Oscar Season 2025-2026: TIFF Crowns A Winner; the State of the Oscar Race After the Fall Festivals

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:14):
Hey guys, welcome back to Academy Anonymous.
I'm your host, jules.

Speaker 2 (00:17):
And I'm Joseph.

Speaker 1 (00:19):
Thank you for joining us, and so we have a few things
to cover today.
We're going to just look reallyquick at who were the winners
of the Toronto Film Festival.

Speaker 2 (00:29):
Winners and losers.

Speaker 1 (00:30):
Right, specifically the Toronto People's Choice,
which is a very coveted prizewith regard to the Oscar race,
and then we'll just take a widerglance at what the Oscar race
looks like now that we're postthe most notable uh fall
festivals of telluride, torontoand venice I would say 80 of the

(00:51):
slate has officially beenscreened.

Speaker 2 (00:54):
A giant movie sort of screened with toronto that was
not part of toronto and sort ofyou know taking the lion's share
of momentum right now.
We'll cover that later yeah butcertainly at this point most of
the films have been seen andthere are maybe like a one or
two films in new york to maybekeep an eye on right.

Speaker 1 (01:11):
And then there are these big behemoths, studio
films that will come out, youknow, for the holiday seasons,
um, in november and decemberright and before we dive in,
just a quick reminder pleasevisit us at our website
framesandflickrcom that's threewords, framesandflickrcom and
follow us on Twitter at AcademyAnon.

(01:31):
That's our official Twitter forthis podcast and you can
actually see both of those onthe podcast cover art.
Yeah we added them there thewebsite and the Twitter handle,
so please follow us there.
And right before we get started, I just want to take a quick
moment to acknowledge thepassing of one of the true
greats in cinema.

(01:52):
The great Robert Redford passedaway recently.
What a loss for the cinematiccommunity, what a loss for
independent film.
Who is a paramount figure andchampion of independent film.
We all feel that loss deeply.
He'll deeply be missed and hislegacy and his art will live on.

Speaker 2 (02:16):
But it hurts hurts to lose someone as great as Robert
Redford yeah, I absolutelyagree, and we're unfortunately
entering into a tough stretchfor individuals who love film
cinephiles because so many ofthe individuals that we idolize
that helped carve out thesignificance of the art form in

(02:37):
the us.
They're getting older in ageand so this is a huge loss for
our community.
But every time we watch a film,we watch a Sundance film.
When we watch any of his workhis early work, his work as a
director, his work as a producer, as an actor we are celebrating

(02:57):
his legacy making movies now,especially on the independent
side.
You know they celebrate hislegacy for everything that he
was able to sort of the, thetrail that he was able to blaze
for independent filmmakers withhis Sundance Film Festival right
, yeah, amen rest in peace yeah,all right.
So let's start by digging intothe TIFF People's Choice Award,

(03:21):
right?
Because I think we're talkingabout winners and losers.
We can talk about the filmsthat showed up, the films that
needed to show up, the filmsthat should have shown up and
the films that, after theyscreened, you know were a very
long shot to show up.
So why don't you recap thewinners for us?

Speaker 1 (03:41):
Well, the most important award is the People's
Choice Award, even though thisyear they did something very
strange.
We talked about it on ourTwitter that somehow they made a
new category of People's ChoiceInternational, which really
seemed kind of weird.
It seemed like we were I don'tknow somewhat ghettoizing the
international films.

Speaker 2 (04:02):
Strange is a kind word I think that you used.
I think I can let me do a twominute rant here.
What kind of decision was thisto sort of split up the People's
Choice Award from the Englishspeaking films and the foreign
language films?
I think it's really odd.
I wonder what motivated it,because a lot of the times the

(04:24):
People's Choice Award has beenpretty inclusive of films that
are international.
I almost would have debatedthat.
Maybe if they were going tomake a prize, it would have been
dedicated just to Canadianfilms and Canadian productions.
That would have made sense tome.
But you have a lot of thoseCanadian films.
Because they're englishlanguage, they're competing for

(04:45):
that very competitive studioprize.
Right, that's coming from abunch of us films, right?
So you're gonna have, forexample, roof man, which did
well or was positively,positively received.
You're gonna have to have thatcompete against, uh, blue heron
right which is from, which isfrom canada, was also really
well received but, not as manypeople watched it and not as

(05:06):
many people covered it in themedia, and so I thought that was
a strange choice.

Speaker 1 (05:10):
It's hard to try to decipher what is the motivation.
I guess initially my reactionis that it's to try to, I guess,
yeah, spotlight certain films,for example, um, maybe, I think
tiff is very invested in havingone of their premieres be on the
final list and maybe byamplifying the possibilities and

(05:34):
creating two categories, makesit more possible that a tiff
premiere actually actually gets,uh, the top prize or gets at
least cited more than once inthe runner-ups, right, um, uh,
but you know they, I think it'sa premiere usually at least
runners up to some degree, right, um, and sometimes wins, right,
I think, often wins, and thatwas the case, certainly this

(05:55):
year.

Speaker 2 (05:55):
But I I actually really like what you're sort of
saying, because maybe themotivation and we talked about
this is that you know, thetoronto international film
festival brand is, you know, theToronto International Film
Festival brand is, you know,possibly being outshined by some
of these more internationalfilm festivals.
And if we look at the worldpremiere section, they weren't
as competitive in terms of theydidn't premiere no Other Choice.

(06:18):
They didn't premiereSentimental Value, two films
that placed.
And so maybe this is a move totry to bring a few more
international titles that wouldhave opted for a premiere at
venice or at can to come andpick up a first or second or
third prize in thatinternational people's choice

(06:38):
category.
Maybe they're hoping that theyeither are going to have the
English language winner in theirPeople's Choice Award or the
foreign language winner in theirPeople's Choice Award.
If there is a movie likeParasite that's able to sort of
capture both at the Academy,that Toronto will have listed it
in what is now two categoriesand six spots right, three spots

(06:58):
per category.

Speaker 1 (06:59):
Right.
I'm getting the impression thatbecause there's two categories,
no film is going to repeat.
So in the case of Parasite, ifthe two categories were
available, it wouldn't show upin both, it would show up in one
.
No, I meant the Academy Awards.
Oh, yes, you know.

Speaker 2 (07:13):
So maybe Toronto wants to say we had the winner
for Best Picture in our People'sChoice Award and maybe they
also want to say we have thewinner for Foreign Language Film
or International film at theoscars in our international
people's choice award.
Right.
And if the occasion should everarise within the academy that
you have a special film likeparasite that wins best picture
at the end and is also a foreignlanguage film, that if you have

(07:36):
that sort of premiere at canright I'm sorry, excuse me, at
toronto, toronto may be able to.
We had our world premiereinternational film go from being
the People's Choice Award tobeing the Oscars Best Picture
Choice.

Speaker 1 (07:51):
Right, I mean, I think that's possible.
I do like your idea that Ithink you're hinting at is a way
to compete with these foreignfestivals that have these
foreign contenders that, aswe've spoken several times
already on this podcast, youknow, the foreign branch of the
Academy is having more and moresay here as to what movies get
highlighted, and so I think theywant to.

(08:12):
You know, as you were, you wereindicating they want a space of
theirs that promotes some ofthese foreign, foreign language
films that make an impact on therace.
I agree with you.
I think that's a good pointEither way.
I just think it's weird.
Uh, I'm not sure I feel that itwas necessary.
Again, I think there's thissort of ghettoizing between the
foreign films and the Americanslash Canadian films, and I'll

(08:35):
also say that it presents anissue in that what if the most
lauded film or the most uh likedfilm by festival goers that
year was actually a foreign film?
We won't really know now,because now they'll be relegated
to their own category and theUS Canadian films will have
their own category, so we won'treally get a good impression as

(08:56):
to which film, foreign orotherwise, was really the
favorite of the festival, thedominant people's choice,
people's preference.

Speaker 2 (09:03):
I think that's exactly right and I have an
interesting question that'sgoing to circle back to that.
You remind me at the end of ourdiscussion to bring that up.
But I do understand it fromlike a business perspective that
Toronto's world premieres for afew years now just have not
been able to stack up againstthe Cannes world premieres or
the Venice world premieres, andI do believe that the

(09:27):
organization likes to have worldpremieres within its People's
Choice Award in either one ortwo of the three spots and by
amplifying that to now be two,I'm sorry, two categories, six
spots, they're hoping to havemore world premieres in there
and from a business point ofview I understand that this is
hopefully a move in the future,as early as next year, to try to

(09:48):
get more international films totry to premiere at Toronto.

Speaker 1 (09:53):
Right.
Anyway, the winners for theToronto's People's Choice
Canadian slash American sectionwere, you know, not surprising
Hamnet.
You and I both predicted thatHammond would win.
I think many people predictedit, predicted that it would,
especially now that if we're,you know, separating categories,
uh, hamnet was the clear winner.
Um, it's certainly a huge uhcandidate, a huge front runner

(10:18):
in the race.
Um, I'm very happy for ChloeZhao.
Uh, she's a very inspiringfilmmaker to me.
Um very surprising that therunner up was Frankenstein,
after having a somewhat kind ofpolarizing response from both
Venice and Telluride.
From Venice was from critics,from Telluride were from
audience members.
You know this generalimpression that it's a it's a

(10:41):
good film, it's not a great film.
It's a little long, it's alittle slow.
It's a a great film.
Um, it's a little long, it's alittle slow.
Um, it's a little bit.
You know uh, it looks great, itlooks majestic, it looks, you
know, uh, completely beautifulto look at, but it's missing
some soul.
Um, that seemed to be theimpression and here it is
running up.
Um, netflix is having a greatyear.

(11:02):
They've got a lot of contenders.
The second runner-up wasactually another netflix film,
wake up dead man, which was apremiere here at uh toronto.
Um, we also predicted that thatwould place uh glass onion.
Uh, the predecessor to uh wakeup dead man also placed knives

(11:22):
out.
Number one, number one didn't.
And the winners of theInternational People's Choice.

Speaker 2 (11:29):
So the inaugural International People's Choice
award, the winner went to noOther Choice from Neon, and that
was a Venice premiere and acan't snubby in theory.
The first runner up went toSentimental Value, which a lot
of people were pegging was verylikely to place among the three

(11:50):
when there was just one category, so no surprise there.
And then the second runner-upactually went to Homebound,
which also premiered in Cannesand was, I believe, it's
executive, produced by Martin.

Speaker 1 (12:04):
Scorsese and he announced that before its Cannes
premiere yeah, I missed it'sexecutive, produced by Martin
Scorsese and he announced thatbefore its Cannes premiere.
Yeah, I missed it at Cannes.
I had a ticket.

Speaker 2 (12:11):
I couldn't get it Right, but I actually don't
think many people had pegged itfor a win here, but it's nice to
see.
It's kind of interesting, right, chloe?

Speaker 1 (12:17):
Zhao.
I will just point out that Igot the reverse impression that
Sentimental Value had a moremuted response at telluride, I
think had an ecstatic response,I can obviously, and uh, I mean
toronto.
Um had an ecstatic response atuh can obviously, and a very
good one at um telluride, but attoronto the response was more

(12:39):
muted.
Um, you know, people liked it,people appreciated it, but it
didn't have this fervor.
They don't have this.

Speaker 2 (12:46):
It just didn't have the same passion I thought that
was very interesting um seeingpeople's reaction to sentimental
value I mean I I will say Ithink it's interesting that
chloe zow now has two people'schoice award, because nomadland
won this award on its way to abest picture win, so it could be
potentially very prophetic interms of the future of this film

(13:06):
.
Interestingly enough, guillermodel Toro I believe he's a
staple in Toronto at TIFF and Ithink the crowd loves him, but
he's never really placed forthis award.
So Frankenstein being the firstrunner up is the first actual
moment that Guillermo is gettingsort of allotted for this prize

(13:28):
.

Speaker 1 (13:28):
Shape of.

Speaker 2 (13:29):
Water did not place Pinocchio.
I actually don't think went tothe festival, but I think that
they are big fans of Guillermoand I don't think that he's ever
actually made a film that'sgotten into the top three, so
that was interesting to see.
Right made a film that's gotteninto the top three.

Speaker 1 (13:45):
So that was interesting to see, right?
Well, like I said I saidearlier, you know Netflix has a
great problem this year.
They have several contenders.
Other years it seems like we'rehead scratching, wondering okay
, where's Netflix going to puttheir weight behind?
This year they've got plenty ofchoices.
At the very top is the, I wouldargue, is the Venice-lauded?

(14:06):
Is the venice uh lauded?
Uh, katherine biglow film um,house of dynamite.
I think that that is going tobe a very big player this award
season, which skipped if skipped, if so, I didn't have a chance
to have that, you know.
Second wind it will have asecond wind soon at the new york
film festival.
Um, and they have Jay Kelly,which again kind of a mixed
response in Venice, a terrificresponse from Tyler Rudd, and

(14:29):
Wake Up Deadman, which had agreat response at Toronto.

Speaker 2 (14:33):
Right, so this is now the second time that Rian
Johnson's film gets listed amongthe top three, so that's good.
I mean, last time it was listed, there was a lot of theories
that Netflix was going to jumpon board and make Glass Onion a
big Best Picture player which Ithink they did try which they
tried before, understanding thatthey had to sort of pivot to
all choir in the Western front.

(14:54):
It'll be interesting to see whatthey make out of this victory.
Obviously, it certainly cementsthe idea that Wake Up Dead man
is a strong screenplay contenderright, but I would.

Speaker 1 (15:05):
I would also say that I think the reception was so
big for so good for wake up deadman, many people saying that
it's as good as the first one.
I love the first night I wasout.
I'm a little bit more iffy onglass onion, um, and so, hearing
those comparisons, some peoplewere saying it was the best one.
It's the best one.
Yet I was thinking thatpossibly it would have a higher

(15:25):
placement than second runner up.
And then you know, when youlooked at the critics, you know
right now it's sort of averagingwhat the last two averaged and
this one is placing where GlassOnion placed.
So it's sort of slowly startingto form into, you know, kind of
the regular kind ofanticipation that you would have

(15:48):
for that movie as to where it'sgoing to place in the awards
radar.
Right now it looks likescreenplay, but is there really
anything else?

Speaker 2 (15:55):
The Knives Out films have been strictly ghettoized
into a sort of screenplaycategory, and it seems like
that's the trajectory here playcategory, and it seems like
that's the trajectory here, andcertainly this is not the case
of 2022 where, as you said,netflix has an abundance of
choices, right to push for bestpicture, so I don't know if this
will push wake up dead man tothe top of the pile.
At the same time, I feel likenow it has almost become a

(16:17):
tradition where, like you'regoing to see a knives out film
premiere strictly at tiff and Ithink the t audience, you know,
is moved by that and it onlyheightens the expectation and
the anticipation and theenthusiasm for whatever they're
going to see on screen, and sowe may be seeing a bit of that.
I think the question that I wasgoing to ask you, which is

(16:40):
important and could be telling,is what if there was only one
category?
What if there was only onepeople's choice award?
Who do you think are the three?
Because that's really, I think,where you have to zero in on
what is the meaning behind whowon each category and what are
the films that are listed?
So, between the six, if I, if Iasked you hypothetically to

(17:04):
give me one category, who do youthink won?
Was it Chloe Zhao's movie orwas it Park Chan-wook's?

Speaker 1 (17:14):
I want to say that I feel pretty confident that that
would have been Chloe Zhao'sfilm.

Speaker 2 (17:17):
Okay.

Speaker 1 (17:18):
And I'd go even further and I would say that, as
well as no Other Choice wasreceived at Toronto because it
was I would wager that if itwere a normal year, the top
three would have been the topthree in the US Canadian
People's Choice.
Oh wow, that no Other Choicewould have ranked somewhere like

(17:38):
number four.

Speaker 2 (17:39):
Okay, well, see, I'm the opposite and I think that's
interesting.
So you think that the top threefrom the People's Choice Award
English side was actually theauthentic top three before they
amplified it into thatinternational category?
Okay, I'm actually I disagreewith you.
I think the winner would havebeen Hamnet and it sort of you

(17:59):
know, epitomizes how much of anearly favorite it is and how
much people are responding.
Audiences are responding to thefilm.
It's meeting the expectationthat people have going into it,
which is a very good sign.
But I actually think that thesecond place because I did not
hear a tremendous amount offervor for Guillermo del Toro's

(18:19):
Frankenstein when it was playingin Toronto I actually do think
the second place would have beenno Other Choice.
I think that the secondfavorite film was Park
Chan-wook's, which isinteresting because there was
this narrative coming out ofVenice that, on a level purely
of the filmmaking, a lot ofpeople were pegging Park

(18:42):
Chan-wwook's.
No other choice to win it was.
It was maybe the first filmthat played at venice where,
after it premiered, people werealready saying okay, so this is
the bar for the golden lion thisis the first true contender to
win the golden lion rightcan anyone beat it?
Obviously it didn't win anyaward at venice.
A lot of films didn't win anyaward at Venice, a lot of films

(19:04):
didn't win anything and the jury, led by Alexander Payne,
decided to go elsewhere.
But to me it sort of solidifiedthat idea that no Other Choice
is a really, really, reallyliked movie amongst audience
members, and so I think thatthat's second, and so third it's
interesting because I wouldhave pegged the Rian Johnson

(19:24):
film, but we already know theRian johnson film lost to
frankenstein.

Speaker 1 (19:29):
So I'm I'm thinking that third is either
frankenstein or sentimentalvalue, and, knowing that del
toro hasn't really placed in thetop three before, I want to say
that the third spot actuallywent to sentimental value I
think that's interesting, but I,I, I feel, I feel, really it

(19:49):
feels wrong to not think that,you know, based on its reception
and based on its legacy as toas of now, that, uh, a knives
out film hadn't played, didn'tplace in the top three.
So that's why that's somethingthat's really turning me to.
Yeah, you know, the top threewere the top american, canadian
I think that's interesting.

Speaker 2 (20:09):
It's possible.
I just not sure that what Iread from the reviews and from
reactions from individuals whosaw it at tiff made me feel like
it eclipsed either the firstone or the second one, that it
matched the second one and itdoesn't feel like the series is

(20:29):
over like that they're not goingto revisit it in the future,
that there's plenty of reasonand motivation to revisit it in
the future, and so it just to me.
My impression was it wasanother solid, very good film in
the Knives Out series.

Speaker 1 (20:44):
Not necessarily anything super special other
than what is now traditionhaving a Knives Out film
premiere at TIFF right itcertainly seems that way, based
on what it won, but based onjust the reaction after the,
after the premiere, it seemedlike it might have been
different.
We'll see what happens and weposted an article on our website

(21:04):
, um, kind of just going throughwhat the general consensus was
of many of the premieres andother films that showed up at
toronto.
So please check that out whenyou have a moment.
Uh, but just going through theslate of films, I think one of
the films that I think waspegged to do really well here um
from a very early start andthen the film premiered.

(21:26):
It got decent critics and evenmany of the people who saw it
admitted that it felt like itwas the kind of film that was
generated in the lab tobasically win the TIFF People's
Choice Award, and that is RentalFamily with Brendan Fraser.
It had a good reception at thefestival, but it did not even
place at the Toronto People'sChoice Again, a film that felt

(21:48):
to many that was sort ofgenerated to do that.
I certainly think thatSearchlight Pictures that was
the intent, that was the goalUse the Toronto People's Choice
win to launch it into the Oscarconversation for Best Picture.
Searchlight is super thin thisyear with Oscar contenders.
This was their big horse, itseems, and it didn't even place.
So I find that very interestingand in one way, it seems like

(22:12):
the audience didn't want to gofor what I guess a film that
felt generated to be the winner.
Um, it didn't really want to gothe predictable route and I
find that really refreshing,because that would have been a
really boring choice.
Um and uh, you know, it wassmelling to me from the very

(22:34):
beginning, when all of thisstarted propping up, the rental
family test screenings weresupposedly very positive.
I think you had some Oscarimpundence kind of push, this
narrative that the film wasgoing to be a big Oscar player
and it was going to be nominatedfor picture and directing and
acting and screenplay.
And then, little by little, thefilm started gaining momentum

(22:56):
on places like Gold Derby andyou and I were always kind of
puzzled.
You know where is this noisecoming from?
It's coming from testscreenings.
That's weird.
You know where is this noisecoming from?
It's coming from testscreenings, that's weird.
Um, uh, you know, it just feltlike certain, you know, pundits
were pushing this narrative.
We were, we were skeptical.
The trailer comes out.
I'm still skeptical, but I'msmelling the possibility of a

(23:17):
jojo rabbit happening here andwinning the tip people's choice
award.
So I'm a little bit worried.
Then the film comes out and ithas a decent premiere and
actually got better critics thanjojo rabbit did.
Better than I thought, yeah,better than I thought too, um
and uh.
But even many of the people whosaw it and liked it and
reviewed it positively admittedthat.
You know there's some blatantmanipulation happening here

(23:39):
emotionally and it's sort ofsent.
It's too sentimental, it's alittle cloying, so you know, but
but it's positive.
It's in the it's in the 60s, onmetacritic, jojo rabbit never
got there, um, obviously you cantell I'm a big fan of jojo
rabbit, um, and and so you knowI just felt like there was this
forced push to make it a thing.

(24:01):
And then it shows up at torontoand it becomes not a thing
because it doesn't even place,wasn't there?

Speaker 2 (24:05):
this idea that it, like it's screened in Berlin for
some individuals, and then thereception was so enthusiastic
that people have started peggingit as like, oh, it's a surefire
best picture contender.
Because, again, I think thereit also exists this idea that
Searchlight is going to get afilm in the top 10.
And that Searchlight is goingto get a film in the top 10.
And that usually does happen.

(24:26):
So you would figure that it'sgoing to be rental family, that
it's not looking like a surefirething right now.
There's still a lot of waysthat they can turn that around,
so we'll see what happens.
But between that sort ofexpectation that Searchlight is
going to be there they werethere yet last year when it
looked like it was a littledicey, they still managed to get
in but um, between thatexpectation for them to be there

(24:46):
and that initial sort of umresponse from that screening and
having, like the first set ofindividuals saying, oh, this is
definitely happening for bestpicture yeah the.
You know, I think it totally gotblown out of proportion.
Yes, I always thought this wasgoing to have a little bit of
trouble with the TIFF crowd,because I think the TIFF crowd
is also.
They're very well-versed in thekind of movies that they like

(25:13):
and they like films from,possibly, filmmakers that are a
little bit more established.
And so I thought it waspossibly a little too soon to
have that filmmaker win.
Yeah, to have Hikari win thevery, the big prize right.

Speaker 1 (25:27):
I think that's a really good point.
I didn't put enough stock intothat.
I was worried that it was goingto win and then when I saw that
had better reviews than jojorabbit, I said it's a done deal.
So did I.
But then hamnet started havingthe screenings and chloe's.
I was doing this masterful, youknow, pre-screening ritual and
I was like this is, this is.
This is brilliant, this isamazing, do?

Speaker 2 (25:46):
you think that chloe zhou and focus are gonna work
now on like having her recordthat I would love that I think
that they're.
I would love I honestly 100.
I would love that it could be alittle tacky, I'm not gonna lie
but, I honestly think that theyare considering it having chloe
zhou introduce the film intheaters to audiences with a
small video, sort of saying whydon't we do this exercise?

(26:09):
For just like 30 seconds Right.

Speaker 1 (26:12):
You know this meditative exercise.
You know I loved it.
I would have loved to been inthe room and you see the videos
that circulated online of ChloeZhao doing this exercise, this
meditative experience, you know,and you know she comes across
so genuine and so graceful andit's really touching, it's
really moving.
I would have loved to have beenin the room when that happened,

(26:33):
so I would love a video beforeevery screening.

Speaker 2 (26:36):
Yeah, I mean, listen.
I think that if Focus Featuresis very committed to winning the
Best Picture Oscar, all theyhave to do is invest the money
to fly Chloe Zhao on openingweekend to as many theaters as
possible and have her leadeveryone in the meditative
exercise, and they are going towin Best Picture If they unleash
the Chloe Zhao initiative then,it's over.

(26:59):
It's like when Ryan Cooglerreleased that video on I don't
even know if it was Instagram orTikTok or Twitter or whatever
talking about the format, thatthe film was going to be
projected in centers, likethat's where he said, like the
staple, like yeah, so this, thisis the individual who's going
to win best director or bestpicture, and so the counter to
that is now to unleash ChloeZhao out there right before the

(27:21):
movie starts, leading wideswaths of audiences right
through the meditativeexperience and that's, and they
will win best picture.
I guarantee it.

Speaker 1 (27:29):
If they invest money that way, there will win it and
actually some other titles thatI think wanted to get a wind at
tiff but didn't.
Other premieres um, we got good, really good notices from
roofman again all this is in thearticle that we posted post
tiff.
Um, but really good noticesfrom Roofman Again all this is
in the article that we postedpost TIFF.
But really good notices fromRoofman.
It's coming out very soon andit got very positive reviews and

(27:52):
it seemed like a, you know, avery charming, possibly winning,
you know, the audience award,the People's Choice Award.
It did not Crowd pleaser Crowdpleaser exactly.
Sony Pictures Classics reallytried to push Nuremberg into the
Oscar conversation.
Some people were pretty high onit.
I think Scott Feinberg reallyliked it.

(28:14):
I think people from Varietyreally liked it.

Speaker 2 (28:16):
Everyone says that it's very topical.

Speaker 1 (28:18):
Yes, yeah, about the Nuremberg trials.
However, you know, criticallyit's still borderline and it
didn't win anything and itneeded.
It needed to win right.
And so I feel like we're inthis territory where sony
picture classic maybe, wasbetting on this movie to be a
possible, you know, their theirtheir ticket to the best picture
top 10 and it's not.

(28:39):
It's not looking like that'swhat's gonna happen, right, I
agree, um, paul greengrass hadhis latest film and come in the
toronto lineup.
The last bus also has sometimeliness because of the forest
fires that happened earlierthis year in california.
Um, and again, I think peoplewere very appreciative of the
technical work of the movie,especially the sound work and

(29:01):
the visual effects, imagery, butthe story itself, the script,
got a more you know sort ofmuted response and, critically,
it's also borderline.
So it wasn't this rapturousresponse and it seems like Apple
TV is rushing that into theplatform, the streaming platform
.
And then a similar case withHedda, which I think received,

(29:22):
you know, pretty decent critics,but again borderline.
Also, a lot of good notices forTessa Thompson and Nina Haas,
who won one of the actingtributes Uh, I heard that they
make a dynamic duo but againmore borderline critics and it
really seems like Amazon isprioritizing after the hunt,
giving it uh enough, uh,theaters to show in, and they're

(29:43):
really rushing Hedda into theAmazon Prime streaming slot.
That's what it seems like,which is going to hurt it
significantly.

Speaker 2 (29:51):
Yeah, I mean.
Well, I mean, I think the otherthing to talk about is sort of
the films that needed a secondwind here after premiering
elsewhere, and I think, forexample, frankenstein is the
best case scenario where you'reright, after having played in
venice and telly riot, for it tocome and go to tiff and come

(30:13):
out with second place.
I think that's a huge, huge winfor that film, um, but there
were some other films thatreally could have benefited from
that sort of um, that sort ofaccolade.
The first one that comes to mymind is the voice of hin rajab.
Yes, after an explosivepremiere at venice.
It would have really, reallybenefited from placing and
especially since now we have twocategories.

(30:35):
I thought it was a definiteeven more, even more reason I
certainly thought it was goingto place when there was one
category among three, whenthere's two and among six.
That it didn't place may sortof stymie some of the idea that
it has the legs to yeah, crashthe best picture to crash the
best picture race to getnominated for something other
than just international film, um.

(30:58):
So that was a bit surprising forme to see it and to see it now
listed there, um, in any of thetop three on the international
section.
Another surprise potentiallycould be that Jafar Panahi's
film, it Was Just an Accident,did not place either.
And there's another film that,as the Palme d'Or winner, last
year's Palme d'Or winner, didplace, onora, and so this is

(31:19):
still strictly a Jafar Panahifilm and thank God for that.
It's an amazing film, abeautiful film, but it's also,
like other Jafar Panahi films,not the typical film to get
listed for best picture or bestdirector.
Really, the Palme d'Or has sortof changed the conversation
around it.
It's a powerful piece, but thePalme d'Or is what is going to
motivate an Oscar voter to watchthe film that it did not place

(31:42):
here in the People's choiceaward on the international
section is a little bit of ablow, um, it doesn't help.
I think the idea that this isfrom the same studio that's
going to be releasing no otherchoice neon and they're gonna
have to make decisions becausethey have just too many films
and too many films playing thesame card, in my opinion.
So sentimental value from neonmakes it in in second place.

(32:05):
No other choice wins.
The big one from neon, um,jafar panahi, was left out of
the top three um, but you alsohave the secret agent, for
example.
That's another one that reallycould have used a little bit
more wind um at its sale.
Um, it did not get listed inthe top three again.
Another neon pick for foreignfilm, um that in another year
maybe would have been able to.

(32:26):
I thought I had a chance to winor place among the category
when there was just three spots,and so those are, I think, um
three of the bigger films thatcould have really benefited from
a boost right from gettinglisted for that people's choice
award on the internationalsection.

Speaker 1 (32:43):
Right, okay, so now let's look at what the landscape
looks like now that these majorfestivals have premiered and,
as you were saying at the top ofthe show, a lot has been seen.
There's very little that hasn'tbeen seen.
Obviously, we're going to talkabout one battle at a later date
.
Yuri and I are going to see itin a couple of days.
Many critics have already seenit.

(33:04):
It's unanimously loved andpraised, so we expect that to
factor in substantially into theOscar race.
A question mark that you and Ihave gone back and forth over is
how well the film is going todo financially.

Speaker 2 (33:16):
That's really going to be sort of what's going to
determine what kind of legs thefilm has.
The movie is good.
Individuals love it, criticslove it.
I'm sure fans of paul thomasanderson are really going to
enjoy it.
We can't wait the the idea ofthe price tag on the film and
whether it's going to make noiseat the box office.

(33:37):
That's going to determinewhether the film is a five
nominee film or a 10 nomineefilm.

Speaker 1 (33:42):
So that's what we're really waiting on, right and so
and if the movie can sort ofmuster a you know actual front
runner, it's going to win bestpicture.
It's going to win best director.
It's going to win all theseawards.
A lot of it's going to depend,unfortunately, on how well the
movie does financially, becauseof the big price tag that we
have here yeah um, and right nowestimates are a little bit

(34:02):
below what's expected.
So we're going to see how thatplays out and we're going to
have more conversation aboutthat.
As we get in the coming daysExactly Um and uh.
All these uh predictions willbe, of course, up on our website
.
You can see our currentpredictions there.
Uh, we're slowly working on thetech categories that will be up
very soon, as well as anytimewe update the last update, you

(34:23):
know the dates will be on thereas well.
So we're looking at bestpicture here.
Uh, certain films actually Ithink I would say five or six
films feel like no brainers.
You know sinners, in noparticular order sinners, hamnet
, sentimental value, one battleafter another, um, and it was
just an accident to me smellalready like, oh, and I would

(34:47):
add to that well, you know I'llget there.
Um, those five to me feel likelocks.
Um, as you were saying earlierin the show.
You know jafar panahi's film.
In any other year where itwasn't the palm d'or winner, its
best shot would just be foreignfilm.
But now that that it is thePalme d'Or winner, I think we
can count on Neon getting boththeir Cannes premiering films in

(35:08):
, and I'll also add that I thinkA House of Dynamite is just so
timely and it's going to do sowell with critics, and I think
it's going to be a film thatreally taps into the zygus, you
know, of sort of climate thatwe're living in as a nation.
I think it's going to be a bigtalking point.
I think people will beconversing about it.

(35:29):
I think it's going to have itsfans in terms of audiences, and
it's going to have itsdetractors.
I expect some you knowpolitical rhetoric to get
involved here because of howtimely the subject is.
Right.
I think it's going to do reallywell on Netflix.
I think it's going to continueto get great critics.
I just don't see how this moviedoesn't get nominated for best
picture.
You and I were pinpointing,before Venice was coming out,

(35:52):
that people were sleeping onthis movie and it was destined
to do really well it did, and Ijust don't see it missing here.

Speaker 2 (35:58):
I think I agree with you.
This is another movie, notunlike One Battle, where it's
obvious that the movie has thegoods.
It's going to come down to whatthe reception is like from
American audiences, us audiencesand even international
audiences when it finallypremieres on Netflix.
Because the film could beattacked to the point of
submission, to the point of theAcademy electing to not wanting

(36:22):
to spotlight it after all.
It could be sort of framed asnot having a thoughtful enough
conversation, framed as beingselective in its point of view.
So we'll just have to wait tosee how audiences react, but it
certainly seems like the moviehas the goods.

Speaker 1 (36:40):
Right.
I think that's a really goodpoint that you're saying
Possibly that's the sixth one.
I would say that I feel prettyconfident about um.
Like I said, netflix has somany contenders that I can't
help but think.
And and as you take a widerscope of the best picture race,
it becomes more clear that Ithink we're going to have a year
where several studios are goingto have more than one film get

(37:04):
nominated for best picture.
That doesn't happen often.

Speaker 2 (37:07):
It does happen, but it hasn't been the trend, yeah
and that's also by virtue of alot of studios just not having
material that is going to go thedistance when it comes to
getting nominated.
So if you look at somethinglike roof man, which it would
need to do so well at the boxoffice for the os Oscars to sort
of be forced into taking itseriously, right, and not a lot

(37:27):
of studios have a film that theycan push that way.

Speaker 1 (37:30):
But I also will say that it's indicative of the
strength of certain studios thatthey're having this year.
So Warner Brothers is having ahell of a year this year, after
having a really not good yearlast year a bounce back, a huge
bounce back.
So it makes sense that theywould get two films in right uh
netflix has an array ofcontenders it would make sense

(37:52):
that they get two films in andafter being pissed from winning
anything really substantial lastyear and then neon you know, as
essentially said, we're pickingup every, you know, every, yeah
, every every grade foreign filmthis year.
Yes, so it would make sense forthem to get in as well.
So right now I have those threestudios as being the ones that
get more than one contender ineven even then, if you go beyond

(38:14):
that.

Speaker 2 (38:14):
I know you're not necessarily pegging it, but if
you look at something like focusfeatures, it looks.
It looks like focus features isrefusing to lose this year right
um and that between the thing,the films that they do have you,
they have.
Hamnet Begonia did well.
It's a question mark again asto is it going to do well enough
with audiences to push acontemporary yogurt film into
the 10?
They already released thetrailer for Song Sung Blue, so

(38:37):
if they need a film that's justgoing to appeal to audiences and
make some money, they have thattoo.
So again, after losing forConclave last year, I really
think that focus features.
Their strategy is we win at allcosts this year right.

Speaker 1 (38:51):
Um, I'm I'm feeling a bit iffy.
I think focus features ishaving a banger year as well.
I just I'm very iffy right now.
In begonia, as we mentioned inone of our last episodes, I had
a terrific response from venice.
I expect strong criticalacclaim.
It already has it.
I expect more so as it getscloser to the release date.
But contemporary films fromYorgos have been spotty at the

(39:13):
Academy.
They certainly prefer him inhis period space.
His you know Taylor Swift, youknow his period era and you know
this is decidedly not bad.
It's very much in the vein ofwhat you and I were anticipating
His Lobster, his Killing of aSacred Deer, terrific, amazing
films.
I think I would even say modernday Yorgos is my favorite.

(39:35):
Yorgos personally, right, butit's not the Academy's favorite.
And knowing that the FocusFeatures has such a bona fide
shoe-in with Hamnet and thatYorgos was so recently
acknowledged for poor things andyou know I'm sensing that the
Academy is going to want a breakfrom Yorgos if we're not

(39:56):
dealing with another poor thingsfavorite sort of scenario Right
now, I'm seeing the film atbest get nominated in the
screenplay category and possiblyone of the acting categories,
which I think will really bedetermined not necessarily by
the strength of the performanceseven though I'm sure that's
there but will be determined bythe space of the category.

Speaker 2 (40:18):
I absolutely agree with you.
I think that's absolutely apossibility.
I think the ultimate test for alot of these films, you know,
after the six films that youmentioned here, I really see the
last four spots being wide openand it's going to come down to
what performs better withaudiences.
And so if somehow Begonia doesmuster a strong reception from

(40:39):
audiences because it epitomizesthe I don't know the extreme
culture and the extreme cultureof violence that we've sort of
devolved into, if that'ssomething that audiences want to
see and want to discuss, itcould.
It could of course get morethan those, those one or two or
three nominations.
So, it again really depends onwhat do audiences in the U?

(41:00):
S and abroad, what do they wantto see?
What do they want to talk about?

Speaker 1 (41:03):
Right and it does feel like the more politically
charged a film is, the more Ifeel like audiences are sort of
skirting away from that sort ofbeing inundated with this sort
of, you know, political vigor.
You know, uh, this vigoroussort of political you know uh
perspective day in and day out,much of it really negative and

(41:26):
sad and ugly is making a lot ofaudiences really kind of
hesitate to go and watch thesefilms in the theater.
Certainly, you know, we'll getinto it, you know soon, but you
know this certainly feels likePaul Thomas Anderson's most
politically charged film.
I haven't seen it yet, so maybethat proves to be different,
but from the reviews that we'reseeing, it doesn't seem that

(41:48):
that's a false statement.
Uh, and I think that couldfactor into its box office as
well.

Speaker 2 (41:53):
Yeah, um, maybe audiences just want to escape.
And if they want to escape andagain we have those four spots
open it just makes a betterargument for why you have to
keep an eye out for a film likeweapons right you have to keep
an eye out for a film like f1just because they are easier,
films that audiences wouldsupport in droves and you know,

(42:14):
their financial sort of um.
Accomplishments are going to beconsidered at the end of the
day.

Speaker 1 (42:19):
But I also will say that you know, in terms of what
we were talking about, with thesort of political climate and
these politically charged filmspossibly not doing so well, I
think that's something that isgoing for a film like house of
dynamite, in that it's notreally a theater release, it's a
streaming film, and so I thinkthat audiences will be more
likely to tune into something sotimely and politically relevant

(42:41):
if it's from the couch of theirown home than having to, you
know, get their ass to a theaterto watch it.

Speaker 2 (42:47):
Wow, you know, so I think that is an asset for a
house of dynamite.
That had not occurred to me,but I think you may be right
there.

Speaker 1 (42:54):
Right.
You know, as you were saying,the last four spots we go.
I certainly go back and forthin my mind.
Something that's a big questionmark for me, and we've talked
about it, is the A24 slot.
It certainly feels like the A24slot is going to go to either
one of the Safdie brothers Willit go to Josh Safdie's Marty

(43:15):
Supreme, or will it go to BennySafdie's the Smashing Machine.
That rhymes, and at least we'veseen the Smashing Machine.
Well, we haven't seen it, butpeople have seen the Smashing
Machine and we kind of know whatwe're dealing with.
The film is well-receivedcritically.
I'm not going to say it's, youknow, hamnet, or One Battle
After Another.
No one's over the moon about it,certainly, but it's received.

(43:37):
It's been received positively.
It just won the directing awardat Venice.
Controversially yes but whichgoes to show you that he has the
credibility and the support ofhis peers that the Safdies in
general do.
The Safdies have never beenrecognized by the Academy Awards
and it's high time that theyare.
It's just an inevitability andit seems like this is the year

(43:58):
where it's going to happen.
But since they're not workingtogether and they're separate
vehicles, the question remainsif the Academy, from going to
embracing zero Safdies, aregoing to embrace both Safdies
wholeheartedly.
I think that the SmashingMachine has so much going for it
that for me, at this particularmoment, I feel tempted to say

(44:19):
that that's the Safdie slot.
Why?
Because it's well, both filmsrevolve around a real life
subject, but the Mario Supremeis a fictional take on this real
life subject, whereas the SmashMachine is not a fictional take
.
In fact, I think some peoplesay that it's very much like

(44:40):
that documentary on the figureMartin McCurr, on the figure
Martin McCurr, and so I see thatfilm doing well at the box
office, because the last timeA24 dipped their toes in was the
wrestling drama.
The underrated Iron Claw.
Yes, which is a very good film,did really well at the box

(45:01):
office for them.
So I have to suspect that ifwe're taking another sports
biopic, mma fighter, legendaryMMA fighter, and the Rock in the
lead role, and the Rock's filmstend to drive in spectators,
tend to drive in audiences.
He has had several successful,financially successful films, if

(45:23):
not critically successful.
I have to expect that that filmis destined to do well at the
box office.
Um, aided by this narrativethat we have now of oh my god,
you gotta watch, you gotta seeit.
The rock transforms.
It's like the rock, like you'venever seen it before.
That's only going to driveticket sales, that's only going
to drive curiosity.
Um, so I expect a very good boxoffice for that movie.

(45:46):
As we said, it's going to havecritical acclaim enough decent
critical acclaim.
Um, it's on a real life subjectand it's not a fictitious take
on it.
Um, the film is gonna possiblyalso do well below the line
because it seems destined to getan eye for makeup.
Um, uh, emily Blunt seems likeshe can write the coattails of
the Dwayne Johnson train and getnominated as well.
So I'm seeing this film verysimilarly as we've talked in a

(46:10):
previous episode as DarrenAronofsky's the Whale, which
didn't get nominated for BestPicture but missed it just by
that much.
Yeah, very close, got veryclose, and on Oscar night it won
two of the three awards it wasnominated for.
So for me that just seems likethe obvious spot.
That just seems like theobvious spot.
You know, I think we're at adisadvantage because no one has

(46:31):
seen marty supreme, so no oneknows what exactly that's gonna
how, what's that's gonna be?

Speaker 2 (46:34):
like, yeah, I agree, I mean they're keeping it under
wraps.
I would, I would go further andI would say that, among those
four spots, because of the filmsthat you have, there's an
argument to be made that thereis enough room to put a24 twice
and to put both safty brothersin um, and that the films that
you have, there's an argument tobe made that there's enough
room to put A24 twice and to putboth Safdie brothers in Um, and
that the films could beactually incredibly
complimentary Um, and that,instead of choosing favorites

(46:55):
from their chosen sons, why notjust put them both in Um.
So that's something that I Idefinitely think can still
happen.

Speaker 1 (47:02):
Well, you know that's a good point, and you know I
can see the headline.
You know both Safdie Brothersfilms get into the Best Picture
lineup.
Finally, but at the same time,like I said, do we really expect
the Academy to go from notembracing them at all to
embracing them bothwholeheartedly for many awards?
To me it feels like a big jump.
Um, you know, like a goldcountry, or you know, he broke

(47:30):
out a bit with uh worst personin the world and now the next
step is even more recognitionfor sentimental value.
Those 70 brothers haven't passedthrough step one yet of being
embraced by the academy at anyto any extent.
So it's a little bit off for meto think that they're all of a
sudden going to be embraced tosuch a degree for these uh
ventures.
And I also think there's arumor that you know there's a,
there was a rift between them.

(47:51):
You know that it's not thatthey decided to go their own
ways because they wanted toexplore their individuality with
regards, as you know, asfilmmakers, but that there was a
sort of, you know, sort of riftthat happened.
And so I think if that is trueand you know, who knows if we'll
ever find out that that is evenmore.
So why?
I think it's weird for themboth to land in such a heavy way

(48:13):
at the oscars for best picture.
So I say that at the mostthere's one a24 spot um, I don't
know, but it's, it's a bigquestion mark.

Speaker 2 (48:21):
yeah, I mean we'll have to see how, how lands, and
again, how much money canSmashing Machine pick up?
That'll be another big factor.

Speaker 1 (48:29):
Right.
And then, in terms of Netflix'sother film, because we've
already mentioned WarnerBrothers, their two film,
sinners, and One Bad AfterAnother and Neon's two films,
sentimental Value, and it WasJust an Accident the other
Netflix film is a question markas well, because they have
several contenders.
Um, you and I have uh heardthrough the grapevine whispers,

(48:54):
uh, that seem legitimate, thatNetflix seems poised to pick up
the testament of ann lee andgive it an oscar campaign for
2025, um, which would onlyamplify their contenders.
Um, but even as of now, itseems like I'm sorry, but it
seems like Jay Kelly, despite amixed reception at Venice, has

(49:14):
enough to land in the latterspots of the top 10.
Number 10, number nine I'm notsaying it's going to be the
clear Netflix favorite, butbeing that it's about the
industry and looking at, youknow, hollywood superstars
through a more complicated lensand the cast, I expect the film
to do well at the Golden Globes.

(49:35):
I expect the film to get anhonor for cast ensemble at the
SAG.
To me, that just is starting tosmell like the kind of film
that just is able to manage anumber 10, a number nine spot
into best picture.

Speaker 2 (49:51):
I mean, I think it's possible.
Again, I think that's a filmthat it's going to depend on
where does George Clooney fallin the race.
If he's the kind of actor who'sgoing to be able to pick up a
globe or a sack for this, it's avery different film.
If he's the kind of actor who'sonly ranking fourth or fifth,
then I think the urgency toinclude the film isn't very high

(50:11):
.
So that's another one where Ithink we're sitting and waiting.
What is that second Netflixfilm going to be?
I haven't dismissed the ideathat Nouveau Vogue can make a
comeback.
I haven't dismissed the ideathat Guillermo del Toro is
beloved enough to getFrankenstein in there, like he
did for Nightmare Alley.

Speaker 1 (50:28):
I have a hard time seeing Guillermo out of all the
Netflix and Tundras.
I have a hard time seeingGuillermo pull another Nightmare
Alley, a film that does well onthe technical side of things
and also gets an eye-refreshedpicture.
I think his ticket into BestPicture again will be something
akin to the Shape of water thatgets support throughout the
above the line categories aswell as the below the line

(50:48):
categories I think that'scompletely fair.
I think that's completely fair,um, but we didn't talk about
much about nouveau vague and youknow nouveau vague has not, not
too dissimilarly from uh, jakekelly has this historical
cinematic context right andthere was also, I think there's.
Interestingly enough, though Ididn didn't get picked from
France as the officialsubmission.
Yes, that is, it was just anaccident Right that was a card

(51:10):
that I think it could haveplayed.

Speaker 2 (51:12):
That was what I was about to bring up is that it
would have been a major card toplay, right, but obviously it
didn't get selected.
But I'm not closing the door onit yet because it is been
pretty well received, because itwent to can, so again, it's
another one.
That, to me, is a question mark.
Those four spots are reallyreally open at the point at this
point right.

Speaker 1 (51:32):
And then another spot , I think, is going to belong to
one of the blockbusters.
Um, so we talked about you know, uh, so we talked about a
possible another netflix spot,wondering who that is.
Talked about an a24 slot,possibly both, possibly just one
.
I think it's just going to beone.
What about blockbusters?
I think, in the kind of yearthat we're having, that's so

(51:53):
tumultuous, and again, you know,the art seems to be driven by a
lot of timeliness and theaudiences seem to be driven by
the opposite.
Um, I don't know that.
I see two blockbusters gettinginto best picture.
I mean, I sure it can happen.
Um, right now I see oneblockbuster and I think it's
very clear it's going to be abattle between avatar and wicked

(52:14):
, um, to the detriment of wicked.
It was just there last year.
I don't expect that what we'regoing to see in this new version
of wicked is going to bedramatically different from what
we saw in the first one, notnecessarily in terms of story
beats, but in terms of theoverall feel of the film.
You know, I think that's a bighandicap that Wicked has to deal
with.
Now, you know, we are seeingthe part two of the story, the

(52:36):
conclusion of it, but we'vealready kind of been exposed to
the kind of tone and feel of themovie.
You know, the story beats inDune part two are very different
from the story beats and Dunepart one, but the feel is, you
know, the the essential feel ofthe film is similar.
It's the same and we saw a bigdowngrade there from Dune part

(52:58):
one to Dune part two and more sothe.
The trend is for these sequelsto do less well the second time
around than the first timearound.
Avatar did really well thefirst one.
The second one did a lot less.
Um, like cut by a third, Ithink.
Right, I expect wicked.
I expect wicked, which had agreat showing at the oscars with

(53:19):
10 nominations and only won twoof those 10 nominations, the
two that were most uh, you knowseen, most tailor-made for it to
win um.
I expect wicked to get lessnominations this time around and
I think the academy is going tohave to choose.
Are we going to go with johnchu and the conclusion of the
story?
Are we going to continue being,in a way, somewhat loyal to the

(53:40):
james cameron franchise?

Speaker 2 (53:42):
of avatar.
No, I completely agree with you, and I would actually
complicate that even more.
To me, the last four spots arewide open enough that we have to
seriously consider thepossibility of how many
international films can we have.
So we already know we have, orwe assume we have, sentimental
Value and Jafar Panahi's filmCan.
The lack of competition in mypoint of view, the lack of

(54:05):
competition for quality titlesand titles that maybe are not as
high in quality but are goingto compete based on their merit
in terms of how they were ableto translate to a wider audience
, can it allow for multipleforeign language films beyond
two?
The secret agent.
I don't think the door isclosed on no other choice, but I

(54:25):
I think that the pendulumswings the opposite way too,
which is how many spectaclefilms can we get?
We already have, beyond whatyou've mentioned.
Sinners is already in there,right, and had sinners not had
that box office, it would nothave not be in this position so
the fact that we have this usbox office behemoth already
included could potentiallycomplicate these other films

(54:48):
getting in if it weren'tpossibly a less competitive year
.
So you mentioned Wicked, youmentioned Avatar, but you didn't
mention F1.
And so if it's going to haveall the muscle of Plan B and
Apple, there's another titlethat's going to try to compete
for that sort of populistpopcorn film spot.
And then don't forget thatWarner Brothers just said that

(55:09):
they're also going to campaignweapons passionately, and that's
another film that, again, I canabsolutely see that film.
In fact, I would actually beton that film being listed among
the Producers Guild Award top 10, where they are unlikely to
recognize Jafar Panahi.
Now is he going to be able tosort of get that nomination ride
, that nomination to an eventualBest Picture nomination at the

(55:31):
Oscars?
I don't know, but I do see thependulum swinging in really sort
of extreme ways in terms of arewe going to go and welcome more
films that are spectacleaudience friendly, or more films
that are more highbrow,intellectual, international
cinema friendly, like the Voiceof Hinrich Hoppe, for example?

Speaker 1 (55:48):
Right, no, yeah, that's the other point I was
going to make that I actuallythink, moving on from the slots,
I think one of the slots I'mpegging it to be the political
timeliness of the Voice ofHinrich Hoppe.
It only won the second placeaward, I believe, at Venice, it
didn't place at Toronto.

(56:08):
But, again, the timeliness ofthat subject matter, and if you
look at the team behind it, theteam behind that movie is huge.
I mean, it's a smalldistributor, watermelon pictures
, that does put out good work,um, but the team behind it is
fueled to such a degree that Ithink they're they want to make
a statement, right, they want tomake a statement with this
movie.

(56:28):
They want a platform to put aspotlight on this movie, um, in
this very, you know, tumultuoustime with everything that's
going on in Gaza.
Uh, they have a bunch of actors, um, who are representing the
film, who are pushing the film,and I think that voting block,
the actors, voting block isgoing to be what pushes this
movie into a best picturenomination.

(56:50):
Um, especially considering, youknow, these secondary choices,
uh, films getting in for morethan one category, films falling
by the wayside, these fourspots being very open and in any
anybody's game.
I really feel like the voice ofHenry Jobe stands a terrific
chance of exploiting that andbeing able to get into that top

(57:13):
10.

Speaker 2 (57:14):
I completely agree with you.
And so again, looking at thatPGA list, which is somewhat of a
harbinger for what's going tohappen at the Oscars or sort of
a template for what the base ofthe Oscars best picture 10 will
be, before we start getting,before we start analyzing it and
seeing where the weak pointsare, at the Producers Guild
Award you're probably going tosee them nominate F1 as the Plan

(57:37):
B movie.
But Plan B is also involved inthe Voice of Hina Rajab.
So I would not be shocked atall if the Voice of Hina Rajab
makes it into the Oscars top 10and takes the f1 spot and takes
a sort of plan b spot that theythey're again, they're really
great at promoting their films.
So that's the kind of, I think,year we're dealing with where
these four last spots couldswing extreme into extremes

(58:03):
between the choices that votersare going to have, right, I?

Speaker 1 (58:05):
think where I hit a wall is that I don't see more
than three studios repeating.
Which is already crazy, by theway, right.
Exactly.
I don't see four studios, Idon't see five studios, I see
three max.
And of those three, it feelslike two are done, it feels like
Neon is done, and it feels likeWarner Brothers is done, done,

(58:28):
and so we're left with one we'releft with one, if I'm right,
and could it be focus features?
could it be netflix?
Could it be a 24, maybe, but itshouldn't be all of them, and
so I think certain choices aregoing to have to be made.
Which safty film do we prefer?
You know?
Which fox features film do weprefer?
Which blockbuster do we prefer?
yeah and also I want to, I wantto have enough room to spotlight

(58:52):
an important cause, animportant film.
That, I think, is, you know, ofthe moment, yeah, and I want to
seize the moment, um, and soyou know, right now, you know,
and there are other films, youknow, there are question marks,
as we've been mentioning.
No other choice.
Can neon really juggle a thirdfilm into best picture?
I highly doubt it.
Frankenstein is Guillermo goingto pull another Nightmare Alley

(59:14):
?
I highly doubt it.
What else?
Weapons Can one of those get infor a third film and have that
film be a film like Weapons,which is a very popcorn film?
I can't imagine a lot of theforeign base, you know, loving
that film.
Um, I highly doubt it.
Um, uh, it.
Can yorgos get in with a modernday yorgos film?

(59:35):
That's yet to happen for bestpicture?
I kind of doubt, I kind ofdoubted.

Speaker 2 (59:39):
So you know, I think, uh, they're gonna have to make
certain choices yeah, Icompletely agree with you and
another, another point therebeing that you know paramount
doesn't really have a hugeplayer and Sony Picture Classics
looks like they don't have ahuge player.
Are they going to make a latepickup?
No one has picked up Endly yet.
Potentially, if someone picksthat up, like Sony Picture
Classics, they can stillcampaign that in their favor.

Speaker 1 (01:00:02):
Even though I do think that film in particular is
a bit more divisive.
Yeah, absolutely For audiences.

Speaker 2 (01:00:07):
Yeah, I agree, but because of the low year that it
is, it's something to look outfor.
And then are we essentiallysaying that Rental Family can't
survive?
You know, not placing at TIFFfor the People's Choice Award.
Are we saying that Searchlightis going to miss Right?

Speaker 1 (01:00:25):
Are they going to have the rare miss and not get
in at all this year?
I certainly think that thatwill happen.
I think Rental Family's bestoption is screenplay.
I think the TIFF loss and notplacing at all made it so that
that is sort of the fate.

Speaker 2 (01:00:37):
That's something to look out for, yeah, we'll see.

Speaker 1 (01:00:39):
So if I had to come up with 10 Again, this will be
reflected in our Oscarprediction chart.
So check that out when you geta chance.
In no particular order, thereare six films that I feel very
confident about, and thenthere's, as we've been saying,
four open spots, the six beingin no particular order Hamnet,
sinners, one Battle AfterAnother, sentimental Value it

(01:01:00):
Was Just an Accident and A Houseof Dynamite.
I feel very, very confidentabout those.
We have those four spots thatare head scratchers right now.
I'm going to say that the a24slot is going to go to the
smashing machine that's seven,that the blockbuster spot is
going to go to wicked for goodthat's eight.
Um, I'm going to say that thisI'm going to hedge my bets as of

(01:01:22):
now that the other uh studiothat's going to get a second
film in it's going to be netflixfilm in is going to be Netflix
and it's going to be a film likeJake Kelly, because it's going
to resonate with a large portionof the academy.
So that's going to be my ninthpick, and then my 10 is going to
be the Voice of Henry Job.
I just think it's a very, veryof the moment.
Film of the moment, statement,and, and it's going to get a

(01:01:46):
push from those that are behindit.
So it's going to be a surpriseto many Watermelon Pictures
being known for Best Picture,but that's the kind of world
that we're living in right now.
We're destined to havesurprises of that nature.
So I think right now I'mthinking, that those are the 10
that we're predicting.

Speaker 2 (01:02:04):
I don't think that's bad at all.
I think that's a solid place tostart with, again the kind of
year it is.
Just watch out for a fewsurprises.
Who knows if one of those fewNew York premieres really take
off, or if Marty Supreme reallytakes off, and then you know, if
we're talking about the PGApossibly being a template for
what the Oscars are going tohave to work with.

(01:02:25):
I don't think it's beyond therealm of possibility for a film
like K-pop to really end upbeing more in the discussion
that we're pegging it to bebecause of the success that it
is, the runaway success, that itis Same thing with weapons and
F1, but I think that's a solidplace to start.

Speaker 1 (01:02:45):
Right For Best Director.
I also feel pretty confidentabout four spots, and it's
really that last spot that hasme questioning who can get it.
In no particular order, I feelthat Ryan Kugler for Sinners,
joaquin Trier for SentimentalValue PTA, for One Battle After
Another, and Jafar Panahi for itWas Just an accident.

(01:03:05):
Um are the four that I feelconfident about, and it's really
that last spot.
Now, who makes most sense inthat last spot?
Yes, it is Chloe Zhao forHamnet, because of its front
runner status.
Um, because of the acclaim,it's a huge Oscar contender.
However, remember that the bestdirector category is the most

(01:03:26):
fickle.
You know, that branch, you know, doesn't care about rules.
They're going to vote for who,they want to vote for the
filmmaker they want to support,and there are patterns that
reveal that they take certainthings into account.
So the fact that Chloe Zhao wasjust there in 2020, not too
long ago and that she won, andthat in the interim between

(01:03:51):
Nomadland and Hamnet, there'sonly been one other film,
eternals, which disappointedcritically and financially, even
though I quite like Eternals, Ithink that that's something
that could really handicap herspot here and could make it
viable to someone like, forexample, catherine Bigelow, who
some would say, or certaincertain filmmakers, I think,

(01:04:12):
will say that she's waitedlonger between her film, um uh,
the Hurt Locker, and up till now, obviously, she was overlooked
for, uh, detroit, oh, zero DarkThirty.
Excuse me, she was overlookedfor Zero Dark Thirty, famously
Um, and so they might think thatshe's waited longer, um, in
between both films, um, and theymight want to give that spot to

(01:04:35):
her.
If Josh Safdie makes animpression with Marty Supreme, I
, you know, you could see JoshSafdie figuring into this
director race.
Um, I don't see Benny Safdiefiguring into this race.
Obviously, we've been seeinghow the director's branch, as of
late, is very iffy aboutnominating actors turned
directors.
I think that's something that'snot going to help.

(01:04:56):
Josh Park Chan-wook has neverbeen recognized by the Academy,
but he's never been recognizedfull stop, not just in the best
director category but the bestforeign language film category,
and so, in a way, he does makesense in this list.
However, again, I don't seethem going from zero part-time
who to a major nomination bestdirector, um, uh, even though,

(01:05:19):
again, it's crazy that he hasn'tbeen recognized.
I don't see guillermo pullinguh, again, this is just.
This film is not the shape ofwater.
I don't see it doing wellacross the board.
Um, I don't think john m chu,for wicked for good is their
thing, um, to get an eye forbest director, especially in
this competition, you know.
So really, I feel like thosefour spots to me seem pretty

(01:05:41):
locked and loaded.
Oh, your goals?
We didn't talk about your goals.
I mean again, he was just.
Again, he was just there.
Right, he was just there and,based on the competition this
year, it seems very likely thathe's not going to win for
Begonia, right?
So I think that's going tofactor in.
Do we want to nominate Jorgoswhen we know he's not going to
win for this?
He was just here, you know.

(01:06:03):
He's been recognized enough fornow.
Let's take a break.
So I really see those four aslocks.
And that last spot is thesurprising one.
Um, could we have a really coolyear where we now made two
female directors?
Since 2020 I think 2020 was theonly year it's happened we now
made two female filmmakers inthe top five?

(01:06:24):
Yes, I, I think we can, but itwould be at the expense of
someone like Josh Safdie.
Can that happen?
I think it can, but consideringthat, I think those four are
locked and loaded.
We only have room for onefemale filmmaker, and so they're
going to have to choose whichfemale filmmaker do they want to

(01:06:45):
spotlight, right?
So if you had to pick five, ifI had to pick five, no
particular order, it'd be RyanCoogler, joachim Trier, jafar
Panahi, pta.
And I'm tempted to say thatthey're going to go and give
Catherine Bigelow her nomination.
No.
Chloe Zhao no.

Speaker 2 (01:07:02):
Chloe Zhao, and so Chloe Zhao might Argo her way
into Best Picture, sort ofRemember how Ben Affleck got
stumped for Best Director, andthen everyone said that we have
to give Argo Best Picture.

Speaker 1 (01:07:11):
Right, it could be that may happen.

Speaker 2 (01:07:13):
I mean, the list makes a lot of sense right now.
We'll see if this stands overthe next few months, where
movies are going to have thechallenge of well, what do
mainstream audiences think ofthe films?
I will say that the one notethat I would make in terms of
year five and some of the moviesyou're talking about here is
that it is pretty heavy on thenumber of nominees who could

(01:07:36):
potentially not have any sort ofactors recognized in their film
.
So I don't think any of theactors are a guarantee for
Sinners.
And so that may make, forexample, ryan coogler in for
director with a film thatdoesn't have any acting
nominations, and the same couldhappen for katherine bigelow
right, and it's likely going tohappen to jafar panahi right.

(01:07:58):
He probably will not get any ofthe actors in for the film
that's a really good so that'ssomething to look out, because,
directors, one thing that theyare definitely going to judge
the films by, and the moviesthat they decide to nominate,
the directing jobs they decideto nominate is by performance.
Yeah.
And so that could end up being afactor.
And so, even if you extend thistalk to films like whether it's

(01:08:19):
a blockbuster like F1, or amore niche international film
like Voice of Hinrya Jha, thefact that these movies don't
have performances attached tothem that are going to be, or
are definitely going to be, aneye for Oscars, that may end up
being a factor as to which filmends up making the final five
and which doesn't.

Speaker 1 (01:08:37):
I think I think you bring up a great point and I
certainly think that that'sthat's something worth thinking
about and it's certainly makingme question.
Maybe you're right and maybeI'm wrong.
Yeah, that that really the,that final spot is going to go
to someone like Chloe.

Speaker 2 (01:08:50):
Zhao, it could, but even then, just it's something
that you have to be aware ofbecause, um, some of the other
alternatives whether it'sGuillermo del Toro or no other
choice they don't necessarilystand great chances for acting
either.
And so, if you look at it thatway, if I told you to make a
list where four of the fivefilms have to have performances
be nominated, you may come upwith a different list.

(01:09:11):
So we'll see what happens,right?

Speaker 1 (01:09:13):
And I also feel that you know those last one or two
spots that are highlycontentious could reveal that a
surprise nominee gets in, likeKleber Mendoza for the Secret
Agent yeah, that a surprisenominee gets in, like Kleber
Mendoza for the Secret Agentyeah, you know, sort of, you
know, possibly Chloe Zhaocouldn't, couldn't necessarily,
you know, overtake CatherineBigelow or vice versa, and then

(01:09:35):
someone that benefits from it issomeone like the Secret Agent
yeah, could be.
Yeah, okay.
Best actor Okay.
This is a fight to the death.
This category is stacked,stacked.
It's a monster of a category,and which is great because we
have so many great leading actorperformances.

(01:09:55):
Hasn't been like this in awhile?
I'd say but I will say get ready, because really big players
will be snubbed.

Speaker 2 (01:10:02):
Yeah, we're revisiting the territory of 2013
, in a year that saw the lateRobert Redford not get nominated
, tom Hanks not get nominated,oscar Isaac not get nominated,
so this is certainly 2013territory.
Yeah, be ready.

Speaker 1 (01:10:19):
A bunch of heartbreaking snubs and in a way
you and I have been talkingabout it it's hard to see.
It's an odd scenario becausewhile there's so many contenders
, it's also hard to see thewinner in this category.
That is an absolute killer,yeah, which makes predicting the

(01:10:42):
top five even harder.
I don't think anyone is in aplace that feels like they're a
guaranteed winner right now.
Most people are assuming andthey would be right to assume
that timothy chalamet for martysupreme is going to have a big
impact, and why that makes senseis because timothy chalamet is
coming off from being nominatedlast year and another year in a

(01:11:03):
lesser film.
He would not be nominated.
The Academy doesn't like tonominate so back to back.
If they just celebrated youlast year, his performance is
undoubtedly going to be comparedto what he gave last year
playing Bob Dylan.
He's playing another historicalfigure here.
It's his third nomination andlead.
If it were to happen and sotheoretically it wouldn't happen

(01:11:25):
he would not get nominated andthis film would do less well
than A Complete Unknown.
However, if the opposite happensand that's what most people are
predicting right now that MartySupreme does really well with
the Academy and he does manageto get that back-to-back
nomination at such a young age,having three lead actor

(01:11:46):
nominations he's going to winBecause in a way, he's proven to
his peers that he's the realdeal, that he can do no wrong,
that he can do anything, that hecan play anyone and he's sort
of putting his money where hismouth is in terms of his sack
speech last year you know, Iwant to be one of the greats,
right.
I mean to have that kind of youknow success with the Academy at

(01:12:11):
such a young age, playing thisdiverse of these diverse parts.
I think that the Academy isgoing to finally accept yes, we
can give him the win here.
He's proven us that he's gotwhat it takes Right, and so
that's the expectation, but noone's seen it right so no one
knows, right.
Um, like I said, I think thefilm has to be very good to

(01:12:35):
great right for him to getnominated, right the bar is very
high right, but that hisbiggest tackle, his, his biggest
obstacle, is going to be thenomination.
Yeah because if Because if hedoes get nominated, expect him
to win, right.
Because if they're nominatinghim this soon right after last
year and going through theTimothee Chalamet tour of being

(01:12:57):
Bob Dylan, and they're doing itagain at this age, it's because
they're ready to give him thewin.

Speaker 2 (01:13:03):
I completely agree with you, but I also think that
him becoming the de factofavorite to win actor has a lot
to do with why Marty Supreme,the film, stands where it does
in all the other races and whypeople are considering a strong
contender for director andscreenplay and technical
categories and best picture.
And so the issue is if MartySupreme, the issue is if Marty

(01:13:24):
Supreme, which will not beunveiled until December if Marty
Supreme comes out there andlands like Babylon, does you
know?
Then everything getscomplicated, Because I don't
know if they're going to giveTimothee Chalamet a back-to-back
nomination.
Even if he does somehow managea back-to-back nomination, I
think it takes him out of thewin by the sheer quality of the

(01:13:45):
film or what the reception is tothe film.
So that'll be interesting towatch because, as you said, if
you take out Timothee Chalamet,it's really tough to pinpoint
who.
The winner could be Right and Iwill go further, though.

Speaker 1 (01:13:57):
I would say if the film is not great and it has a
sort of more mixed reception orjust and you and I were talking
about it it's it's hard to it'shard to think that the film is
going to be received poorly bycritics, because the Safdie
brothers films usually aren'treceived poorly by critics.
Now, I might not be unanimouslyloved, but I I have a hard time

(01:14:17):
.
I would bet against it's goingto be poorly received by critics
.

Speaker 2 (01:14:20):
We'll look at Ari Aster.
You would think that Ari.

Speaker 1 (01:14:22):
Aster is a critical darling.

Speaker 2 (01:14:22):
You would think Ari Aster is a critical darling
right, but then.

Speaker 1 (01:14:24):
But there has been the trajectory there.
You know, with every film, andthen especially Bo's Afraid,
there's been a trajectory thereOkay.
But there hasn't been that here.
So to assume that it's going tobe poorly received, especially
with the status that the Safdiebrothers have at this current
moment, it seems a little bit,you know, like that's not going
to happen.
But I will say that it stillmight not be the academy's thing

(01:14:46):
.
You know, as the safeties haveproven, they haven't necessarily
proven that they're theacademy's thing yeah um, and I
will say that benny's film, manyof the sort of commentary
there's been, commentary thatit's, you know, a safer version
of a safety film.
If you even want to call it asafty film, you know it's sort
of a familiar, safe, you knowkind of conventional biopic,

(01:15:11):
academy friendly.
It's exactly exactly.
I expect for marty supreme tobe more of a wild sort of
exploration of this character.
I expect it to have a littlebit more of the safty energy
that we're used to um, whichmakes it a gamble if it's going
to be something that they'regoing to embrace.
So that's a big question.
Mark Timothee Chalamet.

(01:15:32):
I don't know how to solve it.
I wish we got some sort ofleakage as to what's going on
with this movie.
What are people thinking?
Everyone is mum.
Jeremy Allen White had the filmpremiered at Telluride and I
got a decent reception butalmost unanimous praise for his
performance.
You know this, you knowpossession, sort of performance

(01:15:56):
that we hear about most years.
You know, very academy friendly, he disappears into the Boss,
and so he would seem on paperlike a great candidate for this
category.
But what I really don't like isthat it's seeming more and more
likely that he's going to bethe film's lone nomination, and

(01:16:19):
so Unless it makes a bunch ofmoney, unless it makes a bunch
of money, then I think it's notjust, I think it's a best
picture contender Right, which,you know, fox doesn't have one
yet.
I mean yeah.
So it could be, but consideringwhat we heard from Telluride,
that it's more of a sober takeon Springsteen.
It's not this.
You know, give me the greatesthits and, and and have you know

(01:16:41):
the sort of bohemian rhapsody ofit, all singing songs that I
love to.
You know that I'm very wellaware of playing nonstop.
It's more of a sober take.
It's taking a very particularchapter in his life, when
Springsteen suffered fromdepression, and so I think it's
a darker, moodier tale and Ithink it's going to be not what

(01:17:04):
audiences expect from aSpringsteen biopic.
Um, I think some audiencesmight be surprised when they see
the film that it's a moresobering take on it on his, on
his life story.
Um, I think that could affectits box office as well.
So at the moment, to me itreads like a lone nominee and
that's very dangerous territory.

(01:17:25):
Yeah, um, these sort of uh, youknow the the academy tends to,
you know, nominate thesemusicians, um, uh, these real
life iconic figures, but usually, if you look at it, they tend
to be packaged with their, withtheir best picture.
You know, uh, status right, um,and right now I don't see that

(01:17:45):
happening.
So he would be a low nominee.
I think that's dangerousterritory.
And also his career trajectory.
Right now he's been very muchawarded for the Bears.
That kind of come into account.
Actors might mostly know himfrom the Bear you know, and not
necessarily be able to pinpointa lot of you know his
filmography apart or his careerapart from the bear, and that's

(01:18:08):
okay.
Look at Rami Malek.
But Rami Malek had a bestpicture nominee and Rami Malek's
film made a billion dollars inthe box office.
Two very big differences.
Yeah, will uh Springsteen'sfilm reach those heights?
That's not feeling like that tome, right?

(01:18:29):
Um, uh, michael B Jordan is ina genre film.
Um, that I is a shoe in forbest picture.
I think he'd be recognized as aproducer for that film.
But if you see the film, asgood as Michael B Jordan is and
as old as he is, a nomination itjust doesn't feel meaty enough
for them to nominate in leadactor.
You and I had that feelingcorrect yeah.
I felt the same way.
Yeah, and so you know, I'mfeeling that as much as people

(01:18:49):
are thinking right now thatMichael B Jordan's going to
factor in, I think he's notgoing to factor into the best
actor.
I expect him to get a SAG, Iexpect him to get a Globe, but I
think he's going to miss out onthe Oscar nom for lead or for
lead actor.
I expect him to be snubbed,right.
I expect it to be a bigheadline, right, exactly.
Um, I do think he will um getnominated as a producer for the

(01:19:11):
film.
I do think that he, you know,he'll still have an oscar
nomination, just not as an actor, right, um, I don't think it's
going to be enough for them thathe's playing two parts.
You know there's, if you seethe film, there's no oscar
moment scene.
Um, that is usually required togain a best lead actor
nomination.
Right, we've got Dwayne Johnson, who's had enormous headlines

(01:19:32):
past Venice, post Venice.
But Dwayne Johnson has a lot ofhandicaps as well, in that his
career is mostly not criticallyrevered work.
You know it's a lot of poorfilms.
There's a lot of films whosemain objective is, you know,

(01:19:55):
financial success At the boxoffice.
He's made a name out of that,but I think actors by and large
don't think of him as an actor.
That is really putting thecraft first and typically that'd
be, I would say, a deal breaker.
Yeah.
But the problem is that he isplaying a real life figure, so

(01:20:15):
it's a big stretch.
I mean Even though some actorsmight say that it's not enough
of a stretch.
Right.
Because he's coming from theworld of, you know, wrestling
and trying to get into the worldof MMA.
There's just not enough of a ofa leap.
A leap there, yeah, in a waymaking him an ideal candidate
for that role.
He does fit the prototypical,you know sort of drenched in

(01:20:37):
makeup, kind of transformation,narrative driven, you know
headlines kind of spot.
Yeah, that's the best actorrace, gets into the best actor
race.
Sort of very sympathetic,sensitive performance, right,
824 is going to try, is going toyou know headlines kind of spot
, it gets the best actress, getsinto the best actress, sort of
very sympathetic, sensitiveperformance.

Speaker 2 (01:20:50):
A24 is going to try to whale this, for sure, for
sure, 100%.
The question is are they goingto be able to get away with it?
Because I do.
I strongly believe that everyindividual that gets nominated
and comes to the cusp of winning, or even wins, they do have the
filmography to back it up.
And I think everyone talksabout Brendan Fraser in the
Whale, but he put in years ofwork in films like Gods and

(01:21:14):
Monsters and Crash and SchoolTies, and so Brendan Fraser had
always been an actor that peoplepointed out from a young age as
an actor to watch.
That has not been the case forDwayne Johnson.
In fact, he didn't reallynecessarily even come from film,
so it'll be interesting to seewhat happens there.
Um, that said, you look atsomeone like Lady Gaga and she

(01:21:35):
was able to be nominated rightfor um.
A Star is Born right, um, andshe's not an actor either.
She doesn't come from film.
Um, so it could.
It could turn out that way aswell, but then I I would.
I would expect the smashingmachine to be a best picture
movie.

Speaker 1 (01:21:47):
Right, yeah, yeah, exactly.
I think that if Dwayne Johnsongets in, it's because it's a
best picture movie, um, and Ithink, I think that the smashing
machine is unlike a star isborn, for several reasons, you
know, it doesn't have that kindof historical context of the of
the Academy embracing that story.
A star is born, yeah, not aprized property, and the film
got several nominations, notthree or four, like eight, right

(01:22:10):
, um, so it's a little bitdifferent.
But, uh, certainly right now Ithink he's looking very
attractive for the spot, right,um.
I don't know if that he'll bederailed.
I don't know if it'll be enoughthat his career is sort of full
of.
I mean, honestly, there there'svery little to no bright spot
on his resume.
Some people are big fans ofPain and Gain, I'm not, um, but

(01:22:35):
even if you just take that film,that's all you got.

Speaker 2 (01:22:37):
Yeah, I mean he did say that Steven Spielberg called
him and congratulated him onhow much he loved San Andreas.
Oh, but it's still.
I mean, it isn't.
No, no, no.

Speaker 1 (01:22:45):
So so I feel like just based on filmography he
would not get in, and I knowthat some people might not
believe us, but they do takethat into account they do take
into account what's the workyou've put out.
You know, because their youknow, their nomination is sort
of you know, in recognition foreverything that they've done so
far.
Right, exactly, you know, inrecognition for everything that

(01:23:07):
they've done so far.
Right, exactly, a seal ofapproval in a way.
And so let's see Leo, I think,is having a very big moment
right now with the raves fromone battle after another.
He's certainly getting ravesfor it, even though I wouldn't
say it's the performance that'smost being Lauded.
Lauded, but it's, I would saysecond, yeah, he really got

(01:23:28):
snubbed for a terrificperformance from killers of the
flower moon.
Could that factor in that hewas snubbed?

Speaker 2 (01:23:31):
well, I also think he was the antagonist and that's
true moon.
And here he's, the anti-hero ofone battle yeah, and we've
heard that it's terrific work.

Speaker 1 (01:23:40):
Yeah, and then if one battle ends up being, uh, one
of PTA's more heavily nominatedfilms, I would expect the lead
actor of that film, especiallyif he's being played by Leonardo
DiCaprio, to factor into thefive.

Speaker 2 (01:23:54):
I absolutely agree, and so far it's the only film
that you've mentioned, I meanother than Sinners.

Speaker 1 (01:23:58):
Really, that is a surefire best picture movie,
right, exactly, and I think thatmatters.
I think that what complicatesleo a little bit for me is that
in a way, he is that slot thatwe're talking about, which is
the movie star slot.
We love him.
We can nominate him whenever wecan.

(01:24:18):
He's in another great film,because leo only makes great
films finds a little bit ofcontention when you put someone
like George Clooney into the mix.
George Clooney has been awayfrom the Oscar scene for a while
, but you can't argue that theydislike George Clooney.
They like George Clooney.
He had a great run during the2000s, right Now, repeatedly for
actor.
He doesn't have a lead actorOscar, interestingly enough,

(01:24:41):
right, he only has, weirdlyenough, a supporting actor Oscar
, and you don't associate GeorgeClooney as a supporting actor.
No, you associate him as a head,as a headliner, um, but he only
has an Oscar for Syriana, forsupporting actor.
I think that helps his chanceshere to get an eye for lead.
I think it's a film thatclearly is tailor made for
George Clooney.
It's sort of self-reflexivesort of meta, right, you know,

(01:25:04):
they might appreciate that.
They might appreciate that.
You know, wink, wink, you knowGeorge Clooney always plays
himself kind of thing, right, um, and so I have a hard time
seeing a list with both LeonardoDiCaprio and George Clooney.
Yeah, you know, two mega stars.
Right.
Into the best acting category, Iwould say.
But I don't know.

(01:25:32):
I also feel that because of JayKelly and what it's about and
who George Clooney is playing,it's sort of irresistible to
sort of voters.

Speaker 2 (01:25:41):
Actors love films about actors playing actors and
so, jay Kelly, you can't sleepon it.
I think we also mentioned theidea that, the same way that we
don't have a great Oscar winnerso far without Timothee Chalamet
as the winner from last year'ssag for best actor, we have
terrible choices for who winsthe actor at sag, and the only

(01:26:03):
good choice really to win thesag actor and we've been saying
it for a while and this isreally going to be key for their
campaign is george clooney,right, who does not have a sag
on the acting side, on theindividual actor side, from the
Screen Actors Guild Award.
Remember that year that he wonthe Oscar for Syriana.
He lost that prize to PaulGiamatti for Cinderella man, and

(01:26:26):
so that's going to be hisanswer is can he win the SAG?
And if he wins the SAG and getsnothing else, that would
probably be more than enough toget him into the five.
But I agree with you Is thereenough room for those two huge
pillars of the industry and ofyou know, the Academy Awards Is
there.
It's really important not toget so obsessed with how the

(01:27:00):
race looks at this moment.

Speaker 1 (01:27:02):
You really have to look 10 steps ahead.
So you have to look at, youknow, when the film is released,
what's that release going to belike?
When the SAG nominations comeout, what are going to be the
nominees when the Globenominations come out because the
voters still look at that stuff.
You know what are thenominations going to be.
So you have to not be focusedon September and October, but be

(01:27:23):
focused on next year Januaryand February.
Yeah, because that's what'sgoing to determine who gets
nominated and what doesn't getnominated.
And so it's really goodpractice to think, okay, so what
is the SAG?
What is my best bet as to whatthe SAG is going to look like?
Yeah, what is my best bet as towhat the globe is going to look
like?
And start using markers likethat to help make your

(01:27:46):
predictions.

Speaker 2 (01:27:47):
And to paint different scenarios of what
could happen.

Speaker 1 (01:27:49):
Right Exactly, and so Jesse Plemons is a big question
mark for both of us.

Speaker 2 (01:27:54):
Because, speaking of which, I mean again, we do not
have a SAG winner, unlessthey're going to go back to back
on Timothee Chalamet.
And if that's the case, here'san actor who has never been
spotlighted by the SAG and it'snot necessarily an Oscar Academy
friendly role.
Maybe it's quite aggressive andpossibly quite violent, but he

(01:28:15):
doesn't have any sort ofnomination from the SAG.
So I mean, he sounds like agood bet to possibly get his
first.

Speaker 1 (01:28:19):
Yes, that's true, even though you could argue that
maybe he didn't get his firstSAG because there are more fans
in the Oscar voting body thanthere are necessarily in the SAG
voting committee, which changesevery year.
But this is a big question markfor me because I've heard
terrific things about hisperformance.

(01:28:40):
So it's never about quality andJesse Plemons is a tremendous
actor.
But again, yorgos hasn't hadsuccess with his modern day
films, having luck in the actingraces, despite terrific
performances from actors.
It would be a category shift,going from supporting to lead.
For Jesse Plemons that's good,that's an asset, that's a
pattern that we see often.

(01:29:00):
But actors just really stacked.
Put it alongside these otherbigger heavy hitter, you know
films, um, like One Battle AfterAnother, um, like, uh, sinners,

(01:29:21):
like possibly Mario Supreme orJay Kelly.
I just feel like it's aperformance that many voters are
going to respect and appreciate, but they're going to love the
other movies more and they'regoing to respond more deeply to
the other films and that couldaffect where Jesse Plemons lands

(01:29:44):
here in best actor.
I think it'd be a differentstory if he'd never been
nominated and this was his firstnomination, his first possible
nomination, given that healready has and the kind of role
it is and the kind of film thatwe know we're dealing with now
and the competition he's facing,I just see him as falling off
here and not making the cut.

Speaker 2 (01:30:01):
I mean, I think that's interesting.
I definitely think it'spossibly the most
psychologically scarring choicethat the Academy will have to
will have an option to selectRight.

Speaker 1 (01:30:12):
And then um, we've got Brendan Fraser, who got
great notices for rental family,but I don't think that that's
going to factor into the actingraces.
I would say he got the bestnotices in terms of the ensemble
, but as one that I think is ano-brainer and two that I think
is a heavy spoiler and theno-brainer one is Wagner Mora

(01:30:44):
who has a super criticallyacclaimed performance in the
Secret Agent.
We've seen the Secret Agent.
He's phenomenal in this film.
I certainly am prepared forWagner Mora to be the critic's
favorite for the Secret Agentand I think the foreign voting
body is going to get thatnomination.
It's going to make that happen.
It just as you see the film andyou can see the work.

(01:31:09):
Wagner Mora has enough here toabsolutely make the top five and
I think he will.
I feel really confident abouthim actually.

Speaker 2 (01:31:17):
I mean, I looking at the people who are in contention
, I don't see anyone necessarilytaking the critics darling spot
away from him, right and so, um, I see wagon mora's being safe,
and that just makes less spots.

Speaker 1 (01:31:30):
The week that we have for best actor and the other
person I want to bring a lot ofattention to is ethan hawke, who
got snubbed quite recently, um,in 2018, for first reformed for
lead actor.
I think that that snub has onlyincreased in.
You know, regret that theysnubbed him for that, that
performance.

(01:31:50):
I think he's getting stellarreviews, um, for this, uh, this
film.
I think he's playing a real lifefigure and a figure that was
involved in the entertainmentindustry as well, which I think
is going to matter, and to me,it just smells like the kind of
spoiler that's destined tohappen.
He would be a lone nominee here.

(01:32:12):
I think that decreases thechances of someone like Jeremy
Allen White being the lonenominee spot here, especially
when someone you have someone ofEthan Hawke's stature.
He's never been nominated for alead actor Oscar.
Surprisingly enough, he's onlyever been nominated for a
supporting actor, and to me,sony Picture Classics is behind
the film and they know how toget their acting contenders in,

(01:32:35):
and so I think that to me, ethanHawke for Blue Moon seems like
a very, very, very likelypossibility.

Speaker 2 (01:32:44):
I mean, you can't sleep on it.
I think it's a dark horse rightnow, but you certainly can't
sleep on it.

Speaker 1 (01:32:49):
And then I would say that someone like um uh, Joel
Edgerton for Train Dreams hadterrific reviews for Train
Dreams, but I do think that itsuffers from being among many of
Netflix's choices and I think,in terms of priority, that's not
going to be their top priorityand it's crazy that Joel

(01:33:10):
Edgerton has yet to be nominated.
In another year I think hewould have a much better chance
of getting in.
I think actors are eager tonominate him.
I do expect him to possiblymake an appearance in the
circuit for an award or two tobe a nominee, but I don't think
this is the race that he cancrack because of the competition
.

Speaker 2 (01:33:27):
I mean, the competition is just crazy.
But there could potentially beroom for a quieter performance
like his, but it would come atthe expense of another, more
internalized performance, I'mafraid.
So I'm not sure you can have.
He really would need thecritics, the critics' favorite
spot, which Wagner I think hassewn up right now.
But I don't think that you cansleep on this one either.
And if you look at guys likeChanning Tatum and even someone

(01:33:52):
like Russell Crowe, I meanthey're going to need audiences
to come through in a big way.
But if either of those moviesmake money, either of those guys
, because they are based on realindividuals, they have an
advantage.
Um, and you know we speak aboutwagner mora, someone who could
potentially, if they had, theyprobably are going to have
enough um support from criticsto to maybe list the actor a

(01:34:16):
couple of times, is libyan, gunfor no other choice right, but
again, I I expect there to beone spot among the five for an
actor who is not selected at thescreen actors guild award.
possibly not even at the goldenglobes, you know, not even at
the bafta, maybe to stillgenerate enough support to get a

(01:34:36):
nomination in there.
And I think that that certainlyhelps a more international
actor, wagner being the favorite, but Lee Byung-un, you know, if
that film does pick up momentum, it's certainly a threat to
possibly leapfrog Wagner more.

Speaker 1 (01:34:50):
So that's something to look out for also Right and
you mentioned a lot thepossibility of Daniel Day-Lewis.

Speaker 2 (01:35:00):
I mean, how can you ever?
You know, Daniel Day-Lewis isjust so respected and so
esteemed that you can never, youcan never count him out.
And so if, after that New Yorkpremiere, the Daniel Day-Lewis
film takes off or everyoneagrees it's, it's a fantastic
performance.
Again, I think he can easilytake the spot from both Leo and
George Clooney because of thekind of reputation that he has.

Speaker 1 (01:35:18):
Right.
I just think that you're right.
You can never mess with thegreat Daniel Day-Lewis.
However, this is a first timefilmmaker, you know.
I don't think it's a filmmakerthat the industry or the award,
you know, the Oscar voting body,feels, you know, has proven
their metal.
Yet he's known, obviously,obviously, as being his son and

(01:35:40):
certainly the trailer looks veryinteresting.
We don't know what thereception's going to be like,
but I just don't know that.
I see it right now him breakingout for a first-time
filmmaker's ambitious film.
Yeah, no it could be, and Ithink that's why we didn't see
it, for example, at Venice, andwe're seeing it at New York, a
place like New York.

Speaker 2 (01:35:58):
I think it's completely possible, but I, like
I said, I just don't think thatDanny DeLuis can get in
whenever he wants.
I think, so I think that that'ssomething that I wouldn't, I
wouldn't, I would never dismiss.

Speaker 1 (01:36:10):
And Russell Crowe was getting some notices from
Nuremberg.

Speaker 2 (01:36:14):
Yeah, but again I don't think that landed as hard
as it needed to Again, ifaudiences come back and
resuscitate that movie alongwith Roofman, then I think both
actors are well-liked enough.
I mean, channing Tatum hasnever been nominated before, and
so if you're asking voters toconsider, am I going to nominate
Jeremy Allen White for thefirst time.

(01:36:39):
Dwayne Johnson for the firsttime.
Roof man makes enough money.
You're going to.
You're going to consider right,you know who you're going to
give that first nomination to,first Right.
Um, and same thing with Russellis if, if, if Russell, because
it is a real life figure, youknow.
If that movie does make enoughmoney to push itself back into a
larger awards conversation, Iwould totally expect him to say,
well, ethan Hawke maybe pickedup these nominations and Crowe
maybe picked up a Golden Globenomination.
I expect him to say, well,which movie is more timely right

(01:37:00):
now and which historical figuredo I want to spotlight more?
Do not be surprised thatNuremberg comes up on top in
that decision.

Speaker 1 (01:37:07):
Right, and then I think, lastly, I'll just mention
someone that I think you'repretty excited to watch, which
is Will Arnett's performance,and is's this thing on that's
another New York premiere.

Speaker 2 (01:37:15):
Right, you got to watch out for that one.
It looks like a reallysensitive performance from Will
Arnett and it also gives him anopportunity to do something
really different.
So, for example, we talk aboutwho can win the SAG and again
just the uber competitive yearthat it is.
You know, remember when the SAGnominated Sarah Silverman for I
Smile Back.
That's something that couldtotally happen for Will Arnett
in this film that I think hetakes a lot from his own life on

(01:37:39):
and he was responsible forwriting it, and even something
like original screenplays is notcompletely sewn up yet.
So definitely keep an eye outfor this film.
If it has a positive reception,you could be hearing more about
his name at a Golden Globe oreven a SAG nomination.

Speaker 1 (01:37:52):
Right, and I just don't like that.
Bradley Cooper has beenrecognized enough.
His last two films were so wellreceived by the Academy.
I just have to think that youknow this sort of stepping away
from you know it's a differentfilm from Bradley Cooper, one
you wouldn't expect, absolutelyFeels to me.
The energy I'm getting is youknow they're going to wait and
give it a break.

Speaker 2 (01:38:12):
It could be it's Searchlight, though.
So again, you can never countout Searchlight, right.

Speaker 1 (01:38:17):
And Tonya 2 is incredible in Kiss of the Spider
Woman.
But this is just such a stacklist that I think it's very
unlikely for him to break ineven though he would be worthy
as a breakthrough role.
It's tough, it's a really,really, really tough category
and right now, of our five, I'mgoing to say, because I just
don't see a winner at thismoment, which again is

(01:38:38):
paradoxical to what we'retalking about there's so many
contenders I'm going to say thatTimothee Chalamet for Marty
Supreme, because we need awinner.

Speaker 2 (01:38:50):
No winner, this year Only nominees.

Speaker 1 (01:38:52):
I'm going to say Wagner Mora for the Secret Agent
I think he's, I think I see himas a lock.
I think Leo DiCaprio for OneBattle After Another, I think
Ethan Hawke for Blue Moon, and Ithink I'm going to go with
Dwayne Johnson for the SmashingMachine.

(01:39:13):
The person I'm leaving out isGeorge Clooney, which is very
weird, but and Jeremy AllenWhite, and Jeremy Allen White,
but I'm giving the lone spotinstead to Ethan Hawke.
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (01:39:24):
I mean, it's a very solid list.
Again, the problem is that youhave two or three people that
can get each spot, whether it'sthe real life figure, whether
it's the industry veteran,whether whether it's the
industry veteran, whether it'sthe first time nominee the
critics darling, I will say, theone individual we didn't talk
about.
That again you have to look outfor.
But if the campaign was smart,they would probably shift him

(01:39:45):
down category shift.

Speaker 1 (01:39:49):
But Paul Meskel, if he stays in lead for Amnit again
, then I would really changethings and I'd put him in.

Speaker 2 (01:39:53):
I would make the argument again where, if?
Because Jesse Plemons does nothave an individual acting
nomination on the film side andhe stands a great chance of
getting his first SAG nomination.
That goes the same for PaulMeskel right, who has already
been nominated for After Sun buthas yet to have a film acting
nomination with the SAG, I thinkthat's a terrific point and

(01:40:14):
right now I'm betting that he'sgoing to be numb.

Speaker 1 (01:40:17):
He's going to be a contender in the supporting
actor field, but if he goes lead, I see him getting in and maybe
he wants um.
Because?
Well, because we need a winner,and at least you're right we do
need to win.
You know, george Clooney has anOscar.
Uh, leo DiCaprio has an Oscar.
Wagner Moore I don't think canwin for that, for a foreign
performance at this particularmoment.
Dwayne Johnson I don't thinkcan win for his first nomination

(01:40:38):
in a career.
That's just not enough.

Speaker 2 (01:40:39):
If Marty blows up, maybe then you can see.
Paul Maskell.
But if Marty does its job, thenTimothee Chalamet should, in
theory, get a win before PaulMaskell having been nominated
several years before.

Speaker 1 (01:40:53):
Okay, and the last category that we're going to
cover today is the best actorscategory.

Speaker 2 (01:40:58):
What is the opposite of a bloodbath?
What?
Is that.
What is the opposite of that?

Speaker 1 (01:41:03):
Right.
So the best actors categorythis year is a dearth, yes, a
huge dearth, a blood dearth, andso the exact opposite of the
best actor race.
Um, and so the exact oppositeof the best actor race.
We have not too many contendersand many of them have big cons.
So, really, let's, let's, let'smap this out for a little.

(01:41:24):
For a second, the there's onlytwo locks here, and that's jesse
buckley for hamnet and reynator Rains for a sentimental
Valley.
Um, I would say that JesseBuckley is the front runner.
I think there's no way Ihaven't seen the film, but I

(01:41:45):
think there's no way that JesseBuckley loses us.
I think it's going to be aperformance.
It's going to resonate withmany members of the Academy.
I think the success of the filmthat the film is having is
being so synonymously tied intojesse buckley's powerhouse
performance.
It's not her first nomination,it's a category shift, the

(01:42:07):
nomination is a lock, but Ithink this is absolutely her
year and she's the front runnerthe only issue is if it would
peak too early.

Speaker 2 (01:42:13):
Right, that's it.

Speaker 1 (01:42:14):
Right, renata Narensvita is terrific in her
film, absolutely terrific.
She's a surefire nominee.
I don't think she can beatJessie Buckley.
And then it gets tough.
Let's see Rose Byrne.
We saw her performance atSundance.
She is terrific in this film.

(01:42:34):
She's great, you know.
It's a very this film.
She's great, you know.
It's a very demanding part.
It's a very demanding role.
She pulls it off effortlessly,authentically, with a lot of
feeling.
But it's not a film that Iimagine voters are going to be
crazy about.
I don't think voters are goingto love it Right?
It has this safty energy to it.

(01:42:55):
It's the most safty to love it.
It has this Safdie energy to it.
It's the most Safdie of theSafdie films this year.
Let's put it that way.
Right now that's what it seemslike.
It has the Safdie energy.
It makes sense because thewriter is a frequent
collaborator of the Safdiebrothers and is also the
director's husband or partner.
I just I know that the film isnot going to play for most

(01:43:20):
Academy members or for a largeportion of the Academy, of the
voter, of the acting voter block, for example.
Would I be surprised if shemisses a SAG nomination?
No, I wouldn't be, I think, toher benefit.
I think Rose Byrne is a veryrespected actor I think she has
had a terrific career.

(01:43:43):
she's an incredibly talented uhactor and I think voters are
going to want to reward her withrecognition.
If there's space and there'scertainly space here um, and
like I said, you can watch thatfilm and, no matter how you feel
about it, you know that it's ademanding part that she pulls

(01:44:03):
off perfectly, um, uh, but I'munsure about how the movie's
gonna play and I feel a similarthing, a similar thing with a
sort of twin project here withJennifer Lawrence and Die my
Love, which is a film that Ireally like, that I saw at
Cannes.
But I know voters, many voters,will not like that movie and,

(01:44:25):
unlike Rose Byrne, jenniferLawrence has had her recognition
, several nominations, an Oscar.
So in that particular battle Isee Rose Byrne edging out
Jennifer Lawrence.
But even then I question howmuch voters are going to respond
to the material.

(01:44:46):
You've got Emma Stone in Bugonia, a very praised performance,
but similarly she's already beenrecognized several times by the
Academy and she just recentlywon an Oscar for a Yorgos
Lanthimos film.
Is there going to be a desire,an urgency, to nominate her
again in this category?

(01:45:07):
I think she benefits greatlyfrom her competition.
I think it's certainly fromwhat we've heard, a standout
part, a standout performance,but there's no urgency here.
Will they want to give thatspace instead to someone that
hasn't been here before?
Right, julia Roberts, after theHunt, had a very disappointing

(01:45:29):
premiere at Venice, despite goodreviews for her particular
performance.
I think that Julia Robertsneeded a well-reviewed film to
factor in here, and so I stillsee her as being a player in the
Golden Globe and SAG categories, but I don't see her making it
for this film being a lonenominee.
If we're talking about lonenominees, I think they would

(01:45:49):
prefer the performance and theperformance of Rose Byrne in If
I had Legs, I'd Kick you.

Speaker 2 (01:45:55):
Yeah, the film would have to stage like a huge
comeback at this point, which isstill possible, just unlikely.

Speaker 1 (01:45:59):
I think it's unlikely .
Tessa Thompson suffers frombeing in a film that I think
Prime Video, that Amazon, isgoing to rush into Prime Video.
I don't think that that's goingto get a big campaign.
Sidney Sweeney got a big boostfrom Toronto with Christie
directed by the great DavidMichaud, but reviews have been
mixed and I think SydneySweeney's sort of polarizing

(01:46:23):
figure at the moment.
I'm not sure that the Academyis ready to recognize her in the
lead actress category this yearof all years.
To be fair, though, she gotgreat mentions Her performance
was unanimously applauded, eventhough the film overall has a
very mixed reception.

Speaker 2 (01:46:39):
But again, you know there's another actor that can
possibly figure in in both theGlobe and the SAC.
The question is I agree withyou.

Speaker 1 (01:46:45):
I expect her to figure into both of those Right
and I will say that thiscategory is in desperate need
and we've talked about thisbefore is in desperate need of
an actor who's playing areal-life figure.
If you look back several years,the pattern has held for a
substantial amount of years thatthere should be a performance,
at least one, from an actressreally in every category, but in

(01:47:09):
Best Actress there should be atleast one performance that is
an actor playing a real-lifefigure.

Speaker 2 (01:47:14):
You could pitch technically the Jesse Buckley
performance I don't thinkPossibly.

Speaker 1 (01:47:18):
I don't know, because it's a fictional interpretation
of Shakespeare and his wife,anne Hathaway.
She's not even called AnneHathaway in the film.
I'm not really sure that I buythat argument.
I think there's a big void hereof a real-life figure and it
could certainly be filled withamanda seyfried playing ann lee

(01:47:41):
in the testament of ann lee.
We that film has alreadyreceived, uh, very positive
reviews, even if we expect it tobe a very polarizing film for
audiences.
Um, amanda seyfried is a pastnominee she be going from.
She'd also be doing categoryshift from supporting actors to
lead actors.
So I'm just waiting for thatannouncement to drop and I am

(01:48:03):
Right If it even gets releasedthis year.
But if it does, I'm 100% readyto say that Amanda Seyfried will
get nominated for that, basedjust on the fact that this
category needs a real lifeperson.
And she's in an acclaimed filmfrom someone who's already a
past nominee for that film forthe Buddha List last year,
excuse me and she perfectly fitsthat bill.

(01:48:25):
I like her 10 times more than Ilike Sidney Sweeney for playing
Christy, even if, again, I dothink that because of the
polarizing nature of Amanda'sfilm, she might miss some of the
precursors.

Speaker 2 (01:48:38):
But I think that she'll make it at the very end,
exactly because we need a reallife figure here yeah, so like
like we said, I mean I wouldexpect someone like Sidney
Sweeney or even Julia Roberts tofactor in heavily at the Globes
and at the SAG, and actors likeAmanda Seyfried or Rose Byrne,
who could could miss both at theend, could easily take either
of their spots.

Speaker 1 (01:48:57):
Right, and then someone like Kate Hudson.
There was a trailer that wasjust released.
First song, Sung Blue.
It looks enjoyable.
It looks like a commercial film.
I don't know how much it'sgoing to factor into the award
race.
It didn't make an appearance atany of the festivals.
Kate Hudson hasn't been back ina very long time.

(01:49:17):
Right now it's a little bit toounknown as to whether that film
is even going to be in theconversation for awards.

Speaker 2 (01:49:23):
I mean this will be decided by viewers and whether
viewers show up to see the filmin droves.
Not unlike Roofman.
Interestingly enough, likeRoofman, it looks like another
crowd pleaser.
It is based on a realindividual and that does help.
We said we did need that.
Kate Hudson is a previousnominee.
Right now I don't think thatthis is an awards player, but

(01:49:46):
again, this is the kind of filmwhere, if enough people go and
watch it and vote with theirdollar, the conversation can
change.

Speaker 1 (01:49:51):
Right, and then that leaves us with a very curious.
I mean you've got some veryperiphery contenders.
I think June Squibb could havebeen a contender if the film had
been stronger.
I think she still is.
I don't think so.
I haven't seen the film, Idon't think the film is strong
enough, but this woulddefinitely be a year where she
would have, I think, benefitedfrom being a strong contender in
.

(01:50:11):
Maybe Laura Dern has a standoutpart in.
Is this thing on which we'llknow soon, even though to me
that seems more like a showcasefor the lead actor?
Um, the last boss I didn'tthink was able to drum enough uh
, support or you know, awardsconversation for its
performances.
Um, and one of the curious onesthat's really complicated, I

(01:50:34):
think, is Cynthia Erivo, andwicked for good.
Uh, certainly, uh, there's muchanticipation for this
performance and this film ingeneral.
However, precedent is goingagainst cynthia rivo and ariana
grande uh, for theseperformances, because there has
never been an actor that hasbeen nominated back to back,

(01:50:55):
literally back to back, forplaying the same role.
Um, there's actually only oneexample where that's happened in
the history of the AcademyAwards and it was for Bing
Crosby when he was nominated forgoing my way in 1945.
Um, and he was nominated thefollowing year in the same

(01:51:18):
category Best Lead Actor for theBells of St Mary.
So, going my Way in 1945, bestActor 1946, best Actor of the
Bells of St Mary.
He played the same character inboth films Right, and got
nominated in the same categoryand got nominated in the same
category.
That is the only time it hasever happened, right.
Add to that that technicallythey weren't the same film.

(01:51:42):
It wasn't the same exact case ofWicked, which is kind of the
same film cut in two, a part oneand a part two.
These are different films wherehe just happened to play the
same character, and that's adamning stat, in my opinion,
that there's only been oneperson to do it and it was in
the 1940s.

Speaker 2 (01:52:01):
It's certainly one hell of a climb, right?
I also say that curiouslyenough, you know Bing Crosby was
coming off from a win fromGoing my Way into that second
nomination, right, thatconsecutive nomination for the
same character.
But this is how odd or howsteep that climb is, is that
that year, when Going my Way wonBest Actor for Bing Crosby and

(01:52:25):
it also won Best Picture thatsame year they had nominated a
performer in both the leadacting role and the supporting
acting role for the same movie?
Oh, really, and he's absolutelybrilliant in it, If anyone has
seen it.
Barry Fitzgerald, who I thinkis really the runaway
performance of the film, notBing Crosby.
He won the supporting actorcategory that year along with

(01:52:48):
Bing Crosby, but he was alsonominated against Bing Crosby
for lead actor For the samemovie For the same movie, and so
after that they had to invent arule where, like no, you can't
nominate an actor in bothsupporting and leading so like I
mean I will say that's how farback we're going.
That's how far back we're goingand that's how you know weird or

(01:53:10):
strange of a situation that wasback then.
But you know other examplesthat people have mentioned and
drawn parallels to is, forexample, cate Blanchett right in
Elizabeth and then Elizabeththe Golden Age, which wasn't
back to back.
There was almost a 10-year gapin between them same category.
Another sort of great examplethat kind of shows up in the

(01:53:32):
conversation is actually AlPagino right in the Godfather
for playing Michael Corleone.
But a lot of people overlookthe idea that he was, that there
was a category shift, that hewas actually nominated for
supporting actor um, somewhatcontroversially in 1972 for the
first one, and then a few yearslater, when part two comes out,
he actually gets promoted tobeing nominated in lead actor,
right, and so there is acategory shift that exists.

Speaker 1 (01:53:54):
So if you're looking, it's also not back to back.

Speaker 2 (01:53:56):
There's a year in between there's a couple of
years actually in between and solike if you're looking at the
strictest example, you have togo back to ben crosby, going my
way, and a year where thesupporting actor winner was also
a nominee for best actor right,and so I think that's a very
important stat that I think notenough people are looking at
when considering theperformances of both Cynthia

(01:54:19):
Erivo and Ariana Grande forWicked.

Speaker 1 (01:54:20):
that I think has to come into play here, and if
there were to be a case wherehistory is going to be broken
and it's going to happen again Idon't expect it to happen twice
, meaning I don't expect it tohappen for both performances
from wicked I would expect it tohappen to cynthia rivo.

(01:54:42):
Why cynthia rivo?
It helps that she's the lead ofher film, it helps that I think
this category is very muchlacking in diversity at the
moment, um, and I think it helpsthat she stands a very good
chance as of now to possibly winthe golden globe comedy, comedy
or musical actress award.

(01:55:02):
So in a way, it might also be atempting narrative for the
academy, in that not only can weadd some diversity to the list,
but cynthia revo can campaignfor the win, and it would be
only the second time that ablack actor wins the lead
actress category.
The problem with that is thatJessie Buckley is such a

(01:55:28):
formidable contender, such aformidable opponent, and I feel
she's got this category wrappedup that in a way, it makes me
feel like there's little chancesof Cynthia Erivo winning for
this film.
And it's not a knock on theperformance or the quality of
the performance.
It's more that I can't see theAcademy giving the Best Actress

(01:55:50):
Award to that role.
This sort of fantasy, epicwicked, playing a witch, the bad
witch, you know, uh, you know,the wicked witch of the east
west I think it's the west, um,it's just not a role that wins
the lead actress, oscar nottraditionally exactly and so, in

(01:56:11):
a way, to nominate cynthiaarevo to not make that history
and be the second black actor towin for this performance I mean
for, for, for lead actress,because Jesse Bulkley is going
to win kind of kind of ruins thepoint.
To even nominate Cynthia Erivo,in a way, because she can't win
, so why nominate her again?

(01:56:32):
And in in so doing in in doingso nominate her again is you're
also breaking precedent, andyou're and you're breaking,
you're making history in and ofitself.
You know why.
Why do all of that If she's notgoing?

Speaker 2 (01:56:43):
to win.
I mean, I think if the filmwould really have to live up to
all the expectations and thensurpass them for the nomination
to happen.
But if it does, then I thinkshe's certainly going to be a
formidable opponent for the win.
Another great example when youmentioned the fantasy, it just
occurred to my mind is, again,you look at all the really great
performances in the first Lordof the Rings trilogy, where only

(01:57:08):
Ian McKellen was able to get anomination for that first one.
But there are so many actorsthat could have gotten
nominations you know consecutivenominations for their work
there, right, right.
But there is a substantial biasagainst these kind of
performances winning any type ofOscar, right, really, let alone
the leading ones, right.
And so I think therein lies thedifficulty, right?

(01:57:29):
But I do think that you know,to her advantage, the category
is not very busy.

Speaker 1 (01:57:34):
Right, and I agree that you know, to her advantage
the category is not very busy,right, and I agree.
So in a way I'm torn because Ithink I see it so against
precedent and so unlikelybecause of the last time that it
happened, because of the moviewe're talking about and the kind
of role we're talking about.
That being said, I don't likehow the list is lacking in

(01:57:55):
diversity right at this moment,and I certainly think cynthia
revo is going to be a majorcontender to uh win that golden
globe, uh comedy, comedy ormusical award, which can only
help her awards prospects.
So the way that I see the leadactress category, I see it as
these are the five point blankand only one person can spoil a

(01:58:18):
spot here and the person thatcan spoil.
it hasn't been announced yet ifshe's even coming out this year
and if she spoils a spot, it'sgoing to either spoil spot four
or five.
So what am I saying?
We've got spots one and two,jesse Buckley and Renato
Reinsfeld.
I'm putting in my spot three,rose Byrne, giving the
competition and giving herrespect as an actor and the role

(01:58:41):
, the performance itself.
That's three spots.
My fourth and my fifth spot IfAmanda Seyfried does not come
out this year, I think there'sno way that we're getting around
Emma Stone getting nominatedfor Begonia and Cynthia Erivo
getting nominated for Wicked forGood, two nominations that
technically, if we're looking atpatterns and trends, shouldn't

(01:59:02):
happen.
It's too soon to nominate EmmaStone again in the same lead
category for another Yorgosmovie and it's breaking
precedent to nominate CynthiaErivo back-to-back for the same
movie, just cut in two.
That's why I don't think that'sgoing to happen and I think

(01:59:24):
that if and when it's announcedthat Amanda Seyfried is coming
out this year with the Testamentof Anne Lee, she takes one of
those two spots.
The question is which one Isthe Academy going to prefer to
highlight?
Emma Stone for Begonia, even ifit's really soon after her last
win for another Yorgos movie?

(01:59:44):
Or are they going to side withbreaking those patterns, those
long-held patterns, andnominating Cynthia Erivo again
for the same film, franchiseback-to-back, which would be her
fifth, no fourth.
Yeah her fourth nomination.
Which one are they going tochoose?
And I think that's a reallytough call At the moment.

(02:00:05):
I give the edge, a slight edge,to Cynthia Erivo because of the
very likely comedy or musicalwin in the Golden Globes.
If she were to lose thatcategory, then I feel confident
that it would be Emma Stone forBegonia.

Speaker 2 (02:00:21):
I mean, I think it's another solid list, but I think
you have to sort of be mindfulof any sort of list that
incorporates Rose Byrne and EmmaStone, for those performances
is probably going to be a littletoo challenging for county
members and let alone if youwere to add Emma Stone, anne
Rose Byrne and Amanda Seyfried.
That's very challenging for theAcademy.

(02:00:42):
I mean I can't recall acategory that had that many
performances and films that werenot necessarily films that the
Academy enjoyed Right At large,at large.
So it's going to be easier forthem to appreciate a film
possibly like Christie asopposed to a film like If I had

(02:01:05):
Legs or even Amanda's film andLee is potentially the idea that
there's too many performancesin films that are uncompromising
and that the Academy has roomtypically for one or two of?
Those.
If they had it their way, they'djust pick one, right, so I'd

(02:01:25):
look out for that.

Speaker 1 (02:01:26):
I think that's a really good point, and I think
that possibly if someone I don'tknow like Tessa Thompson had
been in a stronger vehicle thatAmazon MGM was going to push
harder, I think she could havefactored into this race and made
a splash here.
But it seems like that's notwhat's going to happen here, and

(02:01:47):
so, in a way, I think CynthiaErivo really benefits from the
category she's in.

Speaker 2 (02:01:51):
Yeah.

Speaker 1 (02:01:52):
To make that history and be the second person after
Bing Crosby to do that.
Now, I don't expect that tohappen twice in the lead actress
category and the supportingactress category, but who knows?
But she certainly benefits fromher competition.

Speaker 2 (02:02:05):
I mean it could.
It certainly could happen forboth, because it is the same
movie after all, so it's notunheard of.
Another complication that youand I have talked about is the
idea just of having three actorsgo consecutively, and so, if
you're already pegging that,timothy chalamet is going to do
it in the same category andcynthia regal is going to do it

(02:02:27):
in the same category, right?
The idea that you know arianagrande would also do in the same
category is just a little bitcomplicated, in the sense that
it's really tough to find aprecedent for when voters showed
a pattern of voting the exactsame way consecutively so many
times, like you'll see, sam.
Rock From one year to the next,from one year to the next year.
Yeah, exactly Consecutively.
And so you'll see, sam Rockwill get nominated from three

(02:02:49):
billboards in 2017 to vice in2018.
But the idea that a voter isgoing to list three performers
in the same categoryconsecutively, that's a little
bit of a stretch.
I think you and I have talkedabout like a year like 2009.

Speaker 1 (02:03:02):
Which is very no 2010 .
Well, 2009 is the year thatJeff.

Speaker 2 (02:03:06):
Bridges won for Crazy Heart and Colin Firth was
nominated for a single man solonominee, and Jeremy Renner was
in the best picture winner atthe Hurt Locker and all of them
shared the actor category.
And then in 2010, a few monthslater, um, they were actually
all nominated again fordifferent films.
I mean, jeff bridges was in abest picture nominee true grit.

(02:03:27):
Now colin firth was in the bestpicture winner the king's
speech and he won best actorthat year.
Right, but even jeremy rennerhe at least gets a category
shift because he's not nominatedan actor, he's nominated a
supporting actor for the town.

Speaker 1 (02:03:39):
So just the idea, and also that Colin Firth was going
to a win, yeah, and JeffBridges was coming from a win.

Speaker 2 (02:03:46):
Yeah, exactly.
So the idea that all three ofthese performers beyond that
they lost, all of them lost lastyear, it could them lost last
year, it could be an interestingnarrative that develops um.

Speaker 1 (02:03:59):
So it's something to look out for.
Yeah, very, very strangecategory.
I guess the only pro here isthat it's a little bit easier to
map out, I guess becausethere's not a lot of contenders.

Speaker 2 (02:04:08):
But maybe that's also one reason why maybe we're not
looking and there's going to bea big surprise here that's what
I think is sometimes, when youhave categories that are like
you're shuffling for well, who,who the hell can be nominated.
This is this is the kind ofyear where you have your Sandra
Bullock gets in for theblindside, kind of thing.
And then, before you know it,sandra Bullock is winning for
the blindside kind of thing.
So definitely look out in thenext couple of months to see

(02:04:30):
what pops Right.
Okay, well, right okay.

Speaker 1 (02:04:32):
Well, that's our dive into what the landscape looks
like post the fall festivals forbest picture, director, actor
and actress, and the nextepisode we'll tackle supporting
actress and supporting actor andthe two screenplay nominations.
So we'll look at all the abovethe line, see what the landscape
looks like and we'll and thatepisode will be coming out
shortly um, stay tuned with us.

(02:04:53):
Visit our websiteframesandflickrcom.
You have our twitter handle atacademy anon.
Follow us if you can, and welook forward to spending time
with you on the next episode.
Until then, this is Jules andI'm Joseph, and it's been a
pleasure.
The music on this episode,entitled Cool Cats, was

(02:05:17):
graciously provided by KevinMacLeod and Incompetechcom,
licensed under Creative Commonsby Attribution 3.0.
Forward slash, forward slashcreativecommonsorg.
Forward slash, licenses,forward slash, buy.

(02:05:40):
Forward slash 3.0.

Speaker 2 (02:05:44):
Disclaimer the Academy Anonymous podcast is in
no way affiliated or endorsed bythe Academy of Motion Picture
Arts and Sciences.

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

On Purpose with Jay Shetty

The Joe Rogan Experience

Stuff You Should Know

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}Oscar Season 2025-2026: TIFF Crowns A Winner; the State of the Oscar Race After the Fall Festivals

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

.css-r6mb8g{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:1;overflow:hidden;}On Purpose with Jay Shetty

The Joe Rogan Experience

Stuff You Should Know

All Episodes

Oscar Season 2025-2026: TIFF Crowns A Winner; the State of the Oscar Race After the Fall Festivals

On Purpose with Jay Shetty