The Water Cooler Gang reviews the 93rd Annual Academy Awards ceremony and looks at the outcome of the ceremony.
We close our podcast, as always, with the Flash Forward to the media we’re most anticipating in the upcoming week.
Thanks for listening and thank you, in advance, for subscribing and rating us on Apple Podcasts!
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
The 12th Man – should have unquestionably been the first foreign film to win best picture and best foreign language film and best director and screenplay EASILY- penultimate gritty gruelling true chilling compelling war time survival story- only one of 12 survived..on mission to sabotage and steal invaluable documents to give the allies and the UK particularly the edge over the nazi invasion in Norther Europe in WWII it entirely true factual story yet it original screenplay as well..forget ‘the revenant’ this is as real and bleak and inspiring a survival story as you can get!!
Contract Killers – in the new millenium it actually was the first high profile semi foreign / US production i believe where the lead actress was actual role of a ex contract killer commissioned by the US GOVT. when she realizes her family security has been betrayed out of fear her morals by her bosses would prevent her doing the CIA’S dirty work in a dirty deal involving enemies of the west, she on the run but must also counterpunch..after the CIA slaughter her family try to frame someone else for it- it extraordinarily bold demanding role and just totally compelling and dramatically intriguing all way through and again it original screenplay- Frida Farell plays the titled character brilliantly written too!
Zero Dark Thirty – This film should have arguably been Kathryn Bigelow breakoiut and female filmmaker breakout role the event that reshaped the world and realigned the fate and we know what followed of the war on terror post 9/11 far more powerful, complex , ambitious, epic and important film achievement than the Hurt Locker..which incidentally was a event unfolded as a result of 9/11 whereas it a given that hunt for bin Laden was the key event to bring an end ability for terrorists (thus far) to insitgate a future mass scale invasion. Everything about this movie screamed importance..epic..suspense and truth..powerful and equally bold and provocative Bigelow showed why this should been her first breakout oscar winning film..it open question did oscar jump the gun award ‘hurt locker’ when zero dark thirty had far greater implications globally to the event that that film unfolded? what was utterly mind blowing? is that it was a original screenplay but it was factual and most accurate portrayal of decade long manhunt for public enemy no.1 Bin Laden.
Captain Phillips- in any other year this film would get best picture for sure..but i must confess in year it was released same as Zero Dark Thirty, Paul Greengrass masterpiece would get nominations galore and number of wins..it is arguably Hanks most powerful and dramatic performance since Forrest Gump..and Greengrass got the human emotion of this hauntingly true story that forever forced naval security after this near tragic siege to reassess need importance to reinforce armed guard security and systems to protect future vessels from being violently hijacked..if only it was released in a non- Zero Dark Thirty year still disgracefully both films released in same year were unfairluy snubbed altogether. as far as none of them winning any major oscars that year.
Sully I think this is one of Eastwood’s best films post ‘ unforgiven’ and it beggars belief again Hanks did nit get nominated for his precise, focused , compelling and challenging performance as the hero of the Hudson who single handedly saved many lives by doing most daring landing in commercial scale airplane and then the disgraceful attempt to draw him into a conspiracy to take the shine and threaten his crediblity so others could take the credit..very much fight for truth, fairness and powerful unforgettable direction with some amazing sequences that Eastwood only knows how to do at his best…where Hanks performance along with the events before during and after the ‘miracle landing on the Hudson’ so in sync in a way very few films if any nowadays have such astonishing synergy between them. This should have been Eastwood’s tour de force oscar winner NOT few years before that Million Dollar Baby..again, oscar jumping the gun..Sully meant more about event more widely recognized in modern US history to more people and film goers…
The Looking Glass – twisted and intriguing, the 2 leads Nicholas Cage and Robin Tunney performances is what carried this brilliant film…which was provocative and unique- in that characters reactions to the shock an discovery they come across in the quiet remote hotel that they inherit from Cage character’s grandfather- the film photography internally esp moments captured through the literal looking glass are the trigger catalyst that reflects the 2 husband and wife characters deterioration of lack of self assurance, and self security..it a mystery that has horror moments but plays more as a mystery sordid thriller..than a genuine horror movie..it simply brilliant…this film definitely should seen Robin Tunney and Nicholas Cage both win in acting..but unfortunately it was in a year that should got nominations in big categories but even bigger films nominated that year.
The Humanity Bureau – Arguably one of more controversial themed conceptually done films of the lot i seen in quite a while..a semi- science fiction thirller..where the brilliant cinematography portrays it as a semi contemporary western drama- action hybrid..where in the future..after a time worlds climate has forced govts as a result of their negligence to threats and extremes of climate change, the US govt appoints a group of specialy trained white collar and blu collar workers in organisation called the ‘humanity bureau’ to segment and separate the population from poor to the rich…the poor are placed in govt designated zone known as ‘Eden’ but it actually where they neglected and much much worse.. Cage again in increedible performance is the cluey insightful second in command to the bureau who discovers organisation he works for is not all it seems..when he discovers the crimes his organisation are behind he out to find the truth – it original, provocative, compelling, multi genre drama where stakes get higher as movie goes on it superbly written as Cage own boss is ordered by the govt to hunt him down before he crosses the border to Canada and expose the shocking truth what really goes on in ‘eden’ . inspired but dark themed filmaking should got best pic nomination too. Sarah Lund is simply fantastic as the mother who gets caught up in this conspiracy..
Sahara- If ever there a film that took it cue from being inspired by our generations greatest adventure classic/ espionage movies namely indiana jones and james bond..Sahara does this better than any other big screen epic adventure film- it inspired filmmaking 3 leads both funny do their roles well.. Cruz particularly is sizzling as the sexy and determined WHO scientist and link (chillingly looking at mystery of a new emerging pandemic or she thinks in the film to the goal of McConaughey character to find what thought as athe mythical iron clad ship wreck remains he long pursued as a huge american civil war history buff..and way the script sees all 3 unexpectedly get together team up to save that part of the world from corrupt plot to poison water supplies by crooked african militia..resourceful ways they escape danger etc..is just pure entertainment done bloody well..why should a oscar nominnee as it deserved to be have to always have societal commentary to our world today?
Shutter Island– Visionary, very dark, twisted, disturbingly themed at times..but astonishingly filmed by master himself Martin Scorsese…this is arugably his most chilling intriguing work since ‘ Goodfellas’ and it simply beggars belief that Dicaprio- one too many times did not win best actor. The concept was inspiration if somewhat realy sinister…the idea of a prison island that masked a secret via a mystery that links to nazi -inspired ecperiments- supposedly by very people that run the prison/ asylum..but nothing is what it seems and this film really redefines this saying with creative and bold flair this film should won best picture the year it was releaSED- just as good if not better than Scorseses ‘the departed’ – the twist at end really elevates the film to masterpiece status!-
The Foreigner– Who works for who- who on what side from authorities point of view? why won’t Brosnan’s character simply cooperated with Jackie Chan dour and determined outstanding performance as the asian version of ‘Rambo’ with hiw own brand of saboitage, ambush and tricks? Who is Brosnan’s character loyal too? it a modern classic, across the board superb performances….and very thrilling in way it twists and turns evolve..it not so much ‘who did what to who?’ but ‘who is loyal to who’ as the film balances not just temptation to tell Jackie Chan’s story and his desire for revenge but the point of view of the authorities that Chan assumes Brosnan’s character knows the information…in the pre- 9/11 era it was filmed the opening scene seeing it today is exceptionally chilling and tragic..but it one of those films where opening scene really hammers home the desperation and how the web of intrigue of the looming state sanctioned terror involve Chan’s character how it all connects to his motive for revenge..again it visionary and one of Martin Campbell’s best films..superbly written and post French Connection one of best espionage actiona political thriller films made. Def should won best picture.
Tenet- The espionage intrigue thriller for our time..and despite the films flaws in its script the events and scale of the stakes and the nature of the plot and way John David Washington and Robert PAttinsons characters must find a way to save the world turns the entire conventions of the espionage genre on its head..it trademark smart filmmakling we expect of Nolan but it really elevates the dramatic performances of characters at far higher level of intensity – esp performances of Elizabeth Debicki and the self professed pro- soviet arms dealer Kenneth Branagh in one his best performances…in any other year i give it best pictuyre byt surely a film that looks at the films narrative both inverted and in extroverted ways and fiulm that works superbly well with unforgettable visuals and endless intrigue and suspense and twists…should got numerous oscar nominations and not just visual effects .
I”… gonna contrinue this detailed breakdown of each movie another time..films in ‘bold’= films that should won best picture in the year of their release..note each contenders has vision..some reference to challenging societal issues..number most imporessive ones are original screenplays..and ambitious films for wehat they needed to achieve all are critically acclaimed and respected by us.. the film goers and guess what?> NONE OF THEM HARDLY MANY OF THEM WERE NOMINATED AS BEST PICTURE CONTENDERS AT VERY LEAST when they clearly DESERVED TO BE any wonder where the problems for awards season lie?
Patriots Day
The Taking of Pelham 1,2,3
Welcome Home
Skylines
Criminal
Minority Report
@Clarence: Anne Thompson stated in one of her podcasts that around 700 Bafta members are also members of the Academy.
The fact that the vast majority of people didn’t see the vast majority of the nominated films speaks to one thing. It was never easier for people to catch up with films this year; streaming services, lockdown, etc. and we chose not to. We are a nation of idiots who like McDonald’s in our movies and in our food.
To be quite honest, I think your comment is too abrasive and reductive.
I’m not american, but I can reasonably state that in the past there have been some wonderful high budgeted movies/box office hits that are in no way inferior to the “niché” films that the academy keeps rewarding over and over again.
Movies like Gladiator or LOTR trilogy come to mind: They might not have as much dept in their message or purpose but they are a feast for the eyes and the ears, with beautiful scenary, costumes, cinematography and heart melting musical scores.
Raiders of the lost ark or Curse of the black pearl are also amazing adventure movies that left a long lasting impression on the public, even if they were mostly ignored by the academy.
A film is not just about the resonance of a script or the performance of an actor: A promising young woman might be an effective study in psychology but it can’t hold a candle to Cruise/Kidman Far & Away in terms of cinematography, score, costumes, set design… and that is an average movie with a simple/forgettable story that got mixed reviews and didn’t receive a single nod, back in the day.
That is to say, you might look for a deeper meaning, a connection or emotional resonance in a movie, something that makes you reflect on a single issue or on the meaning of life itself; other people, however, might like the visual beauty of a film (movies are not books, afterall!) and focus on that when choosing what to spend 2 hours watching. That does not make said people idiots; in fact, many might have a deep knowledge in a certain area (some costumists only like period pieces and prefer bigger budgeted movies because they have better costumes, see frockflicks. website).
I, myself, am a sucker for a great photography and use of colour, so I would rather watch something like Yimou’s Hero or House of Flying Daggers than Nomadland, yet I wouldn’t call myself an idiot…
House Of Flying Daggers is a superb film. Nomadland is a faux documentary.
EXACT FUKING XACTLY mate! i upvote you half a dozen times for what you pointed out you said it expressed in better ways than i have for years..these niche oversaturated overexposed overrated oscar winners by and large- (mostly not all) have simply got to end IF oscar have any shred of self respect and dignity and care to reconnect to film audiences…like ever again..way they going? well frankly it just stinks to high heaven and i dont hold much hope as most us don’t oscar will change..they worried naturally they get a violent brutal verbal assualt of a backlash by the social media gangs that infiltrated and clouded once respected judgement of likes of critics from: NY times, LA times, Chicago Times, it huge concern and your right on mark why order of things need to have some restoration..TIME FOR OSCAR TO TAKE A BLOODY BREAK (UP TILL AFTER THE CENTENARY) OF THESE MINORITY LITTLE CARED FOR LITTLE PUBLICLY RESPECTED DECISIONS OSCAR HAVE MADE ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!
I’m going to post this in a few places, then I’m semi-officially on break – apart from reading the post-Oscars articles and comments (which I haven’t yet had time to do) and posting a few comments and replies of my own… I would normally stay on longer, but this year there just isn’t time. There’s still too much going on.
I’m here. Not for long, but I’m here. Not unexpectedly (after the major effort I made to get everything done in time for the Oscars), I just could not stop sleeping… 🙂 In a number of spells. I got up, did some things, got too tired again in a few hours, went back to sleep, got up again, and so on. Repeated 2-3 times, at least. Got some work done and all of the other things in the meantime, but this week is still very busy. I do have a bit of time now to put together this stats round-up I’ve been meaning to get to for many hours, then hopefully reply those who have written to me since I went off grid, a few hours after the ceremony – we’ll see if I can get that second part done today as well. If not, over the next few days. Just one thing before I move on to the stats: I haven’t read what people are saying and I imagine that I’m still very much in the minority here, but for me the main takeaway from Oscar night was still WE HAVE TO BRING BACK THE HOST! (Ever since they moved away from that, the Oscars have just had no personality for me, as I’ve said many times.) The best parts of the night (which weren’t many – and apart from a handful of speeches) happened when somebody acted as a host for a few minutes. (Regina King, Lil Rel Howery, etc.) But this just didn’t happen enough, at least for my liking… Worst Oscars I’ve ever seen, that’s for sure! Although the setting was brilliant. They just didn’t do anything with it. Most of the decisions were terrible. (I still enjoyed it, of course, because the main thing for me has always been celebrating the movies – which, even if not well, they still did, just about – and making history, which always happens, inevitably.) That’s about it…
Now, about the stats… There were certainly quite a few upsets – no fewer than five categories saw winners that were being predicted by under 30% of the experts, editors, top 24 and all-star top 24 (or whatever they’re called) at Gold Derby, and only one of those upsets came in a short film category! That said, the only true stats-busting winner was “Fight For You” in song. (One could claim Colette was in that category as well, but not really, given how unreliable the stats are in those categories in general. More on that below.) These are all of the categories where the stats favorite (or at least what I, based on the data available to me and how I read it, had decided was the stats favorite) did not win:
Best Actor
Chadwick Boseman was probably the stats favorite here. Leaving out all things based on both Mulligan and McDormand losing in the other lead category (which did not end up being relevant, and it was always unclear whether they would), he was mainly up against:
– of the previous 26 Best Actor Oscar winners in years with 8 or more Best Picture-nominated movies, only two had failed to be in one (Jeff Bridges – Crazy Heart – and Fredric March – Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde -, who, however, only tied for the win with somebody who was in a Best Picture nominee);
– since 2011, no Oscar Best Actor winner whose movie had been seen by BAFTA (so, not McConaughey in Dallas Buyers Club), and certainly none that was a BAFTA nominee, had failed to win the award there as well (9/9), and BAFTA significantly altered its voting procedure around 2012-2013, making this stat probably rather more meaningful than the average ordinary 9-year matching streak;
– and, finally, losing the Independent Spirit Award (not a very strong stat, particularly in that category, but a reasonably strong one overall – not many Oscar-winners are nominated there and lose, in any category the two have in common, at least not since 2009, for some reason).
His stats looked mostly beatable to me – although the possibility of Davis (or maybe Day or Kirby) winning complicated things, bringing other, stronger stats into the fold -, only the BAFTA streak looking rather concerning. I guess it’s possible that voters realizing they were about to give a movie not up for Best Picture four Oscars, including both Best Actor and Best Actress (given their SAG wins), might have hurt their final tallies in both categories, so perhaps those stats were more relevant than they seem, even with both losing.
Anthony Hopkins was second-favorite, at worst. His issues were:
– not having won LAFCA/NSFC/SAG/Critics Choice, a stat on 100% (26/26) up until this year, in the SAG era (but a somewhat artificial one, and not one I trusted too much to begin with, despite the lack of exceptions – I’m glad there is now an exception, confirming this);
– not having won SAG or the Globe (an alternative stat, at best, since it also includes SAG), which was going on 17 years, but had witnessed several exceptions before that;
– being potentially the oldest Best Actor winner ever (not a very convincing stat, for the same reason Parasite being a foreign film wasn’t much of a stat either – but one can never be sure).
His stats looked quite beatable to me as well, although slightly more convincing (in the negative sense) than Boseman’s, but I can see how this could be interpreted differently, too… In any case, I was quite clear after BAFTA that I thought this was going to be a very close race and Hopkins could easily lose. The stats paint the same picture. At best, one is a marginal favorite over the other, depending on which stat(s) one gives more credence to – I honestly have no idea what the correct answer is, if there even is one.
Best Actress
Here, there were three roughly equally stats-valid possibilities, with Davis probably slightly ahead of Mulligan and McDormand. Again, setting aside the stats based on Boseman winning Best Actor, which did not come into play (and, given the above, were never anywhere near guaranteed to – though they of course needed to be kept in mind to some extent, even so, as I explained), the roadblocks for Davis were:
– having only won SAG (not even also NBR, like Halle Berry), which put her in a-single-precedent-in-the-SAG-era territory (Susan Sarandon, back when there was no AFTRA attached to SAG, which surely was an advantage for Davis there, with her TV background and all that, and back when BAFTA was post-Oscars, there was no Gold Derby Award and so on);
– not having any particularly good excuse for missing the BAFTA nomination (which Mulligan maybe did, and McDormand, the eventual winner, in any case, didn’t need, since she was nominated and even won there), which is a must for all eligible, of course (the point is, while it’s hard to see Mulligan missing with BAFTA, had there been no jury system, it was never that hard to see Davis missing, either way – but of course one can’t be sure);
– losing the Independent Spirit Award while nominated (McDormand broke this anyway, but it was on 11/11 all-time, before this year’s Oscars).
There was some precedent, at least, so I figured she maybe could beat these. I mean, I didn’t really think she would, honestly, which is why I didn’t predict her personally, but objectively it seemed and perhaps still seems like she had the least damaging stats, just about. BAFTA and its juries really did us in this year. Had McDormand won there fair and square, this would have been so much easier to call!…
Mulligan’s issues:
– not winning SAG or the Globe (34-year streak that was just broken by McDormand, but that could be argued to be all-time, since there was no SAG the last time there was an exception).
That was it. A big one, but clearly beatable, since McDormand had the same issue. (And, since I personally predicted Mulligan, I clearly thought it was beatable before the Oscars too, especially given that Davis also had big stats issues.) Any stat that’s based mostly on the votes of AFTRA and the 90 members of the HFPA is probably beatable. Still, of course, pretty strong. Anyway, like I said, I’m just happy my two favorite groups (BFCA & Film Independent), at least, picked Carey as their winner. 🙂 As did many other groups. Pity that the industry didn’t get it… (In my opinion, of course.)
McDormand’s:
– the same no-SAG/Globe-win stat;
– the stat about losing the ISA;
– and the stat about losing 3/4 of the Globe, Critics Choice, SAG and BAFTA as a nominee, which was on 100% in Best Actress up until now (no winners had lost that many in the BFCA-SAG era), but had been beaten in the other acting categories more than once, so it never looked unbeatable, by any means.
Clearly, it’s not easy to make a case for any of these being in a much better position, stats-wise, than the others. I still think Davis had the easier stats to beat, and she had precedent for beating most of them. But who knows?! Objectively, their cases look about the same. McDormand is hardly even an upset – I didn’t think she would win anymore, I’ll admit it, after she lost SAG and beat nobody strong at BAFTA. But that’s got nothing to do with the stats. I guess AFTRA just keeps messing things up…
By the way, Andra Day was just a bad prediction, according to the stats. (Already over-explained this point, no sense going over the nearly interminable list of her stats problems again.) Even in a year with four different precursor winners, when each of the other three had their issues as well (though far, far fewer). James Coburn was the only kind-of precedent, but even he was in a movie rather popular with critics that year, which had won an acting prize (even if not for Coburn) from NYFCC & NSFC and made the top 2 with LAFCA (in the same category). Also made the top 3 in Best Film with the NSFC & NYFCC and the top 3 in directing with the latter. It also had another Oscar nomination. (Nick Nolte, the aforementioned acting winner, in lead.) Coburn also had a SAG nomination – BAFTA only had four acting nominees and took place long after the Oscars, in those days. And he was in supporting, where it’s probably easier for such major stats upsets to happen, anyway. (Or was, prior to 2005. One can’t really get away with such anti-stats predictions anymore, above the line.) History suggests it. It was nice to see most (though not all) of the pundits realized Day was just not a good call by the end – even if one thought they would want to make history, it was clear Davis, the legend, would be the one they would pick, not Day. (Another thing I argued for, earlier on.) I maintain Day was probably in fifth place. Maybe not a terribly distant fifth, I don’t know, but fifth nonetheless. The evidence is all there. The evidence to the contrary… not so much.
Best Adapted Screenplay
The only category where I, personally, went against the stats and got it right… Nomadland was the stats favorite over The Father because the latter, while eligible, had failed to be nominated for the Scripter, as well as the Gold Derby Award. There were precedents for these stats being beaten. (Individually, not together, of course, but that’s the case with most strong stats.) The main reasons I thought they would indeed be broken this year:
– not being nominated for those two also meant Nomadland didn’t actually beat it in a final vote for either; it was probably not nominated (especially in the case of Gold Derby) mostly because not enough people saw it in time, therefore Nomadland only truly beat it at the Critics Choice, but lost to it at BAFTA (and I suspect, and have for a while, it would have lost at WGA too, had they been eligible there, which wouldn’t have affected its being the Best Picture stats front-runner anyway), which is a much better precursor for the screenplay win, it’s been established;
– in the 9 years in which I’ve run my preferential ballot simulation, the winners of that simulation (The Social Network, Zero Dark Thirty, Her, Birdman, Mad Max: Fury Road, Moonlight, Call Me By Your Name, The Favourite and Parasite) have always ended up with at least one Oscar win, often upsetting in at least one category in the process (Zero Dark Thirty tied for the sound win, Mad Max: Fury Road was not expected to win six, this much I remember, and beat The Revenant in a couple of tech categories the latter was a favorite in, Moonlight upset in picture, The Favourite upset in Best Actress, even though it also surprisingly lost in a number of categories, and Parasite upset in directing – and, from many people’s perspectives, picture), and, this year, screenplay seemed the easiest category for it to win (I of course knew it could maybe win actor too, like I said, but had decided to not predict Hopkins there – I believed Boseman’s narrative would prevail, somehow);
– Nomadland just didn’t make sense as an Oscar winner in this category, as many have said, it did not feel written enough (the old “most vs. best” rule for predicting Oscar wins) and I never bought that it would win just because it was winning picture (screenplay is not the category one “drags along” that way, most of the time – bizarrely, it ended up being Best Actress, which, however, was even easier to win, surely, requiring fewer extra votes gathered and a lower final percentage of the vote) – shout out to john smith, wherever he is! I bet he would have been arguing hard alongside me that The Father was the clear favorite for screenplay (stats or no stats), due to this and other reasons! (Well, I wouldn’t have said “clear” – but he might have.) This also played a part in my decision. He was right about Get Out and others. He was the screenplay wizard…
Best Cinematography
This was another marginal upset. Mank was always clearly in it. Its only issues were BAFTA’s 8-year matching streak in this category (since 2013, so this looked reasonably strong, despite the still-small sample) and having lost the Critics Choice (only 1/11 Oscar winners since the BFCA had introduced that category too had done so). These were clearly both well in the “beatable” range, especially since Nomadland wasn’t a 100% valid winner either, stats-wise, not having won any ADG prizes (13 of the last 15 cinematography winners at the Oscars had). One other stat I discovered right after the ceremony makes Mank seem like an even better stats alternative to Nomadland in this category (which was probably always its best chance at winning a second Oscar, given the ASC result) than it already did: no lone nominations leader (as in not involved in a tie for the most nominations) at the Oscars since 1971 has failed to win at least two Oscars!
(Before that year, there were 6 exceptions – so not many, anyway.)
Best Live Action Short
Feeling Through and The Present were maybe the stats co-favorites, having no issues, with Two Distant Strangers close by (its only “issues” being the length of its title – although it’s only three words anyway, plus this stat has obviously been overcome before, even recently – and the fact it didn’t have at least two other award wins listed on IMDb, but just the one – but I knew this might change post-Oscars – I’m curious to see if it does -, so this wasn’t even much of a valid stat, just a potentially valid one).
Best Documentary Short
This is probably the second-biggest stats upset, just about. All winners since 2003 had had at least a 7.4 score on IMDb. (Colette is on 7.2, so very close, anyway.) The 40 minute rule has also gone down again, but this was never a tremendously strong stat (again, none of the shorts stats I look at are, they’re just for orientation when I can’t decide otherwise – or should be, anyway, even if I sometimes have a tendency to overvalue them, purely out of habit, given that in the other categories stats actually do matter quite a bit) and it’s been beaten before, rather recently.
Best Original Song
“Fight For You” winning here was definitely the biggest stats upset, as I said. First of all, “Speak Now” had zero stats issues. More importantly, there were all kinds of rather strong stats going against the H.E.R. song:
– not winning at Critics Choice after being nominated for and losing the Globe (no exceptions in the BFCA era and, in fact, for the last 29 years;
– not winning at least one critics award for song (this was on an 8-year streak – there were exceptions before that, of course… no real 100%-all-time stats to be found for song, either);
– not winning the Globe and not being from an animated movie (only one exception since 1991).
This is one of those below-the-line wins stats just can’t explain. There are one or two every year. Can’t be helped. There just isn’t enough data, there aren’t enough strong precursors and there aren’t enough strong stats in these categories, like I’ve always said…
Bonus:
Stats broken by Nomadland in winning Best Picture:
– not having either the SAG Ensemble nomination or two or more SAG acting nominations.
That’s it. That’s the strongest stat based on the SAG Ensemble snub it was facing (any others that include that would just be “doubles”, basically) and it had no other snubs or losses (all season) that normally disqualify a movie from winning Best Picture. (The Artios “snub”, I guess, but that’s for the same thing and I don’t count those twice – anymore. Plus, its stat is pretty weak, anyway. Barely good enough to be mentioned. I’ll probably take it out of my table altogether, now that there’s yet another exception.) Fabulous run! Evidently, all of the others had several such issues. Yes, even Promising Young Woman. In the critics phase, and not only. (Let alone Trial and Minari and the rest.) All of those stats held. The list would be far too long… Oh, and it was, it seems, indeed not premature to call a lock that Trial wouldn’t win Best Picture, even as early as just after Critics Choice. Further proof that, as much as people love to ignore them, their stats are quite solid, especially in Best Picture, where the stat I based the call on remains on 100% all-time…
I did fairly poorly overall with my predictions (even if I made a significant profit in Oscar bets, as usual) – I got killed by the shorts, 1/3, and only called one “upset” (The Father in screenplay). Didn’t find the path to calling any of the others. Plus that late switch to Trial in editing… Oh well. 16/23 (same as the stats-only picks), 15/20 if we don’t count the shorts. Not terrible, but not good. Congrats to all of those who did better! And see you all in October!! 🙂
P.S.: I definitely can’t get to replies today, too. 🙂 This took a while, as one can imagine… (Will do it over the next few days, as I said.)
Editor’s Note: When we saw how great this was, we had to promote Claudiu’s brilliant work to a feature post on the main page.
Instead of commenting on this page, we would appreciate if you check out his fantastic headline analysis and reply here:
https://www.awardsdaily.com/2021/04/27/oscar-2021-post-mortem-stats-analysis-wrap-up/
I am thankful this Oscar season is over and looking forward to the next. All the people that won, regardless of being deemed as a surprise, were all well deserved wins for their respective categories. I know some are heartbroken and others might be angry enough to say someone was robbed, but at the end of the day the vote body spoke. These winners will forever be enshrined as Oscar winners and hope to see all of them, including the nominees, to continue to work, dream and provide the public with high quality movies.
Now the rebuilding begins.
I may be in the minority, but I thought the show was “different.” At least the setting was different. And the opening credits did play like a “movie” scene. It just lacked humor and more spontaneity. I liked the songs at the beginning of the show and the Red carpet kept its tradition. It could be the beginning of something interesting.
As for the movies, I only saw 2 of them so I can’t speak on that.