Re Davis/Streep Race – Why did Meryl lose at SAG?

Home // Forums // Movies // Re Davis/Streep Race – Why did Meryl lose at SAG?

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 42 total)
Created
4 years ago
Last Reply
4 years ago
41
replies
950
views
22
users
5
4
4
  • dude93
    Member
    Joined:
    Mar 31st, 2013
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #142103

    Sorry to drag this old story up YET AGAIN, but I do have a question about the Viola Davis/Meryl Streep race for The Help/Iron Lady… 

    Streep won the Globe, BAFTA and the Oscar, but Davis won the SAG… Why so? Why didn’t Streep sweep that season, including winning the SAG? If SAG is voted by actors etc., like the Oscars, how did Streep go on to win the Oscar then…? I’m confused… I really feel strongly about Lawrence pulling a Streep this year, having won BAFTA and the Globe, and Lupita gets the SAG, with Lawrence ultimately getting another Oscar – again how would this happen if it does…? Why in these two-horse races, is there such a split decision sometimes? 

    Reply
    Junk
    Member
    Joined:
    Jul 2nd, 2011
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #142105

    The Help’s screener was distributed to everyone, every SAG member. The Iron Lady’s screener went out very late and if I remember correctly, not to the whole SAG membership. So obviously more people saw The Help. Also, The Help was the popular summer release with the ensemble of the year, so SAG members especially could not have missed it.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Words Count
    Member
    Joined:
    Sep 26th, 2013
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #142106

    No actress has been able to win in the lead film category twice.

    Viola Davis was the underdog and the alternative. That makes her an attractive winner for SAG’s union voter body. Davis also won BFCA.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Scottferguson
    Participant
    Joined:
    Sep 26th, 2011
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #142107

    Plus all the races that year likely were close, and Disney I believe sent physical DVDs to members, while Iron Lady, just out, was only online (this makes a HUGE difference most years).

    ReplyCopy URL
    dsps84
    Participant
    Joined:
    Jun 18th, 2012
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #142108

    Another important reason is that Streep had recently won there for Doubt. Perhaps in a close race there was a “spreading the wealth’ mentality. At the Oscars she had not won in 29 years. Big difference compared to Lawrence.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Beau S.
    Member
    Joined:
    Feb 10th, 2013
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #142109

    Wasn’t The Help also the first screener sent to the SAG membership (like Dallas Buyers Club this year)? Always helpful.

    ReplyCopy URL
    nkb325
    Participant
    Joined:
    Feb 6th, 2012
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #142110

    Also you mentioned that the oscars are voted by actors, like sag, but that’s only the case with the nominations. The whole voting body votes for the winners, so it’s possible that if only the members of the acting branch voted for the oscars, maybe Davis would have won. Streep might have just had wider support across other branches

    ReplyCopy URL
    Milk Money
    Participant
    Joined:
    Oct 2nd, 2013
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #142111

    As I SAG member I can tell you that many of us don’t like voting for a nominee twice.  Meryl had just won in 2009.

    ReplyCopy URL
    montana82
    Participant
    Joined:
    Sep 14th, 2011
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #142112

    Probably because SAG as an organization is less snobby and don’t have a problem giving their LEAD actress award to a 46 year old character actress (who happens to be black).

    The Academy only goes for marketable hot white women or legends in lead. Women that can have leading lady careers. People who they want to let into the club, people who make them feel all warm and fuzzy. So Davis didn’t cut it for them. 

    Every factor that won lead actress for Bullock, Portman, and Lawrence recently was there for Viola Davis yet it was the one time voters overlooked all of it. Interesting. One of those things were not like the other.

    ReplyCopy URL
    KT
    Member
    Joined:
    Sep 20th, 2012
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #142113

    Isn’t it interesting that it was against Davis that Streep finally won the Oscar?  Certainly when you look at her competition in the lead category in the years she lost: i.e. Paltrow, Swank, Winslet, Bullock.  It’s just revealing of the Academy, I think.  I agree with what was said above…SAG tends to spread wealth, though I don’t always agree with their popular/uninspired nominees (setting the lineup and potential winners for Oscar).

    ReplyCopy URL
    Mrs. Doolittle
    Participant
    Joined:
    Jul 8th, 2012
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #142114

    Probably because SAG as an organization is less snobby and don’t have a problem giving their LEAD actress award to a 46 year old character actress (who happens to be black).

    The Academy only goes for marketable hot white women or legends in lead. Women that can have leading lady careers. People who they want to let into the club, people who make them feel all warm and fuzzy. So Davis didn’t cut it for them. 

    Every factor that won lead actress for Bullock, Portman, and Lawrence recently was there for Viola Davis yet it was the one time voters overlooked all of it. Interesting. One of those things were not like the other.

    How the hell can you compare Davis to Lawrence. Jen at least won the LA Critics Award and was second place for the NYC to show there was background support for her performance (Not just precursor attention like Portman and Bullock.) Davis’ winning splurge was only hot air because of the popularity of her film and her race. If she went supporting like she should have, she would have most likely won. But in lead, Davis had zero business beating Streep’s tour de force performance. 

    ReplyCopy URL
    Milk Money
    Participant
    Joined:
    Oct 2nd, 2013
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #142115

    Isn’t it interesting that it was against Davis that Streep finally won the Oscar?  Certainly when you look at her competition in the lead category in the years she lost: i.e. Paltrow, Swank, Winslet, Bullock.  It’s just revealing of the Academy, I think.  I agree with what was said above…SAG tends to spread wealth, though I don’t always agree with their popular/uninspired nominees (setting the lineup and potential winners for Oscar).

    Honesty, I think this is what assisted in securing the Oscar for Spencer.  Voters may not have wanted to appear prejudiced for passing up Davis for Streep so they threw their weight behind Specncer, another person of color.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Morgan Henard
    Member
    Joined:
    May 27th, 2011
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #142116

    I will always stand by Davis being Supporting for The Help, and had she rightfully been placed in the category to begin with, Octavia Spencer’s mantle would have remained completely empty because all of the hardware would be on Davis’s shelf. And that raises multiple other questions:

    – With Davis out of Lead, would Tilda Swinton rightfully gotten in for We Need to Talk About Kevin?

    – Would Jessica Chastain still been nominated in Supporting with both Davis and Octavia Spencer? If so, would it have still been for The Help (which would mean The Help had three slots in one category) or would perhaps it had been for The Tree of Life?

    – Seeing that Davis would have swept, would Octavia Spencer gained more of a passionate buzz for Fruitvale Station and not only gotten in this year but swept and won? (A clear case of the nomination being the hard part.)

    The truth is Davis is co-Lead to the true lead, Emma Stone, but she should have gone Supporting. Nothing about it would have been category-fraud in my opinion. In my bolder opinion, Davis’s performance, in Lead, just didn’t stand worthier than Streep’s.     

    ReplyCopy URL
    Words Count
    Member
    Joined:
    Sep 26th, 2013
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #142117

    I want to avoid the racial component of the Davis vs Streep discussion. If you want to keep it real both women were competitive for purely political reasons. Streep didn’t win off the merit of her performance but  the push to give her an elusive third Oscar. Davis being non-white and the emotional spine of her blockbuster picture was prompted up as the alternative. And isn’t it time for a second non-white Best Actress winner. This primary narrative is how many of the more worthier nominees based on performance alone were left off. Close, Williams, Mara got in for political reasons as well. Close was owed a pity nomination for being dogged out during her prime in the eighties. Williams had Weinstein backing and Mara had Scott Rudin. Tilda Swinton’s movie was too difficult for the voters at the Academy to make the final cut. All other potential actress nominees didn’t have a chance based on what was going on with Davis vs Streep.

    ReplyCopy URL
    starfishgirl
    Member
    Joined:
    Oct 10th, 2011
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #142118

    I agree that Viola Davis should have stayed in supporting. She would have swept everything, and a win would have been so much better for her career than a nod in lead but then losing. But it doesn’t speak well of the academy that they only choose a certain type of woman for lead actress. It probably will take a young, hot, Halle Berry-type to make them hand out another lead actress Oscar to a black woman, and that’s pretty messed up

    ReplyCopy URL
Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 42 total)
Reply To: Re Davis/Streep Race – Why did Meryl lose at SAG?

You can use BBCodes to format your content.
Your account can't use Advanced BBCodes, they will be stripped before saving.

Similar Topics
Jeffrey... - Sep 21, 2017
Movies
Miles A... - Sep 21, 2017
Movies