Tommy Lee Jones’ bleak expression of our land rape out west is one of the best films of 2014. No, it doesn’t fit into any category, particularly, and it didn’t light the critics on fire at Cannes but it is, to me, as vital a piece in our American story as John Huston’s The Misfits and Clint Eastwood’s Unforgiven. All three of these films show how the women were used, abused, misused and discarded while the menfolk sought to conquer a land already owned by others.
Unlike many directors in Hollywood, Jones isn’t afraid of being someone with a point of view on western expansion. Though he prefers, at least he did in Cannes, to let the movie speak for itself he certainly isn’t going to dodge responsibility for the comfort of others. This movie makes it quite clear that where we settled, how we did it, what we did to Native Americans was flat out wrong. If you build a civilization over the ruin you can expect tragedy to come back to haunt you.
Like 12 Years a Slave last year cleared a path to American history — to show how our American foundation, even our White House, was built on the backs of slaves — The Homesman, too, shows the rotten underbelly of what we all too often celebrate about our proliferation out west.
What is remarkable about The Homesman is that it focuses on a woman, the brilliant Hilary Swank in what has to be my own favorite performance of hers, who isn’t the right kind of livestock for marrying but has strength, wisdom and ambition. Still, there is no future for her in that definition of America, not without a man’s love or at least his desire to marry her. Swank’s character sets out to deliver women who have lost their minds on the homesteads back to people who will look after them. To their husbands, they are livestock gone wrong. They stopped being the right kinds of wives — dead babies, emotional outbursts, mental illness with no hope of treatment. So back they go — their husbands then on the hunt for another.
The Homesman isn’t a film for everybody — and it certainly isn’t what today’s critics would call “perfect.” I don’t know what its Oscar prospects will be because those depend on perception and perception often depends on what critics think. Its best shot for the Oscar race is that its a strong ensemble piece. The actors might push the film through.
It’s frustrating to watch how every year stories about women get the shaft. The latest is the Disappearance of Eleanor Rigby, one of the few films with a story revolving around women. Now, The Homesman with Hilary Swank and a strong cast of women will likely not get ushered through. Critics seem up for films where women don’t do a lot of talking, like in Gravity, or where their own emotional trajectory is fairly simplistic — but when things get complicated the critics back way off, as though stories of women on their own aren’t enough, or aren’t good enough.
Performances might burst through, like Swank in The Homesman or Julianne Moore and Kristen Stewart in Still Alice, or Reese Witherspoon in Wild – but we never seem to be talking about Best Picture where women are concerned. Sure, David Fincher’s Gone Girl could change all of that. Perhaps Into the Woods might as well. But for now, such is the modern lament of Oscar season.
![2025 Oscars: Can a Late-Breaker Still Win Best Picture? [POLL]](https://www.awardsdaily.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/gladiator-350x250.jpg)
Without spoiling Homesman, Swank’s character is not strong. The twist is ridiculous and the movie is sold as “strong woman show” whereas it’s really about TLJ character’s redemption.
The twist shocked me, but I feel it’s appropriate that it shocked me. I’m not sure it was ridiculous, though. Perhaps curious of Tommy Lee Jones to afford us such insight into her character but omit such an important detail as that one until it proved pertinent to the action. But the twist does not, by any means, diminish her character’s strength.
Ryan, you absolutely didn’t have to, but so grateful you shared this experience with us here. You told me, in not so many words, privately about your mom’s situation and I didn’t dare follow-up fearing I would be intruding in something so personal and critical, but I’m happy to hear she’s much better now. I can now, even if so remotely, begin to understand what made you go into that theater four times in a month’s time — we all have mothers. Thank you. And just yell at me, set me straight or plainly ignore me next time I flip over you not liking as movie as much as I do.
Ryan, I’m very happy to hear that your mom has recovered!! 🙂
I remember you telling me a little bit sometime earlier this year, I can’t remember if it was in emails or on Twitter. Probably in emails. I only stopped asking you because just in case, I wanted to avoid drumming up any sad feelings. Thank you for sharing this with us. I think I represent everyone here at Awards Daily when I say that WE LUV U Ryan! 🙂
Now, we won’t show any mercy when it comes to movies and awards. Ha ha!! 🙂
I guess that aside from all the technical spectacle and beauty, the unity of effect of the simple story (as a whole) coupled with the abundant symbolism, touched me deeply and felt much of the era’s ethos/pathos projected back at me.
That’s true for me too, Bryce.
Full disclosure: The reason for the affection I have for Gravity is almost too personal for me to talk about. But here goes…
The same weekend that Gravity premiered, my mother went into the hospital because she was suddenly unsteady on her feet and her head was cloudy, her demeanor was distant. After the MRI, we found out that my mother had suffered a stroke. What we thought would be an overnight hospital stay to run some tests turned into 3 weeks of hospital treatment and many more months of slow and worrisome recovery.
There was a point when it seemed as if my mother had slipped beyond the bounds of her familiar existence, barely hanging on at the end of a fragile tether. Would she drift away even further — past recovery? or would we be able to find a way help her recapture a solid grasp of reality? It was dicey. Things looked really bleak last October. The doctors were not optimistic.
Imagine me going to see Gravity 4 times that month, and every time I was wrapping my head around all that symbolism, along with the torturous overlay of emotions I was carrying around. Watching that magnificent camerawork go from the intimacy of Sandra Bullock’s desperate eyes and then flinging us into the empty void. It hit me like a brick in the face. My heart was in my throat.
So that’s the nature of the unique personal private response I had to Gravity last year, and believe me it was intense. I wanted to go back again and again so I could try to find the secret to never giving up hope. Gravity helped me through those first few weeks of seeing my mother stranded in unfathomable darkness, beyond our reach.
The good news: The doctors said all the recovery would come in the first 90 days , But we didn’t give up after 90 days because my mother wasn’t back yet. It was more like 8 or 9 months before her recuperation reached a plateau and began to level off. I’m happy to say, that plateau seems to be something like 97% of her former capacity.
So that’s why, for me, in spite of my reservations, Gravity is still one the greatest films of the year. The only reason Inside Llewyn Davis and 12 Years a Slave rate higher for me is because I feel those two movies more realistically represent the lingering damage and psychological scars that a brutal life crisis can inflict.
Now y’all see what you made me confess? This is what I’ve been going through over the past year.
Gravity helped me come to terms with my hypersensitive emotions that first month. A couple of other movies helped me even more. And without you even realizing, all of you — all my friends here at Awards Daily — all of you helped me most of all.
Kane, RUSH is insanely re-watchable. That movie is sexy as hell, who would have thought from Ron Howard. It’s his best film to date. THE COUNSELOR, a superior film, works similarly, like symphony you can just relax letting it wash over you, if only people gave it a chance like Ryan and I did.
Nobody needs me to add this caveat: Please don’t put much stock in my personal quirky taste. I’m the guy who had The Counselor in my Top 10 last year. I’m the guy who refuses to be embarrassed for enjoying the hell out of Godzilla.
Gravity is 50x more significant that Godzilla. I do know that.
By the way I still love HER, but in the meantime my reaction to it has changed from a warm, intimate and ultimately sorrowful love story to a maddening, horrifying cry for help and a critique on self-pity, very disturbing change of heart, I know, but still powerful stuff.
The only film I think I ranked too high is WARMEST COLOR. I had just seen it and was still hyperventilating from the violation, though I love it very much still.
1. GRAVITY
2. THE WOLF OF WALL STREET
3. NEIGHBORING SOUNDS
4. HER
5. SPRING BREAKERS
6. THE GREAT BEAUTY
7. MUD
8. TO THE WONDER
9. INSIDE LLEWYN DAVIS
10. BLUE IS THE WARMEST COLOR
Ryan, I appreciate your comment. Sometimes I come out too dry and probably deserve one slap, soft slap, a baby slap 🙂 but as always I’m glad you’re so considerate. We discussed this so much last season, here and privately, that I’m confident we know pretty well how each feels about the film. I’m the first to admit that GRAVITY’s dialogue is nowhere near a triumph of wit, depth or nuance, but I guess that aside from all the technical spectacle and beauty, the unity of effect of the simple story (as a whole) coupled with the abundant symbolism, touched me deeply and felt much of the era’s ethos/pathos projected back at me. I don’t believe it’s a perfect film and I am aware that between earnest and facile it’s a rather thin line the film walks with these “themes”, but it mostly succeeds — now, you said it yourself, GRAVITY is more of a visual parabola, a sensorial vortex, and each person brings to it different dispositions, or more precisely, it elicits wildly different responses in each of us, and to these varying degrees of emotion, each of us assign a different significance or artistic value (from cheap thrills to meditation on grief, etc., whatever one thought it was or wasn’t). Let me go further and partially agree with your sentiment/theory that film could have been better if the characters spoke a little less, just a little 😉
Kane,
1 other thought. I find myself re-watching certain movies, and they climb the ranks of greatness in my mind. One such movie was Jaws. I never thought I’d think of a simple movie of a giant shark attacking people as movie that can be seen as classic, in the same league as the best of the best, a la Citizen Kane and Vertigo. But, I also find myself not-watching other movies on purpose, not because I don’t love them, but because I don’t want to tire of them. Titanic is one such movie. Titanic is my all-time favorite movie, which I knew before I even finished it when I saw it in March 1998. Since then, I have probably only seen it 5 or 6 times all the way through. Every next time it feels just as fresh as the first time.
I think these are how they’ll divide up ultimately:
See often on purpose: Gravity, Rush, Inside Llewyn Davis, Nebraska
Avoid and only watch once in a while on purpose: The Wolf of Wall Street, 12 Years a Slave, Captain Phillips, Her
For the record, this is why I think The Artist and The King’s Speech are ridiculous Best Picture choices: The “problems” are so fake and so easily solved.
The Artist: What? You can’t speak English. oh fuck, dude, that’s horrible, you might as well commit suicide. Wait! What’s that you say? You can dance?! oh, well then, put that gun down. You can be a millionaire now and get a blowjob from the pretty actress, yay!
King’s Speech: What? You stammer a little? oh fuck, dude, let’s cry about it and throw a hissy fit. Wait, what’s that you say? You’re a billionaire king?! well then, cheer up. Just say the magic words, “fuckity fuckity fuck shit arse and fuck” and you’re the winner of WWII, yay!
I’m sorry about the long harangue. I feel cornered and defensive when anyone challenges me to explain why I think the script of Gravity is its weak link.
I can be more succinct and more on point. Why don’t I think Dr Ryan Stone is a strong character? Because it’s easy to be strong when all you have to do is let an endless string of luck and multiple deus ex machina get you out of tight spots.
How about this for an alternate ending to 12 Years a Slave:
Brad Pitt show up, finds out that Solomon Northup wants to escape. Brad pulls some magic beans out of his pocket, explains to Solomon that all he needs to do is eat the magic beans and click his heels together 3 times and he’ll be able to fly home like a really lucky bird. “Oh, and here, take this fire-extinguisher with you. Just in case you veer off course.”
Problem solved! What are you worried about, Solomon? Snap out of it! Stop being so depressed! It’s a movie! Anything can happen!
Kane, yeah, it’s funny how that works. I think Rush is very watchable. It’s a serious movie, but light hearted sports, all rolled up into one.
I’ve probably seen Inside Llewyn Davis the most in the last year of movies from 2013. Pretty much the whole year last year, I was most anticipating The Wolf of Wall Street, and was so relieved when Marty didn’t push it back to this year.
Heading into Oscar season, I think my awaiting list looked like this:
1. The Wolf of Wall Street
2. Inside Llewyn Davis
3. American Hustle
4. Nebraska
I didn’t realize how great 12 Years and Gravity were going to be, so they weren’t even on my radar. Nor was Her.
Al, my top 3 most anticipated movies of 2013 that I picked back last May looked like this: 1) Gravity…2) Her…3) 12 Years a Slave. Yet somehow Rush is one of the most “rewarding”, in terms of watchable, movies that came out last year, at least for me. The other is Captain Phillips. Now I loved every second of Gravity, 12 Years a Slave and Her. I called 12 Years the best movie of last year while Her was my favorite. Rush and Captain Phillips are ones I’ve watched more time than all 3 combined.
Ryan, that’s pretty cool that you currently have your top for like this:
1. Inside Llewyn Davis
2. 12 Years a Slave
3. The Wolf of Wall Street
4. Gravity
Here are mine:
1. The Wolf of Wall Street
2. Gravity
3. Inside Llewyn Davis
4. 12 Years a Slave
As for rounding out my top 5, I have Rush.
Ryan, If I remember correctly, GRAVITY was in your top 10 at the end of last year, perhaps even your top 5, but I’m not sure.
thanks for bringing that up, Bryce! I swear that already was on my list of things to add to this page today.
My top 6 before Oscar night:
1. Inside Llewyn Davis
2. 12 Years a Slave
3. Her
4. The Wolf of Wall Street
5. Fruitvale Station
6. Gravity
but I’ll confess: Her has lost of some of its luster for me since then. Just hasn’t stuck with me. Her has slipped to #6 and, if I’m being perfectly honest, I would rather rewatch Gravity 3 more times instead of rewatching Fruitvale 3 more times. Since “rewatchability” is my usual gauge for measuring how much I value a movie, that lifts Gravity to the #4 spot. Out of 150 movies I saw last year, not bad, right?
So in fact, Gravity has not gone down in my estimation — it’s gone up.
Bryce, you know something about me and Gravity that nobody else knows. You know that you convinced me last year to lay off talking about the script issues I had with Gravity until after the Oscars were over. You were right. I stopped talking about Gravity unless I said something nice — and that wasn’t hard to do, since there was plenty to admire about the direction and cinematography, the brilliant concept and elegant execution.
But the reason Gravity could never be my favorite movie of the year is because I didn’t feel the slightest sense of jeopardy in the situation. I didn’t care when anyone died. I didn’t care when one astronaut got lucky (especially when part of that “luck” required that everybody else had to die.)
It was a gorgeous surreal abstraction, and I fully appreciate the hypnotic effect it had on me the first couple of times I saw it. I went back a second and third time, trying to regain that same sense of awe so I could meditate on the images again — but all the rickety annoying aimless dialogue and the Roadrunner Wile E Coyote Laws of Physics started to interfere with with my attempts to catch the same ecstasy buzz I first felt. The mild aggravations started to get in the way of all the things I loved about it.
Yes, Dr Ryan Stone was determined and resilient. But I wonder how strong-willed and resilient she would have been if she wasn’t handed 7 or 8 ‘Get Out Jail Free’ cards? What kind of willpower to never give up would she have been able to muster if that MacGyver fire-extinguisher trick had sent her spinning off in a thousand wrong directions? (as it certainly would in reality) What would have happened to her “will to survive” after the first 500 somersaults that improvised jetpack gave her?
(Why does NASA waste millions of dollars inventing precision jet-pack propulsion systems when they could simply give every astronaut a $50 fire-extinguisher and say, “Here, you can use this to navigate around for miles and miles in orbit — it works great!)
But I could forgive the absurdity of the survival plan if everybody onscreen would please just shut up and stop babbling mundane wisecracks for a few minutes.
All the same, you’re absolutely right to point out, Bryce: it’s a testament to the incredibly riveting power of the images Cuaron and Lubezki create that a movie which makes so little sense can be my 4th favorite film of 2013.
“don’t tell me that’s a movie where a woman doesn’t talk much. Cause she talks A LOT.”
whoa, I’ll say. She won’t shut up. If only she would say something when she’s talking.
Does nobody but me think it’s strange that IMDb says this is one of Gravity’s “memorable quotes”:
Nobody wanted to listen to me when I said no way was Gravity going to get a Best Screenplay nomination. Fantastic premise! Yes, brilliant situation. But that’s where the screenplay ends: Stranded in Orbit.
I truly do wish there was an option on the blu-ray to watch Gravity with no dialogue — just sounds and music — but mostly silence. Silence, so I can meditate on the impact of the vast astonishing emptiness of the magnificent visuals. I’d love that!
Oh, and to Ryan: Gravity is meant first and foremost as a sensory experience.
I agree, Chris, and I thoroughly enjoyed it on that level. I saw it 4 times in theaters, for gosh sakes! It was thrilling every time, although I have to say I might have burnt myself out because I saw it so often the same month.
Speaking for myself (who else would I speak for?) 🙂 the experience of Gravity began to deliver diminishing returns — and, in fact, a few things began to bug me a little the 3rd and 4th time around that I accepted with no problem on first and second viewing. (Sort of like how we forgive little tics and habits of a new partner in the first blush of love, but we’re ready to strangle that same partner for the very same tics and habits when we have to endure those tics repeatedly.)
Here’s another thing I firmly believe — and I apologize in advance if I offend anyone — but ordinarily movies with complex characters and nuanced highly-literate dialog do not earn $700 million worldwide. People can recoil from that observation all they want, but there are precious few exceptions to the rule.
And that’s ok with me! Gravity knew what it wanted to do, knew precisely what it wanted to be, knew exactly how to go about achieving everything it achieved. (to be more specific: Cuarón knew.)
For the record, in case anyone has forgotten, there was never a moment in the race last year when I ever wavered from believing Cuarón would win Best Director. He fulfilled all the qualifications and prerequisites to satisfy my own theories about years when Best Picture and Best Director split.
(and my theory has nothing to do with the other popular theory: Crowdpleaser vs Artistic aspirations. nope, my theory is different, but I’ve tried to explain it so many times I’m sick of hearing myself trying to explain it. Nobody cares about my theory.)
I think Gravity earned every one of its Oscars, and I feel the same way about 12 Years a Slave.
But the question raised on this page is not about Best Director. It’s a question of whether or not I personally feel Dr Ryan Stone is a strong female character. Yes, as much as Zelda is a strong character in The Legend of Zelda. She’s strong in the sense that she’s apparently immortal and clearly impossible to kill. She cannot die. The game does not allow for her to die. So it’s a little hard for me to worry about whether or not she might die. I have no emotional anxiety about her survival.
She’s like Zelda in another way: She functions as the damsel in distress. She prevails by not giving up, but the thing that saves her is nothing but sheer luck. A long chain of lucky breaks. Nothing heroic to me about wanting to stay alive. If there is, then I’m a goddamn hero for getting out of bed every morning and deciding to eat something for breakfast instead of giving up all hope for scrambled eggs and letting myself waste away.
Ryan,
If I remember correctly, GRAVITY was in your top 10 at the end of last year, perhaps even your top 5, but I’m not sure. I can of course entertain the notion that since then, the film has gone down significantly on your estimations, but for someone like you who, I know, watches many dozens of films a year, that’s a pretty steep downfall for a film to take — from top 10 of a pretty decent year to being less interesting than watching the niece play “Mario”, and I bet you find that even less interesting than I do — because a film like that wouldn’t make my top 40, so yeah wow, that threw me off. To be perfectly honest, it has happened to me before, so I don’t find the change of mind objectionable in the least. But we’re cool, right? You know me better than to make me aware that you have an opinion and that you’re free to express it. Cheers.
Oh, and to Ryan: Gravity is meant first and foremost as a sensory experience. Bullock’s character is somewhat intentionally left underwritten to allow the viewer to instead place themselves further into the center of the experience. Too much character detail and we can only identify with another flesh and blood human being in that situation rather than living it for ourselves. You might not find much value in that tactic, but in the immediacy of the viewing experience it sure is effective. Children Of Men and Y Tu Mama Tambien are films I prefer over Gravity, without question, but I appreciated the old-school, you-are-there event filmmaking of the kind that hasn’t been (well) made since the days of The Towering Inferno and The Poseidon Adventure.
Doesn’t matter to me if Bullock’s character was strong or not (for the record, I’d say being a survivor means you have some strength, and also sometimes being strong means allowing yourself to be vulnerable and moving forward in spite of that), just don’t tell me that’s a movie where a woman doesn’t talk much. Cause she talks A LOT.
Jesus the moderators still trashing GRAVITY?
More like a moderator having an opinion and feeling free to express it. I’m not the sort of moderator who thinks being moderate is an essential part of the job description. I’m not a neutral moderator-bot.
Some movies I like a lot, some movies I like less. I think most of us here are guilty of that offense.
Sorry Sasha, but you could be “sad and vulnerable” and be strong, that strenght kept her alive (and in a more realistic way, not a sci-fi as Alien). I totally agree about women and minorities being neglected in Films but your backup information as disregarding Gravity or defending Tammy diminishes the message. That’s all
In my last statement above, I meant to write David O. Russell, not Selznick. Jeez, can you imagine if Selznick were in the business today?! Now I wonder if Russell purposefully decided to include his middle initial to evoke the legendary Selznick?
@ Kane – My comment about white guy critics is that they outnumber all other “types” by a large margin. It would be great if publications included more people of color and of different gender, critics that would offer reviews from a varied perspective.
While I understand that it’s the nature of the profession to approach films as objectively as possible, I think when hiring them, a publication’s objective should be to employ differing backgrounds with the capacity to write a solid critique.
Anyways, the problem lies more with Hollywood and their reluctance to support films with white male protagonist. China will force change in this regard. I think as Chinese boxoffice overtakes US receipts, we will see more East Asians on screen than ever before. Let’s see if an entrepreneurial producer or director can set a precedent with a Chinese leading lady. I don’t believe this is too far fetched.
Jesus the moderators still trashing GRAVITY? Didn’t it lose Best Picture in the end? There’s your loser narrative!
And I’m sorry but how is she “pitiful”? Maybe I’m thinking of the word differently than you are but I’d like your take on it.
Sasha, if a real life female astronaut went through that very ordeal the very first thing I’d call her us strong. It’d be far easier to succumb to the infinite darkness than to do what she did, physics be damned.
“What I most loved about Bullock’s Dr. Ryan Stone was that she doesn’t need to be a female character acting like a male character — she is allowed to be a woman and still kick ass. “
I didn’t say she was a BAD female character – she’s a good one. But she’s not Ripley in Alien or Aliens. She’s pitiful and sad and vulnerable. Nothing wrong with that but I wouldn’t call her a “strong” woman particularly. A survivor, yes. Good on her for that.
“All I need from a “strong” character is a character with the strength to hold a narrative together. For me, that’s a character who’s interesting and 3-dimensional. ”
I agree that’s strong character but I disagree that such description applies to Swank in Homesman.
Mac, white male critics have nothing to do with tearing a movie apart. If that’s what you think then I invite you to look at Armond White’s track record, especially the words he had for Steve McQueen and 12 Years a Slave. People like HIM are the problem, not because he’s black or because he’s a man but because he’s an asshole. Gender and skin color, and age for that matter, have nothing to do with it.
I completely agree with criticizing the fact that they don’t make enough movies centering around women. But to criticize how a film about women is received is just silly, a bad movie is a bad movie, like August Osage County last year. The Academy awarded appropriately when the movies about women are good like Gravity, Million Dollar Baby, Gone With The Wind, etc.
“movies these days put too much accent on strong”
call me crazy, but whenever I want a “strong” character, what I really mean by “strong” is “complex.”
I don’t need a character who can kick ass. I don’t need a character who can out-think everybody else onscreen. I don’t need a character who will “ultimately prevail” or “overcome all obstacles” or “find a way to survive.”
hell, a cockroach can find a way to survive.
All I need from a “strong” character is a character with the strength to hold a narrative together. For me, that’s a character who’s interesting and 3-dimensional.
Watching a woman play a cypher in outer space, bouncing around from one orbiting lily pad to another, is about as interesting to me as watching somebody play Super Mario Brothers. In fact, it’s less interesting. Because at least in a game of Super Mario Brothers there’s the suspense of wondering whether or not Mario will make it to Final Level. In last year’s “Luigi on a Space Shuttle” game there was never any question how the game would end.
call me crazy some more, because for me, some of the most interesting “strong” characters ever created are the ones who try and FAIL. The ones who try with all their strength to survive but, in the end, die anyway.
Because in my experience that’s how real life really works. Life is a game that kills everybody who plays it.
we don’t defy the laws of physics like Wile E. Coyote, fall from a height of 200 miles to land in frog pond 6 feet deep and walk away unharmed.
Ripley was scared too. being scared is normal. Both women overcame their fear and survived… until sequel killed off one of them. So they are strong. IMO, movies these days put too much accent on strong = physical ability to kick ass which is saying that majority of women are not strong? Just stupid oversimplification that was first used in male movies (strong man = ass-kicker exclusively, nevermind Ping-Pong ball-size brain and maturity of a man-child)
Without spoiling Homesman, Swank’s character is not strong. The twist is ridiculous and the movie is sold as “strong woman show” whereas it’s really about TLJ character’s redemption.
I guess you haven’t see that I tweeted you about your Twitter link Sasha under the About The Author section – but it reads: https://twitter.com/http:/www.facebook.com/awardsdaily.
You’re welcome. 😉
A MOST WANTED MAN > ZERO DARK THRITY
You really thought Ryan Stone was a “strong” woman? She really wasn’t. She was not strong. She was vulnerable and scared and got out of a life threatening situation. I don’t know if that can be called “strong” particularly. We’re not talking Ripley in Alien here.
LOL, what Swank does half-way through the movie cannot be considered strong at all. It’s total 100% weakness.
Also, strong women (real ones, not this bait and switch) aren’t that rare sight in Oscar race anymore. Gravity’s Dr Ryan Stone, ZDT’s Maya are most recent examples. I’d say Amy Adams character in American Hustle can be considered strong woman too. Of course, Oscars still prefers to award “weakest/most feeble-minded women” roles (Jasmine, what’s-her-face “a soap! a soap!”). Cate deserved the win, though.
Oh boy, here we go again!
Amazing piece Sasha.
I am now more than ever curious to see Homesman (Though my sights are still set on Still Alice because of the way it portrays an unimaginable condition). Not so sure about Gone Girl’s role as woman’s story though because I feel the movie is more about Affleck than Pike. Of course as a Fincher movie, it’s still a must see.
One personal gripe: Seeing “Into The Woods” mentioned in so many of articles (Including the end of this one) really baffles me. The final movie is a butchered vision that looks atrocious. If anything, it could hurt the image and status of talented actresses (and actors) involved with it… Sort of like an even more embarrassing version of Nine.
“Tommy Lee Jones is magnificent.” — Sasha Stone (this time round, in a non-AD editor/owner’s hat).
Because it was taken out of the trailer context and Tommy Lee Jones is both the actor and director (The Homesman), I’m not sure if the term “magnificent” featured in Sasha’s remark was originally meant (by her) to be directed towards his acting (in this film) alone [because, to me, it more naturally sounded that way when read in light of the trailer] or both his portrayal in this piece and his direction. That said, either way, I’m in.
Oddly enough, it feels a bit torn to say the following since it concerns the greatly bad timing in a sense for another talented actress and one of my favorite thesps Annette Bening (talking those two Oscar years). I love Swank’s performances in both Boys Don’t Cry, and Baby. And I also enjoyed some of her other performances in leading actress capacity or Insomnia-like level. So, again: I’m in.
And I recall fancying part of the cinematography when I saw its older-version trailer.
Back to Ms. Swank: Definitely under impression she’s going to deliver as usual, again. Hoping what I’ve seen in this trailer re her acting rings true in the feature film.