|
Post by TerryMontana on Sept 10, 2019 13:50:16 GMT
I'm not buying that JLo thing either. And I insist Eddie Murphy won't be nominated. I'd like it but I can't see it happening. Yeah Murphy doesn't apply as much to me either - different year, different competition. Could he get in ........sure, will he? I tend to doubt it and I especially doubt it over Pryce who is going to be talked about in acting terms as the very first thing about his film. Murphy to Malek doesn't connect to me - Freddie Mercury is a superstar loved by millions, Rudy Ray Moore is a cult figure. I think Just Mercy is way bigger than people think race chasing movie with no white savior.........that's catnip to the woke Academy......not saying it's in but easily could be, just the year may be too deep. I slightly doubt Pryce, for the reason I posted above. I don't think Netflix will push for all of these guys in the leading category. Then again, they know better than us. Plus, we haven't seen anything yet. The Irishman and Marriage Story might flop and at the same time, Murphy and Pryce (or maybe Hopkins?) might get raves and they decide to push them harder. Who knows...
|
|
|
Post by paranoidroegian on Sept 10, 2019 14:15:25 GMT
Wait... I leave Oscar culture and then bam J.Lo gets buzz?
|
|
Good God
Badass
Posts: 1,633
Likes: 1,937
|
Post by Good God on Sept 10, 2019 16:23:16 GMT
I think especially after last year, using Metacritic as an excuse to bumrush some films and contenders out of the race just doesn't fly. Our last Best Picture winner Green Book has a 69 on metacritic. Our last Best Actor winner, Rami Malek came from a film with 49 on metacritic (which also got Best Picture nominated as well to boot). Best Picture nominated Vice has 61 on metacritic. It's pretty damned clear that Academy voters aren't checking metacritic scores to decide whether they like something. If it falls within their tastes, does well with audiences, an average or even low metacritic score is hardly a hindrance now to even winning, let alone being nominated. SAG are also pretty basic these days. They won't necessarily nominate all the arthouse shit with 90 on metacritic that critics are jizzing over, and could just as easily fall for the charms of Dolemite Is My Name or Just Mercy. In fact Dolemite has the kinds of ensemble cast that would fall right into SAG's wheelhouse these days. Murphy is still a major contender, and he'll probably win the comedy Globe. Will Dolemite Is My Name contend for a Best Pic nod? Too early to say. If audiences go wild over it, with recent Academy trends, it's hardly out of the realm of possibility. But when a film with almost 20 points lower on metacritic ( Bohemian Rhapsody) can get a Best Picture nod, and an average scored Green Book can win Best Picture, it's foolishly ignoring these recent trends that well recieved and successful crowdpleasers don't need Metacritic tongue bathes to score with AMPAS. I would not write off Just Mercy at all. You need to take into account how well movies will play with general audiences (and AMPAS and SAG steak eaters), not just critics. 1. Except, you know, the next Green Book could be Harriet and the next Bohemian Rhapsody could be Rocketman and not necessarily the movies you're stanning for. It's not like either Just Mercy or Dolemite Is My Name is going to gross half a billion at the Box Office by nominations time. 2. I don't think the Academy ever checked Metacritic to decide whether they like something. It's just symptomatic. If critics don't think a movie is great, the Academy is probably not going to think it's great either. They don't need to match up exactly every year, but the trend holds true despite the exceptions. Also, great reviews from critics inspire Academy members to actually take the time out of their busy lives to go and watch that movie. They're not going to vote for movies they don't watch unless there is an undeniable narrative. 3. What's foolish is to extrapolate based on exceptions, which you are prone to do whenever it suits your agenda. Just Mercy may well go on to win Best Picture. But so could Jojo Rabbit. Nobody knows the future. The best we can do is look at history, check the current situation, and make predictions accordingly. And going by history and the reviews for Just Mercy and Dolemite Is My Name, they are unlikely to be major contenders.
|
|
morton
Based
Posts: 2,811
Likes: 2,954
|
Post by morton on Sept 10, 2019 17:06:03 GMT
I think especially after last year, using Metacritic as an excuse to bumrush some films and contenders out of the race just doesn't fly. Our last Best Picture winner Green Book has a 69 on metacritic. Our last Best Actor winner, Rami Malek came from a film with 49 on metacritic (which also got Best Picture nominated as well to boot). Best Picture nominated Vice has 61 on metacritic. It's pretty damned clear that Academy voters aren't checking metacritic scores to decide whether they like something. If it falls within their tastes, does well with audiences, an average or even low metacritic score is hardly a hindrance now to even winning, let alone being nominated. SAG are also pretty basic these days. They won't necessarily nominate all the arthouse shit with 90 on metacritic that critics are jizzing over, and could just as easily fall for the charms of Dolemite Is My Name or Just Mercy. In fact Dolemite has the kinds of ensemble cast that would fall right into SAG's wheelhouse these days. Murphy is still a major contender, and he'll probably win the comedy Globe. Will Dolemite Is My Name contend for a Best Pic nod? Too early to say. If audiences go wild over it, with recent Academy trends, it's hardly out of the realm of possibility. But when a film with almost 20 points lower on metacritic ( Bohemian Rhapsody) can get a Best Picture nod, and an average scored Green Book can win Best Picture, it's foolishly ignoring these recent trends that well recieved and successful crowdpleasers don't need Metacritic tongue bathes to score with AMPAS. I would not write off Just Mercy at all. You need to take into account how well movies will play with general audiences (and AMPAS and SAG steak eaters), not just critics. Point taken, but last year feels like more of an exception to me, not the rule, and I certainly wouldn’t start making predictions for what would normally feel like a long shot from here on out because of it. I’d personally need to see that sort of thing happen again at least once before deciding that we’re in a new area, critics don’t matter, ect. Green Book combined two of the most winning ingredients for the Academy (the power of friendship and race relations told from the perspective of a white man) and ran with it. A reverse Driving Miss Daisy which also won 30 years ago. The Blind Side had a much lower metascore in the 50’s and still nabbed a win for Bullock over Streep and even a BP nom with a similar formula. That sort of thing is simply irresistible to voters. And when your film has even the slightest bit of awards sheen and it makes 1 billion dollars, yeah, it’s going to be critic proof. Regarding Murphy, you also did not acknowledge the fact that Netflix already has two contenders who, on paper, feel stronger. If Irishman hits, we could be looking at a whopping THREE contenders for Netflix that have stronger vehicles and may or may not feel stronger in the overall race. I think that is what’s going to be thr biggest obstacle for his chances. I liked Just Mercy and hope I’m wrong, but again, it lacks the cheery tone of films like Hidden Figures, Green Book, ect. It’s heavy, it’s not going to leave people feeling good. It’s more akin to Green Mile. It strikes me as something that needs acclaim a bit more and if not that, certainly box office, but it’s not widely opening until after nominations. I agree though that we shouldn’t write it off. I think it could play better to the industry as traditional bait often does. Yes, I feel Green Book and Bohemian Rhapsody were more exceptions than the rule. I might be wrong, but I did hear rumblings that some voters were tired of small movies like Moonlight winning. Now it doesn't mean that the trend won't continue, but I think it will be more like when Crash won and there was so much more backlash that voters headed a totally different direction the next year because of all the new people that they are getting invited every year, the resistance to Netflix and other streaming services decreasing every year, and also the fact that not every year is going to produce such a big hit like Bohemian Rhapsody and or even a Green Book which olders really love but that almost anyone can appreciate. Plus Roma was always at a disadvantage, which I was dumb enough to believe it could overcome, by also being nominated for Best Foreign Language Film where most voters probably felt that that was reward enough along with a top prize like Best Director. This is also probably why Parasite or really any foreign language film will never win Best Picture or an animated film or documentary because they have their own categories, and no matter how great those films might be at the end of the day, I think it's too difficult to convince voters to award a film two "best picture" prizes. Some years the critics and movie goers will actually align like it seems like this year it seems like Joker will be a big hit, and it's MC score so far is good. Or maybe a better example would be Once Upon a Time in Hollywood which did very well with critics and at the box office. Some years they won't, and we'll see a Bohemian Rhapsody or The Blindside. Some years we'll get a Green Book that critics aren't there for, but movie goers love. At the same time we'll also get a lot of stuff that tries to hit that sweet spot but completely misses the mark. Like this year, it could be Jojo Rabbit; although, I think it will end up being one of those films that had buzz that ended up going nowhere in the end. As for Murphy, it seems like Dolemite Is My Name and The Two Popes are actually the kind of films that might have done better outside of Netflix especially the latter because I do think they could have been very successful at the box office, but because they're on Netflix, no one will ever really know how many people would have spent money to go see them. Marriage Story probably would probably have been fine because of its raves, but I don't know if it would have legs like I think Dolemite Is My Name and The Two Popes would have. The Irishman was definitely helped because if people knew the real numbers of how many people would pay to go see it, I think it would end up being seen as a flop in relation to how much the film cost to make. It probably wouldn't be hurt a lot by that like Steve Jobs or First Man because of Scorsese, but it wouldn't have helped it either.
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Sept 10, 2019 18:26:40 GMT
Maybe it's just me, but I'm getting the sense that after two "feel-good" winners in Best Picture, the Academy's sensibilities are going to start going in a darker direction. It's why I'm starting to get the sneaking suspicion that Joker might be a bigger threat for Best Picture than we might initially think. Yeah, it's a genre movie, but it's far more palatable than what won Best Picture two years ago (even with the "movie-tribute" angle that The Shape of Water promulgated). I think there's a very real chance it could wind up being this year's The Departed: the gritty follow-up to a controversial feel-good movie about race relations. I'd be more convinced in this if Phillips got in for Director, but I think it's overall probably a pretty safe bet for nominations in Adapted Screenplay, Editing, and of course, Actor.
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Sept 10, 2019 18:41:29 GMT
Maybe it's just me, but I'm getting the sense that after two "feel-good" winners in Best Picture, the Academy's sensibilities are going to start going in a darker direction. It's why I'm starting to get the sneaking suspicion that Joker might be a bigger threat for Best Picture than we might initially think. Yeah, it's a genre movie, but it's far more palatable than what won Best Picture two years ago (even with the "movie-tribute" angle that The Shape of Water promulgated). I think there's a very real chance it could wind up being this year's The Departed: the gritty follow-up to a controversial feel-good movie about race relations. I'd be more convinced in this if Phillips got in for Director, but I think it's overall probably a pretty safe bet for nominations in Adapted Screenplay, Editing, and of course, Actor. Hmmmmmm.........forgive my sarcasm stephen but going "darker" suddenly seems more likely to you than my previous posts about "scope" and all these movies about divorce and religious men talking to each other and 70s cult film stars seeming small time/TV-showish? I agree they're going dark but they're also going scope - that IS the zeitgeist - for the win at least and yes, it's a good sign for Joker, true, but........... ..............now going darker means the comic book movie instead of the serious 3 and 1/2 hour movie about American's dark history by America's pre-eminent filmmaker about the murder of one of the most important figures of the 20th century that's actually made by the guy who made The Departed? I mean.....I do get it, no one has seen The Irishman yet and everyone is being cautious because no one likes to be let down but we are saying things that apply to The Irishman way more than any other 2019 film if you think about it and are all suffering from festival hangovers. Grrrrrrrrr.
|
|
|
Post by pendragon on Sept 10, 2019 19:00:48 GMT
Regardless of whether or not this is true in actuality (I'm sure it is), do we know for sure that Sony is pushing them in those respective categories? We don't to my knowledge unless I'm missing something, which I could be because I haven't been following this year's awards race super closely at this point. So unless it's proven otherwise I'm still suspecting that they go with Hanks in lead and Rhys in supporting ... to me it's one of those things where it's "the Mr. Rogers movie" so why would you put Mr. Rogers himself in the supporting category when that feels sort of ... inorganic. Hanks is billed first, after all ... in fact he's the only one billed in the trailer ... plus, a massive star like Hanks is gonna fare significantly better in a leading category than Rhys, who despite being an Emmy-winner is still not really a "name" and hence will just naturally be seen as a supporting player (even if it is true that his character dominates the narrative). Rhys is not getting nominated in either category, and Hanks risks not getting nominated if he is pushed in Lead considering how strong that category is. I really don't understand why people think Hanks will go Lead. I guess we'll find out soon enough. I wouldn't be too sure, Hanks seems to have a real gift for getting his costars nominated. In fact, I went back and checked and in the years since Hanks' last nomination, every single film that he's been in that has scored major nominations, with the sole exception of Toy Story 3 (for obvious reasons), has gotten a nomination for someone else in the cast. And given that ABDITN is looking like a major player, I'd say that bodes pretty well for Rhys.
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Sept 10, 2019 19:04:51 GMT
Maybe it's just me, but I'm getting the sense that after two "feel-good" winners in Best Picture, the Academy's sensibilities are going to start going in a darker direction. It's why I'm starting to get the sneaking suspicion that Joker might be a bigger threat for Best Picture than we might initially think. Yeah, it's a genre movie, but it's far more palatable than what won Best Picture two years ago (even with the "movie-tribute" angle that The Shape of Water promulgated). I think there's a very real chance it could wind up being this year's The Departed: the gritty follow-up to a controversial feel-good movie about race relations. I'd be more convinced in this if Phillips got in for Director, but I think it's overall probably a pretty safe bet for nominations in Adapted Screenplay, Editing, and of course, Actor. Hmmmmmm.........forgive my sarcasm stephen but going "darker" suddenly seems more likely to you than my previous posts about "scope" and all these movies about divorce and religious men talking to each other and 70s cult film stars seeming small time/TV-showish? I agree they're going dark but they're also going scope - that IS the zeitgeist - for the win at least and yes, it's a good sign for Joker, true, but........... ..............now going darker means the comic book movie instead of the serious 3 and 1/2 hour movie about American's dark history by America's pre-eminent filmmaker about the murder of one of the most important figures of the 20th century that's actually made by the guy who made The Departed? I mean.....I do get it, no one has seen The Irishman yet and everyone is being cautious because no one likes to be let down but we are saying things that apply to The Irishman way more than any other 2019 film if you think about it and are all suffering from festival hangovers. Grrrrrrrrr. I'm not entirely sure what you mean -- are you saying Joker doesn't have scope? People have been endlessly talking about how it's a film that reflects the ills of society, for better or worse, and that it's a film with a message at its heart, again for better or worse. Just because it's a "comic-book movie" (a dismissive phrase that WB and Co. have been ruthlessly stamping out at every turn) doesn't negate that. If anything, it's probably even more tapped into the zeitgeist just because of that fact. The last decade has been dominated by the superhero film, and last year we saw one finally break into the Best Picture category (and take home the second-most Oscars overall). The very fact that Joker is rejecting that label may make it more palatable to the average voter, especially as it's getting fewer comparisons to previous incarnations of the character and more towards "serious films" like Taxi Driver and The King of Comedy. It's going to be a huge moneymaker (which will appeal to PGA). It's got a well-respected actor at its helm who may win his first Oscar (BP and Best Actor correlate a lot). It's got a prime studio and release date. It won a hugely prestigious prize at Venice (which has been a great boon the last two years). It's gotten great reception at TIFF. Et cetera, et cetera. I just think at this point, it's more than a simple hanger-on in an expanded BP category. I think it's a flat-out threat. Compare it to the unknown quantity of The Irishman: a four-hour Netflix film featuring actors who have been out of the game with the Academy for ages, with an unknown factor in its CGI, which may or may not be good despite its pedigree. Yeah, it might have scope, but I wouldn't say it's tapped into the zeitgeist any more than Joker.
|
|
|
Post by quetee on Sept 10, 2019 19:14:31 GMT
Joker is definitely scoring PGA.
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Sept 10, 2019 19:32:26 GMT
I'm not entirely sure what you mean -- are you saying Joker doesn't have scope? People have been endlessly talking about how it's a film that reflects the ills of society, for better or worse, and that it's a film with a message at its heart, again for better or worse. Just because it's a "comic-book movie" (a dismissive phrase that WB and Co. have been ruthlessly stamping out at every turn) doesn't negate that. If anything, it's probably even more tapped into the zeitgeist just because of that fact. The last decade has been dominated by the superhero film, and last year we saw one finally break into the Best Picture category (and take home the second-most Oscars overall). The very fact that Joker is rejecting that label may make it more palatable to the average voter, especially as it's getting fewer comparisons to previous incarnations of the character and more towards "serious films" like Taxi Driver and The King of Comedy. It's going to be a huge moneymaker (which will appeal to PGA). It's got a well-respected actor at its helm who may win his first Oscar (BP and Best Actor correlate a lot). It's got a prime studio and release date. It won a hugely prestigious prize at Venice (which has been a great boon the last two years). It's gotten great reception at TIFF. Et cetera, et cetera. I just think at this point, it's more than a simple hanger-on in an expanded BP category. I think it's a flat-out threat. Compare it to the unknown quantity of The Irishman: a four-hour Netflix film featuring actors who have been out of the game with the Academy for ages, with an unknown factor in its CGI, which may or may not be good despite its pedigree. Yeah, it might have scope, but I wouldn't say it's tapped into the zeitgeist any more than Joker. No, I have said Joker has huge scope many times - it's the only one that does far more than any of these other festival films (based on descriptions). It's an exciting film because of that. But first of all De Niro has been nominated as recently as Phoenix right? Second of all - Joker wins at Venice so we assume there's no genre bias now? I am saying there still is for a win and the festival circle jerk reactions are kind of too much. Just saying, on paper, Scorsese has the darker film, the film that won't be affected by box office (Netflix), that PGA might like just for logistically even getting made. He checks off far more boxes in that regard on paper ......but does he have the film quality to do it? To be determined..........
|
|
morton
Based
Posts: 2,811
Likes: 2,954
|
Post by morton on Sept 10, 2019 19:35:06 GMT
I could be wrong, but I do think we'll see AMPAS go a totally opposite way after Green Book. It could be with Joker since it did win the Golden Lion, but just seeing some of the reviews now come from Toronto, it feels like it's going to be too divisive to win Best Picture with the way that it's currently tallied. It might get a lot of #1s, but just based on some of the reviews, it's probably also going to be listed at the bottom of a lot people's ballots during Best Picture voting.
That's why I think it's going to come down to Once Upon a Time in Hollywood vs. Marriage Story. There was a lot of discourse about OUAIH, but I think it's good that it came out early and most of it will be forgotten by the time the ceremony is. Plus as we've seen last year, there can be a backlash to the backlash, and I feel that OUATIH is one of those films because for the most part people like/love it. With Marriage Story, so far, I haven't seen anyone dislike it, but at the same time, it might too small and not considered "important" enough to win plus whatever Netflix bias there might be.
Both will likely get one supporting acting win. Marriage Story probably wins Original Screenplay while OUATIH wins Best Director as well as a few other things like maybe Production Design. Marriage Story could also possibly win Score and maybe Best Actor and Actress, but I'm only really confident in Supporting Actress and Original Screenplay now.
In the end, Netflix still misses Best Picture, but they can celebrate their first acting win and being runner-up again, and if Tarantino really only directs one more film, the pressure is off to award him before he retires so sort of win-win.
|
|
|
Post by quetee on Sept 10, 2019 19:38:14 GMT
I'm not entirely sure what you mean -- are you saying Joker doesn't have scope? People have been endlessly talking about how it's a film that reflects the ills of society, for better or worse, and that it's a film with a message at its heart, again for better or worse. Just because it's a "comic-book movie" (a dismissive phrase that WB and Co. have been ruthlessly stamping out at every turn) doesn't negate that. If anything, it's probably even more tapped into the zeitgeist just because of that fact. The last decade has been dominated by the superhero film, and last year we saw one finally break into the Best Picture category (and take home the second-most Oscars overall). The very fact that Joker is rejecting that label may make it more palatable to the average voter, especially as it's getting fewer comparisons to previous incarnations of the character and more towards "serious films" like Taxi Driver and The King of Comedy. It's going to be a huge moneymaker (which will appeal to PGA). It's got a well-respected actor at its helm who may win his first Oscar (BP and Best Actor correlate a lot). It's got a prime studio and release date. It won a hugely prestigious prize at Venice (which has been a great boon the last two years). It's gotten great reception at TIFF. Et cetera, et cetera. I just think at this point, it's more than a simple hanger-on in an expanded BP category. I think it's a flat-out threat. Compare it to the unknown quantity of The Irishman: a four-hour Netflix film featuring actors who have been out of the game with the Academy for ages, with an unknown factor in its CGI, which may or may not be good despite its pedigree. Yeah, it might have scope, but I wouldn't say it's tapped into the zeitgeist any more than Joker. No, I have said Joker has huge scope many times - it's the only one that does far more than any of these other festival films (based on descriptions). It's an exciting film because of that. But first of all De Niro has been nominated as recently as Phoenix right? Second of all - Joker wins at Venice so we assume there's no genre bias now? I am saying there still is for a win and the festival circle jerk reactions are kind of too much. Just saying, on paper, Scorsese has the darker film, the film that won't be affected by box office (Netflix), that PGA might like just for logistically even getting made. He checks off far more boxes in that regard on paper ......but does he have the film quality to do it? To be determined.......... shape of water won so....
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Sept 10, 2019 19:42:52 GMT
I'm not entirely sure what you mean -- are you saying Joker doesn't have scope? People have been endlessly talking about how it's a film that reflects the ills of society, for better or worse, and that it's a film with a message at its heart, again for better or worse. Just because it's a "comic-book movie" (a dismissive phrase that WB and Co. have been ruthlessly stamping out at every turn) doesn't negate that. If anything, it's probably even more tapped into the zeitgeist just because of that fact. The last decade has been dominated by the superhero film, and last year we saw one finally break into the Best Picture category (and take home the second-most Oscars overall). The very fact that Joker is rejecting that label may make it more palatable to the average voter, especially as it's getting fewer comparisons to previous incarnations of the character and more towards "serious films" like Taxi Driver and The King of Comedy. It's going to be a huge moneymaker (which will appeal to PGA). It's got a well-respected actor at its helm who may win his first Oscar (BP and Best Actor correlate a lot). It's got a prime studio and release date. It won a hugely prestigious prize at Venice (which has been a great boon the last two years). It's gotten great reception at TIFF. Et cetera, et cetera. I just think at this point, it's more than a simple hanger-on in an expanded BP category. I think it's a flat-out threat. Compare it to the unknown quantity of The Irishman: a four-hour Netflix film featuring actors who have been out of the game with the Academy for ages, with an unknown factor in its CGI, which may or may not be good despite its pedigree. Yeah, it might have scope, but I wouldn't say it's tapped into the zeitgeist any more than Joker. No, I have said Joker has huge scope many times - it's the only one that does far more than any of these other festival films (based on descriptions). It's an exciting film because of that. But first of all De Niro has been nominated as recently as Phoenix right? Second of all - Joker wins at Venice so we assume there's no genre bias now? I am saying there still is for a win and the festival circle jerk reactions are kind of too much. Just saying, on paper, Scorsese has the darker film, the film that won't be affected by box office (Netflix), that PGA might like just for logistically even getting made. He checks off far more boxes in that regard on paper ......but does he have the film quality to do it? To be determined.......... Sure, there's genre bias at play in Joker, but it also happens to be a movie that is circumventing the label at every turn. They're pushing it not as a comic-book movie, or a superhero movie, but as a character study that happens to have the Joker (an Oscar-winning character) at its center. Warner Bros. is positioning the film to be the outlier of the genre, and it seems people are responding to that. Certainly Lucrecia Martel and the jury did; everyone expected she would rebuff the film, and look what happened. Now imagine how the rest of the industry will react. Phoenix has been on a rise this last decade, with many considering him one of the greatest working actors. De Niro, by contrast, has been more or less out of the Oscar game for decades, with only a nomination in Supporting Actor in 2012. But he's also won twice before, so there's no real urge to anoint him a third time (contrast that with someone like Streep, who had a steady string of nominations leading up to her third win, and she also had Weinstein behind her). Netflix may have garnered its first above-the-line win last year, but it also had the critical juggernaut of the year in its favor. I dunno what makes you think that De Niro would have the darker film, just because it's about gangsters who may or may not have been involved in the Kennedy assassination. If anything, it feels almost old-hat at this point for Scorsese to do another gangster biopic with De Niro/Pesci, regardless of Pacino's involvement. It's the sort of movie that, on paper, would be tailor-made for the Academy in previous years, but would it play well to them now? It could be that we're getting up in arms about festival reactions, but Joker has thus far exceeded expectations. This time a week ago, people were thinking it would be lucky to be a Picture contender. But Venice and TIFF have proven it's a far bigger threat than initially indicated.
|
|
|
Post by wilcinema on Sept 10, 2019 19:57:47 GMT
I think the Venice win pretty much guaranteed that it WON'T win Best Picture. Being recognized this big and this early is not good for the movie, Oscars-wise. Toronto is already more mixed and the think pieces will tear it to shreds.
Marriage Story is my current frontrunner now. It's pretty much guaranteed nods in all of the top categories and at least screenplay and one acting win.
|
|
Good God
Badass
Posts: 1,633
Likes: 1,937
|
Post by Good God on Sept 10, 2019 20:15:23 GMT
I wouldn't be too sure, Hanks seems to have a real gift for getting his costars nominated. In fact, I went back and checked and in the years since Hanks' last nomination, every single film that he's been in that has scored major nominations, with the sole exception of Toy Story 3 (for obvious reasons), has gotten a nomination for someone else in the cast. And given that ABDITN is looking like a major player, I'd say that bodes pretty well for Rhys. There's a difference between being Lead and getting your Supporting costars nominated and being Supporting and getting your Lead costars nominated. Unless you also think Hanks will go Lead, in which case another recent trend is that Hanks gets snubbed whenever he goes Lead.
|
|
|
Post by quetee on Sept 10, 2019 20:23:47 GMT
I think the Venice win pretty much guaranteed that it WON'T win Best Picture. Being recognized this big and this early is not good for the movie, Oscars-wise. Toronto is already more mixed and the think pieces will tear it to shreds. Marriage Story is my current frontrunner now. It's pretty much guaranteed nods in all of the top categories and at least screenplay and one acting win. based on genre, it is the frontrunner but it is also a Netflix movie that will make no money.
|
|
|
Post by DanQuixote on Sept 10, 2019 21:05:10 GMT
Just updated mine.
Best Motion Picture of the Year 1. Marriage Story 2. Once Upon a Time in Hollywood 3. Little Women 4. The Irishman 5. Joker 6. Parasite 7. A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood 8. The Farewell 9. The Two Popes 10. Bombshell
Best Achievement in Directing 1. Quentin Tarantino, Once Upon a Time in Hollywood 2. Bong Joon-ho, Parasite 3. Noah Baumbach, Marriage Story 4. Martin Scorsese, The Irishman 5. Greta Gerwig, Little Women 6. Todd Phillips, Joker 7. Sam Mendes, 1917 8. Marielle Heller, A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood 9. Lulu Wang, The Farewell 10. Terrence Malick, A Hidden Life
Best Actor in a Leading Role 1. Joaquin Phoenix, Joker 2. Adam Driver, Marriage Story 3. Leonardo DiCaprio, Once Upon a Time in Hollywood 4. Jonathan Pryce, The Two Popes 5. Antonio Banderas, Pain and Glory 6. Robert De Niro, The Irishman 7. Matthew Rhys, A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood 8. Eddie Murphy, Dolemite is My Name 9. Mark Ruffalo, Dark Waters 10. Adam Sandler, Uncut Gems
Best Actress in a Leading Role 1. Scarlett Johansson, Marriage Story 2. Cynthia Erivo, Harriet 3. Renée Zellweger, Judy 4. Saoirse Ronan, Little Women 5. Awkwafina, The Farewell 6. Charlize Theron, Bombshell 7. Meryl Streep, The Laundromat 8. Alfre Woodard, Clemency 9. Lupita Nyong’o, Us 10. Jodie Turner Smith, Queen and Slim
Best Actor in a Supporting Role 1. Brad Pitt, Once Upon a Time in Hollywood 2. Tom Hanks, A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood 3. Christian Bale, Ford v. Ferrari 4. Anthony Hopkins, The Two Popes 5. John Lithgow, Bombshell 6. Willem Dafoe, The Lighthouse 7. Al Pacino, The Irishman 8. Jamie Foxx, Just Mercy 9. Alan Alda, Marriage Story 10. Joe Pesci, The Irishman
Best Actress in a Supporting Role 1. Laura Dern, Marriage Story 2. Zhao Shuzhen, The Farewell 3. Jennifer Lopez, Hustlers 4. Margot Robbie, Bombshell 5. Anne Hathaway, Dark Waters 6. Florence Pugh, Little Women 7. Annette Bening, The Report 8. Nicole Kidman, Bombshell 9. Octavia Spencer, Luce 10. Margot Robbie, Once Upon a Time in Hollywood
|
|
|
Post by pendragon on Sept 10, 2019 22:33:45 GMT
I wouldn't be too sure, Hanks seems to have a real gift for getting his costars nominated. In fact, I went back and checked and in the years since Hanks' last nomination, every single film that he's been in that has scored major nominations, with the sole exception of Toy Story 3 (for obvious reasons), has gotten a nomination for someone else in the cast. And given that ABDITN is looking like a major player, I'd say that bodes pretty well for Rhys. There's a difference between being Lead and getting your Supporting costars nominated and being Supporting and getting your Lead costars nominated. Unless you also think Hanks will go Lead, in which case another recent trend is that Hanks gets snubbed whenever he goes Lead. Perhaps, but I don't think there's a huge difference. I'm sure Hanks will do a lot of campaigning for Rhys, as he tends to do for his costars.
|
|
Good God
Badass
Posts: 1,633
Likes: 1,937
|
Post by Good God on Sept 10, 2019 22:39:43 GMT
Perhaps, but I don't think there's a huge difference. I'm sure Hanks will do a lot of campaigning for Rhys, as he tends to do for his costars. Which category do you expect Rhys and Hanks to be placed in? If you think Rhys will go Lead (as I do), where would you place Rhys right now in the Best Actor race?
|
|
|
Post by pendragon on Sept 10, 2019 23:16:22 GMT
Perhaps, but I don't think there's a huge difference. I'm sure Hanks will do a lot of campaigning for Rhys, as he tends to do for his costars. Which category do you expect Rhys and Hanks to be placed in? If you think Rhys will go Lead (as I do), where would you place Rhys right now in the Best Actor race? Gold Derby has Rhys in Lead and they say they get their information straight from the studios. I have him about 3rd or 4th (the order is negligible) right now, behind Driver for Marriage Story, DiCaprio and possibly Phoenix.
|
|
Good God
Badass
Posts: 1,633
Likes: 1,937
|
Post by Good God on Sept 10, 2019 23:18:20 GMT
Gold Derby has Rhys in Lead and they say they get their information straight from the studios. I have him about 3rd or 4th (the order is negligible) right now, behind Driver for Marriage Story, DiCaprio and possibly Phoenix. Whoa! I think Neighborhood will have to win Best Picture for Rhys to be that high. Perhaps not even then.
|
|
|
Post by pendragon on Sept 10, 2019 23:26:15 GMT
Gold Derby has Rhys in Lead and they say they get their information straight from the studios. I have him about 3rd or 4th (the order is negligible) right now, behind Driver for Marriage Story, DiCaprio and possibly Phoenix. Whoa! I think Neighborhood will have to win Best Picture for Rhys to be that high. Perhaps not even then. Well, it's probably in the top 3 at the moment, though that could change I suppose. He's got great notices and is playing the kind of character that tends to get actors nominated. Sure, other actors like Pryce, or Banderas or Murphy have great notices as well, but how far are there films going? How many films can Netflix realistically push? They have 4 Lead Actor contenders and they might have to choose.
|
|