Jason

You could have just cc'd me. Anyway, it's pretty widely known that the first time this controversy was brought back to light (at least in the news media) was the Variety interview where he decided to bring along his young daughter, which obviously makes it completely improper to have an open discussion regarding rape, I don't think any journalist would do that. It's been reported (not just here) that the Variety interview was pre-arranged and was intended to head off controversy. If that's the case, bringing along his daughter would be an attempt to use her as a shield. The other problem was he said this (underline my emphasis): I, and many others, didn't think that struck the right tone. I don't mind him mentioning that he acquitted, but I would have preferred to hear he was sorry, and knew that he made a mistake. Describing it as a very painful moment for him rather than a mistake seemed to me (and others) that he thought he was the victim. That being said, I was willing to accept that maybe under the pressure of the interview it didn't come out the way he intended. The problem is, since then he's repeatedly managed to write and say things (I don't have time to dig them all up, you can find them if you look though this thread) where his emphasis is always on himself, and even when he acknowledges the suffering of the victim, he always manages to dodge actually making an apology. "I've grown and matured in so many ways" etc. instead of "I made a huge mistake for which I'm really sorry." He made a Facebook post (I think it's since been deleted, but maybe I just suck at finding things on Facebook, it was posted to his page on August 18) where he described the encounter as "unambiguously consensual". Obviously he thought that was the case, but the victim clearly didn't, and if he had grown enough to understand that he would have said "I thought it was consensual at the time". Anyway, I don't see much point in rehashing all this, but you asked. I really don't think people are wanting this film to fail because of racism (although I acknowledge racism is still a very real problem in general), because until this controversy was brought back to light the general tone of critics and the media was very supportive. Even now a lot of critic reviews are saying that the film is worth seeing regardless of Parker's faults. From one of my local newspapers (full review here):

Moana Beauty and the Beast Hacksaw Ridge Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them Sing La La Land Rogue One Arrival Passengers The Red Turtle

I'm pretty sure most (if not all) of us here have no material interest in drawing attention to the rape allegations. That's also the case for most of the people drawing attention to it outside of these boards. It's one thing to say that you're satisfied with his acquittal and looking forward to seeing the film, it's entirely another to suggest that those who are not have ulterior motives.

This is an excellent point. In most years there's a clear frontrunner in terms of critical reception, and in all of those years that film has won the Award. In 2013, Frozen wasn't a clear frontrunner in terms of critical reception, but it was still the obvious frontrunner. Brave and Big Hero 6 are the only winners that come to my mind as not being clear frontrunners in any way, so there isn't enough of a sample to examine whether there's any kind of vote-splitting going on, studio-based or otherwise. True, I imagine Disney was happy about Spirited Away's win, a month before the home video release. But given the strength of its reception relative to the competition that year, I'm quite sure Spirited Away would have won regardless of whether Disney wanted it to.

The Polar Express was borderline on my list for that reason. I liked the story, but the animation style took a bit of getting used to.

Right, but there's no evidence that that's the case. The only year that Disney (incl. Pixar) has had multiple nominations and didn't have one of them win the Award is 2002. Even if you ascribe that to vote-splitting rather than Spirited Away being the superior film, the general pattern is that years with multiple Disney nominations do not prevent a Disney winner.

I would suggest that Spirited Away won because it was a much stronger contender than either of those films, not because of vote splitting. Average RT rating of Spirited Away is 8.6, Lilo & Stitch 7.3, Treasure Planet 6.5.

Just realized it's available on Netflix. I'll watch it soon.

Out of curiosity, is the same/similar scoring system being used?

I wouldn't let it rankle too much, it doesn't actually mean that Pets or Sing has a better chance of getting the nomination, just that Awards Circuit is probably wrong. I examined the average RT ratings of all nominees and eligible films in 2013, 2014, and 2015. I used average RT ratings as a proxy for how the Animation branch might be likely to view films because RT ratings come from a wider sample than Metacritic and don't apply any secret weights. I compared CG animated films to non-CG animated films, since there's some evidence to suggest that the Animation branch has higher expectations for CG films relative to critics (The Lego Movie "snub"). In 2013, two CG animated films were nominated with ratings of 6.6 (DM2) and 6.5 (Croods). In that year, there were only two non-CG animated films to significantly* exceed those ratings, both of which were nominated (Ernest and Celestine, The Wind Rises). The only film that had a significantly higher rating to not be nominated was Cloudy 2. *(from a statistical standpoint) In 2014, the lowest CG animated film had a rating of 7.3 (BH6). There were only two non-CG animated films to significantly exceed that rating, both of which were nominated (Song of the Sea, Princess Kayuga). The only film with a significantly higher rating to not be nominated was The Lego Movie. Even if you make no distinction between CG and non-CG films, only two films with a significantly higher rating than the lowest nominated film (Boxtrolls, 7.0) missed the nomination. In 2015, Inside Out had a rating of 8.9 and the next highest CG animated film had a rating of 7.1 (Peanuts). Of the five non-CG animated films with a rating greater than Peanuts, the maximum possible four were nominated. Pets has an average rating of 6.2. There are already eight films with a significantly higher rating, so at least four of those will have to miss the nomination for Pets to sneak in, which would be unprecedented. In my opinion, Pets has no chance at all. Based on the early reviews and making the usual statistical assumptions (which are sound for the other films I've examined), Sing has only a 10% chance of exceeding a rating of 7.3 (rating of The Little Prince). There are already four non-CG animated films to significantly exceed that rating (Kubo, Red Turtle, April, My Life as a Courgette), as well as two CG animated films (Zootopia, Dory). For Sing to be nominated either all of the other CG animated films will need to miss, or at least one significantly higher non-CG film would have to miss. Both of these scenarios are unprecedented, and this is a reasonably-best-case scenario for Sing's final average rating. The Little Prince already has a rating of 7.3 instead of a 10% chance of reaching it, so it has a better chance than Sing in my view. It may also benefit from being partly in stop-motion. I think Finding Dory, April and the Extraordinary World, and My Life as a Courgette are the most likely contenders for the 5th spot. I consider Miss Hokusai to be somewhat less likely than those three, partly from average rating but also because April won over Hokusai at the 2015 Annecy International Film Festival, and Courgette is the 2016 winner. The Little Prince would be next on my list, based on the fact it is mostly CG. (Average rating isn't much lower than the others and it did beat April at the César Awards.)

Zootopia Beauty and the Beast Wall-E How To Train Your Dragon Big Hero 6 Frozen Ratatouille The Wind Rises The Lion King Princess Mononoke Aladdin Mulan Wreck-It Ralph When Marnie Was There Finding Dory Tangled Finding Nemo The Little Prince Spirited Away The Incredibles Toy Story 3 Howl's Moving Castle The Princess and the Frog The Book of Life The Good Dinosaur Inside Out The Little Mermaid The Iron Giant Up Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs Toy Story 2 Sleeping Beauty Toy Story Lilo & Stitch How To Train Your Dragon 2 The Jungle Book A Bug’s Life Shrek Kung Fu Panda Kubo and the Two Strings Shrek 2 101 Dalmatians The Brave Little Toaster The Land Before Time James and the Giant Peach Prince of Egypt Brave Hercules Despicable Me Emperor's New Groove Kung Fu Panda 2 Kung Fu Panda 3 The Lego Movie Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs Despicable Me 2 Ice Age Rango The Polar Express All Dogs Go to Heaven The Road to El Dorado @chasmmi Confession: I left All Dogs Go to Heaven and The Road to El Dorado for the last minute, so I didn't really have time to give them proper consideration. But they are at least worthy of inclusion.

I'm betting on either Dory or one of the GKIDS releases. Making the usual statistical assumptions, Sing has only a 4.4% chance of exceeding Dory's average rating on RT. I suspect that the Animation branch will receive it similarly to critics overall, and won't be influenced by its more recent release. (I think that's more of a factor in the Academy-wide voting for the winner rather than the nomination process.)

We're trying to do you a favour by giving you a replacement choice for worst of 2016!

Moana Beauty and the Beast Hacksaw Ridge Queen of Katwe Fantastic Beasts Sing La La Land Rogue One Arrival Passengers

So right now there are actually only 4 ratings with an average score provided. Assuming a random sample and normal distribution (good assumptions for the films I've examined in the past), that means there's a 95% chance the final rating of Sing will fall between 4.6 and 7.9. There is about a 15% chance of the final rating either exceeding 7.1 or falling below 5.4. Most probable final RT is much harder to analyze. Usually films with an average rating just above 6 land in the mid-60s, but animated films tend to land higher because a well above average number of ratings equivalent to 6/10 or less are given "fresh" anyway.

@chasmmi I have a draft list, but hoping to squeeze in a couple more. Also want to rewatch The Lion King, and I'm on the waitlist at the library. Think it'll arrive in time though.

Lmao, this reply to the original tweet: (Too late for that. )

Unlike Disney's tie-in to Zootopia, it's also a major stretch. Disney didn't have to photoshop anything to create the tie-in.

Well, 14A doesn't exist in the US. So what I meant is that if some R films were to instead admit teenagers 14+ (regardless of what that new rating was called), that might bother parents in the US even though it's almost always a non-issue here for films rated 14A.

So on further inspection, it seems like "G" in Canada is the de facto rating for animated family movies, I actually can't find a live-action example currently in theatres. Our "R" is the equivalent NC-17, and pretty much never happens as well. So live-action films here are split between "PG", 14A, and 18A (equivalent of R), with PG-13 films in the US generally being "PG" here but occasionally 14A, and R films being split between 14A and 18A. I think that's a little better? But then again, different country, maybe parents in the US would freak out over some R films being rated 14A instead.

It's always a bit weird for me to hear that films like Finding Dory are "PG", but it's quite likely that's just because I'm used to the Canadian rating system. Technically, each province has its own film review board to rate films, but the ratings used are the same everywhere except Quebec. Films usually receive the same rating in most provinces. Here are the ratings and their descriptions (from the Wikipedia article): Recent examples of films in each category: G: Zootopia, Finding Dory, Secret Life of Pets, Storks PG: Kubo, Light Between Oceans, Star Trek Beyond, Suicide Squad, Sully 14A: Blair Witch, Don't Breathe, Magnificent Seven, Snowden 18A: Deadpool, Sausage Party R/A: ? (I can't think of any) Just putting this here for comparison, I'm wondering what those of you used to the MPAA ratings think of it. Wow. This was rated "PG" in every English-speaking province, and "G" in Quebec.

This would have been a surprise at the beginning of the year, but not after the weak performance of Dory and IA5.

I've found figures for total box office revenue for France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and the UK dating back to 2003, allowing a comparison of Nemo, IO, and Dory in terms of box office market share for those countries. US + Canada provided as a comparison. Italicized figures are estimates, all figures are in US$ millions: So we can see that the domestic gross of Dory is an increase over Nemo's even taking into account the expansion of the North American market, but that Dory has had substantially smaller market share (19% to even 74% less) than Nemo did in the major European markets. I think this is surprising in part because of how big Nemo was (even greater market share in Europe than NA), and also because Dory was such a success domestically. Dory will also finish with a smaller market share than Inside Out in France, Italy, and Spain. (With the UK being about the same, and Germany yet to open.)

Tell us how you really feel about Minions, I'm still not sure!

With the opening in Poland, I think Pets is pretty much guaranteed to pass IO. Unless it does somehow does less than ~$13M in Italy.