All of the ones under Award for Outstanding Producer of Televised or Streamed Motion Picture are... something else

Streaming movies that were never considered good enough to get an obligatory theatrical run for awards consideration.

I know, but surely they could find ones better than those

If Unfrosted wins, disband the Guild!

I’m sure they’ve already been paid for their commercial spots.

Carry On is 88% on RT, and stars real movie stars.
Critics Consensus: Taron Egerton and an against-type Jason Bateman make for great adversaries in Carry-On, a throwback thriller that clears all checkpoints of plot logic with its confident execution.

The Killer is 85% on RT. It stars a real movie star and was directed by David Fincher.
Critics Consensus: The Killer finds director David Fincher on firm footing with a stylish and engaging thriller that proves a perfect match for leading man Michael Fassbender.

Rebel Ridge is 96% on RT. IDK the director, but he has a pretty good track record with critics.
Critics Consensus: An intelligent and gripping vehicle for Aaron Pierre's star-making performance, Rebel Ridge lays down the law on its action-thriller contemporaries.

Unfrosted was not well-reviewed, but I thought it was hilarious. That's how comedy is. Big cast of comedy stars. A period piece. Lots of creativity.

And a documentary about an iconic pop culture event that is at 98% on RT.

What movies should they have nominated? Was "Hit Man" eligible?

One of these? https://thoughtcatalog.com/sergio-pe...obably-missed/

If they don't air the ads, then they have to give the money back or give out free ads elsewhere to make good.

How about they just do the best they can to have an Oscar ceremony that is tasteful, and give people a pleasant night to attend or watch . . .

. . . and we confiscate 0.01% of Elon Musk's wealth and instantly have $40 million dollars.

I guess I didn't realize this, but the amazing Guy Pearce has never received an Oscar nomination throughout his illustrious career. That should probably change on Thursday.
Guy Pearce Is Set for His First Oscar Nomination. What Took So Long?

He was overshadowed by Crowe and Spacey in LA Confidential, 1997.

He could have deserved a nomination for Memento, 2000, but I don't know what the competition was that year. Best Actor brings in a lot of heavy hitters.

After that, scanning his filmography, there is not a single title that jumps out as high profile or "Oscar-baity" enough to stand out as something he could have been nominated for. Maybe The Proposition of Factory Girl, but those were not big movies.

Man, you really missed the mark if you think I give a fuck what a movie's RT score is. I even liked Carry-On, despite it being extra stupid

That's the wrong "The Killer".

I just watched the Fincher Killer and didn't even catch it 😂. Yeah, it's John Woo's remake of his own movie

The Proposition is an Australian film,and those just do not show up on the Oscar radar almost ever. Just 4 Aussie films(Lion,Shine,Babe,Mad Max Fury Road) have been nominated for a Best Picture Oscar. And Geoffrey Rush in Shine is the only Australian to win an Oscar in an Australian Production.And the only other Australians to even get nominated in a Aus film is Jackie Weaver in Animal Kingdom and Nicole Kidman for Lion. Even though the Oscar's are supposed to be Global it's still largely a US/UK Industry award who occasionally open the door to films from other parts of the globe. And even the UK part of UK/US is very limited to what types of UK films get nominated.

So just to clear everything up, when Thursday morning comes around and we have four actresses nominated for five nominations how are we supposed to talk about it? I assume gender neutral terms would be acceptable?

Well, your criticism (I believe) was that these movies are not good enough to be considered the best of the year.

Their Rotten Tomatoes scores show that four of them are positively viewed by critics, and the views of critics drive awards consideration. I guess I could have pointed out that they were all PGA nominees, but that seems rather circular.

What, in your mind, would be an good indicator of how a film's quality is perceived, in general?

Also, I asked what movies you thought should be nominated instead, and I don't see an answer.

Despite the use of the term "actress" in the category, which was established about 100 years ago, the word "actress" in the 21st century is not considered to mean a biological woman who acts, but rather designates a female actor. All the nominees will be persons who identify their gender as female. As far as the pronouns go, each will be addressed using the pronoun of their choosing, except by ignorant jerks.

All of the women I know in theater prefer the term actor. What other profession still has gender-specific titles?

Waiter/Waitress

congressman and congresswoman

The Oscars are 100 years old. I'm certain there is a lobbying effort within the Academy to change the terms. There is even, I'm certain, a lobbying effort to go single category and gender neutral like the Spirit Awards (that will never happen). Even if they change it to Male and Female Actors, people are still going to use the words actor and actress.

I wonder if The Crying Game came out today instead of the 90s, would Jaye Davidson have competed for Best Supporting Actress rather than Best Supporting Actor? I don't know how they self-identify. It would have at least kept the surprise twist for longer for some people.

At the time, Davidson identified as a homosexual man. IDK if that is how he still identifies.

steward/stewardess

Yeah, those terms are not used any more for either gender.
Maybe Host/Hostess.

We have our first Oscar controversy of the season. The Brutalist used AI to help front runner Aiden Brody with his Hungarian accent. That could have an effect on whether he wins his second Oscar or not.

FWIW, AI was also used for Karla Sofia Gascon's singing as well.

Cool, I'll use actor and/or person.