Home Forums Movies If there had been no “Dallas Buyers Club,” would “12 Years a Slave” have won three acting Oscars?

If there had been no “Dallas Buyers Club,” would “12 Years a Slave” have won three acting Oscars?

CREATE A NEW TOPIC
CREATE A NEW POLL
Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 77 total)
Created
4 years ago
Last Reply
4 years ago
76
replies
4540
views
38
users
Scottferguson
13
babypook
10
Eddy Q
4
  • Tariq Khan
    Participant
    Joined:
    Oct 9th, 2011
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #150766


    Suppose
    that there had been no “Dallas Buyers Club” in 2013.


     


    Do you
    think that Chiwetel Ejiofor and Michael Fassbender would have both won acting
    Oscars for “12 Years a Slave?”


     


    Without
    Matthew McConaughey, Ejiofor would have likely taken both the Globe and SAG
    awards. With the lead role in the Best Picture winner, he would have been the
    clear Oscar favorite.


     


    Fassbender
    might have racked up the critics’ prizes that went to Jared Leto. That could
    have propelled him to Globe and SAG victories, and eventually the
    Oscar.


     


    With Lupita
    Nyong’o’s Best Supporting Actress victory, would “12 Years” have
    become the third film in history (after “A Streetcar Named Desire”
    and “Network”) to win three acting awards?  If not, how do you think the acting races
    would have turned out with the absence of “Dallas Buyers Club?”


     


    Reply
    vinny
    Participant
    Joined:
    May 20th, 2011
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #150768

    I think it would have won best supporting actor (Fassbender) and supporting actress (Lupita) but lead actor would have been DiCaprio and Idris Elba would have been nominated.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Tyler The Awesome Guy
    Participant
    Joined:
    Nov 19th, 2011
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #150769

    I had a similar thread saying that Fassbender, who I thought had a better performance than Leto, missed out on an Oscar because he didn’t campaign. I think that Chiwetel would’ve won, but I don’t think Fassbender would’ve, someone like Abdi would’ve, because of the simple fact that Fassbender didn’t campaign last year.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Scottferguson
    Participant
    Joined:
    Sep 26th, 2011
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #150770

    No. It would have won one.

    Abdi and Dern would have won.

    The Oscar results showed next to no enthusiasm for 12 Yrs. It won BP because of duty, responsibility and fear in varying degrees among the voters. 

    ReplyCopy URL
    tonorlo
    Participant
    Joined:
    Oct 4th, 2011
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #150771

    Don’t think so.

    Dern (emeritus veteran) and DiCaprio (young veteran who’s already been on the Oscar radar several times in the past decade) frankly had more going for them than Ejiofor had as the lead in the Best Picture favorite. Though they were unsuccessful, both Dern’s and DiCaprio’s campaigns gathered steam that Ejiofor’s just never got; they were the guys being talked about most often alongside McConaughey. Ejiofor was always in the running, but at best, he was a wild card.

    With Leto out of the equation, BAFTA winner Abdi most likely would have been the beneficiary rather than Fassbender (unless the performance has a word-of-mouth x-factor on the level of M’onique, an actor’s lack of participation in a campaign is only going to hurt them).

    ReplyCopy URL
    babypook
    Participant
    Joined:
    Nov 4th, 2010
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #150772


    Suppose
    that there had been no “Dallas Buyers Club” in 2013.


     


    Do you
    think that Chiwetel Ejiofor and Michael Fassbender would have both won acting
    Oscars for “12 Years a Slave?”


     




    Without
    Matthew McConaughey, Ejiofor would have likely taken both the Globe and SAG
    awards. With the lead role in the Best Picture winner, he would have been the
    clear Oscar favorite.


     


    Fassbender
    might have racked up the critics’ prizes that went to Jared Leto. That could
    have propelled him to Globe and SAG victories, and eventually the
    Oscar.


     




    With Lupita
    Nyong’o’s Best Supporting Actress victory, would “12 Years” have
    become the third film in history (after “A Streetcar Named Desire”
    and “Network”) to win three acting awards? 
    If not, how do you think the acting races
    would have turned out with the absence of “Dallas Buyers Club?”


     I’d like to think so.

    Take out DBC and that could have left room for Tom Hanks, Harrison Ford, Joaquin Phoenix and others the sitre wiped out on me a few moments ago.

    My guess is no for the three wins. This is pretty tough to do

    It may have been a boost for Leonardo, although I wouldnt say his film is as Oscar friendly as some of it’s competition.

    Even if there were no DBC, there is always Mud for Matthew, atlhough that may have been “too small” a film. But still, clearly it was his time, physical transformation or no.

    An equation such as this would likely have caused a big ripple effect for all the players, except for perhaps Gravity. It’s an interesting speculation but it’s very much like that old saying, “If my aunt had balls she’d be my uncle”.


    ReplyCopy URL
    ETPhoneHome
    Participant
    Joined:
    Jan 3rd, 2013
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #150773

    I think it wouldn’t have gotten supporting actor, but Ejiofor would have won. It was the BP winner, and he was amazing, and it would have been deserved. He would have won McConaughey’s precursors. Supporting actor would have been very different, and I think any of them could’ve won, and Fassbender’s lack of campaign would have stopped him from gaining front runner status. I don’t think Abdi would have won, maybe Cooper or Hill, two actors they seem to really like in dramatic roles.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Nessie
    Member
    Joined:
    Oct 28th, 2012
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #150774

    I agree that if McConaughey had not been nominated for Dallas Buyers Club, he would have been nominated for Mud and easily won Best Supporting. He had already been snubbed for Killer Joe and Magic Mike the previous year. Mud was actually the better performance. I’m still annoyed Mud got stiffed for nominations.

    ReplyCopy URL
    babypook
    Participant
    Joined:
    Nov 4th, 2010
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #150775

    I agree that if McConaughey had not been nominated for Dallas Buyers Club, he would have been nominated for Mud and easily won Best Supporting. He had already been snubbed for Killer Joe and Magic Mike the previous year. Mud was actually the better performance. I’m still annoyed Mud got stiffed for nominations.

    Yes yes Nessie. I see I’m not alone. I hated Killer Joe but Matthew is the best part of the film imo. As for Magic Mike, I was too busy staring at his bod to notice his perf. Kidding aside, both of these perfs helped prop his win this year.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Nessie
    Member
    Joined:
    Oct 28th, 2012
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #150776

    [quote=”Nessie”]I agree that if McConaughey had not been nominated for Dallas Buyers Club, he would have been nominated for Mud and easily won Best Supporting. He had already been snubbed for Killer Joe and Magic Mike the previous year. Mud was actually the better performance. I’m still annoyed Mud got stiffed for nominations.

    Yes yes Nessie. I see I’m not alone. I hated Killer Joe but Matthew is the best part of the film imo. As for Magic Mike, I was too busy staring at his bod to notice his perf. Kidding aside, both of these perfs helped prop his win this year.

    [/quote]

    Killer Joe is an acquired taste (and not for fried chicken either), but McConaughey’s performance was killer. I was so disappointed that August Osage County didn’t live up to Killer Joe. Actresses who do nude scenes get nominated, but actors apparently don’t (see Fassbender in Shame).  If that’s not sexism, I don’t know what is!

    ReplyCopy URL
    Icky
    Participant
    Joined:
    Jun 28th, 2012
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #150777

    No. It would have won one.

    Abdi and Dern would have won.

    The Oscar results showed next to no enthusiasm for 12 Yrs. It won BP because of duty, responsibility and fear in varying degrees among the voters. 

    ’12 Years’ won because it was the clear alternative to Gravity not because voters were fearful or whatever. I’m sure some voted for it out of “duty”, but that’s not where the gist of its top-ballots came from. It’s as simple as ’12 Years’ being closer to typical Oscar fare than Gravity.  

    When you take the clear frontrunners out of a race it becomes very difficult to suss out who the winners would be. The tone of the race would be completely different right from the beginning.  

    ReplyCopy URL
    Scottferguson
    Participant
    Joined:
    Sep 26th, 2011
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #150778

    Its margin of victory, likely very narrow, came from the factors I described. It wasn’t remotely an anti-Gravity vote (it won virtually every other award is was nominated for). 12 Yrs won for its subject, not its popularity or achievement.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Forster
    Participant
    Joined:
    Mar 29th, 2013
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #150779

    The Oscar results showed next to no enthusiasm for 12 Yrs. It won BP because of duty, responsibility and fear in varying degrees among the voters. 

    You don’t know that. And if 3 wins – all in major categories – out of 9 nominations displays “next to no enthusiasm” then what does 0 wins out of 6 nominations – Nebraska’s score – show?

    ReplyCopy URL
    Scottferguson
    Participant
    Joined:
    Sep 26th, 2011
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #150780

    I “know” that based on numerous conversations with Academy voters and marketing people deep into the race. I know it from Fox Searchlight’s panic near the end of the campaign where they went to “it’s time” to guilt reluctant members into voting for it. I know it from the same circumstances at the GGs and BAFTA where 12 Yrs won next to nothing and it still won best film.

    And I am consistent – I know that in the rare times film I love have won BP it has happened because of factors other than perceived merit.

    Nebraska’s enthusiasm was shown in its better than expected nom total (as opposed to 12 Yrs less than expected one). It wasn’t enough to overcome the MM gauntlet, but it existed, and without MM, I think Dern would have won. If not, Leo D. Ejiofor never had any traction – zero evidence of that, 

    ReplyCopy URL
    babypook
    Participant
    Joined:
    Nov 4th, 2010
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #150781

    [quote=”babypook”]

    [quote=”Nessie”]I agree that if McConaughey had not been nominated for Dallas Buyers Club, he would have been nominated for Mud and easily won Best Supporting. He had already been snubbed for Killer Joe and Magic Mike the previous year. Mud was actually the better performance. I’m still annoyed Mud got stiffed for nominations.

    Yes yes Nessie. I see I’m not alone. I hated Killer Joe but Matthew is the best part of the film imo. As for Magic Mike, I was too busy staring at his bod to notice his perf. Kidding aside, both of these perfs helped prop his win this year.

    [/quote]

    Killer Joe is an acquired taste (and not for fried chicken either), but McConaughey’s performance was killer. I was so disappointed that August Osage County didn’t live up to Killer Joe. Actresses who do nude scenes get nominated, but actors apparently don’t (see Fassbender in Shame).  If that’s not sexism, I don’t know what is![/quote]

    Well, there’s Chris Cooper and Jon Voight…but you’re right. It doesnt appear it matters much what their body looks like either, which reminds me of the snub to Harvey Keitel in The Piano. And they were never going to give one to Michael Douglas…..lol

    ReplyCopy URL
Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 77 total)
Reply To: If there had been no “Dallas Buyers Club,” would “12 Years a Slave” have won three acting Oscars?

You can use BBCodes to format your content.
Your account can't use Advanced BBCodes, they will be stripped before saving.

Similar Topics
Sam K - Dec 17, 2017
Movies
Sir - Dec 17, 2017
Movies