Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: 82nd Academy Award Nominations

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

»	Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE » Community » Film-Yak » 82nd Academy Award Nominations (Page 9)

This topic comprises 9 pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Author

Topic: 82nd Academy Award Nominations

Mike Blakesley
Film God

Posts: 12767
From: Forsyth, Montana
Registered: Jun 99

posted 03-09-2010 11:34 AM

quote: Jeremy Jorgenson
I also didn't like the reversion to "...and the winner is".

I actually did like that. "And the winner is" is one of the most famous phrases in TV history. I never could understand why they changed it in the first place. "And the Oscar goes to" just sounds clunky and doesn't roll off the tongue, IMHO.

| IP: Logged

Jonathan Smith
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 201
From: Youngstown, OH
Registered: Jan 2010

posted 03-09-2010 12:09 PM

There was cleavage and blue alien totties in the movie, near the beginning, the main actor's Navi squeeze.

Jim Cameron ought win an award for getting tits into his last TWO movies on a PG-13 rating.

He's been titlating little boys since 1997 now, quite an accomplishment.

| IP: Logged

John Wilson
Film God

Posts: 5438
From: Sydney, Australia.
Registered: Dec 1999

posted 03-09-2010 01:59 PM

quote: Julio Roberto
We were all waiting for a wardrobe malfunction on the blue alien girls but they were so good not even once we got any nipplelage,

There...you see? You really weren't paying attention. [Razz]

| IP: Logged

Michael Coate
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1904
From: Los Angeles, California
Registered: Feb 2001

posted 03-09-2010 02:15 PM

quote: Julio Roberto
Last year's winner of the American Society of Cinematographers award for feature cinematography was "Slumdog Millionaire", shot in 2K digital.

AMPAS and ASC voted the same last year.

What's with the razzie? Sure, last year the ASC and AMPAS voters selected the same film for Best Cinematography, but you're not proving anything by citing only a single example.

The fact of the matter is that since the ASC started giving out awards in 1987 (for the films of '86), the ASC and AMPAS have agreed on Best Cinematography only about one-third of the time.

And if you're curious what won what, here's the breakdown.

2009
ASC: The White Ribbon
AMPAS: Avatar

2008
ASC: Slumdog Millionaire
AMPAS: Slumdog Millionaire

2007
ASC: There Will Be Blood
AMPAS: There Will Be Blood

2006
ASC: Children Of Men
AMPAS: Pan's Labyrinth

2005
ASC: Memoirs Of A Geisha
AMPAS: Memoirs Of A Geisha

2004
ASC: A Very Long Engagement
AMPAS: The Aviator

2003
ASC: Seabiscuit
AMPAS: Master And Commander

2002
ASC: The Road To Perdition
AMPAS: The Road To Perdition

2001
ASC: The Man Who Wasn't There
AMPAS: The Lord Of The Rings: The Fellowship Of The Ring

2000
ASC: The Patriot
AMPAS: Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon

1999
ASC: American Beauty
AMPAS: American Beauty

1998
ASC: The Thin Red Line
AMPAS: Saving Private Ryan

1997
ASC: Titanic
AMPAS: Titanic

1996
ASC: The English Patient
AMPAS: The English Patient

1995
ASC: Braveheart
AMPAS: Braveheart

1994
ASC: The Shawshank Redemption
AMPAS: Legends Of The Fall

1993
ASC: Searching For Bobby Fischer
AMPAS: Schindler's List

1992
ASC: Hoffa
AMPAS: A River Runs Through It

1991
ASC: Bugsy
AMPAS: JFK

1990
ASC: Dances With Wolves
AMPAS: Dances With Wolves

1989
ASC: Blaze
AMPAS: Glory

1988
ASC: Tequila Sunrise
AMPAS: Mississippi Burning

1987
ASC: Empire Of The Sun
AMPAS: The Last Emperor

1986
ASC: Peggy Sue Got Married
AMPAS: The Mission

| IP: Logged

Julio Roberto
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 938
From: Madrid, Madrid, Spain
Registered: Oct 2008

posted 03-09-2010 05:53 PM

Michael, I was joking. Perhaps I should've chosen the [Big Grin]

smiley instead.

The point was that the ASC and AMPAS both nominated and awarded a non-35mm movie last year as "best cinematography" and the AMPAS also chose it as the "best movie".

And this year both the ASC and AMPAS nominated for best cinematography two non-35mm movies and the AMPAS awarded one of them (while the ASC went with a 35mm one indeed). The AMPAS also awarded a non-35mm movie as the "best movie".

All this is just annecdotical. I was just saying how it's interesting that the Oscars in the past two years to best film and best cinematography have gone to movies that were not shot in 35mm film (plus last year the ASC also agreed and this year also nominated non-35mm films but finally a 35mm one won).

quote: John Wilson
There...you see? You really weren't paying attention.

I must have been too awed with the magnificiency of the brand new 3D technology that I had never ever ever ever ever seen before ... [Wink]

| IP: Logged

John Wilson
Film God

Posts: 5438
From: Sydney, Australia.
Registered: Dec 1999

posted 03-09-2010 06:09 PM

Yes, that must be it.

| IP: Logged

Claude S. Ayakawa
Film God

Posts: 2738
From: Waipahu, Hawaii, USA
Registered: Aug 2002

posted 03-09-2010 06:12 PM

Michael,

You are awesome with all of the informative and interesting facts you provide when you post. [Smile]

They are much appreciated.

-Claude

| IP: Logged

Jeremy Jorgenson
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1002
From: Chicago, IL, USA
Registered: Feb 2005

posted 03-09-2010 08:02 PM

quote: Greg Anderson
Calm down.

Cool. Thanks for the tip! [Roll Eyes]

| IP: Logged

John Wilson
Film God

Posts: 5438
From: Sydney, Australia.
Registered: Dec 1999

posted 03-09-2010 08:20 PM

quote:
Cool. Thanks for the tip!

And when it's cold out...wear a sweater. [Wink]

| IP: Logged

Michael Coate
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1904
From: Los Angeles, California
Registered: Feb 2001

posted 03-12-2010 03:15 PM

quote: Claude Ayakawa
Michael, You are awesome with all of the informative and interesting facts you provide when you post. They are much appreciated.

Thanks, Claude. It's good to know you appreciate my posts, especially since a few film-tech members probably resent my presence. (Hi Dave. [Big Grin]

)

| IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 9 pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Printer-friendly view of this topic

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.