-
-
Now that I’ve seen it, my informed opinion (re: the film itself, the industry raves it’s gotten, and its Oscar nomination) is simply: pic.twitter.com/D6jAyXEgcw
— Matthew Stewart (@MatthewAStewart) January 27, 2023
The Academy should really start to consider using ballots and committees, like the Emmys, cause this is getting out of hand.
Ah,post weinstein oscar race..lets see how the new changes shapes up.also in that governess meeting i wish someone would ask this,why must they always keep an young ingenuine spot?it should be about acting, after all.
This post was found to be inappropriate by the moderators and has been removed.
This post was found to be inappropriate by the moderators and has been removed.On January 29, 2014, a nomination for “Alone yet Not Alone” from the film of the same name, with music by Bruce Broughton and lyrics by Dennis Spiegel, was revoked prior to voting. The Academy concluded that Broughton’s campaigning via personal communication with music branch members was inconsistent with promotional regulations.
What do you think? Does this apply in Riseborough’s case?
This post was found to be inappropriate by the moderators and has been removed.Was Andrea’s campaign shady? yes, but why didn’t AMAPS have the same energy with Weinstein nominations??
AMPAS needs to launch an investigation into that Ana De Armas nomination as well. I’m more than convinced no one in the voting committee actually put themselves through torture porn for 3 hours. Ain’t no way. She got in simply because she was playing Marilyn.
um, I think this is a different kettle of fish. By all accounts Blonde seems to be a problematic movie but there’s nothing to suggest that the de Armas campaign did anything untoward. People just love stars playing stars. Also there are plenty of sole nominees in acting so people are clearly prepared to vote for a performance even if they don’t care for the movie.
I think colman and robbie and their studios searchlight and paramount are behind this and they are just using viola and Deadwyler as cover.
“In the event a nominated achievement is declared ineligible by the Academy, it shall not be replaced, and the category will remain with one less nomination”
Why would they bother doing that if they aren’t getting Robbie or Colman nominated anyway? Just to be vindictive and deny Riseborough a nomination? The investigation is happening because people are thinking that what they did was against the rules, I doubt there is a master plan from other studios behind this.Ana played the game right unlike Andrea Playdough
Was Andrea’s campaign shady? yes, but why didn’t AMAPS have the same energy with Weinstein nominations??
Cause weinstein was very powerful. Andrea however, doesn’t even have a studio backing. And apparently some goodwill with the people she worked over decades.
“In the event a nominated achievement is declared ineligible by the Academy, it shall not be replaced, and the category will remain with one less nomination” Why would they bother doing that if they aren’t getting Robbie or Colman nominated anyway? Just to be vindictive and deny Riseborough a nomination? The investigation is happening because people are thinking that what they did was against the rules, I doubt there is a master plan from other studios behind this.
Their problem is not some actress missing out on nomination, its the well backed studio actress denied a spot.this doesn’t bode well with the power dynamics between studio system and actor branch.if an actor got in without the studio backing .it changes a lot rules.thats why they are unsettled.
The Academy loves scandals. They’ve been having way too many these few years.
The topic ‘2023 Oscars: Best Actress (Part 26)’ is closed to new replies.
