This year's nominees are up Focus: Discuss the awards, the nominations, the hype leading up to the ceremony, and all things Oscar-worthy. Three words: 'The Hurt Locker' I have this sneaking suspicion that this incredible film is going to be denied some seriously deserved acclaim because of Dances with Smurfs. I really hope I'm wrong.
TEN best picture nominations??!?!?! ...though I'm happily surprised to see District 9 in there, and I've seen almost every one of those movies, my pick is still INglourious Basterds. It's not my pick to win (which in that case is Avatar, which was an amazing expereince in search of an original script), it's my pick that SHOULD win. Chris Waltz will win supporting actor, just like I said he would months ago. If he doesn't fuck everybody in this world (though his acceptance speeches creep me out). Director: Tarantino SHOULD win. I know there's lots of hatred towards him, but I think he should have won for Kill Bill vol. 2 and this time he truly, truly deserves it. I'm rooting for you too, Jeff Bridges. Talk about a man who's cut his teeth in the business. Avatar should no doubt clean house, and Cameron will win best director for the incredible amount of work he put into it.
Cinematography, yes. Art Direction, yes. Visual Effects, most definitely. Best Picture or Best Director? Absolutely not. It probably will win, but that doesn't mean it should. It was a visually stunning film with a stale plot that was more of an afterthought than anything. In that way, it is incomplete. I would pick nearly every other title on that list over 'Avatar' for Best Picture. 'Big' does not necessarily equal 'good'.
Avatar should win lots of technical awards, but should NOT win best picture OR best director. Cameron's ex-wife KAthryn Bigelow (she directed Point Break and the highly HIGHLY ignored Strange Days, which was one of the best movies of the 90's) made a war movie miracle with Hurt Locker, and next to Inglourious Basterds it's my pick for Best movie of 2009. With Avatar, it's a popularity contest just like Titanic. Titanic was by no means whatsoever the best movie of its year or any year, but it WAS because everybody that eats up Hollywood Product said so. Movies like No Country For Old Men win because they're the best movie of that entire year. This is not going to be one of those years. There is no arguement that Avatar is the most astonishing technical achievement in the history of film. More than Metropolis, 2001, More than Tron, More than Jurassic Park, more than The Matrix. It's perfect popcorn material, just not Best Picture material.
I liked Avatar, but it just isn't Best Picture. Of the other nominees that I've seen, all of them were better than Avatar. Still, like others have said, it probably will win. If 1997 is any guide, where the more popular movie (Titanic) beat out other, better, movies (Good Will Hunting, L.A. Confidential, hell even Full Monty and As Good As It Gets were probably all better movies in the Best Picture category). Forrest Gump and Dances With Wolves also come to mind. The expansion to 10 nominees probably helps Avatar also. Including other movies is likely to dilute the votes for the lesser-known movies, while having a relatively smaller impact on Avatar.
You don't even need to go back that far. Lest we forget 2005, the year where Crash beat out Brokeback Mountain, Munich, Capote, and Good Night, Good Luck, four obviously superior films that weren't mouthpieces for kitschy, shallow cultural lessons. By that logic, we can all look forward to watching The Blind Side beat out an otherwise incredible field.
Ummmm.... I'll agree with you on Forrest Gump since it competed with Quiz Show, Pulp Fiction and The Shawshank Fucking Redemption (the REAL winner, and we know it) and was not even close to being as good as those movies, but you don't think Dances With Wolves deserved to win best picture? Even I thought it was a better movie than the unforgettable Goodfellas, and most would agree that it's the mob movie of all mob movies, and is one of the all-time greats. Dances With Wolves had no weak points whatsoever, with even the extreme length it's a poweful and unforgettable film. Opinions may vary, but I think it's tied with Fargo as the best film of that entire decade. ....oh, and Even Cowgirls Get The Blues. Wasn't that movie just so totally fucking awesome too?!?! (proof that Gus Van Sant makes repulsively shitty movies just as often as he does good ones)
I've seen seven of the ten nominated for Best Picture (still need to see An Education, Precious, and A Serious Man) and it seems like either Avatar or The Hurt Locker will get the win. I really enjoyed both movies but personally think the Hurt Locker is a little overrated. I think Up in the Air might might get the upset win if it doesn't go to one of the former two. I wouldn't mind seeing Inglorious Basterds win it either. Bridges will win Actor, Waltz will win Supporting Actor. Mo'Nique seems to have Supporting Actress in the bag. I don't know. I love movies and the Oscars but nothing about these nominations has gotten me excited to watch this year. Meh. I honestly don't think The Blindside should have gotten a Best Picture nom. I was hoping (500) Days of Summer and The Road would get some attention, but that obviously didn't happen. I'm glad to see District 9 getting love though.
I usually don't give a fuck about Oscars because it's all a bunch of bullshit decided by morons who wouldn't know a good film if someone beat them over the head with the DVD case, but this year I made a bet in late December that Avatar would not win EITHER Best Picture or Best Director. I was far more confident when I made that wager than I am now. I should stick to betting on theatrical gross, which is something I actually know. That's the most likely scenario, but it also makes me sick. And only half of that nausea is because "Precious" is a worthless fucking film, and "Crazy Heart" is cliched, predictable, and something I've seen dozens of times before but better, "The Wrestler" being a recent example. The other part is that those roles are really theatrical, with numerous opportunities to look great. Another recent example is the Joker role in Batman; think it's merely hard work that gave Heath Ledger the performance of his career, or made Nicholson look so terrific? The role is just great in and of itself, with some exceptional set-ups; at least 20 decent or good male actors would have hit a home run with it, too. (And hey, remember how people were originally bitching that casting Ledger as the Joker would ruin the film?) It's no coincidence that a shitty comedian whose biggest role was "Phat Girlz" like Monique succeeds in the extremely limited, simple, theatrical role of an abusive, monster mother. I'm sure at least 100 other actresses would have done just as well. The role is juicy and doesn't take much range or complexity. To a lesser extent, that's true of Bridges in "Crazy Heart". Mickey Rourke did the same thing about 10 times better last year. Meanwhile, how many actors could have replicated what Clooney did in "Up in the Air", or even Renner in "The Hurt Locker", or actors that weren't even nominated, like Michael Stuhlbarg in "A Serious Man"? Not very many. Those roles are more understated, subtle, partially pathetic, and something the audience is meant to relate to. It's way more difficult. Anyways, I could rag on and on on how stupid and contradictory the nominations and likely winners are, but I'll stop now. I just think it's funny that two really shitty films that everyone disliked and were epic failures at the box office, "Nine" and "Invictus", got so many nominations.
He most definitely will not. Those of you from the old RMMB should remember that when it comes to the Academy Awards my kung fu is second to none. However, this past year I've been a little off my game due to my lack of discretionary cash and access to the Afghan black market; I haven't seen every Best Picture/writing nominee or every acting performance like I normally do though I can still read the tea leaves well enough to predict that this is going to be one of the most predictable Oscars in recent years. That said, there is one hard and fast rule about the pre-Oscar awards that almost always holds true and that is that the Academy will NOT buck the DGA's pick for Best Director. It's happened before, but very rarely and not in a situation like this where the favorite is set to make history as the first woman to win the award. Kathryn Bigelow will be this year's Best Director, and deservedly so. The Best Actor race looks to be pretty well sewn up, since Jeff Bridges is a well-liked actor who by all accounts (I haven't seen Crazy Heart yet) gave an award worthy performance. This award would be akin to the one Paul Newman won for The Color of Money back in the 80s. The biggest consequence of the Academy's decision to expand the Best Picture field to ten films is that it solidified Sandra Bullock's lock on Best Actress. Had The Blind Side not cracked a bloated Top 10 list there might have been some Academy members who'd have held it against her (it wouldn't have been much of an issue in ordinary years where many winners didn't come from nominated films). That blind spot (no pun intended) has been closed though, so the inertia is enough to carry one of Hollywood's most popular - and bankable - actresses over the finish line. I still think Meryl Streep is going to win a third Oscar, but it's not like she's going to run out of chances. Inglourious Basterds was one of the most enjoyable films of the year and the Academy is going to want to recognize it with a big win. It's a no-go for Best Director and a longshot for Best Picture, but it's got a fighting chance up against The Hurt Locker in Original Screenplay. Still, a vote for Christoph Waltz here gives the movie a solid win (much like Ledger's win did for The Dark Knight, though he won for all the right reasons too) and from what I can tell his only real competition is Stanley Tucci from The Lovely Bones...which wasn't a well-received film and a creepy role for Tucci to boot. I'm going to see Up In The Air this week for sure to see if Vera Farmiga and Anna Kendrick are really worth all the buzz, but I'm very skeptical that they can top the chilling performance Mo'Nique gave in Precious. I was a believer as soon as I walked out of the film, and even her hairy ass legs aren't enough to scare voters away from recognizing a truly impressive performance. Other random thoughts: - The Academy's love affair with Penelope Cruz is fucking revolting. Seriously, I can't wrap my ahead around it. - Sam Rockwell gave the single greatest performance of the year that wasn't nominated. It's too bad only me and a dozen other people actually watched Moon. - I don't know if I'm going to place any bets on the Oscars this year, but I might put something down on Stanley Tucci. I don't want to believe the Golden Globes got all four winners right this year and Tucci seems poised for the most likely upset. I'll probably have more to add once I start catching up with all the nominees.
Should Win: Picture: Inglorious Basterds Director: Tarantino Actor: Clooney Actress: Dunno Will Win Picture: Avatar Director: Cameron Actor: Bridges Actress: Bullock (all four of these wiill probably happen, and none deserved) I've guessed best picture correctly the last seven years. Although I HOPE my streak breaks this year, it probably won't. Oh well, at least the Oscars aren't the fucking Grammys. Talk about numbskull corrupt pop culture favourtism.
It's shocking that (500) Days Of Summer got nothing. Nothing at all. In my mind, it is the Best Original Screenplay of the year, and should have at least got a nod for Best Editing. Did no one from the Academy see it? I really just don't understand. I thought they loved stuff like that. I cannot wait to see The Hurt Locker when it opens here. I was excited before, but now that it's tied Avatar for the most nominations, I have to see what all the fuss is about. I love that low-budget film can still garner the same amount of acclaim as the highest-grossing movie blockbuster of all time.
Jesus. The last time I heard people lose their collective shit over an indie film like this is when everybody started watching Boondock Saints on video. What is so phenomenally original about this film? It's just looks like another romantic comedy.
It features boys with tight jeans that shop exclusively at Goodwill and listen to bands like Animal Collective. That is what is so phenomenally original. If Avatar wins best picture I will cut myself. With films like Inglorious Basters and Up in the Air out there I'm not sure how it could win. It just goes to show you that the general public is retarded. Avatar was Jaws 3, with blue people instead of sharks.
It still blows my mind, and I have posted this before, that Avatar will win best Picture even though the story is an exact copy of "Pocahontas".
Just so yall know, all of this stuff is inconsequential compared to the REAL story this Oscar season: My boy Bingham is going to win a fucking Oscar for Best Original Song. That sentence just blows my mind, but his song from the movie is unbelievable. He deserves every accolade he receives.
I loved the fact that when he was awarded the Golden Globe for best song he was sitting in bar having some drinks.
I don't get it either; this past year had an indie hipster romantic comedy called Adventureland that was genuinely good and original. Even I liked it, despite my typical hatred towards those kinds of films. Yet, a boring rehash of cliches and eye-rolling nonsense like 500 Days of Summer was the bigger, more popular hit of the two. I can't even pin it on production budget, advertising, or stars. If I had to guess, it would probably be the nature of the characters; the female lead in 500 Days is nothing more than a porcelain doll, a nerd fantasy/idealization. And while the actress in Adventureland does a pretty average/mediocre job, her character, thanks to the writing, is an actual living, breathing human, with faults, a cruel streak, and a life outside of the main relationship. Also, the male lead in 500 Days is just a really pathetic, mopey, cringe-inducing loser. The male lead in Adventureland is something of a loser too, but a fairly up-beat, confident one, who actively tries to change his problems in life. Apparently, audience members related better to the former. Focus- Anyone seen "The White Ribbon"? I've read ridiculously good things about it, but it's from the same artfag lemmings that gave high marks to "Invictus". So it could go either way.
Honestly, there is no movie that I want to see more than The White Ribbon right now. As far as Best Picture, I've only seen four of the movies on the list. And none of those four are Avatar, The Blind Side, or Precious, so I can't really jump in on the debate here. Truth is, I will never voluntarily see a single one of those movies. But I loved Inglorious Basterds and Up in the Air, would like to see both of those movies get some kind of recognition somewhere. They both deserve it.
Screw the year, that was one of the best performances I've ever seen (granted I'm young, and I'm still working on expanding my movie knowledge.) I saw Moon and 6 of the 10 Best Picture noms, and I'd put it over 5 of them (the one being Basterds.) It was a far better science fiction movie than either Avatar or District 9.