|
Post by JangoB on Aug 10, 2023 17:42:11 GMT
When you're in the business of Oscar predictions and stuff like that, you live in the world of hypotheticals. But how about theorizing on the past Oscar ceremonies? I got a few questions for you (and obviously feel free to write speculations of your own):
1. Do you think The Return of the King would've won Cinematography and Sound Editing had it been nominated for them, thus becoming the most awarded film of all time with 13 wins?
2. Do you think Toy Story would've been nominated for Best Animated Film in 1995 had the category existed back then? Or do you think the hypothetical animation branch of the time would've stirred up some shit because of it being the first computer-animated movie?
3. Do you think Russell Crowe would've won for A Beautiful Mind if not for the BAFTA scandal?
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Aug 10, 2023 18:14:54 GMT
3. Do you think Russell Crowe would've won for A Beautiful Mind if not for the BAFTA scandal? No real POV on 1 & 2..........but Obviously so for #3 ^..............I say this all the time but this is as true as I am a sarcastic bastard .........it's as true as John Q sucking: Denzel Washington's Oscar history is fascinating in its particulars - it is his story in 2001 as much Crowe's : * He won a first Oscar young/early...he had no chance of winning over a legend so soon for a 2nd (Malcolm X) - if he had won, he'd have been kind of hated in a way ........it just wasn't his year - he was never close in '92, he was never 2nd.....that is a myth ........ * He wins his 2nd Oscar because of the scandal....... mostly .......we can argue about who is better but Crowe was winning unti.that ................and Julia Roberts hardcore stanning for Washington didn't hurt * If he never won that 2nd Oscar he would have won for something else later - he'd have 2 anyway.......but there is no telling where Crowe would have gone with winning 2 in a row........... What is fascinating about the scandal is it looked like Crowe would come back.........but........... he never got another nod .....when that door closed on him, it closed hard He was 38 I think.......
|
|
|
Post by JangoB on Aug 10, 2023 18:31:56 GMT
What is fascinating about the scandal is it looked like Crowe would come back.........but........... he never got another nod .....when that door closed on him, it closed hard He was 38 I think....... You know, that is kind of interesting. I never quite thought about it in those terms because he still continued to do some damn big projects after all of that - Master and Commander, Cinderella Man. But the Oscar door did close on him. A good way to put it. Now, the other speculative question is: does Denzel win for Fences if he loses 2001 to Crowe? That is, of course, disregarding the butterfly effect of it all and assuming that his projects (and the overall cinematic landscape) would've remained the same.
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Aug 10, 2023 18:46:36 GMT
What is fascinating about the scandal is it looked like Crowe would come back.........but........... he never got another nod .....when that door closed on him, it closed hard He was 38 I think....... You know, that is kind of interesting. I never quite thought about it in those terms because he still continued to do some damn big projects after all of that - Master and Commander, Cinderella Man. But the Oscar door did close on him. A good way to put it. Now, the other speculative question is: does Denzel win for Fences if he loses 2001 to Crowe? That is, of course, disregarding the butterfly effect of it all and assuming that his projects (and the overall cinematic landscape) would've remained the same. I think so - yes - because that's the year he has the rarest of all things for him - a good movie (too mean?) - or more specifically a BP nominee...........and that matters nowadays........what is weird with Washington is you can pinpoint exactly where he won - and lost - his Oscar races - ie he lost to Pacino when Pacino won the Globe..............he lost to Affleck when he missed a BAFTA nod ........... he beat Crowe after the scandal.........but I think directing Fences, directing Davis to a win, the fact that he was a clear #2 in 2016 - and the Affleck scandal - would have been enough to be a win ..........his SAG win would have really been a sign and not what it was in 2016 which was just a kind of false hope in the face of Affleck's precursor dominance.....
|
|
|
Post by finniussnrub on Aug 10, 2023 18:50:50 GMT
1. Yes, given it swept all categories it was nominated for, there is no reason to believe the academy would've taken more time on those two categories to still award Master and Commander, which sadly would've gotten goose egged. (One can easily wonder if those branches purposefully voted to snub it just to prevent that from happening).
2. No way, only because that theoretical category was FAR too weak that year, even if they were a jury. I mean Balto, The Goofy Movie and Pocahontas, as the nominees over Toy Story? I seriously doubt it.
3. I mean that is *The* question, and there was a month between ceremonies, so plenty of time for voters to rethink their choice. And Crowe was in the best picture winner, much like when Hanks won twice. However, Washington also was seen as overdue for a lead, and obviously was never going to ever win BAFTA. Maybe SAG was truly just making up for not giving him the win the previous year. I imagine it was super close even in the final tally, so maybe? I do think the bigger difference is Crowe probably would've gotten nominated again for possibly both Cinderella Man and Master and Commander.
|
|
|
Post by mikediastavrone96 on Aug 10, 2023 19:02:17 GMT
1. I think it probably still loses Cinematography but wins Sound Editing. So it'd have gone 12/13.
2. Idk if I've ever seen an indication that those in animation were alarmed at Toy Story. I imagine it would've been undeniable for a nomination given that weak ass year.
3. Crowe probably wins given the strength of A Beautiful Mind.
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Aug 10, 2023 19:29:20 GMT
1. It's hard to say. A part of me thinks it would clean sweep for pure momentum's sake, but the fact that it didn't get nominated at either makes me think there would still have been a bit of exhaustion in those respective categories to allow for Master and Commander to still sneak past.
2. I mean, it won an actual honorary Oscar that year, so I can't see how it wouldn't have gotten a nomination, even in the face of tradition. And I think it wins the same way every other animated film wins that Oscar: box office.
3. I think Crowe still wins. I think the margins were very close but the timing on that could not have been worse for him. But it's hard to really bet against that clean sweep up to that point plus a Best Picture/Director/Supporting Actress combine, and without the backlash/controversy, I think Crowe still pips him to the post at the end.
|
|
|
Post by JangoB on Aug 10, 2023 21:54:38 GMT
1. Yes, given it swept all categories it was nominated for, there is no reason to believe the academy would've taken more time on those two categories to still award Master and Commander, which sadly would've gotten goose egged. ( One can easily wonder if those branches purposefully voted to snub it just to prevent that from happening). 2. No way, only because that theoretical category was FAR too weak that year, even if they were a jury. I mean Balto, The Goofy Movie and Pocahontas, as the nominees over Toy Story? I seriously doubt it. 1. It is indeed, shall we say, peculiar that ROTK was snubbed in the two tech categories that the previous installments had managed to win before. At the very least I think the cinematographers were definitely saying "One win for these is enough for you, Lesnie". 2. Haha, I didn't really think about the competition. Yeah, with that thin of a field Toy Story probably wouldn't have had a problem getting nominated. Even though this branch can be rather gate-keepy (I can imagine a hypothetical version of them being like "That's not real animation, that's visual effects!" in 1995)
|
|
|
Post by JangoB on Aug 10, 2023 22:00:10 GMT
1. I think it probably still loses Cinematography but wins Sound Editing. So it'd have gone 12/13. The interesting thing is that the Academy showed that it could go against an overall juggernaut in at least one tech category when they gave Titanic everything except for Makeup. So your outcome sounds very plausible to me. Especially if any voters would've remembered that LOTR had already won Cinematography before.
|
|
|
Post by JangoB on Aug 11, 2023 8:21:24 GMT
Got another one for you, fellow speculators: how do you think Shutter Island fares if it stays in 2009? Strictly techs? DiCaprio? BP? Or nothing at all?
|
|
|
Post by finniussnrub on Aug 11, 2023 15:24:45 GMT
Maybe PD for Shutter Island (most of actual nominees weren't big contenders) and probably that's it.
I honestly think they pushed it back because the studio knew it wasn't going to be a major player anyways, and really looking at how it was being perceived pre-release, and before the 09 awards season, a lot people I think thought it was a far more sort of "prestige" type film, rather than the very "genre" if not exploitation style film it actually was.
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Aug 11, 2023 20:16:24 GMT
Got another one for you, fellow speculators: how do you think Shutter Island fares if it stays in 2009? Strictly techs? DiCaprio? BP? Or nothing at all? Mr. Snrub has the right of it, I think. The very fact that it was delayed to January shows that they didn’t have faith in it as an awards player, because it would’ve been so easy to keep it as a limited release at the end of the year. it could get a nomination for production design (and oh, if only it spared us the horrid winner that year!) but that’s probably it.
|
|
|
Post by JangoB on Aug 11, 2023 20:51:02 GMT
Love your answers, guys. Agreed on Shutter Island. I got two more for you:
1. If Ben Affleck is nominated for Best Director for Argo, does he still win the GG/BAFTA/DGA trifecta and then the Oscar? Or do you think there's a possibility that he swept those three because of the uproar his snub caused? In other words, how do you think the BD race would've looked like had he been nominated?
2. Does Michelle Williams win for The Fabelmans if she's in the Supporting Actress race? Or does the combo of the EEAAO dominance and JLC's veteran status still push the latter forward?
|
|
|
Post by finniussnrub on Aug 11, 2023 21:53:34 GMT
Love your answers, guys. Agreed on Shutter Island. I got two more for you: 1. If Ben Affleck is nominated for Best Director for Argo, does he still win the GG/BAFTA/DGA trifecta and then the Oscar? Or do you think there's a possibility that he swept those three because of the uproar his snub caused? In other words, how do you think the BD race would've looked like had he been nominated? 2. Does Michelle Williams win for The Fabelmans if she's in the Supporting Actress race? Or does the combo of the EEAAO dominance and JLC's veteran status still push the latter forward? 1. The snub became the presumption that it pushed Argo to the forefront but really it must've been pretty beloved by the industry to do as well as it did. I think Affleck wins Director as well, as I don't think one snub would lead to so many wins for him. After all we've seen plenty of snubs that don't result in such reactions. 2. Williams I have no doubt wins. The problem is she derailed all her momentum with her dumb category choice, so suddenly she became a near afterthought in the actress race where she was immediately presumed to be a nominee only at best. Bassett and JLC gained momentum because of the vacuum left by Williams with Condon not fitting into any easy narratives to become the frontrunner. Williams had the role, the reviews and a vet narrative, despite her age, due to all her past nominations. It was a slamdunk that she managed to whiff.
|
|
|
Post by mikediastavrone96 on Aug 11, 2023 23:18:20 GMT
Love your answers, guys. Agreed on Shutter Island. I got two more for you: 1. If Ben Affleck is nominated for Best Director for Argo, does he still win the GG/BAFTA/DGA trifecta and then the Oscar? Or do you think there's a possibility that he swept those three because of the uproar his snub caused? In other words, how do you think the BD race would've looked like had he been nominated? 2. Does Michelle Williams win for The Fabelmans if she's in the Supporting Actress race? Or does the combo of the EEAAO dominance and JLC's veteran status still push the latter forward? 1. Globes voting had already ended before Affleck's snub, so he still wins that. I honestly think he was a frontrunner for Best Director regardless. Maybe he doesn't sweep - I'm usually tempted to say BAFTA could go differently since it's the least industry overlap, but they nominated him for Best Actor so maybe not - but that year was shaping up Argo's way which is what made the snub so shocking. 2. Almost certainly. The race was only as open as it was because Williams felt like a lead.
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Aug 11, 2023 23:27:00 GMT
Love your answers, guys. Agreed on Shutter Island. I got two more for you: 1. If Ben Affleck is nominated for Best Director for Argo, does he still win the GG/BAFTA/DGA trifecta and then the Oscar? Or do you think there's a possibility that he swept those three because of the uproar his snub caused? In other words, how do you think the BD race would've looked like had he been nominated? 2. Does Michelle Williams win for The Fabelmans if she's in the Supporting Actress race? Or does the combo of the EEAAO dominance and JLC's veteran status still push the latter forward? 1. I feel like his snub locked Argo in as the winner, but honestly, it was trending that way anyway. He likely just adds Best Director to Argo's haul that night and Ang Lee has to be contented with his Brokeback win. 2. Williams likely does win, yes. There are some narratives that, when they are started, just happen to align perfectly to the point that all the person in question has to do is not rock the boat, and the season will carry them through. Pundits and prognosticators were keyed up to think it was Michelle Williams's time. She had the screentime, she had the film, and Oscar loves mom roles in this category specifically. And we saw how fractured the race wound up being. The Critics' Choice and Globes scrambled to find a reasonable alternative and settled on Bassett to take advantage of an overdue narrative, BAFTA (which went earlier than SAG) opted for the critics' favourite in Condon, and SAG went for Jamie Lee Curtis, who was campaigning vigorously and is arguably the keystone for getting Everything Everywhere as far as it did behind the scenes. Williams likely would've copied DeBose's pathway and just been an easy namecheck just on momentum, and it would be a way to recognize The Fabelmans somewhere. I don't think Curtis could've stopped her if that had been the case.
|
|
|
Post by michael128 on Aug 12, 2023 21:10:16 GMT
Nah, Julia Roberts was in her prime and was getting Denzel his Oscar no matter what.
|
|
|
Post by TylerDeneuve on Aug 13, 2023 15:56:00 GMT
Do you mind if I pose a question to the forum, JangoB? Had Heath Ledger not passed away, do you still think he would have been nominated and won for The Dark Knight? I sense a nomination, but not a win - The Dark Knight snub in Best Picture is very telling on that front in my opinion. Josh Brolin or Philip Seymour Hoffman seem like the most likely win alternatives in a world where Ledger were still alive.
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Aug 13, 2023 16:06:30 GMT
Do you mind if I pose a question to the forum, JangoB ? Had Heath Ledger not passed away, do you still think he would have been nominated and won for The Dark Knight? I sense a nomination, but not a win - The Dark Knight snub in Best Picture is very telling on that front in my opinion. Josh Brolin or Philip Seymour Hoffman seem like the most likely win alternatives in a world where Ledger were still alive. I definitely think Ledger still wins. That performance was hugely memetic and was a massive, flashy performance that would've been hard for anyone to deny. And as we saw with Boseman, a death doesn't guarantee a win. He would've had the box office and the transformative angle, and he was a prior nominee to boot. Brolin had the Best Picture nominee but he was playing Dan White, who I don't think they would've deigned to recognize as a winning performance for the man who murdered Harvey Milk the same year they feted Penn and Dustin Lance Black for honouring him. I think the nomination was the reward, as well as being acknowledgment of his achievements the previous year. Hoffman had just won, and Shannon barely got over the line in the end. If anything, I think Downey, Jr. was Ledger's biggest competition. He had a banner comeback year with Iron Man and Tropic Thunder and his performance, while in a broad comedy, was very reminiscent of what Kevin Kline was doing in A Fish Called Wanda, and it was tangentially related to the industry and it was clear the Academy was willing to laugh at themselves in this instance. But I don't think anyone was beating Ledger. That was a barnstormer of a performance and while the film itself didn't get the Picture nod, the fact that it didn't showed that they were willing to change the format of nominations to reflect the outcry of its absence. Ledger's passing may have been the (pardon the pun) final nail in the coffin for the other contenders, but I feel like the second that he shows up giving that performance, he's guaranteed himself the Oscar.
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Aug 13, 2023 16:12:47 GMT
Had Heath Ledger not passed away, do you still think he would have been nominated and won for The Dark Knight? I sense a nomination, but not a win - The Dark Knight snub in Best Picture is very telling on that front in my opinion. Josh Brolin or Philip Seymour Hoffman seem like the most likely win alternatives in a world where Ledger were still alive. I think he still wins - 3 of his 4 rivals missed BP - Brolin is an uncomfortably "dark" portrayal that they stay away from usually and it was his first nod where Ledger a lot of people thought was ripped off........PSH had his Oscar........ maybe Brolin........but I don't really think that.........Downey is too silly and Shannon in a movie that missed in Pic and in its leads .......they didn't love it
|
|
|
Post by TylerDeneuve on Aug 13, 2023 16:15:36 GMT
stephen pacinoyes - I definitely hope you guys are right! There's just no denying their genre bias at this point in their history, though, and at 29 (the age he would have been during the ceremony), he still would have been very young for a male winner. I definitely take your arguments though, and they make perfect sense - just playing devil's advocate.
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Aug 13, 2023 16:35:20 GMT
stephen pacinoyes - I definitely hope you guys are right! There's just no denying their genre bias at this point in their history, though, and at 29 (the age he would have been during the ceremony), he still would have been very young for a male winner. I definitely take your arguments though, and they make perfect sense - just playing devil's advocate. There's a reason the performance held such sway that year, and why it augmented the tragedy of his passing to the extent it did. It was a game-changer. Yes, it was in a genre film but Nolan's Batman movies were always the more grounded ones, and as such were more palatable than what had come before it. We'll never know for sure, of course, but I think that seeing how thoroughly he cleaned house that season, it's hard to see why anyone would discount him if he were alive and actually able to promote the movie himself.
|
|
|
Post by JangoB on Aug 13, 2023 17:46:02 GMT
Do you mind if I pose a question to the forum, JangoB ? Of course not, and feel free to pose more questions if you've got'em! That's why I made the thread to begin with - not just to ask my own questions but to hopefully have the others keep the ball rolling.
|
|
|
Post by finniussnrub on Aug 13, 2023 18:00:18 GMT
Just to add a bit more support for Ledger the notion "they won because they died" is a false one. Looking at both the Emmys and Oscars, there are far more examples of voters passing on giving a posthumous win than giving the win. The one other acting posthumous Oscar win in Peter Finch was like Ledger a critically lauded turn in a major player. Peter Finch, despite what William Holden thought, was going to win regardless just as was the case for Ledger.
|
|
|
Post by TylerDeneuve on Aug 13, 2023 18:45:12 GMT
Just to add a bit more support for Ledger the notion " they won because they died" is a false one. Just to clarify, this definitely isn't what I meant to suggest. Edit: I simply meant to point out that, while Ledger's Joker was a game-changing performance, historically speaking Oscar tends to wait to reward gorgeous men until later in their careers (please remember that Ledger had only recently begun to shed his "heartthrob" status with his performance in Brokeback Mountain). And, as evidenced by the snubbing of The Dark Knight and WALL-E in other major categories, Oscar was still reticent at the time to embrace genre work. I do think that after reading all of your cogent arguments, he likely still wins - I certainly hope so, at any rate!
|
|