The Lead/Support Thing

For the films of 2015
Mister Tee
Laureate
Posts: 6409
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 2:57 pm
Location: NYC
Contact:

Re: The Lead/Support Thing

Postby Mister Tee » Wed Jan 13, 2016 4:13 pm

A) I'm certainly glad I raised this issue. It's cleared up misconceptions for me, if no one else.

B) This is a discussion you need to follow two threads to fully absorb. I was working with different definitions of both "simultaneously" and "first".

Obviously it would be impossible to tabulate all categories simultaneously, but, since the two pairs of acting categories do have some dependence on one another, I presume they mean each gender's two categories are tabulated in tandem.

The way I inititally read the "whichever happens first" rule, it sounded as if you had competing CPAs each ready to shout Bingo! when their candidate crossed the vote threshhold, snd it seemed a ridiculously random way of deciding. The way I think BJ clarified it is, if a candidate clears in an earlier round in one category, that's where they'll end up. And if that person qualifies in the same round for both, the tie-breaker is overall percentage of the vote. Do I have it right now?

C) I've genuinely thought for years that the way I initially described it was the system, and I in fact have a good deal of trouble even now figuring how Kate Winslet got her lead nomination in '08 under this rule. She had swept the Globe/SAG/Broadcasters rounds, so I can't believe she didn't make a significant showing in support. Meanwhile, at least theoretically her Revolutionary Road performance would have been siphoning off some of her showing in lead. For it to turn out the way it did seems illogical.

Keisha Castle-Hughes I can more easily understand -- best actress was pretty barren that year, so she may have qualified with a low level of support. Same with Sarandon in '81, given the total miasma of the category beyond Streep/Keaton/Hepburn. Jake Gyllenhaal, conversely, never had a chance, with the four locked-and-loaded leads that year, and a comparatively weaker supporting squad.

I can see elements of this way or the way I'd thought being fairer -- it's not an easy call. I will say, however, that my way would have made things more interesting. This way, it's hard to imagine Mara not being cited in support. Vikander could be more interesting.

User avatar
flipp525
Laureate
Posts: 5816
Joined: Thu Jan 09, 2003 7:44 am

Re: The Lead/Support Thing

Postby flipp525 » Wed Jan 13, 2016 4:09 pm

Big Magilla wrote:You guys are way overanalyzing this stuff.

"And I think you're under-analyzing, Mrs. Chadwick!"
"The mantle of spinsterhood was definitely in her shoulders. She was twenty five and looked it."

-Gone With the Wind by Margaret Mitchell

FilmFan720
Tenured
Posts: 3449
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 3:57 pm
Location: Illinois

Re: The Lead/Support Thing

Postby FilmFan720 » Wed Jan 13, 2016 4:08 pm

Big Magilla wrote:You guys are way overanalyzing this stuff.

Vikander should and will be nominated for Ex Machina in support. She could and might also be nominated for lead in The Danish Girl where she is the clear lead.

Mara is more difficult to predict. Although she is not as likely to be anyone's first choice as easily as Blanchett, Ronan and Larson, she should get some first place votes, but remember that actors get to list their top five picks in each category so she is apt to get quite a few second, third or fourth place votes in lead. Having already listed her in the lead category, I don't think many of the same voters would feel compelled to hedge their bets by also listing her in support. In order for her to be nominated in support, more voters would have to think of her as belonging in support. I just don't think that's the case, but I'm not going to lose any sleep over it. I'll find out soon enough tomorrow morning.


Maybe you are under analyzing this stuff :)

Your logic on Mara doesn't quite hold up because you are discounting the people who will vote for her in Support and not Lead (because they either think she's supporting or buy into what the studio is selling). If enough of those people put her at the top of their supporting ballot, as I think they will, then she gets in there. I don't think many people are hedging their bets.
"Go into the world and do well. But more importantly, go into the world and do good."
- Minor Myers, Jr.

Big Magilla
Site Admin
Posts: 15640
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:22 pm
Location: Jersey Shore

Re: The Lead/Support Thing

Postby Big Magilla » Wed Jan 13, 2016 4:04 pm

You guys are way overanalyzing this stuff.

Vikander should and will be nominated for Ex Machina in support. She could and might also be nominated for lead in The Danish Girl where she is the clear lead.

Mara is more difficult to predict. Although she is not as likely to be anyone's first choice as easily as Blanchett, Ronan and Larson, she should get some first place votes, but remember that actors get to list their top five picks in each category so she is apt to get quite a few second, third or fourth place votes in lead. Having already listed her in the lead category, I don't think many of the same voters would feel compelled to hedge their bets by also listing her in support. In order for her to be nominated in support, more voters would have to think of her as belonging in support. I just don't think that's the case, but I'm not going to lose any sleep over it. I'll find out soon enough tomorrow morning.
“‎Life is a shipwreck, but we must not forget to sing in the lifeboats.” - Voltaire

FilmFan720
Tenured
Posts: 3449
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 3:57 pm
Location: Illinois

Re: The Lead/Support Thing

Postby FilmFan720 » Wed Jan 13, 2016 2:54 pm

Mister Tee wrote:
FilmFan720 wrote:Per the rules below, I don't think Tee's assessment or BJ's assessment are right.

The two categories are tallied simultaneously. When one of them hits the required votes for a category, that nomination is cemented and the other category doesn't matter anymore. Theoretically, you could get 500 lead votes and 300 supporting votes but get the supporting nomination if those votes are counted first.

They only compare the two vote totals if they get both nominations at the same time in the vote count process.


They can't count all categories at once (it's only a three-person team), and I don't see how it would be fair to turn this into a beat-the-clock, whoever gets there first contest.

My reading of the rule you cited seemed to say BJ had it right.


Then why use the word "simultaneously" in the rule? I think BJ is right that it is simultaneous rounds, so whichever round you make it in first counts.
"Go into the world and do well. But more importantly, go into the world and do good."
- Minor Myers, Jr.

FilmFan720
Tenured
Posts: 3449
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 3:57 pm
Location: Illinois

Re: The Lead/Support Thing

Postby FilmFan720 » Wed Jan 13, 2016 2:52 pm

BJ pointed out in the other thread that I may be slightly off.

If voting is done by simultaneous rounds, then that only supports going supporting instead of lead here. It will be easier for Vikander or Mara to get more first/second place votes in supporting, where there aren't many other candidates with passionate support. In Actress, where you have to imagine Blanchett/Larson/Ronan are getting a lot of top-ballot support, it would take a lot longer for them to get the necessary votes, by which time the Best Actress votes don't matter anymore.
"Go into the world and do well. But more importantly, go into the world and do good."
- Minor Myers, Jr.

The Original BJ
Emeritus
Posts: 4175
Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2003 8:49 pm

Re: The Lead/Support Thing

Postby The Original BJ » Wed Jan 13, 2016 2:48 pm

Mister Tee wrote:It TOTALLY favors category fraud in this instance for Mara -- she's got at the least the big three actresses running ahead of her, whereas in support she's likely to run first or second. Game pretty much over.


This was my reasoning -- I think we'd have to see a MASS resistance to category fraud in order for her to get the Best Actress spot, and I just don't see that happening. Even Vikander's fraud seems more likely to be overruled, depending on how many voters want her to get two nominations.

Mister Tee
Laureate
Posts: 6409
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 2:57 pm
Location: NYC
Contact:

Re: The Lead/Support Thing

Postby Mister Tee » Wed Jan 13, 2016 2:47 pm

FilmFan720 wrote:Per the rules below, I don't think Tee's assessment or BJ's assessment are right.

The two categories are tallied simultaneously. When one of them hits the required votes for a category, that nomination is cemented and the other category doesn't matter anymore. Theoretically, you could get 500 lead votes and 300 supporting votes but get the supporting nomination if those votes are counted first.

They only compare the two vote totals if they get both nominations at the same time in the vote count process.


They can't count all categories at once (it's only a three-person team), and I don't see how it would be fair to turn this into a beat-the-clock, whoever gets there first contest.

My reading of the rule you cited seemed to say BJ had it right.

Mister Tee
Laureate
Posts: 6409
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 2:57 pm
Location: NYC
Contact:

Re: The Lead/Support Thing

Postby Mister Tee » Wed Jan 13, 2016 2:44 pm

FilmFan720 wrote:From the official rules:

The leading role and supporting role categories will be tabulated simultaneously. If any performance
should receive votes in both categories, the achievement shall be placed only on the ballot in that
category in which, during the tabulation process, it first receives the required number of votes to be
nominated. In the event that the performance receives the numbers of votes required to be
nominated in both categories simultaneously, the achievement shall be placed only on the ballot in
that category in which it receives the greater percentage of the total votes

That's (obviously) very much new to me.

It TOTALLY favors category fraud in this instance for Mara -- she's got at the least the big three actresses running ahead of her, whereas in support she's likely to run first or second. Game pretty much over.

FilmFan720
Tenured
Posts: 3449
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 3:57 pm
Location: Illinois

Re: The Lead/Support Thing

Postby FilmFan720 » Wed Jan 13, 2016 2:42 pm

Per the rules below, I don't think Tee's assessment or BJ's assessment are right.

The two categories are tallied simultaneously. When one of them hits the required votes for a category, that nomination is cemented and the other category doesn't matter anymore. Theoretically, you could get 500 lead votes and 300 supporting votes but get the supporting nomination if those votes are counted first.

They only compare the two vote totals if they get both nominations at the same time in the vote count process.
"Go into the world and do well. But more importantly, go into the world and do good."
- Minor Myers, Jr.

FilmFan720
Tenured
Posts: 3449
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 3:57 pm
Location: Illinois

Re: The Lead/Support Thing

Postby FilmFan720 » Wed Jan 13, 2016 2:37 pm

From the official rules:

The leading role and supporting role categories will be tabulated simultaneously. If any performance
should receive votes in both categories, the achievement shall be placed only on the ballot in that
category in which, during the tabulation process, it first receives the required number of votes to be
nominated. In the event that the performance receives the numbers of votes required to be
nominated in both categories simultaneously, the achievement shall be placed only on the ballot in
that category in which it receives the greater percentage of the total votes
"Go into the world and do well. But more importantly, go into the world and do good."
- Minor Myers, Jr.

The Original BJ
Emeritus
Posts: 4175
Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2003 8:49 pm

Re: The Lead/Support Thing

Postby The Original BJ » Wed Jan 13, 2016 2:24 pm

Mister Tee wrote:As I understand the rule, if the same performance gets enough votes to qualify in both categories, the higher category – in this case, best actress – is where she's placed.


Is this everyone's understanding of the rules? Because, I thought if an actor qualified in both categories, they received a nomination in whichever category got them more votes. Which is to say, if Mara places in both Best Actress and Supporting Actress, but is higher-ranked on the cumulative Supporting Actress total, she'd get a nomination in support. (And, in fact, that's a major part of my reasoning for predicting both Mara & Vikander down-ballot).

Mister Tee
Laureate
Posts: 6409
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 2:57 pm
Location: NYC
Contact:

The Lead/Support Thing

Postby Mister Tee » Wed Jan 13, 2016 2:12 pm

(ON EDIT : I see that, while I was ratcheting this thing up, Sabin & BJ both weighed in on the issue at the other thread. This is my addition to that complicated discussion.)

The lead/supporting conundrum -- for Mara/Vikander in particular, but conceivably also applying to Tremblay, Dano or Keaton – is what has me most hesitant about making final predictions. In the run-up nominations, we've seen pretty much every permutation imaginable regarding these two women: SAG and the Broadcasters nominated both in support for their Oscar-y vehicles; the Globes put them both in lead, but also slotted Vikander in support for Ex Machina; BAFTA decided Vikander was lead in Danish Girl while Mara was support in Carol – but this may have had something to do with also citing Vikander in support for Ex Machina. How does one make any definitive call with that as background?

There are plenty of other variables involving both candidates and their films – Was Danish Girl more popular with BAFTA than elsewhere simply due to national origin? Is Carol dying (see PGA/DGA) or thriving (9 BAFTA nods)? How these factors will affect likelihood of nomination is unknowable till tomorrow morning. For right now, I'd like to concentrate on the simple mechanics involved in getting either/both nominated and where.

Start with: people are right to say that plenty of category fraud has been easily tolerated: Jake Gyllenhaal, Casey Affleck and Hailee Steinfeld leap readily to mind. But, for the contrary, we have Keisha Castle-Hughes, and Kate Winslet '08 – and, if we drill back in time, Susan Sarandon for Atlantic City and Piper Laurie in The Hustler were surprise leads who could easily have been supporting (Sarandon even said she voted for herself thusly). So upgrades are not completely unprecedented.

As promised, though, the mechanics as I understand them. If someone thinks/knows different, please inform me.

Mara and Vikander will, one presumes, both get votes in both lead and support. In terms of the PricewaterhouseCoopers count, each category is viewed as completely separate. The accountants will, using their complicated system, tabulate the five top vote getters for lead actress. If Mara and/or Vikander land among those five, a nomination for best actress is secured. If either/both fall short, votes under support will not be added – the top five vote-getters in best actress alone will be the best actress nominees.

PwC will then move on to supporting actress, and, again, tabulate the top five vote-getters. It's entirely possible Mara and/or Vikander will be in this group. If either/both are, and she/they've been excluded from the best actress five, she/they'll be given a slot(s) here. However…if either/both has secured a best actress nomination, she'll be eliminated from this top five, and the next highest qualifier will be rolled up. (I'm confident that Winslet in '08, after winning SAG/Broadcasters/Globe in support, was in this position, and some sixth place candidate lucked into a nomination she'd have otherwise missed.) As I understand the rule, if the same performance gets enough votes to qualify in both categories, the higher category – in this case, best actress – is where she's placed.

With Vikander, there's a further wrinkle: If she's already made the best actress list for Danish Girl, that performance will be disqualified for supporting no matter how many votes she gets. Her Ex Machina performance, however, would (with enough votes) then become eligible. The performance, though, would need to rate on its own: votes from the ineligible Danish Girl work wouldn't be added to her totals. If, however, she got enough votes to qualify in the top five (after any best actress qualifier was rolled out), she could get placed in supporting, yielding the rare double nomination.

Note, though: if she qualifies in support for both The Danish Girl and Ex Machina, she could only be nominated once in the category, for whichever performance got the highest vote total. Raising the possibility that she gets far more overall votes for The Danish Girl, but, say, misses best actress by a little, and Ex Machina yields a few more votes than Danish Girl in support – in which case she could get her nomination for her less supported vehicle.

I presume many of you knew all this, at least vaguely, but I thought it might help to put it all on the table, to make sure we're all working from the same set of ground rules (and to make clear that such an approach as "they'll want her in lead actress for The Danish Girl, or, if not, supporting for Ex Machina" isn't as easy to engineer as some might think).


Return to “88th Predictions and Precursors”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests