<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: 2008 Academy Awards Odds</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.slashfilm.com/2008/01/22/2008-academy-awards-odds/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.slashfilm.com/2008/01/22/2008-academy-awards-odds/</link>
	<description>Blogging the Reel World</description>
	<pubDate>Wed,  9 Jul 2008 06:52:46 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Dylan McAvenia.</title>
		<link>http://www.slashfilm.com/2008/01/22/2008-academy-awards-odds/#comment-178467</link>
		<dc:creator>Dylan McAvenia.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Jan 2008 19:05:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.slashfilm.com/2008/01/22/2008-academy-awards-odds/#comment-178467</guid>
		<description>Daniel Day Lewis won this oscar two weeks ago.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Daniel Day Lewis won this oscar two weeks ago.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jamie</title>
		<link>http://www.slashfilm.com/2008/01/22/2008-academy-awards-odds/#comment-177802</link>
		<dc:creator>Jamie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Jan 2008 01:59:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.slashfilm.com/2008/01/22/2008-academy-awards-odds/#comment-177802</guid>
		<description>It depends on what you think is good. A lower number means there is a higher chance a particular film will be a winner. A higher number means the odds are longer but the payoff is greater (if you were actually using these odds for wagering).

So if you bet on Old Men for Best Picture and bet a dollar, you'd win 91 cents (10/11). 10 divided by 11 = .91. That's the payout. Not very good for risking a dollar - that means it's an extreme favorite by their calculations.

On the other hand, if you're Peter Sciretta, you'll bet your buck on Juno for Best Picture at 7/2 odds. 7 divided by 2 = 3.50. That means Peter will win $3.50 if the dark horse comes in.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It depends on what you think is good. A lower number means there is a higher chance a particular film will be a winner. A higher number means the odds are longer but the payoff is greater (if you were actually using these odds for wagering).</p>
<p>So if you bet on Old Men for Best Picture and bet a dollar, you&#8217;d win 91 cents (10/11). 10 divided by 11 = .91. That&#8217;s the payout. Not very good for risking a dollar - that means it&#8217;s an extreme favorite by their calculations.</p>
<p>On the other hand, if you&#8217;re Peter Sciretta, you&#8217;ll bet your buck on Juno for Best Picture at 7/2 odds. 7 divided by 2 = 3.50. That means Peter will win $3.50 if the dark horse comes in.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mark</title>
		<link>http://www.slashfilm.com/2008/01/22/2008-academy-awards-odds/#comment-177713</link>
		<dc:creator>Mark</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Jan 2008 00:28:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.slashfilm.com/2008/01/22/2008-academy-awards-odds/#comment-177713</guid>
		<description>And can somebody please explain to me, what these strange numbers mean (like 10/11 or 3/1)? Is a greater or a smaller number "good"?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>And can somebody please explain to me, what these strange numbers mean (like 10/11 or 3/1)? Is a greater or a smaller number &#8220;good&#8221;?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mark</title>
		<link>http://www.slashfilm.com/2008/01/22/2008-academy-awards-odds/#comment-177706</link>
		<dc:creator>Mark</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Jan 2008 00:20:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.slashfilm.com/2008/01/22/2008-academy-awards-odds/#comment-177706</guid>
		<description>@thomas: There will always be different opinions. But I agree with most of the Academy nominations. Denzel Washington's performance was good, but there are only five Best Actors - to include him they whould have to leave another one out. I haven't seen Tommy Lee Jones in "In the Valley of Elah" yet, but the other four actors definitely deserved their nominations. At the moment I would even consider James McAvoy's performance as the runner-up to those five noms.

Regardless of the performances I'm not really a great fan of "American Gangster". Like I wrote in the other thread it's inferior to "The Departed" and Ridley Scott has his usual problems with the final cut.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@thomas: There will always be different opinions. But I agree with most of the Academy nominations. Denzel Washington&#8217;s performance was good, but there are only five Best Actors - to include him they whould have to leave another one out. I haven&#8217;t seen Tommy Lee Jones in &#8220;In the Valley of Elah&#8221; yet, but the other four actors definitely deserved their nominations. At the moment I would even consider James McAvoy&#8217;s performance as the runner-up to those five noms.</p>
<p>Regardless of the performances I&#8217;m not really a great fan of &#8220;American Gangster&#8221;. Like I wrote in the other thread it&#8217;s inferior to &#8220;The Departed&#8221; and Ridley Scott has his usual problems with the final cut.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jamie</title>
		<link>http://www.slashfilm.com/2008/01/22/2008-academy-awards-odds/#comment-177517</link>
		<dc:creator>Jamie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Jan 2008 21:58:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.slashfilm.com/2008/01/22/2008-academy-awards-odds/#comment-177517</guid>
		<description>In terms of odds, I'd have to disagree with putting Jason Reitman above Paul Thomas Anderson for best director. 

Juno has very high awareness, so do Page and Cody. Reitman doesn't. I would also put Page as the highest for the winning Best Actress...

Juno will most likely take home Best Original Screenplay and plus an Oscar for page.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In terms of odds, I&#8217;d have to disagree with putting Jason Reitman above Paul Thomas Anderson for best director. </p>
<p>Juno has very high awareness, so do Page and Cody. Reitman doesn&#8217;t. I would also put Page as the highest for the winning Best Actress&#8230;</p>
<p>Juno will most likely take home Best Original Screenplay and plus an Oscar for page.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: dan</title>
		<link>http://www.slashfilm.com/2008/01/22/2008-academy-awards-odds/#comment-177499</link>
		<dc:creator>dan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Jan 2008 21:36:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.slashfilm.com/2008/01/22/2008-academy-awards-odds/#comment-177499</guid>
		<description>I wouldn'y say CRAZY, Viggo did a fantastic job in EP...as for Depp, I loveh im..but I don't think he's Best Actor worthy over Denzel.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I wouldn&#8217;y say CRAZY, Viggo did a fantastic job in EP&#8230;as for Depp, I loveh im..but I don&#8217;t think he&#8217;s Best Actor worthy over Denzel.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: thomas</title>
		<link>http://www.slashfilm.com/2008/01/22/2008-academy-awards-odds/#comment-177451</link>
		<dc:creator>thomas</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Jan 2008 20:37:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.slashfilm.com/2008/01/22/2008-academy-awards-odds/#comment-177451</guid>
		<description>WTF!!!!!! Denzel Washington gets NO nods for his work in American Gangster AND the great debators BUT Viggo Mortesen and Johnny Depp do. Hollywood has officially gone crazy</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>WTF!!!!!! Denzel Washington gets NO nods for his work in American Gangster AND the great debators BUT Viggo Mortesen and Johnny Depp do. Hollywood has officially gone crazy</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
