82nd Academy Awards Nominations

Hollywood Z
Temp
Posts: 431
Joined: Tue Jan 14, 2003 1:07 am
Location: Kentucky
Contact:

Post by Hollywood Z »

My reactions (Category by Category):

Best Picture: Okay, we're all a bit peeved about The Blind Side being nominated, but looking back on it, I can see two reasons why from my other two predictions that didn't make the cut. It was an audience pleasing unexpected blockbuster (Star Trek) that featured a performance that will be coattailed into a win based on it being nominated for Best Picture (Crazy Heart).
Am extremely delighted that The Hurt Locker and Inglorious Basterds are two of the highest nominated films this year. Guess it's time I made time for Up in the Air and Precious.

Best Director: At the last minute, I took Lee Daniels off of the list in favor of Neill Blomkamp because I didn't think the academy would try to match the DGA 5 for 5 so quickly.

Best Actor: Having only seen Renner's performance at this point, I knew Morgan Freeman's pedigree performance would earn a nomination.

Best Actress: Well, so much for my hope of Emily Blunt sneaking in over Helen Mirren. Guess it must have just been a BAFTA thing after all.

Best Supporting Actor: Called this one 5 for 5, but have only seen Waltz' performance

Best Supporting Actress: Wow, Penelope Cruz managed to hang on after all. Guess there were enough old men voters who loved seeing Cruz go nympho. Then came Maggie Gyllenhaal's announcement, which really delighted me for her. Still need to see the movie, though.

Best Adapted Screenplay: Well, I can see how Fantastic Mr. Fox and Crazy Heart got shafted, especially in favor of In the Loop. And despite what anyone says, I'm just glad that Nick Hornby is nominated, being such a fan of High Fidelity and About a Boy.

Best Original Screenplay: This is where I take fault. No (500) Days of Summer. Let me say that again, Academy: No (500) Days of Summer. That is just wrong in so many ways. I don't know where you could slide it in, but this was one indie film this year that deserved a nomination.

Best Animated Feature: All together now, what in the holy f### is The Secret of Kells and how is it good enough to be nominated over Hayao Miyazaki's even most minimal effort?!? This better be one knock you over the head amazing movie, Academy.

Best Song: The Avatar song not nominated, good. The Kate Hudson song from Nine shafter, better. Double nominations for Randy Newman, nice, though it'll just be another two times he gets ignored because we all know it's going to The Weary Kind. And I'll join the chorus in saying that I thought there was no way Paris 36 would ever be nominated. Well, if Les Choires taught us anything back in 2004...

Best Score: Sad to see Star Trek not up here for score. It was nice to finaly hear a movie with a good, bold theme again and not just dismissible melodic tones. Guess that's what the music branch likes, even though I love The Hurt Locker, it's inclusion here is just confusing to me. I like that Sherlock Holmes' bizarre theme is included and really hope that Up is the winner here. Avatar, well, every time I listen to it, I keep picking up parts of every other old James Horner score: The Mask of Zorro, Titanic, Braveheart, Glory, etc. That man should sue Horner for plagerism.

Best Cinematography: Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince?!? Who saw that coming, excepet when I saw the name behind it was Bruno Debonnel, then I should have at least considered it in the running. I will chime in and say that, even though Avatar had beautiful colors and the computer software was able to bring them out with such awesomeness, it should not win, if only because there was no light that needed to be adjusted, manipulated or added to enhance the environment.

Best Film Editing: Precious over Up in the Air. While this perplexes many, may I remind everyone of what the last few Film Editing winners have been (Slumdog Millionaire, The Bourne Ultimatum, Crash)? They like the shaky camera work with jumpy editing movies and even I was thinking that Up in the Air's chances at Best Film Editing weren't solid.

Best Costume Design: Horray for The Imaginarium of Dr. Parnassus being able to sneak in here over my pick of Sherlock Holmes.

Best Art Direction: Um, horray, I guess, for The Imaginarium of Dr. Parnassus being able to sneak in here over my pick of... District 9 and Inglorious Basterds? Wait a minute, boo. I'd rather have seen the other two nominated in it's place, despite how pretty Parnassus looked. And while everyone's quick to jump on the Avatar shouldn't win bandwagon, may I point out that it's Best Art Direction, which means that the design of the film's setting is what's being awarded. If sets that weren't 100 made on set had to be removed, then we'd have to take out The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King. I, for one, think that the animated world of the Na'vi along with the real world of the humans was so exquisitely designed and the choice of what was created vs. what was animated was done in the right taste.

Best Sound Mixing: Well, crap, I was hoping for a total shut out of Transformers 2. And doom on you mixing branch for thinking that was a better mixed film than District 9. There wasn't much mixing in Transformers 2, they just kept the all of the levels up on the same high range. That's not mixing.

Best Sound Editing: Am a bit upset to not see District 9 here, either. It's sound effects were just perfectly original. But I can't complain because the other 5 here are just amazing films.

Best Make-Up: Well, I should have known that Il Divo's inclusion on the finalist list did mean something after all, but District 9 losing a nomination out to The Young Victoria? That's just not right, even if the make-up was applied to only one person in District 9.

Best Visual Effects: This is the category I'm the happiest with, if only because I'm glad that the other three out of four (2012, Terminator Salivation and especially Transformers 2) were shut out.
"You are what you love, not what loves you." - Nicholas Cage; Adaptation
Sabin
Laureate Emeritus
Posts: 11075
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 12:52 am
Contact:

Post by Sabin »

It should still be counted since Peter Jackson himself received another Academy Award nomination for it.

Sure, fine. I don't care.
"How's the despair?"
Big Magilla
Site Admin
Posts: 19608
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:22 pm
Location: Jersey Shore

Post by Big Magilla »

Here in the San Francisco Bay Area the big news is nominations for Up and Star Trek, worked on by companies in Marin.



Edited By Big Magilla on 1265175781
FilmFan720
Emeritus
Posts: 3650
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 3:57 pm
Location: Illinois

Post by FilmFan720 »

Re: Sonic's mention earlier about how the media will treat this...here is my local (Chicago) news' take on the nods:

- The Hurt Locker tied Avatar for the most nods (9)

- Precious garnered 6 nods

- Sandra Bullock got her first nod, after starring in lots of movies

- Up only second animated BP nominee ever

- The Hangover completely snubbed (?????)
"Go into the world and do well. But more importantly, go into the world and do good."
- Minor Myers, Jr.
dws1982
Emeritus
Posts: 3840
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 9:28 pm
Location: AL
Contact:

Post by dws1982 »

MovieWes wrote:
dws1982 wrote:
MovieWes wrote:Actually 5 more nominations. 1 for his directorial effort, The Lovely Bones, and 4 for a film he produced, District 9, for which he is a nominee in the Best Picture category. The tally is 40.
He's only counting films that Jackson directed.
It should still be counted since Peter Jackson himself received another Academy Award nomination for it.
Take it up with Sabin. He made the list.

If you count District 9 for Jackson, then the totals for Ron Howard, Steven Spielberg, et al., would go up, since they produced nominated films as well.
User avatar
MovieWes
Professor
Posts: 2019
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 12:33 pm
Location: San Antonio, Texas, USA
Contact:

Post by MovieWes »

dws1982 wrote:
MovieWes wrote:Actually 5 more nominations. 1 for his directorial effort, The Lovely Bones, and 4 for a film he produced, District 9, for which he is a nominee in the Best Picture category. The tally is 40.
He's only counting films that Jackson directed.
It should still be counted since Peter Jackson himself received another Academy Award nomination for it.
"Young men make wars and the virtues of war are the virtues of young men: courage and hope for the future. Then old men make the peace, and the vices of peace are the vices of old men: mistrust and caution." -- Alec Guinness (Lawrence of Arabia)
ITALIANO
Emeritus
Posts: 4076
Joined: Mon Jan 06, 2003 1:58 pm
Location: MILAN

Post by ITALIANO »

Sonic Youth wrote:No, because an expanded field means half the nominees are effectively footnotes. "A Serious Man" is now a Best Picture nominee. That's nice, but it's meaningless, since it's only nominated for one other category.

But it works out fine, because to general audiences who don't follow the particulars of the Academy Awards and aren't caught up in such things as statistics, a movie like "The Blind Side" nominated for Best Picture may be immensely satisfying. True, it was only nominated for two categories and it's not likely to win, but "Blind Side - Best Picture nominee" is very meaninful, both to general audiences and to the distributors who now have the greatest marketing hook they can work with. But "A Serious Man" for Best Picture? Were it nominated in a slate of five, that would be something (not least because it would have garnered more nominations). But in a slate of ten with only a screenplay nomination? Okay, it's interesting for about five minutes. Now, let's move on.

But general audiences have a stronger voice than the passionate fringes do, and they're approval of the 10 film slate will be regarded far more than the latter's disapproval.
All very true.

But yes, with this Blind Date thing, the ten slots system is here to stay.
Zahveed
Associate
Posts: 1838
Joined: Wed Nov 07, 2007 1:47 pm
Location: In Your Head
Contact:

Post by Zahveed »

My disdain for The Blind Side and the hurt over the (500) Days of Summer snub leaves me with nothing really to say about this year's selection that hasn't already been said. Sure, I'm happy with a few, if not many, of the choices - but even so. We were expecting a lot of them and I choose to blame the Best Picture expansion for this. When you have such a large field and so few to choose from, it's rather disheartening to see one of your favorites fail to reach the bottom step.



Edited By Zahveed on 1265148632
"It's the least most of us can do, but less of us will do more."
HarryGoldfarb
Adjunct
Posts: 1074
Joined: Fri Jan 10, 2003 4:50 pm
Location: Colombia
Contact:

Post by HarryGoldfarb »

MovieWes wrote:
Sabin wrote:At the close of the decade, we add one more nomination to Peter Jackson's Decade Tally of now 36 Nominations. 14 for The Fellowship of the Ring, 6 for The Two Towers, 11 for The Return of the King, 4 for King Kong, and 1 for The Lovely Bones. Congratulations to Peter Jackson!
Actually 5 more nominations. 1 for his directorial effort, The Lovely Bones, and 4 for a film he produced, District 9, for which he is a nominee in the Best Picture category. The tally is 40.
I might be wrong but I guess The Fellowship didn't receive 14 nods, "just" 13...
"If you place an object in a museum, does that make this object a piece of art?" - The Square (2017)
User avatar
Sonic Youth
Tenured Laureate
Posts: 8055
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 8:35 pm
Location: USA

Post by Sonic Youth »

At least they knew which five to pick.
"What the hell?"
Win Butler
Big Magilla
Site Admin
Posts: 19608
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:22 pm
Location: Jersey Shore

Post by Big Magilla »

Anyone catch the TV spot for the Awards? It's probably on the Oscar.com site as well. Steve Martin looks and acts like the guy in a rubber old man mask dancing up and down in those Great America commercials. I am so not looking forward to this show.
The Original BJ
Emeritus
Posts: 4312
Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2003 8:49 pm

Post by The Original BJ »

Sonic Youth wrote:No, because an expanded field means half the nominees are effectively footnotes.
Currently, IMDb shows the posters for the following films under its Academy Awards heading: Avatar, The Hurt Locker, Inglourious Basterds, Precious, and Up in the Air. Of course, those are the five films that scored the most nominations...but doesn't it not-so-subtly suggest that these are what the five Best Picture nominees would have been under the old system, and are therefore the ones worth paying attention to? They didn't have to put up five posters. They could have just chosen one or two...or ten. But they picked five.
dws1982
Emeritus
Posts: 3840
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 9:28 pm
Location: AL
Contact:

Post by dws1982 »

MovieWes wrote:Actually 5 more nominations. 1 for his directorial effort, The Lovely Bones, and 4 for a film he produced, District 9, for which he is a nominee in the Best Picture category. The tally is 40.
He's only counting films that Jackson directed.
User avatar
Sonic Youth
Tenured Laureate
Posts: 8055
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 8:35 pm
Location: USA

Post by Sonic Youth »

anonymous wrote:
Mister Tee wrote: I view it more narrowly: a film I love (A Serious Man) got a nomination it never would have normally, but that has to be balanced against a film that makes my skin crawl (Blind Side) achieving the same. All tolled, I don't think it's a good trade-off.

This is a question I'd like to post to the board, with this 10-wide Oscar Best Picture race, does a nomination for a blah film like The Blind Side a fair price to pay for a Best Picture nomination for a film that you love that wouldn't be nominated in a 5-wide race?

No, because an expanded field means half the nominees are effectively footnotes. "A Serious Man" is now a Best Picture nominee. That's nice, but it's meaningless, since it's only nominated for one other category.

But it works out fine, because to general audiences who don't follow the particulars of the Academy Awards and aren't caught up in such things as statistics, a movie like "The Blind Side" nominated for Best Picture may be immensely satisfying. True, it was only nominated for two categories and it's not likely to win, but "Blind Side - Best Picture nominee" is very meaninful, both to general audiences and to the distributors who now have the greatest marketing hook they can work with. But "A Serious Man" for Best Picture? Were it nominated in a slate of five, that would be something (not least because it would have garnered more nominations). But in a slate of ten with only a screenplay nomination? Okay, it's interesting for about five minutes. Now, let's move on.

But general audiences have a stronger voice than the passionate fringes do, and their approval of the 10 film slate will be regarded far more than the latter's disapproval.




Edited By Sonic Youth on 1265150242
"What the hell?"
Win Butler
User avatar
MovieWes
Professor
Posts: 2019
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 12:33 pm
Location: San Antonio, Texas, USA
Contact:

Post by MovieWes »

Sabin wrote:At the close of the decade, we add one more nomination to Peter Jackson's Decade Tally of now 36 Nominations. 14 for The Fellowship of the Ring, 6 for The Two Towers, 11 for The Return of the King, 4 for King Kong, and 1 for The Lovely Bones. Congratulations to Peter Jackson!
Actually 5 more nominations. 1 for his directorial effort, The Lovely Bones, and 4 for a film he produced, District 9, for which he is a nominee in the Best Picture category. The tally is 40.
"Young men make wars and the virtues of war are the virtues of young men: courage and hope for the future. Then old men make the peace, and the vices of peace are the vices of old men: mistrust and caution." -- Alec Guinness (Lawrence of Arabia)
Post Reply

Return to “82nd Nominations and Winners”