2015 Awards Season Discussion

[MrsRafaelBarba]

Really thought Julianne Moore had a shot at an Oscar, for A Single Man.

If she's scores a Nom on Thursday, hope she wins.

[SallyAlbright]

I agree on the Reese comeback factor, plus she has been great as a producer for female roles as well. She was fantastic in Wild, the best I have ever seen her and I've been a fan for a long time. Just a really honest performance that felt very much like a real woman. I would also love to see Rosamund win, but I am just happy that she's getting attention and okay with Moore taking it.

 

Mostly though, I'm nervous about the Best Actor race. I want to see Eddie Redmayne win it sooo badly but am afraid Keaton will get the "overdue" win. Don't get me wrong, I think Keaton is great and gave a solid performance, but I think Birdman is a bit overrated and that his performance was nowhere near as demanding/difficult as Redmayne's. What do you guys think? Also thought BC was fantastic but it seems like the momentum is with Keaton/Redmayne now.

[methodwriter85]

I'm generally okay with Moore taking it, because I've wanted her to win one ever since Far From Heaven. I just wish Rosamund had a shot. Oh, well.

 

At least it's not like Natalie Portman having the Oscar that Jennifer Lawerence should have had for Winter's Bone.

[KatWay]

And Jennifer having the Oscar that should have been Emmanuelle Riva's for Amour in turn.

 

That's why I hate the whole "make-up" "overdue" "reward an established actor/actress" etc. narratives, this way you end up disappointed by who won every year.

 

Julianne Moore is amazing and does great work in Still Alice, though the movie is pretty mediocre IMO. But Rosamund Pike really had the more interesting role, and it's a pretty unique role as far as women go, in a flawed but fascinating movie. I would wish she at least had more buzz, even though everyone knows they'll award Julianne anyways.

[AshleyN]

I want to see Eddie Redmayne win it sooo badly but am afraid Keaton will get the "overdue" win.

Eh, there are all sorts of things that can help someone to a win, and I think that whatever advantage Keaton has from his vet status (and I would argue his narrative is more "comeback" than "overdue"), Redmayne makes up for in sheer Oscarbait. Like, does awards bait get any baitier than Stephen Hawking? A famous real-life person AND inspirational figure facing adversity AND a disability AND a physical transformation? It's pretty much everything the Academy tends to love wrapped up in one role.

 

I mean, I can't say who I think deserves to win, because I haven't seen either film (I really wanted to see Birdman, but it didn't come to my city), but I think sometimes there's a tendency to dismiss winners people don't like by saying they won because of outside factors, whereas winners we did like must have won because they were just that good and deserving. In reality, I think it's almost always a mixture of the two.

[slowpoked]

and I would argue his narrative is more "comeback" than "overdue"), 

 

True. He's not like DiCaprio or Amy Adams or Julianne Moore who's consistently nominated but never won. But Hollywood does love a comeback story - just look at all the fawning on Matthew last year as if he's the second coming of George Clooney.

 

I rewatched Gone Girl again and find Carrie and Kim's acting more dynamic the second time around. It's sad they're not getting more recognition for the Supporting Actress awards.

 

And I would give the Oscar to Rosamund just on the monologue on the reveal of the twist (Cool Girl?). God, her voiceover alone is haunting and scares the crap out of me. The last time I remember having chills from a female lead performance was from Glenn Close in Fatal Attraction.

[methodwriter85]

I hate to say this, but if Eddie Redmayne was still in his 20's like Jesse Eisenberg was for the Social Network, he'd have no chance against Michael Keaton. Absolutely none. Adrien Brody is literally the only guy to win the Best Actor Oscar under the age of 30. Thank god Eddie is 33.

 

That, more than anything, angers me about the Oscars. There is no reason that Timothy Hutton should have submitted himself as a "supporting" actor but for the fact that he was 20 and young guys don't usually stand a chance at Best Actor. It again makes me think about the Heath Ledger thing- he should've won for Brokeback Mountain but didn't because the Academy is generally loathe to give the award to anybody under age 30, on the idea that they'll have plenty of more opportunities as opposed to the older guys. Except Heath Ledger didn't.

Edited January 13, 2015 by methodwriter85

[ruby24]

Only for men though. Women stand their best chance of winning an Oscar in their 20's and 30's, after that it gets much tougher. Great, isn't it? Hollywood likes women when they're young and hot, men when they're older and "accomplished." Ugh. Julianne Moore will be an exception this year, but very few women in their 50's have won Best Actress if you look back at all the winners.

[Dejana]

Here's a list of the youngest Best Actor nominees (age listed is as of date nomination was announced):

 

1. 9 years, 20 days  Jackie Cooper  Skippy  1930/31 
2. 19 years, 142 days  Mickey Rooney  Babes in Arms  1939  
3. 23 years, 137 days  Mickey Rooney  The Human Comedy  1943 
4. 24 years, 3 days  John Travolta  Saturday Night Fever  1977 
5. 25 years, 10 days  James Dean  East of Eden  1955 
6. 26 years, 10 days  James Dean  Giant  1956 (both posthumous nods for Dean)
7. 26 years, 72 days  Ryan Gosling  Half Nelson  2006  
8. 26 years, 279 days  Orson Welles  Citizen Kane  1941 
9. 26 years, 302 days  Heath Ledger  Brokeback Mountain  2005 
10. 27 years, 112 days  Jesse Eisenberg  The Social Network  2010

 

The Jackie Cooper nomination happened before there were even supporting categories (or the now-retired Juvenile Oscar). There seems to be a flawed sense of thinking at play, that the "great roles" only happen for actors as 30 approaches and the young stars will have time to get their awards later. Of course, time flies, and yesterday's young leading man is tomorrow's Honorary Winner.

 

Cate Blanchett and Matthew McConaughey were the same age when they won Best Actor and Best Actress last year (44). You probably aren't going to get a Best Actor winner as young as JLaw any time soon, but Cate, Meryl, Helen Mirren and Sandra Bullock have all won Best Actress at 40+ in the past ten years, so perhaps trends are changing.

Edited January 13, 2015 by Dejana

[slowpoked]

You probably aren't going to get a Best Actor winner as young as JLaw any time soon, but Cate, Meryl, Helen Mirren and Sandra Bullock have all won Best Actress at 40+ in the past ten years, so perhaps trends are changing.

 

That's true. I think JLaw is the exception more than the rule. If you look at the winners the past 10 years, even the "younger" ones are already in the 30s when they won the Oscar (Natalie, Reese, etc.). And by Hollywood standards, that is old. This year's frontrunner is a 54-year old. If the GG nominees for the Best Actress Drama hold up, the youngest nominee will be a 31-year old. I think that's an improvement Hollywood-wise.

 

Maybe this is what Crowe is harping about regarding older women complaining about lack of roles. He's still an ass though.

[SallyAlbright]

Eh, there are all sorts of things that can help someone to a win, and I think that whatever advantage Keaton has from his vet status (and I would argue his narrative is more "comeback" than "overdue"), Redmayne makes up for in sheer Oscarbait. Like, does awards bait get any baitier than Stephen Hawking? A famous real-life person AND inspirational figure facing adversity AND a disability AND a physical transformation? It's pretty much everything the Academy tends to love wrapped up in one role.

 

I mean, I can't say who I think deserves to win, because I haven't seen either film (I really wanted to see Birdman, but it didn't come to my city), but I think sometimes there's a tendency to dismiss winners people don't like by saying they won because of outside factors, whereas winners we did like must have won because they were just that good and deserving. In reality, I think it's almost always a mixture of the two.

 Yeah, I didn't mean that Keaton would be an undeserving winner, I think he's a great actor. I just didn't take to Birdman the way most critics did. I liked it, thought the technical aspects of it were amazing and thought the cast was all around solid, but I wasn't completely wowed. 

[AshleyN]

DGA Nominees:

Wes Anderson - The Grand Budapest Hotel

Clint Eastwood - American Sniper

Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu - Birdman

Richard Linklater - Boyhood

Morten Tyldum - The Imitation Game

[scarynikki12]

While I know Ava could still get a nod for Selma, I think this means that Linklater is all but confirmed to win the Oscar. 

[AshleyN]

While I know Ava could still get a nod for Selma, I think this means that Linklater is all but confirmed to win the Oscar. 

Agreed. I also think Anderson and Inarritu are all but guaranteed nominations, while the last two spots are up for grabs.

[Rick Kitchen]

Eastwood?  Really?  smh

[MrsRafaelBarba]

Brody's win is one of the true surprise moments at at The Oscars.

He was clearly stunned and his fellow nominees were genuinely happy for him.

Notably Jack Nicholson and Nicolas Cage.

Other ones include Juliet Binoche, Marisa Tomei and Anna Pacquin.

Most annoying, Roberto Benigni for Lead Actor is Life is Beautiful.

[Rick Kitchen]

Ugh, I hate Life is Beautiful.

[Shannon L.]

 

I just didn't take to Birdman the way most critics did. I liked it, thought the technical aspects of it were amazing and thought the cast was all around solid, but I wasn't completely wowed.

Exactly how my husband, the couple we went with and I felt about the movie. 

 

I'm working my way through nominated movies.  I've seen Birdman, Selma, The Theory of Everything, The Imitation Game.....I have Grand Budapest Hotel on my dvr and will rent Boyhood soon, as well as try to get to whatever else I need to as soon as I can.  For those of you who've seen most of them, including Boyhood--is Boyhood really better than the others or is it the "filmed over 13 years" gimmick that is giving it the edge?  Don't get me wrong, I think it was a great concept and a great risk, but I still have to wonder.....

Edited January 14, 2015 by Shannon L.

[ruby24]

Imo, it's definitely the technical "accomplishment" of the film that's giving it the edge. With critics especially. It's interesting to watch as everyone ages, but there is undoubtedly some bad acting (from the kids) and flat out bad dialogue in many scenes that bugged me. What's funny is that many reviews have admitted to that but the overall accomplishment of the movie is enough to just forgive everything else about it. For me it wasn't.

 

I liked the movie, but I don't think it's a great movie, and to be honest I like some of Richard Linklator's other movies much more (the Before trilogy and Dazed and Confused are my favorites). But I'm resigned to it winning everything, because I don't see what else they will rally around in its place.

[methodwriter85]

Let's be honest- 2014 was a weak year in general.

 

Man, I miss 2012- THAT was such a great year. Argo, Lincoln, Silver Linings Playbook, etc etc.

[yourstruly]

 

Imo, it's definitely the technical "accomplishment" of the film that's giving it the edge. With critics especially. It's interesting to watch as everyone ages, but there is undoubtedly some bad acting (from the kids) and flat out bad dialogue in many scenes that bugged me. What's funny is that many reviews have admitted to that but the overall accomplishment of the movie is enough to just forgive everything else about it. For me it wasn't.

Completely (and respectfully) disagree. I think what is pretty remarkable about it is that the gimmick draws you in, and then I think it's quickly forgotten. I stopped thinking about it right away. It's just a very good movie and captures a regular life so well, that I had to wrap my mind around the fact that it was not improvised, that it was a script.

 

I agree that this is a comparatively weak year for movies, but I think Boyhood would be getting traction even if it had more competition.

 

You can totally dismiss my comments because I'm from Texas and recognized a lot of the locations, so it had something extra for me. I do like that Linklater and Wes Anderson are both from Houston.

[absnow54]

I'm not sure I'd say Boyhood was the best picture of the year, it definitely has its weaknesses, but I think Linklater deserves all the directing accolades he's getting. He managed to keep the look and feel of the movie very consistent to the point that you forget it was shot over 12 years. 

 

I'm kind of bummed that David Fincher seems to be losing momentum for Gone Girl. It was always a long shot for him to win, but now I'd be surprised if he got nominated.

[vb68]

 

Eastwood?  Really?  smh

 

From the DGA, I thought that was practically a given.  He's basically their Streep.

 

Wasn't Richard Dreyfuss right around  29/30 when won for The Goodbye Girl?    I think he was 29, but I certainly wouldn't bet the house.

[Princess Sparkle]

I just checked since you made me think about it; he was 30 when he won the award.  Adrien Brody was just shy of 30 when the ceremony actually happened.  And to methodwriter's point above, I actually had the same thought about Eddie Redmayne - unless it's a relatively weak year with a really strong performance by a younger guy, the lead actor category tends to skew on the older side.

[methodwriter85]

     It's so true though. Eddie Redmayne would have zero chance if he was just a couple of years younger. He's on the "right" side of 30 now, though, but he's still facing off against a big comeback story.

 

     It's absolutely frustrating when I think of guys like Heath Ledger or River Phoenix who will get the "we will nominate you as the reward but not actually give it to you because you're too young" nominations, and then they don't really get a chance to get the older, mature roles that do tend to win.

[vb68]

 

It's absolutely frustrating when I think of guys like Heath Ledger or River Phoenix who will get the "we will nominate you as the reward but not actually give it to you because you're too young" nominations,

 

This instantly made me think of DiCaprio in Gilbert Grape.   I still can't believe Tommy Lee Jones won for The Fugitive.  That's such a clear case of age basis in my mind.

[Dejana]

David Poland (Movie City News and the wonderful DP/30 series) on the cost of screeners:

 

150,000 units.

 

$2.4 million.

 

For any organization that chooses to send out piracy-protected screeners to all the members of all the groups that now expect/demand screeners, this is the bill. For one movie. And this doesn’t include another number of hundreds of screeners that might be sent to critics’ groups, from LAFCA to NYFCC to any of the regional groups.

 

When I last wrote about screeners, in 2007, the number was about 15,000 units and about $240,000 a film.

 

What happened in 7 years?

 

Everyone got on the gravy train. And once you ask for something for your group, not getting it becomes emotionally criminalized.

 

The post has more about the timing issues with the screeners for Selma—basically, the movie itself wasn't finished until Thanksgiving week, the screeners didn't start being made until December 1, let alone being delivered. Academy members got screeners, but pretty much none of the other guilds (PGA, DGA, SAG).

Edited January 15, 2015 by Dejana

[ruby24]

Yet, the Costume Guild nominated it, so how'd they see it? And Bafta did get screeners, but they shut it out completely. On the one hand, the screener issue makes sense, but on the other hand I keep wondering if it's an excuse. I guess we'll know tomorrow, but I'm kind of thinking that even with the screeners, it may only get 3-4 nominations at most.

[Craphole Island]

Speaking of comebacks, I was kind of hoping Rene Russo would get some awards love for "Nightcrawler". I knew she probably wouldn't, but still. I thought she was great.

[thuganomics85]

Well, here are our nominees.

 

Initial thoughts: biggest "shocker" is Selma only barely getting a Best Picture nod.  No Director or even Actor.  Something must have gone down.  Meanwhile, it seems American Sniper managed to sneak in there with some big nods, although it not getting Best Director is noticeable.  On the other hand, Foxcatcher did better then I thought it would, but actually didn't get a Best Picture nod.  Go figure.

 

Most nods went to both Birdman and The Grand Budapest Hotel, with 9 a piece.

 

Also, Oscar voters still have an obsession with Meryl Streep, but aren't down with Legos.

Edited January 15, 2015 by thuganomics85

[braziliangirl]

I love Ethan Hawke (and loved Boyhood) but I felt his nomination for the Oscar kinda of "undeserved". Am I the only one?

 

(But Patricia is amazing and I'm rooting for her.)

 

I haven't seen Into the Woods but saw some reviews. I gotta say:  I'm sort of tired with Meryl getting nominated almost every year.

[KatWay]

Well, they really loved American Sniper.

Whitest Oscar race in a while, no? Selma was almost completely shut out, as was Gone Girl.

[Shannon L.]

How does a film get nominated for Best Picture with no other nominations and, on the flip side of that, how does a film get nominated for Best Original Screenplay, Best Actor, Best Supporting Actor and Best Director and not get nominated for Best Picture? They're allowed up to 10 nominations and Foxcatcher/Gone Girl couldn't have slipped in there?  My son really wants to see American Sniper and I really want to see as many films as possible, so it looks like I'll be seeing that one soon. 

 

No good surprises this year, just a couple of disappointing ones. Most of them, though, were no surprise at all.

[AshleyN]

On the other hand, Foxcatcher did better then I thought it would, but actually didn't get a Best Picture nod.  Go figure.

I haven't seen Foxcatcher, but it's kind of bizarre to me that it could get nominated for writing, directing, and two actors (including in the extremely competetive Lead Actor category), but not picture. Has anything like this happened since they expanded the Best Picture lineup?

 

Also, it seems like every year there's at least one person to benefit from the Academy's (unique) ranked ballot nominations, and this year it looks like that's Marion Cotillard, nominated for a French language movie that couldn't even crack the foreign language lineup. It seems like the people who saw the movie really loved her performance.

 

I guess Jake Gyllenhaal wins this year's "nominated for everything leading up to the Oscars, only to miss the big one" award. What's the bigger snub: him, The Lego Movie, or Gone Girl for screenplay?

 

Finally, when was the last time the acting lineup was all white? There are also zero women nominated for either writing or directing (the latter isn't exactly out of the ordinary, but unlike most years Duvernay was considered a major contender there, while Gillian Flynn was supposed to be one of the favourites for Adapted Screenplay). Given the ever increasing talk about Hollywood's diversity problems, I can't imagine either of these things will go over well.

Edited January 15, 2015 by AshleyN

[jcin617]

That The Lego Movie missed an animation nomination is really mind boggling.

[MrsRafaelBarba]

I like Meryl Streep, but seriously?

 

 

Eveytime this happens, it shuts out a more deserving actress.

 

Bout time for her to take a page from Night Court's John Laroqutte's book.

 

I know the rules are different for The Oscars.

Could she do what he did, when dude kept on winning Priemtime Emmys?

[methodwriter85]

I am so angry that Gone Girl got almost completely shut out.

[JBC344]

Have to say I'm somewhat disappointed in the overall nominations.  Robert Duvall, Emma Stone, and Meryl Streep really? 

[Oreo2234]

 

Also, it seems like every year there's at least one person to benefit from the Academy's (unique) ranked ballot nominations, and this year it looks like that's Marion Cotillard, nominated for a French language movie that couldn't even crack the foreign language lineup. It seems like the people who saw the movie really loved her performance.

The people who saw the movie have been raving about her performance. She's also won a lot of critics awards. 

[Schweedie]

The Grand Budapest Hotel is nominated in every major category it qualifies for, except for... Ralph Fiennes in Lead Actor, as the character who pretty much carries the entire movie. That makes no sense whatsoever.

 

I'm pulling for Julianne Moore, JK Simmons and Whiplash in general. A really weak year for me.

[BatmanBeatles]

Everything Is Awesome gets nominated for Best song, but Lego Movie is snubbed? I don't get it.

[caracas1914]

Selma's snub is ironic on soo many levels.

[slowpoked]

I am so angry that Gone Girl got almost completely shut out.

Gah, me too! Is it because it's a huge blockbuster?! Nothing for Gillian Flynn and Trent Reznor? I kinda felt David was always a long shot, but he still did great work directing a complicated script. Probably didn't campaign hard enough like Bradley Cooper and the rest of American Sniper. If Rosamund wasn't considered a shoo-in she'd have been gone too.

Speaking of that movie, ugh. I just can't. Just all the controversy against the real-life character it was based on. If there's one thing I gotta give to that movie, it's that they did some serious Oscar campaigning. Practically no recognitions before it, not even SAGs for Cooper, then boom! Six nominations total! This is not a Weinstein movie, is it?!

No longer surprised about Meryl because its Meryl. But I like the surprise nomination of Laura Dern in Wild there.

Kinda feel bad for Aniston. I did feel like she could go either way, she had that precarious fifth slot, but with the SAG nomination I thought maybe she had it in the bag. I guess she's not yet "credible" enough for Oscars glory with the rest of the voters.

Edited January 15, 2015 by slowpoked

[BrittaBot]

I've barely seen any of these movies (Birdman, GBH) is about it, but these nominations make no sense to me. Everything I've been hearing is that Foxcatcher and American Sniper weren't even that good. What do I know though?  I thought Birdman sucked. I like Emma Stone, but didn't think her acting was anything special.

 

Also, Eddie Redmayne is 33, who knew?

 

(The Timothy Hutton thing - just watched Ordinary People for the first time and my husband read on his phone that he won for Best SUPPORTING Actor.)….wut? He's in 95% of the movie.

[hendersonrocks]

I know there are always surprises, but I admit to being stunned at the surge for Foxcatcher & American Sniper and the near-complete cold shoulder to Selma and that not a single actor of color was nominated. There's a lot of outrage on Twitter and online generally, and I'd say rightfully so--from Josh Malina ("Selma was an excellent movie that acted and directed itself beautifully.") to noting the Academy's composition (average age 63, members for life, over 90% white, over 75% male). I've already seen many remarks--from folks who are in a position to do it--about protesting the ceremony.

 

It's going to be interesting to see if the energy sustains or fizzles out between now and the awards.

[Princess Sparkle]

If you had told me 5 years years ago that Bradley Cooper would be a 3-time Academy Award nominee, and that it would happen by him being nominated three years in a row (two of those for lead actor) I would've laughed in your face.  I can't decide if he's just become an Oscar darling, or if the studio was just a master of campaigning this year, because to miss out being nominated on every other major award show but land an Oscar nomination is a shock to me.   

 

One nomination I am slightly confused about, so I'm hoping someone can help me out here: Did John Legend and Common purposely decide to submit the song with their real names instead of stage names, or did the Academy decide that for them?  At first I thought maybe the Academy required it, but I remember Eminem being announced as the winner, and they used Adele's stage name when she won.  I'm just curious if it was strategic on the two artists' part (don't know what that strategy would be necessarily) or if it was something else.

Edited January 15, 2015 by Princess Sparkle

[KatWay]

From what I heard the American Sniper crew campaigned like crazy. But Cooper does seem to be a bit of an Oscar darling, which...okay. He was good in Silver Linings Playbook, but I haven't seen much range from him beyond that, ever.

[caracas1914]

Kinda feel bad for Aniston.

 

I knew it was a long shot, but I would have been fine with a nomination for Amy Adam in "Big Eyes".

 

Marion Cotillard is so consistently good and was overlooked for several performances the last couple of years that I honestly can't complain about her nom.

 

Julianne Moore seems to have all the ducks in line for a win.  The right "Type" of role and the "it's time to honor her for her body of work" big M.

One last lament:

 

Totally overlooked because of the genre, but Richard Armitage for The Hobbit: Battle of Five armies.   Yes, it's extremely  rare to get nom for that type of role but he was amazing.

Edited January 15, 2015 by caracas1914

[absnow54]

From what I heard the American Sniper crew campaigned like crazy. But Cooper does seem to be a bit of an Oscar darling, which...okay. He was good in Silver Linings Playbook, but I haven't seen much range from him beyond that, ever.

He's very good at playing a manic asshole, and that's pretty much all I've seen from him. I haven't seen him in American Sniper, but I thought he was great in SLP (and was undeservedly overshadowed by Jennifer Lawrence that award season -- she's Oscar worthy, no doubt, but not for that role) and it was unfortunate he had to go up against the Daniel Day Lewis juggernaut that year. It does seem crazy that he's been nominated 3 years in a row.

[AshleyN]

One nomination I am slightly confused about, so I'm hoping someone can help me out here: Did John Legend and Common purposely decide to submit the song with their real names instead of stage names, or did the Academy decide that for them?  At first I thought maybe the Academy required it, but I remember Eminem being announced as the winner, and they used Adele's stage name when she won.  I'm just curious if it was strategic on the two artists' part (don't know what that strategy would be necessarily) or if it was something else.

I'm pretty sure Bono and The Edge were nominated under their real names last year, so I just assumed that was an Academy thing. But I wasn't aware of the Eminem and Adele thing, so I dunno.