Are you saying you want the predictions to be spoiled simply to keep things interesting, or because you find the current general consensus to be a bad crop of potential nominees? Gyllenhaal would be a spoiler I could celebrate, while Watts would be an unwelcome shift from the common wisdom in the acting categories. If the popular predictions are going to be upended, please let the interlopers be worthy of crashing the party.flipp525 wrote:Um, but I want the Oscar predix to be spoiled. There's nothing worse than a total slate of ho-hum expected nominations on Oscar nom morning. For example, I think a category like Best Supporting Actress is ripe for a Marcia Gay Harden-type dark horse to come in this year. As Mister Tee keeps invoking, Patricia Arquette (as good as she is in Boyhood - and, yes, ITALIANO, it's a good performance) is no Mo'Nique.rolotomasi99 wrote:Just looking back a few years, there is usually one or two SAG nominees from each category that miss out on an Oscar nomination. It is very possible the four most surprising nominees this year (Gyllenhaal, Aniston, Watts, Duvall) will not spoil our Oscar predix. 2009 is an anomaly in how closely the SAG and Oscar nominations matched.
As for Supporting Actress, do you have a certain person in mind to pull off this shocking win? Chastain, maybe.