Unofficial Academy Awards Discussion Board

Mister Tee wrote:okri, I've given up debating anything about Three Billboards with people. Both here and in my life, I know lots of people who (like me) loved it, and others of equal education/taste who not only dislike it, but find it borderline evil. It feels like trying to argue pineapple as a flavor -- you can't convince anyone to change their feeling about it, and it's pointless to try.

I went back and reread that supporting actor "one-by-one" thread and felt now as I did then - I think Harrelson is the soul of the movie. Given that he was on his third nomination, I genuinely thought he was going to win (even when you reminded me that his sitcom roots worked against him acquiring respect). dws also mentioned that he felt Rockwell was the most "locked" performance to win on the night

It's odd, because that season you also had Janney and Metcalf going at it. Their most popular work came from television, but Janney of course, did her television work solely in the "cool era" (post-Sopranos, aka 1999), whereas Metcalf dated a decade earlier (and was sitcom vs drama, though Janney did the former as well). Both had creditable stage work by their Oscar nomination (Janney had two Tony nominations, Metcalf had three + her work with the Steppenwolf company).

Anyway, I spent a significant chunk of that (and any) Oscar season telling myself that my favourites stand a bigger shot than they actually do, so my inability to learn from my error is probably my own fault!

I think Binoche would have won anyway. She may have been a surprise winner over Bacall, but it wasn't as though the Oscar was her only win that year. She started off awards season winning the National Board of Review award, sharing it with Kristin Scott Thomas with Shine winning Best Picture.

Speaking of coattail best picture winners one can argue that Juliette Binoche caught The English Patient wave but the other examples brought up by Tee and Magilla occurred on years with very little competition. In the case of Binoche the huge favorite was Lauren Bacall so to it’s difficult to say that there was really no competition, even if Bacall’s film is dreadful. So, would Binoche win anyway in the case that The English Patient did not win best picture?

Mister Tee wrote:Here's a weird case: Octavia Spencer in The Help. Had Viola Davis won (as somewhat expected, after her SAG win), we'd probably be putting her in the dragged-along-by-a-best-actress-winner category -- but the outcome instead showed she had the strength on her own. I suspect many, if not most, of the others we're talking about would have turned out the same, so I question the very premise.

Yes, I probably would have, but Spencer's only real competition was Jessica Chastain form the same film so I would probably have called this one "would have won anyway."

Ben-Hur, though, is a prime example of a coattail Oscar. None of the nominees that year were really strong so checking off a Ben-Hur nominee to go with a vote for Heston was a no-brainer for those who voted for Heston. For those who voted for Ben-Hur for Best Picture and James Stewart or Jack Lemmon for Best Actor, I doubt Griffith would have been their first choice for Best Supporting Actor just because he was in their favorite film.

However, it is true that many of those I cited could have just as easily have been pulled in by voter's choice of Best Picture. Certainly some of them, as noted, would have won anyway.

Mister Tee wrote
okri, I've given up debating anything about Three Billboards with people. Both here and in my life, I know lots of people who (like me) loved it, and others of equal education/taste who not only dislike it, but find it borderline evil. It feels like trying to argue pineapple as a flavor -- you can't convince anyone to chance their feeling about it, and it's pointless to try.

I'll co-sign this sentiment. I don't even bring Three Billboard...'s up anymore. But I'm a glutton for punishment so I'll chime in about the film's reception and how much it was despised.

There was a great tradition of welcoming foreign visions of our country, of international filmmakers making movies about our way of life and reflecting on it. I think that in the past decade, that has changed. There is less a desire to meet the filmmaker in the middle between the understood world of the viewer and the vision of the filmmaker to see what they are trying to say and be challenged, and there is more a desire to see movies fill out checklist of agreed upon ideals. Three Billboards... just isn't quite a movie for an era consumed with reflections on racism and sexism (not a bad thing). And it was also released during a period of collective consciousness where there was less a desire to see the racists because less racist but rather to see them dead. If Three Billboards... was released one year earlier, I don't think half the detractors exist.

MaxWilder wrote:

Okri wrote: (The next 2 years were worse. I still like talking about the Oscars, but I find many of their choices now unforgivable, whereas I used to disagree with but accept them.)

You'll blow hot and cold on that. I never thought I'd watch the show with enthusiasm again after Jack Lemmon and Glenda Jackson won in 1973, for the two movies I hated most that year. But exciting wins (and there are some, most years) have a way of bringing you back.

I wonder if the overall focus here is misplaced. A lot of the wins Magilla highlights in his early post were more coat-tailed to best picture wins than other acting wins -- it wasn't Heston's victory that carried along Hugh Griffith; it was Ben-Hur's historic sweep. (In fact, Heston himself might have been simply coat-tailing on that.) Same with Harold Russell, Donna Reed, George Chakiris,Meryl Streep/Kramer. Others arguable.

Here's a weird case: Octavia Spencer in The Help. Had Viola Davis won (as somewhat expected, after her SAG win), we'd probably be putting Spencer in the dragged-along-by-a-best-actress-winner category -- but the outcome instead showed she had the strength on her own. I suspect many, if not most, of the others we're talking about would have turned out the same, so I question the very premise.

okri, I've given up debating anything about Three Billboards with people. Both here and in my life, I know lots of people who (like me) loved it, and others of equal education/taste who not only dislike it, but find it borderline evil. It feels like trying to argue pineapple as a flavor -- you can't convince anyone to change their feeling about it, and it's pointless to try.

Okri wrote:Lol, I had more understanding re: Janney's win, but I spent that entire season going "But Laurie Metcalf is right there!!!! Janney needs to give some of her emmys up anyway!!!!”

Laurie Metcalf brought me to tears. Allison Janney wore a bird as an accessory and gave the same sort of monstrous-mom performance that they had just rewarded earlier in the decade (Melissa Leo). By Oscar night, when it was clear that Metcalf had no chance, I was fully disillusioned.

(The next 2 years were worse. I still like talking about the Oscars, but I find many of their choices now unforgivable, whereas I used to disagree with but accept them.)

Okri wrote:re: Dench

Oh, hers is a make-up win, but I don't think she wins without SiL's coattails. In a scenario, for example, where Blanchett and/or Saving Private Ryan win their category, I don't think she has enough gas solely as a make-up win... to win.

Yes, Dench's win was a make-up win. But I disagree with the above scenario. If Ryan had won and Blanchett for Elizabeth, I think the Academy would still have given it to Dench. She was a distinguished stage star (like Gielgud, Olivier) before her - and like Gielgud's Oscar winning turn in "Arthur", Dench made a huge acerbic impact despite her short screen time. And think of the novelty of the two wins - both Elizabeths winning in one night.

Okri wrote: When it comes to coattails, I'm always interested in the scenario where supporting performances have long enough coattails to drag in another performance (supporting or lead) in with them, though I wonder if that is a true coattail nomination or not.

1944
Barry Fitzgerald pulled in Bing Crosby for a double Going My Way win
1953
Frank Sinatra pulled in Donna Reed for a double From Here to Eternity win
1957
Red Buttons pulled in Miyoshi Umeki for a double Sayonara win
1961
Rita Moreno pulled in George Chakiris for a double West Side Story win
1977
Vanessa Redgrave pulled in Jason Robards for a double Julia win
1987
Olympia Dukakis arguably pulled in Cher for a double Moonstruck win
2003
Tim Robbins pulled in Sean Penn for a double Mystic River win
2010
Christian Bale pulled in Melissa Leo for a double Fighter win
2013
Jared Leto pulled in Matthew McConaughey for a double Dallas Buyers Club win

MaxWilder wrote:

Okri wrote:e) I still don't understand how Rockwell won, if I'm being honest. Tee's explained it to me but I still can't get it in my head.

Like Allison Janney, he has worked with everyone and people like him.

Lol, I had more understanding re: Janney's win, but I spent that entire season going "But Laurie Metcalf is right there!!!! Janney needs to give some of her emmys up anyway!!!!"

re: Dench

Oh, hers is a make-up win, but I don't think she wins without SiL's coattails. In a scenario, for example, where Blanchett and/or Saving Private Ryan win their category, I don't think she has enough gas solely as a make-up win... to win.

When it comes to coattails, I'm always interested in the scenario where supporting performances have long enough coattails to drag in another performance (supporting or lead) in with them, though I wonder if that is a true coattail nomination or not.

mlrg wrote:Judi Dench was more a make up win than a coattail.

Good point, which makes hers a would have won anyway situation.

Okri wrote:e) I still don't understand how Rockwell won, if I'm being honest. Tee's explained it to me but I still can't get it in my head.

Like Allison Janney, he has worked with everyone and people like him.

Had Anna Paquin not win I think the winner would be Winona Ryder and not Rosie Perez.

Also Judi Dench was more a make up win than a coattail.

Tim Robbins would have won regardless of Sean Penn.

Gone with the Wind is really not an example of a coattail win but I didn't want to exclude anything that fit the formula. Had The Wizard of Oz been the phenomenon it later became and had Margaret Hamilton been nominated, Hattie McDaniel would have had some real competition. As it stands, though, had she lost to Olivia de Havilland's category slumming, it would have been an outrage they would still be talking about.

I did originally have Eva Marie Saint down as would have won anyway, but then I though if they weren't going to go with Brando, she wouldn't have been a slam dunk. The same with Joel Grey without Liza Minnelli.

Hmmm....

a) Trying to imagine Gone With the Wind existing without dominating the Oscars is a weird headspace, admittedly, but I'd be curious if de Havilland wins in that scenario.

b) I think Saint would have won anyway. Ditto Moreno and Grey.

c) Shirley Jones vs Janet Leigh is a fascinating one, for sure.

d) I had viewed Robbins as further ahead of his field than Penn his in 2003, to be honest.

e) I still don't understand how Rockwell won, if I'm being honest. Tee's explained it to me but I still can't get it in my head.