LA Winners

anonymous1980
Laureate
Posts: 5223
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 10:03 pm
Location: Manila
Contact:

Re: LA Winners

Postby anonymous1980 » Mon Dec 04, 2017 8:39 am

The Original BJ wrote:If Chalamet were to win one of the TV awards, I would certainly start to reevaluate his chances.


Rumor has it that the HFPA does not like Gary Oldman due to I think his past comments about them. If that is the case and if that factors into their voting at all, I could see them giving it to Chalamet.

User avatar
Precious Doll
Tenured
Posts: 3470
Joined: Mon Jan 13, 2003 2:20 am
Location: Sydney
Contact:

Re: LA Winners

Postby Precious Doll » Mon Dec 04, 2017 5:49 am

Sally Hawkins & Willem Dafoe both won their second acting awards from the L.A. critics group. Dafoe won supporting actor in 2000 for Shadow of a Vampire and Hawkins won actress for Happy Go Lucky in 2008.
"I have no interest in all of that. I find that all tabloid stupidity" Woody Allen, The Guardian, 2014, in response to his adopted daughter's allegations.

Big Magilla
Site Admin
Posts: 15728
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:22 pm
Location: Jersey Shore

Re: LA Winners

Postby Big Magilla » Mon Dec 04, 2017 4:20 am

I don't think the L.A. critics have anything against American actresses. They do like to shake things up, giving their awards to those who aren't considered to have much of a chance. While they usually do this in lead actress, this year they went with an actual strong contender who has not been in the forefront of nominees thus far, but now could be.

Their winners this year are strong in all categories.
“‎Life is a shipwreck, but we must not forget to sing in the lifeboats.” - Voltaire

Mister Tee
Laureate
Posts: 6499
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 2:57 pm
Location: NYC
Contact:

Re: LA Winners

Postby Mister Tee » Mon Dec 04, 2017 1:21 am

The Original BJ wrote:
Mister Tee wrote:What can you say about best actress? Spreading the wealth was such a good idea this year, it weaned LA off its subtitled addiction.


I just realized...technically Sally Hawkins's performance IS in another language! The subtitled addiction continues!


Hawkins being a Brit-Iady also continues the trend I noted a day or two ago: except for Arquette's fraudulently-bumped-to-lead prize two years ago, the last American actress to win LA solo is Vera Farmiga in 2005 (Jennifer Lawrence shared her award with Emmanuelle Riva). American actors who've done the same in the years since: Forest Whitaker, Sean Penn, Jeff Bridges, Joaquin Phoenix, Bruce Dern, Adam Driver. What do the LA critics have against American actresses?

Mister Tee
Laureate
Posts: 6499
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 2:57 pm
Location: NYC
Contact:

Re: LA Winners

Postby Mister Tee » Mon Dec 04, 2017 1:11 am

Okri wrote:*Her third emmy comes six months after Ronan was born, but a line's a line.

And a fine one it is.

Okri wrote: I'll also admit to being wrong about Oldman. I thought he'd win at least one of these awards. Now watch National Society go for him :D

I think you and I both remember (and recoil at the thought) that, of the old-line critics' groups, it was the supposed-to-be-cool National Society that actually fell in line with Jamie Foxx/Ray.

The Original BJ
Emeritus
Posts: 4202
Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2003 8:49 pm

Re: LA Winners

Postby The Original BJ » Sun Dec 03, 2017 10:57 pm

Mister Tee wrote:What can you say about best actress? Spreading the wealth was such a good idea this year, it weaned LA off its subtitled addiction.


I just realized...technically Sally Hawkins's performance IS in another language! The subtitled addiction continues!

Okri
Tenured
Posts: 2609
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:28 pm
Location: Edmonton, AB

Re: LA Winners

Postby Okri » Sun Dec 03, 2017 10:51 pm

The Original BJ wrote:I had the same thought Mister Tee did — Best Director has about twice as many totally valid candidates as there are spots, meaning 1) some people are going to be bummed however that category pans out and 2) there’s a serious possibility for Affleck/Bigelow-like shock omissions, simply because, like 2012, there are just too many contenders. (Just imagine the Internet meltdown if one of those surprise omissions is Nolan!)


Can this happen please? I think I'll spend the rest of the oscar season predicting Nolan's omission, even if I actually want him to get nominated (right now, I do).

User avatar
ThePianist
Graduate
Posts: 168
Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2017 2:54 am

Re: LA Winners

Postby ThePianist » Sun Dec 03, 2017 9:29 pm

I’m sorry everyone. Apologies If I'm taking the conversation in an unwanted direction. But to hell with it, I'm talking about these things.

Where in common sense does it (again) say Dafoe is winning this? Just because he won NY and LA Supporting Actor? I've seen this suddenly pop up in AW, to GD, AD, to wherever else people are blabbering. I mean, do you guys believe this is happening? I certainly don't, because all signs point towards Rockwell. But I suppose since there's tiny bit of backlash against 3BB, that instantly means it's winning nothing. 'The Florida Project' doesn't seem to be getting in for Motion Picture. How many nominations could it garner outside of Supporting Actor anyways? :roll:

This is clearly some form of bias and stanning on AW’s side of things. Calling him things like “Willegend Dafoe”, and other proclamations like “HE’S SWEEPING EVERY AWARD” while adding this Gif: Image

Speaking of which... to put this lightly: HOW CAN GARY OLDMAN WIN IF HIS FILM DOESN'T HAVE A BP NOM?

Gary Oldman isn’t as respected as someone like Jeff Bridges. Neither has he been nominated 4 times before.

User avatar
ThePianist
Graduate
Posts: 168
Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2017 2:54 am

Re: LA Winners

Postby ThePianist » Sun Dec 03, 2017 9:16 pm

anonymous1980 wrote:With Chalamet now winning both NY and LA, is Gary Oldman's presumed front-runner status merely a notion that Oscar prognosticators perpetuated due solely to the fact that it's an Oscar role on paper?


Not necessarily. Although I've spoken on both of these subjects (Oldman's Overestimated Frontrunner Status and Chalamet's Potential), these recent events don't necessarily indicate a slamdunk for what'll win. It could go either way during the next few months. But with that said, I still believe Oldman is being WAY overestimated here.

The Original BJ
Emeritus
Posts: 4202
Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2003 8:49 pm

Re: LA Winners

Postby The Original BJ » Sun Dec 03, 2017 8:51 pm

Nice to see so many films picking up prizes this year, with The Shape of Water bouncing back in a big way after its NBR/NY shut-out, and Three Billboards picking up a ton of runner-up mentions (which made me happy even if it didn’t literally win anything.) I’ve been hearing a lot of “Film X is going to win Best Picture” in recent days; of course, everyone seems to think Film X is a different movie, and I honestly don’t know how anyone could settle on a front runner just yet (unless you’re just making gun-to-the-head predictions for SOMETHING.)

I had the same thought Mister Tee did — Best Director has about twice as many totally valid candidates as there are spots, meaning 1) some people are going to be bummed however that category pans out and 2) there’s a serious possibility for Affleck/Bigelow-like shock omissions, simply because, like 2012, there are just too many contenders. (Just imagine the Internet meltdown if one of those surprise omissions is Nolan!)

If Chalamet were to win one of the TV awards, I would certainly start to reevaluate his chances. But for now I still have such a hard time seeing him get further than a nomination with Oscar — he’s just so young, and he looks perhaps even more like a little boy than he does in real life, and there has historically been such a hurdle for young men with Oscar. (By comparison, Heath Ledger seemed WAY older in Brokeback Mountain — giving a performance I personally found way more dominant — and he seemed like a pretty distant runner-up to Hoffman once that season got going.) It’s possible I just don’t see the revelation in Chalamet’s performance some do that suggests he would overcome that hurdle, even if I do admire what he contributes to the movie in his best scenes.

Thrilled Best Actress seems genuinely all over the place. Hope it stays that way for a while.

anonymous1980
Laureate
Posts: 5223
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 10:03 pm
Location: Manila
Contact:

Re: LA Winners

Postby anonymous1980 » Sun Dec 03, 2017 8:10 pm

The Original BJ wrote:Even as a runner-up, I don't get the Mary J. Blige thing AT ALL. What about that performance even approaches best of the year level?


Having now seen Mudbound, I don't get it either. Apart from the novelty of going, "Oh, look! It's Mary J. Blige! I didn't recognize her! And look, she can act!", nothing about her role and performance stands out and screams "best of the year". Carey Mulligan, Jason Mitchell and Garrett Hedlund are the true standouts in that ensemble.

With Chalamet now winning both NY and LA, is Gary Oldman's presumed front-runner status merely a notion that Oscar prognosticators perpetuated due solely to the fact that it's an Oscar role on paper?

User avatar
ThePianist
Graduate
Posts: 168
Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2017 2:54 am

Re: LA Winners

Postby ThePianist » Sun Dec 03, 2017 8:00 pm

Chalamet looks to be winning the Globe, and Oldman seems to be winning the BAFTA

If Oldman doesn't win the SAG, it's game over for him.

User avatar
ThePianist
Graduate
Posts: 168
Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2017 2:54 am

Re: LA Winners

Postby ThePianist » Sun Dec 03, 2017 7:42 pm

Mister Tee wrote:Chalamet now has a chance (even a likelihood) of sweeping the traditional three critics' groups. This won't make him an Oscar favorite, but it should -- at least until the TV awards come along -- prevent people from calling Gary Oldman a runaway front-runner. (For once, my instincts were correct: the critics don't want much to do with that prosthetics-and-imitation performance.)

Okri wrote:I'll also admit to being wrong about Oldman. I thought he'd win at least one of these awards. Now watch National Society go for him :D


Hate to bring up images for example. But just to scrap past time, here's my exact thoughts on the 'Best Actor' matter...

Image

User avatar
ThePianist
Graduate
Posts: 168
Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2017 2:54 am

Re: LA Winners

Postby ThePianist » Sun Dec 03, 2017 7:28 pm

Past NY+LA winners:

2010 - Colin Firth, King's Speech
2008 - Sean Penn, Milk
2007 - Daniel Day-Lewis, There Will be Blood
2006 - Forest Whitaker, Last King of Scotland (tied LA w/Borat)
2003 - Bill Murray, Lost in Translation
2002 - Daniel Day-Lewis, Gangs of New York (tied LA w/Nicholson)
1996 - Geoffrey Rush, Shine
1995 - Nicolas Cage, Leaving Las Vegas
1989 - Daniel Day-Lewis, My Left Foot
1987 - Jack Nicholson, Ironweed+Witches of Eastwick
1986 - Bob Hoskins, Mona Lisa
1983 - Robert Duvall, Tender Mercies
1982 - Ben Kingsley, Gandhi
1981 - Burt Lancaster, Atlantic City
1980 - Robert de Niro, Raging Bull
1979 - Dustin Hoffman, Kramer vs. Kramer
1978 - Jon Voight, Coming Home
1976 - Robert de Niro, Taxi Driver

Okri
Tenured
Posts: 2609
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:28 pm
Location: Edmonton, AB

Re: LA Winners

Postby Okri » Sun Dec 03, 2017 7:14 pm

Mister Tee wrote:So, Laurie Metcalf repeats her NBR win. I'd honestly thought, if either of the two had a chance to run away with it, it was Janney. But, early days.


When we speak about the echo chamber, we often just limit it to buzz/hype surrounding the Oscar season. But with every prize having a show that appears somewhere, we have a lot of opportunities to see people win awards. And Janney's won a lot of them - 7 emmys in the 21st Century. Meanwhile, Metcalf's emmys predate Saoirse Ronan*. Janney's a broader role and scene stealing type performance. If you're thinking of critics as advocacy, Metcalf feels like she needs it more.

*Her third emmy comes six months after Ronan was born, but a line's a line.

I'll also admit to being wrong about Oldman. I thought he'd win at least one of these awards. Now watch National Society go for him :D


Return to “90th Predictions and Precursors”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest