Of COURSE Clint Eastwood will be nominated for Best Actor.

However, I personally find the yapping over "Clint's last chance to win an acting Oscar" a tad redolent of emotional blackmail.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Pucifer,

The Academy LOVES Eastwood. It would be strange if they didn't. I don't think he'll win though. If Penn and Rourke split the votes, Langella will take it.

Clint Eastwood can be nominated but he won't win the Oscars.

I fully expect Clint Eastwood to be nominated. I was thinking he would have no chance of winning but now that Mickey Rourke and Sean Penn are indulging in infighting it may open a window. If Frank Langella wins the Golden Globe I think he would be the most likely to profit, especially if "Frost/Nixon" is a best picture Oscar nominee, but Eastwood may end up competitive.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: pacinofan,

quote:

Originally posted by Kams:
Clint Eastwood can be nominated but he won't win the Oscars.

I'm always amused at comments like this. Do you have some sort of secret hotline to the Academy?

quote:

Originally posted by westborne:

quote:

Originally posted by Kams:
Clint Eastwood can be nominated but he won't win the Oscars.

I'm always amused at comments like this. Do you have some sort of secret hotline to the Academy?

It's called a prediction, bozo. Ain't that supposed to go without saying by now?

I oughta DRAFT you!!

Clint will definitely get the Oscar nomination, but he won't win.

Marcia Gay Harden is the only actor who managed to win an Oscar without first being nominated by SAG voters. Keep in mind that "Pollock" hadn't opened yet when SAG (and Golden Globe) voters were filling out their nomination ballots that year. "Pollock" opened right in the mist of Oscar voting to great reviews and both Harden and Ed Harris were singled out. I also think that Ed Harris was very, very close to winning that year, but Crowe was in the BP winner and many felt he should've won the previous year.

It is certainly possible for Clint to win that lead Oscar, but it's extremely unlikely. Actors make up the largest voting block of the Academy and if an actor doesn't have their support from SAG, it's damn near impossible to win that Oscar.

Plus, Clint has a lot going against him this year.

"Gran Torino" isn't getting the universal acclaim that "Million Dollar Baby" and "Unforgiven" got. It seems like Clint only gets acting nominations for his biggest, most acclaimed films. He'll probably still get the nomination based on name recognition alone, but I don't think the Academy will be compelled to give him a Best Actor Oscar just because he hasn't won in that category yet.

Plus, Clint's four previous Oscar wins will hurt him. I just don't think many Academy members will have sympathy for someone whose already won four Oscars regardless of the circumstances.

He'll be nom, but won't win.
If Penn & Rourke cancel each other out on bad behavior ( which I think is bull b/c no one in the bizz can talk then) Langella would be next in line.

quote:

Originally posted by east/west:
He'll be nom, but won't win.
If Penn & Rourke cancel each other out on bad behavior ( which I think is bull b/c no one in the bizz can talk then) Langella would be next in line.

Langella looks great in Frost/Nixon but I say if Penn and Rourke cancel each other Clint could slip in there.

quote:

Originally posted by Tome6:
Langella looks great in Frost/Nixon but I say if Penn and Rourke cancel each other Clint could slip in there.

This is the only way that I see Eastwood winning right now. Not that I think he will, but out of the possible veteran nominees Eastwood, Langella, and Jenkins, I think he would have the best shot to win due to possible vote splitting between Penn and Rourke which is sort of weird because I think right now he has the worst chance to be nominated out of those three. He's well liked and well respected. Fellow nominee, Penn might even throw support behind him, and even though he didn't get the Globe or SAG nomination which makes it unlikely that he'll win, if the fighting really gets nasty between Penn and Rourke, the Academy might use that as an excuse along with Eastwood never planning on acting again to give it to him instead. I just feel that he has a better chance than Langella who won the Tony for the role which I think will hurt him, plus I don't see him winning for his biopic role over Penn's biopic. He'll definitely get the nomination, but I feel right now at least that will be reward enough for him.

Since the Academy has a perma-boner for Clint, he will be nominated, no question. I don't think he'll be able to pull off a win, though. Penn is such a lock right now, I would be kinda shocked if he lost.

Well, let me say this: He CAN be nominated. With his absence in the precursors, I would be absolutely shocked if Clint wins; the Globe and SAG winners topped by someone who wasn't even contending on the nominee lists? Wow.

And let's remember, that while this may be Clint's last acting job, that may not still guarantee a win for him. He's lost more Oscars than he's won....

CLINT'S WIN-LOSE RECORD:

1993 - Director - UNFORGIVEN
1993 - Producer - UNFORGIVEN
1993 - Actor - UNFORGIVEN
2004 - Director - MYSTIC RIVER
2004 - Producer - MYSTIC RIVER
2005 - Director - MILLION DOLLAR BABY
2005 - Producer - MILLION DOLLAR BABY
2005 - Actor - MILLION DOLLAR BABY
2007 - Director - LETTERS FROM IWO JIMA
2007 - Producer - LETTERS FROM IWO JIMA

4 for 10

*Not taking into account his Thalberg Memorial Award

Musto's theory about them giving it the oldies like Clint and Meryl seems plausible.