SAG Predictions

[anonymous1980]

So, ideally, it is only single-card actors with exceptions being granted only by the Awards Committee. I would have to re-watch to see if Harry Shum Jr, even with a cameo, had a single-card in the credits or not.

I remember his single card credit distinctly because when I saw his name, I was trying to remember who he was in the film. I had to look it up later and said, "Really? That was it?" It was a blink-and-you'll-miss-it cameo in the mid-credits scene to establish his character who will be a major part in the sequel. Pretty much just an Easter egg for fans.

Because of this, Nathaniel Rogers of The Film Experience wrote, "We owe Gwen Stefani an apology". Gwen Stefani in The Aviator is often referenced to as the glorified cameo of a big star that gets starring single-card billing because of her name and thus, gets the SAG Ensemble nomination over no-name actors with more substantial roles. At least with Gwen Stefani, she had actual lines and you knew she was there. Harry Shum Jr. had nothing.

The Film Experience has a running series on this every time the SAG nominations come out on the key roles in films that get the Cast Ensemble nomination but leave out key members of the cast due to billing technicalities.

[OscarGuy]

Here are the rules from SAG's own rules document:

CAST ELIGIBILITY: “A Cast in a Motion Picture” includes all
actors whose names appear in the cast credits of the final
release print. Motion Picture Casts shall be represented by
those actors with single card billing in the main titles, wherever
those titles appear. In cases of special, unusual or non-billing
or credit, eligibility shall be at the sole discretion of the Awards
Committee. Members of the cast who are not single card
billed but are credited in the cast crawl of the motion picture
announced as the recipient of the Outstanding Performance
by a Cast in a Theatrical Motion Picture shall each receive a
certificate.

So, ideally, it is only single-card actors with exceptions being granted only by the Awards Committee. I would have to re-watch to see if Harry Shum Jr, even with a cameo, had a single-card in the credits or not.

[MaxWilder]

This year we had the weird inclusion of Harry Shum Jr, a previous winner in the TV Ensemble Category (Glee), now a Best Film Ensemble SAG nominee basically for a non-speaking cameo (3 seconds of screen time??) at the end of his film (Crazy Rich Asians).

Meanwhile Ryan Eggold (BlacKkKlansman) and Lil Rel Howery (Get Out) didn't make the list. I'm sure there are countless examples. They really need to change that rule (only people with their own title cards).

[HarryGoldfarb]

At the end of the day there are always going to be winners included in the 'ensemble' who really don't stand out individually but collectively they do contribute to help make a film what it is successful or otherwise.

Winners or for that matter nominees...

This year we had the weird inclusion of Harry Shum Jr, a previous winner in the TV Ensemble Category (Glee), now a Best Film Ensemble SAG nominee basically for a non-speaking cameo (3 seconds of screen time??) at the end of his film (Crazy Rich Asians).

[Precious Doll]

1) I would agree with you if we were talking about a multi-character Altman-like film. But "Black Panther" ain't that kind of film. It has a protagonist, an antagonist, and a handful of secondary roles. None of them is very impressive IMHO, and a couple of them are downright awful.

Funny hearing the mention of Altman in relation to an ensemble award because of course the cast of Gosford Park won that very award back in 2002 for SAG. Most would agree that it was a very worthy win - myself included. But when I rewatched Gosford Park about 10 days ago for the first time since its cinema release I realised that most of that ensemble were not worthy of awarding.

The film holds up beautifully, stands up very well despite knowing the outcome on a second viewing, however, without the exception of a small number of the cast (Kelly Macdonald, Maggie Smith, Clive Owen, Emily Watson & Helen Mirren) most of the characters are nothing more than sketches at best. I always list the performances that impress me as a I see films and I looked back at my 2001 list of the actors that impressed me at the time and those mentioned are the ones I singled out back then and were the only ones the impressed me the second time around. Its simply because they had so much more of substance to do than everyone else. This isn't to demean talents like Eileen Atkins, James Wilby, Alan Bates, Tom Hollander, Derek Jacobi, Richard E. Grant, etc but they simply don't have the material to work with to shine. They are fine for what they have to do but none of them standout. They were absolutely needed for the texture of the film and one with so many characters you do tend to need a lot of recognisable faces to help keep track or who is who but really most of them were little more than window dressing.

At the end of the day there are always going to be winners included in the 'ensemble' who really don't stand out individually but collectively they do contribute to help make a film what it is successful or otherwise.

[taki15]

I'm intrigued by the idea that not having an individually excellent performance (aka, not in the top five of the year) automatically excludes a film from being a great ensemble. I'd challenge that vociferously. I'd argue there wasn't a finer ensemble on television than The Wire, but the nature of the show meant that I can imagine five individual performances being better than the best individual work.

The Full Monty won best ensemble without an individual performance nomination, as did Return of the King. I don't believe those were political decisions and none had individual performances I'd single out (maybe Astin at the time, but I suspect I'd be embarassed to now).

Taki, in response to your other question - which films got nominated for best picture without writing/directing/cinematography/editing/acting (amusingly disingenuous trap, by the way), you've got Selma and Beauty and the Beast along with Black Panther.

1) I would agree with you if we were talking about a multi-character Altman-like film. But "Black Panther" ain't that kind of film. It has a protagonist, an antagonist, and a handful of secondary roles. None of them is very impressive IMHO, and a couple of them are downright awful.

2) Why is my question disingenuous? Anyway, as I mentioned earlier the fact that this happened only once in so many years proves my point ("Beauty and the Beast" not counting for obvious reasons).

[Okri]

I'm intrigued by the idea that not having an individually excellent performance (aka, not in the top five of the year) automatically excludes a film from being a great ensemble. I'd challenge that vociferously. I'd argue there wasn't a finer ensemble on television than The Wire, but the nature of the show meant that I can imagine five individual performances being better than the best individual work.

The Full Monty won best ensemble without an individual performance nomination, as did Return of the King. I don't believe those were political decisions and none had individual performances I'd single out (maybe Astin at the time, but I suspect I'd be embarassed to now).

Taki, in response to your other question - which films got nominated for best picture without writing/directing/cinematography/editing/acting (amusingly disingenuous trap, by the way), you've got Selma and Beauty and the Beast along with Black Panther.

[Sabin]

OscarGuy wrote
The public would agree with you. Critics, however, do not, as Black Panther performed better with major critics (using MetaCritic, not RottenTomatoes) than did Avengers: Infinity War. If you want to know why I disliked Avengers, feel free to read my review. It's a cheat of a movie that sets up this grand "oh goodness, everyone's gone" plotline that we all know...KNOW will be reversed entirely in the next movie.

That's certainly a true statement (public vs. critics), but I don't really care.

I happen to think that Black Panther is a substantially more ambitious and meaningful film than Avengers: Infinity War but it's ultimately sillier because at the end of the day it's a Marvel movie with stupid rhino fights at the end that make it ultimately impossible to reflect back upon as some kind of serious achievement. I think Avengers: Infinity War succeeds more by staying within its lane.

I read your review. It's well-written. You make some good points. I don't really agree with them. That's not to say "I have an opinion and I don't want to be challenged on it." What I'm saying is I think you all are wrong. And that's fine. Sometimes critics get it wrong. One of the best films I've seen this decade in Leslye Headland's Sleeping with Other People. It has a 63% on RT and a 64% on Metacritic. Does that mean I'm wrong? Nope, I've read them all. I think the critics fucked up on that one just like they did on Avengers: Infinity War.

[taki15]

Your comment, Taki, is no different than saying that the only reason people could possibly like it is some progressive hyper politically correct statement. It's no different than saying Spike Lee was only nominated for Best Directing because he's black.

That kind of rhetoric is insulting to me and anyone else who thought the film A) was terrific and B) had the best ensemble of the film's nominated. After all of the discussions here about racism, no matter how "politely" you think you put it, it's demeaning and dismissive.

The two leads of "Black Klansman" were nominated in their respective categories, so winning best ensemble wouldn't have been a huge surprise.
For the same reason I wouldn't find it at all curious if it wins best picture at the Oscars.
As for the discussion about political correctness and racism, I don't remember you or anyone else feeling insulted when a few years ago everybody trashed (deservedly so) "Crash".

[OscarGuy]

Your comment, Taki, is no different than saying that the only reason people could possibly like it is some progressive hyper politically correct statement. It's no different than saying Spike Lee was only nominated for Best Directing because he's black.

That kind of rhetoric is insulting to me and anyone else who thought the film A) was terrific and B) had the best ensemble of the film's nominated. After all of the discussions here about racism, no matter how "politely" you think you put it, it's demeaning and dismissive.

[taki15]

So none of "Black Panther"'s actors were deemed worthy of a nomination, but the movie wins Best Ensemble?
How the hell can anyone explain this other than that it's a blatantly political decision?
Gosh, I never liked much that film but I'm now starting to hate it.

Here's the post that sponsored my response to you, Taki, not your question about Best Picture and other categories.

I still can't see where the personal attack to you is.

OscarGuy wrote
If you're referring to the godawful Avengers: Infinity War, then that says all it has to about your taste in movies.

I agree with Taki. I liked Infinity War more than Black Panther.

The public would agree with you. Critics, however, do not, as Black Panther performed better with major critics (using MetaCritic, not RottenTomatoes) than did Avengers: Infinity War. If you want to know why I disliked Avengers, feel free to read my review. It's a cheat of a movie that sets up this grand "oh goodness, everyone's gone" plotline that we all know...KNOW will be reversed entirely in the next movie.

Just like you said a few posts ago, critics aren't infallible. Especially when it comes to MCU films. They even called "Thor: Ragnarok" a masterpiece FFS.

[flipp525]

Reza’s use of “bitchy” and saying that I love to cause “good repetitious drama that allows me to shine” is intentionally homophobic coded language. Don’t think I didn’t notice that, Reza. I have been detecting this kind of thing my entire life. In an explanation of your racism you got to throw in a dig on me. The comment was a two-fer. I’m sure in the virulently homophobic locale where you reside, it’s perfectly acceptable to mock, demean, or inflict violence on gay people which is why you often feel comfortable doing it here. But I’m going to call it out when I see it.

I’m not surprised at all by the MAGA attack last night on Empire’s Jussie Smollett in Chicago. (White men screaming “This is MAGA country” tied a noose around Smollett’s neck, doused him in bleach and called her a “faggot N-word”) MAGA hat people have been given permission by Trump and his entire administration to unleash violence and hate on people of color, gays, basically anyone black or non-straight. Jussie is himself a two-fer. He’s black and he’s gay. That doubles the amount of insults you can hurl at him. This is part of the Trump Effect. Reza’s views on black people and gays have actually been somewhat normalized which also makes him feel comfortable to “out” himself in these posts.

[OscarGuy]

OscarGuy wrote
If you're referring to the godawful Avengers: Infinity War, then that says all it has to about your taste in movies.

I agree with Taki. I liked Infinity War more than Black Panther.

The public would agree with you. Critics, however, do not, as Black Panther performed better with major critics (using MetaCritic, not RottenTomatoes) than did Avengers: Infinity War. If you want to know why I disliked Avengers, feel free to read my review. It's a cheat of a movie that sets up this grand "oh goodness, everyone's gone" plotline that we all know...KNOW will be reversed entirely in the next movie.

[OscarGuy]

So none of "Black Panther"'s actors were deemed worthy of a nomination, but the movie wins Best Ensemble?
How the hell can anyone explain this other than that it's a blatantly political decision?
Gosh, I never liked much that film but I'm now starting to hate it.

Here's the post that sponsored my response to you, Taki, not your question about Best Picture and other categories.

[Sabin]

OscarGuy wrote
If you're referring to the godawful Avengers: Infinity War, then that says all it has to about your taste in movies.

I agree with Taki. I liked Infinity War more than Black Panther.