Official Academy Awards Nominations 2010 Thread (Announced) (1 Viewer)

[Hanson]

Originally Posted by Tino ">[/url]

Yup...it's gotta be mass hysteria...............

 

[mattCR]

Wow Hanson:

Such was the case with Juno, a movie I dare you to watch again (if you love so goshdarned much), a movie that got to where it was because the screenwriter used to be a stripper -- that was the hook.

Actually, I enjoyed Juno. Still do. I watched Napoleon Dynamite once, didn't like it, and have no interest in watching it again. It just struck me as stupid. I enjoyed Juno, and I found it watchable, still do. And the dialog gets beat up, but it has a ring to it that I enjoy. I guess it's to each there own, just as there are people who love/hate Kevin Smith. I have no interest in Jennifer's Body, primarily because I think that Meagan Fox can't act to save her life.

But "United States of Tara" which Cody also writes, had a fun first season, and I'll watch the second.

 

[Brandon Conway]

Originally Posted by Edwin-S

"Inglourious Basterds" was very good but the blatant historical changes in regards to Hitler and his gang's ultimate end knocks the film down a notch in my book.

While I don't love the film personally, this is pretty much the whole point, no?

Having Jewish Soldiers, a female French Jewish war survivor and a French black man "win" World War II by turning the propaganda film machine against Hitler and his Gestapo is taking the "realism" of historical fiction and turning it up a notch. Why just recreate history when you can truly recreate history?

 

[Brandon Conway]

I, for one, saw Juno and loved it and had no idea who Diablo Cody was, or her backstory, aside from the name on the screen.

 

[Tino]

Originally Posted by Hanson Yoo




Perhaps I'm not grokking your point, but it appears to have something to do with a lot of people liking it and buying tickets somehow refutes the theory of mass hysteria, to which I say, part of the phrase "mass hysteria" seems to be eluding you.

I know very well what he term "mass hysteria" means, thank you very much.

But to suggest that those of us that loved Juno, with it's terrific OSCAR winning screenplay, as well as most critics, are suffering from "mass hysteria" because YOU hated it and Diablo Cody, is frankly a bit "hysterical" itself.

And before we derail this thread further, I suggest if you would like to continue this debate, we move it to the *Official Juno Discussion Thread*.

 

[Jay E]

I really don't like the 10 nominations rule for Best Picture. It somehow cheapens the category.

I think including films like Blindside cheapens it a lot more than having 10 nominations. I don't mind the 10 nominations as long as they select 10 deserving films. Now you can say that there were not 10 deserving films released last year, and I will say that Foreign language films are not excluded from this category, so include a couple of them. A great film such as Summer Hours (which isn't even nominated for best Foreign Language film), is way better than most of the nominations in this category. But the Academy is trying to promote it's own product so the odds are extremely long that we will see this happen.

Anyway, there were quite a few better American films that they could have picked besides Blindside. But of course the Academy is trying to get better ratings which is the main reason for the 10 nominations and the inclusion of this film.

 

[Hanson]

The purpose of expanding to 10 was to include a couple of populist films and a couple of little seen films, so I'm not in any way surprised that The Blindside got a nom. It's not totally critically reviled, has a best actress nomination, and was seen by a ton of people. Up is another movie that would have been shut out if the field were not expanded to 10.

The bigger issue is the Best Foreign Language Film category. The way they do it now is nonsensical, excluding co-productions and allowing only one film per country. Also, the films are submitted by the countries themselves, which means a movie like La Vie En Rose was ineligible because the French selection committee chose Persepolis instead. Cache wasn't even eligible because is was a co-production and no one country could take ownership of it. Here's a NYT article about this subject:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/31/movies/awardsseason/31oscar.html

 

[Steve Christou]

They should have done away with the Foreign Language category a long time ago, the show runs long enough as it is.

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

Originally Posted by Hanson Yoo

The bigger issue is the Best Foreign Language Film category. The way they do it now is nonsensical, excluding co-productions and allowing only one film per country.

I agree. A simple benchmark, like less than 10 percent English dialog, would open up the category in a big way while still keeping it solidly international in flavor. Or maybe less than 10 percent English dialog and less than 50 percent American financing.

 

[Joe Karlosi]

I'm a Tarantino fan, but I don't think INGLOURIOUS BASTERDS has any business being up there for "Best Picture". However, I thought Waltz was very good in it, and I wouldn't mind him getting an award.

 

[Inspector Hammer!]

I actually didn't really care for Inglorious Basterds, I'm a Tarantino fan as well and I thought it was actually a little boring at times and I also thought that Pitt hammed it up quite a bit.

 

[Patrick Sun]

I was able to list 23 other films in the top 10 throwdown, and still didn't find IB in that list. Just didn't much care for it, either.

 

[Brandon Conway]

Originally Posted by Steve Christou

They should have done away with the Foreign Language category a long time ago, the show runs long enough as it is.

That would be an awful reason to get rid of a category that, despite its flaws, brings much needed attention to non-Hollywood films.

 

[Hanson]

IB was the best film of the year, and I haven't really liked anything Tarantino has done since Pulp Fiction. It has almost no chance of winning, but I'd be thrilled if it won best picture.

 

[Steve Christou]

Basterds is far from being my favourite Tarantino film (I couldn't care less about any of the characters) but better that film than some of the others on the list.

When the foreign language category comes up that's the signal to go and make a cup of tea, so it does serve a useful purpose I suppose.

 

[TravisR]

There was no movie that stood out to me as THE best movie of the year but if I was an Academy voter, my vote would go to Inglourious Basterds. Having said that, I won't be angry when Avatar or The Hurt Locker win (although I think The Hurt Locker is kinda overrated).

 

[Steve Christou]

Wouldn't it be a total shocker if Up won Best Picture as well as Best Animated? After all it was one of the best reviewed films of the year. Would anyone be angry if that happened? I'd have a big grin on my face.

Avatar has already won the biggest prize of all the most popular movie of the modern era and it's still chugging along nicely.

 

[TravisR]

Originally Posted by Steve Christou ">[/url]

Wouldn't it be a total shocker if [b]Up[/b] won Best Picture as well as Best Animated? After all it was one of the best reviewed films of the year. Would anyone be angry if that happened? I'd have a big grin on my face.

 

[SamT]

They should have done away with the Foreign Language category a long time ago, .......[no matter what comes here]

This is maybe the worst thing I have read in this thread.

 

[Steve Christou]

Originally Posted by SamT /forum/thread/297692/official-academy-awards-nominations-2010-thread-announced/90#post_3658051