( +1 hidden )
January 15, 2016 at 2:06 am #209864
I still can’t believe the Academy actually bought the category fraud here- There were so many signs that they wouldn’t- The Globe’s placement, the fact that SAG has no choice where to place them, and BAFTA nominating Vikander in lead, Vikander getting votes for another film, ect. There was way more reason for people to predict a leading nomination for either one of them then it was for Kate Winslet in The Reader 7 years ago and she was pushed up to lead as we all know.
What are your theories? Lawrence love?January 15, 2016 at 2:26 am #209866
Because the acting branch is dim.
How is this not a wake-up call to establish a small committee which will prevent these frauds from happening again? The Emmys did it when ‘OITNB’ made it into comedy series, so why can’t AMPAS actually change their archaic system?January 15, 2016 at 5:48 am #209867
my theory is “LOVE” for Rampling, this movie legend 70 year-old with more than 80 movies in her career, has never been nominated for an Oscar, BAFTA, or a Golden Globes, until yesterday !… So i think the fact that Mara & Vikander stayed in the supporting category, has undoubtedly let rampling in the race !…January 15, 2016 at 5:49 am #209868
So they could troll these forums, especially users like Sasha. TROLOLOLOJanuary 15, 2016 at 6:08 am #209869
There’s no need to turn this into another Jennifer Lawrence thread so common now with that “Lawrence love” excuse, specially when that film obviously flopped with voters.
I don’t think there was enough passion for other supporting contenders so they needed to fill up the category with something. In Mara’s case everybody predicting the race had already settled on her being supporting, so you can’t complain or be surprised NOW. While at the same time everybody was pushing Vikander to lead, so there’s that. If there was really nobody else (lack of passion for Stewart, Mirren, Allen and others), why not place Vikander there to get to your five nominees and be done with it?
Then in lead you have your spaces free and that’s how after you get your three locks out of the way you end up with Rampling who probably did have some sort of passionate support and Lawrence who might be the filler contender in a “who else am I going to place here?” situation. She was clearly the more visible of the rest of the contenders: Silverman, Mirren, plus the possible action chick Theron bias who thanks to those 10 nominations one has to asume she was in there somewhere.January 15, 2016 at 7:27 am #209870
I think it’s just as simple as voters following the studios campaigned placements without any really questioning of whether they should be placed there or not. I’d imagine we’re again too ‘in the bubble’ thinking the think pieces and forum comments about category fraud would have any influence with the actual voters(Definitely did for the Gold Derby Awards though!)January 15, 2016 at 7:34 am #209871This post was found to be inappropriate by the moderators and has been removed.January 15, 2016 at 7:49 am #209872
Fraud is not an issue to them. They wanted to give Winslet a Best Actress Oscar. They did not care for Revolutionary Road. They understood she was a lead in both movies and voted for the movie they preferred. The little girl from Whale Rider got in a weak Best Actress lineup. Nobody thinks of fraud when it benefits actors and studios.January 15, 2016 at 8:02 am #209873
It would have helped to push at least one of those two to Actress, since voters clearly struggled to get 5 half-decent nominees there and ended up defaulting to Lawrence again. Especially odd is Vikander since they quite literally could have replaced Vikander with Vikander in the Supporting race.January 15, 2016 at 8:10 am #209874
Rules are flawed. Even if 100 sensible voters placed them at what they were supposed to be placed, they couldn’t have overcome the 101 supporting votes that came from the sheep; cheater’s friends/supporters; voters that were filling empty places from their ballots with the names they have seen on FYC booklets etc.
Not to mention getting in at the lesser category is always easier and requires less support, so the rules were even having them a favour.
But even in a year like this, when we had 2 pretty open slots in Lead -Rampling’s nomination was on a shaky ground, and Lawrence has never really been taken so seriously- couldn’t happen; it is too hard to believe that it will change anytime soon.
I guess the fraud in contention has to be either a too big of a name, or the performance has to have an undeniabe amount of support to push them in lead .It’s so sad that Supporting categories has turned into to the secondary categories that actors put themselves in when they don’t think they are strong enough to hold on to the lead.January 15, 2016 at 8:58 am #209875
I don’t understand the reasoning for Vikander going supporting. She would probably have gotten 2 nominations if she campaigned correctly.
I do think it’s unfair to label the actresses as cheaters though. I read an article where Rooney was not happy about Harvey’s campaign, but he wanted her to be a team player. She said she would forgo all of it if she could to keep her integrity.January 15, 2016 at 9:08 am #209876This post was found to be inappropriate by the moderators and has been removed.January 15, 2016 at 9:13 am #209877This post was found to be inappropriate by the moderators and has been removed.January 15, 2016 at 9:39 am #209878
They dgaf and the ONLY examples in the last few decades of pushing to lead are when the studio literally campaigned no one in lead. The titular Reader and Whale Rider were leads cuz otherwise no one was.
Having Redmayne, Blanchett, Hawkes, Bridges, Streep, etc. as the pushed lead makes voters cool with it.
But that’s still assuming voters are mulling over/actually watching what they’re voting before casting their ballots. Which simply couldn’t be the case this year.
A film like Carol had to have more watchers than some foreign film like Whale Rider. Keisha Castle-Hughes had no other bigger lead actor in her movie to hide behind. But you couldn’t have guessed it if you haven’t watched the movie.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.