-
-
The attempt of getting Scarlett Johansson nominated at both Best Actress and Best Supporting Actress back in the 2003/04 race for both GIRL WITH PEARL EARRING (lead) and LOST IN TRANSLATION (supporting).
I think it was that attempt of frauding her for supporting for LOST IN TRANSLATION that costed her an Oscar nomination back then. She was great in both, but voters didn’t bite it (although Critics’ Choice Award nominated her in Best Supporting Actress)ReplyCopy URLEdgar Pereira
.
Cinema and Popcorn
https://cinemaandpopcorn.blogspot.com/About Julianne Moore in 2003, the majority of people cry about her loss for FFH, but it’s mainly a crime that she lost the Oscar of Best Supporting Actress for The Hours.
Moore’s finest performance in my opinion is in The Hours. It’s just too bad that there were two movies with several women being the victim of category placement politics. I’d like to assume Moore was second in Supporting over Streep.
ReplyCopy URLAlthough she won SAG, it would gave been a horrible attempt to get into supporting for an obvious lead performance.
Emma Stone and Rachel Weiz got nominated in supporting for lead performances the same year. A Quiet Place was an ensemble work and Emily Blunt could have passed as supporting. The Academy do not like her. It’s that simple
ReplyCopy URLFYC:
Best Actor :
Riz Ahmed for Sound Of Metal
Delroy Lindo for Da 5 Bloods
Gary Oldman for MankBest Supporting Actor:
Daniel Kaluuya for Judas and the Black Messiah
Paul Raci for Sound Of MetalBest Supporting Actress:
Amanda Seyfried for Mank
Helena Zengel for News of the WorldEmily Blunt just didnt have an engaged campaign post december after mary poppins wasnt the hit they thought it would be.
Plus both of her roles were an odd type from usual academy nominees, so idk why everybody was so shocked. Plus she can easily pass as supporting in AQP. There were worse frauds that same year that were nominated (and won).And no, its not about them “not liking her”. Thats not really a thing as you guys pretend it is.
ReplyCopy URLPlus she can easily pass as supporting in AQP.
I’m not sure she did for most people. She was first-billed, with all the promotional material centered around her, and without a co-star in lead contention to distract voters from the fraud like there usually is in these situations. It was Kate Winslet in The Reader all over again, except without any hope of landing a lead nomination.
ReplyCopy URLAnyone know the story of Jessica Lange’s placement in supporting for Tootsie?
From what I heard the New York Film Critics came up with the idea of giving her the supporting award first as a makeup for losing for Frances. Then it caught on and spread to other awards.
I did find out from an expert that Lange was never advertised as lead anywhere.
The thing I wonder about was had Tootsie taken out ads with her in Supporting prior to the New York Film Critics placing her there or did the critics group come up with the idea on their own and the studio followed them then in their ads.
ReplyCopy URLEmma Stone and Rachel Weiz got nominated in supporting for lead performances the same year.
Emma Stone was lead. Rachel Weisz was very clearly the most supporting of the three ladies. She disappears for one whole act of the film!
A Quiet Place was an ensemble work
It wasn’t more of an ensemble piece than The Favourite.
ReplyCopy URLFYC OSCARS : PROMISING YOUNG WOMAN IN ALL CATEGORIES (ESP. ACTRESS – Carey Mulligan AND ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY — EMERALD FENNELL), VANESSA KIRBY FOR "PIECES OF A WOMAN", ESSIE DAVIS FOR "BABYTEETH"
Emma Stone and Rachel Weiz got nominated in supporting for lead performances the same year. A Quiet Place was an ensemble work and Emily Blunt could have passed as supporting. The Academy do not like her. It’s that simple
Yep. A Quiet Place was an ensemble so I can buy a supporting nomination. Blunt will never be nominated for her blockbuster type films.
ReplyCopy URL
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
