Julie + Julia - New Clip
Have a look:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oeSgtWw7zEo

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Boomer,

Thanks for posting. I'm kinda sorta interested in seeing this film. I do like that Streep has Childs's wavering voice down pretty darn well. Supporting actress or actress for her, I don't know yet.

I think she will go for supporting from this clip. But i really hope she goes supporting and maybe i hope she wins!

Once again - if Streep wins supporting at some point, it is unlikely she will ever win a 2nd lead Oscar. If I were devoted to maximizing her status, I would not want her to win supporting, but wait for the right lead nomination.

quote:

Originally posted by seanflynn:
Once again - if Streep wins supporting at some point, it is unlikely she will ever win a 2nd lead Oscar. If I were devoted to maximizing her status, I would not want her to win supporting, but wait for the right lead nomination.

Plausible as it may sound, this is really a theory. Who would have thought someone in the acting branch would get 15 nominations?

seanflynn, knowing that you are a true film fan, and by that I mean that you have facts that film historians probably don't, would you say that it's easier to get an acting Oscar nomination in this day and age than it would have been, say, 30 years ago?

Davis got 9 in a span of 17 yrs. Greer Garson is another one. Jennifer Jones was a favourite in the forties. I don't see your point LKMOSCAR, in 'this day and age' who is getting close to 15, or even 13, or 10? Nicholson and Streep are the exceptions.

quote:

Originally posted by Streep Fan:
Davis got 9 in a span of 17 yrs. Greer Garson is another one. Jennifer Jones was a favourite in the forties. I don't see your point LKMOSCAR, in 'this day and age' who is getting close to 15, or even 13, or 10? Nicholson and Streep are the exceptions.

I really don't know if it's easier or not. I'm just thinking, though, that films of today certainly for the most part do not compare to the ones made decades ago. Is it really hard to imagine that a film like Slumdog Millionaire wouldn't have even made a dent in the year of Network?

With that comes the question about performances: How do the nominated performances of today compare, in quality, to those performances nominated a few decades or so ago?

I feel like I'm asking more than one question.

Say if Meryl Streep wins Supporting Actress from this film and continues to consistently get nominations after that, I can see her winning her second Lead Actress, perhaps with her 20th nomination.


But for Cate Blanchett, if she had won her second Supporting Actress for I'm Not There, would she finally win Best Actress?
Hard to tell. She might be able to if her performance really knocks everyone's socks off.
I'm glad it didn't happen. Look forward to her first win as Lead Actress.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: oopschoice,

I can see Streep winning a 2nd supporting after she finally wins the 3nd best actress award...in the next couple of years I am hoping she takes the lead in either August Osage County or the movie version of the musical Sunset Boulevard or the lead role in God of Carnage when transferred to the screen..I thought for sure that "Doubt" wouldve been the film for her 2nd lead actress oscar but the love affair with kate Winslet couldnt be denied...so lets see if playing Julia Child in a biography helps her win that elusive 3rd oscar...????

I'm going to convert this into the official thread for this film. Threads really shouldn't be started just for a new trailer, clip, etc.

quote:

seanflynn, knowing that you are a true film fan, and by that I mean that you have facts that film historians probably don't, would you say that it's easier to get an acting Oscar nomination in this day and age than it would have been, say, 30 years ago?

There are fewer films - far - considered Oscar caliber, certainly from the studios, and most certainly for women, than there have been at any time in Oscar history. Taking nothing away from Meryl Streep (who is just about alone in her ability to word in high-level films, and who is willing to take supporting roles), but it is easier for her to get nominations than it was for older actresses in earlier eras.

I have seen Julie & Julia and there is no way Streep can be considered for supporting...that would be blatant category fraud. The films opens with her charcter, closes with it, and revolves around her...not to mention Streep has more screentime then Adams.

Most are suggesting pushing her for supporting to earn her a double nomination and a possible lead nom for the Nancy Meyer's flick. At this point, Streep does not need more nominations, it would be nice to give her another Oscar.

By the way, I was pleasantly surprised with J&J. It is a solid film and I fully expect nominations for Streep and Tucci.

quote:

Originally posted by VegasMovieMan:
I have seen Julie & Julia and there is no way Streep can be considered for supporting...that would be blatant category fraud. The films opens with her charcter, closes with it, and revolves around her...not to mention Streep has more screentime then Adams.

Most are suggesting pushing her for supporting to earn her a double nomination and a possible lead nom for the Nancy Meyer's flick. At this point, Streep does not need more nominations, it would be nice to give her another Oscar.

By the way, I was pleasantly surprised with J&J. It is a solid film and I fully expect nominations for Streep and Tucci.

Thank you for the information, VegasMovieMan. I apologize if you've already mentioned this back when people were talking about buzz for next year's (or at this current time this year's) Oscars right after SM won or was going to win at the ceremony this year.

I hope she does get pushed lead for Julie and Julia because I think she has a great shot. I think last year, she was very, very close to getting in, but Kate Winslet had never won before and had the advantage of The Reader being nominated for Best Picture, while Doubt was not. Plus, if they wanted to award it an acting prize, Viola Davis and Amy Adams were places that they could have looked instead of Streep.

Also in Streep's favor is that it's a biopic of a famous person, but she's doing heavy drama which I think will work to her advantage when she finally does win again if she's in a comedy or musical, basically anything different than a heavy drama. Currently, the best actress race seems pretty thin, and right now I can't see a newcomer like Carey Mulligan, Gabourey Sidibe, or Abbie Cornish winning because they do seem too new to me, and I can't see a recent winner like Helen Mirren, Penelope Cruz, or Hilary Swank repeating so soon. Given all that, I do hope Streep gets pushed to leading where I think she'll not only have a good shot of being nominated but winning this year instead of going supporting which seems much more competitive to not only win but to be nominated in.

seanflynn, thank you for answering my question.

I'm just going to share why this film could be very successful:

I was in a jam-packed theater, this biggest in the theater, must have been 500+ people in there, and once the trailer for Julie & Julia came on and Streep said "I'm Julia Child," literally everyone in the theater was saying "Oh my God!" with joy. When the trailer was over, everyone in that jam-packed theater CLAPPED! So yeah, I expect this film to be very successful, especially with the female crowd.

Also, VegasMovieMan, I'm glad you said that if Streep were to be in supporting it would be category fraud and she should be in lead! I think she deserves to be in lead!

With that being said, this film looks great and I expect nothing short but spectacular from Streep and even Adams!

So if Mery Streep is lead, she should definitely go lead. The race could in the end be Michelle Pfeiffer vs Meryl Streep. They're both overdue in a different way.

And then Amy Adams goes supporting. It seems like a long shot but another nom for her couldn't hurt.

As for Stanley Tucci, I hope this film helps validate him for The Lovely Bones in Supporting Actor. Words are that he really has a shot.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: oopschoice,

Semi-review from The New Yorker; rave for Meryl...

quote:

The truth is, “Julie & Julia” is not a fair fight. For half he film we are in Paris with Julia Child played by Meryl Streep. It is pretty transcendent. For the other half, we are stuck in Long Island City, Queens, with the ‘lowly cubicle worker’ Julie Powell, a character who is immature, self-pitying, and frazzled (which is to say, an average human being). Powell is played by Amy Adams, who is a talented actress, but she is up against the queen herself.

When Adams, as Julie, is on the screen, it necessarily means that Streep, as Julia, is not, and you come to resent her for this. It is possible that the film would not have worked if it were simply a biopic of Julia Child — that it derives its narrative thrust and commercial potential from the interplay between a young woman idolizing and relying upon Child in the more-or-less present and the splendid story of Julia Child’s past. Perhaps Child is able to emerge in this film as an almost mythical creature because she is presented in contrast to a mere mortal.

But there may be another reason the Julia Child portions of “Julie & Julia” are so irresistably vivid and the Julie Powell bits feel a little flat. It is possible that Nora Ephron no longer understands half as well what it’s like to be ordinary as she understands being remarkable.

http://incontention.com/?p=9649#more-9649

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Dorian,

If Streep is absent from most of the second half of the film, I wonder if this might have some impact on her chances?

I felt (and said here regularly) in the 2007 race that Julie Christie's biggest handicap (apart from her previous victory) was that she was barely in the second half of Away from Her - and that this hurt the impact of her perfomance and her chances.

This is not remotely fatal - the role sounds so dynamic, as opposed to the quiet brilliance of Christie's work - but it is something to watch.

I've actually never thought of that is a factor in Christie's loss, and it being a possibility makes a lot of sense. It is something to watch for this time around too (if Streep makes it in and is strong contender).