The BAFTAs aren’t really the BAFTAs as we once knew them. Meaning, they aren’t really a consensus vote. They are a tightly micromanaged jury vote to spare the membership embarrassment or bad headlines for not being inclusive enough. This is how they define their jury:
Juries are made up of industry experts, with each jury comprised of BAFTA members from a diverse range of backgrounds, experience, gender, location and age groups.
But as of writing this, I can’t find information on their juries. You can’t really predict these without knowing their identity or history. A category as important as Best Director should not be, I don’t think, left in the hands of a jury, but rather their directing branch, as the Academy does. That is the very least they deserve. Becoming a BAFTA member and having a vote should be a high honor that caps a career. Instead, they’re meant to huddle out of sight while the “experts” are brought in to make it better.
Here are their voting practices in the specific categories:
The other thing to note is that the BAFTA nominations were announced after Oscar ballots were submitted. That means there is no chance of influencing the Oscar nominations at all. But they serve their purpose, which is to get the institution out of a jam. Reading anything into the acting categories is basically like fan fiction role play for Film Twitter.
In the same way they celebrated the Gothams and the various film critics awards, so too will Film Twitter celebrate these jury choices. So perhaps that is enough. Perhaps that can be its own celebration. But to think they have any sort of connection to the broader voting public is, well, wishful thinking I guess — if you like their choices.
Trying to read anything into the directing category is foolish. You need hundreds, not a handful, of people voting to get an idea of what is popular. That category and the acting categories will not factor into my own analysis. It would be like factoring in the Gothams. Their choices here are very much like what film critics groups would choose or what small individuals of sophisticated people might choose. But that isn’t what the Oscars are, and it’s not what the BAFTAs once were. They are large consensus popularity votes by an industry. If you mess with that, you have no clue what they actually think about anything.
It’s hard for me to even take any of the acting categories with any sort of serious consideration without knowing who the jury members are, what their background is, and what their tastes are. You simply can’t understand why they pick what they picked without knowing that. We only have last year to go by wherein, after all of their efforts to be inclusive and diverse, they still picked two white actors to win in lead as did the Academy. My friend called it the “BAFTA revolt,” which I thought was hilarious. So just briefly, let’s look at their acting categories:
LEADING ACTRESS
LADY GAGA House of Gucci
ALANA HAIM Licorice Pizza
EMILIA JONES CODA
RENATE REINSVE The Worst Person in the World
JOANNA SCANLAN After Love
TESSA THOMPSON Passing
Are you seriously telling me that after all that, they still only picked one non-white actress? Yes, that is what happened. So what is the ever-loving point? I don’t even know what they’re trying to do anymore. What we do know is that Film Twitter is likely to be supportive and since they trickle up to mainstream media, more or less, they will get decent press anyway? No Jennifer Hudson, because of course. The critics shunned her for an entire year practically, even though audiences responded to her performance. These are all good picks, but they’re not BAFTA picks. They’re jury picks, and we should never forget that. Only one of them, maybe two, is likely to cross over. So that means people will assume only Lady Gaga can now win the award, bouncing off of last year’s BAFTA revolt. But um. No. That isn’t what it necessarily means. Herding cats is what it means. The SAG is likely to be your better guide of the eventual Oscar winner.
Meanwhile, Kristen Stewart is still in limbo. We don’t know if she’ll turn up at the Oscars or not. A very Film Twitter-ish/film critics-ish jury did not select her for who knows what reason. I’m sure people have their theories. But that means nothing when it comes to the Academy. Maybe they will, maybe they won’t. We just don’t know.
Still, with such a confusing year of nominations being announced all on the same day and the lingering specter of COVID, it’s anyone’s guess how any of this will go.
Best Director is a hot mess. It is another Twitter fantasy roleplay. They should rename these awards the Film Twitter Jury Prize. I’m only half-kidding here. The BAFTA members have to sit there and watch all of this go down knowing that these nominees do not reflect their idea of “best.”
DIRECTOR
AFTER LOVE Aleem Khan
DRIVE MY CAR Ryûsuke Hamaguchi
HAPPENING Audrey Diwan
LICORICE PIZZA Paul Thomas Anderson
THE POWER OF THE DOG Jane Campion
TITANE Julia Ducournau
No Steven Spielberg. No Kenneth Branagh. No Denis Villeneuve, even with Dune leading the field with 11 nominations. And that means nothing in terms of the Oscar race. We know Jane Campion is winning anyway, but the whole point of large consensus industry awards is to show what they all think is the best. And that isn’t what this is.
BAFTA did not choose any of the directing nominees. The jury did. Like 10 people. BAFTA members have been put in BAFTA jail until they can learn how to vote like Film Twitter. When that happens, I expect they will be let out of jail.
Last thing on the jury selections – these aren’t exactly diverse and inclusive unless you think “inclusive” means what film critics prefer.
So let’s look at the other categories where the entire membership voted instead.
Best Picture
BELFAST
DON’T LOOK UP
DUNE
LICORICE PIZZA
THE POWER OF THE DOG
Okay, meanwhile back in the real world we get an example of what movies they actually liked, more or less. In the old days, the Best Picture and Best Director categories wouldn’t exactly line up. Now we only have two movies that do – the two the jury approved of and the two the members liked are Licorice Pizza and The Power of the Dog. Not surprising, since that is true of film critics as well.
And then screenplay:
ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY
BEING THE RICARDOS Aaron Sorkin
BELFAST Kenneth Branagh
DON’T LOOK UP Adam McKay
KING RICHARD Zach Baylin
LICORICE PIZZA Paul Thomas Anderson
ADAPTED SCREENPLAY
CODA Siân Heder
DRIVE MY CAR Ryûsuke Hamaguchi
DUNE Denis Villeneuve
THE LOST DAUGHTER Maggie Gyllenhaal
THE POWER OF THE DOG Jane Campion
The thing I would note about these is that Hamaguchi got a screenplay nod by the entire membership. I think that matters, personally, because it is a signal that it might crack the Oscar screenplay list too. Had the Best Director category been voted on by the entire membership or had their nominations been released prior to the Oscar ballots due date, there might be a chance Hamaguchi is that fifth slot. He still might be. That is not a bad way to go, but you have to figure out which of the current DGA five to dump. It ain’t gonna be Paul Thomas Anderson, and I personally don’t think it will be Kenneth Branagh. But I guess you never know. Otherwise, these look as we would expect. They show you which films they liked the best.
The only other thing I would note here is that Dune is coming on strong with 11 non-jury nominations. The Power of the Dog has four non-jury nominations, though we would expect their jury picks to align with the Academy’s, so roughly four. Belfast has six total, and one of those (Best British Film) is by the jury. Licorice Pizza has five, though two of those nominations are by the jury. So Dune is a monster leading this thing. How hilarious is it, then, that the director is omitted.
That is how the cookie crumbles, my friends. It is what it is. All in all, I’m going to take away from this three things:
1) Dune is a monster
2) Hamaguchi in play
3) Don’t Look Up is well-liked enough to get Best Film though we can’t know how that translates over.
In a parallel universe or a different website, you would get a much more broad-minded spin on these. But I’m an old timer. And a traditionalist. I don’t see any point to having a jury control that much of the beating heart of these awards. For whatever that is worth (which isn’t much). History should reflect what their industry thought were the best and to have left off so many of the actual best in order to satisfy — I don’t even know what exactly — seems to defeat the whole purpose.
The BAFTAs will have their live ceremony, and we’ll be watching to see whether or not it matters if their nominees matched with Oscar. Traditionally, that is how it works. There is a status bump for those that have a nomination. Maybe they will vote that way, maybe they won’t. Who knows.
This site is about the Oscar race. That is why we focus on that. And if we didn’t, if we tried to pretend we were film critics, they would not let us (or me) into the club anyway. It’s like Melanie Griffith in Working Girl. You can’t pretend to be something you ain’t.
The black population of the United Kingdom is 3 percent. Why are they being overrepresented?
This little trolling attempt would have worked better last year.
I realized today that King Richard was shut out of Best Film, love that! Such a mediocre effort that should be ignored across the board less Ellis’ performance.
Film Twitter. Am I one of the only ones who doesn’t follow this???
no. neither does the Academy. Sasha clings to it with passion, when it doesn’t matter at all.
I tired Twitter for a bit though it’s unecessary info-overload. Would be interesting to see how many members of the Academy tweet.
I”m gonna need an IN-DEPTH explanation as to why BAFTA hates Denzel Washington. How can they truly be taken seriously when they have never ever nominated one of the greatest living actors? Did he do something embarrassing in front of the Queen like 25 years ago?
Yeah, someone somewhere must know what he did that forever ticked them off. It reminds me of BAFTA with their own Vanessa Redgrave. Didn’t she do something many years ago that they didn’t care for? I seem to recall something like that. And she hasn’t received a nom from them in forever.
TTOM completely bombed with BAFTA. If it had other noms and Denzel has missed, you could argue it’s a Denzel thing. But they didn’t really go for the film at all.
The issue is that this is Britain voting on an American adaptation of Shakespeare. British artists tend to be very protective when it comes to how Shakespeare is created and formed and obviously they didn’t like this one enough.
In saying that you can’t ignore the fact that there has to be a racism element to the fact that Denzel has never gotten nominated, even if you think it doesn’t play a particular role this year.
G-d dude u insufferable wirh u abbreviating of lesser known movies nobody has CLUE wtf u on about? U high man? Spell out the film title properly. We not q society of abbreviating every single bloody film ..only most well known ones. U know rhis
Their nomination process is very odd and unfair. Reminds me of the Cannes festival awards where small jury decides who wins (guess other festivals do the same – don’t know much, I just know about Cannes because I’ve read about it) so ever since they changed the way they pick nominees, the baftas shouldn’t be taken into consideration when predicting the Oscar’s, at least not like before.
I agree that the process is odd and sketchy. But you do get some random picks and spreads the awards love.
As much as I liked Gaga in this and I personally thought she did fantastic and it was a better performance than her first, I kinda hope she doesn’t get a nomination. There are others who I’d like to see like Jodie, Kristen S (whom I thought was a safe bet but not so much anymore) or even Hudson get in the top 5.
Juries are standard procedure at festivals where they’re only judging a small selection of upcoming films. But it doesn’t make sense at awards shows whose prizes are supposed to represent the industry’s favorites among the year’s output. Externalizing that task to unknown juries renders the awards meaningless.
If BAFTA wants to make sure to include diversity, they can implement sensible quotas or add nomination spots that would go to the highest ranked women or minorities if none or not enough were selected among the initial nominees. But whatever adjustments they choose to implement, they need to follow the rankings established by voters.
“But whatever adjustments they choose to implement, they need to follow the rankings established by voters.”
Excellent point!
To be fair, it may be what they’ve been doing already, for ex. choosing the first three male directors and the first three female directors, but we simply don’t know, and it’s the opacity of the process coupled with the impression that a few external judges now have more weight on nominations than several thousands BAFTA members that must be very frustrating to them.
So if there needs to be rules to ensure representation of various groups, let’s add rules and quotas, but let’s make them clear and understandable so people know what’s going on and can rest assured their votes still count.
I guess it’s possible, but if that’s what they’d been doing then I think the lists would be a lot closer to those at other awards shows, so I mostly doubt it. I hope they’ve at least been picking the top choice in each category, but I even doubt that, given some of the misses we had last year, in particular.
I have to say though, gripe all we want, it’s the juried categories that made today exciting. And the jury overall did their job. Each category has some interesting and satisfying entries. And while I’m not at all a fan of her performance, Gaga being the last woman standing is super entertaining. The non-juried categories are boring AF, a snub here or there notwithstanding.
Drive My Car is 3 for 3, so good job, BAFTA!
I love that for the second year in a row actress is all over the place. Makes the race super fun!
there were only the two overlaps last year with Kirby and McDormand. Depending on whom BAFTA bestow theirs to, and depending on who AMPAS nominate, it will be an interesting prediction game.
And also it’s ONE award. I get being sad for Chastain etc etc but this is probably the best day of the lesser known nominees’ lives (at least, one of the best days). I get being upset about folks who unfairly haven’t gotten any recognition anywhere (Comer!) but even as Colman’s unabashed number one supporter of the season, I don’t feel too bad for her in this one instance (but she better get that Oscar nom), ditto Kidman. Even the deserving Stewart still has a bajillion honors from the year. I’ll feel bad for her if she misses Oscar, but also … perspective
Jesse Plemmons, but no Kirsten Dunst?
Of course, no Denzel(which is a good sign for Denzel).
I think Dunst was in the Top 5 but not Top 2. And I think Plemons was not Top 5, but a jury save. So weird how this all works. Too confusing.
That’s gotta be an awkward conversation in bed tonight.
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/2f2e7c2203197f71e100518d69da7f74da5fb0b3564e4693ad04897259ad2d3b.jpg
Hudson missed so BAFTA is film Twitter & sucks, right?
What’s so wrong about picking great movies and great performances? Why is it “woke McCarthyism” for awards to finally choose some art over mere entertainment? I hadn’t cared about the Oscars for years until they finally broke their anti-foreign language Best Picture pattern with the best movie I know of from this millennium so far. They’re
getting better than they’ve ever been, so I hope they follow BAFTA’s example of high art (though not necessarily the same movies) with lots of love for Drive My Car, Passing, and The Lost Daughter.
“No Steven Spielberg. No Kenneth Branagh. No Denis Villeneuve.” YES! Good job BAFTA!
On another note i appct this should be under the Emmy’s/ tv category call me lasy but Lily James transformation as one and only Pamela Anderson suffice to say this is one most extraordinary tv actress performances i have seen it actually MORE challenging to replicate real life person who as famous as REAL Pamela Anderson is..than it is to replicate a role that lesser known IF EVERYONE KNOWS THE PERSON ACTRESS/ ACTOR is based on than the performance needs to be nailed as close to precision as possible.
On all counts IF Lily James and very special mentions to Sebastian Stan as A-hole Tommy lee didn’t get nominated for emmys and ESP if Lilly James did not get nominated and win for BOTh Emmy awards and SAG for tv actress category award then SHAME ON BOTH those awards omg!
I HOPE voters do not discriminated cos it one boldest most provocative in it imagery and scenes of any series made in recent times..and is justified to bring us into the core of Pam and Tommy mad mad life as it based on true fact..all more impressive extraordinary Lily James PERFORMANCE IS she COMPLETELY disappears in mannerisms and essence and spirit and free spirited nature of the REAL PAM..quite extraordinary performance..
One for the ages., even as this link shows the fact she needed huge amount makeup and prosthetics..means all more important challenging her performance shined through all this treatment in link which in itself is impressive..
But James performance is engine room of making PAM recereation more lifelike without it literally all majeup and prosthetics in world only do half the job at BEST to bring Pam so credibly to life well make it 40-sixty in favour of acting part see link.
pretty extraoridnary makeup transormation James needed go through this surely launch her film tv career in the stratosphere..for Lily James…saw hjer in exception an excellent film..
https://www.vogue.com/article/pam-tommy-hulu-lily-james-pamela-anderson-transformation-hair-makeup-prosthetics
Guys, this is good for the BFCA! More of the Oscar favorites will probably turn up for their ceremony, now that they don’t have to for BAFTA. :)) I’m not unhappy about this…
But it’s the critics choice. Does that even mean anything? The BAFTAs have been going for a long time and used to come AFTER the Oscars and didn’t hurt them. Also, BAFTA is industry while CC are Golden Globes wannabes.
It’s my favorite awards group (the one whose winner choices I agree with the most, possibly with the exception of the Indie Spirits, but a lot of stuff isn’t eligible for those), so it means something to me. 🙂 That’s all I’m saying…
I like when they go for highbrow stuff instead of just copying Golden Globes or trying to predict the Oscars.
They definitely don’t copy the Globes as much as BAFTA (or DGA) do…
They are more aligned with the Oscars when it comes to Best Picture.
I know – definitely. People underestimate just how important their results are. You can often read the whole race perfectly based on just the BFCA results…
No one cares about Critics Choice. 🙂
I care. I care big time!
https://media1.giphy.com/media/qGChCAvzGk8Q4p4UoC/giphy.gif
Hi Claudiu,
Apologies to my delay. I’m trying to keep up with Oscars news while my Los Angeles Rams (American football team) is gunning for the Super Bowl championship. Anyways, this is one heck of an awards season isn’t it. BAFTAs juried systems are really keeping things as clear who will win the Super Bowl (Bengals or Rams). For the record, I’m leaning towards team Belfast although I don’t really mind if TPOTD or Dune winning (if the former wins, at least make it four Oscars just so the 94th Oscars are symmetrical with the 74th one 20 years ago). I’ll just say that Villeneuve and Colman being left out were the biggest surprises. Oh, well onto Tuesday. https://media3.giphy.com/media/eDcd8kMjQFRfWpZlQv/giphy.gif
Hey!… You’re always welcome, whenever you have time to show up. 🙂
“I’m leaning towards team Belfast”
Awesome! In terms of winning chances or in the sense that you liked it more than the other major BP contenders? (Both are true, in my case.)
Tuesday should be a lot more telling – no juries there to ruin the stats… 🙂
One of those organisations should change their date soon.
Well, they won’t… BAFTA doesn’t care about Critics Choice (and the BBC schedule has probably already been set, no changing it) and the latter apparently had no other good options for a date…
Most of you will only believe Gaga is the strongest contender when she wins the Oscar. But don’t come with any tone of surprise cause the signs were there since she won the NYFCC.
I’m with you, I’ve been saying for a while she was the frontrunner. Whether intentionally or accidentally Gucci has developed a reputation as high camp comedy and she’s standing out from the competition in that respect.
It would be a crushing blow to her career. She would be the Crash of Best Actress wins.
BAFTA jury is a mess but Mike Faist came through and went from a meme to a real possibility (for 5th spot). Hallelujah!
P.S. I’m happy for Faistbros cause they now don’t look delulu. Unlike Cruzbros. 🙂
Just based on the BAFTA jury?… I don’t think Faist is a real possibility. That’s not a good enough show of industry support, by any stretch.
Credit where credit’s due. he did appear somewhere so they are no more a laughing stock.
Yeah, I guess in that sense… But he was already on the long list, so maybe they never should have been a laughing stock. 🙂
The Zeg and Moreno were on the longlist too but missed. And they were pundits favorites. Faist Powah!
A little baffled. Since BAFTA and the Oscar academy are different groups, how does the BAFTA noms influence the Oscar noms since the Oscar’s voting for nominations closed a few days ago? Are they somehow intertwined? I can see how it can affect the Oscar winners tho.
They do share many members. So no effects due to voting deadlines, but clues can be had.
Thanks
The timing of BAFTA noms may not affect Oscar noms but they can certainly affect Oscar winners. In fact, the BAFTA ceremony is March 13th. Oscar voting closes March 22nd.
“The BAFTA noms may not affect Oscar noms”
You guys realize that there’s a lot of BAFTA members who are AMPAS members, right ? The TOP 2 in each category (we can speculate who they are), Best Film, Screenplay and tech categories shows which movies will have the British support
Isn’t the Oscars/Academy made up of mostly British / Commonwealth actors and don’t they tend to nominate their own?
Director IS what the ever-loving F, true. But if you’re a sci-fi movie fan who had to sit through Annie Hall beating Star Wars and almost 45 years of great SF films being shit on in favor of arthouse/festival stuff, this is a day worth savoring. A sci-fi film leads a big-ticket organization’s nomination day. A victory, a moral one, but a W nonetheless.
And Philly REPRESENTIN’! Will f’n Smith. Get that BAFTA, dude.
Please tell us why Annie Hall beating Star Wars is a moral issue lmao
Presumably he thinks the Academy should’ve been clairvoyant or had a time machine.
Not at all, John. Annie Hall was a speck of dust comedy compared to the four-quadrant cultural force that was Star Wars back in the day. It was a no-brainer that SW should’ve swept the ’77 Oscars as thoroughly as Titanic and Return of the King steamrolled their competition. To me, that was the Brinks job of best picture robberies until Avatar’s eternal screwjob in 2009 which led to the indie film error of the 2010’s.
You fail to explain the moral aspect – if any – of the perceived slight, and you see indie films winning as an insult to…true film lovers?
I am a big fan of that original film, but it’s light and fluffy stuff. That was never going to win Best Picture. It needed to like Rocky which was both cultural dynamite and had something tangible to offer. A Vest Picture has to have a good story and offer something to the actors.
Star Wars fans have always had a tenuous grasp on reality.
It’s kind of disturbing watching Star Trek fans devolving into the batshit incel paranoia that has become Star Wars fandom.
Not that kind of fan. Lucas’ decision to cast Hayden Christensen and insisting on writing the screenplays of the prequel trilogy almost SUNK the franchise. Ewan McGregor carried those 3 movies on his back, IMO. Abrams and Rian Johnson delivered more than admirably to end the saga.
But today is a day to celebrate. Dune leads the BAFTA nominations. *breaks out virtual Cristal* 🙂
Hey, I’m a Star Wars fan. At least the first ones.
We all know J.J. made the best Star Wars films. In fact, they’re the best films EVER. Period. Full stop. Oh shoot, I gotta go. My mom wants me to clean up my room. https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/8c715aa3b5d05828ca619c648fb35e70fdddda010668371ece3430caebcbc6b6.gif
Great trolling. Lol
I have LONG felt that hostility from some corners towards Woody Allen had its roots from that Oscar night. The Lucas stanners never forgave that and took out their frustration on a filmmaker who did nothing other than have an eligible film in those categories.
Gaga is totally winning the BAFTA. Surely.
Or it might produce another shock. It would be beautiful to put an actor who isn’t famous on the map. We don’t usually see these things because it is always the same one who win or nominated. Let’s see some magic.
I’d live for a Joanna Scanlan shocker.
Anyone but the usual suspects would be great.
Nah, the whole membership votes on winners. You won’t see anybody other than Gaga or Haim winning…
Is this when the outsiders become the frontrunners? They might have even nominated but they are fixed for the win?
Well, I meant at BAFTA. Who knows what will happen at the Oscars?! 🙂 I still think Kidman is the favorite there – but that might change very quickly.
I have long suspected that she’s been the Oscar frontrunner this entire time.
Stop saying that!
“The SAG is likely to be your better guide.”
Probably.
Though let’s not forget that any AM radio DJ as well as any sportscaster and meteorologist for any local news channel can be a member of AFTRA and they all now get a SAG-AFTRA ballot.
So I’m not sure how their opinion needs to matter any more or less than a jury member.
Presumably, BAFTA jury members know more about filmmaking than a guy in Oklahoma who recites high school football scores on the 10 pm local news.
I say “presumably” because it’s hard to say for sure unless the identities of the BAFTA juries are made public.
(The names and credentials of jury members for the Breakthrough award are announced with fanfare, so why not jurors for the rest of the categories? Unless their identities are being kept secret for their own safety.)
Great point about AFTRA, it does have a tendency to skew some of the shortlist nominations.
I was careful to save my raised eyebrow for AM radio voters.
FM is another level of sophistication.
Having worked both the AM and FM side of radio, I can agree wholeheartedly. Although weirdly enough, the most racist listener base I ever encountered was on the FM side.
I would still consider AFTRA voters more relevant than BAFTA jury members because at least the former is large enough to approach its own mean (law of large numbers etc.) and unless they go for an Emily Blunt in A Quiet Place type of extremely mainstream win, I don’t think there’s a difference. As for the nominations, I don’t think there’s that much of a difference between a DJ voting and a struggling actor who just got their SAG card voting in terms of their voter profile being more or less Oscar friendly
But SAG also has a nominating jury.
The SAG nominating jury is 1000 people, which is what I was referring to with the law of large numbers point. You can do inference about the population of SAG-AFTRA voters with a sample of 1000 of them because as you increase the amount of people who are voting, larger deviations from the common mean become less probable. On the other hand, I don’t think you can do robust inference about the voting behaviour of BAFTA voters with 10 people (especially when many of them aren’t even BAFTA members)
So, the BAFTA jury is like those at film festivals like Cannes? That’s why they have produced interesting picks. It’s a good thing, however, I think the branches should have more say in nominations. Three each is a good balance I think. Who knows they might influence the branches into better picks in the future.
Is it 1000 now? I thought the latest intel was that it was 2500.
I must have misremembered, I thought it was a 1000 but I didn’t check. In that case, the argument is even stronger
It is 2500.
Based on film Twitter’s reactions does this make The Power of the Dog like the Cincinnati Bengals and Belfast the Los Angeles Rams, or are different contenders more apt comparison?
I just realised Rachel Zegler didn’t make the cut in either the Bafta Rising Star category nor in Best Actress. Sasha makes a strong point about all the jury nonsense only to have 5 out of 6 nominees to be white in Lead Actress.
It would be 5/5 white if not for the jury but yeah the jury thing sucks anyway. It would be much better if they implemented quotas to make sure women and minorities are represented across the board, while following as closely as possible the membership vote. It would make counting votes more complicated depending on the rules they choose but they could ditch the intermediary phase.
If Dune is a monster it’s a monster Prune ! Olivia Colman ignored ! Denzel’s losing streak continues ! Jesse Plemons ? The castrated bull showed more emotion ! As for Drive My Car why didn’t they use the Beatles song ! And I love Alana Haim !
Best. In. Film. 2021. (imo…)
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/3259215a3225429e3597b163de94176e326a101167af59ed6da25e859816e30d.jpg
Always with the castrated Bull!
Yep !
I also felt the same way about McDormand taking a dump in a bucket in Nomadland !
The voting is a mess. That said; I’ll be supporting Dune and CODA up and down the ticket.
“Hamaguchi in play”
Hi! Welcome!
Numbers game; more qualified directors ahead of him.
Not Villeneuve, apparently
Seriously! About time.
Can someone please provide a *specific* definition of what “Film Twitter” even is? It feels like a moving target for whatever the irritant du jour seems to be. Anyone? Please?
I love the image selected here – if only Rebecca Ferguson was up for Supporting Actress this year. Maybe for Part II.
Ferguson should be LEAD, but you’re right. She and Skaarsgard were the top actors. After repeated viewings, I liked Bardem’s Stillgar more and more. But this is a wonderful day for being a Dune fan and a sci-fi movie fan.
Just wait for Zendaya in part 2.
Nah. She’s supporting. And while I’m lukewarm about the film (impressive but cold and ponderous), I loved her performance better than Catherine Balfe’s. Still, it’s a tremendously competitive category and I’m still partial towards KIrsten Dunst, Ann Dowd, Martha Plimpton, Ariana DeBose and Cate Blanchett. I haven’t seen Ruth Negga.
Sigh…
Rita Moreno, Jamie Dornan, Judi Dench –> dead in the water
Rita’s 90 and Judi’s 87. I would rephrase that.
In other words, they’re more alive than most of us will ever be… 🙂
great pair of Dames there! Absolutely 🙂 🙂
“You need hundreds, not a handful, of people voting to get an idea of what is popular. That category and the acting categories will not factor into my own analysis. It would be like factoring in the Gothams. Their choices here are very much like what film critics groups would choose or what small individuals of sophisticated people might choose. But that isn’t what the Oscars are, and it’s not what the BAFTAs once were. They are large consensus popularity votes by an industry. If you mess with that, you have no clue what they actually think about anything.”
Sasha as we all human i made clear how much more nowadays since rise and rise of politically correct vote prevailing in awards season esp over last decade in aagreement with you on all things awards season than i used to be but you let loose contradiction in u above quote..sure there is no flawed disjointed out of touch ‘jury’ to prop up primary voting block of each major awards categories that BAFTA HAS BUT do not forget as you explained to us before in the PRE- OSCAR NOMS period for certain guilds you have additional cluttered membership organisations that cloud and dilute and confuse the shit out of key guild win outcomes..namely you have questionable AFTRA which only existed for a fraction of the 40 plus years of SAG prtimary membership..and who knows i suspect strongly the DGA i admit i not sure or other major guilds award outcomes voted on not just by primary guild membership which all that should be voting like it used ot..but diluted by support secondary tier membership.
Like i said before i can understand anyone goes to footy be it american football or my own country bias the afl..but multi- platform memberships are NOT designed at level of growing clottered clouded crowded complex levels of sophistication that awards season going down a path..of doing..they are designed for range of status- entitlement type membership gfor sporting clubs..ie.. for my Melbourne Football Club in Australia (INCIDENTALLY PROUD TO SAY ONE OLDEST SPORTING CLUBS INT HE WORLD FULL STOP DONT BELIEVE ME? LOOK UP “melbourne football club history’ on google yourself and you see)
But in instance of aussie rules sporting clubs i use my own as example i pretty sure same system in american football club membership too ..for instance.. you have your standard memberships.. then you have your elite members category memberships then you have devoted level memberships , half season memberships..and then anywhere from 2-3 affiliations via sponsors of club benefits memberships, VIP membership. etc..
But as far as most us are concerned it not bout whether awards season race is unpredictable or not it about HOW FAR IT GONE OVER THE TOP IN COMPROMISING WITH A BET EACH WAY MENTALITY..AS A DIRECT CONSEQUENCE OF THAT EXPLAINS WHY MORE THAN WE EVER WITNESS IN AWARDS SEASON HISTORY..THAT A COMPROMISE CANDIDATE WINS SAG, DGA OR PGA AND THEN BIG OSCAR AWARDS.. because there FAR TOO MANY COMPETING ELEMENTS WITHIN THE BEARCRATIC STRUCTURE.,
AFTRA are unnecessary and i deeply suspect certain other memebership affiliations are jeopardising the important primary, secondary and tertiary voting considerations of one and ONLY GUILD MEMBERSHIP why was AFTRA formed? why do we need the USC sCRIPTER? when it for same thing? whereas a membership for sporting club of any major sport there are rightfully minimum half a dosen aspects of membership of club to reap benefits of – seems to me it part of this overboard gone mad inclusive insanity conciounce the guilds have and it clearly hence NOT JUST BAFTA that has this cancerous nuisance usurping undermining it rapidly evolving defunct crediblity..it IS THE ACADEMY AND THE GUILDS as well Sasha..
and others DO NOT FORGET THAT this explains the machinations what i understand what Sasha made clear in explaining to us how changes voting membership affiliates organisations that do NOT DESEVE TO BE INCLUDED IN FINAL SAG/ DGA/ WGA OUTCOME i fear we see compromise at expense of common sense outright deserved best picture winners more and more…
NOT LOOKNG GOOD IT LOOKING FUKIN GRIM FOR ACADEMYS CENTENARY HERE UNLESS ATTITUDES AGAINST THESE MINORITY INLFUENCERS THAT THEY MINIMISED SENSIBLE REFORM IS PROPOSED, SIMPLY PREFERENTIAL BALLOT AND RESOTRATION OF GUILDS AS SOLE RIGHTS TO VOTE ON GUILD MEMBERSHIP…NO OTHER AFFILIATE INFLUENCING ORGANISATIONS PERMITTED like it was up till unecessary crediblity ruining reform..any coincidence existence of Aftra existed round time the broken pref ballot system introduced? FIX IT OSCAR
AND AS FOR BAFTA WELL they clearly in a race to the bottom…great though DUNE as Sasha says is a ‘monster’ contender but we seen this game before haven’t we? most nominated film is bigger loser..far too many occassions in last 15 years omg!
for all the complaning about Film Twitter, they, obviously, do watch all the movies in contention and have, in my opinion, much better sense of what makes some movies just better than others; Green Book, Bohemian Rhapsody, Being the Ricardos, etc. were and are mediocre, not worthy of awards for “best”, while their preferred picks: Social Network, Parasite, Spencer, Licorice Pizza etc. are better cinema w/superlative filmmaking aspects. Is that snobbish? yes, so what?
The Academy and awards bodies have a poor track record for picking actual “bests”, it is in their interest to have people (even if only on Twitter) still care and hold them to a higher standard w/their lack of credibility at this point. If people, paying-customers on Twitter are irrelevant, much more are the bunch of awards’ pundits that get screeners for free and really don’t have any influence, who follow and don’t lead (so Lady Gaga was the only nominee today from the expected hive (now every awards site “predicts” her – what “expertise”! lol)); Actually, “Oliver” is a great example – nice movie I enjoy but it won in the year of 2001 (which, for sure, would’ve the “Film Twitter” pick) and, well, that’s a joke. Does that mean Film Twitter’s over the top passion doesn’t veer into ridiculousness at times? of course not, but vilifying them, also, paying customers and the sole reason these sites exist, while awards bodies w/a legacy of ridiculous choices and “pundits” who, mostly, have no actual knowledge of filmmaking (or even actual opinions) and all they do is talk endlessly about what they think industry insiders will vote for based on the 5 movies those chose to watch that year – is, also, over the top.
This might read like shade, but it’s not; while I don’t agree, w/a lot or even most of the opinions on AD (other than Ryan’s who is terrific and goes beyond the hoopla and actually analyzes the films like art and not race horses) I do find the content, substantially, better and more thought-provoking than your average awards site too invested on the dog and pony show of it all.
“The Academy and awards bodies have a poor track record for picking actual “bests”, it is in their interest to have people (even if only on Twitter) still care and hold them to a higher standard w/their lack of credibility at this point.”
The Oscars have never been solely about “best” in the academic sense. Never. It’s about the zeitgeist. There was always a Film Twitter, always “film snobs” who felt compelled to divide film into categories: “mediocrity” and “art”. Chaplin, Hitchcock, and later Spielberg etc…were considered mainstream popcorn fare in their prime. Filmmakers like Sirk were seen as hacks, and yet, have influenced a generation of artists, like Todd Haynes and Almodover. So Film Twitter can be just as subjective as the rest of us mortals and often miss the bigger picture, so to speak. People respond to film viscerally, emotionally. Film Twitter wants everybody to conform to their idea of what film should be. I mean, the idea that Film Twitter, these pure cerebral souls who “still care and hold them (film?) to a higher standard” can dictate to actors, directors, writers etc, what makes a good film, is hilarious.
actually, it was the academy that dismissed Chaplin, Hitchcock as mainstream popcorn fare and it was because of “film snobs” that that they gained the rightful reputation they now have – why the academy never rewarded them, and, who is dictating what? how do strangers online force you to not like what you already prefer – I just don’t get how a group of strangers vying for their favorites matters so much? sorry, but that is so ridiculous to spend time hating on them in defense of the academy who, mostly, never have picked the best or zeitgeist (save from very few exceptions) – Film Twitter, for example, championed, as did this site, Fincher over Hooper, and they were right, the academy did not pick right then and nor will it pick right at some category this year and it’s right for people to ridicule them for it – after all, it is the critics and “film snobs” (like most directors are) who determine what films are best of all time (AFI, Sight and Sound, etc) and not the industry. Film Twitter, so far, has a better track record at what is considered best than the academy. Roma IS a better movie than Green Book, Social Network is better than King’s Speech, Tree of Life blows The Artist (lol) out of the water, Mad Max better than Spotlight, etc. and while you don’t have to “conform to it” (that’s silly, one should be unapologetic about what they like and, again, care SO much about what “they” think) I think outrage, in an online age, is expected and justified in every field. Keep championing what you do and allow others to think you lack taste and vice versa, this should all be fun, it’s just an award given by, evidently, a very fallible industry. I am a “film snob”-type and don’t care at all if random people online, the “so-called” populists who have to defend the Academy are annoyed by it lol; I mean if filmmakers really knew what’s best, as far back as 1975, they would’ve nominated Spielberg Best Director for Jaws (you know, it was, at least, among the 5 “best” that year and the, definitely, the “zeitgeist”) lol
not* care SO much
and was*, definitely, the “zeitgeist”
But it’s always the film snobs that get triggered during Oscar season. They’re the ones who rage against Green Book, or whatever. To me, it is what it is. The Oscars have always been populist. It’s a small miracle when something small gets in, and I love that.
I have my preferences and they don’t always get represented at the Oscars. But I don’t pretend that the Oscars are something they’re not, or never were.
On this site, it’s not film critics who get triggered. It’s people like Sasha and some others who simply can’t get over Nomadland and Parasite’s Oscar wins and think the Socialists or Liberals or whatever are conspiring to destroy the Oscars and nominate these woke shit even though I have no clue what’s so woke about Nomadland and Parasite.
Errr..u I the minority I heard hogwash in my time but this takes the pardon the pun ( online pixelated) cake OMG
I can’t believe that Lady Gaga is about to win a BA Oscar! The lack of taste!
She is an insufferable attention wh*re
No, that’s not clue, man. You’ve stepped way over the mark.
Her campaign interviews are overly rehearsed and in some cases obsessively banging on weird talking points that are not landing (like the infamous 100 people in a room speeches).
I understand that people may not like some of the nominees, fir whatever reason. I’m talking about the personal insults. That’s uncalled for.
Calling someone an attention wh*re is not an insult, it’s an observation lol. If I called her something else I would have to agree with yoh
You can crave for attention but still be a good person though. Lots of performers crave for attention. They are better at hiding it. She’s more transparent. Just because it triggers you, doesn’t make her “obnoxious”.
I’d agree if I were the only one but I know I’m not alone lol. I actually enjoy some of her music. I’m sorry opposing opinions trigger you haha
I’m not triggered. I don’t use words like “obnoxious” or “whore” to describe you nor anyone.
Agreed. People don’t see that she is the star power at the ceremony, not Will Smith.
I also, didn’t used to like Taylor Swift but now I think she’s great. I mean as a personality. I don’t listen to her music.
Look I didn’t used to like her and her obsessive fans. But as I’ve seen and learned more about her she seems a nice person. And she’s a good actress, although I’ve not seen House of Gucci.
She’s a decent actress but boy oh boy she needs to dial down the tortured method actor stuff in interviews, it comes off as pompous. Show humility that you get to play in this sandbox and appreciation that people enjoy her films.
Not really lol I think a lot of people would agree
I agree with you a hundred percent. Any practicing artist knows that the sh*t that has comes out of her mouth is something who lacks humility or is completely insecure. Regardless of which of these it is both scenarios indicate total narcissism and an insatiable attention seeker. I have found her insufferable since she first started getting headlines for wearing outrageous outfits. She has a good singing voice and is charismatic and good at getting peoples attention, but has very little depth or substance. Also, I am not going to say who because I am sure he will comment after me anyway, but someone of this thread seems to have nothing better to do than spend hours here monitoring and responding to everyone’s distaste of LG.
You’re out of your mind. She’s a once-in-a-generation musical talent who has demonstrated ability in multiple artistic arenas and who, by the way, is a creditable and respected philanthropist and advocate for many diverse groups. She puts her money where he mouth is and shows up, and does the work. And one need only pay attention to her recent special with Tony Bennett to understand what a gracious and versatile performer she is. You’re out of line and the real Herzog wouldn’t abide. That said, she is overplaying her publicity hand and needs to dial down the “method acting” talk and hyperbole, which probably comes from a place of excitement but is coming off as slightly grand.
She’s very musically talented and I never said otherwise. But it doesn’t change the fact that she’s transparent af and hungry for fame. Remember that awful tweet a few years ago when she was jumping up and down for joy bc she got nominated for a Globe? You can be enormously talented and generous and still be an obnoxious attention hog. Like get real, little Monster lol
“Transparent af and hungry for fame.”
That is nonsense. She got famous — world famous — 15 years ago. I doubt that’s what she is chasing at age 35. And just to be clear with you, I’m not a “little monster” and I work in the industry. I’ve also met her twice, first in an elevator shortly after her Oscars gig for The Sound of Music. I complimented her on it. She was alone, dressed in street clothes, unassuming looking and reacted as such: “Really? You thought I did a good job?” The second time was at a Warner Brothers lot screening of A Star is Born. She is tiny, humble and very gracious. No trace of ego She deferred all credit to Cooper and Elliott.
Sorry to burst your bubble.
All actors say kooky shit about their “process”. Leo said he ate a real Bison liver for The Revenant. Jamie Foxx glued his eyes shut for Ray. Hell, Nicole Kidman just told Variety that when she first met Lucie Arnaz, she felt like she was with her daughter. Oh and Will Smith pukes after sex! For some reason, that had everything to do with King Richard! Yes, its easy to pick at these rather grand musings but whatever. A good performance is a good performance.
That’s a great point. Very true. Remember Daniel Day-Lewis becoming a shoemaker?
So, no editing for The Power of the Dog (but Belfast gets in there) – interesting… Means nothing statistically (and could perhaps be a British advantage thing), in direct relation to BP at the Oscars, but could be a sign that I was right and Dog might miss this with AMPAS, too. And missing with them, as we know, means… quite a lot… So, to me, this is the most relevant thing that happened here, in terms of BP chances at the Oscars. Sure, Branagh getting in even with the jury in directing would have been nice, but it probably wouldn’t have meant much even then, anyway. Besides, even pre-juries, there were several Oscar BP winners that missed here in directing. (Recent, too: Green Book, Moonlight, Spotlight.) With the juries deciding all six nominees and their general randomness, this is virtually meaningless.
West Side Story got assassinated here. Will it do that much better at the Oscars? Maybe, maybe not. Is DeBose even winning the BAFTA? The Oscar? As for picture, after missing Best Film here (the one stat that really matters and has no real exceptions in the 22 years since it became relevant), I think we can more or less put to bed the notion that West Side Story could win Best Picture at the Oscars. (ACE & BAFTA BP misses – way too much. The BAFTA miss alone probably is.) Likewise, King Richard (DGA+BAFTA BP), CODA (which was already ruled out by the two snub rule, this only strengthens it) and so on.
In acting, SO much weird s**t… No Denzel again – unbelievable! (I don’t mind it, for this performance, but I can’t believe they keep snubbing him, even with this system. Is there some curse I’m not aware of?! The Denzel BAFTA curse…) No Colman again! Gaga the only GG+SAG nominee that also gets BAFTA! Smith in but Garfield out – guess we know what the top 2 are there… Very happy to see Emilia Jones, Tessa Thompson (haven’t seen the movie yet, but she’s Tessa Thompson and I’ve always thought she was awesome) and, in particular, Jessie Buckley and Woody Norman in there – great stuff! Also Leo, the two Belfast supporting players, Ruth Negga, Lady Gaga herself (I like Gaga – not seen the movie)… Guess I’m a fan this year, overall, of the acting choices they came up with. Sucks (at least from my perspective) that Kidman and Stewart aren’t there. But, unless Gaga is winning (which maybe she is), shouldn’t mean much. (For Kidman, I mean – Stewart isn’t winning without SAG anyway.)
The directing nominations don’t mean much at all, like I said (since there isn’t even a top two-guaranteed stipulation in there, as there is for acting), but still a good showing for Drive My Car, since it got the branch-voted screenplay nomination too, as well as the virtually locked foreign film nomination. I still think it’s only getting in for screenplay (and maybe – but less likely – also picture) at the Oscars, but it’s now a legit threat in directing. Still not gonna replace Branagh, though, even if he gets in, don’t you worry! Unless I’m just way off about that. Which I could be. 🙂
I think The Dog could miss Editing and Branagh could miss Directing. Those are the most likely misses for the two frontrunners.
As you know, I’m with Sasha in thinking Branagh ain’t missing. We’ll see…
I’m not preding a miss because it doesn’t feel right. There are frontrunners who you think will because the director isn’t good or the director is vulnerable because he doesn’t have a pedigree. That’s the case with Belfast or Branagh. However, the director are most highbrow and they have some good options this year so they could snub big names from DGA list. I think Campion and PTA are safest and Spielberg and Branagh are most vulnerable. As usual, Villeneuve straddle between the two most highbrow and cool director’s and the two most mainstream.
It’s not just BAFTA and ACE. It missed ASC and SAG as well. It was considered the front-runner in ensemble. There were easy nods for Moreno and Zegler. They did not happen. The film underperformed greatly at SAG. Three top guilds plus BAFTA.
I know. I was just citing the minimum required to knock it out. 🙂 SAG and ASC don’t really have elimination-rule-level stats attached to them, especially in the AFTRA era. But ACE and BAFTA BP is probably already too much to overcome for any movie.
No discussion on supporting actors and actresses?
I liked seeing Anne Dowd and Mike Faist there, even though I loved Benedict Cumberbatch I thought his on-screen brother was far weaker.
I wonder what some of the craziest BAFTA picks have been for bet picture.
BAFTA predictions
Best Film: Belfast
Best Director: Jane Campion
Best Actor: Benedict Cumberbatch
Best Actress: Alana Haim
Best Supporting Actor: Troy Kotsur
Best Supporting Actress: Caitriona Balfe
Original Screenplay: Belfast
Adapted Screenplay: The Power of the Dog
Despite losing Best Film, The Power of the Dog could still hold a comfortable position into the Oscars’s Best Picture race. I think Pizza will win Original Screenplay at the Oscars.
Boyhood and 1917 are the only Best Film BAFTA winners without an Editing nom.
Dog wins Director and Actor. Dune takes Adapted and Picture.
Big if true
Kek.
It could happen but that require Dune winning WGA. It needs to win one of the major guilds or it’s not happening.
Dune is not happening. I think it might very well miss something big on nominations morning. Plus, Dune can’t count on Shape of Water/Green Book/Nomadland in terms of SAG. Each one had individual actors nominated. Dune has zilch. So you have to go back to Braveheart in 1995.
And on Dune: The film is rather divisive. Many people think it’s dull, beautiful but boring, I think it lacks dramatic events. It’s pretty much all over the place with this film, so I expect it to have a lot of low placements on voters’ ballots.
Licorice Pizza has missed the Best Picture train. The film is well-liked but far from being competitive. Still, PTA can now win screenplay.
That’s true about no acting nominations. However, winning major guild would be a signal that something unbelievable could happen. It would at least improve its chances. Remember that The Power of the Dog is missing SAG too. And other films could miss a big stat themselves. Dune will hit every stats except acting so it’s not as weak as you think. Precedents can be broken, but it needs to win a major guild, most likely WGA
Missing SAG ensemble but getting 3 individual nods is one thing. Missing ensemble plus individual is another. And yes, I expect actors to be the branch not crazy about Dune. After all, even at BAFTA, Rebecca Ferguson missed the longest of top 15 contenders. (And by the way, it missed two important stats – yes, one is juried but it missed directing at the BAFTAs. And in addition, it missed the Globe screenplay nod, which is very strong.
And Dune has a perception hurdle as well. The film is a first part. Why bother recognising it now? They very well could do it in two years. Recognising the first part of a movie never feels right. They did it with The Godfather, but back then The Godfather was a book adaptation, not the first part in a trilogy.
I am saying it’s likely but it can be done. The really big question is can Dune win a major category? For example, are you telling me Dune can’t win Best Picture if Villeneuve won DGA? Or just BD without even winning DGA first. The winners aren’t predetermined and stats are merely clues of what is likely to happen. If things change then stats shift too. At the moment I don’t expect Dune to win either BD or Adapted Screenplay, but winning one them would shoot its chances high up.
I see. Thanks.
Not happening
Deluded beyond belief
agreed that you are deluded beyond belief. 🙂
The Pianist, too. A bit old, but not so old as to not count, I would say.
I think that in the end, we’ll have something like this at the Oscars:
Best Picture: The Power of the Dog
Directing: Jane Campion for The Power of the Dog
Actor: Benedict Cumberbatch in The Power of the Dog (he’ll take BAFTA; even with SAG, I don’t see Smith winning)
Actress: Lady Gaga in House of Gucci (oh, what a farce)
Supporting Actor: Kodi Smit-McPhee
Supporting Actress: Caitriona Balfe or DeBose
Original Screenplay: Licorice Pizza
Adapted Screenplay: The Power of the Dog
Cinematography: The Power of the Dog
Film Editing: Dune
Music, Score: Dune
Music, Song: No Time to Die
Production Design: Dune
Costume Design: Cruella
Make-up & Hairstyling: Dune
Sound: Dune
Visual Effects: Dune
If West Side Story takes a hit, Balfe could very well benefit and become the go-to Balfast nomination. I’m still not sold on this but it might happen.
You’re simply deluded
I never bought the “Stewart is the front-runner” buzz that other places pushed but how quickly that train derailed is fascinating.
By the way, I’ve been telling all you beeeyotches that Emilia Jones is getting in. Hear me now and believe me later.
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/abd062d4652d8cbce94ff5a1b120eedc50e4d538f94d4d01f000f28a06a7ecd9.jpg
Ok, does CODA have an upset path via Jones/Kotsur
CODA can take the Moonlight route, which is screenplay, supporting actor, and picture (or Green Book, if you prefer). If Jones gets in the film has real strength, and if Heder pops in for director, then to paraphrase Obi-Wan, it shall become more powerful than you can imagine. It’s already winning SAG Ensemble.
No to Supporting Actor. It’s Kodi’s to lose and he should not lose.
Not in a million years. Kodi is going to get Chalameted.
In what way? Surely you don’t compare Kotsur to Oldman or think that Kodi will miss a nom?
Film will get Picture, Screenplay, Supporting Actor. Emilia Jones is not getting in. And Coda ain’t Moonlight. At best, you can compare it with Little Miss Sunshine. Entertaining, sentimental, trivial.
You mean the Little Miss Sunshine movie that won the PGA?
CODA ain’t winning PGA
And lost the Oscar.
No.
“Are you seriously telling me that after all that, they still only picked one non-white actress?”
Forget that. They are clearly completely prejudiced against ginger actresses.
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/ebb9b646a3a61ba35db3c3ba6524ee5783cf5ea2dda799f721d9b265840e715b.jpg
Nicole Kidman is blond, though, right?
Nope. Her natural hair color has always been red.
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/f7c6dac0441e30c67d5e200f4575f9471609046977935667ea6f577b877975e9.jpg
name any films in which she has red hair other than this one, then. she seems to be a ginger in denial
Days of Thunder, Eyes Wide Shut, Moulin Rouge….like Celine says, it goes on and on. Here, Katy will loan you her 3-D glasses to see better.
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/3488fa6f6e5210c85f69cbf647c05381458cb87df64305ca53cd7f77176691ad.gif
haven’t seen Days of Thunder. Can’t remember her hair color in Eyes Wide Shut, but yes, you are correct about Moulin Rouge. My mistake
Say three Hail Marys and one “Oh, hell no.”
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/6b60b07d7c1d74933cd59cc7eb90e1fddb0abcdb24509f84a14004ac617ccf48.gif
How many gingers have won BAFTA acting? So, you’re way off on that. Kidman herself won BAFTA and being nominated a few time as well.
Precisely.
No matter whether it was the jury or Bafta membership voting POTD hit everywhere except editing. Dunst missed but POTD got an extra supporting actor nomination. The sign of a solid frontrunner like Nomadland last year. In directing two French film directors got in – Audrey Diwan and Julia Ducournau.
It’s like BAFTA match my thoughts on The Dog. I thought the Editing was weakest part of The Dog. Also, I liked Plemons the most in The Dog so I’m glad he’s got in.
Wow, weakest part? Good editing is not necessarily weak editing. Just take a look at the CinemaEditor website and the video on the editing in a crucial Power of the Dog scene. The film is mesmerising. This is done in the editing room.
I didn’t think itvwas bad or anything. I just thought it was the weakest part of the in the major categories. I think that’s where it’s most vulnerable and BAFTA has just backed up my concerns.
do you happen to have a link for this? can’t seem to find it. would love to watch tho
Dog losing BP would be a Revenant or Brokeback level of shock at this point
The Revenant was very weak, but Brokeback Mountain was one of the biggest shocks.
When Miller lost Director I knew Fury Road wasn’t going to pull the upset, but NO ONE saw Spotlight coming.
I felt BP was between Spotlight SAG Ensemble winner, The Big Short PGA Winner and The Revenant DGA Winner in that order. Let us hope that this year is also a three way split year between the Guilds.
Yes,and they both won WGA as well. The Revenant missed SAG Ensemble and didn’t have Screenplay either.
But winning Actor/Director/Cinematography should have been enough to put it over the top.
Not without a Screenplay nomination. You have to go all the way back to Titanic for a BP winner without a screenplay nomination.
True, but the hard on the Academy had for Inarritu at that time was quite over the top.
Yes. he won back to back directing Oscars. I think that John Ford is the only other director to have done that so far.
Yeah (although David Lean did win for consecutive films in his filmography, albeit five years apart)
Lean’s Oscars were richly deserved. Also Joseph L Mankiewicz won back to back directing Oscars including one for A Letter to Three Wives which till right now I had not heard of.
Oh, that’s a really good one.
Also Cuáron
Forgot about that. Make up Oscars for Children of Men
Mankiewicz
Big Short came on a bit too late, because it really seemed like more of a consensus candidate than Spotlight.
Well Spotlight won SAG Ensemble which is a huge voting body.
Sasha did.
Oh yeah. That Sasha doesn’t work here anymore.
That Sasha died when the site became “supporting Green Book to own the libs” in 2018.
BBM had no editing nomination. One exception to that stat since 1981.
But it could have broken like other big stats have done in recent year. That stats might very tough but there mot impossible. I mean, Brokeback Mountain won every other precursor and Crash missed many stats even they won’t bigger Editing. The stats held, but it had no right to. Winning major precursors can overcome big stats and it definitely should have that year because there is only two films that won more precursors than Brokeback Mountain (Slumdog Millionaire and Argo).
Nobody’s saying it’s impossible. Just that it’s very, very unlikely… 🙂 And it takes overwhelming strength shown elsewhere to make it break. Like Birdman showed.
“Crash missed many stats even they won’t bigger Editing. The stats held, but it had no right to.”
Nope. Crash didn’t miss a single above the line industry nomination. (Not guilds, not Oscar, not BAFTA. It missed Globes and critics stuff. Which are irrelevant when the industry clearly indicates they are, as was the case there and in many other instances.) And it won SAG+WGA, which is a stronger combo than PGA+DGA, when all else is equal. (This has been proven over and over, starting with Shakespeare in Love.) It was a fairly clear favorite, stats-wise. Almost as clear as Parasite. So, no, in fact, it was extremely logical for that stat to hold, the BBM year.
“Winning major precursors can overcome big stats”
Sure. But BBM didn’t win enough industry precursors to compensate. PGA+DGA, even with WGA – not enough against a SAG+WGA winner with no snubs. Birdman won SAG, as well. That was the difference, plain and simple.
It rather needs defining what “overwhelming strength” means. This is what happens, your definition is based on what happened or didn’t happen. It’s problematic.For example, had BBM won that would be defined as overwhelming but since it lost it isn’t. Did Argo show an “overwhelming strength”? It wasn’t stronger than Appollo 13 which also won the triple crown. And Braveheart certainly wasn’t stronger than Lincoln. This “overwhelming strength” thing seems hard to define and also subjective. Again, a couple of precedents isn’t enough to make me think unbreakable. It’s just easier to say that the stats will break from time to time and that was the closest it came to breaking. BBM had more than enough to break as it won three major guilds.
“For example, had BBM won that would be defined as overwhelming but since it lost it isn’t.”
I disagree. Its winning would be inconsistent with both the prior example of Shakespeare in Love vs. Saving Private Ryan and several examples after that (Parasite vs. 1917, Spotlight vs. the field, Moonlight vs. La La Land…) In other words, those of us who chose to take note of that win and regard it as a telling precedent have already been proven right on multiple occasions (and not yet proven wrong).
“Did Argo show an “overwhelming strength”? It wasn’t stronger than Appollo 13 which also won the triple crown.”
Argo also won Globe, Critics Choice, BAFTA. Apollo 13 didn’t win jack s**t else besides the Triple Crown. Even more importantly, Argo won the DGA (beating Lincoln in direct competition) and Apollo 13 lost it, while Braveheart won. Argo and Braveheart also won ACE.
“Again, a couple of precedents isn’t enough to make me think unbreakable.”
Who said anything about unbreakable? 🙂 All I’m saying is that, so far, SAG+WGA has proven over and over to be stronger than even PGA+DGA, under equal-snubs conditions. May not always be the case, but there’s no logical reason to think it won’t continue to prove stronger most of the time. Hasn’t failed so far and, when it does, it will be a stats upset. Can happen, I suppose, but it’s not likely in any given instance. If you believe in what the stats and precedents are telling you, of course, as I do. 🙂 It’s served me rather well so far…
Saving Private Ryan did not win WGA unlike Brokeback Mountain; 1917 missed SAG Ensemble and individual acting at both SAG and the Oscars; La La Land missed SAG Ensemble and lost WGA to Moonlight; and Spotlight had WGA and SAG, which is a better combination than The Big Short’s WGA and PGA. And remember no BP winner has done as badly the other major precursors since 2001 after BAFTA moved it’s ceremony to before the Oscars. And what about GG director stat? Crash massed BD and BP at the GG. That only happened once, when The Sting missed both.
“Saving Private Ryan did not win WGA unlike Brokeback Mountain”
It also, unlike BBM, didn’t miss editing or anything else…
Indeed, in the end, Brokeback Mountain probably is the most extreme example of this SAG+WGA > PGA+DGA thing, but the count of industry precursors make it clear that it’s down to tiebreaks. And, unless you use specifically a PGA or DGA win (and there’s really no evidence for that – if you did that, Saving Private Ryan would come out the favorite over Shakespeare in Love then and many other subsequent races would be called incorrectly with such an approach) or stuff from outside the industry, Crash gets the tiebreaks. You can count snubs (it wins because of BBM‘s editing snub), you can count the ACE win (Crash won ACE over BBM), you can look at SAG performance (Crash won Ensemble, which is clearly more important than some random extra acting nomination). What else is there, in terms of major industry precursors? (I don’t count BAFTA because of the British bias and their generally quite different sensibilities to the American voters, plus back then even the way they voted for nominations and wins was different.)
Globe and even BFCA stats are meaningless to my system. They’re extremely useful in anticipating what will happen in the industry phase, but they’re not industry, they don’t have voter overlap, so I don’t count them. They’re also smaller groups of voters. Bottom line: when they come up against industry stats, they do much worse.
When the stat is 2 out of 66 BD and BP, it doesn’t count because it’s not industry? That’s an easy to understand stat rather than these complicated combinations. I feel sometimes you will get the outcome you want you look at these kind of stats. My question is, has the stats favourite ever lost in your system?
“When the stat is 2 out of 66 BD and BP, it doesn’t count because it’s not industry?”
Why should it? Why should non-industry stats count when there’s zero overlap and a much stronger indicator available in each and every category, in the industry stats? Non-industry stats are unreliable, almost no matter how great their percentages are. For obvious reasons. All it takes is for the industry to have different biases, different tastes, an attachment to different narratives than whatever a majority or even all of the non-industry groups do, which happens more than you’d think, and – boom! Even the strongest non-industry stats can break with no real warning. (E.g. last year, when First Cow won NYFCC Best Film, then proceeded to, for no particular reason, not get a single Oscar nomination, which had never before happened for a NYFCC Best Film winner. And NYFCC is, I’m sure you know… OLD… This is far from the only example of this happening.) Meanwhile, the sum total of the big industry stats always tells a story, if you’re interested-enough to be thorough enough to read it properly. And it’s probably always the correct story. For obvious logical reasons.
And strong industry stats simply do not break without overwhelming evidence from other industry groups’ results that same year that they’re going to. Some of them just never break. This has been going on for almost a century now. Like the stat about movies snubbed for editing and directing (or editing and acting) at the Oscars never winning picture. This has never been broken, in what is now almost 90 years, since the editing category was introduced. Even though several movies without editing and several movies without directing (and several movies without acting) nominations have won picture in the meantime. You’d think it would break. Maybe it eventually will. But it’s still going to be damn close to 100%, even if it does, one time, at some point. (And there are a lot of other such stats for BP, based on major industry evidence alone.) And you bet your ass there will be signs elsewhere in the industry awards that this is going to happen, when it does! It will break because some stat that strong has to break, because all BP nominees will be facing at least one. Which is what happened the Green Book year.
“My question is, has the stats favourite ever lost in your system?”
Evidently not, because that’s how I built it. I understand that this is not the statistician’s approach, but the problem is I want 100% accuracy (or at least 95%-plus, long-term) and if I don’t have it I’m not happy. I’m not interested in a stats-based algorithm that predicts most BP races correctly. You can do that even without a system, as long as you look at everything and maintain objectivity. I want something that predicts pretty much all of the races correctly. And, provided such a system exists in the first place (I like to believe that it does, and have my reasons to think so), I don’t think I’m terribly far from what it might look like.
I did narrowly get wrong a few BP winners with previous versions of my system. But that’s what the improvements are there for. If a system that never gets anything wrong exists, I’ll find it – or die trying… 🙂
“BBM had more than enough to break as it won three major guilds.”
Certainly, it was close. Nobody is disputing that. But enough? Nope. Not the way I read stats – not just for that year, but in general. I do it in a consistent way, same for every PGA era year and every new year. I have a system, as you know. I’m not just coming up with different arguments for each different year and race. I treat all races the exact same way.
Slumdog and Argo both won SAG Ensemble. Argo was facing a very weak fellow WGA winner, so the directing snub was nowhere near enough to hurt it. Slumdog had a strong WGA winner up against it, but it had no snubs. Relatively speaking, those two were clear favorites, whereas BBM was a slight underdog. Stats-wise. (And, no, wins outside of the major guilds don’t count for anything. No matter how many of them there are.)
Lincoln had the necessary stats and probably should have won based on the stats. However, it was “overwhelmed” by Argo winning the triple crown. Funny, that didn’t seem to work Appollo 13.
Wildly incorrect. Lincoln lost PGA, DGA and WGA, while eligible and nominated. To Argo. This is much stronger a stat (when eligible at WGA, at least) than the directing nomination stat (the one that says to no BP winner has failed to win one of those, ever, since the PGA Award was added into the mix), and this was already the case before Argo and Green Book added exceptions to that stat. The former was and remains 100%, the latter had a few exceptions, including one in the PGA era. What else did Lincoln win? Stats aren’t only nomination stats. Win stats are just as important. I don’t see any argument for why Lincoln would be considered anywhere near a favorite that year…
I thought Argo won BFCA but lost WGA to Lincoln, but it’s the other way around. Still, Braveheart missed SAG Ensemble and individual acting at both SAG and the Oscars. That makes it the only film to do that. And it did that despite losing the triple crown. And, again, it’s the only film to do that, too. Surely, Braveheart missing those key stats should have compensated for Appollo 13 missing BD? And the triple crown should have been enough against the WGA?
More importantly, Braveheart also missed PGA. 🙂 The key thing here, and it’s born out by the results of other close races, is that weaknesses (and strengths) shown in the same branch shouldn’t be counted more than once. (As multiple weaknesses.) Braveheart getting 0 SAG noms is the same as if it only missed ensemble. It’s still weakness in acting. Some movies don’t distinguish themselves enough in the acting department, yet still win Best Picture. Also, not being nominated for PGA as opposed to being nominated and losing is the same. There’s an argument that it means more than in other categories, since it represents weakness in picture, but maybe not. Who’s to say?!
True, Apollo 13 would still win the branch-by-branch weakness count (but by only one point, PGA+SAG vs. WGA, since directing is tied, with Howard winning the DGA but missing at the Oscars – plus Braveheart won ACE, to make matters less clear even here), but the real problem and the stat due to which it lost, in my interpretation, is that no movie that lost the WGA and had at least one major snub at PGA, DGA, ACE or Oscars for directing or editing, apart from Green Book (which had 7 co-nominees for BP which all had stats problems that were equally big – and won the count vs. each of them), ever won Best Picture. So Apollo 13 was facing an elimination rule (WGA loss and Oscar directing snub) and Braveheart wasn’t. (Won WGA, only snubbed for picture at PGA, of the major categories I count – I don’t count acting snubs for elimination rules, because it gives misleading results, and not just in this race.)
I find this frustrating. Something never happened stat is just an explanation for why Something didn’t happen. It’s not like when these things happen so and so will happen. There will always be a stat that’s peculiar to any BP winner or loser. I think what’s important is how often something happens because that tells us how strong the stats is.
Yeah, but it’s not different stats to explain each, that’s the thing. Each of the industry stats I use explain or help explain SEVERAL BP winners in the PGA era (and most of those before it, even if there were no PGA or SAG, so a lot of the information was missing). It’s not needlessly stuffed and it all makes a ton of sense. Of course the biggest industry stats would be the ones to look at. And of course acting performance should be the first tiebreak for close races. And so on… I can describe the system in full, if you want, and you can see how it applies to all the races. How it describes each race and correctly predicts each of the winners (retroactively, but not only, it’s also predicted both Parasite and Nomadland since the last time I changed anything about it, plus even in its earlier, less improved forms, it did quite well, even if it often picked the one that just lost out, instead – but it always had it down to the correct two and always indicated when the race was very close/unclear) in a very consistent and logical manner.
“I think what’s important is how often something happens because that tells us how strong the stats is.”
I told you, all of the stats I use have very high percentages of correlation to the BP winners.85%-90% range, at worst. The branch count idea and tiebreaks are all based on careful analysis of all of the 30+ PGA era races, over years of research and fine tuning, which helped derive a set of principles that seem to work extremely well at predicting what will happen in otherwise very unclear races. Of course, more testing is needed. Looking forward to some more unclear races over the next few years. Parasite was a fun one. Not terribly hard to decipher, but not trivial, either. Could have been called wrong, were there some bad rules in there. Nomadland was of course pretty easy. This year, it’s still unclear which we’re going to get, but if Dog continues to build up its advantage, it should be another Nomadland situation.
We will now know till the PGA what happens in a preferential system. And the PGA is in the middle of Oscar voting for the winners. DGA goes to Campion certainly. SAG Ensemble goes elsewhere as POTD is not nominated there. It could be a three way split between the Guilds. That is what happened in The Revenant year.
1. I said this last year, but the “diversity” the BAFTA jury is putting in play is including smaller EUROPEAN productions in major categories. I think the organization began to resent the perception that they were just rubber stamping American Oscar contenders.
2. Dog is going to win at least 6 Oscars including Picture/Director/Script/Supporting Actor in an utterly suspense free night.
3. It’s been more than a little obvious to me that Gaga has been the frontrunner in Actress this entire time. She’s the star power Oscar winner the Academy wants, not Will Smith.
I think it will win 4 or five. I expect it to lose editing and Cinematography to Dune. Greenwood might win Score but I think Zimmer us favourite for that one.
Maybe, but when Dog hit the sound guild nomination, it told me the romp was on. Dune strikes me as a film that is respected but not loved.
No, Dune is film that’s not strong in the top categories but very strong in tech. Kinda like Fury Road or even Gravity.
Gravity at least scored an acting nod (missing a script nod pretty much doomed it).
I think it’s same to assume that Dog is the clear frontrunner with Licorice a solid 2nd. Honestly the only play Team Licorice has is to viciously go after Netflix. The long time between nomination and ceremony might give them time to do that.
Yes, not as strong as Gravity but much stronger than Fury Road. I don’t think Licorice Pizza is realistic a challenger to The Dog.
The Power of the Dog will probably win Cinematography. The Academy will go for the big story there. They will just rejoice at the opportunity to make history with first female DP to win. And it’s well-deserved. Then, directing is probably the safest bet on Oscar night at this point. Adapted Screenplay appears to be a safe bet as well. Supporting Actor is extremely likely. This leaves Actor. I think Cumberbatch will win the Oscar. This will be the most competitive race. Smith will take SAG and Critics’ Choice, but I expect Cumberbatch to win the BAFTA, and given Smith’s status in Hollywood, he can follow in the footsteps of Lauren Bacall, Eddie Murphy, and Stallone, and learn that having a lot of enemies in this town is always a problem. But hey, he doesn’t deserve to even be in the conversation for Best Actor. The performance is mediocre at best.
So I’d say five-six Oscars, depending on Actor. Score probably won’t happen. Dune has the momentum there.
We could have The Power of the Dog taking six major Oscars and Dune taking six techs. The same scenario as the The Artist/Hugo year (5/5).
I don’t think they will care about or even be aware of it. They will go for the most obvious and that’s Dune.
What is interesting is that the PGA awards show happens in the middle of Oscar voting for the winners. if POTD loses the PGA in the prferential system does it matter?
That Best Director lineup DOES look like a jury selection. There’s no way Oscar will come close to replicating that.
Best Actress will continue to be a list of white actresses playing white icons, with perhaps a POC thrown in for good measure (and one that has no hope of winning). Jennifer Hudson is as good any of the usual suspects in that: her performance (as Aretha Franklin) is decent, and in a film that’s an amalgam of biopic cliches. I don’t care to see any of them, including Nicole Kidman, Jessica Chastain, Lady Gaga, or even Kristen Stewart, but if ONE were to do it, Hudson is fine by me.
It’s a nearly impossible game for a woman of color to play, as there aren’t as many beloved non-white icons to play. I think black actresses have the best chance of doing it, but even if an actress gains some traction, there is likely a bigger white icon in her way. Judy Garland vs. Harriet Tubman in 2020 anyone?
It would be really wonderful if this year’s Actress lineup was biopic-free, something like: Olivia Colman, Rachel Zegler, Tessa Thompson, Alana Haim, and Penelope Cruz. Way better performances from way better films.
love this! I approve of this! It doesn’t matter whether my favourites are nominated or not. For me, this the definition of creative chaos. BAFTA is thinking outside the box. We can focus on new faces and new stars rather than just the usual suspects.
Well, I look at the positives. At least with the jury, they will watch *all* of the long listed movies and considered them fully. As opposed to leaving for the mass and live and die by their laziness or busy schedule.
Ay, dios mio! These nominations are curious. I agree with Sasha. Baftita is out of touch with reality! The Best Director lineup is terible. I wonder how the Bafta members feel about these nominations. Que barbaridad!
Why is Adele Dazeem nominated for Best Actor?
No, it’s creative chaos. It’s glorious. What would nominating the same old faces do? No, let’s get new faces in and give them exposure.
At the expense of truly good performances like Kirsten Dunst, Nicole Kidman, javier Bardem? Remember the Best Actor and Actress lineup of BAFTA last year? Right, nobody remembers. It’s mostly pity nominations.
BAFTA is like that weird kid in school nobody gets.
Ole!
It’s subjective which performances or films are worthy. Big names are always more likely to get in and those who are unfamiliar to awards season that struggle to get a look in. I think from that point of view it’s a positive development. I don’t think the usual suspects who are nominated all the time give the best performances of the year and many who think that’s not the case. They have bigger advantage than the unknown filmmakers. I am not that sad if even a deserved big misses one time. Exposure and opportunity should be the name of the game.
Blocked
Honestly, I’m looking forward to a gloriously over the top display of misplaced anger from some corners if Hamaguchi makes it into Director.
I’m okay with Hamaguchi, Anderson and Campion. Not okay with Ducournau (what a mess of a movie) and the rest.
Ole!
All that shows that the 3-6 slots for DGA lagged far behind the top 2 (Anderson and Campion)
How does Don’t Look Up make the top 5? It’s a weird and strangely weak list of nominees all around. But the academy does how a strong contingency of British members. Hmmm. Hopefully they’ll have better taste than the bafta members.
« The BAFTAs will have their live ceremony and we’ll be watching to see whether or not it matters if their nominees matched with Oscar. »
Well, at least Rebel Wilson will keep us entertained. Would be nice to see her poke fun at the weird jury system.
Oh, she definitely will. She made fun of Prince Harry leaving the firm with Prince William sitting in the first row. She will no doubt get a few digs in about the Spencer shut out, as well.
We’ll see. The ‘Spencer’ shut out is not that surprising: the film was not very popular either with audiences or within the industry, and I would surmise that many BAFTA members, who’ve actually met royals, found the way they are depicted in it quite laughable.
Stewart is done. She’s not making it in. I’m not convinced of Haim’s inclusion yet. Colman’s omission was weird but I would be shocked if she missed at AMPAS. Kidman too
Stewart was always an impossible sell at the Baftas.
I’m not sure why people don’t get that Gaga is the frontrunner.
Stewart’s omission is the least surprising thing. Her portrayal of Diana is lèse-majesté.
I just don’t understand why Colman was left out.
Haim was TOP 2 with the membership, over people like Colman, Kidman and Chastain. She is getting an Oscar nom.
I’ll believe it when Leslie Jordan reads out her name