Please take my poll.
Remember, please vote not for who you want to win, but who you think will actually win.
This race is the closest thing to a lock this year.
I agree with R1 that it's probably the easiest to predict of all the categories, although one never knows for certain.
I remember a few years ago when most people thought Mickey Rourke would win, and Sean Penn pulled an upset.
Wish Bradley Cooper would win, but it's pretty much Daniel Day Lewis. OTOH, Best Picture is not a lock. It's either Argo, Les Miserables, Silver Linings Playbook, or Lincoln.
"most people" definitely did not think Rourke would win.
Actually they did, R4. He was the clear favorite going into it, and there were a lot of shocked reactions at the time amongst the general public.
The Republicans, in particular, were furious. They felt that it was gay Hollywood politics giving the Oscar unfairly to Penn for playing Harvey Milk over the more deserving Rourke
I have a feeling it will be Hugh Jackman, surprisingly. Just a guess.
If it is I will come back to gloat.
It's embarrassing that Hugh Jackman is even nominated, so I certainly hope that's as far as it goes. The Oscars would have even less credibility were he to win.
If Bradley Cooper were to come out of the closet tomorrow, he would probably win the Oscar.
Wasn't DDL also considered a lock and a sure bet for Best Actor in Gangs of NY? Whom did he lose to that year?
That's not going to happen, R8, so we might as well cross that possibility off the list, yes?
r2 / r5 is talking out of his ass.
Sean Penn was the clear frontrunner that year; everybody expected him to win, and predictably, he did win.
Rourke was the only one with a 'shocked face' that night, but not due to surprise.
I'm waiting for the SAG awards. The winner @ SAG is usually the winner @ AMPAS. I loved the look on Bradley Cooper's face at the GG when they called out Hugh Jackman's name.
he really expected Harvey & David O Russell to hook him up with his win.
It was especially galling for BC sunce the Best Actor award was divided between comedy/musical and dramatic roles. He knew he had no chance agains Damiel Day Lewis but he was convinced he owned the category for comedy/musical.
Adrien Brody, I believe, R9. I think that was the same year Roman Polanski pulled the upset over Martin Scorsese.
Not likely to happen again.
To Adrien Brody, r9.
In any case, he's considered far more a lock this year than back then.
By industry logic, DDL wins. Cooper and Jackman are lucky to be nominated, Washington already has one, and Phoenix makes a show of hating them and everything they represent.
They won't mind giving DDL a third gong, he's the sort of everlasting, dedicated, "classy" actor they approve of.
R11, you are wrong. Rourke had won numerous awards going into the Oscars, had the momentum for a while, and you can check to see all the angry articles and discussions from Republicans who said Hollywood gave Penn the Oscar for political reasons. It surprised a lot of people at the time.
Maybe you weren't on the boards at the time, or on IMDB or some of the other places when the decision came down, but I was.
R15, the only question is, are the Oscars willing to break with historical precedent and give DDL an unprecedented THIRD Lead Actor Oscar?
Adrian Brody certainly deserved that award. I watched "The Pianist" again this weekend; it still makes me cry. Beautifully filmed and acted. I will forgive Brody for "The Village" just because of "The Pianist."
There is no race this year. DDL wins.
No sweety, it's you who is wrong.
There are often two 'prefered' nominees among the five, and Rourke/Penn were those two. But only Penn was the FRONTRUNNER that year.
There was absolutely zero surprise when he won.
Needless to say, his win was PC to the max. The nature of his film alone ensured him frontrunner status.
Rourke's performance owned the novelty factor that year, because he'd never been perceived as a 'serious actor' before. That's all he had going for him.
Penn was expected to win.
Streep Troll, you are becoming a nuisance.
Originally I didn't have a problem with you, but now I do.
Also, if 'the Republicans' are your point of reference, you should know that Hollywood is solidly Democratic. The Republicans don't get to decide who has buzz going into the Oscars.
What are you even blathering about?
Penn too had won numerous precursor awards.
The entertainment industry expected Penn to win, for all kinds of reasons, not least the PC factor of a big name actor playing Harvey Milk.
For the Streep Troll - from The Telegraph:
[quote]Oscar winners: Surprise as Sean Penn beats Mickey Rourke to best actor award
[quote]Sean Penn provided the only upset of this year's Oscars when he beat Mickey Rourke to the best actor award
From Mother Jones:
[quote]Sean Penn in Oscar Upset
Despite the terrible odds given by America's favorite statistician Nate Silver, Sean Penn snagged the Oscar for Best Actor over favorite Mickey Rourke at the Academy Awards Sunday night in Los Angeles. It was an astonishing upset
I would much rather watch the Streep Loon be devoured alive by fire ants than the actual Oscar ceremonies.
PLEASE ban this obnoxious, asinine troll.
I don't think DDL was truly considered a "lock" for GANGS OF NY.
This time he is, as much as he was for THERE WILL BE BLOOD.
I also have a weird feeling Jackman actually stands a chance for the Oscar, and even moreso the SAG because he's well liked by other actors. In terms of how well liked he is by the multi-types of folks who make up the Academy I'm not as sure, other than that he's a full on suck up.
How are you holding up, Streep Troll?
Are you willing to concede that Penn winning over Rourke was considered an upset by many in the media & the public, or do you want me to hit you with more?
[quote]PLEASE ban this obnoxious, asinine troll.
You can't ban someone for a difference of a opinion. I don't always agree with the Streep troll, but you can't bully someone out either.
r21 and r27, I'm saying this with much love, but I don't care what you two think of me.
I've never asked anyone here to like me, and I'm not doing it now.
Free spreech is a drag, isn't it?
I will keep posting as much as I like, just because I can!
Deal with it, fuckers.
the more they try to bully me, the more I'm going to post. Keep that in mind, r21 & r27.
Finally, r21: your point of reference is still laughably weak. The Telegraph ?? A hardcore right-wing paper. They DO NOT decide over Oscar buzz, dumbass.
Sean Penn had won the SAG award, NOT Rourke. SAG almost always predicts the winners in the acting categories, because acting branch is the biggest AMPAS voting branch.
Sean Penn was the perceived frontrunner, for all the reasons listed so far in this thread.
You furiously linking to some right-wing publications will change nothing about that.
I win, you lose.
You're an idiot, Streep Troll. I posted MULTIPLE LINKS - including one to MOTHER JONES - a left-wing publication.
The fact that you only acknowledged one and ignored all the others proves my point. You were wrong - it was considered an upset, and outlets from one side of the political spectrum to the other show that.
Sweety, Mother Jones and the Telegraph are outsider publications.
As soon as Sean Penn had won the SAG award, he was the frontrunner.
Rourke was done.
And nobody was surprised when he lost.
Get that through your thick skull.
The Streep Troll lost and can't accept it. Rourke's win was considered a big upset to many - that's the point. It made news - that's the point.
And it wasn't just referred to by Mother Jones & The Telegraph - I also cited a couple of entertainment-related websites above. And there are more out there if I wanted to draw this out, but obviously the Streep Troll is irrational.
Meant to say Penn's win over Rourke, obviously. I'm getting tired of this nonsense.
No, r36, you lost and you're unable to accept it.
You still haven't understood the difference between outsider publications, and industry folks sitting in the Kodak theatre - none of whom were surprised.
Do you even know what the SAGs are?
This is a serious question.
One more time: the SAG went to SEAN PENN, and not Mickey Rourke. Penn became the frontrunner through that little feat alone.
And lo and behold, 9 1/2 weeks later, Rourke lost.
The Rourke fangirl also needs to understand that the media needs novely stuff like non-actor Rourke coming back from the dead, surprising everyone with a decent performance in a wrestler film.
It would be boring for them and their readership if they wrote about frontrunner Penn, who'd won predictably.
The novelty factor of Rourke as a contender that year did dominate some of the news.
It never made him the frontrunner, though. Nobody at the venue that night was 'surprised'.
Accept it, fangirl.
Streep Troll, you don't seem to understand what an upset is in terms of public perception and widespread audience reaction.
Within the industry itself, which is more left-leaning and which respects Penn, there was a lot of support in some quarters, yes. It's not a total shock that he won in that sense and I was not totally surprised myself at the time.
What we are talking about here is the perception and reaction among the general public and media that it was an upset. That's why it's referred to as such above in so many different publications and why so many movie-goers were angry.
[quote]In something of an upset, Sean Penn took Best Actor at tonight's Oscars, snatching victory from favorite Mickey Rourke
sweety, Rourke lost SAG to Penn. He was ovah right then and there.
I already explained to you why the media wrote about Rourke.
Nobody thought he was going to win, babe.
Penn might have been a 'quiet frontrunner', but the frontrunner he was. SAG saw to that.
You haven't answered my question yet: do you know what SAG is, sweetheart? I'm not tryin to be provocative with that question.
It really does look like you have no clue who they are, and what they mean.
When Rourke lost SAG, all that was left for him was a supporting role in 'Iron Man 2', plus some Stallone shit film.
He was... done.
"such a shock at the time by so many across the country"
Youtube is youtube. It's not 'across the country'.
You need to disabuse yourself about how much 'the Republicans' mean, when it comes to Oscar buzz.
A few redneck reacionts on youtube mean shit, babe. They're not relevant.
Rourke and Penn were AT LEAST neck-and-neck that year. Rourke's big reward was a nomination and being welcomed back after years in exile. Penn was in a Best Pic nominee and played an important historical figure. I'm sure the voting was close, but a true upset would have been Richard Jenkins or Brad Pitt winning.
I think Daniel Day Lewis is the male equivalent to Meryl Streep but Meryl Streep is punished for being so good. She should have 5 Oscars at least.
The only actor who could give Day-Lewis a run for his money in terms of the quality of his performance, the impressiveness of his career, and the contribution he made to a movie in oscar consideration (also nominated for best pic and director), is Jean Louis Trintignant.
And, inexplicably, the Academy has failed to nominate him.
I would eat Mickey Rourke and Sean Penn's shit!
I agree, r47.
His role wasn't flashy enough.
The idea that Bradley Cooper or Denzel Washington are better than JLT is preposterous.
Which one of the nominees do you think will shit in my mouth?
If there was a God, Joaquin Phoenix would win. His performance in THE MASTER was incredible, and he did not have to sing or wear a bunch of
makeup to look like an iconic figure. I hate this bullshit about shunning actors who criticize the Academy or the awards concept; great actors like Brando and George C. Scott and even Woody Allen all have a point, actually. The Oscar should be given for a great performance captured on film, regardless of the actor's personal life or issues or whatever. Joaquin Phoenix may be batshit nuts (many great artists are!) but I believe that if you really, really looked at the performances alone, he would be the hands down winner. Jackman and DDL did not have one tenth the intensity he had on that screen in THE MASTER. And he should have won for WALK THE LINE. He is an extraordinary actor, and to dismiss him out of hand is just stupid.
DDL, easily and Lincoln for best picture. This isn't the anti-American awards, aka, The Golden Globes. The only reason Argo won anything was that it had to do with the Middle East. The Oscar committee at least recognized that Affleck did not belong in this company of directors.
I wish Richard Jenkins had won.
The feces/Streep Troll-obsessed poster really needs to go away. Not at all funny and while I find the Streep Troll occasionally annoying, the stupid people who get into inane arguments with him are much, much worse.
"If there was a God, Joaquin Phoenix would win. His performance in THE MASTER was incredible, and he did not have to sing or wear a bunch of makeup to look like an iconic figure"
No. All he had to do was emote for the sake of emoting. Phoenix is a very talented guy but his self-indulgent actory turn in The Master is just a showy display of angst. I don't nec. blame Phoenix. That's apparently what Anderson wanted. Given that, Phoenix did as good a job as anyone could.
But it doesn't deserve an oscar.
Me, too. r53 -- Burton deserved an Oscar - for the Spy Who Came in from the Cold if nothing else.
After seeing Joaquin Phoenix in the Master, I thought he would win it but it definitely will go to Daniel Day Lewis. Will this be his third win?
Jesus, you all are so tedious.
Of course DDL will win, duh. Idiotic even to ask.
Best Supporting Actor is the tough race to call, as all the nominees already have Oscars, and DeNiro has two. And Waltz and Arkin both won Supporting quite recently. I am guessing it will not be PSH, but otherwise I have no idea. I would've said Tommy Lee Jones, but I think people find LINCOLN dull.
OMG, r58: you're striking fear into everyone's hearts here with your terrifying and original little "tough bitch who's seen it all" routine!
PLEASE! PLEASE! PLEASE! SHIT IN MY MOUTH R54!!!
Daniel Day-Lewis, no contest. Everyone knows he gave the performance of the year, male or female.