The two biggest premieres on Day 6 of the 82nd Venice Film Festival were without question Benny Safdie’s The Smashing Machine—his first feature without his brother Josh—and Mona Fastvold’s The Testament of Ann Lee, which arrives on the heels of her Oscar nomination last year for co-writing The Brutalist. Both films landed strongly with critics, each greeted by rapturous 15-minute standing ovations, and both introduced serious acting contenders for next year’s Oscars. Ann Lee doesn’t yet have a distributor, so there’s still a chance it slips into 2026.
Starting with The Smashing Machine: while critics agree the film treads a familiar path—offering a straightforward sports-biopic arc with only a few stylistic flourishes—it nevertheless confirms Benny Safdie’s strength behind the camera. More than that, it serves as a showcase for The Rock, who reportedly strips away much of his larger-than-life persona to deliver a raw, gut-level performance. The film currently holds a 75 on Metacritic and an 88% on Rotten Tomatoes.
The raves for Dwayne Johnson have been relentless, with nearly every critic calling him the undisputed highlight of the film. To receive that kind of reception—at Venice, no less—has to be a dream for Johnson, who suddenly finds himself at the very center of Oscar talk. The obvious question for us Oscar-obsessives is: does this make him a lock for a nomination?
Looking at all the angles, Johnson certainly seems like a strong contender at this point. Why? First, beyond the critical acclaim, he’s playing a real-life figure—and as we’ve discussed countless times, actors love recognizing actors playing real-life figures, because they themselves gravitate toward roles that allow them to embody history. Second, the film itself doesn’t stray from the template audiences expect from a sports biopic, which actually works in its favor. If word of mouth is good, it should play broadly at the box office, fueled by the irresistible hook of “see The Rock as you’ve never seen him before.” That narrative alone will draw not only Johnson’s massive fanbase, but also plenty of skeptics curious to see what the fuss is about. (The Iron Claw, A24’s earlier sports biopic, pulled in $35 million domestically—I wouldn’t be surprised to see this one crack $50 million). And finally, Johnson brings some much-needed diversity to a Best Actor race that, while stacked, remains overwhelmingly dominated by white men.
And what about Emily Blunt? If The Rock makes it into Best Actor, expect him to pull Blunt—who’s deeply respected among her peers—right into the Supporting Actress race. At first, we thought she’d compete in Lead (as you can see on our predictions page), but given her actual screen time, a Supporting campaign now feels inevitable.
The truth is, Blunt always had an excellent shot in either category, maybe even more so than Johnson. Why? Because both Actress races are less crowded, and Supporting Actress in particular is desperate for a veteran presence—someone with previous nominations. It’s extremely rare for any category to be made up entirely of first-time nominees. It also helps that she’s playing a real-life figure, since almost every year each acting category includes at least one actor portraying a real person. That’s exactly why we were confident Monica Barbaro would be nominated for A Complete Unknown the moment she scored that SAG nod—it felt like a no-brainer. For all those reasons, we had Blunt in our initial Top Five predictions for Best Actress. And now that her film has landed solidly with critics, her path feels all but assured.
But can she win? Some critics have noted that the role itself is underwritten and that her character falls on the “unlikeable” side of the spectrum—several even suggesting the script stacks the deck against her, and that her part is written with some vitriol. Many argue that her arguments with Johnson’s character feel repetitive and stall the film’s momentum. Still, those same critics also emphasize Blunt’s skill in elevating thin material, adding nuance and depth where little exists on the page. A few even go so far as to call her work in this regard nothing short of excellent. So does the role have the “stuff” to go all the way? That remains the question. But right now, Blunt vaults to the top of the Supporting Actress race—thanks to her name and reputation, her status as a past nominee still waiting for a win, the fact that she’s playing a real-life figure, and the reality that her biggest competitors all carry bigger drawbacks when it comes to imagining a winner.
And what about the rest? Safdie will earn credit for delivering a strong first solo effort, but a directing nomination feels like a long shot given the film’s adherence to the familiar “sports-biopic” template. The cinematography, editing, and score have all been noted, but they don’t seem likely to factor heavily into the race. Makeup & Hairstyling, on the other hand, feels like a lock.
In terms of its awards trajectory, The Smashing Machine most resembles The Whale, which scored nominations for Lead Actor, Supporting Actress, and Makeup & Hairstyling, and only narrowly missed a Best Picture slot. It ended up winning two of those three Oscars, and many believe that if the broader voting body (the one that picks the winners) had also determined the Best Picture lineup, it would have easily cracked the final ten. All this to say: don’t count out The Smashing Machine for Best Picture. If Johnson’s momentum holds through the season, if Blunt takes Supporting Actress, and if the film performs well financially, it could very well land a spot.
We were wary of how critics would receive Mona Fastvold’s The Testament of Ann Lee, given the highly polarized reaction on Letterboxd. But lo and behold, the film has been praised across the board—proof once again that you can never fully trust those immediate post-festival reactions, especially from a crowd like Letterboxd. Most critics have called the film ambitious, exhilarating, innovative, rhapsodic, thrillingly modern, daring, majestic—essentially the very definition of a big swing that lands and transcends. Judging from the reception, it’s all but guaranteed to show up on many year-end “Best of” lists.
But how will it play with the Academy? The film’s heady mix of grandeur, fearless artistry, musicality, ostentatious choreography, period detail, and religious ecstasy seems ripe to divide general audiences (as we already saw with Letterboxd). For now, I’m concerned that same divide could carry over to voters. Amanda Seyfried could easily find herself in the thick of the Best Actress race, with some already calling this the performance of her career. It helps that she’s a past nominee and, once again, that she’s playing a real-life figure. The Best Actress category is sorely lacking in that department—unless you count Jessie Buckley in Hamnet, who plays a fictionalized Anne Hathaway (and I’m not counting it). Seyfried would check that box.
Still, her nomination may hinge on how the film plays with audiences. As we’ve noted time and again, one of the most crucial ingredients for carrying a film and its contenders to the finish line is simple: voters have to enjoy watching the movie. The question is—will they here? And what about the other prospects—like the exquisite cinematography, Daniel Blumberg’s score (already an Oscar winner for last year’s The Brutalist), the production design, or even a potential Best Picture slot? A lot depends on two things: first, which distributor picks it up and how aggressively they campaign; and second, how such a strikingly bold, unusual piece plays outside the bubble of top critics. On that front, I’m still unsure.
My gut says this is a film that would’ve felt right at home with A24, Neon, or Mubi. But since those heavy hitters already have packed slates, I suspect Ann Lee may end up with a more niche distributor—someone like IFC Films.