|
|
Post by sterlingarcher86 on Mar 30, 2020 4:49:31 GMT
I’m stir crazy and baked so let’s go down this rabbit hole. Let’s say that The Lord of the Rings saga comes out one year earlier and Mystic River takes Picture and Director...
Then does Clint still win for MDB? (I say probably not)
If no and they go with Marty for the Aviator does he still win for The Departed (I say probably BUT)
If no and they give the win to AGI do they still give him back to back Oscars the next decade? (This is the hardest one... I think probably not. I think he still wins for Birdman but loses to either McCarthy or Miller the next year)
|
|
|
|
Post by mattfincher on Mar 30, 2020 6:58:32 GMT
Aviator and Scorsese win in '04.
In '06, Little Miss Sunshine wins Picture, but Scorsese still wins Director.
But for the sake of this detour. If AGI wins in '06, I'm actually going to say Linklater wins Director in a split and AGI still wins for Revenant (I'm of the mind Revenant would have won on a plurality ballot and I can't see McCarthy winning Director. And while Miller would have been awesome, I don't think they were touching that film above the line).
|
|
|
|
Post by TerryMontana on Mar 30, 2020 8:11:13 GMT
Aviator would win in 2004 and The Departed wpuld lose in 2006 (AGI would probably be their choice).
|
|
|
|
Post by jimmalone on Mar 30, 2020 8:26:00 GMT
Well, first I'd say that it's not sure Eastwood would have won in 2003 without Lord of the Rings. It could have been Lost in Translation as well.
But okay, let's go with this premise.
I'd say Aviator and Scorsese win in 2004.
I highly doubt Departed and Scorsese win in 2006. I'd actually say it would have been Little Miss Sunshine for Picture and Eastwood winning a third director oscar for Letters from Iwo Jima, who I strongly feel was second in 2006. But well, maybe some people would have been hesitating to give a third one to him and they give it to Inarritu.
If Inarritu wins in 2006 he would still have won for Birdman. But I doubt they would have given him a third so soon. So probably Spotlight not only wins Picture, but also director for McCarthy.
|
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Mar 30, 2020 12:34:21 GMT
I do think that if The Lord of the Rings had come out a year earlier, Master and Commander would've won Picture and Director. But let's say Clint wins in 2003.
I don't think Million Dollar Baby wins Picture or Director, but I think Swank and Freeman still win.
Logic would say Scorsese is probably second, but I have a sneaking suspicion that Sideways could've come out of nowhere and taken it as well. I wouldn't be surprised if there were a split, with Marty winning Director while Sideways takes Picture.
If The Aviator wins in '04, I think Little Miss Sunshine wins out in '06 for Picture and Scorsese probably still wins Director -- it's a return to his gangster milieu, after all. 2014 and 2015 stay the same if that's the case. If AGI does somehow win in 2006, then I think he still sweeps for Birdman but Dr. George wins out in 2015.
|
|
morton
Based
Posts: 2,811
Likes: 2,954
|
Post by morton on Mar 30, 2020 13:05:54 GMT
I’m stir crazy and baked so let’s go down this rabbit hole. Let’s say that The Lord of the Rings saga comes out one year earlier and Mystic River takes Picture and Director... Then does Clint still win for MDB? (I say probably not) If no and they go with Marty for the Aviator does he still win for The Departed (I say probably BUT) If no and they give the win to AGI do they still give him back to back Oscars the next decade? (This is the hardest one... I think probably not. I think he still wins for Birdman but loses to either McCarthy or Miller the next year) I agree with stephen that in this scenario that M$B lose Best Picture and Director, but Swank and Freeman win their categories. Swank would still have the strongest film, baitiness of her role, and critics on her side, and Freeman would have the overdue factor especially over Church and Owens, Foxx would have always won just in leading, and Alda was a surprise nominee in the end. As for BP and BD, I think Scorsese wins both. Sideways missed Best Actor, and while the steak eaters loved Master and Commander, the actors didn't get behind it. So I think The Aviator would have the narrative plus being a good compromise of techs plus old Hollywood, and it also had an acting and editing win. The next year, Scorsese might have won Best Director, but I think Little Miss Sunshine would have won Best Picture since I think it must have been close in the end anyways. Although I could see a scenario where AGI won since I don't think that the Academy would have had any trouble not giving Scorsese two Best Director awards since they have no trouble doing that now. In that case, I think AGI still wins Best Picture and Best Director for Birdman because I think it had the most showy direction. Maybe he ends up losing Original Screenplay though, but probably not because I think that they loved Birdman that much since so many branches could relate to it. The next year though, Leo still wins Best Actor of course, but I think that George Miller would have prevailed in Best Director. Spotlight still probably still wins for Best Picture, but it could have been Fury Road since it would have been a bigger contender if Miller would have won. |
|
|
|
Post by jimmalone on Mar 30, 2020 13:41:12 GMT
I’m stir crazy and baked so let’s go down this rabbit hole. Let’s say that The Lord of the Rings saga comes out one year earlier and Mystic River takes Picture and Director... Then does Clint still win for MDB? (I say probably not) If no and they go with Marty for the Aviator does he still win for The Departed (I say probably BUT) If no and they give the win to AGI do they still give him back to back Oscars the next decade? (This is the hardest one... I think probably not. I think he still wins for Birdman but loses to either McCarthy or Miller the next year) but it could have been Fury Road since it would have been a bigger contender if Miller would have won. That makes absolutely no sense. The voters don't wait to vote on Best Picture for after the director winner has been revealed.
Also generally and I have said this several times on this board:
The voters don't think: Oh, that film won this and this award (talking of precursors), it must be good, so I will vote for this as well. It's exactly the other way around. A film wins awards because the voters like it. When Inarritu would have been on to win his 3rd oscar, this could have lost him votes. Cause THIS is a reason, voters might not give him their vote as easily, if there are directions they like to a similiar extent. So yes: Miller could have won director. But the field of candidates for Best Picture would have been the same and The Revenant didn't win, so there's no reason to think the outcome would have been different here.
|
|
|
|
Post by IceTruckDexter on Apr 20, 2020 20:32:02 GMT
I don't see Scorsese losing Director in 06 simply because it was the best directed film and the best film quite frankly. If Innaritu can win 2 years in a row then Scorsese can win 2 in 3 years.
|
|
wonky
Full Member
Posts: 595 
Likes: 713
Member is Online
|
Post by wonky on Apr 21, 2020 5:24:01 GMT
I do think that if The Lord of the Rings had come out a year earlier, Master and Commander would've won Picture and Director. I'm not really sure about this. I definitely remember M&C basically being an also-ran to Mystic River and Lost in Translation (and obviously LOTR goes w/o saying). The main thing it had was BAFTA love with Weir winning Director but eh, that was when they were still a lot weirder. |
|
|
|
Post by sterlingarcher86 on Aug 28, 2023 15:34:19 GMT
With all the speculation going around I thought it would be fun to bump this.
|
|
|
|
Post by DanQuixote on Aug 28, 2023 20:27:26 GMT
Agree with what’s been said on the thread so far. Sideways and Scorsese win in 2004. Little Miss Sunshine and Scorsese win in 2006.
|
|
