Screen Actors Guild Nominations

[OscarGuy]

I'm not going to count Atonement out unless it fails to appear at the PGA. You are right it's not catching on like we were expecting it to, Italiano, but let's also realize that McAvoy, Knightley and Redgrave are all understated. The entire film is understated. I find it more shocking they didn't go for the overacted Before the Devil Knows You're Dead than that they ignored a quiet film like Atonement. Plus, if you look at what DID get nominated, you'll see some uber-high-wattage performers anchoring those films and perhaps Atonement being overlooked has more to do with the fact that few of the actors are "overdue" big names. It's mostly a younger cast with one major exception and Redgrave is not an actress that commands for an entire film to be paid attention to.

I agree that Atonement took a major hit today. I disagree that it's out of the race. If PGA also ignores the film and the DGA does as well, then perhaps it will fade away.

[OscarGuy]

I wonder if Denzel's lead performances in both Great Debaters and American Gangster cancelled out. I'm not certain this is the case, but it would make more sense than him being completely ignored.

I think Travolta getting excluded in Supporting is enough to say he's not getting an Oscar nomination...it doesn't matter if Hairspray is included in Best Ensemble.

[ITALIANO]

Yes, as I said: a very interesting year (though, let's face it, through all these different messages the precursors send us each day, there is one movie which never fails to show up - and this is why, in such a contradictory, confused year, this movie almost certainly will win).

But one thing was obvious since the National Board of Review announced its awards: Atonement isn't as strong as some of us used to say (and as some still were thinking till a few hours ago). I said it clearly - and as always the reaction by the so-called experts here was shocked. Politely shocked (unlike last year) but still shocked. So I will say it again. Atonement was obviously the kind of movie actors should have loved - its failure here is a clear sign that it won't be the big winner at the Oscar. I still feel that it will get nominated for Best Picture - there MUST be a nod for a traditional, well-made, well-written period piece - and at least one from the cast should also get there. And in another year it's true that it could have had very good chances of winning. But this isn't "just another year", and the critics' awards - despite what some might say - do mean something. One just has to read it, between the lines sometimes.

[rolotomasi99]

Have you seen Sweeney Todd, rolotomasi?

not this again!

if you go to comingsoon.net you will find 17 clips from the film, along with several dozen trailers and featurettes. like DREAMGIRLS last year, i could tell from the clips i saw this film is not as incredible as people in the industry are hyping it (coincidentally the same people who hyped DREAMGIRLS).

oh, i know what some of you are already saying, "you cannot judge a film from some poorly acted, directed, and (in this case) sung clips because they have to be judged within the context of the entire movie." not for me. these clips reveal how out of place burton is in the world of a muscial, and johnny depp has admitted in countless interviews he cannot sing and would never do it again.
http://www.pantagraph.com/article....255.txt

i will eventually see this film because i love everything tim burton does visually, but the man has only once made a work of art dramatically: ED WOOD. SWEENEY TODD is burton at his visual best, but the heart of the story seems to have been sacrificed. i may not have seen the play on broadway, but even the community theatre production i saw was of higher quality than this movie.

the academy may still go crazy for this film, but i am predicting (and hoping) for another best picture shut-out similar to DREAMGIRLS.



Edited By rolotomasi99 on 1198171717

[Big Magilla]

I expect the acting branch of the Academy to nominate Depp and McAvoy over Gosling and Mortenseon and Knightley over Blanchett in the best actress race, but beyond that, who knows. If the Oscar acting slate mirors SAG's penchant for pre-December releases, youcan bet the studios will make sure their big guns are in theatres by Thanksgiving next year.

[The Original BJ]

Well, this is getting interesting. Atonement leads Globe nominations, then gets completely shut out here; Into the Wild receives only token Globe nods, then rallies back big time. Some assorted thoughts:

Obviously Atonement and Sweeney Todd will do better at the Oscars than, say, Hairspray or 3:10 to Yuma. But how well? Many of us had been looking to the Guilds to see just how strong they'd be (particularly with on-the-fence candidates like Carter and the Atonement supporting actresses). I maintain, though, that Keira Knightley is still out of luck.

It's very hard to read the buzz on American Gangster. I knew Ruby Dee would make the list here, but the ensemble nod (particularly the ensemble nod WITHOUT Denzel) is peculiar. Dee's nod for me is one of those can't-really-begrudge-the-legend-but-it's-a-nothing-performance type nominations I love/hate with equal measure.

Who'da thunk that Ryan Gosling and Viggo Mortensen would have so much staying power? After seeing both films, I wrote off the chances of both actors, yet here they are, picking up nomination after nomination. I still think Gosling has an uphill battle, but Mortensen looks pretty good for a nod now. Clooney and Day-Lewis: welcome to the Oscars.

I also wrote off the chances of Blanchett and Jolie in Actress after seeing their films. Silly me. I, too, think Blanchett will ultimately miss for a more popular candidate, but Jolie has stuck around long enough, and her film is serious enough, she could now shortlist without any surprise from me. The other three are completely set.

Yay for Tommy Lee Jones! That's what I have to say about the supporting actor lineup, though I do wonder if the Hairspray ensemble nod keeps Travolta alive.

If there's a Dennis Quaid-style snub on Oscar morning, I think it'll be Cate Blanchett in I'm Not There. Don't think it's going to happen. Hope it doesn't. But I could see it shocking everyone. Best Supporting Actress seems so amorphous at this point, anything could happen I think.

3:10 to Yuma? 3:10 to Yuma??!!! I'm still trying to process that.

Oh. And Casey Affleck CLEARLY should have been nominated in the new Stunt Category! Morons.



Edited By The Original BJ on 1198169285

[OscarGuy]

Tee hits on this and pstough doesn't, but let's remember that it's not the ENTIRE guild that votes for the nominations. Only a select few select them. So, whether they saw all of the year-end releases or not, there are less to choose nominees. Now, this may mean nothing or something, but whether they are admitted to having a problem or not, it does hurt potentially popular films. The lack of mention here will either A) embolden voters to select someone who was omitted or B) encourage voters to go with their guild and nominate respectively. Even last year (ensemble aside), there was an amazing correlation between the two. There are a LOT of lazy Academy voters out there and many of them will go with what they see as the "recognized" best judges of a field, thus why many of those excluded may also be excluded for Academy recognition.

But let's just say for sure that Catherine Keener and Ruby Dee are in the hunt for Supporting Actress, the only category that had not really had a set group of potential nominees.

[Max Wilder]

No Amy Adams? I don't like these people at all.

[FilmFan720]

And a quick hit on the TV side: Damien and I are perhaps the only ones who care, but the continued love for Mad Men and Jon Hamm is very heartening.

Count me in as a third. The most remarkable television of the year!

[anonymous1980]

SWEENEY TODD on the other hand... i hope this is the beginning of a trend with the guilds. tim burton directed a brilliant film in which johnny depp gave a brilliant performance...ten years ago. the academy had their chance to recognize them for ED WOOD but decided they were not ready. a do-over nomination for either one of them or their film is not fair to the far worthier talent this year.

Have you seen Sweeney Todd, rolotomasi?

[Mister Tee]

Well, now...

First off, thanks to SAG, for taking the rapidly gelling consensus and taking a heavy mallet to it.

However...let me expand a bit on what pstough just said, and put this in larger perspective. When you look at this list, what one word jumps out at you? For me, it's "December". As in, practically nothing for December films -- Daniel Day-Lewis and Ellen Page are it (with Juno missing a fully-expected ensemble nod).

Then think back to last year: what was the big difference between the early-named Guild nominees and the somewhat later Oscar nods? A much stronger showing for December films: Children of Men, Notes on a Scandal, Letters from Iwo Jima and Pan's Labyrinth all got writing nods they'd been denied at WGA, and Iwo Jima became the rare film to get picture/director despite being omitted by DGA.

This didn't strike us that hard, because many of the films that had been part of the early consensus -- The Departed, Babel, The Queen -- had been released in early fall, in plenty of time for Guild voters to see them. (The one December entry was Dreamgirls, which, merits aside, had been touted so long and so fiercely even my mother knew about the campaign) This year, however, the emerging consensus was dominated by December releases: Atonement, Sweeney, Juno, maybe There Will Be Blood -- throw in late-November entries The Savages and Diving Bell, also ignored today. Basically, No Country was the only film in total consensus territory that's had a wide release to date (I put Into the Wild in the edge-of-consensus category).

I can tell you, having accompanied my wife as a SAG nominator in '02, it was a real effort to see all the films with a late January deadline, and with universal screener availability. We managed to get to everything, but we met a friend or two of my wife's who confessed they'd missed a bunch of the late releases. Imagine how much worse the situation must be now, with screeners only spottily available, and many of the prime films simply not available for casual viewing.

What I'm saying is, this may be an unusually unrepresentative list -- SAG's list of, mostly, the best films of January through Thanksgiving 2007. I wouldn't expect anything like a repeat of last year's near-match with Oscar in the acting categories. I think Atonement and Sweeney and Juno are far more alive than this list would suggest. (If you disagree, you almost have to make the argument that Hairspray and American Gangster are top contenders for best picture nominations, and that this year's final race will be tween Into the wild and No Country for Old Men. I can't make that leap)

As for what's here...I'm pleased with the Into the Wild showing. I'm DELIGHTED Tommy Lee Jones hasn't been overlooked (though he may have benefitted from Charlie Wilson's War's being December-euchred). I continue to disbelieve in Blanchett/Elizabeth -- I analogize her to Russell Crowe in Cinderella Man, who got all the early nods, too, but fell to a more worthy replacement at the Oscars. (It was too decent a year for actresses for the Oscars to settle for a seat-filler nod like this. Whatever some here think of Amy Adams, her reviews were head and shoulders above Blanchett, and Linney or Knightley would also make better candidates)

Adams, however, is one person you'd have to say truly suffered today, since her film was at least widely seen (though it too was a late November release). And perhaps the biggest sufferer was Michael Clayton for best picture -- even with three acting nods, it couldn't knock off Hairspray or 3:10 to Yuma for an ensemble nod. (It brought to mind Mutiny on the Bounty winning the best film Oscar after The Infomer won acting, directing, writing and score -- prompting the wag to say "I guess they liked everything about The Informer except the picture")

No Country now appears the favorite for ensemble, but it's meaningless in the same way Helen Mirren's Gosford Park win was -- only possible because the rest of the varsity wasn't allowed on the field.

And a quick hit on the TV side: Damien and I are perhaps the only ones who care, but the continued love for Mad Men and Jon Hamm is very heartening.



Edited By Mister Tee on 1198166295

[pstough]

Word over on GoldDerby (so take it with a grain of salt) is that screeners were not sent to SAG members for "Charlie Wilson's War" and "Sweeney Todd". Since these films hadn't opened wide when ballots were due, it's likely that most SAG members had not seen these films. Screeners also were not sent out for "Enchanted", but were sent for most other major contenders, including "There Will Be Blood" and "Juno". I don't know if any were sent for "Atonement", however.

Edit:

Here's the link (scroll all the way to the bottom):

GoldDerby Message Board

[Mike Kelly]

What a difficult year for predicting Best Picture nominees. Other than No Country for Old Men and possibly Juno, the other candidates seem to come and go en masse. Maybe the other guilds will narrow it down. Right now the last three slots look like a fight among: Michael Clayton, Into the Wild, Atonement, Sweeney Todd and There Will be Blood - with three or four possible dark horse spoilers lurking.



Edited By Mike Kelly on 1198162910

[rolotomasi99]

so happy about viggo. best performance of any size or gender i saw this year (though i have not seen mr. day-lewis yet).

i am confused about the sag awards. you have to be a member of the guild to be nominated, right? is saoirse ronan a member? ATONEMENT being completely shut-out is surprising, but not end-game for the film in terms of oscars.

marcia gay harden was not nominated for POLLOCK, but went on to win the oscar. i am sure there are other examples like that. i would not count out any of the ATONEMENT players yet.

SWEENEY TODD on the other hand... i hope this is the beginning of a trend with the guilds. tim burton directed a brilliant film in which johnny depp gave a brilliant performance...ten years ago. the academy had their chance to recognize them for ED WOOD but decided they were not ready. a do-over nomination for either one of them or their film is not fair to the far worthier talent this year.

[rudeboy]

I think only one of them will get in. But not both.

I agree that their prospects look a little more iffy but if both do big business over Christmas they could still both be nominated. It's not like 3:10 to Yuma or Hairspray are serious best picture contenders. Most of the films nominated by the Actors today have been in wide release for some time. Both Sweeney and Atonement are strong contenders for multiple Golden Globe wins, and are likely to be heavily nominated by the tech branches.

I'm more intrigued by Gosling and Mortensen, who are showing up everywhere - did anyone expect that? Also, while I'm in no hurry to see American Gangster, I'm delighted that the always wonderful Dee has been rewarded with a nomination. And Into the Wild makes a fantastic showing - Holbrook is looking pretty safe now but I have fingers crossed for Hirsch and Keener too.



Edited By rudeboy on 1198162514