Deleted
Posts: 0
Sept 24, 2024 11:25:55 GMT -4
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 26, 2015 21:39:01 GMT -4
And Johnny Depp won the SAG the year Sean Penn won the Oscar for Mystic River. Keaton could still pull it off.
|
|
thneed
Landed Gentry
Posts: 816
Jun 19, 2006 0:42:40 GMT -4
|
Post by thneed on Jan 26, 2015 22:50:02 GMT -4
It's a contest between established A-list career actor who starred in some of the most popular movies ever finally giving an arty performance in an arty movie, and playing an actor (Hollywood loves movies about itself) vs. someone changing his body and playing someone with an illness, plus playing a real person the Academy admires. Those are both the kinds of performances that win.
Someone could look at past winners and nominees and work out a points system. Real person (+2, add an extra point if they're particularly admirable), suffers horribly (+3), does something gimmicky like act in real time or play multiple characters (+4), big monologue (+5), is in an action movie or comedy (-100).
|
|
fabrichnova
Lady in Waiting
Posts: 467
Apr 23, 2006 22:27:32 GMT -4
|
Post by fabrichnova on Jan 27, 2015 2:16:40 GMT -4
Isn't Best Actor typically an older man's prize? There's got to be some stat out there about how the award typically goes to an actor over a certain age. I know Adrien Brody's win was the only time Best Actor has gone to someone under 30, and while Redmayne is older than Brody was when he won, the point is that the Oscar voters tend to favor giving the award to an older actor. I did a quick look at winners in the past decade, and I think most all of them were over 35 when they won.
Best Actress is usually where the hot young thing tends to have a stronger chance in a close race.
|
|
Karen
Blueblood
Posts: 1,122
Mar 10, 2005 10:32:09 GMT -4
|
Post by Karen on Jan 27, 2015 3:45:09 GMT -4
Isn't Best Actor typically an older man's prize? There's got to be some stat out there about how the award typically goes to an actor over a certain age. I know Adrien Brody's win was the only time Best Actor has gone to someone under 30, and while Redmayne is older than Brody was when he won, the point is that the Oscar voters tend to favor giving the award to an older actor. I did a quick look at winners in the past decade, and I think most all of them were over 35 when they won. Best Actress is usually where the hot young thing tends to have a stronger chance in a close race. The average age of Best Actor winners is 44. Keaton is 63 and would be the 2nd oldest winner, Redmayne is 33 and would be the 8th youngest. I don't know if it helps Redmayne that this year the other acting categories will probably be won by 45+ veterans and he's the only newcomer, unlike in most years where the Actress categories have at least one non-veteran, or whether the Academy will just do whatever it wants without caring about statistics or age, like when five previous winners were nominated in Supporting Actor. I don't have strong feelings about any of the nominated movies or performances this year (beyond being glad that Cumberbatch isn't fighting for the win), so I'm just happy that Actor is so exciting between Keaton/Redmayne/Cooper this late in the race. Any of them could win. Keaton has the comeback and PGA/SAG-winning movie; Redmayne has SAG/Drama Globe/probably Bafta and the biopic transformation; Cooper is an A-lister with three nominations in a row and an absolutely massive movie.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Sept 24, 2024 11:25:55 GMT -4
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 27, 2015 10:38:56 GMT -4
I've decided to ignore the Oscar race this year from now on. It's not that the nominated films are bad but I feel that so many great films and performances were ignored this year, that it has become the blandest competition ever. And that is also due to the lack of diversity, I'll stand by that. It will make complete sense that the baitiest roles will win lead actor/actress (Redmayne and Moore).
|
|
|
Post by Mugsy on Jan 29, 2015 15:36:58 GMT -4
I've said it before - I don't see why age, previous performances, other nominees, etc. have relevance. Votes should be based on what the voter thinks is the best performance by a male in a leading role that year. Nothing else. And even then, it's obviously subjective, since how do you define "best"? It's more like the voter's favourite among the nominees, which is fine then, but all those other factors mentioned above shouldn't matter. Was Keaton's performance your favourite? Then vote for him. Or was it Redmayne's, or Cooper's or whoever? That's what votes should be based on, never mind how old the actors are or if they'll ever have a chance of being nominated again or if they already have a dozen awards.
And why all the anti-Cumberbatch comments? I thought he was a darling around here, what did he do to become "anyone but Cumberbatch" so quickly?
|
|
|
Post by canuckcutie on Jan 29, 2015 22:33:21 GMT -4
I think best actor oscar will be the trickiest to call. It could be keaton being rewarded for coming back after drifting into exile, it could be the upstart Brit Redmayne or Bradley Cooper could be dark horse candidate. Lets face it, it's never just about the actual performance. So many other factors come into play - is the person well liked, have they been nominated before, is Harvey pushing the movie hard, does someone need to be rewarded for not winning before?
I don't mind cumberbatch. I saw The Imitation Game last weekend and thought he was perfectly fine in it. I think it seems to be obvious he was hustling hard for the nom which has rubbed some the wrong way. I really don't think he or Carrell are in the running for the win though.
|
|
|
Post by Mutagen on Jan 30, 2015 8:29:47 GMT -4
Personally, I think Cumberbatch is a little overexposed at the moment... kind of like that year when Chris Rock made fun of Jude Law being in like 25 movies.
|
|
jmart
Lady in Waiting
Posts: 236
Apr 30, 2013 10:31:38 GMT -4
|
Post by jmart on Jan 30, 2015 10:26:17 GMT -4
I am a huge Cumberbatch fan, but I hope Keaton wins. I thought he was amazing and loved Birdman. I went to see The Theory of Everything and didn't end up liking it as much as I thought I would, but thought Eddie did a good job.
|
|
technicolor
Lady in Waiting
Posts: 337
Nov 22, 2010 9:41:42 GMT -4
|
Post by technicolor on Jan 30, 2015 14:44:00 GMT -4
I think not being a frontrunner for the Oscar and doing work that keeps him away from too much campaigning is a blessing in disguise for Cumberbatch at this point. He has 3 million other projects coming out or in the making anyway (hey, he's ambitious and wants to strike while the iron is hot. Fair enough.), being everywhere for the awards season would have been even more overkill.
|
|