The Wife.

I watched this today too and found the movie to be really banal. The first act was insufferable but the movie slightly improved when it went on. I've never been feeling Close as a lock for either a win or a nom for this and this didn't do much to persuade me. The media and fanboys are pushing the "overdue" factor but I don't think many, even Academy voters care. I think she could in a stronger film but the movie she's in feels really outdated and amateurishly made, with so many laughable directing choices verging on incompetence. Anyone who writes the line "Hey, sis!" in this day and age should have their screenwriting license revoked. There's a lot of yelling, ham and theatrics, with acting very mannered with forced conflict between the characters. You rarely felt like you were watching real people. I think this is pretty much the polar opposite of 45 Years, which was quietly heartbreaking and haunting with an extremely captivating lead performance. Close was very solid here but in a year as strong as this, I find the Oscar talk ridiculous.

4.5-5/10

I just wish the whole film would consist of Close and Slater just sit down and talk with each other. The directing here was uninspiring as was the predictable script. I'm also not sure if Close will make it even though she was definitely the best thing about it.

I think that would've made for a more fascinating film. The interactions with Pryce felt so very "been there, done that" almost to the point of nausea, whereas the woefully underdeveloped subplot with Slater had promise. Imagine if the film had been about Close's character being the supportive wife without any trace of resentment or irritation at her husband's accolades, and that we see Slater's character begin to break down the walls and reveal the secret turmoil. I imagine it as a two-hour version of the Tom Cruise/April Grace scene in Magnolia, where after an hour of Close's character going over her history with Pryce and setting up this idyllic image of being the dutiful spouse to a genius, Slater provides the stories from Close's college years, where some of her language has bled into some of the works her husband has been credited for (because writers really can't abandon their own stylistic voice entirely), and that he knows that she has done more than act as proofreader. Then you see the character Close has crafted begin to crumble, and the second half of the film is her coming to terms with how her husband is a philanderer taking full advantage of her gifts, and how her marriage is a sham.

The movie kinda blows. Close and Pryce are quite good and they basically carry the whole thing on their shoulders, and while Close's performance sometimes seems a tad too calculated for its own good, in its best scenes (the latter part of the film) it really shines. Too bad the rest of the actors ham it up to the highest degree (especially the son) and that the film is just such a silly melodrama.

He's pretty much the opposite.

Man, it's just been a couple of hours since I watched this and it's already become worse in my mind. It's like the antithesis of "45 Years" is pretty much every department - while that film was very light on dialogue and bluntness, this one is verbose and very insistent on expoisition. And I think that does a real disservice to Close's performance - the director seems to want to rely on her face to pull the audience into her inner turmoil, but then he himself undermines that by constantly using flashbacks that literally explain everything we're supposed to read in her face, and by underscoring the close-ups with sappy music which also tells us everything. And all these artificial tricks make the turning of the screws of Close's performance just more visible in the first two acts of the film - there's a real lack of spontaniety and naturalism to the film and a bit of that affects her performance too.

It'd be a shame if she won for a film like this.

I'm gonna have to go against the grain on this one.

I do have my issues with it, beginning and ending with the script's structure. Annie Starke is lovely (it's amazing how much her voice resembles her mother's), but even she can't quite justify those flashbacks, which don't really offer any information that couldn't have been conveyed just as effectively through dialogue. The latter-day scenes are where the film's greatest strengths are, and in no instance does it benefit from interrupting that action to give us a flashback. I also feel that the script lays it on too thick to get its point across at times, including the whole monologue from the female author who discourages Joan to write, as well as some of the dialogue during those climactic fights between Joan and Joe. Having him actually say out loud "but what about the back rubs!" was a little jarring in how inelegant it was in comparison to the rest of the third act, like the writer decided to play to the cheap seats and nudge us in the most obvious direction instead of letting the preceding 90 minutes of characterization speak for themselves. Finally, I wasn't a fan the whole which struck me as too convenient to really have an impact. Everything was wrapped up so quickly that barely even registered for me.

The reason why the film still works in spite of these missteps is that it rests squarely on Close's shoulders, and she responds with a fantastic performance that holds the entire project together and electrifies the screen whenever the camera is on her. She can suggest multiple conflicting emotions at once without uttering a single word of dialogue, and at no point in the film is this as evident as during the scene with Slater at the hotel bar.I love the suggestion that this would work better as a chamber piece featuring only these two characters, with the truth about Joe's writing slowly being revealed as the conversation progresses and Joan finally faces the scalding resentment that she has accumulated over their three decades of marriage, and it's hard not to agree with it when Close takes that short scene and makes it such a Goddamn spectacle. She packs so much into that short exchange: righteous fury, seething contempt (for both men), a long-cultivated instinct to remain poised and in control of the situation at all times even in the face of indignant humiliation, and also a twinge of defiance and irony. Close is also stellar when she goes toe to toe with Pryce, and again I wish that the entire film focused on her, not because of the quality of Starke's acting (again, she's very good), but because the script only really comes to life when it turns the spotlight to latter-day Joan and thus gives Close the space to flex her muscles.

As for her awards prospects, I'll have to disagree again. Obviously hindsight is 20/20, but this really does make sense as a winning role. Her overdue narrative will aid tremendously, of course, but it's showy enough on its own too. I'm yet to see The Favourite, but for my money Close would be a worthy champion.

Zeb31 - I meant to tell you in my message that I think it's the kind of performance that will resonate with older voters and act as an introduction to Close for younger voters (the comparisons to 45 Years and Rampling may be trite, but it makes total sense). 

really liked Close (the performance if not so much the character; Joan is rather pathetic)

But everything else about the film was shockingly bad. Like TV-movie of the week level bad, from the spoiled bitch of a son (surely this was the most annoying character of 2018) to Jonathan Pryce's unconvincing outbursts and the hilariously wooden acting in the flashbacks to the very conceit of the film; an arrogant fraud receiving a Nobel Prize for his wife's writing. The unbelievable convenience and heavy-handedness of it boggles the mind. It's not enough that Pryce is stealing Close's writing, it's that she's a world-renowned artistic genius in disguise who's just gone and won a Nobel Prize for her lying, philandering husband. It's as subtle as a heart attack. 4/10

It was a bit theatrically dramatic and I really wish they hadn't included the flashbacks, as I feel it removes any sense of mystery or doubt to the proceedings, but every time Glenn was onscreen, it was pure fire. Even for how subtle she is in the first half, she's doing so much heavy-lifting and there's so much for her to work with. I actually really liked it as the senior citizen soap opera that it was. Glenn for sure is winning for that performance and had I seen it much earlier, I would have declared that a lot sooner. It was hard to predict her without having seen her work, but it is worthy. Maybe my least favorite of the five nominees, but it's a "winning" performance in a film that almost doesn't deserve her. This is definitely this year's Still Alice for multiple reasons (seasoned veteran finally getting her due, soapy material, incredibly small film).