| re: What SAG nominations might mean for 'Wicked' | |
| Posted by: mikem 12:05 am EST 01/10/25 | |
| In reply to: What SAG nominations might mean for 'Wicked' - WaymanWong 09:41 pm EST 01/08/25 | |
|
|
|
| I believe SAG Award eligibility for Outstanding Cast in a Motion Picture is very straightforward. If a cast member has single-card billing in the main titles (ie, their name appears by itself on screen, with no other cast member's name, when the cast is revealed in the opening titles (or end titles if there are no opening titles)), then they are included in the Outstanding Cast nomination, and if not, they are not included. There is no mechanism for petitioning to include someone who doesn't have single-card billing. Who gets single-card billing has to do with the role but also with how well-known the actor is and who has the better agent, hence Bowen Yang getting single-card billing while Bronwyn James did not for a similar role. (The eligibility for cast members in TV shows is more complicated.) One extreme example of single-card billing not reflecting the significance of the role is that Harry Shum Jr was included in the SAG nomination for Cast for Crazy Rich Asians, even though his entire appearance in the film was in an end-credits scene that literally lasted 20 seconds and in which he had no dialogue or did anything except glance meaningfully at someone a couple of times. His role is very prominent in the next book, although I doubt the film sequel will ever be made at this point. |
|
| Link | The entirety of Harry Shum's SAG-nominated role in Crazy Rich Asians |
| reply | |
|
|
|
| Previous: | What SAG nominations might mean for 'Wicked' - WaymanWong 09:41 pm EST 01/08/25 |
| Next: | re: What SAG nominations might mean for 'Wicked' - WaymanWong 02:31 am EST 01/10/25 |
| Thread: |
|
Time to render: 0.020185 seconds.