my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Community   » Film-Yak   » Who do you think got snubbed by the Academy? (Page 1)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2

Author Topic: Who do you think got snubbed by the Academy? Christian Volpi Master Film Handler Posts: 349 From: Arlington, NE Registered: Apr 2004 posted 01-25-2005 07:50 AM                        I agreed with most of the nominations that were announced just minutes ago but I think that Paul Giamatti deserved a nomination.  |  IP: Logged Scott Norwood Film God Posts: 8146 From: Boston, MA. USA (1774.21 miles northeast of Dallas) Registered: Jun 99 posted 01-25-2005 09:00 AM                        I'm amazed that Sky Captain didn't even merit a nomination for Art Direction. I thought it was a sure-fire winner. And why, oh why, did Super Size Me get a nomination for Best Documentary Feature???  |  IP: Logged Thomas Procyk Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1842 From: Royal Palm Beach, FL, USA Registered: Feb 2002 posted 01-25-2005 10:43 AM                     Because it was the best! Dubble Quarrter Powndur with CHEEEEZE MEEEEAL! mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm! =TMP=  |  IP: Logged Pravin Ratnam Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 844 From: Atlanta, GA,USA Registered: Sep 2002 posted 01-25-2005 11:35 AM                     The geezer nominations. Ridiculous. Best song: Never heard of a single song. Phantom Of the Opera. yuck. Best song is usually the worst nominations almost every year. Snubbed for best actor: Paul Giamatti. He was snubbed for Amer. Splendor last year. I mean, of all the cast, you decide to snub him while nominating the Wings guy and the Madsen chick (who admittedly are not undeserving). Eternal Sunshine got snubbed in some major categories. It was definitely one of the best pics even if it's for not all tastes but satisfies its targeted audience more than Ray which was good and more accessible to more people and a likable movie but didn't really wow as many people. (Jamie Foxx did rule in it and should get an Oscar for it) Also Jim Carrey was more desrving than Eastwood too. For once, his acting was not just a toned down version of his comedic act(witness his boring performance in the Majestic). And where is the nod for Jon Brion for best score for this movie? Why not throw a bone to the Michel Gondry/wesAnderson/DavidORussell/ZachBraff crowd. Since the Adnerson and Russel came up with movies that even not all of their fans liked this year, and Zach's movie is more cute than memorable, how about one for Gondry in this demographic. David Carradine should have gotten a nod. Man, it seems like the nominations this year were for the Readers Digest crowd. Very eurocentric middle aged nominations. I haven't seen Closer. But come on. BORING nominations. I wonder if Portman was really better in that than she was in Garden State or did the voters like her stripper role. You know play a hooker or stripper, get an oscar. Finding Neverland. boring. I hear the movies are good. But way too many movies for the uppercrust society in the nominations. I hear Annette Benning was good iN that Julia movie, but heard the movie itself forgettable. Unless you really put in a career effort, why bother nominating her from a forgettable movie. How ridiculous is it that Thomas Haden Church and Jamie Foxx are seen as supporting actors when they were coleads. Is it a rule that a french movie has to be nominated in the best foreign pic? I mean, people can object to my derision of some of hte nominees and I don't mean to say the names I picked on are totally undeserving. But when you put them together, too much ClintEastwood-Benning_MikeNichols type bent this year.  |  IP: Logged Michael Schaffer "Where is the Boardwalk Hotel?" Posts: 4143 From: Boston, MA Registered: Apr 2002 posted 01-25-2005 05:15 PM                        I think Foxx deserves a nomination simply because I didn't realize the guy who played Ray was the same who drove the taxi in Collateral! I won't even hold it against him that he is making our lives a bit complicated at this point. We have to go to El Centro to check on our newbuild regularly, and it is really hard to get a hotel room because they are shooting a movie with Foxx down there and all the hotels are booked out. I also think that Giamatti got passed over unfairly. I really enjoyed Sideways very much. On the other hand, we all know that the Academy Awards are just an industry PR spectacle, so don't get too upset that your favorite movies and actors got ignored!  |  IP: Logged Aaron Mehocic Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 804 From: New Castle, PA, USA Registered: Jun 99 posted 01-25-2005 05:26 PM                     Conservative talk radio programs like Glenn Beck and Limbaugh are insensed that Gibson's Passion of the Christ was snubbed for best picture. From the sounds of Beck's program, he was hoping to rally the Christians in the so-called "red states" to see just how pathetically biased the voting is among those who can cast ballots. Personally, I thought Passion should have gotten a nod for the top spot, but I'm not going to loose any sleep over it. Keep any comments about this politically clean. I'm only reporting what is being said by others about our industry from a different medium.  |  IP: Logged Mike Blakesley Film God Posts: 12767 From: Forsyth, Montana Registered: Jun 99 posted 01-25-2005 05:46 PM                        I haven't seen "Sideways" yet so can't comment there, but I don't think "Passion" was all that wonderful of a movie. Well made, and a very important film, yes, but best picture material, no. I also find it funny (but NOT in a political way, mods!) that Michael Moore's movie got completely overlooked. He probably would have won in the documentary category, but NO-O-O he wanted best picture and was clearly in over his head there.  |  IP: Logged Aaron Mehocic Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 804 From: New Castle, PA, USA Registered: Jun 99 posted 01-25-2005 06:50 PM                     When Moore first announced that he was going for broke with best picture I figured he'd loose, even if he was nominated. I think Hollywood is going to distance itself from him between now and 2008. I see Michael Moore as more of a rabel-rouser than a serious documentary maker. A side note to all of this was a student of mine last semester who claimed in a class-wide American Government discussion that Moore had ". . . given me a voice". That is exactly what I think the Hollywood elites are afraid of. As more Americans align themselves with a conservative (small c) lifestyle, Michael Moore's views look more and more abstract and surreal. The elites don't want to be allied with this guy when the chips hit the floor and its starting to show as early as now.  |  IP: Logged Brian Michael Weidemann Expert cat molester Posts: 944 From: Costa Mesa, CA United States Registered: Feb 2004 posted 01-25-2005 08:02 PM                        I agree that Eternal Sunshine deserved more nominations, but I was just glad to see Kaufman up for its screenplay. In fact, that's really the ONLY thing I'm rooting for one way or another this year.  |  IP: Logged Pete Wolla Film Handler Posts: 71 From: Tioga, ND, USA Registered: Jan 2003 posted 01-25-2005 08:39 PM                     I think passion got carried away with blood .  |  IP: Logged Jarryd Beard Expert Film Handler Posts: 229 From: Hellertown, PA Registered: Jul 2004 posted 01-25-2005 09:14 PM                     Does that blood fall under makeup? It got a nomination for that.  |  IP: Logged Christian Volpi Master Film Handler Posts: 349 From: Arlington, NE Registered: Apr 2004 posted 01-26-2005 09:04 AM                        Garden State should have been nominated for Best Original Screenplay.  |  IP: Logged Pravin Ratnam Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 844 From: Atlanta, GA,USA Registered: Sep 2002 posted 01-26-2005 09:46 AM                     I feel bad for Chris Rock that he has to emcee this year's Oscars. he has been holding out for a while and this was not the year for him to host with this dull lineup of nominees. I don't normally advocate Oscars kowtowing to the mainstream and nominating at least one controversial movie or one big hit to generate buzz. But this year , that would have been welcome. If all you are going to nominate are mostly solidly good but not great nominees with a few exceptions, then you might as well nominate an above average or merely good nominee that is more buzz generating. Spidey 2(not that I think it is one of the 5 best) over something like Neverland would probably get a younger generation to watch and maybe be curious about the other nominees like Sideways. Hotel Rwanda is a better movie than Ray. Carrey over Depp for purely buzz factor purposes even if one may not agree with the merit argument for Carrey I put forth earlier. I can safely say that interest in the oscars won't be that high this year. I watch a bunch of movies and even I haven't watched a few of the nominees.  |  IP: Logged Leo Enticknap Film God Posts: 7474 From: Loma Linda, CA Registered: Jul 2000 posted 01-26-2005 09:51 AM                        quote: Conservative talk radio programs like Glenn Beck and Limbaugh are insensed that Gibson's Passion of the Christ was snubbed for best picture. Well it wouldn't have stood much of a chance for best original screenplay! Seriously, I don't think it's a coincidence that neither Gibson nor Moore got a nomination. Celebrating any film which has polarised opinion along political, religious and/or ideological lines is guaranteed to alienate as many, if not more people as it would win over. Besides, neither film (IMHO) is good enough to make doing that worth the inevitable fallout.  |  IP: Logged Mike Blakesley Film God Posts: 12767 From: Forsyth, Montana Registered: Jun 99 posted 01-26-2005 12:22 PM                        The reasons Jim Carrey got snubbed are: - The movie was too old. Nobody saw it to start with, and the Academy people were too busy watching new movies to pay much attention to it. - Carrey is known mostly as a rubber-faced, butt-humor comedy star. It'll be a real uphill battle for him to ever be recognized for his dramatic acting. Sad but true. - And a title like "Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind," did not help either. Something like "The Aviator," "Finding Neverland" or the like sounds much more pompous and Oscar-ish. If the movie would have been simply titled "The Spotless Mind" or "Eternal Sunshine," it would have had a better chance.  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2

Printer-friendly view of this topic

Hop To: Select a Forum: Category: Operations -------------------- Digital Cinema Forum Film Handlers' Forum Large Format Forum Ground Level Feature Info, Trailer Attachments & REAL Credit Offsets Category: Community -------------------- Film-Yak Film Handlers' Movie Reviews The Afterlife Bob Maar's Joke-A-Thon Category: Classified -------------------- Equipment and Supplies Wanted/For Sale Help Wanted/Seeking Employment Category: System -------------------- Software Beta Testing Forum

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.