Official Oscar Nomination Thread - Page 2

This article has some pretty nice ideas for simultaneously obliterating the Oscars' credibility, and making them far more interesting.

Extremely Loud was automatically locked in for a Best Picture nomination. Reverse-engineered in every single way especially for the Academy...and probably no one else. Treacly, emotional-backrub bullshit. At least Spielberg got shut out this year for Best Director, despite pulling the exact same trick.

And Albert Nobbs was one of those projects (beloved actress who's never won an Oscar plays a man? And it's not a comedy, but a tear-jerker?) that pretty much had "guaranteed Oscar-nom" stamped all over it from the get-go.

While I knew Deathly Hallows 2 would never get a BP nod, I am a little surprised there was no talk of giving producer David Heyman a Special Achievement Oscar for the pretty unprecedented achievement of getting all eight movies made within a decade with a singular vision and the same cast, and having them all be megabuck-successes.

Well, you can't really be too shocked about LOUD considering they awarded Bullock an award for something like THE BLIND SIDE.

I love Streep but I really hope she doesn't win this thing. My vote will easily go to Williams. I'm not sure I would have put Davis in as an Actress but I guess they didn't want three taking up the Supporting one. Williams should be a lock here (although I still need to see ALBERT and TATTOO).

I've yet to see A BETTER LIFE but I hope his performance is better than the leads in DRIVE, SHAME and TAKE SHELTER.

The BRIDESMAIDS love still shocks me. McCarthy over Mulligan?? Not in my book. Heck, I'd put Aniston in HORRIBLE BOSSES over McCarthy if they needed filth in there. Woodley being left out??


So, I need to see LOUD, TATTOO, BETTER LIFE, TINKER, ALBERT and WARRIOR to finish off the major pictures.

Maybe it's because I've only seen a handful of the movies up for awards this year but I'm nowhere near as excited or intrigued as previous years. Someone mentioned on Twitter that the Oscars have become an Art House/Indie film thing and while I don't necessarily agree with that, I can see where they're coming from.

When I can watch a trailer (Iron Lady, War Horse) and easily call it out as Oscar bait, and it gets nominated for an Oscar, it puts me off. Nothing against those movies since I haven't seen them, but it's as if they're made purely to win an Oscar. Tell a good story? No, Meryl Streep needs another nomination. She's a great actress yes, but is she going to get a nomination every year just for showing up on set?

I don't know if anyone is going to like this but I think Melissa McCarthy is Hollywood's attempt to show that they value more than just the usual thin, beautiful woman. I loved Bridesmaids and thought McCarthy was really good in it but occasionally Hollywood wants to show that they like fat chicks and McCarthy was the lucky recipient. I hope she takes all the opportunities (and hence money) that come from this nomination and runs.

Oscar bait as been around since the 1930s though. This "award" is just Hollywood slapping each others asses so one really shouldn't give too much credit to it. I think part of the problem is that it's doubtful those viewing the films have actually seen all of them. I believe it was Charlton Heston who once said that it was his wife who filled out the form. There's also no question that this is a popularity thing at times, which is why someone like Roberts and Bullock won (sorry, I wasn't blown away by either performance).

I agree that Streep's nominations seem to be because of who she is. I can go with the nom for THE IRON LADY even though the film was crap but J&J is one that I didn't understand.

As for the arthouse thing, I'm sorry if mainstream crowds are upset but to me they usually get it right. I know the mainstream wants to see Spears getting Best Actress and that they want TWILIGHT to get Best Picture but I think being a snob helps in these fights. The mainstream have their People's Choice Awards so we don't need this falling into the Oscars. If the mainstream doesn't want to see a B&W silent movie then that's their problem. If people can't figure out THE TREE OF LIFE, again, not the film's problem.

Just like it's not Michael Bay or Disney's problem that someone like me doesn't understand why PIRATES and TRANFORMERS are loved by people.

There are movie made to be money makers and there are movies made to win awards.


And I agree with Travis. I think politics certainly play a part in things and I guess Hollywood wants to say they "support" everyone but we can see what really happens by the type of roles these types are given. HAIRSPRAY and PRECIOUS didn't exactly get their stars much. I still say the politics of MILK had Penn beating Rourke. I guess Plummer and the type of role is going to help BEGINNERS (great, great performances but the film belongs to the two leads).

Yup, it IS the first Pixar movie to be denied a Best Animated Feature nomination.  That automatically means this will be the first year Pixar hasn't WON the award since 2006 when "Happy Feet" beat "Cars"...

 

Wow I just noticed J. Edgar not getting any Oscar noms at all and Clint Eastwood makes films especially for the Oscar luvvies, that must have stung. Some people were going on about Di Caprio being the one to beat at Oscar time, one of the favourites to win best actor, ha!

 

Another Spielberg snub but he's used to it by now. Hugo and Scorsese all the way for me.

Yeah, Eastwood must be pissed, he always gets noms, even that Hearafter or whatever it was movie got a nom for Special Efffects (I think it won, over Inception and Scott Pilgrim... RIDICULOUS!) and I don't think anyone liked it. Leo had Oscar buzz because that's the normal thing to do now, Leo gets awards noms since he's an amazing serious actor of serious actor movies! HOLLYWOOD HAS SPOKEN! Leonardo has grown into an amazing serious actor like the Tom "Bachelor Party" Hanks before him, and we shall stick Shia Lebouf into every god damned film we can until he too is accepted as an AMAZING SERIOUS ACTOR of SERIOUS ACTOR MOVIES! So Hollywood has spoken, so Hollywood shall have done!

 

 

I don't think Speilberg was snubbed as much as properly recognized for not producing that great of movies this year, though War Horse is in for best picture. Yeash. I haven't seen it, but a movie adaption of a stage play about a horse or some bullshit... yeah, I'll get to that one eventually....

 

Doug Benson (from the Doug Loves Movies podcast) posted on Twitter a good point that has been bugging me about the noms:

 

 

It goes farther too. Meryl Streep won the Golden Globe for Iron Lady, but in the clips they showed her accent slipped into Julia Child's from the Julie and Julia movie (in which she was very very good.). She's Meryl Streep though, so she always gets nominated for being an AMAZING SERIOUS ACTRESS. Patton Oswalt has been getting all types of industry noms for Young Adult, no mention here. And I'm sorry folks, but Michael Fassbender was AWESOME as Magneto in X-Men: First Class as a Holocaust survivor looking for revenge and redemption. He should of been nominated for that. Seriously, that X-Men movie was probably the best film last year. too bad it features superheroes in costumes.

 

Lets face it, the Oscars are never going to get this stuff right.  :S

 

DiCaprio is getting nominated next year for The Great Gatsby anyway, so no big deal for being omitted this year in a film that was received very poorly.

"With the exception of Michel Hazanavicius (THE ARTIST), everyone in the Best Director category has made a better movie. Much better."

 

And....? They didn't make those other movies in 2011. Seems like a week argument. Some would argue that Capra's best film is Mr. Smith Goes to Washington. It just so happened it had to go up against Gone with the Wind that year. They have to have cutoffs somewhere.

War Horse was only nominated because the Academy now allows up to 10 films to get the Best Picture nomination - as a specific response to the negative reaction to the nominees in 2008.  It will not win, since the real race there is essentially down to The Artist and The Descendants.  The favorite seems to be The Artist, which again seems likely to sweep three of the most important categories.

 

Keep in mind that the Academy seldom goes with the big budget movie these days.  They are more likely to go with the smaller budget, more independently minded movie.  Look at the last few winners:  The King's Speech, The Hurt Locker, Slumdog Millionaire, No Country for Old Men.   The Hurt Locker in particular is instructive:  it was a modestly budgeted movie about a munitions-clearing team in Iraq.  It was filmed under difficult conditions in the Middle East, and it overcame all odds to get made and get Kathryn Bigelow a DGA award and an Oscar.   This year, there is definitely popular sentiment for Martin Scorcese, as there was for James Cameron with Avatar.  But James Cameron and Avatar did not win the major Oscars.   Those went to The Hurt Locker.

 

Martin Scorcese also just won a DGA Award and an Emmy in the past year for his direction of the pilot episdoe of Boardwalk Empire.  He won Best Director for The Departed five years ago, most likely in recognition for his long and distinguished career to date, as is normally the case with the Oscars.  Many people finally win an Oscar for something after having been nominated multiple times, and the eventual win is almost a cumulative nod.  Given that Scorcese won a DGA Award so recently, it's not likely that he'll immediately get it again.  The more likely winner will be Hazanavicius for The Artist, for the pure audacity of making a silent movie in 2011, and for making it in such a charming fashion.   Of all the nominees for the major categories, only The Artist has that distinction - it's the kind of idea the Academy tends to reward.  And the movie is a valentine to the golden age of Hollywood, which never hurts either.

 

I'd look for Hugo to pick up a few more technical awards as a nod to the great work done on the movie.  And I'd look for The Artist to take the Picture/Director/Screenplay trio.  The acting categories will be a different story, but they usually are.

 

Steven Spielberg will be nominated again within the next few years.  He's usually nominated for his more serious films, like the two for which he finally won Oscars in the 1990s.  His last nomination was for Munich, which was the serious film out of the two he did in 2005.  He wasn't nominated for the 2008 Indiana Jones movie, and I doubt anyone expected him to be nominated for Tintin.   But you may see a nomination for Lincoln, if that comes out as well as it looks.  I doubt he's much concerned about getting another Best Director nod this year.  He'll make plenty more films and get plenty more nominations and awards down the road.

 

You guys can't be serous. You really think that Clint Eastwood gives a rat's ass about Oscars at this point in his life and career?? Dude's 81 years young. He makes the movies he wants to make.

 

Inception (rightfully) won the Visual Effects Oscar last year, but Hereafter's nomination was earned - the tsunami scene which garnered the nod was spectacular and frightening. 

I'm with you, he has his four Oscars, but he always made movies he wants to make.  At least for the last 35 years or so.

 

With Hazanavicius winning the DGA, The Artist is basically a lock for Director/Picture Oscars. I love the film, so I'm cool with it, but what Scorsese does in Hugo is pushing the language of film to a whole new level.

 

Yeah, I'm afraid so. 

The Artist is on its way to getting the trifecta.

 

But it still could go a little different.  Since 1968, there have been six times where the DGA Award winner did not get the /Best Director Oscar.  Two of those cases were situations where the director was not even nominated for an Oscar.  The divergence is due to the different people voting.  The DGA Awards are voted on by DGA members, including film and television directors of all stripes, as well as below the line production managers and assistant directors.   The Oscars are voted on by Academy members, and the Best Director Oscar is nominated by feature film directors who are Academy members.  So the nomination process is narrowed down to a specific group of movie directors.  Usually, everyone comes out with the same answer, but there have been divergences.

I caught up with a few more of the major noms that I hadn't seen.

WARRIOR was pretty good and Nolte was great in it but I don't think he would have made my list for the Top 5 of the year.

EXTREMELY LOUD & INCREDIBLY CLOSE....yikes. I didn't think CRASH was a good movie but I understand how some might be taken in by it. This film, on the other hand, really shocks me with the Best Picture nomination because I don't recall anyone really calling it a good movie let alone one of the best of the year. I found it to be incredibly frustrating and rather exploitive and for the life of me I don't see how it got Best Picture. Max von Sydow was terrific so I don't have a problem with him getting a nom.

I just got done with EL&IC about twenty-minutes ago and the crowd report was rather telling. I'd say there were at least 30-40 people there and I noticed five walk outs. The crowd was extremely quiet throughout and I noticed one person crying at the end, which is pretty telling and I think it says the film isn't working for most.

Exactly. It's not like there's a one film limit per director. Woody Allen also got nominated for Crimes and Misdemeanors and Martin Scorsese for GoodFellas. Should Orson Welles have thrown in the towel after Citizen Kane? The Magnificent Ambersons, The Stranger, The Lady from Shanghai and Touch of Evil might not hold a candle to that masterpiece, but I'd much rather have them than not.

If a movie wasn't first released in NY or LA at some point during 2011, it shouldn't enter the conversation.

I must say, the SAG awards basically re-enforced what I thought was happening. Between it and the DGAs this weekend they've made this year's Oscars rather obvious. The only real mystery left for me is to see if Hugo will go 0-11, or perhaps actually get one (presumably Art Direction).

There is one very positive note from the SAGs, and that is that momentum may be swinging away from Streep in the Best Actress race as more people see The Iron Lady and realize how bad it is. Very happy for Viola Davis - she has turned in some amazing performances over the past decade and even though The Help isn't her best role (not a comment on Davis but the limitations of the role as written) I still think in this year's crop she's a worthy winner.

 

If it wasn't clear before it should be now that Octavia Spencer is a solid lock for Supporting Actress. And Plummer is the guy to beat in Supporting Actor.

 

I've read some comments that The Help's cast win in the SAGs may mean it is getting some BP momentum. Not sure I buy that. It does look like The Artist has Picture, Director, and Actor sewn up.

 

So yeah, for yet another year it looks like another suspense-free Oscar telecast, at least for the major awards. Bummer.

Now appears to be going towards:

 

Best Picture - The Artist

Best Director - The Artist

Best Original Screenplay - The Artist

Best Actor - The Artist

Best Actress - The Help

Best Supporting Actor - Beginners

Best Supporting Actress - The Help

 

But again, you never know...

The general public will go "Wha?" when it comes to such a landslide night for "The Artist" (if it pans out for it).

 

Talking to the casual movie fans at work, they're already saying"Wha?" due to the lack luster best picture noms, forget about a sweep.

 

The only positive to The Artist sweeping is there is a very thin chance the studios will see this as a chance to profit off their silent film catalogs. Provided they can convert them to 3D and add a Ke$ha song to them anyways....

I'm not one of those miserable bastards who hasn't liked a movie since 1970 (not because they've turned into bitter old men but because the movies are all bad now) but even I think it was a fairly weak year. I haven't seen The Descendents or Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close yet but I've seen the other BP nominess and they are all fine movies but none of them really stuck out as THE Best Picture to me. If I was a voter, I'd probably go with Hugo but I wouldn't be too bothered if The Artist, Midnight In Paris or The Tree Of Life won.

I'll co-sign on this year's slate of Best Film nominees being pretty weak overall. It'll be interesting to see which film from 2011 will be remembered fondly as strong films, even 10 years from now, as I can't see that number being more than 5.

Yeah, I agree this is a lackluster slate.  I've seen 8 of the 9 - all but "Extremely Close" - and can't find a single one that excites me.  That's unusual - I normally find at least one flick to choose as my clear "rooting interest".  "Social Network" last year, "Avatar" in 2010... there's usually something I actively hope will win.

 

This year?  Shrug.  I'll probably root for "Descendants" because I like some of Payne's other work - thought "Sideways" should've beaten the awful "Million Dollar Baby"- but I'm not enthusiastic about it.  More hoping "Artist" LOSES than anything specific wins...

While it's not 1939 I'm not sure why so many people are acting like it's one of the worst years in decades. While there weren't a large number of great films this year we at least got to see some legends return to some pretty big movies. Scorsese, Malick, Allen, Eastwood, Herzog, Spielberg and even Polanski released some pretty good to great films. THE ARTIST and HUGO, whether you like them or not, shined a spotlight on silents and probably got many more saved, preserved and released. Both Clooney and Fincher released very good movies that show we at least have some good directors lined up for future films.

TAKE SHELTER, THE BEAVER, YOUNG ADULT, A BETTER LIFE, THE PERFECT HOST, MELANCHOLIA, EVERYTHING MUST GO, RED STATE and THE CONSPIRATOR were pretty good movies that no one saw so these stand a shot at be discovered at some point. Not to mention the countless foreign movies that were either overlooked or haven't been released here yet.

It's not so much that it was a bad year, it's just that, in terms of BP nominations, there was nothing that stood out all that much to me. Off the top of my head, I liked The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo, The Ides Of March, Young Adult and Drive more than the other movies that actually got a BP nom. I'm not surprised that none of those got nominated (except Ides Of March) but since none of my really favorite movies made it, my interest is lower than normal.

Random thoughts:

I just saw The Help and liked it much more than I thought I would. The performances from everyone (not just the nominated actors) are all very good.

I'm not a Woody Allen aficiando but Midnight In Paris is probably my favorite movie of his since Annie Hall. Granted, I know I've missed ones here and there but Midnight In Paris was a charming little movie.

It's a shame that Young Adult could get some Oscar recognition for its script or its actors.

Speaking of Red State, I'm hoping Michael Parks can use that as a springboard to get some character roles in big movies. For how good that guy is, it's a crime that he isn't more well known and in bigger movies.