Rooting interests? There are a handful of categories that are truly up in the air, which is more than most years. I'd like them to go in a direction we're not expecting.
I'm surprised to find that most of my rooting interests revolve around Barbie. I'd like to see Ryan Gosling surprise everyone and win. I'd like to see "I'm Just Ken" win Best Original Song. And fuck it, I'd like to see Greta Gerwig win Best Adapted Screenplay. I think I'm a little more understanding of why Barbie is considered Adapted than most on the internet but that doesn't change the fact that Barbie would be a slam-dunk for Best Original Screenplay for a host of reasons, but one of them being the reason why Barbie is such a gargantuan hit is due almost entirely to its writing. I'm not the film's biggest fan but there's no reason why a Barbie film had to be *THAT*. It wasn't signed, sealed, and delivered that a Barbie movie had to involve Ken bringing patriarchy back to Barbieland at the midpoint. It could've been anything but it wasn't. She had a vision and people loved it. Poor Things would probably be my favorite screenplay candidate but I think it would be nice to see Greta Gerwig rewarded for her achievement.
I'd also really like to see Maestro given the Best Makeup award. I'm not much of a fan of the film but along with Bradley Cooper, this makeup has undeservingly become an Oscar villain this season. I've been put off by its controversy, much of which is very snarky and high school.
Other rooting interests include Jack Fisk winning Best Production Design and Martin Scorsese picking up Best Original Score on behalf of Robbie Robertson. Increasingly, I find appearances by Martin Scorsese to be very emotional. It's a shame that the only award Killers of the Flower Moon seems likely to win is Lily Gladstone whose performance I'm not the biggest fan of. I'm currently predicting Murphy and Gladstone (backing off of my Stone bullishness). I think Murphy deserves to win but it would be very nice to see Paul Giamatti take Best Actor. I also find his awards appearances to be emotional. Best Actress has been picked apart. I'm less bullish on Emma Stone winning now. Why? Maybe just the sheer force of so many predictions. I think a win for Gladstone isn't just a win for PR. Increasingly, I'm wondering if, hey, maybe voters don't feel the need to give Emma Stone two Oscars before the age of 40. And why not? Gladstone is good and her win is meaningful. But there is an undeniable narrative to her win. There is no narrative to Sandra Huller winning. She's just an internationally acclaimed actor in two Best Picture nominees this year getting her American moment right now. I'm a bigger fan of her work in other films (like Toni Erdmann) but she has at least two or three powerhouse scenes that constitute the best acting of the year. It reminds me of Imelda Staunton for Vera Drake. She had the year's strongest moments. And then there's Emma Stone, who had the best character of the year. I don't know how long we're going to be talking about Bella Baxter but we remember that name right now. Bella Baxter's journey means something. I think it's doubly impressive because as much as anyone nominated this year, Emma Stone is a movie star. From the moment she arrived in Superbad, she's had a clear, contemporary persona that she's applied to various roles. That's been the relative ceiling of her work. Occasionally, she comes across as more effectively cast than a great actor. That all changed IMO with Poor Things. It was all in service of Bella Baxter. All of those outcomes are fine with me (save for Annette Bening winning for Nyad). I think Stone would be the most deserving but Sandra Huller might feel the most unifying. When asked why she won, I think across the board the response would be "Because she's just that good."
Have fun everyone!
Stray Thoughts for Day-of
Re: Stray Thoughts for Day-of
"How's the despair?"
Re: Stray Thoughts for Day-of
I don't agree and I'll add one piece of nuance. You mention "playing Tony Stark" one too many times. I think that ignores how unexpected and miraculous Downey's casting was. As a comic book reader, Tony Stark was a character without a strong personality take. He was just an anonymous brooding billionaire. I'm tired of Tony Stark as well but I think his casting in the first place is still seen as incredibly fortuitous. Beyond that, Hollywood is as fearful a place as it's ever been. It's the inverse of the industry back when Birdman came out and was clowning on an industry that plugged every actor into superhero roles. This industry desperately wants to go back to when that was a sure thing. I suspect they want to crown Downey king and ask him to play Tony Stark one more time.Mister Tee wrote
I may be alone in this, but I'm not all that excited about Robert Downey Jr. winning tomorrow night. Which saddens me, because I really liked him, back in the day -- as far back as when he was James Woods' sidekick in True Believer (so far back, I liked James Woods, then). I rooted for him through his rehab/prison sentence period. But I haven't so much liked him subsequently. When the industry showered him with prizes after that tabloid stretch, his reaction felt cocky rather than chastened. And cocky only begins to describe his screen persona in the years since. He's had a mostly lazy career -- playing Tony Stark too many times, carrying over the persona into more or less everything (including, it's sometimes seemed, real life), doing few interesting projects till now. This may be a case of my confusing an actor's roles with his personality -- he did come across far more appealing in the Sr. documentary -- but I wonder if there's any of that feeling out there among the voters, that he's a bit full of himself. The buzz -- and results of all the TV awards shows -- suggests he's beloved. But, as I recall, we heard that about Lauren Bacall and Eddie Murphy, until after they lost, at which point the viper tongues came out. Now, I'm not saying to bet against him -- my metaphorical money is on him, and, besides, those earlier two weren't attached to a mega-blockbuster/Oscar sweeper. But if, by wild chance, Downey somehow doesn't take the trophy tomorrow night, I want to be the first to have suggested a reason.
If Downey doesn't win, I think it'll be for another reason: he's not that great. Having rewatched Oppenheimer a couple nights ago, Lewis Strauss is the one part of the film that is never entirely clear and I can catch more than a couple of Tony Starkisms in the performance. He has star power but the more I wonder if that's the right quality to that role. I don't know what Lewis Strauss believes at all by the end. Another way of putting it: it's an effective piece of casting but it's Marvel acting.
If voters go with their heart, they might opt for Gosling. The problem is (and this is a longer conversation) that there's so much hive-mindedness in play that I don't think enough voters are interested in bucking what they perceive as the inevitable.
"How's the despair?"
Re: Stray Thoughts for Day-of
The ceremony will start at 11pm local Lisbon time. This is the earliest ever. I remember in 1993 when it started here at 4am
I will get a 5 hour sleep this year
I will get a 5 hour sleep this year
Re: Stray Thoughts for Day-of
In fairness, we've also seen a fair number of films become best picture nominees that absolutely rock [Winter's Bone, Her, Mad Max: Fury Road, not to mention the foreign films that crack the line-up] that wouldn't have otherwise made it.Mister Tee wrote: ↑Sun Mar 10, 2024 12:49 am To more film-centered things: Some pundit commented that the Academy has to go for Nolan -- "They changed the best picture rules for him, and now he reaps the reward". But the point, as I see it, is that no rules needed to be changed: Oppenheimer would be just as prohibitive a favorite in a five-wide set of nominees. That lack of patience from Nolan fans (and intimidated Academy board members) only meant that we've seen The Blind Side, Darkest Hour and other non-luminaries become best picture nominees in the interim.
re: Oppenheimer - I'm genuinely curious if it can win double digits. Only costume design and supporting actress seem like no-hopers.
Re: Stray Thoughts for Day-of
Annette Bening?
-
Big Magilla
- Site Admin
- Posts: 19338
- Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:22 pm
- Location: Jersey Shore
Re: Stray Thoughts for Day-of
I think the ceremony has the potential of being plenty lively.
The actor presentations from former winners, if handled properly, could be quite memorable.
There have been few political jabs at awards ceremonies this year, but with the political winds seemingly turning against the MAGA absurdities, we could see some bolder talk by the winners with nothing left to lose. I'm thinking that this could even manifest itself in the In Memoriam segment. It probably won't happen, but I can see Navalny, the subject of last year's documentary winner, taking the last spot.
On the other hand, if nothing memorable happens, that will be okay too if it signals a return to normalcy.
The actor presentations from former winners, if handled properly, could be quite memorable.
There have been few political jabs at awards ceremonies this year, but with the political winds seemingly turning against the MAGA absurdities, we could see some bolder talk by the winners with nothing left to lose. I'm thinking that this could even manifest itself in the In Memoriam segment. It probably won't happen, but I can see Navalny, the subject of last year's documentary winner, taking the last spot.
On the other hand, if nothing memorable happens, that will be okay too if it signals a return to normalcy.
-
Mister Tee
- Tenured Laureate
- Posts: 8648
- Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 2:57 pm
- Location: NYC
- Contact:
Stray Thoughts for Day-of
Thoughts that didn't fit naturally into other threads, but that are passing through my mind now that we're inside 24 hours:
The hive mind has totally taken over, and what seemed a promising year has turned...well, if not exactly predictable...let's say there's a widely agreed-upon likelihood. The upper-reach categories that seemed seriously contested -- lead actress, the two screenplays -- have devolved into mostly consensus (Gladstone/American Fiction/Anatomy of a Fall), with the dissents (for Stone/Barbie or Oppenheimer/The Holdovers) falling into pretty deep minority. This, of course, doesn't mean the consensus is correct -- but, if it goes down anywhere, it takes most of the forecasting community with it. This can be fun -- as one who always enjoys surprises, even sometimes negative ones, I can always get behind a stunner. But the Oscars are (or used to be) a season, not a single night, and weeks of uncertainty are for me worth more than one zany night. Put it this way: last year's ultimate winners were a disappointment to me all around. But, with BAFTA and SAG splitting on all 4 acting categories, I found last year way more entertaining in the lead-up.
Another quirk I've noticed: people talk about movies or performers gaining or losing momentum, but the only thing they mean is, something else happened at a subsequent televised ceremony to change what they thought would happen. The worst thing: I'm now hearing the theory that the only reason BAFTA was right about the two top acting categories in 2020 and SAG right last year is that BAFTA went last in 2020, and SAG last in 2022. So, from now on, they'll always predict whoever won at the last place reporting in. Refine that algorithm so nothing can surprise us, ever again.
To more film-centered things: Some pundit commented that the Academy has to go for Nolan -- "They changed the best picture rules for him, and now he reaps the reward". But the point, as I see it, is that no rules needed to be changed: Oppenheimer would be just as prohibitive a favorite in a five-wide set of nominees. That lack of patience from Nolan fans (and intimidated Academy board members) only meant that we've seen The Blind Side, Darkest Hour and other non-luminaries become best picture nominees in the interim.
I may be alone in this, but I'm not all that excited about Robert Downey Jr. winning tomorrow night. Which saddens me, because I really liked him, back in the day -- as far back as when he was James Woods' sidekick in True Believer (so far back, I liked James Woods, then). I rooted for him through his rehab/prison sentence period. But I haven't so much liked him subsequently. When the industry showered him with prizes after that tabloid stretch, his reaction felt cocky rather than chastened. And cocky only begins to describe his screen persona in the years since. He's had a mostly lazy career -- playing Tony Stark too many times, carrying over the persona into more or less everything (including, it's sometimes seemed, real life), doing few interesting projects till now. This may be a case of my confusing an actor's roles with his personality -- he did come across far more appealing in the Sr. documentary -- but I wonder if there's any of that feeling out there among the voters, that he's a bit full of himself. The buzz -- and results of all the TV awards shows -- suggests he's beloved. But, as I recall, we heard that about Lauren Bacall and Eddie Murphy, until after they lost, at which point the viper tongues came out. Now, I'm not saying to bet against him -- my metaphorical money is on him, and, besides, those earlier two weren't attached to a mega-blockbuster/Oscar sweeper. But if, by wild chance, Downey somehow doesn't take the trophy tomorrow night, I want to be the first to have suggested a reason.
Something's got to liven this contest up. It can't really come down to which of Barbie/Poor Things wins costumes and/or production design, or which of Godzilla or The Creator takes visual effects. We can't rely on animated feature and the shorts for our excitement quotient. Something...anything...interesting -- please, happen.
The hive mind has totally taken over, and what seemed a promising year has turned...well, if not exactly predictable...let's say there's a widely agreed-upon likelihood. The upper-reach categories that seemed seriously contested -- lead actress, the two screenplays -- have devolved into mostly consensus (Gladstone/American Fiction/Anatomy of a Fall), with the dissents (for Stone/Barbie or Oppenheimer/The Holdovers) falling into pretty deep minority. This, of course, doesn't mean the consensus is correct -- but, if it goes down anywhere, it takes most of the forecasting community with it. This can be fun -- as one who always enjoys surprises, even sometimes negative ones, I can always get behind a stunner. But the Oscars are (or used to be) a season, not a single night, and weeks of uncertainty are for me worth more than one zany night. Put it this way: last year's ultimate winners were a disappointment to me all around. But, with BAFTA and SAG splitting on all 4 acting categories, I found last year way more entertaining in the lead-up.
Another quirk I've noticed: people talk about movies or performers gaining or losing momentum, but the only thing they mean is, something else happened at a subsequent televised ceremony to change what they thought would happen. The worst thing: I'm now hearing the theory that the only reason BAFTA was right about the two top acting categories in 2020 and SAG right last year is that BAFTA went last in 2020, and SAG last in 2022. So, from now on, they'll always predict whoever won at the last place reporting in. Refine that algorithm so nothing can surprise us, ever again.
To more film-centered things: Some pundit commented that the Academy has to go for Nolan -- "They changed the best picture rules for him, and now he reaps the reward". But the point, as I see it, is that no rules needed to be changed: Oppenheimer would be just as prohibitive a favorite in a five-wide set of nominees. That lack of patience from Nolan fans (and intimidated Academy board members) only meant that we've seen The Blind Side, Darkest Hour and other non-luminaries become best picture nominees in the interim.
I may be alone in this, but I'm not all that excited about Robert Downey Jr. winning tomorrow night. Which saddens me, because I really liked him, back in the day -- as far back as when he was James Woods' sidekick in True Believer (so far back, I liked James Woods, then). I rooted for him through his rehab/prison sentence period. But I haven't so much liked him subsequently. When the industry showered him with prizes after that tabloid stretch, his reaction felt cocky rather than chastened. And cocky only begins to describe his screen persona in the years since. He's had a mostly lazy career -- playing Tony Stark too many times, carrying over the persona into more or less everything (including, it's sometimes seemed, real life), doing few interesting projects till now. This may be a case of my confusing an actor's roles with his personality -- he did come across far more appealing in the Sr. documentary -- but I wonder if there's any of that feeling out there among the voters, that he's a bit full of himself. The buzz -- and results of all the TV awards shows -- suggests he's beloved. But, as I recall, we heard that about Lauren Bacall and Eddie Murphy, until after they lost, at which point the viper tongues came out. Now, I'm not saying to bet against him -- my metaphorical money is on him, and, besides, those earlier two weren't attached to a mega-blockbuster/Oscar sweeper. But if, by wild chance, Downey somehow doesn't take the trophy tomorrow night, I want to be the first to have suggested a reason.
Something's got to liven this contest up. It can't really come down to which of Barbie/Poor Things wins costumes and/or production design, or which of Godzilla or The Creator takes visual effects. We can't rely on animated feature and the shorts for our excitement quotient. Something...anything...interesting -- please, happen.