In 10 out of 14 years, the winner of the Screen Actors Guild Award for Outstanding Performance by a Female Actor in a Leading Role has gone on to win the Academy Award for Best Actress. If this year marks the 11th such congruence, Meryl Streep will take home the Oscar. Yet there is an odd circumstance with the Academy’s nominations that hurts Streep’s chances. Another one of the Academy’s Best Actress contenders also received a SAG Award Sunday night: Kate Winslet, who won the supporting actress trophy for The Reader. At the Oscars, this role has been recognized as a lead performance, one that is likely a favorite to win.
Yes, it is a strange situation, one that shocked and confused Oscar prognosticators (especially this writer) on Thursday morning. Winslet’s Reader performance was campaigned as a supporting role, and she was recognized as such by the Golden Globes, the Broadcast Film Critics Association, the Chicago Film Critics Association and of course the Screen Actors Guild. A few organizations did nominate her for a lead award for The Reader, though few people take the Satellites seriously, and the BAFTA Awards are different than most in that they permit Winslet to compete against herself in the same category (she is also nominated for Best Leading Actress for Revolutionary Road).
Some now believe the Academy’s deviation will in fact cost Winslet the Oscar she could have won in the supporting field. Either voters will be confused about what film she’s nominated for (unless I’m simply less observant than elderly Academy members, which may indeed be the case), or she will now split the majority vote with Streep and thus allow Anne Hathaway or Melissa Leo to slip ahead (Angelina Jolie is believed to have no shot). Another idea is that voters will dismiss Winslet due to doubts over which category the performance belongs in. But since enough members of the Academy made it a point to nominate her as lead actress in the first place, this is hardly a reasonable theory.
Also potentially without merit is the Holocaust factor, which seems to be the most popular argument for why Winslet is now a shoo-in to win the Oscar. This is an old favorite for Oscar oddsmakers, but it may not actually apply here. Still, when The Reader made surprise appearances in the Best Picture and Best Director categories last Thursday, one of the first familiar quotes to show up online was “there’s no business like Shoah business.” Yet the Academy already failed to nominate shortlisted documentary Blessed Is the Match, despite its Holocaust subject matter, and they also ignored related features such as The Boy in the Striped Pajamas, Adam Resurrected, Good and Valkyrie (meanwhile Defiance was only recognized by the music branch). So, certainly the Holocaust fetish thing is not a sure thing. It doesn’t even necessarily carry over to Israeli Oscar nominee Waltz With Bashir, as much as people may try to tie that documentary’s favorable odds to its association with the oft-mocked trend (actually could the doc now suffer with pro-Israel Academy members if it makes them think too much about war crimes committed against Palestinians?). Also, Winslet’s role as a sympathetic concentration camp guard should be as exclusive to the fetish as was (her Reader co-star) Bruno Ganz’s brilliant, Oscar-worthy portrayal of Hitler in Downfall. Even if she has told press that she neither liked nor sympathized with her character.
So, then, what are plausible factors in Winslet’s likelihood of winning the Oscar? Well, there is the damage caused by Streep, who has certain advantage in the race for winning the lead SAG Award (which she apparently expected to lose to Winslet), as well as for winning kudos from critic circles, such as the Broadcast Film Critics Association (where she tied with Hathaway). Yet on the other hand, there are all those supporting wins in Winslet and The Reader’s favor, not to mention the triumph she had over Streep at the Golden Globes, even if it was recognition for another performance. There is also the belief that this is simply Winslet’s year to win after losing five previous Oscar races. However, as much as it seems Streep doesn’t need another Academy Award, she has in fact lost her last ten Oscar bids and hasn’t won in more than 25 years. Meanwhile, Winslet has plenty of great years left in her and will surely have more chances in the future.
One additional factor could put Winslet’s odds just past Streep’s, and that factor’s name is Harvey Weinstein. Whether the Oscar-hungry exec is simply holding his high ground with the Academy or he’s making a greater push for his company’s film in order to spite Scott Rudin (producer of Streep’s film, Doubt, and a former producer of The Reader) is unclear and beside the point. Many people immediately cursed his name when they saw The Reader make its surprise appearances in the top categories (Nikki Finke believes the film partly prevailed because the Academy wanted to honor Rudin, Winslet and Daldry for having to put up with “that nasty oaf”).
Even better than the Harvey factor, though, is the actual quality of Winslet’s work. Sure, worth of talent is all but dead in the modern Hollywood, particularly where the Oscars are concerned, but as a deal breaker in a race between two actresses who are truly brilliant thespians, it could very well be consequential. And between Winslet and Streep, this year the former has the advantage. Streep’s Oscar-nominated role has been viewed by some as overdone, and her other performance in 2008 was in a musical comedy. Winslet, on the other hand, will benefit for giving two Oscar-worthy lead performances, only one of which was nominated. And any voters who initially made the attempt to nominate her for Best Actress for Revolutionary Road may surely choose Winslet with that other unrecognized performance in mind (Anne Thompson agrees she’ll win for both films).
With another neck-and-neck race in the Best Actor category and (also thanks to the Academy’s unpredictable deviation from the Winslet campaigns) a lack of a frontrunner in the Best Supporting Actress race, this year’s Oscars are shaping up to be a difficult game to bet on. Knowing that the Academy can be counted on for surprises, it’s possible that Streep will win. Even Hathaway may have a shot (though her time will more likely come from a future supporting role). But if you’re a gambling man who hates to lose, I’d recommend putting your chips on Winslet for Best Actress.
I agree with you… this is complicated. But I dare to tell that, as 1968, the next Academy Awards ceremony will have a tie, this time to Meryl Streep and Kate Winslet, I don’t know but I feel that.
Since 1968 until now, there’s no other year that two actresses will be the favourites -maybe 1988-, and I think that the Academy would like to recognize the Meryl’s15th and the Kate’s 6th nominations with an award to each of them.
Well, I think the moment at the announcement of Best Actress in a Leading Role will be the major moment at night, even that Heath Ledger’s victory.
Regards!
MERYL STREEP gave the best performance among the nominated actresses. Where it could easily have been a caricature, Meryl Streep truly invested Sister Aloysius with true humanity, full of contradictions between what she appears to be and what she is. It was a powerful performance and I was blown away!
Meryl Streep was the best and always will be the best actress. I am at a loss as to why people can say she was cold in her role. She was outstanding! As for her role in Mamma Mia, I personally thought she was having fun and did and great job. She can really sing. “The winner takes it all” was the best I have ever heard it. I loved it!
I hate to say this because I really like Kate Winslet, but Meryl Streep is a superior actor and her role in Doubt was a lot more complicated. I think Streep deserves to win this one. Of course, she has deserved to win many of them and hasn’t.
Critics take Streep for granted. They have higher standards for her and they like underdogs.
Well.., I think it’s quite time Kate won the Oscar… If she has missed for few times..,now it’s up to the Academy Memmbers to decide…,but let us be honest : Winslet for sure !
Meryl overacted, that nun act was a caricature, detracting from the work of her fellow ensemble cast. Her outburst at the end was histrionics. Shanley shouldn’t have given her a free reign.
Do we really want this to be Meryl Streep’s legacy, 15 Nominations, 1 lead win and 1 supporting win?
The woman is nearly 60 years old, do we really want to have her sing another 30 years for her supper?
It is chilling when you put up her record there against actresses with far less ability. In the end, it is the win that will speak directly to her incredible talent. These countless nominations and no wins is beginning to be an embarrassment to the entire process.
It’s been nearly 30 years and she has had to sit there 12 times and see the Oscar given to someone else when in fact she has turned in several Oscar worthy performances. I hope they don’t make this #13.
I saw Doubt and her performance was brilliant. It is a memorable script. Cherry Jones got her Tony and rightfully so. Meryl Streep deserves an Oscar for that role. She put in the work in all the complexities of the character she played.
Meryl should and needs to win! If not, she will never win.
WInselt has one box office hit to her name….Titanic,,,other than that, she is box office poison. She needs to stop being nude in her movies and reply soley on her acting skills. The Reader is more supporting than lead. Streep rocked in Doubt and is vastly different in the mega hit Mamma Mia.
10 years from now, Sister Aloyisus will be remembered but Hanna Scmhidt will be forgotten.
Kate deserving. She is the new Meryl Streep.
Kate is looking better every day. I read here (www.projectweightloss.com) about her anti-pressure diet and , wow, that’s like an universal tool to relax, isn’t it?
Meryl totally deserves it!!!
I mean come on, she is brilliant and not that winslet isn´t good
but I really thinks its meryls time, she is amazing in everything she does and has 15 nominations to prove it, and it has been way to long since she won her last oscar,
Meryl really deserves more than two oscars!
I always think it is a shame if a lesser performance wins an Oscar because better performances missed out and/or were not nominated. Being a Brit I would LOVE to see Kate Winslet win an Oscar - so many of her other performances have been deserving (Eternal Sunshine, Sense & Sensibility etc) but I have problems with her performance in this film….and with the film generally. Also, it is not a leading role. Maybe I am being unfair and she is always so good that we are beginning to take her enormous talent for granted. Is it just me? I wonder too, whether our Kate hasn’t appeared just a little too eager to win this year? The strategy has been SO transparent that is may, ultimately backfire on her.
Meryl Streep transcends parochial flag waving. She is in a league of her own. Who would deny her another Oscar for another brilliant performance as she enters her 7th decade? Not, I suspect the Academy voters.