Jessica Lange vs. Meryl Streep ??? - Frances (1983) Discussion

[–] Prom_Queen_Carrie 16 years ago

Streep. She was more nuanced, controlled and haunting as opposed to Lange's overdone theatrics and histrionics. I don't even understand the big discussion, it's clear to me that Streep's performance is the one frequently considered the best of all time given by an actress. Even Clint Eastwood dissed Lange's performance calling it too actressy.

Mama:They're all gonna laugh at you!
Carrie:For reals?Then I'll f*k them UP!

reply

[–] Yort14 16 years ago

Lange was just as nuanced and haunting.Streep was brilliant and she WAS more "controlled".You got that right!It's a beautifully calculated performance.
Lange gives an organic performance.As for Mr. Eastwood...1982 was the year he won the "Harvard Lampoon"award for Worst Actor for his performances in "Firefox" and"Honkytonk Man"LOL

reply

[–] wallsofjericho 16 years ago

Streep was better in my opinion, her oscar was fully deserved.

reply

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] ComtessaLaRue 15 years ago

Without a doubt. Didn't anybody notice the veins in her neck pulsing while she was screaming for all she had left? The film was a bit long, but Lange's performance was breathtaking and heart wrenching.

reply

[–] johnnysam2 15 years ago

Jessica Lange!!! The movie was hers and hers alone. Raw emotion, grace, and anger were all just pouring out. The perfomance of a life time and so under appreciated.

reply

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] akdemir6 13 years ago

lange

reply

[–] 13 years ago

[deleted]

[–] dinasztie13 11 years ago

Lange as well. Eastwood is crazy. I love Meryl a lot, too, but she's a little bit calculated. Lange, however, is just terrifying.

reply

[–] blackvenom-1 11 years ago

It depends on one's preferences.

Streep does give a tour-de-force powerhouse performance. She's excellent. It's very calculated and controlled work, but at the same time this approach underlines Streep's biggest asset and weakness; her technicality. She's a very technical actress, and every moment is so well-thought and thoroughly acted, that I found this whole 'too perfect' acting a bit unimaginative and, well, colorless. Still, this is nitpicking. It's a terrific performance and she deserved her Oscar.

I slightly prefer her to Lange, who was also at the top of her game. Lange is the kind of actress who relies on her instinct, which is a completely different approach to Streep's whose acting is more 'careful' and more 'controlled' (technical). But Lange makes some risky choices which could actually lead to very theatrical and 'actressy' performances. Her performance in 'Frances' is pretty theatrical, which is fine (after all, Bette Davis gave a great deal of 'campy' performances and she's undoubtedly one of the greatest actresses of all-time), because she's playing an unbalanced and tortured character. But sometimes it's a bit 'too much' and it feels way way too theatrical.

Both performances have their flaws, but both are monumental, due to the amount of pathos, personality and multi-dimensional depth both actresses brought to their roles. I prefer Streep, but my pick (out of the Oscar nominees) is probably Sissy Spacek for her work in 'Missing'. A completely natural and beautifully understated performance.

reply

[–] manco82 9 years ago

Yet it's Lange kicking butt in her 60s on American Horror Story while Streep is doing children's films!

reply

[–] Winter23 11 years ago

Lange!!

reply

[–] djmattn 11 years ago

Lange. So powerful in this role..

reply

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] brockmeeks 10 years ago

Streep. She is so beautifuly haunting in Sophies Choice . There is no way that the Academy could not give Streep BA that year.

Lange was just so damn good in Frances that I think she would have easily won BA if it had been released in a different year.

Lange picked up Best Supporting for Tootsie at the beginning of Oscar night that year. As you all know. She was quoted as saying later. Thats the moment I knew Meryl had won Best Actress."

reply

[–] gray-leblanc 10 years ago

It's really VERY simple to me. Lange should have won Best Actress (or there should have been a tie), but that could not be the case with Streep already on the acting scene. Streep was nominated for Best Supporting Actress in "The Deer Hunter" in 1978, then WON Best Supporting Actress the following year, in 1979 for "Kramer VS Kramer." Streep took a year off, then she moved up to being nominated for Best Actress for "The French Lieutenant's Woman," therefore solidifying her name as 'next on the list' for that Best Actress win. Had Lange been on the award's season a few years earlier, or had Streep not had the early award's success, things may have played out differently, but to me, there was NO WAY the voters would give the Best Actress to Lange over Streep. I personally feel they believed Streep was "due" the win over the newcomer who was on her first Best Actress nomination. I just don't believe that's how politics worked at the time, and that is exactly the reason they gave Lange the win in Supporting for "Tootsie."

reply

[–] rascal67 9 years ago

I consider Jessica Lange's performance in FRANCES, as my favourite of all leading female performances I have ever seen. Going by this notion, I would want to award Lange, the Best Actress Oscar®.

82' was a strong year for leading ladies and another poster has commented on Sissy Spacek's, natural and beautifully understated performance in MISSING. I have only seen the film once and that was several years ago and found it impressive. The other 2 contenders, Debra Winger and Julie Andrews, were worthy of their nominations too.

As for Streep in SOPHIE'S CHOICE, she also gave an Oscar® worthy performance, in a film that I find a chore to sit through. FRANCES is a bit sloppily put together; but I find it more readily watchable than SOPHIE'S CHOICE. I find Peter McNicol's Stingo character incredibly annoying and Kevin Kline' performance, is just that— "a performance" and he is play acting his way through the role. The film also has a superficiality about it in parts, (the concentration camp scenes are well shot) and Streep gives us a brilliant "technical" performance, that does showcase her unique talents as an actress. It is however, no less and probably even more "actress y", than what Lange gave us in FRANCES, in terms of Streep wanting to impress with her ability and there is a coldness to her.

Streep apears self-conscious and overly mannered in parts. It feels like she is showing us her Sophie, rather than being her. Lange was portraying a "real life actress", (hello Mr. Eastwood!), who was self-destructive and at times self-entitled, so it is understandable that her performance has "actress" and "wrought" written all over it, as that was her character. I find Lange much more visceral and real as Farmer, than the calculating technique of Streep in SOPHIE'S CHOICE.

Quote from famous critic Pauline Kael, on Streep in SOPHIE'S CHOICE:

She has, as usual, put thought and effort into her work. But something about her puzzles me: after I’ve seen her in a movie, I can’t visualize her from the neck down…she in effect decorporealizes herself........in her zeal to be an honest actress she allows nothing to escape her conception of a performance. Instead of trying to achieve freedom in front of the camera, she’s predetermining what it records.

Kael had hit the nail on the head.

If I was to award Steep an Oscar®, it would have been for SILWOOD-83 the following year. However, this was a very impressive year for leading ladies too and is difficult to single out.

reply

[–] franzkabuki 9 years ago

There's sort of a self conscious quality shining through Lange's performance at times, especially during her emotional outbursts. Streep in Sophie's Choice is essentially flawless, controlled to a tee in a role no less demanding (perhaps even moreso).

"facts are stupid things" - Ronald Reagan

reply

[–] InherentlyYours 9 years ago

'There's sort of a self conscious quality shining through Lange's performance at times, especially during her emotional outbursts.'
-------------------
I agree. It's as if she's trying to show us what a good actress she is, instead of being in the moment and throwing away lines. Not every line needs to be a profound statement-- and if the emotion is there, the actor doesn't need to make such an effort with the line. Maybe she's gotten better, I don't know.

The paradox with her, is that playing understatement, which I see a pattern of, is a version of the above

reply

[–] FabinhoDantasFlappers 9 years ago

Both performances are amazing. Really brilliant. IMHO, I prefer Lange. She's a force of nature. Streep is great, but a very technical actress.
The Great Katharine Hepburn is quoted as referring to Streep’s acting skills as “click, click, click,” meaning that you can always see the wheels turning in her head.I completely agree. :)

reply

[–] sesquick-seabag 9 years ago

The Great Katharine Hepburn is quoted as referring to Streep’s acting skills as “click, click, click,” meaning that you can always see the wheels turning in her head.I completely agree. :)

----

Hmmm... And yet, in your previous sentence you described her as both amazing and brilliant. Odd.

reply

[–] fa7999 8 years ago

Well, it's well know that Pauline Kael was a big fan of Lange and was not much into Streep. I also remember that both Hepburn and Davis dissed Streep and favored Lange.

Streep's biggest strength is also her biggest weakness: every move, every Expression and every line was delivered in well calculated manner. Personally I hate that kind of acting. I would rather see something racing on the emotion and relying on instincts for key and heavy scenes. Also see Lange's work in Titus (what a great performance), sweet dreams and blue sky. That is the kind of performance only Lange can deliver.

reply

[–] I_Love_Hutch 8 years ago

I thought that Bette Davis was a big supporter of Streep.

reply