Unofficial Academy Awards Discussion Board

Greg wrote:This reminds me of a broadcast where, before they were to announce the awards for the shorts, the host said, "And this is where the pools are won."

Mister Tee wrote:Oh, sure: it's always possible we have an upset at the Oscars, somewhere. But that's not the same as having a race. Every single person in your Oscar pool is going to put down these same four names, because they'd be idiots not to. If anyone loses, everyone loses (as we all did in best picture last year). Where's the sport in that?

Mister Tee wrote:I want to re-route this season through to about 1992, when there was no SAG, if there were Broadcast Critics no one cared, and BAFTA came months later and had nothing to do with the Oscars. This would have been so much fun.

Fuck these precursors. At this point, you have to figure they're all playing the Broadcasters' game ("No: WE predict the Oscars best!"). How in god's name do all these groups come to all the same conclusions, when I can't even pick a clear favorite in half the categories? Unless one is piggybacking on the other...creating a consensus because they find that some kind of kick?

Oh, sure: it's always possible we have an upset at the Oscars, somewhere. But that's not the same as having a race. Every single person in your Oscar pool is going to put down these same four names, because they'd be idiots not to. If anyone loses, everyone loses (as we all did in best picture last year). Where's the sport in that?

By the way: three of these are perfectly acceptable choices, by me. The other is a deserving actor who's going to be listed alongside Al Pacino/Scent of a Woman in Bad Oscars Happen to Good Actors.

Oldman was charming enough. I admit I was puzzled by his reference to Denzel as an old sparring partner. I guess he was talking about Book of Eli?

The TV awards were marginally less predictable. I fully expected Elisabeth Moss once again, so Claire Foy surprised me (I'm told she won last year, too.) The This Is Us cast seemed truly surprised/elated, so it was easy to feel good for them.

And Olivia Munn and (is it?) Niecy Nash apparently thought their shtik at the nominations was so good, they'd do it again.

anonymous1980 wrote
The Help also won 3 and that film underperformed at the Oscars taking home only Supporting Actress and getting only 3 other nominations.

Mister Tee wrote
I want to re-route this season through to about 1992, when there was no SAG, if there were Broadcast Critics no one cared, and BAFTA came months later and had nothing to do with the Oscars. This would have been so much fun.

Sabin wrote:Didn't watch the show but checked in to the Twitter feed.

BJ's fear came through. They copycatted the Globes and the Broadcasters. It sure looks like we've got our acting winners. And 'Three Billboards...' tied with 'American Beauty' and 'Chicago' for taking home the most SAG awards (3). That certainly bodes well for its chances.

The Original BJ wrote:Of course, the one category where I'd most like to see an upset -- Best Actor -- is the one that seems least likely to provide one.)

MaxWilder wrote
The SAG host/presenter thing reminds me: My one openly sexist position is that women should not be award-show announcers.

Mister Tee wrote:I'm not sure what Jada Pinkett Smith is going to say today, as her girl Tiffany was left off again -- along with Octavia Spencer -- but, at the same time, Mudbound got the top category, Mary J. Blige once again turned up

Eenusch wrote:The decision doesn't mean that the broadcast won't include men onstage at all, as video clips from the film ensemble category might be introduced by its nominated male actors.