That's the question this week after "The Revenant" swept the BAFTAs, the British Academy Awards. The frontier drama certainly has the buzz. The momentum is on its side, not just from its five prizes picked up in London -- including Best Film, Best Director, Best Actor (near-lock Oscar hopeful Leonardo DiCaprio), Best Cinematography, and Best Sound -- but also from Alejandro González Iñárritu's historic win a week earlier at the Directors Guild Awards, when the "Revenant" and "Birdman" filmmaker became the first person ever to win two DGA prizes in a row.
But the stats that usually serve as reliable barometers of Academy sentiment? They tend to tell a different story.
And then there's "Revenant's" biggest rival, "The Big Short." It won the American Cinema Editors' ACE Eddie Award. Last weekend, it also won the Best Adapted Screenplay prize from the BAFTAs and the WGA, a feat it's likely to duplicate at the Oscars. "Revenant" isn't even nominated for screenplay, perhaps under the mistaken notion that it's not that big a challenge to write a screenplay that has minimal dialogue. Still, how can a movie win an Academy Award for Best Picture if it's not even a contender for Best Screenplay? That almost never happens, although one of the few times it did was DiCaprio's "Titanic."
The biggest asset "Big Short" has going into the Oscars is its PGA victory. In the award's 25-year history, it's predicted the Best Picture Oscar winner 19 times. In the six years since the PGA adopted a preferential ballot like the Academy's, it's anticipated the Academy victor all six times.
Still, there are some numbers in favor of "Revenant." It has the most Oscar nominations (12), which suggests not only a possible sweep but also enough good will across the Academy's various branches to earn a Best Picture win. And the DGA winner has also won Best Picture 53 out of 67 times.
No director has ever seen two of his movies win Best Picture in a row. But if the momentum for "Revenant" is really that strong, Iñárritu could become the first to reach that milestone. Statistics, after all, aren't ironclad rules, just prediction tools. They're accurate and valid... until they're not.
And there are other strikes against "Big Short" and "Spotlight." Comedies seldom win, even smart, satirical black comedies like "Big Short." Movies without nominated lead performances seldom win, which is another advantage "Revenant" has over its rivals. Finally, there's the foregone-conclusion argument: if the rank-and-file of Hollywood had liked "Big Short" or "Spotlight" more, they would have won more guild prizes and earned more Oscar nominations than they did -- and they'd have buzz as well as numbers on their side. We could still get a Best Picture/Best Director split, like we got twice in the past three years.
One refreshing thing about this year's Best Picture race, aside from how unpredictable it's been, is how little mudslinging there's been. All three of these films are based on historical events, but there's been little grumbling about gross distortions of fact or smeared reputations of real people. That's not to say these movies are scrupulously accurate (they all have taken dramatic liberties), but rather, the focus has been almost entirely on how well each one works -- or doesn't work -- as a movie.
Academy voting ends next week, on Feb. 23. If the voters choose to be influenced by either the buzz or the weight of history, so be it. But at least no one's loudly trying to sway them based on nasty whispers.
from Moviefone News RSS Feed - Moviefone.com http://ift.tt/1oQrkkZ
via IFTTT
No comments:
Post a Comment