The W
Views: 98617314
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Calendar | Color chart | Log in for more!
2.9.14 0650
The W - Random - And here they is (Oscar noms) (Page 3)
This thread has 53 referrals leading to it
Register and log in to post!
Pages: Prev 1 2 3(3066 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (49 total)
OlFuzzyBastard
Knackwurst








Since: 28.4.02
From: Pittsburgh, PA

Since last post: 15 days
Last activity: 14 hours
AIM:  
#41 Posted on

    Originally posted by evilwaldo
    You forget the Academy's politics. Day-Lewis has to hope for a Chicago surprise as Best Picture to sneak in here. I can't see them giving Best Actor and Best Picture to the same film.


Two years ago, Russel Crowe won Best Actor for "Gladiator", which also won Best Picture.

The year before, Kevin Spacey won Best Actor for "American Beauty", which also won Best Picture.

In 1995, Tom Hanks won Best Actor for "Forrest Gump", which also won Best Picture.

IN 1992, Anthony Hopkins won Best Actor for "The Silence of the Lambs", which also won Best Picture.

That's four in the last ten years.



"Contrary to popular belief, there are no good wars, with the following exceptions: the American Revolution, World War II and the 'Star Wars' trilogy."
-Bart Simpson
krakken2000
Kishke








Since: 31.10.02
From: seattle

Since last post: 1949 days
Last activity: 1676 days
#42 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.36
    Originally posted by The Vile1
    krakken2000, obviously it just shows the stupidity of the academy. They loved spider-man less than you, but they still nominated it for best visual FX, for a movie you said had "flat out bad CGI"


No, I said it had *some* flat out bad cgi. There were moments that I was so distracted by how fake spidey looked that I was taken out of the moment. Especially when compared to a film like LOTR that so seamlessly blended live action with cgi.

Oldschoolhero: I still argue that Rob Marshall *did* do some great innovative work in filming scenes. Take the filming of the cell block tango scene, that was a case where the audience (in the showing I saw of the film) spontaneously broke out into applause because they were floored by how tight it was done. And the audience applauding after individual numbers is a phenomenon that is happening in showings all over America. Does that happen in a film that is flatly directed? You say the movie takes no risks, yet I say the entire film is one big risk.

You list "LOTR, Gangs, Minority Report and Catch Me" as movies that entertained the hell out of you and I agree they would all certainly be among my top 20 films of the year (well maybe not Gangs as I felt a little let down, I liked it...but I didn't love it, blame the miramax hype machine for getting my hopes up too high). But I don't know if any of these films were exactly groundbreaking either. Not every film is going to be an evolution in film making, and I'm cool with that. (Well, I'll give you the LOTR as a series *is* changing movie making, but I don't know if TT is that discernible from FOTR in the eyes of Hollywood or the general public and its for that reason I think TT got a bit shafted this year ).

Anyways, enough bashing of spiderman and/or chicago.

We should all pool our resources to bash the movie that truly does deserve some scorn:

The Hours.

Boy does it suck.



(edited by krakken2000 on 12.2.03 0845)


Flaming Box of Stuff, blah, blah, blah...
HairRaiser
Kishke








Since: 13.1.03
From: S. Attleboro, MA

Since last post: 2559 days
Last activity: 1894 days
#43 Posted on
Normally I couldn't care less about the Oscars, but since Spirited Away is in, I now have interest, however minor.

I've got real hopes for it since seemingly popular stuff with the general public gets forgotten by the awards people in lieu of "artsy" stuff.

Can't wait for the DVD release...
HairRaiser
Ruby Trax
Summer sausage








Since: 10.12.01
From: The KZiM Tower

Since last post: 1971 days
Last activity: 1288 days
#44 Posted on | Instant Rating: 8.25
So the Man and I just got back from Chicago so I can finally get in on this one.

The movie is cute and adorable and incredibly entertaining and I would highly recommend it to everyone, but it's not a Great Movie in the least. What makes it as a "picture" good (excluding individual performances) is the material it's working with. It didn't feel like a whole, it didn't suck me in and the entire thing played out like it was behind glass -- it was a TV movie.

Musicals can be visceral and offensive and vulgar and disturbing and sleazy (see Fosse's All That Jazz) and a film version of Chicago had the potential to achieve that, but this one got sideswiped by heaping spoonsfuls of cute. Velma and Roxie aren't there to be sympathetic or even "likeable" in the halfhearted sense (yes they are bad people) but they should still be characters that the audience can get behind and love and relish in their ruthlessness and vicious faults -- the kind of people we can be happy to not know in real life, yet feel grateful to have encountered on film (see All That Jazz again). The reason why people might get put off by them being "too unlikeable" or "not sexy" is not in the material or the performances, but in the fault(s) of the director.

The direction overall was sloppy, and the editing was pretty disgusting -- I kept getting distracted by Roxie's stray hairs appearing and disappearing and reappearing, and a lot of the "quick-cut" edits during the performances felt chopped in and unnecessary and led me to believe they were put in to to cover screw-ups or to marry two different takes. And I'm sorry but you just don't jump the camera all over the place during those big elaborate Bob Fosse tableaux (even if they're fake Bob Fosse). That's just wasteful and wrongheaded and if you have to do that then buddy you are really doing something wrong.

Aside from all that, Renee Zellweger was fantastic and superawesome which was a pleasant surprise because she can be rather irritating. She really threw herself in there and out there and went for it and got it as right as she could considering the circumstances. She was a lot of fun to watch. Everyone else ... eh. Richard Gere I liked! Though mostly it was "Hey look at Richard Gere singing and dancing and hamming it up, how cute," rather than "I am deeply moved by this character's performance, how profound."

If this movie gets Best Picture, I will tell myself that it is only getting it because the Academy realized it should have given it to Moulin Rouge when they had the chance, which is kind of depressing, but whatever.

So yeah, that's Chicago.



The only thing I enjoy more than doing the crossword puzzle is actually finishing it.
BigDaddyLoco
Scrapple








Since: 2.1.02

Since last post: 11 hours
Last activity: 41 min.
#45 Posted on

    If this movie gets Best Picture, I will tell myself that it is only getting it because the Academy realized it should have given it to Moulin Rouge when they had the chance, which is kind of depressing, but whatever


I can see this type of film already becoming trendy. Award shows are already trying to look cool by handing these things out to musicals. Then Hollywood will bombard us with nothing but a steady stream of musicals. Hollywood will then try to make these movies mainstream. I don't see the public buying into it very long. Thus, ruining the buzz and sending musicals into a hiatus once again.

It reminds me of when the record (I guess it's music) industry was looking for the next big thing post Grunge Era. They came up with techno and tried to shove it down everyone's throat. Hopefully it won't go down as horribly as techno but that's how I see the whole Musical Movie phase playing out, in a nutshell.



Enojado Viento
Potato korv








Since: 12.3.02
From: Your Grocer's Freezer, NC

Since last post: 670 days
Last activity: 88 days
#46 Posted on
So, to paraphrase Hyatte, this is "Operation: Get Musicals Over Again, Phase 29?"






-LS

"Yeah, well, the movie lied."
Ruby Trax
Summer sausage








Since: 10.12.01
From: The KZiM Tower

Since last post: 1971 days
Last activity: 1288 days
#47 Posted on | Instant Rating: 8.25
I wouldn't say it's a phase ... musicals have never been extinct, and there have been plenty of visionary (to varying degrees) musicals to come out in the last few years, like Moulin Rouge, Hedwig and the Angry Inch, Dancer in the Dark, Topsy Turvy and Love's Labour's Lost off the top of my head. It's just tiresome that people are falling over Chicago like it's so gutsy and original. Love's Labour's Lost, trifling as it is, took more chances than Chicago does.



The only thing I enjoy more than doing the crossword puzzle is actually finishing it.
evilwaldo
Lap cheong








Since: 7.2.02
From: New York, NY

Since last post: 3356 days
Last activity: 3137 days
AIM:  
#48 Posted on | Instant Rating: 0.00
    Originally posted by BigDaddyLoco

      If this movie gets Best Picture, I will tell myself that it is only getting it because the Academy realized it should have given it to Moulin Rouge when they had the chance, which is kind of depressing, but whatever


    I can see this type of film already becoming trendy. Award shows are already trying to look cool by handing these things out to musicals. Then Hollywood will bombard us with nothing but a steady stream of musicals. Hollywood will then try to make these movies mainstream. I don't see the public buying into it very long. Thus, ruining the buzz and sending musicals into a hiatus once again.

    It reminds me of when the record (I guess it's music) industry was looking for the next big thing post Grunge Era. They came up with techno and tried to shove it down everyone's throat. Hopefully it won't go down as horribly as techno but that's how I see the whole Musical Movie phase playing out, in a nutshell.



But that is the way the entertainment industy works. Find something somewhat new, shove it down everyones throats and run it into the ground as fast as you can.



(edited by evilwaldo on 13.2.03 1413)


'I'm, like, angry at numbers.'

'Yeah, there's to many of them and stuff.'

Freeway
Scrapple








Since: 3.1.02
From: Calgary

Since last post: 254 days
Last activity: 19 hours
#49 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.96
HANDICAPPING THE BEST PICTURE CATEGORY:

The Pianist: Big sweeping (read: SLOW) and depressing Halocaust drama about a guy who plays a piano (Best Actor nominee Adrien Brody) and tries not to get shot. Director Roman Polanski is nominated, too. (For picture AND director, neither of which he'll win).

The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers: Big EPIC (read: LONG) and action-filled action/drama where Frodo and his little hobbit friends try to save the world by destroying an evil ring. Nobody else from the film got nominated in any major category, and 2004 will be the year Return of the Ring gets some long-deserved sweet respect from the Academy and Peter Jackson becomes Duke of Everything...but not this year.

The Hours: Depressing (read: SLOW) character-study drama about three women in depressing lives in different times, but they're all interconnected. Nicole Kidman & Ed Harris are nominated for acting, while Stephen Daldry is for direction. Kidman will win. The film will not.

Chicago: Light, entertaining tongue-in-cheek musical about the press, trials and generally everything as Roxie Hart is put on trial for shooting her lover. Renee Zelwegger, Queen Latifah, John C. Reilly and Catherine Zeta-Jones are nominated for acting while Rob Marshall is for direction. Zeta-Jones will win.

Gangs of New York: Dark, edgy and at sometimes disturbing drama about the early years of New York City when it was full of violence and buxom ladies who stole things. Daniel Day-Lewis is nominated for acting, while Martin F'N Scorsese (who's NEVER won an Oscar) is nominated for direction. Scorsese & Day-Lewis WILL win, and Gangs being the most impactful and timely of all the Best Picture nominees will likely WIN. Hopefully.

Chicago's too light (ala Moulin Rouge) and will win many technical awards. The Hours is too depressing, but will win some acting awards. The Two Towers is merely a placeholder for next year, when Return of the King will reign. The Pianist is bogged down by the Curse of Polanski, and thus will not win anything that'll bring HIM out. Thus, this leaves Gangs of New York...a personal, effecting and downright gripping portrayal of 1860s New York featuring STUNNING direction by Scorsese and probably the best performance of the last few years by Daniel Day-Lewis. It'll win.



"I know something that will cheer you up, Wesley"
"Are you programmed to be thinking what I'm thinking?"
"MAKEOVER!!"
Princical Scudworth & Mr. Butlertron; Clone High
Pages: Prev 1 2 3
Pages: Prev 1 2 3Thread ahead: VOTE BENSON
Next thread: The world's unhappiest cat.
Previous thread: Amazing Race 4?
(3066 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
He looks like a cross between Marilyn Manson and Sting (the wrestler, not the singer).
- It's False, Spidey on MTV (2003)
Related threads: Guess The Oscar Nominations! - Oscar Buzz - The only thing that would get me to sit through the Oscars ... - More...
The W - Random - And here they is (Oscar noms) (Page 3)Register and log in to post!

The W™ message board

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim

This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.168 seconds.