Oscar Race: How Crazy Are Those SAG Awards, Really?
Tuesday, December 29, 2015 at 10:00PM 
Coco here, ready to talk about the current Oscar race and those crazy SAG awards in particular.
As you already know, the Screen Actors Guild decided to honor the best acting of 2015 in the most bizarre way possible; handing the most nominations to blacklist Hollywood drama Trumbo, and nominating a number of performances whose inclusion range from surprising to outright insane. Don't worry, I'm not here to defend SAG's ridiculous choices. I'm here to do what The Film Experience is best at this time of year: speculating about Oscar nominations. See, the other day I saw someone on Twitter say he'd be surprised if any of this year's SAG categories are repeated 5-for-5 at the Oscars. This comment got me thinking...
Although the amount of correlation between SAG and Oscar has gone down a bit in the last couple years, the math still says that at least one of Oscar's acting categories will look identical to SAG's. The question I'm here to answer is: which one?
Lots of awards spaculation after the jump.
Sorry for the gruesome image, but he might get nominated(!?)
Best Lead Actor
(Cranston "Trumbo", Depp "Black Mass", DiCaprio "The Revenant", Fassbender "Steve Jobs", Redmayne "The Danish Girl")
There are quite a few ways to argue that at least one of these gentlemen could fall out of the race by the time Oscar nominations arrive on the 14th. Black Mass hasn't gotten any significant nominations anywhere else, while The Danish Girl is losing buzz and Redmayne seems more and more like he's coasting to a nomination. The biggest reason to bet against this line-up, however, is not coming from within.
The Martian is shaping up to be one of this year's front-runners, which makes Matt Damon's nomination all the more probable. The one thing working against him is that his biggest publicity moment -when he inevitably wins the Golden Globe - will come right after Oscar voting closes, so he won't get to benefit from it.
Mirren won 3 SAG nominations. Can she inexplicably manage 2 Oscar nominations?
Best Lead Actress
(Blanchett "Carol", Larson "Room", Mirren "Woman in Gold", Ronan "Brooklyn", Silverman "I Smile Back")
This is surely the least likely category to repeat at the Oscars, not in small part because it's the one with the weirdest choices. Helen Mirren for Woman in Gold will go down in history as the quintessential example of SAG-voting laziness. Meanwhile, it would be kind of cool to see Sarah Silverman Oscar nominated for I Smile Back, but does she really have a prayer when not even Jennifer Aniston's buzztrain could get to the station?
We also have Charotte Rampling, Jennifer Lawrence, and depending on how Oscar voters feel about category fraud, either Rooney Mara or Alicia Vikander waiting in the wings. This is the last time we'll see this line-up.
Best Supporting Actor
(Bale "The Big Short", Elba "Beasts of No Nation", Rylance "Bridge of Spies", Shannon "99 Homes", Tremblay "Room")
Similarly to Lead Actor, the problem here is not who is weak within the category, but who is strong without. Sylvester Stallone is a current favorite to win the Supporting Actor Oscar for Creed, and he has the Golden Globe nomination to support this theory. For Sly to make it in, however, one of these five has to be left out. Right now it's easy to imagine any of them (except maybe Rylance) getting the shaft on nomination morning.
Beasts of No Nation doesn't seem to have much traction outside of this category. Michael Shannon has appeared in the right places, but have enough voters seen the film? Tremblay is quite adorable, but he has the problem of being a small boy (and maybe even a few "he's the lead" abstaining fans). Bale seemed like a bizarre choice at the time nominations were announced, but The Big Short has been gathering momentum ever since. With Golden Globe nominated Paul Dano and the guys from Spotlight still trying to get a nomination, there is plenty of room for major shakeups in this category.
How we hope Academy voters will feel about the SAG nominations
Best Supporting Actress
(Mara "Carol", McAdams "Spotlight", Mirren "Trumbo", Vikander "Danish Girl", Winslet "Steve Jobs")
And so we come to this -- the likeliest category to repeat exactly on Oscar nomination morning. And even then, it's so far from being a done deal. The biggest question, of course, is whether Oscar voters will listen to the complaints (not just at The Film Experience for once!) that Rooney Mara and Alicia Vikander are the leads of their films. This is a question that won't be close to being answered until nomination morning, but if we assume that voters will put them in supporting, this exact line-up is wholly possible.
Arguing against it are Jane Fonda, who got a Globe nomination and has the advantage of being Hollywood royalty and an awesome campaigner; Jennifer Jason Leigh, who is also Globe nominated and has goodwill from Anomalisa too; Alicia Vikander, who is competing against herself, and getting lots of critics awards for Ex Machina; and Joan Allen, a beloved actress waiting to get some traction off of Room's buzz in other categories.
Supporting Actress is most likely to transfer to the Oscars, followed by Actor, Supporitng Actor, and Actress in that order. Although, statistics be damned, the most likely scenario seems to be none of these shortlists remaining fully intact on Oscar nomination morning.
Do you agre or do you think 1 (or *shudder* more) of these categories will go 5-for-5 with Oscar?
Reader Comments (23)
I wouldn't call Sly a "favorite" to win for Creed. Rylance fits the profile of recognizable character actors who've swept the supporting category. Throw in his inevitable BAFTA support and he looks even stronger. Even if Sly wins the Globe, I can't see him repeating at the Oscars unless Creed picks up unexpected traction in Best Actor or Best Screenplay.
Under no circumstances will Sly coast into the Oscar ceremony as a frontrunner, even if he wins. It's practically impossible unless none of the other precursors agree on Rylance.
Also, it's perfectly okay to say that none of these will look the same as the Academy's. People get so caught up in statistical precedents. Those precedents exist *because* SAG usually makes more plausible AMPAS predictions.
That said, I've noticed a lot of beatback against critiques of these SAG nominations as if critics hate them because they're not decent Oscar predictions. It's worth saying repeatedly: critics hate these nominations because they're TERRIBLE nominations.
I doubt any of these categories matching up with Oscar; they're just too bizarre.
Hopefully none of the categories will be 5-for-5.
I want add names I wish will make the final lineup. This year
is too disappointing to set myself up for what the consensus
will settle for. I remember the last three Best Actor races
were so competitive and exciting on the precursor circuit
then the nominations arrived and Oscar was very good
at ruining a category with two or three weak choices
out of a strong field. Well the field this year in all
categories is weak. Especially disappointed for Jason Mitchell,
Michael B. Jordan and Ryan Coogler. The possibility for either
three seems radically foreign at this point.
Holding out hope that TRUMBO is another HITCHCOCK for Mirren.
This was a GREAT idea for a post and terrific analysis Coco! I for one hope the statistics are defined this year and all of these lineups are altered/corrected at the Oscars.
What I think each of these acting categories might look like at the Oscars?
Actor:
Matt Damon, The Martian (lock)
Leo DiCaprio, The Revenant (lock)
Steve Carell, The Big Short (the surprise that's not a surprise) (I saw the movie and Carell's showy, angry at the world Mark Baum IS the lead character (Bale's Michael Burry is just one of two subplots supporting Carell's relative main plot after the first 25 minutes or so) and they'd be crazy not to fight for this nomination with all the heat this one's been getting.)
Michael B. Jordan, Creed (the popular choice)
Cranston, Fassbender or Redmayne, in that order of probability. (Critics don't really love Trumbo, but it'll get in on Cranston love and Oscar history. Steve Jobs flopped and Fassbender already has nomination 1, which means more popular fare will probably muscle in, and Redmayne's movie is unloved, doesn't have that veneer of Oscar history to get him over the top and men don't really get the Felicity Jones style lazy nominations.)
Actress:
Brie Larson, Room (lock)
Saorise Ronan, Brooklyn (lock)
Cate Blanchett, Carol (lock)
Charlotte Rampling, 45 Years
Lily Tomlin, Grandma
(If cat fraud is overturned, Mara and Vikander take Rampling and Tomlin's slots. And you know what? If cat fraud overturns ageism, I'm kind of okay with it.)
Supporting Actor:
Mark Rylance, Bridge of Spies
Sylvester Stallone, Creed
Christian Bale, The Big Short
Idris Elba, Beasts of No Nation
Michael Shannon, 99 Homes
Supporting Actress:
Kate Winslet, Steve Jobs
Alicia Vikander, The Danish Girl/Ex Machina
Rooney Mara, Carol
Rachel McAdams, Spotlight
Joan Allen, Room/Margot Robbie, The Big Short/Jane Fonda, Youth/Helen Mirren, Trumbo (Why do I think Margot Robbie is in here? Because it's an expertly essayed stick in your throat shameless micro moment in a very buzzy movie and she probably got close in 2013.)
Stallone is this year's Eddie Murphy, the 80's populist choice that stands until they thing about it: are we really giving this guy an Oscar? He has no Norbit now, but they'll remember his career full of awful movies. What I am missing here is who is the Alan Arkin. Rylance?
None of the categories will go 5 for 5. At this point, the category fraud has been such a constant topic that I doubt Vikander and Mara will go supporting. And Vikander has so much goodwill for Ex Machina and she's so winning the Globe for it. When was the last time the Globe-winning performance in supporting actress didn't get an Oscar nomination?
I disagree on Stallone. I could see him as this year's Albert Brooks even though Brooks had much more support from critics. Stallone isn't a SAG nominee and SAG voters had virtually a month and a half to watch the film. It was a snub and SAG snubs can do lots of damage. Only Marcia Gay Harden and Christoph Waltz won Oscars without SAG nods and if I'm remembering things right, both were submitted in lead. I'm sure about Waltz, not so sure about Harden but I read somewhere that she campaigned lead until the NYFCC win. And Stallone has other challenges as well. He's not a beloved veteran. Many consider him an awful actor. And why do we all expect sentiment for Rocky when it's usually a film that makes all the "worst best picture" lists. I really don't see how he's the favorite. The Globe? Maybe. The Oscar? Nope.
Hayden well said. I LOVE shocking SAG nominations. I was so proud of them when they went all in for THE STATION AGENT and HUSTLE & FLOW back in the day. But these were simply terrible lazy decisions. it's like they only saw 7 movies all year, down from the usual 15 or so awards voters seem to see. ;)
Let us remember, Helen Mirren has as many nominations as there are members of the BEASTS OF NO NATION "ensemble".
Glenn Dunks- hilarious!
Haven't seen Creed yet, but friends who have said MBJ should certainly get a nod. Not sure about Sly.
Mark Rylance should win for Bridge of Spies--will be shocked if he's not nominated. Plus he's in everything this year. Excited to see him in a play next month too.
Roony Mara supporting role is like Jake's supporting role in "Brokeback Mountain" they are both co-stars in their respective films- and it could be argued that the movies are really about their story.
I don't understand how Damon did not get nominated for best actor- if " The Martian" was a play it would be a one man show.
I'm having trouble seeing any categories matching 5 for 5. Can't imagine what they would use for McAdams as a clip for the Oscars, I could easily see her being left out but I would hope it would be for Allen or Jason Leigh not for Fonda's cameo.
I don't know why but I think the Academy will give Will Smith another Best Actor nod (unfairly since Courtenay, Jordan, Hardy and McKellan among others, gave better performances). He is just one of those actors they seem to like even when he does mediocre work - they let him present the Best Picture award even after After Earth.
I think both Supporting Actor and Actress will be very different than SAG's lineups.
Stallone is very good in "Creed" ( Son of Rocky) He is looks and acts his age- which may be shameless Oscar baiting but I bet it works.
Eddie I can totally see McAdams making it in, I like her performance, it's good and it's housed in the best picture frontrunner right now. They nominated Jacki Weaver in Silver Linings Playbook for a good but not very showy performance, so the 'lack of Oscar clip' isn't always a detriment.
I don't think SAG and Oscar will line up at all in any category, and it seems with the deadlines the way they are, a lot of later films got missed or were not seen, similar with Wolf of Wall Street etc.
Eddie I can totally see McAdams making it in, I like her performance, it's good and it's housed in the best picture frontrunner right now. They nominated Jacki Weaver in Silver Linings Playbook for a good but not very showy performance, so the 'lack of Oscar clip' isn't always a detriment.
I don't think SAG and Oscar will line up at all in any category, and it seems with the deadlines the way they are, a lot of later films got missed or were not seen, similar with Wolf of Wall Street etc.
JackI Weaver had several possible "Oscar clip" moments in SLP - crying in the car after Cooper is released from the hospital, the moments after Cooper accidentally hits her, etc. I wouldn't have nominated Weaver, but I liked that performance - you knew exactly who she was, a very fragile woman who was at her wit's end spending her life caring for her gambling addict husband and mentally ill son. I know women like that.
McAdams is just blah in Spotlight. This is partially a writing problem, but it's partially a performance problem, too. Who is she, other than a Boston Globe journalist who likes her grandma? That said, I do think she'll probably get nominated - voters are lazy, and she's an easy nomination for those who liked the movie.
Am I the crazy one who thinks it's possible that Sylvester Stallone may not even get a nomination?! I think the only true lock is Mark Rylance, with Michael Shannon and Idris Elba as likely nominees. There's a dozen men after that who I can feasibly see as legitimate contenders, and with how well The Big Short is playing, I could even see BOTH Bale and Carell making it in here (and color me surprised for LOVING this film. It's peaking at the right time and it truly has some great performances, and IMO Carell is best in show). In other words, I don't think that nomination for Stallone is going to be a slam dunk like many think.
Rami - My comment was poorly constructed, I think McAdams will be nominated as well, I expect Mirren might be the likely difference between SAG and the Academy . Just the lack of a good clip occurred to me as I was thinking about Supporting Actress. Most of scenes that focus on her character have no dialogue, it is mostly her glancing at her grandmother. Other scenes where she has dialogue is overshadowed by Keaton or Ruffalo.
I think Stallone gets the nomination but I'm not sure he wins. It's a good point to say that the sheer amount of crappy performances he's put in over the years Matt weigh him down. On the other hand, it could work in his favor too since he IS great in the movie and actually deserves to win. Yes, he's better than Rylance, who just seemed like a piece of wood with an accent to me. He's far better than anyone in The Big Short or Spotlight, too. In truth, Elba's is the only other performance in the ballpark.
People seem to be making a case against a Stallone nod exclusively based on his crappy CV, as if actors before him haven't been nominated and gone on to win wtih similarly questionable pre-awards-bait resumes (Kim Basinger and Halle Berry immediately come to mind). Considering that real-life narratives often are as much a factor in a person's recognition as the actual work, being nominated and even scoring a victory with this performance in this movie would be such a full-circle turn of events that it may work far more for him than against him. Plus, he's just that good.
Coco does say that Stallone is "a" favorite and not "the" favorite to win and I imagine that was intentional. Rylance is also a favorite to win, as is Tremblay in my opinion (if any one of them gets a nomination).
As long as voters forget about JJL's token career nod and let Fonda in for probably the final time in her career everything's ok with me plus the two K/Cate's need there 7 noms to seperate them from the pack.