Friday
Dec192014
The Theory of Cocktails
Friday, December 19, 2014 at 5:00PM 
Theory: I enjoy them. Will put it to the test tonight.
BEST ACTOR & BEST ACTRESS & ACTUALLY EVERY DAMN OSCAR CHART IS UPDATED ICYMI.
please drink (and comment) responsibly this weekend
Reader Comments (51)
I haven't seen all three films, so really I should just stop talking, but I'd much rather see Aniston and Cotillard get in with Jones getting squeezed out.
I'm going to predict that Jones will do far better than anyone is expecting and might even take the crown from JMoore.
Hear me out: In the last two years (and possibly longer), no actor or ensemble has gone on to win a SAG award without sending a screener. Jones is the only actress in the running with a screener currently scheduled to be sent to the membership. With nearly if not all members of the acting branch of AMPAS being SAG members, this is a lot of in your face, vote for me MOJO. It will get her in the conversation quicker and fresher and reach more members than any of the other actresses (it is foolish to think all the AMPAS ,members will trek to theater when the films can be sent directly to their door). Winning with SAG really ups the ante in the "this is the one" category,......and......if its the only performance everyone has seen, it is the only one being talked about at length. Of course, this can change and a film can decide to send a screener at any time (Lincoln).
Last year the winners matched on all four counts, only ensemble differed. The previous year 3 (Waltz won the gold but wasn't even nominated by SAG) of the four matched plus ensemble matched.
Couple that with the difficulties of the downloads (which breed bad blood about the film and studio) and you have a definite advantage.
I also predict (I'm putting on my tin hat now) that Streep is in jeopardy for a nomination for ITW. Disney is doing nothing, NOTHING to promote the film with SAG. No screener, no download, nada. They did the same last year for Mr. Banks and only scored one oscar nom (music). I know they are different films, but Emma Thompson is nearly as beloved as Streep if not as much.
Never under estimate the power of the voter thinking the nominee values their vote.
Henry -- i've been thinking a lot that Streep might be the surprise Oscar snub if Laura Dern's campaign finally clicks in. BUT I've thought that before about Streep and it just doesnt' happen. She never has any trouble being nominated.
as for the value of screeners. I wholeheartedly agree. BUT I think Julianne MOore is a big enough star that a lot of people will vote for her merely because they love her, even if they haven't seen the movie.
Nat: I hear and appreciate you on both counts.
One of the points in Dern's favor is that most AMPAS voters are located together where she can reach them easier than she could with the SAG nominating committee which was spread God knows where. Same goes for Russo who is another credible dark horse, especially with the recognition Jake is getting.
Given that 'Into the Woods' is getting pretty good reviews and is going to succeed at the box office, I actually think Meryl Streep is a big threat to win BSA. Her role is showy, the perceived front-runner (who I love, btw) gives a subtle performance, and Disney is spending a ton of money on the awards campaign. Many awards sites have ads featuring Streep as the witch all over them.
Ultimately, I don't think that Jessica Chastain will make the cut for AMVY. I think that film needed to come out much earlier and build buzz, a la 'Animal Kingdom.' She would probably be the film's sole nomination, and those contenders are the ones who most often miss out in this category, especially now with the shorter voting period.
Jay -- all i will say is a) don't remind me because Disney didn't buy here this year -- still trying to decipher why and b) if Chastain is knocked out i will be furious since i think she's better than most of the presumed nominees and dark horses.
Jay: Where are Disney spending money on the awards campaign? My point is that they are spending nothing on SAG, which is a big part of the awards season. I see them spending a great deal on getting the general public out to see the film, but that doesn't translate to getting the awards voters to vote for the film except that a hit has better word of mouth.
And, I don't care who else is nominated, BSA is Arquette's to lose. For everyone else, it really is about the honor of being nominated.
Henry -- agreed. I'd argue that J.K. Simmons and Patricia Arquette are both virtually unbeatable at this point. Which is ANNOYING. even if you love a performance it never sits right that everyone on earth has the same opinion.
Jones is locked. I've resigned myself to that fact. The Theory of Everything is so beloved within the industry that she'll have no problems getting in the final five. She's good in it, I just wish the script knew what to do with her outside of playing the standard tropes of the long-suffering, supportive wife. Oh well.
Cotillard needs something big, like a major movie star singing the praises of her and holding big Hollywood screenings for her film a la what Julia Roberts did a few years ago with Javier Bardem and his work in Biutiful. Maybe Brad and Angie will do that (hehe).
In best picture, outside of Birdman, Boyhood, The Imitation Game, The Theory of Everything, Selma, and The Grand Budapest Hotel I have no idea what happens. Unbroken could be this year's War Horse or it could be 2003's Cold Mountain and be nixed. I'm thinking Gone Girl and Foxcatcher may have enough passionate supporters to sneak into the best picture race despite both of their "polarizing" and "chilly" criticisms. And everyone who has an "in" with Academy insiders are passionately sticking by Whiplash even though it really hasn't showed up a hell of a lot outside of J.K. Simmons but neither did Beasts of the Southern Wild, so who knows. And I'm still confused about Into the Woods and A Most Violent Year. If they make enough noise during the holiday season like Wolf of Wall Street did last year and Django did the year before they could find their way in too. So many possibilities! I think there will still be 9 nominees this year so I'm going with Birdman, Boyhood, Foxcatcher, Gone Girl, The Grand Budapest Hotel, The Imitation Game, Selma, The Theory of Everything and Whiplash for the time being.
What the hell happened to Foxcatcher? Please elaborate.
I can't believe Ralph is not a lock.
Jen, we love you, but doing a good job after years of tedious performances shouldn't qualify for an Oscar nom.
Nat: I predict either Norton or Hawke for SAG. Whiplash isn't sending a screener. Of the Best Actor, only Nightcrawler isn't sending a screener. Grand B isn't doing a screener but a lot of people already own that one because it has been available for some time.
I expect Birdman and Boyhood to take most everything along with Jones.
Henry -- i guess you mean to SAG? I have like 3 Whiplash screeners. lol.
Quite frankly, part of me hopes every film that is only available in NY/LA until after the nominations gets skipped. It would suck for Chastain, Cotillard, Aniston, and Moore but it would prove that Hollywood had respect for the rest of the countries' film love.
Nathaniel: It's Disney's loss! I check this site religiously and I'm not alone in that. Still, I'm sorry for reminding you. I actually find Disney's advertising to be very annoying this year and it discourages me from visiting sites that sport it.
Henry: I've read that Disney is spending a lot on its awards push, but I don't know where it's going. They did send *some* super elaborate screeners though.
I swear to God, if SAG (or Oscar) goes to Jones or Aniston, I will have a cow. I'm kinda resigned to Arquette, but I am so rooting for almost anyone else at this point.
I really don't see Jones?
What's special about the performance? What's special about Felicity Jones, as a matter of fact?
She is not even due?
I can't even see any pattern in which I can place a nomination for her? Try to find non-star playing a supporting wife in a leading role co-starring a very showy actor. Reese was in a very weak year and she is a megastar. Maybe Helen Hunt?
Streep is a lock for a nomination... Who are you all kidding? Do we have to go through this every awards season? And Dern does not have a shot. Disney/Streep's campaign goes full force xmas day!!
Henry- I love Emma Thompson but Streep is more beloved by the Academy
"agreed. I'd argue that J.K. Simmons and Patricia Arquette are both virtually unbeatable at this point. Which is ANNOYING. even if you love a performance it never sits right that everyone on earth has the same opinion."
I'm usually irritated by unanimity when it comes to awards, but I confess to loving Patricia Arquette's domination of the critics' awards so far (I have yet to see 'Whiplash'). I think it's because she hasn't been recognized all that much over her career, and it's refreshing to see such an understated, nuanced performance get love rather than a really flashy one. She also has such a lovely, down to earth presence.
Meryl at the Globes in a musical is probably unbeatable, so that's at least one big prize that will be going another way.
3? Gidget! They like you! They really LIKE you!
Any of the studios can change their mind and send a screener later. Lincoln did that but it only really works if you have a front runner that everyone wants to see (Alice, Whiplash). It's a strategy I would consider if I needed more box office or wanted to delay the inevitable pirating, but it can backfire. First out of the gate (usually Harvey) has the advantage.
There is also some perspective needed. If a tiny indie like Boyhood (4mil budget) can send screeners but a billion dollar studio like Disney can't be bothered to even offer the film in any format, it's hard to give a damn about their product. And with as much cross over as there is between SAG and AMPAS, that resonates. ITW, no matter how good it might or might not be, isn't the only film in town.
Wow... Some entitled people on this site.
John T--Amen! My goal last year was to see all nominated movies, and I had to see TWO long ones on the night before the Oscars. I'll never do that again. It's hard to participate in awards frenzy when you've only seen 40% of the good ones!
Nathaniel - I think these predictions really nail it, at least as things stand now. If there are 9 pictures, that looks like the list. Director and the acting categories all look sound, though maybe Duvall will still make it over Wilkinson. Mr Turner might be a threat in Original Screenplay if AMPAS keeps up its record of nominating him here.
Even your 'surprise' nods like Nightcrawler in Original Screenplay and Ida in Cinematography feel right to me. I think you may be overstating Dawn of the Planet of the Apes - 3 nods feels like too much, maybe VFX only with Transformers (shudder) for Sound and Maleficent, Hobbit or Imitation Game for Production Design.
It feels to me like Keaton, Moore, Simmons and Arquette are headed for inevitable wins, and Linklater will be a strong threat for Director. At least there is still some suspense for Picture. At the moment, I think it's Boyhood to win, but Birdman will probably earn the most nominations and win the Comedy Globe so can't be discounted. And if Selma is a hit and also gets a big nomination count, momentum could well swing in its favour. So it's good to still have a three-way race here (at least).
I think I agree with the nominations -but wow that's a lot of locks! Especially in Supporting Actor!
I'd say the only real locks are Arquette, Norton, Simmons in the supporting categories.
Jamie--I do feel entitled to see a film, a film that wants me to vote for it, before I vote. I never vote for anyone, even the deity Ms Streep, without viewing the performance first.
Disney wants to win SAG awards, otherwise they wouldn't have submitted their film for consideration (it's not automatic, even for Meryl). Why then are they making it difficult for the voters to see the film, when everyone else is making it easy ........or at least easier. It seems far more entitled to expect votes for a film sight unseen.
Nathaniel - I'll be really surprised if Aniston, Jones, Moore, Pike, and Witherspoon all make the Oscar Best Actress line up: They're the five nominees in Drama at the Globes, and, if I'm not wrong, GG Best Actress Drama and Oscar Best Actress nominees ONLY matched twice: 1995 (Stone, Sarandon, Shue, Streep, Thompson), and 1969 (Bujold, Fonda, Minnelli, Simmons, Smith).
I have a feeling Fiennes will find his way in. There's something about that movie and that role that clicks with people, and the fact it hasn't gone away after all this time is notable.
Really not feeling it on Jones to win, though she'll probably float into the nominee pool. She hasn't won any critics prizes and I think neither has the film. I'm just not feeling a strong buzz on that role. Pike has really shown up for the race, and Cotillard could easily overtake Aniston at this point. But of course it's Julianne's to lose.
I'll have seen all 15 feature films featuring the acting nominees and three of the ones with stunt nominees by January 5, so I'll definitely be ready to vote by the deadline. And the good news (for me) is that my first viewing of only three of them will be on a computer/TV screen. Call me entitled (and old-fashioned), but I'm more about the big screen experience than the screener thing.
My biggest question right now is who will win Best Actor (Drama) at the Globes.
Obvi Keaton will win Comedy, but who will get Drama? I think Redmayne or Oyelowo, but I could also see the Globes awarding Carell, which would really make the race interesting.
Paul Outlaw: Where I live, many of these films won't have even opened (if they open at all) by the voting deadline. Unless I want to drive 300 miles to catch them in the only theater (with a screen that is smaller than the one I have at home(at least it feels that way)) I have to settle for the screener/download thing. If they win big awards, they will open closer.
This is when I miss living in NYC and even there, you don't always get a big screen in a theater........ unless it is aimed at tweens. God I miss the Ziegfield.
Point taken, Henry. I wouldn't drive 300 miles to see Streep in Into the Woods live.
I don't see Jones as being any sort of a threat, screener or not. She hasn't won any critics awards (that I know of) and her reviews were good, but certainly not academy award winning great. She's not in the running for a win, and she's actually my pick for a surprise snub in this category.
Great to see Tilda climbing up the Supporting chart. I still don't quite understand the muted response that performance got on this blog. Supporting performance of the year, as far as I'm concerned. Beating even Uma in Nymphomaniac.
I don't buy the Keaton/Moore/Simmons/Arquette line-up. It's rare for a quartet of Americans to win the acting prizes and at least one of the acting winners typically wins for playing a real-life person. I think Redmayne wins Best Actor. Oyelowo could take it too, but Redmayne's performance, despite its lack of attention from the critics' bodies, is so in line with their usual predilections.
Making a really bold prediction: I think Aniston has moved into the #2 position.
In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if her momentum increases at The Globes with a Drama win and they give comedy to Julianne for Maps. Jennifer is hustling the hell out of this race and we now know she has the same Oscar strategist used for The Artist and King's Speech.
Does anybody think there's a - albeit slight - chance that Rosamund Pike wins the Globe for Best Actress Drama? So, Julianne Moore's guaranteed to win at least one, right? What if she wins the Comedy Actress Globe and then, if the HFPA feels like spreading the wealth, Rosamund picks up the Drama corresponding trophy? Pike's won ten critics awards as of late and, even though they amount to little, it shows growing support for her and the performance. Wouldn't that throw a wrench in the Best Actress race?
Adam-I agree with Bia. If there's a surprise in the Drama race it'll be Aniston (who clearly realizes this is her moment, possibly her only moment) and is taking advantage of the momentum. I wouldn't be stunned if she ends up taking the Drama Globe while Juli then takes comedy and we get a true race.
Pike is winning a LOT of these critics awards. I'm a little surprised, because until this week she seemed to be more of an afterthought candidate.
Why on earth would you put Chastain ahead of Knightley? The latter has gotten every important nomination thus far, and she's in a BP nominee.
The director line-up I would love to see:
Linklater
Inarritu
DuVernay
Jolie
Prince-Bythewood
That would be a pleasant mix of acceptance and shakeup.
Adri -- Whoa. Prince-Bythewood... I even had to look up the film. Talk about the lowest of profiles :)
Ashley -- I think because i've seen Chastain's performance and frankly the only explanation for it missing some prizes thus far is that it got a late start. The other thing is should Arquette lose (highly highly unlikely) it's easy to imagine Chastain as a winner and nearly impossible to imagine Knightley... even though I love Knightley's performance. Hope that makes sense.
Nat--Why do you feel it impossible to imagine Knightley winning? I understand what you are saying, and I haven't seen either film, just curious. Is the role not awards material? Do you feel she doesn't have the support? Or is it something else.
Henry- I thought Into the Woods screeners were sent out on Dec.12th?? Not sure why that is too late for voting.
Jamie: Those screeners aren't being sent to SAG voters (I assume they are for AMPAS). Nor are they offering a digital download. They are offering invite screenings----in NY, LA and San Francisco but they are limited dates/times and only offer enough seats for less than .05% of voters (and they aren't offering plane tickets). If I want to see the film, it first has to open within reasonable distance of my home (or I have to travel to where it is playing) and I have to spend my own money to see it. Everyone else is making it easy to see their film. If Disney don't want my vote bad enough to get the film in front of me, why should I bother. I have all these other films to consider with equally good or better performances.
It's very short sighted. Unless someone important (like the NYTImes) says: "You have to see this film!." which is very doubtful because even the trades aren't saying that, it is dead in the water awards wise.
Jamie: Read this. It was just posted at THR.
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/race/screener-game-why-you-got-759752
Dead in the water since you did not get your SAG screener?
Reading the article says that if they send the screeners AFTER Christmas that it can be "dead in the water"... Into the woods did not send to AMPAS after Christmas...
Jamie: The film is dead in the water for a lot of reasons. Mostly because no one is talking about it, especially the people who have seen it. Even the trades are being measured (good reviews, but not raves) in their response and the big reviews haven't come out yet. Getting screeners out to voters would help get it talked about. Read the THR piece. You may not consider SAG an important award, but most people do. It's considered one of the big three and carries a lot of weight at the end of the day.
Henry- I am not saying that SAG is not a big award... I am simply not measuring the success of the movie by the number of awards that it brings in. For you the movie's success comes down to your votes. For me, a simple movie goer, I am excited to see a film adaptaion of one of my favorite musicals during the Chrsitmas holiday- at the same time contributing to the financial success by probably seeing it a couple of times.
i just do not think it is the movie's fault because you live far away or that the movie owes you anything. They have their reasons- dumb or not. Just think you are taking the slight way too personally and using that excuse to hate on the movie. It is an eye opening thing to me to realize how stupid this whole campaigning truly is....