stripe Posted October 20, 2015 Share Posted October 20, 2015 There is a rule against having 2 nominations for acting in the same category. Didn't know that! Weird stupid rule... A composer or a writer can be double nommed but an actor cannot? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Impact Posted October 20, 2015 Author Share Posted October 20, 2015 Probably was due to back in the 30s/40s where actors/actresses would be in tons of movies per year to avoid a huge problem there. Of course there was when one guy was nominated for lead and supporting for the same role-which the rule has prevented that since. In the early years you could get nominated for every movie as one nomination such as Janet Gaynor won for 3 films in the same year. That would also be a huge problem. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalo Posted October 21, 2015 Share Posted October 21, 2015 Didn't know that! Weird stupid rule... A composer or a writer can be double nommed but an actor cannot? Actually not really, if the same actor was nominated twice in the same category it would end up actually hurting their chances for a win. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Impact Posted October 21, 2015 Author Share Posted October 21, 2015 Actually not really, if the same actor was nominated twice in the same category it would end up actually hurting their chances for a win. Yep-and as said before actors/actresses use to be in way more films a year which would of caused another problem. Though you do have to wonder how much they actually vote on the film they are in-for example, Jim Broadbent won for Iris, the same year he was in Moulin Rouge, he even thanked the people of MR in his speech, which really makes you wonder which film he was winning for. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stripe Posted October 21, 2015 Share Posted October 21, 2015 Actually not really, if the same actor was nominated twice in the same category it would end up actually hurting their chances for a win. Last year Desplat was double nommed in Score but he was able to win. The splitting vote can be a factor (Horner in 1995 or Williams in 2001), but being double nommed can help to put a special focus on the achievement. Specially in acting categories. Voters could be more biased to vote for one of those two instead for one of the rest as an overdue recognition for a fantastic year. On the other hand, if double nominations aren't allowed we could see some members voting for an actor or an actress instead of voting for a performance. Winslet for The reader was helped by Revolutionary Road's performance, that wasn't nommed. Judged only by her performance in The reader, she could have lost to Hathaway (Rachel getting married) or Streep (Doubt). 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoolioD1 Posted October 21, 2015 Share Posted October 21, 2015 Actually not really, if the same actor was nominated twice in the same category it would end up actually hurting their chances for a win. how does that make it a less stupid rule? It's still dumb. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalo Posted October 21, 2015 Share Posted October 21, 2015 how does that make it a less stupid rule? It's still dumb. I don't completely agree with it, but it does make it a little less stupid Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Impact Posted October 22, 2015 Author Share Posted October 22, 2015 I wouldn't be surprise if Bullock makes it in to be honest-given the fact there always seems to be that one film that was not that great but the acting was really good. (Which includes winners even like La Vie En Rose, Iron Lady, Girl Interrupted) Though I'm not predicting her right now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blur Posted October 23, 2015 Share Posted October 23, 2015 AMPAS usually don't have problems accepting category fraud. The fact that critics are buying it further points to how easy of a sell their frauds will be. Yes, they don't. But I remember Weinstein promote Kate Winslet as supporting for The Reader... I know it's very unlikely, but could happen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TStechnij Posted October 24, 2015 Share Posted October 24, 2015 Yes, they don't. But I remember Weinstein promote Kate Winslet as supporting for The Reader... I know it's very unlikely, but could happen. If I remember correctly, the weird thing about Kate that year IS that Harvey pushed her lead when she was a supporting role. Fraud just usually goes the other way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4815162342 Posted October 24, 2015 Share Posted October 24, 2015 If I remember correctly, the weird thing about Kate that year IS that Harvey pushed her lead when she was a supporting role. Fraud just usually goes the other way. Correct. Winslet was initially getting awards in Supporting for The Reader (such as at the Golden Globes and SAG), but when Revolutionary Road's Oscar chances in most main categories plummeted, Harvey pushed as hard as he could for the Lead Actress nod to push out her Rev Road performance Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Impact Posted October 30, 2015 Author Share Posted October 30, 2015 Maggie Smith being nominated would not surprise me-she also would have one of the longest records between first and last nomination (though Hepburn's is still longer). Mainly since she is a older and well known actress, and she is British of course. (She is younger then I thought she was-when she was in Hook I thought she was like 80-she was only 56 when she filmed it!) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoolioD1 Posted October 30, 2015 Share Posted October 30, 2015 she's got that "been old forever" thing. like how Max Von Sydow has been a 70 year old since the exorcist 40 YEARS AGO. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Impact Posted October 30, 2015 Author Share Posted October 30, 2015 2 minutes ago, CoolioD1 said: she's got that "been old forever" thing. like how Max Von Sydow has been a 70 year old since the exorcist 40 YEARS AGO. Ben Kingsley has looked old forever, Helen Hayes always looked old. I would say Steve Martin but that's kind of unfair since he went gray really young. Patrick Stewart was in his 40s when Star Trek TNG started yet looked a lot older. Then there is Tom Cruise who has looked young forever. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4815162342 Posted November 1, 2015 Share Posted November 1, 2015 Cate Blanchett deserves one for Truth, but that film's mixed reception and the dumb Academy rule means it's going to be Carol and Carol alone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
All about Eve - old Posted November 1, 2015 Share Posted November 1, 2015 I preferred Cate in Truth and I liked the film better than Carol too. But I agree, Carol is going to be the one she gets nominated for. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TStechnij Posted November 2, 2015 Share Posted November 2, 2015 16 minutes ago, All about Eve said: I preferred Cate in Truth and I liked the film better than Carol too. But I agree, Carol is going to be the one she gets nominated for. Woof lol. I love Truth and Cate's performance, but I can't fathom how this is justifiable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4815162342 Posted November 2, 2015 Share Posted November 2, 2015 15 minutes ago, TStechnij said: Woof lol. I love Truth and Cate's performance, but I can't fathom how this is justifiable. Is this another of those times where someone's opinion on a film being better than one of your darlings makes no sense to you? Because it's starting to be a noticeable array of blinders you got ready to wear. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
All about Eve - old Posted November 2, 2015 Share Posted November 2, 2015 38 minutes ago, TStechnij said: Woof lol. I love Truth and Cate's performance, but I can't fathom how this is justifiable. Not sure I have to justify it. I preferred Truth, that's all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TStechnij Posted November 2, 2015 Share Posted November 2, 2015 56 minutes ago, 4815162342 said: Is this another of those times where someone's opinion on a film being better than one of your darlings makes no sense to you? Because it's starting to be a noticeable array of blinders you got ready to wear. Isn't this a board to discuss films? I don't understand how me asking someone to elaborate on why they prefer a film is so off-limits? Or even challenging tastes: I'm trying to start a conversation not be a dick, but maybe it comes off too pointed and condescending. That's isn't my intention! Like I said, I loved Truth and is higher on my list of 2015 films than Spotlight. But, when it comes to awards potentials there are no blinders for Truth. It isn't happening and I think everyone agrees with that. Now, The Martian I'll admit I might be fighting it a little too hard. ;) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
