Film-Tech Cinema Systems
Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE


  
my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Community   » Film-Yak   » The Oscar jam is about to slam

   
Author Topic: The Oscar jam is about to slam
Charles Everett
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1470
From: New Jersey
Registered: May 2001


 - posted 11-23-2003 05:01 PM      Profile for Charles Everett   Email Charles Everett   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Fall turns to the holidays and there are a few worthy nominations for 2003 based on what I've seen to date.

Actor? Start with George Clooney and go on to Hugh Grant. Don't forget Johnny Depp! Throw in Ralph Fiennes (Spider) if need be.

Actress? Charlotte Rampling and Diane Lane come to mind. So do Frances McDormand (Laurel Canyon -- it tanked but she was great) and Hope Davis (The Secret Lives of Dentists).

Supporting actor? There's Geoffrey Rush, Rowan Atkinson (Love Actually) and Billy Bob Thornton (Love Actually).

Supporting actress? Glenn Close (Le Divorce) is the one who stands out so far.

This year cries out for an ensemble Oscar. Quite a few good flicks with strong ensembles -- L'Auberge Espagnole, Le Divorce, Camp, The Magdalene Sisters, Love Actually.

But the "Film Snobs" and the Hollywood hacks don't want these worthy actors to get Oscars! The snobs and the hacks want nominations only for what the snobs and hacks want nominated:

In the Cut -- went national in a dead week (Halloween) and tanked as a result.

The Human Stain -- Miramax. Also, it opened in a dead week (Halloween).

Master and Commander -- Miramax involvement.

Big Fish -- opens limited opposite Something's Gotta Give.

The Missing -- from Revolution Studios, which brought the world Gigli. [Big Grin] This Western is getting dumped in a Thanksgiving pileup!

The Last Samurai -- opens in a dead week (the weekend after Thanksgiving).

The Return of the King -- Miramax involvement.

Mona Lisa Smile -- also from Revolution Studios. The curse of Gigli strikes again! [Big Grin]

Cold Mountain -- Miramax. Not only that, the trailer bites. If this $100 million 9-reel epic tanks it will sink Miramax.

House of Sand and Fog -- the trailer says "Borrrrrrinnnnng".

Peter Pan -- an unintentional link to Michael Jackson (his ranch is named Neverland). Also, this remake has Revolution Studios involvement. Gigli! [Big Grin]

Mystic River -- dull and plodding, struggled to make money.

Seabiscuit -- a hit in the US, a flop overseas.

Who do you think will slam at the Oscar jam?

 |  IP: Logged

Pravin Ratnam
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 844
From: Atlanta, GA,USA
Registered: Sep 2002


 - posted 11-24-2003 01:19 AM      Profile for Pravin Ratnam   Email Pravin Ratnam   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Best Picture: Dirty Pretty Things , American Splendor , Magdalene Sisters , Return of the King, Kill Billare at the top for me. Also for your consideration Lost in Translation and Shattered Glass.
I haven't seen Finding Nemo . But I don't know a single person who didn't like this movie. So I must say, it deserves a best pic nod.

I loved most of Mystic River but it had an awful ending with the Kevin Bacon character which really messed it up big time for me and I didn't find the coincidences convincing. Both factors really destroys the story arc. For the Kevin Bacon's resolution alone with his wife and his police work, I would hate to see this movie get a nod. I was pretty steamed at the end. Otherwise , most of the movie was fantastic.

Best Actor: Paul Giamatti (Amer. Splendor), Bill Murray (Lost In Trans.) Chiwetel Ejiofor for Dirty Pretty Things. He captured that tired insomniac stressed dignified look perfectly. Hayden Christiansen for Shattered Glass. One of the creepiest performances of the year Maybe Sean Penn or Tim Robbins (Mystic River).
Hopefully some of the Dec releases will displace these last two guys from the list. Fun nod to Johnny Depp who made both Pirates of the Carribean and Once Upton a TIme in Mexico a lot more fun than they would have been.

Best Actress: Evan Rachel Wood for Thirteen. Felt she was better than even Holly Hunter in a movie that didn't quite equal the acting.Uma Thurman for Kill BIll. For my money, she gave a tougher performance that was better than overhyped duo of Zeta Jones and Renee Zelwegger combined in Chicago. What's up with Oscars having a soft corner for sluts and whores in this and the supporting actress category but ignoring kickass female roles like the Crouching Tiger women in the past? Kiesha Castle Hughes for WhaleRider. Really she and the grandad were the entire movie. Also I hope one of the Magdalene Sisters gets a nod.

Best cinematography: Robert Richardson for Kill Bill. I am biased here. I have always liked his work. This is a guy who improvised and deviated from his usual style(regarding the use of zooms and such) to make a really nice looking movie despite using Super 35MM (both he and QT are not fans of it) for some practical reasons. I will have to complete this list later as I remember some other pretty good works this year. I just can't remember them now.

Best Director: Peter Jackson has helmed an enormous undertaking and succeeded. His nod is a no brainer. Stephen Frears For Dirty Pretty Things. I never liked some of his 80s movies. But this is one of his best. Sophia Coppolla for Lost In Translation
Shari Springer Berman and Robert Pulcini for American Splendor. DId more with the comic book frame look than Ang Lee could with Hulk
Peter Mullan for Magdalene Sisters
Quentin Tarantino for Kill Bill He gave someone like Chiba a better opportunity to shine. Most of the actors delivered their better performances in this. I mean, who hasn't seen Uma in her share of stinker roles prior to this and after this(Paycheck..ughhh). BY comparison, Zwick really didn't give Wantanabe some personal solo shining moments even if Wantanbe made the most of it. Out of left field nod for James Mangold for Identity(OK i know I know, he has a zero chance).But no matter what people think of that script and movie overall, the director did the best most could with that movie.

Best Supporting Actor:
Someone give Sean Astin a nod. Also Ian McKellan is THE MAN. He supplies a lot of charisma to the character. Andy Serkis actually acted in ROTK for as much time as Judi Dench did in her nominated role in Shakespeare in Love. So even if the oscar is going to disregard the CGI gollum, technically Serkis qualifies now.
Paul Bettany in Master and Commander. I thought he was great in his other movies and he changes body language a little bit to make for a very effective doctor
Sonny Chiba is my fun pick. He is no inferior to the sentimental picks Oscar hands out to accmplished Brit actors in butler or advisor roles (think Geilgud in Arthur or Alec Guiness for Star Wars) and I think the direcetor gives him more to do with his tiny role compared to Wantanabe who was very good too.
Peter Saarsgaad in Shattered Glass was very good too.

Best Supporting Actress:
And then it would be nice to see one or two of the Magdalene Sisters actresses complement a best actress nod with a supporting actress nod for one of the less major roles.
HOlly Hunter was pretty good in 13.
Julie Dreyfus was perfect as Sophie Fatale in Kill Bill in very scene right down to her loud wailing at the House of Blue Leaves. Renee in Cold Mountain wouldn't be an undeserving nominee , even if she is not my choice.

Sound :There is more than one category for this. I would hope ROTK and KIll Bill are up for them.

Will edit this post to add more later.

[ 01-15-2004, 08:23 PM: Message edited by: Pravin Ratnam ]

 |  IP: Logged

Charles Everett
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1470
From: New Jersey
Registered: May 2001


 - posted 12-16-2003 02:10 PM      Profile for Charles Everett   Email Charles Everett   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Bumping this up since somebody started a different Oscar thread.

Why are the "Film Snobs" pushing Return of the King for Oscars? Miramax involvement! The Weinstein family developed the Lord of the Rings movies -- then got their names attached as executive producers after putting the project into turnaround.

Then again the "Film Snobs" must have seen the trailer for Cold Mountain and realized "OMFG! This is gonna be another Heaven's Gate!" [Big Grin]

I have to take back my take on Big Fish -- I won't be surprised if Sony gets it into arthouses and megaplexes on Xmas Day.

 |  IP: Logged

Carl Martin
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1424
From: Oakland, CA, USA
Registered: Feb 2002


 - posted 12-16-2003 05:45 PM      Profile for Carl Martin   Author's Homepage   Email Carl Martin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
sheesh, is everybody you don't like a "film snob"? that lord of the rings stuff is designed for mass appeal. yeah, sure, sometimes i get rankled by pretentious, pseudo-intellectual garbage. you know, where "foreign" or "artsy" becomes nothing more than a marketing angle (artsploitation). but i do consider myself a cinephile and i reserve the right to be snobbish about it from time to time.

carl

 |  IP: Logged

Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001


 - posted 12-16-2003 05:52 PM      Profile for Bobby Henderson   Email Bobby Henderson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Charles, you're saying the only reason why the New York Film Critics Circle voted "LOTR: Return of the King" Best Picture of 2003 is mainly over Bob and Harvey Weinstein's involvment in the project? I think that quite a leap.

For one thing, there are so many other indie pics, foreign films and other stuffy elitist minded product out there with the Miramax studio brand name on it. The LOTR movies are branded with New Line and Time Warner logos. Excluding LOTR, the NY Film Critics Circle would still have many Miramax titles from which to choose for distributing their awards.

Truth is, that critics circle can be pretty unpredictable and doesn't automatically vote for something bearing Merchant-Ivory and Miramax branding. They've voted for plenty of non-Miramax product in the past. What they have not done is vote for movies considered populist entertainment, such as a big fantasy epic like LOTR. So I think is it a pretty damned significant thing for the NY Film Critics Circle to award such a film, especially ahead of other fine films like "American Splendor" and "Mystic River."

 |  IP: Logged

David Stambaugh
Film God

Posts: 4021
From: Eugene, Oregon
Registered: Jan 2002


 - posted 12-16-2003 07:02 PM      Profile for David Stambaugh   Author's Homepage   Email David Stambaugh   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
77 of 79 film snobs [critics] quoted so far at rottentomatoes.com seem to be enthralled by RotK (reviews are still coming in of course). Superlatives are being tossed around the likes of which are rarely heard. Even the 2 critics who gave it a thumbs-down didn't hate it.

"Miramax involvement". I'm sorry, but what a crock. [Roll Eyes]

 |  IP: Logged

Pravin Ratnam
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 844
From: Atlanta, GA,USA
Registered: Sep 2002


 - posted 12-19-2003 01:24 AM      Profile for Pravin Ratnam   Email Pravin Ratnam   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Charles, you are off base on this ROTK issue. You probably don't like Miramax, but geez. ROTK , regardless of any indirect involvement of the Weinsteins is not being pushed by the powers at be at Miramax. ROTK is not a Miramax movie and it won't make sense from an ego, financial or prestige point of view for Miramax to push ROTK as best pic against their own Cold Mountain. Do you still maintain ROTK will drop off big time in the second week?

I am not a big LOTR fan. I was bored by FOTR which was dominated by the boring Frodo and myriad conversation about the power of the ring.But I loved TTT and am confident that ROTK will be a lot of fun. This movie will gross at least as much as TTT. Hardly an elitist movie.

Back to on topic. As far as the Golden Globes, I hear very good things about Theron in Monster and I look forward to watching it. As far as actresses like Kidman, Renee Z , it seems like once these boards nominate you one year, you are in for a lifetime tenure of nods. I dont want to see Cate BLanchett mainly because the movies she acted in failed both critically and at the box office. I liked Scarlett in Lost in Translation. Still, she was essentially playing the foil to Bill Murray's character. All she did was stare in that movie with a couple of good moments for her. For her two get two actress nods indicates that the press is a little infatuated with her fresh face aura.

To bad Dirty Pretty Things was recognized only by the San Diego board. At least to me, this movie and Magdalene are better movies than the other UK movies like Calendar Girls and Love Actually.

 |  IP: Logged

Charles Everett
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1470
From: New Jersey
Registered: May 2001


 - posted 01-08-2004 06:32 PM      Profile for Charles Everett   Email Charles Everett   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Nominees? Add in Billy Bob Thornton (Bad Santa) for actor, Amanda Peet (Something's Gotta Give) for supporting actress, and Calendar Girls for best picture.

This week's schedule spells "Oscar Bait" and not just Big Fish:

21 Grams adds 80+ theaters, including the AMC Hamilton, UA King of Prussia and 2 Philly-area Regals.

Calendar Girls adds 200+ theaters and may go wide next week.

House of Sand and Fog goes nearly semi-wide (596 theaters).

Lost in Translation gets a pre-video, pre-Oscar re-release, mostly for nights only. Four Philly-area Regals get it back for a full round of shows.

Monster adds a lot of big New York-area theaters, including the AMC Empire and Loews Village VII. Clearview Cinemas, which is big on arty fare, won't play this film due to subject matter.

 |  IP: Logged



All times are Central (GMT -6:00)  
   Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic    next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:



Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.3.1.2

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.

© 1999-2020 Film-Tech Cinema Systems, LLC. All rights reserved.