Oscars

Current or vintage, broadcast, internet, cable, or satellite

Oscars

Postby mavrach » Sun Feb 22, 2009 9:55 pm

So what did everybody think?
+1. this is very interesting.
User avatar
mavrach
County Attorney
 
Posts: 1695
Joined: Thu Apr 08, 2004 11:41 am
Location: North Jersey, at the end of a one-way dead-end road.

Re: Oscars

Postby mavrach » Sun Feb 22, 2009 10:02 pm

They basically admitted that the nominated films didn't interest the general public. It was odd seeing something like Pineapple Express get an extended focus, while there were no joking references to any of the nominees since nobody would get it. It's sad, but probably a very smart strategy.

I haven't seen Slumdog Millinionaire yet, but I'm happy that Danny Boyle is now an Oscar winner.

Best Animated Film continues to be a joke, and even the presenter is making jokes that Pixar always wins. Actually I think any category that they can only get three nominees in probably shouldn't exist.

What's up with the Short Films? Why don't I ever hear of these movies (unless they're played in front of a Pixar release), and why are they all foreign films? Everybody seems to glance past these, but since they get such recognition each year you'd think they'd be in a higher profile.

If the announcer has to explain what a presenter is famous for, they probably shouldn't be presenting. They said "Amanda Seyfreid from Mama Mia..." Just give the stage to somebody who might actually be famous.

I've said this before, but a professional actor of Oscar calibre shouldn't need a telepromptor. You can tell when somebody knows what they're talking about and reads their audience, versus somebody just reading the words given to them.
+1. this is very interesting.
User avatar
mavrach
County Attorney
 
Posts: 1695
Joined: Thu Apr 08, 2004 11:41 am
Location: North Jersey, at the end of a one-way dead-end road.

Re: Oscars

Postby BenShultz » Sun Feb 22, 2009 10:04 pm

I didn't see Penn's win coming, but I guess the Academy just can't avoid honoring at least 1 actor/actress for a biopic every year. I suppose he deserved it just as much as Rourke did.
Oh, you're paying way too much for worms, man. Who's your worm guy?
User avatar
BenShultz
City Prosecutor
 
Posts: 863
Joined: Wed Oct 06, 2004 1:49 pm
Location: Delmar, MD

Re: Oscars

Postby azul017 » Sun Feb 22, 2009 10:06 pm

An absolute sham -- it's a damn shame The Dark Knight didn't win any more nominations aside from the inevitable Ledger win and Sound Editing (the Cinematography snub was especially maddening, Pfister did an incredible job). Also sad to see Button didn't get the love aside from three technical wins.

Unsurprisingly, Slumdog lapped up virtually every nomination it snagged. Again, the Oscars favor snobbery over more popular, critically-acclaimed films -- I would've rather seen Milk or Button walk away with Best Picture instead.

On the other hand, maybe Boyle can get 28 Months Later rolling with that nice, shiny Oscar he has.
"Aliens conquering Earth would be fine with me, as long as they make me their queen."
- Gillian Anderson
User avatar
azul017
City Prosecutor
 
Posts: 821
Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2004 5:19 am
Location: Durham, NC

Re: Oscars

Postby Andrew Forbes » Sun Feb 22, 2009 10:29 pm

azul017 wrote:An absolute sham -- it's a damn shame The Dark Knight didn't win any more nominations aside from the inevitable Ledger win and Sound Editing (the Cinematography snub was especially maddening, Pfister did an incredible job). Also sad to see Button didn't get the love aside from three technical wins.

Unsurprisingly, Slumdog lapped up virtually every nomination it snagged. Again, the Oscars favor snobbery over more popular, critically-acclaimed films -- I would've rather seen Milk or Button walk away with Best Picture instead.

On the other hand, maybe Boyle can get 28 Months Later rolling with that nice, shiny Oscar he has.

Except Slumdog actually had exceptionally good cinematography. And it's popular. And critically acclaimed. Oh, and it's a colorful, crowd-pleasing, feel-good flick. If you can explain how that equates to snobbery, then explain, by all means.
Formerly chamucamel
User avatar
Andrew Forbes
County Prosecutor
 
Posts: 2615
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 9:43 am
Location: Edmonton, AB

Re: Oscars

Postby Andrew Forbes » Sun Feb 22, 2009 10:30 pm

Oh yeah, and Boyle deserves the win for making Slumdog as watchable as it is.
Formerly chamucamel
User avatar
Andrew Forbes
County Prosecutor
 
Posts: 2615
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 9:43 am
Location: Edmonton, AB

Re: Oscars

Postby Boba Fett » Sun Feb 22, 2009 10:35 pm

The only award that I thought was a true sham was Milk over In Bruges for Best Original Screenplay.

Rourke screwed his chances weeks ago when he said he was wrestling at Wrestlemania; his last minute reversal saying he'll just be in attendance was too little too late. I say in a week or two, he'll be back on the card in a match; the guy is a great actor but acting always seems come second in his life to chasing childish dreams.

Penn as expected acted like a douche; ironic, such a bitter, angry, jerk wins for playing a compassionate and rational man.

I still think Eastwood deserved a Best Actor nomination, but the Academy didn't know what to do with a character like Walt Kowalski.
"I assure you, whatever the others promise to do, when it comes to the showdown, they won't be there."
User avatar
Boba Fett
County Attorney
 
Posts: 1714
Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2004 2:11 am
Location: Oregon

Re: Oscars

Postby Shmoooooo » Sun Feb 22, 2009 10:43 pm

I loved how they presented the main awards with 5 previously winners of the said award each giving a speech about one of the nominees. It was classy, and a great way of giving honour to each nominee. Best change I've ever seen in the Academy Awards.
Shmoooooo
City Attorney
 
Posts: 299
Joined: Mon Oct 14, 2002 6:48 pm
Location: Toronto, Canada

Re: Oscars

Postby Dan Mancini » Mon Feb 23, 2009 6:39 am

Shmoooooo wrote:I loved how they presented the main awards with 5 previously winners of the said award each giving a speech about one of the nominees. It was classy, and a great way of giving honour to each nominee. Best change I've ever seen in the Academy Awards.

I found the format even more nauseatingly self-congratulatory than usual. The great jobs and you nailed its had me reaching for my barf bag. I kept waiting for one of the five presenters to walk out into the audience and fellate his nominee.

The musical numbers were, well, just gawdawful (as expected). And I was pissed that they reversed the normal order of the Supporting Actor/Supporting Actress presentations, forcing me to stay tuned in longer than I wanted. (As a side note, since actresses don't want to be called actresses anymore, shouldn't the lead and supporting awards be reduced to single, non-gender-specific categories? e.g. Best Lead Actor and Best Supporting Actor.)

Tina Fey and Steve Martin were awesome, though. They shoulda co-hosted.
User avatar
Dan Mancini
Chief Prosecutor
 
Posts: 4052
Joined: Wed Sep 11, 2002 7:17 am
Location: Atlanta, GA

Re: Oscars

Postby Steve T Power » Mon Feb 23, 2009 7:19 am

Didn't bother watching. But that winners list was pretty much exactly what i expected.
As the ancient Tibetan philosophy states:"Don't start none... won't be none...".
User avatar
Steve T Power
Judge
 
Posts: 5351
Joined: Wed Sep 11, 2002 3:08 pm
Location: St. John's, Newfoundland, CA

Re: Oscars

Postby molly1216 » Mon Feb 23, 2009 7:31 am

i tuned in back and forth, i found it easier to watch with the sound off actually.
but i did find the video for the musical at the end of Slumdog Millionaire
http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fusea ... D=49482258

i'm gonna have to buy that.
"Isn't it enough to see that a garden is beautiful without having to believe that there are fairies at the bottom of it too?" - Douglas Adams
User avatar
molly1216
County Prosecutor
 
Posts: 3501
Joined: Fri Jul 16, 2004 2:43 pm
Location: methuen, ma

Re: Oscars

Postby Bryan Pope » Mon Feb 23, 2009 8:33 am

Dan Mancini wrote:The musical numbers were, well, just gawdawful (as expected).

Tina Fey and Steve Martin were awesome, though. They shoulda co-hosted.

I'll strongly second those two points. I thought Jackman did a fine job; he just needed better material (Joel Stein, if you're reading, sorry, but it's true).

But Fey and Martin rocked, as did Ben Stiller. Also liked Penn's speech, and I was pleased with Winslet's win.
Agnes, it's me...Billy.
User avatar
Bryan Pope
Judge
 
Posts: 833
Joined: Wed Sep 11, 2002 10:44 am
Location: Texas

Re: Oscars

Postby Pere Jules » Mon Feb 23, 2009 9:09 am

I really liked the tribute to Queen Latifah, and thought it was a particularly nice touch to show images of the notable people who died in the past year during her song. I just wish I could have read some of their names ...
User avatar
Pere Jules
City Attorney
 
Posts: 144
Joined: Fri Nov 21, 2003 4:28 pm
Location: Los Angeles

Re: Oscars

Postby BrettCullum » Mon Feb 23, 2009 9:23 am

It was a good night if you were Indian or somehow affiliated with MILK.

I'm surprised nobody mentioned Penelope Cruz winning. It was a year too late considering her performance in Almovodar's VOLVER was far more Oscar worthy, but I thought it was cool she had the class to thank him first in her speech. She moved me as the most honestly grateful winner of the night other than the guy from MILK.

The speech from the screenwriter of MILK was very good, and everything Sean Penn's SHOULD have been. He was out classed by a young gay guy originally from San Antonio who just had his first big script filmed. I thought his moment was moving, and I certainly think he deserved the award for making the film so clear cut with his work. I loved him because his political message made sense based on who he is in real life.

I don't begrudge Sean Penn the win because it was his most likeable performance since he was Spicolli in FAST TIMES. But he did come off strange and smug, very self-congratulatory. I don't think Mickey Rourke should have won over him though. Penn did do the best job of any actor this year, biopic or not. It's just a shame he comes off as an ass in real life. Even him shouting out to the gay community seemed odd; whereas, James Franco looked more comfy with all of it in his Pineapple Express skit. LOL!

Speaking of appearing gay, how about that Hugh Jackman? He looked like a Broadway Queen prancing around with Beyonce in a Baz Luhrman spectacle. I'm never going to be able to sit through WOLVERINE ORIGINS with a straight face. I thought he was a "safe host" who said nothing interesting, and I sort of forgot about him other than his rather gleefully embarassing love of singing and dancing. I like the edgey hosts better, but he was fine for what he was. Yeah, Tina Fey and Steve Martin should totally host next year.

It was predictable and safe this year. We applaud the Internationally socially relevant movie with the foreign ensemble cast, the actor award goes to a biopic, actress is English, and supporting people are those who were snubbed last year by Oscar. I'm sorry but Heath Ledger should have won for BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN, even with his maniacal turn as the Joker. But the gay cowboy who swallows all his feelings was far more of a stretch and the real reason for him to win. Ah well!
Alex: It's funny how the colors of the real world only seem really real when you viddy them on the screen. (Clockwork Orange)
User avatar
BrettCullum
Judge
 
Posts: 1669
Joined: Fri Jul 30, 2004 4:11 pm
Location: Houston, TX

Re: Oscars

Postby zircona1 » Mon Feb 23, 2009 10:17 am

BrettCullum wrote:The speech from the screenwriter of MILK was very good, and everything Sean Penn's SHOULD have been. He was out classed by a young gay guy originally from San Antonio who just had his first big script filmed. I thought his moment was moving, and I certainly think he deserved the award for making the film so clear cut with his work. I loved him because his political message made sense based on who he is in real life.


Agreed.

I also really liked Hugh Jackman's opening musical number, where he pulled Anne Hathaway up - she can sing!

The actor/actress categories where the past winners spoke of the nominees I was mostly cold on. On the one hand, it was cool they were trying something new, but it made the show DRAG. And I wanted to see film clips of why these people were nominated, not just a gushing speech from someone else.

And I agree with Dan - have Tina Fey and Steve Martin host next year.
Our next film will be for the kiddies. And we'll demonstrate a new, poison gas.
User avatar
zircona1
City Attorney
 
Posts: 143
Joined: Tue Apr 20, 2004 2:02 pm
Location: Missouri - The Land of Meth Labs and Lead!

Re: Oscars

Postby BenShultz » Mon Feb 23, 2009 10:29 am

zircona1 wrote: And I wanted to see film clips of why these people were nominated, not just a gushing speech from someone else.


Couldn't agree more. I was really hoping they would play Kirk Lazarus's "Oscar Moment" scene ("Ain't nothing but a thang!") as Downey's Tropic Thunder clip.
Oh, you're paying way too much for worms, man. Who's your worm guy?
User avatar
BenShultz
City Prosecutor
 
Posts: 863
Joined: Wed Oct 06, 2004 1:49 pm
Location: Delmar, MD

Re: Oscars

Postby hoytereden » Mon Feb 23, 2009 10:36 am

Dan Mancini wrote:
Shmoooooo wrote:I loved how they presented the main awards with 5 previously winners of the said award each giving a speech about one of the nominees. It was classy, and a great way of giving honour to each nominee. Best change I've ever seen in the Academy Awards.

I found the format even more nauseatingly self-congratulatory than usual. The great jobs and you nailed its had me reaching for my barf bag. I kept waiting for one of the five presenters to walk out into the audience and fellate his nominee.


My sentiments exactly. After the first ccouple of these I would just put it on mute and wait till whoever was opening the envelope until I turned the sound back on. The presenters themselves looked uncomfortable and awkward doing these kiss-up speeches. Hopefully, a one and done experiment. I also agree with Pere Jules that the tribute to the many folks who died over the past year was terrible for the folks like me who were straining to see the picture and name while the camera kept acting like it was a moving target! Overall, this years shake-up made no improvement at all and, in fact, I found it worse than the previous non-memorable shows. Hugh Jackman tried but I quickly forgot he was even hosting the show. Btw, was Clint or Nicholson there? Usually they're front and center waith numerous close-ups and references. Just wondering-maybe I missed them when I was frequently changing back and forth to TCM.
"You can lead a horse to water but a pencil must be lead"-Stan Laurel
Moe-"Were you scared?" Larry-"No, just apprehensive." Moe-"Apprehensive, that's a pretty big word.What's it mean?" Larry-"That's scared with a college education!"
User avatar
hoytereden
County Attorney
 
Posts: 1036
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2003 5:24 pm
Location: The Big Island of Hawaii

Re: Oscars

Postby barnaclelapse » Mon Feb 23, 2009 11:24 am

Dan Mancini wrote:
Shmoooooo wrote:Tina Fey and Steve Martin were awesome, though. They shoulda co-hosted.


That's pretty much the thought I had at the end of the show.

I kind of wanted Rourke to win, but I did actually really like Milk.

Sean Penn's speech was surprisingly humble, if that's the right way to put it.
"I'd rather have a bottle in front of me, than a frontal lobotomy."
-Tom Waits
User avatar
barnaclelapse
City Prosecutor
 
Posts: 830
Joined: Sun Feb 10, 2008 11:05 pm
Location: Virginia

Re: Oscars

Postby Dunnyman » Mon Feb 23, 2009 11:34 am

Pere Jules wrote:I really liked the tribute to Queen Latifah, and thought it was a particularly nice touch to show images of the notable people who died in the past year during her song. I just wish I could have read some of their names ...

I just couldn't believe that they missed George Carlin, I mean, one of the greatest entertainers ever, and they missed him completely?????

zircona1 wrote:where he pulled Anne Hathaway up - she can sing!

Um...duh? This a surprise to you? She's a superb singer, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XPPH-UzsAgM as this should prove...
"I ain't a boy, no I'm a man, and I believe in the Promised Land"
-Coming to the USA on January 20, 2009!
User avatar
Dunnyman
County Attorney
 
Posts: 1777
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2004 12:37 am
Location: Seattle

Re: Oscars

Postby BrettCullum » Mon Feb 23, 2009 11:45 am

I just wish they had made Natalie Portman rap like she did for SNL a few years ago.

I found it insane that Tilda Swinton somehow managed to find ANOTHER dress that looked like a trash bag. At least this year she wore makeup.
Alex: It's funny how the colors of the real world only seem really real when you viddy them on the screen. (Clockwork Orange)
User avatar
BrettCullum
Judge
 
Posts: 1669
Joined: Fri Jul 30, 2004 4:11 pm
Location: Houston, TX

Re: Oscars

Postby mona » Mon Feb 23, 2009 11:56 am

i thought anne hathaway should hae won best actor in a supporting role ... i thought that was a let down. i also would have been full circle for Mickey but....Penn was good
mona
Law Clerk
 
Posts: 17
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2009 11:31 am


Return to Television

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest