The Favourite (2018)

[Athena]

Directed by Yorgos Lanthimos from an original screenplay by Deborah Davis and Tony McNamara. Starring Olivia Colman, Emma Stone, Rachel Weisz, Nicholas Hoult, Joe Alwyn, James Smith, and Mark Gatiss. US release slated for November 23, 2018. 

 

 

[GaT]

This looks good.

[JustaPerson]

As a fan of all of these ladies, I'm excited! Olivia Colman's name without the "Academy Award-nominated/winner" just looks wrong and from what I've read of her performance, that'll probably change with this movie. 

[Avaleigh]

I'm glad there's a thread for this. I LOVED it. I'm a sucker for period films in a royal setting so I knew I would see this when I saw the trailer, but I'm still surprised by how much I enjoyed it. It felt very fresh, original and funny. Some royal stories are just paint by numbers adaptations but The Favourite is a film where I feel like I can say that I haven't seen a movie quite like it. 

If I were to compare it to another movie, I guess The Madness of King George comes to mind. I can see a few surface similarities there but both movies have qualities that are totally their own .

The humor really sold me and the language feels very modern but not in a way that feels like it's trying to pander to the lowest common denominator. 

The shooting scenes were fun and really gave Rachel Weisz and Emma Stone a chance to shine. 

Olivia Coleman was terrific. She's funny and alternates between being clueless and occasionally sharp. She has some level of self awareness, but being the monarch insulates her from have to deal with any genuine introspection. On the surface she has some things that people would enjoy having. Money, power, a palace, servants at her beck and call, a best friend she can confide in and have fun with, etc. On the other hand, it's easy to see why she's completely miserable. She's lonely, she's in constant physical pain, she has no family left, she endured 17 pregnancies but has no surviving children to show for it, and she's only in contact with people who are on her payroll or who want to use her for their own reasons. (Sometimes it's both when it comes to people like Abigail or the Marlboroughs.)

I'm curious to know what people think about that ending.

 

 

Each of the three women is definitely in her own personal hell but Abigail seems to be the worst off even if she "won" the battle over being the favourite. In the final scene we have Abigail on her knees in subjugation but we don't feel sorry for her because we've just seen evidence of her being unnecessarily cruel for no apparent reason. The queen is dominating her by physically keeping her head down and in place. If this is Abigail's personal hell then Anne is basically the devil in this scenario and the rabbits are Anne's little demons that Abigail will be forced to interact with as long as she wants to continue being the favourite.The final scene is also a reminder of how Sarah warned Abigail that she too would probably pass through hell one day. By the end of the movie, it's clear that this was an accurate prediction.

 

 

 

Edited December 3, 2018 by Avaleigh

[ElectricBoogaloo]

Golden Globe nominations:

Best Motion Picture – Musical or Comedy
Best Actress in a Motion Picture – Musical or Comedy: Olivia Colman
Best Actress in a Supporting Role in any Motion Picture: Emma Stone
Best Actress in a Supporting Role in any Motion Picture: Rachel Weisz
Best Screenplay – Motion Picture: Deborah Davis and Tony McNamara

[Black Knight]

On 12/3/2018 at 8:47 AM, Avaleigh said:

I'm curious to know what people think about that ending.

 

I saw this over the weekend and it was so damn entertaining! My favorite - or should I type favourite? - film of the year, and I can't wait to see it again. Re: the ending:

Spoiler

 

Anne holding Abigail's head down isn't only about physically dominating her and keeping her in place - it mirrors what Anne saw Abigail do to the rabbit, which is when Anne realized that Sarah was correct about what kind of person Abigail really is. So when Anne does this to Abigail, it lets Abigail know that Anne saw her, and that she's blown it for good. This isn't just one of Anne's passing tempers. She'll never be indulged by Anne again as she was before, not even having to perform her duties as queen's maid; now, for the rest of her days (or until Anne eventually shoves her out altogether, because Anne can't stand her anymore), she really is going to be treated like, and have to perform as, a total servant. All her power is gone. Anne is feeling similar intense regret and loss, as she knows now that she blew it with Sarah. So you get the two women's faces superimposed on the screen at the same time, along with the rabbits, which are of course a symbol of loss, disappointed expectations, and grief.

The one big complaint I had with the movie was the whole thing with Sarah sending her letter through the normal ways. Why, oh why, would she do that when she knew Abigail was in a position to intercept anything Sarah sent? That just killed my suspension of disbelief. Sarah wasn't stupid. And Godolphin had encouraged her to write. She would have sent her letter to him, with instructions for him to deliver it to Anne's hand himself.

 

Edited December 15, 2018 by Black Knight

[Silver Raven]

The two end-of-year critics for Entertainment Weekly both listed this as the best movie of the year.

[Black Knight]

18 hours ago, Silver Raven said:

The two end-of-year critics for Entertainment Weekly both listed this as the best movie of the year.

I was really happy about that. I hope that plus all the nominations gets more people to see it.

[AimingforYoko]

On 12/3/2018 at 10:47 AM, Avaleigh said:

I'm curious to know what people think about that ending.

I think Abigail thought since she had essentially replaced Sarah, that she would enjoy the same kind of relationship with Anne that Sarah had. What she failed to take into account that the reason Sarah had the kind of relationship she did was because of the shared history, which Abigail obviously lacked.

[Black Knight]

1 hour ago, AimingforYoko said:

I think Abigail thought since she had essentially replaced Sarah, that she would enjoy the same kind of relationship with Anne that Sarah had. What she failed to take into account that the reason Sarah had the kind of relationship she did was because of the shared history, which Abigail obviously lacked.

She was enjoying it though - see the scene where Anne called her away from dinner for her to rub Anne's legs, but Abigail had had too much to drink. She lay down and said she was unwell, and Anne just called the doctor for her while calling her "my love." She was being cosseted and indulged by Anne as much as Sarah ever was.

It was the later moment with the rabbit that Anne witnessed that ruined what Abigail had built with her.

Can I just take a moment here to say how wonderful Emma Stone was? She's always been the sweet girl in every movie I've ever seen her in, and she was practically unrecognizable here. I feel a bit bad for Weisz, because she was wonderful as well, and they're both getting nominated in the same category and I don't necessarily know that Stone was better performance-wise than Weisz, but I feel like Weisz is going to get overshadowed because of the whole "what a departure for Emma Stone" thing. (Ye gods, what a run-on sentence that was.) But it's not like Weisz has played a bunch of parts just like Sarah - it's more that she's always played a range of characters and so she wasn't slotted as a certain type in people's minds. The one thing that helps Weisz is that Stone has recently won, for Lead, while Weisz has never won anything.

Colman keeps getting the nomination for lead actress while Stone and Weisz are to fight it out in supporting, and I'm not sure that's entirely fitting either. She actually has less airtime than Stone. Airtime isn't everything, of course, but does Colman's Anne stand out that much more than Stone's Abigail? (I don't have an issue with Weisz in supporting - it's clearly a supporting role.) Looking at a similar film, All About Eve, Bette Davis and Anne Baxter were both nominated for Lead, and it seems to me that this probably should have been the case here as well. (This is where I like the Best Ensemble category of the SAGs, since all three are worthy of recognition!)

Of course, just because Stone has been getting the supporting nominations for now doesn't mean that pattern will continue. The Academy ignored the "Kate Winslet is supporting in The Reader" nonsense of the Golden Globes and nominated her in Lead (which she then won).

[kiddo82]

Anyone else wonder why 

Spoiler

Anne clearly had a stroke an no one in the movie mentioned "Hey, the Queen can't move her arm and what's up with that slurred speech?"

 

It was just weird that none of the characters seemed to notice let alone care.  It's not even a spoiler.  It's barely a plot point.

[afterbite]

Excited to see a topic on this movie. I saw it last week and loved it. It's complicated and frustrating and hilarious. All of the women had really satisfying story arcs, in the sense that they had complex motivations and were imperfect but also understandable. I was reminded of Keira Knightley's comment (paraphrased) that she loved doing period pieces because she got to be a fully realized character in them (and not, I presume, a rather one-dimensional love interest like many roles sent in the modern day are for winsome young women). Everyone here was sympathetic and somewhat reprehensible all at once, and I loved it. I probably enjoyed Weisz's role most of all. It was a delight to see her stomping about, being surly and manipulative, and just not being in the mood to put up with any of this foolishness. It made it all the more poignant to see the moments where her true affection for Anne shone through. Colman was a delight, giving such a layered performance that you could see that she spent most of her time as a shell of the woman she once was but also, on occasion, demonstrating the keenness that she'd developed over time as a figurehead who had to know that most everyone in her life was trying to manipulate her in one way or another. Stone did an amazing job humanizing her character just enough for us to understand why she was doing what she was doing. It was extremely frustrating to know that she was just trying to find a place where she was secure again (and then getting a little greedy, but wouldn't we all) while also being so short-sighted and indifferent to the suffering of others.

Good catch @Black Knight on the significance of the last scene. I took it as a statement that they had all put themselves into a specialized version of their own personal hell because of the decisions they'd made and that it was showing that they'd trapped themselves together in it, but I like the nuance you talked about quite a bit.

[Ms Blue Jay]

On 12/3/2018 at 11:47 AM, Avaleigh said:

I'm glad there's a thread for this. I LOVED it. I'm a sucker for period films in a royal setting so I knew I would see this when I saw the trailer, but I'm still surprised by how much I enjoyed it. It felt very fresh, original and funny. Some royal stories are just paint by numbers adaptations but The Favourite is a film where I feel like I can say that I haven't seen a movie quite like it. 

If I were to compare it to another movie, I guess The Madness of King George comes to mind. I can see a few surface similarities there but both movies have qualities that are totally their own .

I'm enjoying the comparisons online:  So far I've read "Dangerous Liaisons" and "Phantom Thread".  More:  "Barry Lyndon", "The Beguiled".

Thanks to this thread, I'm also reminded that I read "All About Eve" (Rachel Weisz mentioned that herself on the Wikipedia entry) and an angry reviewer who mentioned Dwight and Andy fighting for Michael Scott on The Office.  LOL!

Emma apparently fought really hard for this role, kind of being The Abigail of the film casting, as well....  The director only knew her from Crazy Stupid Love, whereas he already worked with Olivia and Rachel in "The Lobster".  He was not going to use anyone besides Olivia.

Edited December 18, 2018 by Ms Blue Jay

[Browncoat]

I finally got to see this -- it took forever for it to get to my corner of the world (and it didn't really yet -- I had to drive 40 miles!) -- and I loved it!  All the wonderful machinations and manipulations! 

I agree with your assessment of the ending @Black Knight, and yours, too, @Avaleigh.  I had the 40-mile drive back home to think about it, and it was brilliant. 

The expressions on their faces (and you know Anne was pulling her hair), and then everything superimposed by rabbits.  All the rabbits.  Brilliant.

I wondered too, why no one mentioned

the obvious stroke Anne had had.

It does crack me up, though, that the character name of the guy in the carriage is "Wanking Man".

[Ruby Gillis]

On 12/3/2018 at 11:47 AM, Avaleigh said:

If I were to compare it to another movie, I guess The Madness of King George comes to mind. I can see a few surface similarities there but both movies have qualities that are totally their own .

It made me realize how differently men and women are usually framed in period pieces.  In this, the 3 women get the man treatment (shot from below to make them look taller, eating food in unflattering ways, shooting and riding and being active) and the men are off on the sides, wearing the prettiest costumes.  I loved the film!

[anyanka323]

I thought it was a very interesting examination of the nature of female power, authority, and agency.  There have been quite a few films released this year where that theme is present but it's a very important one here. 

The historical Sarah Churchill was a fascinating woman, who ended up being the matriarch of a great British aristocratic dynasty, including an ancestor of Winston Churchill and Princess Diana.  She also was the primary force behind the creation of Blenheim Palace, spending much of her time before and after her break with Anne supervising its construction and the design of its interiors and grounds.  She published her memoirs in her 70s and lived into her 80s, outliving her husband and all of her children. 

The set designers really did their research for this film.  Some scenes were shot at Hampton Court, which was one of Anne's primary residences, along with Kensington Palace, Windsor and St. James' Palace.  The last three are still in use today as royal residences and offices, and their interior spaces have been much altered since the early 18th century.  However, Hampton Court ceased to be used as a royal residence under George II, so the interiors are closer to what Anne would have lived in.  The other very interesting detail was the use of blue and white china for tea by the women.  That particular type, both Chinese import and Dutch delftware, was introduced to England during the reign of Anne's sister Mary and her brother-in-law William. 

[PepSinger]

I thought that was Hampton Court! I've been there, so it's nice to be proven right.

[clb1016]

On 12/16/2018 at 7:21 PM, Black Knight said:

Can I just take a moment here to say how wonderful Emma Stone was? She's always been the sweet girl in every movie I've ever seen her in, and she was practically unrecognizable here. I feel a bit bad for Weisz, because she was wonderful as well, and they're both getting nominated in the same category and I don't necessarily know that Stone was better performance-wise than Weisz, but I feel like Weisz is going to get overshadowed because of the whole "what a departure for Emma Stone" thing. (Ye gods, what a run-on sentence that was.) But it's not like Weisz has played a bunch of parts just like Sarah - it's more that she's always played a range of characters and so she wasn't slotted as a certain type in people's minds. The one thing that helps Weisz is that Stone has recently won, for Lead, while Weisz has never won anything.

 

Weisz won a Best Supporting Actress Oscar in 2005 for The Constant Gardener.

[snickers]

I saw this last week, I thought this movie was excellent, one of the best of the year.   Between Weisz and Stone I have to say I liked Weisz better, but both was so, so good.  This was the performance Stone should have won an oscar for instead of La La Land!

 

Another person who I thought was really good but who none of the critics are talking about is Nicholas Hoult...I loved his character...I thought he had some of the best scenes/lines.

 

I do think perhaps creativity wise the Lobster was maybe slightly better, but Lanthimos wrote that and didn't write this, but I liked the humor of this much better. 

 

I hope this wins some awards!

[Silver Raven]

I haven't seen the movie yet, but I'm surprised that the actress who plays Anne is also the actress who plays Elizabeth in "The Crown".  They don't look the same at all.  :)

[Ms Blue Jay]

58 minutes ago, snickers said:

Another person who I thought was really good but who none of the critics are talking about is Nicholas Hoult...I loved his character...I thought he had some of the best scenes/lines.

Everyone is raving about Nicolas Hoult on Letterboxd, this movie review/list app I use.  I don't get it.  To me he was easily the most false actor.  I believed everyone else much easier than I believed him.  To me, he was just tall.

[PepSinger]

9 hours ago, Ms Blue Jay said:

To me, he was just tall.

LMAO.

[cpcathy]

I loved the Nicholas Hoult character, I thought he was really good in this. And his blue eyes are to die for.

[ombelico]

Enjoyed it, but I thought Emma Stone (who I normally like) was miscast. 

Regarding:

Spoiler

 

On 12/21/2018 at 1:29 PM, Browncoat said:

the obvious stroke Anne had had.

 

I thought it was meant to illustrate that some amount of time had passed (at least a few months or so), at least long enough for

Spoiler

Abigail to feel safely entrenched in her position of power, enough to think that she could behave with impunity.

[meep.meep]

On ‎12‎/‎26‎/‎2018 at 9:16 PM, Silver Raven said:

I haven't seen the movie yet, but I'm surprised that the actress who plays Anne is also the actress who plays Elizabeth in "The Crown".  They don't look the same at all.  :)

You haven't seen Olivia Coleman in The Crown yet - the first two seasons, the role was played by Claire Foy.

About halfway through the film, I remembered that Rachel Weisz and Nick Hoult were both in About a Boy.

I loved this movie.

[Silver Raven]

7 minutes ago, meep.meep said:

You haven't seen Olivia Coleman in The Crown yet - the first two seasons, the role was played by Claire Foy.

Yeah, I know, but I've seen stories about her.

[Blergh]

I noticed in the IMDB credits there was no one playing Anne's husband, Prince George of Denmark who would live to 1708 and was the father to their doomed 19 children  (yes,  NINETEEN children)  none of whom lived to see Anne be Queen and only one lived past infancy. I know the movie's focus was on the rivalry between Her Majesty's women courtiers to try to gain political power but I'm just curious if poor, dull Prince George even got a mention in the movie. I mean his passing greatly affected Queen Anne AND the Duchess Sarah's attempt to try to get the Queen to get over it somewhat contributed to the Duchess of Marlborough's downfall. 

Edited January 1, 2019 by Blergh
corrected number

[HamSammich]

Fine. I’ll be the cheese that stands alone and say that I wasn’t a fan of this. We read the reviews before going, knew what we were getting into and wanted to like it...but it was a big ol’nope.

That being said, the actors were fantastic and the scenery and costumes were worth the price of admission. It was a visual feast and I spent most of the movie drooling over the lavish attention to detail. 

We loved The Lobster. This one just didn't work for us and I ended up disliking every single character. The rabbit and Abigail’s shoe was the last straw. Boo. Hiss. What a wretched bunch. 

[Nidratime]

You're not standing alone. I saw this movie on 12/26, looked over the comments here, and thought, I'm going to be the lone dissenter. Glad for a little company.

Before seeing the movie, I read some of the official praise and was really looking forward to it as sort of a modern day Tom Jones, but was hugely disappointed. Just about every character was so unlikable. There was a weird soundtrack that sounded like nails on a chalkboard -- very discordant noises that kept going on and on -- and camera shots that went on and on and on. I kept waiting for something to happen to make this all mean something, but it just ended, switching one lady-in-waiting for the other. I know they were different. I know that Abigail's ascendancy pushed affairs of state back on the Queen's plate, since Sarah was more like the power behind the throne than Abigail, and that might have been interesting if they showed that being either good or bad, but they didn't.

Two family members accompanied me (who I only see films with one time of year, after X-mas, as a treat during my visit) and I was so disappointed for them. One thought it very bizarre and the other just found it vulgar (and neither of them are prudes).

When I went into the ladies' room at the theater when the movie ended, a lady called out to the group of women there, "Did anyone just see 'The Favourite'?" When I responded that I had, she asked. "What was that?"  That appeared to be the audience's reaction, "what was that?"

[Black Knight]

20 hours ago, Silver Raven said:

Yeah, I know, but I've seen stories about her.

Yeah, Colman is being made up differently for The Crown, and of course the two queens are quite different personalities and their health situations are so opposite. It’s really interesting to see the effect.

[Ms Blue Jay]

I kind of thought it was really well done but I didn't enjoy watching it.  I'm enjoying reading the comments of what people thought far more than the experience of watching it.  There were like, 6 vomit scenes for goodness sakes.

I did love the scenery and cinematography and the costumes, and I especially liked the acting of Emma Stone, but I thought all 3 leads did a great job.  And I actually liked the music, but I agree - it was weird.  

Broadchurch Season 1 is one of the best things I've ever seen - I believe it's on Netflix.  It stars David Tennant and Olivia Colman, if you want to see yet another side of her.

Edited December 30, 2018 by Ms Blue Jay

[ombelico]

Even though I "enjoyed" it in the sense that I didn't think it was a waste of my money and I could admire that it was well done, I didn't find watching it to be a pleasurable experience, and I did find it a bit disappointing. From the trailer and the commercials, I thought the dialogue was going to be a bit snappier and funnier - while there were still humorous moments, I didn't find myself laughing out loud, more just kind of smirking. When it ended I could definitely feel that the rest of the theater was thinking, "And... that's it? Huh?" That said, Olivia Colman was absolutely fantastic.

[kiddo82]

4 hours ago, ombelico said:

Even though I "enjoyed" it in the sense that I didn't think it was a waste of my money and I could admire that it was well done, I didn't find watching it to be a pleasurable experience, and I did find it a bit disappointing. From the trailer and the commercials, I thought the dialogue was going to be a bit snappier and funnier - while there were still humorous moments, I didn't find myself laughing out loud, more just kind of smirking. When it ended I could definitely feel that the rest of the theater was thinking, "And... that's it? Huh?" That said, Olivia Colman was absolutely fantastic.

For me it's definitely one of those movies that if it wins a ton of awards I won't be upset (particularly for any of the three leads but Weisz and Stone will probably cancel each other out.*) but I'm not actively rooting for it either.  It's an objectively fine movie but not one I found myself particularly enamored by.  

 

*Choosing just between those two, Weisz is the easy choice for me.  Stone was fine but I felt like with her you could see the strings.

[ElectricBoogaloo]

Congratulations to Olivia Colman for winning a Golden Globe!

BEST ACTRESS IN A FILM - COMEDY/MUSICAL: Olivia Colman, “The Favourite”

[methodwriter85]

On 12/29/2018 at 7:32 PM, Ms Blue Jay said:

I kind of thought it was really well done but I didn't enjoy watching it.  I'm enjoying reading the comments of what people thought far more than the experience of watching it.  There were like, 6 vomit scenes for goodness sakes.

I enjoyed the beginning but towards the end I just wanted to be done with these characters. I'd rather watch Love and Friendship again instead.

I was kind of expecting something more along the lines of Jane Austen, but r-rated and with lesbian overtones. It started out that way, but these people just became completely irredeemable.

Also, Joe Alwyn kind of just exploded out of nowhere.

Edited January 7, 2019 by methodwriter85

[ElectricBoogaloo]

The Favourite won two Critics' Choice Awards tonight!

Best Actress in a Comedy: Olivia Colman – The Favourite as Queen Anne

Best Acting Ensemble

Edited January 14, 2019 by ElectricBoogaloo

[cpcathy]

Olivia Colman seems so delightful in person, I do hope she wins more stuff!

[Mabinogia]

4 hours ago, cpcathy said:

Olivia Colman seems so delightful in person, I do hope she wins more stuff!

I seriously want her to be my BFF. She is awesome. Which is part of why I didn't enjoy this movie. I felt so bad for poor Queen Anne. She was breaking my heart. 

[thuganomics85]

This was an interesting viewing experience.  During the actual watch, I was enjoying it for the most part, but there were times that it was so out there and unexpected, I was kind of uneasy during it, and wasn't sure how I was going to feel about it overall.  But after it was done and I spent some time thinking about it more, there were just moments that really stuck with me, and in the end, I think I'm in the "I loved it or at least really, really liked" it group.

Safe to say that the acting was fantastic.  A minor nitpick, but I do wonder about how they decided to submit everyone, because part of me felt like Sarah and Abigail were the main characters since they were the ones driving the majority of the story, while I felt like Anne was kind of being dragged along one way or another (until the end.)  So, part of me feels like it really should have been Rachel Weisz and Emma Stone competing for Best Actress, while Olivia Coleman goes for Supporting.  The irony is that if it went that way, I think Coleman might have actually dominating the Supporting Actress category, but instead, it is looking like she'll be the runner-up against Glenn Close, while Weisz and Stone might possibly split their category.  Kind of funny how things work, but then again, this is all speculation and my opinion on that front.

Still, Olivia Coleman is one of the best living actresses in my mind, and I'm glad she is getting the love and adoration for this role.  She did an excellent job and made me feel bad for Anne, her pain, and how she was being played at times, but I also liked that she and the film were willing to show her unpleasant moment like how she mistreated servants and how she kept dumping her responsibilities on others (or mainly letting Sarah do the tasks.)  But I still found her closest to a sympathetic character here.  Either way, I hope this is the beginning Olivia Coleman being more of a household name.

Rachel Weisz and Emma Stone were both great, and I liked how their character arcs' went, with Sarah starting out cold, manipulating, and even close to abusive, but then we see that in some ways, she actually did care for Anne, and wanted what was best for her.  Meanwhile, Abigail starts out looking like the put-upon underdog, but the more power she acquires, the more that facade slips, and she ends up being even worse than Sarah ever was (at least Sarah never hurt the bunnies, Abigail!)  And all of their confrontations and showdowns were epic.  It really is hard to pick which one is my favourite (ha!) since I feel like both completed each other so well, but I might give a slight, slight edge to Weisz since I think it is usually harder to start out as the more unlikable character and reveal more layers at the film progresses, but Stone was still freaking amazing.

While the women easily stole the show, Nicholas Hoult was slaying me with all of his campy, preening glory. Those outfits and make-up were the best!  Also enjoyed seeing Mark Gatiss as Sarah's husband.

First time seeing a Yorgos Lanthimos film, and he certainly has a zany, off-the-wall style I dig.  More films could use epic, slo-mo duck races!

At the very least, I really hope we see Olivia Coleman, Rachel Weisz, and Emma Stone act together again!

[Simon Boccanegra]

39 minutes ago, thuganomics85 said:

in the end, I think I'm in the "I loved it or at least really, really liked" it group.

Same. I'd call it a near-great film. It has lingered with me while some of the more genteel end-of-year pictures have faded. I found it very funny in its rude fashion. It's a royal period drama for people who think they find those boring (although fans of the genre may enjoy it too). 

It's just not a film for anyone who gets hung up on likability. No one here is really "sympathetic" in the conventional sense. Some are just worse than others...and it shifts on you. At best we admire them for their ruthlessness and their wit. 

For some reason, something that stays with me about it is Weisz/Sarah's nonchalant reaction to her scar, the line she has about how it would be dashing on a man. And Weisz doesn't make it sound like a screenwriter's point about society; it is so organic to the character.  

Abigail's mechanical "honeymoon" with the Joe Alwyn character was a hoot.  

I agree with what you say about the categories for awards, but we can never put much stock in those. People get submitted where they or someone else thinks they have the best chance. Viola Davis won a Supporting Actress Oscar a couple years ago for a role that was the co-lead by any stretch of the imagination. In fact, she had won Lead Actress at the Tonys for playing the same character on the stage. I assume Colman was submitted in lead here because the other two, being the rivals for her character's favor, were more "equal" in purely schematic terms.

Quote

First time seeing a Yorgos Lanthimos film, and he certainly has a zany, off-the-wall style I dig

The only other one I've seen is 2010 Best Foreign Film nominee Dogtooth, which was...unforgettable. I would recommend that if you enjoyed The Favourite. I missed The Lobster, but I notice it is available on Netflix at the moment. I will have to check it out before it scrolls away.  

Edited February 13, 2019 by Simon Boccanegra

[cpcathy]

The Lobster was....very odd. Be warned.

[stealinghome]

I just got back from seeing this, and thought it was very good but weird. The acting was utterly top-notch, of course. Olivia Colman and Rachel Weisz were blow-the-doors-off amazing; I found Emma Stone good, but not as good to the other two (though that may be partially because Abigail just wasn't as interesting a character). I felt quite badly for Sarah at the end, and wish more of the movie had been about her, as imo she emerged as the most interesting character, with the most depth/layers of anyone on-screen. When she was walking back through the secret passage after she saw Anne and Abigail sleeping together? OUCH. In some ways I also think Sarah loved Anne more than Anne loved her (not as it appears on the surface), which makes it all doubly tragic. I would totally watch a prequel about Anne and Sarah (really Sarah) running the country...or a sequel where Sarah does something else cool and seethes in bitterness. Did anyone else crack up at her attempts at letter writing? I know I did. But I also love that we don't know what the actual letter said.

Olivia Colman's EYES during the party scene.

Sometimes the (odd) soundtrack worked for me, and sometimes it didn't. The fish-eye view was effective the first 500 times it was used, but by the end I was kind of over it. The costumes and scenery were BEAUTIFUL, though--I do hope it wins one of the technical Oscars for which it's been nominated (especially Costume Design or Production Design), because it was just a visual feast on all levels.

Quote

For some reason, something that stays with me about it is Weisz/Sarah's nonchalant reaction to her scar, the line she has about how it would be dashing on a man. And Weisz doesn't make it sound like a screenwriter's point about society; it is so organic to the character.  

Agreed, I loved that, and I loved Weisz' deadpan delivery of "No, but I do have a standing job offer" when Godolphin finds her in the brothel and asked if she'd been raped. Something about it was both so controlled and wry and nonchalant in the way that Sarah was throughout the movie, and yet hinted that she was about to TOTALLY lose her shit.

[tinaw]

I saw this movie today and liked it a lot  i had sympathy for queen anne and Sarah.Abigail got exactly what she deserved. No sympathy at all for her.

[thuganomics85]

Olivia Coleman won the Oscar for Best Actress!  While I'm still a little mixed on if she and Rachel Weisz/Emma Stone were submitted in the categories I thought they should have been in, I'm happy for the film and ecstatic for her!  I hope this is only the first step towards everyone knowing who Olivia Coleman is and why she is a damn world-wide treasure!

[Black Knight]

11 hours ago, thuganomics85 said:

I hope this is only the first step towards everyone knowing who Olivia Coleman is and why she is a damn world-wide treasure!

Sadly, Olivia Coleman remains unknown. But Olivia Colman's profile just shot up a ton. 😉 Netflix must be thrilled. I'm so happy for Colman!

[stealinghome]

Yeah, I was super pumped (and pleasantly surprised) when Colman won last night--and then her speech was just so charming!!! My new ambition in life is to be her BFF, because she just seems like so much fun.

I'm also glad The Favourite didn't get shut out, as that would have been a real shame (especially as TF tied Roma for the most nominations). I side-eyed HARD Emma Stone being nominated in Supporting instead of Lead, but I guess it worked out, since Stone might have split the Colman vote if nominated in Lead. I wonder if that was actually the thinking behind putting her in Supporting instead.

[methodwriter85]

I feel bad for Glenn Close but I do think Colman totally deserves it, way more than Lady Gaga would have.

[Dr.OO7]

On 2/12/2019 at 11:51 PM, thuganomics85 said:

So, part of me feels like it really should have been Rachel Weisz and Emma Stone competing for Best Actress, while Olivia Coleman goes for Supporting

I thought the same thing. Congratulations to Colman for an excellent performance, but I definitely feel she was Supporting, not Lead.

While I didn't like the grosser scenes, I like that it didn't shy away of what life was like in those days.

[stealinghome]

On 2/12/2019 at 11:51 PM, thuganomics85 said:

So, part of me feels like it really should have been Rachel Weisz and Emma Stone competing for Best Actress, while Olivia Coleman goes for Supporting. 

1 hour ago, Camille said:

I thought the same thing. Congratulations to Colman for an excellent performance, but I definitely feel she was Supporting, not Lead.

It's so funny how mileage varies on this across viewers! It is a testament to the strength of the cast and the screenplay. That said, imo it was the right call to nominate Rachel Weisz in Supporting--the movie was "about" Sarah far less than it was about Anne or Abigail. That is not to say that Sarah was a flat or agency-less character, but rather to say that I thought the screenplay subordinated her story to Anne and Abigail's, and that her importance was really more about her place in theirs. (That Weisz could even be in the conversation for Lead is a great compliment to her performance, I think.) Equally, as I said above, Emma Stone should definitely have been nominated in Lead. I don't know what the screentime totals looked like, but Abigail was the character whose journey the movie was most focused on from start to end and for most of the movie its focal point. I definitely think there were some category shenanigans in nominating her in Supporting--and as I said above I wonder if that decision was made because everyone involved knew Stone wouldn't win (her performance wasn't strong enough) and they thought Colman had a better chance of winning Lead with no costar splitting the vote than Weisz did of winning Supporting with no costar splitting the vote. Turns out that may have been the right call.

I honestly think Olivia Colman could have gone either way--she felt like Supporting for the first third to half of the movie, but by the end it felt like Anne had ascended to co-Lead status with Abigail (that shift starts around when she sleeps with Abigail and the movie becomes more about Anne's choice between Sarah and Abigail and less about Abigail's machinations, I think). Given the strength of her performance as well as its Oscar bait-y nature (the weight she gained, having to mimic Anne's physical condition post-stroke), I can see why they ran Colman in Lead instead of Supporting. I really think that is one that could have gone either way.

Quote

While I didn't like the grosser scenes, I like that it didn't shy away of what life was like in those days.

I was also grossed out by the vomiting scenes, but in reflecting on them I felt they served a purpose. iirc, we usually see Anne and Abigail vomiting because they've overindulged in something (and usually they're overindulging to self-medicate emotional/psychological pain). On the contrary, Sarah, who is so self-controlled and in many ways austere, I think only throws up when Abigail has poisoned her. It's both a really nice little characterization note that splits Sarah off from Anne and Abigail--Abigail can play Anne so well in part because they are more similar, while Anne and Sarah wreck their relationship largely because they are such fundamentally different people--and as far as Sarah goes, also an obvious literalization of Abigail's poisoning of her life.

[methodwriter85]

10 hours ago, stealinghome said:

I honestly think Olivia Colman could have gone either way--she felt like Supporting for the first third to half of the movie, but by the end it felt like Anne had ascended to co-Lead status with Abigail (that shift starts around when she sleeps with Abigail and the movie becomes more about Anne's choice between Sarah and Abigail and less about Abigail's machinations, I think). Given the strength of her performance as well as its Oscar bait-y nature (the weight she gained, having to mimic Anne's physical condition post-stroke), I can see why they ran Colman in Lead instead of Supporting. I really think that is one that could have gone either way.

I did think that it's basically about Anne ascending and realizing her own power while at the same time realizing that she made the mistake in picking Abigail over Sarah. Because she sends Sarah away, she has to assert herself instead of relying Sarah to make her choices for her. The end scene is Anne realizing that she made a mistake, and also realizing that she needs to assert her own dominance over Abigail.