Deleted
Posts: 0
Sept 28, 2024 3:23:28 GMT -4
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 20, 2013 4:44:20 GMT -4
Well, Hathaway will win for sure so no worries there, hushhush ;-)
|
|
|
Post by twodollars on Jan 23, 2013 17:16:39 GMT -4
Why? WHY? ? (Warning: rant ahead!) I can't stand HH, and would like to reiterate my longstanding assertion that her Oscar for As Good As It Gets should be taken from her and given to any of the other four actresses who were in the nomination pool that year. (Helen Hunt beats out Judi Dench NEVER in my book! Judi Dench has more talent, charisma, and screen presence in her ring finger than Helen Hunt has in her whole body.) From what I've seen of Hunt's performance in that movie, she fit the part and did a good job, but I could also think of about 5 other actresses who could have done just as well or better than she did! My point being, she was nothing special! And she's pretty much the only thing nominated from The Sessions?! Bah. HH must have one helluva for-your-consideration campaign team is all I can say. I agree 100% with your post. In my opinion, Greg Kinnear was the only good thing about As Good As It Gets and Helen Hunt was only good in Girls Just Want to Have Fun.
|
|
jynni
Sloane Ranger
Play?
Posts: 2,313
Mar 21, 2005 11:05:04 GMT -4
|
Post by jynni on Jan 23, 2013 21:26:45 GMT -4
I just want Quvenzhané Wallis to win, although my guess is that she doesn't have a prayer. Barring her, then Emmanuelle Riva. If not Riva, then Jessica Chastain. Oh god, please no. I thought Wallis was terrible. Cringe inducing bad, even for a kid. Completely wooden and one note. She made the Potter kids in the first movie seem Oscar worthy. And nominating little kids in general just irks me because they mostly don't know what the hell they're doing. The director stands there and tells them what emotions to indicate and the editor strings together a "performance". I think it's a big part of why many can't sustain a career into adulthood or never live up to the expectations of a"brilliant" childhood/preteen role - they just plain don't know how to actually act.
|
|
|
Post by Atreides on Jan 23, 2013 22:46:00 GMT -4
Totally agree, jynni. I haven't seen Wallis but child actors in general are like that. Their "good acting" is mostly because they're too young to have the filters that adulthood puts on you.
Yeah, I'm looking at you too, Anna Paquin. She's a decent actress but nothing mind-blowing and certainly not deserving of winning an Oscar.
|
|
huntergrayson
Guest
Sept 28, 2024 3:23:28 GMT -4
|
Post by huntergrayson on Jan 25, 2013 8:26:45 GMT -4
They used to have a separate juvenile category, right?
I've seen virtually NOTHING this year because I want to beg my coworker who happens to be in SAG for ALL the screeners, but...
I JUST saw Silver Linings Playbook...and totally awesome and nomination worthy and so forth - but?
You HAVE GOT to be kidding me with this nomination for Weaver for Supporting Actress. Her entire character consisted of moon eyes and random inane questions every twenty minutes.
That slot should be Dame Judi's for her final appearance as M in Skyfall. Point blank truth.
|
|
|
Post by canuckcutie on Jan 25, 2013 11:45:27 GMT -4
I've seen Django, Silver Linings, Life of Pi, Zero, Argo and Les Mis. Plus Flight & The Impossible. Don't really have a desire to see Armour or Beasts. I may try to go see Lincoln. I just worry that it'll bore me.
|
|
|
Post by Mugsy on Jan 25, 2013 15:59:43 GMT -4
So which one do you think will win Best Picture? Which one would you want to win?
|
|
|
Post by GoldenFleece on Jan 25, 2013 21:15:34 GMT -4
I think Best Picture is a three-horse race between Lincoln, Silver Linings Playbook and Argo. Lincoln has the gravitas, SLP got all those acting nods, which shows a big amount of Academy support (plus, Harvey will want to make it three in a row for The Weinstein Co.), and Argo will benefit from Ben-wuz-robbed! sentiment.
|
|
plush
Sloane Ranger
Posts: 2,018
Feb 11, 2006 16:34:33 GMT -4
|
Post by plush on Jan 26, 2013 1:25:22 GMT -4
Of all the nominated BPs I have seen 6. I have yet to see Amour, ZDT and Pi. My ratings are:
1. Lincoln 2. Beasts of the Southern Wild 3. Silver Lining Playbook 4. Argo 5. Django ............................................. ..............................................
6. Les Miserables
I am pretty sure Les Mis willl be the last one after I see the other three plus The Master & Flight & Rust/Bone & The Deep Blue Sea.
I completely agree with the wtf nomination for Jackie Weaver. I will also throw Robert De Niro in there as well. He has a half away decent performance after so many years and all the critics are falling over themselves to praise him. I could still see his annoying facial expressions from Meet the Parents. Now even when he makes a sad face he makes me laugh. I can't get past that. Same for Alan Arkin! How was his role any different than the one he played in Little Miss Sunshine where he got an Oscar? Same tough talking, smartass firecracker. Meanwhile Leo D gives a memorable performance as one scary, charming, absolutely insane villain yet he gets shit. Forget Ben Affleck being robbed in a year of so many talented directors. Leo wuz robbed !!!!!
On the other hand, I was quite surprised with Bradley Cooper. Silver Lining is a crazy, oddball, funny and yet romantic movie that starts out a little slow initially but will charm you in the end. I thought both Cooper and Lawrence were excellent in their roles. Might be my favorite JLaw performance actually and I have seen Winter's Bone (meh) and The Hunger Games (ok). I had seen Coop in Hangover only and he was good in that too but didn't think he could pull off a tough dramatic part like Patrick's in SLP. I am now thinking he should have won over Hugh Jackman but that may be due to my dislike for Les Miserables and Jackman's so so singing. Jackman's acting was one of the few redeeming things about that movie.
In short, my money for Best Picture is still on Lincoln.
|
|
|
Post by Binky on Jan 26, 2013 1:46:10 GMT -4
I think BP will be Argo. (And why Ben didn't get a Director nomination is beyond me). It's a very solid movie, with none of the advantages of Lincoln (iconic, Daniel Day-Lewis, Spielberg) while having some of the same challenges (historic, political) and in some ways more difficult because of being a modern historic piece and lacking a powerhouse actor (though all the ensemble were very good).
If you'd have told me years ago that Ben Affleck would win a second Oscar before Matt Damon, I wouldn't have believed it.
|
|