Home Forums Movies Amy Adams – Always a filler? I don’t think so!

Amy Adams – Always a filler? I don’t think so!

CREATE A NEW TOPIC
CREATE A NEW POLL
Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 77 total)
Created
3 years ago
Last Reply
3 years ago
86
( +11 hidden )
replies
1616
views
25
users
8
5
5
  • Anonymous
    Joined:
    Jan 1st, 1970
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #185165

    I heard it to many times, that Adams is always just a filler-nominee and I disagree a lot.

    2005 – “Junebug” – She’s in Top 3 (probably 3rd) for sure, there is no way that Catherine Keener or Frances McDormand were closer to win than Adams.

    2008 – “Doubt” – People call her a filler because they don’t like her performance much. Viola Davis missed the Baftas, and Marisa Tomei missed the Sags. Taraji P. Henson was also not such a strong contender. – Adams did have all the main awards nominations except of the Critics Choice Awards, but no one cares about them anyways. I think she came runner-up to Cruz for the nomination, maybe third for the winning after Cruz and Davis. 

    2010 – “The Fighter” – The category complications for Hailee Steinfeld, and the weakest link who made it due passionate voters, made Adams a clearly 3rd all the way through.

    2012 – “The Master” – There is no way in hell that Jacki Weaver finished before Adams. She came clear 4th all the way through.

    2013 – “American Hustle” – The only time she finished 5th for the nomination, but for the winning she was probably in Top 3 due to the fact that she is a five-time nominee and everyone else won before. She probably finished before Streep and possibly Dench for the win.

    What do you think? I think the Adams haters just trying to make her look like some kind of filler-Lamy, who’s not overdue at all. I think she is…

    Reply
    manakamana
    Participant
    Joined:
    Jul 28th, 2011
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #185167

    I have to say I’ve always agreed with the camp that Amy Adams, since Junebug, has only gotten nominations on the coattails of a larger, more loved ensemble cast and Big Eyes last year only proved it further to me. I’ve always though it was weird that she gets a free pass for lazy name-check voting while people constantly bitch about Meryl’s nominations. Not to say that it doesn’t apply to her sometimes, too (moreso in the 90s with noms like One True Thing or Music of the Heart), but I think it’s arguably more applicable in this case. 

    ReplyCopy URL
    AMG
    Participant
    Joined:
    Sep 20th, 2012
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #185168

    American Hustle she was definitely either fourth or fifth to win, with Streep the only question mark that year. I did prefer Adams over Leo in a The Fighter though, and thought that she should have won that year.

    ReplyCopy URL
    GhostOrchid
    Participant
    Joined:
    Sep 27th, 2011
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #185169

    I’m so allergic to the word “filler”. Filler nods? Ending up in a top 5, when in every year there are hundreds of films released is quite an archievement.
    Do you really think Academy members go through their lists and think:
    “Oh, I have four actresses that I’ll nominate… but what to do with the fifth spot? Does Meryl or Amy have a film out? Yes? Okay then!”
    It’s true Meryl’s nomination totals are insane, but she’s an easy vote because most of the Academy members simply love and respect her. You need enough #1 votes to be nominated, not just #2 or #3 votes.
    Amy’s gorgeous and though most people think she only rides the cottail of a movie, that’s not right at all. The Academy does not HAVE to nominate a movie in several categories if they don’t want to.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Mrs. Doolittle
    Participant
    Joined:
    Jul 8th, 2012
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #185170

    She only deserved her nominations for Junebug and the Fighter. The rest of the nominations she had no business being nominated for. She did absolutely nothing noteworthy in the Master and Doubt, and she was awful and hammy in American Hustle. I am very glad the Academy wised up not to have her take another deserving spot at the Academy Awards this year for that dreadful Big Eyes film.

    ReplyCopy URL
    babypook
    Participant
    Joined:
    Nov 4th, 2010
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #185171

    Joplin…..

    ReplyCopy URL
    GhostOrchid
    Participant
    Joined:
    Sep 27th, 2011
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #185172

    Joplin…..

    Will that ever be getting made?

    ReplyCopy URL
    babypook
    Participant
    Joined:
    Nov 4th, 2010
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #185173

    This time, I think so Ghostie. I hope. If she can pull Joplin off, we could have a “winner” for Adams. Perhaps one she even deserves.

    ReplyCopy URL
    GhostOrchid
    Participant
    Joined:
    Sep 27th, 2011
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #185174

    Oh, I’m in the veeeeery small minority that thinks she’s better in Doubt than Viola Davis. (or the actual BSA winner that year)
    Really, bring it on!

    ReplyCopy URL
    AviChristiaans
    Participant
    Joined:
    Jul 26th, 2013
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #185175

    I’m so allergic to the word “filler”. Filler nods? Ending up in a top 5, when in every year there are hundreds of films released is quite an archievement.
    Do you really think Academy members go through their lists and think:
    “Oh, I have four actresses that I’ll nominate… but what to do with the fifth spot? Does Meryl or Amy have a film out? Yes? Okay then!”
    It’s true Meryl’s nomination totals are insane, but she’s an easy vote because most of the Academy members simply love and respect her. You need enough #1 votes to be nominated, not just #2 or #3 votes.
    Amy’s gorgeous and though most people think she only rides the cottail of a movie, that’s not right at all. [b]The Academy does not HAVE to nominate a movie in several categories if they don’t want to.
    [/b]

    It is not that they HAVE to, but they are inclined to. Academy voters will feel COMPELLED to watch screeners of acclaimed, buzzed and anticipated films, more so when it comes from popular and respected directors, producers, actors.
    That’s how Silver Linings Playbook and American Hustle got nominations for ALL acting categories. That’s why 127 Hours, True Grit, War Horse,American Hustle got so many nominations. And that is why there was no way Oscar voters were going to ignore American Sniper just because of backlash. Those films they WILL watch/screen, and that is where they will draw most of their nomination picks from. Which brings me to 2015. There is NO WAY they will not watch David O Russell’s JOY, Alejandro G Inarritu’s THE REVERANT, Steven Spielberg’s upcoming BRIDGE OF SPIES, and Tom Hooper’s THE DANISH GIRL, etc They will watch them. And if they like what they see, they will jot those names down in multiple categories. Regardless of how many dvd’s/films that are also deserving and that they still have to watch.

    ReplyCopy URL
    GhostOrchid
    Participant
    Joined:
    Sep 27th, 2011
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #185176

    [quote=”GhostOrchid”]I’m so allergic to the word “filler”. Filler nods? Ending up in a top 5, when in every year there are hundreds of films released is quite an archievement.
    Do you really think Academy members go through their lists and think:
    “Oh, I have four actresses that I’ll nominate… but what to do with the fifth spot? Does Meryl or Amy have a film out? Yes? Okay then!”
    It’s true Meryl’s nomination totals are insane, but she’s an easy vote because most of the Academy members simply love and respect her. You need enough #1 votes to be nominated, not just #2 or #3 votes.
    Amy’s gorgeous and though most people think she only rides the cottail of a movie, that’s not right at all. [b]The Academy does not HAVE to nominate a movie in several categories if they don’t want to.
    [/b]

    It is not that they HAVE to, but they are inclined to. Academy voters will feel COMPELLED to watch screeners of acclaimed, buzzed and anticipated films, more so when it comes from popular and respected directors, producers, actors.
    That’s how Silver Linings Playbook and American Hustle got nominations for ALL acting categories. That’s why 127 Hours, True Grit, War Horse,American Hustle got so many nominations. And that is why there was no way Oscar voters were going to ignore American Sniper just because of backlash. Those films they WILL watch/screen, and that is where they will draw most of their nomination picks from. Which brings me to 2015. There is NO WAY they will not watch David O Russell’s JOY, Alejandro G Inarritu’s THE REVERANT, Steven Spielberg’s upcoming BRIDGE OF SPIES, and Tom Hooper’s THE DANISH GIRL, etc They will watch them. And if they like what they see, they will jot those names down in multiple categories. Regardless of how many dvd’s/films that are also deserving and that they still have to watch.[/quote]

    There are still a lot of movies with more than 7 noms that missed major categories. Even films with HUGE buzz before faded in the end.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Anonymous
    Joined:
    Jan 1st, 1970
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #185177

    I think some of you might misunderstanding me, this thread of not about that Amy Adams is being a deserving nominee or not, or a bashing-fest. It’s about her records with the Academy.

    @ibbster once again, how is she’s a filler for “The Master” when Jacki Weaver was also a nominee? How is she a filler for “Doubt” if many performers of her category missed some of the biggest nominations, but Adams managed to get them all? How is she a filler for “The Fighter” when we had Hailee Steinfeld’s category problem and Jacki Weaver for a noname film made it as well?

    Tell me reasons how Adams is a “coattail” nominee? And why on earth would anyone get a nomination for being “not liked”? I mean she managed to get 5 nominations. That’s something and most than 90% of actors will ever achieve in their career. Tell me the reason to believe you that it’s not you and some others trying to bash Amy by calling her a weak link just because you personally don’t like her work?

    I do want to hear reasonable answers, because all I hear is that she’s not deserving and she’s a “coattail” nominee, but no one is really talking about the certain categories year by year.

    I think it’s pretty unfair to call her a “lucky gal”. No one gets nominated 5 times for being lucky. That’s not real life.

    ReplyCopy URL
    manakamana
    Participant
    Joined:
    Jul 28th, 2011
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #185178

    I think some of you might misunderstanding me, this thread of not about that Amy Adams is being a deserving nominee or not, or a bashing-fest. It’s about her records with the Academy.

    @ibbster once again, how is she’s a filler for “The Master” when Jacki Weaver was also a nominee? How is she a filler for “Doubt” if many performers of her category missed some of the biggest nominations, but Adams managed to get them all? How is she a filler for “The Fighter” when we had Hailee Steinfeld’s category problem and Jacki Weaver for a noname film made it as well?

    Tell me reasons how Adams is a “coattail” nominee? And why on earth would anyone get a nomination for being “not liked”? I mean she managed to get 5 nominations. That’s something and most than 90% of actors will ever achieve in their career. Tell me the reason to believe you that it’s not you and some others trying to bash Amy by calling her a weak link just because you personally don’t like her work?

    I do want to hear reasonable answers, because all I hear is that she’s not deserving and she’s a “coattail” nominee, but no one is really talking about the certain categories year by year.

    I think it’s pretty unfair to call her a “lucky gal”. No one gets nominated 5 times for being lucky. That’s not real life.

    I’m not the one who used the word “filler” (nor “lucky gal”). And I don’t know what placement she managed with those films. But, if anything, I think it’s more indicative that she was never a contender to win for those latter four nominations. She was the beneficiary of being apart of films with ensemble casts that the acting branch of the academy liked in general, while playing second fiddle to her costars. That’s why she was nominated for those, I believe. Not because of the merit of her individual performances in them, which speaks to why she can’t get nominated for performances like Enchanted or Big Eyes when it’s just her on her own in the conversation.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Eddy Q
    Participant
    Joined:
    Oct 13th, 2012
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #185179

    It may be that Adams’s films/co-stars helped her to get nominations more than her performances, but that doesn’t have any bearing on how deserving she was, which for me she was every time except for Doubt. For each nominated performance she had the reviews to support it, as well as major critics awards for Junebug and The Master.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Anonymous
    Joined:
    Jan 1st, 1970
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #185180

    [quote=”Vincelette”]I think some of you might misunderstanding me, this thread of not about that Amy Adams is being a deserving nominee or not, or a bashing-fest. It’s about her records with the Academy.

    @ibbster once again, how is she’s a filler for “The Master” when Jacki Weaver was also a nominee? How is she a filler for “Doubt” if many performers of her category missed some of the biggest nominations, but Adams managed to get them all? How is she a filler for “The Fighter” when we had Hailee Steinfeld’s category problem and Jacki Weaver for a noname film made it as well?

    Tell me reasons how Adams is a “coattail” nominee? And why on earth would anyone get a nomination for being “not liked”? I mean she managed to get 5 nominations. That’s something and most than 90% of actors will ever achieve in their career. Tell me the reason to believe you that it’s not you and some others trying to bash Amy by calling her a weak link just because you personally don’t like her work?

    I do want to hear reasonable answers, because all I hear is that she’s not deserving and she’s a “coattail” nominee, but no one is really talking about the certain categories year by year.

    I think it’s pretty unfair to call her a “lucky gal”. No one gets nominated 5 times for being lucky. That’s not real life.

    I’m not the one who used the word “filler” (nor “lucky gal”). And I don’t know what placement she managed with those films. But, if anything, I think it’s more indicative that she was never a contender to win for those latter four nominations. She was the beneficiary of being apart of films with ensemble casts that the acting branch of the academy liked in general, while playing second fiddle to her costars. That’s why she was nominated for those, I believe. Not because of the merit of her individual performances in them, which speaks to why she can’t get nominated for performances like Enchanted or Big Eyes when it’s just her on her own in the conversation.[/quote]

    I could see her winning for “Doubt” (espeically because after Winslet was nominated lead, someone else had a shot to win); “Junebug” and “The Fighter” too. For her last two nominations, she was probably very  much out of the winning.

    I think someone is not getting nominated for their co-stars (with that theory, possibly every second Oscar-nominee would be a nominee for that). Someone is getting nominated for being liked. Don’t bring up her “Enchanted” film here. She was very deserving for that one, but come on, it’s not an Oscar film. And she picked up the momentum too late for “Big Eyes” – but hey she won a Golden Globe and earned a Bafta nomination for a dead-film which had zero buzz or critics push so I think that’s a pretty big deal.

    ReplyCopy URL
Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 77 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

Similar Topics
RobertPius - Nov 18, 2017
Movies
Andrew ... - Nov 18, 2017
Movies