View Full Version : Oscars!

Rollo Tomassi
02-12-2002, 07:55 AM
The Academy Awards are my SuperBowl, so I am super excited. Here are the nominations this year:

Supporting Actress
Jennifer Connely - Beautiful Mind
Helen Mirren - Gosfrod park
Maggie Smith - Gosford Park
Marisa Tomei - In the Bedroom
Kate Winslet - Iris

Supporting Actor
Jim Broadbent - iris
Ethan Hawke - Training Day
Ben Kingsley - Sexy Beast
Ian McKellan - LOTR
Jon Voight - Ali

Halle Berry - Monster's Ball
Judi Dench - Iris
Nicole Kidman - Moulin Rouge
Sissy Spacek - In the Bedroom
Rene Zellweger - Bridget Jones

Russell Crowe - Beautiful Mind
Sean Penn - I am Sam
Wil Smith - Ali
Denzel - Training Day
Tom Wilkinson - In the Bedroom

Original Screenplay
Gosford park
Monster's ball
Royal Tenenbaums

Adapted Screenplay
Beautiful Mind
In the Bedroom

Ron Howard - Beautiful Mind
Ridley Scott - Black hawk Down
Robert Altman - Gosford park
Peter Jackson - LOTR
David Lynch - Mulholland Drive

Beautiful Mind
Gosford park
In the Bedroom
Moulin Rouge

My big beef is Memento getting shafted pretty much all around the board. I'll wait to tell you what I thing is going to win until I hear your thoughts. I'll also post the smaller awards as they become availible.

Rollo Tomassi
02-12-2002, 08:13 AM
Some more noms:

Beautiful Mind
Moulin Rouge

Art Direction
Gosford Park
Harry Potter
Moulin Rouge

Black Hawk Down
Man who Wasn't there
Moulin Rouge

Affair of the Necklace
Gosford park
Harry Potter

Music Score
Beautiful Mind
Harry Potter

Music Song
Kate & Leopold
Monster's Inc
Pearl Harbor
Vanilla Sky

Black Hawk Down
Moulin Rouge
Pearl Harbor

Sound Editing
Monster's Inc
Pearl Harbor

Visual Effects
Pearl Harbor

Beautiful Mind
Black Hawk Down
Moulin Rouge

Who cares about short films, documentaries, and foreign films? Not me. Discuss!

Rollo Tomassi
02-12-2002, 08:30 AM
Lord of the Rings has the most nominations with a whopping 13!

Beautiful Mind - 8
Moulin Rouge - 7
Gosford Park - 7
Amelie - 5 (including foreign film)
In the Bedroom - 5
Blak Hawk Down - 4

Monster's Inc - 3
Pearl Harbor - 3
Harry Potter - 3
Iris - 3

Shrek - 2
Ali - 2
A.I. - 2
Training Day - 2
Monster's Ball - 2
Memento - 2

Sexy Beast, Mullholland Drive, I am Sam, Bridget Jone's Diary, Affair of the Necklace, Man Who Wasn't There, Kate & leopold, Ghost World, and Vanilla Sky each got one nom.

02-12-2002, 08:33 AM
Watched the nom announcements on Fox 11 news just a little while ago. It was funny to hear someone yelp when David Lynch's name was mentioned in "Best Director". Everybody has been talking about "Monster's Ball", so it's surprising to see it get almost NO nominations at all. LOTR grabbing 13 nominations was shocking, no matter how good the movie is, Sci-Fi/Fantasy always gets shafted (see 1977 for the perfect example, it's 25 years later and we're STILL saying "Annie Hall?!? Annie ****ing HALL?!?"). I feel a bit weird about this, of the list of nods, I have seen ZERO of those films, not even LOTR or Shrek. Upon reflection, I stopped seeing new movies right after Episode I - there is clearly a subconcious connection. :(

02-12-2002, 09:15 AM

it's funny you haven't been to the movies in a while after hoping episode 2 wouldn't be released on home video so soon after it's theatrical release. i used to see about 3 movies a week, but people are getting so rude and theatres sound systems are horribly under-used that the movie going experience has become
a very unpleasant experience.

have you experienced something like this?

i was watching fox news when the announcements were announced, and the 3 hosts hadn't seen any of the films except shrek and LOTR. i have not heard of most of them either. memento and guy pierce got robbed. i like russel crow, but my goodness, is he going to win every year? :happy:

02-12-2002, 10:01 AM
For me, it's like this: Before Ep 1, movies were often good and had allure for me; after Ep 1, movies sorta lost their luster, their allure avoiding me. 2000 and 2001, I can't remember which movies I saw, I can't remember if I actually saw any movies at all. Perhaps my outlook on movies changed from Ep 1, or perhaps Hollywood changed to be more like Ep 1 (at least in their trailers and PR) - I can't be sure, but 3 years between excitement for movies is a bad sign for me, I used to go to movies ALL the time.

As for the quality of theaters, I live in LA where we have a LOT of good theaters (so long as you avoid mall theaters, they're terrible) and I rarely have bad theater experiences. Another thing, I love movie trailers in the theater, but I hate them on DVD/VHS!

I'm still shocked that David Lynch got a nod for a film he did originally as a pilot for ABC. That's wild!

02-12-2002, 12:01 PM
Memento got shafted, and LOTR will get shafted, it won't win squat because its a big blockbuster fantasy.

I know what you mean about how not a lot of people have seen the majority of movies nominated this year. I've only seen

Monsters Inc.

I also know what you mean about how movies don't really seem very good anymore for the most part. I see about a movie a week, and very few stand out as really good.

I very rarely care who wins oscars and who doesn't. Its all opinions, its not like God is picking these winners, just people like you and me, people with their own opinions. Who cares!

El Chuxter
02-12-2002, 02:09 PM
Jimmy Neutron: Boy Genius
Monsters, Inc

WTH?!? Jimmy Neutron? Jimmy Freakin' Neutron? I'll admit I didn't watch it and it could be great, but the reason I didn't watch it was because it looked stupid and childish, and the animation wasn't nearly good enough to make up for it.

Monsters Inc and Shrek I agree with, but did these sons of motherless goats even see Atlantis: The Lost Empire? They must not have, because if they had, it would've been there. Excellent story, top notch animation, perfectly-cast voice-overs. I saw it once in the theater, twice so far on DVD (and am going to see it again with my niece this weekend), and it has yet to get old.

Did the Oscar committee not want two Disney movies in the running? Or did they take the typical view of animation, thinking it was only a bunch of lame kids' cartoons and therefore no one would care, since kids don't watch awards shows?

This just gives me even more justification in my belief that all awards shows are nothing more than pathetic jokes. Remember, this is the show in which John Williams' score for SW:E1:TPM didn't get a single nomination. And in which The Matrix beat TPM for Best Special Effects.

Or my favorite all-time Oscar nomination: Babe for best special effects over Mortal Kombat.

02-12-2002, 04:21 PM
Actually, I think the SFX in Matrix were better than E1. E1 was just a bunch of cgi creatures running around for the most part, or actors in front of a blue screen. Matrix had some pretty cool stuff going on, just watch the behind the scenes on the DVD.

Atlantis was pretty good, but regardless, Shrek is still not only the best animated film of the year, but of any year, its also one of the best movies of the year, too, IMO.

02-13-2002, 04:32 AM
I was really surprised to see Jimmy Neutron nominated too, that was totally off the wall.

02-13-2002, 06:50 AM

Thanks for the run-down on the nominations. I also appreciate the reviews and opinions. Your advantage of being in the movie house biz lends a lot of creedence to your opinions and I value them.

It will be interesting to see how the Academy members vote this year vs. what the SSGers here (aka the public) think.

Rollo Tomassi
02-13-2002, 07:50 AM
The big ?:confused: ? for Animated film is how did Waking Life not get in and Jimmy Neutron did. Jimmy neutron looks like something I'D come up with on my computer, and I'm PC illiterate for the most part.

As far as LOTR is concerned, Oscar has been swinging towards the blockbusters in recent years as public and critical acclaim start to merge. Gladiator, Saving Private Ryan, Titanic, Braveheart, Forrest Gump, etc. These were all top 3 grossers for the year they came out, some of them were THE highest grossers. I think if a movie is well made, it transcends genre and "blockbuster" status and the voters see it for the great film it really is. I think LOTR falls into that category and will get some love come Oscar night.

El Chuxter
02-13-2002, 12:09 PM
I think Shrek should win Best Animated Picture. But the nominations should be things that deserve or almost deserve the award. I wonder if the Academy said, "Well, we need three. We've got Shrek and Monsters. Uh, what else is there? Somebody check the paper to see what cartoon's out now, and we'll nominate it."

I noticed something else that blew my mind. Admittedly, Planet of the Apes isn't Oscar caliber in most respects (even the score is far from Elfman's best work), but shouldn't it at least get a nod for the makeup? And visual effects?

Rollo Tomassi
02-13-2002, 01:32 PM
But the nominations should be things that deserve or almost deserve the award.

Unfortunately, it's about who can buy the most ad space for their film anymore. If it was about best film deserving recognition, Memento would be all over the place. But, NewMarket can't afford $20 million in Hollywood Reporter ads like Dreamworks and Miramax can. So the film suffers.

El Chuxter
02-13-2002, 02:00 PM
Unfortunately true. Otherwise the Oscars, Grammys, and everything else would be very different.

And, uh, I hate to sound ignorant, but what's Memento? I don't recall seeing anything about it. And Waking Life, too, for that matter?

Rollo Tomassi
02-13-2002, 02:40 PM
El Chuxter: "What's Memento?"

Rollo Tomassi: URK!:dead: (THUD)

Memento is the second best movie of the year. It's about a guy who has antero grade amnesia, which means he can't form any new memories after the traumatic incident where he recieved a blow to his head and his wife was raped and killed. Now he's trying to find the guy that did it, but he has to to tatoo the clues he's found all over his body in order to remember them. IT IS AWESOME.

Waking Life is a Richard Linklater(the guy that did Dazed and Confused and newton Boys) film where he filmed a movie and then had different artists rotoscope the images in their own style, so it's kind of a moving painting instead of actual film. It's a hoe hum film, but the visuals are clearly animated and way more interesting than James Neutron. Euuch.

02-13-2002, 05:41 PM
Here are my picks as to what I think will win and I'll also post who I would LIKE to win.


BEAUTIFUL MIND will win only because it won at the Golden Globes. The award should go to wither MOULIN ROUGE or LOTR because they are far better films IMO.


RUSSELL CROWE will win because he won the Golden Globe. He kind of deserves it, but I'd like to see Sean Penn take it. If I could chose nominations, Ewan McGreggor would have been nominated. If Nicole is, then why not him? He was way better than her in Moulin Rouge. And also why not Guy Pearce for Memento? He was awesome.


Sissy Spacek will win because she won the Golden Globe. (I'm sorry I keep on agreeing with the Golden Globes, but the Academy always follows the Golden Globes and never has any originality to it. Nicole Kidman would be my choice because of MOULIN ROUGE AND THE OTHERS.




JON VOIGHT will win. I'd like to see it go to IAN MCKELLAN.


RON HOWARD will win, only because A BEAUTIFUL MIND will win best picture. My vote would be for Peter Jackson.


MEMENTO will win this hands down. It got shafted at the Golden Globes, but I just have a feeling about this.


LOTR. It was a beautiful movie.


I have to go with LOTR. With all the wigs, masks, prosthetics, ears, and all that stuff it beats out the others. Moulin Rouge comes in second.


A tough category. I would narrow it down to Moulin Rouge because of it's beautiful scenery and lavish sets, LOTR, and Haryy Potter due to the fantasy element of them both. Can't pick one for certain.


MOULIN ROUGE wins. LOTR comes in a close second.


LOTR wins.


HARRY POTTER. The music is already becoming a fan favorite. Plus John Williams is amazing as he is nominated twice in this category and deserves it. LOTR comes in second.


KATE AND LEOPOLD will win. Although if it were up to me COME WHAT MAY would have been nominated from Moulin Rouge. That is 1,000 times better than anything that is nominated in this category. Who nominates this stuff anyway?


A close one between BLACK HAWK DOWN, LOTR, and PEARL HARBOR. But if I had to chose one I'd go with LOTR only because BHD and PH are SIMILAR movies and the sound that is in them is WAY SIMILAR. How could you choose one over the other. That is my only justification though.






MEMENTO wins due to the way the movie takes place going backwards.

02-13-2002, 05:43 PM
Oops forgot something. MEMENTO should have been nominated for best picture.

Originally posted by Rollo Tomassi

Memento is the second best movie of the year.

So what is the BEST movie of the year Rollo?

Rollo Tomassi
02-14-2002, 11:13 AM
I think LOTR is the best movie of the year. I was simply blown away by its majestic epicness. Memento is a close second because of its strong acting and its originality. Moulin Rouge grabbed #3 for me for the same reasons.

"Come What May" is ineligible because it wasn't written for the film it was in. Baz Luhrmann actually wrote it almost 15 years ago for a film that never got made, so it can't be nominated on a technicality. I agree it was the best song of the year.

I have issues with some of the acting noms also. Denzel was a ham in Training Day and the film was crap so I don't understand how Ethan Hawke OR him got nominated. Sean Penn? How hard is it to act retarded? I think Ewan and Guy Pearce should have been nominated also, but it is of little concern because I think (deservedly so) that Crowe will take Best Actor this year.

Same goes for Actress awards. How much barrel scraping did it take to get Zellweger up on the list? Was there THAT many crap roles this year? I think Spacek will probably win this year but I think Kidman deserves Best Actress.

Best Supporting Actor is a tough call (except for Ethan Hawke). I liked Broadbent better in Moulin Rouge than in Iris. Voight nailed Cosell perfectly. Kingsley was great as usual, but NOBODY, and I mean NOBODY, transfomed themselves into their character as much as Ian McKellan did. He WAS Gandalf. he should win.

In the Best Supporting Actress category, I thought that all around the support roles were better than the leads (see the Zellweger argument above). Mirren and Smith will cancel each other out. Tomei already has a statue and Winslet wasn't seen by enough people. So Jennifer Connely who did a superb job, and complemented Crowe's performance wonderfully, should win.

Since it only got nominated for Editing and Original Screenplay, Memento will take that home. Where was Pearce's Best Actor Nod? Moss' Supporting Actress? Joey Pant's for Supporting Actor? Nolan for Director? Best Picture?

Adapted Screenplay is an easy choice (for me anyway) as well. How does Akiva Golsman get nominated for anything? The man is the biggest hack in Hollywood today. He's worse than Ezsterhas, if that's possible. Shrek? Not very inspired. Ghost World? Not very noticable. In the Bedroom? Not very hard to adapt. Only Lord of the Rings faithfully captured the scope of the original source on screen. You can tell the writers poured their hearts into keeping it real. it shows in every frame and every line of dialogue.

Ron Howard is the hand's on fave to win Director and I couldn't argue with that choice, "if not for the warning in my heart." Ron did a damn fine job, but Peter Jackson swung for the fences, put it all on the line, and came out with a winner. He should be rewarded for that.

Whicj leads us to Best Picture. 90% of the time, the best director leads to best picture. Except the last few years have reversed that trend. Personally, I don't see how the best director COULDN'T win best picture. (What does that say about his film? Or his directing? It's just strange to me...)
SO if Ron wins director, then Beautiful Mind, should grap the pic statue as well. Except Speilberg won and Private Ryan didn't. Gladiator won and Ridley Scott didn't. So Howard could win, but Lord of the Rings could take the big prize home.

Stay tuned for futher predictions...

02-14-2002, 12:15 PM
We chose pretty much the same thing Rollo.

Training Day, although I never personally saw it, looked so incredibly stupid that I can't believe that Denzel and Hawke got nominated. They really were scraping the barrel. Hey why not nominate Guy Pearce in Denzels place. He deserved it more. I like Denzel, don't get me wrong, but he has had enough oscar nominations and his performance in Training Day certainly doesn't deserve an oscar nod. Also Ewan McGreggor should have been nominated over Will Smith. Will Smith, IMO, is not that great of an actor. He plays the same person in every moive. I never saw ALI because it looked lame and from what I have seen of the trailers nad previews, Smith didn't motivate me to see it with his performance.

As for Best Actress, I agree. How did Zellweger make it into this category. I saw Bridget Jones' Diary and quite frankly it wasn't anything special and neither was her performance.

02-14-2002, 02:13 PM
I liked Denzel in Training Day, I thought his acting was some of his best. But I don't agree with Ethan Hawke. Will Smith was good too, but it was a character role, he had something to work off of.

Ian McKellen definately, best supporting actor.

I got to go with LOTR for picture and director, had could anything else come close? Russel Crowe will get Best Actor (again), but I don't think Howard will get the director nod over Jackson.

Rollo, I liked how you had your predictions in bold type, just like a real news article.

:Pirate: Beware.....Beware....

Rollo Tomassi
02-16-2002, 01:29 AM

So Beautiful Mind had ONE scene at the end where Crowe and Connely are oldefied. Moulin Rouge had soem pretty good stuff especially Jim Broadbent and Richard Roxburgh as the Duke. But Lord of the Rings by sheer volume and diversity alone, makes this award a shoo in.

Art Direction

This is a tough call for me, too. Gosford Park and Moulin Rouge suffer from single set syndrome. (both were regulated to a few set pieces.) Harry Potter? Nice art direction, but sloppy execution. The sets LOOK like sets. But Lord of the Rings? Well again sheer volume and diversity. The Shire. Caves of Moria. Rivendell. Sauron's fortress. Minas Tirith. Isengard. The Argonath and falls of Rauros. All equally stunning and different from each other, yet all in the same film. Brilliant. LOTR scores another Oscar.


Man Who Wasn't There? It's in black and white. Big deal. Black Hawk Down? To be honest, the film's C'tography looked a bit slap dash in a few places. I kept wondering why did he use this shot or that angle? And not in a good way. I'm in favor of LOTR taking home as many Oscars as possible, but I think Moulin Rouge edges it out this time.

Costume Design

And in the "it's an honor just to be nominated" category: Affair of the Necklace. yeah, this'll win when Carrot Top gets a Best Actor statue. Gosford Park? They all wore tuxedos. How hard is that to design? Harry Potter had some nice designs, but ultimately, sheer volume and diversity win out yet again and Lord of the Rings grabs Oscar gold again. Can nothing stop this remarkable film? Memento might have had a shot, but alas...

Musical Score

John William's double threat might actually end up hurting him. I liked A.I.'s haunting melodies over Potter's sacharine. But William's votes will get split and Shore will take it home for Lord of the Rings. I actually liked A.I. better, but not by much. And both are cetainly better than the forgetful sound of Beautiful Mind (Charlotte Church's vocals not with standing). Of course I was sure Gladiator would clean up in this category last year. I was more sure of that than I was of it winning best picture and it got blindsided by that tripe from Crouching Monkey, Hidden Wires. So my prediction in this category is iffy, at best.

Best Song

So Randy Newman writes a song and it's automatically an Oscar nomination? That seems to be the annual case. And just like previous years, it blows and has zero chance of winning. People might vote for McCartney because it's McCartney , but not because his song is any good. And the movie was terrible, so he's out. Pearl Harbor? Voters have had nine months to backlash against this entire film. Long enough to dash any hopes of it winning ANY awards this year. Including Song. I personally prefer Enya's "May it Be" to Sting's...whatever it's called, but I think it's Sting's year and Kate & leopold will grab this one. A slight road bump for the LOTR juggernaut...


Lord of the Rings actually drops the ball on this one. I've watched it at work enough times to notice a lot of tiny flaws in the mix. Moulin Rouge takes up the slack and goes in for the kill.

Sound Editing

Oh lord. Is this even worth having year after year? Two choices. Flip a coin. This category is a joke.

Visual Effects

i was suprised to see a lot of the bigger effects movies not garnering enough votes to even make it on the nomination list. Where's Planet of the Apes? Harry Potter? Oh well. it makes no difference because no one can stop the Lord of the Rings Oscar grabbing machine from steamrolling Pearl Harbor and A.I. in this category. Plus, it'll be cool to see big budget CGI effects get beat out by some long lenses, forced perspective, kids in costumes, and a little ingenuity.


Memento picks up it's second Oscar of the evening and pulls off the rare feat of winning 100% of its noms. Way to go, Christopher Nolan and Co.!!! Too bad it couldn't have been more, but we all know you did a better directing job than Lynch. And Guy acted circles around Denzel...

THE Slayer
02-16-2002, 12:02 PM
Back to the animation for a second. I just watched Atlantis last night and agree, that it should be in there.
And has anyone seen the nominee Ghostworld??? I watched it too. A ridicuously boring movie about even more ridicuously boring teenage girls.

02-16-2002, 01:37 PM
In the bedroom is the WORST. All the good stuff is in the trailer.
A Beautiful Mind was really quit excellent
LOTR...excellent and only 1 nom short of Titanic...that's really amazing considering it's sci/fi
Moulin Rouge was probably the most visually pleasing movie I've seen in a long time and the music was great!

still need to see monster's ball, I heard it was real good. Besides I like B.Bob.

And I like that shrek created it's own nom category this year...best animated film ...very cool!

Rollo Tomassi
03-20-2002, 01:13 PM
So only a few days away and Ian McKellan is looking to take the Supporting Actro nod. Hooray! I thought it was just a pipe dream of mine, but it seems everybody agreed.

Good news for LOTR! Statistically, the film with the most noms ALWAYS grabs best picture. Another Hooray!!

On to the Best Actor fued. More than wanting Russell Crowe to win, I want Denzel to LOSE!:mad: Sure he's had an impressive body of work, and yes, he's black, but the award goes to Best Acting, not blackest nominee. And Denzel's performance ATE in my opinion. How he got nominated over Ewan Mcgregor and Guy Pearce will be a mystery for the ages. They can give it to Will Smith or Tom Wilkinson if they want, as long as Denzel walks away this year, empty handed.

Only days to go....

03-21-2002, 07:45 AM
How the hell anyone can be enthusiastic about what amounts to little more than a hollywood insider circle-jerk is incredible. In any true acknowledgment of this year's films, Guy Pearce would at least be in the running as best actor. When I saw Memento last year, I recall thinking his performance was going to the one everyone else would have to really strive to match or beat. And I've not seen many other people anywhere share my high regard for Harry Potter as a nomination-worthy film in the categories of Director (I mean c'mon! Columbus had to direct all those kids!), and Adapted Screenplay. I mean, whether it were to win or not isn't the point, but how can you not have it even Nominated? That's just unthinkable. And this garbage behavior by the MPAA happens EVERY YEAR. It's an L.A. popularity contest, not in any way a fair or valid critique of any film's or actor's merits.

The exception to this would have to be the technical awards. Held separately, and away from the glam hoopla of the main awards ceremony, these are consistently fair and uncontroversial in their outcome. Since members can only vote for nominees in their own field of filmcraft, time and again, we see that the techies are capable of expressing admiration for the work of their peers, without the politics b/s of the main ceremony.

Hopefully the filmgoing public will mature to the point where this sham of an award gives absolutely zero bounce to any movie's box office or home video receipts. But I'm not holding my breath for that one.

03-21-2002, 08:06 AM
amen SWAFMAN! the oscars are a joke. just a bunch of people who PRETEND for a living and get together each year to PRETEND they love each other, all the while waiting for their FRIENDS to turn around so they can jab a knife in their backs. ;)

maybe i'm just mad alias is not going to be on.
or maybe it's mementos and pierce's ommisions that prove what a sham this whole thing is.

03-21-2002, 08:39 AM
Hey Derek,
Is Alias as good as I have heard? Ive never watched it, so I was just wondering. I need something new to watch on Sunday after the Simpsons.

Rollo Tomassi
03-21-2002, 11:27 AM
I agree there are a lot of immature people in the industry and Your "kindergarten circle jerk" theory might hold water but that means that the truly magnificent films never get nominated or win.

So according to you, Lord of the Rings shouldn't win or have been nominated. Russell Crowe can't act and shouldn't have been nominated for Insider, Gladiator, or Beautiful Mind. Soderburgh can't direct and shouldn't have been nominated for Traffic and Erin Brokovich. Kevin Spacey didn't deserve anything for American Beauty, and the movie itself didn't deserve any awards. Shakespeare in Love and Saving Private Ryan overshadowed better films that year. Speilberg should give his Oscars back for SPR and Schindler's List. The list goes on and on. All of these people and films won based on popularity and had nothing to do with the merits of their work? I'm sorry I disagree. The best films more often than not make it into the final five and the winner usually deserves it. There have been oversights, (Memento in general and Ewan McGregor getting overlooked) but to say the entire thing is a sham is disrespectful to everyones efforts in the industry of PRETENDING. I don't know. I would rather PRETEND for a living and take others (the audience)along with me than to spend the rest of my life in a "real" job like drywalling or accounting.

I do think it's interesting that we are having this discussion on a website devoted to a product of that PRETENDING. Somebody is at the wrong website, then. The boring real life website is just down the hall at www.garbagetruckdriver.com

03-21-2002, 11:43 AM
Ewan McGregor was so freaking awesome in Moulin Rouge, I agree his lack of nomination was an oversight. :eek:

He should have been nominated over Sean Penn and Denzel Washington. Crowe belongs there, and he will probably win. Tom Wilkinson - I've not seen In the Bedroom, so I won't comment . . . Will Smith's nomination, that I agree with. He took on a tough role, and while he wasn't perfect I do think he did a fine job of taking on the performance of Clay/Ali. Congrats to Crowe on his upcoming second consecutive statue :D

03-21-2002, 04:25 PM
jango fett96,

yes sir, alias is a pretty good show. and it dosent hurt that the chick is hot. and since i know nothing, maybe rollo can tell you if jennifer garner really deserved her emmy award.;)

03-21-2002, 04:54 PM
Rollo, the intent of my post was not to diminish the recognition of any film or its cast or crew. Since judging or rating all but the most technical awards is such a subjective issue, there are always going to be differences of OPINION in what/who was more deserving of a "best" label. To be sure, ANY film that manages to make it through production and into theatrical release is a success, to some extent. I have tremendous respect for the dedication such a feat takes. My ill will is toward what I perceive as a lack of even-handedness by the MPAA membership/management in applying a "worthiness" standard to the nomination process.

Rollo Tomassi
03-21-2002, 05:37 PM
Originally posted by derek
jango fett96,

yes sir, alias is a pretty good show. and it dosent hurt that the chick is hot. and since i know nothing, maybe rollo can tell you if jennifer garner really deserved her emmy award.;)

Bah. I don't watch TV. Jennifer Garner is pretty cute though.

Oh. And ";) "....

03-21-2002, 07:44 PM
Since I am an actor and writer I thought that I shoudl address this subject seeing all the recent replies it has had.

First off, actors do pretend around each other a lot. They each feed each other praise so that their egos can grow. Most actors usually show-off, because to them it is a huge contest to see who is the best, when in all actuality who could care less. I am pretty laid back and don't have a really huge head when it comes to my performance or how great I am. I don't need people fueling my ego. I am the one who knows if I am good or not, I don't need other people to tell me.

A lot of award shows are all about who you know. I consider myself a pretty darn good actor for my city where I am from. We have a huge communtiy theatre base and I know tons of actors, directors, dancers, etc... We usualy have an award show each season kind of like the Oscars, but for the 30+ local theatres only. A lot of my castmates have been nominated in the past, but I never have and I have come to the conclusion why. I don't kiss @$$ like they do. I don't need to suck up to people in order to get a nomination, however a lot of that is what happens. The Oscars are no different.

As far as who got shafted this year. Definately Guy Pearce and Ewan McGreggor. Nicole Kidman gets nominated, but not Ewan. He was way better than her in Moulin Rouge, so where is the logic in that? Guy Pearce took on an amazingly complex role and made it seem easy. He was fantastic and he deserved to be nominated.

As far as who shouldn't have been nominated. Denzel Washington and Will Smith. Denzel Washington is a great actor, but his performance in Training Day of all films is not worthy of an Oscar nomination. Will Smith took on a difficult role of Ali and he gets nominated and so does Crowe who played a real life person as well. So where was the Oscar nod for Jim Carrey when he portrayed Andy Kauffman. I thought Carrey was amazing in that film because he had him down to a T. But he got overlooked and other people got nominated over him. This somehow doesn't make sense. And Renee Zellewegger for Best Actress? Come on now, were they scraping the barrel for this nomination. Also what about Ethan Hawke for best supporting? How did he get nominated for this category? I am totally ashamed of the Oscars this year because a lot of really deserving performances got overlooked for lesser ones that just happened to have been seen by more people.

Rollo Tomassi
03-21-2002, 08:27 PM
As far as supporting actors go, I thought Stephen Culp and Bruce Greenwood rocked in Thirteen Days. the movie was so-so, but they were excellent. Way better than Ethan Hawke. But it's all good because Gandalf will win and he's who I wanted to win anyway! You could nominate four chimps and Sir Ian. He's taking home the statue.

03-22-2002, 12:05 AM
I'm with Rollo on his Sir Ian prediction. For awhile I thought Broadbent would ride his Golden Globe to a win, but Ian's gonna take it !

I thought Baz should have been nominated as Best Director, and I agree with SithDroid that Carrey was worthy as Kaufman. I don't think he was snubbed for The Truman Show, but Man on the Moon should have gotten more love. Maybe Courtney Love's inclusion hurt :crazed:

03-24-2002, 02:55 AM
"....You don't pull the mask off the ol' Lone Ranger, and you Don't Mess Around With Crowe!" (http://www.newsoftheworld.co.uk/news.html)
I don't know if this is true or not, but I was surprised to read about it. Any of our Aussie posters already aware of this story? I guess Denzel better be on his guard should HE edge out Crowe for the Oscar.

Rollo Tomassi
03-24-2002, 10:05 AM
Heh. That was a pretty entertaining read. Thanks Swaffy. I thinks it's funny it happened three years ago and it's just NOW becoming an issue because he rocketed to stardom...

03-24-2002, 02:41 PM
I guess all this discussion about movies, and the news about how down & dirty the publicity campaigns became this year leading up to the Academy Awards, got me interested to try and watch some of the nominated films. My goal was to do so without spending a cent (perhaps VT can appreciate that?), so I've used a popular media file server and been very successful. In the last few days, I've downloaded LOTR (already saw on big screen, but wanted to own it), A Beautiful Mind, Moulin Rouge, Gosford Park(still in-progress), and Training Day.

All except Gosford Park are perfect dvd-quality, approx. 1.5 gigabyte files, ripped from dvd screener copies which are sent to the Academy members. Gosford may also be an Academy screener, just ripped at a lower resolution. I'll know in about 20 more minutes, when it's done d/l'ing.

I just can't bring myself to watch Moulin Rouge. I got about sixty seconds into it, and stopped it. Sorry, but Kidman just irritates me lately, and the entire art style of that time and culture period have always bothered me. So I guess I forfeit my right to make any best picture comments.

I walked out on Sexy Beast at the local movie house. I haven't seen all the other performances, but I hope McKellan gets Supporting Actor. Re-watched LOTR last night with my son.

Ever tried searching servers for "In the Bedroom"? Good news is I got a ton of hits. You can figure out the bad news.

My real interest was to see A Beautiful Mind, and I did so today. Ignoring all the recent mudslinging about the film's omissions from Nash's real life, I thought this was a great film. But as a bio-pic, I simply can't imagine how anyone could or should have to try to compare it to Lord of the Rings? They are such totally different Kinds of films. "Mind" cannot begin to compete with LOTR for scale, imagery, all the technical wizardry. LOTR cannot compete with "Mind" for individual performances, simply because of the ensemble nature of its characters, and the fact that the story (or maybe Jackson?) never truly settles on any single character in the way a bio-pic, by definition, does. Unless I'm wrong, Elija Wood's Frodo Baggins is technically the lead character in LOTR (?). But McKellan, Mortensen, and Sean Bean were so much stronger acting presences, and their characters were, in my opinion, much more strongly written. Wood and Frodo, to me, sotra blended into the scenery, like a table lamp in the living room of a soap opera set. But back to the point, I don't know how or why the two films should be competing with each other. They've created a separate category for Animated features. To me, the live-action mega-effects fantasy/sci-fi films ought to have their own category, as well.

I haven't seen three of the five Best Actor nominated films, but based on the buzz lately, the two actors I wanted to compare were Denzel & Crowe. Nothing against DW, but his role in Training Day hasn't got a chance against Crowe's role. It has nothing to do with the two actors respective talents. IMO, the Nash role in "Mind" was such a showcase part for an actor that any one of perhaps several actors working today could have taken the part and won major awards. Had the real Nash been black, no doubt Denzel would be walking away with a statue tonight. So, if Crowe wins tonight, I don't think it is necessarily due to his being some amazingly talented actor (not to say he isn't), I think it's just as much because he was the person fortunate enough to be cast in that role. I honestly believe that if Guy Pearce and Russel Crowe had been cast in opposite films, that Pearce could still have won for "Mind," but I don't think Crowe could have pulled-off Memento as well as Pearce did. Simply by virtue of Crowe's ego, and the demands his star-stature would have imposed on the film, Memento wouldn't have been anything like it was, had Crowe played the lead. I think it would have ended up with the feel of a Stallone action flick.
But that's a blind alley.

Gosford Park's done downloading, so I'm gonna watch it.
(Ack! this one ought to come with a warning that it may cause drowsiness. I literally fell asleep.)

03-24-2002, 05:31 PM
A new avatar Rollo? Can this be true? I like it.

This news of Russell Crowe doesn't surprise me. Crowe has always been kind of out of control. I wounder if he suffers from depression. Every time I see him in an interview he doesn't seen happy to be talking to anyone. Even when he won the Golden Globe, he didn't seem all that happy. Plus Crowe's acceptance speeches are rather dry. No emotion or anything. I wonder what is goijng on in his head. Why don't they make a sequel to Being John Malchovich called "Being Russell Crowe.":crazed:

03-24-2002, 08:00 PM
best editing Oscar to BHD instead of Memento?


Jim Broadbent?

03-24-2002, 10:27 PM
Originally posted by SWAFMAN
best editing Oscar to BHD instead of Memento?


Agreed - I was really pulling for Memento and thought it deserved it. Perhaps it can snag original screenplay . . . :(

03-24-2002, 10:49 PM
Nope, Gosford Park takes Memento's screenplay prize. Not unexpected, but still unfortunate :frus:

03-24-2002, 11:21 PM
who was that guy ian mckellen was holding hands with, his grandson or his girlfriend? :eek:

03-24-2002, 11:29 PM
Originally posted by derek
who was that guy ian mckellen was holding hands with, his grandson or his girlfriend? :eek:

I didn't see that, but I'm guessing it was his boyfriend ?

Denzel Washington just won Best Actor.

03-24-2002, 11:31 PM
Originally posted by SWAFMAN
Nothing against DW, but his role in Training Day hasn't got a chance against Crowe's role.

Okay, I give up.
(Is Halle Berry done thanking people yet?)

03-24-2002, 11:35 PM
SWAFMAN, I didn't think Crowe would lose either. Rollo can't be happy about that one . . .

I just got a call from Halle to thank me, so yep she's done now :D :D :D

03-24-2002, 11:46 PM
am I really That disconnected with the mainstream? I watched Training Day and Beautiful Mind within a couple days of each other. I thought I was capable of evaluating the two movies fairly objectively. I just cannot imagine anyone, let alone a Majority of academy members, voting DW's performance in Training Day over Crowe's role as Nash. If the negative publicity surrounding the film were the issue, then how do you explain Connelly's Supporting Actress, Ron Howard's Director award, and the film's Best Picture award?
Why am I questioning this? I was the one who poo-pooed the whole Oscar thing a couple days ago. I guess I was hoping Rollo would be right, with his comments of support of the academy.

aw, forget it.

03-25-2002, 12:05 AM
Well, I was going to ask who won, but I got the jist of it from the previous posts. You have to remember, most people who care about the oscars, were at the oscars. Do I care which movie other people think is the best picture of the year? No. The people who decide these things are normal people just like you and me. As people they have influenced opinions on everything just like you and I. So does Beautiful Mind winning a best picture award from some award show mean its the best picture? No, it doesn't.

My friend said it best; "The only ones who care about Oscar awards are the people that either are there, or wish they were."

03-25-2002, 12:28 AM
Originally posted by Caesar
I didn't see that, but I'm guessing it was his boyfriend ?

Yup, It sure was!

I think it's great he's openly out too and is still VERY respected!

03-25-2002, 12:29 AM
A-freakin'-men Wolfwood.

03-25-2002, 01:21 AM
O.K. The Oscars were a joke this year.

First off, a lot of really good actors and films got way overlooked.

Ian McKellan should have won best suporting, but I'm glad Jim Broadbent won.

Denzel Washington? For Training Day? What? How? I think I have the answer to this. Last year Denzel was up against Russell Crowe and Crowe won for Gladiator, a performance IMO that wasn't as great as Denzel's in Hurricane. So I think the voters from last year decided that he deserved to win this year. The same is true for Crowe. He deserved the Oscar for best actor the year before that for The Insider, but lost that one, so the voters are catching up with themselves. That is my theory anyway. I love DW as an actor, but not for his performance in such a bad picture.

Best Picture A Beautiful Mind. It always amazes me that the only films that win Best Picture have to have some kind of HUGE DRAMA in them like crazy people or people dying for a just cause. I mean look at all the past Oscar winners for Best Picture, Braveheart, Gladiator, Forrest Gump, Titanic, Schindler's List, American Beauty, etc. I think that Moulin Rouge was robbed in this category.

Best Screenplay written for the Screen should have gone to Memento. This film has been severly overlooked by many people within the academy.

Oh well, I don't really care that much, I just wish that the stuff that deserves to be nominated would be, and the stuff that deserves to win would.

03-25-2002, 01:29 AM
I'd like thank the academy for moving the Oscars back here to Hollywood... but I can't, because it's been such a friggin' disaster!!! 1) That theater sucks; 2) The mall it's built in sucks worse, and raped the Chinese theater of all it's beauty; 3) The traffic around here for the past few days has been really terrible; 4) There has been a ridiculous amount of police presence and the fire department's urban rescue squad just wandering around looking for trouble; 5) Tomorrow, that theater becomes a ghost town for another year and we get stuck with another friggin' mall!!!


03-25-2002, 07:19 AM
sith droid,

you forgot "shakespear in love", which won best picture. no retards or wars in that film.:)


i mean no disrespect to you and wish you all the success in the future as a director, but do you now see what a sham these awards are? not counting just this year, off the top of my head let me count the travesties:

1. tom cruise got absoultely robbed for "born on the fourth of july"
2. "saving private ryan" was a hands down best film. way better than" shakespear in love".
3. russel crow should of won for "the insider", not "gladiator", as sith droid pointed out.
4. enya easily should of won for best song over randy newman, who to the best of my knowledge, won the "bob dole, i've been here longest award", so lets give it to him for his "cute little song".
5. so is denzel the best actor, or the best black actor who got snubbed in the past? is it fair to someone like russel crowe that the academy implement it's own version of affirmative action?
6. i found it rather ironic and annoying watching hallie berry, who i think is a fine actress, go on and on about what a step forward her win is for african-american women, only to see her thank her WHITE mother.(?) i long for the days when race will not be a deciding factor in determining who's performance is considered best. or at least not a major part in the acceptance speech.
7. did ron howard really deserve to win for "a beautiful mind"? couldn't he of gone on auto pilot with crowe in the lead role? shouldn't someone directing and "epic" type film like "lord of the rings", "black hawk down", or even "moulin rouge" have won?
8. ian mckellen for his role in LOTR
9. and last but not least, how memento was over looked for best screenplay, director, film and actor is beyond me, except for maybe the fact that they didn't have a budget to buy off academy voters with an extensive advertising campaign. forget campaign finance reform, what is really need is "academy award bribe reform":)

03-25-2002, 09:02 AM
Originally posted by derek

i found it rather ironic and annoying watching hallie berry, who i think is a fine actress, go on and on about what a step forward her win is for african-american women, only to see her thank her WHITE mother.(?) i long for the days when race will not be a deciding factor in determining who's performance is considered best. or at least not a major part in the acceptance speech.

I agree completely. Race should not be considered, but to some people I guess that it is important to stress the issue. I get tired of it being constantly thrown at me. This is America people. The most diverse country in the world. We should all consider ourselves Americans and not differentiate with adding prefexes (sp?). A persons talent is not not decided by the color of their skin, but rather the actors dedication to the art and their craft.

Mandalorian Candidat
03-25-2002, 10:03 AM
At the risk of sounding like Mr. Blackwell, what the heck was up (or should I say down:D) with Gwyneth Paltrow's dress? I guess she's a member of SAG after all.

Just two words... Wonder...Bra.

03-25-2002, 12:54 PM
Originally posted by SithDroid
Race should not be considered, but to some people I guess that it is important to stress the issue.

I noticed that in 74 years not one black woman has won best actress and it's been 39 years since a black man won best actor. I don't think that constitutes stressing the issue. Should I not wonder?

Why is it that if a black person doesn't win an award no one is supposed to raise a question like that, but when someone DOES win, those same folks want to alledge he or she won because of race?

Remember that no one ever said these awards are the best PERIOD, rather they are the best as selected by the academy. I have my favorites as does everyone else . . . and I disagree with many of the wins. I have fun following it and making predictions.

03-25-2002, 12:55 PM

Finally DW got his Oscar, i'm very happy for that, he shpuld have won that award years ago...take for isntance Malcom X, Hurricane, anyway, i havent watched the movies that were nominated, but i dont care, i'm just happy that Denzel won. Now i hope Tom Cruise will win next year.

03-25-2002, 02:44 PM
Originally posted by Lobito
Now i hope Tom Cruise will win next year.

For what? Minority Report?

03-25-2002, 05:01 PM
I dont care, he just needs to be in a movie and get a nomination and VOILA!

He's 10 times better than Russel Crap.:eek: :D

03-25-2002, 11:33 PM
Lobito, Russell Crap ? :eek:

I can't think of one performance of Crowe's that I have not enjoyed. I found Mystery Alaska, Gladiator, Proof of Life, A Beautiful Mind, The Insider, LA Confidential all quite entertaining. I know he was in other stuff like Virtuosity and The Quick and the Dead but I don't remember those films too well. I don't know about his other work that I haven't seen yet.

Good luck with your Cruise Oscar hopes :)

03-26-2002, 11:32 AM
Hi there my friend, i'm sure lots of ppl find Russel Crowe's acting very entertaining, there's no doubt he is a very good actor, but as i said b4 i like much better the way Tom Cruise acts. As for the Crap last name...well, it has nothing to do with acting, but with the way he behaves with his fans. Actors beating his fans:dead: ...no thanks.:D

03-26-2002, 12:35 PM
Thanks for the distinction, I didn't know if you were referring to his work or his behavior. If those reports are true of his violence, it's inexcusable ! That court case should be interesting . . .


03-27-2002, 04:54 PM
i'm suprised you have not given us your opinions of the 74th annual academy award results. did the outcome sour your whole outlook on hollywood and re-direct your life towards a career in sanitation?:D

i just watched "a beautiful mind" yesterday. pretty good show, but not best picture, or best director. and jennifer connely is hot, as i loved her in "inventing the abbots", but her performance , while decent in this film, was nothing special. russel crowe was good, but was WAY better in "the insider".

Rollo Tomassi
03-27-2002, 05:46 PM
I'm in mourning. At the beginning of this thread, I said the Oscars were my Superbowl. Well, my team lost.:(

I stand corrected, derek. Sort of.

Race Issues at the Oscars. The NAACP won't be happy until there are five minority nominees in a category. Denzel's win will forever be tainted, in my opinion by, "race" and "body of work" allegations. The man is a damn fine actor,as Lobito said (Malcolm X, Courage Under Fire) but this performance was crap and should NOT have won. Halle Berry on the other hand...you can go on and on about her white mother, but watching her reaction to winning. THAT was genuine. I adored it. SHE has no problems thinking of herself as a black actress. In fact I've never heard her refer to herself as anything but. So THAT door WAS flung open on Sunday. Unfortunately, it won't be good enough for the NAACP and the Academy will be pressured into giving minorities "token" noms next year as well. If race truly wasn't an issue, then nobody would bring it up, but sadly certain groups make it an issue every year by loudly decrying about how only whites are getting nominated. The problem lies NOT in the nominations, but in offering the winning roles to minorities in the first place. By the time the Oscars roll around it's too late. So the awards suffer because Ewan Mcgregor and Guy Pearce get left off the list, replaced by inferior work by Denzel because he's BLACK and the academy HAS to have at least ONE minority nominee or it faces politically correct wrath. They aren't nominating the work, they are nominating the man. Which I disagree with.

"Body of Work/Sympathy Vote" issues. The same problem of voting for people over their contributions. Peter Jackson directed THREE MOVIES all at once. He was embroiled in logistics nightmare comparable to a small WAR and threw fifteen months and more of his life into the film. And it shows onscreen. But Ron Howard has been snubbed by the Academy and it was "his turn" to win. I think Whoopie's crack about Moulin Rouge "apparently not having a director" was spot on. The same holds true for Randy Newman's award. Complete Sympathy vote.

"Campaigning" Issues. I agree that it has gotten out of hand. Immensely out of hand. Mud slinging? For a movie? There's no way a small film company like New Market (Memento's distributor) can launch a campaign like the Juggernauts of Dreamworks, Universal, and Miramax. It was clearly a superior film. The boost in increased revenue an "Oscar Winning" film receives is making the award itself secondary. The major studios don't see it as prestige anymore, they see it as income. This has to stop. Call it campaign finance reform if you want, but the Academy has to step in and say to the studios "This is NOT about your bottom line. This is about honoring the best films and film makers."

"Too many award shows" The Golden Globes, The [City of your Choice] Critics Awards, The Director's Guild, The A.F.I. movie awards are all hoarding in on the Oscar's prestige as the premier fimmakers awards. By the time the Oscars roll around, they are merely "confirming" what the other awards already handed out. "Well, naturally, Beautiful Mind won best picture. It already won...blah blah blah."

In the end, I still don't see it as a sham. By saying SPR should have won, are you saying Shakespeare in Love sucked? I wanted SPR to win, too. But I love SIL and thinks it's a brilliant film. I loved Cruise in Born...4th of July, but is Day-Lewis's performance any less praise worthy? I don't have a problem with my favorite film or actor not winning. But the choice should be made based on the work, not on who's "HOT" on Hollywood's "it" list. And in my opinion, most of the winners did indeed win on their own merits, as they should have. Connely, Broadbent, and Berry are all deserving of their awards, even if I was routing for McKellan, Kidman, and...well, Connelly.:)

And as a final thought. As Wolfwood says, These are awards chosen by normal people like you and I who have personal opinions and are not infallible. There is no scientific breakdown of what makes a good film, so there is no objective way to decide what truly deserves a "best picture" statue. But these are people who have devoted their lives to this craft and as such, they have just as much and moreso insight into how and what it takes to judge their peers in such a competition. I wouldn't want the "garbage truck drivers union" deciding who the best actor was. We'd keep ahnding statues out to Sylvester Stallone.:eek:;)

And so, I eagerly await next year when I can yell at my television set when the best cinematography goes to...:confused::D

And no, I do not plan on working in sanitation. The best way to change things is from within.


See you next year!

03-27-2002, 06:40 PM
thanks for responding rollo.:)

the funniest, or most ironic, thing about liberal blacks complaining about the lack of good roles or the lack of nominations, is that they are, on the most part, complaining about the supposed racism of liberal left-wing whites who dominate the film industry.
you would think the klan was running hollywood if you listen to spike lee or the NAACP.

i don't think there are a lack of good roles for minority actors, it is just that blacks only make up 13% of the population, and there is no way 13% of working actors are black. they are just a small overall part of the industry, so it's easy to see why they have had so few nominations.and because the majority of this country is white, the majority of films have to appeal to a white audience. as you have said, it is show BUSINESS.:)

there may not be a completly objective way to select a best film or actor, but a good start would be to consider the film they were actually nominated for, instead of giving out "do-over" oscars to crowe and washington a year late.

do you know who comprises the academy of motion pictures? how are they selected?

03-27-2002, 07:17 PM
Good points Rollo. I can understand the whole minority issue, but this year we had two minorities in the leading actor category. Will Smith, IMO, was the sympathy nomination. His performance was a good one, but not one certainly more worthy than Ewan McGreggor or Guy Pearce.

As far as the NAACP getting mad about minorities not getting nominated:

I mean take a look at some of the films that feature prominately an all minority cast, or a film in which minorites are the leading characters like All About The Benjamins, Big Mommas House, How Stella Got Her Groove Back, Baby Boy, Friday, The Brothers, etc... A majority of the bodies of work that are done by minorities are not really "Oscar" worthy pictures. Denzel Washington and Halle Berry are very talented actors and there are many other minority actors that I respect: John Leguizamo, Sam Jackson, Don Cheadle, Benicio Del Toro, Jennifer Lopez, Wesley Snipes, Lucy Liu, etc.... but they should be nominated for roles in which they deserve to be nominated.

Rollo Tomassi
03-27-2002, 08:24 PM
i don't think there are a lack of good roles for minority actors, it is just that blacks only make up 13% of the population, and there is no way 13% of working actors are black. they are just a small overall part of the industry, so it's easy to see why they have had so few nominations.and because the majority of this country is white, the majority of films have to appeal to a white audience. as you have said, it is show BUSINESS.

Excellent. I wish somebody would mention that to everyone involved.

SithDroid. I didn't see Ali, but Smith looked like he took that role to heart, and from what I saw in the trailers and such, he really nailed it. I don't think it was enough to WIN the statue, but it might be good enough to get the nom regardless of his skin color. Denzel on the other hand blew in all shapes and sizes.

And the acting in BabyBoy far outshined anything Denzel had to offer this year. But I agree, The NAACP should look at Scary Movie 2 and then complain why no minorities are gettin' Oscar Noms.:rolleyes:

And a tenuous segue in the Oscar dept. I just saw a trailer for Changing Lanes. When they are flashing the stars names at the end with the voice over it says "Academy Award Nominee Samuel Jackson. Academy Award Winner Ben Affleck." ARRGH!:mad: Stop that! Affleck hasn't won crappola for acting. he's never even been nominated! If he wrote Changing Lanes, then by all means...but DON'T do that when he's the ACTOR in the movie. That cheeses me off every time I see it, and it's not the first time they've done it. ("They" being the marketing people.)

03-27-2002, 09:27 PM
All are good points. But there is one thing I'd like to touch on:

Sylvester Stallone rocks! Have you seen Demolition Man or Judge Dredd, those movies are a riot and a half. Great sci-fi/action flicks. I love 'em!

In all seriousness though folks, I think this whole race thing is getting out of hand. Now, the Oscars are supposed to be about the BEST performances. Now there is politics involved but they usually due follow a somewhat standard selection process. If a black actor doesn't get nominated, maybe its because the 5 best performances of the year were from white actors. Why should actors like Pearce and McGregor get snubbed because they're white? Denzel is a great actor, and he should of won last year for "Hurricane" IMO, but he didn't. I'm not going to lose any sleep over it though.

Like I said before, its just an awards show and by no means represents the majority of film goers and movie fans. Its always been about "Hollywood-insiders" and the like. They used to not even televise the Oscars because it was in fact a Hollywood affair. Then TV execs decided to capitalize on the popularity of movie stars, and started televising the award shows. Remember, people 50 years ago didn't care. What has changed?

03-28-2002, 02:26 AM
derek, you make a good point about Hollywood and it's supposed liberalism. In the recent debates over race and the Oscar awards, it always struck me as rather odd that these allegations were made against such a leftist business. :)

Rollo, Stallone was snubbed for best actor in Over the Top. Recant your truck driver slam :mad: :D

Okay, seriously though I do disagree with the idea that Denzel's win was "race" tainted. "Body of work" tainted yes, because that guy has had quite a career in film. I think his nomination over Pierce and McGregor is understandable because Washington has been a Hollywood guy for some time. Guy and Ewan were better but this isn't the only time good performances were snubbed. And let's not forget Ethan Hawke in all of this, that guy was in the same film and got a supporting actor nomination.

Denzel's win was a "body of work" win and I don't agree with these sympathy votes (see Randy Newman) in any case. That's what those honorary Oscars are for. :)

04-13-2002, 09:57 PM
SNL had some funny parodies last week. :)

On Weekend Update, they had "Halle and Denzel" join for a moment, with Maya Rudolph doing a funny riff on Halle's "crying so hard I can barely talk yet I'm thanking EVERYBODY". She finished by thanking "that girl in Swordfish who showed her breasts". :D :D :D But I thought Dean Edwards as Denzel was funnier, he had the voice down. More importantly though, he had the whole "Ha ha, yes *hand clapping*" thing going . . .

Even better was a sketch for an awards show recognizing the best car show models. All of the winners were young attractive (well, skanky ) women. But then a man broke the trend and won an award, played by Chris Parnell. Damn, that guy had the whole Halle speech down pat ! Everything from the shakiness in the voice . . . to . . . the squeezing in of every person to be thanked. Very funny stuff. :)

(It took them so long to do their spoofs because they were off for a week or two after the Oscar broadcast - that's why it didn't seem very "timely")

04-13-2002, 10:39 PM
last week on his HBO show, dennis miller was talking about cuba gooding jr.'s next film in which he'll play a mildly retarded man who befriends a southerner. miller suggested the title of the film should be "OSCARS FOR EVERYBODY":)

04-14-2002, 12:24 AM
Oooh, thanks for reminding me about Dennis Miller :)

The week before, he stated that the busdriver who dissed Rosa Parks had died. Miller said something to the effect of, "the cause of death was determined to be last week's Oscars." :D :D :D :D :D

08-31-2002, 04:26 AM
I finally saw Monster's Ball last week, and I must say I think the Academy got the Best Actress category right. Pretty depressing movie overall, and I think Halle Berry filled in nicely. Really brought out the character for me. After watching it on Sunday night, I had to think about some of her past movies and how much they sucked . . . at times I can't believe it's the same actress. :D

What are we looking at for this year's Oscars? Road to PErdition is being advertised as an Oscar contender, what else do we have? Plenty of effects nominees I'm sure, but what about the big categories?
I bet we'll see a bunch of noms from the upcoming months . . . let's see if LOTR can recapture some of the Academy's attention.

08-31-2002, 04:27 AM
The only Oscar worth talking about is Oscar the Grouch, he is truley awsome, I mean come on, he lives in a frigin trash can. :)

Eternal Padawan
09-03-2002, 07:47 AM

Somebody went trawling...

Have you recieved your PM from a moderator yet? I heard posting in posts not on the front page is confusing and a headache for the staff.


09-03-2002, 10:12 AM
Have you recieved your PM from a moderator yet? I heard posting in posts not on the front page is confusing and a headache for the staff.

what??? were you just joking around? I've often dug through pages of old posts to find a thread I remembered was at least tenuously related to my current topic, simply to avoid the overhead to the forum of generating a new thread.

sometimes it takes a LONG time, too, since the SSG search feature is just NOT finding many things it should.

is there really truth to your comment that mods don't want us dredging up old threads for a new post, no matter how well-matched our new post is to the old topic?

Eternal Padawan
09-04-2002, 09:06 AM
Swaffy, the word they used was "disruptive". I'll send you a PM with the text of a message I recieved from a mod (rather than posting it here and blowing it out of proportion...)


09-04-2002, 04:58 PM
I was offline for the last 4 days because of the heat problems here in LA so I didn't see this till now.

EP, what was one of the last things I said to you about that? (Mind you, I'm only referring to the *MOST RECENT* time I've PMed you about this, as opposed to the 2 previous times.) Wasn't it something like "once in a while is alright, but not at this level" or something to that effect? I don't have a copy anymore, but I know I put that in there.

It's about balance, if you fill the main page of a section with old threads, it's not fair to the discussions of new threads and it looks like post-padding.

02-11-2003, 12:34 AM
Here we go again! :crazed:

The nominations will be announced soon - any early predictions?

02-11-2003, 12:42 AM
i predict the LOTR won't get squat. not that it dosen't deserve it, but seeing as how "fellowship" and ian mckellen got the shaft last year, i don't expect much this year. this is going to be a really boring oscar year. nothing in my mind stands out as special or noteworthy. at least we're guaranteed no halle berry nonsence this year.:eek:

02-11-2003, 07:45 AM
the nominations were just announced, and i haven't seen hardly any of the films or actors in those films that have been nominated. LOTR got the nod for best picture, but that's it.
hayden got ripped off!!!:crazed: :crazed: :crazed: ;) i just knew he'd be recognized for best high-pitched, crackling voice!:D

Eternal Padawan
02-11-2003, 09:10 AM
Hooray! It's Oscar time! I have to head into work, but I'll be back tonight with some picks and predictions. I'm sorry to see LOTR get shafted. No sequel has ever been given Oscar love when the first one didn't win anything. I'm hoping ROTK bucks that trend but I doubt it. LOTR had it's moment to shine last year and was beat out by the inferior Beautiful Mind.

The Overlord Returns
02-11-2003, 09:56 AM
Funny thing is....three of the best films of the year didn't get best picture noms..

Punch drunk love
Road to Perdition

All were overlooked....these all deserve nods over Lord of the rings and Gangs....as far as I am concerned.

Patient Zero
02-11-2003, 10:15 AM
I have yet to see any of these movies!

Can you say recluse!?! :zzz:

Books are better anyway. :happy:

02-11-2003, 12:12 PM
I agree with Overlord about Road to Perdition, I was hoping to see it on the list (but not surprised that it didn't make it. :( )

I'd like to see LOTR get a big win somewhere, but I think it will only win second tier awards like last year.

Hmmmm, my early predictions:

Picture: Chicago MAYBE . . . I think it's got a shot. But I'm not ready to make a final choice yet.

Director: Scorcese. I'm picking him in my pool this year.

Actor: I WANT Day-Lewis to win, but will probably pick Jack as the favorite. Brody has a chance for the upset here, I can't choose yet.

Supporting Actor: I like Newman but will probably pick Cooper.

Actress: I'm torn right now between Kidman and Zellweger. With Chicago's nominations and her Globe, I may have to go with Zellweger.

Supporting Actress: Tough one . . . Well I'll eliminate Latifah because I think Zeta-Jones would get it before her for Chicago. I'm thinking maybe Moore. I just don't want Kathy Bates to win, she should be DQ'd because of that nude scene. :eek:

Animated: This year there are 5 noms, last we there were 3 - correct? Hmmm, I think it will be Ice Age or Lilo & Stitch. Right now I'm leaning Ice Age but have no idea really . . .

Adapted Screenplay: I'm picking Adaptation this year.

Original Screenplay: ??? Not sure who to take here, I'm thinking Gangs maybe?

I think Bowling for Columbine will walk away with Documentary.

El Chuxter
02-11-2003, 12:13 PM
Looking at the noms:

1. Where's Signs? In any category?

2. Where's SW's sound nomination?

3. Where are "Hero" (from Spidey) and "I'm Still Here" (from Treasure Planet)?

4. If Atlantis lost a nom last year to that POS Jimmy Neutron, how can the inferior remake, Treasure Planet, get a nom this year?

5. Why did the score to Catch Me if You Can get nominated over Minority Report?

6. Where's Dafoe for his dead-on Green Goblin?

7. No "Best Adaptation" for Spider-Man? Jiminy cricket!

8. All these nominations for Chicago. Ooh, the revival of the musical! That's something we need. Whoopie friggin' doo. Even Disney's getting away from that crap! Maybe I'll watch it. . . on Turner Classic Movies years from now, as I coat myself in Ben-*** so that my arthritis won't bother me when I hobble outside to tell some "whippersnappers" to "get off my dadblamed lawn!"

Edit: I forgot that the autocensor would bleep out the last three letters of a common arthritis medication. You all know what it is.

02-11-2003, 12:20 PM
I started a new thread for this years Oscars, since 90% of this one refers to last years Oscars and 2001 movies. Just FYI incase you want to move the disscussion there :)


The Overlord Returns
02-11-2003, 12:57 PM
Originally posted by El Chuxter
Looking at the noms:

1. Where's Signs? In any category?

Not good enough to be nominated. Signs was a let down for me...a good film for the first three quarters, which was utterly dashed by it's horribly trite and laughable ending.

Originally posted by El Chuxter

2. Where's SW's sound nomination?

That is an easily answered one. Hollywood thinks it very cool to hate star wars and lucas, hence the lack of noms in the technical dept. I don't care what one says about LOTR, ILM is still ahead of it in technology on all fronts. Still, had hollywood been able to find another candidate, SW wouldn't even have gotten an Vis. effects nom.

Originally posted by El Chuxter

3. Where are "Hero" (from Spidey) and "I'm Still Here" (from Treasure Planet)?


Originally posted by El Chuxter

4. If Atlantis lost a nom last year to that POS Jimmy Neutron, how can the inferior remake, Treasure Planet, get a nom this year?

No idea........

Originally posted by El Chuxter

5. Why did the score to Catch Me if You Can get nominated over Minority Report?

Again, no idea....I haven't seen CMIYC

Originally posted by El Chuxter

6. Where's Dafoe for his dead-on Green Goblin?

No where near oscar worthy.

Originally posted by El Chuxter

7. No "Best Adaptation" for Spider-Man? Jiminy cricket!

Competition is hella strong in that category. No way does Spiderman deserve to be there.....

Originally posted by El Chuxter

8. All these nominations for Chicago. Ooh, the revival of the musical! That's something we need. Whoopie friggin' doo. Even Disney's getting away from that crap! Maybe I'll watch it. . . on Turner Classic Movies years from now, as I coat myself in Ben-*** so that my arthritis won't bother me when I hobble outside to tell some "whippersnappers" to "get off my dadblamed lawn!"

Edit: I forgot that the autocensor would bleep out the last three letters of a common arthritis medication. You all know what it is.

Hopefully chicago is just a flash in the pan........

02-11-2003, 01:25 PM
I wanted "the musical" to arrive LAST YEAR with Moulin Rouge but it couldn't quite make it. With Chicago . . . I dunno, haven't seen it yet. I can't comment until this weekend when I (hopefully) see it.

Question about Adaptation (which I've also not seen) : Isn't it more of an original screenplay? I think I recall talk of an Oscar ploy in which they would push for Adapted Screenplay because of the film title even though it's an original scropt by Kaufman. Correct me if I'm wrong.

I agree with Overlord on Dafoe, I wouldn't want him in that category.

As for Star Wars, I'm glad they got a visual nom but I have to agree that it was robbed of a Sound mention. :D

No Tom Hanks?

No Leo either, that's not all bad . . . :crazed:

The Overlord Returns
02-11-2003, 01:31 PM
Originally posted by Caesar

Question about Adaptation (which I've also not seen) : Isn't it more of an original screenplay? I think I recall talk of an Oscar ploy in which they would push for Adapted Screenplay because of the film title even though it's an original scropt by Kaufman. Correct me if I'm wrong.

While it is very much an original from the wonderfully odd mind of Charlie Kaufman...it is also very much based on The Orchid Thief novel.............it's an odd thing...but it is very much an 'adaptation".... ;)

BTW....go see it. Best movie of the year IMO.....

02-11-2003, 02:02 PM
Best Actor
Adrien Brody, The Pianist
Nicolas Cage, Adaptation
Michael Caine, The Quiet American
Daniel Day-Lewis, Gangs of New York
Jack Nicholson, About Schmidt

Best Actress
Salma Hayek, Frida
Nicole Kidman, The Hours
Diane Lane, Unfaithful
Julianne Moore, Far from Heaven
Renée Zellweger, Chicago

Best Supporting Actor
Chris Cooper, Adaptation
Ed Harris, The Hours
Paul Newman, Road to Perdition
John C. Reilly, Chicago
Christopher Walken, Catch Me If You Can

Best Supporting Actress
Kathy Bates, About Schmidt
Julianne Moore, The Hours
Queen Latifah, Chicago
Meryl Streep, Adaptation
Catherine Zeta-Jones, Chicago

Best Picture
Gangs of New York
The Hours
The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers
The Pianist

Achievement in Directing
Chicago, Rob Marshall
Gangs of New York, Martin Scorsese,
The Hours, Stephen Daldry
The Pianist, Roman Polanski
Talk to Her, Pedro Almodovar

Since I havent seen it posted I posted a list for major catergories. I personally don't care who wins what. To me it isn't a big deal. THere are some movies that I have seen that I feel should be nominated but since the public doesn't have a vote who cares. It is a long drawn out event that is over-populized in my opinion.

02-12-2003, 03:38 AM
Thanks Overlord, I do plan on seeing it soon - hopefully in the next 2 weeks. :)

Eternal Padawan - when you come back with your picks, sure I want to hear your personal faves but please include your predictions based on how you think the awards WILL go.
Thanks, I have a travelling trophy to defend. :D

Wow, what are we to make of Julianne Moore in both Actress AND Supporting? Personally, I think she has a better shot at Supporting. A much better chance . . . for Actress I think she could actually finish 3rd so if she wins it will be for Supporting.
No way that she wins both (has that ever happened BTW? :) )

02-12-2003, 08:58 AM
No I don't think that has ever happened. They usually get one or the other but I never heard of anyone getting both.

02-12-2003, 12:21 PM

I was surprised 2 years ago when Soderbergh won Director for Traffic since he was nominated twice in the SAME category. Not that it should matter, since people should be voting for best directing in a movie regardless of who directed it, but . . .

I think we'll possibly see a split in the Director / Picture categories, I know the same project often wins both awards but if Chicago takes Picture, I just don't see it winning Directing.

EP, I think you are quite right about LOTR probably not doing well after being snubbed last year - this year, Peter Jackson is the only director of a Best Picture nomination who wasn't nominated for Director.

Eternal Padawan
02-12-2003, 01:09 PM
The trouble is, I've not seen a lot of these yet. Some haven't even gotten to my area yet (like The Hours and The Pianist) and some are playing at the theatre across town and it's a chore to get free time to get over there.

Best Actor
The only one I've seen is Day Lewis' performance and that didn't exactly blow me away. It was a little over the top in my book. I think Jack has this one in the bag, though. I'll know more when I've seen more.

Best Actress
I've only seen Diane lane and Renee Zelweger in this one. To be honest, I thought Lane's performance was Oscar worthy when I saw it several months ago. It was such a raw, honest performance, even though the movie was only mediocre. I'm rooting for her to be a long shot victory. Renee could ride the Chicago juggernaut to a win, but I'm thinking Nicole Kidman will grab this statue.

Supporting Actor
I'm getting better! I've seen 3 of these! I liked Newman and Walken better than Reilly's cuckolded husband. Without seeing the other two performances ( I think Chris Cooper's time has come, he's great in everything!) I can't really give you an accurate pick. I will say I think Walken should get something just for NOT doing the Walken schtick for once.

Supporting Actress
Queen Latifah is this year's token black. But of the noms I've only seen hers and Catherine Zeta Jones's. I'm totally guessing that Julianne Moore will win.

Unfortunately, no one had the good graces to nominate Peter Jackson for directing THREE MOVIES AT THE SAME TIME! Apparently no one gets it. That being said, I really don't have a fave director this year.
Good luck Roman Polanski. Since you won't be there to except the award. EVER. I doubt they will give you one.
Sorry, Scorsese, I don't even know why your movie was nominated. It wasn't that great. This reeks of a sympathy nom from all your fans who are now in a position to vote.
Pedro Almodovar. Your movie wasn't nominated.
Stephen Daldry. Your movie wasn't Chicago.
Rob Marshall. Congratulations! You directed the best picture, so you get a director's oscar.

Best Picture
Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers is the best movie this year. But since PJ didn't get nominated, this won't win bubkes.
Gangs of New York is pedestrian. Not Oscar worthy.
Pianist and Hours I haven't seen ( as stated above), but that's really inconsequential because I think Chicago is going to win. And I must say, I was very entertained by it. It's a great film. Clearly it's no Moulin Rouge, and it's certainly no LOTR, but if it wins, I'll be satisfied.

Back later with my thoughts on the lesser categories. (I'm also going to go back and see what I thought about last year's pics and wins!)

02-12-2003, 06:52 PM
one thing that popped into my head last night is the lack of a Best Sound nod for Ep 2. I think it's not as much a case of "Hollywood hates Lucas" as Ep 2 has to fight not just the other possible nominees but also the memories of all the previous Star Wars films (most of which, I hate to say, had better sound than Ep 2 IMO).

02-15-2003, 01:37 AM
Eternal Padawan,
If Queen Latifah is "this year's token black" then Renee Zellweger is this year's Token Ugly Chick. :p

I saw Chicago today and really enjoyed the movie. I think Latifah and Reilly's performances were about even; both very good but neither quite good enough to win either of the Supporting categories.

That's an interesting thought on Rob Marshall - see, I thought maybe he would win because Chicago could win Best Pic. However, he being a first timer I'm thinking the Academy might vote Scorcese since he has such a history with making Gangs and just due to his overall popularity.

I'm seeing a result similar to 1999 when Spielberg won Director for Private Ryan while Shakespeare won Best Pic.

hmm, I still have some things to think about . . .

Thanks for the theories! :)

Eternal Padawan
02-15-2003, 10:37 AM
Yeah, Scorcese could pull off the symapthy vote. Even though his movie was dreck. OK, that's harsh. It was good, but not Oscar Worthy.

Mike Troxell
02-17-2003, 06:56 PM
Chicago...not at all bad, but I didn't see it as nomination-worthy in any category. Oh well. I would much rather have seen About a Boy get a few more nods in there (namely Best Picture and for at least one of the songs Badly Drawn Boy composed for it, although I'm glad it did get a nomination for best adapted screenplay). Lord of the Rings should definitely have been nominated for Best Adapted Screenplay. Star Wars once again gets shafted in the technical departments. That is all I can think of now.

Eternal Padawan
03-24-2003, 04:39 PM
Why did everyone feel the need to voice a political diatribe during their acceptance speeches this year? I need to hear actors' political pontificating like I need Donald Rumsfeld in a remake of Cabaret. And what's with all these performers deciding not to attend because of "what's happening" in the world? Let me say, this is what you do for a living, bub. There are thousands of soldiers halfway around the world doing their job right now, the least you could do is show up at the Oscars and sit in your seat like a good little performer and do yours.

That said, I liked Adrien telling the conductor to shush the music. :) Oh, and his uncensored "Holy ****" when he heard his name. Classy. ;)

Poor Mickey Rooney. Why not just have him sit in the lobby?

Hooray for Chris Cooper!

Peter O' Toole. Wonderful. :) (by the way, his name is a double phallic entendre, like Woody Johnson or...never mind) Reminds me of Stanley Donen's speech a few years ago. Those old guys are from a different era of show business. Back when it was more show and less business. :)

Roman Polanski!:eek: Well, well. Is it just me, or should the coward come home and take his lumps?

And Kirk Douglas certainly has more class in his pinkie than most of the rest of the room put together.

Prince Xizor
03-25-2003, 12:19 AM
Originally posted by Eternal Padawan

Roman Polanski!:eek: Well, well. Is it just me, or should the coward come home and take his lumps?

Damn right. It is a sham that this award was wasted on a pedaphile. He shouldn't even have been nominated, never mind win.

03-25-2003, 01:44 AM
Originally posted by Eternal Padawan
Rob Marshall. Congratulations! You directed the best picture, so you get a director's oscar.

And that's exactly who I picked in my Oscar pool. :D

As discussed previously, I really thought Chicago would win Best Pic but Scorcese could take a sympathy Director's award.

Well, recently when Marshall won the DGA, I HAD to pick him for the Oscars just because the DGA winner takes the Oscar almost all the time (what, there have been maybe 5 [now 6 :D ] times that it's ever happened?). Regardless, I picked wrong. :crazed:

As for the political diatribes, yeah - I see your point. I don't think it's too much to ask that they keep it low key. Still, I thought Chris Cooper's comment was sincere, I can't fault him for it.

Michael Moore is catching hell from many people for his antics. Well, regardless of if I agree or disagree with Moore, I realize that it's WHAT HE DOES. He makes a living through political writings and movies, so it's not surprising that he would be that way on stage. Oh well. :)

03-25-2003, 07:50 AM
Originally posted by Eternal Padawan

Roman Polanski!:eek: Well, well. Is it just me, or should the coward come home and take his lumps?

That's the only award I had a problem with. I think two, Gangs and Chicago were directed better, but that's not the big problem. It's the fact that the Acadmy decided to give a Pediphle/Rapist an award, when he should be in jail and not making them to begin with. :dead:


Eternal Padawan
03-25-2003, 01:17 PM
originally by Caesar
As for the political diatribes, yeah - I see your point. I don't think it's too much to ask that they keep it low key. Still, I thought Chris Cooper's comment was sincere, I can't fault him for it.

His was very neutral. There were others like that also, but then some of them were out of line. The oscars are not a pulpit, in my opinion. Moore's was the obvious one, but he just came off as an ***.

The one that bugged me was that little Y Mama Tu Tambien guy came out to introduce a song and said 'If Frida Kahlo were still alive she would be with us. She would oppose this war."

Well excuuuuuse me, but who is 'us'? And how do you know Frida Kahlo maybe perhaps remembers thugs like Hitler and Stalin and is sitting up there in the afterlife wondering why no ones taken this Hussein shmuck out yet?

But enough of that. i don't want to turn this ibto a political argument discussion.

Aside from the creepy aspect, Polanski came as a total shock to me. In the last few years, it seems the Academy is splitting up the Director and Picture Oscars.

Speilberg and Shakespeare in Love.
Soderbergh and Gladiator.

Now this.

I may have to readjust my computations for next year and take into account the "body of work" factor (which I oppose, but it seems to becoming a trend...)

03-25-2003, 10:40 PM
They do it because they know they have a large audience that'll sit through listening to their strong personal beliefs for 2 minutes to see the rest of the show, because they can't hold it in any longer and may never have the opportunity to do it again - similar reason to why Adrien Brody put the moves on Halle Berry :D. Personally, I couldn't care less about who said what, but I couldn't care less about the actual show itself too - I spent my time watching 3 Columbo shows instead. :happy:

BTW, when someone uses "us" in a sentence like that, it's usually to denote the speaker and a group that is with him or her in some way. ;)

Oh, and the term "academy award-winner Eminem" is definitely one of the signs of the apocalypse. :eek: :crazed: