Hahaha, no worries. I went with IMDB, March 1977 as birth, so I assumed she's 35. Wiki doesn't have an age listedOriginally Posted by Rage Colored Glasses
Jessica Chastain Zero Dark Thirty
Marion Cotillard Rust and Bone
Judi Dench The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel
Keira Knightley Anna Karenina
Jennifer Lawrence Silver Linings Playbook
Helen Mirren Hitchcock
Emmanuelle Riva Amour
Maggie Smith Quartet
Quvenzhan้ Wallis Beasts of the Southern Wild
Naomi Watts The Impossible
Other
Hahaha, no worries. I went with IMDB, March 1977 as birth, so I assumed she's 35. Wiki doesn't have an age listed
Exactly. It's not the roles that are un-Oscary, it's the actual contenders. If we have a Lawrence/Chastain/Wallis/Watts/Riva lineup that would be the first time in a decade that we don't have a single previous winner nominated. And when this happened in 2002, that lineup featured Kidman, Moore, Zellweger, Hayek, i.e. big stars and/or Academy favorites. A Lawrence/Chastain/Wallis/Watts/Riva lineup would be too obscure. Even if you throw Cotillard into the mix, it still doesn't feel quiet right.
Conclusion: Mirren is happening
This is the type of lazy filler nominee of a respected vet that we loathe but get almost every year.
Riva has a much better shot than Cotillard, LMAO. Her film will be more, liked, buzzed and rewarded, her reviews are better and more consistent, her role is baitier, she has the same studio. Cotillard has two advantages: major campaign and star factor. I think Riva trumps those. Neither is very possible, of course, and we just have Watts + Mirren for the last two spots.
The man who leaves and the man who comes back are not the same.
Yeah, I've heard in various places anywhere from 81 to 71.
Those two major advantages trump everything that Riva has going for her.
Uh, she has three; she's a previous winner. Asserting that Riva has anything that beats those three other than reviews is misguided.
Yeah, I really think as long as the voters see Amour, they're far more likely to put in Riva. And it's more likely they see that then Rust & Bone.
The man who leaves and the man who comes back are not the same.
And in that case, reviews won't even matter that much. It's not like Cotillard's reviews are bad at all, in fact they're very good. Also, people with Riva's reviews are left out every year. She's not a star, she's foreign and she's old and won't campaign. If she gets nominated it will be solely on the merit of her performance alone and how often does that really happen?
Star power and previous winner both go to the same thing: Recognizable name that people will check off on a ballot more easily. Though a previous winner does have more of an air of respectability than star power so it's not exactly the same, but it's similar.
Yeah, which is why I think Riva is really out of it and we're looking at either Mirren, Cotillard or a Watts upset.
The thing about Cotilliard vs. Riva is going to be how many people watch their films. I think a large portion of people who see either film will include Marion and/or Emmanuelle in their top 5. So will more people watch R&B because Marion's is it? Or will more people watch Amour because it carries the label of best foreign film of the year? I suppose that's what people here are divided over.
Marion is certainly campaigning, but I can still see the percentage of the academy putting in the screener being quite low.
Why? Rust & Bone is a film staring an Academy award winner and directed by someone whose pervious film received an Oscar nomination. She has a great studio and is campaigning. Plus, the film is completely accessible. This film is very high profile. Considering all those factors, I don't know why it wouldn't be seen.Yeah, I really think as long as the voters see Amour, they're far more likely to put in Riva. And it's more likely they see that then Rust & Bone.
I can appreciate that you're sticking to your guns but we're talking about an organization that routinely rewards mediocrity and rarely rewards the critical favorite. It's important to make that distinction and that's simply what others are doing.Yeah, I really think as long as the voters see Amour, they're far more likely to put in Riva. And it's more likely they see that then Rust & Bone.
This is the same organization that chose to nominate Glenn Close in Albert Nobbs last year over very acclaimed performances even from past Oscar winners.
Great. Now who's going to watch Sunday Rose on SAG night??
Though I am somewhat more optimistic about Riva than you Erik, a major qualm I have there is the fact that the subject matter of the film may hurt, rather than help Riva. Yes, older Academy members may identify with her, but do they want to be reminded of their soon impending decay and death? This factor didn't hurt Julie Christie, but I would imagine Haneke will have a much more bleak, uncompromising portrayal of that issue than Polley did.
Again, can someone tell me the last time that someone was nominated and/or won an Oscar solely based on the merit of their performance? Don't say Mo'Nique because she did campaign a little and she was the most talked about performance of the year. Riva has gotten fantastic reviews, but I would still argue that Mo'Nique's were more impressive and she was in a Best Picture nominee. So if Riva were to get in it would be solely off the strength of her performance. That kind of stuff just doesn't happen at the Oscars.
Rust & Bone didn't do very well at box office and if it wasn't for the campaign, Marion would be out and no one would be talking about the film. Amour's campaign is just beginning, it and Riva will get a lot of buzz by winning critics' awards and Amour is arguably the foreign language film of the year also directed by a previous Oscar nominee. It will get a lot of attention and I truly believe it will actually be seen, unlike R&B.
The man who leaves and the man who comes back are not the same.
It's weird, I go back and forth on Cotillard all the time. I feel like she does have a lot of buzz, is campaigning her ass off, and this field is relatively weak, but I remain quite skeptical.
Here's something interesting:
A couple of weeks ago, in early November, Tapley and Thompson were the only two Gurus o Gold that were not predicting Cotillard. Now, they both are. Additionally, 25 of the 26 pundits on Gold Derby is predicting Cotillard in their top 5, which marks an increase in what it was earlier this month. (The one person who is not predicting her has incomplete predictions that haven't been updated in weeks).
So, I'm wondering what is marking this rise in prediction for Cotillard, including from people like Tapley and Thompson, neither of whom even had her in their top 6 a few weeks ago. Perhaps people will demote her more now, as Watts' buzz swells, but for the time being, I'm a bit surprised by this almost unanimous predicting of her performance from all Oscar bloggers.
I'm not saying that people won't watch Amour, but Rust & Bone is high profile enough because of its campaign that I think enough people will see it. Marion is very popular and is very visible right now. All that said, I still think she can miss, but she's still more likely than Riva.
Also, when has BO ever matter for either foreign language films or this category?
Posting Permissions
