Your Final 2014 Oscar Predictions — Page 3

As a lover of the book (and who, when reading the book, envisioned a masterful film) I'm not a huge fan of 12 Years a Slave, a movie which I think could have been great but just isn't. But I can't say my heart would be torn by it winning.

It's still, for all its disappointments, a good movie, with some very admirable elements, and far better than a great many junky films that win best picture oscars.

Besides which, my two favorite movies nominated for best picture (of those I've seen), Nebraska and Her, don't have a snowball's chance in hell of winning. Gravity and American Hustle are, in my opinion, much better movies than 12 Years, but can I bring myself to care all that much which of the three favorites takes home the oscar? Not really.

The truth is that all of the movies nominated for best picture this year including 12 Years (of those I've seen, most of them) are, in my opinion, light years better than..... where should I start? Titanic, Dances with Wolves, Crash, Gladiator, Braveheart, Rain Man, Forrest Gump, Slumdog, etc., etc., etc.

Am I the only one who thinks Sandra Bullock could pull an upset?

I don't think a tie is particularly likely, but a surprising vote split resulting in something like AMERICAN HUSTLE winning Best Picture isn't out of the question.

---

besty-is it the exact same number of votes for a tie? (I thought I read somewhere that for the Tonys, if it's within a certain number of votes, it's a tie.)

I think American Hustle has a better shot at upending 12 Years than Gravity. (Gravity will take the tech awards and Direction-that's it.)

"Here's a question, extremely unlikely but it happened at the PGA so I wonder what if?: What if GRAVITY and 12 YEARS A SLAVE actually tie? What if there's an unprecedented tie?"

Not happening, at least no in Best Picture. The moment that PGA tie happened the Academy stated it could not happen with them despite both the PGA and AMPAS going by preferential balloting they differed in the details. I still think the PGAs had to have an issue where the race was close and one film the felt by smallest of margins had the most #1 votes versus the other that had more second, third, and fourth place ballots.

Like I said before, I think a director split could happen a la Soderbergh beating Scott and Lee when the other two were the neck in neck favorites with Russell being the Soderbergh, the dark horse, if just the actual #2 as opposed to McQueen being #2 to Cuaron's clear first position.

As for Steve McQueen and John Ridley distorting 'truth' in their adaptation. I am letting that sit because I honestly have no idea what that is supposed to mean other than a book well-liked was not adapted in the way some people were expecting it/wanted it to be. I just don't see bad faith anywhere in the adaptation, just artistic decisions. There's no, to put it in deep-track film terms, a 'tracking shot of Kapo' happening for me personally the way I constantly see in other 'important issue' films.

I also think Best Actor and Best Supporting Actor are not on the strongest of grounds. I can easily see Captain Phillips upsetting tech categories in addition to Barkhad Abdi being a spoiler. But also the more I read about what is happening with the telecast, I may just pass watching a good chunk of for Sunday night programming and then tune back in for the major categories. Zadan and Meron are the worst.

I totally agree that Blanchett and Leto (particularly Leto) are locks. But I really think McConaughey will win (and frankly I think he deserves it). I did see all the nominees, and part of the reason I think he should win is that what made his and Leto's performances so remarkable and believable was their chemistry. They played very well off of each other. (I also thought both performances on their own were amazing-I had no clue McConaughey had this in him, or even Leto.)

Interesting, besty, thanks for the correction.

... and as far as I know, no official voting is available or allowed online. They're terrified of being hacked.

So it's all old-school paper and snail mail, even though that could change in the future. A lot of members are pushing for online voting.

---

That's not what it says on their own website, which I quoted and linked to above, so now I'm confused.

---

LOL

Well, there were several times during my days palling around with an Academy voter that we DID have to stop and read the rules.

My friend was in the Actors Branch for over 50 years, and from the time I came in, they always used the preferential nominating system for the four acting awards and Best Picture nominations. I started going to screenings and observing the whole nominating/voting process firsthand back in 1987 and continued for the next 16 years. It was a very fun time!

But admittedly, I haven't seen the ballots with my own eyes since 2003, and this rule came into place in 2009, according to the article. The only reason I'm even questioning it is because the Academy's own website contradicts this statement. The other rules, including recent changes, are all updated on the site as well, so why not this one? They mention the preferential system in place for all awards, they mention the exception for nominating Best Pictures with "no more than ten, no less than five," etc. But no mention of an exception to the rule for a final ballot. In fact, they say otherwise.

I can't imagine this spokesperson for the Academy got it wrong, so I'm assuming they just haven't updated the Academy website---even though all other recent updates are noted and current.

As for my personal opinion on the preferential system being used for the final voting of Best Picture (since 2009), I hate it! Why shouldn't there be a tie if the votes are exactly the same? Prior to the 2009 change, there was never a tie for Best Picture. It's unlikely in any category. But if the votes are exactly the same, it should be a tie.

What this preferential system does is create a weird scenario for two or three movies that are all running neck and neck, but each have solid voter bases. Let's say "12 Years a Slave," "Gravity," and "American Hustle" are splitting the lion's share of the votes. When they first count the ballots, they all have roughly 30 percent of the votes, but "12 Years" has the most by just a few, or even one vote. Because it doesn't have 50 percent, plus one, of the total votes, they go into this preferential system. Prior to 2009, 12 Years would win. Period. It got the most votes. But when they start counting #2 and #3 choices on the ballots, they find out that more people picked Gravity in either the #2 or #3 slots, so Gravity would move up into the 50 percent-plus-one position before 12 Years ... and win Best Picture.

It reminds me of the year Reds, On Golden Pond, and (third option) Chariots of Fire were all up for the award. Chariots of Fire came out the surprise winner because of the split ... but also because it got the most votes! Pure and simple. So it should have won, even if some people felt that one of the other choices was either #2 or #3 on their lists. I really don't think second or third choices should matter.

It shouldn't be a "general feeling" for the award, it should be the one with the most votes.

I hate politics.

---

Updated On: 2/26/14 at 07:23 PM

best12bars can you give anymore info on Jennifer Lawrence vs. Lupita?

Best Song: Ordinary Love (sorry, but it HAS won every award and Mandela just passed away)

And, the Academy loves to honor people who have longevity in the music field and may not ever been nominated again. Case in point - Sondheim, Dylan, Webber, Reznor. As much as I'd love to see the Lopez's join the distinguished EGOT crowd I think this award is going to win for the reasons already started and the fact that it's Bono & The Edge. They've given a lot through their music and their charity work. I really think the award will go to them.

---

Updated On: 3/2/14 at 02:27 PM

Ordinary Love has the unfortunate issue of being a nominee not in a Best Picture/heavily nominated movie and also the fact it is a closing credits song. The other three are prominently featured in their film, all of which are arguably a central asset to moving the film's story and plot.

Let me just say, I saw Mandela at TIFF. I remember a U2 song, it was not 'Ordinary Love'. 'In the Name of Love' played during a very powerful, effective montage in the middle of the movie. Everyone was leaving when the credits rolled. I just don't find it in the nature of people to pay attention to its placement. U2 has only really won the 'Globe', one of the least reliable precursors to use in song, and unlike the other nominees it is not this charting phenomenon.

Updated On: 3/2/14 at 02:39 PM