NYFCC Winners

For the films of 2013
flipp525
Laureate
Posts: 6163
Joined: Thu Jan 09, 2003 7:44 am

Re: NYFCC Winners

Post by flipp525 »

Eric wrote:
Big Magilla wrote:Early word on Adams was that her "terrible" British accent made her performance hard to like
I'm pretty sure it's deliberately supposed to be bad. She (and Bale) are at least at the beginning of the film low-rent hustlers.
That's exactly what I was thinking. I don't think Adams' character is supposed to be doing Shakespeare in the Park. It's like saying that Natasha Richardson was vocally weak as Sally Bowles in "Cabaret" when the character is supposed to be not all that great a singer.

I think Bullock will be the one left out this year.
"The mantle of spinsterhood was definitely in her shoulders. She was twenty five and looked it."

-Gone With the Wind by Margaret Mitchell
User avatar
Eric
Tenured
Posts: 2749
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 11:18 pm
Location: Minneapolis, Minnesota
Contact:

Re: NYFCC Winners

Post by Eric »

Big Magilla wrote:Early word on Adams was that her "terrible" British accent made her performance hard to like
I'm pretty sure it's deliberately supposed to be bad. She (and Bale) are at least at the beginning of the film low-rent hustlers.
ITALIANO
Emeritus
Posts: 4076
Joined: Mon Jan 06, 2003 1:58 pm
Location: MILAN

Re: NYFCC Winners

Post by ITALIANO »

Uri wrote:
ITALIANO wrote:And by the way, if it turns out to really be Blanchett-Bullock-Dench-Thompson-Streep, will it be one of the "oldest" Best Actress races in Oscar history? I mean, the youngest would be Blanchett who, of course, at 44 is VERY young (if only because I'm 44, too), but maybe not so much by Best Actress standards.
Ah – my favorite Oscar pet obsession.

The oldest best actress lineup was that of ’06 (Cruse, Dench, Mirren, Streep, Winslet), with average age of 51. If indeed this year we’ll have Blanchet, Bullock, Dench, Streep and Thompson this record will be shattered and be 58. Since Adams, at 39, is no spring chicken herself, if nominated instead of any of the other contenders bar Dench, the record will still be broken. (Even if she replaces Dench, the average age will still be over 50 for only the second time ever).
Then the record could really be broken, since it's very possible that, if nominated, Adams won't be in Dench's place.

And it's interesting that, without Adams, it would be the same average age of Best Actor 1981, which at the time, I remember, seemed to me kind of prehistoric. Sadly, it doesnt feel SO old now... :)

We know that actresses - in movies but also in Oscar history - have always been younger than their male counterparts. That's why 58 would certainly be unique (and that's why I'm not sure it will happen). Even in 2006 there were two nominees who, while not teenagers anymore, were still young and attractive. This year even Amy Adams wouldn't belong to THAT type. (Of course, there's always the remote possibility of a certain French dark horse...)
Big Magilla
Site Admin
Posts: 19318
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:22 pm
Location: Jersey Shore

Re: NYFCC Winners

Post by Big Magilla »

OscarGuy wrote:The other question would be, would it be the first time we've had a slate of all Oscar winners?.
Yes.
Uri
Adjunct
Posts: 1230
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 11:37 pm
Location: Israel

Re: NYFCC Winners

Post by Uri »

Btw, if indeed the new ladies’ record will indeed be 58, it will equal the best actor age record, set in ’81 (Beatty, Fonda, Lancaster, Moore and Newman). The overall record, 63, was set this year with the supporting actor lineup, breaking the previous one (61) which was set in the same category the year before thanks to Plummer and Von Sydow.
Uri
Adjunct
Posts: 1230
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 11:37 pm
Location: Israel

Re: NYFCC Winners

Post by Uri »

ITALIANO wrote:And by the way, if it turns out to really be Blanchett-Bullock-Dench-Thompson-Streep, will it be one of the "oldest" Best Actress races in Oscar history? I mean, the youngest would be Blanchett who, of course, at 44 is VERY young (if only because I'm 44, too), but maybe not so much by Best Actress standards.
Ah – my favorite Oscar pet obsession.

The oldest best actress lineup was that of ’06 (Cruse, Dench, Mirren, Streep, Winslet), with average age of 51. If indeed this year we’ll have Blanchet, Bullock, Dench, Streep and Thompson this record will be shattered and be 58. Since Adams, at 39, is no spring chicken herself, if nominated instead of any of the other contenders bar Dench, the record will still be broken. (Even if she replaces Dench, the average age will still be over 50 for only the second time ever).
User avatar
OscarGuy
Site Admin
Posts: 13668
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 12:22 am
Location: Springfield, MO
Contact:

Re: NYFCC Winners

Post by OscarGuy »

The other question would be, would it be the first time we've had a slate of all Oscar winners? I know we had this conundrum with Supporting Actor last year, but I don't recall seeing it in Best Actress very recently. Of course, at this point, I really think we're looking at Amy Adams being the only non-Oscar winner.
Wesley Lovell
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." - Benjamin Franklin
ITALIANO
Emeritus
Posts: 4076
Joined: Mon Jan 06, 2003 1:58 pm
Location: MILAN

Re: NYFCC Winners

Post by ITALIANO »

And by the way, if it turns out to really be Blanchett-Bullock-Dench-Thompson-Streep, will it be one of the "oldest" Best Actress races in Oscar history? I mean, the youngest would be Blanchett who, of course, at 44 is VERY young (if only because I'm 44, too), but maybe not so much by Best Actress standards.
Big Magilla
Site Admin
Posts: 19318
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:22 pm
Location: Jersey Shore

Re: NYFCC Winners

Post by Big Magilla »

I see Dench, Thompson and Blanchett as fairly certain with Bullock and Streep probable. Early word on Adams was that her "terrible" British accent made her performance hard to like, but the trades seem to have given her a pass so maybe we are looking at her first Best Actress nod, though I still see her as a question mark.

I think there's a lot more competition in the Best Actor race with Phoenix and DiCaprio poised to upset one of the supposed set five. Hanks, with an almost certain supporting nod for Saving Mr. Banks is probably most vulnerable, but despite their early wins I don't think either Dern or Redford is certain either. Ejiofor and McConnaughey should be swept along, the former by his film, the latter by co-star Leto's almost certain nod but I'd be less surprised by a Phoenix or DiCaprio inclusion than I would be by Adams this year.

Leto, Fassbinder and Hanks seem almost certain in support with Forte and Hill iffy in Supporting Actor. Bruhl, Rush and Adbi are still possibilities. Just about anyone is possible in Supporting Actress, though Lawrence should see a nomination, the only sure thing among her film's stars. Nyong'o, Winfrey and Spencer as well as Squibb would be my other guesses at the moment. Nyong'o has to start winning some of these things, though, to keep her supposed lead in the race.
nightwingnova
Assistant
Posts: 516
Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2011 4:48 pm

Re: NYFCC Winners

Post by nightwingnova »

Philomena was about an average bio pic. Dench, though, elevated her simple character by providing it much depth. I can't say that it was an astoundingly great performance but she brought substantial humanity to a sketch of a character. A really enjoyable performance for me.
Eric wrote:Yeah, I saw Philomena. Dench didn't do all that much for me, but the audience I was in (fans of, as per Tee, "mediocre/old-fashioned movie" movies) were gagging over her punchlines, in the RuPaul sense. I don't think she's at all a contender for the win against her weighty competition, but I think a nomination out of sheer reflex isn't out of the question.

When all's said and done, I'm not even entirely sure Bullock's in as safe a position as everyone thinks.

(Re: Harvey. He managed to get, what, three into supporting actor last year? I don't think he's prone to making Sophie's choices.)
Last edited by nightwingnova on Wed Dec 04, 2013 11:47 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Mister Tee
Tenured Laureate
Posts: 8637
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 2:57 pm
Location: NYC
Contact:

Re: NYFCC Winners

Post by Mister Tee »

Bu the way: is it time yet to offer our apologies to Anthony Breznican of Entertainment Weekly? A few weeks ago, there was substantial sneering at his labeling Amy Adams a front-runner for best actress (and Her for best picture).
FilmFan720
Emeritus
Posts: 3650
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 3:57 pm
Location: Illinois

Re: NYFCC Winners

Post by FilmFan720 »

The Original BJ wrote:Another question...will any of these actresses be going comedy at the Globes? Saving Mr. Banks seems like it could go either way, and there was a rumor for a while that Harvey was trying to push August: Osage County as a comedy as well. Just curious if the Globes won't have to cut any of these candidates, leaving the race pleasingly murky for a lot longer.
American Hustle is going to the Globes as a comedy, so expect Amy Adams to be the probable front runner in her category.

Also, could that leave American Hustle as the most nominated film at the Globes? Picture, actress, supporting actress and screenplay seem guaranteed, probably director, and possibly (in a weak category) double best actor nominations for Bale and Cooper?
"Go into the world and do well. But more importantly, go into the world and do good."
- Minor Myers, Jr.
Greg
Tenured
Posts: 3285
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 1:12 pm
Location: Greg
Contact:

Re: NYFCC Winners

Post by Greg »

I wonder, as unpredictable as things are now, if there is a chance for a Best Actress nomination for Julie Delpy.
The Original BJ
Emeritus
Posts: 4312
Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2003 8:49 pm

Re: NYFCC Winners

Post by The Original BJ »

Another question...will any of these actresses be going comedy at the Globes? Saving Mr. Banks seems like it could go either way, and there was a rumor for a while that Harvey was trying to push August: Osage County as a comedy as well. Just curious if the Globes won't have to cut any of these candidates, leaving the race pleasingly murky for a lot longer.

I assume the Broadcasters will just nominate all six, of course.

God, Eric, you are so right about Dench's "punchlines." The line about condoms just ignited my audience with laughter, as I sat completely stonefaced.
User avatar
Eric
Tenured
Posts: 2749
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 11:18 pm
Location: Minneapolis, Minnesota
Contact:

Re: NYFCC Winners

Post by Eric »

Yeah, I saw Philomena. Dench didn't do all that much for me, but the audience I was in (fans of, as per Tee, "mediocre/old-fashioned movie" movies) were gagging over her punchlines, in the RuPaul sense. I don't think she's at all a contender for the win against her weighty competition, but I think a nomination out of sheer reflex isn't out of the question.

When all's said and done, I'm not even entirely sure Bullock's in as safe a position as everyone thinks.

(Re: Harvey. He managed to get, what, three into supporting actor last year? I don't think he's prone to making Sophie's choices.)
Post Reply

Return to “86th Predictions and Precursors”