Why Meryl Streep Needs to Win Another Oscar NOW!
Tomorrow, August 7, Meryl Streep’s latest film “Julie & Julia” hits theaters. The film tells the tale of Julie Powell, a woman working at a dead end job, and her personal quest to cook every recipe in Julia Child’s book “Mastering the Art of French Cooking.” Meryl Streep plays master chef Julia Child in the film, which parallels Powell’s culinary attempts with Child’s ambitions fifty years earlier.
I have not seen this film but I’ve seen the trailer. Once again, Meryl Streep has disappeared into a role so masterfully; I had to watch it twice to be sure it was Meryl and not archival footage of Julia Child herself. And, once again, I am sure that Meryl will receive an Academy Award nomination for the role. It seems inevitable. Streep is almost always nominated.
And, as such, it got me to thinking about a few things. Meryl Streep is often acclaimed as our greatest living actor. (No arguments here.) Yet, she has not won an Academy Award since 1981 (for Sophie’s Choice). 1981! That’s twenty-eight years. She has been nominated fifteen times; thirteen of those have been after Sophie’s Choice. And, she’s only won the Best Actress category once. (Her first Oscar was for Best Supporting Actress for “Kramer v. Kramer.” She was nominated last year for her role in "Doubt." I believe that Meryl Streep should win another Academy Award for her portrayal of Julia Child.
Why should she win again? Several reasons.
First, Meryl Streep is consistently good in her performance. No matter what the genre (action, comedy, musical, drama), she is always interesting to watch. She is reliable in her ability to dissolve into the character. Once I got over the harsh New Jersey accent of her Sister Aloysius character from “Doubt,” I completely forgot I was watching Meryl Streep. (I think the only reason I got hung up on the accent is because I’m not familiar with it, having not heard it in real life.) And, did anyone even remember that it was Meryl playing the ice queen editor Miranda Priestly? Even in that scene where Miranda is stripped down, crying over the demise of her latest marriage? I think not!
Second, Meryl only has two Oscars to her credit. She’s won a multitude of other awards but still, only two Oscars. The Oscar remains the most prestigious film award given. As I said, Meryl is arguably our greatest living actor. She should have more than just two. Why? Because Tom Hanks has two. Jodie Foster has two. Hilary Swank and Sean Penn both now have two. I’m not knocking these actors. Tom Hanks is great. Jodie Foster is phenomenal, both on screen and off (as a director). Hilary Swank, I believe, deserved the Oscar she got for “Boys Don’t Cry.” Did she deserve it for “Million Dollar Baby?” I guess so. I’m not sure if it was for her performance or for the overall story told in that film. That film won 4 Oscars that year (Film, Actress, Supporting Actor, and Director). Do I think her performance was better than Imelda Staunton in “Vera Drake?” Not really, no. Sean Penn, I believe, deserved the Oscar he won this year for “Harvey Milk.” It was a sublime performance and a great film. “Mystic River” not so much. Personally, I thought he was better in “Dead Man Walking.” I think that Tom, Jodie, Hilary, and Sean are great actors who aren’t afraid to take chances in their roles. But Meryl outshines them all with her fearlessness. The actresses who have won two Academy Awards are Luise Rainer, Bette Davis, Olivia de Havilland, Vivien Leigh, Ingrid Bergman, Elizabeth Taylor, Glenda Jackson, Jane Fonda, Sally Field, Jodie Foster, and Hillary Swank. It seems inconceivable that Meryl is not included in this list. She should be.
I also think that the Academy Award should be awarded for performance, not personality. That is why I believe Sean Penn beat Mickey Rourke for the Acting Oscar this year. (No, I haven’t seen “The Wrestler.”) In the last fifteen years or so, there have been some recipients who, in my humble view, did not deserve the award. Yes, much of it might have to do with a personal prejudice against these persons, but in my view, they are not actors, merely movie stars who got lucky with a single performance.
Finally, the only actor to have won more than two Academy Awards for acting remains Katherine Hepburn. I would argue that Meryl Streep’s acting talent and craft are greater than Katherine Hepburn’s. This may sound like a controversial statement but hear me out. Kate Hepburn was a great actor. She was. And she stars in some of the greatest films ever made. But, and I know I am going to get a lot of flack for this, she plays essentially the same role in them. She always plays Kate Hepburn. It’s as if Kate Hepburn is going down the river in "The African Queen" or sparing with Cary Grant in "The Philadelphia Story." It is definitely Kate Hepburn sparring with Henry in "The Lion in Winter." And I don’t think Kate Hepburn would ever have the nerve to do an outright musical or play someone mean ("The Devil Wears Prada") or conniving ("Doubt," "Rendition") or frightening ("The Manchurian Candidate"). And, I’m always aware it is Kate Hepburn. With Meryl, the character shines, not the great talent behind it.
Meryl Streep needs to win another Oscar because she has gone above and beyond what other actors have done. She has been consistent in her performances. How many times have we all joked about her ability to master accents? She has stretched herself in almost every genre conceivable ("The French Lieutenant's Woman," "Out of Africa," "Cry in the Dark," "She-Devil," "Postcards from the Edge," "River Wild," "Dancing at Lughnasa," "Music of the Heart," "Adaptation," "Lemony Snicket’s A Series of Unfortunate Events," "Evening," "Rendition," "Lions for Lambs," "Mamma Mia!"). Her career is longer than most actors working today (her first role was a bit part in Julia, 1976). And she’s just too damn good to not have a third Oscar (and a second for Best Actress).
I have not seen this film but I’ve seen the trailer. Once again, Meryl Streep has disappeared into a role so masterfully; I had to watch it twice to be sure it was Meryl and not archival footage of Julia Child herself. And, once again, I am sure that Meryl will receive an Academy Award nomination for the role. It seems inevitable. Streep is almost always nominated.
And, as such, it got me to thinking about a few things. Meryl Streep is often acclaimed as our greatest living actor. (No arguments here.) Yet, she has not won an Academy Award since 1981 (for Sophie’s Choice). 1981! That’s twenty-eight years. She has been nominated fifteen times; thirteen of those have been after Sophie’s Choice. And, she’s only won the Best Actress category once. (Her first Oscar was for Best Supporting Actress for “Kramer v. Kramer.” She was nominated last year for her role in "Doubt." I believe that Meryl Streep should win another Academy Award for her portrayal of Julia Child.
Why should she win again? Several reasons.
First, Meryl Streep is consistently good in her performance. No matter what the genre (action, comedy, musical, drama), she is always interesting to watch. She is reliable in her ability to dissolve into the character. Once I got over the harsh New Jersey accent of her Sister Aloysius character from “Doubt,” I completely forgot I was watching Meryl Streep. (I think the only reason I got hung up on the accent is because I’m not familiar with it, having not heard it in real life.) And, did anyone even remember that it was Meryl playing the ice queen editor Miranda Priestly? Even in that scene where Miranda is stripped down, crying over the demise of her latest marriage? I think not!
Second, Meryl only has two Oscars to her credit. She’s won a multitude of other awards but still, only two Oscars. The Oscar remains the most prestigious film award given. As I said, Meryl is arguably our greatest living actor. She should have more than just two. Why? Because Tom Hanks has two. Jodie Foster has two. Hilary Swank and Sean Penn both now have two. I’m not knocking these actors. Tom Hanks is great. Jodie Foster is phenomenal, both on screen and off (as a director). Hilary Swank, I believe, deserved the Oscar she got for “Boys Don’t Cry.” Did she deserve it for “Million Dollar Baby?” I guess so. I’m not sure if it was for her performance or for the overall story told in that film. That film won 4 Oscars that year (Film, Actress, Supporting Actor, and Director). Do I think her performance was better than Imelda Staunton in “Vera Drake?” Not really, no. Sean Penn, I believe, deserved the Oscar he won this year for “Harvey Milk.” It was a sublime performance and a great film. “Mystic River” not so much. Personally, I thought he was better in “Dead Man Walking.” I think that Tom, Jodie, Hilary, and Sean are great actors who aren’t afraid to take chances in their roles. But Meryl outshines them all with her fearlessness. The actresses who have won two Academy Awards are Luise Rainer, Bette Davis, Olivia de Havilland, Vivien Leigh, Ingrid Bergman, Elizabeth Taylor, Glenda Jackson, Jane Fonda, Sally Field, Jodie Foster, and Hillary Swank. It seems inconceivable that Meryl is not included in this list. She should be.
I also think that the Academy Award should be awarded for performance, not personality. That is why I believe Sean Penn beat Mickey Rourke for the Acting Oscar this year. (No, I haven’t seen “The Wrestler.”) In the last fifteen years or so, there have been some recipients who, in my humble view, did not deserve the award. Yes, much of it might have to do with a personal prejudice against these persons, but in my view, they are not actors, merely movie stars who got lucky with a single performance.
Finally, the only actor to have won more than two Academy Awards for acting remains Katherine Hepburn. I would argue that Meryl Streep’s acting talent and craft are greater than Katherine Hepburn’s. This may sound like a controversial statement but hear me out. Kate Hepburn was a great actor. She was. And she stars in some of the greatest films ever made. But, and I know I am going to get a lot of flack for this, she plays essentially the same role in them. She always plays Kate Hepburn. It’s as if Kate Hepburn is going down the river in "The African Queen" or sparing with Cary Grant in "The Philadelphia Story." It is definitely Kate Hepburn sparring with Henry in "The Lion in Winter." And I don’t think Kate Hepburn would ever have the nerve to do an outright musical or play someone mean ("The Devil Wears Prada") or conniving ("Doubt," "Rendition") or frightening ("The Manchurian Candidate"). And, I’m always aware it is Kate Hepburn. With Meryl, the character shines, not the great talent behind it.
Meryl Streep needs to win another Oscar because she has gone above and beyond what other actors have done. She has been consistent in her performances. How many times have we all joked about her ability to master accents? She has stretched herself in almost every genre conceivable ("The French Lieutenant's Woman," "Out of Africa," "Cry in the Dark," "She-Devil," "Postcards from the Edge," "River Wild," "Dancing at Lughnasa," "Music of the Heart," "Adaptation," "Lemony Snicket’s A Series of Unfortunate Events," "Evening," "Rendition," "Lions for Lambs," "Mamma Mia!"). Her career is longer than most actors working today (her first role was a bit part in Julia, 1976). And she’s just too damn good to not have a third Oscar (and a second for Best Actress).
Comments