Sometimes, the period after the Oscar nominations can feel like a snooze. There may be a notable snub that’s worth discussing for a few days, but things eventually settle down and people begin to behave themselves as they head into the final stretch of the season.
This hasn’t been that.
The last two weeks in particular have been some of the most tumultuous in recent memory, thanks in large part to the controversy involving old tweets made by one of the “Emilia Pérez” stars, Karla Sofía Gascón. The initially defiant actress went rogue to defend herself, keeping her scandal in the headlines during several crucial voting periods. Now, a film that led the field with 13 Oscar nominations has been hobbled.
After all of that turbulence, where do things stand? Here are five narratives now emerging from the season that I plan to keep an eye on.
As this year began, the awards-season aspirations of “Anora” appeared to stall out. The Sean Baker-directed comedy went winless at the Golden Globes on Jan. 5, and that failure-to-launch feeling lingered over the next few weeks when the Critics Choice Awards, where “Anora” hoped to score anew, were postponed from Jan. 12 to Feb. 7 because of the Los Angeles wildfires.
What a difference a weekend makes. On Friday, “Anora” picked up a best-picture prize at that delayed Critics Choice ceremony, and scored top honors the next night at separate shows held by the Directors Guild of America and the Producers Guild of America. Any movie that triumphs with both of those guilds has to be considered the best-picture front-runner, even though five years ago, “1917” conquered at the PGA and DGA awards and still lost the top Oscar to “Parasite.”
While surveying the best-picture field in mid-December, I noted that whenever I spoke to voters and industry insiders about their favorite films of the year, “Anora” was the title that came up again and again. Both that movie and “Emilia Pérez” had built strong coalitions across many different voting demographics. With the latter wounded, it’s now “Anora” that has taken the lead.
‘Emilia Pérez’ looks for a lifeline
“Emilia Pérez” may be down, but can it be counted entirely out? This past weekend painted a mixed picture of its post-scandal chances: Though it managed three wins at the Critics Choice Awards, including a supporting-actress prize for Zoe Saldaña, voting for that ceremony closed weeks before Gascón’s tweets came to light. At the PGA awards, where voting ended just as the Gascon controversy ramped up, and the DGA awards, where voting closed two days after the film’s director, Jacques Audiard, disavowed Gascón and her comments in an interview, “Emilia Pérez” went home empty-handed.
If the movie still has a shot at picking up major Oscars, it needs to build a bulwark at this weekend’s BAFTA awards, since that British voting body shares a significant overlap with the academy. The movie swept December’s European Film Awards, where it won every category it was nominated in (including a best-actress victory for Gascón), so a good showing at BAFTA would indicate that international voters remain enamored with “Emilia” and either unaware or unconcerned when it comes to the controversies that have engulfed it.
And though I don’t think stateside voters will take Gascón’s actions out on her co-star Saldaña, the Screen Actors Guild awards later this month will test that theory: That nominating committee went wild for “Wicked,” so I expect the supporting-actress contender Ariana Grande to at least put up a fight.
‘Conclave’ and ‘Wicked’ go the long route
To be considered a major best-picture contender, a film typically needs to score a best-director nomination, too. So how should a movie press on after the directors’ branch delivers a snub?
Two of this year’s contenders hope to chart an unconventional path. Pretty much everyone I’ve spoken to enjoyed “Conclave” as a pulpy but elevated thriller, though it’s rare to find someone who considers it their bar-none, number-one movie of the year. No matter: The “Conclave” awards strategy, which counts on the unique preferential ballot used by the Oscars, is to make a strong go of it by being everybody’s number-two movie. A movie that compiles enough points from second-place votes could very well beat out a film that ranks first on some ballots, but toward the bottom on others. In a season packed with controversy, maybe that likability will be enough.
“Wicked” has an even tougher path, since it lacks both a director and screenplay nomination, and no film since 1932’s “Grand Hotel” has taken the best-picture trophy without those key nods. Still, I’ve talked to voters who plan to cast votes for “Wicked” simply because the success of that kind of spectacle is good for both Hollywood and the Oscars. (Pour out a glass of glowing Bene Gesserit juice for “Dune: Part Two,” the other blockbuster nominated for best picture, as it simply hasn’t been able to marshal that same rah-rah enthusiasm.)
Bupkis for ‘Brutalist’
At a reception before the DGA awards on Saturday, I polled my fellow pundits and a clutch of publicists on which contender they expected to prevail. Every person I spoke to predicted that Brady Corbet would take home the night’s top honor for his epic period drama “The Brutalist,” which he somehow pulled off on a budget of under $10 million. For rising to that challenge, Corbet had already won the Golden Globe for best director, and in an era in which the best-picture and best-director Oscars can often go to two separate films, he seemed to have a strong shot at taking at least one of those prizes.
I wondered if Sean Baker, who directed “Anora,” had heard those same predictions, since he seemed utterly shocked when he and not Corbet was announced as the DGA winner. It helped, I think, that Baker is an affable director who’s known in filmmaking circles, while the serious-minded Corbet is an actor-turned-director who is only just now breaking into the mainstream. And though those who love “The Brutalist” really, really love it, the three-hour, thirty-five minute movie can be polarizing: I have not encountered scads of women who consider it their favorite film of the year. Like “Emilia Pérez,” the movie will now have to count on some BAFTA victories to help it make up momentum.
‘I’m Still Here’ waits in the wings
Is the international-film Oscar back in play? Just weeks ago, you’d have been a fool to bet against “Emilia Pérez” in that category, since the prize almost always goes to the movie with the strongest best-picture shot. But with that film now on the ropes, we could have a real race on our hands.
Any Oscar voter who has befriended or even brushed shoulders with a Brazilian has likely received a text from that person in recent weeks, since advocating for “I’m Still Here” and its leading lady, Fernanda Torres, has practically become a national pastime. It’s true that the Walter Salles-directed movie, about an activist whose dissident husband is disappeared by Brazil’s military dictatorship, faces an uphill battle in the best-picture and best-actress categories. (“The Substance” star Demi Moore is still the favorite in the latter contest). Still, as the only other major contender in the international-film category, there’s a path for “I’m Still Here” to win over voters who’d prefer a tasteful alternative to the scandal-tarred “Emilia Pérez.”
