|
|
Post by sterlingarcher86 on Feb 3, 2022 18:54:16 GMT
I agree I love the system. A precursors job is not to make the Oscar race more clear for us.
It's not BAFTA's job to nominate random films/performances just to make the Oscars more unpredictable either. That's a horrible reason. If it doesn't represent the voting majority of it's members, what's the point of the award? It loses the prestige if 7 random people pick you.
What makes you think I said the BAFTAS should have the academy in mind AT ALL when they make decisions. Because they shouldn’t. Cannes. Quite possibly the most prestigious award in the world is decided entirely by a jury. Bafta uses it only for nominations and the likely winner (one of the top 2) are getting nominated either way so who cares? |
|
|
|
Post by wilcinema on Feb 3, 2022 18:54:31 GMT
I already said it last year, I like this system because it gives visibility to movies and performances that would otherwise be buried by the bigger contenders. And it makes the race much more unpredictable  If you want visibility, follow regional critics awards.
How is considered a BAFTA if it doesn't represent the voting majority of the members? 7-12 jury members (who may not all even be BAFTA members) picking nominees doesn't make sense. Call it something else.
They'll do away with this system pretty soon (and it'll be sad) but big awards like BAFTA and Oscars have only been a reflection of what's been submitted to them, because they simply don't watch movies outside of the ones they are told to watch by publicists. Critics awards don't give visibility lol, what are you talking about? They are part of the problem, though the biggest problem are Oscar pundits.
I'm just glad that someone like Stephen Graham is a BAFTA Best Actor nominee. A BAFTA, Oscar nomination means more opportunity for them.
|
|
wattsnew
Full Member
Posts: 713
Likes: 350
|
Post by wattsnew on Feb 3, 2022 19:05:08 GMT
What a perfect Best Actress line-up  |
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Feb 3, 2022 19:21:51 GMT
I'm just glad that someone like Stephen Graham is a BAFTA Best Actor nominee. A BAFTA, Oscar nomination means more opportunity for them.
Long time coming, too, and damn well deserved. |
|
|
|
Post by thelistenercanon on Feb 3, 2022 21:06:59 GMT
So with Kidman not being nominated.
1. Will the Kidmaniacs be piss?
2. Does that mean she won't be nominated for an Oscar let alone win like some people did?
|
|
havok2
Junior Member
Posts: 403
Likes: 187
|
Post by havok2 on Feb 3, 2022 21:22:19 GMT
Is WSS still winning Picture? Euther Drive My Car or Carax get Spielberg's placement
|
|
havok2
Junior Member
Posts: 403
Likes: 187
|
Post by havok2 on Feb 3, 2022 21:23:29 GMT
Are you all even sure The Power of the Dog is winning? PTA has made it to DGA and BAFTA too, Oscars may still have an anti Netflix sentiment for the big prize
|
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Feb 3, 2022 21:56:49 GMT
So with Kidman not being nominated. 1. Will the Kidmaniacs be piss? 2. Does that mean she won't be nominated for an Oscar let alone win like some people did? She will be nodded and she may win - but her performance is not worthy of a win or a nod imo.......and for me wouldn't make my top 10 of the year - she gave it an admirable effort - and I don't begrudge her getting a nod, I get it. But I really don't see how people can advocate for her winning - it's like advocating for the machinery of Oscar campaigning over logic - Chastain was better specifically and far more transformative in a (somewhat) similar role........... Gaga especially has absolutely everything over Kidman - nothing is built in her role for people to "like", acting opposite a far better cast, Gaga dominates her film, it's a far bigger film commercially.........and on and on. I mean if I had a vote on merit it would be Cruz........but just in terms of who should win that maybe possibly could actually win.........it should be Gaga......msmoviestar worked some voodoo doll magic today I guess to sort of make us rethink that race much more today than we did yesterday.........probably comes down to SAG....... Kidman wins SAG it would be tough to overcome........Gaga wins SAG - same thing.........Chastain wins SAG all bets are off  |
|
|
|
Post by wilcinema on Feb 3, 2022 23:06:18 GMT
So with Kidman not being nominated. 1. Will the Kidmaniacs be piss? 2. Does that mean she won't be nominated for an Oscar let alone win like some people did? She will be nodded and she may win - but her performance is not worthy of a win or a nod imo.......and for me wouldn't make my top 10 of the year - she gave it an admirable effort - and I don't begrudge her getting a nod, I get it. But I really don't see how people can advocate for her winning - it's like advocating for the machinery of Oscar campaigning over logic - Chastain was better specifically and far more transformative in a (somewhat) similar role........... Gaga especially has absolutely everything over Kidman - nothing is built in her role for people to "like", acting opposite a far better cast, Gaga dominates her film, it's a far bigger film commercially.........and on and on. I mean if I had a vote on merit it would be Cruz........but just in terms of who should win that maybe possibly could actually win.........it should be Gaga......msmoviestar worked some voodoo doll magic today I guess to sort of make us rethink that race much more today than we did yesterday.........probably comes down to SAG....... Kidman wins SAG it would be tough to overcome........Gaga wins SAG - same thing......... Chastain wins SAG all bets are off  I'd love it for the chaos and because she'd be a deserving winner |
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Feb 3, 2022 23:42:38 GMT
So with Kidman not being nominated. 1. Will the Kidmaniacs be piss? 2. Does that mean she won't be nominated for an Oscar let alone win like some people did? Kidman's pretty safe for the Oscar nomination still, but her win equity just tanked to the point that she needs to win the SAG to stay in it. And unfortunately for her, her biggest competitor for that particular award got in at BAFTA where she didn't. People can complain about how BAFTA's jury system doesn't make it a logical precursor, but what it does show is passion in regards to who makes the top two in their respective categories, and as we saw last year, that translated 100% to what the Oscar winners were in the above-the-line categories. Kidman missing BAFTA is a blow and I don't know how you can argue that it isn't. If Gaga takes the SAG, then I think BAFTA will follow suit and then the Oscar. There's a definite pathway there. If anyone not named Kidman or Gaga take the SAG, then conventional wisdom would say to follow what BAFTA does (as every single fractured race has been decided by BAFTA), which still leans in Gaga's favor. |
|
morton
Based
Posts: 2,811
Likes: 2,954
|
Post by morton on Feb 3, 2022 23:55:16 GMT
So with Kidman not being nominated. 1. Will the Kidmaniacs be piss? 2. Does that mean she won't be nominated for an Oscar let alone win like some people did? Kidman's pretty safe for the Oscar nomination still, but her win equity just tanked to the point that she needs to win the SAG to stay in it. And unfortunately for her, her biggest competitor for that particular award got in at BAFTA where she didn't. People can complain about how BAFTA's jury system doesn't make it a logical precursor, but what it does show is passion in regards to who makes the top two in their respective categories, and as we saw last year, that translated 100% to what the Oscar winners were in the above-the-line categories. Kidman missing BAFTA is a blow and I don't know how you can argue that it isn't. If Gaga takes the SAG, then I think BAFTA will follow suit and then the Oscar. There's a definite pathway there. If anyone not named Kidman or Gaga take the SAG, then conventional wisdom would say to follow what BAFTA does (as every single fractured race has been decided by BAFTA), which still leans in Gaga's favor. Best Actress is the only one I’m not sure about right now because I think Kidman could win SAG and win the Oscar because BtR could do better overall with the Oscars than HoG, and also because I’m weird and don’t want to get too hopeful about Gaga winning the Oscar until after SAG. With the other acting categories, I agree I think it will be just like last year where the BAFTA winners just won the Oscar too, and will likely be that way as long as this system continues. |
|
|
|
Post by RiverleavesElmius on Feb 3, 2022 23:56:09 GMT
So with Kidman not being nominated. 1. Will the Kidmaniacs be piss? 2. Does that mean she won't be nominated for an Oscar let alone win like some people did? She's probably still a lock for the nomination, but far from a lock or even the frontrunner for the win. As far as I'm concerned, this category has no frontrunner. The nominations could have 1 or even 2 surprises, and I think we need to see who the hell ends up getting into the Oscar's Top 5 before we determine a frontrunner. |
|
|
|
Post by Ryan_MYeah on Feb 4, 2022 0:16:04 GMT
I double down…
FUCK DON’T LOOK UP!
|
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Feb 4, 2022 0:42:08 GMT
So with Kidman not being nominated. 1. Will the Kidmaniacs be piss? 2. Does that mean she won't be nominated for an Oscar let alone win like some people did? Kidman's pretty safe for the Oscar nomination still, but her win equity just tanked to the point that she needs to win the SAG to stay in it. And unfortunately for her, her biggest competitor for that particular award got in at BAFTA where she didn't. People can complain about how BAFTA's jury system doesn't make it a logical precursor, but what it does show is passion in regards to who makes the top two in their respective categories, and as we saw last year, that translated 100% to what the Oscar winners were in the above-the-line categories. Kidman missing BAFTA is a blow and I don't know how you can argue that it isn't. If Gaga takes the SAG, then I think BAFTA will follow suit and then the Oscar. There's a definite pathway there. If anyone not named Kidman or Gaga take the SAG, then conventional wisdom would say to follow what BAFTA does (as every single fractured race has been decided by BAFTA), which still leans in Gaga's favor. Wasn't Olivia Colman the biggest rival to Kidman 5 minutes ago, according to most? Colman missing at BAFTA all but kills her chances, which people seemed very bullish on. She was even top of the GoldDerby odds to win the Oscar . Kidman never needed BAFTA, who I think are becoming increasingly irrelevant as far as the acting races go. Gaga is not in Nomadland. She isn't in the Best Picture frontrunner like McDormand was last year, which allowed her to bulldoze her way to a third Oscar. They seem to consider House Of Gucci a British film for some reason, so that probably helped Gaga. But as I said, I don't think Gaga is winning BAFTA. So it would be pretty incredible if Kidman wins SAG, Joanne Scanlan wins BAFTA and Gaga wins....nothing. But still somehow wins the Oscar. That doesn't happen. Kidman is still in a better position. Gaga still needs to win a major precursor, and she isn't guaranteed anything. Even BAFTA. This will come down to the SAG winner this year, imho. Don't think BAFTA will matter. |
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Feb 4, 2022 0:51:42 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Mattsby on Feb 4, 2022 1:00:29 GMT
 I'd take my Gucci boys over the Dogs but can't complain getting Haim and Graham in there. |
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Feb 4, 2022 2:30:02 GMT
Wasn't Olivia Colman the biggest rival to Kidman 5 minutes ago, according to most? Colman missing at BAFTA all but kills her chances, which people seemed very bullish on. She was even top of the GoldDerby odds to win the Oscar . Kidman never needed BAFTA, who I think are becoming increasingly irrelevant as far as the acting races go. Gaga is not in Nomadland. She isn't in the Best Picture frontrunner like McDormand was last year, which allowed her to bulldoze her way to a third Oscar. They seem to consider House Of Gucci a British film for some reason, so that probably helped Gaga. But as I said, I don't think Gaga is winning BAFTA. So it would be pretty incredible if Kidman wins SAG, Joanne Scanlan wins BAFTA and Gaga wins....nothing. But still somehow wins the Oscar. That doesn't happen. Kidman is still in a better position. Gaga still needs to win a major precursor, and she isn't guaranteed anything. Even BAFTA. This will come down to the SAG winner this year, imho. Don't think BAFTA will matter. I don't follow GoldDerby odds. Frankly, so much of that is reactionary groupthink that even if I did pay it any attention, it wouldn't hold any more weight than the average predictor here. And Colman absolutely took a massive hit today, that's not in dispute. You say Kidman doesn't need BAFTA and that it's becoming irrelevant . . . but it's actually not. If you look at Best Actor, Smith and Cumberbatch (the de facto top two of the category) made it and I'd bet my bottom dollar one of them wins it. Best Supporting Actor, Smit-McPhee/Hinds/Kotsur all made it, and those three are again the de facto frontrunners. Supporting Actress has DeBose/Balfe/Negga, who I think are our top three in that category as well. So what does it mean for Best Actress? Gaga clearly was one of the top two, but who was the other? Haim, for a film they clearly went (lady) gaga for? Scanlan, for the hometown advantage? Someone else? Either way, it wasn't Kidman or Colman, which shows that neither of them were able to engender the individual passion to accumulate the top two votes in the category at the outset. And that's not really a good sign for either of them, because as we saw last year, BAFTA did go 4/4 with Oscar's acting winners. If you expect Kidman to win the Oscar, she needs SAG. Even Sandra Bullock took that one home. Bullock didn't get nominated for the BAFTA, so there is some precedent, but Bullockmania in 2009 was very much a thing and Kidman isn't exactly having that sort of a year. But sure, if Scanlan wins BAFTA, we can consider the category a wash . . . but I don't think she is. At the end of the day, BAFTA has shaped itself as a precursor of note and they will go for the performance with the broadest appeal to their voting body, and I think Lady Gaga is in the prime position to win out (and it most certainly won't be overlooked that she'll be the only main contender for the Oscar actually present at the ceremony, considering it's the night of the BFCAs). And in split races in the past, historically BAFTA has borne out the eventual Oscar winner. |
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Feb 4, 2022 2:47:38 GMT
Wasn't Olivia Colman the biggest rival to Kidman 5 minutes ago, according to most? Colman missing at BAFTA all but kills her chances, which people seemed very bullish on. She was even top of the GoldDerby odds to win the Oscar . Kidman never needed BAFTA, who I think are becoming increasingly irrelevant as far as the acting races go. Gaga is not in Nomadland. She isn't in the Best Picture frontrunner like McDormand was last year, which allowed her to bulldoze her way to a third Oscar. They seem to consider House Of Gucci a British film for some reason, so that probably helped Gaga. But as I said, I don't think Gaga is winning BAFTA. So it would be pretty incredible if Kidman wins SAG, Joanne Scanlan wins BAFTA and Gaga wins....nothing. But still somehow wins the Oscar. That doesn't happen. Kidman is still in a better position. Gaga still needs to win a major precursor, and she isn't guaranteed anything. Even BAFTA. This will come down to the SAG winner this year, imho. Don't think BAFTA will matter. I don't follow GoldDerby odds. Frankly, so much of that is reactionary groupthink that even if I did pay it any attention, it wouldn't hold any more weight than the average predictor here. And Colman absolutely took a massive hit today, that's not in dispute. You say Kidman doesn't need BAFTA and that it's becoming irrelevant . . . but it's actually not. If you look at Best Actor, Smith and Cumberbatch (the de facto top two of the category) made it and I'd bet my bottom dollar one of them wins it. Best Supporting Actor, Smit-McPhee/Hinds/Kotsur all made it, and those three are again the de facto frontrunners. Supporting Actress has DeBose/Balfe/Negga, who I think are our top three in that category as well. So what does it mean for Best Actress? Gaga clearly was one of the top two, but who was the other? Haim, for a film they clearly went (lady) gaga for? Scanlan, for the hometown advantage? Someone else? Either way, it wasn't Kidman or Colman, which shows that neither of them were able to engender the individual passion to accumulate the top two votes in the category at the outset. And that's not really a good sign for either of them, because as we saw last year, BAFTA did go 4/4 with Oscar's acting winners. If you expect Kidman to win the Oscar, she needs SAG. Even Sandra Bullock took that one home. Bullock didn't get nominated for the BAFTA, so there is some precedent, but Bullockmania in 2009 was very much a thing and Kidman isn't exactly having that sort of a year. But sure, if Scanlan wins BAFTA, we can consider the category a wash . . . but I don't think she is. At the end of the day, BAFTA has shaped itself as a precursor of note and they will go for the performance with the broadest appeal to their voting body, and I think Lady Gaga is in the prime position to win out (and it most certainly won't be overlooked that she'll be the only main contender for the Oscar actually present at the ceremony, considering it's the night of the BFCAs). And in split races in the past, historically BAFTA has borne out the eventual Oscar winner. Do we know Smith was even definitely top 2? We don't, because their new system isn't transparent enough. Someone posited a sound theory that Smith is someone the Jury system is designed to save. A black American frontrunner who has never been nominated in the past by BAFTA, whom they never seemed to especially like despite a long career and many acclaimed performances. The voting body could easily have chosen ignore him again, or at least have him outside their top 2 (I have to wonder if the actual top 2 was DiCaprio and Cumberbatch, because DiCaprio does not feel like a Jury save at all. He feels like a basic, big American white star that they love to vote for en masse). The Jury spares BAFTA the embarrassment of looking like complete racists again by saving Smith (and throwing in Ali for good measure). It's one thing to snub Washington again for the umpteenth time, but he wasn't considered a frontrunner in this race, so they can still almost get away with it. Smith being omitted would have started another trending hashtag about BAFTA being racists. So I can definitely see the incentive for him to be a Jury pick. |
|
|
|
Post by finniussnrub on Feb 4, 2022 2:57:58 GMT
Kidman's pretty safe for the Oscar nomination still, but her win equity just tanked to the point that she needs to win the SAG to stay in it. And unfortunately for her, her biggest competitor for that particular award got in at BAFTA where she didn't. People can complain about how BAFTA's jury system doesn't make it a logical precursor, but what it does show is passion in regards to who makes the top two in their respective categories, and as we saw last year, that translated 100% to what the Oscar winners were in the above-the-line categories. Kidman missing BAFTA is a blow and I don't know how you can argue that it isn't. If Gaga takes the SAG, then I think BAFTA will follow suit and then the Oscar. There's a definite pathway there. If anyone not named Kidman or Gaga take the SAG, then conventional wisdom would say to follow what BAFTA does (as every single fractured race has been decided by BAFTA), which still leans in Gaga's favor. Wasn't Olivia Colman the biggest rival to Kidman 5 minutes ago, according to most? Colman missing at BAFTA all but kills her chances, which people seemed very bullish on. She was even top of the GoldDerby odds to win the Oscar . Kidman never needed BAFTA, who I think are becoming increasingly irrelevant as far as the acting races go. Gaga is not in Nomadland. She isn't in the Best Picture frontrunner like McDormand was last year, which allowed her to bulldoze her way to a third Oscar. They seem to consider House Of Gucci a British film for some reason, so that probably helped Gaga. But as I said, I don't think Gaga is winning BAFTA. So it would be pretty incredible if Kidman wins SAG, Joanne Scanlan wins BAFTA and Gaga wins....nothing. But still somehow wins the Oscar. That doesn't happen. Kidman is still in a better position. Gaga still needs to win a major precursor, and she isn't guaranteed anything. Even BAFTA. This will come down to the SAG winner this year, imho. Don't think BAFTA will matter. There is no reason to believe Scanlan is going to win BAFTA, given she very easily could've been snubbed without the jury. Ali and Mosaku (the BIFA winners last year) both lost despite their nominations. When was the last time BAFTA went with an acting winner without at least some American cache for their film/performance? Not in the last ten years certainly (Bill Nighy I guess in 03, which was as they were still shifting closer to Oscar in terms of Oscar nominees/winners). There's been the occasional nominee, Jamie Bell, Steve Coogan, but they never win. |
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Feb 4, 2022 2:59:31 GMT
I don't follow GoldDerby odds. Frankly, so much of that is reactionary groupthink that even if I did pay it any attention, it wouldn't hold any more weight than the average predictor here. And Colman absolutely took a massive hit today, that's not in dispute. You say Kidman doesn't need BAFTA and that it's becoming irrelevant . . . but it's actually not. If you look at Best Actor, Smith and Cumberbatch (the de facto top two of the category) made it and I'd bet my bottom dollar one of them wins it. Best Supporting Actor, Smit-McPhee/Hinds/Kotsur all made it, and those three are again the de facto frontrunners. Supporting Actress has DeBose/Balfe/Negga, who I think are our top three in that category as well. So what does it mean for Best Actress? Gaga clearly was one of the top two, but who was the other? Haim, for a film they clearly went (lady) gaga for? Scanlan, for the hometown advantage? Someone else? Either way, it wasn't Kidman or Colman, which shows that neither of them were able to engender the individual passion to accumulate the top two votes in the category at the outset. And that's not really a good sign for either of them, because as we saw last year, BAFTA did go 4/4 with Oscar's acting winners. If you expect Kidman to win the Oscar, she needs SAG. Even Sandra Bullock took that one home. Bullock didn't get nominated for the BAFTA, so there is some precedent, but Bullockmania in 2009 was very much a thing and Kidman isn't exactly having that sort of a year. But sure, if Scanlan wins BAFTA, we can consider the category a wash . . . but I don't think she is. At the end of the day, BAFTA has shaped itself as a precursor of note and they will go for the performance with the broadest appeal to their voting body, and I think Lady Gaga is in the prime position to win out (and it most certainly won't be overlooked that she'll be the only main contender for the Oscar actually present at the ceremony, considering it's the night of the BFCAs). And in split races in the past, historically BAFTA has borne out the eventual Oscar winner. Do we know Smith was even definitely top 2? We don't, because their new system isn't transparent enough. Someone posited a sound theory that Smith is someone the Jury system is designed to save. A black American frontrunner who has never been nominated in the past by BAFTA, whom they never seemed to especially like despite a long career and many acclaimed performances. The voting body could easily have chosen ignore him again, or at least have him outside their top 2 (I have to wonder if the actual top 2 was DiCaprio and Cumberbatch, because DiCaprio does not feel like a Jury save at all. He feels like a basic, big American white star that they love to vote for en masse). The Jury spares BAFTA the embarrassment of looking like complete racists again by saving Smith (and throwing in Ali for good measure). It's one thing to snub Washington again for the umpteenth time, but he wasn't considered a frontrunner in this race, so they can still almost get away with it. Smith being omitted would have started another trending hashtag about BAFTA being racists. So I can definitely see the incentive for him to be a Jury pick. And I've talked about how I don't think Smith was jury-saved, but was top two elsewhere, and acknowledged all of your concerns in other posts. It can't be proven, but I feel pretty confident that Smith was already in and DiCaprio was the jury save, especially when coupled with the latter's SAG miss. |
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Feb 4, 2022 3:07:16 GMT
Do we know Smith was even definitely top 2? We don't, because their new system isn't transparent enough. Someone posited a sound theory that Smith is someone the Jury system is designed to save. A black American frontrunner who has never been nominated in the past by BAFTA, whom they never seemed to especially like despite a long career and many acclaimed performances. The voting body could easily have chosen ignore him again, or at least have him outside their top 2 (I have to wonder if the actual top 2 was DiCaprio and Cumberbatch, because DiCaprio does not feel like a Jury save at all. He feels like a basic, big American white star that they love to vote for en masse). The Jury spares BAFTA the embarrassment of looking like complete racists again by saving Smith (and throwing in Ali for good measure). It's one thing to snub Washington again for the umpteenth time, but he wasn't considered a frontrunner in this race, so they can still almost get away with it. Smith being omitted would have started another trending hashtag about BAFTA being racists. So I can definitely see the incentive for him to be a Jury pick. And I've talked about how I don't think Smith was jury-saved, but was top two elsewhere, and acknowledged all of your concerns in other posts. It can't be proven, but I feel pretty confident that Smith was already in and DiCaprio was the jury save, especially when coupled with the latter's SAG miss. Agree to disagree. DiCaprio 's film made Best Picture here. He was in a wildly popular vehicle. They love their white Hollywood superstars and they usually don't love Will Smith. You are right, it can't be proven, so there is zero point arguing it. But if I had to bet my house who was probably a Jury save between Smith and DiCaprio, knowing the history of how that organisation votes, I'd bet on Smith being the Jury save, all day, every day. |
|
|
|
Post by quetee on Feb 4, 2022 3:43:26 GMT
And I've talked about how I don't think Smith was jury-saved, but was top two elsewhere, and acknowledged all of your concerns in other posts. It can't be proven, but I feel pretty confident that Smith was already in and DiCaprio was the jury save, especially when coupled with the latter's SAG miss. Agree to disagree. DiCaprio 's film made Best Picture here. He was in a wildly popular vehicle. They love their white Hollywood superstars and they usually don't love Will Smith. You are right, it can't be proven, so there is zero point arguing it. But if I had to bet my house who was probably a Jury save between Smith and DiCaprio, knowing the history of how that organisation votes, I'd bet on Smith being the Jury save, all day, every day. Leo was definitely top two with this group. |
|
|
|
Post by futuretrunks on Feb 4, 2022 4:19:51 GMT
But how? Isn't that weird as hell?
|
|
rhodoraonline
Badass
Your Generosity Hides Something Dirtier and Meaner
Posts: 1,195 
Likes: 571
|
Post by rhodoraonline on Feb 4, 2022 4:30:41 GMT
I already said it last year, I like this system because it gives visibility to movies and performances that would otherwise be buried by the bigger contenders. And it makes the race much more unpredictable True. I watched some fantastic movies that I would have never have known about otherwise, last year after the Bafta nominations came out! Looking to repeat this year  Good on Bafta. Still, sorry for Garfield. Hoping it doesn't hurt his chances going forward. |
|
|
|
Post by stabcaesar on Feb 4, 2022 8:44:06 GMT
So the acting nominees who scored all key nominations are Cumberbatch, Smith, Gaga, Kotsur, Smit-McPhee, Balfe, and Debose.
|
|
