|
Post by Mattsby on Dec 1, 2019 21:28:41 GMT
Ummm.... All of the Gold Derby "experts" who updated in the last week (like 25 of them) have Pitt as their win, with one for Hanks. Nearly all have Pacino as a nominee but not the win, and most leave off Pesci - opting for Hopkins. What happened in one week? Last I checked Pacino had several predicted wins.... I get Pitt is a big contender here but he isn't such a clear cut frontrunner just yet, is he...
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Dec 1, 2019 21:37:29 GMT
Ummm.... All of the Gold Derby "experts" who updated in the last week (like 25 of them) have Pitt as their win, with one for Hanks. Nearly all have Pacino as a nominee but not the win, and most leave off Pesci - opting for Hopkins. What happened in one week? Last I checked Pacino had several predicted wins.... I get Pitt is a big contender here but he isn't such a clear cut frontrunner just yet, is he... I don't know much about Gold Derby but I reckon it's a just a shuffling because they think Pesci/Pacino will vote split. This race will change - for me I see Pesci/Pitt splitting a lot of early critics awards and Pacino winning some key televised ones (SAG?) - I think the Pitt thing for now is just a reset until the season gets under way. As for the vote split, that's up to Netflix's team to structure one of those guys for a win (IF they both get in, not a sure thing).......that's why they make the big money
|
|
Good God
Badass
Posts: 1,633
Likes: 1,937
|
Post by Good God on Dec 2, 2019 23:40:10 GMT
Looks like there is a consensus 5, both here and on AW (even if they're not my predictions ATM):
Pitt Pacino Pesci Hanks Hopkins
|
|
dazed
Based
Posts: 2,624
Likes: 1,790
|
Post by dazed on Dec 4, 2019 0:59:28 GMT
My boy Pitt.
|
|
Savager
Junior Member
Posts: 430
Likes: 508
|
Post by Savager on Dec 5, 2019 18:31:06 GMT
I have a feeling Rockwell (for Richard Jewell) will surprise and steal a spot from Hanks.
Pitt Pesci Pacino Hopkins Rockwell
|
|
Good God
Badass
Posts: 1,633
Likes: 1,937
|
Post by Good God on Dec 5, 2019 18:48:04 GMT
I think, right now, Pitt is the strongest frontrunner of all the acting categories this year. I'll be surprised if he doesn't end up winning.
|
|
|
Post by sterlingarcher86 on Dec 5, 2019 19:05:33 GMT
I think, right now, Pitt is the strongest frontrunner of all the acting categories this year. I'll be surprised if he doesn't end up winning. I think Pitt is winning but I think Dern is probably the strongest.
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Dec 5, 2019 19:08:48 GMT
I think, right now, Pitt is the strongest frontrunner of all the acting categories this year. I'll be surprised if he doesn't end up winning. I'm not so sure he's a stronger frontrunner than Dern but maybe......the LAFC are a contrarian bunch who look forward to screwing things up - they do it on purpose or try too (TWBB in 2007 etc) but Pitt would seem to win that one far more than anyone else (I could maybe see LA making a stand for Dafoe but not really) and once he wins LA ........the only way Pitt can really lose imo is if the Netflix people can somehow bribe people convince people that The Irishman needs an acting win in combination with it's BP campaign........but........that's a whole other thing for them to try to pull off. I'd bet on the BP win before I do on Pitt being upset......
|
|
Good God
Badass
Posts: 1,633
Likes: 1,937
|
Post by Good God on Dec 5, 2019 19:09:42 GMT
I think Pitt is winning but I think Dern is probably the strongest. Not going to argue against that because I think they're close to even, but Dern is someone that I think is benefiting from a weak year for the category, so I can still imagine someone we're underestimating coming in to steal her thunder (maybe Robbie for Bombshell, or perhaps Shuzhen). Unlikely, but I can just about imagine it. With Pitt, I think the only real threat is Pacino, and he's getting his momentum stolen by Pesci right now. And another thing going for Pitt and not for Dern is that Pitt is the spearhead for his movie's campaign, and OUaTiH is arguably as big a contender as Marriage Story is. While Dern is perhaps the easiest place to reward Marriage Story, I think the movies leads will always have more focus than her.
|
|
|
Post by wallsofjericho on Dec 5, 2019 19:39:13 GMT
I think, right now, Pitt is the strongest frontrunner of all the acting categories this year. I'll be surprised if he doesn't end up winning. I'm not so sure he's a stronger frontrunner than Dern but maybe......the LAFC are a contrarian bunch who look forward to screwing things up - they do it on purpose or try too (TWBB in 2007 etc) but Pitt would seem to win that one far more than anyone else (I could maybe see LA making a stand for Dafoe but not really) and once he wins LA ........the only way Pitt can really lose imo is if the Netflix people can somehow bribe people convince people that The Irishman needs an acting win in combination with it's BP campaign........but........that's a whole other thing for them to try to pull off. I'd bet on the BP win before I do on Pitt being upset...... I dunno, I could see Pesci winning LA too. Sometimes the top three work in unison.
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Dec 5, 2019 20:55:23 GMT
The continual underestimation of Joe Pesci truly baffles me, especially when there are so many self-proclaimed fans of The Irishman on this forum. Why is he apparently a non-starter as an actual threat to win for so many? Because his performance isn't full of sound and bluster like his co-star? Because he's not as "iconic" as Pacino. I don't get it The Academy has no problem recognising understated performances in the supporting category. Mark Rylance in Bridge Of Spies and Mahershala Ali in Moonlight are fairly recent examples. The notion that once industry voters see Pacino, Pesci will be discarded and seen as a critics only thing doesn't feel real to me. Pesci is the big acting threat from his movie.
And he's got narrative. A truly beloved character actor who has been away long enough to be really missed. He is someone few would consider unworthy of a 2nd Oscar.
Pitt is likely the frontrunner, but Pesci, even with a Rylance style non-campaign has enough intangibles to upset Pitt. I'm leaning towards Pitt myself, but he's far from unbeatable against someone like Pesci.
|
|
morton
Based
Posts: 2,811
Likes: 2,954
|
Post by morton on Dec 5, 2019 20:57:59 GMT
I think Pitt is winning but I think Dern is probably the strongest. Not going to argue against that because I think they're close to even, but Dern is someone that I think is benefiting from a weak year for the category, so I can still imagine someone we're underestimating coming in to steal her thunder (maybe Robbie for Bombshell, or perhaps Shuzhen). Unlikely, but I can just about imagine it. With Pitt, I think the only real threat is Pacino, and he's getting his momentum stolen by Pesci right now. And another thing going for Pitt and not for Dern is that Pitt is the spearhead for his movie's campaign, and OUaTiH is arguably as big a contender as Marriage Story is. While Dern is perhaps the easiest place to reward Marriage Story, I think the movies leads will always have more focus than her. I guess there's still a way for Dern, Phoenix, Pitt, and Zellweger to lose, so to me they're almost about the same. I guess if I had to rank them though I guess Pitt would be a little bit stronger than all of them. I agree about Dern though. I don't think she loses, but to me she's the weakest just because in most years she probably wouldn't come close to winning. I won't say being nominated for sure because I would think that Marriage Story being so highly rated would still mean that it would be strong in most years to be nominated for BP, and she'd likely coattail for a nomination in a stronger year. It just feels like Pitt's time, and now I'm starting to wonder if there could be some kind of OUATIH/The Irishman split, but I don't want to be too reactionary to critics awards because the industry does their own thing. Plus Pacino's narrative hasn't really took off yet, and I'm not sure that it will at this rate. I would also say Phoenix feels very strong right now especially since Driver wasn't able to win the trifecta and might not even win any of the top tier awards. I guess Joker could still miss BP though since it missed NBR's Top 10 where it should have been a shoe in given their love of WB films over the years and especially "macho" films this year. On top of that I feel pretty good about the top 7 (1917, The Irishman, Jojo Rabbit, Little Women, Marriage Story, OUATIH, and Parasite) and after that there's a lot of films fighting for the last one or two spots. Zellweger is in a weird place where I think she'll sweep everything too, but she's like Dern in that in most years I don't think she'd come close to winning. Johansson just makes so much sense as a winner compared to Zellweger on paper because usually second wins especially leading ones are very hard to achieve unless it's for a film that does as well or in most cases better than the film that the person won for. On top of that Judy is likely to be a lone nominee, and Marriage Story will be top 5 perhaps even top 3 films of the year, and in this decade we've already seen films win two acting Oscars without winning BP (The Fighter, Dallas Buyers Club, Three Billboards Outside Ebbing Missouri), so there's definitely precedent for it. Plus Johansson had never won before and was in one of the biggest movies of the year plus was in Jojo Rabbit, and they love to do that whole "crowning of the Prom King/Queen" type of win which seemed to fit Johansson perfectly this year while Zellweger had pretty much disappeared for a few years there and then had a few years of doing small and/or disappointing movies. Zellweger does have the baitier role, but people in biopics lose all the time, and Johansson also has a very baity role. I have seen some grumblings that if Johansson had more to do in the second half, she'd definitely win, but I think about Lawrence's win for Silver Linings Playbook and Johansson's role in Marriage Story is larger than Lawrence's role was. I'm actually rooting for Zellweger, lol, but I have to admit her winning a second Oscar in lead no less just seems so weird. McDormand's second win made a lot of sense. Colman winning over Close was surprising to me but made sense in hindsight because Colman was the critics' favorite and was in a much stronger movie. Zellweger winning over Johansson who is like a quasi mix between Roberts/Bullock and an "it" girl win doesn't make sense. I don't know now I'm tempted to predict Johansson for the Globes even though the Globes used to love Zellweger a lot because I think that that's all Johansson needs is to win the Globe, and then all of the other awards will just follow that.
|
|
Good God
Badass
Posts: 1,633
Likes: 1,937
|
Post by Good God on Dec 5, 2019 21:11:52 GMT
I agree about Dern though. I don't think she loses, but to me she's the weakest just because in most years she probably wouldn't come close to winning. I won't say being nominated for sure because I would think that Marriage Story being so highly rated would still mean that it would be strong in most years to be nominated for BP, and she'd likely coattail for a nomination in a stronger year. Yeah, she'd be nominated in any year, I think, but would probably only win in weak years. And this is a weak year for the category. Still, I have no real reason to doubt her at the moment. I don't think he will, but if Pacino misses at the Globes, we're going to have to wonder if he even gets the nomination. But the Globes love him, and they must know he's among the frontrunners, so he should make it in. Joker making AFI makes up for missing NBR, I think. Even still, I am currently not predicting Joker. I don't think it's the kind of movie that gets nominated at the Oscars without hitting any precursors, because I think it will play worse for the Academy than for the Globes or BAFTA, for instance. But who knows, Joker has broken enough rules already that I'm not going to put anything past it (except winning Best Picture, LOL). Not a perfect comparison, but this race reminds me of the Stone vs. Portman race from a few years ago. Everybody was saying Portman was undeniable, but I always felt like Stone had everything going for her and would come out on top. I'm feeling the same way this year, even if Zellweger has a little more going for her than Portman did (comeback narrative, more of a veteran, and her first win was for Supporting) and Johansson has a little less going for her than Stone did (not as much praise as Driver, and no previous nominations). I think Johansson will make her presence felt starting with the Globes.
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Dec 5, 2019 21:12:34 GMT
Not going to argue against that because I think they're close to even, but Dern is someone that I think is benefiting from a weak year for the category, so I can still imagine someone we're underestimating coming in to steal her thunder (maybe Robbie for Bombshell, or perhaps Shuzhen). Unlikely, but I can just about imagine it. With Pitt, I think the only real threat is Pacino, and he's getting his momentum stolen by Pesci right now. And another thing going for Pitt and not for Dern is that Pitt is the spearhead for his movie's campaign, and OUaTiH is arguably as big a contender as Marriage Story is. While Dern is perhaps the easiest place to reward Marriage Story, I think the movies leads will always have more focus than her. I guess there's still a way for Dern, Phoenix, Pitt, and Zellweger to lose, so to me they're almost about the same. I guess if I had to rank them though I guess Pitt would be a little bit stronger than all of them. I agree about Dern though. I don't think she loses, but to me she's the weakest just because in most years she probably wouldn't come close to winning. I won't say being nominated for sure because I would think that Marriage Story being so highly rated would still mean that it would be strong in most years to be nominated for BP, and she'd likely coattail for a nomination in a stronger year. It just feels like Pitt's time, and now I'm starting to wonder if there could be some kind of OUATIH/The Irishman split, but I don't want to be too reactionary to critics awards because the industry does their own thing. Plus Pacino's narrative hasn't really took off yet, and I'm not sure that it will at this rate. To repeat.... Pesci can win. Truly bizzare that a lot of people I consider quite intelligent refuse to ackowledge this possibility.
|
|
Good God
Badass
Posts: 1,633
Likes: 1,937
|
Post by Good God on Dec 5, 2019 21:24:09 GMT
The agenda to sideline Pacino in favor of Pesci aside, what exactly is Pesci's path to a win?
Will the Globes really ignore a megastar like Pitt (assuming he goes Supporting and not Comedy Lead) who hasn't won in 24 years and give the award to an actor who is unlikely to even show up? The HFPA wants their stars to show up. If they can give acceptance speeches, even better.
Will SAG-AFTRA, the most basic group of the lot, even nominate Pesci? There is a real possibility that The Irishman is completely shut out at SAG. Pesci has his work cut out for him just to be nominated at SAG.
And then there is BAFTA, where Pesci has never even gotten a competitive (Lead/Support) nomination. He's not loved by BAFTA the way he is with the Academy. The year he won the Oscar for Goodfellas, he wasn't even nominated at BAFTA. And it's not like they didn't like Goodfellas, because it won Best fucking Picture and a bunch of other awards there. Is he suddenly going to stroll to a win there?
More transparent agenda-driven nonsense from a poster that has a clear agenda against De Niro and Pacino. Let's cut the BS.
|
|
morton
Based
Posts: 2,811
Likes: 2,954
|
Post by morton on Dec 5, 2019 21:24:38 GMT
I guess there's still a way for Dern, Phoenix, Pitt, and Zellweger to lose, so to me they're almost about the same. I guess if I had to rank them though I guess Pitt would be a little bit stronger than all of them. I agree about Dern though. I don't think she loses, but to me she's the weakest just because in most years she probably wouldn't come close to winning. I won't say being nominated for sure because I would think that Marriage Story being so highly rated would still mean that it would be strong in most years to be nominated for BP, and she'd likely coattail for a nomination in a stronger year. It just feels like Pitt's time, and now I'm starting to wonder if there could be some kind of OUATIH/The Irishman split, but I don't want to be too reactionary to critics awards because the industry does their own thing. Plus Pacino's narrative hasn't really took off yet, and I'm not sure that it will at this rate. To repeat.... Pesci can win. Truly bizzare that a lot of people I consider quite intelligent refuse to ackowledge this possibility. Group Think is a real thing. Of course he could win, but I think he'll likely lose the Globe to either Pitt, because they think he's the favorite to win/level of fame, or Pacino because they think he's the favorite to win/Globe favorite. He could win SAG, but Pitt has never won there, and Pacino has never won a SAG for film before, so I don't see it. That leaves BAFTA, but unless it's a split race I think they just follow who probably won the Globe and SAG like they usually do. He's not really campaigning, and he might not even attend the Globes which will make them less likely to want to award him there because they're all about their image.
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Dec 5, 2019 21:33:13 GMT
Said it before, I'll say it again, Pitt marks the simplest path to a win - for Oscar races simplest almost always wins - he was great, he gives an old fashioned megastar turn, he doesn't have an Oscar.
Now Pesci and Pacino have the same path to a win - both great, in a landmark film that is an actors film - and Pesci has some advantages over his co-star - his performance is specific and precise (like Pitt's)........ but Pacino has some advantages over Pesci that don't show up in critics awards - mainly Pacino has Oscar clip scenes more and Netflix will attempt to buy him an Oscar more than Pesci, who won't campaign and doesn't have as much of a narrative for a win like Pacino.
For Pacino or Pesci to beat Pitt, it literally comes down to the Academy wanting to reward The Irishman with something for a no-brainer great film that flaunts acting - and giving Pacino 2 makes slightly more sense than giving Pesci 2 to Pitt's 0.
Now Pesci could win - he'd be sort of like the Christoph Waltz of the race if he did - and I'd say he's maybe winning NSFC (and some more regional ones) I reckon too, he isn't done and I called him for winning a lot of critics awards first iirc......but it doesn't make as much Oscar sense for him or for Pacino who actually needs to win a couple before televised contests........The more wins Pesci gets and the less Pacino gets, I'm afraid it hurts both and rather makes Pitt's path which already was the simplest.........that much more simple.
They won't exactly split the vote.......they rather will douse each others campaign heat.
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Dec 5, 2019 21:38:39 GMT
To repeat.... Pesci can win. Truly bizzare that a lot of people I consider quite intelligent refuse to ackowledge this possibility. Group Think is a real thing. Of course he could win, but I think he'll likely lose the Globe to either Pitt, because they think he's the favorite to win/level of fame, or Pacino because they think he's the favorite to win/Globe favorite. He could win SAG, but Pitt has never won there, and Pacino has never won a SAG for film before, so I don't see it. That leaves BAFTA, but unless it's a split race I think they just follow who probably won the Globe and SAG like they usually do. He's not really campaigning, and he might not even attend the Globes which will make them less likely to want to award him there because they're all about their image. Like I said, people are inventing reasons to discard Pesci as a threat. He's the one currently winning significant things from his movie. You basically need to forget about Pacino till he does the same. SAG don't know or care who has or hasn't won before. Their membership is too large and fractured to care about that. DeNiro has never won SAG, and the last couple of times they nominated him ( Silver Linings Playbook, The Wizard Of Lies) they gave it to another performance they liked more. They didn't care they he was a legend who had never won, because most voters didn't know or care. That's how it's gonna work. If SAG like Pesci more, he'll win. If they like Pitt more, he'll win. Heck, if they like Jamie Foxx more, he might come out of nowhere and win. They are not a body that has a big record of giving out "career" wins. Rylance didn't campaign. And his movie was nowhere near the Best Picture threat that Pesci's is. Anyway, we'll see. I just believe people convinced themselves early that Pacino was the real Irishman threat, and are reluctant to let go.
|
|
Good God
Badass
Posts: 1,633
Likes: 1,937
|
Post by Good God on Dec 5, 2019 21:39:46 GMT
Of course he could win, but I think he'll likely lose the Globe to either Pitt, because they think he's the favorite to win/level of fame, or Pacino because they think he's the favorite to win/Globe favorite. He could win SAG, but Pitt has never won there, and Pacino has never won a SAG for film before, so I don't see it. That leaves BAFTA, but unless it's a split race I think they just follow who probably won the Globe and SAG like they usually do. He's not really campaigning, and he might not even attend the Globes which will make them less likely to want to award him there because they're all about their image. Something else in Pitt's favor that hasn't really been mentioned a lot is that this is a bit of a comeback year for him too. He has had a few lean years, and has come back with two raved performances in two acclaimed movies. You can bet that people who liked him in Ad Astra will be voting for him even if they don't really love his performance in OUaTiH. And more importantly, his divorce with Jolie and struggles with alcoholism have been well-publicized, and that he came blazing back with perhaps the best year of his career is not nothing. Remember when he showed up at the Globes just to present Moonlight and the room went crazy? The elite in Hollywood love him; now more than ever. And they want him to win. I can actually feel it.
|
|
vinnyt
New Member
Posts: 191
Likes: 117
|
Post by vinnyt on Dec 6, 2019 16:45:49 GMT
Who would have thought that for the second time this decade that Supporting Actor would be nothing but previous Oscar winners?
|
|