Universal's WICKED Films - News & Discussion Thread- Page 102

[JP2]

Posted: 12/10/24 at 9:47am

joevitus said: "Seb28 said: "Jeffrey Karasarides said: "Wicked just received 4 Golden Globe nominations in the following categories:

Best Actress in a Motion Picture-Comedy/Musical (Cynthia Erivo)
Best Supporting Actress in any Motion Picture (Ariana Grande)"

Glinda is a lead role."

Yes, but if both Grande and Erivo were nominated for Best Actress, the votes for each would cancel each other out. And if one of these roles is going to be slotted into Best Actress rather Best Supporting Actress, that would clearly be Glinda."

Both will be in Lead categories for Part 2. ;)

[joevitus]

Posted: 12/10/24 at 10:16am

Jay Lerner-Z said: "That just cheats the "rightful” winner of that category out of their win, though. Sad."

Well, nominating them both would still cheat the "rightful" winner out of their win, since the votes would be split between them (and the other actresses nominated. The most famous example of this is Anne Baxter refusing to take a Best Supporting Actress nomination for All About Eve, leading neither she nor Bette Davis to win the Oscar that year.

Updated On: 12/10/24 at 10:16 AM

[QueenAlice]

Posted: 12/10/24 at 11:03am

uncageg said: "Seb28 said: "uncageg said: "I totally agree and have been trying to come up with the word for Erivo's performance. Safe. It hit me during "The Wizard and I".

I feel this also has something to do with the crazy amount of editing and autotune on her voice. It sounds really "tinny", it sucks the life out of it a bit. They didn't do nearly as much on Ariana's voice. It makes it sound a bit robotic.

The contrast between the things that were recorded live on set and the studio vocals was also too big I think, I love that they made the cuts, studio tracks work better as they always sound more perfect, but they could have made the difference a little less obvious. Another moment where this was too obvious was in Defying Gravity with the "it's me" line. It already sounds safe because she sings so easily, and the tinny robotic edit sound makes it sound even more safe."



The vocal mixing had nothing to do with itfor me.It was just her overall performance.

"

I truthfully think some of what you are hearing and commenting on is simply the way the specific tembre of Cynthia Erivo's vocal intstrument sounds on film in relationship to the way the score is orchestrated  Sound mixing and editing may also play a part but I don't think what you are hearing is 'autotuning' in the way you are definining it here. 

[TotallyEffed]

Posted: 12/10/24 at 11:29am

QueenAlice said: "uncageg said: "Seb28 said: "uncageg said: "I totally agree and have been trying to come up with the word for Erivo's performance. Safe. It hit me during "The Wizard and I".

I feel this also has something to do with the crazy amount of editing and autotune on her voice. It sounds really "tinny", it sucks the life out of it a bit. They didn't do nearly as much on Ariana's voice. It makes it sound a bit robotic.

The contrast between the things that were recorded live on set and the studio vocals was also too big I think, I love that they made the cuts, studio tracks work better as they always sound more perfect, but they could have made the difference a little less obvious. Another moment where this was too obvious was in Defying Gravity with the "it's me" line. It already sounds safe because she sings so easily, and the tinny robotic edit sound makes it sound even more safe."



The vocal mixing had nothing to do with itfor me.It was just her overall performance.

"

I truthfully think some of what you are hearing and commenting on is simply the way the specific tembre of Cynthia Erivo's vocal intstrument sounds on film in relationship to the way the score is orchestrated Sound mixing and editing may also play a part but I don't think what you are hearing is 'autotuning' in the way you are definining it here."


There’s a lot to autotune on her voice.

[Jay Lerner-Z]

Posted: 12/10/24 at 12:27pm

I don’t understand the “splitting the vote” thing. Voters should just vote for who they thought gave the best performance, like always. Why should having two actors from the same film confuse them?

Anne Baxter was right!

[Wayman_Wong]

Posted: 12/10/24 at 1:17pm

''Category fraud sucks.''

That's just how the game is played nowadays. The studios and the stars don't want the Oscar voters to split their votes between two performers from the same film. Putting one in Leading and the other in Supporting optimizes their chances to win TWO Oscars instead  - even if it gives the one in Supporting an unfair advantage of more screen time over actors who really have smaller, supporting roles.

On Broadway, of course, both Idina Menzel and Kristin Chenoweth were both up for the Tony for Leading Actress for ''Wicked.'' But at the Academy Awards, they rarely nominate two actresses for lead in the same movie. You might have to go back to ''Thelma and Louise'' (1991) with Susan Sarandon and Geena Davis, who both lost. 

But this Oscars has more than one case of ''category fraud.'' Variety reports that ''Emilia Perez'' is pushing Karla Sofia Gascon, who has dual roles, for  Best Actress, while promoting Zoe Saldana as Supporting. Even though Saldana (at 57 minutes) has more screen time than Gascon (52 minutes). Plus, the title of the movie refers to Saldana's character, not Gascon's. They are co-leads. But the awards usually agree with the film's Oscar campaigns. By the way, Selena Gomez has 27 minutes of screen time in ''Emilia Perez'' and is truly Supporting, but yesterday the Globes nominated her and Saldana both in Supporting. 

In ''A Real Pain,'' I'd argue that Jesse Eisenberg and Kieran Culkin are co-leads. They practically are on-screen the same amount of time, and the only thing that distinguishes them is Eisenberg's character has a short monologue near the end of the film. Eisenberg is also the director/writer of ''A Real Pain,'' so I guess that awards are more willing to count him as the lead ... even though the title of the film, ''A Real Pain,'' is a direct reference to Culkin's character.

https://variety.com/2024/film/news/zoe-saldana-oscars-debate-lead-supporting-emilia-perez-1236217249/

Updated On: 12/10/24 at 01:17 PM

[joevitus]

Posted: 12/10/24 at 1:19pm

Jay Lerner-Z said: "I don’t understand the “splitting the vote” thing. Voters should just vote for who they thought gave the best performance, like always. Why should having two actors from the same film confuse them?

Anne Baxter was right!"

She'd agree with you!

But as you can see from just the comments here, while some people think Erivo gave the stronger performance and others thought Grande did, most genuinely liked both. But not putting them in competition that not only gives voters a chance to vote for both, but it also insures that the votes won't be split in such a way (including votes that go to actresses in other movies) that two people who could have won may now both lose. 

[TotallyEffed]

Posted: 12/10/24 at 1:21pm

I can't help but chuckle that Elphaba's gown in part two is made of leather. Those poor Animals...

[TaffyDavenport]

Posted: 12/10/24 at 4:55pm

[marytylermoore]

Posted: 12/10/24 at 5:05pm

Finally caught Emilia Perez last night and I'm dumbfounded that they're pushing for Zoe Saldana to be considered in the supporting categories. She is the clear protagonist of the film, has the most screen time, and is the character around which the entire film is based. If anything, Saldana being considered as supporting lends a ton more legitimacy to Ariana as Glinda being supporting because (while I agree Ariana is very much a lead in this film) she is very much not the protagonist of Wicked. There truly needs to be some sort of board/group that delegates and decides which characters/actors can be considered in which categories rather than allowing the producers to push and campaign their ways into inaccurate categories.

[EDSOSLO858]

Posted: 12/10/24 at 5:09pm

TaffyDavenport said: ""

 

Now he decides to change his tune on WICKED?

Updated On: 12/10/24 at 05:09 PM

[EricMontreal22]

Posted: 12/10/24 at 8:21pm

Leave it to Brantley to imply that for the first half hour he was thinking of just leaving the movie theatre?

[kdogg36]

Posted: 12/10/24 at 9:14pm

Wayman_Wong said: "That's just how the game is played nowadays."

See also: Hannah Einbinder in the supporting actress Emmy category for Hacks, a show that obviously has two leading female roles.

Updated On: 12/10/24 at 09:14 PM

[Wayman_Wong]

Posted: 12/11/24 at 12:15am

Ariana Grande and Paul Mescal share a ''Wicked''-ly wonderful chat with Variety. They're delightful & sweet, proving they're just two grownup theater kids, nerding out over each other's movies: ''Wicked'' and ''Gladiator II.''

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wzc_SCRIB6M

Updated On: 12/11/24 at 12:15 AM

[Wayman_Wong]

Posted: 12/11/24 at 12:41am

''There truly needs to be some sort of board/group that delegates and decides which characters/actors can be considered in which categories rather than allowing the producers to push and campaign their ways into inaccurate categories.''

Some awards organizations do that. In the past, the Golden Globes has ruled whether a movie was actually a drama or a comedy, but it's an imperfect system: like the year they ruled ''The Martian,'' Ridley Scott's sci-fi space movie, a Comedy ... and it won! ... And the Tonys have the discretion to rule whether a performer is Leading or Featured, regardless of where they're positioned or petitioned. 

The Oscars have no such system. They leave it to the Academy voters to agree or disagree with the movie's Oscar campaign. In 2008, Kate Winslet was Oscar-eligible for two movies: She was campaigned for Best Actress for ''Revolutionary Road'' and for Supporting Actress for ''The Reader.'' And in fact, Winslet won the Golden Globe  and the SAG Award for Supporting Actress for ''The Reader.'' The Academy voters didn't see it that way, and nominated her for Leading Actress for ''The Reader,'' and she won!

Here's another bizarre Oscar exception: LaKeith Stansfield and Daniel Kaluuya were the co-leads and stars of ''Judas and the Black Messiah'' (2021). They gamed the system, by promoting Stansfield for Leading Actor and Kaluuya as Supporting Actor. The Academy voters disagreed, and nominated them BOTH as Supporting, and Kaluuya won! 

. 

Updated On: 12/11/24 at 12:41 AM

[Rentaholic2]

Posted: 12/11/24 at 6:40am

Wayman_Wong said: "'The Oscars have no such system. They leave it to the Academy voters to agree or disagree with the movie's Oscar campaign. In 2008, Kate Winslet was Oscar-eligible for two movies: She was campaigned for Best Actress for ''Revolutionary Road'' and for Supporting Actress for ''The Reader.'' And in fact, Winslet won the Golden Globe and the SAG Award for Supporting Actress for ''The Reader.'' The Academy voters didn't see it that way, and nominated her for Leading Actress for ''The Reader,'' and she won!"

You forgot to mention that she ALSO won the Golden Globe for Best Actress that year for Revolutionary Road, which was pretty incredible. I wish she’d won the Oscar for that role, which stuck with me much longer than her performance in The Reader. Revolutionary Road is an underrated movie IMO. 

[Wayman_Wong]

Posted: 12/11/24 at 11:29am

'Revolutionary Road is an underrated movie IMO.''

Actually, I couldn't agree more. At the risk of getting too far off-tangent, I'd add that the Academy really screwed Winslet's co-star in ''Revolutionary Road,'' Leonardo DiCaprio, AGAIN. It's just another instance of where the Academy nominated his leading lady, but not him. Notably, the Oscars nominated Winslet for ''Titanic,'' but not DiCaprio, for playing the iconic Jack in that classic love story.

And recently, the Oscars nominated Lily Gladstone for ''Killers of the Flower Moon,'' but not DiCaprio, a Globe nominee. I'm sure Winslet and Gladstone would agree that they couldn't have given their acclaimed performances without DiCaprio as their incomparable scene partner.

I was thrilled DiCaprio finally won his Oscar in 2016 for ''The Revenant,'' but ironically I thought he won for the wrong movie. He should've gotten it for his tour de force in ''The Wolf of Wall Street.'' Leo has had 6th Oscar nominations for his acting; but in my universe, he would've had about 10. 

Updated On: 12/11/24 at 11:29 AM

[darreyl102]

Posted: 12/11/24 at 3:46pm

I have a stupid question. Can Cynthia be nominated for part 2 as well? I figured the answer is yes but didn't know since she was nominated for the first part. I feel like the second part has a lot more dramatic moments and character stuff for Cynthia to do that would Garner her the award. IDK

[TotallyEffed]

Posted: 12/11/24 at 4:01pm

darreyl102 said: "I have a stupid question. Can Cynthia be nominated for part 2 as well? I figured the answer is yes but didn't know since she was nominated for the first part. I feel like the second part has a lot more dramatic moments and character stuff for Cynthia to do that would Garner her the award. IDK"

 

Yes, she can.

[Kad]

Posted: 12/11/24 at 4:48pm

Yes, Erivo will be eligible again for Part 2.

There are a small handful of actors who have been nominated multiple times for playing the same character. For instance, Al Pacino was nominated for both The Godfather and The Godfather Part 2. But Part 2 was a true sequel, not the second half of one film. Nobody has yet been nominated multiple times for role in a film that was always intended to be multiple parts.