Ruminations

[Mister Tee]

So, not for the first time, the DGA awards are Saturday night February 18th, and the BAFTAs are the next evening. Which means, by my reckoning, it's just about physically impossible for anyone attending the former to get to the latter -- DGA doesn't wrap up till roughly the 11-to-midnight hour in LA, which is 7-8AM Sunday in London. Even if the directors get whooshed to a private jet, they couldn't arrive in London till very late afternoon; they'd have to dress on the plane and get an escort to the ceremony. If they're flying commercial, fuggedaboudit. Couldn't they at least reverse the days, putting the time discrepancy on the side of the travelers?

This matters because, post-2010, all but one DGA winner has also won the BAFTA for directing. In the one year it didn't, Richard Linklater stayed in LA to see himself lose to Innaritu, and missed the chance to accept his win in London -- the last award he won that year.

This won't affect Spielberg's scheduling, since BAFTA obligingly left him out. But the Daniels and, I guess, McDonagh, need to decide at which spot their presence will better suit their campaign.

For the Daniel’s I guess it’s easy. One stays in LA, the other goes to London.

Remarkably, that elegant solution somehow never occurred to me.

[mlrg]

So, not for the first time, the DGA awards are Saturday night February 18th, and the BAFTAs are the next evening. Which means, by my reckoning, it's just about physically impossible for anyone attending the former to get to the latter -- DGA doesn't wrap up till roughly the 11-to-midnight hour in LA, which is 7-8AM Sunday in London. Even if the directors get whooshed to a private jet, they couldn't arrive in London till very late afternoon; they'd have to dress on the plane and get an escort to the ceremony. If they're flying commercial, fuggedaboudit. Couldn't they at least reverse the days, putting the time discrepancy on the side of the travelers?

This matters because, post-2010, all but one DGA winner has also won the BAFTA for directing. In the one year it didn't, Richard Linklater stayed in LA to see himself lose to Innaritu, and missed the chance to accept his win in London -- the last award he won that year.

This won't affect Spielberg's scheduling, since BAFTA obligingly left him out. But the Daniels and, I guess, McDonagh, need to decide at which spot their presence will better suit their campaign.

For the Daniel’s I guess it’s easy. One stays in LA, the other goes to London.

[Mister Tee]

So, not for the first time, the DGA awards are Saturday night February 18th, and the BAFTAs are the next evening. Which means, by my reckoning, it's just about physically impossible for anyone attending the former to get to the latter -- DGA doesn't wrap up till roughly the 11-to-midnight hour in LA, which is 7-8AM Sunday in London. Even if the directors get whooshed to a private jet, they couldn't arrive in London till very late afternoon; they'd have to dress on the plane and get an escort to the ceremony. If they're flying commercial, fuggedaboudit. Couldn't they at least reverse the days, putting the time discrepancy on the side of the travelers?

This matters because, post-2010, all but one DGA winner has also won the BAFTA for directing. In the one year it didn't, Richard Linklater stayed in LA to see himself lose to Innaritu, and missed the chance to accept his win in London -- the last award he won that year.

This won't affect Spielberg's scheduling, since BAFTA obligingly left him out. But the Daniels and, I guess, McDonagh, need to decide at which spot their presence will better suit their campaign.

[Okri]

I'm going to throw this out, and I don't even know how seriously I take it: there have been cases where voters sought out films to see actors in the hunt for lead performance, and ended up, instead, voting for people supporting them. Thinking about James Coburn in Affliction, and Marcia Gay Harden in Pollock. On that basis, I'm not sure I'm ready to completely rule out Hong Chau.

I was thinking that scenario too, actually. Especially if people echo you, Tee, and feel that the film loses something with her absence.

One thing about International Film now is that there appear to be a LOT of high profile films in general. I find it a little hard to tell about profile, truth be told, when you (I, at any rate) follow the films pretty closely. All five films got their screener (links) out early and people have been talking about two of them (EO, Close) since Cannes. I dunno - I'm not saying predict against All Quiet, which obviously has the highest profile, but I hesitate to call it a lock.

[Mister Tee]

Okay, to try and address the many points raised:

I'm in agreement with most all the thoughts re: the Bassett "inevitability". This narrative has essentially been created by 1) Oscar bloggers (over months), 2) the Golden Globe, 3) the Broadcasters and 4) completing the circle jerk, back to the Oscar bloggers.

The bloggers are always looking for a big name/overdue candidate to push in supporting, and they not infrequently succeed in creating enough buzz for a questionable nomination (Matt Damon, Invictus). They can even occasionally craft a win (Anne Hathaway, Les Miz).

The Globes are, still, star-fuckers, and Bassett (along with Curtis) was the biggest name on the roster this year.

The Broadcasters live to create an inevitability/we-predicted-the-Oscar narrative; their voting didn't end till after the Globes presentation, and they were happy to serve as echo chamber.

And the bloggers, presented with some evidence their creation has come to life, happily proclaim the race over.

Stipulate that Sabin is correct: Bassett will likely win SAG, and, if she takes BAFTA as well, there'll be no stopping her.

Stipulate also, as both dws and Sabin note, that Rylance was a greater focal point as alternative to Stallone (Bale had won recently, Hardy wasn't particularly good, and Ruffalo had that unpopular scene constantly playing as his clip). Contrarily, though: maybe recall that many pronounced Rylance fatally wounded after he failed to win SAG even without Stallone on the ballot.

I'm going to throw this out, and I don't even know how seriously I take it: there have been cases where voters sought out films to see actors in the hunt for lead performance, and ended up, instead, voting for people supporting them. Thinking about James Coburn in Affliction, and Marcia Gay Harden in Pollock. On that basis, I'm not sure I'm ready to completely rule out Hong Chau.

But, yes, Kerry Condon is the strongest alternative, and, if she wins BAFTA, she has to be taken seriously as upset potential. I'm of two minds about BAFTA: mlrg is correct, that they seem more resistant to Hollywood career-points candidates, and they will almost certainly see Bassett in that light. On the other hand...don't presume BAFTA will automatically go for the hometown-or-close choice. That's been the case with the ones mlrg cites, but I have to say, I was certain they'd go for Benedict Cumberbatch last year, and they instead lined up with the US choice. It's worth noting that, just as AMPAS has opened its doors to a lot of foreign members, BAFTA has added a fair number of not-Brit-at-all voters. (My friend who's a member is a Jewish distribution guy from Jersey.) So, let's wait till the envelope is opened before we handicap the endgame.

I do, though, fully agree with dws (and those who echoed him): if Bassett does lose, the Internet will be unbearable. In the wake of the Deadwyler/Davis omissions, cries of OscarsSoWhite will grow to peak level. Which may actually work in Bassett's favor, if some people just want to avoid that scenario.

By the way, Sabin, I'm in accord with your entire take on the Black Panther/Boseman/BAFTA/Oscar thing. Well thought out, and something I don't think many Oscar Pundits have given as much thought.

On other subjects:

Had the rules not changed and allowed all voters to cast ballots for International Film, not just those who've seen all 5 films, I'd think All Quiet was prime for an upset, for all the reasons okri cites. The Quiet Girl, from the murmurs I've heard, seems prime upset potential, perhaps Close, as well. But I think, these days, the highest-profile film usually wins, so All Quiet is likely the favorite.

The DGA should be truly fascinating, as the Daniels are so without pedigree, but at the same time seem to have the most excitement around their film. And Spielberg has just been so beloved there -- 3 wins, and something like 13 nominations -- that you can't rule him out. It feels like Fabelmans is losing steam all the time under best picture, but Spielberg remains a prime possibility for best director at the Oscars. Weird, since he has the guy in his film, but it recalls John Ford's last time up, with The Quiet Man. There's no indication in any film histories that Quiet Man was considered a best picture candidate that year -- Greatest Show on Earth's win was an upset, but perceived as at the expense of High Noon. they just wanted the guy to win best director one more time. It's possible Spielberg gets the same late-in-career/we-honor-you-sir salute.

And I have no idea what any combination of DGA or PGA does for Spielberg vis a vis The Daniels this year. It feels like Spielberg needs to win at least one of them. I guess you could say that for the Daniels, as well. Which one is more important, I'm not sure.

okri, thanks for doing that look-up, and I have to say I'm surprised Two Towers is so close to Avatar 2 in profile -- considering Avatar would have the extra sound category were it still extant, the only difference is that editing nomination. Not a small difference, but less than I'd have expected.

[mlrg]

Never underestimate the power of the brits over what seem surefire winners, specially if they look like career achievement wins.

Just look at Colman, Hopkins and Rylance in recent years.

[Sabin]

Tee's point about Angela Bassett has got me thinking.

When I first heard the rumblings about Angela Bassett winning an Oscar for Wakanda Forever, I dismissed it as blogger fiction. But by now, it's pretty clear that it's not. She could win. And for the last few weeks, I've generally come around to that as the likeliest scenario. Which is fine. I'm more than okay with Angela Bassett having an Oscar.

But now (honestly, since Tee's post) I've started to wonder if her chances are being overinflated for a few reasons.

First off, why would Bassett win? Because she won certain precursors, because it's a career achievement award, and because of the emotional power of Black Panther: Wakanda Forever, which is to say it's tied to the loss of Chadwick Boseman/T'Challa. Hers a small role but a lot of her impact is tied to that loss.

I'm going to skip over the precursors that she's won for now. That's all still in progress. I think this season will end with Bassett winning the Globe and the SAG and Condon winning the BAFTA. If Bassett wins the BAFTA then a lot of what I'm writing is probably null and void.

This is a career achievement award for Bassett. Certainly that's going to be some of the appeal. I do have to wonder if her chances might be better if Jamie Lee Curtis wasn't in the race. Curtis' career is twice as long. This only impacts the number of voters who are inclined to vote based on who they know and like, which... honestly, I'd rather not know that number. But that's just a side point I haven't seen written about much.

That brings it down to the emotional power of the performance, which ties itself to the loss of Chadwick Boseman and the film itself. I'll address the latter right now. If enough voters were moved by the power of the film, why didn't Wakanda Forever make a slate of ten like the first one did? It's not like Avatar: The Way of Water or Triangle of Sadness should be that formidable competition? But to the former point, if Boseman's death was so affecting why didn't he win Best Actor that year six months after his death? You could attribute any number of reasons why they gave it to Anthony Hopkins for The Father (which nobody said was a good bet prior to Oscar night) but ultimately they liked his film more (it over-performed at six nominations whereas Ma Rainey... under-performed) and they liked his performance more. It's hard for me to look at Angela Bassett's performance and imagining a winning coalition of Oscar voters saying "Yes, this is the best performance of these five." It's such a small performance in a film that just isn't very serious. Or rather, the only people who would find it serious are MCU fans (who generally aren't Academy voters) or people truly moved by the loss of Chadwick Boseman (which wasn't enough to get him an Oscar).

Taking a step back, if Wakanda Forever under-performed slightly to the first Black Panther and overall expectations with five, The Banshees of Inisherin certainly over-performed Three Billboards Outside Ebbing Missouri and overall expectations with nine. I mention Three Billboards... because I have to believe this race is between Bassett and Condon as the top two vote-getters. People talk about how Oscar voters vote overall rather than as a collection of branches who make individual choices but then come together and vote overall. The clearest disparity this year is how well Triangle of Sadness did overall and yet the actors didn't nominate Dolly De Leon. But what we know about them branch-wise and en masse is that they may have liked the first Black Panther but they're not overall big fans of the MCU. But they seem to dig Martin McDonagh.

Finally, I'll say this. I have no idea how much the zeitgeist matters these days with Academy voters but I don't think it hurts that the Barry Keoghan/Kerry Condon scene has gone viral online. It's as perfect a scene as I've seen all year. I don't think that she's at the center of it.

All of this is probably null and void if Bassett wins the BAFTA but betting on Condon to take this award would probably yield a solid ROI.

[Big Magilla]

Magilla, it's interesting your thought about the DGAs because I almost expect the reverse. I think the Daniels NEED the DGA to make best director a closer race, whereas a victory for Spielberg would really push me in his direction prediction wise. That said, I agree that Banshees (due to what I think will be high overall placements on the ranked choice lists) has an edge in best picture. Which makes me think it could prevail in a few categories (actor, supporting actress, screenplay) which maybe makes it a healthy winner on the night? Meanwhile, Everything... copies McDonagh's previous film and wins best actress/supporting actor.

Yes, but if Banshees wins Actor/Supporting Actress it does the same thing as Three Billboards except that it reverses the sexes from Actress/Supporting Actor to Actor/Supporting Actress.

If EEAAO wins Actress/Supporting Actor and Banshees wins Actor/Supporting Actress, it will the first time ever that two films each won two acting awards in the same year.

[Sabin]

Okri wrote
d) Magilla, it's interesting your thought about the DGAs because I almost expect the reverse. I think the Daniels NEED the DGA to make best director a closer race, whereas a victory for Spielberg would really push me in his direction prediction wise. That said, I agree that Banshees (due to what I think will be high overall placements on the ranked choice lists) has an edge in best picture. Which makes me think it could prevail in a few categories (actor, supporting actress, screenplay) which maybe makes it a healthy winner on the night? Meanwhile, Everything... copies McDonagh's previous film and wins best actress/supporting actor.

e) I actually really wonder about All Quiet on the Western Front being a lock in foreign language film. AMPAS is notoriously indifferent when it comes to remakes/sequels - yeah, they're coming around a little, but really, they're being forced to come around by circumstances. I do think the Berger film has a bit of hedge on that in that [being a remake of a canonical work, but in the culture/language that originally produced it], but I do wonder if it's a work that stops short of actually winning major prizes (see Dunkirk).

To your second point, I agree but I'd add one caveat. While this film may be a remake, it's also an adaptation of a classic novel. It may not be a great film but it's a serious-minded one. Ever since Pan's Labyrinth lost to The Lives of Others, I think we're frequently on the lookout for ways that this category will surprise us. It hasn't really happened since. It is interesting how this category has gone back and forth throughout the season. At first, I thought the film to be (and cross over to other categories) was Decision to Leave. It ended up getting completely shut out.

To your first point, I hadn't really thought about the DGA race until now. I had largely written Spielberg down as the de facto winner at the Oscars and end up being the second director in a row to win Best Director and nothing else -- just like Jane Campion. They both had similar paths in that they both picked up Best Picture and Director at the Golden Globes (Power of the Dog nabbed one for Kodi Smit-McPhee as well). But let's look at the meaningful wins for Spielberg/The Fabelmans coming up. The Fabelmans probably isn't going to win the PGA. It can't win the SAG or the BAFTA. The only award that it might win for the rest of the Oscar season is the DGA, which makes me wonder... how can we be so sure about that? That certainly doesn't mirror The Power of the Dog/Jane Campion's road to winning an Oscar.

The biggest thing working against Spielberg is his film. I don't think they like it. Working in Spielberg's favor is that none of his competition really seem like DGA winners to me. Martin McDonagh isn't going to win. Joseph Kosinski isn't up for a corresponding Oscar (he's quite popular among the director's branch). The Daniels are newcomers (late 30s each). I would hope they have the good sense to give it to Todd Field but Tár doesn't seem like a DGA winner. At this point, I might guess The Daniels end up taking the DGA.

[Okri]

a) If there's any year where The Discourse flattens or ignores a year of pleasing complexity, it's this one.

b) I spent a time clicking through Wikipedia to see if I could prove Tee wrong re: Avatar 2 and my biggest surprise was just how many Oscar nominations Doctor Dolittle received. It got 9 (!) nominations. The closest to Avatar 2 in the era of five would be The Two Towers, I suppose (sound X2, production design, visual effects, film editing).

c) While I disagreed with the specifics of Sabin's examples, I do think he's right to wonder about the overall gestalt of the nomination tally being less than indicative of a film's strength. That said, that makes this nomination slate a little more delightful than not because so many films, as Tee mentions, got surprising/on the edge nominations but also missed what were bigger hopes/more realistic gets.

d) Magilla, it's interesting your thought about the DGAs because I almost expect the reverse. I think the Daniels NEED the DGA to make best director a closer race, whereas a victory for Spielberg would really push me in his direction prediction wise. That said, I agree that Banshees (due to what I think will be high overall placements on the ranked choice lists) has an edge in best picture. Which makes me think it could prevail in a few categories (actor, supporting actress, screenplay) which maybe makes it a healthy winner on the night? Meanwhile, Everything... copies McDonagh's previous film and wins best actress/supporting actor.

e) I actually really wonder about All Quiet on the Western Front being a lock in foreign language film. AMPAS is notoriously indifferent when it comes to remakes/sequels - yeah, they're coming around a little, but really, they're being forced to come around by circumstances. I do think the Berger film has a bit of hedge on that in that [being a remake of a canonical work, but in the culture/language that originally produced it], but I do wonder if it's a work that stops short of actually winning major prizes (see Dunkirk).

[Sabin]

OscarGuy wrote
I don't see how Bassett's role is trivial? It's the core foundation of the emotional arc of the film. She counsels the lead about her inability to deal with her brother's passing and her final scenes drive the narrative to its conclusion. I agree that Jamie Lee's performance isn't terribly central to her film's success and could buy the triviality argument there.

Yeah, but it's just handful of speeches. It's just... y'know... Marvel acting.

[OscarGuy]

I don't see how Bassett's role is trivial? It's the core foundation of the emotional arc of the film. She counsels the lead about her inability to deal with her brother's passing and her final scenes drive the narrative to its conclusion. I agree that Jamie Lee's performance isn't terribly central to her film's success and could buy the triviality argument there.

[Sabin]

Great write-up as always. Especially love your thoughts on Henry/Causeway.

Mister Tee wrote:
Supporting actress = 2015 supporting actor. I mentioned before the nominations that Angela Bassett struck me as a Stallone-in-Creed sort of candidate, and I’ll stick with the notion, despite the fact that Pundit World has surrendered to her inevitability.

I like this observation but I disagree with you in one regard. There were weaknesses to Stallone's "candidacy" that most of us just chose to overlook. Yes, he won the Golden Globe (as well as a National Board of Review) but he wasn't even nominated for a SAG or a BAFTA. Bassett won a Golden Globe and is nominated for both of those films. Creed was also a sole nominee while Black Panther: Wakanda Forever also demonstrated more across the board strength picking up a PGA nom as well as four other nominations.

To Daniel's point, I don't see the Rylance. I don't see any world where it's Curtis or Hsu. Curtis' role rivals Bassett's for its brevity and triviality. Hsu has the more emotional role (and the largest of the category) but she's very much a newcomer. There's also just something about her role that I think voters will have a hard time connecting to. While the film has empathy towards Joy, it's a film where the daughter becomes a multiversal antichrist. There's an abstraction to Joy that I think will prevent voters from voting for her. Also, she's the only one without a BAFTA. On paper, Hong Chau could fit the bill. She's a well-respected character actor who keeps demonstrating range in film after film. She was also very good in The Menu this year. I just don't think her role in The Whale is big enough.

That leaves Kerry Condon. She's the only nominated performer to win a major critic's award. Her role is sizable enough in a Best Picture nominee. She's in a Martin McDonagh film which worked out in 2017. She invites a lot of empathy for her character in how much she deals with the bullshit of the men on this island and arguably she has a pleasing arc in what she ultimately decides to do. She's also almost inarguably gives the best performance in the category. The biggest thing against her is what worked for Rylance in 2015: she's an unknown Brit going up against an industry vet. She's probably going to win the BAFTA in the coming weeks. Suddenly, I'm keeping hope alive and like Daniel I too dread the discourse.

[Reza]

I do dread the Discourse that would follow if Bassett does end up not winning.

From your mouth to God's ears.....and a win for Kerry Condon who is fantastic in Banshees.

Like I've said before Basset's gorgeous hats totally overshadow her performance in Panther.

[dws1982]

Supporting actress = 2015 supporting actor. I mentioned before the nominations that Angela Bassett struck me as a Stallone-in-Creed sort of candidate, and I’ll stick with the notion, despite the fact that Pundit World has surrendered to her inevitability.

I agree with this, with the qualification that I'm not sure who the Rylance would be (if Williams had been nominated here, I really do think she would win), and the lack of a clear alternative may be enough for Bassett. I do dread the Discourse that would follow if Bassett does end up not winning.