As I've said before, I do love that I get to categories where I've seen none of the films and sometimes have never even heard of the actor/actress that's been nominated. That's true here as I know Jackson and Alexander but don't know the rest at all (MacGraw by name only because of the film she's in). It always makes it exciting because I find those diamonds in the rough occasionally and it always feels good when that happens. Of course, I also have to wade through the muck to find those and there's a lot of muck to wade through! Anyway, I do hope that this category brings it home for me and wraps up the decade nicely.
1970 Best Actress
Glenda Jackson - Women in Love
Jackson was probably one of the most anticipated viewings for this project. Here was this two time Oscar winner who had a flurry of nominations in the 70s and then all but disappeared and I had no idea who she even was. I've learned more about her and wrote about that in her other reviews (she got into UK politics and won a Tony in 2018). Interesting lady and interesting nominations. I wasn't a fan of her work in Hedda but I did really like Sunday Bloody Sunday and enjoyed her work enough in A Touch of Class, for which she won her second Oscar. This was her first nomination and first win and I'd heard some very mixed reviews about it. Some people praising it and some thinking it's one of the worst wins for the category. It's certainly a divisive film and performance because of that reason. It's an adaptation of a D.H. Lawrence novel and the film is pretty avant-garde. It feels like a late 60s film (it came out in 69 in the UK) with it's empty philosophizing and psycho babble. There are strange scenes of Jackson dancing wildly in front of cattle of some sort, the two male leads (Alan Bates and Oliver Reed) wrestling buck ass naked in front of a fireplace, an odd ballet dancing scene, Bates running through fields rubbing trees and bushes all over his naked body. Just strange, avant-garde scenes abound in this one. So Jackson has a demanding role of trying to make sense of her character so that her character can make sense to us, the viewer. And it's a tough role and I don't know if Jackson does quite enough for this to be an actual acting performance with depth. Everything is overdone in this film to extremes and that makes the characters come off as if everyone is completely insane. It feels like they are going for this deep, sexually liberated, philosophical treatise on life but it all comes off as clumsy madness. It was probably very shocking in 1969 and had more of an intended effect but now it looks absurd at times. The story is about two sisters who meet a pair of friends at a wedding and then romance ensues in different ways. But as one reviewer put it there isn't much actual women in love as there is everyone talking about love. And I feel that represents the film and the performances as lacking depth and only barely scratching the surface. Maybe in 1969/70 this kind of work was seen as bold and innovative but Jackson's performance left me lacking anything to grab onto. I'll have to see what the rest of the category offers up, but this isn't looking good as a winner for me. Though I wouldn't say it's one of the worst wins ever. It's interesting for sure and Jackson is obviously a very talented actress which comes through here. The pretentiousness, however, has it failing to live up to an Oscar winner type of hype.
Jane Alexander - The Great White Hope
Alexander is one of those underrated actresses who somehow quietly has four Oscar nominations and all of them are good to great. I had no idea who she was before this project, even confusing her with someone else. I imagine anyone reading this doesn't really know her either and that's a shame. She blew me away in Testament and her other two nominations in between were good work. This was her film debut but she had already won a Tony Award for the same role in her stage debut. She played the white woman in black boxer Jack Johnson's life (different name in the film and portrayed by James Earl Jones, who also won a Tony Award for playing the same role) which was controversial back in the early 1900s. Johnson was a heavyweight champion who was an animated guy just like Muhammad Ali and so brought the hate of a lot of folks who didn't like him winning and this was back when racism was the norm. Anyway, like I said, Alexander plays his white girlfriend/lover. I was worried at first because she doesn't do anything for the first almost 30 minutes but then she has a scene where some white DA is asking her questions to try and find some way to charge Johnson with some crime because the whites don't like him. She figures out quickly what he is trying to do and makes a 180 degree turn from being an emotional mess to a woman not to be fucked with. She rebukes him with a great line where she calls him a slimy, two-bit, no dick, mother grabber and storms out. It's an awesome exchange and shows her range and that she won't just be the simple girlfriend type of performance. There's also a great extended scene between Alexander and Jones where the two argue and it's very theatrical and clearly is probably taken from the play they did together. Still, it's great to see them both go at each other and see how comfortable both are in their respective roles. That's the plus of having done the role so often on stage that you can make the film version feel lived in and like a natural extension of their self. It's really well done work for a debut that probably didn't feel like a debut for Alexander and I'm so glad I got to discover her as an actress in this project.
Ali MacGraw - Love Story
This was one of those films that when I looked at the list always threw me for a loop. I knew it was a romantic film and had been made fun of a ton but I thought it was just a cheesy love film and nothing more. I do think it is slightly elevated above that and MacGraw's performance helps a lot in that regard. Now, I'm gonna be real as well and say that I feel like any actress could have played that part and been successful. That's no fault of MacGraw, it's just how the part was written. It's definitely written from a male point of view and so her real story is subdued, or really stifled if you want to be accurate. She doesn't even get told that she has a *SPOILER ALERT* terminal illness. That's kept hidden and the film is very male centric. She's good looking and equally charming to O'Neal and the two have great chemistry. But she doesn't really stand out as you hope she would. MacGraw exists in the film but isn't the reason you are watching. She is essentially an accessory in her own film. But MacGraw is terrific with what she is given to do. She's pretty, smart, charming, funny, says bad words - all of that. And for such a hugely popular film, there was no way she wasn't getting nominated. That's what the Academy does and I won't say it's not deserved, but MacGraw should feel glad she got the opportunity and nomination with this film. That sounds awful to say but here we are talking about her 50 years later, so that's something. It's not amazing but it is effective and we can't deny that.
Sarah Miles - Ryan's Daughter
I'm always curious going into a performance where I don't know the name. I've said this a million times it feels like, but I know it's either going to be good or really bad. It's rarely just a meh. So I knew this was a David Lean epic (he of the Lawrence of Arabia and Doctor Zhivago films) and it wasn't well received by critics which led to Lean not making a film for like the next 14 years or so. But I rather enjoyed it! I love big epics like this with amazing cinematography and memorable shots. It's about a woman (Miles) who marries an older fella (Robert Mitchum, who the critics say was miscast but I enjoyed in the role) but then cheats on him with a British officer. This is during WWI and right after Easter Uprising and it takes place in Ireland so they hate the Brits. It's scandalous and we see the fallout. It's a small romantic plot dressed up in an epic film. Miles is so very good in the role. I really love the fact that she plays the character so restrained. She's like a true sheltered Irishwoman who knows nothing beyond her village yet longs for so much more excitement. It's why she marries Mitchum and why she cheats on him with a war hero British officer. She plays it like a young woman trying to find something better to grab onto and fill a void. I feel like other actresses would have played this in such a grand way or been a really loud, domineering presence in the film. But Miles' way is what the film needs to succeed. She's an innocent girl who gets caught up in her search for excitement. And Miles has to carry this very long film almost on the strength of her performance alone. She's the only real lead and the British officer she falls for does not give a very good performance at all. The fact that she has to act opposite him so much and he gives such a bad performance and she still comes out looking great is a testament to her ability. The guy even admitted his heart wasn't in it because he didn't find Miles attractive and because Sharon Tate was killed during production and they apparently had an affair not long before she died. So Miles is trying to have a romance with a guy who is an awful actor and makes it believable and salvages what she can for the film. That's reason enough to be nominated but she is so good throughout the whole film. She shines in the end when the town comes together to rip her clothes off and cut off her hair because they feel she ratted on their local Irish rebels to her man and got them arrested. She, with her hair cut and ragged looking, looks pitiful but also almost saintly, like Joan of Arc. That sounds wild but it's how she comes off. It's like the experience matured her and though she is separating from Mitchum, she seems at peace. It's great acting and she grows in the performance from the beginning, which is awesome to watch. I think it's a strong performance that really makes this film work. It got shredded by critics but without Miles, it probably wouldn't even be Oscar nominated.
Carrie Snodgress - Diary of a Mad Housewife
This is a name I'm sure nobody recognizes for a film no one has probably seen before. I've read some other bloggers say this one was hard for them to find but I found a copy rather easily, though it wasn't the best copy ever. I'm always interested in these performances from actors and films I know nothing about because it's a wildcard. I have no idea what to expect and it makes for a fun watch. This one happened to be a very good performance in a rather interesting film. It's about a housewife played by Snodgress who has a husband who belittles her at every turn, emotionally abuses her, and just general is an absolute dick head to his wife, treating her like hired help or a slave even. Her kids are no better and she's just so unloved. So she has an affair but that's with a man who treats her poorly as well. She tries therapy but they also are abusive and belittling. It's a story about a woman who is constantly under fire from everyone around her and she has to placate them all as if it's her job to take the abuse. Like I said, an interesting subject and Snodgress has to be effective for it to work and she is. She gives such an understated performance where she just takes the abuse and the emotional belittling without saying much or reacting at all. She gives it back a little bit at times which makes those moments hit harder because she does take so much grief from everyone. It's such a strong performance because her character is downtrodden and I feel like she reacts like a woman in 1970 might. It seems real to me and I appreciate that there isn't this big, theatrical element to her performance. It's subtle and understated and really drives home how awful everyone else is around her. Is this a winner? I'm not sure, but I like that it's different and shows her perspective only. She is the saving grace of the film and I'm glad I got to see her restrained performance of a mad housewife.
A solid group to be sure. I don't agree with the Academy with Jackson's win. I think some would say this is a middling/weak year and I could agree, I guess. It's just that I didn't hate any of these and liked most of them, even if there wasn't a runaway favorite. So I think it's solid enough. Jackson is just in a weird film and I don't think she wows enough to win. Maybe the Academy was shocked and thought it was bold acting or something, I don't know, but I felt it could have been better. She's my fifth. Next up is MacGraw who does exactly what the role and film need. She's good and funny and charming and that's all you can ask for. I do feel like many other actresses would have had equal success so that's why I'm keeping it ranked lower. Next would be Alexander as she does a great job with a role she was very familiar with. She has two really strong scenes but does kind of disappear a little for the rest of the film. It's good, though. Now as for my next two, I really don't know. I like both of them for what they bring, as both have to be good so that their films work. Miles carries her long epic of a film and even has to act opposite a guy who wasn't into her and gave a poor performance and still made it work somehow. She makes the three and a half hours bearable, which is no easy task. I think I'll give my win to Snodgress. It's a very 1970 woman's film and role and I like how understated she plays it. It feels so real and is like a breath of fresh air. Just feels different and in this group, that matters. So there we go, 70s almost over and a decent little category this year.
Oscar Winner: Glenda Jackson - Women in Love
My Winner: Carrie Snodgress - Diary of a Mad Housewife
Sarah Miles
Jane Alexander
Ali MacGraw
Glenda Jackson
No comments:
Post a Comment