|
|
This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2
|
|
Author
|
Topic: And the Oscar will Go To...
|
|
|
Michael Coate
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1904
From: Los Angeles, California
Registered: Feb 2001
|
posted 02-02-2006 01:37 AM
quote: Best Achievement in Music Written for Motion Pictures, Original Score Nominees: Memoirs of a Geisha (2005) - John Williams Munich (2005) - John Williams
This has got to be, what, the fifth or sixth or tenth or fifteenth time in Williams' career that he has received two nominations in the same year! And to think, he could've (and perhaps should've) been nominated as well for "Episode III." Is this guy AMAZING, or what?!
quote: Bobby Henderson I do think Episode III did get shafted
No kiddng. I realize that a lot of folks are tired of the whole "Star Wars" thing and are probably glad it got only a single nomination. Knock the dialogue, if you like, but come on...this was a tour de force (no pun intended) in all of the "craft" departments. And no Visual Effects nomination? I guess the perception is that this type of work is just "too easy" for ILM or that they've won too many times in the past. Whatever... Considering the number of effects-oriented movies these days, I think the Academy should consider making this a traditional five-nominee category.
And, call me crazy, but I actually think Ian McDiarmid (Palpatine/Emperor) deserved a supporting acting nom.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mark J. Marshall
Film God

Posts: 3188
From: New Castle, DE, USA
Registered: Aug 2002
|
posted 02-02-2006 12:52 PM
quote: Steve Scott VFX deserves to be treated like art direction or costume design. True, it is a highly integral part of modern filmmaking, but it ought to be treated like any other technical component of filmmaking.
Jar-Jar was not the star.
Sounds like you're making two arguments there. On the first, I agree with you.
On your second point, it's true that Jar-Jar wasn't the star of Sith, but he was a (bad) supporting character in Menace. And generally speaking, what about Gollum? Gollum was certainly a supporting character in the second two Lord Of The Rings movies, and I don't see why Andy Serkis couldn't have been nominated for his performance (yes, it was his performance - most if not all of it was motion captured) in Return Of The King. I think actors who lend their talent to digital characters should be able to be nominated for lead/supporting actor/actress awards. I also think Frank Oz should have been nominated for Yoda's performance in Empire.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Steve Scott
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1300
From: Minneapolis, MN
Registered: Sep 2000
|
posted 02-02-2006 03:06 PM
Mark, I was trying to personify VFX, but you're right on Andy Serkis and Frank Oz. However, it's always about the selection of decent films each year. While I could justify Oz being a great pick in 1980-81, Serkis was met with decent competition in past years' Academy Awards, probably due in no small part to the effort put out by Hollywood to compete with LOTR in those previous years.
I'm just amazed by how the 2005 crop was slight enough to allow a debate over a film like EP3 deserving more nominations. I felt let down by Lucas' new trilogy; to me, it lacked the classic movie passion of the original, something I see most "oscar-worthy" films & performances striving for. Even putting dialoge aside, there was nothing that drew me into the new trilogy.
But I will probably be all riled up next year if Snakes on a Plane gets snubbed, so I guess it's moot.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 02-02-2006 11:35 PM
quote: Steve Scott I'm just amazed by how the 2005 crop was slight enough to allow a debate over a film like EP3 deserving more nominations. I felt let down by Lucas' new trilogy; to me, it lacked the classic movie passion of the original, something I see most "oscar-worthy" films & performances striving for. Even putting dialoge aside, there was nothing that drew me into the new trilogy.
The Best Visual Effects Oscar is not awarded for things like writing quality, acting quality or any other qualities of dramatic narrative. Those qualities are totally irrelevant in that category.
I wasn't exactly blown away by Revenge of the Sith either. And I have certain deep philosophical disagreements with George Lucas with regard to the use of video in movie making -enough that some could mis-characterize it as being an "anti-Lucas" attitude. Still, what's fair is fair.
If the choice were mine, I would probably still give the Best Achievement in Visual Effects Oscar to King Kong. However, the visuals in Episode III were awful damned incredible at many points throughout that movie. The show should have at least been nominated in that category (as well as Best Sound, Sound Effects Editing and possibly a couple others).
Few, if anyone, in the entertainment press will point out this nominations slight. They're all too consumed in celebrity worship that they probably wish the categories like Best Editing, Cinematography, Visual Effects, etc. were handed out in the separate Scientic Achievement Awards ceremony. Let's devote 7 hours of network time to kiss actor ass!
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2
|
Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM
6.3.1.2
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.
|