Home Forums Movies Oscars Reject Lead Performances Going Supporting?

Oscars Reject Lead Performances Going Supporting?

CREATE A NEW TOPIC
CREATE A NEW POLL
Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 22 total)
Created
2 years ago
Last Reply
1 year ago
21
( +1 hidden )
replies
758
views
15
users
3
3
2
  • ENGLAND
    Participant
    Joined:
    Oct 5th, 2011
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #196946

    I keep reading how many performances this year do not belong in the supporting categories and I was wonder is it possible for the Academy to reject the submissions? How can we protest this BS. From what I am reading: Rooney, Vikandra, Winslet, and Tremblay (who Ive seen) are co-leads. Why are we predicting supporting?

    Reply
    Kristen Boyer
    Participant
    Joined:
    Dec 13th, 2012
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #196948

    Out of the names you mentioned I have only seen “Room” and yes, Tremblay is absolutely the lead of this film and even more so than Brie. I truely hope every case where there is category freud gets bumped.

    ReplyCopy URL
    ENGLAND
    Participant
    Joined:
    Oct 5th, 2011
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #196950

    I think they should start rejecting. This whole campaign thing is getting out of hand. Either you are worthy or not. Either you are Lead, co-Lead, or Supporting. This year seems to be the worst.

    ReplyCopy URL
    KyleBailey
    Participant
    Joined:
    Nov 15th, 2013
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #196951

    Yeah Tremblay in supporting would be the most ridiculous thing ever to happen category fraud wise in Oscar history. Personally I find Winslet a leading performance in Steve Jobs but I can understand why people would say she is Supporting. I have a strong feeling Alicia Vikander in The Danish Girl is going to be a lead supportive wife role like Felicity Jones was in Theory of Everything last year. I remember similar rumblings last year whether or not she would be in lead or supporting last year when she was clearly the lead. 

    ReplyCopy URL
    BamaEd
    Participant
    Joined:
    Nov 3rd, 2010
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #196952

    Tremblay should be a lead, definitely. I actually felt Winslet was supporting in Steve Jobs so I’m fine with her being there. I think Felicity Jones was rightly in lead last year as well.

    The way things are now in Oscar campaigning, what would have happened with Thelma & Louise? 

    ReplyCopy URL
    Kristen Boyer
    Participant
    Joined:
    Dec 13th, 2012
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #196953

    Yeah Tremblay in supporting would be the most ridiculous thing ever to happen category fraud wise in Oscar history. 
    Right?! He narrates the movie, the film is told in his point of view and he is in pratically every scene. I want him to be nominated (or win) but putting him supporting would make the entire a category a joke.  

    ReplyCopy URL
    KyleBailey
    Participant
    Joined:
    Nov 15th, 2013
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #196954

    Tremblay should be a lead, definitely. I actually felt Winslet was supporting in Steve Jobs so I’m fine with her being there. I think Felicity Jones was rightly in lead last year as well.

    The way things are now in Oscar campaigning, what would have happened with Thelma & Louise? 

    My god that would be so attrociously delt with these days. “Sarandon is Supporting because Thelma is first in the title so Geena is the lead!” would be their excuse 

    ReplyCopy URL
    Teridax
    Participant
    Joined:
    Dec 12th, 2014
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #196955

    Here’s a radical new idea:

    The difference between lead and supporting races is no longer decided by the studios OR campaign strategists. From now on if any actor or actress is in MORE than HALF of the movies running time, they are considered LEAD. If they are in LESS than HALF, they are automatically considered SUPPORTING.

    Would Cristoph Waltz have won for lead actor for Inglourious Basterds over Jeff Bridges that same year? If so, then maybe the Academy would have been free to give Jeff his one for True Grit, as a way of recognizing a great film as well. Anthony Hopkins would have won Supporting for Silence of the Lambs over Jack Palance easily, I’m guessing. Think of all the different scenarios!

    It’s very similar in how earlier just this year, the Emmys laid down the law about what is and isn’t considered a “guest” performance. What do you guys think? Should the Oscars go that route, or is it too extreme? Please let me know your thoughts below. 🙂

    ReplyCopy URL
    Tyler The Awesome Guy
    Participant
    Joined:
    Nov 19th, 2011
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #196956

    I hated personally that Andy Serkis was in Supporting for Dawn of the Planet of the Apes when he was clearly lead (Supporting should have gone to Toby Kibbell, who was equally excellent). However, I feel that it’s okay for him to be in Supporting because it’s still giving a great performance a nomination.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Zooey the Dreamer
    Participant
    Joined:
    Jan 12th, 2012
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #196957

    I don’t get Mara in supporting. She’s the heart of her film and she’s a young actress with a previous nomination. She got that much publicized win at the Cannes Flm Festival and her character is such a magnet. She has a real shot in leading. But the thing is that Weinstein wants a sure thing Oscar in supporting, which probably won’t be the case if Vikader is in supporting as well. But I don’t get all Tremblay stuff. He’s a kid. He won’t get into lead actor, we all know that. And every second post about him seems to focus on the fact that he’s lead and what a huge fraud it is. Nobody seemed to have the same issue with Hailee Steinfeld who was just as lead as he is. And nobody seemed to have an issue with Jennifer Hudson or Rachel Weisz or Catherine Zeta-Jones. It’s ridiculous.

    The Meryl Streep comparison is funny because it’s one thing being the complete unknown Tremblay is, the nearly unknown Vikander  is. Even Rooney Mara. It’s another thing to be Meryl Streep who has 19 Oscar nominations and three Oscars, eight Golden Globes out of around 30 (?) nominations and multiple wins from virtually every possible awards’ group. She can afford to go lead with a performance that’s borderline supporting or even a performance that any other actor wouldn’t mind going supporting with (like The Devil Wears Prada). But she’s La Streep. Her performance will be seen. The screen time won’t matter because critics usually focus on her and her alone. All her co-stars get second billing. She’s the lead actor. She’s billed first. Even Nicholson didn’t have the same luxury.

    ReplyCopy URL
    CAROL-CHANNING
    Member
    Joined:
    Sep 30th, 2011
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #196958

    Nobody seemed to have the same issue with Hailee Steinfeld who was just as lead as he is. And nobody seemed to have an issue with Jennifer Hudson or Rachel Weisz or Catherine Zeta-Jones. It’s ridiculous.

    Lol who is “nobody”?  Because I’m pretty sure that Steinfeld’s nomination being category fraud was one of the biggest topics of that year (just below The King’s Speech/Social Network rivalry, arguing over whether Bening’s subtle performance was more impressive than Portman’s showy, and laughing over Melissa Leo’s dissent into madness). 

    ReplyCopy URL
    AviChristiaans
    Participant
    Joined:
    Jul 26th, 2013
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #196959

    Wasn’t there a consensus urgency to give Kate Winslet the Oscar? That’s where the Lead Actress placement primarily stemmed from. They inked her in Lead, and they voted her the winner.

    Keishia Castle Hughes was an obvious one. She was the clear Lead in the Whale Rider. She was the Whale Rider. She rode the Festival circuit like crazy, and the reviews and passion for her was overwhelming.
    Anybody could see that. The same with Quvenzhané Wallis.

    I doubt any of the Academy voters give a damn whether Rooney Mara, Jacob Tremblay or Alicia Vikander is Supporting or Lead.
    –  Mara has Cate Blanchett as competition and co lead. Both standouts in the film. If Cate was massively under-utilized and had limited screentime , than yes.
    Alicia Vikander has Redmayne stealing some of the thunder. She is not the overwhelming arc of the film.

    They will vote them in whatever category they appear in on the ballot.
    And there is no urgency to reward any of them in Lead right now.

    Felicity Jones was another story in itself. She was placed in Lead by the studio, and she and Redmayne carried the film.
    Patricia Arquette was placed in Supporting, and she was part of an ensemble.
     
    A situation where i see a consensus vote for Lead might happen is Samuel L Jackson if he really is outstanding in The Hatefull Eight. He is overdue, and massively respected.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Sasha
    Participant
    Joined:
    Nov 24th, 2013
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #196960

    Best Leading Actor is absolutely atrocious this year so if campaigned there Tremblay would get in quite easily, especially over such underperformers as Michael Fassbender. Vikander and Mara would also both get in leading category quite easily. It’s all about greediness of certain people (cough Weinstein cough). 

    I’m very vocal when it comes to category frauds. I FUCKING HATE THEM. HATE THEM! Zeta-Jones, Hudson and Weisz were co-leads and should be campaigned in leading category. The funny thing is they would all get in if campaigned there. They wouldn’t have won but they would get their leading nods. As for Steinfeld, she wasn’t co-lead, she was a freaking lead. Her category fraud is absolutely appaling. I literally vomited when I saw her getting nominated in supporting category. I’m dreaming about the day that Academy gives a shit about category frauds but the thing is they don’t. They’re too fucking lazy and just do what FYC campaigners tell them to do. I remember that once upon a time HFPA cared about category placement (Connelly, Zeta-Jones and such nominated in leading categories) but now they’re fucking sheep like disgusting SAG voters. Those ones are absolutely despicable lazy basterds.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Eddy Q
    Participant
    Joined:
    Oct 13th, 2012
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #196961

    [quote=”BamaEd”]

    Tremblay should be a lead, definitely. I actually felt Winslet was supporting in Steve Jobs so I’m fine with her being there. I think Felicity Jones was rightly in lead last year as well.

    The way things are now in Oscar campaigning, what would have happened with Thelma & Louise? 

    My god that would be so attrociously delt with these days. “Sarandon is Supporting because Thelma is first in the title so Geena is the lead!” would be their excuse 
    [/quote]

    Funny that the reverse happened with Hilary and Jackie – Hilary went supporting, Jackie went lead. Though that was probably pushed more as a Jacqueline du Pré biopic rather than the tale of two sisters it actually was.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Kevin Dillon
    Participant
    Joined:
    Aug 22nd, 2012
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #196962

    Benicio Del Torro going supporting for Sicario is another case of category fraud too this year.  Del Torro is the heart of this film in many ways, his story is central, and he is also the best part of the film.

    Is it me or does this year’s category fraud seem a little worse than usual?  Maybe I am just tired of it.

    ReplyCopy URL
Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 22 total)
Reply To: Oscars Reject Lead Performances Going Supporting?

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

Similar Topics
Free Mon - Oct 21, 2017
Movies
SN - Oct 21, 2017
Movies