Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Who do you think got snubbed by the Academy?

This is topic Who do you think got snubbed by the Academy? in forum Film-Yak at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=003858

Posted by Christian Volpi (Member # 2370) on 01-25-2005, 07:50 AM:

I agreed with most of the nominations that were announced just minutes ago but I think that Paul Giamatti deserved a nomination.

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 01-25-2005, 09:00 AM:

I'm amazed that Sky Captain didn't even merit a nomination for Art Direction. I thought it was a sure-fire winner. [Frown]

And why, oh why, did Super Size Me get a nomination for Best Documentary Feature??? [Mad]

Posted by Thomas Procyk (Member # 1170) on 01-25-2005, 10:43 AM:

Because it was the best! [Mad]

Dubble Quarrter Powndur with CHEEEEZE MEEEEAL!
mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm! [Big Grin]

=TMP=

Posted by Pravin Ratnam (Member # 1417) on 01-25-2005, 11:35 AM:

The geezer nominations. Ridiculous.
Best song: Never heard of a single song. Phantom Of the Opera. yuck. Best song is usually the worst nominations almost every year.

Snubbed for best actor: Paul Giamatti. He was snubbed for Amer. Splendor last year. I mean, of all the cast, you decide to snub him while nominating the Wings guy and the Madsen chick (who admittedly are not undeserving).

Eternal Sunshine got snubbed in some major categories. It was definitely one of the best pics even if it's for not all tastes but satisfies its targeted audience more than Ray which was good and more accessible to more people and a likable movie but didn't really wow as many people. (Jamie Foxx did rule in it and should get an Oscar for it)
Also Jim Carrey was more desrving than Eastwood too. For once, his acting was not just a toned down version of his comedic act(witness his boring performance in the Majestic).
And where is the nod for Jon Brion for best score for this movie?
Why not throw a bone to the Michel Gondry/wesAnderson/DavidORussell/ZachBraff crowd. Since the Adnerson and Russel came up with movies that even not all of their fans liked this year, and Zach's movie is more cute than memorable, how about one for Gondry in this demographic.

David Carradine should have gotten a nod. Man, it seems like the nominations this year were for the Readers Digest crowd. Very eurocentric middle aged nominations.

I haven't seen Closer. But come on. BORING nominations. I wonder if Portman was really better in that than she was in Garden State or did the voters like her stripper role. You know play a hooker or stripper, get an oscar. Finding Neverland. boring. I hear the movies are good. But way too many movies for the uppercrust society in the nominations.
I hear Annette Benning was good iN that Julia movie, but heard the movie itself forgettable. Unless you really put in a career effort, why bother nominating her from a forgettable movie.

How ridiculous is it that Thomas Haden Church and Jamie Foxx are seen as supporting actors when they were coleads.

Is it a rule that a french movie has to be nominated in the best foreign pic?

I mean, people can object to my derision of some of hte nominees and I don't mean to say the names I picked on are totally undeserving. But when you put them together, too much ClintEastwood-Benning_MikeNichols type bent this year.

Posted by Michael Schaffer (Member # 1204) on 01-25-2005, 05:15 PM:

I think Foxx deserves a nomination simply because I didn't realize the guy who played Ray was the same who drove the taxi in Collateral! I won't even hold it against him that he is making our lives a bit complicated at this point. We have to go to El Centro to check on our newbuild regularly, and it is really hard to get a hotel room because they are shooting a movie with Foxx down there and all the hotels are booked out.

I also think that Giamatti got passed over unfairly. I really enjoyed Sideways very much.
On the other hand, we all know that the Academy Awards are just an industry PR spectacle, so don't get too upset that your favorite movies and actors got ignored!

Posted by Aaron Mehocic (Member # 15) on 01-25-2005, 05:26 PM:

Conservative talk radio programs like Glenn Beck and Limbaugh are insensed that Gibson's Passion of the Christ was snubbed for best picture. From the sounds of Beck's program, he was hoping to rally the Christians in the so-called "red states" to see just how pathetically biased the voting is among those who can cast ballots. Personally, I thought Passion should have gotten a nod for the top spot, but I'm not going to loose any sleep over it.

Keep any comments about this politically clean. I'm only reporting what is being said by others about our industry from a different medium.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 01-25-2005, 05:46 PM:

I haven't seen "Sideways" yet so can't comment there, but I don't think "Passion" was all that wonderful of a movie. Well made, and a very important film, yes, but best picture material, no.

I also find it funny (but NOT in a political way, mods!) that Michael Moore's movie got completely overlooked. He probably would have won in the documentary category, but NO-O-O he wanted best picture and was clearly in over his head there. [Cool]

Posted by Aaron Mehocic (Member # 15) on 01-25-2005, 06:50 PM:

When Moore first announced that he was going for broke with best picture I figured he'd loose, even if he was nominated. I think Hollywood is going to distance itself from him between now and 2008. I see Michael Moore as more of a rabel-rouser than a serious documentary maker.

A side note to all of this was a student of mine last semester who claimed in a class-wide American Government discussion that Moore had ". . . given me a voice". That is exactly what I think the Hollywood elites are afraid of. As more Americans align themselves with a conservative (small c) lifestyle, Michael Moore's views look more and more abstract and surreal. The elites don't want to be allied with this guy when the chips hit the floor and its starting to show as early as now.

Posted by Brian Michael Weidemann (Member # 2243) on 01-25-2005, 08:02 PM:

I agree that Eternal Sunshine deserved more nominations, but I was just glad to see Kaufman up for its screenplay. In fact, that's really the ONLY thing I'm rooting for one way or another this year.

Posted by Pete Wolla (Member # 1581) on 01-25-2005, 08:39 PM:

I think passion got carried away with blood .

Posted by Jarryd Beard (Member # 2543) on 01-25-2005, 09:14 PM:

Does that blood fall under makeup? It got a nomination for that.

Posted by Christian Volpi (Member # 2370) on 01-26-2005, 09:04 AM:

Garden State should have been nominated for Best Original Screenplay.

Posted by Pravin Ratnam (Member # 1417) on 01-26-2005, 09:46 AM:

I feel bad for Chris Rock that he has to emcee this year's Oscars. he has been holding out for a while and this was not the year for him to host with this dull lineup of nominees.
I don't normally advocate Oscars kowtowing to the mainstream and nominating at least one controversial movie or one big hit to generate buzz. But this year , that would have been welcome. If all you are going to nominate are mostly solidly good but not great nominees with a few exceptions, then you might as well nominate an above average or merely good nominee that is more buzz generating. Spidey 2(not that I think it is one of the 5 best) over something like Neverland would probably get a younger generation to watch and maybe be curious about the other nominees like Sideways. Hotel Rwanda is a better movie than Ray. Carrey over Depp for purely buzz factor purposes even if one may not agree with the merit argument for Carrey I put forth earlier.

I can safely say that interest in the oscars won't be that high this year. I watch a bunch of movies and even I haven't watched a few of the nominees.

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 01-26-2005, 09:51 AM:

quote:
Conservative talk radio programs like Glenn Beck and Limbaugh are insensed that Gibson's Passion of the Christ was snubbed for best picture.

Well it wouldn't have stood much of a chance for best original screenplay! [Razz]

Seriously, I don't think it's a coincidence that neither Gibson nor Moore got a nomination. Celebrating any film which has polarised opinion along political, religious and/or ideological lines is guaranteed to alienate as many, if not more people as it would win over. Besides, neither film (IMHO) is good enough to make doing that worth the inevitable fallout.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 01-26-2005, 12:22 PM:

The reasons Jim Carrey got snubbed are:

- The movie was too old. Nobody saw it to start with, and the Academy people were too busy watching new movies to pay much attention to it.

- Carrey is known mostly as a rubber-faced, butt-humor comedy star. It'll be a real uphill battle for him to ever be recognized for his dramatic acting. Sad but true.

- And a title like "Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind," did not help either. Something like "The Aviator," "Finding Neverland" or the like sounds much more pompous and Oscar-ish. If the movie would have been simply titled "The Spotless Mind" or "Eternal Sunshine," it would have had a better chance.

Posted by David Favel (Member # 1125) on 01-26-2005, 02:34 PM:

Was there an issue with Mr Moore screening 911 on Election night on TV that made it ineligible for best doco?

Posted by Aaron Garman (Member # 1653) on 01-26-2005, 02:46 PM:

I enjoyed seeing Natalie Portman and Jamie Foxx nominated, but the absence of Carey, Caviezel, and Kate Winslet's performance in "Eternal Sunshine" it aggrivating. The Oscars get more and more snobby as the years go on it seems. Oh, and Alan Alda for the Aviator? I was most pleased with that, as I enjoyed every moment he had in the film. He was superb! I still don't fully get the difference sometimes between lead and supporting roles. How is Natalie Portman a supporting character in Closer? In the words of cootzilla, "Puuuuleeeeeeeeeeze".

AJG

Posted by William Leland III (Member # 1400) on 01-26-2005, 04:38 PM:

i think Morgan Freeman will win best supporting actor, he's been snubbed 3 times and with better films than "Million $ Baby".

i don't have any favorite films this year, but i would like to see Alan Alda win best supporting actor.

Posted by Jennifer Pan (Member # 2035) on 01-26-2005, 11:37 PM:

Garden State should have gotten some kind of nomination. Soundtrack was pretty good, and the screenplay was awesome. Okay, I might also have a little thing for Zach Braff... but aside from that this movie deserves a little nod from the academy. (Zach should at least be a presenter) [Wink]

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 01-27-2005, 12:38 AM:

I can't believe anybody even wastes their breath discussing the Oscars. A real waste of time......

Mark

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 01-27-2005, 02:45 AM:

Well, it beats discussing painting Richard Greco's truck.

Posted by Christian Volpi (Member # 2370) on 01-27-2005, 11:07 AM:

quote: Mark Gulbrandsen
I can't believe anybody even wastes their breath discussing the Oscars. A real waste of time......

Does that statement count as discussing the Oscars?

Posted by Jim Ziegler (Member # 86) on 01-27-2005, 04:00 PM:

I think Passion did get snubbed. I would have like to have seen a best actor nomination for Caviezel and a directors nomination for Gibson. I think Leo is right however, it was too much of a "hot potato" to touch.

Posted by Pravin Ratnam (Member # 1417) on 01-27-2005, 05:13 PM:

Jennifer, Garden State did have some nice songs, but they don't qualify as they were recorded for albums other than the movie.
I would have rather seen Portman nominated for this than Closer, if only to improve the appeal of the nominations list by a tad.

Posted by Ron Yost (Member # 1850) on 01-27-2005, 09:54 PM:

Me too. I thought Ms. Portman (and everyone else) was absolutely great in "Garden State". She -can- actually ACT! Who knew?? [Big Grin]

(I've not seen "Closer".)

It was one of the best films I've ever seen, and, being a near-geezer, I've seen quite a few. I generally like small, 'personal' films better than Hollyweird over-productions, tho.

In any case, "Garden State" was definitely snubbed. [evil]

'em.

Ron Yost

Posted by Jennifer Pan (Member # 2035) on 01-27-2005, 10:04 PM:

I agree Ron, Natalie did very well in this film.

I'm going to NOT watch the Oscars this year.

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 01-27-2005, 11:11 PM:

quote: Christian Volpi
Does that statement count as discussing the Oscars?

quote: Mike Blakesley
Well, it beats discussing painting Richard Greco's truck.

I'd rather clean out the oil pan in Richard Greco's pickup engine than waste time watching the Oscars.

Mark