Big Magilla wrote: The argument that Mahershala Ali is shoehorned into this category because he's black and therefore seen by his film's producers as subservient to his white co-star being campaigned as lead goes away when you are aware that it was Ali himself who started the campaign.
I have two words for you: Internalized oppression
And the fact that these people cynically play the game, prostituting themselves (Ali, Chalamet, Stone and Weisz - they are all included) to gain prestige and awards doesn't make it acceptable. Or at least shouldn't.
I was going to post something about this.
Fox Searchlight, Stone & Weisz should be utterly ashamed of themselves. They are co-leads with Olivia Colman. I can't and will not accept any argument that says otherwise.
Whilst I haven't seen Green Card, I have seen the the loathsome trailer a few weeks ago and from what I have read about the film Ali & Mortensen appear to be co-leads. Would Jessica Tandy in lead and Morgan Freeman in supporting in Driving Miss Daisy have been acceptable - probably in 2018 but certainly not back in 1989.
Whilst I'm on the fence about Chalamet and did find the film disengaging I picked up enough to realise he has as much screen time as Steve Carrell and it is about both their struggles. I would be inclined to include both as lead but can accept Chalamet in a supporting spot begrudgingly.
Its far easier to justify a small role in lead (Anthony Hopkins in Silence of the Lambs being a prime example) than a larger role in supporting.
I think the last time Academy members grew a backbone and went against a studio campaign was for Kate Winslet in The Reader. She was promoted as supporting actress in The Reader and if I'm not mistake so as not so clash with the campaign for a lead role in Revolutionary Road. She ended up with the lead nomination for The Reader and the Oscar itself.
Its really criminal and I'm sick of it. I hope that this year the Academy members will pull out of their sheep herd mentality and nominate these four actors (Stone, Weisz, Ali & Chalament) were they belong and give people like Jonathan Pryce, Nicole Kidman, Russell Crowe & Marina de Tavira a fighting chance for a slot - after all they are real supporting players and that was what the category was created for - not for stars is big roles slumming it.
"I want cement covering every blade of grass in this nation! Don't we taxpayers have a voice anymore?" Peggy Gravel (Mink Stole) in John Waters' Desperate Living (1977)
Big Magilla wrote: The argument that Mahershala Ali is shoehorned into this category because he's black and therefore seen by his film's producers as subservient to his white co-star being campaigned as lead goes away when you are aware that it was Ali himself who started the campaign.
I have two words for you: Internalized oppression
And the fact that these people cynically play the game, prostituting themselves (Ali, Chalamet, Stone and Weisz - they are all included) to gain prestige and awards doesn't make it acceptable. Or at least shouldn't.
Gleiberman has gone nuts. I liked Black Panther. It's a more substantial film than other comic book adaptations, but it's still a comic book adaptation. If there were comic book adaptations once in a blue moon, then maybe the majority of Oscar voters would consider them worthy of their votes but when the marketplace is gutted with their ilk and they're the only kinds of films all but guaranteed to bring in the big bucks, voting one of them a Best Picture award would be tantamount to giving up and throwing in the towel, which is what he's advocating. If it wins it will because more voters liked it than any other film, not because it would be good for the industry.
Best Actor
Ethan Hawke, like Bradley Cooper, has four previous Oscar nominations. Being shut out at the Globes and SAG is problematic, but if he's nominated, he will have a strong level of support from not just actors, but writers who nominated him twice in the past. He could still win. It's also possible that that Cooper and Hawke will cancel each other out and Malek will emerge the winner. It could be the male version of the 1950 Best Actress race with Judy Holliday triumphing over Bette Davis and Gloria Swanson.
Best Actress
Glenn Close will be nominated and she will win. There is no other active performer considered "owed" as much as Close. If she were competing last year against Frances McDormand she wouldn't have stood a chance, but this year with no clear favorite (whichever way you want to spell the word), she is too formidable a force to be denied.
Best Supporting Actor
The argument that Mahershala Ali is shoehorned into this category because he's black and therefore seen by his film's producers as subservient to his white co-star being campaigned as lead goes away when you are aware that it was Ali himself who started the campaign. If he doesn't win, it will either be because they liked Richard E. Grant or someone else better or because other the dirty tricksters have done their joball too well. Who dug up those meddlesome relatives, anyway?
Best Supporting Actress
They've kind of coalesced around Regina King on this one, but if there's an upset, how about Nicole Kidman? She's not someone people really think about giving a second Oscar to, but this year she has a shot at both Best Actress for Destroyer, which is not likely to happen and Supporting Actress for Boy Erased which seems the better bet.
Best Director
Some may vote for Cooper here and not in the other categories for which he will likely be nominated, but if anyone is considered "due" in this race, it's Spike Lee.
In any case, it would be nice to see someone not being highly touted win in at least of the major categories.
But I'm just going to post what he says about Black Panther simply as food for thought:
I’m sorry, but in what universe should this movie not be winning the Oscar for best picture? A universe where Hollywood spends all its time concocting empty-calorie comic-book megahits, then finally makes one that becomes nothing less than a cultural event, stirring audiences all over the globe? Only to decide that no, why on earth would they want to honor a movie like that? All of which is to say that it would be a marvelous moment in American movie culture if “Black Panther” won best picture. Sure, no comic-book film has won before, but that would be part of its glory; this is the comic-book movie that should finally win. (Actually, “The Dark Knight” should have won, but that’s another story.) And personally, I love the idea of the industry bowing down to the popcorn movies that are now its bread and butter — not every year, perhaps, but one year. Just do it. It will feel good. It will send a message that maybe we can still believe in Hollywood if Hollywood is willing, on Oscar night, to believe in itself.
This is where my head is at. I don't think Black Panther is going to win Best Picture, but I really think the cultural impact that it's had this year isn't quite being appreciated on its board. In a world that is increasingly being consumed by identity politics, Black Panther is good with race and it's good with women. Even some of the silliest moments in the film (such as Daniel Kaluuya at the last minute deferring to his wife in a display of coming to his senses) is done in a way to push meaningful buttons.
I've said this before but the movie that wins Best Picture usually does it not for the movie itself but for the memory that imprints in the viewer, the movie that becomes "more than the movie." Black Panther is certainly more than itself at this point.
Mister Tee wrote
On to best actress, which I think can go a multitude of ways. I assume Lady Gaga and Olivia Colman are dead solid certain nominees, and Melissa McCarthy likely to join them. I see Glenn Close’s range of outcomes extending from not being nominated to winning the whole shooting match. And beyond that, I see a long list of possibles filling out the ballot: Toni Collette (who’s done quite well with those local groups), Yalitza Aparicio, Julia Roberts, Nicole Kidman, Saoirse Ronan, even Viola Davis.
I have no idea who the fifth nominee will be. No idea. We'll see who gets the BAFTA nom. It seems with both Golden Globe and SAG noms that Emily Blunt is the likeliest for Mary Poppins Returns but for the life of me I can't see that happening. If I had to pick right now, I'd guess Nicole Kidman simply due to Annapurna strength.
Mister Tee wrote
Supporting actor seems to have narrowed down to a fairly small group, with only two men seeming certain to make the cut: Richard E. Grant and the category-fraudulent Mahershala Ali. The remainder of the slate should consist of some combination from Adam Driver, Sam Elliott, Timothee Chalamet, Michael B. Jordan, Sam Rockwell, and long-shots Hugh Grant and Steven Yeun. I maintain my doubts about Grant’s winning, based on his film’s low gross – but 1) Ali has an equal handicap in having won so recently and 2) so many hopefuls this year have fallen short commercially that maybe voters will be less influenced by that than usual. Or maybe the category will remain more open than in recent contests.
If Waltz can do it, so can Ali.
Mister Tee wrote
Based on critics’ awards, supporting actress would appear to be a slam-dunk for Regina King, except for two things: the film is a bit wobbly commercially (though see above, re: Grant) and, more significantly, she was omitted by SAG. It may turn out the latter is a fluke – akin to Aaron Taylor-Johnson winning the Globe – and King waltzes to a win. But SAG has been pretty much a blue-chip predictor, so, in case she doesn’t…the two “we’re leads but pretending to be supporting” ladies from The Favourite, Stone and Weisz, seem sure nominees. After that: is it one of Amy Adams’ lucky years or not? Has Claire Foy been utterly forgotten, or will she be cited? Could Elizabeth Debicki or Margot Robbie capitalize on sporadic attention? Might Nicole Kidman’s Destroyer supporters concentrate their attention on her Boy Erased performance despite that film practically disappearing?
I am looking to the BAFTAs for guidance on this one because I have NO idea what to make of this race. It's primed for a giant upset. Of those that "we know":
* Regina King: I haven't seen If Beale Street Could Talk but all of my friends say that she is fine and also extremely subtle in this quiet role. Her SAG omission is baffling. Your citation of Aaron Taylor Johnson seems to indicate the opposite. He was up for a Globe but missed a SAG nom and failed to get nominated. But it's impossible to get a read on this one.
* Amy Adams: I'd be much more bullish on her chances had I not seen the film twice. To put it simply, she doesn't really have much to do in this film but more than this she doesn't have a terribly sympathetic arc. Is the Academy going to really honor a person who is essentially Cheney's Cheney regardless of how many nominations she's had (and this is for my money her least impressive).
* Emma Stone & Rachel Weisz: are we not quite paying attention to these women enough? Are we so confident that the Hollywood Foreign Press won't honor one of these two schemers? The only question is if so... who? I'd imagine Emma Stone but so soon after her last win? If either one of them hadn't won previously, wouldn't we be dead certain on them winning this year?
* Margot Robbie: she's in the club. But has anybody seen this damn thing? If it was any good, wouldn't it be Oscar timber, especially this year? It sure looks like The Favourite took all the air out of the room that this film needed to breathe.
* Elizabeth Debicki: this races Marisa Tomei. Speaking of Oscar timber, is there anything this film couldn't beat this year if it was half as good as it should have been? I know a few defenders but the world moved on. Debicki is different though. Her character might linger on in memory. She's the only character with a full arc. She's the funny, sexy heart in this largely joyless affair. I know I'm crossing my fingers for her.
Mister Tee wrote: This has turned out, in my view, a truly sub-par year, with no film fully satisfying me, and it’s honestly difficult for me to imagine any film out there taking either best film or best director.
I seem to be the opposite of many--I think it's been a great year. I've already seen four or five movies that I would rank higher than anything from 2017.
You have an interesting point about Cooper crapping out with the smaller critics groups; I feel like this year many of those groups have been trying to do what they can to keep Hawke's name out there and hopefully get him on the Oscar list--especially the groups that voted after the SAG/Globe snubs. I liked First Reformed a lot, and liked Hawke in it, but I never would've dreamed that he would've been such a huge critical favorite--to me it's just not reflective of a year that also saw great leading performances from, among others, Lucas Hedges (Ben is Back), Ryan Gosling, Charlie Plummer, Clint Eastwood, Ben Foster, and yes, Bradley Cooper.
Also, Ready Player One is actually scored by the much less Oscar-favored Alan Silvestri. (I think Williams backed out when Spielberg decided to push The Post out in time for the Oscars last year.) Silvestri is also shortlisted for the Avengers film too. Looking at the lineups, they've nominated action/sci-fi blockbusters (or would-be blockbusters) quite a bit over the past few years, so I wouldn't be shocked to see one of those show up.
I read with interest the various thoughts expressed in the Bohemian Rhapsody thread, occasioned by flipp’s notion of Rami Malek being a chief competitor in the lead actor category. I thought of just adding my two cents, but found that I couldn’t discuss best actor without at least semi-considering best director, which led me to best picture…and, finally, I decided maybe it was time to start a general-interest-race-overview thread. This thread will of course become instantly obsolete once the Globes and Broadcasters pick winners, but it’s worth getting a sense of where we stand right now.
I’ll start with best actor, since that’s what everyone was talking about. Let me say at the top that, forced to bet, I’d of course say Bradley Cooper, like most are. But something troubles me about him: so far, he’s just not winning anything. You know all those obscure-and-obscurer local groups I’m always grousing about? Individually, I view them as meaningless. But collectively, they offer insight into the hive mind. In recent years, they’ve often given solace/jump-start to campaigns for actors viewed as popular choices but passed over by the meaningful critics. Gary Oldman was shut out by the top-tier critics, but won about 10 of those local prizes. Leonardo DiCaprio and Brie Larson did even better – sweeping through these no-name groups, setting up their eventual runs through Globes/Broadcasters/SAG/BAFTA.
You know how many of those groups have awarded Bradley Cooper this year? One: the DC group. A fair number of the places that offer nominations didn’t even give Cooper a top five slot. Which raises a question, Is Cooper a bit like Green Book: a supposed popular choice who’s just not all that popular? I’m not at all saying Cooper can’t revive, amp-ing up his campaign by winning over the TV groups. That’s entirely possible; as I said, I’m still betting that way. But if he does, he’ll be more in the company of Sandra Bullock than Oldman or DiCaprio.
Or one other: Eddie Redmayne. Redmayne did very poorly with those groups -- winning only the NY Online prize -– before sweeping through the Globes, SAG and BAFTA. (Michael Keaton, it’s almost forgotten, had rampaged through the local groups, and even won the Broadcasters’ prize.) But Redmayne of course had that special thing Oscar voters have loved this millennium: playing a real person and doing a precise impersonation. (As well as displaying a handicap.) The candidate with that quality this year is certainly not Cooper; it’s Bale or Malek.
I’m prepared to argue Italiano’s premise that Bale could never win a second Oscar before Bradley Cooper won his first. I’m not saying such thoughts wouldn’t figure into some voters’ minds. But I think the fact that Bale would be on his third nomination since his win, and that his win was for supporting but this would be his first lead win, might mitigate that gap somewhat. Especially since I seem to hear far louder appreciation for Bale’s work as a feat of acting than I do about Cooper’s. Bale’s problem is more the fact his film is very divisive, which could turn it into a commercial bummer. So far, the film is not a financial disaster – it’s likely to score $20 million or so before this elongated weekend is over – but a lack of long-term staying power might kill its awards prospects.
But, as flipp notes, Malek doesn’t have that going against him: Bohemian is an utterly unexpected smash. And Malek too has the “changing my appearance to resemble an icon” thing going for him.
None of which may, in the end, prevail over Cooper’s three previous nominations/multi-category talent/unexpected $200 million hit narrative. But I think there’s room for at least a hint of doubt at this moment.
(I omit Ethan Hawke from this discussion because I assume the double-whammy exclusions from the Globes and SAG will be fatal. But it should be noted he’s absolutely dominated those local groups – winning near 20 prizes. So, maybe he’ll be a factor in the end.)
Second thing to discuss, partly as offshoot: best director. I think it’s EXTREMELY unlikely Cooper could win best director. The actor-wins-as-fledgling-director thing was the product of another era; we’re in a far more auteurist time for this category. I’d be less surprised to see Cooper Affleck-ed out of a nomination than I would be to see him win.
That said: I’m not sold on Cuaron having this in the bag. Have those of you who are so certain actually seen the film? I watched it again on Netflix, and I retain my mixed feelings about it: awestruck at some of its moments, but thinking its overall narrative spine is far more diffuse than any movie I’ve ever seen win best picture or best director. I again cite Boyhood, which at this point seemed on its way to winning one or both of those prizes despite its not conforming to usual historical standards. Voters eventually found another way to go, and I harbor a deep fear the same will happen here.
Not that I have any idea who could logically replace Cuaron in the winner’s spot. This has turned out, in my view, a truly sub-par year, with no film fully satisfying me, and it’s honestly difficult for me to imagine any film out there taking either best film or best director. Obviously, SOMETHING has to win, but whatever it is will be breaking through one barrier or another. Which in a way makes me glad: if it can’t be a good year, it might as well be an interesting one. I’m thinking there’s a good chance we’re in doubt about our best picture winner right up to the opening of the last envelope.
(In fact, assume Cuaron does, thanks to massive critical acclaim, take best director. I could imagine BlackkKlansman and The Favourite winning the screenplay awards. What would you then bet on for best picture? If you say A Star is Born – which is entirely possible – can you find me another year where those four awards split four separate ways?)
Anyway, as we discussed elsewhere: Cuaron and Cooper seem the most likely directing nominees. Spike Lee seems a solid bet to finally break through for a nod. Beyond that, we’ll have some combination of (in roughly my order of likelihood) Yorgos Lanthimos, Barry Jenkins, Adam McKay, Debra Granik, Paul Schrader. I’m not seeing Ryan Coogler or Peter Farrelly, but you can’t rule them out. And I guess Damien Chazelle has the faintest pulse.
On to best actress, which I think can go a multitude of ways. I assume Lady Gaga and Olivia Colman are dead solid certain nominees, and Melissa McCarthy likely to join them. I see Glenn Close’s range of outcomes extending from not being nominated to winning the whole shooting match. And beyond that, I see a long list of possibles filling out the ballot: Toni Collette (who’s done quite well with those local groups), Yalitza Aparicio, Julia Roberts, Nicole Kidman, Saoirse Ronan, even Viola Davis.
Supporting actor seems to have narrowed down to a fairly small group, with only two men seeming certain to make the cut: Richard E. Grant and the category-fraudulent Mahershala Ali. The remainder of the slate should consist of some combination from Adam Driver, Sam Elliott, Timothee Chalamet, Michael B. Jordan, Sam Rockwell, and long-shots Hugh Grant and Steven Yeun. I maintain my doubts about Grant’s winning, based on his film’s low gross – but 1) Ali has an equal handicap in having won so recently and 2) so many hopefuls this year have fallen short commercially that maybe voters will be less influenced by that than usual. Or maybe the category will remain more open than in recent contests.
Based on critics’ awards, supporting actress would appear to be a slam-dunk for Regina King, except for two things: the film is a bit wobbly commercially (though see above, re: Grant) and, more significantly, she was omitted by SAG. It may turn out the latter is a fluke – akin to Aaron Taylor-Johnson winning the Globe – and King waltzes to a win. But SAG has been pretty much a blue-chip predictor, so, in case she doesn’t…the two “we’re leads but pretending to be supporting” ladies from The Favourite, Stone and Weisz, seem sure nominees. After that: is it one of Amy Adams’ lucky years or not? Has Claire Foy been utterly forgotten, or will she be cited? Could Elizabeth Debicki or Margot Robbie capitalize on sporadic attention? Might Nicole Kidman’s Destroyer supporters concentrate their attention on her Boy Erased performance despite that film practically disappearing?
The screenplay categories break out a bit more evenly than they did last year, opening the possibility for a pleasing mix of best picture contenders and interesting fringe choices. In adapted, I think BlackkKlansman, Beale Street and Can You Ever Forgive Me? are can’t-miss (the writers have never been sensitive to the box-office argument). If A Star is Born is big enough, it should make it in, but I think there’s at least a chance it’s omitted. After that, you could see something large-scale, like First Man or Widows, or a smaller effort, like The Death of Stalin or Leave No Trace.
Under original, The Favourite is the only one I’d bet the rent money on. Roma is also very likely, given the branch’s long-time affection for subtitles, and the overall praise for the film. I’d like to think Green Book could miss – such cornball stuff has, in the past -- but the recent nomination for Hidden Figures suggests it’ll make the cut. After that, a ton of possibilities: Vice, Isle of Dogs, First Reformed, Eighth Grade, Sorry to Bother You, and, I keep hearing, A Quiet Place, though that last one is hard for me to imagine.
Below the line:
In cinematography, Roma has utterly vanquished the critics’ groups both major and minor, but the question remains, will this clannish branch even nominate a non-certified cinematographer? (If you showed them the same movie with Lubezki’s name on it, the race would be over.) Of course, it’s hard to guess what they’d award otherwise – First Man? A Star is Born? The Favourite? I’m thinking all of those, along with Cold War, are solid contenders for nomination.
Costume design would seem to be an interesting face-off between The Favourite and Black Panther (my bet would be the former), with such typical efforts as Mary Queen of Scots, Colette and Mary Poppins Returns filling out the ballot. Much the same in production design, with maybe Panther winning out this time.
I’ll be interested to see how editing shakes out, as there’s no best picture hopeful that really seems to fit the criteria. A number of those local groups do an editing category, and it’s fascinating how they’ve broken down this year: Roma won a few, but the rest have been all over the place: First Man, Minding the Gap, The Other Side of the Wind, Mission Impossible: Fallout, Vice and If Beale Street Could Talk. Which seems to add up to Who knows?
Best score, already whittled down to 15 by the short-list, would seem to be mostly among First Man, Black Panther and If Beale Street Could Talk, though I suppose Mary Poppins Returns could slip in there, and perennial nominees Desplat and Williams have to be considered for Isle of Dogs and Ready Player One. And could Terence Blanchard finally be rewarded for his long partnership with Spike Lee?
Best song is of course Shallow – the one sure-shot of the night, from this distance.
The Spider-verse cartoon seems to have the edge in the discerning critics’ judgment, though it’s worth noting Isle of Dogs has won a large share of the local groups. Incredibles 2 and Ralph Wrecks the Internet will likely be along for the ride, though I think with little chance of winning.
Is Black Panther going to win visual effects simply by virtue of the film’s prominence? Otherwise, it seems like a wide-open category.
Make-up is the usual mess. Vice would seem to be the obvious choice (by the Iron Lady/Darkest Hour precedent), but this is another one Black Panther might snatch. (Honestly, I’m wildly split on Black Panther – I could see it getting close to double-digits, or closer to 2-3.)
Won’t You Be My Neighbor? was a widely popular choice among those local critics, as well as the highest grosser of the year’s docs. But I’m hopeful we could see a decent competition give there were so many financially prominent films this year.
I know many races in the recent past have seemed promisingly unsettled, only to go predictable once the TV groups stepped in. But for this moment, at least, it feels like we might have a more diverting contest than usual.
