• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Oscar nominations thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
saw the wrestler yesterday. a simple, well-made movie with a great starring performance. as a former fan of wrestling, it also gave me a greater insight and respect for what these guys do for a living, and a sadness that so many of them end up so physically broken by the end.
 
Love To Love You Baby said:
Spielberg is capable of tackling multiple genres, I'll give him that. And he's made a few films I've really liked.

But he hasn't made some of the best movies of all time, as far as I'm concerned. I wouldn't put any of his films in a list of 100 or 200 of my favorite movies.

He's made some amazing movies that would easily make a large amount of top 100 lists.

Jaws
Schindler's List
Close Encounters of the Third Kind
Jurassic Park
Saving Private Ryan
E.T.
Indiana Jones

He also has very few movies he directed that turn out to be awful. Honorable mentions would be munich, amistad, and Minority Report. Hell some may even put minority report in one of his best, I loved it.
 
msdstc said:
He's made some amazing movies that would easily make a large amount of top 100 lists.

Jaws
Schindler's List
Close Encounters of the Third Kind
Jurassic Park
Saving Private Ryan
E.T.
Indiana Jones

He also has very few movies he directed that turn out to be awful. Honorable mentions would be munich, amistad, and Minority Report. Hell some may even put minority report in one of his best, I loved it.

MR rules. One of the best visualized futures in a movie. Really detailed.

Anyways, saw the Wrestler yesterday. It was subtle and very powerful. It is not a movie for everyone though.
 
Memphis Reigns said:
MR rules. One of the best visualized futures in a movie. Really detailed.

Anyways, saw the Wrestler yesterday. It was subtle and very powerful. It is not a movie for everyone though.

Yeah I loved it. I remember a lot of hype when it came out, but it died fast. I was too young to really appreciate it at the time. I watched it recently and it has aged great. I think it deserves more recognition than it gets. Also Tom Cruise was badass in this.
 
Caught Frost/Nixon this afternoon. It's a good film, not a great film, that somehow wandered into the room when the Academy was putting together its list of Best Picture noms and got picked by accident. It strikes me as this year's Michael Clayton, another well-made film with a workmanlike style buttressed by a few great performances that got picked for Best Picture above a dozen other films with as much- or more- ambition or brilliance. I'll say it again- I did like it, with the exception of the faux-documentary trappings. Giving your actors haircuts and letting them talk to the camera doesn't add anything at all to the story, Ron.

On the upside, Frank Langella's performance is most certainly deserving of a nomination, and I hope he wins the gold for it too. It's powerful and memorable, it's more than an impersonation in that he interprets Nixon beyond just embodying him, and that performance is critical to every noteworthy scene in the film. Nixon has been portrayed many times by many people and no one to my mind has gotten beneath the skin of the man until now.
 
Evlar said:
Caught Frost/Nixon this afternoon. It's a good film, not a great film, that somehow wandered into the room when the Academy was putting together its list of Best Picture noms and got picked by accident. It strikes me as this year's Michael Clayton, another well-made film with a workmanlike style buttressed by a few great performances that got picked for Best Picture above a dozen other films with as much- or more- ambition or brilliance. I'll say it again- I did like it, with the exception of the faux-documentary trappings. Giving your actors haircuts and letting them talk to the camera doesn't add anything at all to the story, Ron.

On the upside, Frank Langella's performance is most certainly deserving of a nomination, and I hope he wins the gold for it too. It's powerful and memorable, it's more than an impersonation in that he interprets Nixon beyond just embodying him, and that performance is critical to every noteworthy scene in the film. Nixon has been portrayed many times by many people and no one to my mind has gotten beneath the skin of the man until now.

The gold? If you mean the globe, they already happened.
 
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28877503/

If ‘WALL-E’ couldn’t do it…
Best animated feature category means no chance for animated best picture


It seems like a million years ago, sometimes, but it was really fewer than 20: In 1991, the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences made “Beauty and the Beast” the very first animated feature in the history of the Academy Awards to be nominated for best picture.

Ten years later, the Academy recognized the importance of animation in world cinema by creating the best animated feature category in 2001. While the gesture was certainly appreciated by animators and their advocates, some are questioning whether or not the best animated feature category has become a ghetto from which no animated film can ever escape.

The reason for this speculation comes on the heels of “WALL-E” being left out of the best picture category despite being one of the most well-reviewed films of the year. (So was “The Dark Knight,” of course, but that’s another discussion altogether.) “WALL-E” was honored as best picture by the Los Angeles Film Critics Association (of which I am a member) and rated a 96 percent “Fresh” on RottenTomatoes.com, making it the highest-ranked film of 2008 on the critic-tracking Web site.

Film critic and animation expert Charles Solomon says the genre constantly gets short shrift from Hollywood, despite its popularity with both audiences and critics. “Animation remains at the forefront of contemporary filmmaking — four of the 10 highest-grossing films in the U.S. last year were animated,” he notes, citing the success of not only “WALL-E” but also “Kung Fu Panda,” “Madagascar: Escape 2 Africa” and “Dr. Seuss’ Horton Hears a Who!”

And while no one expects the Academy to pay attention to box office — unless they decide to nominate something like “Ghost” or “The Sixth Sense” for best picture — many of today’s animated films rank among the most acclaimed movies of our generation. If you look at Rotten Tomatoes’ honor roll of the best-reviewed films from the years in which the site has been tracking reviews, one animated title after another pops up: “Ratatouille,” “Wallace & Gromit: The Curse of the Were-Rabbit,” “The Incredibles,” “Finding Nemo,” “Spirited Away,” “Monsters, Inc.,” “Shrek” and “Chicken Run” were all at or near the top of the list in their respective years of release.

But when it came time for the Oscars to select the five best films of the year, none of them made the cut.

“A lot of it has to do with the box that animation has been slipped into,” says Dean DeBlois, co-director of the Oscar-nominated “Lilo & Stitch.” “Just the fact that animation is referred to as a ‘genre’ unto itself is cause enough to question the perception. Animated features come in as many genres as their live-action counterparts; their stories have as much potential to move, frighten, delight and provoke their audiences as any other medium. (The recent Japanese animated feature) ‘Paprika,’ for example, is as much a sophisticated, high-concept thriller as most live-action films of its genre, but few in the U.S. recognize it beyond the boundaries of ‘anime’ or ‘cartoon kiddie flick.’ It could simply be our society’s stigma on animation as entertainment for young people.”

Why can’t animated films be ranked among the best?
The industry’s tendency to isolate animated films as something separate from the “real” movies that everyone else is making got a mild scolding from “WALL-E” director Andrew Stanton, in a gracious statement he made the morning that the film received six nominations that, of course, didn’t include best picture. Part of Stanton’s statement read, “This is a tribute to all of us at Pixar and Disney who do our best to make films, not just animated films, but films for everyone that just happen to be animated.”

Waiting for Hollywood in general and the Academy in particular to bridge the gap and to treat animated films as just another kind of moviemaking may just be a dream (which, thanks to Walt Disney, we know is just a wish your heart makes). “The best animated feature category seems to have been instituted to isolate the medium,” Solomon laments. “If ‘Spirited Away,’ ‘The Incredibles,’ ‘Ratatouille’ and ‘WALL-E’ can’t be ranked among the year’s best films, what can?”

Leonard Maltin, whose career as a film critic includes two books on animation, feels that for the Academy to have taken any steps toward recognition of the genre represents a very big deal. “I think most Academy members feel that having created a separate category for animation is a very big deal — after all, they’ve added very few categories to the Oscars since the 1930s.”

He has a point — this is an organization that didn’t create a category honoring achievement in makeup until 1981, more than 50 years after the death of Lon Chaney. And every year, we hear of groups within the industry, from stuntmen to hairstylists, whose pleas for recognition from the Academy get voted down, usually with the excuse that the show is already too long. (As if audiences wouldn’t rather watch clips of stunts and hairdos over another meaningless montage or bad dance number.)

mov_walle_trailer_080625.300w.jpg

Poor Guy
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom