Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 15, 2020 17:42:49 GMT
Not just with Oscar voters, but also with general audiences? Which do you think carries the most weight?
|
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Jun 15, 2020 17:47:19 GMT
If you're an actor, SAG. Because it's the award voted on entirely by your peers. So it's probably much more meaningful in that respect.
In terms of which is the most essential award to have if you're running for the Oscar, BAFTA has lapped SAG in recent years.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 15, 2020 17:51:28 GMT
If you're an actor, SAG. Because it's the award voted on entirely by your peers. So it's probably much more meaningful in that respect. In terms of which is the most essential award to have if you're running for the Oscar, BAFTA has lapped SAG in recent years. Hm... In the trailer for Marriage Story, Johansson was billed as "Golden Globe Nominee" rather than "BAFTA Winner" - I think the Globes take this. |
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Jun 15, 2020 17:57:04 GMT
If you're an actor, SAG. Because it's the award voted on entirely by your peers. So it's probably much more meaningful in that respect. In terms of which is the most essential award to have if you're running for the Oscar, BAFTA has lapped SAG in recent years. Hm... In the trailer for Marriage Story, Johansson was billed as "Golden Globe Nominee" rather than "BAFTA Winner" - I think the Globes take this. Because the Golden Globes have the most high profile name after the Oscars because of their longevity and name recognition. But they're still insular and have zero crossover with the Academy. |
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Jun 15, 2020 17:59:12 GMT
For the Oscar BAFTA ........for the public it's the Golden Globe......it mimics the way the public sees movies in format and for years was the only one anyway and it has a great TV show....almost self-mocking.
SAG mattered a lot more when it wasn't SAG-AFTRA - for example:when Denzel didn't get that BAFTA nod he lost the big prize - that race was over - the BAFTA has membership overlap I am pretty sure.....There was no way he was winning - I can't think of another precursor that has that clear weight to it.
|
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Jun 15, 2020 18:20:30 GMT
BAFTA isnt that important (despite a small crossover in membership), imho. Ultimately, the Oscars are an American award, and all the precursors that take place in America are more important. You rarely see films in America heavily advertise their BAFTA nods or wins. They definitely do for Golden Globes and for SAG.Like ACCTA, Australia's version of BAFTA, BAFTA has taken a convienient spot in the calender and tries to almost predict the Oscars, which gives it the illusion of more importance to the race than it neccesarily has. But the Oscars went for so long in it's history with BAFTA coming ahead of it, that I can't credit them with too much importance in the scheme of things. They almost act like the Critics Choice. If they weren't so slavishy trying to act like Oscar predictors, a lot more British films would be being nominated in the main category at BAFTA instead. I think the American critics awards have more impact in shaping Oscar races than foreign bodies like BAFTA and AACTA. So Globes, then SAG.You still have things like Hidden Figures, which would never in a million years show up at Best Picture in The BAFTAs, get Best Picture nominated at the Oscars on the strength of their showing at SAG.
|
|
morton
Based
Posts: 2,811
Likes: 2,954
|
Post by morton on Jun 15, 2020 22:01:57 GMT
For the Oscar BAFTA ........for the public it's the Golden Globe......it mimics the way the public sees movies in format and for years was the only one anyway and it has a great TV show....almost self-mocking. SAG mattered a lot more when it wasn't SAG-AFTRA - for example:when Denzel didn't get that BAFTA nod he lost the big prize - that race was over - the BAFTA has membership overlap I am pretty sure.....There was no way he was winning - I can't think of another precursor that has that clear weight to it. Pretty much. I think the Globes do set the tone of things. Not to say that their winners always match the Oscars because they often don't, but with them being the first big awards out of the gate, once a movie or a person wins there, then they usually just go onto win everything else. It'd probably still happen if it were like the Critics' Choice that started off the season, but the Globes have been around so much longer and aside from the Oscars, it's probably the most known award for films. So even though there's like only one voter that also can vote for the Oscars, I think they are a very crucial precursor because of how high profile they are. Certainly from a box office standpoint, the Globe is probably the most important because it's a big thing for a film's box office to win a Globe, which can help it in phase 2 of Oscar voting. Mostly agree about SAG-AFTRA after the merger, but I will give them credit for showing how strong Parasite was while most of the the other awards went with 1917. They totally blew it with Bombshell though, and I think that was probably because of the merger since I think Bombshell would play well to the AFTRA crowd. For acting awards, BAFTA is the better precursor. |
|
Good God
Badass
Posts: 1,633
Likes: 1,937
|
Post by Good God on Jun 15, 2020 22:04:27 GMT
If you're an actor, SAG. Because it's the award voted on entirely by your peers. So it's probably much more meaningful in that respect. Not since 2012. To answer the question, I'm going to answer in terms of the awards themselves rather than the impact/indication they have on the Oscar race. 1. BAFTAs They have a history of over 70 years, are voted for by filmmakers, and show a foreign perspective that the more American Oscars don't. 2. Globes Again, they have a history of over 70 years and are probably the 2nd most popular movie awards after the Oscars. The obvious negative is that they're voted for by people with limited credentials but the general public doesn't know or care about that. 3. SAG I'd have them over the Globes (despite their limited history) if it weren't for the AFTRA merger. They've lost their essence ever since and are just not as special as they used to be. Their increasingly populistic voting patterns also makes them look like a lesser Golden Globes to me. |
|
morton
Based
Posts: 2,811
Likes: 2,954
|
Post by morton on Jun 16, 2020 13:06:48 GMT
Sorry I'm not really adding anything on topic to the conversation, but I forgot to add in my first post in this thread that I'm surprised that BAFTA caved in first to moving to better copy the Oscars again. I figure all the other big televised awards will eventually and probably many of the mid-tier critics awards and all of the lower tier critics awards, but if I would have bet money on which award would have moved first, I thought the Globes or the Critics Choice would do it first, then BAFTA, and then SAG.
|
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Jun 23, 2020 5:19:20 GMT
Sorry I'm not really adding anything on topic to the conversation, but I forgot to add in my first post in this thread that I'm surprised that BAFTA caved in first to moving to better copy the Oscars again. I figure all the other big televised awards will eventually and probably many of the mid-tier critics awards and all of the lower tier critics awards, but if I would have bet money on which award would have moved first, I thought the Globes or the Critics Choice would do it first, then BAFTA, and then SAG. ........and HFPA ups its 2020/2021 influence factor now as 85 journalists - who are not above bribery for their votes mind you - from places including Yemen and Luxembourg can now clearly set the table for quality cinema in the US this season :  ...............and so it begins! The new date of Feb. 28 for the Globes was the original date for the 2021 Oscars, which was set in 2017. The new date means that the results of the Globes could influence Oscar nominations voting, as the process doesn’t begin until a week later on March 5.
variety.com/2020/film/news/golden-globes-postponed-date-nbc-1234637007/#article-comments |
|
morton
Based
Posts: 2,811
Likes: 2,954
|
Post by morton on Jun 23, 2020 12:57:10 GMT
Sorry I'm not really adding anything on topic to the conversation, but I forgot to add in my first post in this thread that I'm surprised that BAFTA caved in first to moving to better copy the Oscars again. I figure all the other big televised awards will eventually and probably many of the mid-tier critics awards and all of the lower tier critics awards, but if I would have bet money on which award would have moved first, I thought the Globes or the Critics Choice would do it first, then BAFTA, and then SAG. ........and HFPA ups its 2020/2021 influence factor now as 85 journalists - who are not above bribery for their votes mind you - from places including Yemen and Luxembourg can now clearly set the table for quality cinema in the US this season : ...............and so it begins! The new date of Feb. 28 for the Globes was the original date for the 2021 Oscars, which was set in 2017. The new date means that the results of the Globes could influence Oscar nominations voting, as the process doesn’t begin until a week later on March 5.
variety.com/2020/film/news/golden-globes-postponed-date-nbc-1234637007/#article-commentslol, I thought about adding the other way that the Globes have a lot of influence, but when I wrote my first post in this thread I decided to be nice to stars like Sharon Stone, Tobey Maguire, Tom Ford, and others that likely bribed their way in, or in the case of Maguire had someone else bribing the Globes voters on their behalf. It's definitely an ugly side of the Globes, and I don't think that the Globe nomination really helps the person/film be nominated elsewhere, but I guess any attention is good attention even when people start to question whether it was really earned or not. Inside and outside the industry, I guess it's just accepted though just like their star fucking as being a part of the Globes, and inside the industry it feels encouraged because it's easier to wine and dine less than 100 voters than it is to try to woo enough of other voters like trying to win over how many actors are on the SAG committee or how many actors get to vote for BAFTA and AMPAS. For the Globes, you already know who most of them are every year, so you just send them some swag and/or have them see your movie in a fancy screening, and hopefully it leads to nominations for yourself and/or whatever film you're promoting. I think the Critics Choice Awards are similar in that they're a small group that can also be "swayed" sometimes, but they're still larger than the Globes so it's more difficult and/or expensive to target every voter, and they don't have nearly as much influence as the Globes do within the industry or with the general public. Not every one shows up to the Globes, but the CCA certainly have more no shows every year, and they're shown on the CW after being bounced around from network to network now unlike the Globes which NBC has aired for many decades. |
|
