Page 1 of 2
Posted: Tue Feb 19, 2008 9:54 pm
by Big Magilla
OG removed the links to that and the two identical posts in other threads, which are apparently the work of a spammer.
Posted: Tue Feb 19, 2008 9:36 pm
by Hustler
Crunchy wrote:lol this is what i think of the nominees:
(OG: Link removed)
What happeneed with that post?
Posted: Tue Feb 19, 2008 5:16 pm
by Crunchy
lol this is what i think of the nominees:
(OG: Link removed)
Edited By OscarGuy on 1203460222
Posted: Tue Feb 19, 2008 4:32 pm
by Akash
Wow Uri, that wasn't my original opinion at all, but your argument is convincing. Good read.
Posted: Tue Feb 19, 2008 3:52 pm
by Uri
The Original BJ wrote:Uri wrote:And I think as a rule, non English speaking films shouldn't be eligible for the Oscars anyway.
Would you mind elaborating on this opinion? I don't think I've ever heard this before.
Ah, this good old debate. Here's something I wrote almost a decade ago. It's still relevant, I think.
Quite a few years ago, in a British comedy show there was a sketch in which the Americans were to be persecuted for calling their baseball final games “The World Series” – “having one Canadian team doesn’t make it an international affair” was one of the arguments, and rightly so.
The Oscars are the World Series of movies – an internal industry affair getting a stratospheric status because of the world wide popularity of the products it promotes. The fact that the academy is gracious enough to acknowledge from time to time some effort made by poor natives of some remote little province called Europe doesn’t change this fact. In a way it’s not an indication of an open mind but an act of clarifying who the real boss is – it’s a colonial maneuver. Expecting, or even allowing this particular group of mainly American (certainly mostly English speaking people) to be the ultimate judge of global Cinema is ridiculous. They have no tools to do it. Zach said something like “we in the US get to see only the best of the foreign films” – no you don’t. You see only a small fracture of it and only those that seem by someone (usually some – at best – well meaning distributor who still wants to make some bucks) to fit an American audience, and even a limited release, only in some “art houses” in NYC an LA is still targeted on a distinct American market, sophisticated as it may be. It’s perfectly OK, but this is all there is to it. And the fact that the Academy considered Il Postino, Life is Beautiful, Central Station and the likes of them to be the crème de la crème of international Cinema only proves its limitations.
So, ruling out foreign language films by the Academy won't be a xenophobic act but an acceptance of its own limitation as a group representing a certain culture, only one among many, mighty as it may be. But I’m afraid there is no way this kind of humble act of self awareness is ever going to happen.
Ok, that was then. I'll add another point. Regardless of my reservations when it comes to the choices the Academy makes, these choices do reflect - in a very certain, limited way, but indicative it is - the history of mainstream American cinema. Hepburn's 12 nominations and 4 Oscars correlate to her stature in American culture. You can follow Woody Allen career and relevance by checking his presence on these lists (or his absence). The emergence of Johnny Depp as an Oscar powerhouse manifests the turn his career took in recent years. On the other hand, the sole nomination Depardieu or Deneuve got says nothing about them as actors or stars. It's totally arbitrary. Everybody here is happy to give Giulietta Masina the 1957 best actress award (and who could blame them), but that’s only because it was a lousy year for English speaking actresses. No one will consider Victor Sjostrom in Wild Strawberries for best actor that same year, because who cares about him when we have the actual nominees Marlon Brando, Alec Guinness, Charles Laughton, Anthony Quinn and those who weren't, like Tony Curtis and Burt Lanchester in The Sweet Smell of Success or Henry Fonda in 12 Angry Men to choose from. Not to mention the grotesque idea of having the same Masina on the list for La Strada at the expense of one of the lovely Hollywood stars who were nominated in 1954. So either it's really about world wide cinema, or not at all. The in-between situation we have now, when Cotillard is on but not the other "foreigners" I mentioned, or even worse, when there's a chance that she's going to win when the Academy wont touch Isabel Huppert with a ten feet pole, well, I find it a little bit, well, silly.
Posted: Tue Feb 19, 2008 2:31 pm
by The Original BJ
Uri wrote:And I think as a rule, non English speaking films shouldn't be eligible for the Oscars anyway.
Would you mind elaborating on this opinion? I don't think I've ever heard this before.
Posted: Tue Feb 19, 2008 1:50 pm
by Uri
Akash wrote:Uri wrote:3. Ratatouille - D. A cold, artificial sentimental, highly calculated piece of plastic. I didn't like it.
Et tu, Uri?
Darling, if so many good people around you feel this way, maybe, just maybe, it's a wake up call.
Anyway, unlike some other people, I wasn't hustle into watching it. I actually paid money to see it, since I do like animation, and though they have hardly made any really good ones since 1970, I still go and see them. You see, I'm not a vicious, heartless philistine as those other, unnamed persons.
Posted: Tue Feb 19, 2008 1:35 pm
by Akash
Thank you, you jackass 
It was a typo. I fixed it.
Anyway, all you Ratatouille haters suck.
Edited By Akash on 1203446186
Posted: Tue Feb 19, 2008 1:33 pm
by Zahveed
Akash wrote:Eh tu, Uri?
Not to be a jackass, but isn't it "Et tu..."?
Posted: Tue Feb 19, 2008 1:30 pm
by Akash
Uri wrote:3. Ratatouille - D. A cold, artificial sentimental, highly calculated piece of plastic. I didn't like it.
Et tu, Uri?
Edited By Akash on 1203446099
Posted: Tue Feb 19, 2008 1:14 pm
by Uri
As always, it's very frustrating for me not being able to be part of many discussions, since we don't get to see here many of the movies in question in real time (meaning when released in North America). But I finely caught up with all the nominated movies available here (only The Savages, The Assassination of Jesse James and Into the Wild won't open here before the Oscars), so it's time for my annual evaluation of the nominees. You can all stop holding your breath.
My rating: A- the ultimate best of the year, B- very good, would make a decent, worthy winner, C- a nomination should suffice, D- not necessarily bad, but not award material, F- a failure.
Best Picture
1. There Will Be Blood – A. A masterpiece.
2. No Country for Old Men – B. Not their best, but a top five spot on the Coens' opus is a mighty place to be in, in my book. A great movie.
3. Michael Clayton – C. Elegant and entertaining, but way too lightweight.
4. Atonement – D. It's a hardworking, good intentioned yet not really imaginative or creative effort. From the clumsy Rashomon part to the humorless Leroy Anderson score, there's too much laborious stuff in it.
5. Juno – D. And I'm being kind. It works so hard at being cool it's extremely tedious, and it doesn’t get that even the abortion stuff aside, it's a reactionary celebration of motherhood as the ultimate manifestation of womanhood. An obnoxious little movie.
Should've been: Gone Baby Gone, Zodiac, hopefully The Assassination of Jesse James.
Best Director
1. Paul Thomas Anderson – A. Here's a filmmaker, whose career so far was never less than fascinating, embarking on what seems to be a different path while keeping his unique, unrelenting voice, and it's exhilarating.
2. Joel Coen, Ethan Coen – B. I'm a devoted fan. The Hudsucker Proxy aside, I enjoyed all their movies, and here I had my fun, being allowed into there world, and this time the material itself was an intriguing, disturbing and profound (and funny). A privilege indeed.
3. Julian Schnabel – C. His visual approach is carefully applied here, it's extremely well executed and serves the narrative very effectively, but somehow, at the end, it felt, well, not banal, but in a way somehow predictable. And I think as a rule, non English speaking films shouldn't be eligible for the Oscars anyway.
4. Tony Gilroy – C. Smooth operation is something too.
5. Jason Reitman – D. Even if one likes the movie, it's the script and the performances which are, well, distinctive in one way or another, but direction?
Should've been: David Fincher, Todd Haynes, Ben Afflek, Sarah Polley.
Best Actor
1. Daniel Day-Lewis – A. All the superlatives are spot on.
2. Tommy Lee Jones – B. The film is all about what a shame the war in Iraq is not a good old decent one, the way the war in Vietnam was, and America is David to this abstract Goliath or something, but Jones is so good, he masterfully transcends it. A beautiful performance.
3. George Clooney – C. I like him a lot, he's a good actor, but like the film he's in, it's a lightweight turn. His charisma is what makes it appears to have some gravity, which is an achievement of kind.
4. Viggo Mortensen – D. He's cool and looks great dressed or nude, so what if he doesn't really get the essence and spirit of the character he's playing.
5. Johnny Depp – F. A meaningless performance. And even if for some reason, vocal abilities are not required here (a huge mistake, huge), they still should have gone for Day-Lewis.
Should've been: Chris Cooper for Breach, Casey Affleck for Gone Baby Gone (or maybe Assassination), Gordon Pinset, James McAvoy.
Best Actress
1. Julie Christie – A. All the superlatives are spot on.
2. Laura Linney – B. I haven't seen the movie, so what. I'm sure I got it right.
3. Cate Blanchett – C. Yes, it's a dismal film and a rather pointlessly written role, but she manages to carry it. I guess it has something to do with inertia.
4. Marion Cotillard – D. A competent but hollow turn. Now, as I said, I'm fiercely against having "foreign" films as part of the Oscar race, but even if I was, Anamaria Marinca, Wei Tang and – why not – Ronit Elkabetz, all of them featured in eligible, non obscure films, were all much better.
5. Ellen Page – D. It's may not be her fault, she seems like a nice actress, but she couldn't overcome the movie she was in.
Should've been: None. They should have a combined list for 2006-7 and have 10 nominees. Last year was such a good one for lead actresses, wasn't it?
Best Supporting Actor
1. Javier Bardem – B. A very good actor having fun with an actor proof role. And it's a very good role.
2. Tom Wilkinson – C. A very good actor having fun with an actor proof role.
3. Philip Seymour Hoffman – C. A very good actor having fun with an actor proof role.
Haven't seen Casey Affleck and Hal Holbrook.
Should've been: Tommy Lee Jones, Paul Dano, Ed Harris.
Best Supporting Actress
1. Tilda Swinton – B. A fascinating characterization which probably has more to do with her persona and acting choices than the initial written role.
2. Cate Blanchett – B. We knew she's was good at impersonating hugely recognizable celebrities, but unlike her turn in The Aviator, this time it serves a smart and poignant segment. A virtuosity well used.
3. Amy Ryan – B. A good, professional piece of acting well used. An intelligent study of a complicated character.
4. Saoirse Ronan – D. Geoffrey Rush won an Oscar for Noah Taylor's work, so why not her being here because Garai was very good (and Redgrave wasn't bad either).
5. Ruby Dee – D. A pointless nomination.
Should've been: Olympia Dukakis, Garai, Charlotte Gainsbourg, Kelly MacDonald, Amy Madigan, Emily Mortimer.
Best Original Screenplay
1. Lars and the Real Girl – C. A very sweet, melancholy fantasy.
2. Michael Clayton – C. Well, C for execution, that is. A solid D for substance.
3. Ratatouille - D. A cold, artificial sentimental, highly calculated piece of plastic. I didn't like it.
4. Juno – F. Sure, it will win. It is so obviously – well - written. Not a single moment of real, natural human behavior in it. I didn't like it, either.
Haven't seen The Savages
Best Adapted Screenplay – (I only read Atonement, so it's really about the films as I saw them)
1. There Will Be Blood – A.
2. No Country for Old Men – B.
3. The Diving Bell and the Butterfly – C. An intelligent, observant and wisely reserved. I guess I just wasn't so much into triumph-of-the-will kind of movies when I saw it.
4. Away from Her – C. The script, which is not bad, is actually the weakest part of this wise, thoughtful and compassionate film.
5. Atonement – D. The book was better.
Posted: Wed Feb 06, 2008 7:52 pm
by HarryGoldfarb
"Mongol" must be something like "the bad" in the Foreign Language category. Indeed, visually outstanding (had it been elegible, it should had been recognized for its costumes and art direction, and maybe cinematography) but the quality of the production doesn't compensate an uneventfull storyline. I know it's part of a trilogy but if The Fellowship of the Rings couldn't grab the award for best picture I'm definitely hoping this "almost-a-film" doesn't win the prize. It looked great but in the end is just a portrait (a minor one) about a great character. Of course I know they're taking it slow, but I hope the next films are better than this one...
Posted: Thu Jan 24, 2008 12:17 pm
by Big Magilla
It hasn't happened since 1935. It's discussed in one of the other threads, I forget which.
Posted: Thu Jan 24, 2008 9:30 am
by zmulls
Did anyone notice that "Michael Clayton" was the *only* film to get more than one acting nomination (3)? The other 17 acting nominations were the sole acting nods each film got...
How often does that happen?
Posted: Tue Jan 22, 2008 1:39 pm
by Zahveed
BEST PICTURE
*The Good*
Juno
No Country for Old Men
There Will Be Blood
*The Bad*
Atonement
Michael Clayton
*The Ugly*
None
DIRECTOR
*The Good*
The Diving Bell and the Butterfly
No Country for Old Men
There Will Be Blood
*The Bad*
Juno
*The Ugly*
Michael Clayton
ADAPTED SCREENPLAY
*The Good*
Away from Her
The Diving Bell and the Butterfly
No Country for Old Men
There Will Be Blood
*The Bad*
Atonement
*The Ugly*
none
ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY
*The Good*
Juno
Michael Clayton
Ratatouille
*The Bad*
Lars and the Real Girl
The Savages
*The Ugly*
none
LEAD ACTOR
*The Good*
Daniel Day-Lewis
Johnny Depp
Tommy Lee Jones
Viggo Mortensen
*The Bad*
Michael Clayton
*The Ugly*
LEAD ACTRESS
*The Good*
Julie Christie
Marion Cotillard
Laura Linney
Ellen Page
*The Bad*
non
*The Ugly*
Cate Blanchett
SUPPORTING ACTOR
*The Good*
Casey Affleck
Javier Bardem
Hal Holbrook
Tom Wilkinson
*The Bad*
none
*The Ugly*
Philip Seymour Hoffman
SUPPORTING ACTRESS
*The Good*
Tilda Swinton - Michael Clayton
Cate Blanchett - I’m Not There
Ruby Dee - American Gangster
Amy Ryan - Gone Baby Gone
*The Bad*
Saoirse Ronan – Atonement
*The Ugly*
none