This must have been the first time in my life that I watched the whole Globes show live - rather than just the beginning and then the rest the following day (it starts at 2 am in Italy, and all those tv prizes don't mean anything to me). But this year it all seems so unpredictable - and the Winslet win confirmed this - so I stayed up. I wasn't disappointed - it WAS unpredictable and, in some ways, it still is. (Though of course this doesn't mean that it will stay unpredictable till Oscar night).
What do we know for sure? Ok, Leonardo Di Caprio will finally get his Oscar. He had already won twice here, and obviously it's not like they didn't like Steve Jobs, still they picked him over Fassbender. The Di Caprio-must-get-an-Oscar narrative started on the net, but now it has trascended it and it has become real, tangible. So real and so tangible that other awards may come to him from other groups only because they don't want to miss what will be known in the future as Leonardo Di Caprio's Oscar winning role. Sad, I know - but this is the way it works, and the only positive aspect in all this story is that it doesn't seem that his win will mean the defeat of a truly great performance (except maybe Fassbender's - I haven't seen his movie - but he will of course have other opportunities soon).
Brie Larson - this was the first time I saw her - is young, pretty, AMERICAN, not untalented from what I read on this board, and even plays a mother. It's not as solid as Di Caprio's maybe - but the Oscar seems to be hers.
Beyond this, it's still difficult to say. Those who have seen Bridge of Spies know two things: Mark Rylance is good in it, but it's not the kind of role which makes one 100% sure that he will win Best Supporting Actor: not showy enough - though he certainly has one or two "Oscar-clip" scenes; not dominant enough in the second half of his movie, etc. It's also true, of course, that he's not the typical Golden-Globe-winner kind of actor, and IF (we still can't be sure) Sylvester Stallone is Oscar-nominated, it's very possible that by the standards of the Academy a nomination for him is enough. In Rylance's case the BAFTA and I'd say especially the SAG can tell us more about his chances, though even if he wins both the possibility of a surprise can't be ignorred.
Best Supporting Actress is even more chaotic, for reasons that we know well. It will become slightly clearer in two days - but the way this race is evolving is so unique that I'm not sure that by January, 28th I'd bet my house on anyone. Alicia Vikander - especially if she's nominated twice - would still be the favorite, but only because the Academy has (almost always, not always) tended to give one award to actors who have got two nods in the same year. Still... I haven't seen The Danish Girl, but it's obvious that it's not a movie anyone seems to love. And I HAVE seen Ex-Machina, which is a nice little effort but not the kind of movie - and hers performance in it not the kind of performance - that one outright associates with the Oscars. Definitely not. It can happen, don't get me wrong, but even if she wins all the awards in the world (and I guess that she will get at least one between the SAG and the BAFTA), a Marcia-Gay-Harden-kind of outcome can always happen. Not Kate Winslet, I know that she won't repeat at the Oscars, but who knows... Carol may be hated, but it could win something, couldn't it? (Though I know that there are problems there too). Anyway, in this case it really depends on the nominees - and where they are placed, and for which movie. The day after tomorrow we'll understand more.
For Best Picture and Best Director, my big problem is that I haven't seen most of the possible nominees yet - including the once-favorite, but now not so strong anymore, Spotlight. I know one thing though. On paper - I haven't seen it - The Revenant looks like a possible Best Picture winner, let's face it. Considered from here, it sounds epic, full of gorgeous images, with a heroic (and, I guess, uplifting) story of survival at its centre, plus it will get Best Actor and maybe something else, etc. There are two reasons why I can imagine that it won't win - it's directed by the same man who made last year's Best Picture (and this is important, but maybe not crucial) and, let me say it, most on this board don't like it. I wonder - I try not to read reviews till I see a movie - if this board's reaction to The Revenant mirrors a more general one, or it's just us. Next week it opens in Italy so I will see for myself.
Because otherwise, even in an era where Gravity wins seven Oscars and Mad Max Fury Road is considered by some to be a masterpiece, The Martian - pleasant to watch as it is - seems really a bit too "light" to get Best Picture. Yet, it's not like even lighter, and certainly more commercial, movies haven't got it in the past. Plus, Ridley Scott IS - deservedly or not, you judge - the kind of director who, according to many (and, I'm sure, many in the Academy too), SHOULD have an Oscar. This, of course, could mean that a Picture/Director split - like so often in recent years - could happen again (and in this case Picture could go to Spotlight or The Revenant or anything else) - but also that it's The Martian's year. Anyway, it's certainly too soon to say.