Interim Thoughts on the Races

For the films of 2018
Sabin
Laureate Emeritus
Posts: 10747
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 12:52 am
Contact:

Re: Interim Thoughts on the Races

Post by Sabin »

Mister Tee wrote
3) OK, gloves off: I don't know what the fuck Gleiberman is talking about when he inflates Black Panther this way. ... [It] seems to me the push for this movie to be even nominated for best picture, let alone win, is an alliance between those who've grown up on comic book blockbusters (and other purely commercial efforts) and want to see their childhood enthusiasms be given esthetic validation, and those for whom taking the right side on important liberal subject matter is the most important element in evaluating art. (The latter, long ago, gave us major Oscar attention for Guess Who's Coming to Dinner?, and my hot take is that elevating Black Panther will look much the same generations hence.) I'm guessing this is an ascendant coalition -- it's managing to label lots of what used to be thought of as grown-up movies "Oscar bait", and has even major critics' groups giving awards to horror movies and dopey comedies. But I don't think it's where Academy members are today. (Ten years from now, it might be another matter.)
I've been trying to concoct a different response for a minute...

Yes, this represents two ascendant coalitions between nerd culture (which went unimaginably mainstream this past year as judging from the box office) and diversity, not just in depiction but in voice. Black Panther may not be judged as much better than Guess Who's Coming to Dinner? in decades to come but it will also be a blockbuster about people of color by people of color. This can be a really good thing. I'll steal a line from Mike D'Angelo in his positive review says, "Myth-making should mean something, and Black Panther, unlike most of its predecessors in this franchise, dares to dream big, granting unimaginable power not to a single dweeby individual but to an entire people." That's cool.

This means that Black Panther can be both a very meaningful film and also not that great. I have no idea if the Academy is "there" today. In 2015, they gave Mad Max: Fury Road ten nominations and six wins. In 2016, Moonlight beat cinephile love letter La La Land. And last year, The Shape of Water may not have been as holy an alliance between diversity and nerd culture as Get Out but it still managed to beat Three Billboards Outside Ebbing Missouri. So, it's doing something.

I don't know if there's a true culture war at the Oscars but I hope so. The reason why most people don't watch the Oscars is pretty simple. It's not that the movies that win aren't good. It's that in my life, they've usually (USUALLY) only been truly meaningful to one group of people. A different coalition. The Weinstein Coalition of Boomers and Olds and Boomers Becoming Olds. There are blips here and there but let's be honest. It's usually because there's no real viable alternative. Because the Oscars are a living history, a win for Black Panther would give historians something to write about. I'll take that over almost every dispiriting, not-much-better-or-worse winner of my lifetime.
"How's the despair?"
dws1982
Emeritus
Posts: 3790
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 9:28 pm
Location: AL
Contact:

Re: Interim Thoughts on the Races

Post by dws1982 »

anonymous1980 wrote:
Mister Tee wrote: A Quiet Place got good notices and made money, but it's a monster movie -- not a revisionist, Douglas Sirk-influenced monster movie like The Shape of Water; a standard monster movie like Cloverfield. Since when have Academy voters been interested in anything like that?
At least one performance of that same vein has been nominated: Sigourney Weaver in Aliens. So it's not that unprecedented.
1 or 2 cases (out of 400+ nominated performances) over a 90-year period is an extreme outlier, not indicative of any kind of pattern.
flipp525
Laureate
Posts: 6163
Joined: Thu Jan 09, 2003 7:44 am

Re: Interim Thoughts on the Races

Post by flipp525 »

Just for fun, here are Karl Rove’s Oscar predictions in the Wall Street Journal for winners:

Best Picture: A Star Is Born
Best Actress: Lady Gaga
Best Actor: Bradley Cooper or Clint Eastwood
Best Director: Bradley Cooper or Clint Eastwood
"The mantle of spinsterhood was definitely in her shoulders. She was twenty five and looked it."

-Gone With the Wind by Margaret Mitchell
anonymous1980
Laureate
Posts: 6377
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 10:03 pm
Location: Manila
Contact:

Re: Interim Thoughts on the Races

Post by anonymous1980 »

Mister Tee wrote: A Quiet Place got good notices and made money, but it's a monster movie -- not a revisionist, Douglas Sirk-influenced monster movie like The Shape of Water; a standard monster movie like Cloverfield. Since when have Academy voters been interested in anything like that?
At least one performance of that same vein has been nominated: Sigourney Weaver in Aliens. So it's not that unprecedented. It's a similar role too. Both are women trying to protect children from a Big Bad Monster.
User avatar
Precious Doll
Emeritus
Posts: 4453
Joined: Mon Jan 13, 2003 2:20 am
Location: Sydney
Contact:

Re: Interim Thoughts on the Races

Post by Precious Doll »

Mister Tee wrote: By the way, Precious Doll, I don't think you can say Olivia Colman has failed to win critics' prizes -- she's won a narrow plurality of the various groups, with LA as a flagship victory...and that's with some of the groups undecided whether she belongs in lead or support.
I meant she hadn't steamrolled them like Helen Mirren. I think Colman needed to win just about everything to be a player for the win and sadly thats not happening.
"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)
Mister Tee
Tenured Laureate
Posts: 8637
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 2:57 pm
Location: NYC
Contact:

Re: Interim Thoughts on the Races

Post by Mister Tee »

Sabin wrote:At the end of the day, giving Best Picture to Black Panther is more meaningful than giving one to The Artist.
I didn't realize it was possible to set the bar that low.

I isolate that quote only because it allows for a cheap joke. But I'm here to respond to the dozens of posts that have turned up while I was off doing my meager New Year celebration. Please pardon the scattershot quality.

1) To answer the earliest comment: I kind of forgot about Emily Blunt; I guess the SAG/Globe nominations should have made me at least reference her. But, even as a long-time fan of the lady, I can't fathom why she'd be much in the conversation. A Quiet Place got good notices and made money, but it's a monster movie -- not a revisionist, Douglas Sirk-influenced monster movie like The Shape of Water; a standard monster movie like Cloverfield. Since when have Academy voters been interested in anything like that? As for Mary Poppins Returns, it's a crushing 65 on Metacritic -- perilously close to a bomb -- and, while it's done well with nostalgic family audiences over the holiday, it's not the overwhelming blockbuster bloggers were anticipating (Aquaman has unexpectedly grabbed that slot). The argument for Blunt seems to be she's been around a while and never nominated, she's got two commercially solid entries, and, I suppose, she's playing a role that won a Oscar 50-odd years ago (though nothing today matches the context in which Andrews won that prize). Never say never, especially in a weird year, but I just don't see why she's in the discussion, except for the fact bloggers have put her there.

2) Offshoot: I don't see any justification for calling Lady Gaga a "clear favorite". Clear competitor, fine. But the category is too muddled to declare anyone a favorite. And, though she's attached to the clearly most popular vehicle, she also has what I'd view as the biggest handicap of any best actress contender: a lot of people will question how seriously they should take her as an actress. Part of this is simply because she comes from another entertainment arena, but beyond that, I think many will have a "she pulled that off, but who knows if she can do anything else?" attitude. Such candidates have found it difficult to win Oscars, especially on a first try (it took Cher a second nomination and three major movie roles in the year she won). I think at least Olivia Colman and Glenn Close have as good a shot as she, and I might throw Melissa McCarthy in there, as well.

By the way, Precious Doll, I don't think you can say Olivia Colman has failed to win critics' prizes -- she's won a narrow plurality of the various groups, with LA as a flagship victory...and that's with some of the groups undecided whether she belongs in lead or support.

3) OK, gloves off: I don't know what the fuck Gleiberman is talking about when he inflates Black Panther this way. Honestly, I think critics and bloggers have gone a bit en masse bonkers over this movie. When the same group hit the campaign trail for Mad Max: Fury Road, I thought they were delusional: looking at a modern-day version of Speed and claiming to see Wages of Fear. But I truly don't know what possesses them to oversell Black Panther like this. It's not any kind of narrative breakthrough -- it's barely different from a dozen other Marvel movies (honestly, not as much fun as some). The only distinction it has is the grafting on of a certain amount of 20th century black experience as background. But this no more makes it a racially significant film than having women commandeer the vehicles made Mad Max a feminist one. It's just using the culture as a MacGuffin, in an otherwise trivial plot. (The Dark Knight had far greater claim to genuine artistic achievement.) It's great that Black Panther is a major hit, for the cultural doors it opens -- just as the success of Crazy Rich Asians is, for hopefully better films to come. But it seems to me the push for this movie to be even nominated for best picture, let alone win, is an alliance between those who've grown up on comic book blockbusters (and other purely commercial efforts) and want to see their childhood enthusiasms be given esthetic validation, and those for whom taking the right side on important liberal subject matter is the most important element in evaluating art. (The latter, long ago, gave us major Oscar attention for Guess Who's Coming to Dinner?, and my hot take is that elevating Black Panther will look much the same generations hence.) I'm guessing this is an ascendant coalition -- it's managing to label lots of what used to be thought of as grown-up movies "Oscar bait", and has even major critics' groups giving awards to horror movies and dopey comedies. But I don't think it's where Academy members are today. (Ten years from now, it might be another matter.)

4) The reason such (to me lunatic) scenarios are being bandied about is, this is a year without much critical/audience consensus. dws, I'm happy for you that you're enjoying what you're seeing at theatres, but I don't see that as a widely-held view. Check the Metacritic scores for all this year's major efforts. Roma is the easy leader, with a 96, and, while Cuaron's Hollywood status makes Roma a sort of honorary English-language movie, the fact is, for most Americans, it's a subtitled effort and thus in a special class. Shoplifters, Cold War and Burning also rate 90 and above -- an exceptional showing for overseas efforts, and the reason for the unusual familiarity of this year's shortlist. English-language efforts can only wish they had such broad popularity. Most of the films of which critics have approved have failed to get even respectable audiences -- here are some titles with Metacritic score/million dollar gross: The Rider 92/$2.4; Eighth Grade 90/$13.5; Leave No Trace 88/$6.0; Can You Ever Forgive me? 87/$7.5; First Reformed 85/$3.5. Compare this to last year, when Dunkirk/Lady Bird/Phantom Thread/Call Me by Your Name/Three Billboards/Shape of Water all had high-80s/90s ratings, plus substantially higher grosses, making for a strong best picture race. This gap -- plus the fact that decently-reviewed films like First Man and Widows (both 84 on Metacritic) have been viewed as box-office failures -- has opened the door for efforts like Black Panther and A Star is Born (a comic book movie and a third remake) to punch above their weight in awards terms, for something like BlackkKlansman (83/$48) to become a sure thing, and for sub-par efforts like Green Book or Mary Poppins Returns to enter the discussion.

(The jury's still out on The Favourite and If Beale Street Could Talk, but both do well on Metacritic (90 and 87, respectively) and may eventually enter the same critical/commercial realm as last year's broader successes.)

5) dws, thanks for pointing out my Silvestri mistake for me. As you might guess, I just took for granted it was Williams, especially once it turned up on the short-list. Looking at IMDB, I see that Williams was responsible for the Jurassic World movie this year (whatever it was called), but not short-listed. I can't recall the last time he had a credit and didn't make the music branch's list.
ITALIANO
Emeritus
Posts: 4076
Joined: Mon Jan 06, 2003 1:58 pm
Location: MILAN

Re: Interim Thoughts on the Races

Post by ITALIANO »

Precious Doll wrote:
Can't help but ponder what would have happened if Italy submitted Happy as Lazzaro, widely regarded as superior to more accessible Dogman,

Same here. As you say we'll never know, but Happy as Lazzaro - while probably less immediately accessible than Dogman - is a movie with a strong identity, a bitter fairy tale, certainly not just "any movie", and American critics seem to have liked it. I feel that at least the committee would have included it in the December shortlist. And then of course in such a competitive year for this category, a nomination would have been less easy.

Anyone who has seen Capernaum - like it or not, and I didn't hate it as much as you did - knows that it has a strong chance to be nominated (in any other year, I would say even at this point that it could even easily WIN, but obviously not thus year). Unfortunately Roma will also be nominated - and win. I havent seen Shoplifters (but I'd also say it will be nominated) and Birds of Passage yet.

I have seen The Guilty, and... I don't know. It's true that it's very Hollywood-friendly, but that doesn't always help here (just think of 2011's French entry The Intouchables, or, even more, 2007's Serbian entry The Trap). Again, in any other year it would surely get a nomination, this year it's I'd say between it and Cold War (Burning, I agree, will probably stop here).
User avatar
Precious Doll
Emeritus
Posts: 4453
Joined: Mon Jan 13, 2003 2:20 am
Location: Sydney
Contact:

Re: Interim Thoughts on the Races

Post by Precious Doll »

Okri wrote: J. I want to talk about foreign language film for a minute. What usually happens (imo) is that the committee omits far more of the “acclaimed” films from their six, so they have to be shoehorned in the longlist. But it doesn’t feel like that happened this year. Dogman was probably the most high-profile eligible film that missed on a nomination. All the bigger Cannes films – Cold War, Capaernum, Burning, Shoplifters – made it. The Guilty and Never Look Away have been strongly festivaled and I could easily imagine them nominees in solid line-up. I almost want to predict Roma being snubbed to see how I feel about it, at this point.
Because the Academy has shortlisted so many high profile titles this year its going to be interesting to see what misses out. I suspect Cold War - just a gut feeling but if there is one title I don't want to read on the nominees list later this month is Capaernum but I think it will make it because 1) general audiences love it 2) I believe director Nadine Labaki in currently in LA 'promoting' herself and her wretched film to Academy selectors 3) it has Sony behind it. Sony have invested into the film - having trimmed it since its screening at Cannes.

Sony also have Never Look Away but I suspect their primary efforts will go into Capaernum.

I'd say without a doubt that the three films that got into the shortlist via the committee were Ayka (winner Best Actress at Cannes), Birds of Passage (Opening Night Film for the Director's Fortnight Cannes) & Burning. The other 6 films (though I haven't seen Never Look Away) are far more audience friendly and I suspect selectors were conscience that they needed to include Roma, Shoplifters & Cold War.

My predictions:

Birds of Passage
Capaeurnum
The Guilty
Roma
Shoplifters

Spoiler Never Look Away over The Guilty (which is a near as to a Hollywood film one can get to with this lineup).

I've maintained since June that Burning won't be nominated and I'll stick to that notion but a nomination would be the most pleasant of surprises.

Can't help but ponder what would have happened if France submitted Custody & Italy submitted Happy as Lazzaro, widely regarded as superior to more accessible Dogman, but we'll never know.

Roma marks Mexico's 8th nomination and if it wins it will be their first win in this category.
"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)
Okri
Tenured
Posts: 3345
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:28 pm
Location: Edmonton, AB

Re: Interim Thoughts on the Races

Post by Okri »

A. To answer Tee’s question: how often does picture/directing/screenplay split four ways. Now, using the writing categories as we know them: zero. Going back to the beginning, it’s occurred exactly once. 1940 saw the three writing prizes going to The Great McGinty, Arise My Love and The Philadelphia Story, best director going to Grapes of Wrath and best picture to Rebecca. It’s interesting, because there are a couple years where it seemed like a possibility – 2000 with Gladiator/Traffic/Crouching Tiger/Almost Famous; 2002 with The Pianist/Gangs/Chicago/The Hours/Talk to Her (the configurations in 2002 are a little more dizzying, but I thought The Hours was the frontrunner in adapted screenplay – but best director/screenplay ended up sticking together. Indeed, Chicago and Gladiator are the only two best picture winners post-1957 to win best picture without director or screenplay

B. That said, that tilts me towards believing Cooper WINS director at this point.

C. You know, Tee’s general/historic bullishness on Bale always struck me as weird. But two of Bale’s nominations came from on the bubble work; his best actor nomination in particular came from a car crash of a category where we could’ve easily seen Oscar Isaac or Robert Redford or Tom Hanks make it ahead of him.

D. I think the Green Book debate, as articulated by Sabin and Big Magilla, indicates a really telling argument that I think we’ll see playing out with AMPAS (and just how much Mortensen will be in the race for a win). The writers tend to be hipper than the group as a whole, as seen by snubbing The Help, The Blind Side, and other pablum. It’s not a box office flop, by any means, but certainly not a hugely popular film. Moreso than Hidden Figures (which might have been pablum, but was also the biggest box office best picture nominee and doesn’t have the concerns that Green Books is eliciting).

E. I find it interesting that Tee can see Close being snubbed. Part of me agrees but the other part of me thinks – well, she got in for Albert Nobbs…. was that down to McTeer remaining so strong in the nomination conversation? Close’s commitments to NY theatre right now means she’s not actively campaigning, but yeah, the Podunk collective not flocking towards her... It’ll be interesting to see, again, because I’m curious if she can actually get the career Oscar momentum which was broadly presumed when SPC bought the film and placed it as an August release. The Oldman comparison from last year is interesting but The Darkest Hour was a much bigger AMPAS success than any of us are expecting The Wife to be. The Moore comparison holds more water, to me, and I think Moore benefited from a startlingly weak race AND I think she benefits more from Oscar history being much more recent. Yes, there was a 12 year gap between her 4th and 5th nomination, but that feels more a part of living memory* (to the hive mind that the internet prognostication game) than Close. In between Close’s 5th and 6th nomination, entire “due” narratives were started by people who got their first nomination within that time frame (Kate Winslet, Cate Blanchett).

F. That said, I’m not convinced it’s Lady Gaga who benefits.

G. If Weisz hadn’t won, I think she’d be winning in support right now (the dominant antagonist). If Stone hadn’t won, I think she’d be leading the race in leading. I do think King has the slight edge because she’s actually had some career momentum in the past few years.

H. No idea what happens in supporting actor. Maybe Eliot Coburns his way to the stage. I liked the idea of Hoult getting in before I saw the film, but I have to admit that Alwyn gets some equally scene stealing moments (that dance!) and given how much the film is ABOUT the women, I don’t think Hoult gets enough oxygen. If he does get nominated we probably should start thinking about The Favourite as a real (sorrynotsorry) favourite to actually win best picture.

I. It does seem like all the races are going to stay open for longer. Best actress is appealingly scattershot. The supporting races have very weak frontrunners at best.

J. I want to talk about foreign language film for a minute. What usually happens (imo) is that the committee omits far more of the “acclaimed” films from their six, so they have to be shoehorned in the longlist. But it doesn’t feel like that happened this year. Dogman was probably the most high-profile eligible film that missed on a nomination. All the bigger Cannes films – Cold War, Capaernum, Burning, Shoplifters – made it. The Guilty and Never Look Away have been strongly festivaled and I could easily imagine them nominees in solid line-up. I almost want to predict Roma being snubbed to see how I feel about it, at this point.
Big Magilla
Site Admin
Posts: 19318
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:22 pm
Location: Jersey Shore

Re: Interim Thoughts on the Races

Post by Big Magilla »

Sabin wrote:If Gary Oldman had released something in 2017 similar to Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy, would he have necessarily won? I'm not sure. I think it takes the right performance for voters to honor the right actor. Look at Peter O'Toole for Venus. Did the Academy want to honor Peter O'Toole? Sure. They just didn't like him or the movie enough. Look at Willem DaFoe last year.
It's takes a combination of things. Perceived as being owed helps, but the vehicle has to be one that if they don't necessarily love, can at least be something they don't feel embarrassed about, such as the film Julianne Moore won for. Venus was a really dreadful movie. The Florida Project was both loved and hated although even those who hated the film loved Dafoe's performance. I was one of them. Sam Rockwell, though, was in a film that more people loved and had his own backstory, that of a much admired performer who had never been nominated before.
I think you might be indirectly referring to me (regarding Gaga as the favorite).
No. I was referencing your comment, but referring to people in general.
You don't think Diana Ross lost because Liza Minnelli was in a movie that almost upset The Godfather for Best Picture? That voters just connected with Minnelli's performance more?
Again, it takes a combination of things. Cabaret was certainly the more popular film, but Lady Sings the Blues was a genuine stunner. Pre-release everyone expected to like the film about Billie Holliday but be ambivalent about Ross. It turned out to be the other way around. Ross really wowed them. Minnelli herself thought Ross would win.
Sabin
Laureate Emeritus
Posts: 10747
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 12:52 am
Contact:

Re: Interim Thoughts on the Races

Post by Sabin »

Precious Doll wrote
Gary Oldman?

Though his film made a zillion more at the world box office than Closes' did, his film and his performance in Darkest Hour was more underwhelming than Close's very ordinary at best performance in The Wife so its probably pointless evening bringing Oldman's name up. He had box office success, Close does not. Still he was seen as 'owed'. The one thing they have in common aside from being 'owed' or 'overdue' was that they were talked up all year on the internet.
I'll just address this here...

Exactly. If Gary Oldman had released something in 2017 similar to Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy, would he have necessarily won? I'm not sure. I think it takes the right performance for voters to honor the right actor. Look at Peter O'Toole for Venus. Did the Academy want to honor Peter O'Toole? Sure. They just didn't like him or the movie enough. Look at Willem DaFoe last year.

Maybe I misspoke when I said The Academy doesn't care about who is due. They do. But it's not enough. The sense I get from Glenn Close and The Wife is it won't be enough, which takes me to my second point.
Big Magilla wrote
Good point. Another one is that Lady Gaga is the "clear favorite" of those who like Lady Gaga and have an emotional attachment to the singer that goes way beyond her performance. That was enough to get Bing Crosby and Barbra Streisand Oscars, but it wasn't enough to get Diana Ross one. It's also worth remembering that Streisand won because then AMPAS president Gregory Peck steamrollered Academy membership for Streisand who voted for herself, thus tying with Katharine Hepburn. Ross lost to Liza Minnelli, who had a stronger emotional pull with voters being the daughter of Judy Garland.
I think you might be indirectly referring to me in this post, and I'll just say: 1) I don't think Lady Gaga is very good in A Star is Born, 2) I don't really like A Star is Born (I'm probably hovering around a C+), 3) I like some Lady Gaga music but I wouldn't remotely say I have an emotional attachment to her (I would prefer Best Original Song go to "All the Stars" or the ineligible "Sunflower"), and 4) yeah, I still think she's the clear favorite.

You don't think Diana Ross lost because Liza Minnelli was in a movie that almost upset The Godfather for Best Picture? That voters just connected with Minnelli's performance more?
"How's the despair?"
Big Magilla
Site Admin
Posts: 19318
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:22 pm
Location: Jersey Shore

Re: Interim Thoughts on the Races

Post by Big Magilla »

At this point, I still haven't decided who or what I personally want to win in any of the categories. All the major contenders and many of the also-rans in just about every category have their pluses and minuses which makes it a good year for someone like Close to get an overdue award for something that is far from her best work with Gaga getting her own Oscar for Best Song. A Close win would be all that sweeter if she loses the Globe and SAG awards. It would be like a Juliette Binoche win over Lauren Bacall, only in reverse.
User avatar
Precious Doll
Emeritus
Posts: 4453
Joined: Mon Jan 13, 2003 2:20 am
Location: Sydney
Contact:

Re: Interim Thoughts on the Races

Post by Precious Doll »

Big Magilla wrote: Another one is that Lady Gaga is the "clear favorite" of those who like Lady Gaga and have an emotional attachment to the singer that goes way beyond her performance.
I tend to agree with that. Though the Academy has invited lots of new members in recent years I'd wager their medan age it still pretty old and certainly older than your average Lady Gaga fan.

Despite my complete lack of interest in modern music I had heard of Lady Gaga but was unfamiliar with her work as a singer. I went into ASIB completely neutral in relation to her and whilst I found her performance the best thing about the film I hardly think she is award worthy.

Whilst I certainly agree Close has the overdue factor her medicore film and her fittingly ordinary performance may work against her. That the film did ordinary business and was released back in August don't help her. A later release would have helped to give her momentum that she simply doesn't have - all she has is the 'overdue' factor.

What makes the best actress race interesting for me is that nobody seems to have a lock on the award. It really is this stage a 'wait and see' what transpires over the next couple of the weeks and I wouldn't be surprised if we are still largely undecided on awards night.

One could make a case for Close, Gaga and even Melissa McCarthy for a win. After seeing The Favourite I feel Olivia Colman's reward will be a nomination - its simply not the type of performance or film to win a best actress Oscar and Colman's failure to scoop the critics awards has pretty much sealed her fate. That said I'd vote for Colman in a heart beat over the other three based solely on the strength of their performances.

Given too that so many of the Oscar hyped films have underperformed critically and commercially we may find Stone and/or Weisz in the actress category and Colman in the supporting.
"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
Site Admin
Posts: 19318
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:22 pm
Location: Jersey Shore

Re: Interim Thoughts on the Races

Post by Big Magilla »

Precious Doll wrote:
Sabin wrote: The Academy doesn't really care about who is "owed" like they used to, and Lady Gaga is the clear favorite.

Gary Oldman?

Though his film made a zillion more at the world box office than Closes' did, his film and his performance in Darkest Hour was more underwhelming than Close's very ordinary at best performance in The Wife so its probably pointless evening bringing Oldman's name up. He had box office success, Close does not. Still he was seen as 'owed'. The one thing they have in common aside from being 'owed' or 'overdue' was that they were talked up all year on the internet.
Good point. Another one is that Lady Gaga is the "clear favorite" of those who like Lady Gaga and have an emotional attachment to the singer that goes way beyond her performance. That was enough to get Bing Crosby and Barbra Streisand Oscars, but it wasn't enough to get Diana Ross one. It's also worth remembering that Streisand won because then AMPAS president Gregory Peck steamrollered Academy membership for Streisand who voted for herself, thus tying with Katharine Hepburn. Ross lost to Liza Minnelli, who had a stronger emotional pull with voters being the daughter of Judy Garland.

This thing about being "owed" is funny. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. It didn't work for Judy Garland and it didn't work for Lauren Bacall, but in the interim it worked for Helen Hayes, Ingrid Bergman, Katharine Hepburn and others who won against stronger competition. It's worked since for Meryl Streep, Gary Oldman and others. It's what's helping drive the narrative for Bradley Cooper and Ethan Hawke, but the vibe is even stronger for Close because not only has she been nominated before, she is believed by many to have deserved to win before. She lost on her first nomination to what many consider category fraud when Jessica Lange won for Tootsie.
User avatar
Precious Doll
Emeritus
Posts: 4453
Joined: Mon Jan 13, 2003 2:20 am
Location: Sydney
Contact:

Re: Interim Thoughts on the Races

Post by Precious Doll »

Sabin wrote: The Academy doesn't really care about who is "owed" like they used to, and Lady Gaga is the clear favorite.

Gary Oldman?

Though his film made a zillion more at the world box office than Closes' did, his film and his performance in Darkest Hour was more underwhelming than Close's very ordinary at best performance in The Wife so its probably pointless evening bringing Oldman's name up. He had box office success, Close does not. Still he was seen as 'owed'. The one thing they have in common aside from being 'owed' or 'overdue' was that they were talked up all year on the internet.
"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)
Post Reply

Return to “91st Academy Awards”