If there’s anyone that can feasibly stop Stone, though, it’s Gladstone. In Killers of the Flower Moon, the 37-year-old Native American actor—who would become the first Indigenous performer to take home the best-actress statuette if things go her way on Oscar night—is stunning as a well-heeled member of the Osage Nation who witnesses the destruction of her family and community. She’s often silent, speaking volumes with her eyes, the crinkle above her brow, and the curved corners of her mouth—so much so that she entirely overshadows her showier castmates (Oscar winner Leonardo DiCaprio and double Oscar winner Robert De Niro).
Later on in the film, when she’s weakened by illness, she clings to the husband who is slowly poisoning her, and you wonder if she’s aware of what’s really happening and letting it happen anyway. You love her deeply, and yet she remains somewhat unknowable. It’s the kind of quiet, intricately detailed performance that the Oscars often overlook in favor of triumphant speeches and grandstanding—but it’s exactly the sort of work the Academy ought to be rewarding.
However, there are still some, myself included, who wonder if she’s actually in the film for long enough to warrant a leading-actress win. (She appears in less than a third of Killers of the Flower Moon, with just 56 minutes of screen time across a 3 hour and 26 minute runtime, compared to DiCaprio’s 1 hour 49 minutes. De Niro has a more comparable 47 minutes, for instance, and is in the best supporting actor race.) Is it really possible for a performance like that to compete against the work of Stone and Hüller, two women who are not only excellent but also in almost every frame of their movies?
There’s also the matter of the film itself, which did receive an impressive 10 Oscar nods, but missed out on a few key nominations, including best actor for DiCaprio and best adapted screenplay. These snubs suggest that overall support for the crime saga may be slightly lower than once predicted. Stone’s Poor Things, for example, fared slightly better, with 11 nods.
Still, all of this could work in Gladstone’s favor: Even those who didn’t love the movie won’t be able to fault her performance, and rewarding it while ignoring DiCaprio can be seen as a way of reprimanding the film’s own tendency to prioritize his experience over hers. The history-making nature of Gladstone’s win would also be heartening, and she’d be sure to give a moving speech which would bring a certain weight and gravitas to the Oscars ceremony.