Oscar Nominations 2026: Reactions and Breakdown ft. Daniel Joyaux

1
00:00:00,160 --> 00:00:02,520
Well, hey everybody, welcome
into film and whiskey.

2
00:00:02,520 --> 00:00:05,920
I am Bob Book and I would say
that I'm flying solo today

3
00:00:05,920 --> 00:00:08,560
because my Co host Brad is not
here with me.

4
00:00:08,960 --> 00:00:12,560
But I did not come empty handed.
I brought along a special guest

5
00:00:12,560 --> 00:00:17,160
because today the Oscar
nominations for the 2026 Oscars

6
00:00:17,160 --> 00:00:19,760
were announced.
Thank goodness we are on the

7
00:00:19,760 --> 00:00:23,440
East Coast and I didn't have to
wake up at 5:30 AM to see what

8
00:00:23,440 --> 00:00:25,200
these Oscar nominations looked
like.

9
00:00:25,560 --> 00:00:28,720
But as with every year it seems
now we have a long standing

10
00:00:28,720 --> 00:00:32,200
tradition of inviting our friend
Daniel Zweio to come in and talk

11
00:00:32,200 --> 00:00:34,840
about the Oscars with us.
This is one of probably 2

12
00:00:34,840 --> 00:00:38,240
episodes Daniel will be on as we
get closer and closer to the

13
00:00:38,240 --> 00:00:41,080
Oscars.
Here, he's very rapidly becoming

14
00:00:41,080 --> 00:00:43,800
our official Oscars
prognosticator and

15
00:00:43,800 --> 00:00:45,880
correspondent.
Daniel's joining us from his

16
00:00:45,880 --> 00:00:47,800
house tonight.
Daniel, how's it going, man?

17
00:00:47,920 --> 00:00:48,880
I'm good.
I'm good.

18
00:00:49,000 --> 00:00:50,800
You know what?
I look over this list of Oscar

19
00:00:50,800 --> 00:00:54,320
nominees and I don't see a ton
of surprises here.

20
00:00:54,320 --> 00:00:56,920
I think there's still quite a
bit of storylines that we can go

21
00:00:56,920 --> 00:01:00,120
through that are exciting and
that get me excited for this

22
00:01:00,280 --> 00:01:04,560
Oscar ceremony.
But overall, like this looks

23
00:01:04,560 --> 00:01:06,440
like the list I expected.
Daniel, how about you?

24
00:01:07,680 --> 00:01:12,120
Yeah, I for the most part it is.
I got I think 38 out of 45

25
00:01:12,120 --> 00:01:13,760
predictions right for the major
categories.

26
00:01:14,520 --> 00:01:17,960
There were a few curveballs and
a few things I'm disappointed

27
00:01:17,960 --> 00:01:21,080
by, but for the most part, I
think this is a really good

28
00:01:21,320 --> 00:01:24,920
nomination list and basically
the expected nomination list.

29
00:01:25,600 --> 00:01:28,040
You know, some people might
think it sounds bad when you say

30
00:01:28,040 --> 00:01:29,480
expected like that.
It's disappointing that they

31
00:01:29,480 --> 00:01:32,880
aren't surprised, but ultimately
when the best stuff is expected

32
00:01:32,880 --> 00:01:35,200
to get nominated and then does.
That's that's a good thing.

33
00:01:36,280 --> 00:01:38,920
Absolutely.
You know, and I've always gone

34
00:01:38,920 --> 00:01:42,080
back and forth on using the
Oscars as a gauge for the

35
00:01:42,080 --> 00:01:44,520
quality of a movie year.
The Oscars are known to get it

36
00:01:44,520 --> 00:01:47,440
wrong quite often.
But there is something about,

37
00:01:47,440 --> 00:01:52,200
especially as you look back
30-40 years at what was deemed

38
00:01:52,200 --> 00:01:56,480
important at the time, I think
it really is a window into what

39
00:01:56,480 --> 00:01:58,120
was going on culturally at that
moment.

40
00:01:58,200 --> 00:02:00,680
You know, and we've talked
about, Brad and I have talked

41
00:02:00,680 --> 00:02:04,000
about 1994 so often on this
podcast cause we've done pretty

42
00:02:04,000 --> 00:02:06,640
much every movie, every major
movie from that year now.

43
00:02:07,080 --> 00:02:09,199
And Forrest Gump wins best
picture.

44
00:02:09,440 --> 00:02:12,520
And you know, it like we look
back on it now and it's like, I

45
00:02:12,520 --> 00:02:15,760
can't believe Forrest Gump won
best picture, but America was

46
00:02:15,760 --> 00:02:18,200
really behind that movie at that
moment.

47
00:02:18,200 --> 00:02:22,440
So it's not necessarily a good
gauge of what's considered the

48
00:02:22,440 --> 00:02:24,280
movie with the most artistic
merit.

49
00:02:24,680 --> 00:02:27,680
But at least in the 1990's, the
Oscars were a really good

50
00:02:27,680 --> 00:02:31,560
indicator of where the movie
going public was and what they

51
00:02:31,560 --> 00:02:33,640
wanted to kind of throw their
cachet behind.

52
00:02:34,120 --> 00:02:38,320
And I look at the movies in
2026, I guess, you know, 2025

53
00:02:38,320 --> 00:02:39,800
films that are getting
nominated.

54
00:02:40,680 --> 00:02:43,640
And we've talked a lot, Daniel,
about what the role of the

55
00:02:43,640 --> 00:02:46,840
Oscars is culturally now in the
20 twenties.

56
00:02:47,360 --> 00:02:50,800
But looking through this year in
this list in particular, do you

57
00:02:50,800 --> 00:02:54,200
think that the Oscars are are
siding a little bit more on the

58
00:02:54,200 --> 00:02:58,400
side of artistic merit or
critical favorability?

59
00:02:58,680 --> 00:03:01,280
Or are they kind of swimming
back towards maybe a little bit

60
00:03:01,280 --> 00:03:04,240
more of a populist award the way
it was in the 90s?

61
00:03:05,080 --> 00:03:08,200
I think there's no question that
they swing more artistically

62
00:03:08,200 --> 00:03:11,240
now.
I think the last few years the

63
00:03:11,240 --> 00:03:14,280
Academy's exhibited probably the
best taste it ever has.

64
00:03:14,480 --> 00:03:17,360
I mean, I think it was 2023 that
it that had, you know, maybe the

65
00:03:17,360 --> 00:03:20,200
best, the greatest, best picture
lineup ever, I think.

66
00:03:20,560 --> 00:03:24,840
But you know, this year is an
interesting, it's an interesting

67
00:03:24,840 --> 00:03:27,640
case because you look at the
best picture lineup and

68
00:03:27,640 --> 00:03:31,240
certainly most of it I think
falls into that realm of

69
00:03:31,240 --> 00:03:34,200
choosing artistry.
But then you have something like

70
00:03:34,200 --> 00:03:38,000
F1 getting in over it was just
an accident, which I to me was

71
00:03:38,000 --> 00:03:40,880
the surprise of the day.
Absolutely.

72
00:03:41,120 --> 00:03:42,640
Actually, let's let's.
Pause here.

73
00:03:42,640 --> 00:03:44,880
Let me just read the we'll get
through a lot of these

74
00:03:44,880 --> 00:03:47,640
categories, but let's do best
picture here because I think

75
00:03:47,640 --> 00:03:49,680
this really sets the stage for a
conversation.

76
00:03:50,200 --> 00:03:53,800
I I've talked to a few people
about these nominees today and

77
00:03:53,800 --> 00:03:56,440
it rains ranges from people who
have seen most of these movies

78
00:03:56,440 --> 00:03:59,760
to like your average movie goer.
And I'm asking them, how many of

79
00:03:59,760 --> 00:04:02,960
these have you heard of?
And so here's the 10 nominees

80
00:04:02,960 --> 00:04:09,040
that we got today.
Begonia F1 Frankenstein Hamnet

81
00:04:09,720 --> 00:04:14,080
Marty Supreme 1 battle after
another, the secret agent,

82
00:04:14,440 --> 00:04:18,519
sentimental value sinners and
train dreams.

83
00:04:19,279 --> 00:04:21,279
Now, Daniel, I didn't mean to
interrupt you there, but I do

84
00:04:21,320 --> 00:04:23,760
think that you are you're you're
in the middle of a pretty

85
00:04:23,760 --> 00:04:27,120
interesting point here, because
this is a this is a year that

86
00:04:27,120 --> 00:04:29,440
feels I hate to use the word
schizophrenic.

87
00:04:29,440 --> 00:04:31,520
I don't want to say
schizophrenic here, but it feels

88
00:04:31,520 --> 00:04:36,440
a little bit like I can't find a
good through line to define

89
00:04:36,640 --> 00:04:40,000
where the Academy's thinking is.
Because you're right, a lot of

90
00:04:40,000 --> 00:04:43,840
these are, as they have been in
the past 10 or so years, really

91
00:04:43,840 --> 00:04:45,960
small.
Either independent films or

92
00:04:45,960 --> 00:04:51,160
films with tiny, tiny release
windows and distribution.

93
00:04:51,880 --> 00:04:55,880
But then you've got an F1 thrown
in here and F1, I don't feel

94
00:04:55,880 --> 00:04:58,440
like was on anybody's radar
until just a few weeks ago.

95
00:04:58,440 --> 00:05:00,720
And then all of a sudden there
were these rumblings that like,

96
00:05:01,000 --> 00:05:03,760
hey, it's gonna it's gonna get
in all the technical categories.

97
00:05:03,760 --> 00:05:07,520
And you should really watch out
for Brad Pitt's F1 getting a

98
00:05:07,520 --> 00:05:11,000
Best Picture nomination.
I was absolutely floored by that

99
00:05:11,000 --> 00:05:14,480
one.
Well, I'd say the fact that you

100
00:05:14,480 --> 00:05:17,800
can't find a through line in
these nominees would make

101
00:05:18,040 --> 00:05:21,280
Academy governors happy.
I think that's.

102
00:05:21,400 --> 00:05:24,960
Probably true.
I, you know, back when best

103
00:05:24,960 --> 00:05:29,280
picture was a field of five, you
would often have years where the

104
00:05:29,280 --> 00:05:32,280
five nominees felt like 5 of the
exact same kind of movie.

105
00:05:32,280 --> 00:05:36,120
It was 5, you know, sort of
prestige, star driven, issue

106
00:05:36,120 --> 00:05:41,640
based dramas.
And even in the last decade, as

107
00:05:41,640 --> 00:05:45,480
we've had 10 nominees, it's
actually been 16 or 17 years

108
00:05:45,480 --> 00:05:48,160
now.
I think there have been a lot of

109
00:05:48,160 --> 00:05:52,160
years where, you know, eight or
nine of those 10 nominees feel

110
00:05:52,160 --> 00:05:55,120
like very similar art house
drama type of films.

111
00:05:55,840 --> 00:06:00,880
This year I really think you
have a mix that it was the

112
00:06:00,880 --> 00:06:03,480
Academy's goal when they
expanded the field to 10.

113
00:06:03,720 --> 00:06:07,760
When they did that, the hope was
that you would get big budget

114
00:06:07,760 --> 00:06:11,120
movies and crowd pleasers and
foreign films and in in every

115
00:06:11,120 --> 00:06:13,240
kind of film.
In this year you really have

116
00:06:13,240 --> 00:06:14,360
that.
You've got 2 international

117
00:06:14,360 --> 00:06:16,040
films.
You've got two of the year's top

118
00:06:16,040 --> 00:06:18,920
ten highest grocers.
You've got several star-studded

119
00:06:18,920 --> 00:06:22,920
dramas it this is the type of
Best Picture line up that I

120
00:06:22,920 --> 00:06:25,080
think The Academy Is always
hoped to get.

121
00:06:25,800 --> 00:06:27,560
Absolutely.
Wait, in terms of the size of

122
00:06:27,560 --> 00:06:30,440
the movies and the thematic
elements of the movies, it's

123
00:06:30,440 --> 00:06:34,040
definitely a diverse crowd, but
there's two at the top that I

124
00:06:34,040 --> 00:06:37,280
think it it really has become in
a lot of ways A2 horse race here

125
00:06:37,560 --> 00:06:41,240
and that is 1 battle after
another with 13 nominations and

126
00:06:41,240 --> 00:06:45,400
Sinners, Ryan Coogler Sinners
breaking the Oscar nominations

127
00:06:45,400 --> 00:06:49,920
record with 16 nominations.
Prior record was 14.

128
00:06:50,240 --> 00:06:53,240
This is a huge deal, Daniel.
And again, it's one of those

129
00:06:53,240 --> 00:06:55,000
things that if you've been
paying attention to some of the

130
00:06:55,000 --> 00:06:57,800
rumblings coming out of
Hollywood, people were saying

131
00:06:57,800 --> 00:07:02,000
this could break the record.
But to smash it by 2 is pretty

132
00:07:02,000 --> 00:07:04,680
extraordinary.
And that goes all the way back

133
00:07:04,680 --> 00:07:07,880
to the acting nominations that
it picked up, including one for

134
00:07:07,880 --> 00:07:12,000
Delroy Lindo, who gets his first
Oscar nomination for supporting

135
00:07:12,000 --> 00:07:14,480
actor after years and years of
incredible work.

136
00:07:15,160 --> 00:07:18,560
Just let's talk a little bit
about Sinners, because I think

137
00:07:18,560 --> 00:07:21,520
that you know, it, you could
say, oh, it, it positioned

138
00:07:21,520 --> 00:07:24,280
itself well in the technical
categories and that's where the

139
00:07:24,280 --> 00:07:26,480
bulk of its nominations are.
But that's not true.

140
00:07:26,480 --> 00:07:29,800
It's it's really spread out and
that makes it a really strong

141
00:07:29,800 --> 00:07:31,360
contender here in the Best
Picture race.

142
00:07:32,000 --> 00:07:34,400
Yeah, so a few things.
First of all, I, I saw a few

143
00:07:34,400 --> 00:07:36,560
people on the line today say
like, well, it only broke the

144
00:07:36,560 --> 00:07:39,200
record because the, you know,
the casting category is new this

145
00:07:39,200 --> 00:07:41,040
year.
That's wrong on 2 fronts.

146
00:07:41,280 --> 00:07:43,200
First of all, it broke, it broke
the record by two.

147
00:07:43,200 --> 00:07:45,480
So even if the casting category
didn't exist this year, it still

148
00:07:45,480 --> 00:07:49,160
would have broken the record.
But second of all, the casting

149
00:07:49,160 --> 00:07:51,640
category took the place of what
used to be a second sound

150
00:07:51,640 --> 00:07:53,440
category.
There used to be two sound

151
00:07:53,680 --> 00:07:56,440
categories, best sound, best
sound effects, editing.

152
00:07:56,880 --> 00:07:58,880
Now there's only one sound
category.

153
00:07:59,360 --> 00:08:01,960
If we were still in the days of
two sound categories, Sinners

154
00:08:01,960 --> 00:08:03,280
would have gotten nominated for
both.

155
00:08:03,640 --> 00:08:06,280
So it would have still broken
the record back then too.

156
00:08:07,640 --> 00:08:12,520
And the other part about the
Sinners Hall today and you

157
00:08:12,520 --> 00:08:14,560
touched on this that it got
nominated everywhere.

158
00:08:15,240 --> 00:08:18,000
Is it actually got nominated in
every single possible category.

159
00:08:18,520 --> 00:08:22,360
There are 24 Oscar categories.
The 8 categories that it did not

160
00:08:22,360 --> 00:08:25,440
get nominated are the three
shorts categories, animated

161
00:08:25,440 --> 00:08:28,360
feature, which it's not animated
International Film, it's not an

162
00:08:28,360 --> 00:08:30,400
International Film documentary
feature.

163
00:08:30,440 --> 00:08:32,799
It's not a documentary feature.
Adapted screenplay.

164
00:08:32,840 --> 00:08:35,280
It had an original screenplay.
And then the last one is lead

165
00:08:35,280 --> 00:08:37,520
actress.
Now you can make an argument

166
00:08:37,520 --> 00:08:39,440
that maybe Hailee Steinfeld was
a lead in that film.

167
00:08:39,799 --> 00:08:42,960
I don't really think she was She
was certainly campaigning in is

168
00:08:42,960 --> 00:08:45,560
a sporting role.
So if you adopt the idea that

169
00:08:45,560 --> 00:08:48,920
the film had no female lead,
then it literally got nominated

170
00:08:48,920 --> 00:08:50,520
in every single category that
results.

171
00:08:51,480 --> 00:08:54,920
Yeah, which is, I mean, first of
all, congratulations to Sinners.

172
00:08:54,920 --> 00:08:57,640
And it's a movie that I've been
pretty vocal on this podcast

173
00:08:57,640 --> 00:08:59,840
about the fact that, like, it
didn't work for me quite on the

174
00:08:59,840 --> 00:09:01,400
level that it has for other
people.

175
00:09:01,600 --> 00:09:06,120
That does not mean that it is
not a very rewarding experience

176
00:09:06,120 --> 00:09:08,600
and certainly deserving of the
nominations that it got.

177
00:09:08,880 --> 00:09:11,880
I do wonder a little bit,
Daniel, And I don't want to say

178
00:09:11,880 --> 00:09:15,080
this points to a weak year in
film because it seems to be

179
00:09:15,080 --> 00:09:18,200
unchallenged in a lot of ways
and because of how many

180
00:09:18,200 --> 00:09:21,880
nominations it got.
But I am wondering if the sort

181
00:09:21,880 --> 00:09:28,160
of technical craft of sinners is
enjoying the fact that there

182
00:09:28,160 --> 00:09:32,000
were not a lot of competitors in
terms of like, you know, if this

183
00:09:32,000 --> 00:09:34,040
would come out the year of like
an Oppenheimer where other

184
00:09:34,040 --> 00:09:37,520
things are really, you know,
being filmed in IMAX, the way

185
00:09:37,520 --> 00:09:39,160
that one battle after another
was.

186
00:09:39,400 --> 00:09:42,840
It seems like both of these two
films enjoyed the fact that,

187
00:09:42,840 --> 00:09:46,400
like, a lot of these technical
categories, the ones that we

188
00:09:46,400 --> 00:09:48,640
thought were going to get
nominated just did not show up.

189
00:09:48,640 --> 00:09:51,800
Like, you don't see Wicked for
good showing up at all.

190
00:09:51,800 --> 00:09:53,240
It gets completely shut out
today.

191
00:09:53,680 --> 00:09:57,880
Do you think that those two
films just kind of separated

192
00:09:57,880 --> 00:10:00,760
themselves by the fact that they
had a lot more technical craft

193
00:10:00,880 --> 00:10:03,800
than everything else this year?
Well, as far as the craft

194
00:10:03,800 --> 00:10:07,960
categories go, the single
biggest shock to me today was

195
00:10:07,960 --> 00:10:10,760
that Avatar, Fire and Ash didn't
get nominated for best sound.

196
00:10:11,280 --> 00:10:14,680
Now, it, it didn't get shut out.
It got nominated for visual

197
00:10:14,680 --> 00:10:17,480
effects and costume design.
But for a James Cameron movie to

198
00:10:17,480 --> 00:10:22,280
miss best sound was just I, I
mean, it's, it's basically never

199
00:10:22,280 --> 00:10:24,240
happened before all of his
movies get nominated for best

200
00:10:24,240 --> 00:10:27,400
sound.
So that was a huge surprise.

201
00:10:27,440 --> 00:10:33,680
And it did speak to the idea
that since the best picture

202
00:10:33,680 --> 00:10:40,040
field expanded to 10, voters are
now less likely to search

203
00:10:40,200 --> 00:10:42,560
essentially beyond the 10 best
picture nominees.

204
00:10:43,200 --> 00:10:46,680
You know, once they sort of
decide or once, you know, the,

205
00:10:46,680 --> 00:10:49,000
the punditry sort of decides
like these are going to be the

206
00:10:49,000 --> 00:10:51,560
10 best picture nominees or, you
know, might be 12 or 13 that are

207
00:10:51,560 --> 00:10:53,960
fighting for that.
For those 10 spots, a lot of

208
00:10:53,960 --> 00:10:56,320
voters will kind of just watch
those 12 or 13 movies.

209
00:10:56,720 --> 00:10:58,840
And no matter what branch
they're in, whether they're

210
00:10:58,840 --> 00:11:01,800
costume designers or editors or
visual effects supervisors, you

211
00:11:01,800 --> 00:11:05,640
know, what have you, they'll,
they'll just kind of check boxes

212
00:11:05,640 --> 00:11:09,920
based on those 12 or 13 movies.
And I think we saw maybe a

213
00:11:09,920 --> 00:11:13,080
little bit of that today in some
of the craft branches that they

214
00:11:13,080 --> 00:11:16,080
just nominated the best picture
contenders instead of, you know,

215
00:11:16,080 --> 00:11:17,560
looking for things outside the
box.

216
00:11:17,920 --> 00:11:19,640
And I think it's a little
unfortunate when that happens.

217
00:11:19,640 --> 00:11:20,920
I, I understand it to some
degree.

218
00:11:20,920 --> 00:11:23,480
I mean, you know, you can't
expect Oscar voters to just

219
00:11:23,480 --> 00:11:24,800
watch every movie that comes out
in a year.

220
00:11:25,200 --> 00:11:27,920
That's not reasonable.
They have to figure out, you

221
00:11:27,920 --> 00:11:29,920
know, somewhere where the line
is and how many things they're

222
00:11:29,920 --> 00:11:32,000
going to watch to figure out to
fill out the ballot.

223
00:11:33,160 --> 00:11:37,480
But it does feel a bit like the
major contenders today picked up

224
00:11:37,480 --> 00:11:40,640
some extra nominations just by
virtue of being the major

225
00:11:40,640 --> 00:11:44,840
contenders.
I mean, I think one group of

226
00:11:44,840 --> 00:11:47,000
people that's not complaining
about it at all is Warner

227
00:11:47,000 --> 00:11:50,640
Brothers, the studio that
released both 1 Battle After

228
00:11:50,640 --> 00:11:55,560
Another and Sinners and Weapons,
which picked up 1 nomination for

229
00:11:55,560 --> 00:11:58,360
Amy Madigan.
Which means that Warner Brothers

230
00:11:58,720 --> 00:12:03,080
is currently sitting on top of
30 Oscar nominations this year,

231
00:12:03,320 --> 00:12:07,440
which is insane, especially
given how embattled that studio

232
00:12:07,440 --> 00:12:11,320
has been in the past year.
David Zasloff wanting to fire

233
00:12:11,680 --> 00:12:15,400
both of the heads of the film
development branch and then

234
00:12:15,400 --> 00:12:18,320
deciding in like September that
he's keeping them both on.

235
00:12:18,560 --> 00:12:21,240
So I, I think it's a great
opportunity for them to take a

236
00:12:21,240 --> 00:12:22,880
bow here, but it.
Never.

237
00:12:22,880 --> 00:12:25,440
I mean, it has always come.
The lesson is that David Zasloff

238
00:12:25,440 --> 00:12:27,160
is an idiot who's done nothing
but fail upper.

239
00:12:28,000 --> 00:12:31,960
Yes, and I, I didn't think that
we would end this movie year

240
00:12:32,280 --> 00:12:35,040
with Warner Brothers taking a
victory lap of this sort.

241
00:12:35,040 --> 00:12:38,000
But like, I'm kind of glad to
see it because I have not been a

242
00:12:38,000 --> 00:12:40,520
fan of the direction of that
studio the last couple years

243
00:12:40,680 --> 00:12:43,080
under Zaslob's leadership.
And it's nice to see that the

244
00:12:43,080 --> 00:12:46,200
people at the studio that
actually care about movies are

245
00:12:46,200 --> 00:12:49,680
being rewarded for that.
I agree.

246
00:12:49,680 --> 00:12:53,240
All right, all right.
Daniel, you published an article

247
00:12:53,240 --> 00:12:57,760
today on rogerebert.com and it
featured a word in the headline

248
00:12:57,760 --> 00:12:59,720
that I am not used to seeing You
use.

249
00:12:59,920 --> 00:13:02,520
Eight biggest snubs of the
Oscars this year.

250
00:13:02,520 --> 00:13:04,320
I thought you were famously anti
snub.

251
00:13:04,320 --> 00:13:06,880
Man, what's going on?
I am, I am anti snub.

252
00:13:06,880 --> 00:13:10,920
I did not use the word snub in
the article and sadly, headlines

253
00:13:10,920 --> 00:13:13,080
are not written by writers of
the article.

254
00:13:13,080 --> 00:13:15,840
So whoever wrote that headline,
you know, I, I don't begrudge it

255
00:13:15,840 --> 00:13:20,440
because look, writing is a
quagmire.

256
00:13:20,440 --> 00:13:25,040
It's hard.
I don't, I'm not going to shoot

257
00:13:25,040 --> 00:13:28,200
on anyone for trying to, you
know, maximalize search engine

258
00:13:28,200 --> 00:13:31,680
optimization, you know, if using
it, if using the word snub is

259
00:13:31,680 --> 00:13:33,120
going to.
Get your writing.

260
00:13:33,120 --> 00:13:36,760
Scene then then go for it.
Yeah, 100%.

261
00:13:36,840 --> 00:13:39,800
I do think that the way the
article's written is that it's

262
00:13:39,800 --> 00:13:42,640
all about the big surprises of
the day, you know, both good and

263
00:13:42,640 --> 00:13:44,760
bad.
And I, I, I'd like to just turn

264
00:13:44,760 --> 00:13:46,840
it over to you, man.
You got 8 of them in the article

265
00:13:46,840 --> 00:13:48,040
here.
I don't need you to spoil the

266
00:13:48,040 --> 00:13:49,720
whole thing.
I'd like people to go read it.

267
00:13:50,080 --> 00:13:52,720
But when you think about the
major storylines and the most

268
00:13:52,720 --> 00:13:55,680
surprising storylines of the
day, what really stands out to

269
00:13:55,680 --> 00:13:57,960
you?
To me, the biggest surprise is

270
00:13:57,960 --> 00:14:01,680
it was just an accident which
was the winner of the Palme Dor

271
00:14:01,680 --> 00:14:04,840
at the Cannes Film Festival.
It's an Iranian film by Jafar

272
00:14:04,840 --> 00:14:07,680
Panahi.
As soon as it won The Palm Door

273
00:14:07,680 --> 00:14:11,720
last May, it had been sort of
presumed to be a major Oscar

274
00:14:11,720 --> 00:14:14,880
contender all season.
I mean, it did get 2 nominations

275
00:14:14,880 --> 00:14:15,880
today.
It was nominated for best

276
00:14:15,880 --> 00:14:18,080
International Film and for Best
Original screenplay.

277
00:14:19,120 --> 00:14:22,000
I I think most people assumed it
was also going to be safely in

278
00:14:22,000 --> 00:14:23,480
the best picture field and best
director field.

279
00:14:23,480 --> 00:14:26,200
I was really surprised it didn't
come through in those

280
00:14:26,200 --> 00:14:31,560
nominations, especially given
everything happening in Iran.

281
00:14:31,560 --> 00:14:35,680
And Jafar Panahi's personal
situation is he's there's a

282
00:14:35,680 --> 00:14:38,160
warrant for his arrest basically
as soon as he goes when this

283
00:14:38,160 --> 00:14:41,040
Oscar campaign season is over
and he goes back to Iran, he.

284
00:14:41,040 --> 00:14:43,160
Is.
Probably facing a jail sentence.

285
00:14:45,720 --> 00:14:47,600
It's especially surprising that
it wasn't nominated.

286
00:14:47,880 --> 00:14:50,080
I mean, you were talking at the
beginning of the episode about

287
00:14:50,720 --> 00:14:52,600
the way the Oscars reflect the
times.

288
00:14:53,200 --> 00:14:55,560
And something that's really
amazing to me about it was just

289
00:14:55,560 --> 00:14:59,640
an accident is, you know, the
movie premiered a year ago and

290
00:14:59,640 --> 00:15:02,120
it was, you know, in production
for however long before that.

291
00:15:02,680 --> 00:15:04,960
But you could watch the film
right now and believe it was

292
00:15:04,960 --> 00:15:07,160
written yesterday.
It feels like it's a movie about

293
00:15:07,160 --> 00:15:12,000
ice, basically.
And so I'm really surprised

294
00:15:12,000 --> 00:15:13,840
voters didn't respond to it.
Yeah.

295
00:15:13,840 --> 00:15:17,160
I, it's something I said in my
article is whenever you expect a

296
00:15:17,160 --> 00:15:18,560
movie to get nominated, it
doesn't.

297
00:15:18,800 --> 00:15:20,280
There are basically three
possible reasons.

298
00:15:20,440 --> 00:15:23,000
Either voters didn't watch it,
voters watched it and didn't

299
00:15:23,000 --> 00:15:25,840
like it, or something went wrong
with the campaign.

300
00:15:25,840 --> 00:15:30,280
And that's the interesting
question to me is because the

301
00:15:30,280 --> 00:15:35,720
distributor is because the
distributor Neon was somehow

302
00:15:36,000 --> 00:15:40,040
managed to pick up all five of
the major contenders in for best

303
00:15:40,040 --> 00:15:43,120
International Film and they were
juggling campaigns for all five

304
00:15:43,120 --> 00:15:45,000
of those movies.
It was just an accident,

305
00:15:45,000 --> 00:15:47,840
Sentimental Value, The Secret
Agent, Serrat and no other

306
00:15:47,840 --> 00:15:50,960
choice.
And most of those movies didn't

307
00:15:50,960 --> 00:15:53,000
get as many nominations today as
they hoped to.

308
00:15:53,520 --> 00:15:56,720
And so it makes you wonder if
one distributor trying to

309
00:15:56,720 --> 00:16:01,080
monopolize this sort of entire
strata of the International Film

310
00:16:01,080 --> 00:16:03,400
market is maybe not a great
idea.

311
00:16:04,080 --> 00:16:06,080
Yeah, I mean, they're
cannibalizing themselves at this

312
00:16:06,080 --> 00:16:08,720
point.
And the the interesting thing is

313
00:16:08,720 --> 00:16:15,880
like, it's hard to accuse Neon
of botching the campaign for it

314
00:16:15,880 --> 00:16:18,360
was just an accident because all
the things that could go wrong

315
00:16:18,360 --> 00:16:21,560
with that, you see that it it
worked in the case of

316
00:16:21,560 --> 00:16:23,600
sentimental value and the secret
agent.

317
00:16:23,800 --> 00:16:26,840
Now the secret agent is Brazil's
nominee for the year.

318
00:16:26,840 --> 00:16:30,480
And the Brazilian contingent has
proven itself to be a really,

319
00:16:30,480 --> 00:16:33,520
really strong voting bloc and
like a monolith when it comes to

320
00:16:33,520 --> 00:16:37,840
voting because last year they
were able to get I'm Still here

321
00:16:37,840 --> 00:16:40,760
nominated for best Picture,
which I will say ended up being

322
00:16:40,760 --> 00:16:43,080
my favorite movie of the year.
So I was really glad to see it

323
00:16:43,080 --> 00:16:46,200
reflected there.
But the Brazilians all seem to

324
00:16:46,200 --> 00:16:49,000
vote as a block.
And sentimental value had gotten

325
00:16:49,000 --> 00:16:52,280
this kind of crossover appeal
that everyone kind of assumed it

326
00:16:52,280 --> 00:16:54,160
was going to get nominated for
best Picture.

327
00:16:54,400 --> 00:16:56,960
And so that leaves it was just
an accident in this really weird

328
00:16:56,960 --> 00:17:00,280
spot because it was assumed,
yeah, it'll probably get a best

329
00:17:00,280 --> 00:17:04,560
picture nomination, but it will
probably win international

330
00:17:04,560 --> 00:17:05,960
feature.
At least that's the reporting

331
00:17:05,960 --> 00:17:08,839
that I saw was like, it's much
stronger in this category.

332
00:17:09,119 --> 00:17:11,680
It'll get a nod for best
picture, but it's not really a

333
00:17:11,680 --> 00:17:14,720
player there.
And now that it didn't get a

334
00:17:14,720 --> 00:17:18,359
best picture nomination and two
other international films did,

335
00:17:18,760 --> 00:17:22,200
it might not even be in the lead
to get the international feature

336
00:17:22,200 --> 00:17:23,800
Oscar.
And I think that puts it in a

337
00:17:23,800 --> 00:17:27,640
really precarious position here.
Yeah, I mean, yeah, it's it's

338
00:17:27,680 --> 00:17:30,240
probably going to go home empty
handed an Oscar night.

339
00:17:30,240 --> 00:17:35,680
I mean, sentimental value got 9
nominations and it's up against

340
00:17:35,760 --> 00:17:38,040
the the two categories that it
was just an accident didn't get

341
00:17:38,040 --> 00:17:39,840
nominated in.
It's up against sentimental

342
00:17:39,840 --> 00:17:42,040
value in both of them.
I think you have to assume

343
00:17:42,040 --> 00:17:45,840
sentimental value is probably
the more likely front runner for

344
00:17:45,840 --> 00:17:47,560
international feature and
original screenplay.

345
00:17:48,160 --> 00:17:49,880
So and look, I love sentimental
value.

346
00:17:49,880 --> 00:17:51,640
It's certainly nothing.
It's that film, but it's it's

347
00:17:51,640 --> 00:17:53,000
too bad that it was just an
accident.

348
00:17:53,000 --> 00:17:54,640
Just something fell flat with
voters.

349
00:17:54,640 --> 00:17:58,880
And it's, it's hard to say what
because the film feels so timely

350
00:17:58,880 --> 00:18:01,440
and so potent about what's
happening right now and the

351
00:18:01,440 --> 00:18:04,560
story behind his making.
I mean, Jafar Panahi shot the

352
00:18:04,560 --> 00:18:08,560
film in secret, even on city
streets in Tehran, but with

353
00:18:08,560 --> 00:18:10,880
hidden cameras.
I mean, it's to to make

354
00:18:10,880 --> 00:18:13,160
literally any film under those
circumstances, let alone a, you

355
00:18:13,440 --> 00:18:17,120
know, pseudo masterpiece.
I'm just amazed that voters

356
00:18:17,600 --> 00:18:19,640
didn't respond to it.
Yeah, man.

357
00:18:19,680 --> 00:18:22,680
Now I will offer a quick brief
correction to you.

358
00:18:22,720 --> 00:18:25,800
Neon did not get that fifth
international feature slot,

359
00:18:25,800 --> 00:18:28,440
which people thought was going
to go to No Other Choice.

360
00:18:28,680 --> 00:18:32,400
No Other Choice did get
legitimately snubbed because The

361
00:18:32,400 --> 00:18:35,920
Voice of Hindra Job, Tunisia's
entry for this category did get

362
00:18:35,920 --> 00:18:39,240
in.
Which I personally am very happy

363
00:18:39,240 --> 00:18:42,960
about because in Vulture's
Movies Fantasy League I picked

364
00:18:42,960 --> 00:18:46,000
up The Voice of Hindra Job for
like $2.00 and it is paying

365
00:18:46,000 --> 00:18:49,400
dividends for me right now.
So I'm sorry part Chan Wook,

366
00:18:49,440 --> 00:18:52,320
that the Academy apparently
hates you, but it worked out for

367
00:18:52,320 --> 00:18:54,560
Old Bob and his on his list.
Here.

368
00:18:54,560 --> 00:18:59,200
So like I said, Neon had picked
up for distribution the five the

369
00:18:59,200 --> 00:19:01,080
highest profile international
films of the year.

370
00:19:01,080 --> 00:19:03,880
And one of the big questions was
would one distributor really get

371
00:19:03,880 --> 00:19:05,800
all 5 slots in the best
International Film race?

372
00:19:05,800 --> 00:19:09,000
As you said, no other choice
didn't manage to get a

373
00:19:09,000 --> 00:19:10,720
nomination.
And that also is a pretty big

374
00:19:10,720 --> 00:19:13,360
surprise for me.
I mean, part Chan Wook, who's

375
00:19:13,440 --> 00:19:17,240
pretty lively regard is one of
the the great masters of

376
00:19:17,240 --> 00:19:19,720
contemporary cinema.
I mean, he this is the guy who's

377
00:19:19,720 --> 00:19:22,400
directed Old Boy, the Handmaiden
and decision to lead.

378
00:19:22,760 --> 00:19:24,640
None of his films have ever
gotten a single Oscar

379
00:19:24,640 --> 00:19:26,600
nomination, which is just, it's,
it's astonishing.

380
00:19:27,280 --> 00:19:29,880
Yeah, man.
Now, the nice thing that Neon

381
00:19:29,960 --> 00:19:32,640
can kind of rest its hat on is
that it didn't botch things

382
00:19:32,640 --> 00:19:36,080
worse than Searchlight, because
Searchlight has a movie coming

383
00:19:36,080 --> 00:19:40,480
out in wider distribution today,
the day of Oscar nominations.

384
00:19:40,680 --> 00:19:43,440
And what that tells me is that
they thought this movie was

385
00:19:43,440 --> 00:19:46,160
going to get some nominations
and then they would open and it

386
00:19:46,160 --> 00:19:49,080
would do killer business in the
small number of theaters.

387
00:19:49,240 --> 00:19:52,200
And it's a movie called The
Testament of Anne Lee, which is

388
00:19:52,240 --> 00:19:54,800
a very tough sell to your
average movie goer.

389
00:19:55,000 --> 00:20:00,040
It is a quasi musical about the
Shaker movement starring Amanda

390
00:20:00,040 --> 00:20:02,600
Seyfried.
And from all accounts, it's an

391
00:20:02,600 --> 00:20:06,080
incredible film.
But nobody has seen this movie.

392
00:20:06,320 --> 00:20:09,200
And crucially, it's not just
like John and Jane Doe in

393
00:20:09,200 --> 00:20:11,080
Nebraska that haven't seen this
movie.

394
00:20:11,080 --> 00:20:13,920
I'm seeing movie critics.
I'm seeing Academy voters that

395
00:20:13,920 --> 00:20:16,440
are saying, I couldn't find a
Screener to this.

396
00:20:16,440 --> 00:20:19,800
I couldn't get the link to this.
They just screwed it up so

397
00:20:19,800 --> 00:20:22,160
badly.
That they basically tanked

398
00:20:22,160 --> 00:20:24,800
Amanda Seyfried's chances of
getting the best actress

399
00:20:24,800 --> 00:20:28,120
nomination that most people had
her penciled in for a couple

400
00:20:28,120 --> 00:20:30,720
months ago.
I just, when you've got a movie

401
00:20:30,720 --> 00:20:33,120
like this where you know it's
not going to do hundreds of

402
00:20:33,120 --> 00:20:36,720
millions of dollars at the box
office, it, it's amazing to me

403
00:20:36,720 --> 00:20:38,920
how badly they fumble this
campaign, man.

404
00:20:39,520 --> 00:20:42,160
Yeah, I like I said, I haven't
seen that one yet either.

405
00:20:42,400 --> 00:20:45,680
It it opens where I live
tomorrow, so and we'll probably

406
00:20:45,680 --> 00:20:47,080
see it this weekend.
I'm looking forward to it.

407
00:20:47,160 --> 00:20:49,680
I I expect to like it.
Yeah, for sure.

408
00:20:50,840 --> 00:20:53,920
Let's talk about a couple movies
that your average moviegoer will

409
00:20:53,920 --> 00:20:55,520
have heard of.
And you know, we've already

410
00:20:55,520 --> 00:20:57,640
talked about sinners.
We've talked a little bit about

411
00:20:57,640 --> 00:21:00,400
1 Battle after another.
I want to go through the acting

412
00:21:00,400 --> 00:21:03,720
categories here because there
are some major players and I

413
00:21:03,720 --> 00:21:06,720
guess at the top of the list,
especially in lead actor, you've

414
00:21:06,720 --> 00:21:10,600
got Timothy Chalamet for Marty's
Supreme, who I think at this

415
00:21:10,600 --> 00:21:15,680
point would have to do something
really, really stupid to lose

416
00:21:15,680 --> 00:21:17,520
this race.
It seems to be his Oscar to

417
00:21:17,520 --> 00:21:18,440
lose.
Am I crazy?

418
00:21:19,880 --> 00:21:22,480
You're not crazy in the sense
that that is definitely the

419
00:21:22,480 --> 00:21:25,200
conventional wisdom.
I don't agree with it though.

420
00:21:25,920 --> 00:21:27,880
Oh.
Who?

421
00:21:28,000 --> 00:21:32,200
Who's it going to?
Well, it's a long time between

422
00:21:32,200 --> 00:21:33,800
now and Oscar night, and so I
haven't.

423
00:21:33,800 --> 00:21:35,400
This is by no means a
prediction.

424
00:21:35,400 --> 00:21:37,000
I don't know who I will
ultimately end up predicting.

425
00:21:37,560 --> 00:21:40,400
But something I have been saying
for the last few months is that

426
00:21:40,400 --> 00:21:43,040
if Ethan Hawke can get a
nomination, and that to me felt

427
00:21:43,040 --> 00:21:45,360
like the big if whether voters
would watch Blue Moon, whether

428
00:21:46,160 --> 00:21:48,920
Sony Pictures Classics could,
could mount enough of a campaign

429
00:21:48,920 --> 00:21:51,680
for it.
But I've long thought that if

430
00:21:51,680 --> 00:21:54,360
Ethan Locke could get a
nomination, he's now sort of

431
00:21:54,360 --> 00:21:57,880
reached the point of his career
where it feels like voters want

432
00:21:57,880 --> 00:22:01,760
to give him an Oscar.
And now that he's officially in

433
00:22:01,760 --> 00:22:06,240
the field, I really think he
could kind of become a contender

434
00:22:07,040 --> 00:22:09,240
similar to the way Demi Moore
did last year.

435
00:22:09,240 --> 00:22:12,040
And then Demi Moore ultimately
ended up losing, which was a

436
00:22:12,040 --> 00:22:15,720
huge surprise in Oscar night.
But, you know, for the longest

437
00:22:15,720 --> 00:22:17,640
time it felt like, well, she's
not going to get nominated for

438
00:22:17,640 --> 00:22:19,800
the substance because that's
this sort of gross out body

439
00:22:19,800 --> 00:22:21,880
horror movie and the Academy
won't watch that.

440
00:22:22,080 --> 00:22:24,040
But then as soon as she did
actually get nominated, it felt

441
00:22:24,040 --> 00:22:27,600
like, oh, well, she might win.
And that's how it feels to me,

442
00:22:27,600 --> 00:22:29,360
right?
Well, and I think that's the

443
00:22:29,360 --> 00:22:32,160
thing that people don't realize
still about Academy Awards

444
00:22:32,160 --> 00:22:35,760
voting is yes, this is a global
body, but it is still highly

445
00:22:35,760 --> 00:22:38,400
localized.
And all of these people have

446
00:22:38,400 --> 00:22:41,800
been doing their campaigns in
and around Los Angeles and some

447
00:22:41,800 --> 00:22:43,760
New York appearances for months
now.

448
00:22:44,040 --> 00:22:46,680
So you've got screenings that
are hosted by the film makers.

449
00:22:46,680 --> 00:22:49,360
You've got, you know, the actors
making appearances at

450
00:22:49,360 --> 00:22:53,320
screenings, at little get
togethers on podcast, what have

451
00:22:53,320 --> 00:22:55,480
you.
And so a movie like Blue Moon,

452
00:22:55,640 --> 00:22:59,920
which played for literally one
week in one theater in the area

453
00:22:59,920 --> 00:23:02,080
that I was in and I still
haven't seen it yet.

454
00:23:02,360 --> 00:23:05,120
And that like that should tell
listeners of this show a lot

455
00:23:05,120 --> 00:23:06,640
about the distribution of Blue
Moon.

456
00:23:06,640 --> 00:23:11,040
Like I have not seen this movie.
And and I, you know, I want to

457
00:23:11,040 --> 00:23:15,880
be a purist about the Oscars,
Daniel, and think that if if

458
00:23:15,880 --> 00:23:18,080
Ethan Hawke is to win, it's good
for the Oscars.

459
00:23:18,080 --> 00:23:20,600
It's good for movies because I
want the best performance to

460
00:23:20,600 --> 00:23:22,520
win.
There is a part of me, though,

461
00:23:22,520 --> 00:23:26,680
that's like, you know, this is
like a populist, if not a

462
00:23:26,680 --> 00:23:29,000
populist award.
It's a populist awards

463
00:23:29,000 --> 00:23:31,120
presentation.
It's it's broadcast on

464
00:23:31,120 --> 00:23:33,320
television.
They want the biggest stars to

465
00:23:33,320 --> 00:23:37,120
be up there, especially for the
future of this telecast.

466
00:23:37,440 --> 00:23:40,640
And I just wonder, like, if
Ethan Hawke is able to kind of

467
00:23:40,640 --> 00:23:44,120
swoop in and and get the Oscar
out from underneath Leo

468
00:23:44,120 --> 00:23:47,360
DiCaprio, Michael B Jordan or
Timothy Chalamet, is that

469
00:23:47,360 --> 00:23:50,280
ultimately a bad thing for the
Oscars future?

470
00:23:50,280 --> 00:23:53,800
Well, I, I, I don't know how to
answer that question because I

471
00:23:53,800 --> 00:23:57,240
mean, look, Blue Moon is a movie
is not going to have the

472
00:23:57,240 --> 00:24:00,280
lifespan that one battle after
another or sinners are going to

473
00:24:00,280 --> 00:24:01,600
have.
But something that people also

474
00:24:01,600 --> 00:24:04,920
hate about the Oscars is when
they look back at a career like

475
00:24:04,920 --> 00:24:06,920
Ethan Hawks and say, what do you
mean he never won an Oscar?

476
00:24:07,520 --> 00:24:10,520
Sure, sure.
So it's it's a double edged

477
00:24:10,520 --> 00:24:14,000
sword.
I'm really so as, yeah, I'm

478
00:24:14,000 --> 00:24:17,760
curious, as you were saying it
about the the populism, who

479
00:24:17,760 --> 00:24:23,480
would you feel like if, if
voters wanted to to, you know,

480
00:24:23,480 --> 00:24:26,080
have the populist winner, who
even is that between Chalamet

481
00:24:26,080 --> 00:24:27,560
and Michael B Jordan, Leonardo
DiCaprio?

482
00:24:28,440 --> 00:24:31,200
It's got to be Chalamet at this
point, I think, especially when

483
00:24:31,200 --> 00:24:34,520
you're thinking about the next
generation and the ability to

484
00:24:34,520 --> 00:24:38,040
pass on the Oscars and and hope
that it's in good hands in terms

485
00:24:38,040 --> 00:24:41,400
of viewership.
You know, Leo famously is like,

486
00:24:41,400 --> 00:24:43,560
I hate doing press.
I hate doing interviews.

487
00:24:43,560 --> 00:24:46,440
And yes, he's still maybe the
biggest movie star in the world,

488
00:24:46,440 --> 00:24:48,200
but you know, he doesn't
resonate with Gen.

489
00:24:48,200 --> 00:24:50,520
Z the way he's resonating with
me as a millennial.

490
00:24:50,880 --> 00:24:54,520
Michael B Jordan yes, but like
Timmy's out there campaigning

491
00:24:54,520 --> 00:24:56,760
for this.
Timmy's doing the rap videos and

492
00:24:56,760 --> 00:24:59,120
everything else.
He really desperately wants this

493
00:24:59,120 --> 00:25:01,280
Oscar.
And I think maybe that that that

494
00:25:01,280 --> 00:25:04,320
could be why he won't get it
because they see him kind of

495
00:25:04,320 --> 00:25:05,960
begging for it in a Bradley
Cooper.

496
00:25:05,960 --> 00:25:08,480
I was just going.
To say Bradley Cooper, it's

497
00:25:08,480 --> 00:25:13,400
starting to feel thirsty.
You know, the Academy has 10,000

498
00:25:13,520 --> 00:25:14,560
voters.
I think it's actually more than

499
00:25:14,560 --> 00:25:15,600
that.
I think it's close to 11 or

500
00:25:15,600 --> 00:25:16,320
12,000.
Now.

501
00:25:17,600 --> 00:25:24,120
We don't know the breakdown of
like, so, so a nominee appears

502
00:25:24,120 --> 00:25:27,760
too thirsty.
OK, So what percentage of voters

503
00:25:27,760 --> 00:25:30,480
does that turn off in, in a
voting body of 12,000 people,

504
00:25:31,160 --> 00:25:35,040
does appearing really thirsty?
Is that going to turn off 500

505
00:25:35,040 --> 00:25:37,120
voters, 1000?
Who knows?

506
00:25:37,320 --> 00:25:41,160
Also, who knows how many or how
far ahead Chalonet might be.

507
00:25:41,160 --> 00:25:44,960
Like if he turns off 1000
voters, that still might not be

508
00:25:44,960 --> 00:25:47,480
enough to lose.
On the other hand, maybe he

509
00:25:47,480 --> 00:25:49,560
turns off 500 voters and that is
enough to lose.

510
00:25:49,560 --> 00:25:51,120
We, we just don't know how close
these things are.

511
00:25:51,880 --> 00:26:00,640
So I, I, I, I agree that the
degree to which he, it seems

512
00:26:00,640 --> 00:26:03,280
like he's begging for it, that
that will cost him some votes.

513
00:26:03,600 --> 00:26:07,040
Whether or not it's enough votes
matter, you know it's impossible

514
00:26:07,040 --> 00:26:10,280
to say.
For sure now, as you said, we're

515
00:26:10,280 --> 00:26:14,440
still a couple months out from
the ceremony itself, but it

516
00:26:14,440 --> 00:26:18,120
seems like most of the major
categories, especially the big

517
00:26:18,120 --> 00:26:22,080
six here are kind of sewn up.
And I, you know, I say the Big

518
00:26:22,080 --> 00:26:24,120
6, I don't, I'm not talking
about the screenplays, I'm

519
00:26:24,120 --> 00:26:26,480
talking about all four of the
acting categories.

520
00:26:26,800 --> 00:26:31,080
Best Picture and Best Director
seem to have clear front runners

521
00:26:31,080 --> 00:26:33,080
at this point.
Do you see?

522
00:26:33,360 --> 00:26:36,800
Do you see them going 6 for six
or do you see somebody losing in

523
00:26:36,800 --> 00:26:39,040
these races?
I, I see multiple, multiple

524
00:26:39,040 --> 00:26:44,160
people losing.
I, I agree that there are, there

525
00:26:44,160 --> 00:26:45,800
is the appearance of front
runners.

526
00:26:46,720 --> 00:26:48,160
I think a lot of that could
change.

527
00:26:48,160 --> 00:26:50,920
So I mean, let's, you know,
quickly go front runner by

528
00:26:50,920 --> 00:26:52,840
category.
OK, So best director front

529
00:26:52,840 --> 00:26:54,440
runner is obviously Paul Tom de
Sanders, right?

530
00:26:54,920 --> 00:26:58,120
However, Sinners officially got
more nominations than one battle

531
00:26:58,120 --> 00:27:01,360
after another.
Another factor is that no black

532
00:27:01,360 --> 00:27:02,960
film makers ever won best
director.

533
00:27:03,280 --> 00:27:07,000
I do think that will become a
story over the next six weeks

534
00:27:07,640 --> 00:27:10,080
and that.
Will get more likely though that

535
00:27:10,080 --> 00:27:12,280
that.
See I'm at the point now where

536
00:27:12,280 --> 00:27:16,800
like if if PTA loses another
one, it's going to be like he's

537
00:27:16,800 --> 00:27:19,640
getting into Diane Warren
territory and I could see it

538
00:27:19,640 --> 00:27:23,440
more likely that Sinners takes
best picture and PTA takes

539
00:27:23,440 --> 00:27:25,280
director.
Then I see the opposite app.

540
00:27:25,960 --> 00:27:29,720
So that could happen.
But again, there have been two

541
00:27:29,720 --> 00:27:32,560
films by black film makers that
have won Best Picture. 12 Years

542
00:27:32,560 --> 00:27:34,560
a Slave in Moonlight.
Neither won best Director.

543
00:27:34,880 --> 00:27:38,040
So I think that the narrative
will be very specific about why.

544
00:27:38,040 --> 00:27:40,560
What does the black filmmaker
have to do to win Best Picture

545
00:27:40,560 --> 00:27:43,080
or to win best Director?
And if it's not for a film that

546
00:27:43,080 --> 00:27:47,760
gets 16 nominations, then what?
What could it ever be for?

547
00:27:47,920 --> 00:27:49,080
What?
What's it going to be?

548
00:27:49,280 --> 00:27:50,680
Yeah, that's fair.
That's fair.

549
00:27:50,960 --> 00:27:54,160
And then to your Paul Thomas
Anderson point, I mean, so he's

550
00:27:54,160 --> 00:27:55,440
obviously nominated for best
director.

551
00:27:55,440 --> 00:27:56,720
He's also a producer on the
film.

552
00:27:56,720 --> 00:27:58,960
So he's nominated for best
picture and he's nominated for

553
00:27:58,960 --> 00:28:01,880
best adapted screenplay.
He could win all three.

554
00:28:01,880 --> 00:28:04,120
He could win 2 out of three.
He could win one of the three.

555
00:28:04,680 --> 00:28:07,680
He will certainly win something.
I find it literally impossible

556
00:28:07,680 --> 00:28:09,400
to leave that.
He won't leave Oscar night with

557
00:28:09,400 --> 00:28:12,320
an Oscar.
Whether or not he goes one for

558
00:28:12,320 --> 00:28:14,440
3/2 for three or three for
three, That's a different

559
00:28:14,440 --> 00:28:16,880
conversation.
And I do think Ryan Coogler will

560
00:28:17,000 --> 00:28:20,400
will turn into some serious
competition that will almost be

561
00:28:20,400 --> 00:28:22,480
a toss up by the time we get to
Oscar night.

562
00:28:23,760 --> 00:28:26,320
If I was.
I was going to say, if I was a

563
00:28:26,320 --> 00:28:33,000
betting man, I think Jessie
Buckley in Hamnet is maybe the

564
00:28:33,000 --> 00:28:35,960
most odds on favorite out of
this entire list.

565
00:28:35,960 --> 00:28:38,480
And not because the competition
is not good.

566
00:28:38,880 --> 00:28:40,880
I'm just looking at the other
nominees here.

567
00:28:40,880 --> 00:28:43,360
You got Rose Byrne in.
If I had legs, I'd kick you.

568
00:28:43,680 --> 00:28:46,840
Great win of the Golden Globes.
I don't know if that movie is

569
00:28:46,840 --> 00:28:50,480
going to have like quite enough
juice to carry her to victory

570
00:28:50,480 --> 00:28:52,680
there.
Kate Hudson, a surprise nominee

571
00:28:52,680 --> 00:28:55,320
for Song Sung Blue.
I think she's absolutely going

572
00:28:55,320 --> 00:28:58,400
to work that circuit and she
could maybe, you know, get

573
00:28:58,400 --> 00:29:00,080
herself up into second position
there.

574
00:29:00,480 --> 00:29:06,120
Renata Rainsby for sentimental
value and then Emma Stone semi

575
00:29:06,120 --> 00:29:08,360
surprise.
Not really for Begonia.

576
00:29:08,720 --> 00:29:12,120
I just don't see any of those
four having what it takes to

577
00:29:12,120 --> 00:29:13,560
beat Jessie Buckley for this
one.

578
00:29:14,560 --> 00:29:16,920
So you're right that Jessie
Buckley is definitely the front

579
00:29:16,920 --> 00:29:19,120
runner.
She is one of the safest Oscar

580
00:29:19,120 --> 00:29:23,680
bets on the board right now.
I would not say it's sewn up of

581
00:29:23,880 --> 00:29:25,840
one factor that I've been
thinking about.

582
00:29:26,560 --> 00:29:28,640
So I think her biggest
competition is Rose Byrne.

583
00:29:28,640 --> 00:29:32,320
And I think Rose Byrne really
could win when you compare those

584
00:29:32,320 --> 00:29:34,680
two movies.
And so let's go with the

585
00:29:34,680 --> 00:29:36,560
stereotype that Oscar voters are
lazy.

586
00:29:36,800 --> 00:29:38,200
They're not going to watch
everything.

587
00:29:38,440 --> 00:29:41,320
They're going to, you know,
watch 10 minutes of this movie,

588
00:29:41,320 --> 00:29:43,560
10 minutes of this other movie,
etcetera.

589
00:29:44,560 --> 00:29:47,440
If that happens, think about
Jessie Buckley's performance

590
00:29:47,440 --> 00:29:50,520
versus Rose Byrne's performance.
Jessie Buckley's performance in

591
00:29:50,520 --> 00:29:53,200
hand, that's what sends it home,
is the last 15 minutes of the

592
00:29:53,200 --> 00:29:55,880
movie.
If you don't watch the last 15

593
00:29:55,880 --> 00:29:58,200
minutes of the movie, you will
not think she deserves an Oscar.

594
00:29:58,960 --> 00:30:00,920
Now compare that to if I had
legs, I'd kick you.

595
00:30:01,520 --> 00:30:05,760
To me, the 1st 30 seconds of
that movie are when I wanted to

596
00:30:05,760 --> 00:30:07,880
give Rose Byrne an Oscar.
Wow.

597
00:30:08,400 --> 00:30:11,240
You could literally watch 5
minutes that movie and think,

598
00:30:11,240 --> 00:30:14,160
well, I want to vote for her.
I mean, the the opening shot of

599
00:30:14,160 --> 00:30:17,640
If I Had Legs, I'd Kick you is
just a close up of Rose Byrne's

600
00:30:17,640 --> 00:30:19,960
eyes while she delivers a
monologue and you don't even see

601
00:30:19,960 --> 00:30:21,760
her lips moving.
It's just a close up on her

602
00:30:21,760 --> 00:30:24,920
eyes.
And it's such a stunning intro

603
00:30:24,920 --> 00:30:28,400
to the movie.
And look, if I had legs, I'd

604
00:30:28,400 --> 00:30:31,120
kick you.
It's about the problems of

605
00:30:31,120 --> 00:30:33,160
parenthood.
It's a it's depressing and it's

606
00:30:33,160 --> 00:30:35,760
also funny, but it's depressing
and heavy in a lot of ways.

607
00:30:37,000 --> 00:30:39,440
So I would believe that some
voters won't watch it or won't

608
00:30:39,440 --> 00:30:42,640
watch all of it, but if they
just watched the 1st 5 minutes,

609
00:30:43,400 --> 00:30:46,040
that might be enough if they
don't manage to finish all of

610
00:30:46,040 --> 00:30:47,600
them.
All right, Daniel, as we wind

611
00:30:47,600 --> 00:30:50,200
down today, because I want to
save some meat on the bone, I'd

612
00:30:50,200 --> 00:30:52,720
love to have you back on as we
get closer to the ceremony

613
00:30:52,720 --> 00:30:57,160
itself, maybe to give some final
predictions as you look across

614
00:30:57,160 --> 00:31:00,360
the board here at the Oscar
nominees, is there any

615
00:31:00,360 --> 00:31:03,560
particular movie, you know, that
we have or have not talked about

616
00:31:03,560 --> 00:31:06,000
today?
We didn't end up doing a A10

617
00:31:06,000 --> 00:31:08,000
best of 2025.
So I, you know, like I

618
00:31:08,560 --> 00:31:11,040
absolutely have movies that I
want to suggest our audience

619
00:31:11,240 --> 00:31:14,120
sees if they haven't yet.
But like what are the ones that

620
00:31:14,120 --> 00:31:18,560
stand out to you of I think if I
could recommend this one or two

621
00:31:18,560 --> 00:31:21,440
movies that everybody watched
before Oscar night, it should be

622
00:31:21,440 --> 00:31:22,000
these ones.
Well.

623
00:31:22,120 --> 00:31:25,160
That's a good question.
I mean, in some ways my taste

624
00:31:25,160 --> 00:31:27,840
was really basic this year.
I honestly believe that One

625
00:31:27,840 --> 00:31:31,400
Battle After Another and Sinners
are the two best movies of the

626
00:31:31,600 --> 00:31:32,840
year.
I really liked sentimental

627
00:31:32,840 --> 00:31:34,240
value.
I really liked it was just an

628
00:31:34,240 --> 00:31:36,400
accident.
I really liked Marty Supreme.

629
00:31:36,800 --> 00:31:39,760
I mean, so I'm not exactly
hitting you with hot takes

630
00:31:39,760 --> 00:31:45,880
there.
I would say watch if I had

631
00:31:45,880 --> 00:31:48,200
likes, I'd Kick You for Rose
Burns performance and watch Blue

632
00:31:48,200 --> 00:31:49,800
Moon for Ethan Knox's
performance.

633
00:31:49,800 --> 00:31:54,760
I think those are two smaller
profile movies that, for what

634
00:31:54,760 --> 00:31:56,560
they're nominated for, really
deliver.

635
00:31:57,720 --> 00:32:00,280
I was going to come in here
today and talk about how my

636
00:32:00,280 --> 00:32:04,080
number one movie of last year
was this small film called

637
00:32:04,080 --> 00:32:09,000
Sorry, Baby, which just happened
to win a Golden Globe and got

638
00:32:09,000 --> 00:32:13,280
itself some really, really good
screenplay juice going into

639
00:32:13,280 --> 00:32:15,480
Oscar nominations.
And I was going to recommend

640
00:32:15,480 --> 00:32:17,840
everybody go see Sorry, Baby
because it was my number one

641
00:32:17,840 --> 00:32:19,680
film and then it got shut out
today.

642
00:32:19,800 --> 00:32:24,160
So if I can use the word snub
one time on this podcast, I

643
00:32:24,160 --> 00:32:26,760
think sorry, baby got snubbed.
And I'm going to break my own

644
00:32:26,760 --> 00:32:29,720
rule about the nominees and
suggest that you go see that

645
00:32:29,720 --> 00:32:33,680
unnominated film so that you and
I can share in our misery

646
00:32:33,680 --> 00:32:36,640
together about how good that
movie was and from on the fact

647
00:32:36,640 --> 00:32:39,440
it didn't get nominated.
I will completely cosign.

648
00:32:39,440 --> 00:32:42,080
Sorry Baby is a great movie.
I believe it's streaming on HBO

649
00:32:42,080 --> 00:32:45,280
Max, so anyone listening, you
should absolutely check it out.

650
00:32:45,680 --> 00:32:47,480
And it has the endorsement of
Julia Roberts.

651
00:32:47,600 --> 00:32:49,960
She stood on the Golden Globe
stage and implored people to

652
00:32:49,960 --> 00:32:50,800
watch.
Sorry Baby.

653
00:32:51,200 --> 00:32:53,880
It was a beautiful moment.
Because you want to believe that

654
00:32:53,880 --> 00:32:56,400
these artists are also
discovering art themselves.

655
00:32:56,400 --> 00:32:59,600
And you know, Julia Roberts in
that, in that moment, used her

656
00:32:59,600 --> 00:33:02,920
platform to recommend a piece of
art, and I'm happy.

657
00:33:02,920 --> 00:33:06,680
Shit, Daniel, thank you so much
for joining me today.

658
00:33:06,680 --> 00:33:09,840
Where can people find you for
more Oscars coverage as we get

659
00:33:09,840 --> 00:33:15,040
closer to this ceremony?
I'm on Blue Sky at Third Man

660
00:33:15,040 --> 00:33:18,920
Movies and like you said, I'd do
some some awards writing for

661
00:33:18,920 --> 00:33:21,920
rogerebert.com.
You can see me, I have my

662
00:33:21,920 --> 00:33:25,160
nominations predictions post
there a few days ago and then I

663
00:33:25,160 --> 00:33:27,360
had my reaction to the
nominations and the eight

664
00:33:27,360 --> 00:33:28,680
biggest surprises post there
today.

665
00:33:29,920 --> 00:33:32,320
All right, this is going up in
just a couple hours folks, so

666
00:33:32,320 --> 00:33:34,640
you can get all of your Oscar
news here.

667
00:33:34,880 --> 00:33:37,840
We'll be back really really soon
with another bonus episode

668
00:33:37,840 --> 00:33:40,760
talking about the re release of
the Lord of the Rings trilogy.

669
00:33:40,760 --> 00:33:44,320
Can I interrupt real fast and
and please make and say one more

670
00:33:44,320 --> 00:33:47,720
thing that I thought was
fascinating about today is

671
00:33:48,200 --> 00:33:51,240
people love to talk about Oscar
Bates and people love to talk

672
00:33:51,240 --> 00:33:54,120
about how these you know, you
know, months in advance what's

673
00:33:54,120 --> 00:33:58,280
going to win and this all rubber
stamps and etcetera, etcetera. 4

674
00:33:58,280 --> 00:34:03,200
movies came out in 2025 that I
felt looked like they were

675
00:34:03,200 --> 00:34:05,480
genetically engineered in a lab
solely for the purpose of

676
00:34:05,480 --> 00:34:08,360
getting best actor nominations
and they were J Kelly

677
00:34:09,239 --> 00:34:10,960
Springsteen delivered me from
nowhere.

678
00:34:12,239 --> 00:34:16,520
The smashing Machine and
Nuremberg with Russell Crowe as

679
00:34:17,199 --> 00:34:19,199
a Nazi general.
As Goering.

680
00:34:19,199 --> 00:34:22,719
Yeah, yeah, Goering.
All four movies failed to get

681
00:34:22,760 --> 00:34:25,920
best actor nominations.
None of them were probably even

682
00:34:25,920 --> 00:34:27,719
close.
I mean, it did never seemed like

683
00:34:27,719 --> 00:34:31,480
they were serious in contention.
The Smashing Machine got a best

684
00:34:31,480 --> 00:34:34,080
makeup nomination, but other
than that all four movies were

685
00:34:34,080 --> 00:34:35,760
shut out.
The Springsteen movie didn't

686
00:34:35,760 --> 00:34:38,080
even get a sound nomination,
which is extremely rare for a

687
00:34:38,080 --> 00:34:40,040
music biopic to not even get its
sound nomination.

688
00:34:40,719 --> 00:34:43,800
So I just, I really think if you
look at those 4 movies, you can

689
00:34:43,800 --> 00:34:48,159
see that actually being good
really doesn't matter.

690
00:34:48,639 --> 00:34:53,280
And voters aren't just rubber
stamping bait created to sort of

691
00:34:53,280 --> 00:34:55,760
dazzle them.
And I think that's a good thing

692
00:34:55,760 --> 00:35:00,200
to recognize.
I will reluctantly admit that J

693
00:35:00,200 --> 00:35:03,000
Kelly worked on me and I don't
know why because I went into

694
00:35:03,000 --> 00:35:05,680
that movie and I was like, I got
25 minutes in and I was like,

695
00:35:05,680 --> 00:35:07,680
this sucks, dude.
And by the end of it, I was a

696
00:35:07,680 --> 00:35:10,640
weepy mess.
So I am pro J Kelly.

697
00:35:10,800 --> 00:35:13,440
But but point taken.
Daniel, thank you so much again

698
00:35:13,440 --> 00:35:15,440
for joining us.
We'll be back with the Lord of

699
00:35:15,440 --> 00:35:18,600
the Rings episode just tomorrow.
If you want to find film and

700
00:35:18,600 --> 00:35:21,440
whiskey, you can find us on all
of our social media accounts,

701
00:35:21,640 --> 00:35:25,960
Facebook, Twitter, Instagram,
Tiktok and YouTube at Film

702
00:35:25,960 --> 00:35:28,760
Whiskey, where you can join our
Patreon at three different

703
00:35:28,760 --> 00:35:31,480
levels of support.
You'll be hearing from me and

704
00:35:31,480 --> 00:35:35,040
Brad tomorrow, but until then,
I'm Bob Book and we'll see you

705
00:35:35,040 --> 00:35:35,480
next time.