P.O.P Posted May 19 Posted May 19 17 minutes ago, QuanticXplosion said: Cate is great but I think Julianne Moore has more chances than her. I also think that Angelina Jolie could achieve that level. Thanks for the laugh ---- No. Cate is an aussie and she will never be the national treasure for Hollywood. Look at Margot, if she was an American, she would have been regarded as the number 1 actress now.
skizzo Posted May 19 Posted May 19 That's like asking if Madonna will ever lose her title of Queen Of Pop. Wont happen. 1
AxelFox Posted May 19 Posted May 19 6 hours ago, Blue Monday said: No shade to Cate but she doesn't have a role as iconic as Miranda Priestly OT: Both are absolutely fantastic actresses and once you reach the level where they're at it's really not a competition anymore. Both have their secured their spots for the cinematography history books.
RT Air Posted May 19 Posted May 19 I do believe Cate is the greatest actress of our time, but she probably won't be recognized as such in the public eye as her best performances are in more left-field movies (although she's probably got the most iconic role out of the two, whenever I bring her up among straight people their inner Galadriel fanboy jumps out)
Blue Monday Posted May 19 Posted May 19 6 hours ago, AxelFox said: OT: Both are absolutely fantastic actresses and once you reach the level where they're at it's really not a competition anymore. Both have their secured their spots for the cinematography history books. I'll give you this is an iconic role but this character does not lead the film like Miranda does TDWP, she's more of an ensemble player whereas they sold TDWP on Meryl's star power and performance. That's the difference between Cate and Meryl; Cate doesn't have a movie as big as TDWP that has been sold on her 1
supertiffany Posted May 20 Posted May 20 Meryl snatch a gold with Devil Wears Prada which obviously Cate is lacking
midnightdawn Posted May 20 Posted May 20 Meryl is more versatile than Cate. Cate tends to do best with big, showy roles like Elizabeth, Blue Jasmine, Tar. She also doesn't have the commercial achievements that Meryl has. The GP know she is a talented actress but they're usually not interested in her the way they are Meryl. 1
OrgVisual Posted May 20 Posted May 20 20 hours ago, Happylittlepunk said: Cate has more iconic film roles than Meryl. Let's be real half of Meryl roles are completely forgotten despite the awards/noms over the years. There's nothing forgotten about Devil Wears Prada and Mamma Mia, at least 2
Dark Miracles Posted May 20 Posted May 20 (edited) 11 hours ago, Blue Monday said: I'll give you this is an iconic role but this character does not lead the film like Miranda does TDWP, she's more of an ensemble player whereas they sold TDWP on Meryl's star power and performance. That's the difference between Cate and Meryl; Cate doesn't have a movie as big as TDWP that has been sold on her Blue Jasmine grossing 100M is more impressive to me than TDWP grossing 300M. The former is a niche auteur film sold on Cate's performance, the latter is a mainstream adaptation of and about a famous public figure among the female/gay demographic, sold on Meryl's performance. At any rate, Helen Mirren could've played the Anna Wintour role and the movie would've looked and fared exactly the same Edited May 20 by Dark Miracles
Dark Miracles Posted May 20 Posted May 20 21 hours ago, duybeeGAshantiGA said: Meryl is the Madonna of acting while Cate is Taylor Swift with talent. So yeah number wise she can surpass Meryl but not in public perception, at least for now or in the next few years. Who knows about the longer future. I get why both are perceived as the pinnacle, or as having the ultimate careers, in their field, but this comparison doesn't track I feel. Meryl is and has always been a huge industry darling whereas Madonna received significant, potentially career-killing pushback from within her own industry, even before the risqué Erotica era. If anything Meryl is Taylor Swift with talent
Blue Monday Posted May 20 Posted May 20 (edited) 15 minutes ago, Dark Miracles said: Blue Jasmine grossing 100M is more impressive to me than TDWP grossing 300M. The former is a niche auteur film sold on Cate's performance, the latter is a mainstream adaptation of and about a famous public figure among the female/gay demographic, sold on Meryl's performance. At any rate, Helen Mirren could've played the Anna Wintour role and the movie would've looked and fared exactly the same That's all well and good but if you go up to the average person and ask them about Blue Jasmine or TDWP they're more likely to know TDWP which is the point. You also forgot to mention that Blue Jasmine is a Woody Allen film which absolutely accounted for the success of Blue Jasmine. Also that's debatable about Helen Mirren, who isn't as good of an actress as Meryl is. I know Meryl has lately been coasting in this late stage in her career but Miranda is one of her best performances; I could say Cate recycled a lot of her Blanche DuBois work for Blue Jasmine but that wouldn't be totally correct now would it? Edited May 20 by Blue Monday 1
OnlyManInTheWorld Posted May 20 Posted May 20 I believe many of Meryl's nominations were unnecessary, like that one for "Post" (she did absolutely nothing in the movie), "Osage County" or that witch role.
Onyxmage Posted May 20 Posted May 20 She doesnt have a movie as Iconic as Death Becomes her or The Devil Wears Prada so no. 1 1
Jay07 Posted May 20 Posted May 20 Also, Meryl is the most commercial actor and dare I say, the more versatile. She has a lot of heavy, dramatic roles but also a lot of comedies and commercial fare like Death Becomes Her, Devil Wears Prada and Mamma Mia. Also, I think Cate takes herself a liiiittle too seriously. 1
Dark Miracles Posted May 20 Posted May 20 5 hours ago, Blue Monday said: That's all well and good but if you go up to the average person and ask them about Blue Jasmine or TDWP they're more likely to know TDWP which is the point. You also forgot to mention that Blue Jasmine is a Woody Allen film which absolutely accounted for the success of Blue Jasmine. Also that's debatable about Helen Mirren, who isn't as good of an actress as Meryl is. I know Meryl has lately been coasting in this late stage in her career but Miranda is one of her best performances; I could say Cate recycled a lot of her Blanche DuBois work for Blue Jasmine but that wouldn't be totally correct now would it? Well of course they are more likely to know it because TDWP is about a very famous person who frequenly appears in mainstream media, as well as an adaptation of a famous book. I only argued the falsehood that Blanchett allegedly doesn't have any successful movies sold on the back of her central performance the way Meryl does, because Blue Jasmine is a shining example of exactly that and, IMO, TDWP isn't considering it would've done numbers among the female/gay demographic regardless of who played the part. Any of the actresses from Meryl's generation could have given that sassy, snobby work boss performance and the movie would've done what it did. There's a character just like that present in practically every popular US sitcom from the 90s/00s. Blue Jasmine however is work of fiction actually sold on the hype and pedigree of a Cate Blanchett performance and it grossed that 100M starting in the usually dormant box office month of July, so before the awards season (which she sweeped) even got to bolster any box office numbers. For me that's actually way more impressive. Woody Allen's films post-Blue Jasmine also all bombed if I'm not mistaken.
Batsy Armada Posted May 20 Posted May 20 What I will say is that if it can be done, she would be the main one to be able to do it. Glenn Close is another that's really up there. They're both such phenomenal actresses.
Blue Monday Posted May 20 Posted May 20 (edited) 4 hours ago, Dark Miracles said: Well of course they are more likely to know it because TDWP is about a very famous person who frequenly appears in mainstream media, as well as an adaptation of a famous book. I only argued the falsehood that Blanchett allegedly doesn't have any successful movies sold on the back of her central performance the way Meryl does, because Blue Jasmine is a shining example of exactly that and, IMO, TDWP isn't considering it would've done numbers among the female/gay demographic regardless of who played the part. Any of the actresses from Meryl's generation could have given that sassy, snobby work boss performance and the movie would've done what it did. There's a character just like that present in practically every popular US sitcom from the 90s/00s. Blue Jasmine however is work of fiction actually sold on the hype and pedigree of a Cate Blanchett performance and it grossed that 100M starting in the usually dormant box office month of July, so before the awards season (which she sweeped) even got to bolster any box office numbers. For me that's actually way more impressive. Woody Allen's films post-Blue Jasmine also all bombed if I'm not mistaken. I'm just not seeing how any of this matters when at the end of the day, more people in the general public know who Meryl Streep is and she has a more robust filmography with crossover hits Edited May 20 by Blue Monday 2
Dark Miracles Posted May 20 Posted May 20 52 minutes ago, Blue Monday said: I'm just not seeing how any of this matters when at the end of the day, more people in the general public know who Meryl Streep is and she has a more robust filmography with crossover hits It was your own point so why even bring it up then if it doesn't matter? Anyway I really don't see how she has more crossover hits than Blanchett though, even if you take away Cate's franchises like LOTR/Hobbit, Thor Ragnarok and Indiana Jones.
Blue Monday Posted May 20 Posted May 20 (edited) 16 minutes ago, Dark Miracles said: It was your own point so why even bring it up then if it doesn't matter? Anyway I really don't see how she has more crossover hits than Blanchett though, even if you take away Cate's franchises like LOTR/Hobbit, Thor Ragnarok and Indiana Jones. The point of the thread is "Can Cate surpass Meryl Streep" and as many have pointed out she may eventually match her nomination tallies or even get a third Oscar, but she is currently not held in the same esteem and that is largely due to the fact that even if Cate has been apart of big movies, big movies have not been sold on her name/reputation as an actress in the same way Meryl's have. That may not matter to you specifically but it does in fact matter if we're talking about Meryl Streep being usurped or surpassed. Edited May 20 by Blue Monday 1
GrandeVersace Posted May 20 Posted May 20 Meryl is the Madonna of acting. No bitc(h) can steal that throne. 1
Dark Miracles Posted May 21 Posted May 21 10 hours ago, Blue Monday said: The point of the thread is "Can Cate surpass Meryl Streep" and as many have pointed out she may eventually match her nomination tallies or even get a third Oscar, but she is currently not held in the same esteem and that is largely due to the fact that even if Cate has been apart of big movies, big movies have not been sold on her name/reputation as an actress in the same way Meryl's have. That may not matter to you specifically but it does in fact matter if we're talking about Meryl Streep being usurped or surpassed. OK so I'll circle back just to set things straight one final time: it was you who raised the point that Blanchett hasn't had successful movies sold solely on her performance mind you, which I rebuked, to which you then replied that it doesn't matter.
Recommended Posts