Well the votes are in and the announcements have been made.

Moulin Rouge is NOT best picture and Nicole Kidman is NOT best actress. At last the Academy has shown some good taste.

Catherine Martin did however win Best Costume Design and also Best Art Direction for the film. I have no difficulties with these awards as it was quite a showy film. It just illustrates that this film is much like Sydney - lots of glitter and glam but not much substance. (Spoken as a true Melbournite)

Pity about Amelie not picking up any statues but as I have not seen seen 'No Mans Land' I cannot compare. At any rate Amelie's success both in the US and overseas is reward enough.

cheers Peter

This post just proves there is no hope for you.

------------------
"It's not the years honey, it's the mileage". - Indiana Jones.
 

I'm a hopeless case.

I think its a good idea not to take these awards too seriously. What is really important is that we have some films to enjoy or not to enjoy as the case may be.

I was just running my eye through past winners of awards and noted that there is a distinct bias against comedies and musicals. Perhaps the Academy does not take such films too seriously?

I'd like to see a category included for Best Comedy or Musical to recognise that there is more to life than just 'serious' filmmaking.

cheers Peter

Yes, you are a hopeless case. You're just jealous because Celine Dion was not nominated for anything.

------------------
"It's not the years honey, it's the mileage". - Indiana Jones.
 

------------------
Greg Mueller
Amateur Astronomer, Machinist, Filmnut
http://www.muellersatomics.com/
 

I think the big robbery was giving the best supporting actor to Jim Broadbent for Iris. He has had better performances, and deserved it for Moulin Rouge, although not nominated for that one.

As for good taste? the academy is hardly known for good taste. Moulin Rouge was in my opinion far and away the best picture of the year. But substance won over glitz and glamour for a change.

Dave
 

On a side note, where did Will Smith go?

------------------
"Asleep at the switch? I wasn't asleep, I was drunk!" - Homer Simpson
 

quote:

---

Why are people like Tiger Woods who have mixed parents disected when they achieve greatness, so that each race involved can stake a claim to their percentage? I personally think it's that sort of thing that keeps lines drawn between people.

---

You mean dissected, like what you just did to Halle Berry?

quote:

---

Halle Berry had a black father who abandoned her at a youg age, right? She has a white mother that was at the awards ceremony, and she thanked her during her speech, indicating that she is closer to her mother than said father. So, why is she up there blubbering like a 4 year old that lost her puppy about how great a time it is for african-americans?

---

On the Halle Berry thing, I wouldn't call her win a politically correct thing or a "quota" thing. I thought her performance in "Monster's Ball" was worthy of an Oscar. Everybody is throwing around the "first black actress to win" thing when she also happens to be half-white as well. Denzel Washington put it best in a press conference when a reporter asked him when he thought black actors will simply be thought of as just "actors" without the color label. Denzel told the reporter he could start the trend now if he liked and just call Washington an actor in the report.
 

I haven't seen Monster's Ball and so couldn't say whether that is an issue in this film, but it still seems strange that when she wins the Oscar the one thing she emphasises is that it is a victory for 'women of colour', rather than for the performance of a good actress in, by all accounts, a very good film. Her mother, by the way, is English (from Liverpool): despite the fact that UK coverage of the Oscars invariably takes the form of 'How well have the Brits done?' no-one has mentioned the fact that a British-born actress (though admittedly, one who moved to the US as a young child) has won one of the main Oscars.

I can only conclude that to celebrate this aspect of her cultural background would be deemed politically incorrect in the context of this year's event...

I wonder if the speeches are vetted beforehand?

What did bother me is that Whoopi Goldberg followed all that class with a tasteless reminder of black stereotypes... the kind we are trying to grow beyond as a culture, I would suppose.

There were tons of examples of class and dignity on Sunday night. Hollywood takes itself so terribly seriously on Oscar night, after all. Those light-hearted moments seemed to reflect that a few presenters were having a genuine good time. But then Whoopi... I don't know what she thought she was doing but I dearly miss Steve Martin.
 

Dignity? Although I agree with you on SP and DW, Halle Berry was about the most undignified and pathetic, most graceless display I've ever seen on the stage. In fact I was so put off (after what seemed like hours of her contorted face on the screen) I had to leave the room
And... I think it was obvious backlash against Russell Crowe for his antics at previous awards that got DW the oscar. DW's a good actor and probably deserves an Oscar, but not for that film. This was a night of pure politics. What's new

------------------
Greg Mueller
Amateur Astronomer, Machinist, Filmnut
http://www.muellersatomics.com/
 

------------------
Greg Mueller
Amateur Astronomer, Machinist, Filmnut
http://www.muellersatomics.com/
 

The race issues are much more complex than the discussion here, and I can't even begin to get into everything, nor do I consider myself an expert or an authority. However, those of you that are throwing around terms like "affirmative action" and "pc" are not looking at the whole picture. I agree, to a degree, that labels of race and heritage should be thrown away in a "perfect world." However, ours is not a perfect world, and the reality is that those with darker skin ARE discriminated against. Whether Halle Berry has a white mom and a black dad and an English lineage does not matter; many simply see her as black. It's a really complex issue and I can't even get my brain around all of the factors involved.

It was a big moment for her, and I can understand all of her emotion, but it was difficult to watch. She cried uncontrollably for what seemed to be 10 minutes and then thanked everyone involved in her life and career, including her lawyers?!? Come on. All of the ass-kissing is nauseating. "I would like to thank the academy..."

------------------
John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist
Worldwide Technical Services, Entertainment Imaging
Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7525A
Rochester, New York, 14650-1922 USA
Tel: +1 585 477 5325 Cell: +1 585 781 4036 Fax: +1 585 722 7243
E-Mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com
Web site: http://www.kodak.com/go/motion

On the subject of Halle Berry. Her performance in Monsters Ball is simply outstanding. She was the longshot, NOT because there were better performances, BUT because she was black. In my opinion there was no other reason for her bieng a longshot. SO WHAT if she staked a claim for all black women to come. SO WHAT?? It's her damn right to, she won the award and can say any damn thing she wants to! Did anyone freak out on Sally Fields acceptance speech.."You like me, you really really like me!". No. In fact everyone applauded it. We found it cute. I personally find it bigotous to complain about a black person staking a claim for black people. How white can you get?

As for denzel, I was pulling for him. I saw every film nominated, and felt that his performance was the most deserving. Yes russel crowe was fantastic in A Beautiful Mind, but there are at least a hundred well known actors that would have been able to pull off the same fantastic performance. For russell crowe, it was not a great feat, but his same fantastic average performance. His problem, is that most of his performances are fantastic. He needs a few average ones for a few years and then a great one. Denzel's performance was over the top, and I truly felt like I was watching the character, and not Denzel. With Russell, I felt I was watching Russell.

As for bieng PC, or Affirmative action, I highly doubt that. Somehow I don't think that all the voters were told who to vote for. I don't even think they were hinted at who to vote for. There are more than a panel of nine, a jury of 12, or some guy in a seat, deciding these things. Thousands vote, one wins. It's all about campaigning, just like running for an election. I have won elections, I have lost elections, and I never one just because I am an Italian American, I won because I paid the most money!! I lost the other ones because I failed to spend any!!

I viewed this Oscars as a great one. No one cleaned house, and every film did well.

Oh and back on Denzels award, remember that he won for his PERFORMANCE, not for the film. A great performance does not necessarily denote even a good film, and a great film does not mean that anyone had a really great performance. Sometimes films win because of the ensemble of crew/cast, sometimes an actor wins because he just really feels the part.

Dave
 

quote:

---

Titanic was very popular and a success, and it swept the oscars.

---

Yes, but it was not a fantasy. If it hadn't been based on a true event, it would never have won Best Picture.
 

Dave
 

Halle Berry showed no dignity in her speech. Certainly she has
would be excited, I know I would be thrilled, but she behaved like a child (much like Julia Roberts' rude behaviour last year. By contrast
Messrs Poitier and Washington were the epitome of class and dignity.

That being said I don't know how I or any of us would act in that situation. Regardles of how they behaved on the stage they deserved their awards.

------------------
Greg Mueller
Amateur Astronomer, Machinist, Filmnut http://www.muellersatomics.com/

Everything is clique-ish, from the academy to the grocery store to this web site! Everyone has an agenda, from those with the most vocal agenda to those with the soft spoken anti-agenda agenda.

I have my job as a stage manager not because I have any real training or any background in theater, but because I networked my agenda to all the right people. Yes I know what I am doing, and I do very very well at it, but I did not apply for the job, nor did I have to compete with anyone. My agenda is to eventually write, direct and produce. As with film or theater, 99.99999999997 percent of the time, the most qualified person never gets in through the front door. No one ever does.

Its all who you know. So I am quite awake, very aware, and just really dont care all that much. I learned a very long ago, back in january, that kissing anyones ass does nothing but stroke egos, and never gets you where you want to be. But it does get you paid from time to time.

Dave
 

------------------
"Asleep at the switch? I wasn't asleep, I was drunk!" - Homer Simpson
 

Whatever the criteria were, Moulin Rouge was still robbed.
 

"How could you possibly think Denzel was the most deserving, when he wasn't even the lead actor in his respective movie? Denzel played a supporting character, while Ethan's character was the lead. They just switched it around for the awards for some reason. More politics likely. I would think that someone that wants to write and direct would have noticed that."

OK NOW YOU HAVE GONE AND DONE IT!!!

Me thinks dat sumwun iz gitten ay bit pehrsunahl?

Lets take moulin rouge for example..

Nicole kidman was the star of the show, both of the movie and of the story, HOWEVER, she was not a lead actor. Reason? The story is bieng told by Ewen McGregors character. She is dead, or possibly a fictional charchter in his mind of lonliness. We are not to find this out, just to listen to his tale. All of the charachters in his tale are supporting, he is the only one in the story that is a lead because he is the only one that we are truly looking at.

Now lets travel back to Training Day. Who are we seeing the story angle from? Is it from denzels or from ethans? Is it from a purely standby telling form? This all depends on your point of view. As Denzel carried the film, the average viewer tends to believe that he is the lead actor, and that Ethan is the Supporting actor. Another view is to believe that because we follow Ethan all day long and he only meets up with Denzel later, that we are seeing the story from ethans point of view, making him the lead actor.

What is really happening here is that the story is bieng told from the point of view of that of someone having been with both of them all day. Remember that Denzel was not present at the start of Ethans day, nor was Ethan present at the end of Denzels Day. This makes both of them the lead actors, or rather, and ensemble cast.

In this case, the academy chose the average viewer take and chose to give ethan hawke a supporting actor nomination instead of the lead actor nomination, in conjunction with Denzels nomination, which would have been more appropriate.

"They just switched it around for the awards for some reason. More politics likely. I would think that someone that wants to write and direct would have noticed that."

Noticed what? That you have an opinion? That you believe that the academy did a switcheroo for politics? SO WHAT? As I recall in my previous writings, I made not one mention as to the worthiness of any NOMINATIONS, but rather to the awards given. Anyone who can type should be able to read. Right?

To refresh the memory, here is what I wrote...

""As for denzel, I was pulling for him. I saw every film nominated, and felt that his performance was the most deserving. Yes russel crowe was fantastic in A Beautiful Mind, but there are at least a hundred well known actors that would have been able to pull off the same fantastic performance. For russell crowe, it was not a great feat, but his same fantastic average performance. His problem, is that most of his performances are fantastic. He needs a few average ones for a few years and then a great one. Denzel's performance was over the top, and I truly felt like I was watching the character, and not Denzel. With Russell, I felt I was watching Russell.""

""Oh and back on Denzels award, remember that he won for his PERFORMANCE, not for the film. A great performance does not necessarily denote even a good film, and a great film does not mean that anyone had a really great performance. Sometimes films win because of the ensemble of crew/cast, sometimes an actor wins because he just really feels the part.""

So as my point made, and my skills as a STUDENT of writing and directing in the fine arts of theater and film having been upheld before a court of peers that I keep hidden within my own multiple personality disorder, I depart this day.

Your most humble of correspondents,

This is Dave Williams,
Live from Tel-Aviv
Fox News
 

No story can have two leads of the same gender, although a story can have leads of opposite genders if the roles are prominent enough. This would explain Nicole Kidman being the 'female lead', not 'a lead that was female', as her role was obviously very prominent among the women in that movie. However in something like Gladiator there would probably not have been a female lead because none of the female roles were that dominant. On to Training Day. In a story where there are two dominant male characters such a this one, or say a story like South Pacific, the story of comedy triumphs over the story of tragedy (comedy originally meaning a story in which the hero defeats his rival, not one that is merely funny; tragedy originally meaning a story where the hero fails, not one that is merely sad). In Training Day, Ethan's story ends in comedy, whereas Denzel's ends in Tragedy, making Ethan the leading man, as opposed to a supporting cast member. This is similar to in South Pacific where Lt. Cable dies ending his story in tragedy, and Emil lives and gets the girl, ending his story in comedy, making Emil the leading man. This is what I was taught, and I have much respect for the teacher that taught me that, but it could be wrong. It is my explanation for why Denzel is not the leading man, rather than using "the average viewer take" as you made reference to the Academy using. Just something you might look into as you pursue your writing interest, which I'm sure you will exceed in, given the passion you display in posting on this site. If your teachers tell you different, please let me know.

------------------
"Asleep at the switch? I wasn't asleep, I was drunk!" - Homer Simpson
 

As for my teachers, the subject of comedy bieng more leading than tragedy has never come up. What I study is the intracacies of character development, relating to arc and relavence to others and surroundings. Story is secondary to charachter.

As for theater bieng stuffy, I propose that theater and cinema are very closely related. The cinema is often presented in auditoriums designed to give a stuffy theater atmosphere, and many films designed to give that feeling of actually witnessing the show as if it were presented to you at the moment, rather on film. As was moulin rouge, and many other films. In fact many theater and broadway style shows become very large and important pieces of cinema, and vice versa as well. The two are very related, from a creative standpoint.

The point of this site is technical in nature, and from a creative standpoint, much of the same creativity goes into both film and theater. ANd as this is film-yak, I can talk about any stuffy thing I want to. HAHA.

Chad, I am passionate about what I write. Both in my posts and in my semi-professional life. My two finished screenplays have generated great praise from all who have read them, however, as my harshest critic, I continually rewrite them. In fact, one was set for production last year, until the chief financier died, and the money lost in probate court. Since then, I have pulled that particular script down and am currenly in the stage of rewriting it for another project, hoping to achieve funding later this year. The other, also in the stage of yet another rewrite.

So don't take any offence chad. I am a very snide, cynical, and very sarcastic individual. I hold nothing back, use brute honesty, but I have absolutely not a mean bone in my body. I never come to blows, and never sue anyone. I don't yell at anything but the cat.

So thats my tale for the day.

Have to run. Mummsy needs the fone.

Dave
 

I agree that cinema and legitimate theater are closely related. Cinema just removes the limits of the stage.