Where We Stand, Post-Festival

For the films of 2015
Greg
Tenured
Posts: 3285
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 1:12 pm
Location: Greg
Contact:

Re: Where We Stand, Post-Festival

Post by Greg »

Magilla, you think The Martian has a better chance with its screenplay landing a nomination than its director?
Big Magilla
Site Admin
Posts: 19318
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:22 pm
Location: Jersey Shore

Re: Where We Stand, Post-Festival

Post by Big Magilla »

It's still too early to make predictions without all the supposed front-runners having been seen, but as of nhe moment:

Best Picture
Bridge of Spies (will be the first choice of the masses)
Brooklyn (will be the first choice of the old guard)
Carol (probable nominee, but not a likely winner)
The Danish Girl (weak but hanging in there))
The Hateful Eight (unless Joy emerges triumphant or Suffragette rebounds)
The Martian (gaining strength)
The Revenant (I'm still skeptical that it can win, but I suspect it will be nominated)
Room (will be the first choice of the under-30s)
Spotlight (one of the two critical front-runners)
Steve Jobs (the other of the two critical front-runners)

Best Director
Danny Boyle, Steve Jobs
John Crowley, Brooklyn
Todd Haynes, Carol
Alejandro Gonzalez Innaritu, The Revenant
Thomas McCarthy, Spotlight

Best Actor
Johnny Depp, Black Mass
Leonardo DiCaprio, The Reverant
Michael Fassbender, Steve Jobs
Matt Damon, The Martian
Eddie Redmayne, The Danish Girl

Best Actress
Cate Blanchett, Carol
Brie Larson, Room
Rooney Mara, Carol
Saoirse Ronan, Brooklyn
Alicia Vikander, The Danish Girl

If Mara and Vikander are dumped in support, then Jennifer Lawrence in Joy and Carey Mulligan in Suffragette

Best Supporting Actor
Idris Elba, Beasts of No Nation
Tom Hardy, The Revenant
Michael Keaton, Spotlight
Mark Ruffalo, Spotlight
Mark Rylance, Bridge of Spies

Best Supporting Actress
Joan Allen, Room
Jane Fonda, Youth
Jennifer Jason Leigh, The Hateful Eight
Julie Walters, Brooklyn
Kate Winslet, Steve Jobs

If Mara and Vikander land here they most likely replace Allen and Fonda

Best Original Screenplay
Bridge of Spies
The Hateful Eight
Inside Out
Son of Saul
Spotlight

Best Adapted Screenplay
Carol
The Martian
The Revenant
Room
Steve Jobs
Okri
Tenured
Posts: 3345
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:28 pm
Location: Edmonton, AB

Re: Where We Stand, Post-Festival

Post by Okri »

Fair enough. I take the Nate Silver approach when predicting oscar winners. I'll wait until after the show to do that. I will only do slightly better though.
Big Magilla
Site Admin
Posts: 19318
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:22 pm
Location: Jersey Shore

Re: Where We Stand, Post-Festival

Post by Big Magilla »

Okri wrote:Big Magilla, one thing that I'd mention re: Dicaprio and the feeling of being "due" is that it seems to be happening a lot sooner. Winslet is the obvious candidate - someone who was considered overdue at a very young age. I'd actually assert that it's not so much being "due" as it is being due while still in your "moment." Winslet never fell off of Oscar's radar so by the time The Reader came along, she had momentum and no one else really "needed" an oscar. You'll see it happen with Bradley Cooper within the next two or three years. Recent examples like Peter O'Toole or Glenn Close are practically afterglow nominations. I think if DiCaprio's considered great in The Revenant, you'll see that critics (who want to be predictive) and the other groups give him wins comfortably.
All things considered, if they think he's "great" in it, without any other non-winners in competition with as many nominations as his, then yes, the "due" factor will play a part. My problem is with people predicting him sight unseen as being "the" front-runner just because he's supposedly "due".
Okri
Tenured
Posts: 3345
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:28 pm
Location: Edmonton, AB

Re: Where We Stand, Post-Festival

Post by Okri »

1. BJ, I'm Not There couldn't even crack the original screenplay line-up, which should have been an easier get. But I'm still surprised at how thoroughly that film tanked, honestly.

2. Big Magilla, one thing that I'd mention re: Dicaprio and the feeling of being "due" is that it seems to be happening a lot sooner. Winslet is the obvious candidate - someone who was considered overdue at a very young age. I'd actually assert that it's not so much being "due" as it is being due while still in your "moment." Winslet never fell off of Oscar's radar so by the time The Reader came along, she had momentum and no one else really "needed" an oscar. You'll see it happen with Bradley Cooper within the next two or three years. Recent examples like Peter O'Toole or Glenn Close are practically afterglow nominations. I think if DiCaprio's considered great in The Revenant, you'll see that critics (who want to be predictive) and the other groups give him wins comfortably.

danfrank's point is a good one, but I don't think that's how AMPAS thinks. I don't think Jeff Bridges' was ever in the win discussion until the year he actually won.

3. Flipp, there has never been an acting category with all one-word titles.

4. I've seen Room and I think it's a textbook writing + acting nominee if I've ever seen one. Very well acted, thematic and interesting screenplay, but it gets lost in the crowd for critics for best picture.

5. I think Carol would HAVE to do well with the critics for me to be confident about it's chances.

6. Will Beasts of No Nation actually send screeners?
The Original BJ
Emeritus
Posts: 4312
Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2003 8:49 pm

Re: Where We Stand, Post-Festival

Post by The Original BJ »

Now that I've seen Beasts of No Nation, I think an even more significant factor is the fact that this is the kind of movie a lot of Oscar voters just won't like. (I'll expand more later, but I'm not wild about it either.) This isn't to say that a movie like this couldn't have a cheering section, but since it doesn't appear to be coming from reviews (in a way that The Hurt Locker's overwhelming push by critics helped mitigate its dismal box office), it would seem like that enthusiasm would have to come from audiences discovering it and responding positively (the way they did for the last Oscar vehicle with the word Beasts in the title.) It just seems like the movie isn't going to make enough of an impact anywhere to overcome what I imagine will be some resistance to its subject matter from Academy voters. (Plus, I just don't see that many categories it's likely to get nominated in, which we all know is important to become a significant Oscar player.)
Mister Tee
Tenured Laureate
Posts: 8637
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 2:57 pm
Location: NYC
Contact:

Re: Where We Stand, Post-Festival

Post by Mister Tee »

Greg wrote:
Mister Tee wrote:I've read people on other sites saying "It doesn't matter; everybody watched it on Netflix" -- to which I'd reply that 1) among certain groups that's the case but I'm not sure the aging Academy demographic is one of them and 2) I just think the bad odor around those truly awful weekend grosses (under $2000 per at only 31 theatres) will stigmatize the movie as a flop in Hollywood eyes and kill most any chance it had.
Isn't it more common for members of "the aging Academy demographic" to watch screeners rather than see movies in theaters, so that to them theater grosses might not mean that much?
1) They watch screeners they pop into DVD player; I wonder how many of them stream. Which, as I noted the other day, is the only way this particular film is available, so there may not be many of them watching the film right now.

2) The weekend grosses have been Holy Writ for Hollywood for the last 30-plus years. Even smaller films generally have to achieve a certain level of commercial respectability to get much traction in the Oscar race. People may WATCH movies on screeners, but they know how they're performing in theatres.
Greg
Tenured
Posts: 3285
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 1:12 pm
Location: Greg
Contact:

Re: Where We Stand, Post-Festival

Post by Greg »

Mister Tee wrote:I've read people on other sites saying "It doesn't matter; everybody watched it on Netflix" -- to which I'd reply that 1) among certain groups that's the case but I'm not sure the aging Academy demographic is one of them and 2) I just think the bad odor around those truly awful weekend grosses (under $2000 per at only 31 theatres) will stigmatize the movie as a flop in Hollywood eyes and kill most any chance it had.
Isn't it more common for members of "the aging Academy demographic" to watch screeners rather than see movies in theaters, so that to them theater grosses might not mean that much?
Mister Tee
Tenured Laureate
Posts: 8637
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 2:57 pm
Location: NYC
Contact:

Re: Where We Stand, Post-Festival

Post by Mister Tee »

The Original BJ wrote: where I DO think you could argue there is something of a bias is with the more marginal candidates. So, The Theory of Everything can be viewed as Best Picture material, whereas Still Alice and Wild get relegated to Best Actress.
This extends to the (mostly male) critics, as well. I couldn't count how many times I heard Still Alice dismissed as a Lifetime movie -- a pejorative I never once heard directed at Theory of Everything. The fact that Carol has already pretty much run that (mostly male) gauntlet argues against the film being penalized in the same way.

Another thing I note from our two sets of predictions below: Beasts of no Nation has shrunk to a virtual non-factor. Part of this stems from the reviews, which were decent but not sensational. But another factor is the dismal commercial showing. I understand that, in a certain sense, we can't tell how well the film did -- Netflix doesn't release "stream watch" figures, and for all we know more people saw it than saw Goosebumps last weekend. And the fact that the film was (for studio/political reasons) relegated to undesirably located theatres mitigates its box office numbers. But, because of its borderline critical status, this was a film that NEEDED to make a commercial splash -- as something like The Imitation Game did last year with its gaudy opening numbers, and equivalently reviewed films like Spotlight or Brooklyn will need to approach. I've read people on other sites saying "It doesn't matter; everybody watched it on Netflix" -- to which I'd reply that 1) among certain groups that's the case but I'm not sure the aging Academy demographic is one of them and 2) I just think the bad odor around those truly awful weekend grosses (under $2000 per at only 31 theatres) will stigmatize the movie as a flop in Hollywood eyes and kill most any chance it had.
The Original BJ
Emeritus
Posts: 4312
Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2003 8:49 pm

Re: Where We Stand, Post-Festival

Post by The Original BJ »

Flipp is right that Far From Heaven was a pretty clear example of an overwhelmingly acclaimed female-centric movie that did far less than anticipated at the Oscars -- the Quaid omission was the biggest shocker, but I also had Haynes predicted as the lone Director nominee, and couldn't believe Art Direction and Costume Design were boxed out too. BUT...it's also worth noting that in 2002, the Best Picture winner was a really female-centric movie, and another really female-centric movie (this one about lesbians!) came in not that far behind. So, I tend to think Sasha Stone's belief in a vast conspiracy doesn't really hold up to the evidence.

(Tangent: where I DO think you could argue there is something of a bias is with the more marginal candidates. So, The Theory of Everything can be viewed as Best Picture material, whereas Still Alice and Wild get relegated to Best Actress. But I don't view those outcomes as any kind of precedent for a movie as wildly acclaimed as Carol missing Best Picture strictly because it's centered around women.)

As for the theory that Todd Haynes is always anathema to Oscar, I think you have to look at his past work and examine more closely why his films, despite acclaim, didn't become juggernauts. Far From Heaven, much as I loved it, was so rigorously academic in its dissection of '50's melodrama that it's easy to see why industry folk just weren't as bowled over as movie critics. And as for I'm Not There, did anyone truly think something so experimental would get a major haul of Oscar nominations? I won't be seeing Carol until next week, but even judging from the trailer, it looks like a far more classical period piece. I'm not suggesting Haynes has sacrificed those qualities that make his work special, but that he's working in a milieu that has traditionally been a lot more appealing to Oscar voters than, say, Velvet Goldmine.

In response to Flipp's comment that the movie could still be a double Best Actress nominee, it's worth mentioning again just how many articles have already come out, early in the season, that seem to be taking issue with the rather high number of attempts at category fraud this year (Mara, Vikander, Jacob Tremblay). I have no idea how any of this will affect the Oscar narrative, but it does seem to be irking a lot more people than usual.
Sabin
Laureate Emeritus
Posts: 10747
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 12:52 am
Contact:

Re: Where We Stand, Post-Festival

Post by Sabin »

Mister Tee wrote
Sabin, I'm curious why you omit Carol from film/director/even screenplay. The reason I highlight this is, both Dave Poland and Kris Tapley are resolutely doing the same, and it strikes me as a major blind spot on the season.
I think you're right. I just glanced over the nominees and I couldn't see which one to omit (although Son of Saul, The Danish Girl, and even Room are on the cusp). It seems like everybody loves is so it should be in the running. No Haynes movie has broken through but Flipp is right that if Far From Heaven came out in 2015, it would get a larger haul.

I will be adding Ridley Scott to my Best Director list as well. Also, Specter for Cinematography which I forgot about but must be some sort of lock at this point.

I'll also say there are only two mysteries for me this winter and they are The Revenant and Joy. My big hunch of the winter is that The Revenant might be the movie that nobody likes. Yes, the trailer looks amazing but consistency and accessibility are not Innaritu's forte.
"How's the despair?"
flipp525
Laureate
Posts: 6163
Joined: Thu Jan 09, 2003 7:44 am

Re: Where We Stand, Post-Festival

Post by flipp525 »

Mister Tee wrote:As far as the woman thing -- a major Sasha Stone hobby-horse -- can anyone give me some examples of women-centered films that were highly acclaimed/successful but failed ro do well at the nomination level?
Well, since we're talking about Haynes, this is completely obvious, but his last big "woman picture" Far From Heaven missed out on a sure-fire Best Supporting Actor nomination for Dennis Quaid (potentially Dennis Haysbert as well, although he was always less assured) and an on-the-fence Best Supporting Actress nod for Patricia Clarkson in the Agnes Moorehead role in the film (she was on a ton of our predictions lists that year). No nominations for Costume or Picture either. It did obviously get nominated for Cinematography, Screenplay, Actress and Score. But if that film came out in 2015, I would expect a larger haul.

I agree with Tee that Carol will figure in more categories than the ones Sabin cited. I'm also not convinced it won't be a double-Best Actress nominee at the end of nominations morning.
"The mantle of spinsterhood was definitely in her shoulders. She was twenty five and looked it."

-Gone With the Wind by Margaret Mitchell
Mister Tee
Tenured Laureate
Posts: 8637
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 2:57 pm
Location: NYC
Contact:

Re: Where We Stand, Post-Festival

Post by Mister Tee »

Sabin, I'm curious why you omit Carol from film/director/even screenplay. The reason I highlight this is, both Dave Poland and Kris Tapley are resolutely doing the same, and it strikes me as a major blind spot on the season.

The premise seems to be that Oscar voters are averse to 1) Todd Haynes, 2) lesbians!, and 3) women-centered films in general. It's certainly true that Haynes' films have not been showered with love in the past, but that was true of many filmmakers (the Coens, Alexander Payne, Danny Boyle, David O. Russell, Ruchard Linklater) until suddenly they broke through. If this were a year of five, you could make a case for the film staying in lone director territory, but in a year of maybe-10, I don't see how it misses. Carol has now been through multiple film festivals and has garnered mostly raves each step of the way. Unless one of the big Christmas boppers becomes a critical juggernaut, Haynes' film has to be a favorite for critics' awards. It presumably isn't a warm-fuzzy, Kings' Speech sort of entry, but lots of films that don't meet that profile have been best picture nominated since the expansion -- The Hurt Locker, A Serious Man, Black Swan, The Tree of Life, Amour, Beasts of the Southern Wild, her, Boyhood, Grand Budapest Hotel. I don't see any reason to think a film so acclaimed wouldn't follow suit.

As far as the woman thing -- a major Sasha Stone hobby-horse -- can anyone give me some examples of women-centered films that were highly acclaimed/successful but failed ro do well at the nomination level?
danfrank
Assistant
Posts: 907
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 2:19 pm
Location: Fair Play, CA

Re: Where We Stand, Post-Festival

Post by danfrank »

Sabin wrote:Everybody is writing down Leonardo DiCaprio's name in ink saying he's due.
This made me think about what makes someone "due" for an Oscar. For me it's certainly not how many nominations they've had (a la DiCaprio's five) or how much box office they've done (a la Will Smith, or Sandra Bullock). I would be perfectly fine, for example, if DiCaprio never wins an Oscar. He showed great promise as a very young actor, and has had some fairly solid performances, but I would never consider him a great actor. Fassbender, with his smaller sample size, has clearly demonstrated that he's a great actor with great range and depth. He's more due in my eyes than DiCaprio. Mark Ruffalo, one of my favorites, is also on my list of "due" actors. Of course there needs to be a single performance that earns it. I don't believe in the "career" Oscar for a lesser performance, a la Pacino or Paul Newman.
anonymous1980
Laureate
Posts: 6377
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 10:03 pm
Location: Manila
Contact:

Re: Where We Stand, Post-Festival

Post by anonymous1980 »

My first attempt at predictions:

BEST PICTURE OF THE YEAR
Bridge of Spies
Carol
The Hateful Eight
Inside Out
Mad Max: Fury Road
The Martian
The Revenant
Room
Spotlight
Steve Jobs


BEST ACHIEVEMENT IN DIRECTING
Steven Spielberg, Bridge of Spies
Todd Haynes, Carol
George Miller, Mad Max: Fury Road
Alejandro Gonzalez Inarittu, The Revenant
Danny Boyle, Steve Jobs

BEST PERFORMANCE BY AN ACTOR IN A LEADING ROLE
Michael Caine, Youth
Matt Damon, The Martian
Leonardo DiCaprio, The Revenant
Michael Fassbender, Steve Jobs
Eddie Redmayne, The Danish Girl

BEST PERFORMANCE BY AN ACTRESS IN A LEADING ROLE
Cate Blanchett, Carol
Emily Blunt, Sicario
Brie Larson, Room
Carey Mulligan, Suffragette
Saoirse Ronan, Brooklyn

BEST PERFORMANCE BY AN ACTOR IN A SUPPORTING ROLE
Benicio Del Toro, Sicario
Michael Keaton, Spotlight
Mark Ruffalo, Spotlight
Mark Rylance, Bridge of Spies
Jacob Tremblay, Room

BEST PERFORMANCE BY AN ACTRESS IN A SUPPORTING ROLE
Jane Fonda, Youth
Jennifer Jason Leigh, The Hateful Eight
Rooney Mara, Carol
Alicia Vikander, The Danish Girl
Kate Winslet, Steve Jobs

BEST ACHIEVEMENT IN WRITING - ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY
Matt Charman, Ethan Coen and Joel Coen, Bridge of Spies
Quentin Tarantino, The Hateful Eight
Pete Docter, Meg LaFauve, Josh Cooley and Ronnie del Carmen, Inside Out
Laszlo Nemes and Clara Royer, Son of Saul
Thomas McCarthy and Josh Singer, Spotlight

BEST ACHIEVEMENT IN WRITING - ADAPTED SCREENPLAY
Phyllis Nagy, Carol
Drew Goddard, The Martian
Alejandro Gonzalez Inarittu and Mark L. Smith, The Revenant
Emma Donoghue, Room
Aaron Sorkin, Steve Jobs

(FYI: Based on my Twitter feed, the one contender that has the post passionate fans is Room and if they're going to nominate Room for Best Picture, it is almost certain that they are going to also nominate the 2nd half of the acting duo of the film, Jacob Tremblay. Everyone I know who saw it says if Room is getting in Picture, he's also getting in.)
Post Reply

Return to “88th Predictions and Precursors”