This is the first time since I’ve been covering the Oscar race that no film has checked all of the boxes a film normally needs to in order to win Best Picture. Some say that stats don’t matter, that it’s all “confirmation bias” — finding proof for your theory. Some say stats do matter because they indicate history, or patterns that can be reliable or not. One of these films has to win so one of the stats will be thrown out or at least deemed fallible, not airtight. The question is, which one?
First, the stats themselves.
- SAG Awards ensemble. We know that since the beginning of the SAG Awards ensemble vote, no film has ever won Best Picture without that nomination except 1995’s Braveheart, the very first year of the ensemble award. It’s the anomaly year that gets dragged out when a presumed frontrunner misses out. Two itportant things to note about them: SAG recently merged (2012) with AFTRA for these awards. That means it’s theoretically possible our sample has become altered a bit. That means a guy who does television or even radio commercials out in Des Moines can be choosing the acting nominees if he gets selected to be on the nominations committee. Does it make a difference? The SAG nominations were a bit “off” this year. But even in years when they’ve been “off” the stat mostly holds true. 25 YEARS
- Golden Globe for Director. You have to go back to 2005 to find a year when the Best Picture winner was not Globe nominated. That’s 10 years. Before the Crash anomaly we have to go all the way back to our second most often dragged out anomaly — Driving Miss Daisy in 1989 which, for some reason, was never nominated for Director, not at the Globes, not at the DGA and not at the Oscars. 10 YEARS
3. The ACE Eddie — you have to drag back out the Driving Miss Daisy stat to find a year when a Best Picture frontrunner did not earn an Eddie nod first. 26 YEARS
Next week, we can suss out the wreckage from the DGA nominations to see if any of the films are missing there, but at this point, each of the films that seem as it they could win are missing SOMETHING.
Not all stats are created equal, though. The Golden Globe voters are 90 people. The ACE Editing voters total roughly 6,000 and the SAG-AFTRA nom com is around 2,000.
Stepping outside the big guilds for the moment, what are the other patterns we often see in the race that may or may not be considered stats?
1) Being released by October at the latest. The Big Short was screening before its premiere on November 12 at the AFI Fest. That is pushing it, date wise, but does it count or doesn’t it?
2) No film has ever won Best Picture after winning with the National Society of Film Critics and Los Angeles Film Critics without winning Best Director too. That stat is a long one, a strange one, and Spotlight could break it this year.
Lessons from Birdman
Last year, the pundits were too confident in their prediction that Boyhood would win or, more importantly, that Birdman could not win. What was the reason for that? Are we so afraid of ridicule that we tend to align behind one idea so as not to be humiliated if we’re wrong? Or did we genuinely have no clue that the guilds would so unanimously go for Birdman over Boyhood? It should be on the minds of anyone who calls this race: how could we have been that off last year from the general pre-guild consensus?
Last year’s stats had Boyhood, Birdman and The Imitation Game all in the SAG ensemble, ACE Editors, and PGA. Imitation Game didn’t have a Golden Globe nomination for director. That is the only weakness among the three of them.
If we throw out the stats altogether this year we have a wide open race where any film can win. If we throw out the stats, The Martian could win. Straight Outta Compton could win. If we hold to the stats, The Big Short has the least dings against it at the moment. The reason I’m writing it down here and repeating myself is to test the stats against this unpredictable season and measure which one gets tossed and why.
Update: just to head you off at the pass if you want to start throwing “meaningless” stats at me, like Birdman winning without an editing nomination and Argo winning without a director nomination – those matter less than when the bigger guilds omit something because it’s a numbers thing. 300 or 400 editing members of the Academy aren’t going to stop Birdman. Nor will 400 or so directors who leave off Ben Affleck, not when the momentum swung his way. And that’s the thing to remember most about stats: they don’t mean anything if the momentum is swinging your way. The reason I’m looking at them now is to help gauge where that momentum is headed.
Sasha, as you said to Tom O’Neill in your podcast with him, you put “The Big Short” at #1 on Gold Derby “as a lark”… And now having seen the film last night at an industry screen, I think YOU’RE RIGHT! The audience LOVED it! And I’m beginning to think it really could go all the way.It’s got the “heat” that “Spotlight” doesn’t have and it’s about something EVERYONE can relate to and wants to know more about -MONEY. It’s got that historical gravitas. NOT THAT I UNDERSTOOD IT ALL. But…I think you’re right…that lack of an Ace Eddie is the beginning of a slippery slope for “Spotlight”. Even two teenage girls, sitting behind me in a NYeaterie tonight were talking about it. Heatedly. Money, the subject that touches everyone.
My heyday as an Oscar prognosticator was in the 1970s and 80s. There was no internet, few pundits and the films weren’t all bunched at the end of the year. My method? I’d go to all the films and decide what looked like winners. I have fairly middlebrow taste, even if I recognize the value of more artistic endeavors.
Ever since there has been this tsunami of punditry and stats, I outsmart myself every time. I should probably just not read any of it, trust my instincts,and come here only to vote! (This year’s instincts say The Martian, by the way.)
I know exactly what you are saying! 😉
I’m just spitballing here and I know the ACE Eddie has like 6,000 members but looking at that chart my first thought was that stats going down. I know it’s the sturdiest stat but like Sasha said its so damning for Spotlight and I see that film as the front runner. Plus it has that SAG nom, I can’t bet against that stat. I know I’ll probably be wrong but just figured I’d throw my two cents in. Lol. Oh and can Inside Out please somehow become a BP nominee. That’d seriously be the best thing ever.
Hi Sasha. Looking into the facts of the race. “THE BIG SHORT” and “THE MARTIAN” are the real frontrunners from now on as SPOTLIGHT”, which does not have the very crucial ACE nod of 6000 members is nearly outpaced from the race. I really can’t see “SPOTLIGHT” winning neither one of the upcoming PGA and DGA Guilds nor BP at OSCARS. The big hype is over ! Cheers. 🙂
The Globes are the awards that come from the entertainment press. The HFPA members are not critics or film makers but do represent a major component of the film industry, publicity. They represent the people who produce the feature articles about films and the celebrity gossip pieces that help maintain interest in the Hollywood actors and films. They represent a point of view that is distinct from craft guilds or critics awards Buzz.
Where is Gail Withers these days? I have a strong feeling that Inside Out will land a Best Picture nomination. I need her to tell me what she sees..
Brooklyn and Sicario seem stronger than we’d first thought. Mad Max has the passion. I’d bet it’s one of those three when all is said and done. (I’m sad for Room, because it’s terrific.)
Thinking of the magic number of 571 (I think that’s it this year?), I can see about 4 films easily getting that number of #1 votes. These movies seem to have a lot of passion so I think they are safe locks from round one: Mad Max, Spotlight, TBS and The Martian. I wouldn’t be surprised at Creed also getting in.
Sooo, yes, I do think MM:FR will get a Best Picture nomination.
Here’s hoping for Inside Out and Carol to get enough #2s so they become 1s after surplus allocations. :-).
With respect, I think most people who were predicting last year loved Boyhood so much that they didn’t/couldn’t/wouldn’t see that it had been anointed too early. Sometimes I find predicting is more fruitful if you talk to every day people than to people who are in this every day.
I think a large chunk of Academy members are not in this every day, they are in it in December. By that time, every person who hadn’t seen Boyhood had heard it was a masterpiece, and when they saw it didn’t agree. That was what would obviously happen. People predicting couldn’t see that because we were too stuck in our own view of the world.
The closest genre film to win BP in history was probably Gravity. The actors didn’t relate to it. Screenwriters also didn’t, but they are a much smaller branch. I think Mad Max won’t win because actors and screenwriters won’t tolerate a winner that is 1) a sequel, 2) not an acting showdown and 3) not a writing showdown. One of the other 3 will probably emerge as a consensus choice. The Martian may win. May be The 1st genre winner. It is palatable for actors, screenwriters and crafts people, which may hate Spotlight and Big Short, unlike 12 Years a Slave, which was also liked by them. Definitely not as much as Gravity, but surely was high on their ballots.
However actors and screenwriters DID tolerate a winner that was 1) a sequel (Godfather 2), 2) not an acting showdown (Argo, Slumdog Millionaire) and 3) not a screenplay showdown (Titanic, for one).
Everybody is brushing this off because it’s ‘genre’ but shall I point you in the direction of Silence of the Lambs?
If a genre film is going to break barriers, it could very well be this one for a combination of reasons (revered director, enthusiastic support in guilds and critics), especially if it gathers momentum in the technical categories.
But the number one thing this has going for it is passionate support. People talk about MM in a way that people don’t talk about Spotlight. We’ll see in a few days whether the AMPAS masses echo that passion or whether its a small core support.
I agree re. passion support and Mad Max. People who love it really, really love it. That’s going to get it a lot of nominations. On the other hand I suspect there are plenty of traditional Oscar voters who are scratching their heads thinking WTF?!? The hurdle is the final round, when consensus trumps passion. Consensus is MMFR’s weakness and something like Spotlight’s strength. If BP consensus is still a mess in late Feb then it could, just possibly, sneak through but it’d be a genuine surprise. I suspect the race will have more clarity by then. The only thing I’m personally invested in is Miller for BD because I think his work is the standout directorial achievement of the year. BP, not so much.
Of course, if something unexpected happens like the Globes give MMFR Best Drama then who the hell knows …. (not impossible, frankly, when you’re talking about 90 unpredictable foreigners!)
Remember (2): Passion gives the nod. Consensus gives the win. Preferential ballot voting assures that.
I thought that was what I said 🙂
I am just adding that the (in my opinion bad) way BP votes are counted, you cannot win If consensus is your weakness.
You are just proving all of my points.
“However actors and screenwriters DID tolerate a winner that was 1) a sequel (Godfather 2), 2) not an acting showdown (Argo, Slumdog Millionaire) and 3) not a screenplay showdown (Titanic, for one).˜
All of the 3 in the same film? (Return of the King won Best Adapted Screenplay)
“Everybody is brushing this off because it’s ‘genre’ but shall I point you in the direction of Silence of the Lambs?”
Is Tom Hardy winning his first Lead Actor for this? Is Charlize repeating just like Jodie Foster? Is it winning or even being nominated for Best Adapted Screenplay? Will it become the 4th film in Oscar history to win the 5 major categories?
“If a genre film is going to break barriers, it could very well be this one for a combination of reasons (revered director, enthusiastic support in guilds and critics), especially if it gathers momentum in the technical categories.”
Well… Gravity: revered director: check; enthusiastic support from critics: check; enthusiastic support from guilds: check (Mad Max still has to win PGA and DGA to equalize this one, Charlize didn’t receive Bullock’s SAG nom). Won 5 crafts Oscars + Score + Director.
“But the number one thing this has going for it is passionate support. People talk about MM in a way that people don’t talk about Spotlight. We’ll see in a few days whether the AMPAS masses echo that passion or whether its a small core support.”
Which people, by the way? Your friends or people from the acting or writing branch? I personally have a handful of journalist friends that burst into tears watching Spotlight.
Remember: Passion gives the nod. Consensus gives the win. Boyhood, Social Network, Avatar… all more loved than than winners. All more hated too.
I find it difficult to believe yhat anyone believes Ridley Scott will win BD because he actually deserves it for The Martian and not as a make up/ lifetime achievement award.
Marty also didn’t deserve it for The Departed. Paul Newman didn’t deserve it for The Color of Money. What’s the problem? There are two ways you can deservingly win an Oscar… For the achievemnt itself or the career.
The two aren’t necessarily exclusive. One can win for great work AND lifetime achievement.
Sure. But one of the two is already enough to justify a win.
I love Departed so i was hoping Marty would win either way. But it’s definitely not his best or most deserving.
And Leo won’t deserve it for The Revenant this year either. Just sayin’.
Leo is finally lucky to be a contender in a terrible lineup. This is the worst best actor field I have seen since I started to follow awards season in 2000.
Yeah it’s pretty damn weak. But that’s partially because some of the best performances of the year got no traction (Ben Mendelsohn in Mississippi Grind, Michael B. Jordan in Creed, Geza Rohrig in Son Of Saul, Jason Segel AND Jesse Eisenberg in The End Of The Tour, Abraham Attah in Beasts Of No Nation, Sam Jackson in The Hateful Eight, Michael Caine AND Harvey Keitel in Youth).
Can someone explain to me why Mad Max isn’t considered more of a frontrunner than say Spotlight or the Big Short?
I feel like the only stat it will break is SAG… which isn’t that strange considering that there’s so little dialogue and doesn’t quite “show off” its cast like so many other nominees this year. It has all the other precursor nominations thus far (it’s loved by the critics and now seemingly the guilds – until DGA announces which I don’t see it missing).. and the actors should like it because it’s using practical effects and hired a big cast, and the popular Charlize Theron is great in it. I just feel like it’s being seriously underestimated..
Agreed, the genre. It’s just so vastly different from anything they’ve ever picked to win or are likely to pick again (even when Avatar came close, it was a much more “palatable” film – pretty colors – and had possibly the safest/most familiar script/plot imaginable). Given that, I’d say it’s being estimated remarkably high (and very very much deservedly so).
the only redeemable thing about Avatar I now remember aside from the pretty colors is Saldana’s performance actually which should have gotten more attention
🙂 Avatar did NOT come close. That’s a myth. Even if you ignore all of the snubs it had to contend with, which made it obvious it wouldn’t win, you still have to look at what it ended up winning – 3 tech awards. BP winners always win AT LEAST one other major award (usually more).
if anyone other than Bigelowe was gonna win best director, though, it would have been him! I’d say it came close insofar as if Hurt Locker weren’t in the race, it very likely would’ve won, but yeah, I’d concede given that Hurt Locker was what it was, Avatar wasn’t a real
threat.
Either Inglorious Basterds (SAG Ensemble winner, acting award winner, had all key noms) or, as much as I hate the idea, Precious (which won an acting award and adapted screenplay, and had all the key noms), probably would have won, had The Hurt Locker not been there. Avatar had no screenplay and SAG nominations. I doubt it gets them even if you remove The Hurt Locker altogether.
Maybe it wins BD, a la Gravity, but that’s it… It does much worse than Gravity elsewhere (except for winning the GG, for some reason, it did, in fact).
Who knows, it could have been Inglourious Basterds on the strength of the SAG Ensemble win plus the chance to name a QT film as Best Picture. For my money, Basterds is still the best film of 2009.
And because the Avatar plot mirrored a previous BP winner in Dances with Wolves. 🙂
“I feel like the only stat it will break is SAG”
Not even close: no GG screenplay nomination (the last 10 BP winners have had it), no Satellite Award BP nomination (the last 11 BP winners have had it) – or BD/screenplay nominations from the same group (the last 9 BP winners have all had both) -, and no BFCA screenplay nomination (the last 10 BP winners have had it). Even if you take out the Satellite Award ones, you’re left with two powerful screenplay stats IN ADDITION to the two SAG stats (ensemble and acting). You’re going to have to rationalize things quite a bit in order to account for all of those…
I think the lack of a strong screenplay is what kills MM: FR more than anything else.
Probably. And a stronger screenplay (at least supporting character-wise) might have helped it to more noticeable acting performances and an ensemble nod as well.
I don’t think there’s anything deficient about Max’s script. It’s a spare, lean narrative, with the emphasis on action and precisely but broadly drawn characters. It’s very much a Mad Max film, and that Miller didn’t dilute the style to make it more “accessible” is, in my opinion, one of the film’s greatest strengths. It really is a shame, I think, that the script has not been appreciated for how solid it actually is.
No, I agree – I LIKE the MMFR script. I just don’t think it’s the kind you need to win BP. For various reasons. That’s all I’m saying.
This detail may throw it in Titanic territory.
If MM:FR had made $600 million plus, I’d agree with you.
Because actors may not relate at all to the film and everyone knows a film doesnt’t win If not well liked by them.
The major stats that Mad Max has to get around are that it’s technically a sequel and that it’s 100% a genre pic and AMPAS only very rarely accepts those.
Except for the aforementioned Godfather 2, along with LOTR-Return of the King.
Of course we all know there is a precedent. But The Godfather II and Return of the King are both special cases obviously. I would like to know what makes people think Mad Max will break through where Gravity, Hugo and other recent genre favorites that swept the techs couldn’t. Because third time’s the charm? I wouldn’t mind if it did, but I don’t know if it’s getting enough second and third place votes. There’s a lot of genre competition that could muddy the waters for it.
special cases… so is MM:FR 🙂
But show me how Mad Max can win over enough actors because the ensembles of The Godfather II and ROTK didn’t have that problem; they were each the ensembles of the year. Mad Max would be lucky to place in the top 7-8 ensembles if AMPAS were prompted to rank them.
The same way Gravity did. Some movies are just too big and good to ignore.
I personally like MM:FR for its unrelenting emotional impact. Admittedly, I haven’t seen the other apparent “frontrunners” like Spotlight or The Big Short yet; it just seems to me that based on the current competition, the Mad Max movie is not only very exciting, brimming with originality, and propelling the Mad Max saga in a new direction, but also it stands alone and apart from anything we’ve seen in 2015, including SW:TFA.
I haven’t scrolled all the way down, but did anyone correct Sasha on the first stat, the “25 Years” one? The SAG award (uh, the “Actor”) has only been around for 21 years, and it’s been 20 years since Mel Gibson’s face was half-blue.
🙂 Yeah, we should have done that by now. Figured it was a typo and somebody else would do it anyway…
That Peter Travers stat is interesting. I looked further back. Since 1990 the winner for Best Picture at the Oscars didn’t appear on this top ten list only three times:
Forrest Gump
Braveheart
Shakespeare in Love
That’s it. So he’s had the winner 22 of the past 25 years and the last 16 straight.
For the record, his top ten is:
10-Inside Out/Anomolisa (tied)
9-Star Wars: The Force Awakens
8-The Martian
7-Tangerine
6-Straight Outta Compton
5-Brooklyn
4-Mad Max: Fury Road
3-Carol
2-Steve Jobs
1-Spotlight
The leaves The Big Short, The Revenant, Room, Sicario, Creed, Hateful Eight, Danish Girl, Bridge of Spies, Ex Machina not looking good (in this silly experiment). Am I the only one that thinks of the so called ‘looking good’ films to make best pic that Bridge of Spies won’t surprise me if it isn’t nominated? Dunno, just a gut feeling.
I have a gut feeling it won’t get in, either, but that might just be because it just feels like such a … so … vanilla, compared to everything else. Last year it would have gotten in easy, but it was also the year of Imitation Game and Theory of Everything and Budapest and Sniper …
In the midst of the weirdness it’s good to be reminded to appreciate the fact that this is a great year.
most definitely
Yeah, I like Bridge of Spies a lot actually, but it sure seems like no one is talking about it much. I just can’t determine if 300 people will think it’s the BEST of the year. Seems like a movie many will have like 6-8th on their lists.
Bridge Of Spies would’ve fit right in with 2014’s mediocrity-fest in Best Picture. Hell, BOS maybe wins if it’s released last year.
It’s still possible it (Bridge of Spies) doesn’t get in, but I’d be very surprised. I was predicting it to get in even before it did so well with precursors.
Dont lump Budapest in with those 3 ;(
Sorry, that’s just a really specific bias I have towards Wes Anderson, whom I consider a racist idiot, but I do realize people really like Budapest/him… sorry haha
I find all his other films exept Bidapest too much. But i do really love the Darjeeling Limited soundtrack. Thats all I like him so don’t feel bad !
That is indeed a very interesting stat – but it’s not written in stone.
But from his list, the films that seem like they have the best chance of a win are Spotlight, The Martian, Brooklyn, Carol and Mad Max.
Yep.
THANK YOU for finally considering one of the precursor stats that go against The Big Short!… Now maybe the next step is to stop ignoring the BFCA Best Director nomination stat as well – since that one is even “older”, by your definition (12 years in a row now with no exceptions), voted on by more people than the GGs (250 or so, if Wikipedia is correct), and is arguably at 100% accuracy (because before 2003 there were 3 nominees or less, so it’s not the same thing at all); also, the fact that these two stats (and the Satellite Award BD nomination stat, if you care to use it), combined, make it extremely unlikely that McKay will not miss at either the DGA, Oscars, or both…
“No film has ever won Best Picture after winning with the National Society of Film Critics and Los Angeles Film Critics without winning Best Director too. That stat is a long one, a strange one”
‘A strange one’ is right – this one actually very much sounds like confirmation bias (which, I’ll admit, is an expression you’ve just taught me, though the concept it describes I was, of course, very much aware of already) on your part, as in trying to prove at all cost Spotlight is somehow not the favorite. Had The Big Short actually won certain critics’ prizes that you could then mould into such stats, would you be holding that against IT?…
“If we hold to the stats, The Big Short has the least dings against it at the moment.”
Nope. It has 3 or 4 (yes, I count Travers – 16 in a row is 16 in a row, no matter how many people are voting -, albeit with caution; but, even setting that one aside, all the BD snubs are not the same as a single BD snub, that’s clear enough, I would say). Spotlight is the one that has the fewest – the Eddie snub. That’s the only real stat it has going against it at the moment. The NSFC/LA thing isn’t a real stat, I’ve maintained this from day 1. Nor is the journalism thing. You can, at best, say The Big Short AND Spotlight are tied for the fewest ‘dings’. You can’t tell me The Big Short has fewer. That’s just not true. It might become true, at some point further down the road, though I, for one, very much doubt it, and expect the opposite to happen, but it’s definitely not the case right now.
“Update: just to head you off at the pass if you want to start throwing “meaningless” stats at me, like Birdman winning without an editing nomination and Argo winning without a director nomination – those matter less than when the bigger guilds omit something because it’s a numbers thing.”
See two quotes higher for an example of a meaningless stat!
Anyway, you’re gonna love it when McKay misses at the DGA, then! That’s a pretty large group… (Man, I hope it’s that one, and not the Oscar, so I don’t have to hear ‘The Big Short is now in the lead’ 100 extra times, for another two days!…)
TBS might not be the favourite but it is the only film that is in a battle for BP win. I have watched and its direction is weak, very weak. Now I understand why it keep missing BD nominations. But while it is weak in direction it’s very strong in screenplay and acting. I see it winning Best Adapted Screenplay(I always say screenplay is the gate to winning BP, so that makes a much bigger threat than ever) and I think it might beat “Spotlight” SAG Ensemble too.
Spotlight is winning screenplay as well AND will very likely have the extra BD nominations. Oh well… hard to convince you once you’ve decided to predict against the stats. We’ll just have to wait for the PGA!
I agree with the stats but I don’t follow them alone. I use logic and look for Academy reaction and what they think of the film. Out of the one that can win BP, TBS is the one that has huge backing from the industry. It’s a big studio film unlike “Spotlight” and has big backers, including producer Brad Pitt. It could also be seen as the more urgent film too. As I said, TBS has huge weak and it could be DGA. it could another film in a long films which have eliminated themselves by having a glaring weakness. Spotlight has been the default favourite because all the other films haven’t strong enough. This year’s Oscar will be the last film standing.
Counter-arguments: Spotlight is clearly the less divisive movie, so more likely to win a preferential; Spotlight isn’t in the comedy category at the GGs (you know full well how “often” comedy generally wins BP, recent exceptions notwithstanding).
For every argument for The Big Short, there is an equally compelling argument for Spotlight. You can’t get to a conclusion that way, unless you’re willing to be biased, and that’s obviously the wrong strategy. That’s why, between movies that aren’t obviously wrong candidates for winning BP, you go with the one indicated as more likely by the stats (and that’s usually what happens, because the movies that are left as genuine contenders by mid-January are, most of the time, all valid choices, in some way, logically speaking). I don’t think you can build an objective case for why The Big Short is more of a BP winner type film than Spotlight.
The logic is this. How many voters are going to vote for The Big Short as their favorite movie of the year? Very, very, very few. Nobody’s in love with The Big Short. It inspires zero passion. And McKay isn’t really one of “them”. He’s not in the classy directors club. He’s a comedy dude who’s made some truly terrible movies.
There you go! Some counter-arguments. Like I said – there are always counter-arguments… It’s much, much harder to argue with the stats, though! 🙂
Tell that to Mark Twain! 🙂
🙂
It’s apparently unclear whether he was the one who came up with that quote, anyway… I’m far from an expert on the subject, though – just going by what it says on Wikipedia. If you are better informed on this, I won’t contradict you for a second. 🙂
I was born in Missouri. Does that count as an expert? Ha.
Not sure… 🙂
Err…. I haven’t seen The Big Short yet, but your statement about the weak directing and the strong acting sounds kinda contradictory. What is the main purpose of a director? To direct the actors how they have to act. So if the acting is very strong (especially from the whole cast), than partly because of the director. And that’s why people like Robert Redford or Tom Hooper even WON that damn statue, despite their directing wasn’t very “showy”.
I really liked the film, the acting was top notch and McKay deserves to win for a great script. When I say the direction was weak, I’m talking about technical aspect of the film. The editing helped the film great because the camera movements were so bad, it was unreal. I think it deserves to win for editing were it for the mind boggling editing of MM:FR
BAFTA is more aligned with the critics than the Oscars and award higher critically acclaimed movies than the Oscars too. BAFTA is much more likely to split than the Oscars. In fact, BAFTA does splits more often than BP and BD together. If there isn’t a clear favourite to win BAFTA tends to award home favourites. Since they moved their dates to before the Oscars, they have been less biased and usually reward the most highly acclaimed films. BAFTA are more likely to reward non home filmmakers than any award show and they will recognise great achievement. They will not simply hand over to Ridley Scott because he is overdue. The great achievement of the year belongs to Miller, who is from Australia where the Queen is still the head of state. It would not surprise if Miller won BD or even his film were to win BP.
I think the SAG Ensemble theory will weaken this year because my guess is the tremendous goodwill that will garner Ridley Scott his first DGA (and Oscar) will probably help The Martian in BP a lot, as well. As I – and many others – had said before, this is his Departed as in not his best or most memorable but the one good enough to collect old debts with.
P.S. I have a hunch that though Spotlight will get the nods, in the end it will only win Original Screenplay which is also a nice way to turn the film’s director and most likely double nominee, into an Oscar winner.
Scott or his film have not being winning even without one dominant film winning everything. He will only win because of sentimental. that goes for Sly too. Funnily enough I’m Okay with Sly winning but not Scott. I think it’s because Scott is much bigger, to me, and also because Miller has the outstanding direction this year.
Agree that Scott won’t be The Martian’s only win.
It’s pure hunch time for me, but I sense that Big Short and Mad Max are gaining momentum and Spotlight is steadily liked if not outright loved. I think the winner is among those three, but I can’t pin it down. I could see Short and Spotlight splitting “issues” leading to Mad Max. I could see Max and Short splitting “fun” and leaving Spotlight to win. Or I could see The Big Short just getting that weird blend of funny and serious and walking off with the whole thing.
I can’t get to a place where I see The Martian or The Revenant winning. They’re both genre movies that are great, but I suspect that the former lacks the passionate fan base of Mad Max and the latter suffers from being from a director just rewarded last year.
I’m continuing to root for Mad Max, but…time will tell!
The lack of ensemble noms for Revenant and Martian make sense to me because neither of those movies – unlike Spotlight and Big Short – were really ensembles. They were solo performances + other actors. I think after BAFTAs it will be seen to be Martian vs Revenant. Although that assumes BAFTA’s won’t embrace MM. If they do that car chase may be going all the way.
I specifically asked people if they thought The Martian was likely to get nominated for the SAG Ensemble beforehand. They did. I’m pretty sure Sasha did too (at least based on her reaction immediately after the snub).
Yeah, SAG was really weird this year, which is one of the reasons it is carrying less weight with me than Sasha’s other “must haves” – ACE Eddies, PGA, Globe director. It stands to reason that when a lot of people step back and go “WTF?” that stat could be the most shaky.
It’s possible… But The Martian has other things going against it, anyway – as does Mad Max, by the way. So it’s still Spotlight vs. The Big Short for me, even if we ignore SAG Ensemble, for some reason or another.
The Martian is in on every other major stat I can think of, including Sasha’s list above. What’s going against it?
It is, indeed, in 2nd place, as far as smallest number of snubs is concerned. The only other one it missed is the Golden Globe screenplay nomination, which is big (the last 10 BP winners have had it, and it’s at 86% since 1966). But there’s the genre thing, too, which I also think is big. And it’s at 80 on Metacritic. So, yeah, even if you ignore the two massive SAG stats (which, for the record, I disagree there’s evidence you should do), there are still multiple things (and stats) going against it.
I’m not taking the GG screenplay nominations to heart, when it’s sure to get an adapted screenplay nom at the Oscars, althpugh if your stat is accurate it’s a bit daunting. But as we all keep saying, it’s a weird year. There’s not one big frontrunner or even two big movies during it out. There are a number of top films, and if you look at the year of Rocky as an example (as someone here did) what ended up on top was a movie people loved, that made them feel good and that worked emotionally. That is The Martian in spades.
I think it’s instructive to look at The Martian’s placements in the guild votes as well. It wasn’t placed in the “fantasy” category. They put it in “contemporary”. That shows me that they don’t think of The Martian as a genre picture.
“if your stat is accurate it’s a bit daunting.”
It is accurate. The reason it’s so strong is it shows what’s in the top 5 for screenplay overall, and, thus, what’s fighting to win screenplay. The past I don’t know how many BP winners have almost all won Best Screenplay (in their category) as well, if I remember correctly.
“There’s not one big frontrunner or even two big movies during it out.”
I guess you can kinda say that, but, if you look at the stats, Spotlight and The Big Short are probably the two big ones…
“I think it’s instructive to look at The Martian’s placements in the guild votes as well. It wasn’t placed in the “fantasy” category. They put it in “contemporary”. That shows me that they don’t think of The Martian as a genre picture.”
That’s a good argument I hadn’t thought about. But, honestly, at this point, I think the genre thing is the least of The Martian’s worries. I just don’t think it’s as liked overall as some/most had assumed. The precursor results suggest that, at least. No way it’s not getting in at SAG, either for ensemble or Damon, if it’s the most liked movie of the year, overall. There’s too much overlap with AMPAS, AFTRA or no AFTRA. And no way it’s not making the GG top 5 for screenplay (ESPECIALLY since it’s a contender, unlike Gravity, which was obviously just too weak in that category). Just no way…
Spotlight, yes. I don’t buy The Big Short at all. I think it has a shot at maybe 4 noms, tops, and that’s not enough to seriously challenge for BP. The shallow number of noms undermines it. The Martian is almost certain to get at least 7, maybe more. And Scott’s likely win pulls it along, too. Even the costume guild put it on the short list, which I certainly wasn’t expecting.
OK, but don’t change tune if The Big Short gets 6 or more! 🙂 It could easily do that and still get nowhere near winning BP… (for other reasons, like, for example, the lack of a DGA nomination)
The problem with statistics – however they’re being used in this context – is that there have only been 87 years of Oscar, and frankly a statistical sample of 87 is just too small. Wake me up in the year 3000 when we might be able to find significant patterns.
Wake me in the year 3000 too! I wanna see how badly humanity screwed up everything non-Oscar
Then why do they keep getting confirmed year after year, despite all having such small sample sizes? Could it be simply because they are obviously on course to reaching similar percentages to what they have now in the long run as well? (Whenever they get to an acceptable sample size.) That’s my theory…
First things first – and let’s not kid ourselves:
Sasha Stone has her favorite – The Martian. And Jeff Wells has his favorite – The Revenant. It’s clear from all the conversations that they have had, and even by Sasha’s selective omission of The Revenant in her BAFTA preview – that she is not as big of a fan as Jeff is.
That being said, I think that The Martian will be stronger with the BAFTA group but I suspect that The Revenant will be stronger with AMPAS. Last year they didn’t give it to Birdman and Inarritu and we know what happened at The Academy. I am not suggesting that The Revenant will win or anything – just pointing to the fact that Academy members will be more dismissive of The Martian and will be more appreciative towards The Revenant.
It clearly stems from the fact, that the British will protect one of their own – Sir Ridley Scott, and The Academy will stand up behind their choice – Alejando Gonzalez Inarritu.
In any case, it’s interesting that The Big Short will show weakness by not showing up tomorrow and possibly – (and it needs this) by missing the DGA which would stop it dead in its tracks. Bridge of Spies might pick up some steam tomorrow, although Sicario will be stronger with AMPAS, possibly.
Last but not least – no mention whatsoever of Mad Max. If it misses BAFTA – that could spell doom for its Oscar chances – possibly meaning that it could end up like The Dark Knight. I like how astutely Sasha is seeing the shift and is now putting it in 5th place BEHIND The Martian and The Revenant.
In terms of Leo winning at BAFTA – he’ll need to win both GG AND SAG – in order to get the “legacy” vote. I am just glad that Cranston won’t get a nomination by BAFTA – in all likelihood.
That’s my 2 cents…
Sasha liked a lot of movies this year and has had gracious, positive things to say about most of them, including The Revenant. She did the Revenant a favor by not quoting the comments about the movie’s muted reaction and the audience’s lack of applause until the actors came onstage. Or mentioning that Leo might win, grudgingly, not because he earned it this year but because of a legacy vote.
Nobody knows how BAFTA will vote but given that there are many of the same voters in both BAFTA and AMPAS it will not surprise me to see the same director win both.
The Big Short doesn’t have staying power. Bridge of Spies or Carol will move into its spot, most likely. Or MM could blow up everything. 45 Years could enter the conversation over here.
I’m not counting out Fassbender and think he could get nominated and win BAFTA.
Hey man, did you see Leo’s dirty ugly and I’m in pain face? I didn’t think he could do dirty, ugly and painful. Give him the Oscar. That’s what BA has come down to now, having dirty on your face, being ugly and being in pain. Oh, don’t forget about being raped by a bear!
I’d be shocked, shocked if “The Revenant” is nominated for BP BAFTA. I thought way before the film was released and now that I have seen it, I don’t think it should be anyway near nomination let alone winning it.
Velimir, Sasha is a big booster of ”The Martian,” but she’s ALSO a big booster of Leonardo DiCaprio. On Dec. 4, she gave a rave review to ”The Revenant,” in which she wrote: ”He has become such a great actor, one taken too much for granted, but he acts this thing from his heart.” And concludes: ”Far surpassing ‘Birdman’ in every aspect, ‘The Revenant’ was a risk worth taking, a film worth making, and one of the most beautiful and breathtakingly rendered works cinematic art of the year.” On Dec. 21, Sasha offered ”The Case For: Leonardo DiCaprio and the Best Actor Oscar”: ”DiCaprio really should win his Oscar. … DiCaprio, I’d say, has more than earned this win for his unforgettable, horrifying, deeply moving performance in ‘The Revenant.”’ (Plus, she’s written other terrific pieces, when DiCaprio was up for ”The Wolf of Wall St,” championing him.) When it comes lionizing this Leo, Sasha has come out roaring. Brava!
https://www.awardsdaily.com/2015/12/21/the-case-for-leonardo-dicaprio-and-the-best-actor-oscar/
TV alert: DiCaprio and Inarritu are on ”Charlie Rose” tonight. Rose previewed it on ”CBS This Morning.”
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/leonardo-dicaprio-the-revenant-challenges-filming/
But TBS does not have a good directing. It can not win.
I can’t agree with that. Yes, the writing and the editing outshine the actual direction, but I’d say McKay does, at the VERY least, as good a job as Tom McCarthy does with Spotlight, and really, a much better one.
This should be another fun exercise this year. It looks like another fractured year. GG Director seems weakest to me, but we’ll see.
I think it’s looking more and more like TBS will trump “Spotlight” on Oscar. One of the big thing I look for is screenplay and as we all know “Spotlight” is big favourite to win Original screenplay. I think Adapted will go to TBS and that means its chances of winning BP will have sky rocketed. Let’s not forget it’s backed a major studio and by big stars such as producer Brad Pitt. Also, it’s a lot less critically acclaimed than “Spotlight” and Academy usually prefers the less critically acclaimed film of the nominees. I watched it and it’s a great movie and I think it should have higher MC than it currently does. It’s got a great script and great acting, but it’s direction is weak, very weak. It didn’t spoil the film, thankfully, but I don’t know if it can overcome it. You can just imagine how much better it could’ve been if it had better direction. Mckay deserves to win Best Adapted Screenplay and for getting great performances. TBS might overcome its weak direction enough to win BP but I cannot see it win BD. TBS winning BP brings the possibility of a split. Arise, Sir Miller!
So Team Spotlight has lost you too… 🙁 OK… I’m used to this sort of thing. Just remember this moment the day after the Oscars! Remember I never wavered! Just like I didn’t with 12 Years a Slave, or Birdman after the BAFTAs…
“Also, it’s a lot less critically acclaimed than “Spotlight” and Academy usually prefers the less critically acclaimed film of the nominees.”
Not a thing. 2011 and 2015 aren’t the only years the Oscar for BP was given out, you know! 🙂 The Hurt Locker and 12 Years a Slave won, for example. There are other such examples in the past, I’m pretty sure.
I am seeing TBS as a potential big spoiler. It’s only that can beat stats or be seen as an alternative to “Spotlight”.
I had THL and “12 Years A Slave” in my mind as the exception to the “rule”, but every other time they don’t give BP to the highest acclaimed film. That is a well know fact about the Oscars. Could that be counted as a stat too? The highest acclaimed film rare win BP Oscar.
Well, Carol is the most acclaimed anyway (96 on Metacritic, to Spotlight’s 93), so that doesn’t eliminate Spotlight from the discussion anyway. (Unless you have some other standings in mind – I’m gonna need proof of this stat of yours, so something that gives the standings for several years, because I don’t believe it’s accurate. And, please, no Rotten Tomatoes – the percentages there are so random…)
Of course TBS COULD spoil. All I’m arguing is it’s not the favorite.
Well, yeah. “Carol” could get nominated and protect that stat from “Spotlight”. This was happening even before they changed from five BP nom. Just of the top of my head, “Titanic” over “L.A. Confidential” “Shakespeare in Love” over SPR, “Gladiator” over “Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon” and “Traffic”, ” A Beautiful Mind” over “LOTR:FOTR, “Chicago” over “The Pianist” and “LOTR: The Two Towers”, “Crash” over “Brokeback Mountain”. They still did after the abandoned five BP nom: TKS over TSN, “Argo” over ZDT(and Amour?) and “Birdman” over “Boyhood”.
Yeah, but Slumdog Millionaire, The Return of the King, American Beauty, all seem to have been the best reviewed (again, on Metacritic) out of the nominees in their year (see here: http://www.metacritic.com/feature/the-oscars-how-to-predict-the-best-picture-winner?page=0) – and I think The Artist might be, too. All in all, it’s not that far from 50%, I would say (I count AT LEAST 5-6 exceptions so far, in 15 years or so). That’s not a very strong stat to me.
BAFTA Best Film nominee has also usually been a requirement to win it, at least since 1996. The one exception was 2004 with the very late-breaking entry “Million Dollar Baby” not being nominated by BAFTA. But since BAFTA started upping its game to more closely align itself with the Oscar race, that rule has held up pretty well.
This is why I find tonight/tomorrow’s BAFTA nominations particularly fascinating (or at least something cool to get us through until the Globes provide more action on Sunday). I’m dying to know what has played well for BAFTA and if we can expect to see the usual suspects (Mad Max, Spotlight) or if one of them or one of the other heavy hitters (The Big Short, Bridge of Spies) gets left out. Only five nominees is what makes these awards awesome, IMO.
I think you mean “Million Dollar Baby”.
Yes, that’s what I meant. Editing that now…
I agree. Something big could happen tomorrow morning (that’s when it is over here, in Romania).
DES MOINES RULES! (Iowa native now in Minneapolis)
Also long-time Iowan (though not native).
People we’re complicating this race more than we need too! TBS isn’t the type of film that wins and if that’s not enough for you, I’m not predicting it to win cause it doesn’t have enough scores of 100 on metacritic. The Martian doesn’t either! Mad Max I just can’t see winning best picture either, although it has enough scores of 100 to win, so it’s in 2nd place for me at the Oscars. Heard that all the Oscar voters love Spotlight, and also heard they “don’t think Carol was that good”, which surprised me I thought Carol could win. So the winner is obvious!
Sasha you should give up on the big short, mad max will win best picure
If Mad Max is nominated for BP, would it be the first time a fourth film in a series got a BP nod?
If Mad Max ISN’T nominated for BP everyone will throw a hissy fit myself included. One of the best things to happen to the race since the expansion of best pic in 09.
I think in the five nominee old days it might have snuck in.
Just you wait. I’ve a horrible feeling it’ll get snubbed.
They can’t go there, seriously. Mad Max, a Best Picture candidate anywhere in the world outside of Australia?
I prefer to wait one week… Right now I think all of the 4 can win. Spotlight, The Martian, The Big Short and Mad Max.
Do you think, if Scott isn’t a BD nom, and those other three are BD-nommed, then that improves Mad Max’s chances at BP? Just wondering if Spotlight and Big Short split the “true story ensemble 00s” vote, and Mad Max benefits from less sci fi competition – in your eyes
There is zero chance Scott isn’t nominated.
I think Scott is dedinitely in. Many things can happen. One of them is a scenario in which actors hate Mad Max and crafts branches hate Spotlight and Big Short. The less hated tends to win in preferential ballot. And that could be The Martian, a sort of consensus film that is liked across branches, although not loved as much as others.
Hell of a topic.
1. If this is a Boyhood v. Birdman year, then it’s the flashier Big Short snaking the big prize away from the respected but way outsider Spotlight. (I think Big Short’s possible two acting nods would give it an advantage over Spotlight)
2. If it’s Gravity v. 12 Years, then Mad Max is Gravity and Spotlight is 12 Years (the respectable and more “important” film)
3. If it’s Babe v. Braveheart, then the oddball George Miller film falls JUST short of Ridley Scott or Inarritu.
4. What if this is 2000…..Big Short is Traffic, Mad Max is Crouching Tiger, Martian is Gladiator. Poor Ridley Scott could be the reverse Ang Lee (two Best Picture winners with no Best Director statues)
5. Maybe it’s Star Wars vs. Annie Hall with Big Short as Annie Hall and Star Wars as…Star Wars
“Big Short as Annie Hall”
You lost me there… Just because they’re both comedies?
Not as much of a stat, but every Best Picture winner since Crash has had above an 86 on Metacritic. The Big Short is currently sitting at an 81, which makes me think it might be too divisive to win?
Well the problem is that Metacritic has changed so much. What to look at is the negative number at Rotten Tomatoes and compare that with every movie since Crash.
Big Short currently has 149 fresh and 22 rotten. Birdman had 21 rotten, Slumdog had 20, and Departed had 24. But those also all had about 100 more reviews. Also, every BP winner since Crash has an RT average rating above an 8.2 (The Departed being the lowest so far) and The Big Short is currently sitting at a 7.9. Not that it can’t win, but I think if it does it would be the least critically acclaimed pick since Crash.
Wow, these are fascinating stats. So Big Short is 149 fresh and 22 rotten. The Revenant sits at 116 fresh and 28 rotten (like Big Short, it also has an average score of 7.9). The Martian sits at 261 fresh and 19 rotten. Percentage wise, The Martian is killing it.
Revenant also has the lowest of the several scores I checked on metacritic, a 76.
And Spotlight has 174 fresh, 6 rotten, and is sitting at an average score of 8.9
I didn’t check them all, just what people consider to be front runners right now. Very impressive. Add another 90 to that and it’s safe to assume it enters double digits, although what the actual negative number would be is impossible to say. But I have plenty of respect for Spotlight.
What really strikes me is how clearly it shows that Revenant does not deserve to be in this conversation, which is what I have been saying right along.
Force Awakens: 299 fresh v. 22 rotten. Game, set, match.
Exactly what I was thinking. Since Crash there’s no Best Picture winner with less than 90% in the rotten tomatoes and also not out of the top 5 of the critics list. The big short is the #15 best film according to critics, not even in the top 10.
Thank you! That IS a stat, as far as I’m concerned. Think of it as the Metacritic Awards… 🙂
That’s another thing that I forgot to point out that remains an obstacle for Big Short’s Best Picture/Director chances: The ol’ Metacritic score. The score has been powerful ever since the Oscars moved to late February/early March. Has to do with voters –somewhat (but not exactly fully as in goody two shoes Boyhood)–relying on the critics to gauge their choices as opposed to the moviegoing public. Titanic, although had a 74 on MC, still won well because MC didn’t exist until 1999. And even Gladiator’s 64 score did not prevent it for winning Picture due to the ceremony being in March and voters relied on the public to make their choices.
One thing though that has questioned the value of Metacritic is that many respected movie critics on that site either get laid off (or in Richard Corliss of TIME’s case die). Further complicating things, we don’t know how MC assigns the weight of each critic.
Nevertheless, we really can’t ignore Big Short’s 81 Metacritic score (in the realm of empirical stats at least) the same way we cannot ignore Adam McKay’s snub at the Best Director GG category. They are both critic oriented groups.
“Further complicating things, we don’t know how MC assigns the weight of each critic.”
Ryan explained it pretty well at some point last year: “they attempt to assign a more calibrated range of numerical scores to indicate different levels of good or bad, They sometime get an assist from the critic himself, if that critic uses stars ***** or letter grades. The MC grading system can then find the corresponding number that matches the number of stars or A,B,C,D grade. Like, a B+ would be 83. Or 3.5 stars would be an 91.” He gave a link for the formula too, but, unfortunately, I pasted that one wrong…
Thanks.
Anyways, it just further goes to show that it a shortened Oscar season since ’04, the critics’ voice as been more powerful (although the guilds do hold the trump card like Birdman).
Yup.
Oh, and the last film to win Best Picture from only four nominations was Cavalcade (1933). Wow, that’s over four generations (or 80 years) for Spotlight.
🙂 Spotlight will get BP, BD, screenplay, editing and McAdams, at the very least – otherwise it’ll have bigger problems than that stat…
I think it’s between Big Short and Spotlight. I can’t decide if this is a Birdman/Boyhood year (ugh!!!!) where the conventional wisdom gets turned on its head when the guilds have their say. In that case, Big Short would win. It could also be a 12 Years a Slave/Gravity year, where the latecomer gets a lot of attention and seems like it may pull off an upset, but the conventional wisdom holds. I am betting on Spotlight unless it doesn’t get DGA/SAG ensemble. I’d be less likely to think it has strength if there’s no acting noms.
SAG is standing between me and all my faves. Also how much of the cast attends if a movie is nominated ?
You make a good case but no mention of Bernie Sanders?
Make it stop.
I see what you did there
Just a gag. I’m on your side. The Big Short is a beauty. Loved my second viewing. Not as good as my sixth of MMFR but still great. My big hope, however, is Emily Blunt for a sneaky nom.
While Max winning would be awesome on toast, I’m just hoping for George Miller.
YYYAAAAAASSSSSS Emily Blunt!
Emily Blunt is a font of delight.
The Imitation Game actually did get the DGA nomination last year.
Yes, you’re right – thanks.