The Envelope Logo

Gold Derby

Tom O'Neil has the inside track on Oscars, Emmys, Grammys and all the award shows.

« Previous Post | Gold Derby Home | Next Post »

Is Sandra Bullock an inevitable Oscar champ?

January 25, 2010 |  6:34 pm

Attention, Jeff Bridges ("Crazy Heart") and Sandra Bullock ("The Blind Side"): You don't automatically have the Oscar in the bag just because you won both the Golden Globe and SAG Award. Several lead stars pulled off the same coup and lost at the Academy Awards: Julie Christie ("Away From Her"), Renee Zellweger ("Chicago") and Russell Crowe ("A Beautiful Mind").

Golden Globe SAG Award Oscar news

Jamian Edward Bailey posted some comments at Facebook in response to some of my reportage on SAG Award winners that are appropriate to this topic, so I'd like to share them here. Words and stats below are Jamian's:

There are several actors who won the Golden Globe and not the SAG, but they went on to win the Oscar. They were Jessica Lange (1994), Mira Sorvino (1995), Hilary Swank (1999), Jim Broadbent (2001), Chris Cooper (2002), Nicole Kidman (2002), Sean Penn (2003), George Clooney (2005).

Instances where actors won the SAG, but not the Globe and went on to the Oscar were Susan Sarandon (1995), Frances McDormand (1996), Cuba Gooding Jr. (1996), Robin Williams (1997), Roberto Benigni (1998), Kevin Spacey (1999), Michael Caine (1999), Halle Berry (2001), Catherine Zeta-Jones (2002), Morgan Freeman (2004), Cate Blanchett (2004), Sean Penn (2008).

And quite a few actors went on to win the Oscar without the Globe or SAG and they were Kevin Spacey (1995), Juliette Binoche (1996), Judi Dench (1998), James Coburn (1998), Marcia Gay Harden (2000), Denzel Washington (2001), Adrien Brody (2002), Alan Arkin (2006), Tilda Swinton (2007), Penelope Cruz (2008).

It should be noted that Arkin, Swinton and Cruz did win the BAFTA in their respective years.

Photos: Hollywood Foreign Press Assn., Screen Actors Guild, Academy of Motion Picture Arts & Sciences

Get Gold Derby on Twitter. Join the Gold Derby Group at Facebook. Become friends with Tom O'Neil on Facebook. Get Gold Derby RSS feed via Facebook. RSS Feedburner. RSS Atom.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Comments

If Meryl Streep's Brilliant portrayal of Julia Child does not bag that Oscar, then the Oscar is not noteworty.

But it is now, and it has been, and it should live up to its reputation and award excellence, the finest expression and the arts and that person who has consistently stayed through to it as she did, in Julie and Julia.

Don't let's mix apples and oranges here just to make a cheap point. It's Meryl Streep's Oscar for her unmatched and brilliant performance in Julie and Julia, and if somebody else goes home with it, it will her Oscar that they'll be taking home--that's a sure call for 2010. You can count on it!

Sandra deserves it just as much as the rest. I was actually bored watching J&J, and acting like a diva (which Meryl does on set) doesn't help her.

It seems that Sandra is having a "Julia Roberts-Erin Brockovich" year. Ellen won all the state critics awards, while Julia won all the major acting awards. Id say its safe to predict that Sandra is the fortrunner for the oscar. Meryl went far beyond brilliance in Julie & Julia, BUT, its just the way things are.
@ bill-Thats what is called CAMPAIGNING. Catherine won over Meryl because of HEAVY campaigning and having Harvey Weinstien supporting her.

Sandra Bullock doesn't deserve any major awards. She is entertaining but not as incrediable as Meryl Streep or the young girl who starred in Push. The movie "The Proposal" was unbelievable. She looked like the guys mother, there was no chemistry and her acting was mediocre at best. Sandra's married to a man with a 16yr old mentally. She tries to take a child away from her biological mother just because the woman didn't pay her taxes and lives in a lower class neighborhood. So what if she is a porn star, I doubt she advocates it for her child.

Many people can't even believe Sandra is getting nominated for these awards; the performance just doesn't merit it. if Bullock wins, it will hurt the Oscar Awards' credibitlity. Bullock really has not been nominated for that many awards; four maybe, and she only started getting these accolades after the Blind Side grossed over $200 million in the United States. I do believe that Sandra Bullock has made a lot of people in Hollywood a lot of money and she has a very good personality, which shines during acceptance speeches. However, it isn't really right to hand Bullock a Miss Congeniality award on oscar night, especially when she is being given it for the wrong reasons.

I also think that the press boistered Bullock's chances of getting nominated for any award. The press wants drama. Three weeks ago, Streep was pretty much a lock for the oscar, which was not that exciting of a story. (Eventhough, Streep hasn't won in 27 years, it wasn't enough of build-up before the award show to get people excited.) Mulligan was her closest competition according to the awards and nominations. Gabby was an outside chance. Suddenly, the Blind Side gets all of this press for being a hit and reporters CREATE oscar buzz—not for the performance, but because Bullock is the first woman to headline a $200 movie in the United States.

Paying attention to what has really happened at these award shows has pretty much been a nightmare. If Bullock wins, it will be the nail in the coffin of this award season. I feel for Gabby and Mulligan, but especially for Streep, who has been screwed-over so many times by this Hollywood crap. I believe, like many other people do, that once again Meryl gave the best performance this year and won't be rewarded for it. Streep won most of the critic awards. She deserves the oscar.

One last detail that I think is very telling: when people mention Bullock winning the oscar, they never say she gave the best performance. That's because everyone knows she didn't. NOT EVEN CLOSE. If these awards don't reflect the actual performances, they mean nothing.

I think Streep would have won SAG if she had not won last year (sigh). However, I cannot see an Academy voter (mostly actors) voting for Bullock over Streep. It's such a no-brainer who gave the better peformance. Also, since it appears Bullock is slightly out in front at this stage of the game, a best picture nod for Julie & Julia or It's Complicated would help's Streep's chances. And, per chance if Streep could beat Mullock at BAFTA she would increae her chances. Anyway, she is a formidable threat to win no matter what...

Tom, are you and the experts planning to do another round of Best Supporting Actress predictions? While the winner and two other nominees are locked, there's a big question mark in my head for the last two spots...

It should also be noted that amongst those listed for winning the Oscar and losing Globes/SAGs, the only lead performances to win same were Denzel Washington (arguably 'cuz momentum favorite Russell Crowe endured awful phone-throw publicity) and Adrien Brody, which will always go down in history as an out-of-left-field surprise.

And the dislike for Sandra Bullock continues. She did give a good performance in "The Blindside." Meryl Streep was good in "Julie & Julia."
To Kanye: Sandra had a flop in "All About Steve" this year, so I guess that falls completely on her shoulders, making her a terrible unworthy actress not capable of ever doing a fine job again. Sandra may lose the Oscar, but once again, to give Meryl Streep an Oscar for career achievement (poor woman, she only has two) seems ridiculous. Get off Sandra's back. I doubt she is running around town telling the world "I have Oscar all sewn up this year."

ugh i think Bullock will win it that average performance w/ a cheap wig and bad accent. When will Hollywood stop taking Streep for granted?

You forgot Marion Cotillard....

Also want to note that the nominees could look like this too:

Meryl Streep
Carey Mulligan
Helen Mirren
Penelope Cruz (for Broken Embraces)
Emily Blunt

So the Oscars can be full of surprises...we'll see...

Meryl is still the gal to beat but to all pundits the race for Best Actress is looking neck and neck which means the votes might end up splitting the two. So depending on who actually will be nominated...a surprise upset might happen here. Again the nominees can look like this:

Meryl Streep
Carey Mulligan
Sandra Bullock
Gabourey Sidibe
Emily Blunt

or like this

Meryl Streep
Carey Mulligan
Sandra Bullock
Emily Blunt
Helen Mirren

or like this

Meryl Streep
Carey Mulligan
Emily Blunt
Helen Mirren
The actress in Coco Before Chanel
or The actress in Bright Star

There could be a chance Sandra Bullock or Gabourey may not make the cut. Sometimes there are those who look like sure bets but wind up not making the cut...it could happen with the Oscars.

Streep deserves the Oscar. Just because Bullock is "likeable" doesn't make her performance great. It was corny and over-the-top. I was embarrassed watching her.

Bullock had an advantage at the SAGs because Streep won there last year; besides, she's more likely to be favored by general SAG members (including TV actors & newcomers) than more seasoned Academy members.

I think Meryl will be more competitive at the Oscars, but let's not forget that what little intelligence is out there about raw vote counts suggests Meryl & Sandra are both BARELY ahead of Gabby Sidibe & Carey Mulligan. Besides, in close races Oscar has almost always preferred ingenues over more seasoned actresses.

Avis may have beaten its lesser competitors by focusing on Hertz instead of them, but the Oscars don't work that way. If the top two in the gold derby (like "On Golden Pond" & "Reds" for Best Picture back in 1981) ignore No. 3 ("Chariots of Fire"), No. 3 will sneak up and win. That's why I'm still going against everyone else right now and saying either Gabby or Carey will win the Oscar.

I don't think

"Attention, Jeff Bridges ("Crazy Heart") and Sandra Bullock ("The Blind Side"): You don't automatically have the Oscar in the bag just because you won both the Golden Globe and SAG Award."

was meant to be taken as an actual note to Bridges and Bullock for assuming they have the Oscar in the bag. It's simply a manner of speaking, as many people who check up on the awards race have begun to assume that their Oscar is pretty much a guarantee.

Dame Judi Dench also won BAFTA for Shakespeare in Love

You forgot Lauren Bacall.... she won both the Golden Globe and the SAG for THE MIRROR HAS TWO FACES and then lost the Oscar to Juliette Binoche for THE ENGLISH PATIENT.

I think that the SAG matters, but not always and the proof is the Nicole Kidman / Renee Zellweger battle in 2002. I think we'll have the same thing this year. Bullock is likable and the guild honored that as well as her b.o., but the Academy is thinking in terms of prestige as well. You remember: Jim Carey has a SAG nod, but an Oscar nod. Eddie Murphy is a SAG winner, but not an Oscar winner. Depp won the SAG for Pirates of the Carribean, but I doubt that even with the Globe win, he wouldn't have won the Oscar.

And UNLIKE the Screen Actors Guild, the Academy owes Streep and they know it. I think that Meryl losing the Oscar actually helps her, because there is always the 'hug factor'. They have seen both Meryl's and Sandra's films (some voters of course!) and there's no question who delivered the better performance and now once Meryl lost the SAG, there will be more sentiment toward her performance and her overall career. And they'll be reminded by the press that she has lost the last 11 times she's been nominated and that she has only 2 Oscars. And in the end the sentiment and the fact that she delivered a better performance in a film they like a lot and that she portrays somebody they are quite fond of will help her. I think it's Meryl's to lose and the fact that critics are on her side is very helpful.

I think that Bullock has the momentum pretty much the way Rourke had it last year. Unlike Rourke, she's very likable, but Rourke had the cool factor (which let's face it Bullodk doesn't have). And Rourke had a very strong performance, which Bullock doesn't have. But in the end - despite of all the great speeches, the great performance, THE BUZZ IN THE PRESS (pretty much like Bullock now) he lost the Oscar. I think Streep will repeat Penn's success from last year.

Sandra is an inevitable Oscar Champ? WTF?!

How about “All About Steve” anyone? That’s also Sandra’s movie in 2009 and it’s flopped! because it’s worst movie and acting all together.

Here, check it out: http://moviesblog.mtv.com/2010/01/20/razzie-awards-nominations-ballots-arrive-to-the-dismay-of-filmmakers-and-fanpeople-everywhere/

Sandra is on target for Razzie nomination as WORST ACTRESS for All About Steve. Wait for the announcement on Feb 1, one day before Oscar nominations.

Oscar? Dream on, Sandy!

what makes you think that they think they will automatically win a Oscar? what shows them saying that they think the will win and Oscar, your putting words in their mouth. I am pretty sure they are not going around saying that they are gonna win...

Yes, the SAG/Globes do not always align with Oscar, but I still think Bridges, Waltz and Monique are pretty much locks. Bridges is due, Waltz and Monique cannot be denied.


Connect

Advertisement

In Case You Missed It...

Stay Connected:


About the Blogger


Pop & Hiss



Categories


Archives
 



In Case You Missed It...