• Claude Brodesser-Akner reports that a Sacha Baron Cohen Oscarcast sketch has been nixed to spare James Cameron’s feelings. It was a dumb idea anyway. [Vulture]
• Steven Zeitchik on what I’ve been saying until I’m blue in the face: Meryl Streep’s silence has done her no favors during phase two, while Team Bullock continues to steamroll. [The Envelope]
• Steve Pond tells us what happens to the ballots now that the deadline has come and gone. [The Odds]
• Elsewhere it’s all “Hurt Locker,” all the time. Here, Dave Karger writes up the perceived backlash, a dubious claim at best, but certainly something people are talking about (because there’s nothing else to talk about). [Oscar Watch]
• In response, as usual, David Poland knows something you don’t know, bangs the corporate gong for “Avatar” one last time, but generally does right by noting there is no considerable impact a “backlash” could have. [The Hot Blog]
• Regarding Nicolas Chartier, Sasha Stone does a nice job of pointing out, in so many ways, how full of shit the Academy actually is. [Awards Daily]
• And the scolded producer gets to have a private viewing party. Awwww. [Deadline Hollywood Daily]
• Finally, some craven soldier wants his cut. [The Big Picture]
Comments
14 responses to “3/3 Oscarweb Round-up”
Who cares if Meryl is silent, if they want to give her they give her. You shouldn’t have to be sucking up to the academy to get an award. Bullock is the worst performance out of the nominees, but she might get it for sucking up. Heck that’s how Paltrow got it for Shakespeare in Love, a big WTF moment for me.
Do you think Meryl wants Sandra Bullock to win? She seems to like her a lot as a person……
I think being silent for the past weeks is the strategy of Meryl Streep’s campaign… And I have a feeling she’ll win on Sunday..
God, I am so SICK of David Poland.
I don’t recall Katharine Hepburn campaining for Oscar. Hell, she never bothered to go the Oscar ceremonies. She won 4 awards. Streep has never been big on campaigns. Streep will win or lose based on factors other than campaigns. I know Sony placed a huge ad in Variety which let the academy know she has lost 11 times straight.
This is a different Oscar climate than the one that yielded four wins for Hepburn. It doesn’t matter who you are. You win by getting out there and glad-handing, simple as that.
But then there’s Monique, the anti-glad hander. Kris, who do you think has had the most active and least active campaigns in each acting category?
“This is a different Oscar climate than the one that yielded four wins for Hepburn. It doesn’t matter who you are. You win by getting out there and glad-handing, simple as that.”
Jack Nicholson doesn’t have to do that. I suspect it’s different for women.
I’m not Kris, but I’d say Bullock, Bridges, Waltz and Gyllenhaal have been the most active.
Mirren, Firth, Tucci, Cruz the least active. And it’s no coincidence that the two ladies are recent winners in the their categories.
Sidibe, Mulligan and Renner haven’t exactly been slouches either.
And Mo’Nique and Tarantino/Basterds have had the best campaigns of them all.
I think Streep has an advantage of being “legendary” and she does not have to campaign.
I have the feeling that Meryl is going to win.
Hope Iam right
This really isn’t news worthy, just a mention, but Cablevision and ABCs new york affiliate are having a falling out, and apparently ABC goes off the air….this saturday. ugh. So, I guess I miss the oscars, along with about 3 million others. great.
Meryl Streep should never have to campaign for ANYTHING related to acting. Plus, she honestly may not give a shit about winning.
I think it’s pretty disgusting for you to call the soldier in the Hurt Locker case “craven.” I mean, WTF? I kind of feel like you should be ashamed of yourself. You just called a man cowardly who spent time in Iraq defusing bombs. Five times more likely to die than your average soldier, isn’t that the line? And now that he feels like he’s been exploited by an opportunistic journalist, he’s suddenly “craven.” I’m not a big fan of the military, generally, but this remark is completely out of line.