list-o-mania
from the cluttered wishing to be categorized brain of Nathaniel R
Compiled in September 2005 using a complex mathematical formula [snort] involving number of films, clarity of obsession, quality of work, and other *undefinables* (such as previous films, awards show appearances, publicity, tv, & stagework) that influence me even though the list is meant to be about 2000 through summer 2005 only for more on the workings of this list -check out the introduction
Actresses of the "Aughts" 10-1 (The Top Ten. Hooray!) |
Few famous actors would be as justified in hating their role in Hollywood as much as Toni Collette. One gets the feeling over and over again that she is capable of far more than any casting director or studio executive has ever been able to imagine. Ever since her debut in the mid 90s she has consistently made the most of her material, even in thankless roles.
What could be more thankless, for example, than supporting Nia Vardalos in Connie & Carla, an actress who is in every conceivable way her inferior? Or losing the Roxie Hart role in Chicago to an actress that can't sing or dance when she does both terrifically as she proved on Broadway in The Wild Party? Or playing endless variations of the undesirable single girl (About a Boy, 2002 and In Her Shoes, 2005 are the latest spins) even though the actress herself is radiant onscreen. Despite all this frustration from the Fan-Of-Collette perspective, there is nothing in her actual performances that suggests any bitterness at her place in the industry. In bit roles like the ones she had in 8 1/2 Women (2000) and The Hours (2002) she proves the hoary adage 'there are no small parts, only small actors.' Toni Collette is no small actor. She's a giant talent and she proves it (Japanese Story, 2003) every single chance she gets.
My dream role for Toni: Don't you think she'd be excellent (and win the Oscar) if she played Liza Minelli in a biopic? The part has all the right elements: neurosis, weight gains and losses, famous person to imitate, ability to show off song and dance skills. I love the idea.
"Presenting...Scarlett Johansson." Filmmakers love to introduce her don't they? Sofia Coppola's first brilliant move in Lost in Translation (2003) was opening with a shot of the actresses round bottom. It wasn't exactly her introduction to movies but it sure was a memorable entrance. A movie star is born...in pink panties. Scarlett had previously been "introduced" in The Horse Whisperer in 1998 though it was, in fact, her seventh feature. Yet each time she arrives, you understand the urge to present her. Those lips. That deep adult voice paired incongruously with a nubile starlet body. Now certainly many actresses have glorious physical attributes. But the demarcation line between flash-in-the-pan starlet and enduring movie stardom is a combination of that carnal appeal with striking talent or singularity of some sort. Scarlett looks likely to keep winning on all three counts.
My favorite thing about Scarlett? In her young career she has been consistently gazed upon, but as an actress she is the one doing the observing. Her best performances have a fascinatingly still quality. Watch her stand back and merely observe. She is the quiet one in Ghost World's (2001) disaffected teen duo but she takes it all in, understanding her friend better than her friend understands herself. Girl With a Pearl Earring (2003) also relies on the trancelike quality of her face, as she silently navigates the world and takes the measure of the people around her. Watched but always watching, Scarlett Johansson all but doubles the usual voyeuristic thrill of moviegoing.
When it comes to the glory that is this actress, this icon of my cinema fixation... I get a little unhinged. Maybe you've noticed? Remember in White Oleander (2002) when she realizes her boyfriend no longer wants her and her eyes go glassy and red with won't-be-wounded heavy artillery pride? Her self construct can't allow for a world in which she isn't his chief desire or a world where she would allow an external force to weaken her. Ingrid Magnussen, Pfeiffer's character, is both the founder and a devotee of her own cult of personality. This is me when it comes to Pfandom (only without the murderous intent): Glassy-eyed, fixated, unable to accept the idea of the cinema going on without her or her no longer desiring the camera's caress.
Michelle Pfeiffer's ascendance to the Hollywood pantheon happened in lockstep with my own conversion to cinema. So perhaps that will help the unconverted to understand why her "semi-retirement" is causing me actual grief. I've been through three of the five stages: Denial, Anger, and Depression. Two stages left to work through...
Bargaining: Oscar-worthy work in 2000's What Lies Beneath (Hitchcock would have salivated... even if he hated the movie) and 2002's White Oleander are not enough to place her at #1. But you know I wanted to put here there. Her voicework in 2003's Sinbad (2003) was not inspired enough to forgive a three-year drought of Pfeiffer-less cinema. Her bitchy grandeur in 2001's I Am Sam was a minor highlight (and the film's best performance. A minority opinion but at least the New Yorker agreed) but I need one more lyrical high, one more Oscary level role to make my peace with her retirement. That's all I'm asking. One more Fabulous Baker Boys signature role. Winning that long-delayed Oscar would make this long goodbye much less painful. Acceptance? I'll get there eventually. (sigh) Wish me luck.
Say a person had never gone to the movies and had only read about them for the past couple of decades. (Hard to imagine but try). Who do you think they would know as the most important actresses in the world? My guess is they'd instantly be able to rattle off two names: Julia Roberts (#44) and Meryl Streep (#23). These two names would come up because the media and the industry are always looking for and conjecturing about the identity of "the next...[insert name here]" Julia and Meryl are the primary current templates for actresses. You've got your rom-com box office queens who are often considered 'lightweight' talents. You've got your 'serious' dramatic actresses who are often revered for their 'range' --these are basically character-actors blessed with the breathtaking beauty of leading stars. If you're a newly emerging actress and you're working in leading roles sooner or later (usually sooner) you will be compared to one of them. The rom-com queens sometimes win Oscars when they stretch even a teensy bit. The dramatic queens often try romantic comedies (to boost box office brand-name value) and they often fail only to suffer ridicule. In case you haven't figured out where I'm going with this... Cate Blanchett is, god bless her, the next Meryl Streep. Call the search off. She's it. And so far (cross your fingers) she has not fallen into the typical trap of trying to be the next Julia Robert as well (I'm talking to you Nicole and Julianne!).
Like Streep, Blanchett is a supreme chameleon. She entered the public consciousness as the Virgin Queen (Elizabeth, 1998) and ever since she's been shape-shifting. In the past five years we've seen her as an Elf queen (The Lord of the Rings trilogy, 20001-2003), a showgirl (The Man Who Cried, 2001), a slutty mother (The Shipping News, 2001), a crusading journalist (Veronica Guerin, 2002), a backwoods psychic (The Gift, 2000), a French Resistance member (Charlotte Gray, 2001), a frontier woman (The Missing (2003), a restless housewife (Bandits, 2001), a vengeful terrorist (Heaven, 2002), a pregnant reporter (The Life Aquatic, 2004), and finally --speaking of actress templates -- the legendary Katharine Hepburn (The Aviator, 2004). This last role won Cate her first Oscar. Oh yes, I mean to imply that she will win another. You see if she's the next Meryl Streep she's just warming up.
As I remarked earlier my film fanaticism began roughly in lockstep with the ascendance of Michelle Pfeiffer (#8) in the mid-to-late 80s. The next progression of my film-obsession occurred in synchronicity with the arrival of Julianne Moore in the mid to late 90s. The inaugaral issue of my print zine "Film Bitch" (which led to the past 5+ years of this here website The Film Experience ) was called "Julianne Moore is God" and through its xeroxed pages you could read my hyperbolic ravings about her astonishing facility as an actress --she can set up camp in places other actresses can't even see with binoculars. I believed and still maintain that she's one of the greatest actors to have ever lived.
Q: So, why is she not #1?
A: This countdown involves films from 2000 to 2005 only. In the past five years America's greatest actress has appeared in the following films: Hannibal and The Ladies Man (2000), Evolution, World Traveller, and The Shipping News (2001), Laws of Attraction and The Forgotten (2004), and The Prize Winner of Defiance Ohio (2005). This nearly complete list features not one film that I would recommend and many that I would not have even seen were it not for her divine presence. This is not a list any person who could lay claim to the title "Greatest American Actress" should be proud of. The only reminder in the past five years of her truly blinding brilliance was found in short succession in November and December of 2002. She was hauntingly sad as Laura Brown in The Hours and miraculous in Todd Haynes masterpiece Far From Heaven. In the latter film she gave what is arguably the greatest performance we've seen yet this decade. When Moore returns to roles worthy of her like Far From Heaven's Cathy Whitaker, or Safe's Carol White, or Boogie Nights' Amber Waves (and I have no doubt that she eventually will) rather than clumsy forays into mainstream comedies, she will regain her rightful place at the top of any sensible list of the top Actresses in the world.
(Next: The Top Five)
Top 100 Actresses of the Aughts So Far
(Compiled in Sept & October 2005)
100 -91 / 90-81 / 80-71/ 70-61 / 60-51 / 50-41 /
40-31 / 30-21 / 20-11 / 10-6 / 5-1
In Anticipation of Best of the Decade Lists in 2010
