Jump to content

Oscar Party!


  • Please log in to reply

1799 replies to this topic

#871

blackburn

blackburn

    Couch Potato

Posted Feb 24, 2012 @ 2:18 AM

Ha, at least Jon Stewart can take solace in hopefully no longer hosting the worst ratings telecast ever (the year of No Country for Old Men's win.)


Oh lordy, was that year a snooze fest. I can't imagine Jon Stewart being blamed for the low ratings, considering everybody and their grandmother knew No Country for Old Men would win. And you couldn't pay me a million to watch that movie again. JS has the worst luck. The previous time he hosted they had another batch of uninspiring movies up for nomination. Even with an expanded category this year it looks to be the same case. Not that they *should* nominate uplifting/blockbuster movies but the academy can spice things up a bit. I don't see much press this year for the show, and they could have benefitted having Eddie Murphy host (whether or not he'd be good). Oh well!
  • 0

#872

Diane Chambers

Diane Chambers

    Fanatic

Posted Feb 25, 2012 @ 8:40 PM

The only BP nominees that were in my local mall theater were the Help, Extremely Loud, Moneyball, Hugo, and War Horse.

And yet "The Descendants" and "Midnight in Paris" were more profitable than all of these films but "The Help."
  • 0

#873

MaggieElizabeth

MaggieElizabeth

    Fanatic

Posted Feb 26, 2012 @ 10:14 AM

I know I'm getting into this particular discussion a little late, but I scrolled upthread and found -- "children's movies should not win Best Picture"?? It's obvious this rather dimwitted actress did not see any good movies while she was growing up, or she would know better.

For one thing, she would understand the crucial difference between a "children's movie" and a family film.

A "children's movie" is something like Judy Moody and the Not Bummer Summer or Cars 2, a movie aimed squarely at an audience of ten years old or younger, with no substantial questions or challenges at its center, and little if anything of importance at stake in their plots. By this definition I would say the actress is right: movies like this do NOT deserve to win Best Picture. But does Hugo really belong in this category?

Hugo and Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2, along with Babe, 1993's The Secret Garden, 1995's A Little Princess, E.T., Whale Rider, and the best works of Disney and Pixar and Studio Ghibli, are something different altogether: they are family films, which means that when it comes to audience appeal, they have the widest of all -- they can speak to any age, any gender. They have humor, heart, intelligence, and imagination. They do ask substantial questions and raise challenges. Something vital is at stake in the stories they tell. The gravely short-sighted and unimaginative among us may dismiss these films as "children's films" because they have child protagonists, or non-human protagonists. That's because they are unwilling to connect emotionally with people unlike themselves -- in this case, because of age. Do we really want to let such ignorance dictate which films we call "best"?

I am not saying I think Hugo should win Best Picture this year, even though I like it a great deal. But if we're going to deny it, it needs to be for other reasons, reasons that speak to the quality of the film or lack thereof (maybe the character of Hugo could have been a little bit better defined; maybe the pacing could have been improved; maybe the movie had too many subplots, etc.). It should NOT be solely because its protagonist is a child. To me, this is an outrageous idea. By its "logic," To Kill a Mockingbird and The Wizard of Oz should never have been Best Picture contenders.

Edited by MaggieElizabeth, Feb 26, 2012 @ 10:14 AM.

  • 0

#874

Limbonaut

Limbonaut

    Stalker

Posted Feb 26, 2012 @ 11:00 AM

This year War Horse was nominated for Best Picture but it's director Steven Spielberg was not. This wasn't the first time this happened to Spielberg as this video from 1976 of his watching the nominations for the that year's Academy Awards. First the list of other movies nominated makes you realize how awesome 70s cinema was and second, Spielberg is crazy young in this video! I think he really believed Jaws would get 11 nominations(which it actually did deserve) but was disappointed he didn't get nominated for director. Trivia note: The guy with the mustache and "Jaws" T-shirt is Joe Spinell, who played Willie Cicci in The Godfather pts 1 and 2 and Gazzo in Rocky. He also starred in the slasher movie Maniac. Who knew he and Spielberg were friends?

Edited by Limbonaut, Feb 26, 2012 @ 11:01 AM.

  • 0

#875

furrylump

furrylump

    Fanatic

Posted Feb 26, 2012 @ 12:37 PM

A "children's movie" is something like Judy Moody and the Not Bummer Summer or Cars 2, a movie aimed squarely at an audience of ten years old or younger, with no substantial questions or challenges at its center, and little if anything of importance at stake in their plots. By this definition I would say the actress is right: movies like this do NOT deserve to win Best Picture.

I have to disagree. I think a children's movie is just something whose primary target audience was children. I don't think it's indicative of quality though, because if something's good, who cares what demographic it was aimed at?

That being said, I wouldn't consider most of the movies you mentioned (most notably Hugo and E.T.) children's films either, because I think they very much intended to be watched and enjoyed by adults just as much as kids. I mean, it's not like Pixar could be blind to the fact that they have a considerable adult audience by now.

Edited by furrylump, Feb 26, 2012 @ 12:45 PM.

  • 0

#876

lastdaughterfk

lastdaughterfk

    Fanatic

Posted Feb 27, 2012 @ 3:52 AM

That being said, I wouldn't consider most of the movies you mentioned (most notably Hugo and E.T.) children's films either, because I think they very much intended to be watched and enjoyed by adults just as much as kids. I mean, it's not like Pixar could be blind to the fact that they have a considerable adult audience by now.



I think there is a confusion between the age of the main character with the age of the audience. There are kids movies acted only with adults and the other way around. I don't consider Hugo a children's movie. I'm sure many children would had fallen sleep in it.

Let's start the ball rolling. I lost interest in the Oscars years ago, out of the snubs, the ceremony is boring and the nominations are very predictable. I do read the list of nominees and winners to keep my pop culture trivia updated. I do celebrate certain winnings like the Muppet's movie song winning and Viola Davis and the Artist of course.
Meh about the rest, although I though HP would had going to get at least one award in account of being the last year for the movies, I guess not everyone can be LOTR I guess :(.
  • 0

#877

braggtastic

braggtastic

    Stalker

Posted Feb 27, 2012 @ 9:54 AM

I do celebrate certain winnings like the Muppet's movie song winning and Viola Davis and the Artist of course.

Viola Davis didn't win; Meryl Streep did.
  • 0

#878

Colonel Green

Colonel Green

    Stalker

Posted Feb 27, 2012 @ 10:44 AM

Streep scores a huge upset victory. Despite what she said, a fourth win would have to still be considered a possibility; she's got another twenty years of career left, potentially, and she's at about where Hepburn was at this point. All the same, she's joined an exclusive club of five (herself, Hepburn, Walter Brennan, Ingrid Bergman, Jack Nicholson).

Some other stats:

- Plummer is correct that the Oscar is only two years older than him, but the specific award that he won is in fact seven years younger (established in 1936).
- Dragon Tattoo is the first film to win only Best Editing since Bullitt in 1968. Kirk Baxter and Angus Wall are the category's first back-to-back winners since Ralph Dawson won consecutively in 1935/1936.
- Hugo has tied The Aviator for the most Scorsese Oscar wins (5), with The Departed (4) just behind.
- Jean Dujardin is only the third actor to win Best Actor for a comedy in the last thirty years (the only two being Jack Nicholson and Roberto Benigni back-to-back in 1997/1998).
- The Artist is also only the third comedy film to win Best Picture in the last thirty years (counting Chicago as a comedy in addition to being a musical), and Michel Hazanvicius is the only director to win for directing a comedy in the same period (since neither John Madden nor Rob Marshall won the prize for their Best Picture winners). All of those comedy winners were sponsored by Harvey Weinstein.
  • 0

#879

lastdaughterfk

lastdaughterfk

    Fanatic

Posted Feb 27, 2012 @ 11:08 AM

Viola Davis didn't win; Meryl Streep did.



Oops. Freudian slip. I meant Octavia Spencer.
  • 0

#880

getawayjordan

getawayjordan

    Fanatic

Posted Feb 27, 2012 @ 11:50 AM

Streep scores a huge upset victory.


Respectfully, I know she has been nominated many times, but it's hard for me to consider a Streep win to be a huge upset. And yes, I was one of those people who groaned "Not her again...." when she won.
  • 0

#881

Colonel Green

Colonel Green

    Stalker

Posted Feb 27, 2012 @ 12:22 PM

It was definitely an upset. Conventional wisdom was firmly behind Davis. But Streep (and Weinstein) finally convinced the voters to pull the trigger on that third win, which was something that people have generally assumed she deserved since at least Adaptation back in 2002, but which never seemed to materialize in any given year.
  • 0

#882

getawayjordan

getawayjordan

    Fanatic

Posted Feb 27, 2012 @ 1:31 PM

Yeah. I feel sorry for poor Meryl. Took her nearly 30 years to get that third Oscar. Hope she doesn't have trouble finding acting work after this.....
  • 0

#883

garnet207

garnet207

    Couch Potato

Posted Feb 27, 2012 @ 4:39 PM

Yeah. I feel sorry for poor Meryl. Took her nearly 30 years to get that third Oscar. Hope she doesn't have trouble finding acting work after this.....

Not to mention having to deal with the "Win a Best Actress Oscar and get a divorce 'curse'".
  • 0

#884

Colonel Green

Colonel Green

    Stalker

Posted Feb 27, 2012 @ 5:12 PM

She's already won Best Actress and her marriage seems fine.
  • 0

#885

braggtastic

braggtastic

    Stalker

Posted Feb 28, 2012 @ 10:01 AM

I did notice in a clip that when she won for Sophie's Choice, she was also wearing a gold dress. I don't know what color her gowns were for all her other nomination years, but maybe I spotted a trend.
  • 0

#886

Redtracer

Redtracer

    Fanatic

Posted Feb 28, 2012 @ 11:59 AM

Isn't there some kind of long-running joke about that? Don't wear a gold dress unless you're absolutely certain that you're going to win?
  • 0

#887

Colonel Green

Colonel Green

    Stalker

Posted Feb 28, 2012 @ 12:56 PM

Well, it was a fun season, even if I think it was underwhelming compared to the previous one (though I'll finally get to see The Artist this weekend).

Let the speculation for next year begin!

Assuming it's good (which, obviously, holds for all the potential contenders), I think Les Miserables could definitely be a nominations juggernaut. The source material is definitely there for it. Could definitely run up acting nominations, in particular - Lead Actor (Jackman), Supporting Actor (Crowe), and since it seems two of the Supporting Actress nominees have to be from the same film, probably Hathaway and Barks (Seyfried and Bonham Carter are also options, but their roles aren't as prominent).
  • 0

#888

Limbonaut

Limbonaut

    Stalker

Posted Feb 28, 2012 @ 2:46 PM

I just looked it up and Sasha Baron Cohen and Helena Bonham Carter are playing the Thernieres? Okay that's going to be awesome.
  • 0

#889

soymilk

soymilk

    Fanatic

Posted Feb 28, 2012 @ 2:59 PM

But after this year's stunt, I wonder if they'll ban Cohen from the Oscars, in character or not.
  • 0

#890

tuco6

tuco6

    Fanatic

Posted Feb 28, 2012 @ 9:38 PM

I'm expecting Les Miserables to clean up at next year's Golden Globes, whether it's a critical success or not, based solely on its scope and star power (see: Nine). However, all that star power might work against it at the Oscars, since I think expectations are stronger. But, it should manage to get noms for a lot of the technical awards, plus Best Song.
  • 0

#891

blackburn

blackburn

    Couch Potato

Posted Feb 28, 2012 @ 9:43 PM

I don't know, I expect Les Miserable to fizzle like Nine did. Sometimes an all star cast is just hype and nothing much. It'll be interesting to see how TWO major blockbusters, The Dark Knight Rises and The Hobbit fare for next year's award season.
  • 0

#892

vb68

vb68

    Stalker

Posted Feb 29, 2012 @ 1:01 AM

I have high hopes for Lincoln. I've been waiting on that one for what seems like forever. I would love to see Sally Field welcomed back to the party as Mary Todd Lincoln.
  • 0

#893

IttyBittyFlavur

IttyBittyFlavur

    Fanatic

Posted Feb 29, 2012 @ 2:50 AM

But, it should manage to get noms for a lot of the technical awards, plus Best Song.


Best Song nominees have to be composed specifically for the film -- which would cause an outcry from all the purists.
  • 0

#894

Colonel Green

Colonel Green

    Stalker

Posted Feb 29, 2012 @ 7:28 AM

They've already announced they're adding a new number (by the original composer).
  • 0

#895

Diane Chambers

Diane Chambers

    Fanatic

Posted Feb 29, 2012 @ 10:08 AM

I did notice in a clip that when she won for Sophie's Choice, she was also wearing a gold dress. I don't know what color her gowns were for all her other nomination years, but maybe I spotted a trend.

Meryl said she hadn't worn gold since then, and she decided to do so this year, for luck.

I already hate Les Mis (just kidding - I think).
  • 0

#896

braggtastic

braggtastic

    Stalker

Posted Feb 29, 2012 @ 10:52 AM

I have hopes for Les Mis, especially since they reversed their awful decision of casting Taylor Swift. I imagine she finally got into a room with one of the composers or the musical director and sang live, and they axed her. I have no idea if that's what happened, but if it is, I'm sure she'll write a song about it.

I'd love to see Tina Fey host the Oscars next year.

Edited by braggtastic, Feb 29, 2012 @ 10:53 AM.

  • 0

#897

nicole8705

nicole8705

    Couch Potato

Posted Feb 29, 2012 @ 1:06 PM

I have hopes for Les Mis, especially since they reversed their awful decision of casting Taylor Swift. I imagine she finally got into a room with one of the composers or the musical director and sang live, and they axed her. I have no idea if that's what happened, but if it is, I'm sure she'll write a song about it.


So they did come to their senses? I was perplexed when I heard they casted her but, ouch!

I'd love to see Tina Fey host the Oscars next year.


I heard that for this year they were campaigning for the Muppets to host the Oscars. Something like that would be interesting to watch. For whatever reason the audience never seems to like the hosts, maybe they are on edge because they don't want to be ridiculed or because they just think the Oscars are a time to be snobby. The Muppets may bring some much needed light heartedness to the program.
  • 0

#898

Colonel Green

Colonel Green

    Stalker

Posted Feb 29, 2012 @ 1:58 PM

There were a bunch of media reports and rumours that she'd taken the part, but the subsequently announced that she hadn't and signed somebody else (a stage actress who'd played the part in, I think, London). But if she had to drop out, I rather doubt it had anything to do with whether she could sing the role, which is something that would have been addressed at the start of the process, not the end.
  • 0

#899

Rickster

Rickster

    Fanatic

Posted Feb 29, 2012 @ 5:20 PM

I think Taylor Swift is a horrible singer live, but I'm sure they could have fixed any problems in Les Miz in post production, easily. I'd think the bigger issue might have been with her acting and lack of experience.
  • 0

#900

Colonel Green

Colonel Green

    Stalker

Posted Feb 29, 2012 @ 7:20 PM

They're doing all the singing in this live.
  • 0