Whatever they throw together for a Kirk Douglas tribute will likely be the highlight. Pretty sure Michael and Catherine will speak. Not sure who else though.

oscarsnotsowoke

It's hard to accept the idea of Brad Pitt winning if you saw the film. DiCaprio acted circles around him, while Pitt just played the subdued man's man he always does.

I'm still amazed "1917" was nominated with no people of color in lead roles or non-binary/gender non-conforming characters in the trenches.

@3 I've also been surprised by Pitt sweeping this year. I thought he was fine.
@2, 4 Trolls

@5 "Trolls" was a great movie. Lots of characters of color and definitely some gender non-conforming ones!

@7 -I’m not sure people do that much, but they do find it fun to speculate on contests. This is the one in the public eye at the moment, so they speculate on it.

7 Why do people care about the Super Bowl? It's harmless fun for some people. I like movies in general, and see a lot of them, in theaters, old school. I don't always agree with the Academy Award choices, but I still enjoy watching. And like Super Bowl parties, sometimes Oscar parties, where everyone drinks too much and bets on their favorites, can be some mindless goofy fun. To each their own.

They say 1917 will win, but that's dumb. It's a significantly average movie, well done. It's not groundbreaking in any meaningful way (although they gave the award to the similarly listless but creatively shot Birdman....).

In a decade, everyone's going to look back and say Joker was the functional winner.

@9 The Super Bowl is like an Epic movie, except it's ad-libbed entirely and it's literally impossible to predict accurately.

"Pitt just played the subdued man's man he always does."

Not too subdued in Inglorious Basterds
Not too man's manny/subdued in Burn After Reading
And in Meet Joe Black?
Nah.

And B.Pitt Wins!*

*for best supporting actor