-
-
In the Best Actor thread, I commented that I thought A24 prioritising Uncut Gems over The Lighthouse as their Oscars push was a poor tactical decision that cost them potentially obtainable Oscar nominations such as Dafoe.
This brings the question – what are some other terrible tactical decisions in Oscars campaigning history? I don’t mean bad performances nor films, I mean poor priorities, category choices that cost nominations, putting the wrong film for the Oscars as the top. Get creative, give me some historical deep cuts!
ReplyFor Your Consideration:
Best Picture: Wolfwalkers
Best Animated Feature: Wolfwalkers
I wasn’t following at the time, but Tom O’Neal once mentioned in a slugfest how Weinstein prioritised Nine over Inglourious Basterds for most of the early season. Needless to say, it didn’t work out. They also pushed Marion Cotillard lead in order to get both her and Penélope Cruz nominations, but only the latter had any success outside of the Globes. (I haven’t seen Nine, but many believe Cotillard did not belong in lead and as the film’s most acclaimed performance would’ve gotten the nod instead of Cruz had they competed against each other.)
ReplyCopy URLNeon dropping the ball with Alfre Woodard’s searing performance in “Clemency” will always be a huge campaigning blunder. I know that Neon is a novice studio and placed all of its eggs in one basket with “Parasite,” which turned out beautifully for them, but still. She could have made history with the right campaign.
ReplyCopy URLNetflix prioritising everyone else over Eddie Murphy.
I won’t be able bare it when they do that to Sophia Loren this year.
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"
I maintain that A24 fucked up by campaigning Jacob Tremblay in supporting for Room. Even ignoring the fact that he is clearly a lead (he has MORE screentime than lead winner Brie Larson, he’s the narrator of the movie, and he’s literally in every scene), the lead actor race ended up being much less competitive than supporting that year, and I really do think he would’ve been nominated had they campaigned him in lead.
I also think if it had happened a couple years later, when A24 was more established at the oscars, they might have had the balls to make the riskier choice of campaigning a child actor in lead, but I suppose I get them going with the safer choice since they were so new to everything.
ReplyCopy URLThe Weinstein Co completely abandoning The Butler is baffling.
• It made so much money ($120m domestic in the summer). The Help just happened two years prior, there’s a recent precedent doing this type of summer adult blockbuster successful.
ReplyCopy URL
• Oprah still getting in everywhere and it making SAG Ensemble clearly showed it would’ve made it further if campaigned
• It’s also structurally similar to the feel good white saviour biopics that AMPAS loved and would’ve been a more easily digestible alternative to voters who didn’t want to reward/watch 12YAS (how many times did we this coming up in honest ballots, Ellen even made of fun it in her monologue)Not a campaigning decision per se, but if Noah Baumbach/Netflix had gotten Marriage Story out a season earlier (it was filmed early 2018) it would have done much better.
The worst fraud ever in Oscar history must be Marlon Brando being put in Lead for The Godfather, and Pacino in Supporting, when it’s CLEARLY the opposite. And Pacino should have easily won in the Lead category.
But Brando did win, so it’s not necessarily a ‘bad’ decision. Just category fraud.
ReplyCopy URLJohn Wayne infamously campaigned hard for The Alamo to get recognition despite it not being a critical or commercial success. Oscar voters were so fed up with his tireless campaigning that they basically said “Fine! Are you happy now?!” According to some film historians, it’s because of this move that Psycho got left out of the Best Picture race despite its nominations for Janet Leigh and Alfred Hitchock.
ReplyCopy URLJohn Wayne infamously campaigned hard for The Alamo to get recognition despite it not being a critical or commercial success. Oscar voters were so fed up with his tireless campaigning that they basically said “Fine! Are you happy now?!” According to some film historians, it’s because of this move that Psycho got left out of the Best Picture race despite its nominations for Janet Leigh and Alfred Hitchock.
If I were an Oscar voter in 1960, I would shut out The Alamo completely just to spite him, and then nominate a bunch of foreign films just to further spit in his face.
ReplyCopy URLHe infamously didn’t get along with his co-star Richard Widmark during filming, due to their differing political views, with Wayne being a Republican and Widmark being a Democrat. Charlton Heston actually turned down the film because he, being a Democrat at the time, didn’t want to to work with Wayne.
ReplyCopy URLI was thinking Rooney Mara could have won in lead category for Carol because I was a bit underwhelmed by Larson. I think people didn’t vote for her in supporting because it is category fraud at its pinnacle. (the hilarious “Rooney Moore” by Diane Ladd) You still could argue Eddie Redmayne is the true lead in The Danish Girl rather than Vikander. In Mara’s case, there is no excuse.
ReplyCopy URL
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
