Saturday night the Screen Actors Guild Awards will go down, televised on TNT, and I can’t really believe the race is THIS sewn up. Right down the line, most are calling it for Bridges, Streep, Waltz and Mo’Nique. There are some differences of opinion on the ensemble performance category, but for the most part, those four Oscar favorites are the expected victors with the guild.
The last time SAG went four-for-four with the Academy’s ultimate winners was 2004. The last time before that was 1997, which actually featured a tie between Gloria Stewart and Kim Basinger, so it’s a bit less definitive. And in point of fact, those are the only times things have matched up.
The reason for this is fairly simple. The Screen Actors Guild (a 90,000-member body of people) votes for the winners at large, while the nominees are decided upon by a roughly 2,000-member nominating committee, 1,200 of them based in Los Angeles. The nominating committee obviously sees more of the contenders than the vast membership. For that reason, generally speaking, you can expect the unexpected.
There will be a number of post-Golden Globes parties tonight — Summit, Warner Bros., Fox, Weinstein, etc. — but a pair of studios did it up Saturday night in honor of their nominees.
And, there we are.
You may well disagree, but I’ve never really understood the point of awards bodies that define themselves along racial lines.
It’s interesting that David Carr’s
With the
The USC Libraries has announced its list of contenders for the Scripter prize, which honors adapted screenplays, their writers and the source materials and authors that spawned them.
As I like to do when Kris boldly throws out a set of
I gave this an
•
Wrapping up my perspective on the year today, a personal list of superlatives, Oscar categories and other silly nonsense.
There wasn’t much in the way of a surprise with this year’s Screen Actors Guild announcement. The nods that are least likely to translate to Oscar, if I were a betting man, are Diane Kruger’s supporting actress bid for
Normally, I’m against critics’ groups bothering with nominations. Just cut the crap and give us your picks — you’re not that anticipated, after all.
Of what he’s seen, that is. He hasn’t seen