Oscar Nominations: The Case of Delroy Lindo in Sinners

As we do every year on the blog, Oscar nominations lead to my Case Of series. What are they? Glad you asked. These are 35 posts covering the nominees for Picture, Director, and the four acting contests. For each one, I give you the case for the movie/director/actor winning and the case against it with a verdict tidying it up. It’s like a trial, but no one goes to prison.

It began with the ten Best Picture contenders and now alternates alphabetically between the hopefuls in the other five races. The BP posts are readily available for your perusing pleasure. Delroy Lindo is our third possibility in Supporting Actor for Sinners. If you missed my posts covering the first two, they can be accessed here:

Previous Acting Nominations:

None

The Case for Delroy Lindo:

As Delta Slim in Ryan Coogler’s blockbuster, Lindo is a well-respected veteran in a movie that could win Best Picture. There is also a feeling that he was snubbed in 2020 for his lead work in Spike Lee’s Da 5 Bloods. Supporting Actor is wide open this year with different winners at the Globes (Stellan Skasgård in Sentimental Value), Critics Choice (Jacob Elordi for Frankenstein), and BAFTA (Sean Penn in One Battle After Another).

The Case Against Delroy Lindo:

Notice you don’t see his name as a recipient anywhere. In fact, you won’t because Lindo missed out on nominations at SAG, the Globes, Critics Choice, and BAFTA. It is extremely rare for someone to nominated (let alone win) without being up at any of those precursors. You have to go back to Marcia Gay Harden in Pollock 25 years ago to find the last one. The voters can honor the Sinners cast elsewhere via Michael B. Jordan and especially BAFTA winner Wunmi Mosaku.

The Verdict:

With the absence of noms everywhere else, logic would dictate that Lindo isn’t a threat to take gold. However, this Supporting Actor derby is unpredictable enough that I wouldn’t completely discount it. The chances increase if Sinners can pry BP away from One Battle.

My Case Of posts will continue with the third filmmaker contending for Best Director, Josh Safdie for Marty Supreme

Oscar Nominations: The Case of Amy Madigan in Weapons

As we do every year on the blog, Oscar nominations lead to my Case Of series. What are they? Glad you asked. These are 35 posts covering the nominees for Picture, Director, and the four acting contests. For each one, I give you the case for the movie/director/actor winning and the case against it with a verdict tidying it up. It’s like a trial, but no one goes to prison.

It began with the ten Best Picture contenders and now alternates alphabetically between the hopefuls in the other five races. The BP posts are readily available for your perusing pleasure. Our third contender among the Supporting Actress nominees is Amy Madigan for Weapons. If you missed the first two write-ups covering the performers from Sentimental Value, you can access them here:

Previous Acting Nomations:

1985 – Best Supporting Actress (Twice in a Lifetime) – lost to Anjelica Huston for Prizzi’s Honor

The Case for Amy Madigan:

The only thespian in the race who’s not a first-time nominee, Madigan’s work as the supremely creepy Aunt Gladys in Zach Cregger’s horror pic arrives 40 years after her initial nod for Twice in a Lifetime. She won the Critics Choice prize and has been nominated at the Globes and SAG Actor. If they bestowed the trophy based on number of Halloween costumed inspired by her role, Madigan would take this in a landslide.

The Case Against Amy Madigan:

Madigan was snubbed at BAFTA. You have to go back to 2018 and Regina King (If Beale Street Could Talk) to find the last Oscar recipient who didn’t make the cut there. Prior to that, it was Marcia Gay Harden (Pollock) in 2000. Teyana Taylor (One Battle After Another) took the Globe as we await SAG. This genre doesn’t produce a lot of acting winners and Weapons missed all other categories including Original Screenplay and Makeup and Hairstyling. Penélope Cruz (Vicky Christina Barcelona) is the last Supporting Actress honoree whose movie only got one nomination and that was in 2008.

The Verdict:

A SAG victory would elevate Madigan’s stock and she is probably runner-up in the race at the moment behind Taylor.

My Case Of posts will continue with third entrant in Supporting Actor – Delroy Lindo for Sinners

Oscar Nominations: The Case of Ethan Hawke in Blue Moon

As we do every year on the blog, Oscar nominations lead to my Case Of series. What are they? Glad you asked. These are 35 posts covering the nominees for Picture, Director, and the four acting contests. For each one, I give you the case for the movie/director/actor winning and the case against it with a verdict tidying it up. It’s like a trial, but no one goes to prison.

It began with the ten Best Picture contenders and now alternates alphabetically between the hopefuls in the other five races. The BP posts are readily available for your perusing pleasure. The third entrant in Best Actor is Ethan Hawke as songwriter Lorenz Hart in Richard Linklater’s musical dramedy Blue Moon. If you missed my posts covering Timothée Chalamet and Leonardo DiCaprio, they can be accessed here:

Previous Acting Nominations:

2001 – Supporting Actor (Training Day) – lost to Jim Broadbent for Iris; 2014 – Supporting Actor (Boyhood) – lost to J.K. Simmons for Whiplash

The Case for Ethan Hawke:

He has garnered some career best notices and made the cut at significant precursors like the Globes, Critics Choice, SAG Actor, and BAFTA. For a career lasting over three decades, Hawke been on a roll lately mixing indies with horror and TV work. Voters may wish to give him his due, especially after being snubbed a few years back for First Reformed and nabbing two other Oscar nods for his Before Sunset and Before Midnight screenplays.

The Case Against Ethan Hawke:

A signature precursor victory has yet to materialize. Chalamet’s performance in Marty Supreme has swept the season thus far. Moon is the sole pic represented in Best Actor that doesn’t come from a Best Picture nominee.

The Verdict:

An upset win is unlikely to occur unless Hawke manages a SAG or BAFTA trophy. Barring that, Chalamet remains the sturdy frontrunner.

My Case Of posts will continue with the third contestant in Supporting Actress and that’s Amy Madigan in Weapons

Oscar Nominations: The Case of Kate Hudson in Song Sung Blue

As we do every year on the blog, Oscar nominations lead to my Case Of series. What are they? Glad you asked. These are 35 posts covering the nominees for Picture, Director, and the four acting contests. For each one, I give you the case for the movie/director/actor winning and the case against it with a verdict tidying it up. It’s like a trial, but no one goes to prison.

It began with the ten Best Picture contenders and now alternates alphabetically between the hopefuls in the other five races. The BP posts are readily available for your perusing pleasure. We have arrived at our third contestant in Best Actress and that’s Kate Hudson for Song Sung Blue. If you missed my posts covering the first two contenders, you can find them here:

Previous Acting Nominations:

2000 (Supporting Actress) – Almost Famous – lost to Marcia Gay Harden in Pollock

The Case for Kate Hudson:

Hollywood loves a good awards comeback story and this marks Hudson’s second try at Oscar glory after a quarter century and probably almost winning for Almost Famous. For her performance as the real-life Claire from a Neil Diamond tribute band in Craig Brewer’s musical drama, Hudson has picked up precursor noms at SAG Actor, BAFTA, and the Golden Globes.

The Case Against Kate Hudson:

As I mentioned in the write-up for Rose Byrne in If I Had Legs I’d Kick You, you have to go back to 2014 and Julianne Moore (Still Alice) to find the last Best Actress winner whose movie managed just one nomination. Hudson missed out at Critics Choice. Blue itself received mixed reviews. Jessie Buckley (Hamnet) has swept thus far.

The Verdict:

Hudson had a much stronger chance 25 years ago as Penny Lane than she has today.

My Case Of posts will continue with the third entrant in Best Actor – Ethan Hawke for Blue Moon

Oscar Nominations: The Case of Jacob Elordi in Frankenstein

As we do every year on the blog, Oscar nominations lead to my Case Of series. What are they? Glad you asked. These are 35 posts covering the nominees for Picture, Director, and the four acting contests. For each one, I give you the case for the movie/director/actor winning and the case against it with a verdict tidying it up. It’s like a trial, but no one goes to prison.

It began with the ten Best Picture contenders and now alternates alphabetically between the hopefuls in the other five races. The BP posts are readily available for your perusing pleasure. Our second write-up among the Supporting Actor five is Jacob Elordi in Frankenstein. If you missed my post covering Benicio del Toro from One Battle After Another, you can find it here:

Previous Acting Nominations:

None

The Case for Jacob Elordi:

The Aussie star of Euphoria and Saltburn (and currently #1 movie Wuthering Heights) entered the awards chat as The Monster in Guillermo del Toro’s passion project. He surprisingly nabbed a trophy at first major precursor Critics Choice and was nominated at the Globes and is awaiting word from BAFTA and SAG Actor.

The Case Against Jacob Elordi:

He lost the Globe to Sentimental Value‘s Stellan Skarsgård. All other nominees in the Academy quintet are veteran thespians and voters might think Elordi’s time could come later.

The Verdict:

At the time of this writing, it is definitely a mystery whether that Critics Choice podium trip was a fluke. It will become more clear if Elordi can manage to take BAFTA or SAG Actor. Both are possible and if takes either or both, his stock on Oscar night goes up.

My Case Of posts will continue with the second director in contention and that’s Ryan Coogler for Sinners

Oscar Nominations: The Case of Inga Ibsdotter Lilleass in Sentimental Value

As we do every year on the blog, Oscar nominations lead to my Case Of series. What are they? Glad you asked. These are 35 posts covering the nominees for Picture, Director, and the four acting contests. For each one, I give you the case for the movie/director/actor winning and the case against it with a verdict tidying it up. It’s like a trial, but no one goes to prison.

It began with the ten Best Picture contenders and now alternates alphabetically between the hopefuls in the other five races. The BP posts are readily available for your perusing pleasure. Our second contender among the Supporting Actress nominees is Inga Ibsdotter Lilleass for Sentimental Value. If you missed the first write-up covering her costar Elle Fanning, you can peruse it here:

Previous Acting Nominations:

None

The Case For Inga Ibsfotter Lilleass:

The Norwegian thespian gets her first Oscar nod along with three of her costars for Joachim Trier’s acclaimed family drama. Precursors nods include the Golden Globes, BAFTA, Critics Choice, and a win from the National Board of Review. Value did better than expected on nominations morning and the cast could benefit.

The Case Against Inga Ibsdotter Lilleass:

Her cast mate Stellan Skarsgård appears most likely to benefit in terms of victory chances. Lilleass wasn’t nominated at SAG Actor and only 2 of the 31 previous Academy recipients were ignored by SAG. Vote splitting is probable between her and Fanning. Precursors have gone to Teyana Taylor in One Battle After Another (Globes) and Amy Madigan for Weapons (Critics Choice).

The Verdict:

A BAFTA win could increase the chances of a Lilleass upset, but I wouldn’t bet on it.

My Case Of posts will continue with the second man up in Supporting Actor and that’s Jacob Elordi in Frankenstein

Oscar Nominations: The Case of Leonardo DiCaprio in One Battle After Another

As we do every year on the blog, Oscar nominations lead to my Case Of series. What are they? Glad you asked. These are 35 posts covering the nominees for Picture, Director, and the four acting contests. For each one, I give you the case for the movie/director/actor winning and the case against it with a verdict tidying it up. It’s like a trial, but no one goes to prison.

It began with the ten Best Picture contenders and now alternates alphabetically between the hopefuls in the other five races. The BP posts are readily available for your perusing pleasure. A mostly unknown chap that goes by Leonardo DiCaprio is our second contender in Best Actor for One Battle After Another. If you missed my post on Timothée Chalamet as Marty Supreme, you can peruse it here:

Previous Acting Nominations:

1993 – Supporting Actor (What’s Eating Gilbert Grape) – lost to Tommy Lee Jones for The Fugitive; 2004 – Actor (The Aviator) – lost to Jamie Foxx for Ray; 2006 – Actor (Blood Diamond) – lost to Forest Whitaker from The Last King of Scotland; 2013 – Actor (The Wolf of Wall Street) – lost to Matthew McConaughey from Dallas Buyers Club); 2015 – Actor (The Revenant) – WON); 2019 – Actor (Once Upon a Time in Hollywood) – lost to Joaquin Phoenix from Joker

The Case for Leonardo DiCaprio:

Arguably being the biggest movie star on the planet helps. It doesn’t hurt that Battle is the frontrunner or easily co-frontrunner for Best Picture. As former revolutionary turned forgetful dad Bob Ferguson, DiCaprio has racked up all the precursors nominations including the Globes, Critics Choice, BAFTA, and SAG Actor.

The Case Against Leonardo DiCaprio:

He is up against arguably the biggest movie star on the planet Timothée Chalamet and his work as Marty Supreme has already won him the Globe and Critics Choice prize. Leo’s overdue narrative ended ten years ago with his Revenant victory.

The Verdict:

A SAG Actor or BAFTA trophy would be needed for DiCaprio to pose any real threat to a Chalamet sweep. He might be #2 among the Best Actor five, but there’s some considerable distance between 1st and 2nd.

My Case Of posts will continue with the second nominee in Supporting Actress and that’s Inga Ibsdotter Lilleass in Sentimental Value

Oscar Nominations: The Case of Rose Byrne in If I Had Legs I’d Kick You

As we do every year on the blog, Oscar nominations lead to my Case Of series. What are they? Glad you asked. These are 35 posts covering the nominees for Picture, Director, and the four acting contests. For each one, I give you the case for the movie/director/actor winning and the case against it with a verdict tidying it up. It’s like a trial, but no one goes to prison.

It began with the ten Best Picture contenders and now alternates alphabetically between the hopefuls in the other five races. The BP posts are readily available for your perusing pleasure. We have arrived at our second contestant in Best Actress and that’s Rose Byrne for If I Had Legs I’d Kick You. If you missed my post covering Jessie Buckley for Hamnet, you can find it here:

Previous Acting Nominations:

None

The Case for Rose Byrne:

Despite an impressive career mixing comedies (Bridesmaids, Neighbors, Spy), superhero sagas in the X-Men franchise, and horror (the Insidious series), Mary Bronson’s anxiety inducing dramedy marks the Aussie performer’s first big screen awards vehicle. The buzz started after she took the Silver Bear for Best Leading Performance at the Berlin festival. She has landed precursor noms at BAFTA, SAG Actor, Critics Choice, and took home the Golden Globe for lead in a Musical or Comedy.

The Cast Against Rose Byrne:

The recipient for lead actress in a drama at the Globes is Hamnet‘s Jessie Buckley. She also received the Critics Choice prize and is rightfully seen as the frontrunner. Byrne’s inclusion in the actress quintet marks the sole nomination for Legs. You have to go back to 2014 and Julianne Moore (Still Alice) to find the last winner whose movie only nabbed the one mention.

The Verdict:

While she’s yet to miss any precursors and it could be argued that Byrne is #2, Buckley is a formidable favorite.

My Case Of posts will continue will the second Best Actor nominee and that’s Leonardo DiCaprio for One Battle After Another

Oscar Nominations: The Case of Benicio del Toro in One Battle After Another

As we do every year on the blog, Oscar nominations lead to my Case Of series. What are they? Glad you asked. These are 35 posts covering the nominees for Picture, Director, and the four acting contests. For each one, I give you the case for the movie/director/actor winning and the case against it with a verdict tidying it up. It’s like a trial, but no one goes to prison.

It began with the ten Best Picture contenders and now alternates alphabetically between the hopefuls in the other five races. The BP posts are readily available for your perusing pleasure. Our first contender in the quintet of Supporting Actor nominees is Benicio del Toro for One Battle After Another.

Previous Acting Nominations:

2000: Supporting Actor (Traffic) – WON; 2003: Supporting Actor (21 Grams) – lost to Tim Robbins for Mystic River

The Case for Benicio del Toro:

As sensei Sergio in Paul Thomas Anderson’s multi-nominated pic, del Toro would certainly win if this competition were based on internet memes. Outside of that, his third appearance in this category has been preceded with noms everywhere else including the Golden Globes, BAFTA, Critics Choice, and SAG Actor and several wins from regional critics groups. If Another takes BP (where it’s the frontrunner), an acting victory seems likely to come with it. del Toro is coming off an impressive 2025 with his work here and as lead in Wes Anderson’s The Phoenician Scheme.

The Case Against Benicio del Toro:

Jacob Elordi (Frankenstein) took Critics Choice and Stellan Skasgård (Sentimental Value) got the Globe while we await SAG Actor and BAFTA. He could vote split with his costar Sean Penn. Teyana Taylor, his cast mate contending in Supporting Actress, appears best poised for a Battle acting win.

The Verdict:

Of the four acting derbies, this might be the most unsettled. I still think Benicio needs SAG or BAFTA (that one seems more out of reach) to have a better shot at Oscar.

My Case Of posts will continue with our first directing nominee and that’s del Toro’s auteur Paul Thomas Anderson…

Oscar Nominations: The Case of Elle Fanning in Sentimental Value

As we do every year on the blog, Oscar nominations lead to my Case Of series. What are they? Glad you asked. These are 35 posts covering the nominees for Picture, Director, and the four acting contests. For each one, I give you the case for the movie/director/actor winning and the case against it with a verdict tidying it up. It’s like a trial, but no one goes to prison.

It began with the ten Best Picture contenders and now alternates alphabetically between the hopefuls in the other five races. The BP posts are readily available for your perusing pleasure. Our first contender among the Supporting Actress nominees is Elle Fanning for Sentimental Value.

Previous Acting Nominations:

None

The Case for Elle Fanning:

The 27-year-old has amassed numerous nods for her TV work on The Great, but her appearance in Joachim Trier’s Norwegian drama is her first Oscar at bat. She was nominated at Critics Choice and by several regional critics groups. Value also had a slight overperformance with nine mentions from the Academy.

The Case Against Elle Fanning:

She is likely to vote split with her costar Inga Ibsdotter Lilleass. Fanning did not receive nominations from the Golden Globes, SAG Actor, and wasn’t even shortlisted at BAFTA. Teyana Taylor (One Battle After Another) and Amy Madigan (Weapons) have taken the Globe and Critics Choice, respectively. The best shot at a victory for this cast is in Supporting Actor with Stellan Skarsgård.

The Verdict:

Most prognosticators did not have Fanning in their quintet. I will give myself a pat on the back for predicting her, but I’m under no illusions that she is a threat to win.

My Case Of posts will continue with our first Supporting Actor write-up and that’s Benicio del Toro from One Battle After Another