Best Picture
One key to predicting is to look at how the preferential voting effects the choices. The key is that films need to be loved. They need to be the first choices, not the fourth of fifth choices.
The top two contenders in my mind are Boyhood and Birdman. Both are not like anything in the race this year or any other year, for that matter. These two are shoo-ins.
The next tier, in my opinion, are The Imitation Game and Selma. Both are traditional Oscar bait, well done true life stories. Hard to imagine either of them missing.
One other contender during the entire race has been The Theory of Everything. While I sense some fading around this title, the likely only film to gain both Best Actor and Best Actress nominations I think will still have enough to get nominated even though it is similar to The Imitation Game.
One film that seemed to be in the race most of the way is Foxcatcher. But it is a hard film to love. I think of the traditional films, this is the film that has gotten lost in the shuffle. I have moved it out of my list. While we are at it, remember when Unbroken was considered a favorite? There is such a thing as filmmaking being too traditional (and relegating the most interesting part of your story to an end credit crawl).
What has climbed the list and has come up in a lot of precursors is The Grand Budapest Hotel. What at first viewing is a slight entertainment has more weight, and has picked up steam.
The Academy is older, and old pros are valued. Clint Eastwood has about as much respect as any figure, and especially because he has not rested on his laurels. I think it is close on American Sniper. Either it just gets nominated or just misses.
For awhile I was thinking Into the Woods would slip in, especially as there are no musicals in the group above. But Whiplash is about musicians, has a musicality about it, and a you-gotta-see-it performance by J. K. Simmons. I think Whiplash has gained the musical slot.
Finally, I think there is room for one darker film. Most of the above films are uplifting in one form or another. For a long time I thought that film was Gone Girl. But what started as a performance to watch in Jake Gyllenhall has gathered steam for Nightcrawler. I think it has gained the last slot.
Predictions:
American Sniper
Birdman
Boyhood
The Grand Budapest Hotel
The Imitation Game
Nightcrawler
Selma
The Theory of Everything
Whiplash
Best Director
First, we go with the big two: Birdman and Boyhood. Both directors are in.
The next tier are less sure. I think The Imitation Game is the traditional well made film that gets respected. I am even shakier on Selma's Ava DuVernay, but I think she will be helped because of the history, that no black woman has ever been nominated. Plus she delivered, which is the most important reason.
The fifth slot is wide open. The director's branch appears to be big believers in the auteur theory. There is no prediction which I am rock solid on. I'll predict the auteur of a probable best picture nominee that has yet to be nominated.
Predictions:
Wes Anderson (The Grand Budapest Hotel)
Ava DuVernay (Selma)
Richard Linklater (Birdman)
Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu (Birdman)
Morten Tyldum (The Imitation Game)
Monday, January 12, 2015
Sunday, January 4, 2015
Foxcatcher (2014)
Every year, there seems to be one film from a big film festival that just doesn't match the hype. Usually that film comes from Sundance, but this year it comes from Cannes.
Foxcatcher is that film. The film plays like a funeral. There's no life to it. It drags. And drags. And drags.
I've heard this film is some kind of great dissection of American society. All I really got from it was something that I already knew: the idle rich have too much money and are accorded too much respect because of that money. Thanks for that insight, guys.
I'm not going to say this is a horribly made film. On a technical level, it is well made. Steve Carell plays the one note of John DuPont very well. But it is one note. Channing Tatum impressed me more with a much more complicated person as portrayed in the film.
Ultimately, this film felt like homework. Except I did not feel educated at the end.
Grade: C-
Foxcatcher is that film. The film plays like a funeral. There's no life to it. It drags. And drags. And drags.
I've heard this film is some kind of great dissection of American society. All I really got from it was something that I already knew: the idle rich have too much money and are accorded too much respect because of that money. Thanks for that insight, guys.
I'm not going to say this is a horribly made film. On a technical level, it is well made. Steve Carell plays the one note of John DuPont very well. But it is one note. Channing Tatum impressed me more with a much more complicated person as portrayed in the film.
Ultimately, this film felt like homework. Except I did not feel educated at the end.
Grade: C-
Sunday 1/4/15
I awoke this morning to the news Stuart Scott had died.
For me, Sportscenter's heyday on ESPN was in the 90s. Before the commercialization of ESPN led to stupidity like a 6 pack of questions brought to you by Coors Light, before management led to mixing up the teams and anchors so there was little connection of personalities, before ESPN had celebrities show up who don't have anything to do with sports events, there were two shows and four anchors who I loved following. Dan and Keith were on at 11, and Stuart and Rich were the late show.
The magic was not just the personalities that each of these unique anchors brought to the table, but that they were true teams. Dan Patrick and Keith Olbermann clearly made each other laugh. They entertained us because they entertained each other. Stuart Scott and Rich Eisen clearly worked together even though they were complete opposites.
I heard a lot of references to Stuart's lines like "boo-yaa" and of course "as cool as the other side of the pillow" but I really enjoyed his interactions with Rich, when they would say together "MMMMMillion" whenever that ridiculous number came up. Then they added Raul MMMMondesi" to the lexicon.
They guys felt like my friends, felt like guys I would talk sports with. It shouldn't be taken serious. It should be fun. There were references to Scott today and how he brought a hip hop lexicon to the sports, and that was resisted by many. There were some that attributed that to race, but I think it was more generational. Stuart's three years older than me, but he was the first anchor who felt to me like my generation. And last I checked, I'm not black.
Journalistically, I am supposed to refer to people by their last name. But Stuart Scott -- who I never met -- felt like a friend. I will indeed miss him.
*****
It says something on how ESPN has lost its hold on me that I did not find out about Stuart Scott through ESPN. I found out through my preferred football show in the morning, The Other Pregame Show, on CBS Sports Network. I then searched the internet, saw ESPN's excellent tribute {they obviously prepared for this) narrated by Robin Roberts.
ESPN drummed the personality out of Sportscenter, and it is much the worse for it. Rich Eisen bolted for NFL Network, and Dan Patrick basically was overworked until he had no choice but to quit (although his radio show is entertaining) and Keith Olbermann is back, although it is not on Sportscenter, but his own highlight show.
I would note entertaining personalities get me coming back, not more gimmicks. What shows do I continue to watch on the ESPN channels? PTI is number one, because of Tony Kornheiser and Michael Wilbon. Mike and Mike, because of Mike Greenberg and Mike Golic. And Olbermann. That's about it. All due to personalities.
And because of your obsession with the Yankees and the Red Sox, during the summer I've stopped watching Mike and Mike, because the MLB Network actually covers the entire league.
For me, Sportscenter's heyday on ESPN was in the 90s. Before the commercialization of ESPN led to stupidity like a 6 pack of questions brought to you by Coors Light, before management led to mixing up the teams and anchors so there was little connection of personalities, before ESPN had celebrities show up who don't have anything to do with sports events, there were two shows and four anchors who I loved following. Dan and Keith were on at 11, and Stuart and Rich were the late show.
The magic was not just the personalities that each of these unique anchors brought to the table, but that they were true teams. Dan Patrick and Keith Olbermann clearly made each other laugh. They entertained us because they entertained each other. Stuart Scott and Rich Eisen clearly worked together even though they were complete opposites.
I heard a lot of references to Stuart's lines like "boo-yaa" and of course "as cool as the other side of the pillow" but I really enjoyed his interactions with Rich, when they would say together "MMMMMillion" whenever that ridiculous number came up. Then they added Raul MMMMondesi" to the lexicon.
They guys felt like my friends, felt like guys I would talk sports with. It shouldn't be taken serious. It should be fun. There were references to Scott today and how he brought a hip hop lexicon to the sports, and that was resisted by many. There were some that attributed that to race, but I think it was more generational. Stuart's three years older than me, but he was the first anchor who felt to me like my generation. And last I checked, I'm not black.
Journalistically, I am supposed to refer to people by their last name. But Stuart Scott -- who I never met -- felt like a friend. I will indeed miss him.
*****
It says something on how ESPN has lost its hold on me that I did not find out about Stuart Scott through ESPN. I found out through my preferred football show in the morning, The Other Pregame Show, on CBS Sports Network. I then searched the internet, saw ESPN's excellent tribute {they obviously prepared for this) narrated by Robin Roberts.
ESPN drummed the personality out of Sportscenter, and it is much the worse for it. Rich Eisen bolted for NFL Network, and Dan Patrick basically was overworked until he had no choice but to quit (although his radio show is entertaining) and Keith Olbermann is back, although it is not on Sportscenter, but his own highlight show.
I would note entertaining personalities get me coming back, not more gimmicks. What shows do I continue to watch on the ESPN channels? PTI is number one, because of Tony Kornheiser and Michael Wilbon. Mike and Mike, because of Mike Greenberg and Mike Golic. And Olbermann. That's about it. All due to personalities.
And because of your obsession with the Yankees and the Red Sox, during the summer I've stopped watching Mike and Mike, because the MLB Network actually covers the entire league.
Thursday, June 19, 2014
Rediscovering Mystery Science Theater 3000
I have belonged to two fan clubs in my lifetime. In the late 1970s, I joined the Muppet Show fan club. In the early 1990s, I became an official MSTie.
An appreciation for Mystery Science Theater 3000 requires an appreciation of bad movies. Really, really bad movies. Especially watching bad movies with friends and making wisecracks. Because that's what Mystery Science Theater 3000 is: watching bad movies with three friends, listening to their wisecracks.
Now that my schedule has freed up a bit, I have time to get to all those classic movies clogging up my DVR. I have time to get to all those films in my Netflix queue. Instead, I have been rewatching MST3K episodes. So if I am going to start writing again, I figure: why not review what I am watching? So I have added a new label to my blog: MST3K.
An appreciation for Mystery Science Theater 3000 requires an appreciation of bad movies. Really, really bad movies. Especially watching bad movies with friends and making wisecracks. Because that's what Mystery Science Theater 3000 is: watching bad movies with three friends, listening to their wisecracks.
Now that my schedule has freed up a bit, I have time to get to all those classic movies clogging up my DVR. I have time to get to all those films in my Netflix queue. Instead, I have been rewatching MST3K episodes. So if I am going to start writing again, I figure: why not review what I am watching? So I have added a new label to my blog: MST3K.
Wednesday, June 18, 2014
Thank you, Springfield Symphony Orchestra. Thank you, John Williams.
My hometown is Springfield, Ohio. One of the best things about living here is the Summer Arts Festival. This is six weeks of free stage performances in the park.
Last Sunday was the summer performance of the Springfield Symphony Orchestra. This was a performance of John Williams music. I attended the first attempt to do this concert five years ago. Due to threatening weather, five years ago was, as the conductor put it, the Readers Digest version of the concert. This week was the unabridged version.
One piece performed this week was Close Encounters of the Third Kind. Seeing and hearing it performed live is to truly appreciate the genius of Williams. The first few minutes of the piece is a series of quiet atonal sounds with unique instrumentation which slowly builds and builds. It isn't until halfway through that the more familiar sounds that everyone remembers from the movies.
The sound is unsettling. It captures the unease and confusion of the characters in the movie. It is brilliant. While I enjoyed the whole concert, that piece was what I will treasure for years. Any chance anyone has to see Close Encounters live? Take it.
Last Sunday was the summer performance of the Springfield Symphony Orchestra. This was a performance of John Williams music. I attended the first attempt to do this concert five years ago. Due to threatening weather, five years ago was, as the conductor put it, the Readers Digest version of the concert. This week was the unabridged version.
One piece performed this week was Close Encounters of the Third Kind. Seeing and hearing it performed live is to truly appreciate the genius of Williams. The first few minutes of the piece is a series of quiet atonal sounds with unique instrumentation which slowly builds and builds. It isn't until halfway through that the more familiar sounds that everyone remembers from the movies.
The sound is unsettling. It captures the unease and confusion of the characters in the movie. It is brilliant. While I enjoyed the whole concert, that piece was what I will treasure for years. Any chance anyone has to see Close Encounters live? Take it.
Sunday, March 9, 2014
Looking back at the Oscar show
One week later, reading everyone's thoughts and reviews, I wanted to weigh in with a few thoughts of this year's show.
I'm tired of reading that this year's show was not edgy enough. That's a complaint if the Spirit Awards are too safe. This is the Oscars. This is a show everyone and their grandmother watches. Safe is what you are going to get. Their are elements within the show that can be pushed, but ultimately there are too many people to be pleased for edgy to work.
One element the show got right this year was the speeches. This has been a pet peeve of mine for years, and this year, the show finally let them breathe a little. It has been proved year after year: give the winners 30 seconds, and you get a list of names. Give them 45 seconds, and you get something clever in the speech. This year, speech after speech contained something entertaining.
Ellen DeGeneres started, well, terrible. Her monologue was not very good. But the rest of the night, with a drop in here and there, she was excellent. That's what a host should do.
Which brings me to the first change I would make. Let's get rid of the opening monologue. It adds nothing but time. It generally means 20-25 minutes before the first award. Kill it.
Imagine this next year, if the host walked out and said, "Welcome to the Oscars. And now, here's Jared Leto to present the first award for supporting actress." It would bring down the house.
The other option depends on the best song nominees. If one of the songs fits -- and Happy did this year -- just open with a song nominee that gets the night going with some energy.
It is also time to lose the montages. Chuck Workman used to do a beautiful job with different themes, but I am assuming given the drop in quality that he isn't doing the work anymore. Workman made it look easy. The past two years have decisively proved it isn't.
But I would not lose the In Memorium segment. It has become part of every award show, and at this point would be seen as a slap in the face to those who left us in the past year. I thought they did fine with it this year, and Bette Midler's performance after the list of names worked for me.
If I am producing, my focus would be on the past year. (In Mermorium therefore fits.) Drop the production numbers for films from the past. The production numbers should simply be the best song nominees. It should be said, the production on all four this year was exemplary.
Want to add a little more? Focus on the nominees. Show about 20 seconds of each editing nominee showing what they had to work with. Show what were special effects and how they were applied. Break down the soundtracks of the sound nominees. Truly celebrate the nominated work, instead of a film, however great, that is 75 years old.
It isn't rocket science. But with a little tweaking, I think what was a good show this year could be a great show.
I'm tired of reading that this year's show was not edgy enough. That's a complaint if the Spirit Awards are too safe. This is the Oscars. This is a show everyone and their grandmother watches. Safe is what you are going to get. Their are elements within the show that can be pushed, but ultimately there are too many people to be pleased for edgy to work.
One element the show got right this year was the speeches. This has been a pet peeve of mine for years, and this year, the show finally let them breathe a little. It has been proved year after year: give the winners 30 seconds, and you get a list of names. Give them 45 seconds, and you get something clever in the speech. This year, speech after speech contained something entertaining.
Ellen DeGeneres started, well, terrible. Her monologue was not very good. But the rest of the night, with a drop in here and there, she was excellent. That's what a host should do.
Which brings me to the first change I would make. Let's get rid of the opening monologue. It adds nothing but time. It generally means 20-25 minutes before the first award. Kill it.
Imagine this next year, if the host walked out and said, "Welcome to the Oscars. And now, here's Jared Leto to present the first award for supporting actress." It would bring down the house.
The other option depends on the best song nominees. If one of the songs fits -- and Happy did this year -- just open with a song nominee that gets the night going with some energy.
It is also time to lose the montages. Chuck Workman used to do a beautiful job with different themes, but I am assuming given the drop in quality that he isn't doing the work anymore. Workman made it look easy. The past two years have decisively proved it isn't.
But I would not lose the In Memorium segment. It has become part of every award show, and at this point would be seen as a slap in the face to those who left us in the past year. I thought they did fine with it this year, and Bette Midler's performance after the list of names worked for me.
If I am producing, my focus would be on the past year. (In Mermorium therefore fits.) Drop the production numbers for films from the past. The production numbers should simply be the best song nominees. It should be said, the production on all four this year was exemplary.
Want to add a little more? Focus on the nominees. Show about 20 seconds of each editing nominee showing what they had to work with. Show what were special effects and how they were applied. Break down the soundtracks of the sound nominees. Truly celebrate the nominated work, instead of a film, however great, that is 75 years old.
It isn't rocket science. But with a little tweaking, I think what was a good show this year could be a great show.
Sunday, March 2, 2014
Oscar blog
I am going to try something different this year. I am going to type comments as the Oscar show goes on.
First off, while I half watch the arrivals and ABC proves again that Jimmy Kimmel is still not very funny, I .. sorry, that Kimmel bit was so tired I lost my train of thought.
If I just wanted to be snide, I would point out that Will Smith just showed up a day after he won a Razzie, his son won another, and they won three. But that would be mean.
I thought last year's show was terrible, so I am worried how tonight will turn out.
My general plan is to post during the commercials. We'll see. Maybe it will be as much of a train wreck as last year's show.
Dove Chocolates using a famous dead celebrity to sell chocolate. Since Audrey Hepburn died of cancer, are we supposed to think of cancer when we see Dove Chocolate?
Wait a minute, ABC is trying to sell Resurrection by random tweets. So we are supposed to watch a show which has not yet aired because random people were impressed by its ads. Uh huh.
I really have nothing much to say about the opening monologue. It wasn't really bad, but wasn't really that great, either. Let's put it this way: the Golden Globes had the better opening.
Supporting Actor: Jared Leto (I am 1 for 1 in predictions.) Great tribute to his mom. Great message to the world. This is what happens when you allow the speeches breathe.
Oh great, a montage for animation which takes us nowhere. Not a good sign.
Pharrell Williams is cool. And that performance fit him to a T. With four good song nominees this year, we should be in good hands.
Costumes: The Great Gatsby (1 for 2). Baz Luhrman's wife wins Oscar #3. Richly deserved.
Make-up and Hairstyling: Dallas Buyers Club (2 for 3) Perfect example for voting for the film, not the category. I don't enjoy the Jackass movies, but the old man makeup on Johnny Knoxville was more award deserving.
I want scenes to illustrate the nominees, not trailers. I have already seen the trailers many tines.
What Ellen DeGeneres does so well is to keep the show fun. She is as good at that as anyone on the planet.
Animated Short: Mr. Hublot. (2 for 4) The only film that I thought could upset Get a Horse actually pulls it off. It is a charming film.
Animated Feature: Frozen. (3 for 5) Because it was the obvious choice.
And a second montage, which is something about heroism, but is poorly focused. Great.
Visual Effects: Gravity (4 for 6) Because it was obviously the best this year.
Two for two for great song presentation. Just as Happy needed to be big, The Moon Song needed to be quiet and gentle. Now would they release a soundtrack to Her already?
Live Action Short: Helium (4 for 7) I am so happy to have been wrong about my prediction, as this was my favorite short out of all three short categories this year.
Documentary Short: The Lady in Number 6. (5 for 8) This is a vote for the subject, because the filmmaking did not deserve the award.
Documentary Feature: 20 Feet From Stardom. (5 for 9) I incorrectly guessed the Academy would go for issues rather than entertainment.
Foreign Film: The Great Beauty. (6 for 10)
Three for three in song presentations. I am assuming the producers did whatever U2 wanted, because they are U2.
Sound Mixing: Gravity (7 for 11)
Sound Editing: Gravity (8 for 12)
Supporting Actress: Lupita Nyong'o (9 for 13) I strongly believe this is the birth of a major star.
Cinematography: Gravity (10 for 14) I have been rooting for Emanuel Lubezki to win an Oscar since A Little Princess.
Editing: Gravity (10 for 15) Here's Gravity's first win I did not predict. Any other surprises coming?
I admit I wasn't looking forward to a Wizard of Oz tribute, but Pink knocked that out of the park. Much better than the Chicago tribute last year.
Production Design: The Great Gatsby (11 for 16) And two Oscars tonight for Catherine Martin to match the two she won for Moulin Rouge!
Oh goody, another montage. How is The Terminator heroic?
As I expected, Bette Midler is singing Wind Beneath My Wings as part of the In Memoriam segment. I think this is a good choice not only because of the lyrics but because this song did originate in the movie Beaches.
Original Score: Gravity (11 for 17) Wow, I misread the tea leaves on this one. I thought it was too soon for Steven Price to win an Oscar.
Original Song: Let It Go, Frozen (12 for 18) And the award for the speech of the night goes to...
Adapted Screenplay: 12 Years a Slave (12 for 19) I went out on a limb predicting Philomena and the branch just broke off.
Original Screenplay: Her (12 for 20) Well, it is original. Actually, I'm thrilled for Spike Jonze. One of the truly original film artists now has an Oscar.
Director: Alfonso Cuaron, Gravity (13 for 21) I have been rooting for this win since A Little Princess.
Actress: Cate Blanchett, Blue Jasmine (14 for 22)
Actor: Matthew McConaughey, Dallas Buyers Club (15 for 23)
Picture: 12 Years a Slave (16 for 24)
I believe Gravity just tied the record with most wins (7) without a best picture win.
First off, while I half watch the arrivals and ABC proves again that Jimmy Kimmel is still not very funny, I .. sorry, that Kimmel bit was so tired I lost my train of thought.
If I just wanted to be snide, I would point out that Will Smith just showed up a day after he won a Razzie, his son won another, and they won three. But that would be mean.
I thought last year's show was terrible, so I am worried how tonight will turn out.
My general plan is to post during the commercials. We'll see. Maybe it will be as much of a train wreck as last year's show.
Dove Chocolates using a famous dead celebrity to sell chocolate. Since Audrey Hepburn died of cancer, are we supposed to think of cancer when we see Dove Chocolate?
Wait a minute, ABC is trying to sell Resurrection by random tweets. So we are supposed to watch a show which has not yet aired because random people were impressed by its ads. Uh huh.
I really have nothing much to say about the opening monologue. It wasn't really bad, but wasn't really that great, either. Let's put it this way: the Golden Globes had the better opening.
Supporting Actor: Jared Leto (I am 1 for 1 in predictions.) Great tribute to his mom. Great message to the world. This is what happens when you allow the speeches breathe.
Oh great, a montage for animation which takes us nowhere. Not a good sign.
Pharrell Williams is cool. And that performance fit him to a T. With four good song nominees this year, we should be in good hands.
Costumes: The Great Gatsby (1 for 2). Baz Luhrman's wife wins Oscar #3. Richly deserved.
Make-up and Hairstyling: Dallas Buyers Club (2 for 3) Perfect example for voting for the film, not the category. I don't enjoy the Jackass movies, but the old man makeup on Johnny Knoxville was more award deserving.
I want scenes to illustrate the nominees, not trailers. I have already seen the trailers many tines.
What Ellen DeGeneres does so well is to keep the show fun. She is as good at that as anyone on the planet.
Animated Short: Mr. Hublot. (2 for 4) The only film that I thought could upset Get a Horse actually pulls it off. It is a charming film.
Animated Feature: Frozen. (3 for 5) Because it was the obvious choice.
And a second montage, which is something about heroism, but is poorly focused. Great.
Visual Effects: Gravity (4 for 6) Because it was obviously the best this year.
Two for two for great song presentation. Just as Happy needed to be big, The Moon Song needed to be quiet and gentle. Now would they release a soundtrack to Her already?
Live Action Short: Helium (4 for 7) I am so happy to have been wrong about my prediction, as this was my favorite short out of all three short categories this year.
Documentary Short: The Lady in Number 6. (5 for 8) This is a vote for the subject, because the filmmaking did not deserve the award.
Documentary Feature: 20 Feet From Stardom. (5 for 9) I incorrectly guessed the Academy would go for issues rather than entertainment.
Foreign Film: The Great Beauty. (6 for 10)
Three for three in song presentations. I am assuming the producers did whatever U2 wanted, because they are U2.
Sound Mixing: Gravity (7 for 11)
Sound Editing: Gravity (8 for 12)
Supporting Actress: Lupita Nyong'o (9 for 13) I strongly believe this is the birth of a major star.
Cinematography: Gravity (10 for 14) I have been rooting for Emanuel Lubezki to win an Oscar since A Little Princess.
Editing: Gravity (10 for 15) Here's Gravity's first win I did not predict. Any other surprises coming?
I admit I wasn't looking forward to a Wizard of Oz tribute, but Pink knocked that out of the park. Much better than the Chicago tribute last year.
Production Design: The Great Gatsby (11 for 16) And two Oscars tonight for Catherine Martin to match the two she won for Moulin Rouge!
Oh goody, another montage. How is The Terminator heroic?
As I expected, Bette Midler is singing Wind Beneath My Wings as part of the In Memoriam segment. I think this is a good choice not only because of the lyrics but because this song did originate in the movie Beaches.
Original Score: Gravity (11 for 17) Wow, I misread the tea leaves on this one. I thought it was too soon for Steven Price to win an Oscar.
Original Song: Let It Go, Frozen (12 for 18) And the award for the speech of the night goes to...
Adapted Screenplay: 12 Years a Slave (12 for 19) I went out on a limb predicting Philomena and the branch just broke off.
Original Screenplay: Her (12 for 20) Well, it is original. Actually, I'm thrilled for Spike Jonze. One of the truly original film artists now has an Oscar.
Director: Alfonso Cuaron, Gravity (13 for 21) I have been rooting for this win since A Little Princess.
Actress: Cate Blanchett, Blue Jasmine (14 for 22)
Actor: Matthew McConaughey, Dallas Buyers Club (15 for 23)
Picture: 12 Years a Slave (16 for 24)
I believe Gravity just tied the record with most wins (7) without a best picture win.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
