Home Forums Movies Lead or Supporting no. 19: Meryl Streep in The Devil Wears Prada

Lead or Supporting no. 19: Meryl Streep in The Devil Wears Prada

CREATE A NEW TOPIC
CREATE A NEW POLL
Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 22 total)
Created
8 months ago
Last Reply
8 months ago
21
replies
1333
views
15
users
BenitoDelicias
4
Asgaroth
2
KAZ-2.5
2
Lead or Supporting no. 19: Meryl Streep in The Devil Wears Prada
Lead
Supporting
  • Profile picture
    Sab227
    Joined:
    Dec 29th, 2012
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1203334205

    Here we go again. What do you guys think was Meryl leading or supporting. Theres no doubt it was Hathaway’s movie from start to finish but Streep left this indelible impression and she loomed so large over the film that I understand the lead push. I myself considered her lead along Hathaway not because she has the same amount of screen time but because of the impression made by her character

    • This topic was modified 7 months, 3 weeks ago by Sab227.
    Reply
    Profile picture
    Human Bartender
    Joined:
    Apr 24th, 2016
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1203334231

    A borderline case. It’s not her story, you’re never not thinking about Streep throughout. She could fit into either category, but I’m happy with her lead placement.

    Let’s Go Bucks

    ReplyCopy URL
    Profile picture
    Emmyfan
    Joined:
    Nov 26th, 2010
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1203334243

    I agree with her lead placement. When Streep is not on the screen, I am wondering what is her character doing or how would she feel about this.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Profile picture
    Asgaroth
    Joined:
    Nov 1st, 2012
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1203334275

    It’s a very tough case. The movie is not about her character, but revolves around her character; you remove Meryl’s character and you basically have no movie. Strictly speaking it’s a supporting role, but her role is just so dominant and gravitating that a leading consideration is understandable. But I’ll stick with the norms and say it was a supporting role.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Profile picture
    lady_bird
    Joined:
    Mar 20th, 2019
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1203334417

    It was supporting to me. She could and should have won her 3rd Oscar if she went supporting.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Profile picture
    Tooner
    Joined:
    Dec 8th, 2019
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1203334425

    It was supporting to me. She could and should have won her 3rd Oscar if she went supporting.

    Would have loved to see it

    ReplyCopy URL
    Profile picture
    RobertPius
    Joined:
    Nov 22nd, 2012
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1203334438

    Would she have beat Jennifer Hudson (another is she lead or supporting performance?)

    Meryl’s overdue narrative didn’t seem to kick in until The Iron Lady.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Profile picture
    Joined:
    Jan 1st, 1970
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1203334445
    This post was found to be inappropriate by the moderators and has been removed.
    Profile picture
    KAZ-2.5
    Joined:
    Jan 16th, 2018
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1203334566

    It is a supporting role.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Profile picture
    BenitoDelicias
    Joined:
    Nov 3rd, 2010
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1203334685

    It’s a supporting role. She’s not the lead actress and doesn’t have the lead role.

    Even with such a great second half of your career defining performance, she was such a supporting player with supporting-caliber screen time that the world even found another supporting actress in the film in Emily Blunt and there was enough material and time left to make her a star, with even a couple of nominations here and there.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Profile picture
    BenitoDelicias
    Joined:
    Nov 3rd, 2010
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1203334687

    Would she have beat Jennifer Hudson (another is she lead or supporting performance?)

    Meryl’s overdue narrative didn’t seem to kick in until The Iron Lady.

    This was her first nomination after her comeback with Adaptation (or was Prada the real comeback?) where she clearly placed 2nd and gave the speech at the Globes about not winning anything since forever. So I think many would’ve welcomed a third Oscar for a legend being extremely legendary in that film. This was not a random indie film, it was a hit and people were obsessed with her.

    But yeah, Jennifer Hudson was a predicted winner months and months before the release. People would’ve rightfully predicted Streep for months too, but with a mandatory “we need to wait for Jennifer Hudson…” next to the prediction.

    Who knows what would’ve happened. Perhaps an exciting race till the end because SAG could’ve happened for her since she didn’t have one for film yet at that point and I don’t know how, but SAG sometimes votes with that in mind.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Profile picture
    Eddy Q
    Joined:
    Oct 13th, 2012
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1203334694

    I voted lead, but can understand a justification for supporting. (Streep actually won NSFC in supporting jointly with A Prairie Home Companion.) The lead push was strategically justified by Emily Blunt vying for a supporting nom (Hathaway would’ve never had a chance even with Streep out of the way), and the likelihood that Streep probably would’ve rather lost to Helen Mirren than Jennifer Hudson. And no, I don’t think she would’ve beaten Hudson.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Profile picture
    Eddy Q
    Joined:
    Oct 13th, 2012
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1203334700

    This was her first nomination after her comeback with Adaptation (or was Prada the real comeback?) where she clearly placed 2nd and gave the speech at the Globes about not winning anything since forever.

    Wouldn’t Dench have been 2nd? She had a dramatic role – arguably her best – in a film with a screenplay nom that also might’ve got into Best Picture in an expanded lineup. And she had yet to win in lead.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Profile picture
    Asgaroth
    Joined:
    Nov 1st, 2012
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1203334708

    This was her first nomination after her comeback with Adaptation (or was Prada the real comeback?) where she clearly placed 2nd and gave the speech at the Globes about not winning anything since forever.

    She gave that speech when winning for Adaptation in 2002, not Prada. Also I wouldn’t consider Adaptation as a “comeback” when she had been nominated only 3 years earlier for Music of the Heart in 1999. The longest she’s been without nominations was 5 years between 1990 (Postcards from the Edge) and 1995 (Bridges of Madison County).

    ReplyCopy URL
    Profile picture
    Kubrick
    Joined:
    Jan 9th, 2019
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1203334723

    <p style=”text-align: center;”>

    She gave that speech when winning for Adaptation in 2002, not Prada. Also I wouldn’t consider Adaptation as a “comeback” when she had been nominated only 3 years earlier for Music of the Heart in 1999. The longest she’s been without nominations was 5 years between 1990 (Postcards from the Edge) and 1995 (Bridges of Madison County).

    </p>
    The subject is winning, not just being nominated. Until that Adaptation win at the Globes, which was courtesy of Zeta-Jones being put in lead, it was her first Globe victory since Sophie’s Choice. After that, her awards attention had a second career wave. But let’s be aware that there was a window of nearly two decades where she wasn’t winning anything.

    ReplyCopy URL
Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 22 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

Similar Topics
DaKardii - Oct 1, 2020
Movies
Stank83 - Oct 1, 2020
Movies
Tom O'Neil - Oct 1, 2020
Movies