|
Post by Brother Fease on Jan 15, 2024 14:47:34 GMT
Lets talk about Best Actress. In the last ten years, 36 out of the last 50 SAG Best Actress nominees went on to score a Best Actress nomination. That comes to 3-4 range per year accuracy. We haven't seen a perfect match since 2009. For the last two years, we have seen 3/5 matching.
If you look at the Golden Globe awards, we typically see between 3-4 of the Best Actress in a Drama nominees scoring a Best Actress nomination. There were perfect matches in 2019 and 2020. 2005 was the last time, we saw three of the Golden Globe Best Actress in a Comedy Musical nominees land a Best Actress nomination.
Laura Linney for The Savages (2007), Penélope Cruz for Parallel Mothers (2021), and Andrea Riseborough for To Leslie (2022) are the only actresses with a Best Actress Oscar nomination without any of the four big precursor nominations this century.
SAG NOMINEES Annette Bening - Nyad Lily Gladstone - Killers of the Flower Moon Carey Mulligan - Maestro Margot Robbie - Barbie Emma Stone - Poor Things
Gladstone won Best Actress at NBR, New York Film Critics, and the Golden Globes (Drama). Stone took home trophies at LA Film Critics, Golden Globes (Comedy/Musical), and Critics Choice. Sandra Hüller won leading performance awards at LA Film Critics and National Society of Film Critics for her performances in Anatomy of a Fall and The Zone of Interest. Both the Globes and Critics Choice honored her performance from Anatomy of a Fall in the lead actress category. She is currently campaigning for lead for Anatomy of a Fall and supporting for The Zone of Interest.
Other contenders we have are Greta Lee for Past Lives (Golden Globe Drama nominee + Critics Choice nominee + BAFTA Long List), Fantasia Barrino for The Color Purple (Golden Globe Comedy/Musical nominee + BAFTA Long List), Cailee Spaeny for Priscilla (Golden Globe Drama + Volpi Cup winner), and Natalie Portman for May December (Golden Globe Comedy/Musical nominee + made multiple critics circle runner-up lists).
As for your wildcards, I will throw into the mix Penelope Cruz for Ferrari and Alma Pöysti for Fallen Leaves. Cruz was nominated for the SAG in the supporting category, but the Satellite awards has her nominated for Lead. Pöysti made the cut because she was nominated for the Golden Globe for Comedy/Musical Actress and Satellite Comedy/Musical Actress.
Since 2016, 5 of the 7 last Volpi Cup winners have landed a Best Actress nomination. Charlotte Rampling for Hannah and Ariane Ascaride for Gloria Mundi are the two exceptions. Hannah was released in the next calendar year and only played in 2 theaters between March 9th and March 11th. Gloria Mundi was never released into U.S movie theaters. Priscilla played well at the independent box-office, but hasn't been getting much awards traction.
Please note: I will include two Sandra Hüller entries. Unlike SAG, the Academy is free to place an actor or actress in either lead or supporting. Gladstone, Hüller for The Zone of Interest, and Cruz could be seen as either or.
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Jan 15, 2024 14:57:20 GMT
Gladstone, Hüller, Mulligan, Robbie, Stone.
I could maybe see Greta Lee getting in over Robbie (who is still getting her laurels as a producer anyway, and I think voters are cognizant of Robbie being as much of a force behind the scenes as she is the face of the movie that it could make a difference, and I also don't think she's going to get quite as many #1 placements on voters' ballots) if there's a sudden Past Lives resurgence, but that five feels right.
|
|
|
Post by JangoB on Jan 15, 2024 15:06:45 GMT
1. Gladstone 2. Stone 3. Hüller 4. Mulligan 5. Bening
Uh-oh!
|
|
|
Post by Brother Fease on Jan 15, 2024 15:16:51 GMT
Gladstone, Hüller, Mulligan, Robbie, Stone. I could maybe see Greta Lee getting in over Robbie (who is still getting her laurels as a producer anyway, and I think voters are cognizant of Robbie being as much of a force behind the scenes as she is the face of the movie that it could make a difference, and I also don't think she's going to get quite as many #1 placements on voters' ballots) if there's a sudden Past Lives resurgence, but that five feels right. That's what I have.
My order in confidence:
1. Stone / Gladstone - Both are in popular films. Both have been splitting the big awards. I don't believe the Academy will put Gladstone as supporting. After seeing KOTFM, I can't see why you put her as supporting. She's the heart beat of the production and the film's representative of Native American discrimination.
3. Mulligan - The chemistry between her and Cooper are the main attraction to the picture.
4. Hüller - I am referring to Anatomy, not Zone. This is under the condition that BAFTA nominates her.
4. Robbie - The Academy loves Robbie and her film is getting major, major awards attention.
The other two strong possibility are Annette Bening and Greta Lee. I feel the most confident in 1-3. 4 and 5 are something I might change.
|
|
|
Post by wilcinema on Jan 15, 2024 15:22:54 GMT
There's no way Huller misses with Anatomy of a Fall getting PGA, a likely Best Picture nomination and as a legitimate contender for Original Screenplay.
I don't get Robbie's appeal but she's the face of Barbie, predicting a snub is risky.
|
|
|
Post by Brother Fease on Jan 15, 2024 15:27:58 GMT
1. Gladstone 2. Stone 3. Hüller 4. Mulligan 5. Bening Uh-oh! May I ask why you have Robbie outside the top 5?
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Jan 15, 2024 15:29:09 GMT
After seeing KOTFM, I can't see why you put her as supporting. She's the heart beat of the production and the film's representative of Native American discrimination. Honestly, I don't know how anyone could watch the movie and think she's anything but supporting. The film absolutely fails to give Mollie any agency as a character (and I don't mean agency as in her being an active combatant against the conspiracy to murder her family and her people because obviously that's not what happened historically (even though at one point she goes to speak with Calvin fucking Coolidge and the movie devotes about thirty seconds to that); I mean agency as in giving her perspective and using her as the fulcrum around which the rest of the film orbits). Even if you agree with those who claim that this is a movie decrying white supremacy by anchoring the focus on Ernest Burkhart and the conspirators, by definition that means that Mollie is ancillary to that focus, and by definition that makes her a supporting character.
|
|
|
Post by Brother Fease on Jan 15, 2024 15:33:06 GMT
After seeing KOTFM, I can't see why you put her as supporting. She's the heart beat of the production and the film's representative of Native American discrimination. Honestly, I don't know how anyone could watch the movie and think she's anything but supporting. The film absolutely fails to give Mollie any agency as a character (and I don't mean agency as in her being an active combatant against the conspiracy to murder her family and her people because obviously that's not what happened historically (even though at one point she goes to speak with Calvin fucking Coolidge and the movie devotes about thirty seconds to that); I mean agency as in giving her perspective and using her as the fulcrum around which the rest of the film orbits). Even if you agree with those who claim that this is a movie decrying white supremacy by anchoring the focus on Ernest Burkhart and the conspirators, by definition that means that Mollie is ancillary to that focus, and by definition that makes her a supporting character. Are you implying that Gladstone could be put in as supporting?
I would put her as lead for the reason below:
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Jan 15, 2024 15:37:42 GMT
Honestly, I don't know how anyone could watch the movie and think she's anything but supporting. The film absolutely fails to give Mollie any agency as a character (and I don't mean agency as in her being an active combatant against the conspiracy to murder her family and her people because obviously that's not what happened historically (even though at one point she goes to speak with Calvin fucking Coolidge and the movie devotes about thirty seconds to that); I mean agency as in giving her perspective and using her as the fulcrum around which the rest of the film orbits). Even if you agree with those who claim that this is a movie decrying white supremacy by anchoring the focus on Ernest Burkhart and the conspirators, by definition that means that Mollie is ancillary to that focus, and by definition that makes her a supporting character. Are you implying that Gladstone could put in as supporting? Not at all. Gladstone saw an opportunity to make a statement about how Native actors and their stories have historically been marginalized and sidelined throughout history, both in Hollywood and elsewhere, and she wanted to gun for a leading nomination. She sacrificed what could've been a lay-up win in supporting actress to shoot for a riskier leading bid. And on paper, it should be a leading performance . . . but in execution, it's not.
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Jan 15, 2024 15:41:40 GMT
Honestly, I don't know how anyone could watch the movie and think she's anything but supporting. The film absolutely fails to give Mollie any agency as a character (and I don't mean agency as in her being an active combatant against the conspiracy to murder her family and her people because obviously that's not what happened historically (even though at one point she goes to speak with Calvin fucking Coolidge and the movie devotes about thirty seconds to that); I mean agency as in giving her perspective and using her as the fulcrum around which the rest of the film orbits). Even if you agree with those who claim that this is a movie decrying white supremacy by anchoring the focus on Ernest Burkhart and the conspirators, by definition that means that Mollie is ancillary to that focus, and by definition that makes her a supporting character. Are you implying that Gladstone could be put in as supporting?
I would put her as lead for the reason below:
Screentime isn't everything (there's less than nine minutes' margin between Gladstone and De Niro, and no one is claiming De Niro is lead), and I take umbrage with Matthew Stewart's follow-up statement about how deeming her supporting misinterprets the film.
|
|
|
Post by Brother Fease on Jan 15, 2024 15:56:31 GMT
Are you implying that Gladstone could be put in as supporting?
I would put her as lead for the reason below:
Screentime isn't everything (there's less than nine minutes' margin between Gladstone and De Niro, and no one is claiming De Niro is lead), and I take umbrage with Matthew Stewart's follow-up statement about how deeming her supporting misinterprets the film. The bed scenes (Not going to spoil the film for anybody), does not make her supporting. It is apart of the film's message. The movie is about the relationship between Ernest and Mollie. Since she gets by far the most screen time for a female performer, I think it is fine if they consider her lead. DeNiro is not lead, because he's not the top billing male actor and he's more of the chaos agent of the picture.
Side note - Gladstone has indicated that her Native American culture does not rely on gender specific pronouns. Going to refer to Gladstone by feminine pronouns, because she goes by both female and gender neutral terms.
|
|
|
Post by PromNightCarrie on Jan 15, 2024 16:02:09 GMT
I'm about to follow this year's race closer than I usually do. I really want to see Anatomy of a Fall with Sandra Huller next. Is that the kind of performance the Academy responds to?
Lily Gladstone Emma Stone Carey Mulligan
I don't know. There are many possibilities for the last two spots. Looking at everyone else, Margot Robbie getting in makes the most sense. However, I wouldn't be shocked if Gosling was the only acting nomination from Barbie.
|
|
filmnoir
Full Member
Posts: 820
Likes: 408
|
Post by filmnoir on Jan 15, 2024 16:04:50 GMT
Lets talk about Best Actress. In the last ten years, 36 out of the last 50 SAG Best Actress nominees went on to score a Best Actress nomination. That comes to 3-4 range per year accuracy. We haven't seen a perfect match since 2009. For the last two years, we have seen 3/5 matching.
If you look at the Golden Globe awards, we typically see between 3-4 of the Best Actress in a Drama nominees scoring a Best Actress nomination. There were perfect matches in 2019 and 2020. 2005 was the last time, we saw three of the Golden Globe Best Actress in a Comedy Musical nominees land a Best Actress nomination.
Laura Linney for The Savages (2007), Penélope Cruz for Parallel Mothers (2021), and Andrea Riseborough for To Leslie (2022) are the only actresses with a Best Actress Oscar nomination without any of the four big precursor nominations this century.
SAG NOMINEES Annette Bening - Nyad Lily Gladstone - Killers of the Flower Moon Carey Mulligan - Maestro Margot Robbie - Barbie Emma Stone - Poor Things
Gladstone won Best Actress at NBR, New York Film Critics, and the Golden Globes (Drama). Stone took home trophies at LA Film Critics, Golden Globes (Comedy/Musical), and Critics Choice. Sandra Hüller won leading performance awards at LA Film Critics and National Society of Film Critics for her performances in Anatomy of a Fall and The Zone of Interest. Both the Globes and Critics Choice honored her performance from Anatomy of a Fall in the lead actress category. She is currently campaigning for lead for Anatomy of a Fall and supporting for The Zone of Interest.
Other contenders we have are Greta Lee for Past Lives (Golden Globe Drama nominee + Critics Choice nominee + BAFTA Long List), Fantasia Barrino for The Color Purple (Golden Globe Comedy/Musical nominee + BAFTA Long List), Cailee Spaeny for Priscilla (Golden Globe Drama + Volpi Cup winner), and Natalie Portman for May December (Golden Globe Comedy/Musical nominee + made multiple critics circle runner-up lists).
As for your wildcards, I will throw into the mix Penelope Cruz for Ferrari and Alma Pöysti for Fallen Leaves. Cruz was nominated for the SAG in the supporting category, but the Satellite awards has her nominated for Lead. Pöysti made the cut because she was nominated for the Golden Globe for Comedy/Musical Actress and Satellite Comedy/Musical Actress.
Since 2016, 5 of the 7 last Volpi Cup winners have landed a Best Actress nomination. Charlotte Rampling for Hannah and Ariane Ascaride for Gloria Mundi are the two exceptions. Hannah was released in the next calendar year and only played in 2 theaters between March 9th and March 11th. Gloria Mundi was never released into U.S movie theaters. Priscilla played well at the independent box-office, but hasn't been getting much awards traction.
Please note: I will include two Sandra Hüller entries. Unlike SAG, the Academy is free to place an actor or actress in either lead or supporting. Gladstone, Hüller for The Zone of Interest, and Cruz could be seen as either or.
As with the Actor poll, why are you including people who aren't serious contenders - Spaeny, Barrino, Portman, Cruz, Poysti should not even be here. There's enough information at this point. There are only 3 possibilities for the 5th spot - Huller, Bening, Lee.
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Jan 15, 2024 16:09:02 GMT
I'm about to follow this year's race closer than I usually do. I really want to see Anatomy of a Fall with Sandra Huller next. Is that the kind of performance the Academy responds to? It's showy enough and she gets a lot to do (and it helps that the bulk of her performance is in English so she doesn't have to contend with the international bias this category has), and I think she is win-competitive at BAFTA. The SAG snub hurts her but it was to be expected; Anatomy plays better to other contingents who will absolutely go to bat for her.
|
|
|
Post by JangoB on Jan 15, 2024 16:14:20 GMT
1. Gladstone 2. Stone 3. Hüller 4. Mulligan 5. Bening Uh-oh! May I ask why you have Robbie outside the top 5? It's less about Robbie and more about Bening - I've been playing around with the idea of predicting her for a long-ass time and I still think that she's got a great chance to be the basic groan-worthy pick of the year. So I really want to predict her but for that I need to throw out one of the favorites. And Robbie makes the most sense to me with the role itself being the least Oscary one. Like I said in that cynical predictions thread, I'm kinda expecting AMPAS to snub both Robbie and Gerwig in directing, causing an avalanche of headlines and chaos. I guess that's me trying to make an unsafe prediction. Then again, Bening might replace Mulligan for all we know. Or maybe Hüller. Or maybe the lineup is secured with Gladstone, Stone, Hüller, Mulligan & Robbie and there's no need to overthink it.
|
|
|
Post by Pittsnogle_Goggins on Jan 15, 2024 16:15:06 GMT
Gladstone Stone Mulligan Huller Bening
|
|
|
Post by dadsburgers on Jan 15, 2024 16:15:41 GMT
Lets talk about Best Actress. In the last ten years, 36 out of the last 50 SAG Best Actress nominees went on to score a Best Actress nomination. That comes to 3-4 range per year accuracy. We haven't seen a perfect match since 2009. For the last two years, we have seen 3/5 matching.
If you look at the Golden Globe awards, we typically see between 3-4 of the Best Actress in a Drama nominees scoring a Best Actress nomination. There were perfect matches in 2019 and 2020. 2005 was the last time, we saw three of the Golden Globe Best Actress in a Comedy Musical nominees land a Best Actress nomination.
Laura Linney for The Savages (2007), Penélope Cruz for Parallel Mothers (2021), and Andrea Riseborough for To Leslie (2022) are the only actresses with a Best Actress Oscar nomination without any of the four big precursor nominations this century.
SAG NOMINEES Annette Bening - Nyad Lily Gladstone - Killers of the Flower Moon Carey Mulligan - Maestro Margot Robbie - Barbie Emma Stone - Poor Things
Gladstone won Best Actress at NBR, New York Film Critics, and the Golden Globes (Drama). Stone took home trophies at LA Film Critics, Golden Globes (Comedy/Musical), and Critics Choice. Sandra Hüller won leading performance awards at LA Film Critics and National Society of Film Critics for her performances in Anatomy of a Fall and The Zone of Interest. Both the Globes and Critics Choice honored her performance from Anatomy of a Fall in the lead actress category. She is currently campaigning for lead for Anatomy of a Fall and supporting for The Zone of Interest.
Other contenders we have are Greta Lee for Past Lives (Golden Globe Drama nominee + Critics Choice nominee + BAFTA Long List), Fantasia Barrino for The Color Purple (Golden Globe Comedy/Musical nominee + BAFTA Long List), Cailee Spaeny for Priscilla (Golden Globe Drama + Volpi Cup winner), and Natalie Portman for May December (Golden Globe Comedy/Musical nominee + made multiple critics circle runner-up lists).
As for your wildcards, I will throw into the mix Penelope Cruz for Ferrari and Alma Pöysti for Fallen Leaves. Cruz was nominated for the SAG in the supporting category, but the Satellite awards has her nominated for Lead. Pöysti made the cut because she was nominated for the Golden Globe for Comedy/Musical Actress and Satellite Comedy/Musical Actress.
Since 2016, 5 of the 7 last Volpi Cup winners have landed a Best Actress nomination. Charlotte Rampling for Hannah and Ariane Ascaride for Gloria Mundi are the two exceptions. Hannah was released in the next calendar year and only played in 2 theaters between March 9th and March 11th. Gloria Mundi was never released into U.S movie theaters. Priscilla played well at the independent box-office, but hasn't been getting much awards traction.
Please note: I will include two Sandra Hüller entries. Unlike SAG, the Academy is free to place an actor or actress in either lead or supporting. Gladstone, Hüller for The Zone of Interest, and Cruz could be seen as either or.
As with the Actor poll, why are you including people who aren't serious contenders - Spaeny, Barrino, Portman, Cruz, Poysti should not even be here. There's enough information at this point. There are only 3 possibilities for the 5th spot - Huller, Bening, Lee. Remember when Marina de Tavira was nominated for Roma? I don't think it hurts to include shot in the dark options.
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Jan 15, 2024 16:19:26 GMT
May I ask why you have Robbie outside the top 5? It's less about Robbie and more about Bening - I've been playing around with the idea of predicting her for a long-ass time and I still think that she's got a great chance to be the basic groan-worthy pick of the year. So I really want to predict her but for that I need to throw out one of the favorites. And Robbie makes the most sense to me with the role itself being the least Oscary one. Like I said in that cynical predictions thread, I'm kinda expecting AMPAS to snub both Robbie and Gerwig in directing, causing an avalanche of headlines and chaos. I guess that's me trying to make an unsafe prediction. Then again, Bening might replace Mulligan for all we know. Or maybe Hüller. Or maybe the lineup is secured with Gladstone, Stone, Hüller, Mulligan & Robbie and there's no need to overthink it. I don't think you're wrong to have Bening in contention here. I would've dismissed her long ago as someone whose ceiling was SAG and that was it . . . but the thing that is stopping me from that is Foster. Jodie has been racking up those precursors alongside her and it's going to be very hard to see her miss now (shout-out to that True Detective bump as well boosting her profile as voting opens). And if Foster's in, Bening could easily get in as well. And Robbie is easily the least flashy role in contention; Gosling at least gets to sing and dance and do wild shit Oscar loves, whereas Robbie is much more grounded and there could be a lot of people who diminish her as "well, she's playing a Barbie doll." She's much more vulnerable than I think people are giving her credit for, and I do think Mulligan still has the edge over her in terms of safety because of the sort of role she's playing. In short, I think there's enough flux here where anything can happen below the GladStone duo.
|
|
|
Post by Brother Fease on Jan 15, 2024 16:20:12 GMT
As with the Actor poll, why are you including people who aren't serious contenders - Spaeny, Barrino, Portman, Cruz, Poysti should not even be here. There's enough information at this point. There are only 3 possibilities for the 5th spot - Huller, Bening, Lee. I 100% agree, it is most likely going to boil down to the Stone ladies, Mulligan, Hüller, Robbie, Lee, and Bening for the Best Actress. However, there are some concepts you need to understand:
1. There are posters here who like to go for the "No Guts, No Glory" picks.
2. For the last two years, we have seen a left-field nominee break into the Best Actress category.
3. It's about polling dynamites. It's not just about who you think will get in, but about how others might feel. Spaeny, Barrino, Portman, and Poysti got a Globe nomination. Cruz got a SAG nomination.
4. So what? I had 12 contenders listed for Best Actor and 13 listed for Best Actress. It's not like I have a list of 15-30 choices.
|
|
tep
Full Member
formerly known as Ban
Posts: 577
Likes: 149
|
Post by tep on Jan 15, 2024 16:20:28 GMT
For sure - Gladstone, Stone
Yeah probably - Mulligan, Robbie
And gonna go out on a limb and predict Greta Lee, and a Huller snub
|
|
|
Post by Pittsnogle_Goggins on Jan 15, 2024 16:21:40 GMT
After seeing KOTFM, I can't see why you put her as supporting. She's the heart beat of the production and the film's representative of Native American discrimination. Honestly, I don't know how anyone could watch the movie and think she's anything but supporting. The film absolutely fails to give Mollie any agency as a character (and I don't mean agency as in her being an active combatant against the conspiracy to murder her family and her people because obviously that's not what happened historically (even though at one point she goes to speak with Calvin fucking Coolidge and the movie devotes about thirty seconds to that); I mean agency as in giving her perspective and using her as the fulcrum around which the rest of the film orbits). Even if you agree with those who claim that this is a movie decrying white supremacy by anchoring the focus on Ernest Burkhart and the conspirators, by definition that means that Mollie is ancillary to that focus, and by definition that makes her a supporting character. At a minimum she’s borderline and if you can’t see how others would feel that way you’re just letting your very vocal bias on the film take over.
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Jan 15, 2024 16:23:41 GMT
Honestly, I don't know how anyone could watch the movie and think she's anything but supporting. The film absolutely fails to give Mollie any agency as a character (and I don't mean agency as in her being an active combatant against the conspiracy to murder her family and her people because obviously that's not what happened historically (even though at one point she goes to speak with Calvin fucking Coolidge and the movie devotes about thirty seconds to that); I mean agency as in giving her perspective and using her as the fulcrum around which the rest of the film orbits). Even if you agree with those who claim that this is a movie decrying white supremacy by anchoring the focus on Ernest Burkhart and the conspirators, by definition that means that Mollie is ancillary to that focus, and by definition that makes her a supporting character. At a minimum she’s borderline and if you can’t see how others would feel that way you’re just letting your very vocal bias on the film take over. My very vocal bias is based in part on how the film sidelines her. It didn't come from a vacuum here.
|
|
|
Post by Brother Fease on Jan 15, 2024 16:24:55 GMT
Remember when Marina de Tavira was nominated for Roma? I don't think it hurts to include shot in the dark options. Here is more examples:
Rooney Mara for Dragon- only nominated for the Globe Yalitza Aparicio - Only Critics Choice Keisha Castle-Hughes - Nominated for SAG supporting actress
Gary Oldman for Tinker Tailor Spy was only nominated at BAFTA and he got in over Dicaprio.
I already noted for Riseborough, Cruz, and Linney didn't get nominated for any of the major precursor awards.
|
|
|
Post by Pittsnogle_Goggins on Jan 15, 2024 16:25:16 GMT
At a minimum she’s borderline and if you can’t see how others would feel that way you’re just letting your very vocal bias on the film take over. My very vocal bias is based in part on how the film sidelines her. It didn't come from a vacuum here. Sure, but it’s not a consensus. Many echo your viewpoint on how the film should have been approached. And just as many thought it worked how it was presented.
|
|
|
Post by stabcaesar on Jan 15, 2024 16:26:58 GMT
Stone and Gladstone are in for sure, Hüller most likely in, then Mulligan, Robbie, Lee and Bening are fighting for the last 2 places. I will decide after the BAFTA noms.
|
|