Daki:
With the Oscars coming up in a month, and Jovan's love of
movies and my love of gambling still very much present, we decided to combine
the two topics and make some bets on the upcoming Oscars. Jovan is looking to
come back from a heartbreaking decision last year, which saw Meryl Streep take
an award and Jovan’s cash as well. Jovan you feeling luckier this year?
Jovan:
Not when it comes to the Best Actress category. Even
though the winner will most probably be either Jennifer Lawrence or Jessica
Chastain, there's no clear frontrunner. Jennifer Lawrence would be the
favourite because she picked up the SAG award for Best Actress, but I'm not
taking my chances again. The majority of analysts kept saying Viola Davis would
win at last year's Oscars, but clearly they didn't know anything. I'm not even
considering betting on this category. Best Supporting Actress is pretty much a
lock with Anne Hathaway, however I don't believe your payout is going to be
high enough to justify a bet in that category.
Daki:
So you like Anne Hathaway for best supporting actress. It
would be hard to disagree with you there, she has had a great year and
displayed some incredible range (her roles in 'The Dark Knight Rises' and 'Les
Miserables' could not have been more different). Is there a long shot in the
best lead actress category which would provide good value on a bet? So if you
could not choose Lawrence or Chastain, who would you pick?
Jovan:
I honestly wouldn't put any money on any of the other
three candidates. Emmanuelle Riva has the next best chance of winning, but even
her odds are extremely low. The Oscars are always the same - the acting
categories either have a clear frontrunner (such as Daniel Day-Lewis as Best
Lead Actor for Lincoln) or it's a battle between two of the nominees. Actually,
that's only mostly true. For Best Supporting Actor this year, Tommy Lee Jones
is currently the favourite, but Waltz won the Golden Globe, and some analysts
have predicted that Hoffman will win. However, Jones is the safest bet since he
won the SAG award. I wouldn't put any money on Arkin, while De Niro is probably
competing for 2nd or 3rd place.
I am very glad you brought up Lewis. You know that I
think he should win best actor for his performance in Lincoln. The whole cast
of that movie was magnificent. As for Jones, I truly think that Waltz did a
better job, but that is probably because I love Tarantino movies more than
almost any other. It's a real shame the Academy hates him, but that's for
another time. What type of odds could you get on "Lincoln" sweeping
the actors awards?
Jovan:
Zero. Sally Field isn't beating Anne Hathaway. As for
Best Picture, there are only two movies contending. Sorry to all the other
nominees, but only Lincoln and Argo stand a chance. Lincoln was the clear
frontrunner until the Golden Globes gave the award to Ben Affleck, both for
Best Picture - Drama and for Best Director. Argo also won at the PGAs and the
SAG awards, and it's gaining a lot of momentum heading into Oscar night. The
fact that Ben Affleck was snubbed for the Best Director category may actually
increase Argo's chances of winning Best Picture, as voters who feel that
Affleck didn't get recognition for his work will give him the vote for Best
Picture. In my opinion, the Oscars are very political, which is why a good, but
overrated film such as Lincoln is even being considered a contender. If Affleck
wins at the DGAs, I feel that Argo will become the definite favourite to win
Best Picture.
Daki:
I am actually perplexed that the concept of 'momentum'
can exist here. You're telling me that the Oscar voters (average age: 63) are
gonna be swayed by the results of some less prestigious award shows? While we
are on this topic, how do directors select nominees but have no say in who
actually wins? That would be like the NBA writers picking 5 MVP candidates,
then having fans vote... It just does not make sense. As for the Lincoln vs. Argo
debate; we watched both movies and I think we will disagree here, but my pick
would go to Lincoln. It just felt like a more polished movie with better acting
performances top to bottom. What are your thoughts?
Jovan:
These smaller awards shows are less prestigious, but they
are very good indicators because most, if not all of their voters also vote on
the Oscar winners. And while directors pick the nominees for Best Director,
everyone votes on the winner. As for the Argo and Lincoln comparison, it comes
down to the directing because the way a movie is filmed is almost more
important than the acting. Lincoln is very simple and relies on its acting and
dialogue. There are no intense sequences (while there are multiple in Argo) and
while some people believe that actors talking for two and a half hours about
the 13th amendment makes a great movie, I think it makes the movie less
dimensional than Argo. The acting in Argo was still good, the script was solid,
and Ben Affleck did a fantastic job as director and kept you much more engaged
than Lewis and Jones did (notice that I mentioned the actors in Lincoln, not
Spielberg as director). In addition, Lincoln is apparently not even entirely
accurate (I'm not a historian, but there are online articles that have pointed
out flaws in the historical accuracy of the movie). I don't know which movie
voters will pick, but Lincoln has political and historical importance and
that's the only reason people are considering it. To be honest, I would give the
award to Life of Pi, but I'm perfectly fine with Argo winning.
Daki:
Wait a second, you mean to tell me that a movie made in Hollywood
about a historical figure/event was not completely accurate!? Next you’ll be
telling me that Rocky isn't real too. All jokes aside, I fail to see how the
amount of 'intense sequences' can justify one movie being better than the
other. It's not like they could have made Abraham Lincoln secretly be a vampire
or something... Also, you made my argument for me in your previous e-mail:
Lincoln manages to be amazing even if they are focusing on the 13th amendment
for most of the movie. Most movies would fail spectacularly if they had to
follow a similar formula. However, Affleck should win best director, ill agree
with you there.
Jovan:
I rate a movie on how well it engages its audience as
much as I do the script, directing, acting, etc. Lincoln had too much talking
(with good acting) and too little of anything else for me to give it any Oscar
other than Best Adapted Screenplay and Best Actor for DDL. By the way, Ben
Affleck won at the DGAs, so Argo is now the favourite to win Best Picture. I
guess we'll have to see what happens on Oscar night, especially in the Best
Director category.
Daki:
So, for the betting public what is our advice? I've
consulted the odds on sportsinteraction.com and here are my picks:
Movie: Lincoln
Best actor: DDL
Supporting actor: Waltz
Actress: Jessica Chastain
Supporting actress: Anne Hathaway
Animated: Wreck-It-Ralph
If you want to do some other categories (such as best
adapted screenplay, or best original song) I'm in on those too.
Jovan:
I still think Jennifer Lawrence is the favourite to win
Best Actress and Tommy Lee Jones for Best Supporting Actor.
As for other categories, here are my predictions
(although I'm not confident enough to put money on many of them):
Director: Spielberg for Lincoln
Film Editing: Zero Dark Thirty (possible upset: Argo)
Original Screenplay: Zero Dark Thirty (possible upset:
Django Unchained)
Adapted Screenplay: Lincoln (possible upset: Argo)
Foreign Language Film: Amour (110% sure to win)
Costume Design: Anna Karenina Visual Effects: Life of Pi
Cinematography: Life of Pi
Best Original Score: Life of Pi
Best Original Song: Skyfall by Adele
Short Animated Film: Paperman
For the few categories that I did not mention, there is
no point in predicting a winner since I have no clue at all as to who will win.
*Keep in mind that our discussion took place a month ago. Since then, some nominees have gained more momentum (i.e. Emmanuelle Riva for Amour). Argo appears as though it will pull through in both the Editing and Screenplay categories.
No comments:
Post a Comment