my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Community   » Film-Yak   » Complete Oscar Nomination List (Page 3)

This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3

Author Topic: Complete Oscar Nomination List Charles Everett Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1470 From: New Jersey Registered: May 2001 posted 02-13-2003 11:09 AM                     Bad: Chicago, Gangs of New York, The Hours, The Two Towers. Fixed for Miramax! Good: Far from Heaven, El Crimen del Padre Amaro, Adaptation, About Schmidt, The Pianist. Great: Bowling for Columbine, The Quiet American. Miramax has no choice but to expand The Quiet American -- it opens in NYC/Philly suburbs on the eve of major antiwar marches around the world. Perfect Timing: Talk to Her -- it expands to Philly tomorrow and 3 nearby Regals are picking it up. Shafted: Monsoon Wedding, Frailty, xXx, 8 Women, The Ring, Jackass, 8 Mile. I wanted to see 8 Women but no stadium theaters near me played it (not even the Regals) and Focus Features does not bribe the Oscar nominators (unlike Miramax). Scott: Y Tu Mama Tambien was eligible this year in all categories except foreign-language feature. It was eligible for foreign-language feature last year but was not submitted as such. [ 02-13-2003, 06:35 PM: Message edited by: Charles Everett ]  |  IP: Logged Paul Linfesty Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1383 From: Bakersfield, CA, USA Registered: Nov 1999 posted 02-13-2003 03:29 PM                     [quote]The Quiet American. Miramax has no choice but to expand The Quiet American -- it opens in NYC/Philly suburbs on the eve of major antiwar marches around the world.[\quote] Charles Has no choice? Was a law passed or somthing? Interesting the FOUR movies you mentioned as BAD all had a least some small part to do with Miramax. Also, 8 Women was in your opinion overlooked, yet you admit to not even seeing it. Why? because it played at NO stadium theatres in your area. So is this the ONLY criteria that you will accept when attending a cinema? Are all non-stadium theatres beneath you and unworthy of your patronage? And you're feeling sorry for Focus features? Doesn't this company ALSO make those artsy snob movies you claim to abhor? (I'm sure Focus sends out DVD's and VHS screeners to the academy members, just like everyone else, including Miramax). You make it sound like one of the reasons you didn't see it was because Focus doesn't bribe the nominators. If so, does that mean you only support movies from companies like Miramax, because, as you clam, they DO bribe?  |  IP: Logged Michael Brown Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1522 From: Bradford, England Registered: May 2001 posted 02-13-2003 05:37 PM                     quote: Bill on page 1 wrote:WOW!!! Look at all those Miramax nominations, 30 by its self and another 9 with the ones from "The Hours" Paramount/Miramax release. "Chicago" 13 nominations "Gangs of New York" 10 nominations "Frida" 6 nominations "Quiet American" 1 nomination "The Hours" 9 nominations I don't see Quiet American on the nominations list?? Am I missing something? EDIT: Oh I see. Michael Caine as best actor.  |  IP: Logged Pravin Ratnam Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 844 From: Atlanta, GA,USA Registered: Sep 2002 posted 02-13-2003 06:06 PM                     Charles, Monsoon Wedding was last year. I remember the British awards nominating Monsoon Wedding for best foreign picture last year. And XXX? Man, please tell me you are joking. I wanted to like it so much, but it was just watchable at best. Which category did you think it deserved? I don't think it even excelled on a technical level. I liked Pitch Black and even the silly Fast and the Furious. But about the only cool thing about XXX was the casting of Asia Argento. And what is the obsession with stadium seating? I like it too. If you watch a movie with less people during a weeknight, then a sloped hall should not be a problem for you unless you are a midget. But I think there are far more problems with theaters now like not showing the freaking proper aspect ratio and dim projector bulbs. How do you say a movie like 8 Women was shafted when you didn't even see it? I do agree Miramax is really annoying when it comes to oscars where even its very average movies have gotten numerous nominations and wins.  |  IP: Logged Charles Everett Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1470 From: New Jersey Registered: May 2001 posted 02-13-2003 06:32 PM                     Pravin: Monsoon Wedding was eligible for this year's Oscars -- it opened in the US on 2/8/2002. For most categories the US release date determines eligibility. That's why Miramax rushed to open Confessions of a Dangerous Mind on 12/31, the last possible date.  |  IP: Logged Bill Gabel Film God Posts: 3873 From: Technicolor / Postworks NY, USA Registered: Jan 2002 posted 02-13-2003 06:33 PM                     Pravin quote: Charles, Monsoon Wedding was last year. "Monsoon Wedding" was part of the features, Focus Features released last year. Because Focus Features ran Academy screenings in December thru early January in New York. Because I handled the screenings. It just did not get any nominations  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3

Printer-friendly view of this topic

Hop To: Select a Forum: Category: Operations -------------------- Digital Cinema Forum Film Handlers' Forum Large Format Forum Ground Level Feature Info, Trailer Attachments & REAL Credit Offsets Category: Community -------------------- Film-Yak Film Handlers' Movie Reviews The Afterlife Bob Maar's Joke-A-Thon Category: Classified -------------------- Equipment and Supplies Wanted/For Sale Help Wanted/Seeking Employment Category: System -------------------- Software Beta Testing Forum

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.