|
Post by SeanJoyce on Aug 28, 2023 20:24:39 GMT
Imagine thinking Denzel had a chance of getting nominated, let alone winning, for all the forgettable dreck he did in the early 2000s lol. I can imagine just fine. That's why it's called a hypothetical scenario.Sandra Bullock won a Best Actress Oscar for a piece of shit, virtual Lifetime Movie called The Blindside. That same movie also got nominated for Best Picture somehow. It got better reviews and than say John Q, but quality wise, they're about the same movie, imho If the industry likes you enough and you are a big enough deal ( which the likes of Bullock and Denzel are), they'll find a reason to give you an Oscar. If Denzel loses in 2001, I think the industry starts taking whatever opportunities he gives them to award him. Bit again, we'll never actually know, so ultimately who gives a shit This is exactly the point... The Blind Side may be a "virtual Lifetime movie", but it was recognized by the major awards body in addition to its lead actress's performance. Denzel losing in 2001 isn't going to suddenly turn risible pieces of shit like John Q or The Manchurian Candidate into relevant Oscar hopefuls. And Denzel certainly isn't beating DDL for a sloppily-written turd like Flight. I think he wins in '16 with no additional nominations.
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Aug 28, 2023 20:49:08 GMT
I can imagine just fine. That's why it's called a hypothetical scenario.Sandra Bullock won a Best Actress Oscar for a piece of shit, virtual Lifetime Movie called The Blindside. That same movie also got nominated for Best Picture somehow. It got better reviews and than say John Q, but quality wise, they're about the same movie, imho If the industry likes you enough and you are a big enough deal ( which the likes of Bullock and Denzel are), they'll find a reason to give you an Oscar. If Denzel loses in 2001, I think the industry starts taking whatever opportunities he gives them to award him. Bit again, we'll never actually know, so ultimately who gives a shit This is exactly the point... The Blind Side may be a "virtual Lifetime movie", but it was recognized by the major awards body in addition to its lead actress's performance. Denzel losing in 2001 isn't going to suddenly turn risible pieces of shit like John Q or The Manchurian Candidate into relevant Oscar hopefuls. And Denzel certainly isn't beating DDL for a sloppily-written turd like Flight. I think he wins in '16 with no additional nominations. Ummm... your personal opinion aside, since when is The Manchurian Candidate considered a "risible piece of shit"? It got 80 % on Rotten Tomatoes, 76 on Metacritic. That's comfortably within the critical reception range of a film that can normally achieve a Best Picture nomination. It also got Streep Golden Globe and BAFTA nominations, so it was a legit contender for the Oscars in the acting categories. Compare that to The Blind Side (66% RT, 53 Metacritic), which is outside that usual critical reception range for a Best Picture nod, but the industry went there anyway. Because it was Sandra Bullock's time.That's how these things work. If Bullock already had a Best Actress Oscar, does anyone feel the need to push her or something as "meh" as The Blind Side to Oscar glory? Probably not. Again, that's your personal opinion for Flight. That "sloppily written turd" got a Best Screenplay Oscar nomination so voters probably would view the script as an asset, not a liability. Reviews for Flight were strong, it was viewed as a return to form for a beloved director in Robert Zemeckis. I think it had everything needed to be a vehicle for Denzel to win, if he lost in 2001. The narrative is there. But again, it's all based on hypothetical/alternate timeline scenarios that we can all justify in our heads being right or wrong, so it's nothing more than a fun exercise playing "what if?". I won't lose any sleep if you disagree with my scenarios. Because we'll never know
|
|
|
Post by JangoB on Aug 29, 2023 0:11:20 GMT
Speaking of Streep, what do you think happens if she doesn't win for The Iron Lady? Do you think she still gets a third one down the road? And if yes, for what? Again, assuming that the projects and overall Oscar races would've remained the same?
|
|
|
Post by finniussnrub on Aug 29, 2023 0:17:41 GMT
Speaking of Streep, what do you think happens if she doesn't win for The Iron Lady? Do you think she still gets a third one down the road? And if yes, for what? Again, assuming that the projects and overall Oscar races would've remained the same? Not yet. The perceived importance of the role of Margaret Thatcher gave her the extra oomph she needed to win. She/Roberts limped in for August Osage County, which flopped as a contender outside of them. No one was stopping Arquette in 2014, particularly since Into the Woods basically died outside of Streep. She limped in for Florence Foster Jenkins, which also largely flopped as a contender outside of her. And The Post was almost an immediate afterthought despite its best picture nomination. Streep herself just barely squeezed in that time.
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Aug 29, 2023 0:24:51 GMT
Speaking of Streep, what do you think happens if she doesn't win for The Iron Lady? Do you think she still gets a third one down the road? And if yes, for what? Again, assuming that the projects and overall Oscar races would've remained the same? I agree with Mr. Snrub. She doesn't beat Blanchett in 2013 or Arquette in 2014 -- those were juggernaut sweepers and, again, I don't think the perceived overdue narrative would've helped Streep against them. Maybe she gets a bit more juice in 2017 but considering how that movie barely made a blip in the end despite some notable precursor attention, I doubt Streep can beat McDormand with only two Oscars to her name instead of three. So yeah, I think if Streep loses in 2011, she remains a two-time winner as of 2023.
|
|
|
Post by JangoB on Sept 1, 2023 1:04:45 GMT
Got another one for you: if the slap doesn't happen, do you think Will Smith gets an afterglow nomination for Emancipation? Considering that the 2022 fifth spot was wide open and that his role was pure Oscar catnip?
I assume that the film's tepid reception will factor in your speculations so I'll ask a question outside of the awards realm too - do you think the film gets an overall better reception without Smith's toxicity (it was, after all, his first release after the scandal)?
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Sept 1, 2023 1:14:49 GMT
Got another one for you: if the slap doesn't happen, do you think Will Smith gets an afterglow nomination for Emancipation? Considering that the 2022 fifth spot was wide open and that his role was pure Oscar catnip? I assume that the film's tepid reception will factor in your speculations so I'll ask a question outside of the awards realm too - do you think the film gets an overall better reception without Smith's toxicity (it was, after all, his first release after the scandal)? They sure as hell would've tried, considering how much money Apple TV+ spent on it. It must've been utterly humiliating for them to know that their big Oscar vehicle in 2022 got scuppered on Oscar night. Assuming the slap doesn't happen and Smith accepts his Oscar with the goodwill of the industry in full force behind him, I think he at least gets some traction. Mescal is obviously the vulnerable one but he had passion behind him at the end, and I could maybe see him edging past Nighy by the time of Oscar voting, so maybe one of the two of them misses to Smith. Keep in mind that it was the first time since 1934 when Best Actor was all first-timers, so odds are that Smith playing an even baitier role than the one that won him the Oscar would have been working the circuit hard. What I'm really curious about is how it affects the supporting races. Do Ben Foster and Charmaine Bingwa get any sort of traction? What about the techs?
|
|
|
Post by mhynson27 on Sept 1, 2023 1:26:21 GMT
Also, if the slap happened earlier in awards season, does Smith still win? And if not, would it have been Cumberbatch or Garfield??
|
|
|
Post by JangoB on Sept 1, 2023 1:30:00 GMT
Got another one for you: if the slap doesn't happen, do you think Will Smith gets an afterglow nomination for Emancipation? Considering that the 2022 fifth spot was wide open and that his role was pure Oscar catnip? I assume that the film's tepid reception will factor in your speculations so I'll ask a question outside of the awards realm too - do you think the film gets an overall better reception without Smith's toxicity (it was, after all, his first release after the scandal)? What I'm really curious about is how it affects the supporting races. Do Ben Foster and Charmaine Bingwa get any sort of traction? What about the techs? While I do think Emancipation would've probably been received a bit warmer if not for the scandal, it still seems to me that it would've been a Best Actor player only. And I believe Smith would've indeed been nominated for it. Frankly my gut tells me it would've been a fairly easy get for him.
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Sept 1, 2023 1:33:45 GMT
Also, if the slap happened earlier in awards season, does Smith still win? And if not, would it have been Cumberbatch or Garfield?? I think there's a very real chance of a Russell Crowe situation if it happens early enough in the season. And with The Power of the Dog losing so much steam by the end, I think Garfield might've had the edge over Cumberbatch.
|
|
|
Post by JangoB on Sept 1, 2023 1:34:00 GMT
Also, if the slap happened earlier in awards season, does Smith still win? And if not, would it have been Cumberbatch or Garfield?? I'm mostly curious whom he would've slapped if it happened earlier. Rebel Wilson at the BAFTAs?
|
|
|
Post by finniussnrub on Sept 1, 2023 1:39:03 GMT
No chance on Smith/Emancipation, as they mostly ignored his bait particularly when it was critically derided. And that film just wasn't very good, did it maybe get a few extra negative reviews due to the slap, probably, but it wouldn't have changed the consensus.
|
|
|
Post by mhynson27 on Sept 1, 2023 1:57:53 GMT
Also, if the slap happened earlier in awards season, does Smith still win? And if not, would it have been Cumberbatch or Garfield?? I'm mostly curious whom he would've slapped if it happened earlier. Rebel Wilson at the BAFTAs? If that happened, he'd 1000% not win.
|
|
|
Post by wilcinema on Sept 14, 2023 15:07:01 GMT
What happens if Viola Davis goes lead for Fences? Does Stone still win?
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Sept 14, 2023 15:18:54 GMT
What happens if Viola Davis goes lead for Fences? Does Stone still win? The easy answer is that it never happens specifically because Davis's camp knew Stone was going to be a tough one to beat and Supporting Actress (which was the right category for Davis anyway, she's supporting) was the clearer path for her. Stone had the stronger film and she was much more what the Academy goes for in that category. I do think Davis gives her a run for her money and probably wins the Globe/SAG, but I think Stone takes the Globe/BAFTA and beats her in the end.
|
|
|
Post by DanQuixote on Sept 14, 2023 17:25:11 GMT
What happens if Viola Davis goes lead for Fences? Does Stone still win? Nah, Stone still wins. It would be close though.
|
|
|
Post by JangoB on Oct 12, 2023 10:03:17 GMT
Who do you think would've won the 2021 Best Supporting Actor award if Judas and the Black Messiah wasn't put in the extended 2020 eligibility pool - Daniel Kaluuya or Troy Kotsur? Or maybe someone else entirely? And how do you think Judas and the Black Messiah would've fared in 2021 overall?
|
|
|
Post by finniussnrub on Oct 12, 2023 10:15:15 GMT
I say Kotsur wins based on CODA's overall success. I think Judas benefitted greatly from being essentially the last contender screened, if it was still released in February I think it would've struggled to maintain its momentum.
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Oct 12, 2023 11:26:05 GMT
Kaluuya gives one of the few great performances - Denzel Washington in Malcolm X is another - (hey look who pacinoyes just praised!) where so much of the role is speech making..........it's almost astonishing how little of Kaluuya's quiet moments work but his speeches are flat out rousing and exceptional. Kaluuya wasn't losing so close to George Floyd - regardless of how far away that was - he wouldn't diminish and CODA was winning BP with or without Kotsur- it had screenplay anyway. I said this before on here - and was promptly called a racist for it - yawn / fnck you - (including by some asshat who is reading this today - hey, apologize, bitch - YOU go to Parler, how about that? ) - but people win Oscars for a whole lot of reasons that have nothing to do with merit - nothing - and that includes career totality, social circumstances, skin color, political winds, money they've made for others, etc......... this was one of those years and I don't mean specific year - I mean years .....and roles........you could not ask for a more innocent victim messiah than Fred Hampton - a black man and social activist man who went to jail for giving out ice cream to kids ffs.........Kaluuya embodies that man.......although the performance that makes that (greatish) film work - oddly - is Stanfield......because his character is less easy to read and counters the Hampton arc (reviewed below, one of my better ones tbh..........): movie-awards-redux.freeforums.net/post/348501
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Oct 12, 2023 11:29:30 GMT
Kaluuya's victory was already called well ahead of the season -- he was the lone industry sweeper that year, and he was playing arguably the baitiest role of both seasons. I think he's set in stone to win regardless, because Smit-McPhee (a very quiet, understated performance) was seen as the frontrunner until CODA gained momentum at the critical time and Kotsur overtook him. I think CODA contents itself with two wins and goes home, Spotlight-style.
It's still stupid that they allowed Kaluuya to be eligible in 2020, though.
|
|
|
Post by mikediastavrone96 on Oct 12, 2023 12:34:18 GMT
Honestly, if the eligibility had not been extended, I imagine Judas would've just come out earlier, like Christmas day or something. From my understanding, it didn't narrowly meet its February date but was put there strategically to try to give it the best chance for its theatrical run, allow it a Sundance bid for promotion, and let it be a late Oscars contender since the eligibility extension had been announced all the way back in June 2020.
Assuming they keep Judas in 2021 though, Kaluuya still wins.
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Oct 12, 2023 12:48:21 GMT
Piggybacking off the Kaluuya question, if the usual eligibility had actually been enforced and Kaluuya was pushed to 2021, who wins 2020? Because all of a sudden, you have two empty slots (as Stanfield also gets bumped)? Who fills them?
|
|
|
Post by finniussnrub on Oct 12, 2023 13:43:39 GMT
Well that leaves Cohen and Odom from SAG and from those two I think it would've been the former as perhaps a groundswell narrative between that and Borat 2. Whereas with Odom there didn't seem to be a drive to award him given they could've given him song and passed.
|
|
|
Post by finniussnrub on Oct 12, 2023 13:46:45 GMT
As for the other two nominees, probably Boseman gets double nodded, despite Bloods limping overall and...anyone's guess. Easy to say Leto but SAG obviously loves Leto, so not so sure.
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Oct 12, 2023 13:51:29 GMT
I'm thinking either Trial of the Chicago 7 or One Night in Miami... gets double-nodded. One of Rylance/Langella/Abdul-Mateen II likely pick up some steam early on, or maybe Ben-Adir for the latter film. Raci might get more early mentions as well but yeah, I'd have to think a double Boseman nod is on the table (and maybe they give Boseman the consolatory win in supporting, as Hopkins starts gaining momentum).
|
|