Can she really win the Best Actress Oscar for "The Blind Side" over Meryl Streep in "Julie & Julia"? According to recent press releases, Bullock's campaign is working hot and wild for the popular actress to take home her first golden boy. Her Golden Globe nomination for Best Actress (Drama) in the football story is all but sealed, since nobody is talking about Carey Mulligan anymore. If she wins the SAG, are Streep's chances for her third overdue statue over?
This sickens me because I like Bullock alot, but her performance doesn't come close to Streep, Sidibe's or Mulligan for that matter. It's a cute role, with a southern accent and plenty of relish, but it just doesn't feel right. Also, people comparing Bullock's potential victory to Julia Roberts in "Erin Brockovich" need to do their homework. Roberts' film was a Best Picture nominee, and I don't see "The Blind Side" making the cut. Roberts also was up for her third trophy, while this will be Bullock's first time at bat. And normally in order to win Best Actress you either have to a) Be in a very popular film that has excellent reviews across the board, or b) Be in a mediocre film but give a performance that is leagues beyond the rest of the product. Bullock's movie, while popular, is not getting excellent reviews. And her performance is not legendary or deserving of such fawning. Not that this stopped voters in the past from honoring such work (We can all throw up together on Gwyneth Patlrow's undeserved win in 1998 for "Shakespeare in Love"). But now Bullock's campaign has got 20/20 to do a segment devoted ENTIRELY to her film. Why? What is this movie showing us that hasn't been shown before? Rich white person saves poor illiterate black person? I guess since "Precious" is also about an illiterate black person being saved, the academy should just place a theme on this year's Oscars: OBAMA, CHANGE and HELPING OUT THE BROTHAS & SISTAS. I mean come on!
No comments:
Post a Comment