Kalo Posted February 25, 2016 Share Posted February 25, 2016 (edited) I know this is really early, but I just saw "Risen" last week, and was shocked by how good Joseph Fiennes was in it. now given that fact that it's a February release and a film the academy likes to ignore and that fact that there is still A lot of movies to be released, he probably won't get a nom. but I thought it's worth talking about, especially for a film opening so early in the year. other strong possibilities so far. Michael Fassbender - The Light Between Oceans, just from the trailer you could tell he was giving his all. Adam Driver or Andrew Garfield - Silence, forgive me if I'm wrong, Liam Neeson is playing a supporting role in the film I believe? and I think Andrew is the lead, and considering it's a Scorsese Film and that I think it's just a matter of time before either actor gets a nomination I wouldn't be surprised at all if it were for Silence. Birth of Nation is getting a lot of buzz too, I don't know much of anything about Nate Parker though Casey Affleck - Manchester by the Sea lots of positive buzz. Casey is a very underrated actor imo Tom Hanks - Sully. Thats pretty much all I can think of at the moment. thoughts? Edited February 25, 2016 by Kalo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jake Gittes Posted February 25, 2016 Share Posted February 25, 2016 Affleck, Parker and Garfield seem like good possibilities, especially the first two since they already got a lot of praise. I think Hanks will miss out as is usual for him these days. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WrathOfHan Posted February 25, 2016 Share Posted February 25, 2016 Casey Affleck, Manchester by the Sea Adam Driver/Andrew Garfield, Silence Tom Hanks, Sully Woody Harrelson, LBJ Michael Keaton, The Founder Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jake Gittes Posted February 25, 2016 Share Posted February 25, 2016 Casey Affleck - Manchester By The Sea Christian Bale/Oscar Isaac - The Promise Andrew Garfield - Silence Michael Keaton - The Founder Nate Parker - The Birth of a Nation some alternates Warren Beatty - untitled Howard Hughes Joel Edgerton - Loving Ryan Gosling - La La Land Michael Fassbender - The Light Between Oceans David Oyelowo - A United Kingdom Brad Pitt - War Machine Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Impact Posted February 26, 2016 Share Posted February 26, 2016 Leonardo will finally! Sorry had to say that Really-not sure yet. Wonder if I should start threads for the other acting awards. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoolioD1 Posted February 26, 2016 Share Posted February 26, 2016 Casey Affleck, Manchester By The Sea Joel Edgerton, Loving Michael Fassbender, Light Between Oceans Andrew Garfield, Silence Nate Parker, Birth of a Nation but that all looks a bit too young there needs to be at least one oldie in there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Impact Posted February 26, 2016 Share Posted February 26, 2016 1 minute ago, CoolioD1 said: Casey Affleck, Manchester By The Sea Joel Edgerton, Loving Michael Fassbender, Light Between Oceans Andrew Garfield, Silence Nate Parker, Birth of a Nation but that all looks a bit too young there needs to be at least one oldie in there. Yes we need at least one old bloke! Really I think Affleck is the oldest one listed on yours! (I have to check) Edit: Just checked, Edgerton edges out Casey Affleck by being 14 months older at the ripe old age of 41! Yes such a old bloke! (if you are 13 years old that is :P) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalo Posted February 26, 2016 Author Share Posted February 26, 2016 Well the 2015 awards should have ran about 25 years younger so we'll see. lets hope there is no Treblay level snubage this year (but that's probably is too much to ask for) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WrathOfHan Posted February 26, 2016 Share Posted February 26, 2016 16 minutes ago, Kalo said: Well the 2015 awards should have ran about 25 years younger so we'll see. lets hope there is no Treblay level snubage this year (but that's probably is too much to ask for) This year's nominees aren't really young Cranston: 59 Damon: 45 Leo: 41 Fassbender: 38 Redmayne: 34 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalo Posted February 26, 2016 Author Share Posted February 26, 2016 (edited) 8 minutes ago, WrathOfHan said: This year's nominees aren't really young Cranston: 59 Damon: 45 Leo: 41 Fassbender: 38 Redmayne: 34 that's not what I was saying at all. I'm saying Jacob Tremblay gave one of the best-if not the best actor performance of the year and didn't even get nominated. thus should have Been. Eddie Redmayne (youngest) 34 - Jacob Tremblay's age 9 = 25. Edited February 26, 2016 by Kalo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Impact Posted February 26, 2016 Share Posted February 26, 2016 Deadpool for the win Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SLAM! Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 On 2/26/2016 at 11:10 PM, Impact said: Deadpool for the win I think Ryan Reynolds will have a real shot at Best Actor in a Comedy at the next Golden Globes for Deadpool. Anyways, my picks for the Oscars thus far: Casey Affleck (Manchester by the Sea) Tom Thanks (Sully) Michael Keaton (The Founder) David Oyelowo (A United Kingdom) Michael Fassbender (Light Between Oceans) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
filmlover Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 On February 26, 2016 at 10:28 PM, Kalo said: that's not what I was saying at all. I'm saying Jacob Tremblay gave one of the best-if not the best actor performance of the year and didn't even get nominated. thus should have Been. Eddie Redmayne (youngest) 34 - Jacob Tremblay's age 9 = 25. The director's nomination was probably their way of recognizing the difficulty it likely was getting that kind of performance out of a very small child. But the actor categories have always been much more difficult for those under 30 to get nominated in compared to the actress side, unless your movie is a top 5 Best Picture contender (Brokeback Mountain, The Social Network). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalo Posted March 3, 2016 Author Share Posted March 3, 2016 1 hour ago, filmlover said: The director's nomination was probably their way of recognizing the difficulty it likely was getting that kind of performance out of a very small child. But the actor categories have always been much more difficult for those under 30 to get nominated in compared to the actress side, unless your movie is a top 5 Best Picture contender (Brokeback Mountain, The Social Network). Exactly why are younger woman so much more likely to be nominated then younger men? one of the many problems with the oscars. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
filmlover Posted March 3, 2016 Share Posted March 3, 2016 1 minute ago, Kalo said: Exactly why are younger woman so much more likely to be nominated then younger men? one of the many problems with the oscars. Because young women are faced with more challenging roles than young men when it comes to meaty material (like the Brie Larson role in Room). As much as people like to say that Hollywood is unfair to women (a stance that I won't disagree with), they're also kinda limited in terms of rich material for younger men too: the "meaty" roles for that age group are limited to comedies (mostly raunchy college/high school-set ones) and action/blockbuster films, and the rest for the most part is simply being there in a supporting role as either the son to an established star or some other part of the ensemble (ex: in the past year, Sebastian Stan was Meryl Streep's son in Ricki and the Flash and was part of The Martian's ensemble). But it's mostly because females mature 10 times faster than males do. True story. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalo Posted March 3, 2016 Author Share Posted March 3, 2016 1 hour ago, filmlover said: Because young women are faced with more challenging roles than young men when it comes to meaty material (like the Brie Larson role in Room). As much as people like to say that Hollywood is unfair to women (a stance that I won't disagree with), they're also kinda limited in terms of rich material for younger men too: the "meaty" roles for that age group are limited to comedies (mostly raunchy college/high school-set ones) and action/blockbuster films, and the rest for the most part is simply being there in a supporting role as either the son to an established star or some other part of the ensemble (ex: in the past year, Sebastian Stan was Meryl Streep's son in Ricki and the Flash and was part of The Martian's ensemble). But it's mostly because females mature 10 times faster than males do. True story. I can't argue with that, although I'm not sure I would say 10 times faster haha. you could also argue that older woman have it harder than younger woman too. it's all quite unbalanced. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Impact Posted March 16, 2016 Share Posted March 16, 2016 I have pointed this out before-but looking at the 10 youngest for actor and actress winners you will see a huge difference in age. Just consider this: Youngest lead actor win: Adrian Brody at 29 years, 343 days. 10th youngest lead actress win: Vivian Leigh at 26 years, 116 days. To put it more in perspective:Reece Witherspoon is the 31st youngest winner for lead actress, at the time of her win, she was 3 days younger then Brody was at the time of his! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoolioD1 Posted March 16, 2016 Share Posted March 16, 2016 they like that young pussy but the young guys make them feel insecure. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SLAM! Posted April 16, 2016 Share Posted April 16, 2016 (edited) Neel Sethi did one of the best Mowgli interpretations ever in the Jungle Book. I think he might be in the running for a nomination. Serious. Neel Sethi was basically acting by himself in the movie, but not only did he be himself and allow his personality to be displayed, but he also demonstrates very good emotional acting. It's not a normal suggestion by any means, but I think he deserves it. Edited April 16, 2016 by slambros Added a word Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AniNate Posted April 16, 2016 Share Posted April 16, 2016 The only thing Sethi did was make me appreciate how difficult being a one man show is. Found him annoying half the time and stiff the other half Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
