There’s a group of movie watchers that despise watching an actor do their thing with a ton of caked-on prosthetics attached to their face. I’m pretty impartial on the matter, but this sentiment has made the makeup and hairstyling category at the Oscars one of the more controversial categories. This year is no different. At least two of this year’s nominees have raised eyebrows for their makeup usage.
You need to begin this conversation with “Maestro,” in which Bradley Cooper is transformed into Leonard Bernstein with the help of a much-discussed nose prosthetic. I didn’t like this film, but the nose itself is not really an issue from my perspective. The nominated designer, Kazu Hiro, is one of the greats in the field, and Bernstein’s children absolved the production of any wrongdoing. With that, I’m not going to get offended on behalf of other people, especially when my gut tells me that Hiro did a fine job of bringing Lenny to life.
Just in case you didn’t hear enough about noses, I have great news for you. The makeup in “Golda” features Helen Mirren in a faux-nose in order to portray the controversial Israeli prime minister, Golda Meir. I think the prosthetic in this case is less of an issue than Meir’s legacy, which is not looking especially good at the moment. Strictly on the basis of makeup, “Golda” is pretty impressive, but the film as a whole has received very mild acclaim.
The Academy tends to favor makeup over hairstyling in this category, but “Poor Things” balances the two very well. There’s the transformation of Willem Dafoe into a Dr. Frankenstein-style weirdo. There’s Emma Stone’s transformation into the straight-haired Bella Baxter, the subject of the Dafoe character’s experiments. And the film is a period piece that is true to Victorian stylings. Every character looks the way they should, and the makeup and hairstyling team deserves a lot of the credit.
“Oppenheimer” is a more subtle work compared to these other options, but remember that the film spans decades and constantly bounces around to different time periods. The central characters need to be recognizable in each of these eras, but the makeup still needs to indicate the passage or reversal of time. Underneath the aging, Cillian Murphy, Emily Blunt and the rest of the ensemble are still there.
“Society of the Snow” was a big hit on Netflix this year, a rare level of visibility for a foreign film about a chilling situation. If you’re unfamiliar with the 1972 Andes flight disaster, Google with caution. This is about as stressful a situation as humans can find themselves in, so the makeup department needed to do some heavy lifting to sell the horrifying conditions. Imagine surviving a plane crash and then having to grapple with the bitter cold of the Andes. You won’t look so hot.
I question how controversial these choices actually are. To me, this is a pretty standard selection of nominees, though “Oppenheimer” and “Society of the Snow” have some makeup and hairstyling elements that I find a bit more creative. For betting purposes, the Academy usually ignores subtlety. The more prosthetic work, the better.
