Hugh Jackman's Oscar Chances End with Release of "Movie 43"
Not that he had much chance, anyway, but this puts the final nail in the coffin.
Unbelievable that anyone in this project agreed to be in it.
I guess me too, then.
When do Oscar voters cast their ballots anyway?
What the hell would Movie 43 have to do with Jackman's oscar chances? Which I agree with you are small.
Oh please everyone in Hollywood, and half the voting Academy is in Movie 43, they all did it as a favor to the producers and no one takes it seriously. It means nothing.
The ads for this look so unfunny.
Why did so many big names agree to take part in that shit?
I saw M43 yesterday. It was funny. HJ had what were probably the funniest scenes in the movie. I'm sure the academy has a sense of humor.
op is trying way too hard and failing miserably.
r3, the idea is that "Movie 43" is to Jackman what "Norbit" was to Eddie Murphy's Oscar bid for "Dreamgirls" -- a truly dreadful comedy flop that will doom his chances of winning the Oscar.
Except that Murphy was never considered a likely winner (except, perhaps, in his own mind), just like Jackman, and that, even if "Norbit" siphoned off potential votes, I doubt that will happen re "Movie 43," as it is an ensemble piece and Jackman won't get all the blame for the movie.
(Besides, Jackman's skit is one of the funnier bits in the movie -- I did laugh out loud during this skit; the funniest, though, is the last skit involving Elizabeth Banks, Josh Duhamel and an animated cat and which features one of the most horrifying and hilarious sight gags I've ever seen.)
[quote]Except that Murphy was never considered a likely winner
Yes he was. With his SAG and Golden Globe wins he was the early favorite. It wasn't until Dreamgirls missed the BP and BD noms, Norbit came out and Arkin won the BAFTA that the chance for an upset seemed more and more likely.
Even that oscar night there were many that still had Murphy as the winner.
R8 I also liked the last skit with the animated cat "Beezel"
Um, no, r9. Arkin was considered the shoo-in all along. Murphy might've been thought of as a spoiler, but it was Arkin all season long that was predicted to win.
What? that's not true at all. How do you explain Murphy's Globe and SAG wins, the latter being the most reliable when it comes to predicting the ac ting oscars.
Little Miss Sunshine was constantly gaining buzz that awards season, but Alan Arkin was never a "shoo-in".
I walked out an hour into. so bored. got a refund.
R11, are you an idiot? After winning the Critics Choice, Golden Globe, and SAG, Murphy was the projected winner; Arkin was the spoiler, especially after he won BAFTA. But the predictors still gave the edge to Murphy up to the night of the ceremony.
[quote]Murphy might've been thought of as a spoiler, but it was Arkin all season long that was predicted to win.
Bullshit. It was Murphy's oscar to lose since Dreamgirls came out. Mirren, Whitaker, Murphy and Hudson were the predicted winners.
Actors don't get demerits for respected work because they also do shit.
If that were the case, there would be few oscar winners. As everyrone does shit.
Of course, in this case, Les Mis isn't a very good movie to begin with. But that's another story.
That's what putting stock in the Globes and SAG will get you. On the Oscar board that I used to particpate in, Arkin was seen as the likely winner all along -- there was no way the Academy was going to vote for Murphy ("Norbit" or no "Norbit") -- Arkin was the beloved Oscar-nominated-but-never-a-winner veteran in a popular film. It was a slam dunk and if you believed otherwise, you don't know the Oscars.
Wow, the critics are harsh. "Worst movie they've ever seen"...? I'd rather sit through this again than "Beasts of the Southern Piece of Shit."
no, r18, that's just you trying to be an insufferable know it all with your Streep troll attitude, rewriting history. Arkin was the spoiler, NEVER a slam dunk. The british block is what probably gave him the edge.
Plenty of times the "beloved oscarless veteran" has lost to another, more buzzed performance. Murphy was the favorite on every oscar site, and his chances only became shaky when he lost the Bafta and Norbit came out to disastrous reviews.
Murphy had the strong performance, Arkin was the alternative in the beloved indie hit.
Why IS Alan Arkin so beloved? He's basically irrelevant at this point. I was shocked when I saw he was nominated for Argo.
[quote] It was a slam dunk and if you believed otherwise, you don't know the Oscars.
Then no one except for you and three others on that oscar board that you used to participate know about the Oscars. Eddie Murphy was widely seen as the favorite, even before he started winning the awards.
[quote]Bullshit. It was Murphy's oscar to lose since Dreamgirls came out. Mirren, Whitaker, Murphy and Hudson were the predicted winners.
Bullshit, Jennifer Hudson was the shoo-in. Murphy was a contender(and I wanted him to win) but it was not a surprise that Arkin won for unofficial "Lifetime Achievement" on his third nomination. Such as Christopher Plummer, James Coburn, Jack Palance, Don Ameche, Melvyn Douglas and so on had done.
R7 is disgusted with OP that he didn't even bother to capitalize "OP."
r24=op, still tryin'
Eddie did win the SAG award and he won after Mirren and Irons so when he came into the press room he started talking like they did with (in an English accent): "The craft of acting..." as if that's what a SAG award winner should say.
Now it's easy to say "I knew Alan Arkin was going to win" since you know the outcome, but at the time Eddie Murphy was seen as the favorite, and not a fake media favorite as Kate Hudson, he was winning critics and industry awards. To say that Alan Arkin was always a slam-dunk and that anyone that thought otherwise was stupid is just ridiculous.
[quote]Why IS Alan Arkin so beloved? He's basically irrelevant at this point. I was shocked when I saw he was nominated for Argo.
This is the logic of a Jackman/Les Miz fan.
"OMG!!! Yes!! If someone shakes his ass cheeks in front of voters, isn't THAT the same as not only being relevant & doing the best most award-worthy performance of the year? Well?"
I should think Jessica Chastain would be more worried about her chances upon the release of Mama.
No, R28. I didn't like Les Mis and I couldn't give a shit if Hugh Jackman wins or not. I'm just genuinely curious. You never hear about him. He didn't campaign. And I didn't even know he was IN Argo until the announcement was made. It is just unexpected that the Academy shows him so much love, and I was wondering why.
Don't make assumptions of me and my motivations for asking something.
Movie 43 is like a bad Woody Allen film (To Rome with Love). There are so many guilty parties involved that every participant will be given a pass. The only people it'll harm are people like Halle Berry, who haven't had a hit in ages.
Larry (One Direction) saw this movie a few days ago. Would be fun to see what they think about it.
The whole point of the movie is that it's terrible. That's the actual premise. And considering, EVERYONE is in the movie - at worst, Hughand the rest of the cast look like good sports for acting like idiots.
It's not like Norbit, where the people involved thought they were actually making a good movie.
Wow, it's all the rest of you who are re-writing history. I was there, I was part of the campaign and Murphy was never the front-runner, he was always nipping at Arkin's heels. Again, the Globes and SAGs mean very little (as do the BAFTAs).
Arkin was a major star in the late 60s, with 2 Oscar nominations for Best Actor ("The Russians Are Coming The Russians Are Coming" and "The Heart is a Lonely Hunter"); his career slipped in the 70s and 80s, but he remained a reliable character actor and was beloved in Hollywood, with nary a scandal associated with him, known as one of the good guys. He enjoyed his biggest success in decades in "Little Miss Sunshine" and it was considered a great comeback (and the film was nominated for Best Picture); he enjoyed campaigning for the Oscar.
Eddie Murphy had been a major star in the 80s and 90s, but was never particularly well-liked in Hollywood -- he spoke the bitter truth at times, but also insulted a lot of people along the way. He's endured a lot of massive flops over the years and has found himself in a couple of scandals. Who's to say if "Norbit" was the final nail in Murphy's coffin; but it didn't help what was an uphill battle to win.
Seriously, if you know anything about the Oscars, you could see the outcome from space.
R34 is spot-on. Furthermore, I might get banned but I will be more blunt.
The Academy is and always will be filled with old Jews. Do you really think they would have voted for Murphy's overrated performance isntead of the performance given by Alan Arkin in a wonderful film?
By the way, besides his being difficult, don't think his rather colorful sexual "history" didn't hurt Murphy's chances either.
[quote]I was there, I was part of the campaign
[quote]the Globes and SAGs mean very little (as do the BAFTAs).
Keep telling yourself that.
R 25, desperate les miseriqueen triharding and desperate over her fave movie's imminent loss.
you're gonna see anne lose too. waahhhhhh
[quote]I think Jackman will win the Oscar. He certainly deserves it.
Jackman deserves zilch for butchering the score, especially "Bring Him Home." That was unforgivable. In a musical, especially one where it's mostly sung-through, it matters when he can't handle the score. It was painful listening to him.
R42 I think some people's definition of "deserving" is whether or not a person is willing to degrade aka self promote and essentially bribe the voters. Creepy gladhanding. Not who gave the best performance.
r37 is extra mentally ill.
[quote]Now it's easy to say "I knew Alan Arkin was going to win" since you know the outcome, but at the time Eddie Murphy was seen as the favorite, and not a fake media favorite as Kate Hudson, he was winning critics and industry awards. To say that Alan Arkin was always a slam-dunk and that anyone that thought otherwise was stupid is just ridiculous.
Honey, we are talking The Academy NOT critics and industry awards. It was absolutely NO surprise to anyone who knows the Academy that Alan Arkin won. They frequently reward the vets in the Supporting category.
An example and there are many, is they gave The Oscar to Helen Hayes for her silly role in "Airport" over Karen Black in "Five Easy Pieces", Lee Grant in "The Landlord", Sally Kellerman in "MASH" & Maureen Stapleton in "Airport".
it's abundantly clear what your agenda is r7/25/44, troll.
Your examples are from fifty years ago r45. That has NOT been the case for the past two decades.
OT, but in response to R45, why haven't they tried to reboot the Airport series? It seems like that would be a great idea for a new franchise. And with the success of Valentine's Day and New Year's Eve, there's an audience for big ensemble star films that would grow even larger with the adventure element added.
Give it a rest, OP. Your case has no legs.
Eddie Murphy was THE star of Norbit. Jackman is one among many A-list stars who are in Movie 43. He's not taking the fall for it.
Honey, plenty of SAG member are member of the academy.
Murphy also had the narrative of a comedy vet who was finally taking a demanding role and getting away from the stupid fat suit comedies. That backfired with Norbit at the height of the Oscar campaign.
The supporting actor category often rewards old men in underwhelming roles but there are also plenty of examples where the vet went home empty handed. The next year Hal Holbrook, another veteran who was miles better than Arkin in Little Miss Sunshine, lost to the favorite Javier Bardem (Globe and SAG winner), Christopher Plummer lost to Christoph Waltz (Globe and SAG winner).
Spin all you want but to say that it was always Alan Arkin is wrong. The links to the predictions prove it.
Hugh never had a shot at that Oscar, the AMPAS isn't going to give the big actor's gong to someone who sang his entire role. But the nomination is great for his career, I hope he's happy with it.
Huge Hugh Fan
Murphy didn't win so much because of Norbit, but because he is extremely unpopular in the industry, and has burned a lot of professional bridges.
Exactly, r52. And that is why those of us who really follow the Oscars knew he didn't stand a chance and that it was going to be Alan Arkin.