UPDATE: AD Readers Ballot Results (Recount!)
UPDATE: After taking another look at the ever-changing explanations for the ever-changing rules, Rob has made a significant adjustment to our readers’ nominations for Best Picture. Redistributing votes according to the new guidelines, Midnight in Paris now enters the BP category as the 8th nominee.
Rob has knocked out the massively complex task of tabulating over 2000 ballots cast for detailed results of the 3rd Annual Awards Daily Readers Nominations. Films and performers are ranked here according to vote totals.
Picture:
- The Artist
- The Tree of Life
- Drive
- Hugo
- Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part2
- The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo
- The Descendants
- Midnight in Paris
(Midnight in Paris, Moneyball, Melancholia, A Separation, The Help, Bridesmaids, Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy, Shame, War Horse, Beginners, Weekend made it to the second round but were not nominated)
Here are the links to Rob Y’s PDF spreadsheets detailing the ballot breakdown in 10 categories:
Picture
Director
Lead Actress
Lead Actor
Supporting Actress
Supporting Actor
Original Screenplay
Adapted Screenplay
Cinematography
Editing
Tally summaries after the cut.
Lead Acting:
- Meryl Streep – The Iron Lady (19% of first round votes)
- Viola Davis – The Help
- Mara Rooney – The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo
- Tilda Swinton – We Need to Talk about Kevin
- Michelle Williams – My Week with Marilyn
(6th through 10th – Kirsten Dunst (Melancholia), Elizabeth Olsen (Martha Marcy May Marlene), Charlize Theron (Young Adult), Glenn Close (Albert Nobbs), and Kristen Wiig (Bridesmaids))
Supporting Actress:
- Octavia Spencer – The Help
- Jessica Chastain – The Help
- Carey Mulligan – Shame
- Melissa McCarthy – Bridesmaids
- Berenice Bejo – The Artist
(6th through 9th – Shailene Woodley (The Descendants), Vanessa Redgrave (Coriolanus), Janet McTeer (Albert Nobbs), and Sareh Bayat (A Separation))
3-Way Tie for tenth: Carey Mulligan (Drive) and because Jessica Chastain’s roles in The Tree of Life and Take Shelter were ineligible because she qualified with The Help
Lead Actor:
- Michael Fassbender – Shame (22% of first round votes)
- Brad Pitt – Moneyball
- George Clooney – The Descendants
- Jean Dujardin – The Artist
- Ryan Gosling – Drive
(6th through 10th – Michael Shannon (Take Shelter), Gary Oldman (Tinker Tailor), Leonardo Dicaprio (J Edgar), Joseph Gordon-Levitt (50/50), and Tom Cullen (Weekend))
Supporting Actor:
- Christopher Plummer (34% of first round votes) – Beginners
- Albert Brooks – Drive
- Brad Pitt – Tree of Life
- Andy Serkis – Rise of the Planet of the Apes
- Kenneth Branagh – My Week with Marilyn
(6th through 10th – Alan Rickman (HP7.2), Corey Stoll (Midnight in Paris), Nick Nolte (Warrior), Jonah Hill (Moneyball), Patton Oswalt (Young Adult))
Directing:
- Tree of Life (20% of first round votes)
- The Artist
- Hugo
- Drive
- Dragon Tattoo
(Midnight in Paris, Descendants, Melancholia, Moneyball, Shame are next in line)
Adapted Screenplay:
- Descendants (23% First Round votes)
- Moneyball (22%)
- Dragon Tattoo
- Hugo
- Tinker Tailor
(Drive, Help, Talk about Kevin, Harry Potter, Ides of March are next in line)
Original Screenplay:
- Midnight in Paris (27% First Round Votes)
- The Artist
- A Separation
- Bridesmaids
- 50/50
(Tree of Life, Young Adult, Shame, Beginners, Margin Call are next in line)
Cinematography:
- Tree of Life (54% of first round votes)
- Hugo
- Drive
- The Artist
- War Horse
(Tinker Tailor, Melancholia, Dragon Tattoo, Harry Potter, Descendants are next in line)
Editing:
- Dragon Tattoo (22% of first round votes)
- Drive
- The Artist
- Hugo
- Tree of Life
(Money Ball, Contagion, War Horse, Harry Potter, Martha Mary are next in line)
====
Here are the totals:
7 Nominations
The Artist
6 Nominations
Drive
5 Nominatioons
The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo
Hugo
Tree of Life
3 Nominations
Descendants
The Help
2 Nominations
Bridesmaids
Moneyball
Shame
My Week with Marylin
1 Nomination
50/50
A Separation
Beginners
The Iron Lady
Midnight in Paris
Rise of the Planet of the Apes
Tinker Tailor
War Horse
We Need to Talk about Kevin
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part 2
157 Comments
Leave a Comment
Tracker Pages
Recently on AD
Follow Us!
Tags
Gallery
Well, we did good work with The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo.
And thanks to Rob for putting this all together.
Good job AD’ers! Though I would have liked to have seen Moneyball instead of Tree of Life for Picture and Alan Rickman for Supporting instead of Brad Pitt’s pitiful role in TOL. Also, Potter should have got in for at least one of screenplay, cinematography, or editing.
Basically people here won`t have a lot to complain tomorrow because except for Best Picture and Directing, all the other categories are gonna be, at least, 4/5 tomorrow.
I made a mistake. With the exception of BP… Directing/Sup. Actor/Editing (probably 3/5)…. all the others (4/5 or even 5/5)
AD Readers also by far prefer The Artist over everything else this year.
The reach of The Artist is all-encompassing, it has absolutely everybody in its corner.
I these were the Oscar results I would be very happy: Gosling, Mulligan and Swinton all made it in – not bad, but god do you people think like the Academy.
Just came back from “The Artist”. Undoubtfully a stunt. But way deeper than people is saying, some themes – universal themes – and one of the best sequences of the year… and what an ending. 9/10, wouldn’t make into my top 5 of the year. Still deciding which place for the top 10. Won’t complain if it even sweeps.
Man oh man. AD readers love Harry Potter 8. I find this to be pretty sad (bring on the hate, fanboys and girls. The movie was really not that good).
Somebody’s gonna have to apologize for this Artist shit sooner rather than later.
If Fassbender doesn’t get a nomination tomorrow I may just go nuclear. His performance was a revelation.
AJC says:
January 23, 2012 at 10:53 am
Man oh man. AD readers love Harry Potter 8. I find this to be pretty sad (bring on the hate, fanboys and girls. The movie was really not that good).
Pfft, the response of the critics and general public says otherwise.
RT- 96% (100% from Top Critics) with 8.4 avg.- Golden Tomato Winner
Metacritic- 87 (tied for 2nd highest of the year)
BFCA- 93 (2nd highest of the year)
#1 Box Office Domestic & Worldwide
A+ Cinemascore
#2 on Flickchart Best of 2011
#7 on IMDB Best of 2011
So yeah…any way that you view it it’s amongst the 10 Best of last year.
Have to say that I’m surprised, confused, and even saddened to find Moneyball and Midnight in Paris fall outside the circle of nominees for Best Picture. Judging from enthusiasm all year in the comments, I had hoped to see a lot more support.
One of the most agonizing things for me about this project every year is to see how the math adds up to unexpected clusters of numbers — and how ruthlessly brutal the raw accounting can be.
Price-Waterhouse-Cooper sez Now I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds.
And if the nominees were decided by the experts who watch films for a living (Critics) instead of the “players” (AMPAS members) then with 10 it would yield the following lineup…
The Artist
Poetry
A Separation
Le Havre
The Descendents
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2
Hugo
Drive
Take Shelter
Moneyball
Great job, Rob!
I´m looking forward to see – we,, finally! – “The Descendants” and “Drive” next weekend, which should give me a proper base for the final vote.
I like the AD´s nominees very much! Pretty intresting to see that very probably many many readers are voting for this that do never post a comment at all. Which leads me to the conclusion that denial is a much stronger motivation to comment on this site than approval. If I would hate “The Artist” for example (or at least it´s frontrunner status) I would rant my ass off in this comment section … (ok, I wouldn´t, but still)
Harry Potter, Drive, The Tree of Life, Andy Serkis blah blah blah blah
You couldn’t have voted for Corey Stoll over Andy Serkis? What Andy Serkis did was the best work he’s done? Have you so easily forgotten his failed Oscar campaign for The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers? That was fantastic work!!!! He played a monsterish mutant creature with split personalities and wild mood swings. Here he plays an ape who looks sad every once in a while. Big Freaking whoop. Give him best acrobatic performance, sure [if he did all that swinging around], but not an acting prize. Not for this.
Same thing went for Jennifer Hudson in Dreamgirls. The girl has a great set of lungs, and deserved a Grammy, but an Oscar for ACTING? No way…she was awful. There have been much better debuts in Oscar history: Tatum O’Neal, Orson Welles, Harold Russell, Shirley Booth, Richard Widmark, Anna Paquin, Keisha Castle-Hughes (wow!), Eva Marie Saint, Terence Stamp, Whoopi Goldberg, Oprah Winfrey, Julie Andrews….and Jennifer Hudson!? Gimme a break!
Ha, figured these arguments would come up.
Box office score does not correlate with quality or what is “best”. The fact that you use that as an argument weakens your stance.
Cinemascore = let’s look at three other movies that got an “A” from Cinemascore: Tranformers 3, Fast Five, and Madea’s Big Happy Family. So, awful source of a grade for quality. Awful.
Never heard of flick chart.
As for the critics, explain why their scores over the summer were so high, yet during the Best Of and Top 10 lists and Film Societies, HP8 was dramatically left out? Explain that.
HP8 was not good. Fans of this movie LOVE to dominate these comment sections.
Why do I keep pointing this out? Because, honestly, it is annoying and detracts from the overall quality I feel I can get from these comment sections. Not the fault of the authors, but I come on this blog to learn about good movies, and when fan boys voice their absolute love for this film, it takes away from some good reading. I know many people on this site agree.
But, anyway, answer my question above, and don’t use any other bogus sources for an assessment of quality please.
And just like No Guts No Glory, and now 3 Oscar Wishes (!), the purpose of this exercise is….?
Rob
Many, many thanks for all the work you did in compiling these ballots. It is truly fascinating to see how the nomination process works. It certainly shows that there are no “they came out of nowhere” nominees.
I found it amazing that the Best Director category had to go to 27 rounds! That’s pretty amazing, and proves what a diverse group actually participates in this website.
I’m fairly pleased with the results as listed. Love the love for “Drive”.
Two biggest surprises for me?
Nods for Andy Serkis in “Rise of the Planet of the Apes” (admittedly, I haven’t seen the film) and Ryan Gosling in “Drive” (I was routing for him, but didn’t think he had a chance).
I would have liked to have seen Vanessa Redgrave in there for “Coriolanus” (she just missed it – darn it!).
Thanks Rob for all the work.
The rest of you have some ‘splaining to do. *shakes fist*
bbl
Oh, and thanks Rob! Any way we can get a detailed description of how you worked these formulas? Or maybe just an example of an excel sheet?
Wow, the support for Fassbender brings a tear to my eye. Excellent!
The Artist again? Damn Weinstein bought the AD readership too! (eheh)
Thanks for all the hard work. Im curious to see how this matches up to the actual nominations tomorrow. Hopefully Moneyball and MiP will sneak in.
This once again shows that the consensus picks from even ardent film fans doesn’t really stray outside the same “comfort zone” as is the case with the Academy. When you tabulate 2000 readers’ responses they resemble the institution that they are often – as individuals – quite antagonistic about. That is interesting, if slightly discouraging.
And just like No Guts No Glory, and now 3 Oscar Wishes (!), the purpose of this exercise is….?
…among other things, David, it’s fun to fuck with your blood pressure.
I don’t see what’s discouraging about it. Even if I wasn’t thrilled with the last Harry Potter, that’s a pretty damn good list.
great to see michael fassbender in first and carey mulligan in third
Aside from the few oddities this looks like didn’t vote but rather tried to predict. But I see some of my own votes in there (voting Pitt in supporting instead of lead) while my lesser votes (was I alone championing Submarine? Probably.) went the way of the dodo. Alas we get the awards we deserve, except when we don’t.
How did last year’s ballot go? Does anyone have a link?
The next thing to ponder is to take a look at the 6th, 7th, 8th-ranked titles in each category and wonder which of the top 5 will get those votes on the final ballot.
Julia,
We have to consider which films the voters have seen — (just as we wonder the same thing about Academy members)
I’m looking forward to seeing Submarine, but haven’t yet.
Super interesting, thanks.
When you look at the Best Picture votes some really interesting questions emerge. Assume that we had run this poll BEFORE NY Critics, LA Critics, Guilds, Globes, announced – I wonder how different the results would be?
You see that The Artist gets about 16% of the votes in the first round (and that’s a lot) but it also means that EIGHTY-FOUR PERCENT of voters thought that The Artist was NOT the BEST movie of the year. It’s like, yeah, Mitt Romney won New Hampshire, but actually a larger % than voted for him wanted someone else (or the same can be said about other candidates in other states, just using an example).
So, it’s about consensus, as Sasha and others have been saying on this site for a long time.
But, consensus comes from someone speaking. NY Film Critics speak and say The Artist. Then others want to seem smart or agreeing with the experts and follow suit. The next round comes in and many agree. Golden Globes – they want to predict and agree (and know that Oscar voting results in consensus wins) so they agree.
I would be VERY curious to see this experiment run BEFORE we have had a chance to be told by several groups which movies we should think are the best of the year.
And, of course, I would be even more curious to see what would happen if THE ACADEMY announced its nominations before anyone else (not ever going to happen, for obvious reasons, but I’d be super curious to see if the sheep-mentality type voting that has seemed pervasive in past years would still hold).
I love this experiment, thanks for hosting it!
Ryan, I too am disappointed about Midnight in Paris not making it…… for shame
AJC, are you serious? Just because you didn’t like the film doesn’t mean it’s a bad film or AD is dominated by Potter fanboys. The vast majority of the critics, along with the audiences, loved the film. It’s considered the best reviewed blockbuster of the year and the best-reviewed wide-released film of the year. The fact that it doesn’t get much industry support is because they simply don’t care about it. The same way they don’t care about Melancholia, The Tree of Life, Chico & Rita, Shame etc. For different reasons, of course. I myself really liked it. It barely makes my top 30 for Best Film but I give it a solid 7.5 out of 10. Great ensemble cast, mind-blowing techs and a really tight and solid plot.
Anyway, it’s been a great year for foreign films (which fortunately made a lot of critics top 10s, because the Oscars don’t give a shit about this sort of films).
Yup, dead serious
@Ryan Adams you should send this to the Academy
@AJC the movie made box office record and records in Amazon.com, also it made over a billion dollars in ticket sales, and it had universal critical acclaim and one more thing……did everyone including critics hated the movie?
@AJC in 2011 to me it was sequels were high grossing in the box office than major movie, how do you explain that?
@Ryan Adams you should send this to the Academy
Mission Impossible 5
Phase I – Create Convincing Oscar Ballot Simulation
Phase II – Substitute AD Simulation for AMPAS Ballot
OCO300, every time you and I do this in the comments, you have never once answered my question about the ending for the film, and give me your take on the content, as well as the style in which is was filmed. The ending was so flat and awkwardly paced, and what happened is very counter to what the story is actually about; the director chose underwhelming special effects and simple action instead of the narrative of what Harry stood for especially in light of his overall battle with Voldemort. The ending ruined the film in a huge way. What do you have to say to that.
Please stop citing $$ as a barometer for how “good” the film is. I’m glad scores of people love it. Scores of people also “loved” Transformers 3 if you look at the $$.
And yes, I know tons of people that have sense not to get in comment wars on blogs that disliked the movie in general and especially the ending. Tons.
Sorry to the rest of the blog, I’m baited into these.
Here come the fanboys, citing the box office.
I will feel so much better about this when, tomorrow, I wake up to watch “Harry Potter” not get nominated for Best Picture. Despite everything that will disappoint me, that will make me feel better.
Sorry to be snarky and rude. I’m usually not. I am just so over that franchise.
I know everyone’s taste is different, but I have to say I’m pretty flummoxed by all the love for The Artist and the relative lack of love for the other contenders. To me the Artist, despite being fun and charming, felt very slight and one note. I think people are very forgiving about the cliche story because A.) film fans dig films that celebrate film history and B.) the ending is undeniably rousing (and C.) there’s a cute dog).
I’m very surprised at the fairly lukewarm reaction to The Descendents. To me, that’s the best film of the year. Incredibly sharp writing, nuanced and touching performances. Alexander Payne’s directorial touch deepens the relationships between the characters by always steering the film in the direction of true emotion over what’s conventionally expected (the scene between Clooney and the stoner-kid is a perfect example). I thought it was easily Payne’s best since Election. I thought Moneyball was also far more complex than The Artist, and as feel-good movies go, Midnight in Paris was more fun.
Of course, the indie-snob in me wants to whine that Take Shelter, Shame, A Dangerous Method and so many others will be ignored in crucial categories, but the fact that a soft-ball like The Artist is getting so much love really baffles me.
I’d just like to comment on what excellent taste the AD readers have – and salute their evident recognising that of all the films released in the last year, it is indeed The Tree of Life that will be regarded as not only the best but the most important work of 2011*. The most frustrating thing about this Oscar season is that Hollywood seem incapable of acknowledging that American cinema has produced a genuine, bona fide living legend. The Academy’s continuing and likely snubbing of Malick will eventually be seen in the same light with which they so often overlooked Kubrick.
*Ok, so The Artist pipped it to the top spot for Best Film but Malick took Directing honours.
All of this:
“RT- 96% (100% from Top Critics) with 8.4 avg.- Golden Tomato Winner
Metacritic- 87 (tied for 2nd highest of the year)
BFCA- 93 (2nd highest of the year)
#1 Box Office Domestic & Worldwide
A+ Cinemascore
#2 on Flickchart Best of 2011
#7 on IMDB Best of 2011″
Doesn’t mean a thing to Oscar voters.
Well at least we know that the taste of the majority of AD readers is as crappy as the AMPAS’. There is that. Meh.
(Possible) things that would make me happy tomorrow:
- Hugo leads with 13 or 14 including Best Supporting Actor and Song.
- Michael Shannon takes the 5th spot for lead actor.
- Potter gets 4 or 5 tech nods.
- Tree of Life gets a solo cinematography nod.
- Spielberg makes the cut for directing putting the 3 greatest american filmmakers nominated together.
- Rio, although not a great film, surprises and takes out the mediocre Cars 2 out of the animated Oscar.
- Cars 2 snubbed.
- An out of nowhere surprise in the supporting categories, specially Sup. Actor.
- Alexandre Desplat makes the cut for any of his scores.
Shut up AJC. All you are doing is intentionally stirring up shit trying to pick a fight. Grow up and let them like what they like.
Thanks Rob Y for all the number crunching. For me, best thing about Awards Daily each year.
@AJC maybe Harry Potter’s last film is somehow popular with the critics and the public. I mean alot of movie and news critics thought the movie was really great.
I really like these results, and with the voting system it shows that some films many here think are locks are way more vulnerable than pretty much anyone believes. Films like Moneyball, Midnight in Paris and The Help are films with wide support but not common #1 picks. While films like Tree of Life and Drive have passionate support but are not widely loved.
I bet I could wage a good argument that most people who chose to participate in this “experiment” are not that different than Academy Voters. While I don’t think HP8 will make the final Academy List, I do think The Tree of Life will. I am, perhaps, even more confidant of that today than I was yesterday. If you liked The Tree of Life, there’s a great chance you will put it at #1. The film, here, got TWICE the amount of support it needed for a nomination.
I am extremely anxious for tomorrow morning now.
@AJC, where I appreciate your views on HP, I think you’re wrong. They did just fine with the ending (despite some changes from the book). It really was one of the best films of the year.
No, Craig Z, I’m really not. I have strong opinions about HP8, and I think, if you look at all of the top 10 lists (from critics and blogs), Film Critics Societies and major award nominations, you will see HP8 missing. So, pointing out that difference is interesting and noteworthy. Yes, I am placing my opinion on this noteworthy difference as well. Finally, I am also commenting on how some of other people’s “defense” of this film is very bogus and irrelevant.
So, when I disagree with something, yet hear commentors make passionate and reasonable “arguments” for why they like a film (people defending Drive is an example for me) I learn something and get to be part of the great conversation. People will always disagree with how they like films and which films they like.
I guess my problem is that the Harry Potter chatter on this blog never contains anything except for pointing at the box office success and those Metacritic and Rotten Tomato rankings. That’s it.
So, I am intentionally joining in and talking about films and reacting to this blog’s readers’ picks for the AD ballot. I am intentionally injecting my opinion onto the film and why I am baffled that people picked it. I am not intentionally picking a fight.
Jeremie,
Let’s point out that nobody has to show an ID to participate in this project. Anyone from anywhere on the web who runs across the ballot can fill it out. We like to think most voters found out about through AD links or come from among Sasha’s Twitter followers, but the web is a lawless frontier.
Besides, I heard from my cat’s nanny that your mistress filled out your ballot.
Wow, The Descendants BARELY got in… This just makes me excited for tomorrow’s outcome.
@ rufussondheim
The truth is that nobody knows exactly what could happen tomorrow considering the new rule. But this forum is not a parameter. If the voting for the Oscar winner was done here in 2011, King`s Speech would probably have been one of the 3 least voted films along with Winter`s Bone and The Kids Are All Right.
Thanks Chris.
In other news, I think the Decendants was great and am also wondering about the lukewarm reception it is getting.
Ryan, nice job. I’m listening in to A.O.Scott doing a talk tomorrow where people can share our reactions to noms. Get on it, too! http://www.nytimesknownow.com/index.php/beyond-the-red-carpet-oscar-talk-with-a-o-scott/
rufussondheim:
I too thought the groundswell support for “The Tree of Life” on the first ballot was extremely encouraging from AD participants. And Malick won best director on the first ballot. Another great sign that it will do well tomorrow.
AMPAS loves Malick. And it feels like its his time.
Despite I did not feel respected by some people here when I exposed my concerns about Tree of Life a few weeks ago, I respect AJC, Jeremy and everyone who didn`t like Potter. It`s a great blockbuster and I think many categories of film deserved more space in the Oscars race than only Oscar-baits. Blockbusters, Docs (Senna was my favorite film of 2011), comedies (not only MiP but Bridesmaids should have been considered more seriously) and foreign films (A Separation is one of the closest things to unanimous that came out in 2011).
AJC, you told them to “bring on the hate fanboys” That is picking a fight. Why do you care if they love it?
I really hope Kirsten Dunst shows up in tomorrow’s Best Actress selections, along with Michael Fassbender and Michael Shannon in Best Actor
And of course animated films (I forgot because 2011 was such an awful year for them but my favorite film of 2010 was TS3).
True Ryan! That cheeky cow, she does it every year!
Filling my ballot with arty fancy crap, where all I wanted to vote for was Scream 4 for best pic and Hayden Panetierre for supporting actress.
Glad to see this wrong was rectified by some brave voters who thankfully placed it above The Skin I Live In, Uncle Boonmee Who Can Recall His Past Lives, Attack The Block, The Guard, Le Havre, Of Gods And Men, Tyrannosaur, Jane Eyre or Mysteries Of Lisbon.
Take that pretentious intellectual crap!
Also the term fanboy is the most overused term on the internet. Jerks use it as a derogitory term that they think refers to everybody but them. Also why are you so passionate about hating something. That’s wierd. Don’t you have anything better to do? Like talk about things you like?
Great job, Rob.
Really illustrates how vulnerable liked-but-not-loved films are. We’ll see some surprises tomorrow, for sure.
Ad-ers – pretty good job. Given some of the recent posts, I’m shocked at the strength of The Artist, which definitely will be similar tomorrow.
I was hoping for a stronger showing for the indie/divisive films, but this is a fair cross-section or tastes. If AMPAS is this benevolent, I can live with it.
Please JP don’t involve me in another endless pointless HP conversation. I’ve been trying, thanks to the great advice of my therapist, to avoid wasting my time on meaningless issues.
Jeremie, pretentious is the second most overused term on the internet….
Is “mind your own business” the third?
Sorry Jeremie! it`s a fact that I don`t see you talking about Potter for a long time.
No the third most used is Oscar bait……
AJC, sure box office and cinemascore aren’t always great measures…but if you weren’t so thick you’d realize that combined with all the other factors it makes a solid case. Think of it like a bridge. One support member is relatively weak but combine 4 or 5 and it can withstand a lot more force.
… and nobody’s business on this forum is their own
King`s Speech/ Social Network are also one of the most used ones. Every study of case, every awards theory end up with those 2 films as examples. And Fincher (one of my favorite directors) is the most used person name here probably.
I doubt you’d argue with any of these, even though IMDB and Box Office are 2 of the measures. These are what are considered the “super films”
Top 100 Box Office, AFI, and IMDb.com
Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring
The Godfather
The Bridge on the River Kwai
Star Wars
Rear Window
Raiders of the Lost Ark
One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest
Lawrence of Arabia
Forrest Gump
Granted Deathly Hallows probably won’t make the AFI list any time soon and it’s not in the Top 100 on IMDB, but box office wise it’s still in good company of Avatar, Titanic, Return of the King, and The Dark Knight.
And I’d like to requote what one of my friends from a Potter forum said, he makes some excellent points…
“Now, Potter’s situation is a very weird one. First, the films have never been nominated for major awards. Secondly, the series hasn’t even won a goddamn Oscar after seven films. Can a miracle happen now? Will the Academy members really overcome their prejudices and stereotypes about the series and embrace it? The answer is unclear. But this time, Potter has a lot of advantages.
First, we’re talking about the final film so the Academy will somehow want to give some awards to the film (which will happen in the tech categories for sure). Secondly, it’s the biggest film of the year and the third best of all-time right after the Cameron films. Both Titanic and Avatar were major frontrunners and Titanic even won Best Picture. The forth most successful film is the Return of the King which also won Best Picture. Now, we’re not talking about winning Best Picture, but it seems that all the massive critically-acclaimed blockbusters have been nominated before. Why not the final Potter?
Another advantage is that DH2 has received critical acclaim beyond any other film of the series so far. 97% on RT, 100% from top critics, 87% on Metacritic, 93% on BFCA and 8.3 on IMDb (currently the 133th best film of all-time, according to their list. It’ll drop but it’ll stay in top 250 easily). It’s also the best received film of the year. Actually, its ratings are even higher than Return of the King, Avatar and Titanic’s! Hell, the RT ones are even higher than last year’s Best Picture winner ‘The King’s Speech’! Surprisingly or not, Deathly Hallows 2 seems to have a massive support by the critics.”
Some people should learn that repeating something a thousand times does not make it true, nor does it make the argument more convincing.
Thanks for all the hard work Rob. I am both flabbergasted and thrilled with the results. I really don’t like HP7pt.2 making the Best Picture field but that’s life. These results really make you think about the nominations tomorrow. Should be exciting!
Except it is true, those are FACTS jerkwad
Well some of the numbers have changed slightly…like the RT score dropped from 97 to 96 and a few films eclipsed it as the best reviewed, but still…
AMPASSucks is right
I was about to say something about my annoyance of how HP discussion overtakes these message boards but I guess its more relevant in this thread than it usually is. Usually HP has nothing to do with the subject but at least it was nominated for this…..
Rob
Let me comment about your Best Picture tabulations. As I understand the Academy rules, on the first ballot The Artist, The Tree of Life, Drive, Hugo, Harry Potter 2 and The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo achieved nominations by scoring at least 5% of the First Place votes.
All films with less than one percent of the votes are eliminated and their second place votes are then distributed. I see that you added votes to the films already nominated for Best Picture. Isn’t this an error? Films with nominations no longer need votes, and this essentially deprives other films of votes. Isn’t the idea to make the ballots of as many members/voters as possible count? This might have pushed Midnight in Paris over the 5% minimum.
What do you think?
Great nominations, almost all the films i loved had a good showing. Would’ve been a nice to see Chastain’s Tree Of Life make it over The Help what a close vote though 14% to 11%. Atleast i know they’re other people who agree with me.
Adding an insult does not do it either. Just make you look a choleric child.
Thanks, Rob. Very heartened to see the support for Weekend and Corey Stoll in Midnight in Paris, though disappointed they didn’t make the final roster.
Yay for Dragon Tattoo (but not in cinematog, which is its most likely chance of an Oscar nod, and it’s beautiful?) and YAY CAREY MULLIGAN I VOTED FOR YOU!
GO MERYL!!!!!!
Ironic how so many of us complain about AMPAS then turn out nominations that will likely be quite similar !!
The internati
Isn’t it ironic that we spent so much time complaining about AMPAS and then turn out nominations that in the end will be quite similar !!
The international cinefile noms are much much better
Jeremie says:
January 23, 2012 at 1:16 pm
Adding an insult does not do it either. Just make you look a choleric child.
Whatever, you know I’m right.
Great work. Now can WE get screeners please?
My guess is very few readers saw “Albert Nobbs.”
you know it’s more difficult to get around the moderation then I thought…had to change name, email, and ip location, lol.
Anyways, I gotta go now, but Potter fans do not despair if we don’t receive a nomination tomorrow…just remember we were crowned the Best Reviewed Film of the year and at the end of 2011 it was still the only wide release with 100% Top Critics approval!
Plus, the Oscars kinda are irrelevant seeing as the AMPAS voting body is not really made up of “experts” like Ebert, Roeper, Turan, Phillips, Travers, Corliss, McCarthy, etc. Instead it is made up of names like Jennifer Aniston, Steve Carell, Martin Sheen, etc. Making an analogy to baseball, The Oscars is more like the Player’s Choice awards then the MVP, Cy Young, Rookie of the Year, and Manager of the Year awards, which if you aren’t aware are voted on by the Baseball Writers Association of America. Which do you think should have more weight?
Also, remember the prestigious in its own right National Board of Review voted the Potter finale as one of the 10 Best Films of the Year!
Ok, so long!
For all the very impressive work Rob did, I find it amusing that in every category except for one the five films that got the highest percentage of first round votes were still the five highest at the end of 20+ rounds of redistribution.
The only category where that did not happen was Best Supporting Actor, where Kenneth Branagh pulled off a last-minute surge to overcome Nick Nolte. Every time a film or actor received at least 5% of the first round votes they got nominated.
Pete,
I have read and re-read the discussions about the change in BP nominations. It is still the (total/6+1) to attain the first round nominations. Those that meet it are set aside and if they meet the 20% rule their ballots are redistributed at a smaller weight to the other titles. Those with less than 1% are also redistributed.
I would love to find a definitive explanation for this somewhere.
Rob
ugh, too many typos in that last message. Scratch that…what I meant to say is-
Potter fans do not despair if we don’t receive a nomination tomorrow…remember that we were already crowned the Best Reviewed Film of the year and at the end of 2011 it was still the only wide release with 100% Top Critics approval!
Not to mention, the Oscars kinda are irrelevant seeing as the AMPAS voting body is not really made up of “experts” like Ebert, Roeper, Turan, Phillips, Travers, Corliss, McCarthy, etc. Instead it is made up of names like Jennifer Aniston, Steve Carell, Martin Sheen, etc. You see, the Oscars is more like the Player’s Choice awards then the MVP, Cy Young, Rookie of the Year, and Manager of the Year awards, which if you aren’t aware are voted on by the Baseball Writers Association of America. Which do you think should have more weight?
Oh and remember the prestigious in its own right National Board of Review voted the Potter finale as one of the 10 Best Films of the Year!
Anybody in their right mind would not be able to ignore the facts, like with Titanic, like with Avatar, like with Return of the King, and like with The Dark Knight in a year with more then 5 nominees. And if it’s not nominated well let’s give ‘em hell just like the TDK fans did in 2008 :p
Tom,
with the exception of the two acting categories, the first rounds pretty much nailed it. Look also at Supporting Actress. Bejo versus Woodley flip flopping for fifth place.
Rob
The rules function differently for Best Picture and all other categories.
Five percent or more on the first ballot garners an automatic nomination for BP as long as there are no more than ten such films.
Just because the Academy doesn’t choose to reward HP8 doesn’t make them susceptible to prejudice or is it evidence they rely on stereotypes.
It’s just evidence they didn’t like the film as much as they liked other films.
—————
GO TREE OF LIFE!
What this tells me is that there is no front runner for BP. There isn’t a ground swell for The Artist. It just happens to be the one most liked (not loved). I think it will pull off as a winner for BP, but I don’t think it is firm.
I think that the campaigning for it is about to hit full steam. The secret weapon it has is Uggie the dog. He was on stage at the Globes. He will be seen a lot more over the next few weeks. Notice that Uggie got TWO first round votes for Supporting Actor.
Just my $.02
Surprised to see Potter there based on how much hate it gets on this site. AJC being a prime example of someone who thinks of himself to high to even consider it.
NOTE:
I have just updated the SUPPORTING ACTRESS spreadsheet. It had a mistake that did not affect the end results. When Jessica Chastain attained her nomination for The Help, she had two other roles for consideration: The Tree of Life and Take Shelter.
I originally only removed Tree of Life from consideration. Her role in Take Shelter was eliminated in a subsequent round.
When I caught this in my review yesterday, I fixed the spreadsheet to reflect it, but I didn’t upload it to my site.
Ryan, can you add an “UPDATED” after the Supporting Actress link above?
Will add an update note as soon as I get back to the desk.
Pete, I would like to think your interpretation of the BP rules are right. We’ll doublecheck.
Mark Harris’ explanation of how Best Picture balloting works:
Here’s how the new system works. (If you’re not a numbers nerd, feel free to skip ahead.) Every Academy voter ranks the year’s five best movies preferentially. Those paper ballots — let’s assume there are about 5,000 of them — are sorted into stacks based on first-place votes. Then an immense amount of, you know, math happens involving ballot redistribution and fractional votes and so forth, but what it comes down to is this:
• Any movie with more than 10 percent (about 500) of overall first-place votes is an automatic Best Picture nominee. Movies that soar far above that threshold get their extra votes redistributed to piles for their second-choice movies.
• Any movie with less than 1 percent (about 50) of overall first-place votes is immediately eliminated from contention. Those ballots are redistributed into other, still-viable piles according to their second-place (or lower, if necessary) votes.
• After the first five nominees are chosen, no sixth (or seventh, or eighth, etc.) film will be eligible for a Best Picture nomination unless it passes a steep test: It must receive at least 5 percent of the overall first-place votes. That means any movie without close to 250 votes calling it the best film of 2011 is out of the running. So while it’s tempting to believe that the number of nominees will be determined by the overall quality of the movies, consensus is a much bigger factor. If, say, 42 percent of Oscar voters pick The Artist as their top choice, another 25 percent pick The Descendants, and another 19 percent pick Hugo, then by definition, there will be only five Best Picture nominees this year. But if those three movies combined get only, say, 40 percent of the first-place votes, there’s room for a longer list.
http://www.grantland.com/blog/hollywood-prospectus/post/_/id/41613/oscarmetrics-predicting-the-best-picture-and-best-director-nominees#more
Huh, but what about Harry Potter???
Since five films qualified in Round 1 – does there need to be a round 2? (Best Picture Race)
I actually look forward to this as much as the real nominations. Still, one thing that comes up every year in the end results is that AD readers are no less different than AMPAS (though I think a lack of love for The Help, and ample love for Tree of Life indicate some differences). Weren’t the instructions to vote as we expected the Academy to vote though?
Happy to see Meryl get 19% in first round! Her performance is astounding, and most of all, deserving.
Based on Harris’ explanation, then The Artist, The Tree of Life and Drive would’ve automatically become Best Picture nominees, as they were over the 10% requirement; their additional ballots — 126 for The Artist, 88 for Tree of Life, and 27 for Drive — would then be redistributed for the second-place votes.
Likewise, all those films with less than 1% of #1 votes would be redistributed based on their 2nd (or 3rd or 4th or 5th) choices. Since we’re not able to see what those 2nd, 3rd, 4th and 5th choices were, it makes it difficult to determine how the tally should’ve gone. (I’m not complaining — I truly appreciate Rob’s work here.)
Weren’t the instructions to vote as we expected the Academy to vote though?
Not exactly. Loosely suggested that our reader/voters imagine that each of them had their own Oscar ballot, to do with however they please (just as an Academy member does.)
Whether a reader imagines he got hold of a ballot by being John Malkovich, or by writing one hot script in 1966 and never had another screenplay produced ever since, or is a bawdy British comedian who’s been in a couple of rom-coms, or a 3-time Oscar-winning composer — we don’t pry into your individual fantasies.
Next year one of you can imagine you’re a Jack Russell Terrier after Uggie is invited to be a member of the AMPAS.
@Andrew: “Isn’t it ironic that we spent so much time complaining about AMPAS and then turn out nominations that in the end will be quite similar !!”
I’ve noticed that phenomenon every year they’ve run this experiment. ADers really do think a lot like AMPAS, not matter how much we complain about the nominations….
I don’t get why Chastain’s performance in Tree of Life is listed lower than her performance in Take Shelter when she got more votes for TOL from the very beginning. I get why she still got nominated for The Help, but just asking.
ADers really do think a lot like AMPAS, not matter how much we complain about the nominations….
let’s say that AD readers who are the most vocal commenters complain about the nominations.
we might also assume that there are many Academy members who complain about the nominations, too, right?
brainypirate, similar but NOT the same. AMPAS is still a bit out of touch with reality when it comes to quality films that the general public likes.
Although, the format of the last couple years allowed a few of those to no longer go unrecognized (ie Avatar and Inception)
How did last year’s results compare?
I think its hilarious that unless Mulligan, Redgrave or McTeer get in that Best Supporting Actress will be five people who 1 year ago I had never heard of.
Also, very sad about Bingham Ray. Breaking the Waves and Bowling for Columbine in theaters were two of the best filmgoing experiences I have ever had. Also remember liking him much more than Weinstein in the Biskind book. Very sad.
AMPAS is still a bit out of touch with reality when it comes to quality films that the general public likes.
I think most of us here have drifted from the “general public” too. Have you ever stopped to stare at the selections on offer at a Redbox kiosk? Case closed.
How did last year’s results compare?
All I can find right now are the results of the final winners for the past 2 years.
2010 results
2011 results
Well it doesn’t take too much thought to realize that one of us probably doesn’t differ much from the average Academy member. We try to maintain a certain level of quality amongst our film viewing but we don’t see hundreds of films a year like a professional critic would. In a sense the players and the fans aren’t that much different. The players might have a bit more inside knowledge but still, it’s not their job to evaluate and so they are limited by the amount of down time they have outside of work, just as any of us are.
Ryan Adams says:
January 23, 2012 at 3:15 pm
How did last year’s results compare?
All I can find right now are the results of the final winners for the past 2 years.
2010 results
2011 results
Hmm, well that’s not really helpful…
I will say that I typically think the Academy makes good nominee choices but there have been some glaring omissions over the years and I don’t often agree with the winner.
The username is in preparation for tomorrow, lol
I was excited to see some fresh and original nominees from the AD simulated ballot but these are more of the same. YAWWN
@Joseph “Based on Harris’ explanation, then The Artist, The Tree of Life and Drive would’ve automatically become Best Picture nominees, as they were over the 10% requirement; their additional ballots — 126 for The Artist, 88 for Tree of Life, and 27 for Drive — would then be redistributed for the second-place votes. ”
It says “movies that soar far beyond that threshold.” I seem to remember from a previous discussion that this limit was 20%. This limit makes sense, as it guarantees at least 5 nominees. Can anyone verify?
Joseph, Pete, Ryan et al,
After the announcement of the change this past summer, there has been a lot of conflicting information. I used a site which used the minimum chosen to be greater than:
total votes / (number of films nominated + 1)
The question comes down to what is the number of films nominated? The Academy has between 5 and 10. Some of the analysis used 5 films which makes the minimum to be 1979/(5+1) = 329.8. Other analysis used 10 films which makes the minimum to be 1979/(10+1) = 179.9. I used the analysis where 5 films are used.
HOWEVER, I reviewed Steve Pond’s blog and he uses the 10 number. This seems to be the majority of opinions. So I will recalculate the totals a little later today.
BTW, Midnight in Paris makes the cut, but Moneyball does not under this redo.
So 8 films actually make the cut then?
The username is in preparation for tomorrow, lol
Likewise, if necessary, I have a more appropriate Twitter avi chained up, straining to be unleashed.
Also who is this Mara Rooney girl? Is she related to Mickey Rooney?
Rob, I just wanted to say thanks too – great work!
Rob, thanks for doing this.
But I’m extremely disappointed how the same names practically came up that have been considered for most of the recent awards. There are too many other good films not in the mix here.
I normally like turning to the Awards Daily nominations for a pleasantly surprising change of pace, but man did the readership of this site disappoint me this year. All the frontrunners, plus you threw the uninspiring Drive, the terrific but flawed Tree of Life, and Harry fucking Potter into the mix? Great job, guys. Moneyball is so much better than any of those movies.
And I can understand nominating Drive for Best Director, but for Ryan Gosling’s performance? Really? Did you really think he was better than Michael Shannon’s utterly brilliant performance in Take Shelter? Did you even see Take Shelter? Yeah, that’s what I thought.
Also, Kenneth Branagh was better than Nick Nolte and Patton Oswalt? Tinker Tailor’s screenplay was worthy of nomination, but not its cinematography? Only one nomination each for A Separation and Beginners, easily two of the best films of the year? Again, did you even see these fantastic movies?
Listen up, Internet film taste. I’m breaking up with you. We had a good thing going back when you thought Inglourious Basterds was better than The Hurt Locker and Avatar. But then you couldn’t stop masturbating to Inception last year, and now the overrated Drive is your flavor of the month. Also, for some reason, you want to nominate Harry Potter for Best Picture even though deep down, you know it doesn’t deserve any other nominations. That’s just silly. Your one saving grace is that you nominated two performances from Shame. But still. Don’t call me again.
I can’t say I’m not disappointed. It feels like most people took the “Predict the Oscars” route instead of nominating what they actually thought were the best movies and performances. How many of you have actually seen The Artist? Definitely not all of the 300 people that voted for it. I had high hopes for Kirsten Dunst securing a nomination, at least here, but the expected Oscar line up just repeated itself.
Yeah I’m thinking that it was critics and other oscar watchers who lurk here and don’t comment. Those nominees are way too expected. I don’t really think that the commenters would have nominated Clooney for example. I think most of us that add comments to the site had five other favorites. At least I’ve never felt any Clooney love among the regulars. Christopher Plummer and can believe but by that much? And there is no way even a thousand people comment here. I dunno, I feel infiltrated.
I’ve personally seen The Artist, and thought it was very good. Probably my third favorite from this list. Of course, you’re not going to get 300 responses to that question, but I don’t think the movie was that little seen, especially when you consider the sorts of people who would vote for this.
THE UPDATED SPREADSHEET FOR BEST PICTURE HAS BEEN UPLOADED.
Rob
In case anyone was wondering, if there were exactly 10 nominees like last year, Moneyball and Melancholia would take #9 and #10 respectively. The Help would be an extremely close runner up.
I recall conversations with the operators of Salon Table Talk message board a decoade or more ago. They would always say that the ratio of lurkers to people who actually post was about 10 to 1. Not sure if that ration holds up on this site, but I would guess it’s much higher.
I would wager a lot of people stop by here to read an article here or there when they are bored and, if they have a spare moment or two, will fill out the ballots if and when they appear.
Only the deranged few actually take the time to comment here.
“They would always say that the ratio of lurkers to people who actually post was about 10 to 1. Not sure if that ration holds up on this site, but I would guess it’s much higher.”
The Rooney Mara piece we posted a couple of weeks ago? Nearly 300 comments. 7000+ page views.
“And I can understand nominating Drive for Best Director, but for Ryan Gosling’s performance? Really? Did you really think he was better than Michael Shannon’s utterly brilliant performance in Take Shelter? Did you even see Take Shelter? Yeah, that’s what I thought.”
Yes, I saw Take Shelter and Drive and I preferred Gosling’s performance to Shannon’s. I got bored with Shannon’s performance about halfway through the movie. Though I don’t blame him as much as the director.
Only the deranged few actually take the time to comment here.
Remember back to club-hopping days when it seemed every time you went out you’d see the same hard-core group virtually always partying?
sure, they might have been a bit deranged. But they were also club royalty, right?
Rob
I think you used the methodology for a ten nominee race. The new rule is that a film with 5% of the first place votes is an automatic nominee. Films with one percent or less of the votes have their second place votes distributed among the non-nominated films. Films already nominated need no additional votes; they are “wasted” since they cannot affect the final result. That is why the votes are distributed to films still have a chance at a nomination. In the initial round of voting, six films were nominated. Hugo, HP2 and Dragon Tattoo did not need additional votes to cross the victory line. Whether Moneyball or Melancholia would have made it remains to be seen.
Pete,
5% is not the guaranteed minimum. If 12 films get 6%, they all can’t be nominated. Most likely a film with 5% will be nominated, but it won’t be determined until the second round. Total ballots / 11 guarantees being one of the top 10 films in the first round.
I sent a number of very specific questions to the Academy to clarify the process, and it took them a couple of weeks (and a consultation with PricewaterhouseCoopers) to get me the answers. But for the numbers wonks out there, this is directly from AMPAS and PwC:
In the first round, you presume a 10-nominee field in setting the magic number for nomination. (Contrary to what Mark Harris says, it comes out to about 9%, not 10%.) As the spreadsheet points out, that means 180 votes in a field of 1979.
In the Best Picture category only, the surplus rule is triggered if you have 10% more votes than you need. (In this case, 198 votes would do the trick.) All three first-round nominees trigger the surplus rule and have their ballots redistributed under that rule. (Votes for “The Artist” would count .61 for that film and .39 for the voter’s second choice, “Tree of Life” would be .69/.31, and “Drive” would be .88/.12.)
In all other categories, it takes a 20% surplus to trigger the rule.
Then the votes for sub-1% films are redistributed to the highest-ranked film still in the running on each ballot.
Then you set the 5% bar. (In this case, as the spreadsheet points out, it’s 99 votes). Everything above it is a nominee, everything below it isn’t.
The Rooney Mara piece we posted a couple of weeks ago? Nearly 300 comments. 7000+ page views.
That’s the article that brought me here from Google. It was ranking high that day if you got home and were breathless after seeing Rooney Mara’s performance and decided to Google here and see who in the heck she was.
This website has renewed my love of Oscar and brought it back where it was years ago. I went through a patch of 6 years where I worked 65 hours a week with really ODD work hours that did not match up right. I pretty much gave up on life and had no time to ever go to the movies, or even rent many, which is ironic considering my love of film and television brought me to my career which had stripped me of the joy of either. But that’s changed in the last year and I’m so happy to be back!
Mel,
Thanks, buddy. That’s really nice to know. You made a great impression on us from the first day you wandered in.
Twitter pals too!
Even here in AD The Artist is tops.
Trying to finalize my Oscar predictions now, been doing his even before Oscarwatch. To hell with work. Last night I saw a film from the Republic of Guinea (need to put ‘Republic’ coz there are several Guineas on this planet) entitled The Golden Ball and one of the main characters’ name is Mr. Bechir. I’m taking that as a sign that it’ll be Demian Bichir and not Fassbender or Oldman making the cut (whatever works, right?).
Rob’s results encourages me to predict high as far the BP slots go. The new rules may be restrictive but there are a lot of choices this year. It may not be indicative of overall high quality, but there are indeed a lot of films to root for this year. And I will not give up on The Tree of Life, even if it doesn’t make the cut, there’s still a chance for write-in nominations.
Just skimmed through the comments section and, class or crass, it’s always a delightful read.
Steve Pond,
You mean that there is a 10% rule? Oy!
Rob
Steve Pond,
The next time you have the opportunity with PWC, ask them what they do with misspellings of names of actors/actresses.
Thanks back, Ryan. I love the way you and Sasha conduct things around here. I love the passion and I also love your kindness and goodwill….as well as your dry/wry sense of humor.
And yes to Twitter! I’m kind of new there too (I really did call it The Twatter and declare it useless…..I also got really drunk at our college graduation party in 1996 and when my friend showed me his “homepage” on the web I declared the WWW useless trash so I have a great track record!)
@Daveylow: Okay, so I guess there’s ONE person out there…
Personally I got bored with Ryan Gosling’s performance at the beginning of Drive. You didn’t like Shannon in the cafeteria scene? You got bored of watching the raw emotional outpouring of a man watching his world falling apart all around him? Different strokes, I guess. Shannon was my favorite male performance all year, and it actually required him to, you know, act, which IMHO was more than you can say about Gosling in Drive. I am glad that Michael Fassbender was the top vote-getter in Best Actor (my second-favorite male performance).
This years Oscar season needs Kingsley to be nominated in a big way. Scorcese to be nominated too. That may be the only way we actually have a race for Best Picture this year…..
Except maybe if The Descendants suprises at the SAG and gets nods for Woodley and Editing(plus the probable WGA win)
Those are the only ways I can imagine this Best Picture race staying interesting.
Imagine if all this somehow happens! That would be so exciting (even though I don’t like the Descendants I would still enjoy this just for tension sake)
Dammit, meant to post this in Oscar wishlist! I’m gonna copy and paste it over.
The best way to imagine The Artist not making mince meat of its competitors is to watch the Box Office starting tomorrow. If there’s not a serious uptick becuase of all of the nominations, The Artist won’t win Best Pic.
Guaranteed, if the next 7 days doesn’t see an onslaught of ticketbuyers for The Artist, Hollywood won’t embrace a film that America rejected.
Rob and Steve
Many thanks for the clarification. How fascinating that nine films made the cut this morning.
Wish these were the actual nominations…
Rob –
Yep, there’s now a 10% rule, but only in Best Picture. All the five-nominee categories are still 20%.
As for the misspelling thing, I asked them about that years ago. If they can determine who the voter meant to vote for, they count it. So if somebody writes down “Jesica Chastane,” it still counts. If the name is completely illegible or spelled so badly that they can’t tell who it’s supposed to be, they discard it. It’s a judgment call on the part of the accountants.