u/AdUseful2297

If Sean Penn announced someone else's name when he opened the Best Actress envelope at the 77th Oscars in early 2005, someone who didn't already have a better win under their belt from five years prior, would y'all be saying "Swank should've won again!" or "She already had an Oscar, so I'm glad someone else got their due."

And one more thing to make things clear: You might think I hate Hilary Swank because I've talked multiple times in the past about not being the biggest fan of this win, but I promise you I do not.

I do think this is a very good performance, I just don't think the win itself was very exciting or inspired. (Wow, the only performance in that lineup attached to a Best Picture nominee won? And it was the Best Picture winner at that? Crazy.)

But Swank herself seems pretty nice and chill, I like her. (And I think she's hotter than she gets credit for, thank you very much The Office...)

But back to the question: If someone else in that lineup took it, would you be saying she should've gone two for two, or would you be fine with her only having one win and be glad that someone else got their due that year?

Inspired by his letterboxd reviews of Maestro (2023) and King Richard (2021).

Also it bothers me more than it should that he got the order of Aunjanue Ellis-Taylor wrong in his King Richard review.

Come on, the narrative and momentum for her was right there.

It was her 5th nomination that decade, and happened after losing for Fatal Attraction the previous year. Here she is back yet again with yet another great performance leading another Best Picture nominee, and one that was clearly stronger than Fatal Attraction seeing as Dangerous Liaisons actually won a couple awards that night.

This was the time to give Glenn her moment...

So why did they ignore all that and gave it to Jodie Foster in The Accused instead?

Now look, before you all go accusing me of saying things, Jodie is very good in The Accused, great even, okay?

But Glenn Close was better, and Jodie got a much better win for a much better performance in a much better movie to boot just three years later. Honestly, I think they could've waited three years to give Jodie her moment in favor of Glenn getting her moment here.

(Jodie's kind of the opposite of Hilary Swank in my book. I could live without Hilary's second win, though I agree her first win is pretty good, while with Jodie, I could live without her first win but I won't dare touch her second.)

Geraldine Page in The Trip to Bountiful over Whoopi Goldberg in The Color Purple?

Or Al Pacino in Scent of a Woman over Denzel Washington in Malcolm X?

Julianne Moore taking everything for Still Alice while Rosamund Pike didn't win shit for Gone Girl doesn't sit right with me.

I'm also not the biggest fan of Frances McDormand completely dominating her way to a second win for Three Billboards when Margot Robbie in I, Tonya was right there.

Also, did Philip Seymour Hoffman have to win EVERYTHING for Capote? Obviously he's great in it and I'm glad he got a moment before he left us way too soon, but like, I don't know. It would've been nice if Heath Ledger won something for Brokeback Mountain that season and got to give some kind of major award speech before he left us even sooner, seeing as he wasn't alive to appreciate his sweep three years later.

He did it 14 years before Al Pacino.

But also, in all seriousness, anyone know why Best Picture was announced so abruptly here? (And also during Oppenheimer's ceremony.)

I love Gary Oldman, I'm glad he has an Oscar... but much like Kate Winslet in The Reader, I often ask myself: "Why was Darkest Hour the movie and performance that made the Academy finally decide to give him a win?" (And while I'm at it, why does he only have three nominations, and why did his first not happen until Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy when he was 53?)

It's not a bad movie, I'll give it sound and film editing, and it is pretty well directed, (Coming from someone who's not a very big Kathryn Bigelow fan. Point Break ain't great, sorry not sorry.) but like, it kinda feels like it does the bare minimum? The bomb defusing scenes are great and easily the best parts, and it also has a pretty good atmosphere, but you gotta deal with slow pacing, serviceable but not particularly memorable performances (I'm not surprised the overall strength and popularity of the movie within the Academy at the ceremony didn't help Jeremy Renner win Best Actor), an utter waste of both Guy Pearce AND Ralph Fiennes, and it surprisingly doesn't have a whole lot to say to back up all that it has to show. What planet am I on where it deserved Best Original Screenplay and Best Picture?

I know 2009 was a very weak year for film and all, but surely we could've done a little better, could we?

Looking forward to the remaining 2010s acting winner rankings.

Perhaps for preparation for the later 2010s acting Oscar winner rankings since it was nominated for Best Actress for Annette Bening and Best Supporting Actor for Mark Ruffalo.

He has no problem instantly Avada Kedavra-ing random military grunts and not hesitating to give his other chosen victims from season 4 the claw, which is of course instantly followed by the snap, crackle, pop treatment.

But if it's someone from the party?

Nah, lemme just stand there menacingly over Max for a while. Both the first time he had her dead to rights in Dear Billy, and again and worse in The Piggyback when he stands over her menacingly for even longer... not instantly giving her the claw for whatever fucking reason, to the point where by the time he finally does do it, El is able to stop him before he can apply the finishing move of crushing her skull. 'Cause if he does that, then El can't undo her death three minutes later!

Or when he has Nancy effectively dead to rights but uses her to tell the party his plans instead of crushing her. Imagine if he spoke through her the same way Will spoke through him in Shock Jock, acknowledging that her death won't open the 4th gate but he doesn't care 'cause he's done fucking around and wants her out of the way and WILL open the 4th gate whether it's through Max or someone else they won't be able to find and help, and then gave her the snap, crackle, pop treatment right then and there.

And don't get me started on him gently tossing Joyce to the side instead of telekinetically snapping her neck, or throwing her into the fire, something metal, or one of the wide open Upside Down gates, or skewering her with his Groot arm, or tossing her to one of the demogorgons after he showed zero mercy for all those military grunts less than a minute prior.

Not only that, but he actually SAVES Holly when she's about to go ker-splat! My dude has a NEGATIVE kill count on the party! How is he THIS incompetent?!

I'm starting to think he's just like the Duffer brothers in that he was secretly so attached to the party that he didn't have the balls to kill anyone... which just results in the cast getting bloated, Vecna looking stupid, the writers looking like cowards, and the tension and stakes being borderline non-existent once you realize nothing bad is ever going to happen to the main cast.

These 15 performances made the lineups at the Golden Globes, Critics Choice, SAG and BAFTA, only to miss the Oscar lineup.

1. Leonardo DiCaprio, The Departed (2006 Best Actor)
2. Tilda Swinton, We Need to Talk About Kevin (2011 Best Actress)
3. Marion Cotillard, Rust and Bone (2012 Best Actress)
4. Daniel Brühl, Rush (2013 Best Supporting Actor)
5. Tom Hanks, Captain Phillips (2013 Best Actor)
6. Emma Thompson, Saving Mr. Banks (2013 Best Actress)
7. Jake Gyllenhaal, Nightcrawler (2014 Best Actor)
8. Amy Adams, Arrival (2016 Best Actress)
9. Timothée Chalamet, Beautiful Boy (2018 Best Supporting Actor)
10. Caitríona Balfe, Belfast (2021 Best Supporting Actress)
11. Lady Gaga, House of Gucci (2021 Best Actress)
12. Viola Davis, The Woman King (2022 Best Actress)
13. Margot Robbie, Barbie (2023 Best Actress)
14. Chase Infiniti, One Battle After Another (2025 Best Actress)
15. Paul Mescal, Hamnet (2025 Best Supporting Actor)

Who on this list do you think should have gone all the way? And who would you take out of the actual Oscar lineup that year in favor of them?

People like to point to homophobia as the main reason why it lost Best Picture, but if that many homophobic Academy members hated it that much for obvious reasons, it probably would've really underperformed nominations wise by getting into fewer categories (Which I guess it kinda did by missing editing. Very few Best Picture winners have won without an editing nomination) and then proceeded to go home completely empty handed that ceremony.

Except it clearly didn't. It was still the most nominated movie at the ceremony with eight nominations and won three, including two ATL.

I'm not saying there wasn't any homophobic backlash, there most certainly was, but I think the extent of it is a little exaggerated given that it still got those three wins and was likely the runner up to Crash for Picture.

I think the real question is: Why were they fine giving it all that, (again, including two ATL awards) only to chicken out of giving it the big one?

What if there was no embarrassing envelope mixup and when Warren Beatty and Faye Dunaway announced La La Land as the winner of Best Picture, the producers didn't stop to correct them because that's what actually won?

How would a La La Land Best Picture win have looked in the moment, and how would it have aged in the years since?

And why is it Death Becomes Her (1992)?

He made Dial of Destiny, which James hasn't talked about much on the channel before, unlike the first four that Steven Spielberg directed...

And you know, he made some other stuff too.

Who that has multiple nominations but hasn't won would you say their first nomination was also their best nomination or the best time to give them one?

Or, for those who ended up winning later, whose first nomination was better than what they ended up actually winning for?

I think these six should've been able to follow in the footsteps of Kathy Bates, Nicolas Cage and Charlize Theron and gotten their moment on their first try.

1. Junebug was Amy Adams's first and best nomination, and I do think I slightly preferred her to Rachel Weisz in The Constant Gardener.
2. Judi Dench in Mrs. Brown > Judi Dench in Shakespeare in Love
3. Need I say more about Ralph Fiennes in Schindler's List?
4. I think Cinderella Man would've been a good time to give one to Paul Giamatti.
5. Julianne Moore in Boogie Nights > Julianne Moore in Still Alice
6. Gary Oldman in Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy > Gary Oldman in Darkest Hour

Of all 21 Meryl Streep nominations, most of which are in fact good and deserved mind you, Music of the Heart (1999), Into the Woods (2014) and Florence Foster Jenkins (2016) are the worst offenders by far. No one on the planet would complain if those three didn't happen.

Her getting into those lineups for those performances in those years when there were in fact better and more inspired alternatives from actresses not named Meryl Streep (Reese Witherspoon in Election for 1999, Rene Russo in Nightcrawler and Jessica Chastain in A Most Violent Year in 2014, Amy Adams in Arrival, Annette Bening in 20th Century Women and Taraji P. Henson in Hidden Figures in 2016) is definitive proof that the Academy loved her way too much back in the day.

She could've gotten completey ignored for those three, and should have in the first place, and STILL would be the most nominated actor/actress in history, so yeah.

These trailers were freaking awesome and set my and everyone else's hype and excitement levels through the roof.

So why did the actual season 5 these things promised end up being so... not awesome for the most part?