Hello and thank you for being a DL contributor. We are changing the login scheme for contributors for simpler login and to better support using multiple devices. Please click here to update your account with a username and password.

Hello. Some features on this site require registration. Please click here to register for free.

Hello and thank you for registering. Please complete the process by verifying your email address. If you can't find the email you can resend it here.

Hello. Some features on this site require a subscription. Please click here to get full access and no ads for $1.99 or less per month.

Was Cate Blanchett robbed of the Oscar for Tar?

I feel like Cate losing the Oscar for Tar will be treated the same way as losing her first Oscar nomination for Elizabeth and in a few years, the Academy will give her a 3rd Oscar as a makeup for Tar.

by Anonymousreply 304March 19, 2023 8:58 AM


by Anonymousreply 1March 13, 2023 9:06 AM

No. She already has two. Just as many Oscars have been given for narrative and as an informal lifetime achievement as they have for merit.

She has two already. She doesn’t need sympathy.

by Anonymousreply 2March 13, 2023 9:06 AM

She didn't help her cause with that speech where she basically said they should stop giving awards and that they are part of the patriarchal pyramid. (whatever that is.)

by Anonymousreply 3March 13, 2023 9:08 AM

Tar is racist.

by Anonymousreply 4March 13, 2023 9:09 AM


by Anonymousreply 5March 13, 2023 9:16 AM

Yes, of course she was!

by Anonymousreply 6March 13, 2023 9:20 AM


I think the movie was Oscar bait bullshit. Ever since I read the Sony leaked emails from years ago, movies like this only get made to be Oscar movies.

I remember the “Jobs” saga with Pascal and Rudin. I read the e-mail sent to Leonardo DiCaprio and the whole pitch was “This will be your first Oscar win”.

Cate can stand up there at award shows pretending this wasn’t all for winning another Oscar but I’m sure her emails would tell a different story.

I don’t think any of the cast or crew of “Everything All At Once” would be huge at the Oscars so I’m happy for them.

Michelle seemed like a genuine win. Cate’s was way too calculated.

by Anonymousreply 7March 13, 2023 9:30 AM


Is she loathed in Hollywood or something?

by Anonymousreply 8March 13, 2023 9:37 AM

She has 2 Oscars already and 8 nominations she clearly isn't loathed. The star of a more popular movie and the first Asian actress to win sunk her chances. (and as was said she didn't seem to really want another one. Too soon after the last one.)

by Anonymousreply 9March 13, 2023 9:40 AM

She needs to identify as Asian/Pacific Islander.

by Anonymousreply 10March 13, 2023 9:52 AM

Cate did a much better acting job than Michelle, Michelle was the center of a much better liked movie. Tar is inauthentic and unlikeable. Cate acted the hell out of it, but she couldn't overcome the film's core problem of being completely unbelievable.

by Anonymousreply 11March 13, 2023 9:57 AM

Consolatory Oscars are not given to people who already have two.

by Anonymousreply 12March 13, 2023 10:10 AM

Michelle’s win made the unstable, profoundly insecure membership of the academy feel good about itself. It had nothing to do with greatness.

by Anonymousreply 13March 13, 2023 10:11 AM

NOPE. You butthurt old white cows can go to an abattoir. Tar was an insufferable piece of contrived Oscar-bait bullshit and the crowd reactions to Cate's win at the BAFTAs said it all. No way were people voting for her stateside. She's never won the Oscar without also winning SAG, so suck you deluded bitches. She tried to strong arm people into voting for her & it didn't work. Choose better material next time.

Mark my words, Cate won't be working with Tedious Field anytime soon. She's given him multiple chances and they haven't paid off. The Academy clearly doesn't care enough for him. In a post Weinstein, post Oscars So White world, we may have finally turned the corner from rewarding these tired Oscar-bait movies with a narrow focus and all white casts that underperform at the box office.

by Anonymousreply 14March 13, 2023 10:15 AM

R11 Cate lost because her movie is unbelievable? So EEAAO is an exercise in restraint and reality?

by Anonymousreply 15March 13, 2023 10:17 AM

"Was Cate Blanchett robbed of the Oscar for Tar?"

Only if someone broke into her closet.

Isn't that where she allegedly keeps them.

Cher claimed she used hers as a door stop.

She also made those infomercials at the height of her career, so...

by Anonymousreply 16March 13, 2023 10:19 AM

God no.

by Anonymousreply 17March 13, 2023 10:19 AM

R7 You’re “The Actor” here, aren’t you? 😏

[quote] I said a little prayer during TÁR that I would never have to watch Cate Blanchett act again. I thought, this has got to be the end of this, this can't go on. I think she's a talented woman, but she's so technical, she's ice cold, and I always see her acting. The person I wanted to be in there was Judy Davis in Nitram. Astonishing. You've got Cate Blanchett and Judy Davis, both from Australia, and they couldn't be more different. Cate is working it like crazy, like, get a big stinking load of me, and Judy Davis is just doing the work and knocking it out of the park every single time. I feel like Cate just wants us all to fall in love with her and be a movie star, and I'm not on board.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 18March 13, 2023 10:32 AM

I said from the start that Cate's "Tar" performance was a massive campfest featuring yet another of her scenery-chewing final-act character disintegrations in the patented style of "Blue Jasmine," "Notes on a Scandal," and . . . what was that other, I've blocked it out . . . Is there really some obligation for the Academy to endlessly reward these hambone thespians?

by Anonymousreply 19March 13, 2023 11:22 AM

Ack, no. Tar was pretentious as all hell and if I never have to hear another of Cate's speeches again, it will be too soon. Loved the genuine emotions from last night!

by Anonymousreply 20March 13, 2023 11:32 AM

Admittedly, I haven’t seen any of the movies, but Tar won a slew of awards. Has anyone slamming it actually seen it? Or are you assuming that because of the description (I’m looking at you r14) it was simply Oscar bait?

Really, Tedious Field? He’s made three films besides this one, and In The Bedroom was phenomenal.

by Anonymousreply 21March 13, 2023 11:34 AM

Yes, of course she was, her performance was in another level from all the other nominees.

by Anonymousreply 22March 13, 2023 11:46 AM

It’s not about the performance, it’s about the performer’s personal narrative. That’s the acting the Academy is rewarding, not what is up on screen.

by Anonymousreply 23March 13, 2023 11:52 AM

Cate was not robbed of a first Oscar for Elizabeth. Fernanda Montenegro of Central Station was. If you haven’t seen that film, rent it today. The film and FM are amazing. It lost Best Foreign film to Life is Beautiful.

by Anonymousreply 24March 13, 2023 11:52 AM


Thread Closed.

by Anonymousreply 25March 13, 2023 11:53 AM

It's always gonna be subjective. I heard many voters felt she was too technical, too mannered, and too Oscar-baity. I wouldn't be surprised if she actually came in 3rd th or 4th in the actual votes.

by Anonymousreply 26March 13, 2023 11:53 AM

Cate gave an outstanding performance despite a tedious script. She lost to a feel good narrative and Michelle's pity party campaing.

That sucks.

by Anonymousreply 27March 13, 2023 11:57 AM


by Anonymousreply 28March 13, 2023 11:58 AM

It's ridiculous to suggest Cate only took this role because she thought it was Oscar bait. Look at her career history. She's a leading actress, and she's also a character actress. She has played such a variety of roles and many of her movies could be supposed to have been chosen because they are challenging and unconventional and may result in an Oscar nomination, but—no, she's just a character actress with tremendous gravitas. She and Nicole Kidman have similar careers except that Nicole has done many more poorly written duds than Cate has.

She and her husband were the co-creative directors of the Sydney Theatre Company for many years. She's not just some awards-chasing movie star with no talent and grand ambitions. It's strange to hear her spoken of in such a way.

Anyway, this article is an interesting take on the movie's narrative and especially its ending. The writer makes two points that occurred to me during the mvoie:

1. Just as he writes, Tár in the 'abusive' Juillard scene reminded me of my own grad school (MFA in creative writing) experience. The department head in particular was sort of an ideological bully, and we mostly appreciated what he taught us, but some were personally offended and never got over it based on mismatched values.

[spoiler below]

2. Is the end of the movie as tragic as it seems? It's mentioned earlier in the movie that she has done movie scores, and so doing this doesn't suggest some huge fall from prestigious office. In the end of this movie, she is conducting a recording of a movie or video game soundtrack. She may be making a fortune for that. It may be a lucrative gig, not an indication of destitution. She started out in NYC and ended up conducting in Berlin. Now in the end, she is in an unnamed southeast Asian country directing a video game-derivative soundtrack—this could be hugely profitable. Like Brando's movie crocodiles, she may just have found the perfect conditions to thrive.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 29March 13, 2023 3:14 PM

I wonder if her comments on winning awards put some voters off? I'm going to watch EEAAO and get back to you, ATM it sounds like sentimentality won out for the 4 Acting winners. I'm personally disappointed there wasn't more love for Banshees, I thought it was brilliant.

by Anonymousreply 30March 13, 2023 3:25 PM

[Quote]It’s not about the performance, it’s about the performer’s personal narrative. That’s the acting the Academy is rewarding, not what is up on screen.


by Anonymousreply 31March 13, 2023 3:27 PM

Jodie Foster would have won had she been cast as Tár. She would have played it gruffly and made it look like w-o-r-k. Cate did it all a little too breezily.

by Anonymousreply 32March 13, 2023 3:29 PM

R32 interesting, I could see Jodie in that role. Pity she hasn't really challenged herself since Nell!

by Anonymousreply 33March 13, 2023 3:32 PM

[quote] wonder if her comments on winning awards put some voters off?


Cate along with Brendanbhad very early Oscar buzz, theyn were winning all the awards till Cryics Choice, after that speech, Brendan kept winning and Cate was replaced with Michelle.

If there was a year for Cate to secure a 3rd Oscar scar,.it was this year. None of the women were in her league however, it appears Michelle wanted it more. ThatnGolden Globes speech set the ball rolling for her and Cate's attidue too did it. Cate skipped the Globes, then won at Critics, got up on-stage and derided award shows.

by Anonymousreply 34March 13, 2023 3:33 PM

Is R34 having a stroke while typing?

by Anonymousreply 35March 13, 2023 3:35 PM

R34. Nailed it.

by Anonymousreply 36March 13, 2023 3:36 PM

Maybe Cate wanted Michelle to win and she said all that stuff to throw it to her.

by Anonymousreply 37March 13, 2023 3:37 PM

R37, uhm sure

by Anonymousreply 38March 13, 2023 3:40 PM

Who cares? It’s over til next year. Did Judy get robbed of an oscar for A star is born? Who cares? She’s dead.

by Anonymousreply 39March 13, 2023 3:43 PM

I fear it was Cate's last chance at Oscar gold. She needs to ditch the lesbian roles and try soemthing different, if she wants any chance at another Oscar.

by Anonymousreply 40March 13, 2023 3:57 PM

r39 as inane as your post is the Judy reference reminds one of a passage in one of the Dirk Bogarde's autobios.

He recounts that Judy (who accompanied Capucine to the London premiere of her first big Hollywood film) took Capucine aside to tell her to stop making derogatory remarks about the film to the press. (The film does stink)

Judy understood that if you want to work and get rewarded in the Biz you don't challenge any aspect of the system publicly.

Cate's insufferable comments about awards sealed her fate.

by Anonymousreply 41March 13, 2023 4:05 PM

If Cate had shut her mouth about the system, she would have won. But, she turned off the traditional voters, so she did herself in. No "woke" choice, just a woman haunted by her previous words.

by Anonymousreply 42March 13, 2023 4:08 PM

Nope. It was a fair fight.

by Anonymousreply 43March 13, 2023 4:12 PM

Cate had this in the bag but got too comfortable She probably realize it last minute how she messed up her chances because she was everywhere all at once trying to get back on people's good side and garner votes, in the final weeks leading to Oscar night ... a case of too little too late

by Anonymousreply 44March 13, 2023 4:12 PM

So I just watched the clip of Michelle winning, it was actually sweet and people seemed genuinely happy for her.

What made me uncomfortable was poor Andrea cowering like a criminal during her segment, the way she was humiliated after her nomination was unforgivable, I'm glad she attended.

The Academy could have done their investigation in private then announced afterwards they'd checked into it, they just had to announce it right away as their petrified of offending the twitter mobs

by Anonymousreply 45March 13, 2023 4:13 PM

Cate realized she messed up with the awards speech because suddenly she was everywhere all at once in the weeks leading up to Oscar night , trying to garner votes.

Too little too late.

The poor dear. I'm sure she is pissed over her loss and regrets talking trash .

by Anonymousreply 46March 13, 2023 4:15 PM

As they are petrified *

by Anonymousreply 47March 13, 2023 4:21 PM

Have we discussed her outfit?

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 48March 13, 2023 4:26 PM

R41. Oscars are nothing. They have no worth in your life. Or mine. A bit of fun taken over the top because of Social media. Judy winning or not ment fuck all then & nothing at all now.

by Anonymousreply 49March 13, 2023 4:35 PM

Cate ate in this outfit! She looked stunning ! She was serving Tilda Swinton Extravaganza, ganza. Opulence!, rich bitch vibe!

by Anonymousreply 50March 13, 2023 4:35 PM

Yeoh has more than paid her dues, just like Blanchett. Yeoh deserved that win.

by Anonymousreply 51March 13, 2023 4:37 PM

Deep Thoughts, by...

by Anonymousreply 52March 13, 2023 4:37 PM

R49 And yet here you are, Trollina.

by Anonymousreply 53March 13, 2023 4:49 PM

R50 mince away rupaul drag race reject.

by Anonymousreply 54March 13, 2023 4:51 PM

I gave my opinion. It means nothing. But okay I’m a troll. Another insipid response to prevent conversation R53

by Anonymousreply 55March 13, 2023 4:58 PM

She always gets it right. Her outfit is gorgeous, glamorous, not revealing, not tendy, not desperate looking. Her performance in Tàr is pitch perfect.

Has she ever given a poor performance or shown up looking less than grade A?

by Anonymousreply 56March 13, 2023 5:09 PM

Yes, no question. Danielle Deadwyler wasn't nominated but gave the only performance close to Blanchett.

Blanchett lost because Yeoh and others basically ran around saying it was racist to nominate a white woman. I'm fairly certain she broke Academy campaigning laws but they never enforce them so it won't matter.

by Anonymousreply 57March 13, 2023 6:14 PM

Just ask the actors' agents if winning the Oscar means nothing.. For the unwashed at home in front of the tv, no. But to the winners, it means big bucks at the next contract. For the studio, prestige and legitimacy.

by Anonymousreply 58March 13, 2023 6:31 PM

[quote]Blanchett lost because Yeoh and others basically ran around saying it was racist to nominate a white woman.

You must love Fox News, because you are outright lying. Now, take your bitter little ass back to the tv nd get ready for your hero, Tucker.

by Anonymousreply 59March 13, 2023 6:33 PM

Cate needs to take a break from these lezzie roles.

by Anonymousreply 60March 13, 2023 6:38 PM

I love Cate but I don't think Lydia Tár was her GOAT performance. However her line delivery of "I'm Petra's father " to the little schoolyard bully was top tier actressing.

by Anonymousreply 61March 13, 2023 6:44 PM

R58 I’d agree to that. I’m not Hollywood. I’m not an awArds watcher. I did watch Joan Rivers post award shows. That i watch. To get into Angela VS Jamie Lee is nuts. Jamie has a lot of Halloween box office money. Angela has comic book money. It’s hard to care.. They both have already won.

by Anonymousreply 62March 13, 2023 6:45 PM

The Oscars are all politics. Nothing to do with the actual acting/performances.

by Anonymousreply 63March 13, 2023 6:46 PM

I don't know a single person who watch Tar. I certainly have no interest in it.

by Anonymousreply 64March 13, 2023 6:47 PM

Most Americans don't have the attention span to watch Tar.

by Anonymousreply 65March 13, 2023 6:58 PM

Yes. Cate was head and shoulders above the rest of the nominees. Michelle Yeoh won because she was an old Asian lady, not even because she was a good actress. She has no history of excellent work. She was in third rate Jackie Chan sequels and martial arts movies. She had the greatest marketing campaign of all time.

by Anonymousreply 66March 13, 2023 7:17 PM

Tár is a movie for people who still have an attention span, who read things other than buzzfeed and believe there is more to music than aging pop divas and tacky rapstresses. I bet Michelle Yeoh’s tiger mom wished she had done a movie like Tár instead.

by Anonymousreply 67March 13, 2023 7:17 PM

It was also not Oscar bait, if anything was Oscar bait, it was “feel good” EEAO.

by Anonymousreply 68March 13, 2023 7:21 PM

Cate's Twitter stans are saying that Tar was a huge hit and resonated with audiences in Europe and Latin America and basically Americans were too uncouth and ignorant, hence their snubbing of Tar (as well as The Banshees of Inisherin and The Fabelmans) while favoring EEAAO and The Whale.

by Anonymousreply 69March 13, 2023 7:27 PM

Oscars aren’t given out based on need or on how long an actor has struggled. Also, someone doesn’t lose out because they already have two awards! They are awarded on merit, skill, and to a performance that brings an unforgettable character to life. Accordingly, Cate was the best actress creating a multi-dimensional character with brilliance. Michelle Yeoh’s performance was a comic book portrayal.

by Anonymousreply 70March 13, 2023 7:29 PM

Could anyone else tell that she knew she wasn't going to win? The second I saw how she was dressed, it was obvious to me because she was very toned down and not dressed like someone expecting an Oscar. Her energy was very low and when they called her name as a nominee by the end, she seemed downright wistful.

by Anonymousreply 71March 13, 2023 7:32 PM

You contradicted yourself r70. Oscars are often given without a thought to merit, skill, or whether the performance brings an unforgettable character to life.

by Anonymousreply 72March 13, 2023 7:32 PM

Many good comments and Cate love after all. She looked stunning as always.

These Oscar were horrible, not only Cate lost, but, worse, Brandon won over Colin Farrel for using suit. And gave a predictable horrible speech, full pf self pity and victimizing, ugh.

by Anonymousreply 73March 13, 2023 7:42 PM

Agreed, Cate and Colin should have won. They didn't broadcast themselves as victims which is why they lost.

by Anonymousreply 74March 13, 2023 7:47 PM

Many DL posters sound very much like this guy.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 75March 13, 2023 7:55 PM

R68 It’s always the “smart,” deluded ones that resort to straw man tactics and ad hominem attacks.

by Anonymousreply 76March 13, 2023 8:05 PM

[Quote]It was also not Oscar bait, if anything was Oscar bait, it was “feel good” EEAO.

And how do you arrive at this conclusion? Moonlight was not a feel good movie and Tar has grossed about the same $$$ so far.

by Anonymousreply 77March 13, 2023 8:23 PM

Cate Blanchett used this hair thickener spray to create her gorgeous Oscars updo

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 78March 13, 2023 8:26 PM


by Anonymousreply 79March 13, 2023 8:27 PM

No, but I was robbed of the 1h20m that I made through one of the most boring and uninteresting films ever.

by Anonymousreply 80March 13, 2023 8:33 PM

R78, thank you for this vital info. Now I can sleep peacefully tonight

by Anonymousreply 81March 13, 2023 8:34 PM

The movie was kind of a bore. She was overhyped as the definite Oscar winner

by Anonymousreply 82March 13, 2023 8:35 PM

She looked stunning. I loved the hair, the makeup the outfit. The rich luxious silk fabric was everything. Oh loved it. Yass Kween - Miss Blanchett served!!!

by Anonymousreply 83March 13, 2023 8:36 PM

I liked Blanchett in the movie EXCEPT in the scene where she was conducting. Her conducting technique just looked weird and amateurish

by Anonymousreply 84March 13, 2023 8:37 PM

Cate Blanchett attends the Vanity Fair Oscars Party in Beverly Hills

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 85March 13, 2023 8:41 PM

R84 = Miss Michael Tilson Thomas

by Anonymousreply 86March 13, 2023 8:42 PM

R81 - hopefully with a B & Y updo.

by Anonymousreply 87March 13, 2023 8:44 PM

Yes I agree with poster uptrend. Lydia Tar was not her Magnum Opus. Carol was. She delivered! In Carol. For that she was robbed by Brie Fucking Larson

by Anonymousreply 88March 13, 2023 8:46 PM

Cate deserved an Emmy for her Phyllis Schlafly portrayal in Mrs. America. Regina King won that year when the diversity wins started to become a priority.

by Anonymousreply 89March 13, 2023 8:48 PM

Cate has a very strong fandom of young lesbian women on Twitter. They are positively bereft that she was robbed of the Oscar, first for Carol, and now again for Tar. They're convinced that the Academy will never award an actress for playing a lesbian.

by Anonymousreply 90March 13, 2023 8:51 PM

R90, I saw that. These lezzie fangurls may be more upset than Cate herself. They are raging..

by Anonymousreply 91March 13, 2023 8:54 PM

They awarded Charlize for Monster.

by Anonymousreply 92March 13, 2023 8:56 PM

Does Charlize have a lesbian fandom?

by Anonymousreply 93March 13, 2023 8:57 PM

No R 93

by Anonymousreply 94March 13, 2023 8:57 PM

Good question how did Cate amass a lesbian fandom and not Charlize?

by Anonymousreply 95March 13, 2023 8:58 PM

She played a lesbian (serial killer).

by Anonymousreply 96March 13, 2023 8:58 PM

I suppose Monster was released before Gen z ( the bulk of Cate's fandom) came of age and Carol> Aileen Wuronos

by Anonymousreply 97March 13, 2023 8:59 PM

Charlize was the first makeup win, paving the way for Brendan Fraser. Cate was much better than her in TAR.

by Anonymousreply 98March 13, 2023 9:00 PM

The only other contemporary of Cate I can think of who does have a young lesbian fandom is Rachel Weisz for The Favourite and Disobedience.

It seems the trick is you have to play a lesbian twice at least.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 99March 13, 2023 9:00 PM

So what R96.

Villanelle is a lesbian murdering psychopath and Jodie Comer has a lesbian fandom for life

by Anonymousreply 100March 13, 2023 9:00 PM

I knwo she is great at what she does, blah blah but honestly Cate is missing something in her acting. I can't describe what it is but something is missing to make it whole/ complete

by Anonymousreply 101March 13, 2023 9:03 PM

I think it comes down to what R97 said that projects like Carol, The Favourite, and Killing Eve are all recent and came out in the age of social media so Gen Z and younger millennials were able to take notice of them. Monster is definitely before that time. Same with Notes on a Scandal.

by Anonymousreply 102March 13, 2023 9:03 PM

Cate had no business as a straight actress playing a gay character, much less winning an Oscar for it. This is the second times she's done this, btw. She's been appropriating gay culture in an effort to win awards, and she needs to be called out for it.

by Anonymousreply 103March 13, 2023 9:04 PM

She's an Australian and playing American parts. How do you feel about that?

by Anonymousreply 104March 13, 2023 9:06 PM

R103 gtfo with this bullshit...so Jodie Foster should be called out for playing straight roles. ?

by Anonymousreply 105March 13, 2023 9:09 PM

That's right, r103. Instead of having actresses acting, only lesbians should be allowed to take on lesbian roles. Which leaves Kristen Stewart as the only option for al these roles.

Alternatively, true gay liberation will be when lesbian/gay actors play straight roles without the film industry worrying that audiences will reject them.

by Anonymousreply 106March 13, 2023 9:11 PM

R15, Yes, the character played by Yeoh is far more realistic than the one played by Blanchett. I've seen both movies and don't really like either of them. I found EEAO frenetic, so I didn't have space to connect to the characters, and Tar was just insanely unrealistic about what it's like for women in classical music. Women conductors of major orchestras are still vanishingly rare and they don't get the kind of leeway for conduct that a James Levine did. *Hillary and Jackie* is a much better portrait of woman-musican-as-monster. And I've spent time around the classical music world. This was a case of the more you know, the more ludicrous the movie is--seriously, a Julliard student disdaining Bach? You can't disdain Bach--he's too fundamental. If you take a class in music theory, it's all about Bach because he invented so much of it. It's like not liking Euclid--it doesn't really matter if you like or dislike Euclid, you're still going to have to deal with geometry if you're learning math.

EEAO, on the other hand, which I consider a mess of a movie, had realistic relationships--the family dynamics were pretty on, as was the sense of disappointment in one's own life. It was also a weirdly accurate depiction of Los Angeles--the range of people there and how they interact.

So, yeah, the nutty SF pix is more authentic than the bitchy conductor one. I personally think that Blanchett did a much more complex acting job, but Tar is hollow at its core and that hurt Blanchett.

by Anonymousreply 107March 13, 2023 9:12 PM

[quote] Which leaves Kristen Stewart as the only option for al these roles.

God forbid! Nobody wants that

by Anonymousreply 108March 13, 2023 9:12 PM

R106 Have you forgotten Jodie Foster?

by Anonymousreply 109March 13, 2023 9:14 PM

For that matter, does Jodie Foster have a young lesbian fanbase?

by Anonymousreply 110March 13, 2023 9:14 PM

Jodie hasn't said the words and until she does ...

by Anonymousreply 111March 13, 2023 9:14 PM

This was Cate's year to win. She fumbled the bag

by Anonymousreply 112March 13, 2023 9:15 PM

It was kind of a snooze.

by Anonymousreply 113March 13, 2023 9:20 PM

R110, no

by Anonymousreply 114March 13, 2023 9:24 PM

Cate Blanchett and Jodie Comer play over-the-top, glamorous lesbians. Jodie Foster has never fit that bill.

by Anonymousreply 115March 13, 2023 9:26 PM

Here we fucking go.

For the remainder of civilization and for as long as we have the internet, we'll have fucking threads about bitches not getting Oscars.

by Anonymousreply 116March 13, 2023 9:26 PM

Not only was Cate robbed, ever other woman in that category was. Michelle was the least deserving of Oscar gold

by Anonymousreply 117March 13, 2023 9:30 PM

I haven't seen Andrea's performance but I would have awarded Ana de Armas and Michelle Williams above Michelle Yeoh.

by Anonymousreply 118March 13, 2023 9:31 PM

She looked devastated when Michelle Yeoh was announced

by Anonymousreply 119March 13, 2023 9:34 PM

She definitely knew here

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 120March 13, 2023 9:35 PM

Yup r120

by Anonymousreply 121March 13, 2023 9:38 PM

[quote] and the crowd reactions to Cate's win at the BAFTAs said it all.

I didn’t see that - what happened?

The discussion above of Cate being icy and cold as an actress I sorta agree with now but she wasn’t always like this (see Paradise Road).

by Anonymousreply 122March 13, 2023 9:39 PM

Paradise Road was the movie where Glenn was incredibly threatened by Cate. 2 Oscars later, I can see why.

by Anonymousreply 123March 13, 2023 9:41 PM

I disagree with all these icy and cold nonsense. I find her to be real, frank and down to earth in interviews. She has a stern look to her, looks like a displinarian/ professor type but not ice cold.

by Anonymousreply 124March 13, 2023 9:42 PM

R123. Where are you getting this info? Who said Glen was threatened by Cate. Grantes Mcdormand was in the same film. Why would Glen have been threatened by a no name which is what Cate was at the time, amd not her?

by Anonymousreply 125March 13, 2023 9:43 PM

She needs to mix it up and do one of those messy family life roles--she's married with three kids, surely she could make some sort of connection to a role like that.

by Anonymousreply 126March 13, 2023 9:44 PM

This moment is going viral on Cate Twitter

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 127March 13, 2023 9:44 PM

Enough art house shit. Do a comedy or horror movie

by Anonymousreply 128March 13, 2023 9:45 PM

R125 Some thread here on DL mentioned that a long time ago, Cate gave an interview about how she was playing a supporting role in one of her early movies and the lead actress was an A-lister who gave her a hard time.

by Anonymousreply 129March 13, 2023 9:45 PM

Wtf did Sarah do to her hair? That forehead is giving RiRi competition

by Anonymousreply 130March 13, 2023 9:46 PM

R129, most likely Goop

by Anonymousreply 131March 13, 2023 9:46 PM

Photo @ R137. Cate seems to be handling the loss better than her fans

by Anonymousreply 132March 13, 2023 9:51 PM

R132 She still looks sad to me.

by Anonymousreply 133March 13, 2023 9:52 PM

I've never seen Cate campaign as much for any movie as she did for this one. This performance meant something more to her which is why the loss is especially hard.

It reminds me of how Katharine Hepburn only ever campaigned once for her Oscar nominated performances, which was for Long Day's Journey Into Night, because she was especially proud of it.

by Anonymousreply 134March 13, 2023 9:54 PM

[quote] I've never seen Cate campaign as much for any movie as she did for this one. This performance meant something more to her which is why the loss is especially hard.

Why did she trash talk award shows then at the Critics Choice?

by Anonymousreply 135March 13, 2023 9:59 PM

R135 I think she miscalculated and thought it would make her more relatable and her win over other non-white nominees would look less bad if she was advocating for everyone to be awarded instead of just herself.

by Anonymousreply 136March 13, 2023 10:01 PM

In the photo with SP, Cate has something stuck in her teeth

by Anonymousreply 137March 13, 2023 10:02 PM

R132 agreed. What’s interesting is she’s lost to quite a few lesser actresses-Jhud, Larson, Paltrow and now Yeoh. I wouldn’t even put the other two she lost to, Cotillard and Swinton, in Cates talent realm, but they’re close. It was a tight race which could go either way. I wasn’t really sure how the Academy would respond to EEAAO, but as some anonymous voters said, they were trying to prove a point by voting for it, probably because the inevitable backlash and bitching they would’ve experienced Monday morning, by God forbid, voting for who they loved, vs. the politically correct crapfest that is EEAAO. It was just one of those Oscar years where a bad film won and swept. Cate is a trouper, and knows the reality surrounding the Oscars. She will be back and win that third soon.

by Anonymousreply 138March 13, 2023 10:05 PM

R136, she said fuck the patriarchy. Nothing about non whites or diversity

by Anonymousreply 139March 13, 2023 10:05 PM

R139 The implication was that if she won all these awards, it was the patriarchy's fault for pitting women against each other, including the non-white women. She wanted to avoid what is happening to Jamie Lee Curtis now, with accusations of being racist for winning over the non-white nominees. Had she won last night, you can imagine all the backlash she'd be receiving for winning over Michelle Yeoh.

by Anonymousreply 140March 13, 2023 10:19 PM

Talk shit, get hit bitch.

by Anonymousreply 141March 13, 2023 10:20 PM

I'm sure Michelle's mom is delighted that she didn't have to sit through her daughter in Tar.

by Anonymousreply 142March 13, 2023 10:27 PM

[quote] She wanted to avoid what is happening to Jamie Lee Curtis now, with accusations of being racist for winning over the non-white nominees. Had she won last night, you can imagine all the backlash she'd be receiving for winning over Michelle Yeoh.

Oh stfu. Nobody would deride Cate for winning over Michelle Yeoh. Cate is well liked. JLCuntis is not

1- JLC is an attention seeking whore, who has been getting on ppl's nerves way before Oscar. Cate is not 2.JLC is hated for revelling in her nepto granny status. Cate is not 3. Cate is a talented actress and deserves wins. Jame is not and does not. 4. Cate talked shit at the podium because she was prob drunk not scared of racial backlash

by Anonymousreply 143March 13, 2023 10:33 PM

[quote] I knwo she is great at what she does, blah blah but honestly Cate is missing something in her acting. I can't describe what it is but something is missing to make it whole/ complete

I completely agree, r101. I get the same vibe with her I do with Streep—everything seems so calculated and carefully studied.

by Anonymousreply 144March 13, 2023 10:34 PM

[quote] ppl's

Really, R143? You couldn't type the whole word?

by Anonymousreply 145March 13, 2023 10:34 PM

All the Jamie Lee haters seem to conveniently be forgetting that we'll get to see her for next year's awards season by default now that she's the latest winner. She's not going away anywhere.

by Anonymousreply 146March 13, 2023 10:36 PM

So, she'll be presenting, in other words, R146. That's better than having to see her in a 2.5-hour movie.

by Anonymousreply 147March 13, 2023 10:38 PM

Cate took a seven year gap between her last two Oscar-nominated performances, Carol and Tar, so I'm curious how many years we'll have to wait before Cate's ready again for another try at that third Oscar.

by Anonymousreply 148March 13, 2023 10:38 PM

Great analysis, r407. I like what I think is the concept of Tár, but the problem is that Todd Field is just not good enough of a filmmaker to have encapsulated it effectively. We are given so many hints as to what may be Lydia Tár's problem (family background, possible mental illness, hallucinations, cold and controlled on the outside but sexually and emotionally disturbed within) but they are never presented in a coherent or complete way. Then there are total fallacies, as you say, such as the preposterous idea that a Julliard student would disdain Bach. The crucial issue of her predatory behaviour is presented in such a garbled manner, it's not clear whether what happens was real or just in her head. Then there's whatever the fuck it is that happens at the end of the movie and this weird thread of psychosis that may or may not run throughout the whole film.

Field was trying to do too much, and in a very precious way. I think if he had just come up with the story and written the script but did not insist also on directing and a more skilled director had taken over the task of shaping his ideas into a film, then it would have been the seminal movie that he aspired to make. As it stands, it's too all over the place and just too precious and tortured but also too obvious (the cliche arty Berlin apartment just rings so fake to me) to be the ground-breaking work of art that he envisaged.

by Anonymousreply 149March 13, 2023 10:40 PM

When was the last time someone won for playing a throughly unlikeable character (from beginning to end)? Lots of characters have "arcs" and are redeemed in the end, but not in this movie.

All I can remember is Jeremy Irons as Claus Von Bulow (and that is debatable depending on who you believe)

by Anonymousreply 150March 13, 2023 10:42 PM

Despite her deluded fans, Cate was never going to win for Tar. It’s an intellectual, boring film and her character is unlikable.

It also was a bomb at the box office.

Michelle Yeoh was a much easier decision for the Academy to reward. First Asian American woman in their choice for best picture.

Cate should take a long break.

by Anonymousreply 151March 13, 2023 10:42 PM

R148 Cate has a mini series and a movie coming up

by Anonymousreply 152March 13, 2023 10:44 PM

The Juliard student represents the new SJW cultural viewpoint and his repudiation by Tar is in the very text of the movie. Saying that student is unrealistic as a character ignores the current higher education/academic reality.

by Anonymousreply 153March 13, 2023 10:51 PM

[quote] Saying that student is unrealistic as a character ignores the current higher education/academic reality.

That's for sure, R153. And I happen to know someone who actually teaches at Juilliard.

by Anonymousreply 154March 13, 2023 10:57 PM

Is Carol worth watching? I’ve heard good things about Cate but not so good ve things about the other actress.

by Anonymousreply 155March 13, 2023 11:01 PM

It was better than "Tar," R155. And she was better in it than in "Tar."

by Anonymousreply 156March 13, 2023 11:02 PM

R150 Jeremy Irons won for Reversal of Fortune more because he was snubbed for Dead Ringers two years before and the Academy was making it up to him. He even mentioned that in his speech for Reversal of Fortune, thanking the director of Dead Ringers. I'm more surprised that Glenn didn't get a nomination for that movie.

by Anonymousreply 157March 13, 2023 11:05 PM

R155 Rooney Mara was good as well. She's always much better than her dreadful sister.

by Anonymousreply 158March 13, 2023 11:05 PM

R152 Isn't the movie some awful sci-fi flick with Kevin Hart?

by Anonymousreply 159March 13, 2023 11:06 PM

[quote] She's always much better than her dreadful sister.

Mickey Mara?

by Anonymousreply 160March 13, 2023 11:08 PM

[quote]When was the last time someone won for playing a throughly unlikeable character (from beginning to end)? Lots of characters have "arcs" and are redeemed in the end, but not in this movie.

Joaquin in Joker? Though I guess Arthur’s pathetic mess made him somewhat sympathetic. Male villains win all the time, though usually in supporting. Female villains— Nurse Ratchet? Surely it can’t be that far back.

by Anonymousreply 161March 13, 2023 11:13 PM

Negative performances, particularly ones by female characters, were rarely awarded. Examples include Judith Anderson in Rebecca, Angela Lansbury in The Manchurian Candidate, Barbara Stanwyck in Double Indemnity, Gene Tierney in Leave Her to Heaven, Glenn Close in Fatal Attraction, etc.

by Anonymousreply 162March 13, 2023 11:15 PM

I deserve from love for that.

by Anonymousreply 163March 13, 2023 11:15 PM

R150 Liz in Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?

by Anonymousreply 164March 13, 2023 11:15 PM

I deserve some love for that.


by Anonymousreply 165March 13, 2023 11:16 PM

R154, please ask this person you know who teaches at Juilliard if a student who cannot play or analyse works by Bach would be accepted into the classical music division.

R153, big difference between general higher education and a school the very existence of which is to train students to perform and analyse works by composers like Bach. For a start, a student with that kind of attitude would not have the performing capabilities to be accepted into a music conservatory.

by Anonymousreply 166March 13, 2023 11:16 PM

Except, R164, Liz is redeemed in the big reveal at the end.

by Anonymousreply 167March 13, 2023 11:17 PM


by Anonymousreply 168March 13, 2023 11:18 PM

Cate stans are nuts, lol. I went to t he Vanity Fair IG page and went down an Insta rabbit hole which landed me on the page of Cate's makeup artist. Stans are leaving message on the makeup artist's page talking about how Cate was robbed, " wokeism" won etc. How is this tolerated?

by Anonymousreply 169March 13, 2023 11:18 PM

[quote] please ask this person you know who teaches at Juilliard if a student who cannot play or analyse works by Bach would be accepted into the classical music division.

R166, I was speaking of the climate of entitled wokeness that teachers deal with, and it's far more egregious than that student in the movie, which I thought felt forced and was a clumsy plot point.

by Anonymousreply 170March 13, 2023 11:20 PM

Current requirements for the conducting audition at Juilliard. It would be a bit difficult to manage this is if you didn't like Bach because he had loads of kids.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 171March 13, 2023 11:22 PM

I read somewhere that Todd Fields the director had an original idea of a business woman instead of a conductor. Had he gone with the former, it would have been a hit

by Anonymousreply 172March 13, 2023 11:23 PM

That's fine r170, but what the supposed classical conducting student in the film was saying would be impossible for a classical conducting student to say in real life, however woke he/she/they may be.

by Anonymousreply 173March 13, 2023 11:24 PM

Remind me what the student said, R173--something about not liking Bach because he was considered by the student to be objectionable as a person, or something like that?

Because believe me, they DO say shit like that.

by Anonymousreply 174March 13, 2023 11:28 PM

R174 He didn't like Bach for fathering about 20 or so children....which was ironic considering how rampant of a problem that is in the black community. Even Jimmy Kimmel made a Nick Cannon joke about all his kids.

by Anonymousreply 175March 13, 2023 11:33 PM

For what role did Regina King win the Emmy over Cate ?

by Anonymousreply 176March 13, 2023 11:39 PM

R174, he (sorry, they) didn't simply not approve of Bach's private life, but he would never want to perform Bach and similar (i.e. classical) composers. Instead, he was more into learning to conduct a contemporary Icelandic female composer.

by Anonymousreply 177March 13, 2023 11:41 PM

To add to r177, it would be impossible for a student who refused to conduct or study Bach and other classical composers to be admitted to music school.

by Anonymousreply 178March 13, 2023 11:44 PM

R176, I think it was for Watchmen - Lead Actor in a Limited or Anthology Series.

by Anonymousreply 179March 13, 2023 11:53 PM

No other year was Cate robbed more than the year she lost to JHud

by Anonymousreply 180March 13, 2023 11:55 PM

What is up with Cate calling out photographers and waving her fingers at them on the red carpet?

by Anonymousreply 181March 13, 2023 11:58 PM

I'm guessing calling the awards "patriarchal" got a few backs up and a few less votes. Can anyone tell me if SAG members were still voting when she made her Critics Choice speech?

by Anonymousreply 182March 14, 2023 12:13 AM

Yes R182. Not only that but the popularity of EEAAO helped Michelle too. Look Jamie Lee Curtis in a joke of a role won over Angela Bassett.

by Anonymousreply 183March 14, 2023 12:15 AM

Is Cate going to retire?

by Anonymousreply 184March 14, 2023 12:16 AM

Ouch I just saw SAG voting started a couple of days after the Critics Choice awards. Her SAG loss makes more sense now. I get what she was trying to say and if she hasn't used the word "patriarchal" her speech would have gone over so much better.

by Anonymousreply 185March 14, 2023 12:16 AM

Ohh Cate, you shot yourself in the foot there lady

by Anonymousreply 186March 14, 2023 12:17 AM

I don't think she was expecting to win.

by Anonymousreply 187March 14, 2023 12:19 AM

R187 I'm not so sure. She recovered well but when Michelle's name was called out she looked a bit confused for a second. Anyone else think this?

by Anonymousreply 188March 14, 2023 12:21 AM

Just a guess but maybe some male voters turned on her as men are getting a bit tired of being blamed for everything?

by Anonymousreply 189March 14, 2023 12:24 AM

R188 she probably was expecting Yeohs name, considering where the night was headed when the film kept winning key awards. She didn’t looked confused to me, just resigned to the fact it wasn’t going to be her night. Again, I don’t think the critics choice speech made a difference. The guild awards were clamoring around EEAAO big time, along with critics choice, aside from Cates win. The globes and BAFTAs were the only ones not so hot on the film. The momentum definitely shifted big time to EEAAO at the tail end of the season.

by Anonymousreply 190March 14, 2023 12:29 AM

Social media campaigning, word of mouth, tweets etc helped that film. Suddenly everyone everywhere was talking about it.

Actors need to get on social media and sell themselves if they want to win awards

by Anonymousreply 191March 14, 2023 12:32 AM

The BAFTAs have to realize that the film industry is no longer limited to English-speaking, British-centered movies. They should no longer be considered a predictor of the Oscars.

by Anonymousreply 192March 14, 2023 12:39 AM

Had Cate won you know it would be severe backlash against her

by Anonymousreply 193March 14, 2023 12:51 AM

R192 no British centered film won this year at the BAFTAs. Still they went 0-4 in the acting categories. But to be fair, the lead actor actress races were tight this year. Last year they were 3 for 4 and the year before they were 4 for 4 in the acting categories. So they’re still a pretty good predictor for the Oscars.

by Anonymousreply 194March 14, 2023 12:57 AM

It may be several years before she is nominated again. Her upcoming films look unlikely to garner her an Oscar nod. Maybe she’ll be nominated for an Emmy but not for film.

This was probably her last chance to win as best actress, so I hope she spends time with her children.

by Anonymousreply 195March 14, 2023 1:02 AM

She has sent out the word to her agent - kept me a good new role, STAT!

by Anonymousreply 196March 14, 2023 1:29 AM

... GET me ...

by Anonymousreply 197March 14, 2023 1:30 AM

I think she will take time off . She needs it. This woman has been dropping on average 3 films per year , the past few years

by Anonymousreply 198March 14, 2023 1:35 AM

she has 3 projects in development - Apples, Queen Bitch & The High Horse, and The Champions.

by Anonymousreply 199March 14, 2023 1:38 AM

Queen Bitch is a comedy.

by Anonymousreply 200March 14, 2023 1:41 AM

Cate Blanchett to Produce Embezzlement Drama ‘Queen Bitch and the High Horse’

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 201March 14, 2023 1:43 AM

That article is from 2021.

by Anonymousreply 202March 14, 2023 1:45 AM

Tar was crap. Zero Oscar's. Zilch.

by Anonymousreply 203March 14, 2023 1:54 AM

[quote] Oscar's


by Anonymousreply 204March 14, 2023 2:04 AM

Why is it so tough for women conductors to make it big time?

by Anonymousreply 205March 14, 2023 2:08 AM

Cate Blanchett looks like a pretentious bitch and has a big nose. And like Meryl, the thinks she’s some sort of genius. Meh.

by Anonymousreply 206March 14, 2023 2:21 AM

I caught the red carpet and show a few mins ago, had it recorded. Is it me or was that ABC red carpet cohost with the granny panties flirting with Cate?

by Anonymousreply 207March 14, 2023 3:04 AM

Andrea Riseborough must’ve known she was out of the running based on her seating assignment.

Didn’t get much of a reception either when they called out her name.

by Anonymousreply 208March 14, 2023 3:05 AM

Cate was the best thing about Tar but the movie in itself was not really that easy to like. I loved watching Cate in it, but we know she can do this. EEAAO was so mind bending and Michelle played various roles in the movie. It was quite an acting challenge and I'm fine with her winning. The cast acted their asses off with something someone wrote when High.

by Anonymousreply 209March 14, 2023 3:18 AM

did cate pose for any pics with Michelle at the after party? maybe the rabbit hole person knows.

by Anonymousreply 210March 14, 2023 3:32 AM

Cate is the closest to a new Meryl Streep. She'll keep getting nominations in the future and unlike Meryl, they'll be deserved.

by Anonymousreply 211March 14, 2023 3:58 AM

someone should cast them as sisters. Maybe in the remake of Baby Jane. Cate to play Jane.

by Anonymousreply 212March 14, 2023 4:00 AM

Cate needs to do a movie with either Nicole or Naomi. I've noticed that despite the fact that Nicole is good friends with both, she's never starred alongside either of them.

I'd also like to see Cate and Julianne together in a movie. I know Julianne is working with Natalie Portman in one and Sandra Oh in another.

by Anonymousreply 213March 14, 2023 4:02 AM

I don’t know if she was- who cares? What’s most important is that she was in a film that is a work of cinematic art as it blurs reality with fear which is often unreal. I’m not sure most on this thread really understood the film. And I think her performance as well as the film will stand the test of time as a great piece of work. She is an extraordinarily gifted actress who I am sure will continue to do great work as long as she chooses to act. She’s also a class act.

by Anonymousreply 214March 14, 2023 4:39 AM

R106 Two words. Rock Hudson.

by Anonymousreply 215March 14, 2023 5:01 AM

Her performance was mechanical to the point of buffoonery. I hope she recovers from the trauma of overacting.

by Anonymousreply 216March 14, 2023 5:14 AM

She got an Oscar for her horrendous Katharine Hepburn impersonation, which was ludicrous, so maybe this loss makes up for that undeserved win.

by Anonymousreply 217March 14, 2023 5:47 AM

[quote]When was the last time someone won for playing a thoroughly unlikeable character (from beginning to end)?

Daniel Day-Lewis for "There Will Be Blood" or Denzel Washington for "Training Day".

by Anonymousreply 218March 14, 2023 5:57 AM

I am watching Elizabeth now.

She was *so* stunning looking in the sunlight with her long red hair at the beginning of the movie.

And her performance is even more striking than her appearance. What a brilliant actor. She gave the movie so much gravity.

She needs another period movie whose drama presents similarly high stakes.

by Anonymousreply 219March 14, 2023 11:51 AM

Whenever I see her name attached to a project I always trust that it will be good. She doesn't disappoint.

by Anonymousreply 220March 14, 2023 12:08 PM

She should have been nominated for Don’t Look Up for a great comic performance. I thought she was hysterical and seemed to be channeling Laura Ingraham

by Anonymousreply 221March 14, 2023 3:21 PM

R151, don't you mean the first Malaysian Best Actress? Yeoh is not American.

by Anonymousreply 222March 14, 2023 9:46 PM

R217 oh god, I'm glad I missed THAT!

by Anonymousreply 223March 14, 2023 11:34 PM

Cate's Oscar for playing Kate was a makeup for losing Elizabeth to Goop.

by Anonymousreply 224March 14, 2023 11:39 PM

Cate as Kate was such a HAM fest. It makes no sense she was awarded for that role but not Carol

by Anonymousreply 225March 14, 2023 11:41 PM

Kate always loved Vanessa Redgrave and said she wanted Vanessa to play her in a biopic. I wonder if we can ever get a Kate biopic set during her later years.

by Anonymousreply 226March 14, 2023 11:43 PM

She is this generation’s Katharine Hepburn. There’s nothing wrong with her having three. But they had to give it to that chinky lady.

by Anonymousreply 227March 14, 2023 11:50 PM

R19, I agree re Blue Jasmine, not Oscar worthy, not even the best actress in the film (that was Sally Hawkins).

by Anonymousreply 228March 14, 2023 11:51 PM

R228 talks shit

by Anonymousreply 229March 14, 2023 11:53 PM

Jessica Lange will win her 3rd Oscar next year for Long Day's Journey Into Night so I wonder if that'll hurt or help Cate's chances in the future.

by Anonymousreply 230March 15, 2023 12:38 AM

No way, Lange Loon. She won’t be nominated for a filmed play.

I think Cate is suffering the same backlash that impacts any woman who speaks her mind.

by Anonymousreply 231March 15, 2023 2:06 AM

I don't know about 3-time winners, but I can see Kate Winslet, Julianne Moore, Rachel Weisz, and Nicole Kidman becoming 2-time winners.

by Anonymousreply 232March 15, 2023 2:39 AM

Kidmans film career is over. She looks too weird to cast as someone her own age or older.

by Anonymousreply 233March 15, 2023 4:31 AM

Cate can join a very...very long queue of people who were robbed. It's a distinguished club.

by Anonymousreply 234March 15, 2023 4:36 AM

She wasn't robbed; she lost.

by Anonymousreply 235March 15, 2023 5:01 AM

I thought Cate's performance in TAR was better than in the films she won Oscars for.

by Anonymousreply 236March 15, 2023 5:33 AM

She was great in Cinderella.

by Anonymousreply 237March 15, 2023 5:44 AM

Michelle won for whining about being Asian… As if Asian actresses don’t always win in their own countries. The faux victim narrative is lame.

by Anonymousreply 238March 15, 2023 6:04 AM

In these grand dame roles, I’m really aware of her actors tricks: raising her head and tossing her hair with a laugh, the hurumphing, the Paddington Bear hard stare. It became unbearable in Carol and Nightmare Alley.

I’d like to see her do a silly comedy. Even a bourgeois romance with Nancy Meyers or Richard Curtis.

by Anonymousreply 239March 15, 2023 6:44 AM

That isn’t fair r238. I never heard her whine about that. Caveat—I only saw snippets (previews) of each movie but Michelle looked amazing in the preview, so did Cate, but Michelle showed a range of characteristics and scenarios that Cate didn’t. But Cate showed a depth that perhaps Michelle didn’t. Both were worthy. That’s the problem with these awards. people start reaching for reasons when their favorite doesn’t win.

by Anonymousreply 240March 15, 2023 11:57 AM

[quote] No. She already has two. Just as many Oscars have been given for narrative and as an informal lifetime achievement as they have for merit.

And she got one of them for "Blue Jasmine." She has had sufficient.

by Anonymousreply 241March 15, 2023 12:27 PM

Had Tar been released any other year Cate would have won . It's unfortunate this kaleidoscope of events occurred this year

by Anonymousreply 242March 15, 2023 5:49 PM

Jamie Lee winning was the biggest joke in decades. People will mock her bs win for years.

by Anonymousreply 243March 16, 2023 3:03 AM

No one will mock her, except the queens on DL and incensed black people.

by Anonymousreply 244March 16, 2023 3:26 AM

Jamie Lee was more gracious to Cate than Michelle was.

by Anonymousreply 245March 16, 2023 6:46 AM

I am probably alone in this, but I have never understood the notion of 'success' as being some objective of amassing more assets than I need or receiving arbitrary trophies from other people—and I find it sad to see people who have every reason in the world to be content with their lives behave so pettily over a silly golden trophy. It is literally the same thing in my view as a homecoming queen crown and sash. It's a petty measure of a person's popularity among other people who clamor to feel like *the most popular* person for a fleeting moment. And then that moment passes, and their egos feel forever inflated because of it and starved because they need to win again so as not to have become a loser.

This is the same kind of personality disorder that causes a person like Trump or Putin or any other dictator to 1) measure their worth based on popularity; 2) create false self-flattery and inflate popularity to satisfy their sad, desperate egos; 3) lose their fucking minds when they have to confront impending loss of not being the homecoming king; and 4) destroy all around them in an effort to maintain this idea they are most powerful.

It's the same personality disorder that drove Elon Musk to buy and ruin Twitter. He was the richest man in the world, assumed probably by most to be some kind of engineering genius when he never was. He had a great con going. Then he proved himself to be a fool just because his ego was freaking the fuck out that he wasn't as important to people as he once had been.

I hope Cate really has risen above it and seen through it, because it's revealed Michelle Yeoh to be a pretty sad person in my eyes. Cate said some disparaging things about awards that I understand can be taken as ingratitude, but Michelle seemed perty and ego starved, and she used the whole Asian community as her ego's scapegoat when if she had been honest she would have said, "I'm old, I feel I have been denied casting opportunities because I am pigeonholed as an Asian lady, this was a pretty good role and I worked hard, I have a lot of buzz power behind me, and I am really fucking annoyed I am up against today's Kate Hepburn this year because, come fucking on, I really want a fucking Oscar and I'll never get another role that will qualify me for consideration. Have pity!"

by Anonymousreply 246March 16, 2023 7:26 AM

If Cate is the next Katharine Hepburn and Meryl Streep is the next Bette Davis, who is the next Joan Crawford?

by Anonymousreply 247March 16, 2023 7:38 AM

R247 Julia Roberts, maybe? Big movies, Oscar win, very limited range with a few good roles that fit her natural charisma well?

by Anonymousreply 248March 16, 2023 7:45 AM

The Kate/Cate comparison really holds up well. They both also have a very odd beauty and are feminine looking while possessing a masculine energy, often taking roles that command men around but also occasional daffy-chick roles that they pull off well.

Who are today's Rosalind Russell and Lucille Ball? They round out my favorite ladies.

by Anonymousreply 249March 16, 2023 7:51 AM

R248 Joan's work has been re-evaluated over the years. I don't see that ever happening with Julia Roberts. Compare her Pretty Woman to Joan's Rain and you have as big a difference as there can be in terms of portrayal of prostitution. Joan was a lot more versatile than Julia ever was and a lot more liked in the industry. She started off Spielberg's career whereas Spielberg hated Julia for her unprofessional behavior. Joan was never unprofessional and never tried to hijack a movie like Julia did with Shakespeare in Love. Also she's no horse mouth.

by Anonymousreply 250March 16, 2023 7:54 AM

R249 Did Kate ever command men around? Certainly not in her Spencer Tracy days where their movies together were popular with male audiences because he always got the upper hand over her and put an uppity female in her place. She gave him top billing in all his movies as well. Commanding men seems more accurate for Crawford, Davis, and Stanwyck.

Blanchett has said that she's been heavily influenced by Liv Ullman, Bette Davis, and Joan Crawford. She mentioned using Crawford, Davis, and Stanwyck as inspiration when playing Lady Tremaine in Cinderella, mainly Crawford.

by Anonymousreply 251March 16, 2023 8:00 AM

But Kate could play comedy and I have never seen Cate do any.

by Anonymousreply 252March 16, 2023 8:09 AM

R251 She did onscreen, in character. And she did as herself, at least in the case of her interview with Dick Cavett.

She wasn't necessarily a ball buster as her characters, but she confidently spoke up on her own behalf and did what she wanted. She literally wore the pants. She usually had a strong 'matriarch' type of energy, from Stage Door to The African Queen.

But yes, her movies with Tracy were exceptions. Their dynamic usually put him in control and made her meek. I read a long time ago about that dichotomy in her acting record: she was always a strong, rigid New England sportswoman, except when she was submitting onscreen to her rumored offscreen paramour. It's pretty odd, really.

by Anonymousreply 253March 16, 2023 8:12 AM

R251 I feel like the evil queens from both Disney's Snow White and Cinderella were modeled on Crawford, so that would make sense.

R252 I see her Margot character from Ripley as a comedic performance, or I thought she and Philip Hoffman both added an unnerving type of tragicomedy, her as an unwitting pretentious fool and him as a creepy rapey douchebro, to the movie.

I also think she's similarly funny in Blue Jasmine and Notes on a Scandal. Of course, all these are women who are foolish and victims of their own dimwittedness and poor decisions, but the characters all would be so much flatter if they weren't played somewhat comically.

I LOVE Bringing Up Baby and while the role is obviously not a type Hepburn played often, I think she's amazing in it...but I have read that when it came out, it was absolutely panned and particularly her performance was panned as a failed attempt of a serious, stolid woman to play madcap comedian. I think she's incredibly successful at it.

One thing I love about Nicole Kidman is what a mess her acting choices have been. She's always good in her roles but she has chosen such great ones and such utterly confounding ones, like the recent Russian-lady-who-runs-a-psychedelic-retreat-center one. And to your point, she has chosen plenty of straightforward comedies as well as stealthy comedies, so perhaps one could say her range is broader than Cate's is. On the other hand, Cate is similarly prolific and like Nicole, Cate's material has to be great to rise to the level of her performances, and Cate's overall body of work has been much more consistently high quality.

I do think we have some really extraordinary actresses working today. I don't understand the pheneomenon of Reese Witherspoon and some other huge successes, but Cate, Nicole, Meryl, Glenn, Kate Winslet, Julianne Moore, Renée Zellweger—hate me, but even Gwyneth (as actress, not as Goop)—deserve the same level of acclaim as the dead-and-gone Hollywood icons whose work I still enjoy often.

Bette Davis and Katharine Hepburn do stand alone IMO, but mainly because they were first and utterly unique and live on in magnificent black and white, from oddly beautiful youth to *really* fascinating old ladies.

And Lucille Ball stands alone for me.

And Crawford, but mainly as an idea and an image. I don't think she was a bad actress at all, but her acting ability was very shallow compared with Davis and Hepburn's. But I do see her in my mind as a vulnerable glamourpuss with football player shoulders and as the ultimate Disney cartoon villainess.

by Anonymousreply 254March 16, 2023 8:31 AM

I do wonder whether the now wide presence of social media will increase some of the poor decisions made in recent Oscar's.

It really drove the Yeoh & Fraser narratives and people bought into it.

I can only see it continuing.

by Anonymousreply 255March 16, 2023 8:59 AM

R254 The animated stepmother from Cinderella wasn't based off of Joan but the Evil Queen was. Snow White came out in 1937 so Joan Crawford was one of the most popular stars back then and at the height of her beauty. The face and eyebrows are the biggest dead ringer. There was an old cartoon villainess from a newspaper strip called the Dragon Lady who was also based off of Joan. Snow White, in turn, was based off of Janet Gaynor although the Hedy Lamarr documentary claims that Snow White was based off of Hedy Lamarr. Cruella De Vil was based off of Tallulah Bankhead while Jessica Rabbit was a combination of Veronica Lake (the peekabo hair), Rita Hayworth (the red hair), and Lauren Bacall (the husky voice voiced by Kathleen Turner who considered herself the new Lauren Bacall). I've heard some people say that Jessica Rabbit's mouth was based off of Gene Tierney's.

You're right that Bringing Up Baby was an enormous flop back when it came out. It's only been reconceived as a classic in the years since.

Kidman is decent at comedy but only if the movie is actually good. I don't think she can elevate a terrible comedic film like Bewitched for example. That was atrocious and her strengths overall still lie with drama.

I don't understand the appeal of Reese Witherspoon either. She's good at negative characters like in Election, Vanity Fair (although her character is made too sympathetic), and Big Little Lies, but other than that, she's very one-note. Renee gets a lot of hate on DL but I think she's a lot more talented than she's given credit for especially when you look at how many awards she's amassed in her truncated career. I'm surprised that with her return as Bridget Jones and Oscar win for Judy that she hasn't gotten any great offers since besides an NBC limited series. Gwyneth is okay to me as an actress. I wouldn't put her with the other actresses you listed and she definitely didn't deserve an Oscar for Shakespeare in Love but she's not terrible either especially when you consider what passes for an "actress" today.

by Anonymousreply 256March 16, 2023 9:04 AM

R255 Most of the social media discourse about Brendan Fraser is attacking his win for glorifying fat suits and stealing roles away from plus-sized actors. I feel like Brendan's comeback tour was more from TV and media outlets than social media. EEAAO and Michelle's win definitely got boosted from social media, mainly Twitter, though.

by Anonymousreply 257March 16, 2023 9:05 AM

R255 It's fine. It's not going to ruin anything in the long run. We've gone through many social movements, and these awards always have been political anyway.

Hollywood went through McCarthyism and came through the other side.

It went through various Civil Rights movements.

I feel pretty certain plenty of white people were offended when black actors got their first Oscar nominations, feeling like good white actors were displaced.

Marlon Brando did the political protest thing to raise awareness about American Indian plights and it was historic and then society marched on. It didn't forever change the Oscars into one thing or another. Susan Sarandon and Tim Robbins both gave political rants during their Oscars appearances when I was young and I didn't get that, but c'est la vie.

I do think that actors of color were not considered for roles for so long because if scripts didn't indicate an actor was black or Latin or Asian, the default understanding was that they should be white, and that denied work to a lot of people. That began to change about 20 years ago. We are now seeing a resetting.

In case people here didn't clock it, there was an overrepresentation/big celebration of All Things Gay within entertainment for about a decade until we were no longer novel and people felt overall like we are now just people, and so things have begun to even out and normalize. The same will happen eventually with this. But for now, we're in a period of overcompensating for longstanding oversights, and the process is a little bit blended with a post-MeToo McCarthyism spirit.

This, too, shall pass.

This is how progress happens. The sooner it happens unemcumbered, the sooner we will rebalance and move on from it and start to think more nationalistically, with American people in opposition to people from other countries, instead of as differently colored people within our own country.

by Anonymousreply 258March 16, 2023 9:10 AM

Whether she was robbed or not, Cate will be fine. She is still considered the most talented actress of her generation. She is still a Hollywood titan, and will continue working steadily on demanding and high profile projects, for which she will be paid gazillions. Michelle Yeoh on the other hand has probably reached her peak and I bet after another comedy or two will disappear, like so many lesser Oscar winners.

by Anonymousreply 259March 16, 2023 11:02 AM

R258, well said, people forget progress is never a straight line. It happens over time.

R259, Michelle has been around for 40 years. I’m sure she’s heard that same line for, let’s say, 40 years. I’ve always thought she was incredibly talented, she’s the highlight of any movie I’ve seen her in. She deserved this Oscar, she played a character that was unlike any other character out there this year.

by Anonymousreply 260March 16, 2023 11:40 AM

Now that the Oscars are over, DLers can go back to doing what they used to do - ignoring Cate Blanchett.

by Anonymousreply 261March 16, 2023 11:48 AM



by Anonymousreply 262March 16, 2023 11:51 AM

R259, I think you're spot on about Michelle and her future. In future campaigns, we will have to get used to other actresses/actors spinning their narrative of I deserve this award because... blah, blah, blah

I've rewatched the Actors on Actors with Cate and Michelle and I wish that Variety didn't set it up that way. I didn't get a good vibe of their segment together. I would have liked to have seen Cate with Bill Nighy or Colin Farrell chatting - someone that she's not competing against.

In hindsight, maybe Cate should have held off on all of those huggy photos with Michelle at the awards. It amplified Michelle's profile.

by Anonymousreply 263March 16, 2023 11:51 AM

All of you queens think that Michelle Yeoh is a newcomer to the screen. Cate lost the Oscar with her Critics Choice speech. But then, she was very sure she had the award in the bag. So, don't go trying to re-write history, You don't insult people then hope to get their vote. Is it political? Yrs, but it's the same system that awarded her two previous Oscars. All she had to do was keep her mouth shut and not presume that she had already won.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 264March 16, 2023 12:33 PM

From the link above:

Some Critics’ Choice members I spoke to were unconcerned, dismissing it as “woke” or “actor-speak,” while others in the audience (which surely included Oscar voters) found it ungracious. If the horse race is so unpalatable, maybe she should have taken herself out of the running altogether?

Critics’ Choice member Kjersti Flaa of Norway told me Cate’s discourse “will definitely be in the minds of some voters” and, given the precarious state of televised awards shows, “they might be worried she will do something similar if she wins” on Oscar night.

by Anonymousreply 265March 16, 2023 12:34 PM

Australians never have been anything but trouble.

That's why we banished their ancestors in the first place, and that meant the breeding pool for 150+ years has been a criminal-nut-job lake of trouble.

by Anonymousreply 266March 16, 2023 12:46 PM

Good lord, Michelle has been working for 40 years. When do you think her career will fade? 2063?

by Anonymousreply 267March 16, 2023 1:32 PM

The blacks are pissed that Jamie Lee Curtis won over a negress. If this had happened last year, they would have stormed the stage.

by Anonymousreply 268March 16, 2023 2:10 PM

Michelle and Jamie Lee won because they gave the best performances. Hammy Blanchett, angry Bassett and the irish whatsherface had no chance.

by Anonymousreply 269March 16, 2023 2:26 PM

[quote] I've rewatched the Actors on Actors with Cate and Michelle and I wish that Variety didn't set it up that way. I didn't get a good vibe of their segment togethe

Glad I wasn't the only one

by Anonymousreply 270March 16, 2023 2:34 PM

R261, Cate has always been a DL icon, albeit not a popular one but she solidified her icons status amongst gay men way way before lezzies tried to claim her

by Anonymousreply 271March 16, 2023 2:37 PM

Anyone who doubt the critics choice speech didn't cost Cate the Oscar and SAG is stupid In what world would Hollywood give Michelle Yeoh, an ageing Asian actress who is not even popular in America, over Cate Blanchett the second coming of M. She had to do something to really piss Academy voters off for them to not vote for her, and she succeeded with the Xritics Chpice speech. Look at the faces of the other nominees during Cate's speech and you will get your answer

by Anonymousreply 272March 16, 2023 2:40 PM

[QUOTE] But Kate could play comedy and I have never seen Cate do any.

Then you should look no further than last year’s DON’T LOOK UP in which she is hysterical.

by Anonymousreply 273March 16, 2023 2:57 PM

[quote] Then you should look no further than last year’s DON’T LOOK UP in which she is hysterical.

Nope. It was a medicore performance. There was nothing " hilarious" about her performance. It was just okay. Face it Cate cannot do comedy

by Anonymousreply 274March 16, 2023 3:00 PM

Jamie Lee Curtis and Cate Blanchett have a movie coming out soon called Borderland.

by Anonymousreply 275March 16, 2023 3:22 PM

Movie will bomb. Read eli Roth is at the helm and Blanchett was miscast

by Anonymousreply 276March 16, 2023 3:29 PM

It sounds awful. I know Cate likes to vary her projects but this one should have been a skip. It sounds right up Jamie Lee's alley though.

by Anonymousreply 277March 16, 2023 9:01 PM

R276 Eli Roth? God, I love Cate. She is gutsy and will try anything. And she’s a spectacular actress.

That said, I’m glad Yeoh won. She gave the best performance by an actress this year.

by Anonymousreply 278March 16, 2023 9:22 PM

I don't think Cate Blanchett was robbed or that her tone-deaf comment at the Critics' Choice Awards hurt her in any substantial way. Michelle Yeoh's film was clearly much more popular with the Academy than Tár, performed better at the box office, and is the rare Oscar movie to make a cultural impact outside of the industry and cinephiles.

What I think worked against Blanchett is that the performance is quite subtle, Field's script only allowing for a few brief, showy moments that occur near the conclusion of the film and end up feeling out of character. I admired her work and think she would have been a worthy winner in several other years over the past decade, but to me Yeoh gave the fresher, riskier, more unexpected and affecting performance in the stronger film.

by Anonymousreply 279March 16, 2023 10:06 PM

One thing's for sure, Cate will never work with Michelle and there won't be any cuddly photoshoots of the two of them together ever again. And after Jamie Lee realizes that she's never going to be invited to the Asian club, she's going to drop Michelle and company and stick to Hollywood royalty like Cate.

by Anonymousreply 280March 16, 2023 10:22 PM

I'm sure Cate was genuine with her affection but I thought Cate was really overdoing it with all the hugging and kissing with Michelle Yeoh. It was also obvious that Michelle was not comfortable with it. Most minorities are not built like that. They see it as fake. Also, the Vanity Gair actors on actors interview between the 2, revealed Michelle to not be the warm fuzzy type person

by Anonymousreply 281March 16, 2023 10:36 PM

The Academy voted exactly the same for the Actors and Actresses as the Sag Awards did. Copycats!

by Anonymousreply 282March 16, 2023 10:40 PM

R281 Let’s see…

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 283March 16, 2023 10:42 PM

^^^Michelle's grin looks forced

by Anonymousreply 284March 16, 2023 10:44 PM

[quote] It was also obvious that Michelle was not comfortable with it. Most minorities are not built like that. They see it as fake.

Australians see this as very fake, as well. It’s a sign she’s been in Hollywood too long.

by Anonymousreply 285March 17, 2023 1:31 AM

Nothing is more fake than Michelle. Cate has a lot more power and clout in Hollywood than her. She will use her connections to keep Michelle blacklisted so all Michelle and her Asian cronies can play in is cheap Disney+ fare.

by Anonymousreply 286March 17, 2023 1:42 AM

Good lord, r296. Obsessed much with Asian hate? You have about 100 posts on this thread.

by Anonymousreply 287March 17, 2023 2:02 AM

Kates performance was fine. But she didn’t deserve the Oscar. The right person won it. The end.

by Anonymousreply 288March 17, 2023 3:42 AM

Does anyone with an opinion about Todd Field consider him to be a better actor or director?

The bio he/his management wrote on imdb is rather glowing about both career paths.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 289March 17, 2023 4:44 AM

^ obviously I meant r286 in my post at r287. He is quite the prolific poster and racist. More than 100 posts here are his.

by Anonymousreply 290March 17, 2023 5:14 AM

You guys maybe take all of this too seriously.

High stakes for the actors themselves and their careers, obviously—especially for Michelle, considering this is a first for her. It's Cate's EIGHTH Oscar nomination, so let's stop acting like she's suffering. Bette Davis was 'only' nominated for 10, and she'll always be the benchmark. Meryl may have 1,400 nominations by now, but who cares? She's out there on her own and no one will catch up.

Cate has been one of my favorite actors since Elizabeth and I've watched almost every movie she's ever made (not the dumb comic book ones, though) and enjoyed most.

And still—this is SO a first-world problem.

I will never feel bad for Elon Musk about anything and I will never feel bad about the career status of someone who is universally celebrated of one of the greatest of all time in her field.

The highly opinionated people here may legitimately care about this more than Cate Blanchett herself does. Chill out a little.

by Anonymousreply 291March 17, 2023 7:01 AM

Agree with everything r291 said. Stop crying for Cate, she will be fine.

by Anonymousreply 292March 17, 2023 3:01 PM

Australians need constant validation from their northern hemisphere counterparts.

by Anonymousreply 293March 17, 2023 5:34 PM

Cate is box-office poison. Except for Don't Look Up, which was an ensemble cast, all of her movies in recent years have bombed. She can't open a picture as lead actress.

Michelle is booked and busy for years to come, and her movies make money. She's also far more liked in in the industry than Cate.

by Anonymousreply 294March 17, 2023 8:24 PM

I'm watching Variety's 'actors on actors' conversation between Michelle Yeoh and Cate Blanchett right now. Yeoh's personality is adorable and she really does seem to respect Blanchett. Interesting that she has never done theatre and doesn't believe she could do it.

Cate comports herself more like a professional, which doesn't surprise me. She's all about technique and communication. She does seem like someone who was a theatre director. Also a bit warm but with a cool edge.

by Anonymousreply 295March 19, 2023 12:24 AM

Cate Blanchett's loss has prompted Todd Field to retire.

by Anonymousreply 296March 19, 2023 12:27 AM

Well damn. Cate should follow suite

by Anonymousreply 297March 19, 2023 12:39 AM

Cate must be so devastated that she didn't win the Academy Award for Tar . I just read an interview she did where she said she had never encountered a character like Tar and that the character "inhibits (her) dreams "

by Anonymousreply 298March 19, 2023 12:42 AM

The British seem to like Cate more. She has 4 BAFTAs there and only 2 Oscars. They didn't snub her for Elizabeth and Tar.

by Anonymousreply 299March 19, 2023 1:39 AM

She's a colonial.

by Anonymousreply 300March 19, 2023 1:40 AM

Meryl must be in 7th heaven that Cate, who supplanted her in terms of artistry, hasn't joined the 3-Oscar club yet. Each of Cate's Oscar-nominated roles are all classics whereas no one can say that about Meryl's bilge of work.

by Anonymousreply 301March 19, 2023 1:43 AM

Cate is good at entertaining herself during a boring junket.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 302March 19, 2023 2:07 AM

Cate was brilliant in Tár but she was let down by a shitty movie.

by Anonymousreply 303March 19, 2023 8:53 AM

Was Virginia Madsen robbed of an Oscar for Sideways? Yes.

Move the fuck on.

by Anonymousreply 304March 19, 2023 8:58 AM
Need more help? Click Here.

Yes indeed, we too use "cookies." Take a look at our privacy/terms or if you just want to see the damn site without all this bureaucratic nonsense, click ACCEPT. Otherwise, you'll just have to find some other site for your pointless bitchery needs.


Become a contributor - post when you want with no ads!