2/1 OSCARWEB ROUND-UP: Wolverine, Iron Man to present, ‘Superman’ snub “reverse McCarthyism,” Franco’s class

Posted by · 8:27 am · February 1st, 2011

Greg Ellwood shrewdly notes potential motive to announcing Wolverine (Hugh Jackman) and Iron Man (Robert Downey Jr.) first as presenters at this year’s Academy Awards. [Awards Campaign]

Tom Hooper and Geoffrey Rush respond to the notion of cutting “The King’s Speech” to appease a PG-13 rating. [Inside Movies]

“Master Class: Editing James Franco…with James Franco meets on Thursday afternoons weekly.” [Movieline]

Kyle Smith chalks the “Waiting for Superman” Oscar snub up to “reverse McCarthyism.” [New York Post]

Patrick Goldstein responds, though misrepresents the eligibility issue of “Fahrenheit 9/11” (which was actually not submitted for consideration as a documentary in order to capitalize on Best Picture potential). [The Big Picture]

Harvey Weinstein goes on the record with Mike Fleming. [Deadline]

Kyle Buchanan, knowing only of a season with Weinstein as snake charmer, apparently, lampoons it as a talking points memo. [Vulture]

Scott Feinberg believes that not predicting “The Social Network” for Best Picture when it was sweeping the critics “would have been impossible to justify with anything more than just a gut feeling.”  I’m guessing he wasn’t talking to Academy members. [ScottFeinberg.com]

Alec Baldwin remembers Oscar-winning film music composer John Barry, who passed away Sunday. [Huffington Post]

[Photo: ABC]

→ 8 Comments Tags: , , , , , , , , | Filed in: Daily

8 responses so far

  • 1 2-01-2011 at 8:33 am

    Zack said...

    It’s always hilarious when wingnuts get butthurt over Oscar snubs that they claim were politically motivated. Anyone remember in 2005 when that Media Research Center douche was saying that if Hollywood had their finger on the pulse of Real ‘Murika, they’d give Best Picture to “The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe”?

  • 2 2-01-2011 at 8:49 am

    kel said...


    It’d be interesting for you to write an article about the 2 different types of performances: loud and “out-there” (Melissa Leo, Christian Bale, even Colin Firth when he shouts [a “must” to win an Oscar]) vs subtle (Geoffrey Rush, Jacki Weaver, Mark Ruffalo).

    I feel that despite Leo and Bale’s likely wins in the supporting categories, this year has been good for those nice, low-key, usually not Oscar worthy subtle performances.

    Art Carney and Adrien Brody both won Oscars for oh-so subtle performances.

  • 3 2-01-2011 at 9:56 am

    Scott Feinberg said...

    You’re guessing wrong Kris. But regardless, when you’re talking to 600 Academy members — which is what a representative sample of the overall Academy would be — let us know.

  • 4 2-01-2011 at 10:06 am

    Kristopher Tapley said...

    The truth is the truth, Scott. Of course I’m not talking to that amount of people, but in La La Land, you take what you know from your own reporting, talk to others doing the same in their circles, and so on, and so on, and you come up with one constant: They love “The King’s Speech,” they don’t love “The Social Network.” So there’s no “gut feeling” to it.

    This is something that was reported consistently in my podcasts with Anne, by the way. It’s not 20/20 hindsight talking.

    For my part, the “gut feeling” came when, despite the reporting, despite everything I was hearing, I simply thought the Academy would feel strong-armed into voting the critics’ path, or more likely, that they would want to appear relevant by not missing the boat.

    My gut feeling was wrong. I should have stuck to the original reporting.

  • 5 2-01-2011 at 10:20 am

    Maxim said...

    “when you’re talking to 600 Academy members — which is what a representative sample of the overall Academy would be — let us know.”

    Not too big on statistics are we, Scott?

    May I suggest you look up a term called “random sample” and THEN come back to us?

  • 6 2-01-2011 at 10:24 am

    Maxim said...

    Heck, I think I’ll take it one step further, where did the number 600 come from? Is that how many #1 votes or whatever, is needed to win an Oscar in that category? Is that what a representative sample is to you?

  • 7 2-01-2011 at 3:41 pm

    Derek 8-Track said...

    Also i feel like The King’s Speech prediction could be made based on Oscar history. I made the prediction back in September by the trailer alone. While its no guarantee and may not get you very far, a long history of “Oscar Movies” winning is still something to consider when making a prediction.

  • 8 2-03-2011 at 7:58 am

    Maxim said...

    I think Scott is foundamentally wrong in denying Kris the ability to see a film like King’s Speech, see reaction to it and make a prediction that it’s going to win, a prediction that it more than just a gut feeling. Those who rely just on precursors are not really taking the best possible approach to “predicting”, so much so that I wouldn’t even call it that.