2020 Nominations -

Cynthia Erivo , I’m not sure what people saw in that performance. It was wooden , she had the same expression for the entire film . Harriet Tubman deserves a better film than this midday lifetime pile of crap.

I wonder if Parasite will be treated the same way Roma was last year. In that both were nominated for best picture and best foreign language film. Yet, Roma didn't win best picture but did end up winning best foreign language film. I could see the same thing happening for Parasite. Specially since both were films with great acclaim in their respective seasons.

Yeah, don't agree with Ervio's nomination at all. The movie and her performance were mediocre. I agree that the story of Harriet Tubman deserves a better film than the one we got.

I noticed that Frozen II wasn't nominated for best Animated Feature, although I think they made the right call by nominating Toy Story 4 over it.

Updated On: 1/13/20 at 11:46 AM

Guess Taron Egerton had the misfortune of giving great performance of rock legend Elton John right after Rami Malek won Oscar for playing Freddie Mercury. I saw "Bombshell" last Friday and Charlize Theron was fantastic in her portrayal of Megyn Kelly, glad she got nomination.

It's hard to escape the suspicion that Cynthia Erivo was nominated as a token black acting nominee, and that Academy voters were more comfortable picking a slave/escaped slave in a film that got no acclaim rather than choosing a standout performance like Lupita Nyong'o's in Us because of the bias against horror films.

Brad Pitt is certainly not supporting. He's a co-lead, and arguably the actual star of the film. But I enjoyed his performance a lot, so I'm not complaining too much.

My guess is that Parasite gets the Roma treatment. The absence of an acting nomination doesn't help.

I liked 1917, but it's a little silly for it to get best original screenplay.

bear88 said: "Brad Pitt is certainly not supporting. He's a co-lead, and arguablythe actual star of the film. But I enjoyed his performance a lot, so I'm not complaining too much."

The same can be said about the two popes' Jonathan Pryce (lead actor) and Anthony Hopkins (supporting actor). Both are lead roles. Even the title says so.

Mike Barrett said: "As has been the case the last few years, my favorites, and what frankly seem to be audience favorites (granted, online fans favorites, doesn't necearrily speak for everybody) you'd think the nominations today would've highlighted The Farewell, The Lighthouse, Uncut Gems, and Lupita Nyongo's performance in US. But nope, only a cinematography nom for The Lighthouse. The nominations here are not bad but they just don't feel like what audiences are watching/getting the most out of each year.

And I agree whoever said they nominated Erivo because she's a POC. If they truly felt the need to nominate a black woman, Lupita is right there. But of course, no academy member would ever DARE see a horror film or expand their horizons a bit. As a millennial who actually pays attention to these things, my god do they need to shaken up the voting pool. Its the exact same kind of films every single year. Its so predictable at this point. There are many different types of films that inspire and provoke people (in good and bad ways), its about damn time we start honoring them. "Best Picture" has always just been a name for "Best Drama". Was really feeling like some change was going to happen this year."

Well, they nominated Get Out for Best Picture. I'm sure they all saw Us, but just didn't remember it come voting time. And honestly, I didn't think Lupita was particularly award-worthy (I also thought the movie was pretty bad).

I feel like this year the Academy DID pay attention to what audiences are watching. They showed a lot of love to Joker and the execrable Jojo Rabbit, both of which were divisive among critics but loved by audiences, They nominated Parasite, unquestionably the most acclaimed movie of the year. I think they did a pretty good job representing the year's most important and talked-about films, even if my personal favorites were ignored. I do find it a little odd that The Last Black Man in San Francisco came out to huge acclaim but has since been mostly forgotten, but whatever.

Us wasn't a good movie, maybe that's why it wasn't nominated? I liked Harriet, but also thought Cynthia wasn't particularly remarkable. Im happy for Antonio Banderas, Pain and Glory was brilliant.

As for 90% of the acting nominees being white, and all of the directors being male....that's the Oscars for you. Every 3 or 4 years they make it more diverse to seem like they believe in inclusivity though!

LuPita2 said: "Us wasn't a good movie, maybe that's why it wasn't nominated?I likedHarriet, but also thought Cynthia wasn't particularly remarkable. Im happy for Antonio Banderas, Pain and Glory was brilliant.

As for 90% of the acting nominees being white, and all of the directors being male....that's the Oscars for you.Every 3 or 4 years they make it more diverse to seem like they believe in inclusivity though! "

Silly me. I thought awards were given on merit not on a quota system . BET is really inclusive. What a shame we have sunk to a level like this. .

I agree that awards should be based on merit rather than a quota, but it is a problem that the Academy generally overlooks non-white people as having merit. The supporting acting categories this year are particularly tunnel-visioned and boring. The Best Supporting Actor nominees are literally five old white Hollywood stars, all but one of whom have won before. Given the vast selection of noteworthy supporting performances, it's a shame they go with safe, boring choices based on their own demographic (i.e. old white guys).

That said, I wouldn't have nominated Greta Gerwig either. In fact this is the first year in a while in which there hasn't been a female-directed film that I found notable.