Unofficial Academy Awards Discussion Board

All these mentions of just Cuaron and Cooper for Best Director are ignoring the real possibility of a career Oscar to Lee.

Precious Doll wrote:I know Cuaron is virtually considered a given for director but given he is also a given for Foreign Language Film & cinematography, does the Academy really want to give him a third award on the night for director.

The ballot will list Mexico as the FLF nominee and Roma as the directing nominee. Even though virtually everyone knows who made it, it could make a difference that they’re not voting for “Alfonso Cuarón” each time.

flipp525 wrote
I'm starting to think that Rami Malek could possibly win Best Actor and Bradley Cooper would then get Best Director, as crazy as that would have sounded a month ago and still kind of does. Cooper will get three nods for Picture, Director, and Actor (possibly a fourth for Screenplay) and Director would be his 'consolation prize,' since he had a great hand in that picture and it was a big success beyond everyone's expectations. Likewise, Bohemian Rhapsody has grossed more than half a billion dollars and Rami plays a beloved British singer, uses an accent and dons false teeth (Nicole Kidman factor) plus as a son of Egyptian immigrants he's considered a minority.

Just throwing that out there. Stranger things have happened. People seem a little too quick to be naming Cooper as a sure-thing Actor winner at the moment. To tie this in to the La Vie en Rose comparison made below, everyone thought Julie Christie was guaranteed a second Oscar at this point in the conversation. I know the metrics of the comparison don’t like up exactly, but it’s something worth considering. I think this could very well turn into a Cooper v. Malek race rather than the Cooper v. Bale one most people are envisioning.

I haven't even seen Bohemian Rhapsody, but I've seen Vice. Trust me. Christian Bale has almost no chance of winning. The film is a bitter pill. Even though Christian Bale is staggeringly convincing as Dick Cheney, he's not winning it. The film's biggest problem is it doesn't have a clear view of who Dick Cheney. This is literally a disclaimer at the start of the film.

It's Cooper v. Malek for sure. In the end, I think the likeliest scenario is that Cooper wins Best Actor* for two reasons:

1) Even though Bradley Cooper is a three-time acting nominee, it feels like people are only truly acknowledging him as an exceptional actor RIGHT NOW. I think that's because all three of his previous nominations were surprises, on the bubble, or so completely overshadowed by the competition that people forget he was nominated in the first place. His American Sniper nomination is the most memorable because A) nobody was expecting it, and B) the controversy surrounding the film. But even though this will easily be my least favorite of his nominated performances, it's his first "Look at me" tour de force.

2) As I've said elsewhere, the Best Actor races these days are pretty much "Front-Runner + Four Others = Front-Runner Wins." So... Malek has a shot. So did Denzel Washington. But I think even if Malek upsets, it's hard to argue against Bradley Cooper being the clear front-runner at this point.

Also, I just really don't think the Away from Her/La Vie En Rose comparison tracks.

* (and prob Director too, although I do see Cuaron winning another Best Pictureless-Best Director prize becoming the next Ang Lee, which makes a certain amount of sense).

anonymous1980 wrote:

Precious Doll wrote:
Its also been an awfully long time since an actor turned director won the best director award - Mel Gibson being the last for Braveheart. Its funny that in the 16 year period 4 actors turned directors won director and two of them (Redford & Costner) for directorial debuts. Beatty & Gibson won for their second directorial efforts.

Are you not counting Clint Eastwood?

He was such a well-established filmmaker when he won (had been directing for two decades) that I wouldn't put him alongside Gibson, Costner, et al.

Precious Doll wrote:
Its also been an awfully long time since an actor turned director won the best director award - Mel Gibson being the last for Braveheart. Its funny that in the 16 year period 4 actors turned directors won director and two of them (Redford & Costner) for directorial debuts. Beatty & Gibson won for their second directorial efforts.

Are you not counting Clint Eastwood?

Big Magilla wrote:Cuaron cannot be nominated for Best Foreign Language Film, which is given to the country of origin, not the director although it is usually accepted by the director on behalf of the country.

Nevertheless, it will be seen as his 'win'.

Cuaron cannot be nominated for Best Foreign Language Film, which is given to the country of origin, not the director although it is usually accepted by the director on behalf of the country.

Reza wrote:As much as Ramek is a serious threat to win Best Actor it will be Cooper who will most probably win. He has the Susan Hayward/Shirley MacLaine factor going for him - four previous nods without a win.

The directing prize will easily go to Cuaron.

Whilst that sounds about right things may play out very differently.

Cooper could be up for 4 awards (producer, director, actor, screenplay adaptation). However, Cuaron could be up for 6 awards (producer, director, screenplay, cinematography, editing & Foreign Language Film).

I know Cuaron is virtually considered a given for director but given he is also a given for Foreign Language Film & cinematography, does the Academy really want to give him a third award on the night for director.

With Roma locked out of the SAGs help makes for a potentially interesting award show for those viewing it.

Its also been an awfully long time since an actor turned director won the best director award - Mel Gibson being the last for Braveheart. Its funny that in the 16 year period 4 actors turned directors won director and two of them (Redford & Costner) for directorial debuts. Beatty & Gibson won for their second directorial efforts.

As much as Ramek is a serious threat to win Best Actor it will be Cooper who will most probably win. He has the Susan Hayward/Shirley MacLaine factor going for him - four previous nods without a win.

The directing prize will easily go to Cuaron.

Director would be the grand prize for Cooper, actor the consolation prize.

1. I can definitely see it coming down to Cooper vs Malek.

2. Not sure I imagine director being the spot where they recognize Cooper above all, though.

I'm starting to think that Rami Malek could possibly win Best Actor and Bradley Cooper would then get Best Director, as crazy as that would have sounded a month ago and still kind of does. Cooper will get three nods for Picture, Director, and Actor (possibly a fourth for Screenplay) and Director would be his 'consolation prize,' since he had a great hand in that picture and it was a big success beyond everyone's expectations. Likewise, Bohemian Rhapsody has grossed more than half a billion dollars and Rami plays a beloved British singer, uses an accent and dons false teeth (Nicole Kidman factor) plus as a son of Egyptian immigrants he's considered a minority.

Just throwing that out there. Stranger things have happened. People seem a little too quick to be naming Cooper as a sure-thing Actor winner at the moment. To tie this in to the La Vie en Rose comparison made below, everyone thought Julie Christie was guaranteed a second Oscar at this point in the conversation. I know the metrics of the comparison don’t like up exactly, but it’s something worth considering. I think this could very well turn into a Cooper v. Malek race rather than the Cooper v. Bale one most people are envisioning.

Very spot on Uri.

La Vie en Rose was a mess of a film and that muddled narrative led me to suspect that the film was cut that way because if had played out in events in order its shortcomings would have been even more obvious. Director Olivier Dahan has literally disappeared and My Own Love Song and Grace of Monaco confirm the man is devoid of any talent and I suspect his earlier French films probably remain justifiably obscure.

At least Bohemian Rhapsody is well edited but that SAG ensemble nomination There are really no other characters in the film that register any more than a sketch apart from Freddie Mercury. The other things that struck me is how well cast the other actors were that played the band members. They had virtually nothing to do but they all looked like the members of Queen. Those hairdos helped too I think. Regardless, whoever green lite the film at Fox deserves a big Christmas bonus.

A lame film. Watchable, maybe, but very lame.

It reminds me of watching La Vie en Rose, being a lifelong fan of Edith Piaf – the film was no good, but yes, once the first few notes of Non je ne regrette rien, or Milord or the title song were heard I was conditioned to be emotionally responsive, and that response, as well as the response by many to BR, have nothing to do with whatever over simplified, childishly manipulated sentimental drivel is served onscreen.

Back then people confused Marion Cotillard’s serviceable performance for the second coming of the legendary icon she was playing, and likewise, people are likely to project, awards wise, their admiration for Mercury on Rami Malek (although, admittedly, a well cast capable actor, who would have probably been far more interesting in a better film).

My nephew is a professional musician, and this is what he wrote about it:

“I love the music of Queen, but it's hard for me to explain what an awful movie Bohemian Rhapsody is.

For those who haven’t seen it yet (I would say it's a spoiler, but these are all things which happened 30 years ago, and we all know quite a bit about them), practically all the scenes from the film are characters who read out AllMusic entries about themselves. The dialogues are bursting with so many clichés, I was squirming with embarrassment half the time.

The characters have no story or personality. There is no exciting or intriguing narrative. Most of the dialogues between the characters are actually arguments between members of Queen who seem to know before they wrote each song how the reviews will look at it 30 years later and mention it in their conversations with each other.

In short, spare your time, and go listen to Queen songs instead, because they're really good.”

A smart kid.

Since I mentioned this in the Globes thread, my brief thoughts:

I only went because Malek has been touted as a lead actor candidate, and I was kind of dreading it. But, like Precious Doll, I found it surprisingly watchable. There's nothing notable or inventive about it -- subject matters aside, it pretty much follows the template of showbiz bios from the 40s on -- but there's not much about it that's cringeworthy, the dialogue scenes are fairly crisp, and the other band member characters have a general likability about them that makes it all go down easy. As for the music...I never thought Queen was a "great" band -- I thought Bohemian Rhapsody was a song that was straining way too hard to be important. But their music is emotional and rousing (I still remember waking up the morning after the Yankees won the World Series in 1978, and how great We Are the Champions sounded on the radio), and the final performance at Live Aid ends the movie on a stirring note.

Malek is an actor I thought was sensational on the first season of Mr. Robot. I didn't care for what he did in this film's first half hour -- a charitable interpretation would be, he was suggesting Freddie was trying out outrageous personalities before he settled into himself, but more likely it was the actor struggling to find a authentic voice. But his work in the later scenes, and of course the musical performances, is first rate.

Again, this is not to oversell the film, which no doubt benefited from my below-the-floor expectations. But I didn't think it was nearly as bad as some reviews have suggested. (I even thought it was kind of a companion piece to A Star is Born, with Malek playing both parts and surviving long enough to do his own tribute finale.)