If a dictionary were made up of images instead of words, one contender for the definition of “actor” would be a picture of Meryl Streep. As Scribe Grrrl blogged about in August, Streep’s new movie, Lions for Lambs, premieres November 7. With its release less than a month away, and Streep speaking about it in interviews, it’s worth another look. I may spring for this one at the theatre out of curiosity: It’s one that could stir a little controversy. Set against the backdrop of the U.S. involvement in Afghanistan and the War on Terror, Streep plays a journalist, Janine Roth, on the scent of a big story with bigger policy implications.
Can I pause a moment to say that Streep is looking smarter, more powerful and consequently sexier than ever? (I, too, have a girl-in-glasses fetish.) In
Lions for Lambs, Streep throws down with Tom Cruise (not literally, though I bet she could take him), who plays a pro-war GOP senator, over a bombshell story that could shape policy on the war. Robert Redford directs and also stars as a university professor whose story fits in there somehow (I got bored reading the IMDb plot synopsis, sorry). If you haven’t seen it yet, here’s the trailer.
So here’s what’s new. This week, she spoke with Times Online about the movie and her career, and only added to my adoration of her. (I’m going to ignore the usual annoying questions directed at every successful woman about how she can possibly manage to cope with her personal and professional lives.)
Naturally, the conversation begins with politics. Streep expects the movie to be perceived as anti-war, but claims that it raises questions more than offering opinions. However, she does speak to her own view of the upcoming election:
I’m glad that there seems to be change. People are holding their breath. That’s why you don’t see masses on the streets – they know he’s [Bush] going. I’ll be relieved when the whole group is out. I think in a way things had to get this bad before they got better. It would be nice to have a woman president. I think half the Senate should be women, half of Parliament, half the ruling mullahs.You and me both, Meryl. She also reports that her childhood ambition was to work for the United Nations, as a result of a trip there at age 10: “There were all these women in booths in headphones. I thought it was so cool. They were taking the language of one culture and translating it to another.”
As for acting, she “suspected” it “in a puritan way. It didn’t seem serious or contributing to the betterment of the world.” I, for one, am glad she got over that. However, she says still wonders, “When I grow up what will I do with my life?” I, for one, can also relate. Then again, I’m not an award-winning actor, so maybe not. The downside of fame, she reports, is being watched, in part because it makes her self-conscious, but also because she would rather observe others: “I always think, ‘Why are they watching me? I want to watch her’.”
When the reporter reminded her that she is labeled one of the greatest actors now in Hollywood, this was her response:
“It does not go in. It can’t. How can it? It’s not like I haven’t tried to believe it. [laughs] But I don’t. They just say that about me because I’ve been around a long time.”Or because she’s got skills. As for being around “a long time,” Streep brushes off any questions about turning 60 in a couple of years:
“Oh, that’s miles away. I’ve lost enough people and had enough be ill to know that all the people who whine about getting old should just shut up. Because of the ones who are not here, who didn’t make it this far. My God, what a thing to whine about. Imagine! I have no patience for it. We are just lucky to be here. Every second we’re lucky.”Streep’s upcoming projects include playing Donna in Mamma Mia! and a role as Sister Aloysius in the adaptation of the controversial play Doubt, opposite Philip Seymour Hoffman.
