Reply to Topic
That's true.He should have been recognized by now;but I wouldn't want to be in a position to receive an oscar nod...just because I've been around long enough and deserve one.I really believe that's why Julia Roberts won her's last year.Erin Brockovitch was not a compelling enough performance to have earned her a best actress oscar.It sounded more like,"Jeez,Julia has been around scince Pretty Woman...and people love her...let's just give it to her...she deserves it.After all,she IS hollywoods highest paid female...that has to count for something."
Potential Oscar Candidates for 2002
Originally posted by ryanpaige
As for Shrek, isn't there a separate Animation category now?
As for Shrek, isn't there a separate Animation category now?
X
Favorite Movies
X
User Lists
There wasn't a separate feature animation category when Beauty and the Beast came out. The animation category is new this year. It's unlikely that an animated movie will be nominated outside the animation category now that there is one.
Besides, there's nothing particularly noteworthy about Shrek as a film. Technical awards, sure. But not Best Picture. Not by a long shot.
Besides, there's nothing particularly noteworthy about Shrek as a film. Technical awards, sure. But not Best Picture. Not by a long shot.
Animated movies needed their own awards.I think,in every department.They totally shut out all other nominations in the musical score department.Stupid Disney songs sung by Vanessa Williams or freakin' Elton John,getting chosen for best song from a motion picture,sucks.
Ugh, Sundance...me hates that Indy crap. 
Roberts is a good actress...honestly man. She's doesn't have humongous breasts, and she doesn't possess a natural-born beauty the way someting like Catherine Zeta-Jones does, either...so what's she got going for her? I think she's fairly attractive, has a great on-sceen prescence, and is a very good actress. Now, I was not a big fan of Erin Brockovich (I got a little tired of her yelling something somewhat witty/angry every 5 minutes. How many times can you be a clever smartass in such a short span of time? It seemed so fake), but I don't care too much about her winning. I wouldn't call it undeserved...though I doubt I would have chosen her as the best that year. If I were a voter, though, it's hard to say what I would have done...for one, I would've watched all those nominated several times over. 
Roberts is a good actress...honestly man. She's doesn't have humongous breasts, and she doesn't possess a natural-born beauty the way someting like Catherine Zeta-Jones does, either...so what's she got going for her? I think she's fairly attractive, has a great on-sceen prescence, and is a very good actress. Now, I was not a big fan of Erin Brockovich (I got a little tired of her yelling something somewhat witty/angry every 5 minutes. How many times can you be a clever smartass in such a short span of time? It seemed so fake), but I don't care too much about her winning. I wouldn't call it undeserved...though I doubt I would have chosen her as the best that year. If I were a voter, though, it's hard to say what I would have done...for one, I would've watched all those nominated several times over.
X
Favorite Movies
X
User Lists
Guy Pearce should recieve a nod for Memento.
__________________
Horror's Not Dead
Latest Movie Review(s): Too lazy to keep this up to date. New reviews every week.
Horror's Not Dead
Latest Movie Review(s): Too lazy to keep this up to date. New reviews every week.
X
Favorite Movies
Originally posted by TWTCommish
Ugh, Sundance...me hates that Indy crap.
Ugh, Sundance...me hates that Indy crap.
The fact that anyone beat Ellen Burstyn for her performance in Requiem for a Dream speaks volumes for the Academy's credibility. Julia Roberts winning just goes to show you that quality isn't the only thing behind the oscars. Same with Almost Famous not getting a Picture nomination, and Michael Douglas not getting a best actor nom for Wonder Boys (my theory is that both of these were shut out becuase of box office...which should have NOTHING to do with the academy awards. the fact is that people sometimes miss great movies, for whatever reason.)
__________________
**** the Lakers!
**** the Lakers!
Originally posted by TWTCommish
(I got a little tired of her yelling something somewhat witty/angry every 5 minutes. How many times can you be a clever smartass in such a short span of time? It seemed so fake)
(I got a little tired of her yelling something somewhat witty/angry every 5 minutes. How many times can you be a clever smartass in such a short span of time? It seemed so fake)
-The Mexican? uh-huh
-Step Mom? uh-huh
-American Sweethearts? uh-huh
-Notting Hill? uh-huh
-My Best Friends Wedding? uh-huh
-the Runaway Bride? uh-huh
*have I made my point? Or do you see the pattern...she is a one charactor actress.That's it.Interchangable in every film.
I move for that remark to be stricken from the record, due to its unbelievable ignorance.
The fact that anyone beat Ellen Burstyn for her performance in Requiem for a Dream speaks volumes for the Academy's credibility.
The only other thing I've got to say about the Academy Awards right now is that I'm sick of dramas sweeping all of the awards. Why can't a full-blown comedy be nominated for Best Picture? What is Best Picture supposed to be? I might argue that a comedy might be a better COMEDY than this drama or that drama was as a DRAMA. You have to judge a film by it's genre, don't you? And dang, when are we going to get a movie like LOTR, or "T2: Judgement Day" up for Best Picture? Never, because the Academy is nuts when it comes to stuff like that. If it isn't some dramatical, emotionally moving movie that makes you cry, or gasp in wonderment for some reason, it's not good enough. Balderdash (great word)!
Sades: I dunno about that. Yes, the characters are similar in some senses, but I wouldn't call them the same. In "America's Sweethearts," she was mousy most of the time, and didn't have much attitude until later on, for example. Anyway, I think she has a bit of depth. More than Meg Ryan, at least.
Sunfrog: did you see those outfits she wore? Give her the frickin' lifetime achivement award. Hahahahaha.
X
Favorite Movies
X
User Lists
[purple]Originally posted by TWTCommish [/purple]What is Best Picture supposed to be? I might argue that a comedy might be a better COMEDY than this drama or that drama was as a DRAMA.
I have one question tho. Why do you keep talking about LOTR getting an Oscar when it isn't even out yet? Are the trailers THAT good??
[quote]Originally posted by TWTCommish
T2 just wasn't a very good movie. Sure the fanboys love it, but it wasn't anything more than slam-bam-shoot-em-up seem in any number of other movies. The dialogue was trite and the concept itself was even done better the first time around. Aside from the amazing-for-their-time special effects, the movie had nothing special to offer, at least not anything to make it worthy of Oscar Consideration. Fine popcorn movie, but nothing I would want to see go home with the statue. It's just "Raw Deal" with better special effects.
But the Gladiator movie was a movie not unlike T2, and it won.
While I agree that the movies that win should not always be dramas. They should be the best picture. The movie that shows emotion, passion, whathaveyou more than the rest should certainly be considered regardless of genre. But T2 didn't have those things and was rightfully not considered.
And dang, when are we going to get a movie like LOTR, or "T2: Judgement Day" up for Best Picture? Never, because the Academy is nuts when it comes to stuff like that. If it isn't some dramatical, emotionally moving movie that makes you cry, or gasp in wonderment for some reason, it's not good enough. Balderdash (great word)!
But the Gladiator movie was a movie not unlike T2, and it won.
While I agree that the movies that win should not always be dramas. They should be the best picture. The movie that shows emotion, passion, whathaveyou more than the rest should certainly be considered regardless of genre. But T2 didn't have those things and was rightfully not considered.
Frogman: YES! The trailers are amazing...at least, you'll find them amazing if you've read the first book, and gotten a little into it. For example: I wouldn't care too much about the Harry Potter movie if I hadn't read the books...because now I want to see it come to life.
LOTR has one helluva cast.
Ryan: I'll have to disagree with you. I thought it was fairly deep...much deeper than 99% of the other action movies out there. I found it exciting, a bit dramatic as well, and obviously amazingly cool. I was still fairly young when I saw it, but it completely blew me away. I've always thought of it as a step above most action flicks. Just my opinion, though.
LOTR has one helluva cast.
Ryan: I'll have to disagree with you. I thought it was fairly deep...much deeper than 99% of the other action movies out there. I found it exciting, a bit dramatic as well, and obviously amazingly cool. I was still fairly young when I saw it, but it completely blew me away. I've always thought of it as a step above most action flicks. Just my opinion, though.
X
Favorite Movies
X
User Lists
Originally posted by TWTCommish
Just my opinion. You hate certain types of films, and I hate certain types, and one of the types I almost always hate are Indy films. They're good for a long nap, though.
I dunno...I never take a stance like that, because you have to realize that even if they picked absolutely everyone YOU wanted them to, there would be thousands of people screaming "How could they not pick so and so? This is ridiculous...I no longer respect the Oscars." They're in a position where they need to remain interesting to the public, and try to please people with incredibly varying tastes. They're screwed either way.
The only other thing I've got to say about the Academy Awards right now is that I'm sick of dramas sweeping all of the awards. Why can't a full-blown comedy be nominated for Best Picture? What is Best Picture supposed to be? I might argue that a comedy might be a better COMEDY than this drama or that drama was as a DRAMA. You have to judge a film by it's genre, don't you? And dang, when are we going to get a movie like LOTR, or "T2: Judgement Day" up for Best Picture? Never, because the Academy is nuts when it comes to stuff like that. If it isn't some dramatical, emotionally moving movie that makes you cry, or gasp in wonderment for some reason, it's not good enough. Balderdash (great word)!
Sades: I dunno about that. Yes, the characters are similar in some senses, but I wouldn't call them the same. In "America's Sweethearts," she was mousy most of the time, and didn't have much attitude until later on, for example. Anyway, I think she has a bit of depth. More than Meg Ryan, at least.
Sunfrog: did you see those outfits she wore? Give her the frickin' lifetime achivement award. Hahahahaha. [/b]
Just my opinion. You hate certain types of films, and I hate certain types, and one of the types I almost always hate are Indy films. They're good for a long nap, though.
The fact that anyone beat Ellen Burstyn for her performance in Requiem for a Dream speaks volumes for the Academy's credibility.
The only other thing I've got to say about the Academy Awards right now is that I'm sick of dramas sweeping all of the awards. Why can't a full-blown comedy be nominated for Best Picture? What is Best Picture supposed to be? I might argue that a comedy might be a better COMEDY than this drama or that drama was as a DRAMA. You have to judge a film by it's genre, don't you? And dang, when are we going to get a movie like LOTR, or "T2: Judgement Day" up for Best Picture? Never, because the Academy is nuts when it comes to stuff like that. If it isn't some dramatical, emotionally moving movie that makes you cry, or gasp in wonderment for some reason, it's not good enough. Balderdash (great word)!
Sades: I dunno about that. Yes, the characters are similar in some senses, but I wouldn't call them the same. In "America's Sweethearts," she was mousy most of the time, and didn't have much attitude until later on, for example. Anyway, I think she has a bit of depth. More than Meg Ryan, at least.
Sunfrog: did you see those outfits she wore? Give her the frickin' lifetime achivement award. Hahahahaha. [/b]
Dramas sweep because the Academy feels that giving a "silly movie" best picture would damage their prestige and credibility. Ejemplo: Rushmore, Being John Malkovich, and There's Something About Mary were all shut out for picture. The academy also shuts out things that are deemed 'risky', example: Requiem for a Dream. The point I was trying to make with my post was that the Academy doesn't only want to give awards to the 'best' movies and the best performances. They want to please everybody, which is stupid. They've got no balls.
I agree with Ryan about T2. It was a fun action movie, but nothing special. And they nominated the Fugitive in 1993, but Schindler's List beat it (deservedly). There really haven't been any great action movies in the past few years. They've all sucked.
Meg Ryan is good in City of Angels, she plays a more dramatic role than her usual sunny crap.
I thought America's Sweethearts was so weak. I didn't see barely any redeeming value to it, whatsoever.
Good point: "Being John Malkovich" deserved a nomination. And I do agree with you...no balls whatsoever. I am still, however, sympathetic to their plight...if they don't give some kind of edge to popular movies, they'll fall out of favor (and popularity with the public). They've struck a decent balance in some ways. How many people watch "The Sundance Awards," anyway?
The reason they try to please as many people as possible, though, is to minimize situations with people like yourself, where they're getting blasted. They want that kept to a minimum...a decision which does have merit. Honestly, half of the excitement when watching the Oscars, for me, is in their sheer size. It's a huge event.
Anyway, I still hate most Indy films. A film that relies completely on dialogue needs to have some really good dialouge (REALLY good)...and that's a rare thing. Not everyone can be Kevin Smith (and not all of his work is great, either). Oh, and John Cusack had some completely perfect lines in "American's Sweethearts." He's got great comedic timing, and a helluva delivery.
The reason they try to please as many people as possible, though, is to minimize situations with people like yourself, where they're getting blasted.
They want that kept to a minimum...a decision which does have merit. Honestly, half of the excitement when watching the Oscars, for me, is in their sheer size. It's a huge event.Anyway, I still hate most Indy films.
A film that relies completely on dialogue needs to have some really good dialouge (REALLY good)...and that's a rare thing. Not everyone can be Kevin Smith (and not all of his work is great, either). Oh, and John Cusack had some completely perfect lines in "American's Sweethearts." He's got great comedic timing, and a helluva delivery.
X
Favorite Movies
X
User Lists
Originally posted by Steve N.
The only other thing I've got to say about the Academy Awards right now is that I'm sick of dramas sweeping all of the awards. Why can't a full-blown comedy be nominated for Best Picture? What is Best Picture supposed to be? I might argue that a comedy might be a better COMEDY than this drama or that drama was as a DRAMA.
Sades: I dunno about that. Yes, the characters are similar in some senses, but I wouldn't call them the same. In "America's Sweethearts," she was mousy most of the time, and didn't have much attitude until later on, for example. Anyway, I think she has a bit of depth. More than Meg Ryan, at least.
[/b]
The only other thing I've got to say about the Academy Awards right now is that I'm sick of dramas sweeping all of the awards. Why can't a full-blown comedy be nominated for Best Picture? What is Best Picture supposed to be? I might argue that a comedy might be a better COMEDY than this drama or that drama was as a DRAMA.
Sades: I dunno about that. Yes, the characters are similar in some senses, but I wouldn't call them the same. In "America's Sweethearts," she was mousy most of the time, and didn't have much attitude until later on, for example. Anyway, I think she has a bit of depth. More than Meg Ryan, at least.
[/b]
TWTCommish made a good point.
The Oscars are Hollywood through and through and they like to reward their own kind. The event is about pizazz, fashion, entertainment, song-and-dance numbers and Billy Crystal one liners. Both ET and Star Wars got best picture nominations, not because they were one of the five best films of the year (though, they may have been) but because they made money.
Julia Roberts has made millions and millions for Hollywood. Sure, she often grates. I'm one of the many who'd like to knock one of her teeth out, destroying that smile once and for all. And yet, I didn't begrudge her Oscar. Her performance in Erin Brockovich surprised me, it even moved me. Sure, Mr Soderbergh played a giant part in its success. However the scene where Julia rings home to find out her daughter has said her first word without her being there, was heartbreaking, and it was all Roberts.
I haven't seen Ellen Burstyn in Requiem for a Dream. I'm sure her performance was better. But for a small film like that, a nomination is just as good as a win.
Onto TWTCommish's other point. Indy films are for the most part horrible. I strongly disagree. They mightn't all be fantastic but they have often had a huge influence on Hollywood. And it's often amazing to see the creativity that comes out of making a film on such a shoestring budget. Recommendations include Happy, Texas; any Coen Brothers film; Memento, etc. - I've drawn a blank. AAAGGHH. I know there's loads more.
The Oscars are Hollywood through and through and they like to reward their own kind. The event is about pizazz, fashion, entertainment, song-and-dance numbers and Billy Crystal one liners. Both ET and Star Wars got best picture nominations, not because they were one of the five best films of the year (though, they may have been) but because they made money.
Julia Roberts has made millions and millions for Hollywood. Sure, she often grates. I'm one of the many who'd like to knock one of her teeth out, destroying that smile once and for all. And yet, I didn't begrudge her Oscar. Her performance in Erin Brockovich surprised me, it even moved me. Sure, Mr Soderbergh played a giant part in its success. However the scene where Julia rings home to find out her daughter has said her first word without her being there, was heartbreaking, and it was all Roberts.
I haven't seen Ellen Burstyn in Requiem for a Dream. I'm sure her performance was better. But for a small film like that, a nomination is just as good as a win.
Onto TWTCommish's other point. Indy films are for the most part horrible. I strongly disagree. They mightn't all be fantastic but they have often had a huge influence on Hollywood. And it's often amazing to see the creativity that comes out of making a film on such a shoestring budget. Recommendations include Happy, Texas; any Coen Brothers film; Memento, etc. - I've drawn a blank. AAAGGHH. I know there's loads more.
__________________
I couldn't believe that she knew my name. Some of my best friends didn't know my name.
I couldn't believe that she knew my name. Some of my best friends didn't know my name.