The inexplicable editing snub is the big monkey wrench in OUaTiH's Best Picture aspirations.
Stats like these don’t mean anything unless one can explain a deeper relationship between the two nominations and a win.The inexplicable editing snub is the big monkey wrench in OUaTiH's Best Picture aspirations.
The last film to win Best Picture without an editing nomination AND without a silly "one shot" gimmick to excuse its absence was... get this... Ordinary People in 1980.
That's how significant a snub this is. It's a HUGE deal.
It's similar to an Edgar Wright film in that it's unfunny and boring but people love to insist that it's very good actually
Maybe compared to the rest of his filmography (though I’d hold it higher than World’s End). But sucked is a bit strong considering some of the films we get on the regular that actually suck.
They are basically co-leads. But putting them both up for the same category would ensure that neither would win, so they split them as such. Leo gets Lead Actor because he gets top billing and probably, even if very narrowly, he has more screen time.
I'll say that Watiti did something Edgar Wright didn't, directed a total of one (1) good movie. But it's not Jojo Rabbit
Can't deny the Welsh pope his nom. I mean, you just can't nom one pope and not the other. It wouldn't be right.
Anthony Hopkins won Best Actor 28 years ago. The category has never been "Let's time how long a person appears on screen!"
Trust me - there's more to it than that, but I can see where you're coming from. Wright has a kinetic genius to his films that's almost Buster Keaton-esque in its approach.
When your acting nom will be the film's only nom, it's easy to get snubbed at the Oscars even if you were getting recognition in precursors. Same goes for Lupita, she had some notice but would have been the only nom for Us. Even if they're just song noms, Judy and Harriet (real original titles there) do have a second nom.You're absolutely right. Zellweger was getting nominated regardless.
Awkwafina needed Erivo to miss and for the Academy to feel that giving Erivo a nomination for Best Song was enough.
And that's a difficult feat to pull off when Erivo's film made almost three times as much at the box office as hers.
And was entirely in English.
And had her playing a famous American.
The only other possibility would have been Ronan. And the Academy loves to nominate Ronan.
Largely because Saoirse Ronan is consistently awesome.
Couple that with Little Women's Best Picture presence and it was always going to be an uphill battle for Awkwafina.
I was already part time when Titanic won it all.
I thought Pesci deserved it specifically because he didn't dominate the film. It was the complete opposite of his performances in Goodfellas or Casino, loud and brash and in your face. He did a superb job reminding everyone who remembers him post-retirement for Goodfellas and Home Alone that he has much more range than just "short angry asshole".A Best Supporting Actor nod for Pesci but nothing for De Niro?! That's some bollocks. Don't get me wrong, Pesci is good in The Irishman, but it's not exactly an Oscar-worthy performance. As for Pacino, anyone could see that nomination from a mile away. He dominates in that movie.
Shame about Uncut Gems getting snubbed. Really wanted to see Adam Sandler get nominated, if purely for the disbelief factor.