What's new

2021 Oscar Nominations And Discussion Thread. (1 Viewer)

Jake Lipson

Premium
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2002
Messages
20,966
Real Name
Jake Lipson
Setting aside whether or not it was appropriate to honor Boseman last, I'm shocked that the producers don't appear to have considered the possibility that he would lose. It was very strange how they just sort of threw to Questlove to come up with some kind of closure for the evening after the event they were expecting did not come to pass.

This is another thing a good host could have helped be less awkward. If a host is there to guide us through the evening, and we return to the host at the end to take us out, there is a sense of completion to the whole thing. A good host could've made some sort of joke about it or acknowledged how weird it felt in an attempt to smooth things over. Instead, it became very clear that they didn't have a contingency plan for Boseman losing and they really should have.

Riz Ahmed won the Independent Spirit Award for Sound of Metal and Hopkins won the BAFTA for The Father. So while it was a reasonable guess that Boseman was going to win, there were precursor clues that it might not have gone that way. They didn't know, but they did know that Hopkins wouldn't be present. So if I were involved in planning the ceremony, I would've said in some meeting, "If we're moving Best Actor to the end, what do we do just in case Boseman doesn't win?"

The lack of organization around this idea is stunning.
 

Josh Steinberg

Premium
Reviewer
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jun 10, 2003
Messages
24,504
Real Name
Josh Steinberg
In just about any other circumstance what would have happened would simply have been that the winner got up and gave a speech. It just so happens that the winner wasn’t there, and the Academy had in advance made a decision that they would not to be open the possibility of letting an elderly adult in the middle of a global pandemic accept via webcam.
 

Jake Lipson

Premium
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2002
Messages
20,966
Real Name
Jake Lipson
It just so happens that the winner wasn’t there, and the Academy had in advance made a decision that they would not to be open the possibility of letting an elderly adult in the middle of a global pandemic accept via webcam.

Right. But they knew that it was at least possible Hopkins might win. They knew he wasn't going to attend. They weren't allowing webcam acceptances. Especially because of their decision to make this award the very last one, it seems like there should have been at least a conversation about how to end gracefully in the event of this outcome.

If Best Actor had been presented in its usual place prior to the Best Picture announcement, Hopkins winning and being absent wouldn't stick out like a sore thumb. It would be normal. We've all seen the presenters accept on behalf of an absent winner before. It's only weird because they accentuated it by placing the award last and not planning for a possible alternative closure to the one they wanted.
 

steve jaros

Supporting Actor
Joined
Sep 30, 1997
Messages
967
Location
Baton Rouge, LA
Real Name
Steve
Setting aside whether or not it was appropriate to honor Boseman last, I'm shocked that the producers don't appear to have considered the possibility that he would lose. It was very strange how they just sort of threw to Questlove to come up with some kind of closure for the evening after the event they were expecting did not come to pass.

Yes, it was a major gaffe. They should have just left "Best Picture" for last like it always is.
 

steve jaros

Supporting Actor
Joined
Sep 30, 1997
Messages
967
Location
Baton Rouge, LA
Real Name
Steve
I'm waiting to see The Father because it is a premium rental price right now and I don't want to pay that much. But I've heard a lot of people say they were both great and both deserving, which is probably the case. There can, of course, be multiple great performances in a single year even though only one person actually gets the prize.

I saw both films in the theater. Both were great performances. One thing going against Boseman, IMO, is that the whole cast of his film was great, I thought Viola Davis should have won Best Actress, and the other cast members were about as good. So the movie was more of ensemble effort, IMO, Boseman didn't particularly stand out. In contrast, Sir AH was much more front-and-center in The Father. He carried more of the load.
 

TonyD

Who do we think I am?
Premium
Ambassador
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Dec 1, 1999
Messages
23,105
Location
Gulf Coast
Real Name
Tony D.
The show is up on Hulu and probably abc for anyone who chooses to watch again.
 

Mike Frezon

Moderator
Premium
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2001
Messages
59,136
Location
Rexford, NY
This all (the Oscars telecast) has become so much ado about nothing.

I sincerely doubt there was anything extemporaneous about the Questlove closing. I'm sure that was the plan all along and what he said was scripted (and really out of place).
 

MartinP.

Screenwriter
Joined
Mar 26, 2007
Messages
1,713
Real Name
Martin
^^^

Thanks for linking that; interesting article. It's my belief that, besides the sound branch, the rest of the voters do not know exactly what the difference is and vote for films they like best in those categories. As many times the last 20 years that people try to explain the difference I still don't fully understand it. IMO, one award seems appropriate.

It's been maybe near thirty years, but I had a conversation once with Ralph Burns. He won an Oscar for Cabaret. (And A Little Night Music, too, I believe.) During our brief conversation he mentioned that he was always somewhat unhappy with the sound on that film. He said after they'd wrapped production in Germany that they said they were going to bring everything back to the U.S. and would redo the sound. For whatever reason, he said, they didn't. Later that day I was thinking, I bet Cabaret was nominated for the Sound Oscar. At that time, anyway, I always thought that a lot of movies that won Sound, didn't necessarily deserve it. I was probably thinking of The Last of the Mohicans which I saw in a high end movie theatre and thought the sound was horrible. Then it won the sound award. I pictured voters looking at the nominees and thinking, oh yeah, I remember the sound from that film. (Of course, I know that different theatres can have different sound systems or improperly convey the sound, whatever.) In any case, I looked it up and sure enough, not only did Cabaret get nominated, it won the Sound award.

From the linked article it was stated: "It is now written into the Sound Branch rules that an individual cannot receive more than one Oscar statuette for a single film, no matter how many jobs they do on that film."

? ? ? If that was a rule across the board, Frances McDormand would only have three Oscars. Bong Joon-Ho would have one instead of three. And, yet, in the music branch you can write one line of lyrics (as was the case for Arthur's Theme) and win an Oscar.
 

MartinP.

Screenwriter
Joined
Mar 26, 2007
Messages
1,713
Real Name
Martin
#2: The Father
[...]
(A pet peeve of mine is generic movie titles like this one. Like The Wife. I suppose they could make sequels to The Father, like The Son and then The Holy Ghost.)

Though it has nothing to do with The Father, Florian Zeller's next film is indeed to be titled THE SON.
 

B-ROLL

Senior HTF Member
Joined
May 26, 2016
Messages
4,593
Real Name
Bryan
Sony Pictures Classics already released The Wife too in addition to The Father. ;)
Fiddler On The Roof Broadway GIF by GREAT PERFORMANCES | PBS
:D!
 

Jake Lipson

Premium
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2002
Messages
20,966
Real Name
Jake Lipson
This is interesting. Not sure I believe it tho.

Even if he's telling the truth and it wasn't about Boseman, it's still stupid. There is a reason the show is structured with Best Picture last. It is the biggest award. Even a win for Boseman would not have been an appropriate ending because there is a natural build to the evening which leads to its climax with the award for the best film of the year. There is nowhere to go from Best Picture but down.

I didn't even like Nomadland that much personally, but putting any other awards following their Best Picture win deflates the significance of that moment by focusing on other things. The show should be putting a spotlight on what the voters consider the best movie at the end, not shrugging it off in order to get to speeches they think will be better by other people.

Since they thought actor speeches are so much better than producer speeches, that's even more reason to allow any winning actor to speak. Instead, they refused to allow a 93-year-old to accept via webcam because their stupid show is more important than his health during a worldwide pandemic. Hopkins didn't even attend last year before the pandemic when he was nominated for The Two Popes, so why would he come now. The no Zoom rule was so stupid and runs counter to Soderbergh's stated reasoning in this quote about wanting to have actor speeches go last.

If it was about Boseman, as I suspect, that was a depraved choice to sensationalize his death for a big finish. If it wasn't about Boseman, it still took away focus from the Best Picture. So either way it was doomed to fail.

There are times to innovate and there are times to let the existing structure continue working. This was one of the latter times and it's astonishing that a filmmaker as well-respected as Soderbergh doesn't understand that.

The only silver lining is that the low ratings mean less people than usual saw what a trainwreck this was. Ironic that they held it in a train station.

On another note, because we are almost two weeks past the Oscar telecast, I suggest that this thread should now become un-sticky. Although of course the discussion should continue as long as people want to use the thread, it no longer feels as topical or frequently used to necessitate a sticky.
 
Last edited:

Colin Jacobson

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Apr 19, 2000
Messages
12,153
This is interesting. Not sure I believe it tho.


Even if he's telling the truth and it wasn't about Boseman, it's still stupid. There is a reason the show is structured with Best Picture last. It is the biggest award. Even a win for Boseman would not have been an appropriate ending because there is a natural build to the evening which leads to its climax with the award for the best film of the year. There is nowhere to go from Best Picture but down.

I didn't even like Nomadland that much personally, but putting any other awards following their Best Picture win deflates the significance of that moment by focusing on other things. The show should be putting a spotlight on what the voters consider the best movie at the end, not shrugging it off in order to get to speeches they think will be better by other people.

Since they thought actor speeches are so much better than producer speeches, that's even more reason to allow any winning actor to speak. Instead, they refused to allow a 93-year-old to accept via webcam because their stupid show is more important than his health during a worldwide pandemic. Hopkins didn't even attend last year before the pandemic when he was nominated for The Two Popes, so why would he come now. The no Zoom rule was so stupid and runs counter to Soderbergh's stated reasoning in this quote about wanting to have actor speeches go last.

If it was about Boseman, as I suspect, that was a depraved choice to sensationalize his death for a big finish. If it wasn't about Boseman, it still took away focus from the Best Picture. So either way it was doomed to fail.

There are times to innovate and there are times to let the existing structure continue working. This was one of the latter times and it's astonishing that a filmmaker as well-respected as Soderbergh doesn't understand that.

The only silver lining is that the low ratings mean less people than usual saw what a trainwreck this was. Ironic that they held it in a train station.

On another note, because we are almost two weeks past the Oscar telecast, I suggest that this thread should now become un-sticky. Although of course the discussion should continue as long as people want to use the thread, it no longer feels as topical or frequently used to necessitate a sticky.

I believe Soderbergh - he acknowledged that the prospect of Boseman's winning was a major part of the decision, so I don't see any reason to think he lied.

If he'd wanted to lie, he would've denied the Boseman concept entirely.

Also, Hopkins is 83, not 93! :D
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Forum Sponsors

Latest Articles

Forum statistics

Threads
353,168
Messages
5,010,028
Members
143,411
Latest member
Sound4rv
Recent bookmarks
0
Top