Unofficial Academy Awards Discussion Board

Yes, I'll try to concel my histeria from this time onwards, but I think the general feeling of disillusionment towards this year's potential outcome is getting everyone really tired about how undistinguished the consensus is.

The Original BJ wrote:Your individual mileage may vary, but assuming these repeat, these will be some of the few winners on Oscar night that won't make me feel like I am trapped in room.

I have to admit, the speed at which I stopped caring about this year is startling even to me. The diversity debate was a disheartening eye-opener, the snubs/also-rans of the nominees, the casual way the acting categories have settled down (and if it's not settled, the frontrunners are uninspired). I mean, even rooting for George Miller is weird because if it happens, I'll come back here and read of Cal's hysteria and Italiano's condescension. Brie Larson is definitely an acceptable choice, but she ranks fourth in her category for me (with Lawrence still unseen). The Big Short will be among my least favourite screenplay winners (it's easily last in this group) and Spotlight is an equally uninspired choice (though original is lacking this year in a big way).

Frankly, I haven't even convinced myself I'm going to watch the oscars yet.

Good for Spotlight, but Carol IS the best adapted screenplay and should win the Oscar as a sign of respect for the film, assuming that neither Mara nor Burwell will win. That won't happen, of course. They prefer Margot Robbie explaining some stuff in a bubble bath.

flipp525 wrote:God, am I really going to have to watch Trumbo?

Lol

Your individual mileage may vary, but assuming these repeat, these will be some of the few winners on Oscar night that won't make me feel like I am trapped in room.

The rare year when (I'm presuming) the disqualifications will not figure in; these should both repeat at AMPAS.

The winners were Spotlight and The Big Short.

I voted for Spotlight and Steve Jobs.

God, am I really going to have to watch Trumbo?

Why was mad max ineligible? It was produced by Warner Bros. which is a guild signatory.

OscarGuy wrote:A screenplay about a blacklisted screenwriter? How could it NOT have been nominated? Of course, what else could have been? Adapted isn't very anemic, but with Room, Brooklyn and a handful of others out of the competition, it sure looks anemic. Revenant and Mad Max aren't dialogue-heavy films. Are we really that surprised that neither was a major player here?

Mad Max was ineligible.

Ugh, Trumbo has more guild support than Carol.

Mad Max fits more the Avatar/Gravity comparison. Then again, I'm shocked that a movie with so many "SUB-text" was not nominated.

A screenplay about a blacklisted screenwriter? How could it NOT have been nominated? Of course, what else could have been? Adapted isn't very anemic, but with Room, Brooklyn and a handful of others out of the competition, it sure looks anemic. Revenant and Mad Max aren't dialogue-heavy films. Are we really that surprised that neither was a major player here?

Yeah, sadly, Trumbo was just the sort of choice this guild would make, for reasons of pure narcissism. (I refuse to believe writers viewed that as a good script.)

Granting the easier field of play, this is obviously a much better day for Carol -- and for Steve Jobs, as well. But that category's going to be a demolition derby.

On the other hand: you have to feel The Revenant isn't going to be significantly in play. If it couldn't make it into this depleted field...even should it get the glamour nominations, its best picture run will probably be Gravity/Avatar style, missing screenplay.

The original nominees were pretty much the only possibilities, weren't they? I have to say, I love this WGA omissions policy; it makes their nominations the one set that don't more or less predict the AMPAS group.