comment #1

Luke Y. Thompson says ...

For people whose principal gig is simply Oscar prognostication, I don't think their personal aesthetics are a big part of the equation. Rather, they're writing as if analyzing a competitive sport.

For you and writers with a wider range of coverage, it's a little different -- you're in it more for the love and analysis of the movies themselves.

Saying "I know as much if not more than your average Academy person does about what's good and what isn't and what will live on" may be true...but it also means that the Academy will likely pick different (inferior) choices than you. And you are exactly the sort of writer who should be championing with the heart, but someone whose sole gig is prediction and analysis should probably not.

comment #2

Jamieson says ...

I was just saying that Poland's charts represent predictions, you're talking here about the bigger picture, which is fair. A prognosticator by definition is someone who makes predictions based on what they observe.

comment #3

Jamieson says ...

I'll add that I say that as someone who enjoys reading this site and the sites of many of the authors you mentioned above. Again I point to what your complaints have largely been directed at, Poland's charts, which as I stated represent those people's predictions. You were faulting your peers for not standing "against the rest" when really they were just faring predictions rather than listing their favorites. I don't see any fault in them doing so in the context of Poland's Gurus of Gold.

comment #4

bmcintire says ...

Or maybe they just really don't like Soderberg's bio of Che very much. They would not be alone.

I haven't seen it yet, but I'm not exactly itching to do so.

comment #5

gruver1 says ...

Wells to Jamieson: What a nothing thing it is to sit around and try and figure what certain entitled professionals, some of whom don't know or care about movies as much as I do and who've historically voted for the lamest and most deplorable of motives, will say in two voting procedures. Bleccch! There is a time for pure prognostication, but not now. Now is a time to mix it up and truly proclaim what's great and what matters.

comment #6

Doug says ...

Aside from the voters, the studios/distributors are the ones who most determine Oscar nominees - based on release dates and which movies and performers they decide to campaign for.
Anyone can be an Oscar prognosticator. Just look at the release schedule for November and December, eliminate anything that's not a drama, and there you have about 80% of your nominees in the top categories.

comment #7

Edward says ...

Here, here. I agree with you on this Jeffrey. It is time to "proclaim what's great and what matters."

comment #8

Jamieson says ...

Hey man, I say if that's what you want to do power to you. I agree with your feelings on AMPAS but again I was only pointing out why the Gurus o Gold look the way they do.

The context of my original post was meant to say that you were misconstruing your peers' motives in omitting (so to speak) someone like Jenkins from their top 5 predictions. I don't believe that all of those prognosticators who did so don't feel that it's unworthy, or maybe they do, who knows.

It's your prerogative to step out of line with the traditional line of prognostication and again I say power to you if that's how you wish to play it, but there's no need to take swipes at people who are simply putting their predictions out there and banging the drum for their favorites in the context of op-ed pieces or whatever instead of the Gurus o' Gold. If you wish to bang said drum in your prognostication, by all means do. That's all I was saying really.

comment #9

Sasha Stone says ...

What's great and what matters is, of course, in the eye of the beholder. What you are is an advocate -- you push movies and actors and hope to influence the Academy. My experience is that you can't really influence them. The more you shout at them what they SHOULD vote for the more they dig their heels in and vote for whatever they damned well please.

Having said that, it's virtually impossible to predict without the heart getting involved, or the head or whatever, which is why when you predicted Crash to be in the top five back in November of that year you were right -- you went with your heart and you happened to be on the money.

I'm not in the business of advocating, or I try not to be. Lord knows a few slip in here or there but the purpose or aim is to predict, not to influence and not to get caught up in wishful thinking. It's a silly and stupid game that means nothing, really, except when your heart gets involved.

comment #10

Jamieson says ...

Well said as always, Sasha.

comment #11

Breedlove says ...

Wow - I remember Sasha's dramatic retirement from this site, must have been a year or so ago, over some slight which I can't recall. She's back!

comment #12

Sasha Stone says ...

Na, I just decided to post with my actual name for a change.

comment #13

Deathtongue_Groupie says ...

Wonder how much higher Jenkins and Leo's chances will be after an Obama victory? Wonder if the "New Seriousnes" or whatever the pundits will dub this coming era will cause critic groups and the Academy to dig deep to reward the performances and avoid the star-fucking that most these things have become.

comment #14

p.Vice says ...

Ah, we haven't gotten an "I desperately need to pound my chest and justify my meaningless existence" post for a while. Long overdue, IMHO.

comment #15

Edward Havens says ...

I'd be interested to see if there is a correlation between the rise of the self-described "Oscar prognosticator" bloggers and the decline of the Oscar telecast ratings. So many people going on about Oscar this and Oscar that, sure shots this and dark horses that, I'd be little shocked if the collective had Oscar burnout by the time the fuckers finally rolled around.

Remember about seven or eight years ago when Patrick Sauriol and a few others were trying to get an code of ethics for online journalists going? God, I wish we had that, and I wish one of the codes was "no talk about Oscars until the NBR gives out the first awards of the season." I'm already sick of Oscar and the season's only begun.

(And for the record, so some people don't get bent out of shape... this is not a specific attack on any person or any site. I just think all the coverage is deep in overload area, and I would rather have five incredible sites that talked Oscar instead of a few good ones and a thousand really lousy ones.)

comment #16

Sasha Stone says ...

Edward Havens, I've been at this going on ten years now and when I started there were only two. I have no idea why the industry grew the way it did. And there hasn't seemed to be any correlation between the ratings and the blogs in either direction. What the effect has been, I think, is that the blogs steered the Oscar race in a different direction, away from the mainstream and big studio output, which in turn meant that the films in the race weren't really the popular films - without popular films in the race no one really cares much about the Oscars except the tiny little group that does. Just a theory.

comment #17

Edward Havens says ...

As I said Sasha, I wasn't singling anyone out. But I do believe there may be a correlation. Look at television. Television viewership had been on a decline long before the internet and VHS/DVD/Blu-Ray and home videogame systems. The decline in viewership began with the increase in the number of channels available to the consumer. As more and more cable channels became available to people, it became harder and harder to find quality programming. Bruce Springsteen didn't know what he was onto when he wrote "57 Channels and Nothing On" in the early 1990s. Now we have ten times as many channels, and people all over the country are canceling their cable subscriptions because it's not worth $80-100 per month for one good show on AMC and one good show on Showtime and one good show on Animal Planet. Sure, I sometimes miss seeing Robert Osborne two or three times a week on my screen, but the savings benefit of not having cable far outweighs what few benefits it gave.

I think you do a fine job on Awards Daily. I've never had a beef with you and you've always written nice things when I do my annual Oscar odds charts the weekend before the final verdict. I just wish we as a community of webmasters could come to some kind of agreement to have certain sites handle certain things. Do we really need several handicapping the Oscar handicappers charts, especially when most of the same people are on every chart? Let Tom handle one thing, and Sasha something else and Kris another and Jeff this and David that, instead of fracturing the potential audience by giving them basically the same thing at every turn?

It's a pipe dream, I know. I'm just depressed that I am finding my love of cinema sucked out of my soul every winter. Hopefully, tonight's screening of Milk will recharge my batteries for a few days.

comment #18

EDouglas says ...

I agree with Havens... and thanks Wells for continually ignoring my efforts every year. No, I don't spend every single day of every month every year trying to predict the Oscar race, but that's because I go about it the same way I do my weekly box office column which you also completely ignore. That's because I'm an actual prognosticator, someone who actually waits to analyze something (like an Oscar race) until there's enough facts and data on the table to analyze, which there haven't been until last week as far as I was concerned. But see, I don't feel the need to have my own blog to get my opinion out there because when people want my opinion, they just ask me...this includes filmmakers, publicists and studio heads... because I won't be spinning everything based on my own personal biases as you do. It's gotten to the point where ALL of the johnny-come-lately prognosticators (every site has to have one apparently) are a fucking JOKE because they're not basing their opinions on anything except throwing anything out there that might stick. I'm so glad you don't read my column or anything I write because I wrote a nice rant about this in today's column, which I know you won't read.

comment #19

janee says ...

Si vous etes interesses par le dossier, ou desirez en savoir plus, contactez-moi par mail, et je vous mettrai en contact.
Best regards,Jane, CEO of sql server high availability