Unofficial Academy Awards Discussion Board

I think it's important to note that Three Billboards is partly considered a UK film; therefore, the hometown crowd may have been biased towards it for its lineage.

Mister Tee wrote:

The Original BJ wrote: The two films that have done the best by far with the tv precursors are The Shape of Water and Three Billboards. It would seem to me that these are the two strongest candidates overall, but there seems to be a narrative out there that the opposite is true — “everyone” hates Three Billboards, and no one much loves The Shape of Water.

With Three Billboards, I think it goes further. Its vocal opponents seem to feel they've shamed everyone out of liking it. Results like this (and SAG) suggest that, if anything, the sometimes-close-to-vicious attacks are simply getting people's backs up and making them support it more vehemently. This isn't to say I'm confident it'll win best picture -- like BJ, I'll save that debate for a best picture thread. But the "it can't possibly win/it's too widely hated" feels like the product of people talking amongst themselves a bit too much.

Speaking of best picture: it's, weirdly, the single most suspenseful category left standing. This is partly because of the preferential ballot, which, as last year permanently attests, can have funky outcomes. But it's also something that's going to be the case as long as the Guilds don't line up director/screenplay. Here's a wild stat to consider: in the 8 years since The Hurt Locker, the DGA winner has had a match with a WGA winner only once (and that was Argo, which of course had its own Oscar handicap). Now, two of those years, the problem was the DGA winner had its screenplay disqualified by WGA, so stipulate that The King's Speech would have made it 2 of 8 (I think Grand Budapest Hotel would still have had a chance at WGA even with Birdman on board). But The Artist, Gravity, The Revenant, La La Land and (now) The Shape of Water failed to win (or, in some cases, be nominated) at WGA. Given the tendency of director/screenplay winnerrs to win best film, this non-match-up has done much to create the final award suspense of recent years. For which I guess we need to be grateful, if they're going to take the air out of the acting races.

No, Three Billboards isn't dead. In fact, I suspect it will have more first place Oscar votes for Best Picture than other nominee. If it weren't for the damn preferential ballot I'd say it would coast to a win. If they have to go to a third or fourth preference to hit 50% plus one, it could still be another film that wins.

Right now I'd say Shape of Water or the not quite dead Lady Bird or Call Me by Your Name could still pull off a victory as I suppose could Get Out. I really don't see any scenario where Dunkirk, Phantom Thread, Darkest Hour or The Post would win.

The Original BJ wrote: The two films that have done the best by far with the tv precursors are The Shape of Water and Three Billboards. It would seem to me that these are the two strongest candidates overall, but there seems to be a narrative out there that the opposite is true — “everyone” hates Three Billboards, and no one much loves The Shape of Water.

Further proof that the Internet is not reality.

With Three Billboards, I think it goes further. Its vocal opponents seem to feel they've shamed everyone out of liking it. Results like this (and SAG) suggest that, if anything, the sometimes-close-to-vicious attacks are simply getting people's backs up and making them support it more vehemently. This isn't to say I'm confident it'll win best picture -- like BJ, I'll save that debate for a best picture thread. But the "it can't possibly win/it's too widely hated" feels like the product of people talking amongst themselves a bit too much.

As for the rest of this show...

Son of a bitch; they did it. They took what should have been a wonderfully competitive season and gave us, for the first frickin' time, sweeps of BFCA/Globes/SAG/BAFTA in every goddamn acting category. How can they have done this, except deliberately? Minimally, two of the categories (supporting actress, actress) should be close to jump balls. And the craziest part: not one of these four winners won a single one of the holy troika of NY/National/LA -- their dominance sprang fully-formed in this TV round; it's Brie Larson in quadruplicate.

Now, of course, there could be an upset at AMPAS, but, as I've said many times, a surprise, while nice, isn't suspense -- it lasts only a moment, not weeks. And it doesn't make your Oscar party any more fun, because, like best picture last year, everyone will have got it wrong in the pool.

Speaking of best picture: it's, weirdly, the single most suspenseful category left standing. This is partly because of the preferential ballot, which, as last year permanently attests, can have funky outcomes. But it's also something that's going to be the case as long as the Guilds don't line up director/screenplay. Here's a wild stat to consider: in the 8 years since The Hurt Locker, the DGA winner has had a match with a WGA winner only once (and that was Argo, which of course had its own Oscar handicap). Now, two of those years, the problem was the DGA winner had its screenplay disqualified by WGA, so stipulate that The King's Speech would have made it 2 of 8 (I think Grand Budapest Hotel would still have had a chance at WGA even with Birdman on board). But The Artist, Gravity, The Revenant, La La Land and (now) The Shape of Water failed to win (or, in some cases, be nominated) at WGA. Given the tendency of director/screenplay winnerrs to win best film, this non-match-up has done much to create the final award suspense of recent years. For which I guess we need to be grateful, if they're going to take the air out of the acting races.

Like Magilla, I avoided the Internet all day and watched cold on BBC America. Frances McDormand and Guillermon del Toro gave very nice speeches. Timothee Chalamet gracefully helped James Ivory to the stage. del Toro hugged Martin McDonagh when the latter defeated him for best film. Gary Oldman, surprisingly, didn't get a standing ovation.

Biggest surprise in the undercard was Baby Driver beating out Dunkirk for editing. More on that when we have a thread for the category.

The season isn't totally forlorn, but, oh, what a greater contest it could have been without these precursors falling in line.

I hope the Oscars make a dent in one of the major categories -hopefully Dafoe over Rockwell - otherwise it's going to be one hell of a boring ceremony.

Unfortunately it looks like it's going to be a repeat of the Baftas all down the line.

I stayed away in order to watch this on BBC America without knowing what the winners were.

A few minor surprises, but no major ones.

A few observations:

Joanna Lumley made a great host. Selma Hayek made the best presentation saying she was there in this year of the woman to honor the men or something to that effect.

Frances McDormand gave the best acceptance speech by far. It will be interesting if she can top herself at the Oscars.

This is probably a topic for a longer Best Picture thread, but...

The two films that have done the best by far with the tv precursors are The Shape of Water and Three Billboards. It would seem to me that these are the two strongest candidates overall, but there seems to be a narrative out there that the opposite is true — “everyone” hates Three Billboards, and no one much loves The Shape of Water.

Now, I’m not discounting the possibility of something else winning, but I’m surprised by the degree to which many seem convinced one of the other candidates is way ahead. Plenty are arguing Get Out is the frontrunner (including Mark Harris), Kris Tapley has said it’s a race between Get Out and Dunkirk, and Vanity Fair’s Oscar podcast made the case for Dunkirk as the winner this week.

Dunkirk seems a particularly baffling choice to bet on at this point — I know I’ve long doubted the movie’s chances as the likeliest winner, but Nolan isn’t even making any dent with Director prizes (and it couldn’t even win anything beyond Sound here, not even Editing). I’m not sure how a movie is supposed to come from so far behind to win the top Oscar.

Get Out at least has the WGA, which folks are pointing out was basically Moonlight’s haul. (Which isn’t really true — it also had a Best Picture Globe and two major critics’ awards, all of which Get Out lost to Lady Bird this year.) But I think many are still underestimating a big hurdle for this one, namely the fact that I think a certain group of Academy voters will have the reaction my parents had when they caught up with it over the holiday — decent genre movie, but what’s the big deal? (And I wouldn’t consider them particularly square moviegoers either.)

I’m not ruling out the possibility of a win for Get Out, or Lady Bird for that matter (though Dunkirk I REALLY don’t see the case for), but I think it’s worth noting that for that to happen, they’ll have to leapfrog some movies that don’t appear to be losing much steam with the precursors (ie the same things that have convinced everyone the acting races are all locked up.)

After this I think all acting categories are locked up.

Best picture could surprise only because of the preferential voting system.

Well, this didn't exactly unmurk the race, did it?

Best Film: Three Billboards...
Best British Film: Three Billboards...
Best Director: The Shape of Water / Guillermo Del Toro
Best Leading Actor: Darkest Hour / Gary Oldman
Best Leading Actress: Three Billboards... / Frances McDormand
Best Supporting Actor: Three Billboards... / Sam Rockwell
Best Supporting Actress: I, Tonya / Allison Janney
Best Original Screenplay: Three Billboards...
Best Adapted Screenplay: Call Me By Your Name
Best Original Score: The Shape of Water
Best Cinematography: Blade Runner 2049
Best Film Editing: Baby Driver
Best Production Design: The Shape of Water
Best Costume Design: Phantom Thread
Best Makeup & Hairstyle: Darkest Hour
Best Sound: Dunkirk
Best Visual Effects: Blade Runner 2049

I really, really hope that Lesley Manville’s mention here leads to an Oscar nomination. #1 on my wishlist this year by far.

OscarGuy wrote:SPOILERS

He beats up the ad exec...that's a pretty shitty thing to do.

It is, but the one time we see his police brutality in action, it's on a white male with higher socioeconomic status. (He's not an ad exec like Don Draper, but he has a desk job in a rural town.) Not that that makes it OK, but imagine Dixon beating up a poor, black woman. Brutality is brutality, but we would hate him so much more. He's given the 'least worst' target.

An interesting point I read on the Criterion DVD site about the BFTAs Best Picture nominees is that every winner of the Oscar for Best Picture was at least nominated for a BFTA Best Picture Award. The last time an Oscar winning Best Picture missed out on a BFTA Best Picture nomination was in 2004 with Million Dollar Baby.

Of course the voting has changed since then and records, etc, are made to be broken but is the Oscar winning Best Picture in the line-up in this years BFTA lineup of Call Me By Your Name, Darkest Hour, Dunkirk, The Shape of Water or Three Billboards. What effect will this have on Lady Bird & Get Out.

Well the whisper campaign is rapidly turning into a full on backlash against THREE BILLBOARDS OUTSIDE EBBING, MO. Obviously it is too late to sway the Director's Guild, but Oscar voters have until the 13th to pick their nominees. However, if the Academy Director's Branch had no problem nominating a violent bigot like Mel Gibson last year, I doubt they will let this accusation of a much more subtle type of racism dissuade them from supporting Martin McDonagh.

a) His actions vis-a-vis torturing a black male are abstracted. You don't see the victim, he faces no consequences for said actions and it's fodder for jokes.

b) He threw the ad-exec out the window, which is witnessed by a cop (who happens to be black). The cop fires him, but no charges are filed despite him actually witnessing it. Later on in the film, the same black cop tells the protagonist: "Not all cops are bad." The ad exec, after being thrown out a window, fears him initially, but then acts kindly to him.

I adore McDonagh as a playwright and think his gift is practically peerless, but his view of how race and racism circulates in America is very shallow.

White liberal tyranny at its absolute worst. Let’s just say they didn’t “get” the movie in the slightest if that’s what they’re focusing on.

OscarGuy wrote:SPOILERS

He beats up the ad exec...that's a pretty shitty thing to do. Yeah, it takes that interaction and his later hospital stay to make him realize what kind of a monster he is, but I would hardly call his past actions abstract.

They seem to feel the word "torture" is too vague/abstract and want to see the action, have it rubbed in their face, otherwise it might as well not have happened. It's probably a desensitization, but if you're going to paint the white guy as a monster, make it explicit rather than merely implying his past actions.