The State of the Race: Oscar Nominations Drop at Last

“People should not underestimate how huge it is that Once Upon a Time
missed editing. That is an enormous hurdle for it to overcome. The editing miss has predicted many a lock, from Brokeback Mountain to Roma last year. I think Once Upon a Time is out.”

So you think they should overestimate how huge it is, instead! 🙂 Interesting… Even though no fewer than 10 films have won BP without it. Unlike directing, where only 3 movies have won without that nomination since the editing category even first came into existence. So, Jojo Rabbit is somehow not out, despite its directing snub – now, that’s some cherry-picking right there!… Even though, throughout all 22 years of preferential voting for BP at the Oscars (1935-1946 and 2010-2019) there are actually 3 winners without an editing nomination, as opposed to only 2 without a directing nomination…

Nope… A single snub, however big, is never enough to rule out a movie. (Unless it’s at the PGA, but that’s only happened once anyway – a top contender being snubbed for that -, so it’s pretty much moot.) At least four (and in fact more like six) movies are still in play for the BP win. With varying degrees of likelihood, obviously, but Once is certainly not among the least likely – quite the contrary…

Joker missed DGA and SAG ensemble. The Irishman hasn’t won ANYTHING major televised. They most certainly have major handicaps…

Definitely could still happen… The (perceived) BD front-runner is super-vulnerable (huge no-acting-or-editing-noiminations stat going against it, plus it only tied at Critics Choice). An “upset” may well be in the works.

Can’t ignore acting snubs. But, yes, I agree it looks stronger than The Revenant. But that’s not saying much. The Revenant was never very likely to win BP, stats-wise. Not at all…

“I feel like 1917 needs two big guild wins as opposed to being seen as a directorial feat and nothing else”

Precisely. Because of the lack of acting nods. (Also, Braveheart is the only movie to win BP with zero SAG nominations so far. Quite a while ago…)

Probable SAG winner is not Jojo. It’s almost anything but. 🙂 WGA is probably not Parasite – foreign films never win there. (Even though some have been eligible and nominated, most recently Roma.) The Irishman, maybe. 1917 favorite for DGA is more than debatable, but it’s certainly one of the strongest possibilities.

These were not new things for me (I was brought up to always try to see things from the other person’s perspective), nor was the movie saying anything else I found particularly interesting, but I find it very cool that it had that impact on you and, if it had such an impact on at least a few other people, it’s perhaps a more worthwhile movie than I’d originally thought.

But it IS OUATIH or Parasite… 🙂

Continuing my post on 1917, where i rated it as the 5th best war film of modern era in heart of my generation, I feel it must be stacked up to gain perspective against raft of other war movies. again they are rated as greatest 1 being greatest to 9 being beginning of Brilliant:

1. Saving Private Ryan
2. Dunkirk
3. Three Kings
4. The Hurt Locker
5. 1917
6. The Thin Red Line
7. Rules of Engagement
8. Black Hawk Down
9. American Sniper

But a war film i believe needs to be broken down when talking about how oscar worthy it is in 5 categories: Overall appeal and impact (above- overall rating), Artistic integrity, Realism, Epic factor, and importance historically and relevance to today.

So my next rating of the above is for ARTISTIC integrity:

1. Saving Private Ryan
2. Dunkirk
3. 1917
4. The Hurt Locker
5. The Thin Red line
6. Three Kings
7. Black Hawk Down
8. Rules of Engagement
9. American Sniper

1917 includes its ratings here.

But now we go to realism…and i particularly looked at this objectively- esp. when it comes to 1917 i explain when i do actual meat of the review part of 1917 shortly:

1. Saving Private Ryan
2. The Hurt Locker
3. Black Hawk Down
4. Three Kings
5. Dunkirk
6. American Sniper
7. The Thin Red Line
8. 1917
9. Rules of Engagement

Epic Factor trying to seperate Epic from realism is hard but necessary as there general belief that whatever story is told must be in bigger picture of theatre of war..even small story cannot isolate the bigger desperation and stakes of battle characters are involved with and the broader conflict at hand must be referenced to..

1. Saving Private Ryan
2. Dunkirk
3. Black Hawk Down
4. The Thin Red Line
5. Rules of Engagement
6. 1917
7. The Thin Red Line
8. Three Kings
9. American Sniper

Importance Historically and relevance today this combines extent it resonates with regards to films engagement understanding of subject matter how it conveyed to audiences and also historical importance of film to Hollywood itself.

1. Saving Private Ryan
2. 1917
3. The Hurt Locker
4. Three Kings
5. Dunkirk
6. Rules of Engagement
7. The Thin Red Line
8. American Sniper
9. Black Hawk Down

It has to be said 1917 has been incredibly difficult to calculate or compare…but perhaps that cos it importance to the film industry as never before has there been such a realistic upclose and personal point of view portrayal of war let alone film focuses so intimately in great detail of WWI before.

BUT importance is NOT Everything. Once can understand the hype about this film..But i cannot help but think that 1917 which has timed it run for awards win out from nowhere almost perfectly at campaigning level has to be said…and i feel not taking away from relevance and importance of films achievement – and it tribute to those soldiers and generations of deceased who didn’t survive ‘the war to end all wars’ (WWI)- and who obviously have to have their grandchildren and great grandchildren have stories of their great grandparents and grandparents (in event they still teeny amoutn alive who living past age of 100 yrs) and it cannot be emphasized how significant 1917 is to those people..and way it conveyed to film public it simple film..purposefully focused on telling a singular perspective.

BUT BUT BUT- that where my praise ends. let look at my overall ratings to which when academy votes they MUST consider the overall ratings of one war film against another. AS many as myself overwhelmingly feel to this day that, indeed Saving PRivate Ryan was robbed..as far as a runner up it did indeed win second most oscars for a war film behind next most which was 7 or 8 inc best pic for a war movie. But many felt it was robbed…people nit picked unforgiveably but they entitled to in my view some of ‘quiet’ chatter btw battles or sentimentality..but critics of SAving PRivate Ryan ought to look at 1917 for not since Saving Private Ryan has there been a more sentimental intimate story- it not direct criticism takes away from height of 1917 cinematic achievements but it takes awaysomewhat from other components of 1917 as overall rating compared to oscars past nominated and oscar winning war films. The Academy MUST consider especially IF 1917 wins best picture at oscars how many additional oscars it wins.

For instance my rating for other war movies focuses on my generation as young adults i could go forever to rate further back esp. 70’s and 80’s but many felt Platoon was most defining war film still amongst most to this day it won help me out guys about 4 oscars? Saving Private Ryan for runner up given it stil to this day no question the definitve game changer in how realism and atristry merge and drama all go to that in your face real dramatic level as close as any war film has gone to being having audiences look at confronting, disturbing realities of war backed in by unforgettable epic vistas but not losing site of intense realism directly as translated on big screen from cluster real war veterans beyond that it film style through it realism has been interpreted and huge source of influernce in several movies since who could forget Ridley Scott in his oscar winning GLADIATOR 2 years later admitted his influence was Saving Private Ryan..fair to say no question Private Ryan was influence to Ridley Scott for Black Hawk Down too., Scott words not mine.

1917 if it wins best picture i certainly will commend the academy- but look at the ratings in my broken down caregory for 1917

for 1917.

For Artsitic Integrity 3rd place– this is because there no denying given so so few WWI films have been made who could forget combined challenge of one continuous shot- as in one moment in time journey from start of mission to finish- and all different times of day merged into it how that been captured- it without question in top 3 and who could forget imagery of horizon vistas of dawn and dusk over france particularly that superb in my view of 2 absolute outstanding brilliance of night silhouette and chase through war ruins and then one of final scenes where he racing in opposite direction to germans bombing the delayed ‘2nd’ push. (but i have criticism of that aand certain other sequences too for 1917

For Realism and intensity 8th place Now I gonna relay same sequence i described above..it memorable artistically in terms of Mendes interpretation of journals..but i cant help but feel there have been things that have been missed opportunity and this is exacty why 1917 is NOT amongst greatest of greatest of war films ever made just under great in truth but more on that ltr. I never heard of underrepresentation and we never really know for sure…And I can understand the context for bulk of 2 soldiers journey that, indeed as journal of soldier as example of what films goal was specifically to recreate and why..at end credits, that indeed aftermath of carnage was seen more than the carnage itself. But WHEN particularly moments characters central to story are shot at..other than fact amount of shots they not hit..and one time they are is that sort of barnyard scene and person was killed cos he was really dumb enough trust enemy that way he got killed..by the way, even though there was no medic on scene fact that no attempt to seal the wound , that it was a stab wound sure he died cos of lost blood but sheer length of time took for soldier to die, honestly, i looked aroundno of people shaking their heads that i was in cinema with even my dad who read accounts and was told more to the point particularly form his father first hand of when he had to tend to wounded though my dads dad was not a medic..and in fact my dad worked as assistant grenadier supplier delivering supplies to local bases that would then deploy soldiers to other battles overseas (after vietnam of course- my dad was only 3 during vietnam war) so right here in writing is EVIDENCE that unofrtunately diminishes credibility of 1917 for realism. yes, you get desperate in war time is short you dont know when next shot comes from where next bomb above comes or how far away approaching ambush is..but stil if nobody in site how long does it REALLY take to seal a knife wound before they bleed out? Cos THAT EXACTLY WHAT MY LATE GRANDFATHER DID in WWII. and saved lives you dont need to be a trained field medical expert to rap a bandage you could see plenty of and even when soldier in shock no reason try to think to simply wrap a bandage they were on level ground no enemies in site..and yes emotions were high but difference between clotting a wound by pressure but NOT blocking it properly by wrapping excess gause banage is not huge not impact time take to do it not require a medic. His best mate could done it film did not explain failed to why it was done that way i keen here directors commentary. This was pivotal moment in film when one of two died..but i think when a film does this to amplify drama – regardless true or not..i think it would been more refreshing 1917 given artistic liberties were taken in precedence of graphic shock horror factor..could have been done that he was left behind but ALIVE and suffering but in care of soldiers he rendezvous with taken him back to safe zone behind allied lines.

Why need for all war movies to have best mate always killed? if filmmaker has enough faith in their craft they think oif other creative but still realistic ways to tell story..we know in war sacrifice too many films tell us that.. that been made..but there bigger missed opportunity to realism. why not have BOTH why artistic integrity and beauty and ugliness over realism? and with Saving PRivate Ryan it had personal loss, grief, angery at losing ones other soliders who didnt die had be left behind in spades not EVERY close person died some some didnt..but in unique considerably inventive therefore amongst boldest war films made for that reason to be deeply admired in 1917 focuses on just 2 characters why kill off one of them under circumstances clearly they could be saved?

But i gonna quote JRR Tolkien yes, yes i know i looove lotr but i loooooove respect admire even more Tolkien graphic, real and true testimony cos they were so confronting and real..in documentary ‘beyond the movie lotr the fellowship of the ring’ a gigantic section devoted to Tolkiens influences of the ‘horrors of war and startling imagery’ let remember as Tolkien quotes from his time where he served direct in the ‘battle of the Somme’ from there ‘ his writings direct when seeking cover when enermy fired from the trench’ thjat rite- whereas lot of war veterans and survivors tuirned journalists writers write in reflection- Tolkien did BOTH – in order to craft his landmark ubnforgettable most brilliant LOTR books- he wrote first hand what he was wtinessing during battle. NOT just reflecting upon his survival,

NOW the FACT that WWI was dubbed the “war to end all wars” – ironic given i think many debated in hindsight after WWII that WWII was the war to end all wars- unfortunately WWI in my view should been dubbed the war to TRIGGER FUTURE WARS. Just a thought..but Tolkien described horrors- not just of dead corpses and bodies,.of physically being drowned in blood and guts of bodies exploded by artillery form enemy trenches..slipping over corpses guts, intestines, shot bodies with bits of persons limb flying off in his direction..the barbed wire when seeking cover in mud..lined with corpses internal bits of their organs..shredded skin- you get the idea. apologies if some readers might be under age of 18 i safely assuming after many years- on this site majority readers are mature enough stomach such descriptions.

You cannot simply cannot have a truly GREAT WWI movie given particularly Hollywood ignorance to encouraging total lack of WWI movies filmed compared to WWII which is disappointing to say least..that WWII movies in volume and quantity outnumbner WWI on ratio of 4 times amount WWII to I.

For minority of WWI films made with technology and realism proven been huge impact with audiences in other films rated far higher ojn realism meter..i feel it was squandered opportunity for 1917 to elevate itself to one of greatest war films. for small perspective choice by filmmaker with big backdrop nobody can tell me on evidence i revealed here- remember JRR Tolkien before he became worlds most influential and famous author even to this day in 21st Century, fact is that LOTr crafted with DIRECT influce of his first hand notes from one of most confronting devastating fronts WWI that battle of the Somme..a battle no less that was part of what 1917 is all about in considerable part.

It considerable disappointment that 1917 stunned us inspired us with artistic vision but was underwhelming aprtiuclarly in perspective tale and yes has to be contrasted with even WWII movies in our generation, cos- shock factor need to be there when 2 people encounter corpses even..and barbed wire they crawled through anytone notice how clean barbed wire looked? so much energy ijn aftermath yet in second half of film numerous instances realism intensity shock factor should been more pronouncesd esp during brilliant artistically phjotgraphed sequence of him running in opp direction to seconbd wave..and i feel mendes could still elevated his artistic integrity and overall sueprior queality of film to superior unfortgettable powerful levels by having shoick factor ramped up even more. i sorry have to go inspection i continue shortly.

Epic Factor- 6th place It may a surprise a no,. of people but i believe strongly for every person that declares 1917 great, there would be equal no that would feel missed opportunity to elevate it to truly truly GREAT film if epic scope and scale looked at bigger picture not just little picture. The Truly GREAT war movies in spades truly understand the intimate story between characters but do not lose site of capturing true scale and scope of WWI. Yes WWII bigger theatre of war than WWI but by NO means for it era and it time was WWI small tragedy, I think that it would have been a masterstroke if some of brilliant shades of colours with night chase scene or toward end of the film..suggested approach or presence more strongly even in silhouette in backgroud to capture scope of enemy not just isolate to one, two or a handful. Fact is 1917 does full justice in spades to core story and goal but goal really truly stands out almost fades as insignificant to scale of tragedy and scope of broader assault by foot invovlving artillery strikes by BOTH enemy and the allies. WE get glimpses in terms of strategy but given the trajectory of 2 characters journey evolves from aftermath and carnage of war in the trenches through to the actual war itself unfolding.

Now finally ratings for historic / film industry Hollywood importance_ extent fills a void educate film goers bout past war h history .

1. Saving Private Ryan
2. 1917
3. DUNKIRK
4. Black Hawk Down
5. Rules of Engagement
6. The Hurt Locker
7. The Thin Red Line
8. American Sniper
9. Three Kings

This is ultimately the stat that determine 1917’s oscar best picture winning ability..this years oscars. But Oscars notwithstanding 1917 is deserved Oscar winner..BUT not the MOST Deserving Cos as indicated in my comparisons inc by no. of films that won best picture or moreover got nominated best picture the establoshed crowd surely know there been better more effective war films in capturing the true realism horror and artfulness – cinematifally of war..Maybe most likely Mendes wanted to do his own evolutionary artistic tapestry with moments of drama but those moments of drama are hardly explosive or shocking or shake you as one should when being confronted by an enemy…there was an all too keeness for the filmmaker i feel to get loss in the artistic framing of key moments of scene throughout where vistas and haunting music which has to be said is not finest of Thomas Newman scores- but effective indeed in helping to pass the time- however for a filmmaker to capture the beauty within horror of war though missed opportunity to truly deeper level sharpen contrast between haunting beauyty of night silhouette or the gradual plane crash scene- for instance one feels contrast seen through eyes of a soldier is more startling and stark between horrors of war and the in between quietness- whethjer it aftermath of battle or not but particularly as 1917- a perspective as a constant point of time not so much continuous shot- there was editing one can see but in representing the film as onbe continuous timeline.

This is not as much a credit to screenplay which is NOT the biggest part of successful parts of the film..hence why i feel 1917 should NOT got screenplayu nominati0bn. But small perspective or not- it is really inexcusable to only get halfway there to show contrast of horrors of war. Corpses ok maybe my description above was way too harcore but just think the extent of emotional dramatic impact most of films i listed had when there was a killing scene or pain and suffering and how awful it really was to crawl through barbed wire..none of this was conveyed but this is ultimately the most accurate at a technical level in terms of set recreation and costumes too- in terms of the vistas and contrast of vistas to minority of battles shown the geography which no doubt mendes strength is knowing how things connect- and for sure he was absolutely right and nailed the artistic integrity with truly memorable images.

But despite it being a WW movie and a WWI movie contrast to other WWI movies the recreation of trenches and sets and geography, feel atmosphere- combat realism and after math horrors lacking to an extent aside- and despite fact no other hollywood movie has come close to real visual recreation of WWI uising traditional, creative , visionary and technologicalk means at directors disposal…but the missing and absence of extent of monumental struggles between allies and enemies in trenches in WWI and extent of horrors contrastred with silent beauty of vistas day and night, it is certainly in top 10 but this is why overall 1917 is on edge of greatness but not quite there as some of lavish excessive praise suggests, If it wins this year ultimately, it will be mainly cos of it historical importance and relevance meaning to film industry it more the buzz for awards season pullled audiences in- but even for under 2 hr film…it does struggle to fill time on their long treacherous journey…

I love Sam Mendes but on reflection academy need to be clear how improtabnt is it for academy focus on historical importance over considerably better oscar contenders this year? is for academy it time long overdue for nearly 50-60 yearts a WWI film win best picture? maybe so.

But considering strenght of competition it not MOST deserved but not undeserving either- short of a masterpiece therefore, (for me has to be top 3, but right ranking as 5th best i seen….i take my hat off to Sam Mendes but one cant think the accounts from journal he quoted…well one cant help but th8ink he let his artistic mind with absoutely gorgeous vast range of cinematography his excitement at that part of opportuntiy through journals he may have underestimated the value of those contrasts and lot more realism of just how awful crawling over dead bodies and how a person is killed or blown up really is…Mendes strength lies in film like ‘Skyfall’ creative balanced with artistic opportunities galore and contrasts but realism is not his finest strength.

And i seen jo jo rabbit it it absolutely refreshing pearler thaty film to be reviewed next post:)

So as it stands given I seen JOJO Rabbit now, give you all a preview where JOJO rates before i review it, my top 6- wow i doubled my record i NEVER IN PAST OSCAR YEARS SINCE I FOLLOWED IT..EVER though i see majority of oscar contenders but there ya go..is as follows:

1. Ford Vs, Ferrari
2. Joker
3. Jo Jo Rabbit
4. 1917
5. Once Upon a Time in Hollywood
6. Irishman

For record the ONLY reason OUATIH has gone down the pecking order in my view most deserved best pic winner is, as JO JO proved to me today you dont need do really longish oscfar contender to show your one of best pictures of year- in that respect 1917 was more efficient but not OUATIH is still amongst top of overall 9 nominees i only listed ones i seen.

A “special” film? 1917? Absolutely ladies and gents I proud to say I saw 1917 yesterday with my dad. Geez I tell ya dad and I have truly been on the war path footing since 1998. We seen together combined in cinemas and on blu ray: Saving Private Ryan , The Thin Red Line, Black Hawk Down, The Hurt Locker, Dunkirk, and now 1917 no doubt there are few others too many to name.

In order to review 1917 which shatters the record becoming the 5th Oscar nominated film I seen this year 2 better now than my previous personal best . I will rate of war film’s I seen my top 8-10 .

1. Saving Private Ryan
2. Dunkirk
3. The Thin Red Line
4. The Hurt Locker
5. 1917
6. Rules of Engagement
7. Black Hawk Down
8. American Sniper

I gonna review 2 parts but starters brilliant film 1917 deserved best pic winner in number of ways but not greatest yet very important. I explain next post . Gtg for now

we all know, that being nominated as Doc, Animated or Foreign is the kiss of death on Best Picture chances… most do not get both nominations. It is like a consolation price or a way to reward more films as “Best” of the year. Look no further than Roma or this year’s Parasite, but also Up or Toy Story 3 for the matter.

Tell that to How to Train Your Dragon 5…

Before the 2nd Oscars the Academy ruled that “Best Picture, Production” was the sole Best Picture category (won by “Wings”) and was not the equivalent of “Best Unique and Artistic Quality of Production”.

what do you think about Parasite?

Where are you getting 93 Best Picture winners from?? There are 91.

Based on the stat that, out of 93 Best Picture winners, only 10 films have won without a Best Editing nomination, iyou suggest that the contenders are therefore down to Jojo and 1917.

But an even stronger stat is that out of 93 BPs, only 5 have won without a Best Director nomination.

Comparing those two stats, OUATIH has a small advantage over Jojo since the former has a Director nom and the latter does not.

The FROZEN 2/female complaint is quite The reach to me… The base issue is from overall opportunity for female directors etc. FROZEN 2 didn’t get in because it’s nothing special or even very good for that matter. The original is way better and even that one is overrated. Others argue that they’re amazed that the highest grossing animated film of all time got snubbed but nobody’s complaining that the highest grossing film of all time got snubbed for best picture or even a few other categories that it was Worthy… Avengers: Endgame is probably the only “biggest movie of all time” that wasn’t at least nominated for Best Picture in history.

And sorry for a third response, but the BAFTA incident you’re referring to, it wasn’t the speech that hurt Russell Crowe, it was the fact that after he got off stage, he assaulted the person who cut his speech short by body slamming him against a wall, and that made headlines and gave him bad press in that last stretch.

How fortunate for you. My favorite movie of that year was La La Land. (aka best picture for two minutes)

I agree. We’re just waiting on PGA and DGA. That’s basically it.

It hasn’t happened in the 4 years so far, but I’m sure it can and probably eventually will. 🙂 For me it causes no conflicts, as this table is only a guide for me, for my unofficial prediction, and intermediate ones. My final, all-industry stats prediction doesn’t take its findings into consideration. (Not that I necessarily think it shouldn’t – I just haven’t found it necessary yet, or decided to try that approach.) So, of course, for me as well, the lone stat (especially if above 97% from a large sample size) would be the one that mattered.

I’ll have to listen to it outside of the movie to fully assess it, but I still think Newman is sadly going to get his 16th Oscar nom and not win. He’s the new Roger Deakins. If you want memorable themes, just go back and listen to his Meet Joe Black score. And I personally would call Interstellar the best score of the decade.

But at least TOY STORY 4 was good and had some good underlying messages that pixar’s best can always be depended on for.

Love this whole editing conversation. It’s one that has always fascinated me about predicting the Oscars. I agree with others that it can seem hasty to put too much importance on one tech category, but yet the fact remains that year after year I let people persuade me that editing doesn’t matter and then watch Best Picture go to a film that is nominated for editing, even when there’s a consensus pick (like last year) that seems to be winning literally everything up to the Oscars. Only 10 times in the 93 years that the category has existed has a film won Best Picture WITHOUT an editing nod, and one of those was Birdman, which I think gets a pass for the same reason 1917 does. It even seems like editing can be more important to have than best director if we think about Driving Miss Daisy, Argo and Green Book (only three examples I know so not statistically significant). If you take the holy trinity into account (editing, directing, and writing), that leaves only Joker, The Irishman, and Parasite that can win best picture this year, unless we throw in 1917 because we consider the editing miss to be justified. I guess all of this debate is just mental masturbation waiting for PGA and DGA to clarify things.

I think that for the win…

1. 1917
2. Jojo Rabbit
3. Once upon a Time in Hollywood
4. Joker
5. Parasite
6. The Irishman
… no one else has a shot

This is quite interesting and makes me wonder: would it be possible for a film to dominate your ranking in such a way that its competitors are almost out of contention statistically speaking, yet at the same time this film misses one crucial stat that would normally disqualify it too? What would prevail the points differential or the crucial stat?

It seems to me Sasha would go with the crucial stat to predict an upset, but it could also be that we’re in one of those odd stat-busting years and the points differential is an indication of that. I wonder what you make of it based on your experience from previous races, and of course the answer might be different whether we are under the preferential ballot system or a straight vote system.

And Jennifer Lee wrote the screenplay, while a cadre of others did the story.

So, what remedies are left for Frozen II, honors-wise? Three sources:

1) PGA, Saturday. This will be tough; Abominable joins them,Toy Story 4, How to Train Your Dragon 3 and Missing Link.

2) The International Animated Film Association, aka the Annie Awards, January 25 in which FII leads all contenders with 8 nominations, including Animated Feature (vs. TS4, ML, HTTYD3 and Klaus [grrrr….].

3) BAFTA. They usually nominate only 3 movies, but this year 4 got in; FII, TS4, Klaus and Shawn the Sheep: Shawnmageddon. They could go local and give it to Shawnmageddon, but this should be between FII and TS4. TS4 did outpace FII, boxoffice wise in the UK ($83m-$65m).

The issue here is with the Oscar slap in the face, it may have a ripple effect in the remaining 3 competitions. Hopefully, there will not be a herd mentality and the losing streak continues.

maybe you should watch it again and pay attention to the plot mechanisms, the foreshadowings and elements that mirror both sides of the battle… even the first and the final shot mirror each other, framing the whole surreal experience in between.

They would not in an year they had two better reviewed Disney films (yeah… the old-fashioned and non-inclusive Zootopia and Moana), two international masterpieces also better reviewed and simply Kubo, Laika’s best film.

Have you cared about giving a try to very right-wing My Life With the Zucchini. As you want to go on a riot, you know who gave the voice to one of the main characters? That Fox News regular… Ellen Page.

And I may have watched a different film… Monsters University is probably a story about Mike and Sulley’s romance in university and it was snubbed because of that. Snubbed for The Croods, with considerably inferior reviews and box office.

Good to mention Todd Haynes. Poor Greta Gerwig has a best directing and two BP nominations for making the cool kids from NYU version of Mean Girls and for the centennial adaptation of Little Woman. But Todd Haynes couldn’t score a single directing or picture nomination for masterpieces and unique Carol and Far From Heaven. They were so mean to Greta. Also good to remember she was nominated over Luca Guadanigno two years ago.

Here’s what I don’t understand about when a movie misses a big category, like OUATIH for Editing:

How many editors are in the editor’s branch? 300 or so?

That could mean that the 5 films that got nominated could’ve had support from as few as 20-30 editors to nab that nomination and maybe the highest vote-getters got upwards of 80-90, etc etc. If that’s the case, maybe OUATIH only received, maybe, 15-20 votes?

Still. If The Irishman nabbed 90 votes there, and OUATIH nabbed 20 … that’s a 70 vote difference.

Out of 7,000 voters ……. who cares about those 70 votes from editors who MAY or may NOT vote #1 for OUATIH for Best Picture?

I feel like too much stock is sometimes thrown at these BP contenders missing a major nom. Does anyone else know what I’m getting at?

Jojo didn’t make well at the Globes and not enough well at BAFTA. It also has no acting frontrunner like GB.

And that EXACTLY why the dga is no longer an accurate reflection of best picture this is why O me should not underestimate dark horse in joker.

But the fact it connected with so many people around the world and nuked the law of diminishing returns – it made almost $60 million more domestically than the original. That is so rare. From coast to coast, that was in the top 5 snubs of the day. It IS owed, Gregoire, the CHANCE to compete against the best of the rest.

The snub of this movie might actually be the highlight of the nominations for me. The first half is an absolute chore to get through. I think the second half rises to the level of “OK.” With completely unmemorable songs along the way.

It’s the best score of the decade. It’s that good. There are at least 5 major themes all of which are memorable,

You’re right. I’m not a war film fan, but 1917 made me feel like I was there.

Scene after scene.

Tiny spoiler alert

That plane scene…I thought it was going to land on my lap

It had the emotion and personal touch that I felt Dunkirk lacked which sets it apart from a lot of war films.

I know what you mean. Objectively, it’s silly to say “Oh, it didn’t get nominated for editing so it can’t win best picture.” That makes no logical sense, but when you’re trying to predict the future you sometimes wind up with weird speculation like that. In the past, frontrunners who were surprise misses in the editing category have wound up losing, but there are so few data points that it could easily be a coincidence.

OUATIH missing editing is an indication that its support is slightly less broad than we thought. Obviously, that doesn’t mean it can’t win.

1917 really hitting the mark with a lot of posters here! If only we were voters. I think the more voters that actually watch it, the more chance it has for BP

Keep throwing out your rancid bait, cirkusfolk. Never know, somebody may bite.

Guess that leaves only one film…
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/d064adab741779887837f937e3970667d6863600d97baedaf337e7b3bd540bc9.gif

Jojo didn’t make well at the Globes and not enough well at BAFTA. It also has no acting frontrunner like GB.

Worth mentioning here that Frozen 2 did not get a Best Animated Film nomination, has a female director, and all nominees in that category were also directed by men.

This sends a message whether they like it or not that Academy really seems to not want women to be awarded, or directing films.

As has been pointed out, a small handful of BP nominated films got nominated in almost every category; there wasn’t much room in the techs for anything else that came out last year. The shortened season is one way to explain it, but another is that it’s a close race, and people are voting for their favorite BP nominee in other categories because they think it will push it over the top.

Did people really walk away from Joker and The Irishman thinking, “Wow, those costumes were amazing!” Probably not, but they liked the movies themselves a lot, wanted to see them celebrated, and were worried they’d be crowded out of the awards by other good movies. That’s my take, at least.

If someone from the current line-up, it could be Bong. He won the Palme after all.

Plus given the nature of the film the make-up needed to be even more accurate between shots/days than the average film would be able to get away with.

No, I think there are mostly white people in Latin America but for some reason all these snub articles are calling Lopez a POC. She’s white like Banderas is white, but they are from Hispanic ethnicity.

Best war film ever, probably. Everything Saving Private Ryan should have been and wasn’t

1917 was good, but anything can lose.

Updated top 10…

1. 1917
2. Dolor y Gloria (Pain and Glory)
3. The Irishman
4. Parasite
5. Us
6. Midsommar
7. Atlantics
8. Don’t f**ck with cats: Hunting an Internet Killer
9. Toy Story 4
10. I lost my body

I think there is a world where the expanded SAG membership votes for Lopez. Ever since that expansion, SAG has got further and further away from Oscar. If they are not concerned with predicting the Oscars, that is.

Why do you think I said I’d be happy with Director and Cinematography for 1917?

Montgomery Clift!

Meanwhile, Spike Lee was named president of the Jury for the 2020 Cannes Film Festival:

https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-51104506

Sorry, meant to say “has predicted many a presumed lock ultimately losing.” I couldn’t figure out how to edit my own post.

Good fucking question.

Let’s be real. Parasite had all time great reviews. The Farewell had great but not all time reviews. So when it came time to vote, I’m sure most voters saved only one “asian” slot and gave all their love to Parasite. Because God forbid we have two predominantly asian films in one year.

Many have OUATIH for PGA and 1917 for DGA. I have the reverse.

I think the steak eaters at the PGA will fall behind 1917. Meanwhile, I think the Directors go for 1917. I think a lot of directors, from TV to film, see themselves in Tarantino, a rags-to-riches indie director who worked his way up the Hollywood ladder to become Hollywood royalty.

And I’m still wondering why people are saying POC were snubbed. First off, you can’t consider Jennifer Lopez a POC and then not Antonio Banderas. Both people are technically considered Caucasian, it’s just one is from Spain and the other has Puerto Rican parents. So by all means say Hispanics are not POC but then keep it consistent. But furthermore, if you just look at the leading acting categories, getting 1 POC nomination out of 5 is actually better than it should be. People want to put rules on art and want the representation in film awards to be equal to the US population demographics for some reason. Well in that case, Hispanics make up 17.8 percent of the US while blacks make up 14.6 percent and yet they each got 20 percent of the category they were nominated for. Anywho, I’m sick of this stuff overshadowing what we are all really here for.

Bonus question, if one of the Wachowskis was nominated for Best Director, would they count as a man or woman?

You can love Joker and still recognize the fact it just wasn’t worthy of a Costume Design nomination. That’s it.

The fact a film isn’t worthy of a specific nomination doesn’t mean it’s not a cinematic achievement lol

You know it’s interesting that this year features all male best cinematography nominees (AGAIN) but that hasn’t been mentioned by the female camp. Wonder why? Also, it’s worth noting that in the past 20 years, there have been 6 times all the nominees for best costume design were female and I don’t recall males pointing it out or making a stink about it.

Why don’t we just call it what it is? Overrated films from two undisputed living legends earned nominations at the expense of more accomplished, if more conventional and less risk-taking, efforts by female directors. I cannot blame anyone for nominating Todd Phillips regardless of precursor attention, name recognition, genre bias, polarizing reviews, and even the fact that Joaquin’s performance is the selling point.

yep, LW only adds up to her narrative. banner year and all that.

This is a good example of why people dislike the movie. If this is the message of it, it’s not a good movie.

Agree about Mackay, he deserves to be in the line up even in a stacked year.

It is kinda the movie of the year. Not the best movie (not by far) but it is a phenomenon that defined the film year of 2019, sort of like Bohemian Rhapsody did 2018.

BP nominee with most nominations by year:

2000 – American Beauty
2001 – Gladiator
2002 – The Fellowship of the Ring
2003 – Chicago
2004 – The Return of the King
2005 – The Aviator
2006 – Brokeback Mountain
2007 – Babel
2008 – No Country for Old Men/There Will Be Blood
2009 – Benjamin Button
2010 – Hurt Locker/Avatar
2011 – The King’s Speech
2012 – Hugo
2013 – Lincoln
2014 – American Hustle/Gravity
2015 – Birdman/Grand Budapest Hotel
2016 – The Revenant
2017 – La La Land
2018 – The Shape of Water
2019 – The Favourite/Roma

The switch actually happened 15 years ago, not in the last decade. Prior to 2005, the winner almost always had the most nominations. Since then, it’s only won 5 times in 15 years. The rules have changed. It’s just not a good predictor any more.

That’s not what the media has indicated. Google. Aside from that, Marriage has more nods than Bombshell, including Best Picture.

What does someone being a household name have to do with anything? Dern is on the Board of Governors for the Academy. She also is in 2 films for Best Picture. She is in a supporting role in the film – like Regina King.

if you ask majority of people it is. if you asked movie buffs aka minority it isn’t.

“blogs considered collectively with their writers and readers as a distinct online network.”

And going back further than last decade that % increases dramatically.

it’s a shit movie. I’m glad you liked it and I’m gladder that audience did not (hence shit boxoffice) and that awards ignored it (even critics ha ha).

I think the point is not that the guilds did not give it a push, the guilds and academy Members overlap. The point is that the directing branch has a very narrow perspective on what they consider good direction. The lack of guilds still got Little Women best picture because of the Critical and Public push, the lack of the directing nomination shows that the directing branch chooses to reward technical feats and movies with very obvious direction over movies like let’s say the farewell or little women And maybe even marriage story where the nuanced direction is creating a layers of emotion and undertones that keeps the story going at multiple levels.

or Mendes actually. Many are predicting the Brit will prevail.

I believe it will resonate pretty well right at this moment, since the film represents a kind of classic analog 35mm filmmaking that is probably out of fashion pretty soon.

expanding… Paquin only LAFCA (ex aequo with Rosie Perez) and Tomei, nothing… talking only about actual precursors.

IMDB is quite useful, you know

his film won BP, BD, BSA… he was in a roll and would have done back-to-back Oscars, everybody counted on that, till the BAFTA incident.

Don´t let Sasha read this!

I also take Aquaman over BP any day for Aquaman is superior Lion King remake of the two. And it doesn’t take the silly premise seriously.

maybe it is because I have lived in a country at war and even crossed the line of fire. Did not have to live these experiences but certainly witnessed the aftermath and consequences. The film I expected would have been something void, just the typical a->b->c story of war is bad… no, there are elements everywhere that takes it to Paths of Glory or The Thin Red Line territory, and really far away from explotation propaganda as Black Hawk Down, Saving Private Ryan or Pearl Harbor, thank godness. Like Titanic, the screenplay may look simple but it is deliberately elaborated to look like that, with continuous beats here and there to provoke an emotional rollercoaster beyond the literal rollercoaster you witness on screen. The film would be worse if we did not witness it as a continuous shot. It was a brave move by Mendes, and he just did a brilliant masterpiece. Best film of the year, that I have seen… and I think, at this point, maybe one of the top 5 of the new century so far…

Could have been great to see Julia Fox waking a red carpet.

I love this kind of a mess! 😉 Makes the predicting more challenging.

last year was so awful they should have cancelled oscars due to unworthiness of movies.

It would be okay for me if the PGA/SAG/DGA all would skip their announcement in order to keep this Best Picture race as thrilling as it is right at this moment…

Do you? 🙂

YES. And I fucking love Ran. But what 1917 does goes way beyond just directing mastery or amazing shots. It does what a proper war film should make: get the audience under the skin of the soldiers. The Thin Red Line did so, Paths of Glory, also. Saving Private Ryan and Black Hawk Down completely misleaded the audiences into thinking war is something different from what it actually is, by demonizing and making inhuman the enemy, rather than other soldier scared to die, in front of you.

I finished watching the BP nominees today with 1917.
The main thing I can say about this film is that it’s very entertaining. Tense, exciting, scary, and overall rewarding. If I dare say so, it’s ultimately a popcorn film. An exquisitely made, best-of-its-kind experience, whose main aim is to give you a great time at the cinema.
The visuals are absolutely great, with Deakins bringing his A-game. The first part of the scene in the ruined town is one of the most breathtaking I’ve seen in a while. The music is very effective at keeping the tension up, often echoing the score of Dunkirk. The actors both do a fine job.
Narratively, I had more problems with it. It doesn’t exactly tell much of a story, it just goes from point A to point B with some unexpected troubles on the way. I found the characters to constantly make bad decisions and never learn from them, and thus many big moments were a bit unearned for the film. And I would have loved the camera to wander off a bit here and there, showing us things around the characters, but it stays almost glued to the actors.
As for Oscar prospects, I think it could win Best Picture or Best Director, but so far I don’t see it as a runaway favourite. However, it has to be noted that it’s very “not screenplay heavy”, more than I anticipated, so its inclusion there might signal larger than expected strength. Deakins stands a good chance to win I think, but Newman’s score, while great, isn’t flashy enough to triumph over Joker or even Little Women, I think.

Now I’m finally able to complete my Oscar nominee rankings:

1. Marriage Story
2. Parasite
—————————————–
3. Little Women
4. The Irishman
—————————————–
5. 1917
—————————————–
6. Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood
—————————————–
—————————————–
7. Joker
8. Jojo Rabbit
9. Ford v Ferrari

I’m surprised (and delighted) to say that none of my top 6 winning Best Picture would bother me one bit.

Oscar punditry made professional thanks to the internet.

It connects in an emotional way you would not expect if you go in with low expectations (misleading poster and publicists sold it as a race between C.Bale and M.Damon) .
Most of my friends(whom i recommended to) said that i was better than expected.

You would think 1917 would be less affected by the snub than OUATIH though.

Yup, another reason why campaigning exists

Keep it up, Sammy, feed my trauma! 🙂

He’s 50, the same age as Cate Blanchett!
But of course, anything could happen.

no way ! Jojo will hardly get something (screenplay ?) and has no gas in the tank left, the favorite should be parasite in terms of quality, but the Academy is not looking after that anymore if it ever looked for it (remember Green Book vs Roma)

Think maybe you need to rewatch it – or at least not comment immediately after having seen it. It’s a great movie, but you’re way over the top.

stats aren’t be all and end all. that said, Jlo was a surprise to a degree. I think that we all underestimate one important thing which is – who gets nominated with what precursors. There are nominees that don’t pop until their precursor nominates them and then they get Oscar nom. this is very typical of Brits. For example, Pugh always had a spot because BAFTA was guaranteed to push her through, but that wasn’t visible til, well, BAFTA. So it’s important to know how precursors vote and distinguish between “just precursor X thing” (Foxx, Bening, Buckey) and “a real thing”. Jlo was never going to make BAFTA which we knew. Question was only how damaging lack of that support would be and the answer is very. Aniston was stopped by BAFTA as well. OTOH, BAFTA locked Pryce who was going to make GG too (foreigners wouldn’t miss to nominate a Pope). So yeah, something to take into consideration in the future.

And yes, AFTRA is definitely diluting crossover with AMPAS hence so many SAG noms that didn’t translate into AMPAS.

banderas is a bad example. to my knowledge, he did nothing to alienate people. Few bad movies, sure, everyone does them. But I don’t recall diva behavior or anything offensive. So he didn’t have to work on rebuilding his reputation first and then credibility as an actor. Moreover, he plays a director. That’s relatable to the industry.

Jlo has reputation as a diva, and, worse, a stripper movie. Just because critics called that movie a feminist anthem, it doesn’t mean that industry types view it as more than a stripper flick. That could make a difference. some movies/roles connect, some don’t. this one didn’t.

“Dern does too in a way but she’s not as much a household name”

I’m sure Regina King won cause household name…oh wait! Due-ness has nothing to do with being a household name. what matters is that industry knows them and thinks it’s time.

As for flashiness, she has a flashy af monologue which is the reason why she’s been sweeping so far.

With 1917 winning BD as well of course 😉

I could see 1917 winning Outstanding British Film and Best Film going to something else.

It’s out there, man. For instance, Deadline fanned the flames pretty hard yesterday with Issa Rae’s comment during the nominations announcement.

Moronic.

Did you mean to type “I think the Directors go for OUATIH“?

“now a significant portion of “woke twitter” is trying to unfairly degrade and undervalue Scorsese and Tarantino’s masterworks, just because Gerwig didn’t get in Directing for a remake of a remake, or Wang, or whoever else.”

proof right there are no one should take them seriously and Hollywood should stop paying attention to their histrionics. They don’t care about quality but only agenda push.

I think that 11 nominations puts “too divisive” to bed. Doesn’t mean Joker will win but it’s obviously much less divisive than (some circles) hoped.

if you want an agreeable movie, look no further from Jojo. Nobody talks about this one. It didn’t generate controversy, it didn’t generate discussion. Yet it’s lining up big nominations under the radar. It isn’t buzzed about but it isn’t forgotten. It isn’t fading (unlike Marriage Story arguably more talked about movie). So what do we make of it? Could it win? Sure. Forgettable winner is what AMPAS does the best. we’ll soon know what Guilds think. But yes, it could come out on the top by making no waves.

Oh, very sorry. Terrible oversight on my part. I sincerely apologize. About the rest of what I say, do you think I”m all wet? Just wondering.

Vice and Joker are completely different.

Well 1917 is winning BAFTA unless Joker surprises. And the winner of BAFTA doesn’t match with Oscar anymore so I’d say they were right.

I just thought that what I saw (wounds, bruises, illness, etc) looked like great make-up work.

Imagine making Tropic Thunder now and plastering RDJ’s blackface on the screen as they announce.

it’s a movie about Hollywood in the 60s with no action save the end. it was never going to pull Django numbers. It didn’t pull Django numbers in USA either.

I agree… I stated before that many of the “snubs” were actors/films that released way earlier in the year like HUSTLERS, US, THE FAREWELL and ROCKETMAN and have been on home video for months… You can argue all you want that they deserved to get in and I’ll gladly hear you out, but truth is MORE late breakers got in than usual that actually have a chance to win things like 1917& LITTLE WOMEN… You can’t blame the shortened calendar for that.

People in this blog and comments are so dismissive of Joker.
Reminder:
Venice WINNER. It has a huge chance at Best Picture.

Agree.

Someone at Golderby told something interesting. This year is the first time in a while that Costumes and Production Design have BP nominees only (that’s why Joker had a laughable nomination in the first category). The Sound categories also have four BP nominees each. It’s also the first time in history that more than 3 movies have 10+ nominations.

We can all blame the shortened season for that. They clearly didn’t have time to see a lot of movies. I really hope they reconsider this idea at the future.

Yes, that’s why I said it really shouldn’t strike me, and yet every year I can’t help thinking “damn, why is it so obvious so early?”. Is it because a few films and performances really tower above the rest and can get support across the board? Is it a snowball effect or self-fulfilling prophecy: films that are buzzed about get seen and voted for? Is it the big names associated with each project? Or is it a campaign thing since it seems Oscar nominees often come from the same few studios or major indies and have the same few big shot publicists? (though the publicists will often come later in the game when the films have already garnered praise elsewhere) I guess it’s a mix of all four.

What’s the blogosphere??

JOKER is the movie of the year? Really?

I won’t even go there.

Not seeing JO JO getting anything. It is competitive in screenplay only and it’s presence re-defines the term “extreme long shot.” I like the film but NOBODY is talking about it.

For the record if you were born in the 80s you’re almost certainly a millennial.

OH okaaaaay now I get it the passive-aggressive little down voters are Joker fans. Zero counter argument just that anonymous bitchy little down vote. Explains a lot. A LOT.

I’d take that over BLACK PANTHER any day.

Can’t see Joker missing score, tbh.
And yeah, hair and make-up is Bombshell’s
Suppose FvF is a big threat in the sound categories.
Director and Cinematography would make me very happy, though.

I’m with you, but at least they still have a graphic, and aren’t rushing. The Globes announcement is unwatchable. Going extremely fast, and no visual aid whatsoever.

1964 saw three films get 10+ nominations: Becket, My Fair Lady, and Mary Poppins.

I’m perfectly fine with who got nominated. There’s always peoples favorites missing out. Oddly enough many of the actors/films who were “snubbed” (THE FAREWELL, HUSTLERS, ROCKETMAN US etc) have had their films out WAY longer than the one’s who got in. So I wonder if the shortened season really mattered that much. I personally love it.

Calling it now! It’s not happening. There have been egregious snubs every year at the Oscars. I don’t consider Jlo in Hustlers one of them. In a year, let alone 5, or 10 years, no one is going to remember this film or the performance. It’s not the enduring piece of work some writer on NYT prophetically claims it is while once again attacking the Academy for racism. Naomi Watts in Mulholland Drive is a classic and enduring performance, as is INGRID Bergman in Casablanca, Paul Giamatti in Sideways, Mia Farrow in Rosemary’s Baby, James Dean in Rebel Without a Cause. Those are all snubs. Jennifer Lopez in Hustlers is not a snub – and if that means I’m a racist for not appreciating the “greatness” of her performance, so be it.

This year’s actual line-up is SO much better than last year. However, those Top 4 films received too many nominations due to the truncated voting time. And the acting nominations could’ve been so much better.

Look, I get it, I understand your opinion, but… It is just that, your opinion. Think it’s healthier for you to just let it rest. I’m sure next year will provide other outrages and other reasons to celebrate as well. It is what it is.

I actually prefer Joker to 2/3 of the nominees, so I’m pleased it got in. I’m shocked with Philips, sure, but I don’t think I’d dismiss him as completely undeserving. The film got nominated pretty much across the board, in almost every single category it had a shot in, and it’s clearly his vision. Not an original vision per se, but original in terms of the twist it puts on the cinema-dominating comic bok movie umbrella of films (it would not be appropriate to use genre here).

He had a vision that the studio bought into and they knew how to perfectly market and open it. His job was then to get all these departments working together to execute his vision. And anyone saying Phoenix did more than Philips is wrong. The fact that he had the score done ahead of time and performed on set for Phoenix to get inspiration from shows he knew what he was doing, even if it meant giving the actor freedom once that inspiration was provided.

If every single aspect of a movie is recognised and said movie is an “auteur” movie, driven by a single person’s vision, then that person being recognised for best director is not something that bothers me…

I just think it’s a matter of perspective and constantly beating this drum against Philips does nothing but enrage you.

This years BP lineup is so much better than last years it’s ridiculous… I probably like (more or less) my least favorite from this year as much as my favorite from last year… That’s crazy.

This is correct.

I agree that the shortened season affects the ability of AMPAS members to see all of the potentially “worthy” films out there. It wasn’t that long ago that you would have certain high profile actors championing their colleagues’ performances for nominations by hosting special screenings of the latter’s films for AMPAS members, which would sometimes lead to nominations. Think Javier Bardem in Biutiful or Naomi Watts in the Impossible—two performances that might have been overlooked by voters had big names such as Julia Roberts not taken up their cause. Now there’s just not enough time for something like that to happen—at least for this year. I say “for this year” because if this is understood to be the new norm, then not only are studios likely to change their campaign strategies, but the afore-mentioned celebrity endorsements might also come earlier. Having said that, though, the drive to diversify the academy appears not to have yielded the corresponding results that it was expected to or that were hoped for, with only one person of colour nominated in the acting categories and no women or people of colour nominated for director (Yes, i know “but Bong Joon-Ho”, except I think “International” directors from non-Western countries are perceived differently) despite what many agree was a banner year for racialized actors and female and racialized directors. They even missed an opportunity to nominate their first Indigenous director with Taika Waititi. I think that, ultimately, the majority of AMPAS members have pretty mainstream tastes when it comes to award-worthy films. The success last year of not only Green Book, but Bohemian Rhapsody, in particular, proved that. That doesn’t mean an outlier such as Moonlight won’t break through from time to time; but AMPAS members, for the most part, aren’t film critics who study film for a living; they’re industry workers who create the films who also happen to be members of this special club and will vote for many reasons ranging from the quality of a given film to which one their grandchildren liked the most. Some of these are what we might consider to be “smart” reasons, while others we would deem idiotic, juvenile, or petty—perhaps even bigoted.

Going back to the shortened season, I think AMPAS’ decision to push up the voting date backfired if its rationale was to get the jump on the Globes and other awards-granting bodies as a way of creating a more unpredictable and, hence, exciting awards season. Whether we think certain films are deserving or not in any category is beside the point; if the same 4 or 5 films people have been talking all year end up with the bulk of the nominations, people are just going to get bored with the Oscars and look elsewhere to satisfy their desire for unpredictability and diversity in their awards shows, such as Critics Choice. I think it’s very telling that a only handful of films are represented so ubiquitously across the main categories—namely The Joker, OUATIH, The Irishman, 1917, and Parasite, with Little Women, Marriage Story, Bombshell, and JoJo Rabbit bringing up a sort of second tier. All of these “top tier” films, with the possible exception of JoJo Rabbit, have been talked or buzzed about ad nauseum the entire year, some even before their release. In effect, the Oscars have now become the popularity contest that AMPAS tried desperately to prevent. On a personal note, all of my emotions are now going to be channeled towards Parasite to sweep all of the awards it was nominated for.

Remember Vice?

https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/c197f7aac4f6436eef78fdbbb602fdcacee1d584f30cd3fe8f6d1d03bd4f891d.jpg

What strikes me most (though it really shouldn’t) is how predictable these nominations were. I just went back to the September predictions of both Sasha and Scott Feinberg and almost all the nominees were either frontrunners or strongly anticipated sight unseens back then. The few that weren’t frontrunners were listed as major possibilities. It’s almost like you CAN call ’em locks in September and you could get a big chunk of the lineups right before the films have even been seen, if you follow the patterns knowing what the Academy likes and what the studios are going to campaign.

Pulling out of a scheduled performance because you didn’t get the nomination you wanted would be remarkably petty and childish.

Sure. Why don’t every studio boycott the award show whenever their strongest contender, ie a film as award-worthy as Cats, doesn’t land a nomination? By the way, Frozen 2 had 64 points on metacritic, and it won nothing from the guilds in the animated feature category, its “legacy” on the pantheon of films is hardly what I would consider a runaway critical success one should cry hell and high water about over its snub. But I’m sure Idina’s boycott will send a clear message. CYNTHIA Erivo is doing it at the BAFTAs after all, although in that case it actually makes sense.

It still lost DGA.

I keep saying two Jo’s are underestimated. One creates too much noise so people think it’s too divisive (even though 11 noms speak against it) while the other is too quiet yet racking up major nods (Editing that supposed frontrunners missed) under the radar.

Hahaha, remember how it was a Frozen II theater showing, not a Joker showing, that led to a violent attack involving machetes? XD

I hate (and laugh endlessly at) how many critics preemptively looked down at Joker more because of potential theater massacres it could cause and less because of its cinematic merits (or lack thereof, film being subjective and all). That, and how the critics were forced to stick by their words as the film not only became the first R-rated film to join the Billion Dollar Club, but surpassed The Dark Knight to become the unadjusted worldwide box office champion that never played in China—all without a single noteworthy theater attack.

It depends on how well it plays with the actors branch, i think. Cate Blanchett’s earnest comments about it at the Globes were very telling in that regard

I’m just happy it got into SOMETHING! And it was something it absolutely deserved.

You risk repeating the past when you regard the monsters of the past only as monsters and never as fellow humans who lost their way. That’s why humanity throughout history undergoes more war than peace, for they forget too easily and too quickly why they fought so hard for peace in the first place.

What do they say about heartless people? That they once wanted so much to be loved.

oh no no no cancel Bong! 🙂

I don’t think most mainstream moviegoers really care who is sitting in the director’s chair on a Marvel movie. Kevin Feige is the one who’s really running that show.

Renee doesn’t deserve second Oscar…in your opinion. That may not be shared by the industry. They love comebacks and hers is stellar. Also, she isn’t an offensive or unlikable personality for them to hate her.

should win: Joker. It’s movie of the year and no other Picture win can take it from Joker

will win: something else that will be fast forgotten unless Parasite makes history as the first foreign language to do it

You asked why she’s not considered as big of a lock, so I provided my view. You care free to disagree, I’m not telling you that you can’t consider her a lock. By the way, it’s not a double standard. Brad Pitt is a household name, and Joaquin Phoenix’s role is a very flashy, everyone’s-talking-about-it sort of thing. Dern was in two small scenes in the film. Chill out.

As tempting as it is to now say the main categories are locked and loaded, they may not be. I concede that Pitt and a Phoenix are pretty untouchable. I think that Zellwegger and Dern are not seen up.

Until SAG and BAFTA have had their say, then I would feel more comfortable predicting the same contenders but a GG win and Critics choice for Renee doesn’t yet convince me. I recall being in denial back when Sandra Bullock was the frontrunner and Sasha advised me to let it go, Meryl was not going to prevail. I couldn’t conceive of The Blind Side winning over Streeps Julie & Julia.

‘Judy’ is enjoyable but flawed and Renee doesn’t deserve a 2nd Oscar just because she took on iconic Garland. Too many ticks and the voice and face just didn’t do it for me. Scarlett Johansson was heartbreakingly good in MS. She has matured into a really interesting and brave actor and she showed enormous vulnerability. For me she stole that movie.
I’ve yet to see Bombshell but I sense the Oscar will go to Renee, but it doesn’t have to be an inevitability. Glenn Close is still re-composing herself after the loss!

I so want Laura Dern to win but SAG and BAFTA may mix it up and if they do her category is up for grabs. Robbie and Pugh are still ingenues Oscar wise. And Johansson might do a Jessica Lange and take support releasing AMPAS to honour Judy Garland, I mean Renee Zellwegger….

It ain’t over yet.

It stays with you too.

Will enough voters see it, and see it on the big screen?

Yeah it’s really a mix of everything. And what really upset me is the possibility that some movies and performances never really got the chance to be seen by Academy members and audiences at large, which could mean 2 things: they nominate something they hadn’t seen because everyone is talking about it OR they didn’t nominate something that truly deserves it. I don’t want to make a big assumption, but damn I just did.

Like the reminder: “The Academy doesn’t like horror movies.” “Oh, it’s a genre movie, they won’t nominate that,” etc. Like, how? A great movie is never gonna get rewarded just because of some personal preferences? LOL, I think I gave the Academy too much credit.

God forbid a brilliant filmmaker has a non-popular opinion. Also, he’s not wrong. Makes me like him even more and I hope like hell he NEVER touches a Marvel movie.

To me, the message is very simple – if you ignore people that are suffering from economic hardships, or people that are suffering from mental illness and you just explain their behavior by just labeling them “crazy” and born that way, you create the monsters that you then blame for the mass murders that occur.

In my day to day life, I deal with patients all the time and not everyone is easy to to deal it. But this movie opened my eyes. Prior to seeing it, it was easy to just assume that bad people are just inherently bad and evil and that they are just assholes.

Now, I always to try to put myself even for a second in their shoes – to try and find out what caused them to be so angry or bitter. Is it me or is it their circumstances? And what can I do to try and understand what their issue is so that I can help them even a little bit. Sometimes people just want to have someone to talk to, someone to listen to them. And sometimes, if those simple things are taken away, if certain access to medications is stopped, you never know who the next Joker would pop up.

Because it doesn’t take that much to make someone just lose it.

So this movie just shows you if not how to be empathetic toward others, to at least TRY and understand what makes them that way.

And that’s why I feel that it’s a powerful movie. It makes you think about lots of things.

Do you really believe that Hitler was born evil? Or were there certain events in his life that made him this way?

Or are all Jihadists born with hatred towards the United States or are the circumstances of their lives figure into their upbringing? Etc. etc.

So, I am going to just hypothetically make a path for Joker winning Best Picture… I know I know (the outrage, the peasants coming at me with the pikes and pitchforks)

But here it goes:

The Revenant couldn’t win Best Picture because it was missing a writing nomination.

Three Billboards outside Ebbing, Missouri couldn’t win Best Picture because it was missing a directing nomination.

But Joker is not missing anything – it has the support of the Actors, the Writers, the Directors, the arts and crafts and the all important music and sound branches of the Academy.

It is driven by a massive, monumental performance by Joaquin Phoenix and it’s a movie that struck a cord with average moviegoers and people alike. Sure, it’s a difficult watch but it definitely has a powerful message. A message that has clearly been embraced by the Academy, given its record number of Oscar nominations.

Sure, the detractors will say that it’s too divisive, that it’s missing SAG and the all
important DGA nomination. But at the Oscars it has all the nods that it needs.

I am not predicting it to win but you have to wonder – just how much of the $1 billion worldwide box office will factor in the voters at the PGA which will be voting in the coming days.

A symbol of protest around the world? Protest against what?

It has it’s flaws in the sense that it’s not all that great and there were a bunch of better movies that came out this year.

Frozen II made more money than Joker, but it doesn’t deserve Best Screenplay and Best Director nominations, either.

As for what’s being talked about, I’ve had more conversations about Avengers and Star Wars than I have about Joker.

We follow things way too closely, we can’t complain that things are predictable.

If you want to be surprised by nominations, don’t follow blogs like this!

you are wrong dude, that you look stupid

Wow, what a double standard. Dern has actually won more critics awards than Phoenix. Pitt is the critics favorite, but so is she. No, the men aren’t any more of a lock than she. ALL 3 of them are.

Probably, but I’m guessing most if not all SAG-AFTRA ballots have alreadybeen casted by yesterday and though she may have a chance through the remaining online ballots (IF most haven’t casted yet), I doubt they’ll vote for her over a more deserving performance from Laura Dern who also happens to be the Actors branch’s representative at the Academy.

I still think you have to look at both. I was one of the few that pulled for Green Book because I liked the film but I think it was saved due to being nominated in the Editing category and not in Directing

Joker has more chance of winning Bafta than Oscar , and even that’s not too good of a chance

Then again I don’t think 1917 is AS hurt by the Editing snub as any other contender thanks to its “one damn shot dammit!” narrative.

I don’t think Hollywood really respects Lopez enough to give her an Oscar nomination. She’s not considered a great actress, just a passable rom-com actress who *sometimes* tries to do something else. And her music career is one of the most mocked in the industry, since it’s widely known that she barely ever sings live, and even her actual studio recordings use ghost-singers (back up singers who are not credited, as to add some extra vocal talent that listeners assume is J Lo herself). She’s a mega-star, and amazing at branding herself (film, music, fashion, etc) but she’s never been regarded as anything more than a commercial entertainer.

Now, there are plenty of commercial entertainers that land Oscar noms, but it’s usually that they lucked into an over-dramatic oscar-bait movie, or did something truly transformative. Or, at least, just flew under the radar and finally did something great. J Lo, however, has been seen as a just an entertainment machine for a couple decades now, not a true artist. I think most voters would hold that against her.

I get what you’re saying, but if Almodóvar didn’t manage to get in over Phillips (and P&G got Banderas in!) I’m not sure Sciamma would’ve either.

So what? Why can’t we just not care what “woke twitter” thinks? Getting outraged about the outrage is just as silly.

Cinematography and Vfx for sure, right?

Which of those blockbusters won the top prize in the second most prestigious film festival in the world?

And the voters who nominated him will just tune it all out now?

I saw it at the London Film Festival at a midweek early morning public screening so it was almost empty and it was the same thing, the 50 people in the huge screening room were all a damn mess by the end. The studio dropped the ball BIG time, the US Box Office total is a disgrace considering how brilliant, heartwarming, life-affirming and relatable that film is. And ffs they had name recognition from legends like Sigourney Weaver and Liam Neeson and Felicity Jones just off the 1B hit that was Rogue One. How that film ended its US run with 3.7M when it was distributed by a mini major that gave it a semi-wide release, that I’m fairly certain will remain one of the great film mysteries of my life.

A film without a SAG Ensemble or Acting nomination is certainly divisive in the largest branch of the Academy.

Calling it now! Dern is going to lose SAG to JLo. I know it doesn’t mean much at the Oscars. She’ll still win there, but the actors are going to throw JLo a bone after the academy left her off here. Consider it my NGNG pick for SAG.

No Country for Old Men and The Departed are my only two true favorites to win since I’ve started paying attention.

Here’s the deal :

I thought Joker deserved 3 and would be a solid winner in any of those three (Lead Actor, Score, Cinematography).

I genuinely would have been fine with even 8 nominations (Costumes, Makeup, Editing, Hair, Sound Mixing, Sound Editing).

And while, to me, BP was a stretch, I could have accepted it considering its success at capturing the zeitgeist. That’s 9.

If it had gotten that 9, while a lot, I would honestly be shutting the hell up now and wouldn’t a say word about Joker. Other films, BETTER films, would have the field-leading double digits and other writers and directors, BETTER writers and directors, would have received Oscar nominations.

But 11 including Directing and Writing is just one step too far. Well, make it two steps.

But they will just give it International and nothing else, because it has all just become predictable and dull at the end of the day.

I’m afraid that will happen indeed. And while I have great respect for OUATIH and The Irishman, I think if BP doesn’t go to Parasite, it should go to 1917. To me, that is the perfect film : a beautifully understated script, masterful direction, brilliant acting and top-notch production values. Its aspect that, to me, puts it above OUATIH and The Irishman, is its impressive, laser sharp focus. Not a single frame or line wasted.

So which comedy rejects will find their way into the race next year? PJ Hogan? Paul Weitz? Nicholas Stoller? Ben Stiller?

Joker’s 11 nominations, and maximised in all the right spots, is a little unnerving. Never imagined Phillips, McKay or the Farrellys would ever find their way here. Also been more acclaimed comedy directors like Waititi & McDonagh getting into Best Picture recently.

I love your opening statement. It’s virtually an awards mantra!

Yet you’re certainly here talking about it. I hear this each year yet the exact same people saying it are quick to complain when a film they liked didn’t get nominated for something.

Passion gets you the nomination, preference gets you the win.

With shortened season and the late arrival of 1917 and seemingly 5 films that could win the whole thing, this is a more difficult year than most to predict BP.

The question is, which film is the least divisive, the most likely to score #2 and #3 votes from the voters? Who would Joker voters preference? Irishman voters? And so forth.

The offerings are all very different and it’s hard to know where the preferences would go. Are Joker and Once the most divisive? I don’t think Parasite is divisive but it is out of the box? Irishman isn’t divisive as such I don’t think it’s just go the length and the Netflix handicap. 1917 seems a safe bet, not too divisive? I don’t know it’s really hard to tell.

That’s what makes this years race exciting.

I love the Oscars and nominations day. Today I had an online chat with a dear friend that made it even more special.

Say how you really feel!!

I agree that Joker is over-nominated although I thought the production design was great and nomination-worthy, but I still think the film is a ton better than the load of crap that won BP last year.

And I am more upset by snubs of great films like The Farewell and Portrait of a Lady on Fire.

I think he has made better films but he has also made worse films. To me this one is closer to his A-game than his career lows.

My exact problem. I honestly don’t care if the 5th slot in BD goes to a man or a woman. But I do care about it going to someone who delivered a masterpiece on the level of the other 4 nominees. And Joker, to me, wasn’t it. Not even close. Not in a year when Almodovar delivered his magnum opus, Sciamma delivered a timeless masterpiece, Mangold brought the best of that classic old Hollywood vibe back and Gerwig delivered one of the boldest and most impressive literary film adaptations in recent years. Bottom line, if the Academy thought the bar (=5th slot) was Todd Phillips and not any of those directors, then that’s a problem for me. I will get over it but I still had to say it out loud at least.

Why do people care what Twitter thinks about anything? Why would you let it dictate your opinions about movies?

Yep salient stat.

Scorsese brought his A game? Lol

Yep. Just look at the BAFTA snub.

But can it survive preferential voting rounds. Will it be enough people’s type of film to help it through? Maybe. It’s the BP point of difference that makes that category now eternally difficult to forecast.

She easily cold.

The field-leading 11 nominations for Joker is something that makes me question the credibility of the Academy and the whole Oscar game. Big time. Look, I’m fully aware that it is all subjective and that a film I may not like, could be loved by many and all that applies to Oscar voters, as well, so if they loved Joker, a film I didn’t, who am I to tell them their highly arguable personal opinion is any less valid than mine.

Having said that, I gave Joker two shots, I did see it twice in cinema and by the end of the second screening all my initial suspicions were confirmed : while Phoenix, the score and the cinematography were excellent and worthy of Oscar nominations, the rest, to me at least, was mediocre to bad. My problem is that if this film can get 11 nominations then 1917 deserves 50. It is the optics that bugs me. No, in a year when the likes of Mendes, Bong, Scorsese bring their fucking A-game, a considerably less accomplished film should not be getting more nominations than any other film that year.

My two (bitter) cents.

P.S. I genuinely don’t know how he does it and I can honestly say I have nothing against him because I really do think he is an excellent actor who always delivers excellent performances but somehow Bradley Cooper received his 8 Oscar nominations in the last decade exclusively for films that I low-key hated and considered vastly overrated : Silver Linings Playbook, American Hustle, American Sniper, A Star is Born, Joker.

The pity is that Tracy Letts’ two noteworthy perfs in two Best Pic nominees would have equalled one very solid nomination prospect. If only the voters didn’t have to separate them out and choose between them.

She was great in Midsommer, and is a good actress… but future “superstar”? there is no such thing anymore. Many actors enjoy some fame and success nowadays, but they quickly fade away (Where is Alicia Vikander?) .
Even Jennifer Lawrence, for all the success she had in a short period of time, pretty much went off- radar, and while she is well known in the USA, she is not a superstar WW in the league of Johansson or Emma Watson.
Pugh is not going to get “superstar” fame unless she gets the lead in a saga (and even that is not enough anymore, Keira Knightley from Pirates is definitely more well known WW than Gal Gadot who has the Wonder Woman franchise, Brie Larson who has Captain Marvel or Daisy Ridley who had 3 Star Wars…)

Agreed, not to mention that as a conventional war film it’s much more typical Oscar fare than Hollywood or Parasite.

My view at this point is ABH. Anything But Hollywood. Give Tarantino his third writing Oscar if you must and give something else BP. Anything is better.

If you see/read the news Joker became a protest symbol against the government in countries like Chile and China and I’m aware of the Frozen II box office but the audience target was completely different. Lol

You forgot to mention that Joker is the first R-rated film to ever join the Billion Dollar Club, not to mention the unadjusted worldwide box office champion that never played in China. It’ll be a long time before another R-rated film follows it into the Billion Dollar Club, much much less take the latter title.

[Re-posting this – haven’t done that much this year (on purpose), but there’s so much info here that it might be worth it. Might save time for later.]

This is long but, I think, all QUITE relevant… So, first, the final version of the stats table (top 13 – including all Critics Choice Best Picture nominees, as well as, of course, all PGA and Oscar nominees in that category):

Once Upon a Time in Hollywood 81 43
The Irishman 74 39
Parasite 70 35
Marriage Story 62 34
Joker 61 30
Jojo Rabbit 56 28
1917 50 26
Little Women 40 21
Knives Out 27 15 (not up for Best Picture)
The Two Popes 25 14 (not up for Best Picture)
Ford v Ferrari 23 11
The Farewell 22 13 (not up for Best Picture)
Uncut Gems 16 10 (not up for Best Picture.)

The first figure is the weighted total (3 points assigned to the strongest stats, 1 to the weakest – meaning those not far enough over 90% and/or with samples that are too small, and no voter overlap -, 2 for those in-between), the second one is the straight count (simply 1 point for each stats box ticked). Now, I shall quote myself from last year:

I’ve kept this table for four years (sure, the things included and their weights have changed slightly, over time), this being the fifth, and the two times a movie ended up in clear, sole first place (according to both tallying methods), it won the Oscar for Best Picture in the end (Spotlight and The Shape of Water), and twice there was no lone first place and it was a movie not in first (or clear second) that won: Manchester by the Sea was 1 point ahead of both La La Land and Moonlight in the weighted standings but 1 point behind the former in the straight count standings and Roma was 2 points ahead in the straight count standings but only tied with A Star is Born in the weighted ones. And both of those lost. (To Moonlight, 1 off and 2 off, and Green Book, 8 off and 9 off.)

This data could be useful moving forward, if one is to assume things are likely to continue in this vein (which the general trajectory of Oscar stats over the years, as well as the current correlation percentages, suggest it will), such as when there’s a clear leader again (which seems to mean that movie will win, even after seemingly very tight races) or there isn’t (which seems to actually suggest that a movie outside the top 2, but not too far off, will win – Green Book was 5th/4th-5th, respectively, and no more than 9 points off in either of the standings, which would narrow it down to 3-5 movies, tops, for those closer years). But there’s much more data to collect in years to come, of course, before any of this will seem more certain. For now, it’s good for some strong early clues, which is all I wanted it to be when I first started compiling it.

So, according to this four-year sample (do remember, however, that this table is based, each year, on A TON of data, all working, via high-percentage correlations and, in many cases, voter overlap as well, towards indicating what is most likely to win Best Picture at the Oscars), Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood should win, since the only previous clear leaders in both standings did so. If that’s unreliable, then we have The Irishman as the only other movie no farther off first place (or in first place) than any of the four BP winners in the covered period. Parasite, the third place finisher, is 11 points off (8 on the straight count side – still valid there), 3 more than the previous lowest-ranked winner, Green Book, so it shouldn’t win. (Of course, 3 points may well not prove statistically relevant, once the sample increases. But, again, if history repeats itself, given that there is a clear leader in both, and by at least 4 points in each, Once should just win. We’ll see how this goes…)

Now, the current situation according to my official Best Picture-predicting system:

Some preliminary notes (if any of these don’t make total sense as is, one should probably just read them after the explanations below):

– I see I was a tad optimistic before about Once and its editing snub. I’d forgotten about the WGA ineligibility, which I score as -0.5 points (and this IS needed, or else I have to change my tiebreak rules somehow to get Shape as the 2018 predicted winner), and which, more importantly, perhaps, means it can’t physically win SAG+WGA… I think it needs to win either PGA+DGA or PGA+SAG (the latter seems more doable, and I think if it wins the PGA it’s likely to win SAG as well – and the former is also possible). So, it’s still very much valid, but it’s in more trouble than I’d thought. Meaning, it’ll be more difficult for it to become the points leader at the end (as it’s now losing almost any tie – I’ve also decided to score a SAG ensemble win for a movie with no SAG or Oscar acting nominations as -0.5 overall for acting, similarly for WGA/screenplay and DGA/directing, so if Parasite wins SAG and ends up tied with Once for first, somehow, then that’ll be a proper mess, as I’ve never had this situation before).
– I failed to comment earlier on just how well Jojo Rabbit did here, despite the predicted directing snub! It got not only supporting actress (which I expected) and screenplay (which was even more likely), but also editing, which I think was a bit of a surprise. Thus, a funny situation has arisen: even though Joker is the lone nominations leader with 11 and Jojo is only tied for 5th with 6, the former is out of contention (it already was) for the BP win, whereas the latter remains valid, as its only deduction so far is in directing! No two snub rule. Of course, it WILL need to win the WGA. Because…
– The Irishman, unless I change my elimination rules (I’ve been considering adding a rule that says a movie has to win either PGA, DGA, SAG ensemble or WGA to not be out of contention, a rule with zero exceptions in the PGA era and more, and The Irishman might be a good reason to do so), cannot end up being one of the movies eliminated, so (again, unless I make some changes) all of the movies eliminated (which I will list below) are not going to win Best Picture. (At least according to my system.) If all others are eliminated, The Irishman will become the favorite to win even if it loses PGA, DGA, SAG and WGA – all of them. (But, let’s face it, I’ll never let that happen! Since it just wouldn’t make much sense. I almost surely WILL add the aforementioned rule, should it come to that.) They keep finding ways to give me tough decisions, somehow! 🙂 Although maybe this won’t happen. There’s a good chance it won’t.

Quick(-ish) explanation of my system and how it works:

Stage 1 – elimination rules, all based on stats with under 4% exceptions over at least 30 years (usually way, way more than that – the PGA one is the only one with a sample under 70 years, and it, of course, has zero exceptions):

– a movie snubbed by the PGA is assumed to not be able to win Best Picture;
– a movie not at least tied for 5th in the Oscar nomination rankings is assumed to not be able to win Best Picture;
– a movie snubbed in at least two different major categories (picture – meaning PGA -, director, writing, acting or editing) by the guilds and/or Oscars is assumed to not be able to win Best Picture;
– a movie that loses the WGA while eligible (either by being snubbed or by losing the final vote) and has at least one guild or Oscar snub in one of the other four aforementioned categories (picture, directing, acting or editing) is assumed to not be able to win Best Picture.

All of this, unless a situation arises in which ALL movies are facing at least one such stat, in which case the count described below decides matters, and all nominees take part. Otherwise, only the movies not eliminated by any of the above rules move forward.

Stage 2 – weakness count (among the movies still in contention):

– any snub for picture (PGA), directing (DGA and/or Oscar), writing (WGA and/or Oscar), acting (SAG ensemble, SAG and/or Oscar acting) or editing (ACE and/or Oscar), when eligible, results in a one point deduction, but no more than one point being deducted per each of the five categories;
– any major guild defeat (PGA/DGA/WGA/SAG) WHEN NOMINATED also results in a one point deduction, with the exceptions mentioned above: a movie that wins the DGA but gets snubbed for directing only loses half a point, likewise a movie that wins SAG Ensemble but gets snubbed for acting (at either SAG or the Oscars or both) or a movie that wins the WGA but gets snubbed for screenplay (which hasn’t happened yet, at least in the PGA era).

Stage 3 – tiebreakers (if no one movie still in contention emerges as clear first place after the count), used in this order until a movie is ahead (so, no totals):

– a higher number of SAG acting wins;
– fewer snubs in the categories listed above;
– WGA win;
– PGA win;
– DGA win;
– SAG Ensemble win.

Of course, since this is my modus operandi, the system, as described, correctly predicts all PGA era Best Picture winners, the hope being that it can, as a result, also predict future winners (especially in closer races). Probably a bit optimistic, but, if it doesn’t, the further hope is, then, that there is a way to tweak it some more so that it eventually does…

The situation this year, so far (we actually already have a clear, ranked top 4, which is odd – and will likely change, anyway):

1. The Irishman (0)

No deductions so far.

2. Parasite (-0.5/-1)

Either a full point deduction or a half a point deduction, for missing out on SAG and Oscar acting nominations, depending on whether or not it wins Best Ensemble.

3. Jojo Rabbit (-1)

One point deducted for the Oscar directing snub. Amazingly, it’s missed nothing else of consequence to this system…

4. Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood (-1.5)

A full point deducted for the Oscar editing snub and another half a point deducted for the WGA ineligibility, which prevents it from winning there.

These four are the only remaining valid winners… The ones below are eliminated:

5-6. Joker, 1917 (-2)

Joker is eliminated by the two snub rule (DGA and SAG ensemble snubs = directing and acting weakness).
1917 is also eliminated by the two snub rule (SAG shutout plus no Oscar acting nominations, ACE and Oscar editing snubs = acting and editing weakness).

7-9. Marriage Story, Little Women, Ford v Ferrari (-3)

Marriage Story is eliminated by the two snub rule (DGA plus Oscar directing snubs, SAG ensemble snub, Oscar editing snub = directing, acting and editing weakness).
Little Women is eliminated by the two snub rule as well (DGA plus Oscar directing snubs, SAG shutout, ACE and Oscar editing snubs = directing, acting and editing weakness).
Ford v Ferrari is eliminated by both the nominations ranking rule (it’s not even tied for 7th, and no movie not at least tied for 7th has EVER won Best Picture) and the two snub rule (DGA plus Oscar directing snubs, WGA and Oscar screenplay snubs, SAG ensemble snub and no Oscar acting nominations = directing, writing and acting weakness).

What needs to happen in order for Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood to become the system’s final stats favorite:

– it needs to win one more major guild than Jojo Rabbit. Jojo might win: PGA (possible, but doesn’t seem very likely… Green Book, Argo, Little Miss Sunshine, Moulin Rouge!, Apollo 13 and Driving Miss Daisy have done this withoug directing nominations at the Oscars, but only Little Miss Sunshine and Apollo 13 hadn’t first won the Globe for picture – nor the Critics Choice, in their cases), SAG ensemble (also unlikely – posted some stats a few days ago, in a reply to john smith), WGA (possible but not very likely – probably even less than The Irishman). Once might win: PGA (definitely possible… Birdman, Little Miss Sunshine and Brokeback Mountain have done it without editing nominations at the Oscars, all in the last 14 years; also, 14 of the last 21 BFCA BP winners won the PGA as well), SAG ensemble (very likely, co-favorite with The Irishman according to the stats, with Parasite also entirely possible), DGA (also possible, but a lot less likely: Roma, Birdman and Brokeback Mountain are the ones that have done it without editing nominations at the Oscars most recently, however, only Birdman also did it without winning either the Globe or the Critics Choice for directing first). So, overall, I would say it’s quite likely Once wins more big guilds than Jojo Rabbit, looking at all of this.

– it needs to win one major guild more than Parasite. Once’s expected wins, based on the above, are, for me, around 1.5 wins (something like 40%-50% for SAG ensemble, 50%-70% for PGA and some slight chances for a DGA win added to all of that). Parasite might win: PGA (not very likely… in the SAG era, only The Return of the King and Moulin Rouge! have won the PGA with zero SAG acting nominations, but no foreign film, not even Roma or Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon, has ever won the PGA), SAG ensemble (maybe 15%-20%), DGA (Roma, The Return of the King and Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon won the DGA without any SAG acting nominations, and two of those were foreign… I would say it’s on at least 60%-70% here), WGA (I think highly unlikely – has a foreign film EVER won the WGA? Not since 1984, I know that). Its total expectancy looks to be around 1 win. So, Once getting one more than that is doable, but far from certain.

– it’s actually irrelevant to Once’s chances whether Parasite or Jojo Rabbit lose the WGA and get eliminated by the two snub rule, because my system doesn’t allow a WGA-ineligible movie with at least one major non-screenplay industry snub to be picked as the favorite over a movie eliminated by the WGA+1 rule unless it’s ahead of it in the count. (This, courtesy of the crazy Three Billboards year…) However, it would help it in terms of the count, obviously.

– it needs to win two major guilds more than The Irishman. And The Irishman might win: PGA (extremely unlikely, I would say, since no movie in the BFCA era has won the PGA without wins for picture/director/screenplay at either the Globes or Critics Choice), SAG ensemble (40%-50%), DGA (almost as unlikely as Once/Tarantino winning this, since no movie in the last 16 years has won this vs. TWO different Globe or Critics Choice-winning directors), WGA (also seems unlikely to me, honestly, looking at precedents – Little Women should be the favorite here, after the BFCA win, since the last BP-nominated BFCA winner to be eligible for and lose the WGA appears to be Lincoln, 7 years ago -, but certainly not THAT unlikely, so let’s give it 25%-30% here)! So, its total expectation is also around one win. Which, if it does get it, might be difficult to beat for Once, but I, personally, don’t see The Irishman winning any of these. If it does, it’s perhaps likely to become the Best Picture front runner and stay there until the end…

So, to sum up: I think it’s most likely still between Once and Parasite, with The Irishman and Jojo Rabbit as dark horses, but no more than that. For Once to become the final stats favorite, according to my system, I think it’s most important that it win SAG Ensemble, as that is how it can prevent its main rivals (Parasite and The Irishman) from getting one of THEIR most likely big guild wins. Looking at the favorites for each of the four, I would say Parasite is the front runner for the DGA (not sure whether 1917 is in second place or not – the Oscar stats it’s facing for the directing win might be just as strong at the DGA), Once for the PGA and SAG, and none of the not-yet-eliminated BP contenders is the favorite to win the WGA (but The Irishman seems most likely, out of only the top four in BP – well, the three that are eligible). Assuming a DGA win for Parasite and a PGA win for Once (the Critics Choice split scenario), then Once absolutely NEEDS to win Best Ensemble to win the count. (Otherwise Parasite will have -3 and Once will have -3.5.) So, basically, this year’s Best Picture race might actually be decided by SAG Ensemble, which isn’t something one gets to say very often. 🙂 (Or at least us stats people don’t…) I think it will win SAG Ensemble and probably also PGA, so I’m still predicting it to prevail at the Oscars, too. (Still unofficially, as there isn’t yet enough data for an official prediction by my stats system.)

Driver has won 20-odd critics groups awards. It is bizarre that he didn’t take CC. Don’t count him out yet.

Scott Feinberg, one of the few who had predicted the J-Lo snub and who had Kathy Bates said that Hustlers wasn’t particularly well received outside of the U.S., where an increasingly large number of Academy members are based.

One can be obsessed with awards and at the same time think them useless. Many do, I think.

But you’re commenting on Awards Daily.

Driver is in ONE prominent movie this year, the hugely derided Rise of Skywalker.
No one saw The Report (shame, as it’s a good movie) or that zombie flick and Marriage Story bored the tits off people, so few actually saw it and those who did didn’t recommend it.

If anything, that all works against him.

True. But it makes me wonder how well liked(and known) Tracy Letts is within the acting branch since he mostly does theater and has done some film stuff. And of course how well liked Wesley Snipes is within the branch as well.

There was not really any excuse for it this year with Parasite and The Farewell in the mix. The total shutout of The Farewell is embarrassing.

We had a lot of editing discussion with Birdman. Is the editing stat less reliable in a “one-take” film?

Its lengthy but here is a post i just put up on my facebook page. Lots of Academy Award history and stats went into it so I hope you all enjoy:

Extremely early Academy Award Best Picture Prediction:

I have to admit that I am extremely behind on my movies this year but this post is going to look at the history of the Academy Awards to make early predictions for the winners on February 9th. Once I see the films I may change some these when the award show gets closer but until then, lets take a look.

When predicting the Best Picture Winner there is always two other categories to look at: Best Director and Best Editing: In the 91 years prior to this years nominations, 65 of the winners also won for it’s director. That’s 71.4 % of the time. Since the 21st century however, this trend has gone down a bit with 11 of the 19 films taking both, which is 57.9%. Along with the dual wins for both categories, it is also extremely rare for a film to win without its director even being nominated. Since 1989, only 3 films have won Best Picture without the director getting noticed (1989-Driving Miss Daisy, 2012-Argo, and 2018-Green Book). Keeping this in mind we have already narrowed down the selection to 5:

The Irishman
Joker
1917
One Upon A Time…In Hollywood
Parasite

The other category to look at is Film Editing. Using an article produced by Variety in 2013 and updating it with the winners after that article was published, only 10 films have won in 91 years without being nominated in the Editing category (10.9%). The last came in 2014 when Birdman took home the award. Before that, you have to go all the way back to Ordinary People in 1980 for the same thing to occur. Here are the nominees in that category this year:

Ford Vs Ferrari
The Irishman
Joker
JO JO Rabbit
Parasite

Keeping all this in mind, the 3 favorites appear to be The Irishman, Joker and Parasite since they are the only ones of the 9 Best Picture nominees in the Director and Editing races. So who is the best bet to win?

Joker, which earned the most nominations with 11, seems to have the most steam coming down the stretch of the 3 contenders. It’s been praised all Awards season for Phoenix and his portrayal of the title character and it has been noticed by almost everyone as a top 10 film in the critics lists. But a comic book film has never taken home the big award. This would be an unprecedented win and a slap to old Hollywood considering the backlash from some on their remarks about comic book movies not being real films (mostly screamed by Scorsese the director of the Irishman).

Parasite has a double whammy on its side as its a foreign language film (South Korea) and has no nominations in the acting categories. No true foreign language film has been recognized by the Academy in its 91 year history. As for the acting problem, only 11 total films have won the top award without anyone in the 4 acting categories being recognized. The last time it occurred was 2008 when Slumdog Millionare won.

Last comes down to The Irishman, a 3 and a half hour film that has been largely seen by the public on Netflix streaming service. If The Irishman should win the award it would hold the title for the Lowest grossing Best Picture Award winner in history. Calculating for Adjusted Gross, the two films with the lowest amount of ticket sales is The Hurt Locker (2009) with 19 mil and Moonlight with 27 mil. So how much does The Irishman currently have? Well according to Box Office Mojo, its limited release has only earned to date, $961,224. My guess is this will go up slightly in the next 3 weeks as I expect Netflix to re-release the film in theaters but if not, I think this hurts it’s chances.

Prediction: This looks like a very hard year for predicting the winner but with everything taken into consideration I am going with Joker right now. Had 1917 been nominated for Editing I would have said it was a shoe in but its omission makes it anyones guess right now.

My problem with the “the best films just happened to be by men” argument is that the Academy does not pick “the best films” year in and year out. Almost always, good films lose to worse films or don’t get nominated at all.

The Academy makes decisions about what to honor based on all kinds of factors, and the director’s branch happens to look past the work of women again and again. They nominated Pawel Pawlikowski last year but couldn’t find room for Celine Sciamma this year? What’s the difference?

Hell, a few years ago they went with Morten Tyldum over Ava DuVernay. Was Selma the best directed film of that year? No, but God knows neither was The Imitation Game! Selma was a perfectly Oscar-y movie, certainly up to the standards of, say, Green Book or some similar mediocre crowd-pleaser that tickles the Academy’s fancy.

I definitely preferred Midsommar to Hereditary, though I didn’t expect any nominations for it, so hard to call anything a snub.

I hope she doesn’t go away. She’s immensely talented.

I hate when all the drama around award shows causes people to root against good films and filmmakers (not just at awards shows, but in general).

I knew JLo would miss and just am pissed I talked myself out of Bates. I kept telling everyone we were sleeping on her. Respected veteran prior winner in an Eastwood film can get a lone nomination; JLo in a stripper heist-style movie cannot. But I was too hopeful for Farewell’s chances especially after Laura Dern singled out Nai Nai last night.

I knew on paper a year ago Cynthia would be a force to be reckoned with—and that Saoirse and one black actress would get in—but I can’t be blamed for settling on Lupita after actually seeing Harriet and questioning her position in a preferential-ballot race. Even the black critics were championing prior nominee Lupita for the more inventive performance.

The Gerwig controversy does a disservice to her merits as a filmmaker. She deserved a nomination because the direction and film were strong—not because the direction and film were strong and she’s a woman. They also can’t be blamed for nominating Joker. Too bad Scorsese stayed in and Irishman became the stat champ. I still don’t see it winning for being so slow. 1917 would break with history, but the editing is obviously not prominent. The screenwriting nomination is a big deal. Revenant and Avatar and Dunkirk all missed this. But do enough writers prefer it to other films up for screenplay?

As with Harriet, I went ahead and bet against the Popes after actually seeing the film and being unimpressed. Plus, the category fraud. Oh, well. The Brits always get a BAFTA/Globe spoiler in. That’s more reliable than affirmative action votes for diversity. The interesting development was that Taron missed out despite noms from all but the BFCA (which Pryce also missed) and Elton campaigning for him and the Globe win over Leo. So, the Brits supported the Popes and LW actors instead.

Beyonce and Frozen missing, along with JLo, are the kinds of predictable yet unexpected upsets you never actually predict. I had the Randy Newman song in over Steenburgen though. Never thought they’d buy that. Part of me just wants Diane Warren to win finally so that maybe she’ll stop getting nominated for obscure songs and films at the expense of more memorable hit offerings—though I say this as someone who’s found Beyonce insufferable for years and always questioned her nomination this year for a lyrically and melodically sparse pop song with Elton also blackballing her publicly.

Agree

it takes time to write a Dolemite Snub article, it’s coming so don’t worry. 🙂

nothing but ♥ for Sasha, she fought a good fight.

Uff, I’m so jealous. 1917 doesn’t open were I live until February 6th!! I’ll only have 3 DAYS to go watch it before the Oscars. And I’m VERY hyped for it.

Completely agree about Phoenix BTW.

I’d put the rest of them in the same line. they won’t happen so % of not happening doesn’t matter.

Various nominations and winning the top prize are two TOTALLY different things. Best Picture is a stamp of approval from the entire filmmaking industry. They are NOT ready to concede their traditional idea of cinema to a streaming behemoth.

And how many of those 24 nominations will result in wins? I’d wager not many. Laura Dern is the only Netflix lock. They might win 1 or 2 others.

Phoenix gave a very nice and coherent interview on CBS Sunday morning yesterday. Sorry, but this is his race to lose.

Erivo is English

> …that’s either The Shape of Water or La La Land…

But LaLa Land didn’t win, right?

I’ll throw in cognitive dissonance. I’ve had a bout of it for decades 🙂

I have a feeling that The Farewell fuck up was because they didn’t think Asian cast movie would take off (parasite says Hi) while being overly confident that AMPAS wouldn’t snub a black cast one. Even when it became clear early on that Waves was a dead end.

Banderas is not King. For one, he didn’t win Globe and therefore is not the frontrunner to sustain SAG/BAFTA snubs which she did. Moreover, I have hard time seeing both SAG and BAFTA snubbing Phoenix and going for 2 different actors, let alone 2 that missed AMPAS noms (like Bale and Taron).

Driver is not happening because his movie has faded and it was over for him when critics backed up Banderas. if Driver had critics backing than he could have factored if he won one of televised since he hit them all (unlike Banderas).

The only one that could have challenged somewhat, GG winner taron, is out of race.

Frankly, I’m OK with that. this is Phoenix year and he should take the prize.

Praying hard for a The Color Purple situation with at least one of those four movies…Like this:
Best Picture to Parasite
Best Directing to Bong
Best Actor to Banderas
Best Supporting Actor to Pesci or Hanks
Best Original Screenplay to Parasite
Best Adapted Screenplay to Little Women
Best Cinematography to 1917
Best Costume Design to Little Women
Best Production Design to Parasite
Best Editing to Ford v Ferrari
Best Makeup and Hairstyling to Judy
Best Score to 1917 or Little Women
Best Sound Mixing to Ad Astra
Best Sound Editing to Ford v Ferrari

Sorry Andrew, no can do on that, but nice try 🙂

I was actually coming here to write that, first it’s noteworthy because before this year there had never even been 3 films get double digits in a year let along 4. I do believe it is because of a combination of the earlier date meaning they just saw less films and the fact that since the best picture ballot expanded and the blogosphere has taken over there tend to be up to 10 dominating films, meaning there is a clear list of films for voters to see and they just don’t see a lot more than that list. I am absolutely happy the date is pushed back again next year because that is the most obvious answer but I don’t really know how to fix the second issue. The blogosphere isn’t going anywhere and even if they go back to 5 nominees that idea is kind of out there now and it’s less a problem with the Oscars having more than 5 rather with other groups that influence what the voters watch.

In addition to the fact that there were 4 films with double digits nominations this year the best picture nominees got 69 nominations between them. Before this the highest ever (except the year’s with 10 nominees) was 61 I believe (unless I did some math wrong). So again, what we see is that less films are sucking up more of the nominations proving that voters just aren’t looking very far afield. This explains so many of the films that got 0 nominations but were expected to land in crafts at least this year. Oh well, at least next year the date is pushed back.

Yup. Whenever anyone asks a movie from the past 5-10 years that they probably haven’t seen or heard of that’s my number one every time, with a caveat that it’s sad as f. lol

Inside Llewyn Davis is an all time great. And A Monster Calls fucked. me. up. And that hardly every happens,

Back in the day, when a movie had more than 10 nominations, it would be a news worthy fact. Nowadays there are more categories, but also, you don’t get many “odd” choices in any category. Cinematography and Costumes are usually the ones getting something unexpected.

Perfectly put. The film is so economical. Compared to Hollywood and Irishman that just go on and on and on. I think 1917 is perfect.

Stats-wise the writing has been on the wall about Lupita who was truly brilliant in her dual role but Lopez was definitely a surprise.

https://twitter.com/filmystic/status/1216889606873997313

I don’t disagree about a lot of the examples you cite, but Wu and Yeoh missing for CRA I don’t think says all that much about attitudes toward Asian actors; the days when romantic comedies were Oscar vehicles are largely behind us.

Well said. 2019 is a huge disappointment I think. The Parasite nominations are great. I could imagine that the majority of voters think it is the best film of the year. And the best directed. Maybe the best written. But they will just give it International and nothing else, because it has all just become predictable and dull at the end of the day.

Anyone can vomit hatred at Gerwig, but at the end of the day she was the only woman that stood a chance at a directing nomination. Everyone knows that. (And I feel bad for her to be in this position). Most everyone thought that there was another female director that was more deserving. Have you fucking watched Portrait Of A Lady On Fire? If you think that the best of film is represented at the Oscars each year then you are delusional. It’s a fucking game. The fact that Joker leads noms says everything about where we are in 2020. And that AMPAS and ABC cannot figure out that streaming the show live (with advertising) should have started many years ago just proves that all of it will probably almost disappear in a decade says it all.

I love this!

Also, I think the “most nominations” tally is particularly insignificant when you have so many films with huge nomination tallies.

which we don’t even know the boxoffice figures for either of them.

Relevant because…?

Also, this category has never liked animated sequels, other than the Toy Story franchise.

They got nominated with Les Miserables anyway.

No one other than you and children cares about Frozen 2! It didn’t deserve to win and thankfully it wasn’t even nominated! Many are sick of hearing about that crap!

That is the right approach to all the craziness of Nominations Day 🙂

I disagree on OUATIH mainly just because all the possible comps (previous Tarantino movies, movies with an all-star cast) always pointed to a WW gross at around 500 million WW, given the excellent reviews and the overseas market growth. It still made profit and was a good result, but, again, without even comparing Django, it played weirdly on par with Murder on the orient express, which also was not an action movie (though it did have some actione scenes, but so does Once). One would expect thatTarantino + Di Caprio, Pitt, Robbie, Pacino + awsome reviews would do much better than Branagh + Depp, Pfeiffer, Dench, Dafoe, Cruz+ mixed to negative reviews.

This will always be the year for me when Joker got 11 nominations and Portrait of a Lady on Fire got zero.

Hard to predict the future and what will better stand the test of time. Passage of time has a way of bringing clarity. For example, I’ve seen Kramer Vs Kramer, but it’s not something I’ve had a desire to watch in a long time. (Ok some KvK fan is going to get on my case now, lol.) But Apocalypse Now, I’ve watched that many times, and it was shown in my university film studies class. Even my friends still do riffs on “I love the smell of napalm in the morning”. I think it was a hell of a movie. I was surprised to learn it lost to KvK back in the day.

You and I are scarily on the same page today Andrew. Must be the time zone alignment helping us. 🙂

Scorsese was nominated for delivering another masterpiece that may have had its flaws but overall was still more impressive than almost any other film in 2019.

Phillips got nominated for a film that was a rather obvious knockoff of two Scorsese films, Taxi Driver and King of Comedy.

My two cents.

Yes and I like her very much, but she is no superstar, nor will she ever be one.
We should just accept that superstars are relics of the past, as “manwe” said, and that Johansson is likely the last real “diva” we will get, and that would be because while she is still fairly young, her success came in the early 00’s, at the sunset of the old cinema as we knew it.

In the vein of Blanchett, Mirren or Streep yes looking at Florences range so far I think superstar as a versatile awards contender mainstay not a Bullock, Roberts, or Witherspoon money maker

After twitter went off AGAIN I’m ready to go down for Joker as the spoiler. I think quite a few members that might have had Joker in slots 4-7 will move it up just out of spite.

Humans are spiteful and reactionary and Joker continuing to be used as a negative example for the wrongs of the Academy might just be the catalyst of further mobilization behind it.

If it’s not OUATIH or Parasite, go all the way and give it to Joker. Fuck it.

Because sadly there is a Bias against women, and the academy voters are mostly males. Women voters are not really supportive towards women auteurs either: just look at Sasha…last year she basically campaigned against “The favourite” which, while directed by a man, had a women centric cast,and many women in the techs; this year, she hated little woman, despite it being basically the only women-centered movie up for the prize.

So it always feels like women need to do something more then what men would, for a film to get recognized.

That’d chance everything, but I don’t it’s happening. It wasn’t nominated for DGA.

I don’t see how the notion that Coppola deserved nominations and wins for those films (wins in picture, director, screenplay for Lost in Translation and Marie Antoinette, nominations or at least very strong consideration in all of those categories for Somewhere and at least a screenplay nomination for The Virgin Suicides and The Beguiled) but only got attention for Lost in Translation means that Gerwig should be held to a higher standard and somehow surpass those films in order to deserve a nomination while men can do dull work that stands out because it’s not in comparison to anything in the minds of voters

The credibility of the Oscars has never been there, it’s not in question, it’s never been there

There’s the rub. It’s such a strong year, there are so many awards-worthy films, and we keep saying “X was good but there just weren’t enough slots for it to be nominated”, but we’re using slots on Joker? It’s disappointing.

It’s been 5 years since her oscar win, and the only notable role she had was in tomb Raider, which flopped in Usa and saved face WW. Had literally zero prestigious roles, and many embarassing critical failures (earthquake bird, tulip fever)…

Alicia Vikander played in the popular blockbuster Tomb Raider in 2018, with a sequel in the making, as well as four other projects currently under production.

parasite is a big hit for a foreign language movie. It’s going to make 30M+ in US which is big for that type.

Joker boxoffice is reportedly 1.069B as of today.

OUATIH boxoffice is great given 90M budget and the topic (including lack of action). Stars (actors + director) clearly did their job drawing audiences for in many movies it’s really star + action/SFX that do the trick rather than stars alone.

It wasn’t a speech that hurt Crowe that year, just so you know. The fact that he had won the previous year didn’t help him either.

Norbit has settled into becoming the term used to describe when an acting Oscar contender’s win gets undermined by a lesser-quality new release prior to the oscars.

Sure, Alan Arkin won the BAFTA (where Eddie Murphy wasn’t nominated) on the way to the Oscar, but that snag was never as interesting.

And I hear that they completely bungled the screener issue.

Green Book misrepresented the relationship between Don Shirley and his family just to drive the plot. Argo aggressively downplayed the Canadian ambassador’s role in the operation just to drive the plot.

Historical films do that. I don’t see why this is used to disparage some films, but not others.

please don’t write the review. it’s only your opinion and that’s it. I respect you but the movie’s rightfully ignored left and right. When your most talked about moment is an awkward sex scene that had people roll with laughter, wires clearly crossed somewhere.

Shouldn’t that be an easy lock for Bombshell?

Could Zellweger take Makeup & Hairstyling along with her a la Meryl Streep (The Iron Lady) and Gary Oldman (Darkest Hour)?

Absolutely true. They are for me a mirror to hold up to see what’s out there with ‘prestige’ movies but invariably I go seeking further afield to find stories and storytellers that really speak to me, not just the ones that an industry of cash splashing publicists and executives have thrown at critics and guilds to ‘shape’ the awards narrative. It is a point of reference for me now. But I am still obsessed by the Academy Awards and am always struck by it’s place in the culture whether I approve of their choices or not.

I like the awards partly because they get it wrong so often. It’s fascinating that politics rather than quality really matters. Has always been that way

Doesn’t matter. Oscar ballots closed two days after the Globes.

Anything he’s done since then doesn’t count.

I’m not going by stats just a gut feeling that a lot of people love Marty without loving The Irishman. For me, equal love of it, Parasite and Once.

It still won’t be over as it doesn’t have DGA or SAG Ensemble noms. But then I guess all bets are off.

I forget to read him. He’s a pretty savvy prognosticator

What happens if Joker wins PGA?

1917 already got $37m US domestic in the first weekend. It is going to be a big Box office hit but is it too late?

Greta wasn’t snubbed. If anything her nomination would have been an insult. Hollywood saying we don’t care about merit, here’s a nom, just because you’re a women. Little Women just wasn’t great unfortunately, it was solid, but had plenty of flaws and nowhere near as good as the ’94 version. Saying this with all my love for Greta, she is incredible and can’t wait for her to do something original next. As a matter of fact she wouldn’t have made the cut if there were 5 female directors. I always create a yearly award and have a cat for female directors and this year the top 5 is:

CLAIRE DENIS – HIGH LIFE
JENNIFER KENT – THE NIGHTINGALE
LAURE DE CLERMONT-TONNERRE – THE MUSTANG
CÈLINE SCHIAMMA – PORTRAIT OF A LADY ON FIRE
LULU WANG – THE FAREWELL

They are the real snubs.

Yes I agree I think it’ll be a scattershot divide of prizes.

This is the greatest disappointment for me as well. Parasite & The Farewell are my Top 2 favorites of 2019 and it makes me so sad that none of the actors were included.

You can do whatever you like with your time, but you’ll be missing out on so many great movies if you apply this standard to your watchlist.

Supp Actor this year looked full up so early in the season as did Leading Actor but seeing 5 Oscar winners whilst impressive and will be a glittering moment to hear Regina King read out their 5 names, it smacks of predictability. But they are all amazing actors. Sasha and others had talked early on about Tracy Letts and personally I am so impressed with his talent.

Green Book (traditional academy fare) following Shape of Water and Moonlight (non traditional) has really complicated BP predicting.

1917 seems much more like a traditional winner than Parasite (genre but language) or Hollywood. It’s hard to know which way AMPAS will go.

Sasha or Ryan or someone else in the know, how are the campaigns going? I have no sense of that from over here in Australia.

Oh and Jessie Buckley who should have been nominated. Bright star

Yes he did Supp Actor for Creed

His Oscar spends the same

Stallone didn’t make it

People aren’t always linear in how they come to like or dislike things.

What is really disappointing to me is that the Academy continues to ignore Asian performers. This was the perfect year to honor them, yet not one actor made it. It’s a travesty. It’s not just about women or black people. Asians also exist and they sure can churn out brilliant performances. What a shame.

-both actresses were nominated for both a Golden Globe and a Screen Actors Guild award, but were left off the Academy’s list.-

Lupita wasn’t in the Golden Globes’ list which I still don’t understand.

But Brad never won for acting.

It is an Oscar-calibre powerhouse performance. Same with Penélope Cruz in Everybody Knows. There are obvious reasons why both were snubbed, but we are judging quality, too… both of them, in my opinion, were better than Scarlett Johansson in Marriage Story.

But nobody will watch Harriet.

Some of her overly devoted “fans” make it hard to root for her films.

Wild that there are 6 movies that can win Best Picture this year (Once, Parasite, 1917, Irishman, Jojo, Joker)

I guess I think Once and Parasite are the most likely but honestly who knows.

we are talking about the Oscars. If they want, they give it to a child or to Marisa Tomei for a subpar Hollywood comedy (she was great in it, though). Or they just snub some legends everybody thought were going to pick up their Oscar like…

Eddie Murphy (Showgirls)
Burt Reynolds (Boogie Nights)
Sylvester Stallone (Creed)
Peter O’Toole (Venus)
Lauren Bacall (The Mirror has Two Faces)
… we could go on and on… Oscar night is full of shockers, and it is hilarious that when someone points out that there is still margin for a shocking upset (and why), so many people gets angry… the same people that is first to say “boring” if the Oscars go as predicted.

It’s nominated for Makeup & Hairstyling…you can play this game with just about anything. Have you ever seen the brilliant Academy Award-nominated “Norbit”? 😛

and that proved crucial

Good as Lopez might have been, hardly as good as say, Annette Benning or others ignored. It really would have been star power giving her a nom.

Well said

there’s that controversy too

Delighted to see Florence Pugh now an Academy award nominee. A future superstar.

Best Supporting Actor has 5 Academy award winners in it already! One of them already has 2 Oscars.

THANK YOU Sasha for some sanity on the Gerwig snub being some massive crime against all women when scores of great male directors ignored over the years.

Also on Lopez, a tad surprised given her SAG and CC noms but guess her diva behavior and (let’s be frank) crappy movie resume (besides Out of Sight) worked aginst her with voters.

I’m delighted to see Antonio Banderas finally an Oscar nominated actor.

EARLY OSCAR PREDICTIONS:

PICTURE: Once Upon a Time in Hollywood
DIRECTOR: Sam Mendes, 1917
ACTOR: Joaquin Phoenix, Joker
ACTRESS: Renee Zellweger, Judy
SUPPORTING ACTOR: Brad Pitt, Once Upon a Time in Hollywood
SUPPORTING ACTRESS: Scarlett Johansson, Jojo Rabbit (I see a SAG win)
ADAPTED SCREENPLAY: Little Women, Greta Gerwig
ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY: Once Upon a Time in Hollywood, Quentin Tarantino
CINEMATOGRAPHY: 1917
PRODUCTION DESIGN: Once Upon a Time in Hollywood
COSTUME DESIGN: Once Upon a Time in Hollywood
FILM EDITING: Ford v Ferrari
INTERNATIONAL FILM: Parasite
SOUND: 1917
SOUND MIXING: 1917
VISUAL EFFECTS: The Irishman
SCORE: 1917, Thomas Newman
SONG: “Stand Up”, Music and Lyric by Joshuah Brian Campbell and Cynthia Erivo (from Harriet)
MAKEUP: Bombshell
ANIMATED FEATURE: Missing Link
DOC FEATURE: Honeyland

Strange how there is no mention on how homogenized the acting nominees are. In years past, Sasha would have commented on the lack of inclusion.

The one thing that is commented on is to just shoot down the criticism on the directors all being men.

yes and nomination is her award. she ain’t magically going to win Actress just because she plays Tubman. She didn’t win shit so far.

Pugh wasn’t snubbed big time for Midsommar. Nobody cares for that movie. Even critics didn’t. They went with Lupita. I get that Midsommar stans cannot accept that the movie was lesser to hereditary in every way but it was. Worse reviews (including for Pugh), worse boxoffice, worse Aster fans reception. It was a non-factor, it is a non-factor, it will be a non-factor. There.

yep but in that case she wouldn’t be the frontrunner. which Phoenix is.

So antiNetflix that Netflix has 24 nominations. Disney has 23.

Irishman feels like Gangs of New York, which won 0 from 10

Ronan is SO Amy Adams or Deborah Kerr…

Erivo has the narrative of being African American playing an African American icon that is more important and relevant politically and in our zeitgeist, than Judy Garland, that is why she has a minor chance to upset.

Ronan is not Pugh. Pugh is hotter right now, has been SNUBBED big time for Midsommar and is about to star in an MCU film as the new Black Widow. If any LW lady would have a chance for an upset, it would be in Supporting, where Dern is slightly in danger due to Scarlett’s double nom.

tough luck if their category was stacked

If Regina King has one Alison Janney (someone sweeping) in her year, no way she would overcome the snubs.

Yes but if we’re ranking chances from 1st to 5th I would put it as Zellweger, Johansson, Ronan, Theron and then Erivo.

no one has a chance against Zellweger. There’s forecast and there’s wishcast.

I think Ronan has a better chance than Erivo for actress.

Joaquin Phoenix CAN lose. If he repeats his half-drunk speech of the Globes at the SAG… watch out for Driver or Banderas.

On the acting races…

Actor
Phoenix 90%
Banderas 5%
Driver 5%