2004 Academy Awards: Early predictions and discussion (1 Viewer)

[Mikel_Cooperman]

I can think of a lot worse things than seeing Jude Law up on the screen this Winter. Saw the trailer for Closer last night and it looks terrific. Amazing cast and Mike Nichols directs which is a good thing.



I am really hoping that The Passion doesnt get any top nods but you know Gibson will get Director because you know, you dont want to piss of the religious high powers.

I thought the thread was about the Sylvester Stalonne movie too. Might want to change that.

 

[Nathan V]

Some updates.

I just saw The Motorcycle Diaries, which I feel is one of the best of the year. It has opened to strong critical reviews and rides on great festival buzz. This film, along with last year's Cidade de Deus, is part of what has been dubbed a 'renaissance' of the Brazilian film industry, which is expected to produce 50 movies this year, the most since the 1970s. However, the enormous success of 'City of God' last year puts some undue pressure on Diares.

Annete Bening has/will recieve the San Sebastian Film Fest Lifetime Achievement Award, and the Hollywood Film Fest Award this year for her performance in 'Being Julia.' DiCaprio will also get the Hollywood Fest Award, I assume for the Aviator.

Here's an excerpt from Oscarwatch.com about oscar's tendencies towards prostitutes and actresses which I thought was interesting-

quote:"Will Annette Bening (“Being Julia”) join the ranks of Gloria Swanson (“Sunset Boulevard”), Bette Davis (“All About Eve”), Simone Signoret (“Room at the Top”), Geraldine Page (“Sweet Bird of Youth”), and Dianne Wiest (“Bullets Over Broadway”)?


All of these women were nominated (and some won) for playing aging, flamboyant actresses. My book, All About Oscar, shows that the two most prominent professions among the female Oscar roles are actresses and prostitutes. You don't have to be a sociologist to see the link between the two occupations or to understand the sexism that explains their prominence among Hollywood's femme roles. Both acting and prostitution are service-oriented professions that rely heavily on physical looks and the desire to please, sexually and otherwise.

Actresses playing actresses stand the best chance to receive Oscar nominations and awards for a number of reasons. First and foremost, the Acting Branch has the largest number of members (about one fourth of the Academy) and is easily biased toward portraits of eccentric showbiz personalities (actresses, singers, dancers). Second, playing a performer, preferably one afflicted with a problem or disease, provides a meaty, juicy part that lends itself to histrionics and wide gamut of emotions."

Also, MIRAMAX has pulled its oscar hopefuls 'Proof' and 'Unfinished Life' from release, presumably to cut marketing/distribution costs. As we all know, Miramax has recently had to cut a lot of funds and staff, due to friction with Disney. They don't have the power anymore to push all these films. I assume they will focus their attentions on The Aviator as their primary oscar hopeful. There's no word on if/when the other films will be released (next year's oscar season?).

Hotel Rwanda won Toronto's BP.

I also wanted to talk about Best Actor for a second. I just realized this is one hell of acrowded category. Obviously, Jamie Foxx will be nominated for Ray. But as for the other 4 spots, we've got-

Leo Dicaprio, who I am pretty sure will get nominated;
Jim Caviezel, who starred in that one foreign movie;
Jude Law, who will probably get nominated for something;
Jeff 'door in the floor' Bridges, critics call this his best perf;
Jim Carrey deserves a nom for Eternal Sunshine;
Colin Farrell, as Alexander the Great;
Bill Murray, in Wes Anderson's next; losing last year will give him a boost this year;
I already mantioned Gael Garcia' Bernal's 2 movies;
Johnny Depp, in Miramax's Finding Neverland;
Al Pacino in a new 'Merchant of Veince' adaptaion;
Don Cheadle is said to be extraordinary in Hotel Rwanda;
Sean Penn, also said to be terrific in 'Assassination...Nixon;';
Kevin Spacey has his Bobby Darin movie coming out;;
Kevin Bacon's performance as a pedophile is said to be excellent;
Christian Bale lost x amount of pounds for his role in the Machinist; and
Liam Neeson has serious buzz going for him with Kinsey.

I can't ever remember a category being this effing crowded. Just about everybody I just listed could conceivably get nominated.

Discuss!

Regards,
Nathan

P.S. I can't believe there's more awareness on HTF of a sylvester stallone movie than there is of the academy awards! Mods, if you are reading this, if you could rename this thread as 'Oscar 2004,' or 'Academy Awards 2004 discussion' or somesuch, it'd be greatly appreciated.

 

[Seth Paxton]

I still think its one of Sly's better films. Very funny stuff.

JK (well I do like the film)

I think we will see the Actor category thin out after we get to take a look at some of these "should have a chance" roles. Outside of last year I can't think of too many years when the Oscar field wasn't crowded when all we had were expectations, and every time it thins way down once the product is seen beyond the inner circles and festival fandom.

I'm not knocking your list or this early discussion as I think its great. But Sept/Oct is to the Oscars what spring training is to MLB teams - at that point everyone thinks they have a shot.

My early bet goes with Neeson. I think Murray gets pushed out this year, though Carrey has a strong shot because he has the one serious Oscar contender from pre-Oscar season, and frankly its just a damn strong effort.

Put Foxx in there and you are already at 3. I think Bacon could slip in, not sold on Leo being quite powerful enough (he's been good but not stellar so far), Cheadle is an interesting choice and could get in if it really is a juicy social/political role.

Spacey I think might have slipped out of the main running barring a comeback role. Not sure if Pacino's role will be enough since actors with wins/noms tend to need a really outstanding role/performance.

 

[andrew markworthy]

I think this is one of the most open seasons for years. The obvious choices aren't there:



(1) massive epic (e.g. LOTR)

(2) something about a guy with a serious illness (e.g. Beautiful Mind)



However, when it's a relatively open field, there does tend to be a habit of going for something based on the classics (preferably English). E.g. consider Shakespeare in Love, which let's face it now that the hype has died down, isn't all that hot. I'd therefore predict Vanity Fair for Best Picture and possible Best Actress.

 

[Holadem]

quote:P.S. I can't believe there's more awareness on HTF of a sylvester stallone movie than there is of the academy awards! Mods, if you are reading this, if you could rename this thread as 'Oscar 2004,' or 'Academy Awards 2004 discussion' or somesuch, it'd be greatly appreciated.

It's awfully early for this kind of talk, is all. Also, I don't see anything terribly exciting on the horizon, nothing with a big prelease buzz that I am aware off. No runaway indie either. Oscar is chilling in dullsville right now.



--

H

 

[ZacharyTait]

Is it possible that Collateral could have 3 Best Actor nominations among it's cast this year? Jamie Foxx and Javier Bardem (who played Felix) are virtual locks to get a nomination. Tom Cruise is a longshot, but it could happen as the fall season progresses and the contenders open.



I wonder if any movie in a given year had this happen? I know there have been movies where 2 cast members were nominated in the same category (Al Pacino and Marlon Brando for Best Actor for The Godfather).

 

[Kristian]

quote:Jamie Foxx and Javier Bardem (who played Felix) are virtual locks to get a nomination.

I don't think Javier Bardem has any chance of getting a supporting nod for Collateral. He was great in the one scene he was in, but it was just one scene. It is simply too small a performance to get noticed in a crowded Oscar season. If he gets nominated at all, it'll be for his lead performance in The Sea Inside.

As for Foxx... I think it's much more likely he'll be recognized for Ray.

 

[Chuck Mayer]

Chris Rock to host this year. Interesting choice. I hope he stays bloodthirsty

Click here

Take care,
Chuck

 

[Chris Lockwood]

Yeah, just heard about Rock. Great choice. Almost like the Academy is trying to shed its stuffy image.

 

[Citizen87645]

I'm happy about Rock too. Should be pretty good.

 

[Kristian]

I like Chris Rock, but I'm not sure if his style will gel with the Academy Awards ceremony. Personally, I was hoping Steve Martin would come back.

 

[Eman_Ramos]

Chris Rock? Crazy...





At least it's somebody new. Billy Crystal was great...about 10 years ago. Same with Whoopi.

 

[ZacharyTait]

quote:I don't think Javier Bardem has any chance of getting a supporting nod for Collateral. He was great in the one scene he was in, but it was just one scene. It is simply too small a performance to get noticed in a crowded Oscar season. If he gets nominated at all, it'll be for his lead performance in The Sea Inside.





As for Foxx... I think it's much more likely he'll be recognized for Ray.

I just realized that my wording wasn't very clear. I meant that 3 actors in the same movie all grabbing Best Actor nominations, not for said movie.





I, of course, mean Tom Cruise for Collateral, Jamie Foxx for Ray, and Javier Bardem for The Sea Inside as you pointed out. That's what I meant; it's my choice of words that wasn't clear enough.

I'm off to flog myself for being so stupid.....

 

[ZacharyTait]

David Poland has posted his first 20 Weeks to Oscar column at MCN.





Main article





Best Picture





Best Director





Best Actor/Supporting Actor





Best Actress/Supporting Actress





Best Screenplay/Adapted Screenplay

 

[Holadem]

I am really surprised by the talk of Collateral in this thread. Decent movie, no more (my opinion obviously). If it so much as gets nominated, that would be evidence of one dreadful movie year (a la 2000).





I like Chris Rock as a host. No more Crystal or Whoopi. PLEASE.





--


H

 

[Ray H]

Rock is an interesting choice. I was personally hoping for Steve Martin though.





Any word on whether or not Fahrenheit 9/11 is still eligible? I thought I heard somewhere that Moore took it out of the running or something.

 

[Craig S]

quote:Any word on whether or not Fahrenheit 9/11 is still eligible? I thought I heard somewhere that Moore took it out of the running or something.

Moore took Farenheit 9/11 out of the running in the Documentary category in order for it to be eligible for Best Picture.

Chris Rock is an interesting choice. I think he's very funny in his stand-up routines, but on the Oscars he'll have to tone down the language.

After last year's pre-ordained LotR-fest, this year feels wide open. The only prediction I'm willing to make at this point is that Jamie Foxx appears to be a shoo-in for Ray.

 

[Chris Farmer]

Of course, as far as "substance" noms go, I think last year's nomination of Johnny Depp for Pirates showed that the Academy is capable of recognizing well-down acting jobs even in highly unusual roles. Excellent job, and I wish he'd won in fact, but if Depp can get nominated for playing Cptn. Jack Sparrow, I would think Caviezel's incredible performance as Jesus would be worth a nom as well.

 

[Seth Paxton]

I like Chris Rock, but I don't like him as Oscar host. Just seems like a more awkward pairing than Letterman ending up being. It's got nothing to do with being funny and everything to do with the type of entertainer you are.

In that respect I think a guy like Jamie Foxx or David Alan Grier would be a lot better as hosts. But good luck to Rock, I hope he pulls it off for both his success and for my enjoyment of the night.



I disagree on 2000 being a weak near. I think it was more average than anything. When the Oscars rolled around it seemed weaker because they left out stuff like Almost Famous and Memento, and tehy had a foreign film as a major player (rightfully so however).

Like most years there were 5-6 really exceptional efforts and probably 20-30 other either good small films (Ghost World, Memento, Requiem) or quality entertainment films (like X-Men or Gladiator).

At this point 2004 actually feels much weaker than that. We have Shrek 2, Spidey 2 and Potter 3 as fun flicks. You have a couple of tough fits who's ratings seem tough to seperate from their content in F911 and PotChrist. And then you have a couple of non-players due to size in Before Sunset (acting/writing noms maybe) and Garden State.

The only decent Oscar contender IMO from the first 10 months is Eternal Sunshine. I mean that is the only one, and its not like it was Erin Brockovich or Gladiator popular.

Foxx in Ray sure does have a lot of good buzz going. I keep hearing about people who saw it and thought it was great.

 

[Quentin]

Really though...when was the last time we had more than a couple possible contenders at this time of the year? It's all about how the distribution patterns have changed. Oscar contenders no longer come out before October for the most part.