DGA Winners

[Sabin]

OscarGuy wrote
Parasite might have actually been better NOT winning SAG in that situation.

Or Moonlight would have been better winning the SAG.

I think the one question is whether Parasite is more “the actor’s film.” I don’t think that’s the case.

[Okri]

Hmm...

I think 1917 is just a little too far ahead at this point for Parasite to catch up. It would be a disappointing outcome to this year for Parasite to only win foreign language film, though.

[OscarGuy]

I am not sure why I had down that it did. I must have copied something over wrong.

That does re-frame the argument entirely as that eliminates the one route Parasite could have carried momentum towards the Oscars. In that case, it's 5/2/2 in the PGA/DGA vs SAG reference. Parasite might have actually been better NOT winning SAG in that situation. That means in 24 years, SAG matched Best Picture only 11 times. For PGA, it's 16 times (including the wonky tie year). For DGA, it's 16 as well and of those 16 times between PGA/DGA, they both matched in tandem 12 of the times.

[Mister Tee]

Since multiple people here seem to have forgotten: Moonlight DIDN'T win SAG in 2016; Hidden Figures did.

[Sabin]

anonymous1980 wrote
No, it's not. If anything, it could be a slightly weaker frontrunner. You seem to forget that Birdman was nominated for multiple SAG awards and won Best Ensemble. 1917 wasn't nominated for ANY SAG awards. The last time a film won Best Picture without any SAG nominations was Braveheart and that's 24 years ago.

Sure, that ignores two thing though: the strength of the SAG Ensemble as a precursor has been minimized AND the fact that the SAG Ensemble was likely the only nomination it could get. Maybe Actor but unlikely.

When La La Land lost a SAG Ensemble nomination and Moonlight won, I thought this award was crucial. Then The Shape of Water won without one and Green Book did the same. Yes, those films all got acting nominations and actors make up the biggest branch, but I think that forgets something else as well:

1) We’re talking about which film with no acting nominations is better loved by actors. Neither film got a SAG, Golden Globe, or BAFTA nomination for a specific actor. So it’s hard for me to accept the idea of Parasite as “the actor’s choice” when it very well might still be 1917, SAG notwithstanding bc the actors can recognize other actors in 1917.

2) That narrative basically would position 1917 as The Revenant to Parasite’s Spotlight, La La Land to Moonlight, and Roma to Green Book. 1917 has more precursors going into the race than The Revenant and Roma (same as La La Land) and Parasite is weaker than Spotlight (no acting nominations) and Green Book (but stronger than Moonlight). Which is to say 1917 might be stronger than those films that lost.

1917 doesn’t have an acting nomination but it shouldn’t. It doesn’t have an editing nomination but it shouldn’t. It has a writing nomination... and it also probably shouldn’t. But it does.

No, it doesn’t have any acting nominations but it’s up against another movie that doesn’t have any either. We can’t forget that Roma got acting nominations largely because Best Actress and Supporting Actress were crazy weak fields to the point where Emily Blunt was probably the likely runner up in both categories for Mary Poppins Returns and A Quiet Place.

OscarGuy wrote
I know a lot of people want Parasite to win, but don't let that cloud you to the possibility that it's probably going to lose. For 1917 to lose a la Saving Private Ryan, it would need to be up against a light comedy with a large ensemble. Parasite is definitely not that.

This is such a good point. I want to reframe it a little...

For Parasite to win, it needed to be more different than 1917. I know both films on the surface couldn’t seem more different but that’s not true. They’re both important issue dramas (war/class disparity) that have a cutting edge feel to them for different reasons. But most importantly, Parasite never had time to position itself as an “underdog response” to 1917. It’s basically been the “underdog response” to every film in the race. Just when it was done being the underdog response to The Irishman, it was the underdog response to Once Upon a Time in Hollywood. It doesn’t have time to “rebrand” itself which is why this race doesn’t *feel* like La La Land vs Moonlight or Roma vs Green Book. The race just feels like 1917’s to lose.

[OscarGuy]

Since the SAG cast award was created, PGA/DGA disagreeing with SAG has happened 9 times. 3 of those times saw the SAG winner take Best Picture (Shakespeare in Love, Crash, Moonlight). 5 of those times, the PGA/DGA winner took the Oscar (The English Patient, Titanic, The Hurt Locker, The Artist, The Shape of Water). 1 of those times, neither winner won with the Academy (12 Years a Slave), which was an odd year because that's the year that PGA tied between Gravity and 12 Years, so it did technically win one of the three awards. In that case, we could also look at it as a three-way split (if not counting Gravity and in those cases, SAG winner won once, the PGA winner thrice, and the DGA winner twice).

So, what can we learn from this? A slight majority have favored the PGA/DGA winner over the SAG one. The only hope for Parasite of the SAG example is Moonlight, the only critically acclaimed movie of the three to sweep the precursors. On the PGA/DGA side, 1917 has a lot more in common with English Patient, Titanic, and Hurt Locker than it does with Artist or Shape of Water. That said, in all three of the five of the PGA/DGA cases, the PGA/DGA winner won a mini- or a major-sweep. English Patient (9 of 12), Titanic (11 of 14), and The Hurt Locker (6 of 9). On top of that, all five were either the top nominee of their year or received double-digit nominations.

For the three SAG winners, Shakespeare in Love (7 of 13) was the only sweeper (though PGA/DGA Saving Private Ryan did take a strong 5 awards) while Crash and Moonlight only won 3 Oscars apiece. Neither Crash nor Moonlight were the most nominated films of their year.

With that data out of the way, let's look at the films that won SAG and lost PGA/DGA as well as the PGA/DGA winners that lost to SAG.

On the SAG winner side, The Birdcage, The Full Monty, Inglourious Basterds, The Help, American Hustle, and Three Billboards won SAG, but lost the Oscar. On the PGA side, it was Saving Private Ryan, Brokeback Mountain, Gravity, and La La Land.

Comparing these, The Birdcage was nominated for 1 Oscar and was the only one of those films not to get a Best Picture nomination. It was the flukiest of the fluky SAG winners. The Full Monty (4), Inglourious (8), Help (4), Hustle (10), and Billboards (7) versus Pvt Ryan (11), Brokeback (8), Gravity (10), and La La Land (13). So, the PGA winner was a double-digit nominee or the most nominated film of its year. The opposite is true of the SAG winners with only American Hustle being the year's most nominated film.

Within the first comparisons, Parasite only closely resembles Moonlight while 1917 looks more like an English Patient/Hurt Locker combo. So, is Parasite more of a Moonlight than 1917 is more of an English Patient/Hurt Locker?

For the second set of comparisons, Parasite looks more like Full Monty/Help/Billboards while 1917 resembles Pvt. Ryan. Or is Parasite more of a Full Monty/Help/Billboards versus 1917 being a Private Ryan?

I know a lot of people want Parasite to win, but don't let that cloud you to the possibility that it's probably going to lose. For 1917 to lose a la Saving Private Ryan, it would need to be up against a light comedy with a large ensemble. Parasite is definitely not that. Whereas the opposite situation, with Parasite being the critically acclaimed film, it would have to be going up against another critically acclaimed film, but this one a juggernaut a la La La Land.

Ultimately, I think Parasite chances, based on this data is incredibly small.

[anonymous1980]

I sort of thing Parasite may have run its course. It will win Best Foreign Language Film at the Oscars and may sneak in a couple of minor awards (Editing & Screenplay) but it unlikely to win director and will struggle for a Picture win.

Screenplay isn't a "minor" award. In fact, I think if it DOES win Screenplay, it has a legitimate shot to win Best Picture.

[Precious Doll]

I sort of thing Parasite may have run its course. It will win Best Foreign Language Film at the Oscars and may sneak in a couple of minor awards (Editing & Screenplay) but it unlikely to win director and will struggle for a Picture win.

[anonymous1980]

If SAG were an actor heavy film its lack of a nomination in any category might be a factor but there was no place for 1917 to have snared a nomination there.

Into the Wild was practically a one-man show for a huge chunk of it and that somehow got a SAG Ensemble nomination. 1917 couldn't even get in Stunts.

[Big Magilla]

1917 is in VERY good company. If it wins the BAFTA, it's going into the Oscars a stronger front-runner than Birdman.

No, it's not. If anything, it could be a slightly weaker frontrunner. You seem to forget that Birdman was nominated for multiple SAG awards and won Best Ensemble. 1917 wasn't nominated for ANY SAG awards. The last time a film won Best Picture without any SAG nominations was Braveheart and that's 24 years ago.

If Parasite wins WGA, there could be hope for the #Bonghive yet.

If SAG were an actor heavy film its lack of a nomination in any category might be a factor but there was no place for 1917 to have snared a nomination there. It's still the Oscar front-runner but that doesn't mean it can't be beaten by one of the other nominees.

[anonymous1980]

1917 is in VERY good company. If it wins the BAFTA, it's going into the Oscars a stronger front-runner than Birdman.

No, it's not. If anything, it could be a slightly weaker frontrunner. You seem to forget that Birdman was nominated for multiple SAG awards and won Best Ensemble. 1917 wasn't nominated for ANY SAG awards. The last time a film won Best Picture without any SAG nominations was Braveheart and that's 24 years ago.

If Parasite wins WGA, there could be hope for the #Bonghive yet.

[Sabin]

Now that we're at the end of the decade, it's kind of baffling that the one movie to win the DGA, PGA, SAG, Golden Globe, and BAFTA... is Argo. Truly, the biggest front-runner of the decade. In the 2000's, there were two: Slumdog Millionaire and The Return of the King.

It seems pretty certain that 1917 will win the BAFTA but let's hold off on that calculus for a moment. How many movies this decade won three of those four major precursors (DGA, PGA, SAG, Golden Globe) thus far?

The Artist, Birdman, The King's Speech, and La La Land.

1917 is in VERY good company. If it wins the BAFTA, it's going into the Oscars a stronger front-runner than Birdman.

It has been disorienting to watch this race evaporate before my eyes.

[Reza]

Outstanding Directorial Achievement in Feature Film
Sam Mendes, 1917

Shit!! This screws it up for the South Korean.

[Sabin]

Outstanding Directorial Achievement in Feature Film
Sam Mendes, 1917

Outstanding Directorial Achievement of a First-Time Feature Film Director
Alma Har’el, Honey Boy

Outstanding Directorial Achievement in Documentary
Steven Bognar and Julia Reichert, American Factory