 |
| Lesley Manville didn't get invited by SAG or HFPA, but she was good enough for Oscar anyway. |
But that's a gripe for a different day, because today we get to do one of my all-time favorite traditions at TMROJ: our annual "No Globe/No Sag/No Problem!" article. For those unfamiliar, every year we take a look at one of the more under-reported aspects of the awards season, that despite people pretending like anyone without a Globe or SAG nomination is DOA when it comes to Oscar, almost always there's at least 1-2 actors who randomly get nominated without either of these precursors. Even in an era of group think with the Academy, we have not had a year where no one is a "new name" since 2006, which was largely due to the bizarre Best Supporting Actor race that season (nine different actors were cited in those categories that year between the Globes & SAG Awards). For reference, in the past ten years these have been the "No Globes, No SAG" victors with AMPAS:
2017: Lesley Manville
2016: Michael Shannon
2015: Charlotte Rampling, Tom Hardy & Mark Ruffalo
2014: Bradley Cooper, Marion Cotillard, & Laura Dern
2013: Jonah Hill
2012: Quvenzhane Wallis, Emmanuelle Riva, & Jacki Weaver
2011: Gary Oldman & Max von Sydow
2010: Javier Bardem
2009: Maggie Gyllenhaal
2008: Michael Shannon
As you can see from the above, the "No Globe/No SAG" contenders usually fall into one of two camps. Either they are previous nominees/winners who are making a late play for the Oscar nomination, as they're already established enough with the Academy that they don't need precursors to get their screener into the DVD player, or they are "halo" nominations from films that are doing well in the Best Picture or other acting races that sneak onto enough ballots to get a fourth or fifth place nomination. It's worth noting that none of these actors usually end up winning (I believe the last time that someone pulled off an Oscar win without either precursor nomination was Marcia Gay Harden in 2000), but it's too soon to count the following ten contenders out of Oscar's big night:
For Her: She received raves for her work in Hereditary, which is a genre film but has the prestige-horror angle that Oscar sometimes goes for (look at Get Out last year), and she's a previous nominee. Collette has been working the rooms hard for this citation, and is the sort of actor most everyone has worked with & acknowledges is one of the best, but her nominations count doesn't really speak to that fact.
Against Her: It's a rough year for Best Actress outsiders (there is a lot of consensus forming around the Close/Gaga/McCarthy/Blunt/Colman quintet), so she'd likely have to take out either McCarthy or Blunt for their nominations, a tall order considering the former is one of Hollywood's most bankable movie stars and the latter most agree is overdue for this nomination. Plus, it's still genre and she might have needed more critical hosannas to land this spot.
For Her: Kidman is consistently one of the best actors in cinema, and this is exactly the sort of role that gets you nominated (long-suffering, long-supporting mother). Lucas Hedges did get a nomination for Best Actor at the Globes, and as a result this is probably more in the conversation with AMPAS than most critics have been giving it credit for, and Kidman's exactly the sort of matinee idol that gets nominated for work such as this. If people ignore her on their Best Actress ballots for Destroyer, perhaps they'll want to include her here?
Against Her: She's looking at likely vote-splitting for her work in Destroyer, even if it's in a different category, and she's got The Favourite women taking up two of the nominations already. Will Oscar have room for an actual supporting performance if they already have 40-60% of the category filled up with leads?
For Him: Carell seems to be pulling a play from Michael Shannon's book this year, where you just appear in as many films as possible and see what sticks. He likely doesn't have to worry about vote-splitting with Beautiful Boy and Welcome to Marwen, but a trio of films could make the Academy give one of its occasional "they were in everything, so let's nominate them" citations. Carell's got a showy role in a movie that feels like a Best Picture contender, which always helps-could this be a "halo" nomination of sorts?
Against Him: Best Supporting Actor seems to be solidifying (again, lead performers Timothee Chalamet & Mahershala Ali both make it harder for a turn like this to make the cut), and if anyone from Vice makes it, won't it be recent-winner Sam Rockwell, who got the Globe nomination? It's hard to envision the Academy loving this movie so much that both of them get into the lineup.
For Her: I can't decide if this should be #1 or if I'm crazy for including it on this list at all. Cardellini's role in Green Book is a trifle, nothing really impressive about it and lacking even a really juicy scene that might get her into the conversation in a different year. But she's also playing the supportive wife (one of Oscar's favorite roles) in a probable Best Picture contender, and romancing a surefire Best Actor nominee in her film. Is this a Jacki Weaver-type nomination?
Against Her: She's not as famous as most of the people on this list (though she's worked in Hollywood a while), which makes standing out more of a challenge, and it's a pittance of a part. With category fraud so rampant this year, how will there be room for a genuine supporting part to sneak in like Cardellini's?
For Him: I get the feeling that First Man is going to do much better with Oscar than it had any hopes to do with some of the precursor awards, considering it has very showy tech attributes that go a lot further with AMPAS. That should help Gosling, a two-time nominee who has never won, who gives an introverted performance here that has gained a lot of critical praise. If AMPAS wants subtle, he's a pretty strong option.
Against Him: If John David Washington is genuinely getting his nomination, that leaves very little room for a Best Actor nominee to sneak in, as Gosling would have to take out Viggo, Bale, Malek, or Cooper, none of which feel movable at this point. Oscar only occasionally goes for subtle-this might be too subdued for them, and the SAG miss for Claire Foy makes me wonder if no one is feeling this work this year.
For Her: The work in this film is showy and impressive, and you can't help but connect with her Cleo. For actor-fans of Cuaron's film (there will be a lot of them-expect this to be a Best Picture nominee), they've got no other place to show their enthusiasm other than Aparicio, and Globe/SAG are more into stars than Oscar is (because you become a star with that Oscar nomination).
Against Her: It's a director's film, and while the cast is an undersung hero of why it works, the combination of it being a visual rather than actorly showcase and that it's in a foreign language (already a hiccup with Oscar), means that Aparicio is going to need Oscar to love it a lot in order to get her into the race.
For Her: She's one of the country's most recognizable movie stars, and as a result can make a late play in a way that few others would be able to pull off (if Clint Eastwood's work in The Mule is good enough, he should be on this list as he's in the same boat, but the lack of a critic's screening makes me think that is entirely a commercial play). Ben is Back is getting great notices for Roberts, and it hasn't opened yet so it could be a strong commercial play (plus she'll be on red carpets already thanks to Homecoming). While there are a lot of Globe/SAG-nominated performers who could break up the quintet I've listed above, my gut says that if one of those names isn't on the list, it'll be Roberts that comes out of nowhere & scores for her work here.
Against Her: She needs strong box office & she needs to oust someone who is already a big part of the conversation. She can do that, but Roberts has never pulled off an Oscar citation without serious Globes support heading into the night.
For Him: He's a superstar actor (he must be getting a nomination at some point, right?), who has the most obvious, nominatable performance in a film that is a serious threat to win Best Picture. It's relatively rare for a Best Picture winner not to have at least one nominated performance, and villains do well in Best Supporting Actor.
Against Him: The Return of the King was a much surer Best Picture victor, and it missed completely for nominations. It's entirely possible that the Academy will skip this considering they don't go for comic book performances (Heath Ledger being the obvious exception), and he's been skipped over before for more obvious work. Maybe they just aren't fans?
For Him: Hawke's work here is remarkable, a tour-de-force triumph that will be catnip to anyone who sees it. Oscar loves very physical performances, and ones with lots of great monologues. It's easy to see him making it on #1 ballots if enough people catch the film...
Against Him: ...but will they? Schrader is probably looking at a Best Screenplay nomination here if Hawke can also pull it off, but this is a rough movie that people are going to have to start catching around the holidays, and it was released months ago, so the buzz is going to be tough to maintain as Vice and Bohemian Rhapsody continue to be a big presence in theaters. Might it just be one of those performances the Oscars wish they'd nominated after-the-fact?
1. Michelle Yeoh (Crazy Rich Asians)For Her: Everything. She's a well-known actor (check) who is appearing in a showcase supporting role (check) in a populist film that everyone saw (check) that is increasingly likely to win a Best Picture nomination (check). Plus, in an Academy increasingly focused on diversity with their acting nominations, Yeoh's an easy way to honor one of the most important Asian women in cinema. I had toyed with putting Hawke or Jordan at #1, but the SAG nomination for Best Ensemble combined with the dual nominations at the Globes makes me think this is probably going to happen. Also, Supporting Actress is the only race where the fifth slot doesn't have a clear favorite so she has room (Adams, King, Stone, & Weisz make it, but Foy is slipping, Robbie is out-of-nowhere, and Blunt will get in for Mary Poppins instead).
Against Her: It's a relatively slight role, and it's entirely possible that the Academy (allergic to comedies) won't love CRA the way the general public did. But I think this is happening-it's the only one on this list that I'd have listed on my official Top 5 predictions at this point.
No comments:
Post a Comment