Unofficial Academy Awards Discussion Board

Well, we know what Jennifer Lawrence won't be voting for:

http://www.news.com.au/entertainment/mo ... 603c0e54d1

Clearly she has a very limited attention span.

Fascinating. It seems to imply that while more diverse, the numbers are not there to make huge differences.

anonymous1980 wrote:Ah. This is not exactly a "Brutally Honest" ballot article but this is an article about the new Academy members. They polled 14 new members of the Academy to see how they voted this year and how it's changing the landscape. Pretty interesting stuff.

Ah. This is not exactly a "Brutally Honest" ballot article but this is an article about the new Academy members. They polled 14 new members of the Academy to see how they voted this year and how it's changing the landscape. Pretty interesting stuff.

Big Magilla wrote:

ITALIANO wrote:

anonymous1980 wrote:A ballot from someone in the Executive branch of the Academy.

This one especially should quit cocaine soon.

She was definitely high on something. It could have just been that she was delighted to be given the opportunity to pat herself on the back.

Trust me, Big Magilla: cocaine. And not the best kind.

anonymous1980 wrote:Here's another one.

It's a publicist this time. This person seems to be a bit more in line with my taste, I think, more so than all the others so far at least.

This one's been the most logical so far, even if I don't agree with all his or her choices.

ITALIANO wrote:

anonymous1980 wrote:A ballot from someone in the Executive branch of the Academy.

This one especially should quit cocaine soon.

She was definitely high on something. It could have just been that she was delighted to be given the opportunity to pat herself on the back.

It is clear that a lot of the Academy members are still confused by the prefrential ballot system.

And like always a lot of them vote for friends or if they feel someone is overdue.

anonymous1980 wrote:A ballot from someone in the Executive branch of the Academy.

This one especially should quit cocaine soon.

Here's another one.

It's a publicist this time. This person seems to be a bit more in line with my taste, I think, more so than all the others so far at least.

Mister Tee wrote:

anonymous1980 wrote:Another one.

This one isn't as infuriating as the others. They didn't say who this person was but I suspect it's an editor since he (or she) said a lot about it.

Well, that and the fact that the headline literally says "Editor thinks..."

And nothing else other than Picture and Score.

Actually I found this the most infuriating of the three.

I am so sick of this over-glorification of Get Out, a perfectly fine Grade B movie and something I've probably recommended to more people than other film last year, but deserving of a Best Picture Oscar? No. A nomination, OK, considering there are more than five slots, but not a win.

And I didn't like the score for Dunkirk at all. Too loud and intrusive, screaming "listed to me!" over and over.

anonymous1980 wrote:Another one.

This one isn't as infuriating as the others. They didn't say who this person was but I suspect it's an editor since he (or she) said a lot about it.

Well, that and the fact that the headline literally says "Editor thinks..."

Another one.

This one isn't as infuriating as the others. They didn't say who this person was but I suspect it's an editor since he (or she) said a lot about it.

I wasn't talking about the costume designer, I thought that was a woman. I was referring to the Daily Beast writer.

The Original BJ wrote:Someone sat through Darkest Hour FIVE TIMES?!

I couldn’t really believe that, honestly. I mean, like, really?

These voters seemed to be enthralled by Mudbound. I feel like I saw a totally different movie than the IndieWite girl (I felt like that was clearly a woman actually, Wes). Can you imagine staying that Mudbound had more timely relevance than Get Out?