I'm going to go through each category, tell you who has been nominated and won for what, give a context for what that means, and order the nominees from most to least likely to win on Oscar night. That doesn't mean I'll be right, but it does mean I'll be informed. Wish me luck.
Previously:
Nomination Reaction
Documentary, Animated, and Live-Action Short
Documentary Feature
Animated Feature
Foreign Film
Visual Effects
Sound Mixing and Sound Editing
Makeup & Hairstyling
Costume Design
Score and Song
Production Design
Cinematography
Film Editing
Adapted Screenplay
Original Screenplay
Supporting Actress
Supporting Actor
Lead Actress
Lead Actor
Director
Best Picture
Glossary:
Eddie - American Cinema Editors Award
PGA - Producers Guild of America Award
BAFTA - British Academy of Film and Television Arts Awards
Golden Globe - Presented by the Hollywood Foreign Press Association Award
ACS - American Cinematographer Society Award
SAG - Screen Actors Guild Award
DGA - Director's Guild of America
Oscar History
Best Picture is a broad category. It's the only category that shouldn't be voted on in a vacuum. For instance, Sound Editing, is voted on based on the Sound Editing in a film. The Production Design should have nothing to do with how Sound Editing is decided. The Best Picture award should consider both of those and more. The aim of the Best Picture award is essentially to find what movie balances everything the best. That means it's smart to look at a lot of factors. Over the years, there's been four categories (or category groups) that are the greatest indicator of an Oscar winner: Directing, Writing, Acting, and Editing. No other category is close to those. Basically, the breakdown goes like this.
The best picture winner has also been nominated for...
...Direction 48 times in the last 50 years. The only exceptions are Argo in 2012 (which was a widely criticized snub) and Driving Miss Daisy in 1989.
...Acting 46 times in the last 50 years. The only exceptions are Slumdog Millionaire (2008), The Return of the King (2003), Braveheart (1995), and The Last Emperor (1987).
...Writing 48 of the last 50 years. The only exceptions are Titanic (1997) - shocking, I know - and The Sound of Music (1965).
...Editing 45 of the last 50 years. The only exceptions are Birdman (2014) - which is just lazy voting, Ordinary People (1980), Annie Hall (1977), The Godfather Part II (1974) and A Man for All Seasons (1966).
If I'm to rank the importance of each, I'd pick screenplay as the most important. With 10 spots to fill between Original and Adapted, any Best Picture winner should make the cut. Direction is right up there, especially considering that Ben Affleck had no business not making the cut that in 2012, making it more like 49 of the last 50 years. Acting is probably next. The only reason some actor doesn't get nominated in a Best Picture winner is if the movie is more about the spectacle. Otherwise, there's 20 slots to fill between lead and supporting. There should be plenty of room. Editing is important but it doesn't seem as vital. The numbers don't lie though. They all matter in this discussion.
In the 50 years I went back, 37 of the Oscar winners for Best Picture were nominated in all four of those category groups. Here's the important part, no movie has won without a nomination in three of the four categories. None. You'd think a surprise winner like Braveheart or Crash would've failed to meet that threshold, but they didn't.
Let's see how this year's nominees break down:
The Big Short (Directing, Acting, Screenplay, Editing)
Bridge of Spies (Acting, Screenplay)
Brooklyn (Acting, Screenplay)
Mad Max: Fury Road (Directing, Editing)
The Martian (Acting, Screenplay)
The Revenant (Directing, Acting, Editing)
Room (Directing, Acting, Screenplay)
Spotlight (Directing, Acting, Screenplay, Editing)
That thins the field out quickly. Bridge of Spies, Brooklyn, Mad Max: Fury Road, and The Martian are out. I'd say Fury Road is the only one with any hope at all, going on the strengths of all its other nominations and the fact that if a movie like that has stayed in the race this long, it's already bucking trends.
The Big Short and Spotlight are the only two movies with all four category groups, which is no surprise, since they've been looked at as the front runners for long stretches of the award season. It's interesting that Room is only missing the editing nomination. As I said, I think editing is the least valuable of the four. Room may have more strength than it seems to at first glance. The lack of screenplay nomination for The Revenant isn't a fluke. No one nominated the screenplay (WGA, BAFTA, Golden Globes). It's not a kiss of death, but that intensifies the importance of the directing and acting.
Precursor Awards
It's also important to look outside the Oscars for guidance. There are dozens of guilds, critic groups, and random film groups handing out awards leading up to the Oscars. I've picked 7 groups with awards that either correspond closely with the Best Picture winner or are broad enough to be worth discussing. Here's the credentials of each:BAFTA for Best Film: 18 of the last 20 Best Picture winners were also nominated for this award. The only two to miss the cut were Million Dollar Baby (2004), which broke out late in the season, and Braveheart (1995). They've only matched winners 11 out of 20 times. Lately they've been more accurate. Before last year, when they picked Boyhood instead of Birdman, they'd picked the last 6 Oscar winners.
Golden Globe for Best Film, Drama & Comedy/Musical: The Golden Globes aren't very helpful when looking at their winners. Between the Drama and Comedy/Musical category, they've only picked the Oscar winner 12 time in 20 years. They're more useful for seeing where public favor is right as the Oscar nominations are coming out. Their real value is in the nominations. The Oscar Winner has been nominated for a Golden Globe 19 times in the last 20 years. The one exception was Crash in 2005 – Good on them.
Producers Guild of America Award for Best Film: The PGA is by far the best indicator of the Oscar winner. The last time they didn't at least nominate the Oscar winner was Braveheart in 1995. Better yet, the Oscar winner for Best Picture also won the PGA the last 8 years. This is probably because the PGA is the only other group to vote with a weighted ballot like the Oscars do.
Screen Actors Guild Award for Ensemble in a Film: Like the PGA, the last time the SAG didn't even nominate the Best Picture winner was Braveheart in 1995. The winners have only matched 10 times in the last 20 years, which makes sense, since every Best Picture winner isn't really the best ensemble.
Directors Guild of America Award for Best Director: Over the last 20 years, the DGA has the best track record of any group. It's nominated the Oscar winner every year. Better yet, the DGA winner has matched the Oscar winner 15 times, the best record in that time frame that I could find.
American Cinema Editors Award for Editing, Drama & Comedy/Musical: Another group who has been 20 for 20 over the last two decades nominating the Oscar winner. It helps that it has two awards, like the Golden Globes (so 10 nominees rather than 5). They've matched the Oscar winner a dozen times in those two decades, but it's on a cold streak lately.
American Society of Cinematographers Award for Cinematography in a Film: This is the award that is least indicative of what movie will win the Oscar. They've nominated the Best Picture winner 14 out of 20 times and matched winners 6 of those times. It's the next most important precursor I could find though, and I liked the sound of 7 more than 6.
I'll be getting into what each individual nomination or win means for this year's Oscar winners in a bit. Looking for a base line, this is what I found. In the 20 years that all of those awards go back, all the Best Picture winners won at least 1 of the 7 awards and were at least nominated for 4 of them.
So, how do things look among those 7 groups for this year's Best Picture nominees?
The Big Short: 6 nominations. 2 wins.
Bridge of Spies: 3 nominations. 0 wins.
Brooklyn: 1 nomination. 0 wins.
Mad Max: Fury Road: 5 nominations. 1 win.
The Martian: 3 nominations. 1 win.
The Revenant: 6 nominations. 4 wins.
Room: 1 nomination. 0 wins.
Spotlight: 5 nominations. 1 win.
Based on that, Bridge of Spies, Brooklyn, The Martian, and Room are all out. There's not enough broad support for them. The Revenant looks strong but beatable. The Big Short, Mad Max: Fury Road, and Spotlight all have a fighter's chance.
Other Considerations
This is the part where I remind you that numbers mean nothing, and there's still plenty of room for me to factor in arbitrary considerations. The odd thing about this year is how quiet everything has been. Last year, American Sniper jumped in late and made a ton of noise with a record-breaking weekend and overall box office performance. The Revenant is the movie that made the most late-season noise and it has certainly helped its award season haul. It's been dominating the guilds after doing unremarkably with the critics in the early rounds. There haven't been any big plays made by any of the nominees nor has any controversy arisen over any single nominee. No, the diversity issue has dominated the season which has looked more at what or who wasn't nominated. Fair or not, this group of Best Picture nominees have been lost in the discussion, making it hard to get a sense of how anyone feels about them compared to one another.
This is the murkiest best picture race in years. All the movies have big strikes against them. Room is too small. Bridge of Spies isn't adventurous enough. The Martian is too frivolous. Brooklyn is too quaint. Mad Max: Fury Road is an action movie and technically a sequel: double strike. The Big Short would be the first true comedy to win in years or decades depending on your definition. Spotlight seems to be lost in the shuffle. The Revenant is hurt by the unlikeliness of Oscar voters awarding Alejandro G. Inarritu two years in a row.
Then, there's always the consideration of the Oscar ballot itself. You see, it's a weighted ballot, meaning everyone ranks their 8 picks. If a movie doesn't have a majority on the first count, the ballots picking whatever movie came in last get redistributed using the second pick, and so on and so forth until one movie has a majority. If you ever feel like the Oscar winner is a compromise, you're kind of right. This method is more favorable for generally liked movies than ones that people run hot and cold on. For example, if Mad Max: Fury Road has a lot of 1st and 8th place votes it will be harder for it to win than if Spotlight has mostly 3rd and 4th place votes, even if Fury Road has more 1st place votes. In case you want to read more on how it works, this is the best site I could find about it.
OK, enough stalling. What are my picks?
Predictions
(From most to least likely to win)
12 Oscar nominations (including Directing, Acting, and Screenplay)BAFTA - Feature Film - Winner
Golden Globes - Drama Film - Winner
DGA - Direction - Winner
ASC - Cinematography - Winner
PGA - Feature Film - Nominee
Eddie - Drama Film Editing - Nominee
Pros: I've been hesitant to pick The Revenant. However, when I finally look at everything before me, it has the strongest argument for winning Best Picture. It has the most Oscar nominations of any movie. 13 of the last 20 Best Picture winners have had or tied for the most Oscar nominations in their years. It has the virtually required 3 out of 4 major nominations (Directing, Screenplay, and 2 Acting). No other movie can match The Revenant's collection of wins down the stretch. The DGA win in particular is a big plus.
Cons: I don't know how alarmed I should be by the lack of nomination for the screenplay. That's a very rare snub. The last time a movie that won without a screenplay nomination was Titanic. I'm not comfortable putting The Revenant at Titanic level (Leo connection or not). There's a gnawing feeling I have that the Academy won't award a second Inarritu movie in a row. It's nothing against Inarritu. The Academy has a habit of voting in turns a lot of the time (i.e. "Last year was Inarritu's turn. This year, it's someone else's."). That's only a hunch. The lack of the PGA win is concerning since their voting process is so similar to the Oscars' and the PGA are on such a hot streak lately (matching the Oscar winner since 2007 - the longest streak of any group). I have a feeling that this is the kind of movie that voters love or hate, so if it doesn't get enough to win on the first count of the ballots, its chances of winning go down.
The Big Short
5 Oscar nominations (including Directing, Acting, Screenplay, and Editing)
PGA - Feature Film - Winner
Eddie - Comedy Film Editing - Winner
BAFTA - Feature Film - Nominee
Golden Globes - Comedy Film - Nominee
DGA - Direction - Nominee
SAG - Ensemble - Nominee
Pros: That PGA win is huge. There's no underselling that. As I said, they have the longest streak going of any group out there. The PGA is the only other group that tallies votes in the way the Oscars do, which means, movies that are generally liked, like this one, do much better that ones that polarize the audience. While The Big Short doesn't have many nominations (5 total), it does have all the ones it needs (Directing, Acting, Screenplay, Editing). That's all The Departed (another Dicaprio movie - he's all over this) needed in 2006, which coincidentally, was the last time the PGA didn't predict the Oscar winner.
Cons: A SAG win would've sealed it in my mind. That would indicate broad support AND support within the largest branch of the Academy (the actors). Everything about this movie is relying on minimums. 5 nominations is the fewest any movie has won Best Picture with in at least two decades. The only movie to do it, The Departed, had far less competition. That lesser competition came in the form of another Inarritu movie (coincidences abound), Babel, which led the way with only 7 nominations that year. The closest parallel I could find for The Big Short vs. The Revenant is Million Dollar Baby - 7 nomination - beating The Aviator (another Leo movie) - 12 nominations. That's not even fair though because Million Dollar Baby got in the mix late whereas The Big Short has been positioning for an Oscar the whole season.
Spotlight
6 Oscar nominatiosn (including Directing, Acting, Screenplay, and Editing)
SAG - Ensemble - Winner
BAFTA - Feature Film - Nominee
Golden Globes - Drama Film - Nominee
PGA - Feature Film - Nominee
DGA - Direction - Nominee
Pros: I've been thinking of Spotlight as the true front runner for months. It's a great movie with a well-liked cast that won the SAG ensemble award. It's well-written and tonally balanced. Almost every group likes it enough to nominate it, which will help with the preferential ballot employed by the Oscars. While we'll never know the final results beyond who won, I'm certain that the more recounts there are of the ballot, the better Spotlight's odds are. Like The Big Short, it can overcome a low Oscar nomination count by having all the right nominations (Directing, Acting, Screenplay, and Editing - the big four). That SAG win is important in that the star power of The Big Short should've made it a lock (think, American Hustle in 2013). That Spotlight won instead could play in big in the hypothetical recounts.
Cons: Am I crazy to think that this needed a news cycle or two with Catholic leaders (bishops and the Pope) bashing it to think this could win? When I first heard about Spotlight, I assumed it would be this year's Selma, with stories about people questioning its accuracy and such. There's been a little of that, but it has mostly been an afterthought.
Similar to The Big Short, the last two movies to win Best Picture wish as few total nominations as Spotlight, The Departed in 2006 and Crash in 2005, had the benefit of less imposing front runners than The Revenant. Spotlight would be the first movie to win Best Picture based solely on the strength of a SAG win in the precursors. Even the divisive Crash had an Eddy award to go along with the SAG Ensemble award. It's not hopeless for Spotlight, but it's set up as being one of the quietest winners in years if it pulls it off.
Mad Max: Fury Road
10 Oscar nominations (including Directing and Editing)
Eddie - Drama Film Editing - Winner
Golden Globes - Drama Film - Nominee
PGA - Feature Film - Nominee
DGA - Direction - Nominee
ASC - Cinematography - Nominee
Pros: The 10 Oscars nominations is great. Any time a movie cracks double-digits, it's a contender. The Eddy win keeps it alive when looking at the minimum "requirements". This is the last movie that I can even entertain the idea of winning Best Picture. The return of George Miller to prominence is a great story that could drive some votes. People who love Fury Road, really love it so it's certain to get some 1st place votes on the ballot. If voters decide they are tired of Inarritu already (a real possibility with the way the Academy does things), they could put Fury Road right ahead of The Revenant on the ballot. Then, Spotight and The Big Short split their votes, allowing Fury Road to sneak in. That is the only scenario that will lead to a win. And it's a long shot.
Cons: Fury Road only has 2 of the big four nominees (Directing and Editing). Given the perceived split between it and The Revenant in the technical categories, I don't know where enough support will come from. The DGA loss hurts big. Any shot at a win for Best Picture centered on the George Miller redemption story. If the directors aren't even backing him, who's left?
The Martian
7 Oscar nominations (including Acting and Screenplay)
Golden Globes - Comedy Film - Winner
PGA - Feature Film - Nominee
Eddie - Drama Film Editing - Nominee
Pros: The screenplay nomination is pretty vital. The lack of directing nomination can be excused somewhat (just look at Argo in 2012). Random snubs can happen. And the editing nomination correlation to winning Best Picture I've always found a little arbitrary. This is a well-received, popular movie. In a just world, it would have a real shot at the Best Picture award.
Cons: I'm baffled that this couldn't even get a SAG Ensemble nomination considering how deep, talented, and well liked the cast is. That alone means not enough people are taking it seriously. With only an acting and a screenplay nod, it's under the "big four" nomination threshold of 3. It's under the guild and group nomination minimum of 4. It's only win came from sneaking in as a Comedy at the Golden Globes. Its greatest strength, the technical Oscar nominations, is eclipsed by two other nominees (The Revenant, Mad Max: Fury Road). There's no way.
Bridge Of Spies
6 Oscar nominations (including Acting and Screenplay)
BAFTA - Feature Film - Nominee
PGA - Feature Film - Nominee
ASC - Cinematography - Nominee
Pros: This is the Steven Spielberg, Tom Hanks, Cold War era kind of movie that speaks to the Oscar voting demographic.
Cons: The nomination count is pretty low and is missing the Directing and Editing nods. There's a lack of guild and group wins too.
Room
4 Oscar nominations (including Directing, Acting, and Screenplay)
Golden Globes - Drama Film - Nominee
Pros: Clearly, there's something about this that the Motion Picture Academy likes, since it pulled a directing nomination in a stacked field in addition to the expected nominations for Brie Larson and the screenplay.
Cons: Despite so big time category nominations, there's no sign that love for this movie goes any deeper than Brie Larson's performance, given the lack of nomination from the BAFTA, DGA, PGA,SAG, etc.
Brooklyn
3 Oscar nominations (including Acting and Screenplay)
PGA - Feature Film - Nominee
Pros: This is probably the most agreeable film in the field. It's a completely pleasant film with Saoirse Ronan at the center. Many other years, she'd be the front runner in the Lead Actress race.
Cons: There's no sign of larger support for it. It's an "end of the ballot" pick. It has the fewest Oscar nominations of any Best Picture nominees since Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close and The Tree of Life in 2011.
There you go. That's my thought process regarding this. All that's left now is waiting for Sunday to see how wrong or right I am.
No comments:
Post a Comment