Home Forums Movies Why Did Cameron Diaz MISS nominations for Being John Malkovich/Vanilla Sky?

Why Did Cameron Diaz MISS nominations for Being John Malkovich/Vanilla Sky?

CREATE A NEW TOPIC
CREATE A NEW POLL
Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 15 total)
Created
2 years ago
Last Reply
2 years ago
14
( +1 hidden )
replies
941
views
12
users
2
2
1
  • Jason Travis
    Participant
    Joined:
    May 20th, 2011
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #197148

    To this day, I am still puzzled as to why Cameron Diaz failed to receieve Best Supporting Actress nominations for both Being John Malkovich and Vanilla Sky.

    In 1999, she was nodded for the Golden Globe, SAG and BAFTA. She lost her slot, I believe, to Samantha Morton’s puzzling inclusion for Sweet and Lowdown. (Morton has always been cited for a nomination that comes as a surprise; in 2003, she made the cut for Best Actress in In America).

    2001 I was even more surprised at. By now, Diaz was at the height of her popularity in Hollywood and her performance earned her nods from Globe, SAG, BAFTA and Broadcast Film Critics + a win from the Boston Film Critics. She lost her slot then, most likely, to Maggie Smith in Gosford Park. While I certainly am not complaining about Smith being included (she was fabulous), I am still irked.

    Both her performances in both BJM and VS deserved recognition. In the former, she is hardly recognizable but is still compelling, and a perfect match for chemistry with nominee Catherine Keener. In the latter, she’s never looked more beautiful- and she has limited but impactful screentime as Tom Cruise’s insane fling.

    Was the academy just biased against her because she normally did paycheck roles? Let’s not forget the infamous New York Film Critics when they deemed her Best Actress in 1998 for There’s Something About Mary. So she apparently HAD critical appeal.

    Any ideas?

    Follow Me on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/jasonmovieguy
    13K Subscribers, 29 Million Views

    FYC: Derbyite of the Year, 2017

    Reply
    Emmys2011
    Participant
    Joined:
    Aug 29th, 2011
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #197150

    Cause she wasn´t that good, and Catherine Keener was better.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Jason Travis
    Participant
    Joined:
    May 20th, 2011
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #197151

    Cause she wasn´t that good, and Catherine Keener was better.

    That’s your personal preference. I am more interested in the political standpoint.

    Follow Me on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/jasonmovieguy
    13K Subscribers, 29 Million Views

    FYC: Derbyite of the Year, 2017

    ReplyCopy URL
    FilmGuy619
    Participant
    Joined:
    Jan 13th, 2013
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #197152

    While I would’ve nominated Keener for Being John Malkovich, I wouldn’t have any complaints over Diaz being included. I can’t really explain why Diaz got snubbed both times. It is suspicious given that she was a Globe and SAG nominee. But I can’t figure out why she got ignored both times.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Sasha
    Participant
    Joined:
    Nov 24th, 2013
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #197153

    She was at the top of the world then, the most sought-after actress in Hollywood, everyone wanted to work with her but apparently Academy members hated her. They were probably jealous of her success. Her performances in BJM and VS are absolutely outstanding. If it happened today she probably would been a double Oscar winner but then young megastars were very much disliked. I have already given up on her winning an Oscar or even getting nominated ever (especially now that she’s retired) but it still irks me she’s been snubbed those both times.

    ReplyCopy URL
    OnTheAisle
    Participant
    Joined:
    Sep 19th, 2011
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #197154


    In 1999, she was nodded for the Golden Globe, SAG and BAFTA. She lost her slot, I believe, to Samantha Morton’s puzzling inclusion for Sweet and Lowdown.
    Any ideas?

    There was little surprise to Morton’s nomination for Sweet and Lowdown. She had been nominated for the Golden Globe and cited by a number of critics’ organizations. It is a terrific performance.

    The Academy has always looked kindly on actors who play mutes successfully. I suspect it has to do the artistry of acting with the eyes. Note previous wins for Patty Duke in The Miracle Worker, Jane Wyman in Johnny Belinda, and John Mills in Ryan’s Daughter. And don’t forget another muted winning actor – Jean Dujardin in The Artist.

    Finally supporting actresses in Woody Allen films do well. Allen scripts have provided four Oscar winning supporting actress roles and another six supporting actresses (including Morton) were nominated.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Madson Melo
    Participant
    Joined:
    Jul 25th, 2011
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #197156

    First: the surprise nominee of 1999 was Toni Collette for Sixth Sense, not Samantha Morton, as I remember Collette was nominated only at the Oscars.

    Second: Connelly and Mirren were locks in 2001, but Winslet (BAFTA/GG), Tomei (CC/GG) and Smith (GG/BAFTA) were in a very similar place, so anyone could had knocked her out, and judging by the popularity of GP and Smith herself, I believe Winslet and Tomei had lower votes than her.

    Let’s point that both years that she got GG nods were years with six nominees and in both case all of her co-nominees got the five slot at the Oscars (except for Portman in 99), and for the SAG in 01 they nominated Blanchett, Faning, Diaz and Dench for Shipping News, so it was not like they were right at the nominees at that year, so did the BAFTA in 99 when they nominated two AB girls, Blanchett, Diaz and gave the award to Maggie Smith. Basically I’m trying to saying that those nominations didn’t exactly had much influence or impact because the groups were either too far from Academy taste or she was very close but the movies were not strong enough.

    Let’s not forget that BJM was in an era that Diaz was not exactly huge and had an stigma, and by the time of VS the movie received very bad reviews (all the nominees that year were in BP nominees), so that hurted her chances. Maybe if Connelly had avoided category fraud and went lead, she would be an Academy Award Nominee by now.

    She truly deserved more than Keener and I hope that my point is not that confusing to understand.

    ReplyCopy URL
    nkb325
    Participant
    Joined:
    Feb 6th, 2012
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #197157

    ^ I agree, when BJM came out it was her first dramatic performance and the first time she got seriously in the awards conversation after starting her career with blockbusters and love interest roles. It was an indication of her talent but they probably felt she wasnt serious enough an actress yet. So then Vanilla Sky came along, and she had already proven herself by getting close to the nom once, but that movie ended up getting pretty awful reviews for everything besides her, so they probably didnt feel the movie deserved any recognition. I cant help but wonder, is the movies came out in the reverse order, would she have then gotten in for BJM after getting close for Vanilla Sky?

    ReplyCopy URL
    Jake
    Participant
    Joined:
    Jul 2nd, 2011
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #197158

    ^^Maybe but they didn’t take her seriously enough which is a shame. She should’ve been nominated for “BJM” even over Catherine Keener. She was MVP of that movie. Very bold performance she hasn’t done ever since. By comparision she was good in “Vanilla Sky” but had far less screentime, her character was much more easy to hate and too sexy so perhaps it didn’t look like a big stretch to play. I guess she will never be nominated, just like her first co-star Jim Carrey.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Emmys2011
    Participant
    Joined:
    Aug 29th, 2011
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #197159

    [quote=”emmys2011″]

    Cause she wasn´t that good, and Catherine Keener was better.

    That’s your personal preference. I am more interested in the political standpoint.
    [/quote]

    I think its because she is seen first and mostly as a moive star, more than a respceted/prestigious actress, aside the fact that despite her (few) proven dramatic roles, she is mainly thought of as a comedy actress (aka not oscar material). Some people in the same position find a way to break through that into award movies/roles, like Sandra Bullock has, but most don´t. As for Vanilla Sky, the movie wa spoorly recieved and not an awards player, and despite her couple of big noms, the film was never getting anywhere near the oscars.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Milk Money
    Participant
    Joined:
    Oct 2nd, 2013
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #197160

    She’ll have to play a real person like Sandra did.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Jason Travis
    Participant
    Joined:
    May 20th, 2011
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #197161

    First: the surprise nominee of 1999 was Toni Collette for Sixth Sense, not Samantha Morton, as I remember Collette was nominated only at the Oscars.

    Second: Connelly and Mirren were locks in 2001, but Winslet (BAFTA/GG), Tomei (CC/GG) and Smith (GG/BAFTA) were in a very similar place, so anyone could had knocked her out, and judging by the popularity of GP and Smith herself, I believe Winslet and Tomei had lower votes than her.

    Let’s point that both years that she got GG nods were years with six nominees and in both case all of her co-nominees got the five slot at the Oscars (except for Portman in 99), and for the SAG in 01 they nominated Blanchett, Faning, Diaz and Dench for Shipping News, so it was not like they were right at the nominees at that year, so did the BAFTA in 99 when they nominated two AB girls, Blanchett, Diaz and gave the award to Maggie Smith. Basically I’m trying to saying that those nominations didn’t exactly had much influence or impact because the groups were either too far from Academy taste or she was very close but the movies were not strong enough.

    Let’s not forget that BJM was in an era that Diaz was not exactly huge and had an stigma, and by the time of VS the movie received very bad reviews (all the nominees that year were in BP nominees), so that hurted her chances. Maybe if Connelly had avoided category fraud and went lead, she would be an Academy Award Nominee by now.

    She truly deserved more than Keener and I hope that my point is not that confusing to understand.

    You  make some excellent points, but I am still standing by my opinion that Samantha Morton was a surprise. Back in 1999, I and many others did not have her or Penn in their final predictions. I DID have Toni Collette- I knew she would make it due to the huge popularity of her film, her amazing performance and the last-minute buzz surrounding her. The day of the nominations, multiple critics appeared baffled by Morton (and especially Penn) making the cut. For Best Actor, I remember everyone thought either Matt Damon (Talented Mr. Ripley) or Golden Globe winner and SAG nominee Jim Carrey (Man on the Moon) were going to get in. Sean Penn was a wildcard, and to me- so was Morton. Sure she had a Globe nod, but I don’t remember much talk circulating Sweet and Lowdown. Maybe that’s just me, but I remember keeping a keen eye on the races back then. Woody Allen does have a good track record for getting his actors nominations, but I still didn’t think it would happen with that film.

    Follow Me on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/jasonmovieguy
    13K Subscribers, 29 Million Views

    FYC: Derbyite of the Year, 2017

    ReplyCopy URL
    zordon
    Participant
    Joined:
    Jul 16th, 2014
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #197162

    I agree with MadsonMelo that Collette was the suprise nominee in 1999. I thought Diaz would have gotten in over her and I would be ok with that.
    Re: Vanilla Sky – it’s just such a bad movie and Diaz was not that good in it as some critics insisted. I actually really liked her in Gangs and thought she deserved more recognition for it.
    It all doesn’t matter know as she’s become perennial Razzie nominee.  

    ReplyCopy URL
    babypook
    Participant
    Joined:
    Nov 4th, 2010
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #197163

    Yes she did miss for those films Jas. Lol.

    To her credit, they are two of her better films. Could that be a marginal factor in wondering why she hasnt been nominated? When she doesnt make you laugh unintentionally or she doesnt absolutely stink, we’re surprised and want to give her a shot at Oscar?

    Given the right vehicle and back story, who knows?

    ReplyCopy URL
    Atypical
    Participant
    Joined:
    Dec 1st, 2011
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #197164

    She wasn’t considered a serious, respectable actress back then (or arguably ever). I don’t think it goes much deeper than that.

    ReplyCopy URL
Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 15 total)
Reply To: Why Did Cameron Diaz MISS nominations for Being John Malkovich/Vanilla Sky?

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

Similar Topics
AviChri... - Oct 18, 2017
Movies
Hunter-ish - Oct 18, 2017
Movies