My first predictions of the year (pre-fall festivals)

[mlrg]

First reactions to House of Gucci... it's not going to be Ridley Scott's year.

Reactions seem to be all over the place. From plain atrocious to Godfather vibes. Anyway, it seems Gaga is poised for a second acting nomination.

[flipp525]

First reactions to House of Gucci... it's not going to be Ridley Scott's year.

Tell me more…

[Sabin]

First reactions to House of Gucci... it's not going to be Ridley Scott's year.

[flipp525]

Spencer deserves a slot on the Best Picture list. Apart from its sure-fire nod (and most probable win) for Kristen Stewart it also deserves nods for Pablo Laraín's direction, the screenplay, production design, cinematography, costumes, and editing. Long shot nods for the score, sound design and in support for Sally Hawkins and Timothy Spall.

Both Hawkins and Spall make such vivid impressions during their limited time on the screen, I don’t see how they can’t be in the conversation for supporting nods. They are both such classic supporting performances that used to be nominated regularly in other Oscar eras.

Kristen Stewart is in a different conversation by herself for the film - she’s a sure-fire nominee and will perhaps win it all. It’s such a memorable, multi-faceted performance that really lingers afterwards. I thought Emma Corrin was wonderful in The Crown but this is just another level.

[Reza]

Spencer deserves a slot on the Best Picture list. Apart from its sure-fire nod (and most probable win) for Kristen Stewart it also deserves nods for Pablo Laraín's direction, the screenplay, production design, cinematography, costumes, and editing. Long shot nods for the score, sound design and in support for Sally Hawkins and Timothy Spall.

[rolotomasi99]

My critic buddy saw Belfast and said he doesn't think it's winning Best Picture. He said it's not emotional enough. It's a bit more rambling than one would guess. He says these qualities of what it is not make it a bit more interesting than one would anticipate but at no point did he think it had that *thing* that wins over Academy voters.

We have had two art house Best Picture winners in a row, and I feel like the crowd pleaser contingent of the Academy is clamoring for a winner this year. Just from early reports, I figured BELFAST might be that film since it could pull together those two groups as it straddles the line of artsy and mainstream -- like a mash-up of of ROMA and GREEN BOOK. With the film focusing on a country divided against itself with culture wars turning into actual violence, it might feel like exactly the right movie we need at this moment. No offense to your friend Sabin, but I still feel like BELFAST is in the best position to win, but an alternative I have recently been considering is KING RICHARD.

Like BELFAST, it is being released around the Thanksgiving holiday to appeal to the family crowds. From the trailers I have seen, the movie is combining the excitement of a sports movie with the heart of a family drama and just a dash of racial justice (but not too much to scare away the Red State audience). From what I have heard, Lead Actor is Will Smith's to lose, but will that be enough to propel it to Best Picture? SPOTLIGHT took the top prize with only a Screenplay win, but even in the early wild years of the Academy Awards, no Best Picture winner has accompanied a sole acting win. Anything seems possible these days as GREEN BOOK won without a Director nomination and PARASITE of course was also an International Film winner.

However, being crowned Best Picture based only on Will Smith's winning performance still feels unlikely at this point. Perhaps it could be a double acting win with Aunjanue Ellis taking Supporting Actress as well. That I could buy a little more because I doubt the film is going to be nominated for Director (than again, I said the same thing about JOKER). Original Screenplay and Editing nominations seem very possible but wins would be long shots.

Then again, maybe something like NIGHTMARE ALLEY will be considered mainstream enough in comparison to NOMADLAND. After all, THE SHAPE OF WATER was viewed as a more mainstream choice after the pure art house pick of MOONLIGHT. Del Toro's movie is star-studded and it has a good chance of doing quite well down ballot, but Academy voters have to be in mood for some darker fare since it is missing the romantic whimsy of the director's last Best Picture winner.

I am keeping BELFAST at the top of my Best Picture predictions list for now, but KING RICHARD and NIGHTMARE ALLEY are right behind it.

[Sabin]

My critic buddy saw Belfast and said he doesn't think it's winning Best Picture. He said it's not emotional enough. It's a bit more rambling than one would guess. He says these qualities of what it is not make it a bit more interesting than one would anticipate but at no point did he think it had that *thing* that wins over Academy voters.

[Big Magilla]

I don't recall the character from the novel. Steenburgen's role is probably a cameo, maybe as one of the people taken advantage of at the carnival. I wouldn't think she'd be a serious contender.

[rolotomasi99]

I read something about Mara's role being beefed up, essentially at the expense of Collette's character.

In the book and the 1947 film version, Joan Blondell in the role Collette has in this one, was the most sympathetic character. Apparently many of her characteristics and lines have been transferred to Mara's character.

I could not find the character played by Steenburgen (Miss Harrington) listed in the credits for the 1947 version. Do you know, Big Magilla, if her character was created for this adaptation, or is she from the book but was just not included in the original film? She must be more than a cameo if Searchlight is campaigning her alongside Blanchett and Collette.

[Big Magilla]

I read something about Mara's role being beefed up, essentially at the expense of Collette's character.

In the book and the 1947 film version, Joan Blondell in the role Collette has in this one, was the most sympathetic character. Apparently many of her characteristics and lines have been transferred to Mara's character. Still, I would be shocked if that's enough to make Mara's character stand out enough to win Best Actress awards for what is still essentially a supporting role without Bradley Cooper winning for playing a character that should be in every scene. Think Jack Nicolson and Louise Fletcher in One Flew over the Cuckoo's Nest. That just doesn't seem to be in the cards this year.

[Reza]

BEST ACTRESS IN A SUPPORTING ROLE
Toni Collette, Nightmare Alley
Ariana DeBose, West Side Story
Ann Dowd, Mass
Kirsten Dunst, The Power of the Dog
Marlee Matlin, CODA

This may not change anyone's predictions, but just thought folks should know Searchlight is officially campaigning Blanchett as Supporting in NIGHTMARE ALLEY along with Collette and Steenburgen. Mara is the only female Lead along with Cooper as male Lead. The male Supporting category is quite crowded for this film, with Dafoe, Jenkins, Perlman, and Strathairn.

I'm actually surprised that Rooney Mara is being campaigned as a lead. In the original version of Nightmare Alley (1947) with Tyrone Power all the characters supported Power who was the only lead. Coleen Gray who played the part that Rooney Mara has was also supporting. Helen Walker played the part Blanchett has in the remake while Joan Blondell played the part Toni Collette has in the remake. All supporting including every male character other than the one played by Power.

By the way its well worth checking out the 1947 version. Tyrone Power richly deserved an Oscar nomination for it. Zanuck found the film extremely distasteful so kept it out of circulation until a re-release in 1956-57 when it became a success at drive-in cinemas.

[rolotomasi99]

BEST ACTRESS IN A SUPPORTING ROLE
Toni Collette, Nightmare Alley
Ariana DeBose, West Side Story
Ann Dowd, Mass
Kirsten Dunst, The Power of the Dog
Marlee Matlin, CODA

This may not change anyone's predictions, but just thought folks should know Searchlight is officially campaigning Blanchett as Supporting in NIGHTMARE ALLEY along with Collette and Steenburgen. Mara is the only female Lead along with Cooper as male Lead. The male Supporting category is quite crowded for this film, with Dafoe, Jenkins, Perlman, and Strathairn.

[Sabin]

Mister Tee wrote
DiCaprio makes your argument better, in that The Revenant got a multitude of nominations (many undeserved). But, for the life of me, I can't see what about that grunting performance rates a capital P. DiCaprio was miles better in pretty much all his other nominations (yes, even Blood Diamond). But, again, the bloggers had decided it was his time, and his strongest competitor, Michael Fassbender, had seen his film tank at the box office, and everyone thought it was "time" for Leo.

Your conclusion is: yes, sentiment can carry the day. Lousy competition helps too. That lineup was dreadful.

rolotomasi99 wrote
After all, many folks are predicting Jane Campion will be nominated for Director, and she has never won despite her long career.

Her career may be long but after The Piano, it hasn't been terribly full. She's directed five narrative features in the last twenty-eight years, none of which made a ripple. It's certainly possible that she's seen as due for a career directing win but -- I wonder -- seen by who?

[Mister Tee]

Scorsese's Director victory was for a movie that also won Best Picture so clearly it was generally well loved just beyond Scorsese being due.

Pacino, DiCaprio, and Oldman all won in Best Picture nominees, and they were giving capital P performances that would have been hard to ignore even if these were not their first Oscar victories.

Wayne perhaps had career sentiment behind him, but he was also playing a pretty great character who earned another actor a nomination as well, 40 years later. I think anyone who had played Rooster Cogburn in 1969 could have won because the character is just that much fun.

I'd argue that the sentiment for Scorsese made The Departed the ultimate victor in a best picture race without much of a front-runner. The main critics' awards (NY, LA, NBR) went to United 93 and Letters from Iwo Jima; the Drama globe went to Babel; PGA and SAG chose Little Miss Sunshine; BAFTA The Queen -- only the Broadcasters picked The Departed. But Scorsese as best director was a widely held choice (NY, Boston, Chicago Critics; NBR; Globe; Broadcasters), and that helped propel the film over the rest of the field in a race that remained up in the air till the end. Which is to say, Scorsese made the film a best picture winner, not the other way around.

Pacino's performance was as much mocked in some quarters back then as it is today. But there wasn't that much competition (prime candidate Denzel having just won for supporting a few years earlier), and people came around to the idea Al's career had to be honored at some point, so why not now, for a performance that was certainly noticeable? Scent of a Woman was not a particularly highly regarded film, and its Globe victory and best picture nomination (at the expense of The Player) was see as a big surprise, largely a corollary of the best actor push. Like with Scorsese: it was a best picture nominee because Al was a best actor favorite, not vice versa.

Ditto on Gary Oldman, who had the added edge of bloggers touting him for the prize from the moment he was cast in the role. Darkest Hour played no significant part in that year's heated best picture discussion; it was on the slate because it contained the performance that was going to win best actor. (Even though it's a pretty bad one.)

DiCaprio makes your argument better, in that The Revenant got a multitude of nominations (many undeserved). But, for the life of me, I can't see what about that grunting performance rates a capital P. DiCaprio was miles better in pretty much all his other nominations (yes, even Blood Diamond). But, again, the bloggers had decided it was his time, and his strongest competitor, Michael Fassbender, had seen his film tank at the box office, and everyone thought it was "time" for Leo.

John Wayne's reviews for True Grit were the best of his career, but chiefly in gratitude that he was doing more than his "Greetings, pilgrim" thing. As far as actual acclaim, Voight and Hoffman's performances dominated the critics' voting that year, with Wayne not even in the discussion. But everyone knew -- literally, from early summer, when both films were already playing -- that Wayne would win, because he was a Hollywood legend and these kids would have other chances. It was the ultimate sentimental choice.

ON EDIT: No one's saying these wins were 100% based on sentimentality (though one mlrg mentions, Don Ameche, comes close). They had to get vaguely into awards discussion to be even nominated. But ask yourself how many of these candidates would have won if they'd been unknowns/young faces. It was their veteran, overdue status that propelled them to wins over, in most cases, far more deserving candidates.

After all, many folks are predicting Jane Campion will be nominated for Director, and she has never won despite her long career.

She does, of course, have an Oscar for screenwriting, which with the exception of the Coens, has often precluded directors from winning subsequent directing prizes. There wasn't enough sentiment for Tarantino to "finally" win best director for Once Upon a Time in Hollywood, because his two screenplay awards were deemed enough recognition.

[mlrg]

I do not buy into the idea Academy members pick winners based on who is overdue -- just look at Peter O'Toole and Glenn Close. However, I think Sabin is correct that Branagh is a well-liked actor and director, which could help him in a tight race.

Sure, there are a few examples of folks who have been nominated a bunch of times and never won, but there are also lots of examples of “career” Oscars. Al Pacino, Paul Newman, Leonardo DiCaprio, Gary Oldman, Martin Scorsese, and John Wayne come immediately to mind. Of course they also sometimes choose fresh faces. All I’m saying is that all things being relatively equal there is a tendency to reward those who have a storied career.

Of the five examples you gave, the only one I would say is a "career" win is Paul Newman for a perfectly serviceable performance in THE COLOR OF MONEY. There was also the factor that he was reprising his greatest performance from 25 years ago so the symmetry was just too perfect.

Scorsese's Director victory was for a movie that also won Best Picture so clearly it was generally well loved just beyond Scorsese being due.

Pacino, DiCaprio, and Oldman all won in Best Picture nominees, and they were giving capital P performances that would have been hard to ignore even if these were not their first Oscar victories.

Wayne perhaps had career sentiment behind him, but he was also playing a pretty great character who earned another actor a nomination as well, 40 years later. I think anyone who had played Rooster Cogburn in 1969 could have won because the character is just that much fun.

However, to both our larger points, I think if Branagh wins it will be because audiences just truly love BELFAST, not because anyone thinks they owe him a win. After all, many folks are predicting Jane Campion will be nominated for Director, and she has never won despite her long career. Interestingly, both Campion and Branagh debuted as film directors in 1989.

I agree with your comments abour career wins. They are much more of a reality in supporting categories with the likes of Ameche, Connery, Coburn, Williams, Arkin, Dench, Freeman, Robbins, Landau, Palance, Gielgud, and the list goes on and on.