Forum Replies Created
February 23, 2021 at 3:20 pm #1204057511
I’m cautiously excited for this project. I’m a fan of all three actresses and I’m optimistic about the quality of the overall miniseries, even with the director and writer involved. Davis has the toughest role because it’s contemporary and it’s going to be interesting how they write the character, what they choose to include and omit. Pfeiffer’s character was brilliantly portrayed by Gena Rowland’s and she cast a large shadow, but I’m curious what she does with the role. Anderson is an interesting choice because she’s just recently released The Crown, and playing two icons back to back is gutsy, especially because she could been seen as miscast for the more recent role. I was fond of Cynthia Nixon’s portrayal of her in Warm Springs, and I hope she brings the same endearing resolve. Roosevelt can be overplayed and I hoping Brier doesn’t let the actresses stay on 11.February 21, 2021 at 9:42 pm #1204053762
Cary Grant was nominated a few times during his peak for dramas. Unfortunately he didn’t play the studio game and was snubbed, particularly for his more memorable comedies. I remember seeing The Philadelphia Story the first time and I was just shocked that Stewart won best actor in that film, especially because Grant was far more prominent.
Sutherland should have won supporting for Ordinary People, as I’ve always believed Hutton was the sole lead role.
Jim Carrey should have been nominated for The Truman Show and Eternal Sunshine.
Emily Blunt – She was robbed by The Devil and A Quiet Place
Hugh Grant – He was robbed for Florence Foster Jenkins.February 21, 2021 at 4:05 pm #1204053394
I just finished binging the show twice over the weekend. The show is absolutely heartbreaking. The best thing I’ve seen all year. The acting is superb and I’m hoping that it receives several nominations and wins for the talented cast. Olly Alexander deserves any and all awards coming his way. I found the series the best thing that I’ve seen from Davies. I am supporting wins for Alexander, Howells and especially Hawes, and nominations for Harris and West in supporting. Howells was devastating in Episode 3 and Hawes owned Episode 5 with her brilliance. I like that the show didn’t offer easy answers, or characterizations. The characters were complex and recognized the complicated realities of coming of age, confronting the virus, and the scary era.February 17, 2021 at 2:24 pm #1204047106
King is coming for that lead actress award! I’m here for it! The role is so juicy and baity. I’m hoping the script and especially the direction are worthy of the subject.February 8, 2021 at 12:33 pm #1204031492
Seyfried has never really received the type of previous notices to make her inclusion in this category inevitable. I could easily imagine a set of five nominees that does not include her. Another actress with a stronger resume or pedigree would be more competitive. Maybe I’m off base and she wins a few of the televised awards, but it’s unlikely. Colman, Close, and Bakalova are strongly positioned at this point, and Youn and Zengel are also seeming like viable nominees. The lack of support for Seyfried at SAG is troubling for her prospects. Her career is not similar to King, who was able to overcome those snubs due to being a highly respected and awarded tv actress. Seyfried is mostly been nominated for Teen and People’s Choice awards and she didn’t exactly excel in her previous Awards bait, Les Misérables.
Seyfried is possible at this point, maybe probable, but I think her chances of being a frontrunner are gone.February 8, 2021 at 10:25 am #1204030934
At this point I’m sticking with Day as the final nominee. She has the type of Oscar bait that led to Erivo taking the final slot last year. Day’s film is getting a tepid response but I think it will still end up being less polarizing than Adams or Zendaya. Flanigan seems unlikely due to the smallness of her film and her lack of name recognition, Ronan would have probably been a safe bet in the same role. Unfortunately Loren was a nonstarter in this category, which is a shame because I think she would have been a force in supporting. I’m hoping Han Ye-ri surprises like Marina de Tavira in Roma, although those are two very different situations. Is she lead or supporting for the Oscars?February 8, 2021 at 9:13 am #1204030497
The halftime show started messy and I’m not sure the staging was always the most effective. Fortunately, the sound issues that sank the first section were improved as the show progressed. After Hours is a brilliant album, although I have never been fully sold on his visual aesthetics. I guess he has a concept, although I don’t usually see the connections between the songs and his ideas for the visuals. Blinding Lights was a great closer and somewhat redeemed the messy sections. The show was okay, and likely will go down as a middling effort. I had high expectations and the only section I truly loved was the ending. At least I’m glad he didn’t wear the bandages himself, turn into a bloody mess, or reference plastic surgery.
Grade: BDecember 28, 2020 at 10:29 pm #1203950854
I understood placing Karyo in supporting, as the main mystery surrounded James Nesbitt’s Tony Hughes. I was always disappointed that Nesbitt wasn’t able to get nominated at the Globes or Emmys. His performance was absolutely heartbreaking. I never understood how Frances O’Connor was nominated in lead at the Globes, she was absolutely supporting. The show was renewed for a second season before the Emmys, but I guess they got away with it being a technicality. Karyo was still involved in the second season, but the mystery was different. I’m glad Karyo was able to front his own show, with Baptiste on BBC/PBS. The second season will premiere soon and I’m looking forward to seeing Fiona Shaw in this particular world of corruption. I’m sad to hear it will likely be Baptiste’s last, after two seasons of The Missing and two of Baptiste.December 28, 2020 at 9:30 pm #1203950800
In Six Feet Under, Griffiths was supporting in season 1, 3 and 4. I would argue that she could have been classified as a lead in seasons 2 and 5. She likely would have won the Emmy if she had stayed supporting for the first two seasons. Her unfortunate tape “The Secret,” also didn’t help matters, as it was centered on her sex addiction and included a threesome. The decision was likely made based on her acting, but it wasn’t wise coming off her Golden Globes win.
Hall was a lead but he would have won at least once if he had submitted supporting, especially for “A Private Life.” I think the vote splitting helped Chiklis and Janney win in 2002. That year was expected to be close between Six Feet Under and The West Wing, but instead the latter won three out of four acting awards, with the latter only winning director for Ball guest actress for Clarkson.December 28, 2020 at 9:18 pm #1203950794
Contracts and salaries were also likely factors in placement for shows like Seinfeld and Friends. For example, the latter had an all for one mentality which resulted in some being nominated while competing in supporting and some in lead, I believe Aniston was nominated in both, winning lead. The actors in Friends all had the same contract and salary, therefore it made sense to keep them together.
Seinfeld was a different scenario, as Jerry was the driving force, created the show, and made significantly more than the other three. I remember reading that the other three banded together in negotiations to receive significant raises during the last few seasons.December 28, 2020 at 8:20 pm #1203950749
So you would have wanted all of the core four to submit in lead? Why would you single out George as a lead? Only because he’s the only supporting actor who couldn’t win his category? Richards and Louis-Dreyfus were both able to win competitive supporting races, and both would have likely been snubbed in lead. The show was not built around their personas.
Grammar was the lead in Frasier, Shandling was The Larry Sanders Show, same goes with Ray Romano in Everybody Loves Raymond. All of these shows had significant supporting characters that had their own storylines and yet I don’t recall there being a push to nominate Hyde Pierce in lead, and he won multiple SAG awards. Brad Garrett also had his own storylines and sometimes had more comedic moments than the lead, but I guess I just see things differently.
I always thought Seinfeld was created to compliment Jerry’s point of view, he tied together the stories thematically, sometimes with his stand up. Louis-Dreyfus was able to win a Golden Globe and two individual SAG awards but I’m not sure she would have won or even been nominated in the highly competitive leading category. So many of these comedic actresses had the show created for them, like Candice Bergen, Ellen Degeneres, Cybill Shepherd and Roseanne. I’m a huge fan of these series but I think it just made logical sense to single out a lead, or in some cases two leads. I’m sure it was likely in the contract that Cybill Shepherd was the lead in the series named after her, even if Christine Baranski received more acclaim and was singled out by SAG.December 28, 2020 at 7:27 pm #1203950705
Alexander was supporting in Seinfeld and his best chance at winning would have been in supporting. It’s unfortunate he was never able to overcome Richards, his role just wasn’t as flashy. George was a supporting character, every actor other than Jerry were supporting him. Alexander would have had no chance against Danson or especially Grammar or Lithgow, both of whom were undeniable and dominating leads.December 28, 2020 at 6:22 pm #1203950633
I personally have Eugene winning, I made the distinction in an earlier post by singling out Daniel by his first name. I know that Daniel has the flashier role and is a Hyphen (Director/Producer/Writer) that they generally like, but I think the actors will want to reward Eugene.
Eugene is a well liked actor who has many noteworthy roles, both large and small. He has worked with so many of his peers in the industry and he seems to have general good will for his career. I saw a recent Newport Film Festival tribute online and so many actors had such wonderful things to say about his career, as well as his character as a person. It seems like his moment to shine, a recognition for his legendary career as a comedian.
I could also see them rewarding Sudeikis or Daniel. Sudeikis, and Ted Lasso, seem like something the actors may take some time to fully discover, but I may be wrong. Sometimes SAG is slow to reward new series, and I have a suspicion that will be the case.December 28, 2020 at 1:40 pm #1203950151
I’m also predicting O’Hara and Levy. I think Levy will have a harder time overcoming a vote split, but I still think he beats Sudeikis. The Comedy Actor race will be wide open this year, as Shalhoub will not have a chance to three-peat. I don’t see any of the female contenders being a real challenge, in fact, O’Hara and Annie will likely receive the most votes.December 27, 2020 at 12:41 pm #1203948041
The lines between leading and supporting have always been blurred, at the Emmys, Academy Awards and even the Tonys. What constitutes a lead and why does the same performance change as supporting? The determination can be star power, positioning, or simply being practical.
I believe all of the main actors submitted lead at the Canadian Awards, with O’Hara dominating, Levy winning a few times, and Daniel and Annie only receiving nominations. The only benefit to their placements were that some of the other supporting performances were rewarded or nominated. Hampshire, Reid and even Elliott won, while Dustin Milligan, Sarah Levy and Jennifer Robertson were nominated. The placement does not usually make sense at the Emmys, or other awards, because of the internal competition, especially considering the other nominees. O’Hara might have overcome vote splitting with Murphy, but I’m not so certain one of the Levy’s would have prevailed, even with weaker competition.