As William Goldman told us -- or maybe it was David Poland -- nobody knows anything. With that in mind: Let's assess the meaning of the SAG nominations! Since actors make up the Academy's largest voting block, these must mean something, right? Maybe not: Inglourious Basterds won the SAG equivalent of Best Picture last year (Best Ensemble) and we all know how well that worked out. Still, there were a few winners and losers following this morning's announcement; time to name them as such.
WINNER: Hillary Swank
Hey, remember Conviction? SAG does! They nominated Swank for the fourth time (fifth if you count her ensemble nod with the cast of Million Dollar Baby) for a movie that was long thought to be dead and buried. Before you scoff at this nomination, though, consider: SAG didn't acknowledge Swank's theatrics last year in Amelia (a similarly forgotten early fall prestige release), meaning perhaps they just really liked her in Conviction; it's not like she's reached honorary nominee status just yet. If Swank was one of the five Best Actress nominees, you'd be shocked, but not really.
LOSER: Michelle Williams
Then there's Michelle Williams. To be fair, Blue Valentine was shut out en masse at the SAGs -- Ryan Gosling wasn't nominated either -- but Williams does seem potentially vulnerable come Oscar time. She doesn't have the track record of Swank, and Oscar already seems dead-set on giving Jennifer Lawrence the "ingenue" slot at the ceremonies. Besides, wasn't she better in Shutter Island? (Just sayin'.)
WINNER: John Hawkes
After being relatively ignored during the critics' nominations this week, Hawkes needed something splashy to remind voters that he was great in Winter's Bone. What he got was a SAG nomination. Hey, good enough!
LOSER: Andrew Garfield
Garfield, Justin Timberlake and Armie Hammer are all deserving nominees for their work in The Social Network, and none may ultimately get nominated. It's the matter of splitting votes really: Is Garfield that much better than his co-stars? In the end, SAG might be prescient here, with either Mark Ruffalo, Jeremy Renner or Hawkes taking what was thought to be The Social Network's birthright.
WINNER: Robert Duvall
Colin Firth, Jesse Eisenberg and James Franco are locked in as Best Actor nominees. After that? A big muddle with Javier Bardem, Ryan Gosling, Jeff Bridges and Duvall all competing for two slots. Considering the buzz surrounding Gosling and Bridges -- not to mention the fact that everyone pretty much agrees that Bardem gives the best performance of the year -- it wasn't hard to envision a scenario where Duvall got left out in the cold. That he didn't at SAG bodes well for the future.
LOSER: Mark Wahlberg
WINNER: Betty White
The Hot in Cleveland star just doesn't get enough notice.
LOSER: TV Critics
You have to love the chattering class of TV critics on Twitter, if only because they take everything so personally. "Seriously, SAG Awards?" writes Vulture's Joe Adalian. "The ensemble of Hot in Cleveland gets nommed but NOT that of Community or Parks & Rec or Cougar Town or The Middle?" Seriously. Maybe SAG just didn't like those shows as much as everyone else does. After all, you can never account for taste.