My first Oscar predictions!

[anonymous1980]

If any actor is gonna win for Mank, it's more likely to be Amanda Seyfried in Supporting Actress. Word has it she's sensational as Marion Davies and is the type of actress the Academy would love to finally give their stamp of approval to.

Let's also not forget Chadwick Boseman is being promoted as Lead. So Oldman also has that to contend with.

[Sabin]

Reza wrote
Oldman will not win again. It's too soon. Hopkins is the frontrunner provided his film has a release date set - cinema or a streaming platform.

1) I don't know. I haven't seen the films.
2) Sure, Oldman can win again. Why not? He's pretty beloved. Let's say Mank wins a ton of Oscars. Will it be possible to separate the film from his part? We've seen it happen before but if Mank is a hit, why not Oldman again?
3) And yes, Hopkins can win as well. But how many times do we spend our Oscar season playing the game of "Who hasn't won yet?" and then they don't end up winning? Remember Peter O'Toole? Anthony Hopkins can win for The Father but remember that we only had two actors over the age of 70 nominated last decade and the last time an old man won was Henry Fonda for On Golden Pond.

Reza wrote
Do you really think McDormand will win her third?

I think if Pfeiffer is nominated they will give it to her - one of those career awards.

1) I don't know. I haven't seen the films.
2) Sure, McDormand can win again. Why not? She's pretty beloved. Let's say Nomandland wins a ton of Oscars. Will it be possible to separate the film from her part? We've seen it happen before but if Nomadland is a hit, why not McDormand again?
3) And yes, Pfeiffer can win as well. But how many times do we spend our Oscar season playing the game of "Who hasn't won yet?" and then they don't end up winning? -- okay, I'm going to break with this.

Look, if we're playing the game of who is due, then we're looking at Anthony Hopkins, Michelle Pfeiffer, and Glenn Close locked in, right? What are the chances of all of them happening? Probably zero. Michelle Pfeiffer is first out to me because her movie looks like it's just going to get one nomination, because it's not getting the best reviews, and because it's an Azazel Jacobs film. And also because Michelle Pfeiffer just seems like one of those actors who is going to have to wait and wait until the *RIGHT* movie comes along that voters warm to. If that sounds silly, that's how we keep passing them over for President.

NOTE: I was getting total The Wife vibes from how French Exit sounded to me. Modestly received, likely sole nominee, vehicle for a due actress. I looked to see what the distributor is... Sony Pictures Classics! A distributor from another era. That said, they did release Still Alice, so... we'll see.

[Reza]

All of Trial of the Chicago 7 actors will be pushed for support. That lineup is getting packed.

If any of the actors deserve a nod from this film it's Frank Langella.

[Reza]

Nomadland is up for 6. Movies like Nomadland don't usually win but Best Actress seems in play. If it wins Picture, Actress, and Adapted Screenplay, it fits the new typical Oscar profile to a T.

Do you really think McDormand will win her third?

I think if Pfeiffer is nominated they will give it to her - one of those career awards.

[Reza]

Mank is up for 12. It certainly seems like it would have a shot at winning Picture, Director, Actor, Original Screenplay, Cinematography, Film Editing, Production Design, Costume Design, and Original Score. That's a hefty total.

Oldman will not win again. It's too soon. Hopkins is the frontrunner provided his film has a release date set - cinema or a streaming platform.

[Sabin]

anonymous1980 wrote
I just saw the trailer for The Midnight Sky and it looks VERY promising. It could be a stealth contender.

It looks like a reverse The Martian, where Matt Damon is on Earth but with a kid and the scientists are in spy instead of on Earth.

Clooney's smart, but this looks... fine.

[anonymous1980]

I just saw the trailer for The Midnight Sky and it looks VERY promising. It could be a stealth contender.

And, Sabin, keep in mind that this year, SUNDANCE 2021 will actually be a factor. Due to the eligibility period being extended to end of February, a buzzy hit there that we may not know about yet could try to make a play for the April Oscars.

[Sabin]

All of Trial of the Chicago 7 actors will be pushed for support. That lineup is getting packed.

[Sabin]

anonymous1980 wrote
Let me take a stab at it.

BEST PICTURE OF THE YEAR
The Father (Sony Pictures Classics) David Parfitt, Philippe Carcassone and Jean-Louis Livi, producers
Ma Rainey's Black Bottom (Netflix) Todd Black and Denzel Washington, producers
Mank (Netflix) Cean Chaffin, Eric Roth and Douglas Urbanski, producers.
Minari (A24) Christina Oh, producer.
News of the World (Universal) Gary Goetzman, Gregory Goodman and Gail Mutrux, producers
Nomadland (Searchlight Pictures) Peter Spears, Chloe Zhao, Mollye Asher, Frances McDormand and Dan Janvey, producers
One Night in Miami (Amazon) Jess Wu Calder, Keith Calder and Jody Klein, producers.
The Trial of the Chicago 7 (Netflix) Stuart M. Besser and Marc Platt, producers.

I'd like to thank Irvin for posting his first Oscar predictions, instantly followed by ten or twenty posts saying "What's the point, they're going to be cancelled anyway?" "No, they won't but they should."

Let's assume you're right, Irvin, that these are the nominees. You've been predicting now for about twenty some odd years so you've probably got a good sense of these things.

Your tally is that:

Mank will lead the day with 12 nominations followed by News of the World with 11. Ma Rainey will get 7 nominations. Nomadland, One Night in Miami, and The Trial of the Chicago 7 will get 6, The Father will get 5, and Minari will get 4.

You're predicting that The Father, Mank, News of the World, Nomadland, and The Trial of the Chicago 7 will get directing nominations, which probably puts them in closer position to win than Ma Rainey, One Night in Miami, and Minari.

You're also predicting that all of them will get writing nominations. Probably a safe best.

And you're predicting that Mank, News of the World, Nomadland, and One Night in Miami will get film editing nominations. I haven't seen One Night in Miami. It sounds stagey to me which makes me think it might be something else. But let's say you're right.

This would mean that at this point, the likeliest winners for Best Picture are Mank, News of the World, and Nomadland, right?

Here's my big question mark: when was the last time that Playtone had an Oscar contender? It's Tom Hanks' company. He's pretty square. When I saw the trailer, I cringed a little. That said, they're usually not collaborating with Paul Greengrass, a director whom I don't love but whose presence indicates there might be a little more than meets the eye.

Nomadland seems like a front-runner. It's won plenty of awards to be way out in front at this point.

There are rumblings online that Mank is a delight. My biggest concern is that it's clearly a replication of a different era, will it come off like a curio like The Good German? I get a slight Tom Jones vibe from it. It's an old-fashioned, rollicking good time in a time where we need something of the sort.

Maybe it's Mank vs. Nomadland? A nostalgia trip vs. a realism trek.

Here's another question: these days, it seems like movies end up winning around three or four trophies. That seems to be the new magic number. Spotlight (2) and The Artist (5) are this past decade's only outliers. nd there's usually some other film that is the big technical achievement that wins everything below the line.

How do Mank and Nomadland look for trophies?

Nomadland is up for 6. Movies like Nomadland don't usually win but Best Actress seems in play. If it wins Picture, Actress, and Adapted Screenplay, it fits the new typical Oscar profile to a T.

Mank is up for 12. It certainly seems like it would have a shot at winning Picture, Director, Actor, Original Screenplay, Cinematography, Film Editing, Production Design, Costume Design, and Original Score. That's a hefty total.

Anyway, just throwing some thoughts out there on the race. I'm starting my pool up in a week so thanks for the assist, Irvin. I have a better idea of what my blue chips are.

[Okri]

My three favourite theatres in the city are closed. If the world is a forgiving place, they'll reopen (though I have my doubts about two of them). I'm finding it very difficult, in this context, to get truly excited about the Oscars.

And I want to be.

[HarryGoldfarb]

I don't know about L.A., but the N.Y.F.C.C. has already declared that its cut-off will be December 31, 2020 which poses a problem if theatres do not reopen in New York before year's end. Since that doesn't seem likely, they will have to either extend their cutoff or cancel their awards for 2020 altogether.

Or, you know, give out awards for the best films that have come out this year.

I don't know why everyone is freaking out over not having "enough films." I could easily fill out a ballot of films I've seen so far this year that are awards worthy. Maybe this will just be a chance to highlight films that don't normally get highlighted.

Amen...

[HarryGoldfarb]

So you'd prefer they simply cancel the Oscars next year rather than make adjustments for eligibility due to the pandemic?

I prefer they cancel the Oscars rather than pretend a movie year existed when it didn't, in anything close to normal form. It feels to me like an attempt to preserve a ceremony for its own sake, rather than for the achievements it's meant to honor.

Why, oh why?

There have undoubtedly been achievements to honor released throughout the year, even if they ended up premiering on alternative platforms or in a reduced form.

Since the eligibility calendar adjustment has been discussed, I have felt very unhappy and uncomfortable about it.

It's been an unusual year, yes, but it's not like it doesn't exist. With its complications, it has been a challenging year for many people, for various reasons, and we will always keep that context in mind when we remember 2020. Now, films were released in theaters in a massive way between January and March 2020. Other films they have managed to be projected through different platforms and the Academy has recognized the validity of these measures (with clear conditions that must be met to maintain eligibility). So, I think it would be unfair to those who have managed to screen their films, despite adversity, if we ignore the year or even if we extend the period so that the great bets can benefit from this measure. I want to know which was, according to the criteria of the Academy, the best film that was screened in 2020 despite everything, and not the best of 2020 and part of 2021...

Let me try to explain myself with an example: what if the Best Animated Film of 2020 is Onward? Well, it wouldn't matter... it will only be the winner in a critical and most difficult year, with few productions to compete against. Would it be fair for Onward to be blamed for having been released in 2020? Well, no! It would be a mediocre winner in the absence of greater competition (once again, this is just an example. Replace Onward with the film you like in any category you mean), but we will be able to reason it in the future due to the context we are experiencing.

[Mister Tee]

So you'd prefer they simply cancel the Oscars next year rather than make adjustments for eligibility due to the pandemic?

I prefer they cancel the Oscars rather than pretend a movie year existed when it didn't, in anything close to normal form. It feels to me like an attempt to preserve a ceremony for its own sake, rather than for the achievements it's meant to honor.

Besides, if there wasn't a pandemic and the film year went ahead as expected, I don't think the Oscar race, as we see now, would change all that much. Eighty percent of the potential Best Picture nominees would remain more or less the same: The Father, Nomadland, The Trial of the Chicago 7 and Mank would still be considered major contenders. Of the films we know that were postponed/delayed to 2021, which ones would've factored this year had they been released? West Side Story, Dune, The French Dispatch and In the Heights are the only ones I can come up with.

I dispute this massively. Everything shut down in mid-March. The Fall release schedule at that point is typically only about 1/3 of the films that ultimately turn up released. The added prestige films largely come from festivals, which we didn't have this year in anything like standard form (apart from Sundance, which pre-dated recognition of the outbreak). Even those that did go ahead had way thinner English-language representation than usual. What might have emerged from a normal Cannes/Venice/Telluride/Toronto/AFI? Some films that, just in the past few years, were unknown to most of us till their festival debuts but became heavy Oscar hitters: Room, Moonlight, Jackie, Lady Bird, I, Tonya, The Favourite. There were also higher-profile titles with little Oscar hope till their enthusiastic festival response: The Big Short, The Martian, Joker.

We've also been deprived of theatrical play, which has been known to significantly enhance prospects. On one end of the scale, Bohemian Rhapsody would never have been a best picture nominee without its outlandish gross. At the other, Parasite might not have even been a best picture nominee, let alone winner, had it not displayed such spectacularly broad appeal at the box office.

Last but not least, there were films that were in production but suddenly halted -- del Toro's Nightmare Alley the most prominent I can recall, but I know there were others. Given a normal schedule, they might have been wrapped by May or June, more than enough time to enter the release schedule if studios had enough enthusiasm for them.

So, no: I don't accept that the field would be more or less the same. And, a further point everyone seems to want to forget: hardly anything has been in production since March -- a few things have haltingly returned, but not close to on a grand scale. Meaning 2021 is going to be very weak as well, apart from those few big bopper titles you cited. If, god willing, a vaccine enables us to get in the neighborhood of normality next Spring, there should be just about enough movies between this year's crop and the next to add up to one standard year. Why not go for that?

FilmFan, I planned to address your post here, as well, but this has got a bit long, and I'm being summoned somewhere, so let me defer that for a bit and address it in a separate post.

[FilmFan720]

I could easily fill out a ballot of films I've seen so far this year that are awards worthy. Maybe this will just be a chance to highlight films that don't normally get highlighted.

For my edification, please show me this ballot and tell me where you saw all these movies. (For the record, I've seen five movies that seem to fall under Eligible this year, and I couldn't come close to filling out a single category.)

And let me say that "it's a chance for films that normally wouldn't get in" is not an argument that persuades me. It's not far off from "if we have ten nominees, there'll be things that wouldn't be there otherwise", which I've also never liked. When you make it easier to qualify, you devalue the prize.

But, as I said elsewhere, I guess some people still think Mary Lou Retton is a super-Olympian.

I didn't mean that a weak year devalues films. I mean that, in a year without all of the hoopla and without the major studios piling money onto films that no one really seems excited about, it means that there are lots of films that maybe can't normally afford a major campaign to actually compete this year (not that that will happen -- the streamers seem bent on filling this out.)

But from what I've seen already, I would be happy to see Film/Director nods for Da 5 Bloods, First Cow, The Trial of the Chicago 7, and Never Rarely
Sometimes Always, and a Best Picture nomination for the underappreciated Onward. I also loved Bacurau and The Old Guard more than most people seemed to, although I imagine many here would scoff at their inclusion.

Among the actors who have given great performances this year include Delroy Lindo (and a few supporting actors) in Da 5 Bloods; Lena Olin and Bruce Dern in The Artist's Wife; Brian Dennehy in Driveways; Sidney Flanagan and Talia Ryder in NRSA; Elizabeth Moss in The Invisible Man; Julia Garner in The Assistant. Certainly, Trial of the Chicago 7 could fill Supporting Actor all by itself.

And then you have some great smaller screenplay contenders: The Climb, Saint Frances, Miss Juneteenth.

Plus, I would be thrilled with a Best Documentary lineup of Dick Johnson is Dead; Circus of Books; The Booksellers; The Way I See It; and Jasper Mall. Or even Class Action Park and John Lewis: Good Trouble.

EDIT: I forgot about Palm Springs -- certainly a worthy screenplay contender -- and Emma, which I haven't seen yet but see is available on HBO now.

[anonymous1980]

For my edification, please show me this ballot and tell me where you saw all these movies. (For the record, I've seen five movies that seem to fall under Eligible this year, and I couldn't come close to filling out a single category.)

I've seen thirty-seven 2020 releases so far (only three theatrically, the rest on streaming) and as far I know, at least 20 of them qualify for an Oscar under this year's eligibility rules.

When you make it easier to qualify, you devalue the prize.

So you'd prefer they simply cancel the Oscars next year rather than make adjustments for eligibility due to the pandemic?

Besides, if there wasn't a pandemic and the film year went ahead as expected, I don't think the Oscar race, as we see now, would change all that much. Eighty percent of the potential Best Picture nominees would remain more or less the same: The Father, Nomadland, The Trial of the Chicago 7 and Mank would still be considered major contenders. Of the films we know that were postponed/delayed to 2021, which ones would've factored this year had they been released? West Side Story, Dune, The French Dispatch and In the Heights are the only ones I can come up with.