Oscars

IT’S fair to assume Will Smith had high hopes for a better year ahead after a disastrous stretch of career lows and romance woes.

But as 2026 rang in, the fallen Oscar-winner and rapper was slapped with a lawsuit amid claims of sexual harassment and wrongful termination.

Violinist Brian King Joseph, who performed on Will’s 2025 tour, Based On A True Story, accuses the A-lister of “grooming” him while they worked together.

And he alleges that when he reported things to management, he was kicked off the tour and “shamed” by the powers that be.

According to Brian, who reached the top three on America’s Got Talent in 2018, he was hired by Will in 2024 after auditioning for him at his home.

Will apparently told him: “You and I have a special connection.”

TRAGIC LOSS

Tommy Lee Jones’ daughter ‘found dead on New Year’s Day in luxury hotel’

‘PREDATOR’ SMITH

Will Smith sued for sexual harassment by male tour violinist & TV star

Then, while touring with him in Las Vegas last March, he says he came back to his hotel room at 11pm and found it had been “unlawfully entered” by an “unknown person”, who had left a handwritten note, as well as random items including wipes, a beer bottle, an earring and a bottle of HIV medication.

The note read: “Brian, I’ll be back no later [sic] 5:30, just us” with a drawn heart, and signed: “Stone F.”

In legal filings, Brian says he reported the incident to hotel security and Will’s management out of fear someone would return to his room to “engage in sexual acts” with him.

But after doing so, he alleges, he was “shamed” by tour management and given the boot, causing him “severe emotional distress, economic loss, reputational harm and other damages” as well as “PTSD and other mental illness”.

‘Lost all self-control’

According to the lawsuit, a member of Will’s tour management told Brian, “Everyone is telling me that what happened to you is a lie, nothing happened, and you made the whole thing up”, court documents state.

Though not naming Will, 57, as the unknown person who entered his room, court papers say the “facts suggest” the star was “deliberately grooming and priming Mr Joseph for further sexual exploitation”.

He is now demanding a jury trial.

Will denies all allegations, with his attorney Allen B. Grodsky slamming Brian’s claims as “false, baseless and reckless”.

He added: “They are categorically denied, and we will use all legal means available to . . . ensure that the truth is brought to light.”

A court battle would be an ugly circus for Will at a time when he could really use some good news in the public eye.

After all, things have ostensibly gone from bad to worse for the former blockbuster king over the past few years.

It’s now approaching the four-year anniversary of the Oscar slap that was heard around the world, when an irate Will stormed the stage at the 94th Academy Awards and hit comedian Chris Rock across the face.

The incident was sparked after Chris made a joke about Will’s wife Jada Pinkett Smith’s bald head, which was a result of her alopecia, and amid Will’s calls to “keep my wife’s name out of your f***ing mouth!”.

It was supposed to be Will’s night of triumph as he finally received an Oscar for his critically acclaimed performance in King Richard.

Instead, it went down in infamy as the night he lost all self-control.

He was duly given a seven-year ban from all Academy, Grammy, Tony and Emmy events and, in the aftermath, shirked the spotlight.

Since then, things haven’t gone smoothly.

In fact, his road to redemption has been paved with constant knocks and embarrassing detours, personally and professionally.

In particular, his unconventional relationship with Jada, 54, has been the subject of much scrutiny and confusion.

Having long been pegged as one of Hollywood’s golden couples, the pair hit headlines in 2020 when they revealed during an episode of Jada’s Facebook series Red Table Talk that she’d had an affair a few years before with singer August Alsina.

At the time, Jada described it as an “entanglement”.

As a result, she and Will had even more of a point to prove when they stepped on to the red carpet at that fateful 2022 Oscars.

But a year later, Jada dropped a motherlode of truth bombs about their relationship in her 2023 memoir, Worthy.

In the book, and on its promo trail, she revealed that — despite putting on a united front in public — she and Will had been separated for seven years and no longer lived together.

According to Jada, she’d kept up the facade because Will “wasn’t ready” to tell the world.

So instead, she said, she took the bullet, painting herself as “the adulterous wife” in the “false narrative” they created.

While the pair had no intention of divorcing — and still have not done so — Will was reportedly “humiliated” by Jada’s candidness.

They used to live by their famous slogan, paraphrased from Will’s movie Bad Boys: “We ride together, we die together, bad marriage for life.”

But Jada’s revelations apparently left Will feeling more isolated than ever — which, insiders said at the time, was a bitter pill to swallow after he defended her at the Oscars.

Crashed and burned

As things stand, Will and Jada still have no plans to officially end their 28-year marriage.

They came together to wish their daughter Willow a happy birthday in October, and have since been reportedly pictured together in public.

But as news spread of Brian’s lawsuit against Will, Jada stayed noticeably quiet.

She previously said that, at some stage, they’ll live together again, but only because, “it’s getting apparent to me that [Will’s] gonna need someone to take care of him” — making her ex sound more like a burden.

Meanwhile, Will’s attempt to reclaim his place on the A-list have seen things go from bad to worse.

In late 2023, as the dust settled on Jada’s marriage revelations, Will was accused of previously having sex with his Fresh Prince of Bel-Air co-star Duane Martin.

In an interview with internet personality Tasha K, Brother Bilaal — who described himself as Will’s ex-personal assistant — said he’d walked in on the alleged act.

A court battle would be an ugly circus for Will at a time when he could really use some good news in the public eye

On podcast Unwine with Tasha K, he also compared the size of Will’s manhood to a “pinky toe”.

In response, Will’s spokesperson slammed the claims as “completely fabricated” and said they were considering taking legal action.

No action was taken, but Brother Bilaal hasn’t gone quietly.

In fact, he’s since filed a $3million lawsuit against Jada, alleging “emotional distress”.

Neither Will nor Jada have commented, but a hearing is scheduled for March 9, inevitably casting another shadow over them.

Then, of course, there is Will’s damp squib of an attempt to reignite his music career that crashed and burned with last year’s tour.

In late 2023, as the dust settled on Jada’s marriage revelations, Will was accused of previously having sex with his Fresh Prince of Bel-Air co-star Duane Martin

Having long proven himself as a multi- hyphenate entertainer, it should have been a safe bet for Will to return to his rapper roots after his Oscar disgrace.

That way, he could continue to make us miss him on the big screen, while still connecting to his fans and making up for a few years of lost income.

So, his comeback tour, Based On A True Story, really was supposed to be an all-out triumph.

‘Used to be cool’

However, promotional footage started going viral for all the wrong reasons, after fans accused the star of using AI in crowd reactions.

In the film — which was posted to Will’s YouTube channel — there were a whole host of bizarre visual errors, including blurred faces, oddly shaped hands and one sign that read “FR6SH CRINCE”.

As one fan said: “Imagine being this rich and famous and having to use AI footage of crowds and bot comments on your video. Tragic, man. You used to be cool.”

Will looked a shadow of his former self as he kicked off the European leg of his tour in front of 6,000 fans in Scarborough at TK Maxx Presents . . . last summer, followed by Wolverhampton Civic Hall and the O2 Academy in Brixton.

Let’s remember, this is a former superstar who performed in front of more than half-a-million people at the Live 8 event in Philadelphia in 2005.

Imagine being this rich and famous and having to use AI footage of crowds and bot comments on your video. Tragic, man. You used to be cool

A fan

The same year, he set a Guinness World Record after attending an unprecedented three movie premieres in one day.

He hightailed it across the UK to promote romcom Hitch in Manchester, Birmingham and London.

Back then, he was untouchable, with two US No1s under his belt and the ability to command leading- man status in films including Men In Black (and its sequels), as well as Ali, The Pursuit Of Happyness and I Am Legend.

But nothing lasts for ever, and Will’s much more modest tour last year was a reminder of how far he’s fallen from grace.

He put on a brave face, but the online comments spoke for themselves.

One fan called him “pathetic” and told him to “enjoy” his retirement instead of seeking his former glory.

Now, as the former Hollywood icon begins the year facing a lawsuit, it’s fair to say he is staring down the barrel of yet another challenging 12 months.

Having always relied on his family to support him, the world will be watching to see if he steps out with Jada and their children, Jaden, 27, and Willow, 25 — plus his older son Trey, 33, from a previous marriage.

But as things stand, all parties had yesterday remained silent.

It may be early days for 2026, but Will has certainly taken a sharp detour from the golden road he trod for so long.

With no movies on the docket, he’s hanging his hat on upcoming National Geographic docu-series, Pole To Pole With Will Smith.

Alfred Hitchcock never won an Oscar for directing. Neither did Stanley Kubrick nor Robert Altman nor Sidney Lumet nor Federico Fellini nor Orson Welles.

It’s a group almost as distinguished as the list of winners.

But we’re likely going to cross one name off that ignominious list this year — Paul Thomas Anderson.

I’m Glenn Whipp, columnist for the Los Angeles Times and host of The Envelope newsletter. I already gave away who’s on top of our Oscar power rankings for director. How does the rest of the list shake out? Let’s take a look.

1. Paul Thomas Anderson, ‘One Battle After Another’

Anderson has three Oscar nominations for directing — “There Will Be Blood,” “Phantom Thread” and “Licorice Pizza.” That feels light. He has 11 Oscar nominations in all, including five as a writer and three as a producer. He has never won. That feels wrong. So with “One Battle After Another,” he checks off both of the main boxes that Oscar winners often possess — he directed the year’s best movie and he’s well overdue for an honor. Like Sean Baker for “Anora” last year, Anderson likely will come home with an armful of Oscars, as he also produced and wrote the movie.

2. Jafar Panahi, ‘It Was Just an Accident’

Panahi has never been nominated for an Oscar, though his films have won the top prizes at the Venice Film Festival (“The Circle”), the Berlin Film Festival (“Taxi”) and, this year, the Cannes Film Festival (“It Was Just an Accident”). That movie’s withering takedown of the cruelty and corruption of authoritarianism packs a punch; it’s also unexpectedly funny in its clear-eyed social critique. Panahi has been imprisoned by the Iranian government many times for speaking out and was recently again sentenced, in absentia, to a year in prison on charges of “propaganda activities against the system.” Like we needed another reason to celebrate the man and his work.

3. Ryan Coogler, ‘Sinners’

(Eli Ade / Warner Bros. Pictures)

Coogler has two Oscar nominations, but they aren’t what you might expect. He was nominated for producing “Judas and the Black Messiah,” the thrilling 2021 historical drama looking at the politics of race. And he earned a songwriting nod for the Rihanna ballad “Lift Me Up” from “Black Panther: Wakanda Forever.” Coogler should have landed an adapted screenplay nomination for the first “Black Panther” movie, a more inventive, world-building work than the umpteenth remake of “A Star Is Born.” But that’s the past. Coogler, like Anderson, figures to be feted in multiple categories at the upcoming Oscars and may well bring home the prize for original screenplay.

4. Chloé Zhao, ‘Hamnet’

(Agata Grzybowska / Focus Features)

Zhao owns two Oscars for directing and producing “Nomadland,” the empathetic and searching portrait of America that felt like a balm when it premiered during the pandemic. After an ill-fitting detour into the Marvel Cinematic Universe with “Eternals,” Zhao came all the way back with “Hamnet,” a deeply felt look at love, loss and the cathartic power of art. Even those who find it overwrought laud the movie’s climactic sequence, a performance of “Hamlet” at the Globe Theatre. I’d argue the ending works so well because of the care Zhao took earlier in establishing the wonder and joy of the family’s life. “Hamnet,” to my damp eyes, is her best film.

5. Joachim Trier, ‘Sentimental Value’

(Lewis Joly / Invision / AP)

From here, you could shuffle the five through eight slots and make a good case for any of these directors landing the fifth slot in the field. Trier has much to recommend his subtle interweaving of past and present, hope and hurt in “Sentimental Value.” He received a screenplay nomination for his last movie, “The Worst Person in the World,” also starring Renate Reinsve. The directors branch boasts a strong contingent of voters from all over the world, a group that could easily nominate the filmmakers behind two of the year’s most celebrated international feature contenders. Plus, “Sentimental Value’s” salty view of Hollywood is bound to appeal to this bunch.

6. Guillermo del Toro, ‘Frankenstein’

The affable, movie-loving Del Toro has won many fans inside and outside the industry over the years, along with Oscars for directing and producing the 2017 best picture winner “The Shape of Water” and for “Pinocchio,” the enchanting 2022 movie that snagged animated feature. “Frankenstein” is far from his best work, but it probably has enough admirers to land a best picture nomination and mentions in several other categories. Director, though? If Del Toro didn’t make the cut for “Nightmare Alley,” he’s probably a near-miss for this one too.

7. Josh Safdie, ‘Marty Supreme’

(Atsushi Nishijima / A24)

It’s “Marty Supreme” week! The movie finally arrives on Christmas and, over the holidays, we’ll begin to have the sorts of conversations that will shed some light on the movie and its Oscar chances beyond the certain nominations for best picture and lead actor Timothée Chalamet. Is the title character, a single-minded ping-pong player oblivious to anything but his own advancement, a jerk? Or is he just like any other man in his 20s? Is the film’s last shot a sign of growth or a man contemplating his own death sentence? We’ll have time to discuss and, yes, revel in the unhinged chaos Safdie unleashes here.

8. Clint Bentley, ‘Train Dreams’

(Daniel Schaefer / BBP Train Dreams)

And finally, we arrive at the man behind “Train Dreams,” a contemplative film about an ordinary man puzzling through loss, guilt, the mundane and the magnificent. It’s the anti-”Marty Supreme” — quiet, painterly, a tad slow, sure, but hypnotic in the way it evokes a bygone America. Just the second movie Bentley has directed, following the little-seen 2021 drama “Jockey,” it has built a devoted following since landing on Netflix last month.

It is often said that film directors are siloed off from one another, that they don’t get to watch how others work. So when you put a group of them together, as with the six participants in The Envelope’s 2025 Oscar Directors Roundtable, they are quick to share all sorts of ideas. Like where they prefer to sit in a movie theater — centered in a row or on an aisle? How far back is the best for sound, or so the screen runs up to the edges of your peripheral vision? Should you even take the worst seats in the house, since somebody will eventually be asked to pay money to sit there?

Guillermo del Toro, there with his adaptation of Mary Shelley’s classic novel “Frankenstein,” likes the top of the first quarter of the theater. Rian Johnson, who finds new twists for Benoit Blanc in his third “Knives Out” detective story, “Wake Up Dead Man,” says, “I look for wherever Guillermo’s sitting.” Nia DaCosta, who made the bold, adventurous Ibsen adaptation “Hedda,” likes the top of the first third. Mona Fastvold, who explores the life of the founder of the religious movement known as the Shakers in “The Testament of Ann Lee,” likes the center a little farther back. Jon M. Chu, who made the second part of a musical adaptation with “Wicked: For Good,” sits dead center — and has been known to talk to the theater manager if the sound isn’t loud enough. And Benny Safdie, who explores the rise and fall of mixed martial arts fighter Mark Kerr in “The Smashing Machine,” tries to find a spot where he can fidget in his seat and not bother anyone.

Read on for more excerpts of their conversation about the art of adaptation, navigating budget constraints at any scale and much more.

Jon, I’ve heard you say that with “Wicked: For Good,” you wanted the film to be deeper but not darker. And it doesn’t pull any punches as far as dealing with themes of antiauthoritarianism. What was it like to have those very serious ideas and yet still have this be a buoyant, crowd-pleasing musical?

Chu: The reason we made it was because it had that meat to it, and it was always a two-movie, yearlong experience that set up the fairy tale first. And Movie 2 is kind of where we all are, this moment of this fairy tale shattered in front of us.

I have five children now, so I’m thinking about how to present stories to my kids. Do I still believe in the possibility of dreams and the American Dream? “For Good” really gets to delve into that stuff. And because it was shorter than the first half, we get more room to do it. We added new songs to explore that idea. So it all felt really fitting. Movie 1 could be an answer. Movie 2 is much more of a challenge: Who are we gonna be now that we know the truth?

All of your films in their own way are speaking to right now. Rian, “Wake Up Dead Man” is specifically set in the year 2025 and all the “Knives Out” pictures have been dealing with our contemporary reality. What makes you want to do that?

Johnson: That kind of started for me with the first movie. This is a genre, the murder mystery genre, that I love and that I’m just seeing so much of growing up. But it’s also a genre where most of what I had seen throughout my whole life, murder mysteries are period pieces set usually in a cozy little bubble of a little “Queensfordshire” place in England.

And I guess my realization was, that’s not what Agatha Christie did. She was not writing period pieces. She wasn’t an incredibly political writer, but she was always writing to her time. It’s not trying to do anything radical in terms of making it new or updating it, but let’s set it very much unapologetically in the modern moment. … You have a group of suspects that have a hierarchy of power amongst them and the person at the top they all wanna bump off — it’s such a potent vehicle for building a little microcosm of society.

Benny, one of my favorite things in “The Smashing Machine” is that it’s funny to realize setting a story at the turn of millennium is a period piece now. What was it like crafting this very specific, recent time period?

Safdie: It’s a time period that I think everybody thinks is just yesterday. But when you actually get into the nitty-gritty, it’s a long time ago. And things were very different and everybody knows exactly what those things are too. Because it was heavily documented, there was so much footage of it, it’s so top of mind. And I think a large amount of people also want to go back there a little bit, to this time where the internet was just kind of happening. People want to go back to this simpler moment. But trying to re-create what that feels like is what I was really going after — just thinking about how you would live in that time, and then represent that in the movie. Because I did want it to kind of feel like time travel.

Guillermo, you’ve spoken so much about how “Frankenstein” has been a lifelong dream project for you. Now that it’s done, where does that leave you?

Del Toro: There’s a massive postpartum depression, No. 1, and it’s real. And it affected me more than I thought it would, to be candid. But fortunately, I’ve been very interested in two new themes that are going to be sure to produce blockbusters, which is memory and regret. The dynamic duo of past 60. And I always thought about that in the abstract, but now I try to make the movies not only about the moment I’m in, but about me.

And I’m seriously trying to express what makes me uneasy, what makes me believe in the possibilities of grace even in the most horrible circumstances. And I’m not talking only social, but personal or philosophical. Something happens when the six clicks in on the counter. And all you can do is [ask], “Do I feel I have something to say, genuinely?” And then you go to that. Cronenberg, I had dinner with him when he was turning 74, and he said you have to scare yourself into being young again.

Nia, “Hedda” is such a bold adaptation of the play “Hedda Gabler.” You switched the gender of one of the main characters. You aren’t afraid to inject issues of race and class and sexual identity into the story. Were you ever concerned that you were asking too much of this classic text?

DaCosta: I wrote it on spec, so I wasn’t thinking about anything besides letting my freak flag fly, basically. I just thought, “This character makes more sense as a woman.” OK, what does that mean now? How does that affect the rest of the story? And then I just go from there. And then it ended up being really bountiful and generative.

And then when I met Tessa [Thompson] three years later, I thought, “Oh, when I write this, eventually Tessa will play Hedda.” So now she’s Black. OK, what does that mean? And Tessa’s also mixed-race. So then you get that element of it as well. And then I chose the 1950s, and then I chose England and the country house. You just treat these things as truths, and the story has to go in a certain direction. So I never worry about those things. Maybe because I’m a Black woman, so my presence or my identity for some people will complicate the story. But for me, it just is life.

Guillermo, in adapting “Frankenstein,” did you feel like you were dealing with the Mary Shelley text and also all the Frankenstein movies that we know?

Del Toro: I put all the cinematic stuff on the side. I didn’t want to make an erudite cinematic movie or a referential movie. I have lived with the three iterations of the text for my entire life. And there’s a lot of the interstitial stuff that I took from her biography, fusing with my biography, because even if you sing a song everybody knows, you’re doing it with your lungs. And your passion and your pain and your throat. … It’s the difference between seeing a living animal and taxidermy. If you just want the text, then buy the text. You cannot be more faithful to that text than reading the text. But if you want to see how we interact and resuscitate something into being emotional again, then that’s what we try to do.

Mona, “The Testament of Ann Lee” is a story told with music, but is it a musical? Is that a question you asked yourself as you were making it?

Fastvold: I consider it a musical. I do. But it’s just a different kind of musical. No one’s singing dialogue. It’s not magic when they start to sing. I think, as I was writing the script with Brady [Corbet], we realized early on it had to be a musical because the Shakers worship through ecstatic song and dance. They would be moved by the divine spirit and then receive a song or a piece of movement, and then they would start to sing and dance. Their life was a musical, so that’s what it had to be. And that was exciting to me, to create the whole structure of that.

But it couldn’t be, “OK, here’s a story and then here’s an amazing musical number.” It had to come from this place of worship. So all the musical bits and pieces of the film, our moments of feeling moved by the spirit and having this sort of religious experience, it had to be grounded in that and it had to be really organic-sounding and -looking. So we had to ground it in live recordings and create the soundscape and the music in dialogue with my choreographers. Every body slap and stomp is part of the rhythm and the music of it, because it couldn’t just be where diegetic audio fades out and then there’s this great, wonderful piece.

Chu: In a weird way, we all make musicals. All the movies, everybody has a take on how music integrates with it.

Del Toro: I was aiming for opera.

Guillermo, Jon, both of your films have a sense of scale to them. What kind of challenges does that present? Is it wrangling all the extras? Is it having the sets built on time? Jon, just the number of florists credited at the end of “Wicked: For Good” is wild.

Chu: It’s like building Disneyland, essentially. We had the warehouses going — there’s first a recording studio, so we’re recording music while their dance rehearsals are going on. You have hundreds and hundreds of people. Then you go to the costumes department and then you have the hair, just the wigs alone. People are getting there at 2:30 in the morning. And that’s before you even start the day.

We were planning two movies at the same time. So we had 20-something musical numbers rehearsed and worked with our cinematographer and our team to understand everything and build sets around these pieces. And then you get there on the day and how do I say, “Hey, all that stuff we did, this is actually happening over here. Let’s move everything over here”? I felt the hardest thing was being OK with wasting money if it was the right thing to do at that moment. I needed to feel free and had everybody aware that if I’m moving all of a sudden, we’ve got to go and we’ve got to figure it out. And I think that’s where the magic is.

Del Toro: To me, it’s three things. The first one is tonal, meaning everything that you do, you’re not doing eye candy, you’re doing eye protein. You’re telling a story. So it’s not about looking good or looking big. It’s about, does the gesture happen at the right moment? Because you can make gestures on the wrong moment of the film, and they don’t have a dramatic impact. I say we designed the movie for the Creature to feel real, of a piece with the world. So that’s the first one.

The second one: Is it expressing something different every time we go to a bigger thing? It’s not about the scale. And the final one to me is, does it feel real in the world? So the way I go at it is, there’s no typeface, no paint, no photograph, nothing, that cannot be investigated and designed to within an inch of its life. Even great movies, I’m very fidgety. I go, “That’s not a painting from the 1930s. Somebody painted it much later.” Or a typeface or a carnival banner or something like that. So at the end of the day, if you do your job right, you have a world and people just get into it almost like a vibe. Nobody should notice, but if you do it right, they want to experience it over and over again.

Rian, you make a really bold decision in “Wake Up Dead Man,” where the signature character of the series, Daniel Craig’s Benoit Blanc, is offscreen for much of the first 45 minutes or so of the movie. Did you have to convince people that’s the way things should go?

Johnson: Not really. For this one, first of all, it is a little closer to actually a traditional detective structure. That’s kind of how most Agatha Christie books work, is you meet the suspects in the first act. You get a very good idea of who’s gonna get bumped off. And then, end of the first act, the murder happens, and then the detective shows up and starts to solve it. So there was a precedent for it. But the real reason I had done backflips in the previous two movies to get around that was so we could get Blanc in there earlier. The reason it made sense for this [is] because Father Jud, who’s played by Josh O’Connor, [is] kind of the protagonist of it because of the themes of religion, and so the whole lay of the land was more complicated and delicate in this one to set up. I felt like the audience would be best served by having that runway and getting the time before this powerhouse that is Daniel playing Benoit Blanc comes in and brings this whole new energy to it.

The other thing that I’ve landed on with them is you have to constantly resist the candy of the mystery. You have to always remind yourself [that] the mystery elements are not a load-bearing wall, that those are never going to keep an audience entertained or engaged. You need to do the same thing you do in any movie where you have an emotional, bold line going that’s thrown at the beginning, that lands at the end. And the mystery then has to support that.

Mona, with “Ann Lee,” but also with “The Brutalist,” it seems like the movies that you and Brady Corbet are collaborating on together, you’re doing so much with relatively limited resources. What is it that the two of you are doing in these films that you’re able to make them seem so grand?

Fastvold: I mean, there’s no trick. I had to prep for almost a year for this one, because I knew that no one was going to give me a lot of money to make a musical about the founders of the Shakers. It was not gonna be this sexy pitch. It was a hard pitch. So I knew that it was going to be a limited budget. But at the same time, I just desperately wanted “Ann Lee” to have a really grand story. And I wanted there to be a believable, lush world. And I wanted to tell a story about her whole life, not just a day in her life.

So I had to make it work somehow. It was so much about saying, “OK, I’m working with my [director of photography], my production designer, my costume designer every weekend and night for months and months before we started official prep. And same with my choreographer and composer and with all of the cast as well, just rehearsing. Amanda [Seyfried] was rehearsing at night while she was shooting something else. She would go and have dance rehearsals at night, on the weekends, so we could keep on adjusting.

So the only way that I could, to quote David Lynch, get dreamy on set, which was something I really wanted, was by having so much prep time, and then just really knowing what my Plan A and B was, and to sort of experiment in advance more. And because I knew there’s no way that you can try and build a world and then have the same flexibility on this budget, it’s all about knowing every line item in my budget, what everything costs in Hungary, what everything costs in Sweden. “OK, this is how much a cherry picker in Hungary costs, and therefore I’m gonna take out two shots and only build half the roof.”

The 2025 Envelope Directors Roundtable. Top row, left to right: Rian Johnson, Benny Safdie, and Mona Fastvold. Bottom row, left to right: Nia DaCosta, Jon M. Chu and Guillermo del Toro.

Chu: I think that’s one of the biggest lessons I learned being a director. You don’t have a right to make your movie, because it costs so much and you need so much help. You do have to earn the right to make your movie. That is a part of our job.

Nia, you come to “Hedda” having just made a Marvel movie. You’ve just also finished a sequel to “28 Years Later.” Is there a secret through line for you that connects all these projects?

DaCosta: Being a nerd, Marvel, horror, comic books, for me, those things that I’ve done that I haven’t written are worlds that I loved as a kid. So “Candyman” was hugely important to me when I was younger. I used to love Marvel comics as a kid. “28 Days Later” is one of my formative films that I watched. And so when the opportunities came up to be a part of those worlds, it was really exciting for me. And then “Hedda,” I’m a theater nerd too, so I just really go by my passion, and I’m really compelled by just interesting characters.

“Hedda” and “28 Years Later” are very different films, but for me, they were so similar because I learned from my experience jumping into the studio system after making a sub-million-dollar movie [“Little Woods”] what works for me and what doesn’t work for me. And what works for me is really being given authorship. And so I’m setting the tone early. We’re not here to battle. We’re here to make the vision that I have. And if you’re into it, cool and great, let’s work together. If you’re not into it, then it doesn’t have to exist or I’ll find another way for it to exist.

Del Toro: The ambition should always be beyond the budget. If they give you $130 [million], you want to make a movie that is $260 [million]. But the way to that I found by doing “Devil’s Backbone,” which is $3 million, or “Shape of Water,” which is $19.3. “Shape of Water” opened with all the different sets in the first 15 minutes. And then it’s two sets. Lab, apartment, lab, apartment, lab, apartment. I always tell the departments, let’s choose meatballs and gravy. Where do we put the real resources? You reach a plateau no matter what the budget. Never spend money on a plateau. It always needs to mean something.

Safdie: You pick and choose the moments when you’re gonna get big. We were doing the hospital scene and then we built the plane in the hallway of the hospital. Because that was the most affordable. But there was a column in the middle of the plane, and I would always joke that we should go through the column. I find those limitations exciting. Because you really have to figure it out.

Rian, “Glass Onion” had a more robust theatrical release than “Dead Man” has gotten. Do you feel like as filmmakers that all of you are being put in this position of fighting for the future of theaters and moviegoing?

Johnson: I actually feel incredibly optimistic at this moment about the future of moviemaking. I don’t feel that way because we’re all picking up signs and marching down the street and preaching to people that they need to keep this sacred. I feel optimistic about it because I go to movie theaters and I see them packed with young people who want to go to movie theaters and have that experience.

And I see them coming out for new movies. I see them at revival cinemas. I see theaters at 2 p.m. on a Tuesday showing a Melville film that are just full of young people who are excited. And then you see it with movies that have come out this year. You see it with something like Ryan [Coogler]’s movie, “Sinners,” or with so many films that have struck chords with audiences and created cultural events. You can’t wag your finger at people and say, “You should be going to the theater and having this theatrical experience,” but you feel it rising right now. And so for me, it’s less that I want to advocate for it. It’s more that I want to ride that wave of it coming up.

Even the most accomplished actors sometimes feel out of their depth on a movie.

Gwyneth Paltrow, who returns to the big screen this fall as an Old Hollywood star trying to make a new start in “Marty Supreme,” was “way out over her skis” in her early 20s when she played a Park Avenue wife opposite older co-star Michael Douglas in “A Perfect Murder.” Jennifer Lopez, who showcases her triple-threat skill set in the musical “Kiss of the Spider Woman,” felt a “huge” responsibility to get it right when portraying Tejana icon Selena Quintanilla in the 1997 biopic about the late singer. And Emily Blunt, who goes toe-to-toe with Dwayne Johnson in the mixed martial arts saga “The Smashing Machine,” had to avoid being typecast as the go-to “acerbic British bitch” after the success of 2006’s “The Devil Wears Prada.”

These and many more tales from inside the maelstrom of megawatt stardom were the subject of The Envelope’s 2025 Oscar Actresses Roundtable, where Paltrow, Lopez and Blunt were joined by Sydney Sweeney, who transformed physically and emotionally to play boxing legend Christy Martin in “Christy”; Tessa Thompson, who tries to keep up appearances as the title character in “Hedda,” Nia DaCosta’s acclaimed new adaptation of “Hedda Gabler”; and Elle Fanning, who plays an American star struggling to find her way into a Norwegian art film in “Sentimental Value.”

In conversation with Times critic Lorraine Ali, the six performers discussed how they deal with bad press, resist being put in career boxes and inhabited some of the most-talked-about film roles of the year.

Jennifer, you play the title role in “Kiss of the Spider Woman,” a story set in Argentina during a military dictatorship. It takes place in a political prison where the men imagine themselves in a glamorous, sweeping musical. As producer on the film, why was it important for you to tell this story now?

Lopez: It’s never been more relevant, which is really scary. Manuel Puig wrote the novel in the 1970s about these two prisoners during the uprising in Argentina. It really is a love story about seeing the humanity in another person, like two very different people with different political views. One is queer, and the other is a political revolutionary. The two of them were like oil and water. But they escaped into the [fantasy of] a movie, which is “Kiss of the Spider Woman.” They slowly come together and see each other’s souls instead of who they were on the outside. I think with everything that’s happening in the world right now, especially in this country, with Latinos and queer communities being targeted, demonized — there’s never been a more important time to say, “Look at me on the inside. Stop with all of this divisiveness. See people for who they are.”

Gwyneth, “Marty Supreme” is set in the 1950s. You play Kay Stone, a faded starlet. Who did you base her on?

Paltrow: She’s an amalgam of a few ideas, but principally Grace Kelly, who also had this amazing movie career and was this incredible star, and then walked away from it for marriage. My character does the same. When I was looking at photographs [of Kelly during] her films, and then photographs after she got married, it was like the light dimmed. She lost something. My character had a very rough road to get to stardom, so she walks away from this big career to marry an unsuitable but very wealthy man. And then her son dies, so she has a lot of tragedy.

Sydney, “Christy” is the story of Christy Martin, a pioneer in popularizing women’s boxing in the 1980s and 1990s. You really transformed for the role. Can you talk about that transformation?

Sweeney: Her story is probably one of the most important stories I’ll ever get to tell, so I felt that immense importance. I needed to fully transform myself. I trained every day for three months leading up to shooting. I put on 35 pounds. And I got to spend time with her, and now she’s like one of my best friends. I just kinda lived and breathed Christy for the entirety of the whole thing.

There’s so much violence in her world, particularly outside the ring. Was the real-life Christy there when you shot the domestic abuse scenes between her and her husband, Jim Martin (played by Ben Foster)?

Sweeney: To protect her, we didn’t have her on set when we were shooting the last part of the movie where the domestic violence came into play. The following Monday, we had her come to set, and the entire crew stood up and just started applauding. It was so beautiful. Then after that, she was on set all the time. We would be in the ring, and she’d be sitting [outside the ring], and I’d hear her say, “Hit her with the left hook, Sydney!”

Lopez: She was coaching from the sidelines?

Sweeney: Oh, yeah. We were having a blast. And in the fights, we actually fought. My No. 1 thing with all the girls was that I don’t want this to be fake because so much of Christy comes to life in the ring. I didn’t want to have [the camera] at the back of my head or have to cut to fake the punches. Every single one of those girls, they’re badasses. They punched me, and I punched them. We had bloody, broken noses. I had a concussion.

Blunt: Sydney broke someone’s nose.

Sweeney: I got a concussion. I’m not going to confirm [what else happened]. But I definitely caused some, uh, bruises and blood.

Emily, with “The Smashing Machine,” you play Dawn Staples, girlfriend to Mark Kerr, who was a pioneer in the field of MMA fighting. How much did you know about that world before taking on the role?

Blunt: I knew very little, and I was moved that Mark Kerr was my first window into [MMA] because he is such a juxtaposition to the violence of the world. This is a man who headbutted people to oblivion, and when you meet him, he’s like [subdued tone], “Hi, how are you?” He’s so nice. And I said to Mark one day, “How did you do that?” And he goes, “I know, it was nasty.” He’s just so sweet and dear and eloquent. But I think he was sort of filled with this uncontrollable rage that he hardly knew what to do with, and he struggled so much with his own demons. The movie is more about struggle and fragility than it is about fighting.

Tessa, “Hedda” is an adaptation of Henrik Ibsen’s play “Hedda Gabler” and you play the title role. Your castmate, Nina Hoss, said the role of Hedda Gabler is for women actors what Hamlet is for men. Do you agree?

Thompson: I like to say that Hamlet is the male Hedda, just because I think it’s a nice reversal. But people say that because the truth is that we don’t have that many [roles] that are canonical in the same way that Hedda Gabler is, so it feels like this behemoth. It’s one of the parts in theater that feels like a mountain to climb. There’s a kind of complexity to the character that has compelled audiences and actors for centuries … which is the case with both [Hedda and Hamlet]. But I think the comparison is kind of boring, frankly. I remember an actor saying to me, “Oh, I learned in drama school you have to have your Hedda ready.” And I did not have my Hedda ready, but I got it ready.

The wardrobe and sets in “Spider Woman,” “Hedda” and “Marty Supreme” are beautiful. Did you swipe mementos when the films wrapped?

Paltrow: No, you can’t.

Lopez: I mean, you can.

Paltrow: I tried the Birkin bag from “The Royal Tenenbaums” [but I could not], so I took the loafers instead.

Blunt: Not the same. Not quite.

Thompson: [To Gwyneth]: I was almost you [in “Tenenbaums”] for Halloween, but I couldn’t get it together in time and I wanted do you justice. But one day …

Paltrow: Next year. I’ll lend you the loafers.

Elle, in “Sentimental Value,” you play a Hollywood star who’s cast in an art–house European production. In reality, you were shooting the massive production “Predator: Badlands” when you joined “Sentimental Value,” a smaller European film. Were the parallels with your character, Rachel, apparent at the time?

Fanning: I got a call that “Joachim Trier has a part for you and would like to talk over Zoom, and here’s the script.” I was like, “Oh, my gosh, Joachim Trier [who made] ‘The Worst Person in the World.’” I would’ve said yes to one line. But I was already doing “Predator.” I was about to go off to New Zealand, but it’s very important for Joachim to rehearse, so he [wanted me] to come to Oslo. I wasn’t sure which movie I could do, and I wanted to do both. So, of course, there were parts to the character that I could relate to. I kept thinking, “There’s a lot of meta-ness going on in this film,” particularly for my character, being the Hollywood actress coming to Oslo for the first time, working with a Norwegian director. And coming off of this action-packed film to go to this very intimate, emotional foreign film, they fed into each other in ways that I didn’t expect them to.

How do you all deal with rough reviews?

Paltrow: I try to never read anything about myself, full stop, ever. Period.

Lopez: Wait, not anything about yourself? Ever? Period? Because I don’t read reviews of my films either, but people will bring it to you it when it’s good and you’re like, “Oh, nice.” But there’s other things they’ll bring you …

Paltrow: Sometimes I’ll come upon it.

Lopez: And you want to die.

Paltrow: Want to die. Like when someone forwards you a link to something really horrible about yourself, and they’re like, “Oh, this is bull—.” I do try to avoid [that kind of stuff]. I deleted Instagram.

Blunt: Me too.

Lopez: You need to cleanse every once in a while.

Sweeney: Sounds nice. I can’t do that.

How do you push the negative stuff about you or your personal life aside and focus on your work?

Sweeney: It helps when you love what you do. Like, if you’re loving the characters that you get to play, you’re loving the people you get to work with, and you’re proud of what you’re doing, then it’s just outside noise. When we walk on set, the world kind of disappears and we get come to life in a different kind of way. Those are the moments and the relationships that matter. Everything else is just people we don’t know.

Paltrow: [To Lopez] I want to hear your answer to this question.

Lopez: From the very beginning, for whatever reason, I’ve been a lightning rod for nice things and a lot of negativity. And it’s hard because you say to yourself, “These people don’t get me. They don’t see me. They don’t understand me.” Then all of a sudden they do. And then they don’t again. Even from when I was very young, I would always say, “I know who I am. I’m a good person. I know what I’m doing. People wouldn’t hire me if I wasn’t good at what I do.” I was always affirming myself and keeping my feet on the ground. Luckily, I had a great mom and dad who really instilled in me a sense of self. And what Sydney was saying, I’d have to block out the noise so I can put my head on the pillow at night and go, “I did good today. I was a good person. I was kind to people. I worked really hard. I’m a good mom.” That has always helped me through.

Thompson: Not having your sense of self or identity entangled in this other self that belongs to the public seems like such a healthy thing. I’m still trying to figure out my balance with that. When I was acting in some projects, I felt like I was delivering a lump of clay that got sculpted by somebody else. So if someone was harsh on the final [product], I was like, “Well, I didn’t sculpt it. I’m just the material.” But now that I produce, it’s a completely different thing. It’s building it from the ground up and feeling so much responsibility to the people that you’ve made it with. You made a baby and sent it into the world, and you just hope it doesn’t get misunderstood.

Gwyneth, you’re stepping back into the film world with “Marty Supreme” after seven years doing other things, such as Goop. Were you nervous coming back into the fold?

Paltrow: I [had been] doing things like “Iron Man” and “The Avengers,” which are totally fun, but it’s like doing a TV show where you go back in and you know the character. It’s not that difficult. So it had been a really long time, and I was like, “How did I used to do this? How are you, like, natural?” And then I did the camera test and I was really nervous. I felt like a fish out of water. And then luckily the first scene that I shot for real was a scene in the movie where she’s rehearsing a play. And I started in the theater, and I did a million plays before I ever did a film. The camera was far away, and I had my mom’s voice in my head. She’s like, “You’re on the boards, you know, just let the energy come through your body.”

Can wardrobe and styling help you embody the emotional core of a role?

Blunt: Dawn’s got a vibe for sure. It was that very overt ’90s, overglamorized thing, and everything was so revealing. I feel like my t— looked like two heads by the time they were done with the Wonderbra. They were just up under my chin. That helps you stand different, walk different. And the nails helped me. She had this incredibly long, square, chunky French tip manicure, and she’d talk with her hands. And the spray tan and the wig. It’s all fabulous. It’s such an amazing thing to look at yourself and go, “Who’s that?”

Thompson: [In “Hedda”], the construction of those dresses in the ’50s, there’s so much boning. We had Lindsay Pugh, who’s a brilliant costume designer. I also started looking up the starlets of the time and what their waist sizes were. It was like 20 or 21 inches. They were extreme. In the beginning, when we were constructing the dress, I was like, “I’m going to try to get down to that Dior-like silhouette,” which is impossible. Then we [fell in] love with the idea that the dress doesn’t actually fit her, because she’s inside of a life that doesn’t fit her. But the sheer sort of circumference of the dress makes her a woman who comes into a room and takes up space. A big part of [a woman’s] currency was their beauty and their body. That felt very foreign to me to inhabit. I didn’t recognize or had maybe suppressed the idea of using that part of me to gain power in the world.

The 2025 Envelope Oscar Actresses Roundtable: Top row, left to right, Tessa Thompson, Gwyneth Paltrow and Elle Fanning. Bottom row, left to right, Sydney Sweeney, Jennifer Lopez and Emily Blunt.

Hollywood likes to put people in boxes, particularly women. What boxes has it tried to stuff you in?

Fanning: I was in “Maleficent” and I played Sleeping Beauty, so like Disney princess in pink. Blond.

Blunt: But look at that face. Come on!

Fanning: But I can be mean too! In “The Great,” [I played] Catherine the Great, she was a queen, but she was raunchy. It was such a delicious show in that way. People were like, “Whoa.” They were surprised [seeing me like] that.

Blunt: If there’s a movie that takes off, you will have to carve out space away from that. I remember after “The Devil Wears Prada,” I got offered every acerbic British bitch. I’m like, “I should not do that for a while.”

Paltrow: When I stepped back to be an entrepreneur around 2008, I really confused and upset people. Nobody understood what I was doing, and I faced a lot of criticism and confusion over the course of the 17 years since I sent out my first Goop newsletter. I really do think that women, we are so incredibly multifaceted. We are all the archetypes. We’re not just a mother, or an artist, or an intellectual. We’re all the things. So I’ve always kind of tried to make it my mission to say, like, “No, don’t put us in boxes. We get to define who we are.”

Blunt: Was it hard for you to keep going and ignore it?

Paltrow: It was really hard. Some days I was like, “Why did I do this? The headwinds are so extreme and I’m so misunderstood. I had a perfectly good job. People did my hair. Why on earth did I do this to myself?”

Thompson: And you also did it before there was a cultural appreciation for people doing multihyphenates and starting businesses.

Lopez: I think our generation started thinking, like, “We need and want to do other things.” Even when I started acting and I had done my early films, “Out of Sight” and “Selena,” and then decided I wanted to record music, and it was such a big deal. People were like, “They’re never going take you seriously as an actor ever again.”

Paltrow: And you had the No. 1 movie and the No. 1 album in the same time, right?

Lopez: It was in the Guinness Book of Records. But that’s the thing, everybody’s always trying to tell you: “You can only do this,” or “You can only do that.” I had my perfume line. I had my clothing lines. I have my J Lo beauty now. You have to just do what feels good for you. It doesn’t mean it’s for everybody. Somebody wants to just act their whole life, that’s beautiful too. That’s fantastic. I still want to direct. I still want to write more books. And I don’t ever feel like there’s somebody who can say to me, “No, you can’t.”

Blunt: Say that to Sydney and she’ll break their nose.