Deleted
Posts: 0
Sept 25, 2024 0:28:30 GMT -4
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 22, 2009 17:26:56 GMT -4
The one nomination I'm happy for is Richard Jenkins for The Visitor. I thought he was going to be overlooked. I'm glad for him; however, thanks to Brangelina phenomenom, he won't have a chance in hell. It's all about Billy Brad.
|
|
rockthecasbah
Guest
Sept 25, 2024 0:28:30 GMT -4
|
Post by rockthecasbah on Jan 22, 2009 17:46:46 GMT -4
I'm shocked that Leonardo DiCaprio wasn't nominated. He gave a brilliant, breathtaking performance and gets nothing while Brad Pitt, who gave an average performance, gets the nomination? Angelina "I want MY son back!" Jolie over Kristin Scott Thomas? I really do think these two get awards just because of who they are and the whole "Brangelina!" hype.
I thought Revolutionary Road would get the Best Picture nomination instead of The Reader, so I'm surprised by that. I would have liked to see The Dark Knight get the best picture nomination, but I wasn't expecting it. I thought Christopher Nolan might get a Directing nomination (and Sam Mendes, too, for that matter), but I guess not. And I thought Kate Winslet should have gotten nominated for Revolutionary Road rather than The Reader, but her nomination was really for her work in both films, and I'm hoping she finally gets her win this year. I guess she's passed on the "overlooked" and "loser" labels to Leo now.
|
|
|
Post by bklynred on Jan 22, 2009 17:51:25 GMT -4
I like Angelina but the Changeling was not her best work. A lot of hysteria, but not a ton of substance in her role. Not sure what happened there.
|
|
|
Post by Mugsy on Jan 22, 2009 20:57:03 GMT -4
Is there any reason why there have to be five, and only five, nominees in the major categories? Way back in the day there'd be more noms, depending on how many worthy nominees there were. Why was that changed?
|
|
ohnoshedidnt
Guest
Sept 25, 2024 0:28:30 GMT -4
|
Post by ohnoshedidnt on Jan 22, 2009 21:09:04 GMT -4
I don't know who I'd swap him out for, and I know nobody's been paying attention to him this award season, but I'm slightly bummed that Michael Sheen didn't get a nod for Frost/Nixon. Frank Langella was amazing in that movie and I'd honestly like him to win, but Sheen matched him at every step. Ah well. I read a few months ago that he wanted the studio to campaign for the lead and they felt it was better for supporting. I guess they didn't want to split the vote.
|
|
|
Post by kostgard on Jan 22, 2009 21:22:09 GMT -4
|
|
|
Post by scarlet on Jan 22, 2009 22:37:41 GMT -4
Since I'm one of those people who was underwhelmed by Slumdog Millionaire I'm actually pretty happy that the one actor (whose name I don't even know) wasn't nominated, as he was in the Best Supporting category though he was clearly the lead. I don't like that kind of category manipulation.
I'm pleased with most of the noms--though I wish James Franco had squeaked in there for Milk--and am really hoping this is finally (finally!) Kate's year.
|
|
aibohphobia
Blueblood
Posts: 1,341
Jan 29, 2006 20:23:45 GMT -4
|
Post by aibohphobia on Jan 22, 2009 22:40:27 GMT -4
The love for The Reader is purely thematic - the Academy traditionally creams itself for Holocaust movies. Yes, hopefully I don't come across as a TDK fangirl because I do think it had it's problems. I'm just surprised although I know I shouldn't be that The Reader got nominated for Best Picture. It wasn't as well received by critics or at the box office even though there were other films that were. TDK is one of those films, but there were others that wouldn't seem as baffling like WALL-E, The Wrestler, Gran Torino, or even Doubt which I wouldn't have been surprised with because of all four primary actors being nominated which meant it had support from the largest voting branch of the Academy. I know that nominating The Reader is a way of honoring Sydney Pollack and Anthony Minghella one last time, but it just seems so safe and boring to nominate that kind of film when there were better choices out there. It feels like when movies like Chocolat, The Cider House Rules, or Finding Neverland among other safe choices are nominated for Best Picture. They're not the worst films ever, but it's very easy to find better choices than the safe choice. Of course, I'm probably expecting too much from this group, but I do think that they at least tend to be better than the other two big award shows the Emmies and the Grammies. Anyhow, things that I'm happy about: -Melissa Leo and Richard Jenkins being remembered. -Only one case of category fraud, and PSH isn't going to win anyway. -Kate Winslet only being nominated once that way she'll have a better chance to win her category instead of possible vote splitting since she could conceivably have won in both categories had she been nominated. -No John Williams! Things I don't like: -Ugh, it looks like the Weinsteins are back to being Oscar players. I thought the Academy had finally had enough of their underhanded campaigning, but I guess not. -No Bruce Springsteen nomination. Usually I don't like the Globes because of how they can be bought so easily, but they're starting to look like a much better alternative lately. Their award shows are much shorter and funnier. Even with some questionable nominations being bought and their love of favorites, at least they're Best Song category is a million times better than what the Academy ends up nominating, and with the Drama and Comedy split, it helps recognize more films that otherwise wouldn't get that chance like In Bruges. (Of course, oftentimes they nominate crap because they have more open spots to fill, but no award show is perfect.) -Brangelina being nominated. It's not that they weren't fine in their films, but the smugness factor is going to become even more unbearable. Although on the plus side, Gwneth Paltrow is probably even more miserable today than she normally is.
|
|
|
Post by Binky on Jan 22, 2009 22:53:17 GMT -4
I'm happy about Taraji P. Henson - I thought she was the best thing about Benjamin Button . I liked Brad Pitt, but Sean Penn was amazing in Milk and better than Pitt.
I haven't seen The Reader, but it sure sounds like Winslet is a lock.
|
|
wallflower
Guest
Sept 25, 2024 0:28:30 GMT -4
|
Post by wallflower on Jan 23, 2009 4:45:02 GMT -4
The love for The Reader is purely thematic - the Academy traditionally creams itself for Holocaust movies. Yes, hopefully I don't come across as a TDK fangirl because I do think it had it's problems. I'm just surprised although I know I shouldn't be that The Reader got nominated for Best Picture. It wasn't as well received by critics or at the box office even though there were other films that were. TDK is one of those films, but there were others that wouldn't seem as baffling like WALL-E, The Wrestler, Gran Torino, or even Doubt which I wouldn't have been surprised with because of all four primary actors being nominated which meant it had support from the largest voting branch of the Academy. I know that nominating The Reader is a way of honoring Sydney Pollack and Anthony Minghella one last time, but it just seems so safe and boring to nominate that kind of film when there were better choices out there. It feels like when movies like Chocolat, The Cider House Rules, or Finding Neverland among other safe choices are nominated for Best Picture. They're not the worst films ever, but it's very easy to find better choices than the safe choice. Of course, I'm probably expecting too much from this group, but I do think that they at least tend to be better than the other two big award shows the Emmies and the Grammies. Anyhow, things that I'm happy about: -Melissa Leo and Richard Jenkins being remembered. -Only one case of category fraud, and PSH isn't going to win anyway. -Kate Winslet only being nominated once that way she'll have a better chance to win her category instead of possible vote splitting since she could conceivably have won in both categories had she been nominated. -No John Williams! Things I don't like: -Ugh, it looks like the Weinsteins are back to being Oscar players. I thought the Academy had finally had enough of their underhanded campaigning, but I guess not. -No Bruce Springsteen nomination. Usually I don't like the Globes because of how they can be bought so easily, but they're starting to look like a much better alternative lately. Their award shows are much shorter and funnier. Even with some questionable nominations being bought and their love of favorites, at least they're Best Song category is a million times better than what the Academy ends up nominating, and with the Drama and Comedy split, it helps recognize more films that otherwise wouldn't get that chance like In Bruges. (Of course, oftentimes they nominate crap because they have more open spots to fill, but no award show is perfect.) -Brangelina being nominated. It's not that they weren't fine in their films, but the smugness factor is going to become even more unbearable. Although on the plus side, Gwneth Paltrow is probably even more miserable today than she normally is. I just have to second the Melissa Leo shoutout. I think we're the only ones who have seen Frozen River. I mentioned it earlier in this thread (I think), but it's heartbreaking, and she's wonderful. (And I saw it just as this economic meltdown was becoming apparent, so it was particularly heartbreaking, as I can imagine many American families pressed to do things they wouldn't have done 12 months ago.)
|
|