Skip to main content

Jennifer Lawrence's "admirable" deference

Daniel D'Addario wrote this: 

Jennifer Lawrence, at this year’s Golden Globes, seemed stunned to have won her second prize there in two years. “HFPA, you really are, just, too kind!” she said to the Hollywood Foreign Press Association, thanking her “American Hustle” director and fellow nominees before saying, “I’m sorry I’m shaking so much — don’t ever do this again! It’s so scary!”

She seems to have meant it. The 2013 Golden Globe and Oscar champion, Lawrence has put absolutely no effort into campaigning for a second Oscar — one that would make her only the sixth person in history, and the first since Tom Hanks, to win in consecutive years. 

[…]

The official reason, here, is not solely pique (as it is in the case of Lawrence’s “Hustle” costar Christian Bale) but the contingencies of Lawrence’s filming schedule, one that “Hustle” director David O. Russell called “12 years of slavery.” Hooked into the “X-Men” and “Hunger Games” franchises, Lawrence’s life is largely composed of long, action-packed shooting days; that she was able to get away to shoot “American Hustle” is a function of the fact that the role is a long cameo.
It’s a short, funny role — and Lawrence’s main competition in the best supporting actress race is Lupita Nyong’o — the likable new star whose performance in “12 Years a Slave” is riveting and heartbreaking. For all Lawrence’s accolades, Nyong’o, who won the Screen Actors Guild Award and seems to be the critical favorite, has gathered as many.
They’re a picture in contrasts: Lawrence, at 23, has already scooped up three Oscar nominations and the big prize. Nyong’o, at 30, waited for “Slave” to make her film debut (she’d previously been getting a drama degree at Yale). If Lawrence wins, it won’t necessarily be undeserved — she’s quite amusing in “Hustle” — but will document just how much easier it is for an actress who looks like Lawrence to triumph generally. There simply aren’t nonwhite actresses who have won multiple Oscars, ever, let alone before their 25th birthday.
And, to her credit, Lawrence, who asked the Hollywood Foreign Press to never honor her again, seems to know that. ("Jennifer Lawrence doesn't want a second Oscar now," Salon.com)
-----

Two recent heroes of yours are Bob Costas, for disregard of his health, and Jennifer Lawrence, for still being abashed at her success, just wanting to be an ordinary person. The individual who denies -- gets your vote. Sounds like a traditionally conservative preference, something we'd see at play in a Clint Eastwood movie -- by the "hero" -- with the "villains" unwilling to deny their health, nor absent themselves tributes, just so they seem malleable for others' fantasy requirements of them. 
Costas and Lawrence can be moved about. Costas by patriotism, and Lawrence in order to show she's not full of herself, spoiled. I'll applaud them when they grow out of it, 'cause it's just awful to see people who can be owned. 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Discussion over the fate of Jolenta, at the Gene Wolfe facebook appreciation site

Patrick McEvoy-Halston November 28 at 10:36 AM Why does Severian make almost no effort to develop sustained empathy for Jolenta -- no interest in her roots, what made her who she was -- even as she features so much in the first part of the narrative? Her fate at the end is one sustained gross happenstance after another... Severian has repeated sex with her while she lay half drugged, an act he argues later he imagines she wanted -- even as he admits it could appear to some, bald "rape" -- but which certainly followed his  discussion of her as someone whom he could hate so much it invited his desire to destroy her; Severian abandons her to Dr. Talus, who had threatened to kill her if she insisted on clinging to him; Baldanders robs her of her money; she's sucked at by blood bats, and, finally, left at death revealed discombobulated of all beauty... a hunk of junk, like that the Saltus citizens keep heaped away from their village for it ruining their preferred sense ...

Salon discussion of "Almost Famous" gang-rape scene

Patrick McEvoy-Halston: The "Almost Famous'" gang-rape scene? Isn't this the film that features the deflowering of a virgin -- out of boredom -- by a pack of predator-vixons, who otherwise thought so little of him they were quite willing to pee in his near vicinity? Maybe we'll come to conclude that "[t]he scene only works because people were stupid about [boy by girl] [. . .] rape at the time" (Amy Benfer). Sawmonkey: Lucky boy Pull that stick a few more inches out of your chute, Patrick. This was one of the best flicks of the decade. (sawmonkey, response to post, “Films of the decade: ‘Amost Famous’, R.J. Culter, Salon, 13 Dec. 2009) Patrick McEvoy-Halston: @sawmonkey It made an impression on me too. Great charm. Great friends. But it is one of the things you (or at least I) notice on the review, there is the SUGGESTION, with him being so (rightly) upset with the girls feeling so free to pee right before him, that sex with him is just further presump...

The Conjuring

The Conjuring 
I don't know if contemporary filmmakers are aware of it, but if they decide to set their films in the '70s, some of the affordments of that time are going to make them have to work harder to simply get a good scare from us. Who would you expect to have a more tenacious hold on that house, for example? The ghosts from Salem, or us from 2013, who've just been shown a New England home just a notch or two downscaled from being a Jeffersonian estate, that a single-income truck driver with some savings can afford? Seriously, though it's easy to credit that the father — Roger Perron—would get his family out of that house as fast as he could when trouble really stirs, we'd be more apt to still be wagering our losses—one dead dog, a wife accumulating bruises, some good scares to our kids—against what we might yet have full claim to. The losses will get their nursing—even the heavy traumas, maybe—if out of this we've still got a house—really,...