Kate Winslet and Oscar mania

23rd February 2009

Kate Winslet and Oscar mania

posted in Arts and Music, Body Image, Body-Affirming, Fashion, Pop Culture |

There’s no end to the Kate Winslet love here at The-F-Word. In an industry that insists actresses remain ageless, pliant and overly thin even into middle-age, Winslet remains defiant of imposed cultural and beauty standards — and she’s a fine actress, too. Time magazine preemptively named Winslet with the Oscar for Best Actress in this week’s cover feature story this week and Winslet delivered, winning Best Actress for “The Reader.” At 33, Winslet is the youngest actress in history to receive six Oscar nominations. She’s also the recipient of two Golden Globes, a Screen Actors Guild prize and a British Academy Award (BAFTA).

I haven’t seen “The Reader” and I’m somewhat apprehensive after reading that some consider it to be a revisionist holocaust film in the worst kind of way. I have the book around here somewhere, but I’m not reading anything for the next few months that isn’t listed on a syllabus. For those who have seen “The Reader,” was the award aptly deserved? What’s your take on the other winners of the evening? Who were the fashion hits and who just missed the mark completely? Discuss anything Oscars below.

Click to Bookmark

This entry was posted on Monday, February 23rd, 2009 at 11:16 am and is filed under Arts and Music, Body Image, Body-Affirming, Fashion, Pop Culture. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

1 On February 23rd, 2009, blogreader said:

I actually really disliked The Reader. She was way better in Revolutionary Road. The Oscars always miss the mark though, I think…

posted on February 23rd, 2009 at 1:29 pm

2 On February 23rd, 2009, Diane said:

Well, of course, I stayed up late to watch the end of the Oscars and to see which woman would win the coveted “Best Actress” award. I have seen Revolutionary Road and read the novel. I must say I wasn’t too impressed with the movie because the novel is definitely offers up move as far as character development and plot development (but that is to be expected). I have not seen The Reader and would like to see it. Anyone know how I could see it online for free? I am a poor college student (soon to be poor graduate student).

Just a side note (as I step up onto my soap box)… I am a huge supporter of the arts don’t get me wrong, but I think sometimes actors get WAY too much recognition. I am going to be a social worker someday, and I think we do some of the most difficult (and necessary work) in the world. I wish I would what it would be like to walk into work every day and have people applauding me and saying “Wonderful job!” I just think other professions deserve more recognition too (like lowly graduate students!)

posted on February 23rd, 2009 at 2:40 pm

3 On February 23rd, 2009, J. said:

I think it’s deserved. I saw The Reader and while it took me a while to really figure out what was going on and what the sequence was (rarely a problem for me)… the acting was interesting. Everyone was very private and guarded therefore it was intense and subtle acting. Kate’s character was very complex but she led a seemingly simple life.

I just skimmed the Slate article… I don’t know how you personally would respond to the film but I definitely didn’t see it in that light. I’m a big believer in looking at every situation from as many points of view as possible, and this film showed a point of view often overlooked or shoved in the closet. Do I think the actions the character took were justified? No. But I think her story has as much right to be heard. There is a lot going on in the film I think, that isn’t straightforward. A lot is trying to be told through emotion and pauses, so to anyone who’s focused on “omg Holocaust!” it might slip past them.

posted on February 23rd, 2009 at 4:01 pm

4 On February 23rd, 2009, CassandraSays said:

I saw a pre-Oscar movie show a few weeks ago that had a review of The Reader, and one of the critics called Winslet “the finest working actor in the world”, female or male. I have to agree – she’s awesome.

I must admit that I’m a bit put off seeing The Reader though, and not for the reason other people seem to be. Am I the only one a bit uncomfortable with the age difference between the two leads who’re having a relationship? I mean I have no idea how old the actor actually is, but I believe he’s meant to be in high school when they start sleeping together. I dunno, I just think that if the genders were reversed there a lot more people would find that troubling.

From what I’ve heard it’s not so much Holocaust revisionist as supposed to illustrate Ardent’s banality of evil idea. Ie, ordinary people often do horrible things. There have been quite a few German films lately trying to address that question of why did so many apparently ordinary people go along with the Nazis, so I’m seeing this more as part of that process.

posted on February 23rd, 2009 at 4:30 pm

5 On February 23rd, 2009, Kt D said:

I have not seen the Reader yet, but I still want to see it. Kate Winslet is such a talented actress, yet she is still quite laid-back and genuine. I thought it was interesting that Great Britain was quite a triumphant during this year’s awards. Besides Kate Winslet and Slumdog Millionaire, best documentary went to Man on Wire. Also, best costume design went to the designers behind the Duchess. Quite a pattern, eh? I watched an excellent video that summarizes the “real” winners at last night’s Academy Awards. Take a look:

http://www.newsy.com/videos/oscars_winning_perspectives/

posted on February 23rd, 2009 at 5:46 pm

6 On February 23rd, 2009, imnotemily said:

I did not think of the film as a revisionary tale (until just now), but what I found most compelling about the movie was the long-term impact first love has on a person, and the ways that love blinds us to ugly truth. I agree w/ the Slate writer- but the screenplay’s refusal to make Hannah a redemptive character makes the story all the more interesting. What do the choices Michael make regarding Hannah mean, considering the atrocities she has committed unrepentantly? I recommended this movie to my Holocaust survivor grandparents yesterday when I saw it, but after reading the Slate piece, I might retract that recommendation.

I also was somewhat disturbed at the age difference between the characters- Michael was supposed to be 15 (the actor I believe was 17 at the time), and Hanna was 37, I believe. She was twice his age. The film never really goes into the obvious taboo nature of this relationship, although Michael keeps it a secret from his friends and family. I find our inability to acknowledge child rape in nontraditional scenarios, such as older female/younger male, or older female/younger female (”The Little Coochie Snorter That Could” from Vagina Monologues, anyone?) problematic.

Also- what the frik was Jessica Biel wearing last night? It looked like she got lost on the way to a college toga party…

posted on February 23rd, 2009 at 8:30 pm

7 On February 24th, 2009, Alyssa said:

I haven’t seen the movie, but speaking as a former actress, I see the Oscars as prom night for Hollywood. It’s basically the popular kids (the “A-listers”) celebrating themselves, crowning a prom king and queen. Don’t get me wrong, I think some of these films and actors deserve recognition, and I ADORE Kate Winslet! But the whole time I was an actor I heard people talking about what a “noble” profession it is.
I think the arts are important. But I also think social workers, teachers, and many other professionals are RIDICULOUSLY underrated, while celebrities are highly OVERrated. Just as Diane said.
Just my opinion.
(BYW, if you’re not one of the A-listers, you’re often treated like garbage.)

posted on February 24th, 2009 at 1:42 am

8 On February 24th, 2009, magic_at_mungos said:

I’ve seen the film and read the book. When I read the book, the main thing I got from it was that it was dealing with memory and how people deal with collective memory. In the book, I felt Sclink was trying to make the point that what people choose to forget is just as important as what they chose to remember.

In the film, they focussed a lot more on the relationship between Hanna (Kate Winslet) and the main character and how love can lead you to explain away things that the person had done in the past. Picking up on what imnotemily said, I don’t think it was rape or least I never read it as rape in the book. The film was a bit more dubious. There’s definitely an unequal power dynamic. Yes, he is 15 when the affair started and she is old enough to be his mother but the age difference wasn’t what made me uncomfortable. It was the power dynamic.

posted on February 24th, 2009 at 7:08 am

9 On February 24th, 2009, Mary Sue said:

Her dad? Is ADORABLE.

(Haven’t seen the film. Probably won’t. Like Will Smith, I prefer movies that have car chases, explosions, and, you know, fans.)

posted on February 24th, 2009 at 3:05 pm

10 On February 24th, 2009, Diane said:

I just saw “The Reader” last night, and I thought it was a very intriguing and thought provoking film. Okay, anyone else think that the actor, David Kross, who played “Young Mike” in this film, was gorgeous?!? I know he’s not 15 in real life, he is 19 or 20 (not that I have looked over every part of his biography or anything on imbd.com…). Also, I am only 21 years old so I don’t think it’s weird for me to be attracted this young actor!

I thought that the relationship between Hanna and Michael was very complex and bizarre. At points I thought that Hannah was being very controlling and taking advantage of the boy. Other times I thought she was dependent on Michael as she depended on him to read to her and not to be vulgar, but he was always the “domineering” one when they mad love.

I thought the film was very sexy but also extremely sad towards the end. It’s interesting to look at the Holocaust story this way, I don’t condone what Hannah did at the concentration camps AT ALL, but it is interesting to figure out why seemingly “good” people commit evil acts. See this movie!

posted on February 24th, 2009 at 3:49 pm

11 On February 24th, 2009, sarah said:

There are spoilers here, I think. WARNING.

I have read and seen The Reader, and I must say that I find myself getting increasingly angry with the Slate piece. The thrust of the article is that The Reader tries to “exculpate Nazi-era Germans from knowing complicity in the Final Solution,” a claim that, I think, is a profound misreading and mis-viewing of the book/film. While it’s possible that The Reader has been marketed as redemptive or a film about personal triumph, that’s a product of a film industry that needs to grasp on to easy tropes for marketing purposes, since the American industry and film-goers seem to generally be very wary of morally complex stories. The actual text of the book, and the screenplay, does not present itself this way AT ALL. Yes, I do think that there is a way in which Hanna’s illiteracy comes off as an inadequate moral foil to her crimes, and that made me uncomfortable when I first read it. On second thought, I think I’m really more confused by the depth of Hanna’s shame about her illiteracy–it seems unrealistic given what she sacrifices by not being truthful about it. But the fact of the matter is that Michael NEVER attempts to use Hanna’s illiteracy as a way to excuse her of her crimes. He sees it as a the circumstance that put certain horrible events into motion. He struggles with whether or not to keep her secret, knowing that she has confessed to things she can’t possibly have done because of her inability to read. People don’t seem to remember that this is also a story that deals in trial law and legal systems–if the court had knowledge of Hanna’s illiteracy, it would not clear her from murder, but the evidence against her is different…that is simply how the legal system works, like it or not.

Michael still feels something for Hanna after he finds out what she has done, because he was such a major part of his life. But it is clear that he will never forgive her of her crimes. Very clear.

I dunno, I’m blabbering but, as a Jew AND as a student of literature it seems to me to be really unfortunate that people must always cling so desperately to “good” and “evil.” At a certain point it is irrelevant–Nazis had lives outside of killing Jews. That doesn’t mean their murders were justified. It just means that life is fucking complicated.

posted on February 24th, 2009 at 4:24 pm

12 On February 26th, 2009, Misty said:

There was a funny item posted at E Online a while ago. Remember, this was filmed over a year ago. Beneath the joke, there’s a sharp observation, especially given her win.

http://www.eonline.com/uberblog/b101256_kate_winslets_prophetic_joke_holocaust.html

On a different note, I find it sad that Winslet wins an Oscar specifically now, when she is clearly thinner than she has been in the past.

posted on February 26th, 2009 at 7:17 pm

13 On February 26th, 2009, Misty said:

Sarah, your comment is very thoughtful. It is much appreciated.

posted on February 26th, 2009 at 7:20 pm

14 On March 12th, 2009, Rebecca M said:

Hello! I’ve just found your blog tonight and I love it.

Anyway in reply to you saying – “I haven’t seen ‘The Reader’ and I’m somewhat apprehensive after reading that some consider it to be a revisionist holocaust film in the worst kind of way.”

I haven’t seen it yet either, but I read the book years ago, and it’s actually more about the love affair between the woman and the boy, and the boys life. The whole Nazi plot is a side story that comes in near the end of the book.

Perhaps the movie does focus more on the holocaust, I’m not sure. I’m still really excited to see it though. I really loved the book, as controversial as it was.

posted on March 12th, 2009 at 11:58 pm