Monday, November 28, 2005

If I Were an Oscar Strategist...

...I'd be planning a full-blown profile raising strategy for my supporting actor. And I'd be doing it RIGHT. NOW. Before all the Christmas films open and suck up all the media attention. During the Geisha blast (since there's no direct competition.) Because, right now this category is just hopelessly even. Someone needs to get a headstart soon or that particular race will turn into a Best Picture only category or a flat popularity contest --by way of default voting habits. In no other category is the race as blurry.

(could get a boost from "career tribute" sentimentality or "we're sorry about [insert snub here]...")
Sutherland, Plummer, Dillon, Jenkins, Giamatti, Langella

(could get a boost from general AMPAS popularity)
Clooney, Rush, Hurt, Hoskins

(will get a boost if their film makes a significant overall impact)
guys from... Munich, The New World, Crash, The Producers, and Syriana

New Oscar Predictions in all major categories will arrive in a couple of days. Supporting Actor I deliver to you early. Enjoy.


adam k. said...

Donald Sutherland!? But he had absolutely nothing to do. I'd think Clooney's chances were better than his any day. Also, why has Jake fallen into red territory? Is this from your viewing the film? What's wrong with it? Is it too much of a lead? Is the film bad? It's been PAINFUL to think about this movie the whole time you've been sitting on your reaction. This was supposed to be the big A+ film of the year.


i will post a grade tonight. It really wasn't intentional torture. just holiday chaos.

Paul C. said...

If New Line actually gets behind A HISTORY OF VIOLENCE (and really, they should), another possible career-tribute/former snub nominee could be Ed Harris. The guy's been great for years, doesn't have an Oscar despite several nominations, and while Hurt's role is more showy, Harris has more screen time. And let's face it, this isn't the supporting actress category or anything.

Anonymous said...

Agreement that this is a hellishly difficult category to predict. Though Leading Actress still has a bit of room for manoeuvre, this one is pretty much Vacancy Central.

I agree that Hopkins is looking fairly comfortable for a nomination at this stage (though mindful that Dennis Quaid was considered a likely winner at this point not so long ago, and we all know what happened there!)

I'm rooting for Dillon, and I think he got enough early buzz to sneak in. He's my winner at this point.


Anonymous said...

...and by "my winner", I don't mean "my prediction"; he hasn't a chance in hell of winning! Merely that he's my pick of the Supporting Actor Class of 2006 thus far.


Anonymous said...

...and by Hopkins, I mean Hoskins.

I clearly need coffee.


Anonymous said...

I highly doubt Harris would get nominated over Hurt. I like people out there stubbornly sticking by Hurt, even if I can't bring myself to do it.

While I consider Donald Sutherland to be 21st greatest actor of all-time (yes, I have such a list), I'm somewhat doubtful he'd get nominated unless P&P goes over really big and there's a huge 'career' push. They've ignored him for brilliant work before...not so sure they'd go for this.

Though I'm starting to think Giamatti is looking solid in all this "all-over-the-placeness" that is this category.

If nominated, I think Clooney is the likely winner. Though he could still miss the nod.
Damn this category is kooky. The leading categories (and to a lesser extent Supporting Actress) seem to all have a few likely nominees and a few plausible spoilers.

Also can't wait to see Nat's review/grade of Brokeback!

Anonymous said...

And I bet Beach gets a SAG nod but misses at AMPAS.

I'd have more faith in Dillon if it weren't for the fact that Cheadle is so much more respected in the business and Howard (who really gives the film's best turn IMO) is having a fantastic year. Not to mention the fact that Matt's off shooting a movie and not on the campaign trail.

I currently think...
-Plummer (only because I've been predicting him all year and don't want to stop now)

Anonymous said...

I'm not sure about Dillon.

What about Terrence Howard? If anyone were to be nominated from "Crash" I'd suspect it'd be him given the year he's had.

Anonymous said...

Oy..I'm completely lost on Supporting Actor, too. Just look at my NBR predix. Alexander Siddig? That's a 90% bias guess. No William Hurt? Now that's 100% bias. I hope Bob Hoskins has something to show for being the only true contender at this point, otherwise I might throw a fit.

Hmm...I never thought about Donald Sutherland...

Anonymous said...

i'd rather compare dillon's situation to quaid's

my picks are:
hoskins (LOCK)
giamatti (near LOCK)
howard (very POSSIBLE)
rush (very POSSIBLE)
and the last spot is between both Focus' actors-Sutherland and Gyllenhaal

adam k. said...

Shouldn't Clooney be considered kind of a good bet considering he's one of like three people who can actually be singled out as "THAT guy! we should nominate him". Plus he almost went lead. And he's George Clooney with a baity role. It just seems weird that he's even lower on Nat's supporting chart than in leading. I'd predict him at this point. I think he, Hoskins, Giammati and Gyllenhaal are good bets simply because of stardom/past snubs/prominent roles in their films. Those things are important. The last spot will probably go to whoever emerges as the critical favorite of the category.

John T said...

I think Clooney's in (he'll have the Globe win-they love their movie stars), as is Hoskins (frontrunner for the nod, at least), Rush (they love him-it'd be nod number four), Dillon (I'm going with him as well, though it could just as easily be Cheadle or Howard) in a comeback, and finally, I'm also going with Sutherland (though I'd like to say Gyllenhaal), as this is a weak year, and he's worked with a large amount of this branch.

George Clooney (Syriana)
Matt Dillon (Crash)
Bob Hoskins (Mrs. Henderson Presents)
Geoffrey Rush (Munich)
Donald Sutherland (Pride and Prejudice)
As for the winner, in this weak year, it'd be important to look at past trends.

1995: Hip, much ballyhooed film (Dillon)
1996: A new star! (No one)
1997: Surprisingly dramatic (Dillon)
1998: Legend (Sutherland)
1999: Legend (Sutherland)
2000: Hot newcomer (No one)
2001: Character Actor Made Good (Hoskins)
2002: Character Actor Made Good (Hoskins)
2003: Director/Actor (Clooney)
2004: Legend (Sutherland)

So, if the math is right, it'd be between Dillon and Sutherland, though I'd have to say that Clooney could also take it, as he is a star.

adam k. said...

I could see Clooney being nommed (but losing) for GN&GL but then winning for Syriana.

Joe R. said...

Wait, somebody help me out here (and I'm honestly asking because I haven't read Syriana reviews): has Clooney been singled out for special commendation in the reviews for Syriana? Like, above and beyond the rest of the cast?
Or is the groundswell for Clooney more of a movie-star-slums-it-in-Supporting kind of thing?

adam k. said...

I think it's the baitiness of the role. The weight gain, etc. That will get anyone talking.

Glenn Dunks said...

He's the film's biggest star.

And, Gerry, I too have been predicting Plummer all year so I feel bad dropping his now.

I don't think Sutherland will get it. He doesn't do anything! But then, I just don't like Donald Sutherland.

Giamatti I just... unless he gets some big precursers, I don't see it happening.

I'm loosing faith in Dillon.

This category is extremely odd. At the moment I am predicting:

Gary Beach
Matt Dillon
Bob Hoskins
Christopher Plummer
Geoffrey Rush

It still saddens me to see people hating on my man Geoffrey. Aussie Legend, pure and simple. But I'm biased.


Anonymous said...

What a great site » »