The Biggest Snubs And Surprises Of The 2025 Oscars Nominations

So, the whole "this year’s ‘Green Book’” descriptor is something I’ve seen come up a lot in the many criticisms around “Emilia Pérez” over the last several months. Truthfully, I walked out of the movie at the New York Film Festival last year feeling pretty great about it. The performances, two of which are now nominated for Oscars (Karla Sofía Gascón and Zoë Saldaña) are both really good. The story was unusual and interesting. The title character is a Mexican cartel leader (Gascón) who undergoes gender confirmation surgery to live her life as a fully realized woman, faking her death to her wife (Selena Gomez) and their children. Emilia decides to become an advocate for missing and murdered people in Mexico and recruits an unsatisfied lawyer (Saldaňa) to help. When Emilia later decides she cannot live without her children, Emilia finds herself dangerously contending with her past and present urges.

OK, that’s a mouthful and sounds absolutely ridiculous. And, at the time, coming out of the festival, that worked for me. But after reading and speaking to Mexican and trans journalists about their experiences watching the movie (this is a really good example), I found their criticism really valid and compelling — and it complicated all my thoughts around the movie. Everything from the authenticity of transitioning to the trivial way Mexico and femicide in the country is treated in the film. It has some merit, mostly its performances, but still. Add to the issues, this is a movie made by a white, cisgender and French male director (Jacques Audiard, also nominated) that has been arguably marketed to European and white cisgender American audiences — with no Mexican or trans consultants. (Gascón, who is Spanish and a trans woman in real life, did tell The Hollywood Reporter that she pushed back on some truths in the movie, and Audiard was receptive to them, which was undoubtedly helpful. But clearly, the movie needed more.) Thus, “Emilia Pérez” became one of those movies that was categorically problematic for me — and clearly many others who are actually in the community.

Earlier I mentioned how some movies can be about you but not for you, and I think that’s where some folks in the trans and Mexican communities are coming from when they described this movie as another “Green Book.” — Candice

Can we also talk about how I didn’t think the songs were any good? Like, why was this a musical? I know I’ve already said I don’t even like musicals for real, but this seemed like a poor choice. That’s really all I have to add. — Erin

YES, ERIN! I also question the choice to make it a musical. The songs were very unmemorable. A few of the numbers I did think were well-choreographed. But yeah, very questionable decision to make this a musical, on top of the many, many problems with this film.

Candice, great summary of the conversation around this film. I was entertained by it, but didn’t love it (and similarly to “Nickel Boys,” though not to the same degree, was confused by the raves for the movie). Then, like you, I started reading more reviews from trans and Mexican journalists and critics, and now, I’m even more baffled by the raves. I especially don’t love that this is likely going to run away with the Best International Film Oscar, over several more deserving nominees. It’s especially galling given the very problematic and trope-y way the film portrays Mexico and Mexican culture, which are so integral to the story. — Marina

I was really pleasantly surprised to see several great films nominated for Best Documentary. The two that I’ve seen are “Black Box Diaries” and “Sugarcane,” which both premiered at last year’s Sundance Film Festival. The former follows journalist Shiori Ito, who spent years investigating her own sexual assault. The latter is a really thoughtful exploration of Canada’s shameful history of Indigenous boarding schools (which also happened here in the U.S.), directed by HuffPost alums Julian Brave NoiseCat and Emily Kassie, whom our colleague Kelby Vera interviewed recently.

I’ve heard nothing but great things about “No Other Land,” which I really need to see. It’s pretty infuriating that it has yet to get a distributor (but unfortunately unsurprising, given that it’s about Palestine). — Marina

I wasn’t as hot about “Black Box Diaries” as many others were. The filmmaking was a bit too amateurish to me. But I love that “Soundtrack to a Coup d’Etat” got a very deserving nomination. I just wish that “Daughters,” which would make a very good double feature with “Sing Sing,” also made the cut. — Candice

“Nickel Boys” dissenters, reporting for duty. At the opening night press screening for this at New York Film Festival, I was so befuddled because all around me, other reporters and critics were raving about this film. Meanwhile, I was sorting through my pretty mixed feelings about it. Mostly, my head hurt, both from wondering if I had missed something that everyone else seemed to get from it, and from following the film itself. So many people have praised the choice to shoot the film from the POV of the two boys. I understand that and appreciate the technical skill and planning that went into it, a collaboration between the actors and the camera operators. But for me, it didn’t add anything at all. Moreover, it made for such a disorienting viewing experience, and combined with the film’s abstract approach, felt like it was dropping us in and out of scenes. It really wasn’t for me, but it’s been so rare to find reviews from people who felt similarly mixed about it, which is why I keep joking that we’re the “‘Nickel Boys’ dissenters.” — Marina

*Cracks knuckles.* I’ve read many reviews of “Nickel Boys.” Some have called it one of “2024’s strongest films”; it has been praised for how it’s a “cinematic experience like no other.” There’s always at least one movie a year that gets praised like this, and I have to wonder — is it me? Am I crazy? All that to say, I don’t get the hype for “Nickel Boys.” I thought watching the film was disorienting and I could never quite grasp what actually was happening and whose point of view I was deciphering the plot through — especially as it ends. There’s no easy way to make a film that explores trauma and abuse that doesn’t make people uncomfy. But I left the film more concerned about why the film was made like that. There’s so many abstract shots — I have noted several times in conversations about the film that I’m confused as to why we were taken to space every 10 scenes. It felt like an “arty” movie just for the sake of being different, a highbrow look at abuse at a reform school. I’d like to know who this film was made for, and perhaps it could have been a good — albeit haunting — story if it had just been told differently. — Erin

I have stared at this blank page for a long time, wondering what else I am going to say about “Nickel Boys” — and how I want to say it. It’s a difficult film to discuss because so many of my films are wrapped around what I can probably best describe as a lost connection. After writing about the film and awards bodies’ general uneasiness around honoring more than one Black film per year, a Black person, someone I know, commented with something like: I walked out of it feeling like it was a Black movie that was not made for me. I think that’s what I am stuck on; this idea of a movie about Black people that doesn’t resonate with Black people. Obviously, many — including a substantial number of Black folks — love the movie and have written really magnificent and worthy articles on it. But I think this might also be another instance where Black folks don’t feel comfortable openly critiquing a Black film, especially one that has been so well celebrated this year. Because that is a sadly rare feat for any Black film. But I also wonder how many other Black people feel totally disconnected from this movie, and how that has influenced how they feel about it as a whole.

LOL Erin, the external narratives that occur in the movie — the scenes with civil rights icons, space, etc. — were strange for me too. And it seemed like a way to underscore moments that didn’t need to be underscored or, perhaps, to overexplain moments to audiences that needed that. I don’t know. It’s a pretentious movie, but you could say that about many Oscar movies. Still, I do agree that it’s a bit try-hard to the point that it could be losing an audience it might be intended for. — Candice

Lol, exactly. I was like: “What is this space footage?! Why are we here?” Pretty much none of the aesthetic choices of the movie worked for me.

Everyone should read Candice’s really sharp piece about the contrasting reactions and awards campaigns for this versus the wonderful “Exhibiting Forgiveness,” which I think about a lot. — Marina

Clarence Maclin’s performance in “Sing Sing” was one of my favorites of the year. He went toe-to-toe opposite Colman Domingo in a way that was so sincere and convincing that I was just delighted by his performance at every turn. I imagine his name should be in this category — I haven’t seen “A Complete Unknown” yet, but why not swap him in instead of Edward Norton? (I’ll see “A Complete Unknown” before the Oscars and rant about this again at some point.) — Erin

I also think that it was telling that Domingo said that he did some of his best acting in this film because of the skill Maclin and the other men brought. Even with that acknowledgement, it was so clear watching this that Maclin is a star. There were even a few times when he stole the scene standing next to Domingo. That’s no small feat. — Taryn

Still very annoyed about this. And I think if Maclin was white, he would have had a very good shot of being a double nominee. I know he’s newer on the scene, but I stand by that. I’ve seen how the academy has honored people who’ve pulled off this twofer in the past. So. — Candice

The membership of the academy has become much more international over the last decade, so you can usually expect to see at least one international film in the Best Picture lineup. There were many worthy contenders — I’m sad to not see “All We Imagine As Light” get more nods, for instance. But I’m happy to see “I’m Still Here” included here. I’ll admit it was only peripherally on my radar until the film’s lead actor Fernanda Torres won a surprise Golden Globe a couple of weeks back, which prompted me to finally see it. I went into it not knowing much about it, and came out absolutely blown away. It’s a wonderful drama about a family who was persecuted during Brazil’s military dictatorship. Torres plays the family’s matriarch, who spent decades trying to find answers about her husband, who was murdered by the government but whose death was never acknowledged. Highly recommend. — Marina

I’m going to bump this film up on my priority watch list. — Erin

Yeah, basically everything Marina already said. I think the film is definitely worth a watch and is very solid. But I am kinda shocked to see it here in the best picture category. I love a nice surprise, though! It’s so rare at the Oscars! Still, I think Torres is the best thing about the movie. Hers is such a quiet, subtle and difficult performance that she makes look so effortless. — Candice

I didn’t want to watch this movie, but, man, are the performances by Sebastian Stan as Donald Trump and Jeremy Strong as his former lawyer Roy Cohn so good? Absolutely. When I finished the film, I really sat there like, damn, I really just witnessed how Trump became Trump by watching this film. I would not be mad if either of them win in their categories. I also am glad that Stan didn’t get a performance nomination for “A Different Man,” which I couldn’t even finish. He’s much stronger in “The Apprentice.” — Erin

I have a ton of complicated thoughts about “The Apprentice” that have a lot to do with the way an increasingly conservative Hollywood, and most certainly Black audiences, feel about a Trump film of any kind. But I think the movie has merit, and that Jeremy Strong is especially good in it. I’m not mad at either of these nominations. — Candice

Agreed, Candice. I always think about your great, incisive review of it. Did this movie need to be made? Who is the audience for it? Does it give anyone any new information that they didn’t already know about Donald Trump? No. But man, these performances were so chillingly mesmerizing, especially Strong as Cohn. Oof.

Also, curious to see if a certain president goes on a rant about this… — Marina

Folks have been going up for Cynthia Erivo’s performance in “Wicked” since day one. I think she’s good in the movie, and I think Ariana Grande is good in it. But I also think that so much of the hoopla around this movie has been overblown standom for both people who ride hard for Grande the pop star and the original Broadway musical. For that reason, I feel like people were claiming this movie and the performances in it were great before they even saw it. And I think that the academy is desperate for young audiences to watch the awards, so they felt compelled to recognize the film here. So, while I do think the film has some merit (though, it is too long and should not have been split into two parts), I question the motives here. — Candice

Yeah, it’s giving they want Grande and Erivo to perform at the awards for ratings. I’m just saying! I’m not really a fan of film musicals to be honest, so I thought the movie was fine. But it definitely breaks my rule that any good movie shouldn’t be over two hours. — Erin

I keep thinking about your piece about how heavily “Wicked” was marketed, Candice. I was surprised to see it get so much love from the academy, but I truly think the cash they threw at putting “Wicked” literally everywhere is why it got several nods. I did think the film was good, the songs were catchy (though excessive) and Erivo’s acting was good, but I didn’t expect Grande to get an acting nod for it at all. Like, am I missing something? — Taryn

I’m not surprised at this. The academy, as you all have said already, likes to leave a spot for the big box-office spectacle of the year, so once “Wicked” made so much money over Thanksgiving weekend, it seemed inevitable it would start getting a ton of awards buzz. I have so many mixed feelings about “Wicked” too — a three-hour musical broken up into two parts, the first of which was almost as long as the entire musical itself?! Such a cash grab. I enjoyed seeing it with my parents in a packed theater over Thanksgiving weekend. It’s good to see so many people going to movie theaters. But the cash grab of it all, and the impulse to have to make everything into a franchise, left me so cynical by the end of the movie (which, again, is only the first part!!!). And yeah, while I enjoyed the spectacle of the movie and the experience of seeing it, it was mostly just … fine? Nothing to rave about, nothing to throw a bunch of awards at. — Marina

“Sing Sing” was the best film I saw last year. Hands down. And it deserved to be in this category. It was stellar all around. From the acting, to the screenplay to the fact that the cast and crew were given equal share of the film’s equity, it’s surprising (and disappointing) that this film doesn’t get more praise. The film stars Colman Domingo alongside a cast of formerly incarcerated men (Clarence "Divine Eye" Maclin, Sean San José, Jon-Adrian "JJ" Velazquez, among others) who participated in the theater arts program while serving time at Sing Sing Correctional Facility in New York. Though it stars established pros Domingo and Paul Raci, the men who are starring as themselves, telling their own stories of how the stage gave them the hope and strength to press on while incarcerated, is the most moving part of “Sing Sing.” Though it snagged a handful of nods, the academy made a glaring mistake not including this in the Best Picture category. — Taryn

Yeah, I am extremely pissed about this one. I’m happy that Maclin was nominated in the Best Adapted Screenplay category (well deserved!), but he definitely should have also been nominated in the supporting performance category. (And I would have swapped out Edward Norton’s nom for “A Complete Unknown” for Maclin.) The fact that only Colman Domingo was nominated as a performer — especially when many other white films here have several undeserved performances nominated — is more proof that the academy has no imagination, no sense of risk. They’re boring and clearly don’t know or appreciate how to qualify Black and brown talent. — Candice

So pissed! When this film came out over the summer, everyone was raving about it (as they should), and it felt like it had a lot of awards momentum. But by the fall, when the more “traditional” (heavy on the air quotes there) Oscars season contenders started to roll out, the enthusiasm for “Sing Sing” started to peter out, and I feared people would forget about it. I’m really sad to have been right. I’m so happy for Colman Domingo — but he should have been a slam-dunk nominee, not someone I was fearing would get snubbed, as he has been at several other award shows this season. A24 did re-release the film recently to get it back on awards voters’ radars, but that doesn’t appear to have been enough. Once again, it brings up so many of the questions we ask every year about which kinds of films get the resources for award campaigns, get anointed as contenders, etc., etc., etc. Endlessly frustrating. — Marina

So thrilled to see all the love for “The Substance,” especially in Best Picture, Best Director and Best Actress. The academy famously is not too keen on genre films, so I wasn’t expecting this film to figure heavily as a possible awards contender. I’m so happy for Demi Moore: She gives such an incredible, career-defining performance in the film, and there’s something fascinating and poetic about the meta quality of it. The experience of her character, an actress whom Hollywood has discarded in favor of younger actresses, bears a lot of obvious parallels to her own decadeslong career. Really wonderful to see her get her flowers for this role. I’m also happy to see director Coralie Fargeat included in Best Director — but as I say every year, it’s confounding to me that the academy seems to think they can only nominate one (1) woman for Best Director (if they even nominate a woman at all). — Marina

Totally agree, Marina. Oscars famously hate horror films. So, I am glad to see both “The Substance” and “Nosferatu” get recognized this morning. I do wish that Lily-Rose Depp was nominated for “Nosferatu,” though, and that Margaret Qualley was nominated for “The Substance.” (And I would have very easily swapped Isabella Rossellini or Monica Barbaro out for Qualley in the Actress in a Supporting Role category, but alas). — Candice

Marina, to your point about the Best Director category — it’s become a habit of mine to see if a woman has even been nominated on Oscar nominations morning. And you’re right, it’s so, so, so rare that there is more than one. But yes, I’m happy for “The Substance” nominations! It was such a fun and disturbing viewing experience, in the best way. — Erin