Win or lose, Streep is class act and actress

Win or lose, Streep is class act and actress 

Meryl Streep may not win the Oscar this weekend because she's too ... brilliant. Too unbelievably talented, an actress who can do anything or disappear into anyone, from a drunk ("Ironweed") and dying wife and mother ("One True Thing") to a frosty fashion editor ("The Devil Wears Prada").


She is like the A-plus student who excels at everything she tackles and who is expected to be at the top of the class -- because she is Meryl Streep. She can meet and master any challenge, perfect any accent and appear to transform herself, no matter what the role demands.

As John F. Kennedy once said, "To whom much is given, much is required." Much has been given to Ms. Streep and much is required and, often, taken for granted.

Of course she can play Julia Child, even if that means creating the illusion that she's 6 foot 2, with a thicker midsection, curly brown hair, a lower voice and the ability to be moved almost to tears by superb food. She did just that in "Julie & Julia."

A judgmental nun? Been there, done that in "Doubt."
Divorced mother teaching violin to children in East Harlem? "Music of the Heart."
Blue-collar heroine whose battle for truth exacts the highest price? "Silkwood."

And the list goes on, all the way back to "The Deer Hunter" (1978) when she received her first Oscar nomination, and "Kramer vs. Kramer" (1979), when she won for the first time, in the supporting race. "Holy mackerel!" she exclaimed, from the podium of the Dorothy Chandler Pavilion.

Ms. Streep's second win, this time for leading actress, came in "Sophie's Choice" as a Polish concentration camp survivor who had faced a question about her children that was the embodiment of evil. When Sylvester Stallone opened the envelope on April 11, 1983, he announced her as "Marvelous Meryl Streep."

Crazy but True: Meryl Streep Hasn't Won an Oscar in 26 Years. Why Not?

Febr 28, 2009 moviefone.com

It's hard to believe, but Meryl Streep, arguably America's most acclaimed actress, has not won an Academy Award since 1983, when she took home the Best Actress trophy for 'Sophie's Choice.' (Three years earlier she nabbed her first Oscar for her supporting role in 'Kramer vs. Kramer.') 

That's a grand total of two wins -- and only one for a leading role -- in her entire 32-year movie career, despite having been nominated 15 times. (For some perspective: Sally Field and Hilary Swankboth won the Best Actress award twice.) Streep's current and 16th nomination is for her delicious portrayal of Julia Child in'Julie & Julia.' Will she lose out yet again?

Judging from past years ... it's a distinct possibility. Winning an Oscar, of course, is all about who else is in the running that particular year. In addition to other disadvantages, which are detailed below, Streep has had the misfortune to be nominated repeatedly alongside actresses who not only gave outstanding performances, but whose "Time Had Come" to win. When the Academy, like God, decides that it's someone's time, there's no getting around it.

"2010
• Is Nominated for: 'Julie & Julia'
• Fellow Nominees: Sandra Bullock ('The Blind Side'), Helen Mirren ('The Last Station'), Carey Mulligan ('An Education'), Gabourey Sidibe ('Precious')
• Streep's Chances: Her toughest competition is Mirren (stunning as Countess Tolstoy) and Bullock (who's never been nominated before), but the Academy might decide that 26 years of showing up and graciously applauding her fellow nominees is long enough. Maybe Streep's time has finally come ... again". 

Let's break it down by year of nomination (all for Best Actress unless otherwise stipulated; winners are in bold): Continue reading after the cut:

State of the (Oscar) Race: Best Actress, Accumulated Oscars, and Meryl Streep

State of the (Oscar) Race: Best Actress, Accumulated Oscars, and Meryl Streep


Source: Relatively Entertaining (Feb. 25, 2010)


Qutes from the arrticle:


"...I genuinely love Sandra Bullock.  I do.  I find a lot of her performances fantastic, and eminently watchable and natural and enjoyable.  But Meryl Streep, wow.  First, talk about overdue.  But then, take another look.  She WAS Julia Child.  And she was Julia Child in some really remarkable moments.  If you took the two of them side by side, and made everyone watch both films again, one after the other, I think most would realize how much higher the level is where Streep’s performance progresses...."

"Her Julia Child was the warmest and most memorable person I’ve seen all year." 

"And sure, everyone expects that Meryl will have another chance next year.  But my God, how many years are we going to keep on saying that?  Doesn’t “some day” eventually have to turn into now?  And what the heck is that going to take?"

"Yeah, poor Meryl’s awesomeness does end up hurting her, doesn’t it, in that weird way?  The idea that it’s nice to give awards to other people when they have a chance, because Meryl’ll be back for more opportunities?  It really IS unfair.  

Streep, on the other hand – first of all, she’s portraying a person who EVERYONE knows.  So there’s the immediate challenge of capturing that, which she does brilliantly.  But then, you also do get that growth, that progression.  She’s starting somewhere, as a certain person, and she moves and blossoms into something and someone else.  The fact that she does that and we’re a part of it (and for only half of a movie, no less!) really makes that performance special, in my eyes.  And it’s just one more time (along with similar tour-de-forces in films such as Doubt,Adaptation, The Devil Wears Prada, One True Thing, Bridges of Madison County, etc.) that she’ll be unfairly rationalized out.

"...How crazy is it that Hilary Swank has essentially two knock out performances in her career, and has an Oscar for each of them?  She has as many Oscars as Meryl Streep, despite Streep’s 16 nominations!"

"...Finally, you have to wonder what goes through voters’ heads.  I have this sneaking suspicion that what could push Bullock over the top is this idea that this could be her one chance.  Sure, Meryl was better, but Meryl will be back next year, and the year after, and the year after.  We’ll eventually get her her third Oscar.  But Sandy, this could be her one chance.  She’s so nice and fun, we might never get the chance again to give her one of these.  I worry that that might do it.  (And again, don’t get me wrong – I love Bullock.  Just feel like Meryl’s been overlooked too many times, and did actually give the best performance this year.)..."

FULL article here: Relatively Entertaining (Feb. 25, 2010)

Update: Videos (interviews & clips)

 *****

Click HERE for the latest added clips of  'Julie & Julia' and  interviews with Meryl Streep.

****

Is Meryl Streep Oscar's comeback kid?

Source: hitfix.com

"... On the other hand, a comeback could be stirring for one of the long expected frontrunners during the season, Ms. Meryl Streep.

After having been the bridesmaid at the big show 11 times over the past 26 years, there was a growing consensus throughout the industry that it was time for one of the world's greatest living actresses to finally get that third Oscar statue. It didn't hurt that her two early wins aside, Streep had subtly made her displeasure known on more than one occasion at having lost at the Academy Awards more than any other actor in history. When one possible winner, Carey Mulligan, started to fade following "An Education's" mediocre box office cume this past Fall, Streep's heralded turn as Julia Child in the hit "Julie and Julia" seemed as though it could finally break her through. Then, dramatically, Streep and Sony Pictures got blind sided, literally, by Sandra Bullock's turn in the blockbuster "The Blind Side."

Read more after the cut: