Topic: Oscar Nominations! (Read 26707 times)

ImRonBurgundy? · « **on:** 22 Jan 2008, 10:09 »

No Country for Old Men and There Will Be Blood are leading with 8 noms each.

http://www.oscar.com/nominees/

Lines · « **Reply #1 on:** 22 Jan 2008, 12:04 »

Wow, I'm really happy with all of the best picture nominations. I've only seen two of them so far, but I've heard great things about the other three and plan on seeing them before they leave the theaters.

Joseph · « **Reply #2 on:** 22 Jan 2008, 12:25 »

2 + 2 = 5? (Let the record show that Linds edited out her mistake)

I still need to get around to seeing Atonement. Ian McEwan is one of my favourite authors, and hopefully the strength of the story will save the movie from Keira Knightly.

I'm kind of surprised that The Diving Bell and the Butterfly wasn't up for best foreign language film. Great movie, that. Deserving of the best director nomination, which I am happy to see it got though.

MusicScribbles · « **Reply #3 on:** 22 Jan 2008, 12:58 »

I still need to get around to the job of seeing There Will Be Blood. ALSO: Michael Clayton does not deserve nomination for best picture over 3:10 To Yuma.

Liz · « **Reply #4 on:** 22 Jan 2008, 13:12 »

Quote from: Dark Flame on 22 Jan 2008, 12:25

I still need to get around to seeing Atonement. Ian McEwan is one of my favourite authors, and hopefully the strength of the story will save the movie from Keira Knightly.

It is fantastic. I'm not a huge fan of Keira Knightly either, but she does a better job than normal and the other actors more than make up for her. Also the film is ridiculously faithful to the book aside from one or two small changes, but they didn't mess with anything important. You will not be disappointed.

tommydski · « **Reply #5 on:** 22 Jan 2008, 14:18 »

Quote from: MusicScribbles on 22 Jan 2008, 12:58

ALSO: Michael Clayton does not deserve nomination for best picture over 3:10 To Yuma.

I saw 3:10 to Yuma because it was a western and I am a fan of the genre. I actually thought it was really standard. Not Academy material aside from the chap that played Charlie Prince. He was the only person that got me through an otherwise predictable and ridiculous film.

They overlooked David Fincher's Zodiac though. That is a shame. For a populist-leaning film, that was very ambitious.

Inlander · « **Reply #6 on:** 22 Jan 2008, 15:23 »

If they were going to give a nomination to an actress from Atonement, it really should have been to Romola Garai. Her performance was superb in that movie.

KvP · « **Reply #7 on:** 22 Jan 2008, 22:02 »

Quote from: MusicScribbles on 22 Jan 2008, 12:58

I still need to get around to the job of seeing There Will Be Blood. ALSO: Michael Clayton does not deserve nomination for best picture over 3:10 To Yuma.

I honestly thought both of those movies were a little overrated. But if they were to be nominated for something, I'd agree with you, 3:10 was better.

Agreed with Tommy re:Zodiac as well. Robert Downey Jr. deserves Hal Holbrook's spot. Holbrook, while good, was in the movie for no longer than William Hurt was in A History of Violence.

Inlander · « **Reply #8 on:** 22 Jan 2008, 23:09 »

Yes, but there always has to be at least one old codger in the Oscar nominations. If he was actually good in the film he's nominated for, that's just a bonus.

ImRonBurgundy? · « **Reply #9 on:** 23 Jan 2008, 04:45 »

Quote from: tommydski on 22 Jan 2008, 14:18

Not Academy material aside from the chap that played Charlie Prince.

If there were ever an actor who deserved a big break, it's Ben Foster.

singeivoire · « **Reply #10 on:** 23 Jan 2008, 06:43 »

I'm mildly peeved about the Animated Feature category - you're telling me Surf's Up beat out The Simpsons Movie and Beowulf for that third spot? Seems a little janky.

And Animated Short - I was pulling for Lifted, the new one from Pixar...

And yes, Ben Foster was brilliant in 3:10.

All in all, not a bad batch.

michaelicious · « **Reply #11 on:** 23 Jan 2008, 08:51 »

I like that No Country For Old Men and There Will Be Blood are nominated for almost all the of same categories.

They should just have a gang war between movie crews.

sean · « **Reply #12 on:** 23 Jan 2008, 15:47 »

Guys guys am I the only one that finds it amazing and awesome that Juno got nominated for best picture?

Joseph · « **Reply #13 on:** 23 Jan 2008, 15:47 »

Quote from: singeivoire on 23 Jan 2008, 06:43

I'm mildly peeved about the Animated Feature category - you're telling me Surf's Up beat out The Simpsons Movie and Beowulf for that third spot?

Either way, Persepolis should win.

TheFuriousWombat · « **Reply #14 on:** 23 Jan 2008, 16:48 »

I'm honestly a little upset Ratatouille didn't get a best picture nomination. Call me crazy but it's easily one of the best animated films ever made and I didn't enjoy a whole lot of movies more than I did that one this year. I also think There Will Be Blood will beat No Country in many of those categories even though I think I might like the latter more. Also, what's up with Tommy Lee Jones not getting nominated for No Country? He was incredible. Overall, however, I'm pretty happy with all these nominations.

singeivoire · « **Reply #15 on:** 23 Jan 2008, 18:02 »

Quote from: Dark Flame on 23 Jan 2008, 15:47

Quote from: singeivoire on 23 Jan 2008, 06:43
I'm mildly peeved about the Animated Feature category - you're telling me Surf's Up beat out The Simpsons Movie and Beowulf for that third spot?

Either way, Persepolis should win.

I grant you that - though I haven't seen it, I hear Persepolis is brilliant.

However, it would be a stupendous upset if it did win. Let's be honest, Ratatouille is a bit of a lock.

jimbunny · « **Reply #16 on:** 23 Jan 2008, 18:06 »

It really did have brilliant animation, but the plot, characters, and voice acting were pretty so-so. For Pixar, at least.

Lines · « **Reply #17 on:** 23 Jan 2008, 19:13 »

Though Ratatouille is amazing, Persepolis has a chance of beating it. I don't remember what the third one is, but I pretty much don't see that one winning.

ImRonBurgundy? · « **Reply #18 on:** 23 Jan 2008, 19:30 »

Quote from: Objects inside Clouds on 23 Jan 2008, 15:47

Guys guys am I the only one that finds it amazing and awesome that Juno got nominated for best picture?

No, just bewildering.

Johnny C · « **Reply #19 on:** 23 Jan 2008, 23:17 »

It was an excellent film, and not just for a comedy. It's visually interesting and emotionally engaging on a high level. That's award material.

Boro_Bandito · « **Reply #20 on:** 23 Jan 2008, 23:28 »

It would be really nice for a comedy to win the award for a change though wouldn't it? I mean, its few and far between that anyone recognizes good comedies for what they are damnit.

ImRonBurgundy? · « **Reply #21 on:** 24 Jan 2008, 09:56 »

You could call There Will Be Blood a black comedy. It would be a stretch, but it wouldn't be completely unwarranted. There are parts of that movie that are absolutely hilarious.

My main problem with Juno is that it doesn't really get any good until about halfway through, where it finds its heart. The beginning is full of superficial hipness, cringe-worthy dialogue ("Honest to blog!" "This is one doodle that can't be undid, homeskillet!"*), unnecessary--even amateurish--touches (the diagram of the cheerleader girl becoming a "weird girl" was entirely out of place and unneeded), and contrived plot points (fetuses have fingernails?!).** By the end, though, it manages to be happy and sweet without being overly saccharine, but the myriad problems in the first half are enough to hold it back from Oscar status. I just don't think it's on the same level as No Country for Old Men or There Will Be Blood.

_{*Spouts Rainn Wilson, his comic talents being entirely wasted.

**To be completely honest, the entire beginning isn't bad. Michael Cera's "I've wanted this for a long time" is one of the most subtly funny things in the entire movie. Actually, Michael Cera's character is the most consistently good part of the film.}

TheFuriousWombat · « **Reply #22 on:** 24 Jan 2008, 11:22 »

Just like Little Miss Sunshine last year, Juno has absolutely no chance at all of winning best picture. I guess it's cool to see different genres getting more recognition though. We need more high quality comedies so I say it's a good thing for them to get nominated even if they'll never win.

Paav · « **Reply #23 on:** 24 Jan 2008, 13:56 »

Quote from: Dark Flame on 22 Jan 2008, 12:25

I'm kind of surprised that The Diving Bell and the Butterfly wasn't up for best foreign language film. Great movie, that. Deserving of the best director nomination, which I am happy to see it got though.

Schnabel, the director, is an American and there is speculation that this is the reason the French did not make this movie their nomination. Because for some reason each country can only put one film up for consideration.

Johnny C · « **Reply #24 on:** 24 Jan 2008, 14:34 »

Man the "homeskillet" part isn't cringeworthy, I don't know what you people are on about. It's supposed to be this gawky adult imitating what he thinks "kid speech" is. Basically it's Dwight.

I am just sick of everyone basically saying a chunk of a movie is bad based on one line that happens before the credits.

TheFuriousWombat · « **Reply #25 on:** 24 Jan 2008, 17:55 »

As a slight revision to what I said, No Country will definitely win for sound. The sound mixing and editing in that movie was pretty much perfect. I can't imagine it losing in those categories.

RaysOfDarkMatter · « **Reply #26 on:** 28 Jan 2008, 16:19 »

Quote from: tommydski on 22 Jan 2008, 14:18

I saw 3:10 to Yuma because it was a western and I am a fan of the genre.

A little off topic, but did you also see Seraphim Falls? I'm just curious, since I don't know a single other person who has and wondered if I just liked it because of my love for Liam Neeson. ^_^

Back on topic: I hadn't realized how behind on movies I fell this past year. I need to step it up a little (it doesn't help that the only theater within walking distance of my college is closed for renovations or something. *sigh*). Ratatouille was adorable. I could have been that I watched it on a bus and sleep deprived, but I liked it.

Also, I don't want Norbit to win anything. Ever.

RedLion · « **Reply #27 on:** 28 Jan 2008, 20:40 »

I'm pulling for No Country to get away with Best Picture. The only movie that came close to it for me this year was ....Blood, but as amazing as that movie is, it's really just an extended character study. DDL had better win for Best Actor, in any case.

soatari · « **Reply #28 on:** 29 Jan 2008, 00:36 »

Quote from: RedLion on 28 Jan 2008, 20:40

DDL had better win for Best Actor, in any case.

God knows he deserves it. He's one of the best actors I've had the pleasure to watch.

I'm really pulling for Ellen Page on Best Actress. Her performance in Juno was amazing.

Inlander · « **Reply #29 on:** 29 Jan 2008, 00:47 »

It was most certainly amazing and apart from anything else it was a magnificent demonstration of the craft of acting, however I don't think it was an Oscar-winning performance. By which I mean the Oscars tend to reward not the best performances, but the most showy or the most obvious ones. Sometimes they do recognise more subtle performances, but generally a year or two down the track by giving the award ostensibly for a different performance: see, for example, Russell Crowe winning for a fairly middling performance in Gladiator when he was widely perceived (at least here in Australia!) as having been unfortunate to lose the year before for the Insider.

EDIT: and as far as this year's nominees go, I'd really liked to have seen a nomination for Brian Dierker, for his performance as Rainey in Into the Wild. However I suspect among other things the Screen Actor's Guild might kick up a bit of a fuss about nominating a non-professional actor . . . I dunno, am I too cynical about the Oscars??

TheFuriousWombat · « **Reply #30 on:** 29 Jan 2008, 10:39 »

On further viewings and consideration I think that, far from being the best film of the year, Atonement will win best picture with DDL taking best actor, Bardem taking best supporting actor, Linney winning best actress, Blanchett taking supporting actress and the Coens taking best director. No Country will also win the awards for sound (I'm almost certain). I'm thinking it will also win adapted screenplay and I'm pulling for Ratatouille to win best original screenplay since it was absurdly ignored for a best picture nomination (it's far better than Juno and deserves its spot). Editing and cinematography will either be TWBB or NCFOM. Those are my predictions anyway.

Johnny C · « **Reply #31 on:** 29 Jan 2008, 11:05 »

We can only hope for it to be that well-rounded. As for your Best Picture prediction, I would be surprised if the Academy picked a weighty period piece. It'd really break tradition.

TheFuriousWombat · « **Reply #32 on:** 29 Jan 2008, 12:26 »

I think we can effectively rule out There Will be Blood, Juno and Michael Clayton for best picture. The middle of the three has no chance and the first is simply not a Best Picture kind of film. Michael Clayton wasn't on par with TWBB and NCFOM but I guess it may stand a chance. It's a politicalish thriller which the academy does seem to like. To me though, I really think it will be between NCFOM and Atonement and somehow I feel like the latter will take the prize. None of these films feel like typical Best Picture choices really so I would be not at all surprised if it won.

KvP · « **Reply #33 on:** 29 Jan 2008, 12:34 »

Atonement seems like the best choice to spite all the Blood and Old Men fans. Michael Clayton, I wasn't mad at when I saw, but if it wins it'll be another Crash.

Liz · « **Reply #34 on:** 29 Jan 2008, 18:02 »

So I've seen all the Best Picture nominees aside from Michael Clayton, which I was never really interested in seeing. That being said I think Atonement will probably win, judging by past winners, but if I got to choose I would give it to There Will Be Blood. My favorite movie last year was actually Into the Wild, but it got pretty much snubbed, aside from Film Editing and Supporting Actor, the former it may have a chance at.

TheFuriousWombat · « **Reply #35 on:** 29 Jan 2008, 20:02 »

Quote from: Misconception on 29 Jan 2008, 18:02

My favorite movie last year was actually Into the Wild, but it got pretty much snubbed, aside from Film Editing and Supporting Actor, the former it may have a chance at.

You think? I though Bardem was a shoe-in for that one.

KvP · « **Reply #36 on:** 29 Jan 2008, 20:32 »

Quote from: The dictionary!

the former =
the first of two things mentioned
Example: We visited America and Australia, staying longer in the former than in the latter.

TheFuriousWombat · « **Reply #37 on:** 29 Jan 2008, 20:55 »

Woah, my mistake. Don't know what I was reading there. I really do know the difference. I promise.

Johnny C · « **Reply #38 on:** 29 Jan 2008, 21:22 »

You had better, you used "latter" two posts ago.

Ishotdanieljohnston · « **Reply #39 on:** 30 Jan 2008, 16:09 »

No Country is gonna win cause it's just won the Directors guild award and they just about always go on to win the Oscar. Also, it's the best film, ever. Period.

Ishotdanieljohnston · « **Reply #40 on:** 30 Jan 2008, 17:13 »

I don't know, I guess I'd have to sit down and watch them all again, but hyperbole aside this is a damn fine film. I do think it's there most focused and masterfully made film. That's a deffinite, and it certainly crushes any competition for the Oscar.

KvP · « **Reply #41 on:** 30 Jan 2008, 17:39 »

It fits into the noir spirit of the Coens' best films. But yes, I think it's better than Miller's Crossing (which was exhausting at times, although the attempt on the Irish kingpin's life is my favorite Coen scene) and The Man Who Wasn't There. Not as good as Fargo, and I wouldn't compare it to Lebowski, though if I had to I'd say it wasn't as good.

Johnny C · « **Reply #42 on:** 30 Jan 2008, 22:59 »

Quote from: tommydski on 30 Jan 2008, 17:01

Is it really better than Fargo, The Man Who Wasn't There, Barton Fink, Miller's Crossing, O Brother Where Art Thou and The Big Lebowski?

In order: as good as, better, as good as, better, as good as, as good as.

bryanthelion · « **Reply #43 on:** 02 Feb 2008, 18:49 »

Marion Cotillard was AMAZING in La Vien Rose.

michaelicious · « **Reply #44 on:** 24 Feb 2008, 21:06 »

Poor Paul Thomas Anderson

TheFuriousWombat · « **Reply #45 on:** 24 Feb 2008, 22:07 »

Why? Everyone who won for TWBB seemed to be completely in love with him. I don't think anyone thought his movie was going to win the picture or director nod. It just isn't Oscar material and, frankly, I'm sure he knows he made a masterpiece and doesn't need a very small, shiny bald man to remind him of it.

Narr · « **Reply #46 on:** 24 Feb 2008, 22:44 »

For those that don't know who won what, I SOLVE-A YOUR DILEMMA.

I'm appalled The Golden Compass got nominated for anything, let alone taking home a win. That was easily the worst movie I've seen in years. Everyone I know who liked it went "DID YOU SEE THE BEAR KNOCK OFF THE OTHER BEAR'S JAW?" and when I ask them to name a single other part of the movie that was worthwhile, they usually stare at me slackjawed and respond, yet again, with "DID YOU SEE THE BEAR KNOCK OFF THE OTHER BEAR'S JAW?"

Joseph · « **Reply #47 on:** 25 Feb 2008, 00:02 »

Congrats to the Coens. Disappointed with the actress wins though. Was really especially hoping Cate Blanchett would take home the supporting actress Oscar.

KvP · « **Reply #48 on:** 25 Feb 2008, 00:08 »

It's awesome how apparent it is that Daniel Day Lewis is the son of a Poet Laureate of England.

singeivoire · « **Reply #49 on:** 25 Feb 2008, 08:25 »

Did anyone else notice that The Bourne Ultimatum won the second highest number of Oscars this year?

THESE FORUMS NOW CLOSED (read only)

Author Topic: Oscar Nominations! (Read 26707 times)

tommydski

singeivoire

singeivoire

Paav

RaysOfDarkMatter

soatari

Narr

singeivoire