August 11, 2016 at 12:19 pm #1201905797
Can someone please explain to me how John Travolta got nominated for ACS: people Vs. OJ Simpson when his performance was nothing short of a massive joke? Critics weren’t exactly kind to him, and he hasn’t been particularly relevant in a number of years now.
I just don’t get how he got a nomination but Nathan Lane whose performance was praised left and right got shut-out. Anybody have any thoughts? was it simply name checking?August 11, 2016 at 12:21 pm #1201905798
Completely agreed on Lane, who was terrific. I suspect both Travolta and Schwimmer merely got in on account of high name rec.
OSCAR FLASHBACK: Best Original Song (1992) – Whitney Wakes Up the OscarsRiley (the normal one, not the one who won the predictions contest)ParticipantAugust 11, 2016 at 12:23 pm #1201905799
He is not the show’s worst acting nominee.August 11, 2016 at 12:27 pm #1201905802
He is not the show’s worst acting nominee.
I disagree, I think Travolta is the worst but I agree that Cuba Gooding JR wasn’t very good either. But I at least understand why he got a nomination.August 11, 2016 at 12:29 pm #1201905804
Lane should have been a nominee. I would sacrifice Cuba, John, and David to ensure a Lane nomination.August 11, 2016 at 1:02 pm #1201905818
I actually think he can win as well. He’s the only Oscar nominee and unarguably the biggest and most recognizable name in the category.August 11, 2016 at 3:08 pm #1201905854
I actually think he can win as well. He’s the only Oscar nominee and unarguably the biggest and most recognizable name in the category.
Anyone who actually watched the thing would not vote for him just because.
That’s the only hope. It performed so well in the nominations, they have to have seen just how good Brown was in the show. Still, I’d never underestimate their ability to namecheck Travolta. I have Brown winning, but Travolta at 2.August 11, 2016 at 3:24 pm #1201905862
I liked John Travolta’s performance and I’m glad he got nominated, but Nathan Lane should absolutely have been nominated as well.August 11, 2016 at 3:41 pm #1201905866
If he beats Sterling K Brown, we riot.August 11, 2016 at 4:25 pm #1201905884
I WANT John Travolta to win, I’ve seen all 6 performances and thought he gave best of the bunch, even though Sterling K. Brown has the best specific episode submission with “Manna From Heaven”, very intense work.
Travolta would get my vote, and after Chris Beachum’s article, I’m starting to think this is a 2-way race between him and “Dr. House” Hugh Laurie, who unlike Travolta has a HUGE Emmy I.O.U. Factor that combined with love for the Night Manager, could lead to him winning.August 11, 2016 at 4:29 pm #1201905888
I liked John Travolta’s performance and I’m glad he got nominated, but Nathan Lane should absolutely have been nominated as well.
Agreed about the Nathan Lane snub. I would have replaced Plemons with him, personally. I think if there were 7 nominees, Lane probably would have made the cut considering all the O.J. love.August 11, 2016 at 4:45 pm #1201905896
I think John’s performance was good It’s that joke of Cuba being nominated that SuxAugust 11, 2016 at 4:50 pm #1201905897
If we assume they actually watched all 3 of thee shows in the category, which it seems like they did based on nominations, this is probably a race between Brown, Laurie, and Woodbine. I could see any of them winning, Travolta only got nominated because voters only watched these three shows it seems and had to fill spotsAugust 11, 2016 at 5:43 pm #1201905919
Even though I wouldn’t personally nominate John Travolta, I kinda enjoyed his performance. He was convincing as a smarmy lawyer. A role like this seems to be right up his alley.
It’s actually David Schwimmer’s nom that had me scratch my head. There was nothing noteworthy about his role to begin with. Is this because voters wanted to keep up with the Kardashians? It’s weird that Nathan Lane, who is somewhat of a respected name, was snubbed in favor of him.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.