And you're basing this on...?

Sorry, but I honestly am having a hard time remembering any of your past awards comments that you've nailed, so you'll have to forgive me if I don't look at you as an authority of some kind on the subject...

A well run DVD caimpain, as it will be available for such a thing, takes care of any lack of box office. It's a new variable that you're not even considering. Diana Lane is loved. I will point out that she appeared in the worst reviewed film by far since 1998 that the academy looked the other way over because they wanted to give her a nomination. It's a lot more about politics than it is about "it only made ______ at the box office".

The fact that the film got almost entirely "Good not great" reviews, the abysmal B.O. run, the fact that it was released the week after Labor Day (Almost always the worst weekend of the year), the fact that Focus already has Catch a Fire to push, should I continue?

And for gods sake, please don't say "Stranger things have happened," or I'm pimping Borat as a lock for Best Actor.

And I'll admit I usually don't post in this forum. I spend more of my time over at Oscarwatch with these kind of topics.

I've said "stranger things have happened" like twice, and you're carrying on like I've got banners in my signature or something.

Oscarwatch? That explains the lack of perspective. Those guys should be used to being wrong by now, huh? Don't listen to their gibberish. They'll have you believing a movie like King Kong had a shot in hell.

Nobody's saying anything about pushing the film, just the acting, so it's not like Focus Features won't push those performances just because of Catch a Fire (which is getting mixed reviews, I might add) , and the box office/release date isn't that big of a deal with last year's showing of how a DVD campaign can impact things now. That only applied when it was paramount for a film to be in the spotlight during the season. September could become a very viable awards release date from now on. Things change.

If there is one incredible performance after another in supporting actress/actor in the following months, sure, it'll be harder, but Hollywoodland got good reviews, PLENTY strong enough, will be available on DVD in perfect timing for a campaign, and as I've shown, Diane Lane is favored by the academy, as shown by her lead actress nomination for a performance in a film that got only 47%.

Stranger things have happened.

Everything I have read about Hollywoodland and Oscar in the same sentence mentions running Ben Affleck as lead.

Not that he has a significantly better chance as supporting, but that is just a little off. And I'm not referring to the title he won at Venice.

Both Hollywoodland and Black Dahlia have 0 oscar nominations coming their way with the way both films are performing at the box office and in the oscar buzz. If the oscar slate truly falls apart at the end of the year, Diane Lane MAY have a chance and so might Affleck, but I don't think it will happen.

And I still don't get how you still can tout around saying Kong never had a chance. You have no insight whatsoever as to how true that might be. With four nominations on its back and tied for the most wins at the ceremony, I can't see how it can be denied that it at least had a shot at a nom.

You could argue that Walk the Line never had a chance at a BP nomination. It had one more nomination and 2 less wins than Kong.

I wouldn't have wanted King Kong to get nominated when there were better films to award in its place with a nom but I just find it funny how you are "carrying on like you've got banners in your signature" still for that.

I put up one argument after another for why it wouldn't happen for Kong, and believe it or not, it wasn't just a lucky guess. I don't do all of the studying I do because I'm trying to get "no foresight" or be told that I don't have any or anymore than the average joe. How about studying my butt off over the past precedent? Doesn't that count somehow as an educated opinion? I'm not taking wild stabs in the dark or anything.

As good as I personally thought Ben Affleck's performance was in Hollywoodland -- all the hype about him being the leading Oscar candidate in this film, is simply studio propoganda to counteract all the bad press he has received in the past 2-3 years.

They had to print that regardless of his actual performance...

I see Hollywoodland pulling a big fat goose egg at the awards, honestly. Will be forgotten by Oscar time.