Performance by an Actress in a Supporting Role
Monica Barbaro, A Complete Unknown
Ariana Grande, Wicked
Felicity Jones, The Brutalist
Isabella Rossellini, Conclave
Zoe Saldaña, Emilia Pérez
If you’re wondering how many times I’m going to say “category fraud” during this awards season, my answer is--
Not as often as I have in the past, but more than you’re going to like.
It’s especially tricky in this category, because while two people have been accused of committing the crime, only one of them really is, and I sort of…don’t mind the other one?
Let me just get specific.
Arguments have been made that Saldaña and Grande are both leads in their respective films. After watching Emilia Pérez, I can only assume this argument was made by people who didn’t make it past the first half hour of the film (Honestly? Good for you), because she quickly is relegated to the background aside from her “big moment” in the fundraiser scene. If Saldaña wins, it won’t be because she had so much more material to present than her competitors. In fact, considering how much people dislike Emilia Pérez, less content might have helped her chances.
Common wisdom dictates that she’s going to win, but I have a sneaking suspicion there might be an upset. When they happen, they typically happen in the supporting categories, and we might see a repeat of a recent controversial win.
Before we get there, let’s talk about real category fraud.
Ariana Grande is in far too much of Wicked to be considered a supporting actress, and yet, because I’m one of those mentally sound people who loves to argue with themselves, I think you can also make a great case that if supporting vs. leading is less about actual screen time and more about whose story is the driving force behind the film and whose story serves to highlight that more prominent story, then Galinda is definitely a supporting role.
What I find most impressive about Grande’s performance is that she’s doing everything an actor would do in a supporting role, but by giving her more screentime to do it, it should come across as exasperating, but because she has such a firm handle on who this character is, you’re almost able to feel where she’s going to take her not just in this film, but in the second one as well. It’s the kind of goodwill an audience usually only grants a much more accomplished actor. Her vulnerable moments are so gorgeous, you’d sit through nine more hours of watching her present Galinda’s silliness to you since now you know that it really is just frosting on an extremely well-made cake.
I was very happy to see Barbaro on this list, because I thought she was the strongest actor in A Complete Unknown.
Hang on, I’ll say that again.
She was the best part of A Complete Unknown.
Her surprise appearance on this list means she won’t win, but in a less competitive year (those don’t exist when you’re talking about actresses, actually), I would have no problem with her snatching the statue. Although I suspect that she would become burdened with an award this early in her career. She’s better off with just the nomination.
Speaking of people who disappeared after some awards attention, Jones didn’t win an Oscar for The Theory of Everything, but she suffered the same kind of setback other actresses who win Best Supporting Actress do after winning. She got put in a blockbuster (Rogue One), which was surprisingly great, but then struggled through other lackluster awards bait like On the Basis of Sex. Her performance in The Brutalist is a visceral one. She’s very clear that she’s the female anchor in an Arthur Miller homage, and her final scene channels Greek tragedy the way Miller and O’Neill and all those other angry American playwrights always channeled them. Her character faces the same challenges those playwright’s female characters suffered from as well. We only receive her through the lens of the male protagonist. Jones does a solid job of trying to give us as much of Erzsébet as she can beyond what the script promises. It’s the type of performance that would have walked away with the award between 2001 and 2005. This year, however, much of it gets lost in the scope of the conversations about The Brutalist. It’s tough being a woman in a movie that seems not just surrounded by masculinity, but powered by it.
That brings me to who I think might upset the whole apple cart. Rossellini has been criticized for her role in Conclave being so brief. Even her “big moment” doesn’t feel like much of a moment. Her monologue isn’t quite a monologue, and her character is neither there for us, the audience, nor most of the other characters. There’s so much of her we’re not given, but Rossellini knows how to make mystery work to her advantage. It’s the perfect example of what can happen when you cast a true star in a role that’s on the underbaked side. While you could argue that a few actresses might be able to get a nomination out of these other roles, I’m not sure anybody but Rossellini could have pulled a nomination for playing a part like this.
One could also argue that it’s because of who her parents are, and if she does win, I’m sure some people will pair her win alongside Jamie Lee Curtis’ win for Everything, Everywhere, All at Once. I would find that unfair for a few reasons, but the major one would be that I’m not sure who still sees Rossellini as a nepotism hire. She’s a star in her own right, and has been for some time. Her performance is exactly the kind of portrayal that the category was invented for--succinct but impactful. I’m not necessarily saying she’d be my pick to win if I was allowed to choose, but I think she deserves her place on this roster. And if she causes an upset, it might end up being the only real shock of the night.
All that being said, here are my predictions:
Will Win: Saldaña
Should Win: Grande