2015 Awards Season Discussion

[JBC344]

Joaquin Phoenix is another one who has gone on the record expressing similar sentiments while promoting The Master.  It didn't seem to hurt him when he was nominated for that movie, but there was no way he was going to beat Daniel Day-Lewis for playing Abraham Lincoln. 

 

I'll add Jared Leto to the list of actors who went into Melissa Leo and Anne Hathaway territory in campaigning for an Oscar. Leto didn't seem like the type prior to last year to really care what his peers thought of him.  He seemed more interested in his music career than acting.  He seemed more interested in following the beat of his own drum than doing what a team of publicists told him to do.  He doesn't work in film very frequently.  It's telling when your best known role is for a TV show that aired for 13 episodes almost 20 years ago. 

Other than doing the usual press for a movie, what "unusual" things did Jared do to campaign for his Oscar.  I think most people would know Jared from Requiem for a Dream, Panic Room, and Alexander than those of us among the "cult following" of My So Called Life. 

[Trini]

How to Train Your Dragon 2 won best feature at the Annie Awards, making it a favorite to win at the Oscars.

[AshleyN]

Innaritu/Birdman win the DGA, to go along with PGA and SAG.

 

Looks like Boyhood is indeed getting Social Network'd. BAFTA is probably it's last hope at this point.

[thuganomics85]

Damn, so much for my Linklater prediction then.  Looks like Birdman is building momentum at the right time.  I mean, sure there could always be an upset, but the DGA winners tend to win the Oscars.

Edited February 8, 2015 by thuganomics85

[ruby24]

Yeah, I really thought Linklater would win here. But with PGA, SAG and DGA, there's no reason to think Birdman won't win Best Picture now. It looks pretty unbeatable.

 

I am surprised, because I thought for sure Linklater would at least take Director. I guess he could still have a chance, but will they split Picture and Director three years in a row? Unlikely. The last time that happened was in the 1930's. The Oscar race looks to be over.

 

I'm wondering what's going to happen in Best Actor though- if they love Birdman that much, it's hard to see how they don't pick Michael Keaton too.

[truthaboutluv]

With Birdman's DGA win, this is starting to remind me of the race between The Social Network and The King's Speech some years ago. When the race started, The Social Network seemed the lock for Best Picture and Best Director, though Eisenberg was never the favorite for Best Actor. But the closer it got to Oscar night, momentum just swung in a big way in The King's Speech favor. As someone who always likes some element of surprise Oscar night, I like that things don't seem so set in stone. I guess right now it seems impossible Birdman doesn't win but you never know. 

 

I think this may easily be a case of Viola Davis/Meryl Streep a couple of years back. Everyone thought Viola was a slam dunk winner after winning the SAG, but Streep came back with a BAFTA and ultimately won the big prize.

 

 

I will be shocked if Eddie loses the BAFTA to Michael Keaton. I don't want to make it sound like "oh he's British so they'll obviously vote for him" but let's be honest, with the race so close between them, I do think that might give him a slight edge. Not to mention he's playing a famous, well regarded British scholar. 

 

But is that really true?  A lot of actors don't get the opportunity to get nominated for Oscars multiple times let alone win.  With the way the movie industry works today there is no guarantee that Eddie will be nominated again. Now personally I think he may just because he is a good actor but there is no guarantee.  There are so many factors that go into getting an opportunity to be nominated that I wouldn't take it for granted that it will just happen again.

 

 

Please say that to James Dean, River Phoenix, and Heath Ledger. Oh, wait.

 

 

Exactly to both comments. And we don't even have to look at those young actors who tragically passed away too soon - look at the ones still alive who got multiple chances after but circumstances, someone else just having the moment of their career, etc. made them lose and so they've still never won. 

 

Think Leonardo Dicaprio. I'm sure there probably was an attitude when he was first nominated for What's Eating Gilbert Grape? that he was 19, a kid, it was his first big role, he'd have plenty of other chances. Well he's now 40 and sure he's had multiple other nominations but there's always been someone just a little better or with a better story/campaign and so he's still without an Oscar. And yeah sorry but I am slightly bitter over the fact that Jamie Foxx who I think is an average actor at best has an Oscar and Leo who I personally believe is if not the best but one of the best actors of his generation, doesn't. 

 

And the thing about the "young, they will have other chances" mentality is also why Oscars eventually started doing what many consider the "make-up Oscar", where they give someone who should have won years before for much better roles/performances a win, for an at best average performance to make up for the other losses. Think Denzel Washington for Training Day (asshole or not, Russell Crowe deserved that win), Al Pacino for Scent of A Woman (because he inexplicably did not win for The Godfather and incidentally his win came at the expense of Denzel for a much better performance in Malcom X or hell even Robert Downey Jr. for Chaplin) and more. 

 

And also because his role reminded me too much of two other performances with almost his exact narrative the year they both lost- Bill Murray in Lost in Translation and Mickey Rourke in The Wrestler.

 

 

Honestly, as much as I like Keaton and it's nice to see him having this comeback, I saw Birdman and I honestly think he was completely outshone for the first half of the film by Edward Norton. The best thing that happened to him is that Norton's character sort of vanishes or is severely diminished in the second half of the film. It's a pity that Whiplash was this year because JK Simmons was brilliant in that and deserves his accolades but remove him and I really think Norton would have had an excellent chance of winning this year. And I absolutely agree about it being very similar in many ways to Bill Murray's performance in Lost In Translation. 

 

Melissa Leo was such a frontruuner that year that prognosticators found her "Consider" ads, and "jokingly" badmouthing Hailee Steinfeld, completely inexplicable, and it was only then that came rumblings of a possible upset.

 

 

This is exactly how I remembered it. The Supporting Actress category that year seemed a lock fairly early on and didn't seem like anyone had a legitimate chance so that's what made her intense campaigning seem just odd and slightly distasteful to some. It was like she was clearly the front-runner and barring some shocking turn of events had the win locked down and yet she was in voters' faces relentlessly. 

 

Jennifer Lawrence fits that description, and nearly pulled it off last year but in the end even she couldn't quite make it all the way.

 

 

Unpopular opinion perhaps but in my opinion, the only reason she didn't pull it off was because she didn't campaign and she didn't because backlash was starting against her due to some in the industry and honestly, largely the public, started to resent her being so successful, so fast and so young. Rumblings of her not even being that good started right around the Golden Globe win and then some turned the conversation into a discussion on race in Hollywood when the Oscar race seemed clear between her and Lupita Nyong'o, which was certainly not helped by David O'Russell's moronic and out of touch comment. 

 

So she and her people wisely realized, you know what, she already has a win, for Best Actress no less, just walk away from this one. Lawrence was virtually invisible last award season. She had a good excuse with doing post-production work on MockingJay but let's be honest, everyone knew that was just an excuse. She could have gotten out of that for some of these events. She just didn't want to go. And still, going into Oscar night, many thought the Best Supporting Actress was almost too close to call, especially with her surprising upset at the BAFTA's that many thought Lupita had locked down. I honestly think had Jennifer campaigned and public tide not shifted against her slightly, she would have won.

 

And speaking of that race, I think it's interesting the judgements on Eddie Redmayne for his hard campaigning and how people practically loathed Anne Hathaway by Oscar night some years ago when from all I read and observed last year, no one campaigned harder than Lupita Nyong'o. She was everywhere, at the every single event, schmoozing with everyone to the point that one Oscar expert basically put the race between her and Jennifer down to people just liking Lupita so much and were so charmed by her because she was everywhere and spoke to everyone. Some observers noted how tirelessly she was campaigning, how some voters actually got annoyed at Jennifer for not campaigning and took her not showing up at some of these events as thinking she was above it all, etc. And yet I don't remember many being turned off or annoyed by Lupita. 

 

Dreamgirls was pretty horrendous all-around and I wouldn't have given anyone from that movie an award.

 

 

This. I like Eddie just fine but I saw that movie twice and I couldn't figure out what was so amazing about his performance. Jennifer Hudson was slightly better but really, I just thought her character was loud for most of the movie more than anything else. And Beyonce's fans upset she didn't get any award recognition is frankly just laughable.

Edited February 8, 2015 by truthaboutluv

[KatWay]

I think with Lupita there was also the recognition that she would likely never get the roles and chances that Jennifer Lawrence will get in Hollywood. So this Oscar could push her at least somewhat and perhaps could lead to some roles for her. Otherwise? This meant a whole lot more for Lupita than it meant for Jennifer, who is tall, blonde, beautiful and and over five years younger.

 

I mean, I'll be very happy if I'm wrong but Lupita might never even be nominated again. Meanwhile JLaw is basically everyone's first choice for every twentysomething to thirtysomething role in an Oscar bait flick. And she already has an Oscar, even if she got the one that Emmanuelle Riva should have gotten. Winter's Bone was her best role. And of course Hunger Games, but she'll never be nominated for that.

[truthaboutluv]

For the record, I'm not disagreeing about Lupita and I wouldn't say her win was undeserved but I just think of her when people slag off other actors for "campaigning too hard" because as I said, from everything I read and noted last year, no one campaigned quite as hard as her and yes, she probably needed to. Not just because she's an African American who truly may never get a role that Oscar perfect again but because it was a very close race much like Eddie Redmayne and Michael Keaton is for Best Actor.

 

I guess for me, I was more irritated by someone like Melissa Leo because again, her win was never in doubt. She had that Best Supporting Actress on lock. Still, I don't entirely begrudge anyone wanting to win and being honest about wanting to win. Of course I've always found many of the actors who act like they're above everything and just there for their art man, kind of pretentious. 

Edited February 8, 2015 by truthaboutluv

[Dejana]

And speaking of that race, I think it's interesting the judgements on Eddie Redmayne for his hard campaigning and how people practically loathed Anne Hathaway by Oscar night some years ago when from all I read and observed last year, no one campaigned harder than Lupita Nyong'o. She was everywhere, at the every single event, schmoozing with everyone to the point that one Oscar expert basically put the race between her and Jennifer down to people just liking Lupita so much and were so charmed by her because she was everywhere and spoke to everyone. Some observers noted how tirelessly she was campaigning, how some voters actually got annoyed at Jennifer for not campaigning and took her not showing up at some of these events as thinking she was above it all, etc. And yet I don't remember many being turned off or annoyed by Lupita.

 

I'm kind of glad it's a man being criticized for shamelessly wanting to win this time around. I never did think the "Hathahate" was solely down to sexism or society not being able to handle a woman who dared not to be plucky and self-deprecating, like some tried to argue that year. Many men and women through the years have wanted to win awards pretty badly and not all of them (from either sex) are bashed for it; it's all in how well they can mask the relentlessness.

 

Boyhood is another critical darling that's admired more than loved and doesn't have the importance angle to make people feel obligated to vote for it, anyway. The only twist this year seems to be that the alternative can't really play the importance card, either (in the way that The King's Speech was set against the backdrop of World War II or Crash was about racism), but Birdman is about "the industry" and they've just gone for that this decade, with a silent, black and white movie, no less. Argo had the best of both worlds, managing to give Hollywood big role (at least onscreen) in saving Americans from the Iranian hostage crisis. So, I guess if you want a surefire Best Picture winner, marry showbiz and history/news somehow.

Edited February 8, 2015 by Dejana

[JBC344]

Personally I think Lupita deserved the Oscar over Jennifer who I also thought was great.  I also think that Lupita benefitted from the "Cinderella" narrative of a newcomer who is discovered in an explosive performance and is so humble and sincere and just genuine.  Interestingly enough it sounds like Jennifer Lawrence's narrative when she came out.  It happened a little with Winter's Bone and really took off with SLP.

 

As much as I love Ann and think that she gets a bad rap, I personally was annoyed with her during the awards season.  For me it wasn't about her campaigning it was I and I think many others felt a certain level of insincerity or "fakeness" with her.  The main complaint I heard about her was the "Taylor Swift effect" where for someone her age and her experience in Hollywood she was coming off as some new actor who has never been to the party.  I love Ann but her acceptance speeches did not come off honest or sincere to me, I felt like she was playing the role of "surprised actress winning an award".  Quite honestly I think Ann has even acknowledged that sometimes people don't know how to take her, which sometimes can get in the way.

[AshleyN]

With Birdman's DGA win, this is starting to remind me of the race between The Social Network and The King's Speech some years ago. When the race started, The Social Network seemed the lock for Best Picture and Best Director, though Eisenberg was never the favorite for Best Actor. But the closer it got to Oscar night, momentum just swung in a big way in The King's Speech favor.

Honestly, isn't this playing out with almost the exact same timeline as that race? The Social Network/Boyhood sweep the critics awards, the Golden Globe, and the Critics Choice, establishing itself as the heavy favourite. Then the industry awards start coming and everything changes.

 

The only thing that seems different is the nature of the challenger: The King's Speech was a more traditional "Oscary" movie than The Social Network*, whereas I haven't seen Birdman yet (it didn't come to my town), but everything I've read about it makes it seem kind of...weird for a Best Picture winner. Even The Artist had that kind of throwback/nostalgia thing going for it.

 

*Which is why I thought Selma or even The Imitation Game could play that role this year - another historical biopic about a Great Man doing Important things.

 

One other thing that's interesting is that after Alfonso Cuaron became (I believe) the first ever Latin American director to win the Oscar last year, there's now a pretty good chance that they could go back to back.

Edited February 8, 2015 by AshleyN

[SallyAlbright]

Eddie Redmayne just won the BAFTA for Best Actor:

 

LEADING ACTOR
Eddie Redmayne The Theory of Everything - WINNER
Benedict Cumberbatch The Imitation Game
Jake Gyllenhaal Nightcrawler
Michael Keaton Birdman
Ralph Fiennes The Grand Budapest Hotel

[absnow54]

I think Eddie Redmayne has really pulled ahead in the Best Actor race. The Best Picture race is getting interesting though, since Boyhood took both Picture and Director. I think Birdman has an edge though, since it's been winning all the Guild awards.

[truthaboutluv]

Called it. Certainly is looking like Redmayne is pulling ahead but I can still see Keaton pulling it out on Oscar night but right now I'd say Redmayne has the slight edge. Also, looks like the BAFTA's are still feeling the Boyhood love. It won both Best Film and Best Director for Linklater. 

Edited February 8, 2015 by truthaboutluv

[Dejana]

BAFTA winners in full:

 

BEST FILM:

BOYHOOD — Richard Linklater, Cathleen Sutherland

 

LEADING ACTRESS:

JULIANNE MOORE — Still Alice

 

LEADING ACTOR:

EDDIE REDMAYNE — The Theory of Everything

 

DIRECTOR:

BOYHOOD — Richard Linklater

 

EE RISING STAR:

Jack O’Connell

 

COSTUME DESIGN:

THE GRAND BUDAPEST HOTEL — Milena Canonero

 

ADAPTED SCREENPLAY:

THE THEORY OF EVERYTHING — Anthony McCarten

 

FILM NOT IN THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE:

IDA — Pawel Pawlikowski, Eric Abraham, Piotr Dzieciol, Ewa Puszczynska

 

ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY:

THE GRAND BUDAPEST HOTEL — Wes Anderson

 

OUTSTANDING DEBUT BY A BRITISH WRITER, DIRECTOR OR PRODUCER:
STEPHEN BERESFORD (Writer), DAVID LIVINGSTONE (Producer) — Pride

 

CINEMATOGRAPHY:
BIRDMAN — Emmanuel Lubezki

 

SUPPORTING ACTRESS:
PATRICIA ARQUETTE — Boyhood

 

SUPPORTING ACTOR:
J.K. SIMMONS — Whiplash

 

SPECIAL VISUAL EFFECTS:
INTERSTELLAR — Paul Franklin, Scott Fisher, Andrew Lockley

 

ANIMATED FILM:
THE LEGO MOVIE — Phil Lord, Christopher Miller

 

SOUND:
WHIPLASH — Thomas Curley, Ben Wilkins, Craig Mann

 

EDITING:
WHIPLASH — Tom Cross

 

BRITISH SHORT ANIMATION:
THE BIGGER PICTURE — Chris Hees, Daisy Jacobs, Jennifer Majka

 

BRITISH SHORT FILM:
BOOGALOO AND GRAHAM — Brian J. Falconer, Michael Lennox, Ronan Blaney

 

PRODUCTION DESIGN:
THE GRAND BUDAPEST HOTEL — Adam Stockhausen, Anna Pinnock

 

MAKE UP & HAIR:
THE GRAND BUDAPEST HOTEL — Frances Hannon

 

DOCUMENTARY:
CITIZENFOUR — Laura Poitras

 

ORIGINAL MUSIC:
THE GRAND BUDAPEST HOTEL — Alexandre Desplat

 

OUTSTANDING BRITISH FILM:
THE THEORY OF EVERYTHING — James Marsh, Tim Bevan, Eric Fellner, Lisa Bruce, Anthony McCarten

[vb68]

I really hope Keaton surprises on Oscar night.

[MrsRafaelBarba]

@ truthaboutluv...

Lupita isn't African American.

She's of Kenyan descent, though born in Mexico.

Edited February 8, 2015 by MrsRafaelBarba

[truthaboutluv]

I do know that Lupita is of Kenyan descent and was raised there, so yes, my mistake in referring to her as African American. However, the point I was making pretty much stands, although I should have said a black actress rather than an African American actress.

[MrsRafaelBarba]

I do know that Lupita is of Kenyan descent and was raised there, so yes, my mistake in referring to her as African American. However, the point I was making pretty much stands, although I should have said a black actress rather than an African American actress.

Didn't comment on the rest of your post.

[Athena]

Personally I think Lupita deserved the Oscar over Jennifer who I also thought was great.  I also think that Lupita benefitted from the "Cinderella" narrative of a newcomer who is discovered in an explosive performance and is so humble and sincere and just genuine.  Interestingly enough it sounds like Jennifer Lawrence's narrative when she came out.  It happened a little with Winter's Bone and really took off with SLP.

 

As much as I love Ann and think that she gets a bad rap, I personally was annoyed with her during the awards season.  For me it wasn't about her campaigning it was I and I think many others felt a certain level of insincerity or "fakeness" with her.

 

Lupita's campaigning worked out well because she was a newcomer and completely unknown in Hollywood. She not only deserved the Oscar, her style game was also on point. Even though she broke out onto the scene, she is not an ingenue or as young as some other first time actresses. She is well-spoken and very beautiful. When you watch her interviews or speeches, it's hard not to like her. She has been compared to Audrey Hepburn and similar to how Hepburn won the Oscar for Roman Holiday, Lupita just charmed her way to the podium. Her team played her strengths and those around her really wanted her to do well so she got a good boost. 

 

Hathaway's backlash did seem to stem a lot from her insincerity in her speeches. It just became routine after she won her first couple of awards. I don't hate Anne or Eddie Redmayne though.

[ancslove]

But really, what makes an acceptance speech insincere?  There seems to be a very narrow range of "acceptable" reactions for award shows.  If they act surprised and happy about winning each time, they seem "fake", but if they finally come to accept their frontrunner status and think they're going to win, they seem arrogant.  And god forbid if a frontrunner does NOT win, and looks surprised or disappointed.

[ruby24]

Everyone always loved Daniel Day-Lewis's acceptance speeches every time he won. Same for Sandra Bullock. I think people like it when you're grateful, charming, funny, self-deprecating (this is a big one that always endears people) and not too much of any one thing. Not gushing, not smug, not crying, but right in the middle of everything. Kind of ridiculous I guess. I remember people I knew being really annoyed at Halle Berry's acceptance speech for acting like it was the greatest thing that had ever happened to anyone in the history of the world.

[JBC344]

But really, what makes an acceptance speech insincere?  There seems to be a very narrow range of "acceptable" reactions for award shows.  If they act surprised and happy about winning each time, they seem "fake", but if they finally come to accept their frontrunner status and think they're going to win, they seem arrogant.  And god forbid if a frontrunner does NOT win, and looks surprised or disappointed.

For me it was Anne's hysterical shock whenever she won an award.  Her and Sally Field were neck and neck for awards season and Anne had won her fair share.  Like I mentioned earlier I felt like Anne was playing the role of "actress who wins Oscar" than naturally winning an Oscar, whatever that may look like for her.  I don't think it is a matter of being shocked or arrogant I just don't think Anne was being herself.

 

As to Halle's hysterical shock, there was a precedence that warranted it.  No other black woman had ever won Best Actress in 70 something years so there was a reason for her to legitimately think that she wasn't going to win.  Halle to me came across as sincere.

[ancslove]

But, Anne and Sally Field were neck and neck - therefore, there was reason to be surprised, since each time, it could go either way.  I mean, this year, Julianne Moore has won every major award, and she still seems reasonably surprised.  None of us know these people, how can we tell if they aren't "being themselves"?

 

 

*Disclaimer - I never thought Anne acted hysterical, so maybe I'm just missing something big.

[JBC344]

But, Anne and Sally Field were neck and neck - therefore, there was reason to be surprised, since each time, it could go either way.  I mean, this year, Julianne Moore has won every major award, and she still seems reasonably surprised.  None of us know these people, how can we tell if they aren't "being themselves"?

 

 

*Disclaimer - I never thought Anne acted hysterical, so maybe I'm just missing something big.

Your absolutely right I do not know Anne Hathaway in any capacity.  For me, Anne's level of surprise would be more understandable if she was the dark horse in a five person race, she wasn't.  Best Supporting was between her and Sally Field. 

 

As I said before it isn't the emotion an actor displays it is whether or not they come off real/sincere.  I didn't feel Anne did.  I also adore her as an actress.

 

I don't think you are missing something big, we just disagree that is all. 

[harrie]

I don't recall that Hathaway and Field were neck-and-neck at all; that doesn't mean it wasn't the case, just not how I recall it.  Everything I saw and read - at least that stuck with me -- posited that Hathaway was a lock, largely due to her live singing.  There's nothing wrong with feigning surprise at your win, I guess; but when the audience can tell you're faking it the umpteenth time around, that's the tipping point where one starts to lose people.  Just my opinion.  

 

I think it's possible to graciously accept you award, thank whomever you want, and acknowledge the competition (if you wish) without acting like you had no idea in the world that this would ever happen to you.  Sally "You like me, you really like me" Field, Hathaway's apparent main competition, might have been able to offer some advice on the topic.  Again, just my opinion. 

[vb68]

 

Everything I saw and read - at least that stuck with me -- posited that Hathaway was a lock, largely due to her live singing

That's what I remember too.  It always seemed like a foregone conclusion.

 

I still don't understand what she did that was so bad.  Did she really, really want to win?  Sure, I have no doubt.  But nothing she did rose to the level of Melissa Leo, who was so over the top in my eyes with her photos and whatnot that it was kinda gross.   It didn't help her either that she cursed in her acceptance speech.  Even Christian Bale chided her for that. "You'll not hear any of that from me."

Edited February 11, 2015 by vb68

[harrie]

I wouldn't say that Hathaway did anything wrong or bad; personally, I just got tired of the surprise and amazement, and it ceased to ring true after a while.  

 

The whole Melissa Leo campaign baffled me - do glamour shots convince anyone to vote for you?  But is it wrong for Melissa Leo (or anyone) to want an award too much?  A question for the ages, perhaps. 

Edited February 9, 2015 by harrie

[hendersonrocks]

I wouldn't say that Hathaway did anything wrong or bad; personally, I just got tired of the surprise and amazement, and it ceased to ring true after a while.

Ditto. To me, what spurs the reaction that I--and I think a lot of others--have is affect more so than the actual words in a speech. And of course affect is really subjective, and varies a lot person by person, but packs a punch. For me, Lupita's affect was consistently charming, grateful, and relatively humble. Anne's affect, on the other hand, was consistently (and increasingly) self-congratulatory and kinda pandering. I felt for her because it seemed like she tried to adjust as the backlash grew but it just kept getting worse. And I say this as someone who LIKES Anne Hathaway!

 

Birdman just holds no appeal for me, so I'm kind of holding out hope that Boyhood's resurgence at the BAFTA's means that a different film walking away with Best Picture is not an entirely lost cause.

 

And after the Grammy's last night, I'm really excited to see John Legend and Common BRING IT to the Oscars.

 

 

[slowpoked]

But really, what makes an acceptance speech insincere?  There seems to be a very narrow range of "acceptable" reactions for award shows.  If they act surprised and happy about winning each time, they seem "fake", but if they finally come to accept their frontrunner status and think they're going to win, they seem arrogant.  And god forbid if a frontrunner does NOT win, and looks surprised or disappointed.

 

I like how Cate Blanchett approached her front-runner status last year, even though I fully understand how it may appear arrogant or annoying to some. Cate knew she was the front-runner, but didn't act too humbled, or too braggy about it. Just the right amount, I guess. Some snark here and there (I loved her SAG speech of "For those of you who voted for me, thanks. For those of you that didn't, better luck next year), but mostly appreciative of the recognition and complimentary to her fellow nominees (Loved, loved her shout-out to Judi Dench). It does help that she has reached the level of "respected" veteran status. To most of the audience, some stars just can't do anything wrong - Clooney, Pitt, Bullock, Day-Lewis, etc. I think while Anne has reached A-list status, I don't think she's quite at the "respected veteran" level yet, and that's why Hathahate was born. But I for one didn't find anything wrong with her during that awards season. She knew it was her best shot and she went for it.

[PepSinger]

After seeing Benedict Cumberbatch in The Imitation Game this weekend, I cannot for the life of me understand why he isn't a frontrunner for Best Actor. The man brought me to tears and left me speechless with his performance.

Edited February 11, 2015 by PepSinger

[ruby24]

I thought he was great too. It's weird, he was talked about like a frontrunner when the movie came out, but then after the Golden Globes, the movie itself seems to have lost any momentum to win anything. I guess they chose Redmayne instead (to me, that's going to be a terrible win- it's a performance that Daniel Day-Lewis did already, and he did it so much better in an even harder role- if you don't believe me, go back and watch My Left Foot). That's just drawing the voters into voting for the "physical" aspect of a performance and that's it. Oscar Bait 101- it's almost a parody of itself at this point. Play a person with a disability, win an Oscar.

 

If The Imitation Game was a legitimate threat to win the bigger awards, I think Cumberbatch would be too. I find it interesting that as much as the Academy seemed to like it (8 nominations, including Director), it hasn't caught on in the industry awards. To be honest, I would think that the box office would have an effect on this (it's the second most popular movie besides American Sniper), but the public now appears to be totally shut out of race, which I'm a bit ambivalent about.

 

It's not that I think they should toss awards at stuff like Transformers and superhero movies, but I do think that if well-reviewed, adult audience movies do well with the public, that's the kind of thing that you'd think would be rewarded in Hollywood. It sure used to be. For example, that's why I really thought Gone Girl would get at least a Best Picture nomination- even if they didn't like it that much, I think it makes sense to reward an adult-oriented, studio movie that gets good reviews and does very well at the box office ($168 million)- isn't that the kind of success they want to encourage? Plus, it brings in an audience that can actually recognize the movies that get nominated at these things and feel like part of the conversation, otherwise it's just going to become more and more insular.

 

Both Boyhood and Birdman would be one of the lowest grossing Oscar winners ever, most people will have never seen either of these films, plus most of the other nominees. I just think the public ought to still play SOME role in this, if they want the Oscars to continue to remain a cultural event that everyone should watch. And their only voice is through box office, so I think the good movies that catch on with audiences should be acknowledged too.

Edited February 10, 2015 by ruby24

[truthaboutluv]

I guess I would agree with this sentiment if there weren't plenty of huge/decent box office winners nominated for Best Picture last year. In fact last year, the Best Picture race was a very, very close race between 12 Years A Slave and Gravity, the latter which was a big box office hit. American Hustle, Captain Phillips and The Wolf of Wall Street were also all decent box office hits. A few years ago also had The Social Network as a favorite and that was a huge box office hit, same with Avatar, etc.

 

I honestly cannot off the top of my head think of any huge box office smash this year that I would consider a Best Picture contender. I thought Hunger Games: Mockingjay was pretty good but the critics were very mixed on it and while some thought it was a great look at PTSD, others just thought it was boring and nothing happened. And I know many loved Gone Girl but honestly, I just thought it was a good movie, an interesting way to spend two hours but nothing more. Of course I also read the book and didn't think it was all that either, especially that stupid ending.

Edited February 10, 2015 by truthaboutluv

[AshleyN]

I guess I would agree with this sentiment if there weren't plenty of huge/decent box office winners nominated for Best Picture last year. In fact last year, the Best Picture race was a very, very close race between 12 Years A Slave and Gravity, the latter which was a big box office hit. American Hustle, Captain Phillips and The Wolf of Wall Street were also all decent box office hits. A few years ago also had The Social Network as a favorite and that was a huge box office hit, same with Avatar, etc.

Yeah, I think this year is an anomaly more than anything. There are always small indies in the mix, but in most years there's more of a mix. And like you said, Gravity came damn close to winning last year, and did in fact take the second biggest prize of the night.

 

The funny thing is, a few months ago there seemed to be plenty of potential for box-office contenders this year: Gone Girl, Interstellar, Unbroken, and Into the Woods were all talked about as potential nominees or winners at some point, but failed to get there in the end for one reason or another. I also think if Selma hadn't been so mishandled by the studio it could have made more than it has. I imagine the Oscar producers are amongst the happiest about American Sniper's huge breakout for this very reason.

Edited February 10, 2015 by AshleyN

[anyanka323]

Oscar voters' apparent indifference to Gone Girl, other than Rosamund Pike, surprised me.  She was a lock in actress and I thought that Flynn would get a nomination for adapted screenplay.  Flynn's screenplay fixed some of the problems from the novel, especially in the third act after the reveal that Amy faked it all.  I'm also fond of Trent Reznor's musical collaboration with Fincher.  Reznor's scores are a refreshing change from the conventional orchestral scores with their minimalist, eletronica style.  That style worked beautifully in Gone Girl by not allowing the music to overwhelm and build the suspense.  I know Reznor won for Social Network, but the Academy music branch tends to nominate previous nominees and winners.  Like others have said, it was an adult orientated movie that did well at the box office and got good reviews. 

 

2014 wasn't as bad of a year for film as some have made it out to be.  There were some critical stinkers that made money like Transformers.  Other than that, a number of box office successes were actually good movies - Guardians of the Galaxy and Mockingjay, to name a couple.

 

It's always interesting to read predictions throughout the year for the Oscars.  On another site's forums, there's a number of users that are predicting Star Wars Episode 7 to be nominated for best picture.  These are people who know Oscar voters' tastes and what has been nominated in the past.  They tend to be averse to nominating popcorn and sci-fi movies.  Star Wars falls into both categories.  It also has the hand of JJ Abrams behind it and based on his past history, it doesn't inspire much confidence.  I speak as a Lost and Alias fan who knows from experience how inconsistent he is as both a writer and director.  This is the same group that expanded the best picture lineup in reaction to The Dark Knight's snub and no popcorn and/or comic book movie has made it into that category yet in the 5 years since the expansion.  Last couple years, there could be a case made for movies from those categories as potential best picture nominees.  In 2014, both Guardians and Captain America got good reviews and were probably the MCU films with the best scripts so far.  2013 had Catching Fire.  I know there were some internet rumblings about Avengers as a best picture nominee. 

[thuganomics85]

While I'm glad the Academy at least recognizes smaller films and are usually deserving, I really do wish they found better ways distributing them.  It just hit me today that I've only seen three of the Best Picture nominees, because in my area we either never got them, or we did, but they left the theaters very quickly.  I knew for a fact that I wanted to see The Theory of Everything, but I was busy, so when I had time two or three weeks later, it already disappeared, and never came back to my area, even after the nominations.  Same with Birdman.  Selma is already down to about one showing, and it only just came in January, right?

 

The only ones I saw where American Sniper, which is the lone box office "smash", ​The Imitation Game, which thankfully stuck around a bit longer then normal, and Whiplash, because I made damn sure to catch that as soon as it came here (J.K. Simmons is one of my favorites.)  Again, maybe it's just my area and I do hold some of the responsibility for not making the time, but it's just a little annoying.

Edited February 11, 2015 by thuganomics85

[Rick Kitchen]

We should have a generic Movie Industry thread.

[Athena]

We should have a generic Movie Industry thread.

 

We can use the News thread which I have retitled The Business... to be a more generic topic on the industry.

[thuganomics85]

And, we have out WGAs: Original Screenplay goes to The Grand Budapest Hotel, while Adapted Screenplay goes to The Imitation Game.  Of course, as the article mentions, some of the Oscars noms, like Birdman and The Theory of Everything, weren't eligible, so we'll see if that changes anything come Oscar time.

Edited February 15, 2015 by thuganomics85

[Dejana]

Brutally Honest Oscar Ballot:

 

VOTER PROFILE: A longtime member of the Academy's 378-member public relations branch.

 

There's a PR branch and they get to vote for the Oscars: who knew?

 

➻ BEST PICTURE

First, let me say that I'm tired of all of this talk about "snubs" — I thought for every one of [the snubs] there was a justifiable reason. What no one wants to say out loud is that Selma is a well-crafted movie, but there's no art to it. If the movie had been directed by a 60-year-old white male, I don't think that people would have been carrying on about it to the level that they were. And as far as the accusations about the Academy being racist? Yes, most members are white males, but they are not the cast of Deliverance — they had to get into the Academy to begin with, so they're not cretinous, snaggletoothed hillbillies. When a movie about black people is good, members vote for it. But if the movie isn't that good, am I supposed to vote for it just because it has black people in it? I've got to tell you, having the cast show up in T-shirts saying "I can't breathe" [at their New York premiere] — I thought that stuff was offensive. Did they want to be known for making the best movie of the year or for stirring up shit?

 

On paper, The Imitation Game seemed to be the one to me. It's a great story, well-crafted, [benedict Cumberbatch] is really good and it's been a big success. It's what you call "prestige filmmaking." So why isn't it receiving more recognition? I'd like to believe it's karma for Harvey [Weinstein]. But I'm going to hold my nose and vote for it anyway because when you vote for best picture, what you should try to do is vote for the movie that, years from now, people will still watch and talk about. For some years, it's like, "Huh?! Around the World in 80 Days [the winner for 1956] won best picture? Are you kidding me?" So I try to vote in a way so that, in 50 years, people aren't going to go, "Huh?!" MY VOTE: (1) The Imitation Game; (2) Birdman; (3) American Sniper; (4) Boyhood; (5) The Grand Budapest Hotel

 

On Best Supporting Actress:

 

But I'm voting for Arquette. She gets points for working on a film for 12 years and bonus points for having no work done during the 12 years. If she had had work done during the 12 years, she would not be collecting these statues. It's a bravery reward. It says, "You're braver than me. You didn't touch your face for 12 years. Way to freakin' go!"

 

➻ BEST ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY

I'm not voting for Nightcrawler — that was really unpleasant. With Foxcatcher, they said seven words in the whole movie and the rest of it was people staring at each other, so I'm not voting for that. I didn't really get the sense of a screenplay with Boyhood — it was more like they just turned on the camera once a year. Birdman and Budapest were both pretty clever, but I liked Birdman more. MY VOTE: Birdman

 

Edited February 19, 2015 by Dejana

[sweetcookieface]

Huh, Brutally Honest Voter is kind of an a-hole. I don't mind brutal honesty, but some of his comments about Selma and Patrica Arquette seem really out of touch.

[hendersonrocks]

Here's today's Brutally Honest Oscar Ballot from The Hollywood Reporter (someone from the short films & feature animation branch).

 

Do you think these people only agree to do this anonymously because at least they know they're assholes? My lord.

[thuganomics85]

Hate to admit it, but I pretty much quit paying attention to the second brutally honest guy, after he said he was voting for Streep.  Out of all the supporting actress, really?  I know Streep is pretty much untouchable with some, but this was one of the few times I wasn't impressed by her.

 

Really though, that voter just seemed like a huge The Theory of Everything fanboy.  Nothing wrong with that, I guess, but I just feel like I'm not going to agree with his opinions on many films.

 

Judging from both articles, the Selma backlash has clearly stuck a nerve with them.  Too bad it seems they're just doubling-down on their stances, and basically saying everyone is being mean.

Edited February 19, 2015 by thuganomics85

[Shannon L.]

 

American Sniper glosses over feelings — how do you feel when you kill 170 people? You just see him hesitating in the one scene with the boy who briefly picks up the rocket and then you see him sitting at a bar looking depressed; that’s not enough.

I almost stopped reading when I saw this.  How out of touch is he to not know that the biggest controversy is how, apparently, the real life Kyle felt nothing--no remorse at all for the killings he did and that movie Kyle was shown as feeling too much.  Had it been a completely fictional story, then, I'd agree.

 

The final straw for me was that he can't separate the performances from the movies.  I know it's not easy, but there have been many times over the years where I've heard (or said myself) "the movie wasn't great, but so and so was really good in his/her part."

[Dejana]

Brutally Honest Oscar Ballot No. 3, from the Writers' branch:

 

➻ BEST PICTURE

I thought that the attacks on American Sniper were not legitimate. As a screenwriter, I feel like it has always been the case, throughout the history of films, that in order to dramatize someone's life, artistic liberties are taken. If you don't like that, that's why there are documentaries. This is one interpretation of Chris Kyle's journey. I admire it for having a carefully constructed screenplay, a performance so minimalist and nuanced that you could hardly see it, and direction and editing that were phenomenal, particularly in the war scenes.

 

MY VOTE: (1) The Imitation Game, (2) Birdman, (3) Whiplash, (4) The Theory of Everything, (5) American Sniper

 

 

➻ BEST ORIGINAL SONG

I thought The Lego Movie [in which "Everything Is Awesome" is featured] was horrible. It was whack and I just did not like it at all — I mean, I couldn't even get through the film. But "Glory" I thought was fantastic — an inspiring song from an inspiring film. MY VOTE: "Glory" (Selma)

 

 

➻ BEST PRODUCTION DESIGN

I didn't see Into the Woods or Mr. Turner. Budapest revolved so much around its production design — they created a whole world with this fantasy-land, fairy-tale hotel. Interstellar I just thought was an abomination — like, I just didn't get it on any level and I thought it was so boring and awful and fucking indulgent and stupid — and although the design was interesting, I just can't vote for it. I have a feeling, as I'm talking to you, that I may have misvoted because, from the trailer, the production design of Into the Woods looked pretty cool. MY VOTE: The Grand Budapest Hotel

 

➻ BEST SOUND EDITING

In all honesty, I don't understand the distinction between sound editing and sound mixing. My guess, though, is that sound editing was probably crucial to Sniper. MY VOTE: American Sniper

 

➻ BEST SOUND MIXING

And my guess is that the sound mixing was probably crucial to Whiplash. MY VOTE: Whiplash

 

This seems like something you should want to figure out if you're an Oscar voter. I'm pretty sure what the categories entail is also something that gets explained (in brief) during the telecast many years.

Edited February 20, 2015 by Dejana

[ruby24]

It's funny how expanding the Best Picture category didn't end up fulfilling the goal of getting the voters to nominate more movies people have actually seen, which was why they did it in the first place.

 

I wonder if there's anything they could do to make that happen. What if they went back to 10 total, but had to nominate five big studio movies and five independents? That might do the trick. If that had been the case this year, for the independents we probably would have gotten Boyhood, Birdman, Grand Budapest, The Imitation Game and Whiplash (guessing, based on nomination total). But on the studio side they might have had room for American Sniper, Selma, Gone Girl, Interstellar, and I don't know- maybe it'd have to be Unbroken or Into the Woods or something.

 

But at least that would offer a decent amount of films that appealed to the public too, by forcing them to pick out stuff from the studio side that wasn't totally awful.

[Dejana]

It's funny how expanding the Best Picture category didn't end up fulfilling the goal of getting the voters to nominate more movies people have actually seen, which was why they did it in the first place.

I wonder if there's anything they could do to make that happen. What if they went back to 10 total, but had to nominate five big studio movies and five independents? That might do the trick. If that had been the case this year, for the independents we probably would have gotten Boyhood, Birdman, Grand Budapest, The Imitation Game and Whiplash (guessing, based on nomination total). But on the studio side they might have had room for American Sniper, Selma, Gone Girl, Interstellar, and I don't know- maybe it'd have to be Unbroken or Into the Woods or something.

But at least that would offer a decent amount of films that appealed to the public too, by forcing them to pick out stuff from the studio side that wasn't totally awful.

I don't mind the expanded lineup but think they should just stick to a firm 10 nominees; pretty much all of the critics' lists are of their Top 10 movies of the year and I think in 2009-2010, the lineups were the most varied they've been in a long time. The way it's been since 2011 is that a movie has to get five percent of voters to rank it in first place in order to be nominated for Best Picture, with a flexible number of nominees. I think this eliminates a lot of movies that voters probably consider very good and among the best of the year, but maybe not something they would vote as their number one choice: animated movies, sci-fi (Inception, District 9 sci-fi, not "Is Gravity sci-fi or just a fictional story set in space?" sci-fi) and well-made blockbusters that weren't necessarily engineered to win awards.

Edited February 20, 2015 by Dejana

[Trini]

 

This seems like something you should want to figure out if you're an Oscar voter. I'm pretty sure what the categories entail is also something that gets explained (in brief) during the telecast many years.

 

Isn't sound mixing/editing one of those categories where the voting is done by people who actually work in the same category (sound)? Or is that just to get the final nominations?

[Shannon L.]

 

I wonder if there's anything they could do to make that happen.

I think advertising is a big issue.  I'm still running into people who've never heard of Whiplash (for example).  The only reason I knew about it and other movies like Still Alice was because I read about them here.  Granted my family and friends tend to go to blockbusters/comedies/action-adventure, but still....there's no reason why movies like those two couldn't be part of the previews.  I understand that previews tend to to be in the same genre of the movie that's being shown, but just because we paid money to see a certain type of picture doesn't mean some of us aren't drawn to all kinds of films. 

[AshleyN]

Isn't sound mixing/editing one of those categories where the voting is done by people who actually work in the same category (sound)? Or is that just to get the final nominations?

I believe the nominating (for all categories) is done by people who work in that field while the final voting (also for all categories) is done by the entire Academy.

 

I noticed from reading these things that a lot of voters actually abstain from the more technical categories (particularly sound), because they don't feel qualified to judge the difference, or from the categories where they haven't seen enough of the nominees. Obviously that guy didn't care (you'll notice he also voted in a couple of categories where he'd only seen one nominee, which is stupid IMO). I've also seen ballots where the voters say they asked people who work in particular fields for their opinions before voting (I think one of this year's examples actually mentioned doing that for the editing category).