Psychic Oscar Predictions Contest!

[bizarre]

I have liked Wright's past films and I think he's a cleverer craftsman and more auteuristic filmmaker than people give him credit for, but I can't say Darkest Hour looks interesting on paper - that being said, it's a revered actor who only got his career due in a (surprise) nomination quite recently after being first off the tongue when you'd ask people who one of the best non-nominated actors was, loaded up with prosthetics playing one of the major figures in recent history and a British icon and doing it at another pivotal time in British and world history. It'll clean up at the BAFTAS and in any usual year would haul in heaps of Oscar nominations regardless of its quality. Best Actor looks like a strong slate this year but I'll eat my hat if Oldman isn't nominated and I'd put money on him winning, sight unseen. I'm afraid to say he looks to be 'anointed'. There's gonna be lots of twists and hills to die on in what looks like a strange year (and judging from this year and last year's membership shakeups and their clear effect on last year's slate of nominees) but an Oldman snub is astronomically unlikely to be one of them.

The Globes nominating him, on the other hand - that's a wager

Edit: I'll be hesitant to drop him as my winner's prediction unless the film truly is a massive bomb, but I think his only competition for the gong are Day-Lewis (retiring for the millionth time) in a film that from what I've heard - though I've heard contradictory plot details - might be a tough sale for the Academy even if it wasn't directed by PTA, who they seem to have fallen out of love with. Friends who have read the Downsizing script say that Damon's role is very much straight-man to the lunacy going on around him and Hong Chau's role is the best bet for major contention, but if the film's a hit I'd predict him as a nominee though not a winner. Who else? Whichever Last Flag Flying actor is the lead, possibly, or Andrew Garfield (Breathe) or Hugh Jackman (The Greatest Showman), though I'm not personally confident in either film's wider chances. Other than them I don't see anyone on the horizon, unless the Washington-Gilroy film gets a release this year - a lot of people were angry that he lost last year and with the new membership I can see that bloc growing.

[Reza]

Gary Oldman is a respected actor who's put in more than three decades worth of work. The reason people are citing him as a likely winner is that, while Joe Wright has never directed an Oscar-winning performance, he's gotten several nominated and three of his films have received a total of 15 Oscar nominations with two wins under his belt. The question is not whether Oldman will win, but whether or not the film is any good. If it's on the level of Pride & Prejudice or Atonement, it could be a major Oscar player. If it's instead like Soloist or Pan, it's doomed. The difference I see here is that his historical period dramas (Pride, Atonment, Anna Karenina) have done well with Oscar voters. His contemporary and fantasy productions (Soloist, Hanna, Pan) have not.

So, historically, the Academy has shown an appreciation for his period work, which puts Darkest Hour into the positive column of options.

The secondary question is: who can possibly topple him for the award? Matt Damon for Downsizing? Alexander Payne has a much better track record with acting victories. Hugh Jackman for Greatest Showman? With that and Logan under his belt this year, awarding him might be seen as a given. Daniel Day-Lewis for Phantom Thread? He's already got three and is supposedly retiring from acting (again). Tom Hanks for Spielberg's Pentagon Papers film? Hanks has two already. Steve Carell for Battle of the Sexes? Benedict Cumberbatch for The Current War? Chadwick Boseman for Marshall? Jake Gyllenhaal for Stronger? There are many options, but none of them sound like they have the level of love that Oldman possesses or the prominence of a true-life role like this.

Yes, it's too early to surmise and a lot could happen between now and then. A lot of the fun is in guessing. If you aren't into that, fine. Don't do it. However, don't ridicule those who enjoy early prognosticating and considering you found this site and this message board, something about the Oscars and forecasting them must have caught your attention.

I think Oldman has a strong shot at a nod and the Oscar itself. It's a flamboyant role and the competition seems pretty pallid.

[Mister Tee]

To put a finer point on some of this: Wright has directed precisely two actors to nominations, and one of them -- Knightley in Pride & Prejudice -- was a throw-in on a slate so weak that a borderline supporting performance was the winner.

Payne's last three films have got all the glamour nominations (film/director/screenplay), and he's had 7 actors nominated this millennium. He hasn't been lucky enough for one of them to win yet, but some (Nicholson in About Schmidt, Madsen in Sideways, Clooney in The Descendants, Dern in Nebraska) got a lot closer than any of Wright's actors, despite strong competition or circumstance (like Clooney going for a second win).

Speaking of Clooney: not enough people are noting that Matt Damon, in addition to starring in Downsizing, also has the lead in the Clooney-directed Suburbicon. We of course don't know how either film will turn out, but the combo suggests to me Damon could be in for a big year. Combine that with his now 20-year service in the industry, three prior nominations, and recent personal success as actor (with The Martian) and producer (with Manchester), and I don't see why Damon isn't being at least as heavily touted by those peering into the future.

Except, of course, for the fact he won't be putting on heavy make-up and doing an impression of a well-known figure in a rehash of oft-retold history. Academy catnip!

Disclaimer: I think Gary Oldman is an excellent, often-underappreciated actor; I just hate to see him promoted for this sounds-dreary film.

[OscarGuy]

Gary Oldman is a respected actor who's put in more than three decades worth of work. The reason people are citing him as a likely winner is that, while Joe Wright has never directed an Oscar-winning performance, he's gotten several nominated and three of his films have received a total of 15 Oscar nominations with two wins under his belt. The question is not whether Oldman will win, but whether or not the film is any good. If it's on the level of Pride & Prejudice or Atonement, it could be a major Oscar player. If it's instead like Soloist or Pan, it's doomed. The difference I see here is that his historical period dramas (Pride, Atonment, Anna Karenina) have done well with Oscar voters. His contemporary and fantasy productions (Soloist, Hanna, Pan) have not.

So, historically, the Academy has shown an appreciation for his period work, which puts Darkest Hour into the positive column of options.

The secondary question is: who can possibly topple him for the award? Matt Damon for Downsizing? Alexander Payne has a much better track record with acting victories. Hugh Jackman for Greatest Showman? With that and Logan under his belt this year, awarding him might be seen as a given. Daniel Day-Lewis for Phantom Thread? He's already got three and is supposedly retiring from acting (again). Tom Hanks for Spielberg's Pentagon Papers film? Hanks has two already. Steve Carell for Battle of the Sexes? Benedict Cumberbatch for The Current War? Chadwick Boseman for Marshall? Jake Gyllenhaal for Stronger? There are many options, but none of them sound like they have the level of love that Oldman possesses or the prominence of a true-life role like this.

Yes, it's too early to surmise and a lot could happen between now and then. A lot of the fun is in guessing. If you aren't into that, fine. Don't do it. However, don't ridicule those who enjoy early prognosticating and considering you found this site and this message board, something about the Oscars and forecasting them must have caught your attention.

[ThePianist]

Torn between my love of lists and my desire to see my pet favourites represented somewhere and my disgust at the deterioration of the industry and critical integrity lol.

That means your foresight sucks and you should stop then. There's no way Gary Oldman will win Best Actor.

You're part of the problem imo

[bizarre]

I have a question that applies maybe more to other sites than here: why so much confidence in Gary Oldman/The Darkest Hour? What in Joe Wright's filmography leads one to believe he could generate a major awards contender? I'd argue that Joe Wright has led Oscar predictors down the garden path more than almost any other current director.

Which leads to a generalized critique of these imaginary Oscar contests. It seems to me this process makes people imagine the inside of heads of caricatured Academy voters -- those with the worst, most baity taste. Very often such predictions fail dismally -- remember best picture winner Unbroken? But they can also occasionally elevate dreck like The Danish Girl or Invictus, which then survive as nominees almost solely because people had them on lists for so long that the idea of them as contenders becomes impossible to dislodge, no matter how indifferently they're received by critics and public. Stop feeding the machine!

Of course I view some films as more promising than others, and vaguely game out how the rest of the year will go. But I prefer the Damien route: wait for the films to be seen and responded to, so the films make the race rather than vice versa.

I think the very existence of the internet put a nail in that particular coffin but the industry is changing rapidly so hopefully one day the races will be as unpredictable as they were in the 70s. Everyone and their mother running a "critics' award" and embossing their oscar predictions on a certificate isn't helping matters though.

So true. I don't even bother paying any attention to most of the awards apart from the ones that have been going for decades. They are such a bore.

Torn between my love of lists and my desire to see my pet favourites represented somewhere and my disgust at the deterioration of the industry and critical integrity lol.

[ThePianist]

So true. I don't even bother paying any attention to most of the awards apart from the ones that have been going for decades. They are such a bore.

Actually, around Awards Season, the Guild Awards that go out to; Screen Ensembles, Acting, Directing, Producing, often predict 96% of the time of what or who is going to win at the Academy Awards. The SGA is nearly 100% of the time. (But the Critics Choice Awards really doesn't mean shit...)

[Precious Doll]

I have a question that applies maybe more to other sites than here: why so much confidence in Gary Oldman/The Darkest Hour? What in Joe Wright's filmography leads one to believe he could generate a major awards contender? I'd argue that Joe Wright has led Oscar predictors down the garden path more than almost any other current director.

Which leads to a generalized critique of these imaginary Oscar contests. It seems to me this process makes people imagine the inside of heads of caricatured Academy voters -- those with the worst, most baity taste. Very often such predictions fail dismally -- remember best picture winner Unbroken? But they can also occasionally elevate dreck like The Danish Girl or Invictus, which then survive as nominees almost solely because people had them on lists for so long that the idea of them as contenders becomes impossible to dislodge, no matter how indifferently they're received by critics and public. Stop feeding the machine!

Of course I view some films as more promising than others, and vaguely game out how the rest of the year will go. But I prefer the Damien route: wait for the films to be seen and responded to, so the films make the race rather than vice versa.

I think the very existence of the internet put a nail in that particular coffin but the industry is changing rapidly so hopefully one day the races will be as unpredictable as they were in the 70s. Everyone and their mother running a "critics' award" and embossing their oscar predictions on a certificate isn't helping matters though.

So true. I don't even bother paying any attention to most of the awards apart from the ones that have been going for decades. They are such a bore.

[bizarre]

I have a question that applies maybe more to other sites than here: why so much confidence in Gary Oldman/The Darkest Hour? What in Joe Wright's filmography leads one to believe he could generate a major awards contender? I'd argue that Joe Wright has led Oscar predictors down the garden path more than almost any other current director.

Which leads to a generalized critique of these imaginary Oscar contests. It seems to me this process makes people imagine the inside of heads of caricatured Academy voters -- those with the worst, most baity taste. Very often such predictions fail dismally -- remember best picture winner Unbroken? But they can also occasionally elevate dreck like The Danish Girl or Invictus, which then survive as nominees almost solely because people had them on lists for so long that the idea of them as contenders becomes impossible to dislodge, no matter how indifferently they're received by critics and public. Stop feeding the machine!

Of course I view some films as more promising than others, and vaguely game out how the rest of the year will go. But I prefer the Damien route: wait for the films to be seen and responded to, so the films make the race rather than vice versa.

I think the very existence of the internet put a nail in that particular coffin but the industry is changing rapidly so hopefully one day the races will be as unpredictable as they were in the 70s. Everyone and their mother running a "critics' award" and embossing their oscar predictions on a certificate isn't helping matters though.

[ThePianist]

I have a question that applies maybe more to other sites than here: why so much confidence in Gary Oldman/The Darkest Hour? What in Joe Wright's filmography leads one to believe he could generate a major awards contender? I'd argue that Joe Wright has led Oscar predictors down the garden path more than almost any other current director.

Which leads to a generalized critique of these imaginary Oscar contests. It seems to me this process makes people imagine the inside of heads of caricatured Academy voters -- those with the worst, most baity taste. Very often such predictions fail dismally -- remember best picture winner Unbroken? But they can also occasionally elevate dreck like The Danish Girl or Invictus, which then survive as nominees almost solely because people had them on lists for so long that the idea of them as contenders becomes impossible to dislodge, no matter how indifferently they're received by critics and public. Stop feeding the machine!

Of course I view some films as more promising than others, and vaguely game out how the rest of the year will go. But I prefer the Damien route: wait for the films to be seen and responded to, so the films make the race rather than vice versa.

THANK YOU! I have no f'ing clue why people are going with 'The Papers' or 'Darkest Hour' for early major contenders, It's like they're retarded or something. Steven Spielberg hasn't made an above decent film since 'Minority Report,' and almost the rest of his filmography after that consists of Oscar Bait that hasn't been taken seriously as a major front runner. Everyone's argument on 'Darkest Hour' is that it's "Prime Joe Wright Bait! He Made 'Atonement' and that's when there was only 5 BEST PICTURE NOMINEES DURRRR!" Really? It's like everyone keeps making the same mistake over and over while never learning. Some Moronic Narc on 'movieawardsredux' named 'JayAgain' predicted the Academy will likely go with another "Generic Oscar Bait Drama" for next years Best Picture. Really?


The only reason I picked 'Call Me By Your Name' to be a BIG winner next year, is not only because It's one of the very few contenders that have been actually seen by audiences. But the early Film Festival reception for the Film has made it the almost Godlike, I'm pretty sure It's near 'Boyhood' levels of critical reception. Everyone who's seen it has fallen head over heals for it. It'll be distributed by SPC and be released in November. There's absolutely no way the film will garner no love by the time Awards Season comes by. PIus; Two LGBTQ Films winning Best Picture back to back seems like a very Modern Liberal Hollywood thing to do in order to once again flip off the Trump Administration.

(PS: The Idiots on 'AwardsWatch' are the absolute worst. Pathetic Celebrity Obsessing Tumblr Posters posing as 'Experts.')

[Mister Tee]

I have a question that applies maybe more to other sites than here: why so much confidence in Gary Oldman/The Darkest Hour? What in Joe Wright's filmography leads one to believe he could generate a major awards contender? I'd argue that Joe Wright has led Oscar predictors down the garden path more than almost any other current director.

Which leads to a generalized critique of these imaginary Oscar contests. It seems to me this process makes people imagine the inside of heads of caricatured Academy voters -- those with the worst, most baity taste. Very often such predictions fail dismally -- remember best picture winner Unbroken? But they can also occasionally elevate dreck like The Danish Girl or Invictus, which then survive as nominees almost solely because people had them on lists for so long that the idea of them as contenders becomes impossible to dislodge, no matter how indifferently they're received by critics and public. Stop feeding the machine!

Of course I view some films as more promising than others, and vaguely game out how the rest of the year will go. But I prefer the Damien route: wait for the films to be seen and responded to, so the films make the race rather than vice versa.

[ThePianist]

I agree, but I think Jason Mitchell could also show up there and in a category that seems (at this point) as rarefied as Supporting Actor does I still think he's the film's best chance for an acting nomination at the Oscars.

Don't think so. Not even as a possible wildcard. The Supporting Actor Category as of now seems to be between Stuhlbarg and Dafoe, with Cranston as a 'Maybe.'

I don't think they believe it's his time to receive an Oscar nom yet. His time will defiantly come though.

[bizarre]

Yes, Netflix controlling Mudbound is a problem, but hopefully one that can be resolved.

Don't think so. This will be their final lesson well learned on how to handle an Awards Season Campaign, and another failed attempt in trying to break through the Hollywood/Awards Season Bias on streaming services.

Mary J. Blige could possibly get a BAFTA or an SAG nom, but that's about it.

I agree, but I think Jason Mitchell could also show up there and in a category that seems (at this point) as rarefied as Supporting Actor does I still think he's the film's best chance for an acting nomination at the Oscars.

[ThePianist]

Yes, Netflix controlling Mudbound is a problem, but hopefully one that can be resolved.

Don't think so. This will be their final lesson well learned on how to handle an Awards Season Campaign, and another failed attempt in trying to break through the Hollywood/Awards Season Bias on streaming services.

Mary J. Blige could possibly get a BAFTA or an SAG nom, but that's about it.

[ThePianist]

Who among us is psychic? Time to find out!

It's easy to predict the Oscars in December but it almost takes a psychic to predict them even before half the year is over. Let's see who will be able to be more accurate in predicting the Oscars this early.

Bold Lettering = WINNER
(An Explanation for the majority of my Predictions below )

Best Picture:
Call Me By Your Name
Detroit
The Disaster Artist
The Florida Project
Get Out
Last Flag Flying
Lean on Pete
Mother!
The Post
Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri

Best Actor:
Andrew Garfield - Breathe
Timothée Chalamet - Call Me By Your Name
Gary Oldman - Darkest Hour
Harry Dean Stanton - Lucky
Daniel Day Lewis - Phantom Thread

Best Actress:
Claire Foy - Breathe
Daniela Vega - A Fantastic Woman
Margot Robbie - I, Tonya
Jennifer Lawrence - Mother!
Frances McDormand - Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri

Best Supporting Actor:
Michael Stuhlbarg - Call Me By Your Name
Will Poulter - Detroit
Willem Dafoe - The Florida Project
Bryan Cranston - Last Flag Flying
Steve Buscemi - Lean on Pete

Best Supporting Actress:
Allison Janney - I, Tonya
Michelle Pfeiffer - Mother!
Melissa Leo - The Noiviate
Meryl Streep - The Papers
Vicky Krieps - Phantom Thread

Best Director:
Luca Guadagnino - Call Me By Your Name
Kathryn Bigelow - Detroit
Sean Baker - The Florida Project
Jordan Peele - Get Out
Darren Aronofsky - Mother!

Best Original Screenplay:
Sean Baker, Chris Bergoch - The Florida Project
Mark Boal - Detroit
Jordan Peele - Get Out
Liz Hannah - The Papers
Martin McDonagh - Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri

Best Adapted Screenplay:
Luca Guadagnino, James Ivory, Walter Fasano - Call Me By Your Name
Scott Neustadter and Michael H. Weber - The Disaster Artist
Richard Linklater - Last Flag Flying
Andrew Haigh - Lean on Pete
Margaret Betts - Novitate

Best Animated Feature:
The Breadwinner
Cars 3
Coco
The Lego Batman Movie
Loving Vincent

Best Cinematography:
Roger Deakins - Blade Runner 2049
Sayombhu Mukdeeprom - Call Me By Your Name
Hoyte Van Hoytema - Dunkirk
Alexis Zabe - The Florida Project
Matthew Libatique - Mother!


First Off; Regardless of how every single one of my other predictions favors. 'Call Me By Your Name' WILL be the Big Winner heading out of the Oscars Come Next Year, Mark My Words!

Also, I believe next year we'll see the return of #OscarsSoWhite, (at least in the acting categories.) That's what I believe what'll push Academy Voters to have Jordan Peele win Best Original Screenplay for 'Get Out' over 'The Papers' perceived win. The Massive, Overwhelming love for 'Call Me By Your Name' will have Luca Guadagnino Win Best Director Next Year, along with James Ivory's Anticipated Recognition in the form of an Adapted Screenplay Win. (Note: as of now, I don't see anyone sweeping the Acting Awards Next Year like Viola Davis did this Year. Almost everyone who wins the SAG will win the Oscar.)

BEST ACTOR:
I firmly believe Gary Oldman would be the "Audience" Favorite heading in, winning the Golden Globe for Best Actor in a Drama. But I believe (much like Cumberbatch during Mid-Late 2015 Awards Season) his steam will run from when the film premieres, all the way to the start of the season, then It'll start to die down. That's when Andrew Garfield will pop out of nowhere, winning the majority of the critics awards (including the Critics Choice Award for Best Actor) all the way to a BAFTA Win. But, in the end; It'll go down between Andrew Garfield in 'Breathe,' and Daniel Day Lewis for his final performance in 'Phantom Thread.' Garfield will unexpectedly loose the SAG to Day Lewis, which will cause him to also loose the Oscar, in what would be a heartfelt sentimental victory for DDL as gives his final Oscar Acceptance Speech, capping off one of the greatest Acting Careers in History.

BEST ACTRESS:
The Race will start with Francis McDormand and Jennifer Lawrence, who'll both win Actress Golden Globes for the 2 Categories. Lawrence will win the BAFTA, but loose the Critics Choice Award and the SAG to McDormand. Which will cause everybody to be predicting McDormand as the frontrunner, but then Daniela Vega (who wasn't nominated for a Globe or a BAFTA) will pull off one of the biggest Oscar Upsets ever, winning the Academy Award for Best Actress and becoming the first Transgender to do so.

BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR:
I personally believe Amazon will push Bryan Cranston for 'Supporting' this time around, due to the possibility of less competition for Heisenberg. Michael Stulhbarg will loose the Globe to William Dafoe, and be snubbed for a BAFTA Nomination. Only to win a last second SAG award and pick up a Best Supporting Actor Win for his Tender, Tearjerking, and Caring Performance in 'Call Me By Your Name.' Plus, he's respected by just about everyone in the industry. Sure, Dafoe is also very respected, but a possible win for him would turn off a lot of voters if they think they have snub Stulhbarg to throw him a bone.

BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS:
I think next year Streep will be heading back into the Supporting Category for 'The Papers.' I not 100% confident in the Academy handing her a Another Lead Actress Nom when there are so many others, they'll still nominate her of course, but It'll instead be for the latter to beef up that category. Plus, very early on everybody thought Rachel McAdams would get a similar lead actress nom for 'Spotlight.' As he she WAS perceived to be one of the few leads in the Film. But in the end, she was nominated for supporting instead. As for the winner; Michelle Pfeiffer will be the beloved Favorite by just about everyone heading into Awards Season, winning the Globe and the BAFTA, also the majority of the Critics Awards. It'll last until word is spread around of Melissa Leo being an unexpected contender after winning the Critics Choice Award. An SAG win will make her a front runner and the enviable winner. Leo will then win her 2nd Oscar in a shocking upset.