and the Oscar nominees are....

soulsinging · January 2009

Heineken Helen wrote:

soulsinging wrote:

That was the first thought I had when I saw previews for Benjamin Button. It looked like the kind of epic made solely with the Academy in mind... not of interest to me. Frost/Nixon looks ok, but I find that political films almost always sound more interesting than they actually are. Case in point: good Night and Good Luck. Charlie Wilson's War would be the exception proving the rule.

Milk was excellent though and Slumdog and the Wrestler both look fantastic. I'm planning to see them soon. Also need to see Doubt.

I was so happy that Downey Jr got nominated for Tropic Thunder... he was utterly hysterical in that flick. One of the best comedic performances I ever saw. That said, Ledger's Joker was one of the greatest movie villains of all time so I hope he takes that one.

I thought ledger was good but overrated... but he'll win cos of the whole ya know, dying, thing. I agree about Downey Jr. I think it would be great if he won... but then Hoffman :oops: was fantastic. It's a pity Ledger died, cos I'd be very interested in this category otherwise.

That's a pretty common view, but I know I would be praising Ledger's performance regardless of whether or not he died and I'd be saying he deserved the Oscar as well. The only time his death plays into it is my disappointment with the fact that he was slated to reprise the role in the next movie but won't be able to now. But then, I'm a sucker for a great villain, so I see nothing overrated about the way he handled the Joker. He turned a character that used to be a cheesy joke (no pun intended) into a completely chilling and compelling psychopath. I loved it.

Heineken Helen · January 2009

soulsinging wrote:

Heineken Helen wrote:

I thought ledger was good but overrated... but he'll win cos of the whole ya know, dying, thing. I agree about Downey Jr. I think it would be great if he won... but then Hoffman :oops: was fantastic. It's a pity Ledger died, cos I'd be very interested in this category otherwise.

That's a pretty common view, but I know I would be praising Ledger's performance regardless of whether or not he died and I'd be saying he deserved the Oscar as well. The only time his death plays into it is my disappointment with the fact that he was slated to reprise the role in the next movie but won't be able to now. But then, I'm a sucker for a great villain, so I see nothing overrated about the way he handled the Joker. He turned a character that used to be a cheesy joke (no pun intended) into a completely chilling and compelling psychopath. I loved it.

he just doesn't even come close to the last great villain IMO, no country for old men, but yeh, I agree his performance was good, just not oscar worthy considering the opposition IMO.

mickeyrat · January 2009

The level of menace he brought to the character was great. That scene with the criminals , where he says says "I'm not crazy" You could see it in his eyes he was not to be played with and you could hear the hurt in his voice.

decides2dream · January 2009

soulsinging wrote:

Solat13 wrote:

decides2dream wrote:

just saw frost/nixon and the wrestler over the weekend. i honestly do not see why mickey rourke was nominated for a best actor oscar....i found the whole film predictable. as to frank langella, excellent performance....but the film itself, good....but not great imo. still need to see milk, the reader and slumdog millionaire, but of those i have seen...i think benjamin button is IT thus far.

I haven't seen Button yet, but when I saw this clip last week it made me not want to see it.

http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/1d7650 ... om-fgump44

That was the first thought I had when I saw previews for Benjamin Button. It looked like the kind of epic made solely with the Academy in mind... not of interest to me. Frost/Nixon looks ok, but I find that political films almost always sound more interesting than they actually are. Case in point: good Night and Good Luck. Charlie Wilson's War would be the exception proving the rule.

Milk was excellent though and Slumdog and the Wrestler both look fantastic. I'm planning to see them soon. Also need to see Doubt.

I was so happy that Downey Jr got nominated for Tropic Thunder... he was utterly hysterical in that flick. One of the best comedic performances I ever saw. That said, Ledger's Joker was one of the greatest movie villains of all time so I hope he takes that one.

ben button is just a damn fine story, told so well, beautifully acted......i loved it. i don't get the hype over the wrestler, at all. mickey rourke has always been a marginal actor at best in my mind, can't think of any film he has wowed me in, and this is no exception. there is nothing truly unique to this story, at all. if he wins i will be terribly disappointed. well frost/nixon is interesting, just not riveting cinema ya know? i liked good night and good luck.....but yes, charlie wilson's war was a fantastic, overlooked film.

milk, the reader, slumdog and doubt - which is probably tops of my list of what to see next - all look worth seeing.

i will be VERY surprised in ledger doesn't win. it was a great performance, no doubt...but those post humous awards, sadly, always seem no-contest.

Kilgore_Trout · January 2009

petrocs wrote:

Best Picture-
What should win- The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
What will win- Slumdog Millionaire

Best director
Who should win- David Fincher
Who will win- Danny Boyle

Best actor
Who should win- Sean Penn - Milk
Who will win- Mickey Rourke - The Wrestler

Best actress
Who should win- Anne Hathaway - Rachel Getting Married
Who will win- Kate Winslet - The Reader

Best supporting actress
Who should win- Penelope Cruz - Vicky Cristina Barcelona
Who will win- Penelope Cruz - Vicky Cristina Barcelona

Best supporting actor
Who should win- Heath Ledger - The Dark Knight
Who will win- Heath Ledger - The Dark Knight

Best animated feature film
What should win- Wall-E
What will win- Wall-E

Best adapted screenplay
What should win- The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
What will win- Slumdog Millionaire

Best original screenplay
What should win- In Bruges
What will win- In Bruges

I cant comment on foreign language

spot on! except for "best picture"... "slumdog" should and will win... finchers vision for BB was as good as always but the script and story was lacking

should be interesting to see what hugh jackman does as host... i dont think of him as a funny guy

pjfan31 · January 2009

Go Heath

soulsinging · January 2009

Heineken Helen wrote:

he just doesn't even come close to the last great villain IMO, no country for old men, but yeh, I agree his performance was good, just not oscar worthy considering the opposition IMO.

I thought the Joker was a more fascinating villain than Chiggur... is that how it was spelled... but Bardem did do a helluva job in that role too. Definitely among the elite movie villains, but I still prefer the Joker. I can see thinking he wasn't as chilling as the guy in No Country, but to say he didn't hold a candle? Seems to me more like annoyance with the hype than anything... like me railing on all those Pitchfork beloved folk groups in the other forum

Kilgore_Trout · January 2009

soulsinging wrote:

Heineken Helen wrote:

he just doesn't even come close to the last great villain IMO, no country for old men, but yeh, I agree his performance was good, just not oscar worthy considering the opposition IMO.

I thought the Joker was a more fascinating villain than Chiggur... is that how it was spelled... but Bardem did do a helluva job in that role too. Definitely among the elite movie villains, but I still prefer the Joker. I can see thinking he wasn't as chilling as the guy in No Country, but to say he didn't hold a candle? Seems to me more like annoyance with the hype than anything... like me railing on all those Pitchfork beloved folk groups in the other forum

no one will ever compare to nurse ratched from cuckoos nest and longshanks from braveheart

heath did a damn fine job with the joker though and definitely deserves the oscar... regardless of his death

gregkitefan · January 2009

I saw Frost/Nixon last night and thought it was a great movie.
Frank Langella was amazing.

Heineken Helen · January 2009

soulsinging wrote:

Heineken Helen wrote:

he just doesn't even come close to the last great villain IMO, no country for old men, but yeh, I agree his performance was good, just not oscar worthy considering the opposition IMO.

I thought the Joker was a more fascinating villain than Chiggur... is that how it was spelled... but Bardem did do a helluva job in that role too. Definitely among the elite movie villains, but I still prefer the Joker. I can see thinking he wasn't as chilling as the guy in No Country, but to say he didn't hold a candle? Seems to me more like annoyance with the hype than anything... like me railing on all those Pitchfork beloved folk groups in the other forum

it's not annoyance with the hype... I just saw the character as heath ledger... and to me, that's not a sign of a great performance. I enjoyed the film and thought he was pretty good. Is he better than hoffman or downey jr? I don't think so... you might... but I don't.

soulsinging · January 2009

Heineken Helen wrote:

soulsinging wrote:

Heineken Helen wrote:

he just doesn't even come close to the last great villain IMO, no country for old men, but yeh, I agree his performance was good, just not oscar worthy considering the opposition IMO.

I thought the Joker was a more fascinating villain than Chiggur... is that how it was spelled... but Bardem did do a helluva job in that role too. Definitely among the elite movie villains, but I still prefer the Joker. I can see thinking he wasn't as chilling as the guy in No Country, but to say he didn't hold a candle? Seems to me more like annoyance with the hype than anything... like me railing on all those Pitchfork beloved folk groups in the other forum

it's not annoyance with the hype... I just saw the character as heath ledger... and to me, that's not a sign of a great performance. I enjoyed the film and thought he was pretty good. Is he better than hoffman or downey jr? I don't think so... you might... but I don't.

Interesting, because when I first heard about it I was a bit skeptical, figuring that I would think of the Joker as nothing more than Heath Ledger in make up. But that thought never occurred to me once during the movie, I thought he completely disappeared inside that role. It was quite impressive. In general, no, he's not better than Hoffman or Downey Jr. But I think this particular role was a more impressive performance than Downey's in Tropic Thunder (even though I loved that one). I've not seen Doubt yet, though I'm sure Hoffman was phenomenal in it as always. But that's less of a stretch/surprise for him.

Heineken Helen · January 2009

soulsinging wrote:

Heineken Helen wrote:

soulsinging wrote:

I thought the Joker was a more fascinating villain than Chiggur... is that how it was spelled... but Bardem did do a helluva job in that role too. Definitely among the elite movie villains, but I still prefer the Joker. I can see thinking he wasn't as chilling as the guy in No Country, but to say he didn't hold a candle? Seems to me more like annoyance with the hype than anything... like me railing on all those Pitchfork beloved folk groups in the other forum

it's not annoyance with the hype... I just saw the character as heath ledger... and to me, that's not a sign of a great performance. I enjoyed the film and thought he was pretty good. Is he better than hoffman or downey jr? I don't think so... you might... but I don't.

Interesting, because when I first heard about it I was a bit skeptical, figuring that I would think of the Joker as nothing more than Heath Ledger in make up. But that thought never occurred to me once during the movie, I thought he completely disappeared inside that role. It was quite impressive. In general, no, he's not better than Hoffman or Downey Jr. But I think this particular role was a more impressive performance than Downey's in Tropic Thunder (even though I loved that one). I've not seen Doubt yet, though I'm sure Hoffman was phenomenal in it as always. But that's less of a stretch/surprise for him.

I suppose you're right about it not being a stretch/surprise for Hoffman but that's not really fair to hoffman... just cos he's always good, no point giving him the oscar all the time. Probably why Meryl won't win it either. I do think it was a very good performance... I just don't think it was great. Sometimes 'great acting' can run a fine line between being 'too obvious acting' and that's just how I found it. I know that's what the character required but, for me, it was just too obvious. But that's just my opinion... we can debate this for days but a great debate isn't gonna make it a great performance in my head.

mickeyrat · January 2009

Some of this is what we expect of a performance going in. That can skew our opinion of a movie.

soulsinging · January 2009

Heineken Helen wrote:

I suppose you're right about it not being a stretch/surprise for Hoffman but that's not really fair to hoffman... just cos he's always good, no point giving him the oscar all the time. Probably why Meryl won't win it either. I do think it was a very good performance... I just don't think it was great. Sometimes 'great acting' can run a fine line between being 'too obvious acting' and that's just how I found it. I know that's what the character required but, for me, it was just too obvious. But that's just my opinion... we can debate this for days but a great debate isn't gonna make it a great performance in my head.

No, but it's a fun debate and refreshingly less heated than most of the debates I have around here

I think I see what you're saying and I suppose that's a matter of perspective. I appreciate an actor who has to really go out on a limb and obviously act and make it convincing. Not that you lose points for not doing that, but if you can pull it off, I see it as a very impressive accomplishment worthy of recognition. I don't want to penalize Hoffman for a role he could play in his sleep, but when he won for Capote... that was something truly amazing. He has had other roles where I thought he was a bit more outside his comfort zone... even Alomst Famous or Boogie Nights. He was excellent in Owning Mahoney as well. I've no doubt he was fantastic in Doubt and I look forward to seeing it, I just don't think his performance could be so impressive as to top the way Ledger transformed himself from what I thought was nothing more than pretty teen idol face into a cultural icon in a way that completely changed the way we looked at that icon. It was obvious he was acting, but that makes what he did al the more impressive to my mind.

For the same reason, I was all for Johnny Depp winning for Jack Sparrow. Maybe it wasn't his most serious role and it was very campy in some ways, but he created a character everyone loved and managed to sell a movie that had no business being anything other than a cheesy Disney disaster. He turned a film about an amusement park ride into one of the most entertaining films of the past several years. That's impressive. And maybe it's not as "respected" as doing Hamlet, but the Oscar should recognize compelling acting performances, not who pulled off the most somber gravitas in a movie. But the academy has always been slanted towards trying to be very serious.

Heineken Helen · January 2009

soulsinging wrote:

No, but it's a fun debate and refreshingly less heated than most of the debates I have around here

I think I see what you're saying and I suppose that's a matter of perspective. I appreciate an actor who has to really go out on a limb and obviously act and make it convincing. Not that you lose points for not doing that, but if you can pull it off, I see it as a very impressive accomplishment worthy of recognition. I don't want to penalize Hoffman for a role he could play in his sleep, but when he won for Capote... that was something truly amazing. He has had other roles where I thought he was a bit more outside his comfort zone... even Alomst Famous or Boogie Nights. He was excellent in Owning Mahoney as well. I've no doubt he was fantastic in Doubt and I look forward to seeing it, I just don't think his performance could be so impressive as to top the way Ledger transformed himself from what I thought was nothing more than pretty teen idol face into a cultural icon in a way that completely changed the way we looked at that icon. It was obvious he was acting, but that makes what he did al the more impressive to my mind.

For the same reason, I was all for Johnny Depp winning for Jack Sparrow. Maybe it wasn't his most serious role and it was very campy in some ways, but he created a character everyone loved and managed to sell a movie that had no business being anything other than a cheesy Disney disaster. He turned a film about an amusement park ride into one of the most entertaining films of the past several years. That's impressive. And maybe it's not as "respected" as doing Hamlet, but the Oscar should recognize compelling acting performances, not who pulled off the most somber gravitas in a movie. But the academy has always been slanted towards trying to be very serious.

Ugh... don't get me started on Johnny Depp :? pretty much hate every film he's ever done :oops: .

Ok, if I were to say anything about Hoffman's acting in doubt, it would pretty much give away the plot... but it's his acting that left me thinking at the end and that kinda carries the storyline :oops: so I can't really comment at the mo... but it's not as simple as it may seem from the outside.

gregkitefan · January 2009

I rented The Visitor last night.
Very good movie.
Not sure if Richard Jenkins deserved a Oscar nomination.

decides2dream · February 2009

now that i've seen ALL the films nominated for best picture, i feel i can truly weigh in with an informed opinion. without a doubt, in my mind, the curious case of benjamin button should win, hands down. i would put the reader at #2, and slumdog millionaire right behind. milk was fantastic and frost/nixon was good...but yea....that's how it pans out for me.

as to best actor, i definitely think sean penn. i have NO idea wtf mickey rourke is doing there, at all. frank langella was great, i'd put him right behind penn, but i just don't think the role, or his portrayl, was quite as juicy as penn's.

the other categories, again, i can't fully weigh in b/c i didn't see all the nominate films, or actors. i really, really, really wanted to see doubt, but unbelievably it is no longer playing in my area.

i can see it making it's way back, after the oscars...but right now, seems i am sol.

mensane · February 2009

so far, i have only seen Benjamin Button. I havent seen the others yet (seeing Slumdog Millionaire and/or The Reader this weekend), but I dont think Benjamin Button was great. It was okay, but WAY too much like Forrest Gump. Brad Pitt shouldnt win best actor- the special effects of the aging process should win though. Cate Blanchett was great as always.

mensane · February 2009

ok. we saw Slumdog Millionaire last night. i've got to say... if this movie doesnt win best picture, something is wrong with the academy. best movie i have seen in a very long time.

smithnic · February 2009

I may have to quit everything to do with the Oscars if Benjamin Button wins anything. I love David Fincher and the movie looked cool, but c'mon zzzzzzzzz.

Best Picture probably should be Slumdog
Actor~ Penn or Rourke
Actess~ Anyone but Winslett

and the Oscar nominees are....

Comments

Categories