SAG Nominations and Predictions

Sabin
Laureate
Posts: 7496
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 12:52 am
Contact:

Re: SAG Nominations and Predictions

Postby Sabin » Thu Dec 14, 2017 8:11 pm

Cool.
"If you are marching with white nationalists, you are by definition not a very nice person. If Malala Yousafzai had taken part in that rally, you'd have to say 'Okay, I guess Malala sucks now.'" ~ John Oliver

Eenusch
Graduate
Posts: 76
Joined: Fri Sep 20, 2013 1:21 am

Re: SAG Nominations and Predictions

Postby Eenusch » Thu Dec 14, 2017 7:53 pm

The decision doesn't mean that the broadcast won't include men onstage at all, as video clips from the film ensemble category might be introduced by its nominated male actors. And of course, the male winners will take the stage.


Well, how generous of SAG to allow this. Question - is this virtue signalling stunt eligible for the Best Stunt Award?

Big Magilla
Site Admin
Posts: 15836
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:22 pm
Location: Jersey Shore

Re: SAG Nominations and Predictions

Postby Big Magilla » Thu Dec 14, 2017 4:35 am

Just learned that all the presenters at the ceremony will be women.

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/ ... rs-1067155
“‎Life is a shipwreck, but we must not forget to sing in the lifeboats.” - Voltaire

Big Magilla
Site Admin
Posts: 15836
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:22 pm
Location: Jersey Shore

Re: SAG Nominations and Predictions

Postby Big Magilla » Thu Dec 14, 2017 4:31 am

One good note. The SAG awards will be presented on January 21, 2018, two days before the Oscar nominations are announced, so the odd nominees out will not have to sit there with a forced smile knowing they haven't got a chance at winning the big prize as is usually the case.
“‎Life is a shipwreck, but we must not forget to sing in the lifeboats.” - Voltaire

Sabin
Laureate
Posts: 7496
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 12:52 am
Contact:

Re: SAG Nominations and Predictions

Postby Sabin » Wed Dec 13, 2017 11:58 pm

OscarGuy wrote
My call right now: Get Out wins Best Picture at the Oscars. If it picks up the Kaluuya nomination and a Film Editing nod, I think the Academy could really get behind it. It's not that polarizing, which helped several others win recently.

That's been my call for a little bit now. I think it's a very good bet to win the SAG Ensemble nomination. Everyone should read Owen Gleiberman's end of the year piece. He's right. 'Get Out' has been in the zeitgeist for a year now. Not just in Starbucks, like Jeffrey Wells says. People fucking love it and care about it. It's like 'The Silence of the Lambs.' It's hanging in there. Nominations for Picture and Original Screenplay are all but ensured, but if it grabs nominations for Peele for Best Director and Kaluuya for Best Actor, yeah, it's a done deal. However, if Jordan Peele misses out on Best Director...holy shit, the outcry we saw about Ben Affleck will seem tame by comparison.

However, there's one film that I think is edging up very slowly and it has just as many passionate fans as 'Get Out' and that's 'Lady Bird.' It's easily the most universally adored film of the year. It's not as scary as 'Get Out' and in its own way it's just as revelatory a choice for Best Picture for simply being about an unexceptional young girl's coming of age.
"If you are marching with white nationalists, you are by definition not a very nice person. If Malala Yousafzai had taken part in that rally, you'd have to say 'Okay, I guess Malala sucks now.'" ~ John Oliver

User avatar
OscarGuy
Site Admin
Posts: 12578
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 12:22 am
Location: Springfield, MO
Contact:

Re: SAG Nominations and Predictions

Postby OscarGuy » Wed Dec 13, 2017 11:50 pm

My call right now: Get Out wins Best Picture at the Oscars. If it picks up the Kaluuya nomination and a Film Editing nod, I think the Academy could really get behind it. It's not that polarizing, which helped several others win recently.
Wesley Lovell
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." - Benjamin Franklin

Big Magilla
Site Admin
Posts: 15836
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:22 pm
Location: Jersey Shore

Re: SAG Nominations and Predictions

Postby Big Magilla » Wed Dec 13, 2017 10:56 pm

I can understand how screenings would be difficult, if not impossible, for those nominators outside of screening areas to get to them, but if their only access to late-year films is screeners, one would think that those nominators would wait until they received and had a chance to view screeners of high-profile releases like The Post and Phantom Thread before they cast their ballots. If they saw them and failed to vote for them, that would obviously be an indication that the two films are in trouble, but as it stands we don't have a clear picture.

All the Money in the World was screened late for the Globes and was not expected to factor into the SAG nominations. The Greatest Showman was all but abandoned by Fox, but they did screen it for Globes at the last minute. Neither of these films were screened early enough for critics, either, although neither seems the kind of film that would win critics' awards anyway. Whether their popularity at the Globes will translate to recognition by AMPAS is unknown.

I don't hold much stock in the concern that a non-SAG cast nomination means doom, but at this point I think that the winner will actually be one of those films that is so nominated, simply because it is a film that is well-liked by almost everyone, and if it doesn't make the cut with first place ballots alone, it should place high on subsequent ballots. That film is Lady Bird.
“‎Life is a shipwreck, but we must not forget to sing in the lifeboats.” - Voltaire

The Original BJ
Emeritus
Posts: 4255
Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2003 8:49 pm

Re: SAG Nominations and Predictions

Postby The Original BJ » Wed Dec 13, 2017 9:19 pm

Sabin wrote:Right, but did they get the screeners? Screeners really rule the day with these people.


The Post and Phantom Thread, yes. (All the Money in the World and The Greatest Showman, no.)

User avatar
flipp525
Laureate
Posts: 5862
Joined: Thu Jan 09, 2003 7:44 am

Re: SAG Nominations and Predictions

Postby flipp525 » Wed Dec 13, 2017 9:13 pm

So, I guess the Mary J. Blige thing is definitely happening now? I feel compelled to watch Mudbound again to see if I might have missed something in her performance, but my first impression is that I did not.

I managed to catch The Big Sick on my flight back from London last night (I also met Maggie Smith at the Ivy in London, but more on that elsewhere! We talked about California Suite.) I thought Hunter was excellent and, honestly, I had not gone into the film that positively for some reason, maybe after the Globe snub. I think she gives a great performance that is kind of low-key, but affecting with, I think, two excellent scenes: dealing with the heckler at the comedy show and then her scene outside the hospital room with Kumail after Emily has woken up. She would be a worthy nominee in a relatively small bench.

With Janney and Metcalf locked in and Chau very prominently poised to be recognized, I’d say that the remaining slots are a slug between Blige, Spencer, Hunter, (still) Haddish and, to a lesser degree, Lesley Manville.

A major dark horse would be a complete non-factored-in candidate like an early-talked-about Alison Williams or Catherine Keener. Especially if Get Out exceeds expectations.

I think this category is amorphous enough in the lower tier to yield a shocker come Oscar nomination morning.*

*When is the last time something like that happened? A totally out-of-nowhere citation. Sort of like - wait, would Sylvia Miles in Midnight Cowboy qualify?
Last edited by flipp525 on Wed Dec 13, 2017 9:22 pm, edited 5 times in total.
"The mantle of spinsterhood was definitely in her shoulders. She was twenty five and looked it."

-Gone With the Wind by Margaret Mitchell

User avatar
rolotomasi99
Associate
Posts: 1943
Joined: Wed Jan 29, 2003 4:13 pm
Location: n/a
Contact:

Re: SAG Nominations and Predictions

Postby rolotomasi99 » Wed Dec 13, 2017 9:12 pm

Like most people here these nominations threw me for a loop. Some years SAG's choices match closely with the Academy's, and other years they are way off. Last year they only three SAG nominees missed an Oscar nomination, but the year before there was a discrepancy of seven. So now we wait and see what type of carry over there will be. I think Dench, Washington, and Carrell are the most vulnerable, with Streep, Day-Lewis, and Hammer waiting in the wings to replace them. Harrelson, Chau, Blige, and maybe Hunter could also be replaced by Stulhberg, Spencer, and Manville.

As for the ensemble nominees, I keep thinking about the Braveheart stat (no Best Picture winner has missed an ensemble nomination except Gibson's movie). If this is true (and LA LA LAND was unable to break the streak) then no matter what else happens the rest of the year, our eventual Best Picture winner has to be one of these five films:
LADY BIRD
GET OUT
THREE BILLBOARDS OUTSIDE EBBING, MO
MUDBOUND
THE BIG SICK

Certainly not where I thought we would be just a few weeks ago, but this has been one of the wackier Oscar years in a while.

On the one hand, I love a wide open race...on the other, I hate that so many of my favorites were the ones snubbed. :?
"When it comes to the subject of torture, I trust a woman who was married to James Cameron for three years."
-- Amy Poehler in praise of Zero Dark Thirty director Kathryn Bigelow

Sabin
Laureate
Posts: 7496
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 12:52 am
Contact:

Re: SAG Nominations and Predictions

Postby Sabin » Wed Dec 13, 2017 9:08 pm

Right, but did they get the screeners? Screeners really rule the day with these people.
"If you are marching with white nationalists, you are by definition not a very nice person. If Malala Yousafzai had taken part in that rally, you'd have to say 'Okay, I guess Malala sucks now.'" ~ John Oliver

The Original BJ
Emeritus
Posts: 4255
Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2003 8:49 pm

Re: SAG Nominations and Predictions

Postby The Original BJ » Wed Dec 13, 2017 9:07 pm

anonymous1980 wrote:
Big Magilla wrote:As to the nominations themselves, I have no axe to grind given the lack of nominations for either The Post or Phantom Thread, but I do think it lowers the credibility of the awards if those two high-profile films were provided the nominators on screeners and they couldn't or wouldn't take the time to view them.


Actually, I just read reports that The Post and Phantom Thread were indeed screened for SAG nominating committee members so these are actual snubs.


I think we have to clarify what "screened for SAG nominating members" actually means, though. (And I'm just basing this off reports from friends who have served on the nominating committee over the years. Mister Tee might even be able to attest firsthand, since I believe his wife was on the committee one year).

Yes, those two movies screened for the nominating committee. But they weren't even finished until the week of Thanksgiving, which meant that nominators had TWO WEEKS to see those films before voting. (And one of those weeks included a major holiday that for many people involved travel.)

But this deserves even more clarification, as many folks likely had LESS than two weeks to see the films. Because as soon as the movies were finished, they started screenings, mostly in major markets (LA/NY/London.) But plenty of SAG-AFTRA members don't live in those cities -- if you're in, say, Atlanta (which given the amount of film/tv that shoots there, you might be), you might not have as many opportunities to attend screenings. And even in LA, no one puts a gun to your head to force you to go to a screening -- if you're really busy that week, you might miss the screening!

To mitigate, everyone gets sent DVD screeners...however, I can guarantee you those probably took a few days to make and ship out, which means many voters might have only had ONE WEEK to see those movies before they turned in ballots, during a period when they're already being inundated with screeners, and might have fallen behind on earlier releases. I know everyone on this board would probably think -- well, I'd make SURE to see the new Spielberg and PTA before voting, but trust me, many people in Hollywood just don't take these things as seriously as you want them to. If they don't have time to get to it, they don't get to it.

It's pretty easy to see why this schedule favors films like The Big Sick and Get Out -- which have just been out for so long, everyone has had a chance to see them -- and often hurts the late releases.

anonymous1980
Laureate
Posts: 5271
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 10:03 pm
Location: Manila
Contact:

Re: SAG Nominations and Predictions

Postby anonymous1980 » Wed Dec 13, 2017 8:33 pm

Big Magilla wrote:As to the nominations themselves, I have no axe to grind given the lack of nominations for either The Post or Phantom Thread, but I do think it lowers the credibility of the awards if those two high-profile films were provided the nominators on screeners and they couldn't or wouldn't take the time to view them.


Actually, I just read reports that The Post and Phantom Thread were indeed screened for SAG nominating committee members so these are actual snubs.

Big Magilla
Site Admin
Posts: 15836
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:22 pm
Location: Jersey Shore

Re: SAG Nominations and Predictions

Postby Big Magilla » Wed Dec 13, 2017 5:40 pm

The Original BJ wrote:OH ALSO — did you guys watch the announcement live? That was possibly the most obnoxious award nomination announcement I’ve ever seen. Just read the damn nominees, it’s not about you!

Yes, and I agree.

I had forgotten about the SAG nominations being announced today, thought I had missed them at 9:40 EST, but then discovered that they were being streamed on YouTube beginning with the stunt nominations at 9:50 AM, but that never happened. Then when I went to stream the brunt of the nominations at 10 AM, it still wasn't working so I caught it on TNT. It was bad enough when the one announcer started showing off, but when the other one joined in and the two continued for the remainder of the ten minute presentation to see which one could outdo the other, it was torture to sit through. Who cares who the announcers "know", who they "love", and who they apparently neither "know" or "love" because they have no "cute" remark to make about that person.

This year they have an actual host in Kristen Bell. I hope that means their treacly opening "I am so-and-so and I'm an actor" opening will be put to a long overdue rest, but I doubt it.

As to the nominations themselves, I have no axe to grind given the lack of nominations for either The Post or Phantom Thread, but I do think it lowers the credibility of the awards if those two high-profile films were provided the nominators on screeners and they couldn't or wouldn't take the time to view them.
“‎Life is a shipwreck, but we must not forget to sing in the lifeboats.” - Voltaire

Mister Tee
Laureate
Posts: 6597
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 2:57 pm
Location: NYC
Contact:

Re: SAG Nominations and Predictions

Postby Mister Tee » Wed Dec 13, 2017 5:27 pm

The Original BJ wrote:OH ALSO — did you guys watch the announcement live? That was possibly the most obnoxious award nomination announcement I’ve ever seen. Just read the damn nominees, it’s not about you!

1000% agree. Anyone who complains about Seth McFarlane's nominations read should be forced to sit through this for eternity. (It was especially annoying because I had it DVR-ed, and it was going to run out before they got to the top nominations -- they'd have finished well inside the time limit easily if they hadn't done all that me-me-me.)


Return to “90th Predictions and Precursors”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest