Producers Guild awards celebrate Everything Everywhere, and B.J. Novak celebrates Mindy Kaling
There's a not-so-small chance that Everything Everywhere All At Once will win Best Picture at the Oscars
Aux News Mindy Kaling
It’s starting to look even better for Everything Everywhere All At Once at the Academy Awards in March, because the Daniel Kwan and Daniel Scheinert-directed film just won the top prize at the Producers Guild Of America Awards. While not a perfect predictor of the Best Picture winner at the Oscars, the PGAs are at least a very good predictor—having picked the eventual Best Picture winner 11 out of the last 14 times—thanks to the fact that both use the same number of nominees and both have ranked-choice voting. Also, “producing” is a more nebulous thing than directing or writing, so if the producers think a movie was produced the best, it stands to reason that it is also, simply, the best.
The PGAs award for animated films went to Guillermo del Toro’s Pinocchio, the drama TV award went to White Lotus and the comedy TV award went to The Bear (TV genres are fun, right?), and another highlight is that Weird: The Al Yankovic Story has continued its delightful awards season run by notching another victory into its belt (it beat out Prey to win the award for televised or streamed motion pictures).
Also at the PGA Awards, B.J. Novak presented Mindy Kaling with the Norman Lear Achievement Award In Television, and for anyone invested in hearing the two Office castmates say nice things about each other, there was a lot of that:
She knows a lot about producing now but she was great at it even before she did, because she’s a great producer for the same reason that many people, including her, are great parents right away. She cares so much that she either knows what to do or finds out fast. She cares so much about everything, and I care so much about her.
In her acceptance speech, Kaling honored the awards namesake by talking about how Lear paved the way “or all kinds of people to be centered on TV — nuanced, three-dimensional people who are sometimes awkward or selfish but they’re always hilarious.”
7 Comments
shes pretty gross.
Now that it’s looking very likely COVID really did originate from a lab leak, the Academy will almost certainly award this best picture to combat percieved anti-Asian sentiment in society.https://www.wsj.com/articles/covid-origin-china-lab-leak-807b7b0a?mod=hp_lead_pos1Wonder if they’ll thank the Wuhan Lab in their acceptance speech.
The Department of Energy assessed in the intelligence report that it had “low confidence” the Covid-19 virus accidentally escaped from a lab in Wuhan.The other assessment options are medium or high confidence. A low confidence assessment generally means that the information obtained is not reliable enough or is too fragmented to make a more definitive analytic judgment or that there is not enough information available to draw a more robust conclusion.So it’s basically saying “maybe” it came from a lab leak, they’re not able to completely rule it out, but they also don’t have enough evidence to say it’s actually true, or even highly likely to be true. Anyway, EEAAO has been winning praise and awards since basically its release, so to suggest that if it’s win, its for some other reason than it simply being the best movie from last year, is racist.
Yes, didn’t you hear? It was Wuhan lab’s mission all along to get Oscars for EEAAO.
Unless you are joking, you didn’t understand this article very well. This is understandable, because the WSJ article is misleadingly written. Basically, there are two different questions when someone asks about where the virus came from: 1) how the virus originated, and 2) how the virus began to spread (the vector that delivered the virus to the human species). Until now, the prevailing theory on both issues has been 1) a natural origin, with the virus emerging as a naturally occurring mutation from a similiar virus, and 2) zoonotic origin, with the virus jumping to humanity from another non-human species.
This report, from the DOE, only deals with point 2 and does not propose an answer to the ultimate origin. This article does NOT say that the virus was “human engineered” or created in any way. This report does NOT claim that a Chinese lab created and released this virus as a biological weapon, or that it was created as a biological weapon and accidentally released. What this report says, is that DOE researchers believe that accidental release from a lab studying viruses is the “most likely” origin. They go on to say that they have “low confidence” in this theory, which is basically saying that it will not surprise anyone at the DOE if a different vector is discovered. Statistically speaking, low confidence findings are considered meaningless, the equivalent of saying, “We don’t know, but what we do know suggests that this might be the case?” The WSJ is reporting on this issue, because right wing readers are absolutely hungry to be proven right on any count when it comes to the virus, and while this article appears to suggest this…it does not.
If you ARE joking, I apologize for getting annoyingly pedantic, but it’s a weird joke to suggest that the Academy will nominate EEAAO just because they fear the perception of anti-Asian prejudice. How about because it was a fucking awesome movie?
Just FYI, the Dr Emilio imposter account here is NOT the long-established user account that has contributed positively to many discussions.It’s a shriveled soul coward, instead.
and both have ranked-choice votingI wondered about that, considering voting for one candidate out of ten could lead to really stupid results, like a very bad movie winning with 11% of the vote cause nine much better movies split the vote.It wouldn’t likely be that bad, of course, but it’d be very likely that a movie would win that the majority of voters didn’t actually consider the best.