Topic: 2024 Oscar Awards bets and discussions - page 7. (Read 2120 times)

@Saint-loup. This proposal of yours is very good. This will certainly make the Oscar ceremony more exciting next year hehehehe.

Final clearance from you. If Sandra Hüller is not included in the final list of nominations, my bet against your Lily Gladstone will be Emma Stone for odds of 1:1, however, if Sandra Hüller is nominated for best actress then this bet continues and it will be on odds of 1:6.50. Correct? Bet is 1mbtc and I want you to be the escrow. I will send once the fees are lower. Also, it might be yours already ehhehehehehehee.

Send me address.

To be honest, it would really bore me to have to care about that bet during several months and to waste transaction fees for nothing at the end if your actress is not qualified. So I have a counterproposal, if Sandra Hüller is not nominated, your bet will be replaced by another one, on another actress, with other odds then. It would be a kind of joker.
So you would need to choose 2 actresses instead of one and we would need to agree with the payout of the 2nd choice. Of course if Hüller is nominated, your 2nd choice will be voided, and won't count anymore for the victory.  
I would have a joker too, but my joker would be Gladstone Lily   LOL  
If our joker is not qualified either, there is no 3rd joker, and the bet will continue to the end.

My other proposal is to change the bet into a bet against Gladstone at 1:1 in case of failure of Hüller's nomination (while Gladstone being nominated), instead of a 2nd actress bet. That is to say I would pay you 2mbtc(your stake+mine) if Gladstone doesn't win the best actress award and I would keep your 1mbtc stake if she wins. If she's not nominated I would send back your stake(1mbtc).

@Saint-loup. It appears you do not understand. Similar to my enjoyment for the movie the Holdovers, I liked Sandra Hüller's performance and to win $100 I would only need to bet $15. This is a bet for fun on the Oscar awards. If this is a bet of inner conviction then I would bet everything I have. You make it appear that this is a serious challenge hehehehe.

In any case, if we are talking about a winning bet. Lily Gladstone is very much praised by the critics and speculated to win but only very few people have taken notice on Sandra Hüller's performance. Also, I can use the same argument on you, if you have Lily Gladstone with inner conviction then why would we need to wait for Emma Stone's performance?

However, I will accept your bet and it appears that you might be afraid that I might not pay by telling me I will be tagged by DT members. I will send you the money and you will also become the escrow for this bet. We use 1mbtc as the price for me to win 6.5 mbtc from the bet. But I have my proposal, if Sandra Hüller is not in the final list of nominations the bet will not continue.

It's not the same thing as a sportsbook bet because at sportsbooks you would lose your stake if any other actress win, while here you would only lose $50 if Gladstone is the winner, and nothing else, so it's not the same thing. Especially if you think Killers of the Flower Moon is not good...
Anyway if Sandra Hüller is your favorite in your heart and your inner conviction it wouldn't be funny to bet on someone else you don't trust and you don't like simply because she is better rated by bookmakers (who are wrong most of the time).
So if you still want to bet on her I'm ready to take your bet at those odds (ie 7.50). It means it would be a 6.5 to 1 paying bet (6.5:1). If you win I would pay you 6.5 what you would pay me if I win. For $50, I would pay you $325. On a sportbook you would pay $50 to bet and receive $375(7.5x) if you win because you would receive your stake back($50) along with your winnings($325)(6.5x). Here you don't pay anything to bet, so you keep your stake but you receive the winnings only(6.5x). What do you think of that?
If you prefer betting on Emma Stone, I can accept it but only if you really like the movie and the actress's performance. So we would need to wait for its release.

@Saint-loup. Hehehehe are you a hustler? Why would I accept your offer if I can risk my money on the sportsbooks' offer with better odds. Sandra Hüller is presently on 7.50 for best actress. However, I will accept your offer if you agree that my bet is Emma Stone against your Lily Gladstone. Also, I cannot agree if the price is in crypto. This will be a problem for the loser. Let us agree on $50 and pay after the winner is announced using an acceptable altcoin if fees on bitcoin are high.

Sandra Hüller is an interesting bet for the best actress award but personally I still stand with Lily Gladstone. Would you like to bet against me? 1 or 2mbtc (it could be less or more, if you prefer)
If none of them win the best actress Oscar, the bet would be voided. If Sandra Hüller win the award I would pay you Xmbtc in the week after the Oscar ceremony (currently scheduled for March 11, 2024 utc), if it's Lily Gladstone you would do the same. In case of high BTC fees, the settlement could be done in a large cap altcoin (failing to pay could lead to be tagged by DT members and a thread in the Reputation section, of course). What do you think?

Ah, I understand. I watched Tenet only once and I have no intentions watching it ever again.


Nope, as movie is 3 and a half hours liong so i have to wait for weekend (most likely Saturday) to be able to watch it in one go.


She is always great! If you haven't already, I suggest you to take a look at one of hers previous movies, Toni Erdmann and she has another inteersting one that should be out soon, The Zone of Interest]https://www.imdb.com/title/tt7160372/?ref_=nm_flmg_t_2_act]The Zone of Interest.

I didn't really consider Killers of Flower Moon as a big big movie and just wanted to see it because Leo and De niro was in it, and I still think that Oppenheimer was better. I still think Oppenheimer is not even remotely close to any other movie, if that doesn't win the best movie of the year then I do not know what I am watching because it is by far the best, not even maybe for me.

I would put 1.01 odds for that movie, that's how much I believe that they should win, doesn't mean they will, academy has made some terrible decisions here and there, so I would guess some years they pick the movie that should win and some years they are just picking something because they want to pick it, and that means we are going to just wait and see if they will give it to the movie that deserves it or the one that they want to give just because they feel like it. The decision making process is a bit weird, you do not exactly know what they look for, certainly not what the people wants, otherwise it would just be marvel movies with billions of box office returns.

Theres the danger of personal bias when judging these category winners.  Tenet is just an easier movie to watch, more entertaining but the awards are for exceptional performances etc.  personally I love all the action movies but they lack the depth to get a win often.  The best route can be in something like soundtrack category where some movies are awesome in the midst of a quite light plot or dialogue.    
  Of those two movies I'd be biased towards Oppenheimer even if its less watchable on repeat because the very nature of the events it describes are world changing and extremely sensitive to handle and describe to a global audience.   Its probably easier to win an oscar in that regard though it doesn't have to be true, a musical or any movie can win but I look out for new or different in some way to advance the  chances of any particular movie.

@Rikafip. No, I said I cannot watch Oppenheimer 4 times similar to what I did to Tenet where I liked Tenet very much on the second viewing then watched it again 2 more times. On Oppenheimer, I reckon 2 viewings is too much hehehe.

In any case, did you like Killers of Flower Moon?

I have already watched Anatomy of a Fall yesterday. The movie is simple and low budget, however, this is the type of movie that would make me run fast to get more snacks. It is a very good movie! Sandra Hüller will be my bet for best actress.

Too late for that.  Few of my good IRL friends already hyped me as they loved the movie (and we have similar taste) so my expectations are already high. But, even witout them its hard not to have high expectations when Scorsese is director and, even though his last movie The Irishman was a big disappointment (imho that mvoie would be great if it was made ~20 years earlier).


You watch Oppenheimer 4 times? U crazy lol. I saw it once and probably won't see it ever again.


I am curios to hear your opinion on the former as for me its one of the best movies this year.

@Rikafip. I remind you to make your expectations lower for Killers of Flower Moon to enjoy the movie. I made my expectations very high and this only caused disappointment very much similar to Oppenheimer. I watched Oppenheimer again with subtitles. It did not give me the same experience similar to Tenet where I did not like it at first viewing, however, on the second viewing I very much liked it which made me do a third and fourth viewing hehhehehe.

I will next watch Anatomy of a fall this week then Poor Things once available.

I watched The Holdovers yesterday (solid rip is out btw, if yoiu want to watch it again) and It completely lived up to my high expectations, definitely one of the best movies this year (along with Past Lives and Anatomy of A Fall). I still have to watch the few candidates though to decide which one I actually like the most and the next one is Killers of The Flower Moon as quality rip finally showed up.



What's the point in making a remake of the american movie that isn't even that old and still looks pretty good? Smh...

Update on the odds for best picture. We have a new entry in the top 10 and this is the movie The Holdovers. The odds for it is presently placed at 10.00, I reckon it was on 25.00 when I created this thread. I was waiting to watch Poor Things and Anatomy of a Fall before making a speculation bet for the best movie, however, I cannot wait anymore hehehe. I knew I should have done this already on The Holdovers after watching it.

Oppenheimer 2.20
 1.77
Killers of The Flower Moon 3.70
 4.50
Poor Things 6.00

Past Lives 9.00
 10.00
[New Entry] The Holdovers 10.00
Lee 12.00
 13.00
Maestro 12.00
 13.00
Anatomy of A Fall 13.00

The Color Purple 15.00
 14.00
Barbie 17.00
 15.00
The Killer 17.00 15.00

Oppenheimer appears to be behaving very much similar to the Fablemans. Odds became smaller before nominations voting then it went bigger after nominations announcement.

From what I see, he was merely sharing his personal opinion on those 3 movies, and not saying that its not good enough to win any Oscars.


I have yet to see Killers of the Flower Moon (waiting for a good screener) but I agree about Oppenheimer/Imitation Game as I wasn't imporessed with neither of those and I think that the are both highly overrrated.

Yes I agree with you but in his initial message bbc.reporter was talking about movies he watched likely to receive Oscars according to him. And from what I understood he isn't thinking that Killers of the Flower Moon is good enough to receive one main Oscar. I think the opposite, for me this movie is "cinematically" better than Oppenheimer. Oppenheimer is not surprising, and looks too much like other movies such as The Imitation Game, I believe.

Its not a joke though, I agree the 5 second view is what the hell is Barbie even in the line up for.  Oscars, film royalty the greatest actors in their generation etc. so why would you do this but comedies can make the Oscars all sorts of film types, funny animated films anything.  I think the main deciding factor and swing to votes is usually a theme of some kind, if you can watch Barbie and find some message and believe thats what the Oscars might vote on and it might win then you have a bet; its 17x odds so we arent requiring much down to win a fair amount it just has to have some slight chance there.   
  Its outside bet for sure but I like the long shot bets, thats just me and Ive yet to decide for sure just yet.  I havent even watched them all yet, thats probably most important.

I am not sure why should movies be comparable in this way. Why couldn't movies with different genres enter into the game? Imho depth is just a matter of perspective and we need all kinds of movies. The idea that movies should all be heavy to process, artsy, or deal with concepts like oppenheimer in order to be taken seriously, would leave us with pretty bleak cinema.

Lack of depth in a movies is in eye of beholder as you can see lots of levels in different movies. They don't all need to be sad or direct about something that happened. It's not about who makes the saddest and most realistic movie should win. And it's not like Barbie went with the easiest route. It went all in bashing the very firm it was advertising. Backgrounds weren't digitally added. But moved by hand. Music was actually well done considering it was mostly musical. Imho it was bold and original, and left Bechdel test seem to be like a bad memory in movie history.

Sometimes being funny is the sugar we need to get the medicine in while being all preachy about it.

Edit: This might make it more difficult for judges to justify "best leading role" or something like that, but i assume it makes it more predictable for outcomes, as many people will see "serious" and sad roles with genocide ect, as winners. Which they often are. But there are other areas to judge, which makes the whole event more interesting and fair

Well, of course that watching such a bad copy can affect your perception of the movie and for exactly that reason I am not watching them anymore.


Oscar nominations are not released yet, but based on what we've seen in previous years, Barbie will most likely end up getting nominated in (the most important) Best Picture category. It made shit load of money ($1.4 billion+) and critics generally liked it meaning both criteria is met. Best Picture nomination lost its value since they increased the number of nominated movies from 5 to 10 so now we get all sorts of mediocre movies nominated.



All that is completely irrelevant when it comes to personal opinion about a movie. Everything Everywhere All At Once won 7 Oscars last year while I coulnd't even finsih the movie and I probably won't give it another try.

You shouldn't say that about Killers of the Flower Moon, this movie is very likely to win at least one or two Oscars IMO because it owns very well reputed and awarded -almost living legendary- actors Leonardo DiCaprio and Robert De Niro and director Martin Scorsese. But mostly because it doesn't try to be commercial unlike Oppenheimer, with such a duration(3h30) and such a subject(a massive scam and murder of Indians) Scorsese knew it won't be a great business success. So I think he made it for the glory. And I bet Lily Gladstone (the squaw) will win the best actress award at least.