Emma Stone was nominated for two Oscars this week – Best Actress and Best Picture for Poor Things since she’s also a producer on the film. 


That makes her the second woman, after Frances McDormand (Nomadland), to be nominated for acting in a Best Picture nominee. Obviously not bad company to be in, considering that Frances has four Oscars: three for acting and one for producing. And remember, all of Frances’s acting Oscars are in the lead category, which some would consider to be more than Meryl Streep who also has three acting Oscars, though one of those is in the supporting category. Frances’s equal in the Oscar department, then, is Daniel Day-Lewis, and I’m sure I don’t have to tell you how people talk about him. 


I’m not saying that Emma is there yet, but I am saying that she’s the frontrunner in the Best Actress race right now so she’s close to getting her second. 

Emma was at SAG-AFTRA Foundation yesterday doing a career retrospective Q&A. Some might say that at 35 years old, a career retrospective is a bit premature. Clearly the campaign strategists think it’s the right move though, to position her as someone who has been in the business for a long time, since she was a teenager, going from Olive Penderghast in Easy A to Bella Baxter in Poor Things – adolescent girl to Serious Award-Winning Actress and Producer. That’s part of the narrative for Emma during this award season run: dismantling any previous perception that she’s still one of the younger girls in the industry and establishing her as one of the greats of her generation.


 SAG voting is currently underway and will run until just before the awards on February 24, four days after the BAFTAs. Lily Gladstone, who is probably the closest nominee to Emma in terms of odds in the Best Actress field, was not nominated for a BAFTA. There’s a lot of overlap between BAFTA and the Oscar Academy. There is also overlap between the Screen Actors Guild and the Oscar Academy. So it’ll be interesting to see what happens at the SAGs and whether or not Lily can make up some ground in the next few weeks. Right now, though, Emma’s clearly not letting up on the campaign effort. She wants seconds. 

And I want to know why she chose to wear tights underneath these pants? I like the length of the pants, but I feel like tights were the wrong choice. I would have done with socks, pulled just above the ankle, leaving a couple of inches of skin between the pants and the socks. But maybe that’s just me…because I haaaaaate the feel of tights under pants, I don’t know how people can stand it.