Mary J. Blige
Age: 47
Film: Mudbound
Role: Florence Jackson, devoted wife of an upwardly mobile sharecropper on the muddiest farm in Mississippi, sometime domestic employee to the desperate wife of the farm’s ignoble owner, and mother to Ronsel who survives World War II to face horrors at home he never imagined.
Nomination History:
This is Blige’s first nomination. She is also nominated this year for Best Song.
Why She Should Win:
When I first watched Mudbound, I found it difficult to understand why Mary J. Blige was being singled out for acclaim. There’s much to praise about the movie for sure, but Blige’s understated work as Florence Jackson seems overshadowed by showier performances from…basically all of her co-stars. Initially I watched thinking in bafflement, Yeah, sure she’s good, but like every single person in the whole entire cast is even better, so…
At first I thought Blige was being singled out because people had strong responses to the film and wanted to find a way to honor it, but there was simply no room in other categories. Why not honor Rob Morgan (my personal favorite), Jason Mitchell (so moving), Jonathan Banks (evil personified), or Garrett Hedlund (dynamic but destroyed)? Well, they’re all men and Best Supporting Actor is too crowded already.
I also wondered if Blige’s nomination was a way of acknowledging her character who is definitely the most sympathetic of the entire (enormous) cast. There is nothing not to love about Florence Jackson. She is always kind, fiercely moral. She lives her faith, loves her children, and is one-half of what has to be one of the most exemplary marriages ever presented on film. She’s a force for good. She does no harm. She’s brave and strong, but she never brags about her impeccable character. She only shows it to us in her words and actions. She’s a self-aware, kind, morally centered person. And what happens to her? Terrible, terrible things that would wound any mother’s heart. Does she deserve any of this maternal anguish? No, of course not, but she has to suffer through it, anyway, because that’s Mississippi for you. (At times, Mudbound makes Mississippi look so unbearable that you start to imagine it’s put out by the tourism board of some rival state.)
Of course, I said to myself, it’s also easy to sympathize with Florence because she’s the narrator. An embarrassingly long interval passed before I had to correct myself, Wait no, she’s not the narrator. She’s a narrator.
All of the lines that really stick with you seem to be spoken by Florence Jackson. Her words ring out with surprising power. The other characters share a bit of their own background and impressions, so that we know what matters most to them. But Florence’s words seem to matter in general. Her words feel true. While the others may offer insight into their motivations, Florence gives us insight into ourselves and the working of the world in which we live. Her words seem so relevant and continually surprising.
In fact, what has stuck with me most from Mudbound is Florence’s meditation on how she understands that nothing had better happen to the white family’s children while they are in her care.
So Florence is an amazingly sympathetic character and one of the least tortured people in Mudbound, despite all of the horrible things that happen to her family. She’s one of the most (and only) centered people in this terrible muddy place.
As I watched, I realized all this. Still, I couldn’t shake the nagging feeling that the character was more special than the performance. I kept thinking, I mean, she has a good part, but she’s not really doing anything…
And then recently the truth hit me. Oh my gosh! What if she were doing something!
See that’s really the brilliance of the performance. Mary J. Blige is just saying her lines and disappearing into the role. As someone who has had a very successful music career since–I don’t know…forever?–Mary J. Blige is a huge star. Sometimes huge stars are not willing (or possibly able) to put vanity and the spotlight aside and simply give the story what it needs. She’s there serving the story and the film, not the other way around. She’s just being Florence Jackson. She’s not trying to turn the film into The Mary J. Blige Show. It’s a remarkably giving and gracious performance, and I, personally, am curious to see what Blige does with similarly demanding roles in the future.
Why She Might Not Win:
With a new Golden Globe and SAG actor to add to her trophy case, Allison Janney is on a winning streak at the moment. Most people (myself included) expect the wildly popular and arguably overdue Janney to add an Oscar to her existing haul on March 2.
If Janney doesn’t win, next in line is Laurie Metcalf whose own past winning streak was ended by Janney’s present one.
But from a certain perspective, those two performances are extremely similar. Both of them play overly critical mothers to the protagonist of a female-anchored film. (On closer inspection, of course, Janney’s character is abusive while Metcalf’s is trying to be a good mother despite having an abusive model.)
The point is, maybe these two high-profile “critical mother” performances will end up cancelling each other out, causing a vote split that results in a free-for-all.
Though I personally believe Mary J. Blige gives the weakest of the nominated performances, she could still end up winning. Mudbound has a pretty passionate following, and some people are quite vocally disappointed that it failed to snag a Best Picture nomination.
Since “Remember Me” from Coco seems likely to win Best Song, the Best Supporting Actress Oscar would be a good way to honor not just Mary J. Blige, but the film, as well.
Janney is without question the front runner at this point, and Laurie Metcalf seems like the clear second in line. But the reality is that any of these women could win Best Supporting Actress.
A win for Blige would be a big surprise, yes, but not a miracle by any means.
Age: 58
Film: I, Tonya
Role: LaVona Golden, the abusive mother, who humiliates, harangues, stabs, and betrays her daughter Tonya Harding, all to shape her into the universally known Olympian she ultimately becomes.
Nomination History:
This is Janney’s first nomination.
Why She Should Win:
This is Janney’s first nomination??????! What??!!??? How is that even possible?
How many movies have been improved immeasurably by Allison Janney’s presence? All of them she’s in, that’s for sure!
That this multi-Emmy-winning staple of American entertainment has never even been nominated for an Oscar before is so egregious an oversight that it’s honestly kind of hard to believe it’s true. (I mean, she’s even appeared in the types of films that generate Oscar buzz. Why has nothing happened for her until now? Is it because she’s funny? It’s because she does comedy too well, isn’t it?)
Seriously if Allison Janney appears in a film, then you know it will have at least one redeeming quality. She should have an Oscar already.
Janney is one of those actresses you always recognize. She’s a bit like Katharine Hepburn in that way. It’s not that she plays every character the same way because she definitely does not. It’s that she brings all these different, varied, complex characters to life through the medium of Allison Janney. You know it’s her, but during each performance you sort of forget that she’s not always like whatever way she’s playing that character. She’s like the sun, always the same and different every day. (I’m going to pretend that makes sense and just cross my fingers and hope you know what I mean about Allison Janney. I’ll bet you do.)
A difficult aspect of playing LaVona that I had not initially considered is that Janney performs several scenes with a live bird on her shoulder. I don’t have much experience performing with live animals. (I was supposed to perform with a live snake once, but regrettably, it died just before curtain.) I can’t imagine that having a bird so close to my ear canal would be optimal working conditions. I’ve really enjoyed listening to Janney recount how she selected that particular bird in interviews. None of the other nominees in this category had to work so closely with an animal–unless your definition of “animal” includes Lady Bird, Doug Jones in a fish suit, or Daniel Day-Lewis. (I suppose there are horses in Mudbound, but they’re not up nibbling on Mary J. Blige’s ear while she tries to deliver her lines.)
Bird aside, LaVona Golden is a nasty piece of work. She’s definitely a huge presence in I, Tonya. For some reason, her unfeeling command, “Skate wet,” is stuck in my head. Janney delivers that particularly well. The line perfectly illustrates what’s so special about this performance. Tonya’s mother is abusive and cruel, but we’re always delighted when she shows up because Janney makes her so funny and entertaining. It’s like the actress is sympathetic even though the character is not, and this kind of thing is difficult to pull off while still doing justice to the character.
The accidental stabbing scene really resonated with me (and probably with anyone else who has had the bad luck of better aim than intended), but Janney’s very best moment comes late in the film in her final moments with Tonya. Their parting moment is the most gutting scene I saw in any movie this year, so heart-breaking, so powerful. Janney deserves the Oscar for that scene alone.
Why She Might Not Win:
Well, I mean, she probably will win. She won at the Globes and the SAGs. Everyone is predicting a win for her.
Her biggest threat is Laurie Metcalf whose turn as Lady Bird’s mother has impressed a lot of critics and resonated with mothers and daughters everywhere. (Fewer people (I hope) will identify with the more extreme and abusive mother/daughter dynamic in I, Tonya.)
So while Janney will probably win the Oscar, Laurie Metcalf is a genuine threat, and Octavia Spencer as part of the most nominated film of the year is a potential dark horse.
I would be happy to see any of these three win, but to be honest, at this point I am kind of rooting for Janney because she brightens up every movie she appears in. She deserves an Oscar to acknowledge her outstanding body of work in film, and her turn as LaVona is both Oscar worthy and memorable.
Lesley Manville
Age: 61
Film: Phantom Thread
Role: Cyril Woodhouse, the ever-present, always poised, somewhat intimidating sister and business partner of genius 1950s London fashion designer Reynolds Woodcock.
Nomination History:
This is Manville’s first nomination.
Why She Should Win:
I almost never connect with Paul Thomas Anderson movies. I’m not always the biggest fan of Daniel Day-Lewis. And the theatrical trailer for Phantom Thread made it look like the most uninteresting story ever captured on film.
But I was stunned to enjoy the movie, and the biggest reason why was Lesley Manville. As performed by Manville, Cyril is such a presence. I completely believed the dynamic she shares with Reynolds, to most an exacting genius but to Cyril her fragile younger brother.
The film quickly shows us that Cyril and Reynolds live in a closely controlled little world where visitors to the house and even Reynolds’s occasionally love interests join them only temporarily as awkward guests. We get the idea that some phantom thread connects Reynolds and his sister. He says he sews secrets into the linings and of his clothes. Their whole relationship reads as one such secret. There’s nothing untoward going on. They’re just intimates from childhood connected by a common past, and no one else gets them like they get each other.
At first Cyril seems controlling, almost menacing, but we soon see that she merely loves her brother and tries to make up for his deficiencies with her strengths. They work together seamless. He is the eccentric genius. She takes care of business, including any tricky social interactions that her fragile brother finds vexing.
Though she initially comes off as overbearing and odd, Cyril ultimately becomes the source of some of the most delightful moments of comedy in the film. Manville has a gift for making a situation funny with the most understated, maybe even restrained, line delivery. I love the scene when she puts her brother in his place while discussing what’s to be done with Alma.
I also love Cyril’s evolving relationship with Alma. Lesley Manville and Vicky Krieps have some of the best scenes in the movie together as the power dynamic between them gradually changes. I love the scene when Cyril advises Alma about how to eat her toast more quietly and also the later moment showing the polite power struggle as the women fight for control of the household and situation when Cyril sends for the doctor.
My initial appraisal of Cyril was, “She seems so sinister,” but as the movie wore on, she gradually became the only character I completely trusted.
Manville has been quietly gifting us with great performances for a very long time. I had hoped she might get an Oscar nomination for her work as Mary in Mike Leigh’s Another Year. She’s just incredible in that and completely different here. I’m delighted she’s finally gotten her first Oscar nomination.
Why She Might Not Win:
Lesley Manville is not going to win. I cannot imagine a likely scenario in which she pulls off a surprise upset. Even Mary J. Blige has a better chance of nabbing the award. Manville would just have to make it through too many people.
Of course, stranger things have happened at the Oscars. Voters probably will watch Phantom Thread to see the final performance of Daniel Day-Lewis, and you can’t watch the film without noticing Cyril. If Manville somehow does end up winning, she’ll get a big round of applause from me because I don’t know if I would have liked Phantom Thread much at all without the presence of the perfectly played Cyril.
Laurie Metcalf
Age: 62
Film: Lady Bird
Role: Your mom…No wait, she just reminds you of your mom. She’s actually playing Marion McPherson, mother of your fiery eighteen-year-old self…no sister…no daughter…no, actually, you know what? Let’s just say she’s the mom in Lady Bird.
Nomination History:
This is Metcalf’s first nomination.
Why She Should Win:
Non-theater goers probably think of Laurie Metcalf as Roseanne’s sister or the mother of Big Bang Theory‘s Sheldon Cooper.
But when I saw her performance in Greta Gerwig’s Lady Bird, I could only think one thing. She is definitely getting nominated for Best Supporting Actress.
In my review of the film, I joked that in the first draft, Gerwig must have named the character For Your Consideration Marion McPherson. Metcalf keeps graciously insisting in interviews that “it was all on the page,” and I’m certain that much of it was on the page. This is a plum role. It’s not only Oscar bait, but actress bait. You write somebody a part like this, and you’re bound to attract talent.
And Gerwig certainly has. She’s written a great part, but it isn’t all on the page. As someone who writes novels, the idea of only being able to reveal my characters through the interpretation of someone else makes me cringe. Yes, the part is well written, but don’t let Metcalf’s graciousness fool you. She’s giving a magnificent performance.
Metcalf has so many outstanding moments that every moment she’s in belongs to her (which is saying something because Saoirse Ronan is great, too). And yet she doesn’t do anything particularly showy, nothing crazy. In my experience, it’s easier to play someone insane or villainous or even someone incredibly sympathetic. Marion hovers somewhere between frustrating and wonderful. She’s a realistic, rounded, imperfect human being, just a mom doing her best every day and sometimes falling short. Metcalf’s performance is nuanced. She makes Marion difficult to understand, yet easy to get.
Why She Might Not Win:
As of now, Allison Janney looks most likely to take home the statuette, but don’t count out Laurie Metcalf yet.
For one thing, Lady Bird is already so beloved with such a loyal following, and this is a ridiculously competitive year. A win for Laurie Metcalf would be a way to honor the film. I mean, yes, Lady Bird has a chance to win Best Picture or Director, but it probably won’t. It might not even when Original Screenplay (where it has to compete with Three Billboards and Get Out among others).
Oscar night usually gives us a couple of surprises, and Laurie Metcalf stealing the statuette from Allison Janney would not shock me at all. (I mean “stealing” figuratively, of course. I’m not expecting a brawl to break out on stage, although that might help revive the broadcast ratings.)
Octavia Spencer
Age: 45
Film: The Shape of Water
Role: Zelda Delilah Fuller, a cleaning woman at a top secret government facility in the 1960s who risks her job and her life to help a desperate friend.
Nomination History:
Won Best Supporting Actress Oscar in 2012 for The Help (2011).
Previously nominated for Best Supporting Actress for Hidden Figures (2016).
Why She Should Win:
Sally Hawkins and Doug Jones give amazing performances in The Shape of Water, but to be honest, midway through the movie, their love story begins to feel removed from what’s happening with all the other characters. From the start, Hawkins’s Elisa feels like she’s lost in another world, and her love affair with Jones’s character just pulls her further and further away from our reality.
At one point, I realized I was far more invested in the fate of the sympathetic supporting characters, particularly Spencer’s Zelda.
(Well, maybe not in the world, but that’s how strong my concern felt in the moment.)
Here’s the thing. Elisa risks everything for love. And Zelda risks everything, too, but for what? Even if it all goes their way, Zelda has nothing in particular to gain from the success of their plan and everything to lose (her life included) from its failure.
I suppose ultimately she takes these risks for love, too. She responds to Elisa’s need. When the time comes for a test of character, Zelda summons courage and chooses to protect the vulnerable. In one fantastic scene, Elisa pleads with Giles, telling him that they are not human if they don’t help the creature. Zelda comes to this realization on her own, and she acts immediately.
I love the moment when her eyes grow bigger and bigger, increasingly filled with understanding and apprehension as she realizes what her friend is up to and up against. Without being asked, she makes a decision. Putting herself in great peril, she takes action.
Watching her in that moment of worry and decision, I realized, This is what makes Octavia Spencer a great actress. A moment like this could pass almost unnoticed, but she makes it pivotal. She doesn’t have to say anything. The inner conflict and its resolution are written on her face for all of us to see.
I loved this performance. Zelda was my favorite character in the film, and I think Spencer is my favorite in this category.
Why She Might Not Win:
As I have not failed to mention at this point, Allison Janney is probably going to win the Oscar.
Octavia Spencer may be giving my favorite performance by a Supporting Actress this year, but there are a few stumbling blocks between her and a win.
1) Momentum for Janney will be hard to overcome, and Laurie Metcalf seems to be next in line.
3) She won for playing a maid in the 1960s.
I’m actually quite impressed with the way Spencer has been addressing this in interviews. She keeps using the word “archetype,” which I think is brilliant. Guillermo del Toro wrote this part for her. He was writing a fairy tale. He had a certain archetype in mind.
So now, anyone concerned about Octavia Spencer playing a 1960s cleaning lady after winning for playing a 1960s maid can rest easy. The character is not a stereotype. Zelda is an archetype.
For what it’s worth, I think Octavia Spencer is absolutely right about del Toro’s use of archetypal characters to tell his story. (I’ll talk more about that in my write up of Best Picture.) But I do think that by discussing the role this way so often, Spencer really helps her Oscar chances.
As his work makes clear, Guillermo del Toro is a genius, but he does not always describe his work very clearly. I don’t think this is because English is not his first language. I think that his mind works differently from many, and that his films as works of art speak for themselves telling us what he means more clearly than he can articulate it in casual conversation.
(I don’t claim to be working at del Toro’s level, but I often find that I am able to express myself more clearly in the totality of a novel than I am in conversation.)
Spencer, though, is incredibly clear. She presents a coherent and concise explanation for how her character in The Shape of Water operates within the story. She’s obviously put a lot of thought into how to describe the role to others because she does a lot of the work for the listener. She has taken control of the narrative so that even the laziest listener will be able to understand the role as she is describing it. This a sound strategy that seems to be paying off so far. It might even help her to win a second Oscar.
Consider this. Almost everyone will watch The Shape of Water (or pretend to) because it’s a front runner for Picture and Director, so a lot of people are going to see this lovely Octavia Spencer performance without going out of their way at all. I expect Allison Janney to win, but if there’s some kind of weird vote split between Janney and Metcalf (the two complicated mothers), then the popularity of the The Shape of Water could help Octavia Spencer to walk off with the Academy Award.