Unofficial Academy Awards Discussion Board

I guess it depends on the timing of release. I don't think the Oscars permit day-and-date releases, so they would have to release in theaters first and later show on Netflix. Narrative films have vastly different rules than documentaries and short films.

We have reason to believe that Beasts of No Nation is some kind of hit in the making. What if Netflix assists its visibility a la Z Channel and it becomes a more serious contender than perhaps we are thinking?

This season is aggressively biopic-heavy already.

Gotta love Sasha's latest pronouncement on the Best Actor race:

"We in the pundit world would make our predictions for the top five probably along these lines:

1. Leo DiCaprio, The Revenant
2. Eddie Redmayne, The Danish Girl
3. Tom Hardy, Legend
4. Johnny Depp, Black Mass
5. Bryan Cranston, Trumbo
6. Michael Fassbender, Steve Jobs
7. Michael Caine, Youth
8. Tom Hanks, Bridge of Spies"

You'll note that 6 of the 8 are playing real life people. The supposed front-runner, one of only two playing fictional characters, will probably not be seen by SAG voters and maybe not even Globe voters in time for their consideration. Maybe those in the pundit world will prove more valuable to Oscar prognosticating then the all-knowing , all-seeing precursors and validate their existence once and for all, eh, what?

Okri wrote:But I also don't think anyone can win at this point (as in, I don't think in terms of those that can win the oscar before winter).

This is a very good point, and one that more people (myself included) could stand to keep in mind. Just last night, a friend was asking if I'd seen the festival notices for Steve Jobs, adding that "Michael Fassbender is probably going to win Best Actor." My thought was, if by "probably" you mean, he's got as good a shot as any of the umpteen other candidates in the race, many of whom haven't even been seen yet, depending on how a ton of unknowable factors play out, then sure, but that's not how I define the word "probably."

Reza wrote:

OscarGuy wrote:And will they nominate Michael Fassbender for Macbeth or for Steve Jobs? That's an important question.

I think Steve Jobs will be more "user friendly" compared to Shakespeare.

Have a feeling Vikander will get a push in lead for Testament and in support for The Danish Girl.

That's unfortunate. I'm so tired of Oscar's obsession with movies about Important People™. I'd much rather them honor Fassbender for what looks to be the greatest Shakespeare film since "Chimes at Midnight."

A) BJ, I think it's very optimistic of you to hope the critics will rally against category fraud. I think the best we can hope for is that a truly acclaimed supporting actress does come along and gets most of the awards. Which never happens nowadays - the supporting categories are always wide open [/sarcasm]

B) While I don't think Redmayne can win, I also think that the performance will be spoken of in such terms - as "if he hadn't won last year, he'd be a shoo-in" type. But I also don't think anyone can win at this point (as in, I don't think in terms of those that can win the oscar before winter).

c) Sorry, Tee. I know you don't like Redmayne and Hooper, but I think Redmayne and Vikander have got to head any list of contenders. The 67 on metacritic doesn't really strike me as meaning a whole lot.

I've basically given up hope that even the most grindingly obvious cases of category fraud will ever matter to the Academy, but given that Carol seems like the type of movie that could do very well in the critics' derbies, I really do think the critics have the opportunity to at least put a dent in the fraudulent campaigning by rewarding these actresses in the correct category. My instinct has always been that Mara seems the more likely candidate for fraud simply based on fame/prestige vis a vis Blanchett, but if the critics veto that in a big way, it's possible that at least some folks in the industry might vote against Harvey's gerrymandering. (Whereas when critics' groups started honoring Casey Affleck in Support, the die seemed pretty much cast.)

Given that Tom Hooper and Eddie Redmayne are two individuals who I think have already been generously over-rewarded at the Oscars as of late, I have zero desire to root for either of them for what appears to be one of the more obvious attempts at lurching for awards this year. Obviously being designed as Oscar bait can get you pretty far, but what amazed me were the number of articles released after the trailer dropped with arguments suggesting this could be Redmayne's next Oscar-WINNING role. I'm sorry, but I find it EXTREMELY difficult to imagine a scenario in which Eddie Redmayne wins back-to-back Oscars, especially given the number of popular actors who have never won who have vehicles coming up ahead. I'd imagine The Danish Girl would have to be the next Forrest Gump in order to pull that off -- anyone want to bet on how likely a scenario that is? Do people really think the hook of Redmayne playing transgender is such an obvious awards magnet that it can overcome the pretty major hurdle of having just won last year?

Mister Tee wrote:Recall that there was a point in 2013 where Streep was proposed as supporting, so don't take any of this as more than publicist spitballing.

That was the point I was trying to make.

Mister Tee wrote:What if this is Unbroken II?

More like The Theory of Everything 2 which not only managed a nomination but a win for Redmayne. This one sounds like he actually had to do some acting, not just physical mimicry. I'm sensing a nomination, but not a win.

I have a feeling that Unbroken 2 is more likely an accurate euphemism for The Revenant.

Yes, this category manipulation smacks of Weinstein, so let's not drag Blanchett through the mud. Recall, also, that there was a point in 2013 where Streep was proposed as supporting, so don't take any of this as more than publicist spitballing. I do think this will be a test case: Blanchett and Mara are, by all reports, absolutely clear co-leads, so if voters split them up, they're making a declaration that there will never be a multiple lead nomination again.

I wasn't going to comment on how the races are shaking out until after the festivals had passed, but I'll throw in I'm surprised how many people are taking for granted that Redmayne & Vikander are dead solid certain for nominations. I'm obviously cognizant of how clearly they've been designed for nominations -- as if they were engineered in a lab -- but this was a movie that got a number of truly crappy reviews (it sits at 67 on Metacritic, and that's aided by an outlier 100 from the Variety guy, who evidently saw a different movie than everyone else did). Are we assuming there's no downward limit on how unimpressive a movie can be and still get the predicted nominations? What if this is Unbroken II?

I think Oscar Isaac is the most versatile actor around today. No two of his performances are the same. No two of his characters are the same. It's only a matter of time before he receives an Oscar nomination and quite possibly a win. It could well be for Ex Machina in support even though it's really a co-lead performance.

Regarding the co-leads in Carol, I read somewhere that Cate Blanchett is "going to go supporting", whatever that means. I thought it was up to the voters to ultimately determine category. She's the bigger star, has what looks to be the slightly larger role so if they're going to split them up, she would be the more likely contender in lead. If she thinks that "going Supporting" would make it easier for her to win a third Oscar in a weak field, it's possible, but they don't exactly give out third Oscars like they're candy. It kind of reminds me of the Meryl Streep-Julia Roberts uproar of a couple of years ago over category placement in August: Osage County. Then I remembered that both are Weinstein Company releases so it's more likely Harvey, not Cate, who is behind this foolishness. Enough with this guy controlling or attempting to control every Oscar race.

Reza wrote:Have a feeling Vikander will get a push in lead for Testament and in support for The Danish Girl.

I'd say that if Rooney Mara gets a co-lead nomination in Best Actress alongside Blanchett, Vikander will get a supporting nod for The Danish Girl. If Mara goes into support (ugh), Vikander might get lead placement. From the trailer, she looks to be quite impressive in it (certainly more than Felicity Jones' barely-registered performance opposite Redmayne which was nominated last year, albeit in a weaker field). Also, the trailer shows THE ENTIRE FILM.

It's sort of hard to imagine Mara/Blanchett both making it into lead when that hasn't happened since '91 with Davis/Sarandon AND desperate Oscar whore Harvey Weinstein is involved and can smell a likely win in support for Mara.

Reza, I agree with Precious Doll: Testament of Youth will not be making a showing here. Possibly BAFTAs and/or critics' prizes.

OscarGuy wrote:Ex Machina isn't a competitor. Oscar Isaac will continue to have to wait. Best Actor is way too tough right now.

And will they nominate Michael Fassbender for Macbeth or for Steve Jobs? That's an important question.

I think, though, that a strong case could be made for Oscar Isaac as a Supporting Actor for Ex Machina, though, and he could carry through in that category. He is due a nomination in many circles and has a flashy part that got strong reviews in a movie that performed very well. With the right push he could get in there.

OscarGuy wrote:And will they nominate Michael Fassbender for Macbeth or for Steve Jobs? That's an important question.

I think Steve Jobs will be more "user friendly" compared to Shakespeare.

Have a feeling Vikander will get a push in lead for Testament and in support for The Danish Girl.