Jump to content

Film Awards Thread


Bright Eyes

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

  • Administrator

Producers Guild Awards nominations:

  • “American Fiction” (MGM)
  • “Anatomy of a Fall” (Neon)
  • “Barbie” (Warner Bros.)
  • “The Holdovers” (Focus Features)
  • “Killers of the Flower Moon” (Apple Original Films/Paramount Pictures)
  • “Maestro” (Netflix)
  • “Oppenheimer” (Universal Pictures)
  • “Past Lives” (A24)
  • “Poor Things” (Searchlight Pictures)
  • “The Zone of Interest” (A24)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Emma Stone is already doing the “I don’t want this—Lily deserves it” routine that Cate Blanchett did last year when she collected a few of the precursors before Michelle Yeoh ultimately won:

 

I do wonder, though: EEAAO was a juggernaut that got two other acting Oscars and I doubt KOTFM will have the same force.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I think Lily and Cillian will win, because Oppenheimer has the momentum you mentioned and I'm not sure that the respect and love a lot of people seem to have for Paul is enough. (there will also be building backlash against Alexander Payne, even if the Oscars usually don't care about that type of thing)

Lily is the opposite - she's a prize they can give out to a movie that likely won't be getting any others. She's also a way they can pat themselves on the back. I guess it also depends on how divisive Poor Things is or whether people will feel the "she has had her turn" mentality as much with Emma (as she's only won one, not two like Cate).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

If both "Barbie" and "Oppenheimer" score Oscar nominations, then I hope whoever writes and produces the Oscars this year will do a sketch imagining what it would be like if "Barbie" had been filmed like "Oppenheimer" and vice versa.

Edited by Khan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I really don't get it. Saltburn is just pop fluff. It's fun to watch, beautiful people, gorgeous scenery and viral moments, but ultimately it is vapid empty calories. What is the Academy hook? Are people just enjoying hooting at it over the holidays?

Edited by Vee
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I can only assume Emerald Fennell is well liked (or has good connections) and it being British means it gets more support than American films along the same lines (although Glass Onion did get an Adapted Screenplay nod). It's also one of those "we're saying something...well not really," movies some voters love, like Crash or Green Book.

Rosamund Pike is a gem but I would probably go for Carey Mulligan in Support over her (and take Carey out of Lead for Maestro). 

I would give Archie Madekwe a supporting actor nomination but there are already people even more deserving like Charles Melton who are going to be shut out anyway.

Nothing about that screenplay deserves a nomination. They should invent a category for Barry Keoghan's ass before they give the screenplay any recognition. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • Okay, now it's my turn to ask about the Thorntons, namely Edna. Did she and Opal have any scenes together? I ask because I was familiar with Opal first, so when I found out about Edna, my biased mind saw her as the first try for that type of character.
    • There is no dispute that Jill Farren Phelps had a successful career in daytime based on longevity, but that does not preclude discussion and dislike of her decisions at various shows. Sure there may have been some misogyny involved BITD(we don't know as I don't recall JFP ever mentioning that) but the head of CBS Daytime at that point was a woman and there were other women involved BTS. I think that so long as an EP could deliver, or at least talk a good game they would be respected.  
    • It surprises/disappoints me too that GL's ratings during '89-'93 don't reflect the quality of the show. But when I call it great soap, I'm not defining that by ratings either.  I'm probably in the minority, but I think Reilly takes something intangible with him when he goes. There's a sense of humor that just disappears in '93. 
    • Ok, I know nothing about Another World except their catchy intro song from long ago, but this makes me want to catch!  That crazy mother keeping her son's girlfriend or wife hostage, wow! 
    • And maybe Hotel could have been placed at 9pm Tues instead of Paper Dolls. Not that I thing it was a surefire thing but at least viewers were familiar with the show and it might have done better than PD. ABC's line up was pretty threadbare at that point. And with a big guest star to launch the season - Elizabeth Taylor- the numbers would have been there initially.
    • Any fan of RuPaul would dispute calling any of these examples “drag”. A costume?, A disguise?, A lame attempt at humor? -- yes -- Drag? -- nope
    • No asterisk. I meant that the circumstances during the first year were in her favor.
    • Maybe I am misunderstanding you? Are you suggesting that her success at GL should have an asterisk next to it because she was smart enough to exploit a weakness in the marketplace to gain ratings?  Note: Try not to take this personally—I’m not accusing anyone of being consciously misogynistic. I’m simply proposing that the origins of certain ideas about Ms. Phelps—such as claims that she was unprepared or a poor manager of her writing staff—may be rooted in misogyny. Perhaps, with the benefit of hindsight, it's worth reconsidering those opinions. At the very least, imagine being one of the few women in the room while a male network executive tries to decide what women want to watch during the day. That context has certainly led me to reassess many of my own long-held views.
    • Through 78 and 79 under Marland and Pat Falken smith GH was still heavily hospital based with a mix of storylines. The Doctors would have been fine had they followed that template. Once GH went with Ice Princess all bets were off.Who knows how much TD would have copied that direction? And OLTL, DOOL went in that direction quite heavily while other shows dabbled in far out stories. The thing is that TD was well set up for an expansion.
    • Thank you

      Please register in order to view this content

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy