MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland

What SAG Says…

In the last five year, the following people have received Best Actor Oscar Nominations without having received a SAG nomination:

2003:  Jude Law, COLD MOUNTAIN

2002:  Michael Caine, THE QUIET AMERICAN

2001:  Will Smith, ALI

2000:  Javier Bardem, BEFORE NIGHT FALLS

            Ed Harris, POLLOCK

1999:  Richard Farnsworth, THE STRAIGHT STORY

            Sean Penn, SWEET AND LOWDOWN

They’ve missed every year, at least once. And five of the eight performances are from indie films, with The Straight Story, although released by Disney, very much in the same vein. 

Yet SAG has been a much better predictor in the Best Actress category, missing only three Academy nods in the last five years… two last year.

2003:  Samantha Morton, IN AMERICA

           Keisha Castle-Hughes, WHALE RIDER

2001:  Nicole Kidman, MOULIN ROUGE

Two indies and three foreigners.

The closest SAG got to a low-profile indie nominee this year was Catalina Sandino Moreno.

And by the way… the track record of SAG winners winning The Oscar… much worse.  That said, none of the Oscar winners in that five years have failed to grab a SGA nod first.

Be Sociable, Share!

30 Responses to “What SAG Says…”

  1. bicycle bob says:

    another excuse for an awards show. they’re tv awards are a joke

  2. Paul says:

    So will Bardem do it agian?

  3. joe says:

    I cant believe finding neverland and ray got nominated for best movie or whatever its called. Are they really oscar contenders? Eternal Sunshine isnt nominated and neither is Kinsey, I CANT BELIEVE IT!
    And catalina Sandino Moreno deserves an oscar nomination indeed.

  4. Mark says:

    Bardem will get in over Depp.

  5. joe says:

    Oh! and Javier will do it agin, It will be a shame if he isnt nominated, I think he is already a lock.

  6. Joe Sullivan says:

    I agree Bardem will get the nod over Depp, or possibly Neeson over Depp, but I’m 90% sure Bardem will get it. And he totally deserves it.
    But the one category that will be the oddball, per usual, is Best Supporting Actress. I doubt Winslet will get nominated in both categories. I think Blanchett and Madsen are the only locks there. The other three spots are anyone’s guess. I think it’ll be Laura Linney, Natalie Portman and…Regina King from Ray. That’s my bet.

  7. Mark says:

    The female awards are always a crapshoot, especially supporting. Who would have thought Scarlett J would get passed over last year? Winslet is my choice as a lead.

  8. Josh Massey says:

    Joe, I would call Portman a lock as well.

  9. Joe Sullivan says:

    I think Portman is a near lock. But she wasn’t nominated for the SAG, and the movie has kind of fizzled since it’s release. Clive Owen seems to have a better shot. A lot of predictors think Depp and Portman are locks at this point, but I disagree. However, I won’t be at all surprised if he/she does get the nod.

  10. Dan R% says:

    Catalina Sandino Moreno’s nomination makes me quite happy…about the best news I’ve read all day…

  11. Martin says:

    who the fuck is that? I hate it when these assholes nominate people I’ve never even heard of.

  12. Martin says:

    To the guy that said Portman, you’re fucking stupid. All I read was bad stuff about her performances in GS and Closer. She’s like 1000 to 1 at this point. Better put your bets on the Spaniards. The outta nowhere votes go to those guys. (someone owes someone something)

  13. mex says:

    laura linney
    natalie portman
    virginia madsen
    sophie okonedo
    kate winslet
    or rays mom.
    javier bardem
    leonardo dicaprio
    don cheadle
    paul giamatti
    jamie foxx
    or liam nessom

  14. KamikazeCamel says:

    What on earth is Martin on about? Catalina is from Maria Full of Grace (if you can’t read) and while it is a foreign language film it is indeed American (it was in AFI’s top 9) and Natalie Portman is actually, along with Clive Owen, getting the best press out of Closer.
    I don’t know what you’re reading.
    But, anyway, those SAG lists are so boring! Especially Actor and Ensemble! Whoa… I personally don’t actually think Depp will be nominated. The Academy don’t actually seem to like Depp THAT much and they gave him an obligitory nomination last year. I still think Neeson is more respected and will get in. And I also thought Javier Bardem had a shot but I wouldn’t know who to knock out…
    And, obviously the SAG nominated Cloris Leachman before it was released and everyone realised it was a flop, right?

  15. Neal says:

    Really, really shocked that Closer was shut out here. Martin must have his head up his ass because she’s been getting a lot of good reviews for this performance. Where is this bad press you’re talking about? And have you even seen the damned film? Honestly, I loved Cate Blanchett, Virginia Madsen, Sharon Warren, and Laura Linney, but did any of those actresses plumb the depths that Natalie did in Closer? I really don’t think so. I know the award shouldn’t be judged on screen time, but I just think her performance covered so much emotional territory, from reeling in Jude Law to taunting Clive Owen to sizing up Julia Roberts. And the ending of the film calls into question everything that her character has said and done, which adds another layer. It’s sad because I think she’s getting unjustly penalized for being in the Star Wars films.
    One other thing, Clive Owen puts to shame everyone else in the supporting male categoryr. Thomas Hayden Church was great, but this one really shouldn’t even be close. Church just played a horny jerk, while Owen gave us a total psychopathic asshole in a million shades of grey.

  16. KamikazeCamel says:

    Oh, and another thing, SAG did nominate Keisha Castle-Hughes… just in a different catagory. Like when they nominated Jennifer Connolly for Best Actress.
    So that sort of makes the actress differences even smaller because if Connolly had been in supporting like she was at the oscars I’m sure Nicole would have gotten in. And if Newmarket weren’t so intent on having the lead character of Whale Rider nominated for Supporting then the amount would be smaller still.

  17. bicycle bob says:

    hey marty relax a little. portman was great in closer and in garden state and shes gonna get a nom for closer. so take that

  18. Joe Sullivan says:

    I suppose this is silly to say…
    I posted that Portman was not a lock for Supporting Actress, but I never said I didn’t think she deserved it. All of these predictions we post are somewhat based on merit, but more so based on “those people’s” taste. Personally, I thought her portrayal of that character in Closer was outstanding. She’s 21 years old, is as tiny as a stick and stared down Jude Law and Julia Roberts without a blink.
    But I hope Laura Linney gets the gold, I thought she was the center of that film and I was never a big fan of hers until the last couple of years and now I think she’s one of the best actresses around.

  19. bicycle bob says:

    unfortunately theres no such thing as a lock.

  20. Cal says:

    Regarding Natalie Portman snub from SAGS:
    “It’s sad because I think she’s getting unjustly penalized for being in the Star Wars films.”
    Can you elaborate, Neal? I read something about the ‘Star Wars’ prequels not using SAG actors and personnel. Is that what you’re on to? Or that SW is outside of Hollywood studios? Or her performances in SW?
    Because I was wondering what they might have against Portman as an actress, seeing that she gave two outstanding performances this year, and has gotten pretty much nothing but rave reviews for ‘Closer’ and ‘Garden State.’
    Portman really goes to extremes and depths in ‘Closer’ esp in comparison to the other SAG nominees in their roles. Seems odd they would snub her on the grounds of her acting.

  21. bicycle bob says:

    portman has what they call talent. she can do star wars flicks for cash and movies like closer for prestige because she can. shes got range. now if only lucas would give her anything to do…

  22. Mark says:

    I think its pretty solid for Portman for Closer. A travesty if she doesn’t but hey its the Academy.

  23. Neal says:

    In referring to Natalie being overlooked because of Star Wars, I was referring mainly to some kind of condescending towards the films in general, not because of her performances in them, which weren’t bad so much as lacking in oomph, something a better actor’s director would have overcome. One could say that Ewan McGregor doesn’t suffer from the same prejudice, but last time I looked he hadn’t been nominated for a SAG award or Oscar either. Lord knows he deserved recognition for Moulin Rouge as much as Kidman did.

  24. Joe Sullivan says:

    I’m sure this will get most people peeved, but hey that’s what talkbacks are for.
    The awards for acting are way WAY over emphasized. Yes, they’re the famous people, yes they’re the ones we see in interviews and on late night talk shows. Yes, everyone knows how to act instead of editing and dubbing a film.
    What I’m trying to say is that I wish the awards put equal attention on Sound, Cinematography, Score, editing, etc. I assume if you are on this chat room you are very much aware how vital this is to a movie’s success…I just wish the masses knew that too. I wish we could have discussions that started with “Roger Deakins was robbed”, or “Thomas Newman was robbed”. Instead of Nicole vs Rene stuff, or “can you belive Tom hasn’t won yet?” Acting is overpraised. Let’s have the guys behind the scene (aside from the Directors) have their due. Wishful thinking, right?

  25. PeppersDad says:

    Joe Sullivan –
    Well, yes and no.
    Few people would dispute that the behind-the-scenes artists deserve more praise and attention than they receive. Unfortunately, those artists are not what drive the box office. All of these major awards try to strike some balance between the art and commerce of the industry. The people who market these films and these awards would be irresponsible to put as much of their focus, influence and money behind those elements that simply don’t deliver anything quantifiable on the commerce end of the scale. I doubt you would do it either.
    None of that excuses the awards given by critics groups, which seem designed to be nothing more than a platform to promote their Oscar predictions.

  26. Mark says:

    Joe Sullivan must be an underpaid backstage guy or a struggling bitter actor. To make a statement like that is just funny. Like the actors don’t deserve what they get and the awards they receive? Come on. Thats just juvenile.

  27. Neal says:

    Roger Deakins WAS robbed. For The Man Who Wasn’t There. Loved Andrew Lesnie’s work, but the award should have gone to RD.

  28. KamikazeCamel says:

    Joe, it’s never gonna happen. While cineasts will gladly say that the cinematography catagory is more interesting this year than best supporting actor, it’s just a fact that Mrs. Joblo Armchair doesn’t really care how well lit a movie was, or who performed the sound mixing.
    And, yeah, people actually do have discussions like the one’s you’re talking about, you’re just not gonna be able to have one with your friend who works in accounting down stairs (or whatever).

  29. bicycle bob says:

    seems like whining to me. we see movies because of good stories and acting. not because a scene was well lit.

  30. bicycle bob says:

    seems like whining to me. we see movies because of good stories and acting. not because a scene was well lit.

The Hot Blog

Quote Unquotesee all »

It shows how out of it I was in trying to be in it, acknowledging that I was out of it to myself, and then thinking, “Okay, how do I stop being out of it? Well, I get some legitimate illogical narrative ideas” — some novel, you know?

So I decided on three writers that I might be able to option their material and get some producer, or myself as producer, and then get some writer to do a screenplay on it, and maybe make a movie.

And so the three projects were “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep,” “Naked Lunch” and a collection of Bukowski. Which, in 1975, forget it — I mean, that was nuts. Hollywood would not touch any of that, but I was looking for something commercial, and I thought that all of these things were coming.

There would be no Blade Runner if there was no Ray Bradbury. I couldn’t find Philip K. Dick. His agent didn’t even know where he was. And so I gave up.

I was walking down the street and I ran into Bradbury — he directed a play that I was going to do as an actor, so we know each other, but he yelled “hi” — and I’d forgot who he was.

So at my girlfriend Barbara Hershey’s urging — I was with her at that moment — she said, “Talk to him! That guy really wants to talk to you,” and I said “No, fuck him,” and keep walking.

But then I did, and then I realized who it was, and I thought, “Wait, he’s in that realm, maybe he knows Philip K. Dick.” I said, “You know a guy named—” “Yeah, sure — you want his phone number?”

My friend paid my rent for a year while I wrote, because it turned out we couldn’t get a writer. My friends kept on me about, well, if you can’t get a writer, then you write.”
~ Hampton Fancher

“That was the most disappointing thing to me in how this thing was played. Is that I’m on the phone with you now, after all that’s been said, and the fundamental distinction between what James is dealing with in these other cases is not actually brought to the fore. The fundamental difference is that James Franco didn’t seek to use his position to have sex with anyone. There’s not a case of that. He wasn’t using his position or status to try to solicit a sexual favor from anyone. If he had — if that were what the accusation involved — the show would not have gone on. We would have folded up shop and we would have not completed the show. Because then it would have been the same as Harvey Weinstein, or Les Moonves, or any of these cases that are fundamental to this new paradigm. Did you not notice that? Why did you not notice that? Is that not something notable to say, journalistically? Because nobody could find the voice to say it. I’m not just being rhetorical. Why is it that you and the other critics, none of you could find the voice to say, “You know, it’s not this, it’s that”? Because — let me go on and speak further to this. If you go back to the L.A. Times piece, that’s what it lacked. That’s what they were not able to deliver. The one example in the five that involved an issue of a sexual act was between James and a woman he was dating, who he was not working with. There was no professional dynamic in any capacity.

~ David Simon