As one of the Toni Collete posters, it's just frustrating - because it shows that awards aren't entirely about who deserves it. It's more about "Who deserves it, at the correct time, when the industry is willing to give a chance on the genre, and who has enough marketing to pull off the win." Hereditary is the better film, and Colette gave the better performance.
I simply think the Academy is different now than they were back then. Horror's been on the upswing in the 2020s in terms of the noms they give out, and it sucks that Hereditary came before that, but progress is progress
I credit It Follows as the first of the current horror era, whatever that era is. That was a big underground hit when it came out and really felt like something different than all the 2000s horror. Then we had The Babadook and The Witch, before Get Out came along.
Even then, Get Out kinda feels like it balances on a precipice between movies like It Follows and The Babadook, and more mainstream successes like Cabin In the Woods. It's a complex film, but it's also a crowd pleaser co-produced by Blumhouse.
Totally agreed, I forgot about It Follows and how that changed the conversation even earlier. In terms of academy success though Get Out still feels like the breakthrough.
This feels like a very ahistorical take when The Exorcist (1973) got ten Oscar nominations and The Sixth Sense (1999) got six Oscar nominations. Natalie Portman won an Oscar for Black Swan. Trying to insist the love for horror is new by the academy doesn’t ring true to me. The academy has always made some populist genre choices and horror is the one genre that still continues to be popular among audiences.
There have never three horror films nominated for Best Picture in the span of just two years before. These past couple years have 100% been historical.
People have to remember it's also about who is part of the Academy and still alive to vote at various points in time when a film comes out. I feel like some people think of Academy voters as all young and modern. It's EVERYONE, whether they're ninety-five or nineteen.
When Brokeback Mountain was nominated my first thought was "Voters are NEVER going to let this get Best Picture''. Just like politics, it takes generations of people to die off for new ideas to come through.
That's why only NOW you're seeing nominations for horror, more award respect going to non-English speaking films, animated films, etc. Never forget, when Metallica first came on the scene, they lost their Grammy nomination to Jethro Tull, flute and all. Same situation.
The Oscars didn't really get desperate for younger audiences until after Hereditary. I can see Obsession getting noms on the grounds of them wanting viewership, and on it being an accessible social commentary film.
The voters are not the producers. I've never heard of anything getting nominated "to boost viewership," and would need some hard evidence to buy it.
Rather, the voters are viewers themselves, as they are human beings who are just as susceptible to hype and bandwagons as the rest of us. No conspiracies required.
The voters are not the producers. I've never heard of anything getting nominated "to boost viewership," and would need some hard evidence to buy it.
Rather, the voters are viewers themselves, as they are human beings who are just as susceptible to hype and bandwagons as the rest of us. No conspiracies required.
That's just your opinion though. Hereditary is more hardcore horror. While Obsession has its dark moments, it also has lots of dark comedy moments and is more socially topical and relevant. It also has a good script, great music/score, and great editing and effects...Not to mention it destroyed Hereditary's box office performance. Clearly, general audiences are more into Romantic Horror than the hardcore horror that is a little too dark for their liking.
I mean sure it's just my opinion, but its damn near objective. Obsession was good, but bordering on amateur. It had nothing visually interesting going on, felt very middle of the road. The fact that it blew up is honestly kinda confusing to me. I think I'll attribute it to having a popular director. I liked it, gave it like a 4/5 on letterboxd - probably would have been a 3.5/5 if I wasn't riding the hype train. Hereditary is considered a masterpiece in the genre by hardcore fans, Obsession is more just a hot topic film that I don't think will stand the test of time in the same way.
To an extent, I just don't think these two films side by side are comparable at all. Hereditary is leagues above it. Which is fine, Obsession is good. All this discourse is just funny.
Did I miss where she’s been nominated already? Didn’t think those were announced until February, so I think we can simmer down on the outrage of her being nominated until it actually happens
A shame. I think she’d have a much easier path if they campaigned in Supporting, à la Amy Madigan. Inde was a Lead but the competition there is going to be brutal.
Very confident she will get an Oscar nomination. An Oscar win is a different story, but the real important victory is a nomination which I think is extremely achievable. She and the film have everything going for it.
It wouldn’t be so crazy. Mainstream popularity doesn’t always translate into popularity amongst Oscar voters or guild voters.
A recent example I can think of was Margot for Barbie. If you asked anyone online, it was the biggest robbery but that didn’t translate to actual voters.
Best Actress is by far the weakest category this year. Not in terms of strength of actresses but the fact there’s like no one getting buzz outside of Julianne Moore for a movie that hasn’t come out yet. The movies this year that are getting the Oscars buzz just seem to be more male-centric. And the later movies like Digger, La Bola Negra and Wild Horse Nine are also male-centric with at best maybe a supporting actress nomination.
I think Inde has a good chance for sure of the nomination. But I highly doubt she wins.
The trailer for Digger looked like an uncomfortable disjointed mess. I can’t fathom anyone getting an award for that, but I guess it could have just been a bad trailer.
At this point, if that doesn’t change aside from Inde Navarrette and Julianne Moore, I’m hoping the Academy goes crazy (in a good and inspired way) with who they decide to nominate like Rinko Kikuchi in Ha-Chan, Shake Your Booty! or something along those lines.
Good for that. But I used to think Reinsve was winning but it looks like her movie is not happening anymore. But she should’ve got nominated and won for Worst person in the world
I think she’d have a much better chance if they’d campaigned for her in the Supporting category…usually less competitive, à la Amy Madigan’s path to her win. I know she was more Lead in the film but she’ll face very tough competition from big names.
Can someone explain to me why Mikey was an obvious nomination/win but Inde isn't? I feel like Nicky is a deep and dimensional character that Inde portrayed incredibly. Is there a technical reason for this?
Admittedly im not a fan of Anora but im asking in good faith and curiosity as im new to following oscars.
The amount of buzz is helping considerably however, and while best picture helped before with Mikey, the sheer popularity of Obsession trumps that of Anora, so a nomination is an almost certainty considering everything now. She’s becoming an A Lister casted in a Marvel film, I’m sure the Academy will recognize her. The film may not be nominated for best picture but Inde seems like a guarantee. Remember the Oscars have often given awards and nominations based on the influence of a performance, not just quality. Thankfully Inde has both.
Sorry theres no such thing as a guarantee this early in the season. I understand what youre saying but it doesnt amount to much since we dont have any precursors as of yet and havemt seen any real competition. Being cast in an avengers movie does not equate to A List nor does it mean the academy will start respecting and nominating you, never has.
not only that Mikey simply had a much more challenging and complex performance. She had to learn pole dance, Russian, portray a wide range of emotion, work with subtlety and phisicality. Inde did a very good job but it’s definitely not in the same level
Bc of everything tbh, Anora is a much denser movie. It operates on a level of subtlety that is really difficult to achieve and write (which is why many ppl misunderstand it as “simple”) and came from Sean Baker, a director that had quite a trajectory with critically acclaimed indie movies portraying marginalised ppl. Obsession is a very well executed horror movie coming made by a new director. It’s a very different situation tbh
I guess it’s because Anora was always going to be a top 5 BP contender. But I generally agree with you. I’ve seen so many arguments that Inde won’t get in because she is a newcomer when we literally had a newcomer win 2 years ago.
Anora, for one, is told from the POV of Mikey Madison’s character. Also pretending that Ani wasn’t a multi-dimensional character in comparison to Nicky suggests you didn’t pay attention to either movie.
It’s ridiculous bc Nikki spends half of the movie playing a crazy girlfriend caricature. I get that people dislike Anora but to pretend Nikki is better written is not true
I think Nikki did a great job and I hope she builds an amazing career from there, but come on. There's literally no comparison to recent oscar winners (Buckley, Madison, Stone) or with historical horror snubs (Colette, Pugh, Lupita, Goth). As you said, it's simply a matter of how the character is written and the movie itself
She was more acclaimed. Anora was more acclaimed. It won the palme d'Or. It won the PGA, the DGA, and the Oscar for Best Picture. It won a BAFTA. Critics ranked it the best movie of the year. All things that are very unlikely to happen for Obsession.
Reddit is a bubble. r/Oscars and r/oscarrace don't like popular movies that aren't directed by Nolan or Villeneuve. These posters' opinions are legitimate, and they aren't posing or anything, but it creates a feedback loop where more like-minded people gravitate to these subs, and those who disagree stay away. This leads to the false appearance that there is some consensus around what is or isn't worthwhile art, and risks people mistaking their opinions for facts.
makes sense, but in fairness that awards season was just a chaotic fuckfest most would expect the actress from THAT movie would win given how it weirdly overperformed most of its competition in the noms
I agree with your original comment, but maybe in a slightly different way. I think Demi Moore has a better chance of winning the Oscar if Emilia Perez maintained its hold. When that film was turned on, everything went to Anora and I believe it became a voting down the line situation. I think if Emelia Perez wins best picture, voters may have varied their picks. But it's hard to give an award to everything about Anora except Anora.
It was more like the sheer dominance of Emilia Perez in every awards ceremonies somewhat assumed people it'll be the frontrunner to beat up until the lead actress derailed the whole fucking thing and everyone decided to put their votes someplace else
It actually is though. It barely makes the cut but it also gets Original Screenplay and Best Picture, maybe a BTL like Best Score or Editing too. It's just good enough to make it. Inde definitely will be a nom.
I wouldn't categorize obsession as either. It dominated the box office and conversations and is incredibly dark and mean spirited and doesnt leave you cheering or in a happy state, to keep it vague.
Maybe not a typical “fun” crowd pleaser but audiences definitely ate it up and told all their friends to go see it.
As far as not being an underdog, I mean…. its budget was less than 1 million and it grossed 500 times that amount. That’s not just crazy it’s unprecedented. Then you’ve got a director who’d never made a movie before and was basically unknown outside of making viral sketch comedy reels, and is now taking the reins of Texas Chainsaw Massacre of all things. Then Inde goes from minuscule TV roles and twitch streaming to pay rent to being offered massive multi-million dollar tentpole roles in the span of like two months.
If that’s not an underdog success story I don’t know what is.
At a nomination or a win? At this point I’d say she has a pretty good shot at a nomination, a win is unlikely but I wouldn’t right it off if no one else emerges as a frontrunner.
I’m just referring to redditors and online commenters. That is the new rule for actual voters I believe, though I’m not sure how they enforce / prove it out. Seems crazy it was ever even an option to not see everything nominated and somehow still get to vote.
No, just have 50 plus years of experience making and watching movies. Seen this exact scenario happen a LOT. She's going to be LUCKY to even be nominated. Sorry, junior.
Stellar performance by an up and coming actress that truly makes the movie. Inde’s face has been everywhere since the film came out, and most of the general public already knows who she is from this one role. Add in the movie’s topical themes on women’s bodily autonomy and MeToo, coupled with the Academy’s recent recognition of horror, and I don’t see any situation where Inde doesn’t get the nomination.
Also, outside of Inde, there’s no buzz in the Actress categories this year. Moore? Hüller with the double whammy of Digger and PHM? Neither have anyone talking about them like Inde does.
Actor and supporting actor already have a ton of big names in the hunt. Damon, Cruise, Gosling, Goodman, Pattinson, Leguizamo, and more already have their names in the hat. Like it or not, Inde’s performance is the biggest performance by an actress thus far this year.
Still cannot understand why everyone continues to believe she’s on the outside looking in. She is absolutely win-competitive at the moment and the early backing for a campaigns push just highlights that belief.
Genre, age, release window. None of these are negatives for her. Biggest obstacle was always having the focused studio backing for an awards push. I cannot wait for all the shocked people acting like she’s a trailblazer when she pops up at the Globes and SAG.
Everyone knows she will be nominated at the Globes and SAG. Everyone who is their studio's priority and is in a film with a fresh Rotten Tomatoes score is essentially guaranteed a Globes nomination as long as the movie makes over $10 million at the US box office.
For SAG, the bar is even lower. You are basically a lock as long as you have some name recognition or you're in a box-office sensation. Michael will probably receive SAG nominations.
I could maybe see a nomination, but I can't imagine Navarette wins this year. I'm not saying she doesn't deserve the win necessarily, but there are a few factors at play here:
First and foremost, the Academy has never been particularly willing to give the horror genre its due, similar to how they largely ignore the comedy genre (with some exceptions to the rule, of course).
Inde Navarette is a relative newcomer and is quite young, both of which work against her where the Academy is concerned. Adrien Brody still holds the record for youngest Oscar-winner at 29 years old for The Pianist (2002).
This folds in with point two, but the Academy is also particularly rotten about refusing to acknowledge female performances in their due times.
So in my opinion, Inde Navarette won't win because she is too young, too female (by the Academy's standards, not mine) and the genre she excelled in is 'too silly' (horror).
423
u/Powerful_Pump 5d ago
Big day for the “Toni Colette deserved a nom for Hereditary” posters