Awards Season 22/23

Those acting noms are all over the place, who are the snubs? I can’t think off the top of my head

Although I never expected Redmayne or Cruise for Actor, if I’m honest
 
I’ve been trying to think where I know her from, and Google reminded me it was of course Oblivion.

Not a bad movie. But she was forgettable in that as well.
 
Notable FLOPS/SNUBS

Babylon across the board - no acting noms, no directing, no Best Picture.
The Woman King - Viola Davis snubbed, no Picture or Director.
Women Talking - No acting* or directing nom, but a surprise Best Picture nod at least. (*Jessie Buckley FOILED AGAIN! :disco: )
Tom Cruise for Top Gun Maverick (which otherwise did very well)
Dolly de Leon for Triangle of Sadness (must have come very close given how well the movie did elsewhere)
Eddie Redmayne for The Good Nurse :disco:
Danielle Deadwyler for Till (and Till in general)
The Son - its momentum died fast once people saw it, but Hugh Jackman was an early favourite for Best Actor
Nope - I didn't see it anywhere?
Empire of Light - its momentum was also pretty much dead, but there were thoughts Academy fave Colman might sneak into actress
Nina Hoss in Best Supporting for Tár
She Said for Carey Mulligan and pretty much across the board
Glass Onion for Janelle Monae in particular
 
  • Like
Reactions: dUb
funky said:
Those acting noms are all over the place, who are the snubs? I can’t think off the top of my head

Although I never expected Redmayne or Cruise for Actor, if I’m honest
Click to expand...

I think of the top of my head Viola for Woman King, Nina Hoss for TAR (a movie that you will never watch), Danielle Deadwyller for Till and the Women Talking actresses.
 
Viola Davis of course! :o

which is a bit :manson: considering Ana de Armas got in
 
Ana De Armas has apparently been campaigning HARD. What a joke though, the movie is pretty much universally reviled. Should have been Davis or Deadwyler.
 
I’m glad Ana De Armas at least managed to get one win out of doing Blonde which without this nominations could have been a career killer.
 
Nina Hoss was amazing.

Could definitely have seen Cate take Best Actress and Nina Supporting for Tar.
 
As much as I love Cate and Tar is one of her best performances. I’m still rooting for Michelle, Cate is gonna get many more chances to get her 3rd and probably 4th oscars.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VoR
The Twitterati were already pre-emptively fuming about JLC getting in over Stephanie Hsu, so I'm really pleased they're both in so our unproblematic queen Jamie-Lee can just enjoy being an Oscar nominee without being dragged online all month. :disco:
 
A JLC and Stephanie Hsu nomination is very chic indeed.

1674570236203.gif
 
  • Like
Reactions: VoR
The obligatory Dianne Warren nomination is just as boring as all the others. This woman has entirely too many friends!

 
I think Cate's momentum is slipping and I feel her enthusiasm on the promo circuit has been rather... muted. she did the Variety actors on actors with Michelle Yeoh and I think she knows everyone wants it to go that way. Tár getting a muted/divisive response with shit box office vs EEAAO being a breakout smash probably sealed the deal for a lot of voters too.
 
She's getting quite a bit of backlash for leveraging her celebrity mates to grab a nomination that would likely have gone to one of the two black women who got snubbed (Viola Davis and Danielle Deadwyler).

Hope it was worth it!
 
Le Pupille is on Disney+ and I thoroughly enjoyed that one too. Less so Haulout, which could have been 5 minutes long instead of half an hour and said the same thing.
 
I watched To Leslie last night and loved it, she is terrific so well deserved the nomination, even with the unusual way she got it.
 
aren't all actors (and films) nominated because rich white guys in suits wine and dine and schmooze every voter in Hollywood, and having loads of cash available to do that already puts some actors' campaigns at an advantage?

so... how is this any different or worse or worthy of investigation? calling in your famous mates to campaign for the nom openly doesn't seem worse than studios doing it behind the scenes to me.
 
I think that's kind of the irony. The Oscars trying to make out like the whole thing hasn't been engineered by industry people the last 100 years:basil:
 
Jark said:
aren't all actors (and films) nominated because rich white guys in suits wine and dine and schmooze every voter in Hollywood, and having loads of cash available to do that already puts some actors' campaigns at an advantage?

so... how is this any different or worse or worthy of investigation? calling in your famous mates to campaign for the nom openly doesn't seem worse than studios doing it behind the scenes to me.
Click to expand...
It's ALL BOUGHT, but if you buy it somewhere DIFFERENT from the STANDARD SHOPS, they won't take it :)

The sooner we start using these awards as any benchmark for quality, the better. Snobs as they are, at least Cannes put themselves through a fairer process that has a hundred times more transparency in what was selected and why.
 
Peekaboo said:
It's ALL BOUGHT, but if you buy it somewhere DIFFERENT from the STANDARD SHOPS, they won't take it :)

The sooner we start using these awards as any benchmark for quality, the better. Snobs as they are, at least Cannes put themselves through a fairer process that has a hundred times more transparency in what was selected and why.
Click to expand...

It’s not exactly bought, it’s manipulated and yes there’s a whole industry that is dedicated to campaigning that this outrage about poor thirsty Andrea is silly.
 
Anyway they put All Quiet on the Western Front back in the cinema for a week here so I went to see it.

It’s very much another 1917, technically it’s up there (although I bristle at the idea that big bloody action scenes are the mark of good film making). Other than that, war is bad, they sent kids to die, trench warfare was horrible. 7/10
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top Bottom