HarryGoldfarb wrote:
- I am very happy for Paul raci, he survived a season that did not treat him quite well, with frequent omissions by important groups. His acting is one of those restrained and subtle ones that can easily be overlooked by more showy efforts. His nomination is perhaps the one that pleases me the most.
This one - almost above all the others - made me the most happy too, Harry. Paul Raci was so SO GOOD in this movie.
His character reminded me of my American Sign Language teacher in high school who was the first person to open my eyes to the fact that there was an entire group of Deaf people who were proud of their culture and community (those who were “culturally Deaf” with a capital “D”) and did not want to be hearing.
"The mantle of spinsterhood was definitely in her shoulders. She was twenty five and looked it."
HarryGoldfarb wrote:
- If Zhao wins Best Director, as it seems to be, we will continue this drought of American directors not winning, and Chazelle would remain the only one in more than 10 years.
Chazelle is the only white American man to win since the Coen brothers in 2007.
Only four of last year's nominees have returned this year -- Anthony Hopkins, Diane Warren, Michael Menkler, and Oliver Tarney. That is the lowest number of returnees since the 2nd Academy Awards!
"Go into the world and do well. But more importantly, go into the world and do good."
- Minor Myers, Jr.
The presentation of the nominees was smooth and pleasant; Priyanka and Nick did an adequate job, although I'm not sure why they were chosen.
Regarding the nominations:
- I am very happy for Paul raci, he survived a season that did not treat him quite well, with frequent omissions by important groups. His acting is one of those restrained and subtle ones that can easily be overlooked by more showy efforts. His nomination is perhaps the one that pleases me the most.
- Netflix's aggressive campaign for The White Tiger somehow paid off. I have not seen the movie, and maybe the nomination is well deserved, but I can't stop thinking about how much there is to campaign to achieve this. Perhaps this nomination explains the choice of presenters.
- I had to Google what Greyhound was ...
- The average age of the nominees for Best Director is 44.8 years; This must be one of the youngest lineups to ever nominate. At 58, Fincher is the senior of the group, while Fennell, at 35, must be in the top 20 of the youngest nominees (although this I have not verified).
- Out of the three Golden Globe winners (no SAG nomination), only Day survived. She, along with Raci, Stanfield, and Seyfried are proof that an omission by the SAGs can be survived. However, I don't know if there are more or fewer survivors this year than in previous years.
- It must be a bittersweet day for David Fincher: the fact that his late father was not nominated must be something that may be affecting him on a personal level.
- In fact, considering the end result, Mank could have easily been placed in the pantheon of 12 nominations, but was deprived of two key nominations. As it is, it looks buried in terms of chances of winning.
- Ma Rainey's Black Bottom being left out of Best Picture is somewhat unexpected: not that I'm complaining (I'm not a fan of the movie) but with five nominations it equals PYW. In fact, if it had been the ninth nominee, it would have tied with six nominations with the other six films that show that tie rarity.
- In fact, without the intention of controversy, I am pleased that neither MRBB nor ONIM were nominated for BP: I insist, they are adaptations devoid of cinematographic language. Just because a topic is important doesn't by itself make a great movie.
- It is striking how we went from Regina King being somewhat safe to today's result. For the sake of statistics, regardless of what I think about her film, it would have been gigantic to have three women nominated.
- Did Nomadland underperform? What else could it have gotten nominated? Obviously not Stratheirn ... maybe sound?
- If Zhao wins Best Director, as it seems to be, we will continue this drought of American directors not winning, and Chazelle would remain the only one in more than 10 years.
"If you place an object in a museum, does that make this object a piece of art?" - The Square (2017)
Geez, some of you have final awards all given out, before I even get to comment on the nominations.
Generally, a pleasing set -- within the vague parameters of the expected (best actor and actress slates were pretty widely predicted), but with enough wrinkles around the edges to prevent them being mere rubber-stamp for earlier groups.
It turns out the Globes' Best Drama list -- which omitted Da 5 Bloods, Ma Rainey and One Night in Miami -- was prescient...though AMPAS deflects the racism charge by including late-breaker Judas and the Black Messiah, as well as Minari (and Sound of Metal, with its Asian protoagonist). The nominations in their entirety, in fact, are something of a monument to diversity -- three black supporting actors! two black actresses for the first time since 1972! multiple Asian actors nominated! two female directing contenders! -- but two highly-touted black efforts, Ma Rainey and One Night in Miami, under-performed. (To be fair, so did Mank, which is neck and neck with The Father as the white-man-est of the contenders.)
Honestly, I was unenthusiastic about either Ma Rainey or One Night in Miami as films (as opposed to their individual elements), and liked Judas and the Black Messiah far more, so it shook out well enough for my taste. Nomadland, Promising Young Woman and Minari still unseen, Judas/Messiah and The Father are the two contenders that have roused my artistic sense the highest, so I'm very pleased to see them on the list despite their late starts. And two cheers for Sony Classics, who finally don't blow a contender -- in fact, have it perform about as well as possible. Moral of the story: Sony Classics should team up with the Brits more often.
I will always lament the absence of Delroy Lindo, but the best actor list is hard to strenuously argue with. In fact, it's easily superior to "normal" years like 2017 or 2015. Some people are arguing that Ma Rainey's weakish showing, and Boseman's failure to score the possible double, mean he's not quite the lock we assumed. My response to these people: bet me; I'll be glad to take your money.
So, yeah, once again, two black actresses are nominated, and, once again, it's because of Billie Holiday -- the Edith Piaf of black chanteuse roles. Viola Davis becomes the most-nominated black female performer ever, with her 4th nomination -- no doubt there are more to come. Vanessa Kirby is still probably a blank for most people (until you tell them, oh, Princess Margaret), but maybe this will get her film more attention. Carey Mulligan is probably the favorite, but, with BAFTA out of the picture for her, she won't have the undeniable march to victory she might have. I think Day and even McDormand have a shot at the upset.
So, supporting actor provided our communal "wow -- where did that come from?" It's ridiculous, of course, for Stanfield to be nominated in this category -- marginally more ridiculous than Kaluuya -- but Stanfield is a terrific actor, and I was happy both for his achievement and for the fact he was a more interesting alternative than any other possibility named. It's weird that supporting actor, having gone a quarter century without double-nominees, has now put up such a slate three out of four years. Even weirder that one of them was so totally unexpected -- this is more, as noted below, Jennifer Tilly (Bullets over Broadway)/Joan Cusack (Working Girl): unexpected castmate to widely expected nominees. (Also weird that Stanfield was thought to, if anywhere, be campaigning for best actor. People are understandably going to evoke Kate Winslet/2008, but what this calls most to mind for me is Susan Sarandon's surprise best actress nomination for Atlantic City, when she confessed even she'd voted for herself under supporting.) Oh, and lest it pass by unnoticed: despite missing multiple precursors, Paul Raci secured the well-deserved nomination.
In supporting actress, perhaps the biggest news is that Amanda Seyfried, the one who went from potential winner to potential snub-ee, nailed her spot. And that Bakalova/Youn proved the critics still have sway. Foster becomes the first Golden Globe winner in her category to fail to repeat at the Oscars since Katharine Ross/Voyage of the Damned. Burstyn fails to rack up longevity/age-related records. And the category, to me, remains wide open -- I honestly can't rule out anyone winning.
Side issue: we can laud BAFTA for having put The Father into contention, a la Darkest Hour, but their effort with The Mauritanian was a complete bust.
Thomas Vinterberg is not only a lone director (our third since the '09 expansion), but a lone-lone director -- his nomination being the only one for his film in standard Oscar categories (i.e., International Film, under a different set of qualifying rules, doesn't count). This is a VERY select list past 1930: Mark Robson (The Inn of the Sixth Happiness); Hiroshi Teshigahara (Woman in the Dunes -- same circumstance as Another Round re Foreign Film, though in his case it was a year earlier); Arthur Penn (Alice's Restaurant); Fellini (Satyricon); David Lynch for both Blue Velvet and Mulholland Drive; Martin Scorsese (The Last Temptation of Christ); Robert Altman (Short Cuts).
He also completes the Scandinavian trifecta for the category -- Bergman & Troell long ago represented Sweden; Tyldum (Imitation Game) covered Norway; and now Denmark is in the game.
Ma Rainey's surprising omission from adapted screenplay might suggest the writers' branch is finally invoking BJ's "how much is writing and how much is copying?" question. Of course, one could follow-up "Howcome The Father and One Night in Miami are okay?" -- the answer is either 1) there was more obvious work making the latter two into films, while Ma Rainey seemed straight-up transcription...or 2) voters weren't as familiar with the other two, and experienced them all more anew. Interesting that The White Tiger managed to pull in here, ahead of a competing Netflix entry. Maybe Netflix might have done better to push Tiger harder?
Oh, and, I agree with what's said below, that Nomadland could lose screenplay and still easily win best picture (assuming its easy directing win). But which of these nominees might beat it? The Father?
Yes, it makes for a good joke that a movie about a screenwriter could lead the nominations and have screenplay be among the missing. I've long said I thought Mank was an inertia candidate -- getting nominations because it was so engineered to be a big Oscar movie, but showing weakness at the margins (here and in editing). Sabin blanched when I compared Mank to Bugsy, but the feeling was much the same about Levinson's film in 1991 -- that it was getting nominated everywhere, but who expected or wanted it to win anything? Mank may well end up with exactly the same two prizes in the end. Or less.
By the not-long-ago standard that a film needs nominations for directing/screenplay/editing to have a real shot at best picture, Nomadland or Promising Young Woman are the only possibilities. But we've seen exceptions to those rules of late (Green Book without directing, Birdman without editing, Titanic without screenplay), so we wait and see.
Original screenplay, by the way, seems to me a complete jump ball between Promising Young Woman and Trial of the Chicago 7. And I'm not sure the Writers Guild -- a somewhat male-dominated group -- will be a sure harbinger.
The deepest impact COVID had was probably on the Visual Effects category, where we're going to have to plow through some real obscurities to be completists.
And yes, thank god I don't have to put myself through Cherry.
Interesting trend: We're on a four-year run of actors being nominated for song as well as performance (Blige, Gaga, Erivo, now Odom Jr.).
There are other things I'm probably forgetting, but I want to get this posted before it's even later in the day. I reserve the right to re-comment later.
I can’t imagine Kaluuya NOT winning. It’s rare to see a performance as powerful as his, combining charismatic ferocity with sensitivity and nuance. Performances with that level of “wow” just don’t lose very often.
Already people on my feed are convinced Daniel Kaluuya is going to lose because voters will split between not just Kaluuya, Stanfield, AND Leslie Odom Jr. because they're going to look at all the black performers the same and split the vote. So, we're not the only people who talk about vote-splitting in the world, lol. But they legitimately think that will happen.
Daniel Kaluuya is the odds-on favorite to win the BAFTA and the SAG, as well as the Critic's Choice and Golden Globe. I don't think we've ever had an actor win all four and lose.
I'm guessing the Kaluuya and Stanfield votes were from different groups - one considering the other lead and vice versa rather than the same people voting for both in support which would be blatant category fraud.
Sabin wrote:Congratulations to Daniel Kaluuya and LaKeith Stanfield for being the first two Best Leading Actors nominated in a Supporting Role.
LaKeith Stanfield's nomination is a big surprise. I doubt anyone will project LaKeith Stanfield will siphon votes from Daniel Kaluuya -- the way perhaps Joan Cusack diminished Sigourney Weaver's voter base for Working Girl. Rather it will be a case similar to when Jessica Lange won for Tootsie with co-star Teri Garr also nominated (and when Dianne Wiest won for Bullets Over Broadway with Jennifer Tilly among the contenders). Daniel Kaluuya still seems positioned to win even when competing against his fellow co-star. (Timothy Hutton won with Judd Hirsch also nominated for Ordinary People.)
Last edited by Jefforey Smith on Mon Mar 15, 2021 1:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.
OscarGuy wrote
Pinocchio, Love and Monsters, and Another Round are the three I was thinking of, but that LaKeith Stanfield selection is also odd, though I doubt intentional.
That's not that many weird nominations. Most of those are, like, who cares? Visual Effects, Makeup...
I guess Thomas Vinterberg but we've seen the director's branch do this before with Pawel Pawlikowski and Cold War over Peter Farrelly and Green Book. It seems like a director's flip. And Best Director was in a weak scattershot place this year with notable snubs besides Sorkin (who to be fair, did not do a great job directing so this cannot be a surprise) include people we've literally never heard of before: Florian Zeller, Darius Marder, Shaka King... I guess one could make the argument that Regina King was a high-profile snub but she's always been a bit of a longshot.
LaKeith Stanfield being nominated for Best Supporting Actor is VERY weird because he was pushed for Best Actor. Why did they think they could nominate him for supporting? It would only make sense if half the voters thought LaKeith Stanfield was the lead and half thought that Daniel Kaluuya was the lead, and both voted for both. The closest thing I can think of is Leonardo DiCaprio pushed for Best Supporting Actor for Supporting... but Stanfield wasn't even pushed for support. Usually, the Academy promotes upward to lead by mistake. I know we're talking about race a lot on this board recently but really, would a white guy be pushed to supporting like this?
Really there's just two weird nominations that I can tell and both are welcome in my book.
rolotomasi99 wrote:It will be interesting to see what order they put the categories on Oscar night. If Editing is toward the beginning of the night, we could have a good idea of which film will win Best Picture. NOMADLAND or PROMISING YOUNG WOMAN winning would be a strong sign they were going all the way that night. THE TRIAL OF THE CHICAGO 7 winning would not be a guarantee of success in Best Picture since it is the nominee with probably the most editing (similar to FORD V FERRARI beating PARASITE last year).
As for Original Screenplay, THE TRIAL OF CHICAGO 7 and PROMISING YOUNG WOMAN will not win Best Picture if they are not triumphant here. Either could still lose to NOMADLAND at the end of the night, but they certainly will not lose to the film they beat for writing. NOMADLAND, on the other hand, could easily lose in Adapted Screenplay and still be take the top prize since even fans of the film agree it is not a writer's movie.
Besides Best Picture itself, I doubt the three frontrunners will end the night completely empty handed:
NOMADLAND has Director locked, plus has a good shot in Cinematography. Adapted Screenplay, Actress, and Editing are possible but it faces strong competition in those categories.
PROMISING YOUNG WOMAN is the frontrunner in Actress as far as I can tell (though by no means a lock). I actually think it has a slight advantage in Original Screenplay given the writer was also nominated for Director but will not win. Winning in Editing is only possible if it is taking Best Picture.
THE TRIAL OF THE CHICAGO 7 has a good shot at Editing but all of the nominees seem like plausible winners. As mentioned, it faces stiff competition in Original Screenplay. Daniel Kaluuya is not going to lose in Supporting Actor, but Sacha Baron Cohen is the only other possible winner I could imagine (still...not going to happen). I just listened to all the Song nominees, and this film's entry is good but just not memorable enough to win. Its inclusion in Cinematography is actually embarrassing so it can just fuck off.
At this point, I think NOMADLAND win Best Picture, Director, and Cinematography. If the love for the film is even stronger than expected, it could pull in Adapted Screenplay and Editing like THE HURT LOCKER did with the two Sound categories. I think Actress would be more likely if this were not the third win for McDormand and so soon after the last one...but then again Day-Lewis did the same thing not too long ago.
I think it's going to pan out like this:
Nomadland - Best Picture, Director, Adapted Screenplay, Cinematography
Promising Young Woman: Best Actress, Original Screenplay
Sabin wrote:It could means either THE TRIAL OF THE CHICAGO 7 is going to win Best Picture or we have three films generally in the running for Best Picture: NOMADLAND, PROMISING YOUNG WOMAN, and THE TRIAL OF THE CHICAGO 7.
It will be interesting to see what order they put the categories on Oscar night. If Editing is toward the beginning of the night, we could have a good idea of which film will win Best Picture. NOMADLAND or PROMISING YOUNG WOMAN winning would be a strong sign they were going all the way that night. THE TRIAL OF THE CHICAGO 7 winning would not be a guarantee of success in Best Picture since it is the nominee with probably the most editing (similar to FORD V FERRARI beating PARASITE last year).
As for Original Screenplay, THE TRIAL OF CHICAGO 7 and PROMISING YOUNG WOMAN will not win Best Picture if they are not triumphant here. Either could still lose to NOMADLAND at the end of the night, but they certainly will not lose to the film they beat for writing. NOMADLAND, on the other hand, could easily lose in Adapted Screenplay and still be take the top prize since even fans of the film agree it is not a writer's movie.
Besides Best Picture itself, I doubt the three frontrunners will end the night completely empty handed:
NOMADLAND has Director locked, plus has a good shot in Cinematography. Adapted Screenplay, Actress, and Editing are possible but it faces strong competition in those categories.
PROMISING YOUNG WOMAN is the frontrunner in Actress as far as I can tell (though by no means a lock). I actually think it has a slight advantage in Original Screenplay given the writer was also nominated for Director but will not win. Winning in Editing is only possible if it is taking Best Picture.
THE TRIAL OF THE CHICAGO 7 has a good shot at Editing but all of the nominees seem like plausible winners. As mentioned, it faces stiff competition in Original Screenplay. Daniel Kaluuya is not going to lose in Supporting Actor, but Sacha Baron Cohen is the only other possible winner I could imagine (still...not going to happen). I just listened to all the Song nominees, and this film's entry is good but just not memorable enough to win. Its inclusion in Cinematography is actually embarrassing so it can just fuck off.
At this point, I think NOMADLAND win Best Picture, Director, and Cinematography. If the love for the film is even stronger than expected, it could pull in Adapted Screenplay and Editing like THE HURT LOCKER did with the two Sound categories. I think Actress would be more likely if this were not the third win for McDormand and so soon after the last one...but then again Day-Lewis did the same thing not too long ago.
"When it comes to the subject of torture, I trust a woman who was married to James Cameron for three years."
-- Amy Poehler in praise of Zero Dark Thirty director Kathryn Bigelow
Pinocchio, Love and Monsters, and Another Round are the three I was thinking of, but that LaKeith Stanfield selection is also odd, though I doubt intentional.
And, Franz, Emerald Fennell was nominated for 3 (Picture, Directing, and Original Screenplay)
Wesley Lovell
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." - Benjamin Franklin
OscarGuy wrote
I'm very excited for Chloé Zhao and, especially, Emerald Fennell, for getting nominated. History made. That said, I can't help but feel a little disappointed in some of the nominations. They went for oddball choices seemingly for the sake of picking oddball choices.
Franz Ferdinand wrote:
Leslie Odom Jr. becomes the third person to receive Acting and Song nominations in the same year after Mary J. Blige and Lady Gaga, all within the past 4 years.
Actually he's the fourth person. Cynthia Erivo was also nominated in acting and song last year.
