My tiny quibble is that The New World was nominated neither for best sound nor for best musical score. I thought for sure it would get at least one of those.
Does anyone have any opinions about the foreign-language choices? For once, I haven’t seen a single one of the nominated films.
I am reasonably satisfied with the nominations this year. I’ve seen everything on the list and I think, for the most part, they’re all worthy. I am a bit disappointed with Charlize THeron being nominated. She overacted the entire movie. Every line was a quest for an oscar. Mrs. McDormand deserved to be nominated I think but not Ms. Theron.
Regarding Best Picture, it’s a tough pick, at least for me. My favorite movie of the year was Millions. With that not being nominated (and I knew it wouldn’t be), it’s a little difficult for me to pick. I honestly enjoyed all of the nominations but Brokeback Mountain has it with Crash coming up second. The reasoning behind that is that they created the most buzz this year. My vote would probably go to Munich (but I’m a Spielberg fan so I’m biased) but won’t be disappointed when Brokeback wins. I enjoyed it too.
Best Actor is a lock. Philip Seymour Hoffman has got it.
Best Actress is a pretty tight race between Felicity Huffman and Reese Witherspoon. They’ve both won major awards already (Reese with SAG and Globe, Huffman with Globe). Ms. Knightley and Dame Dench did great jobs, both, but I think it’s between those two.
Supporting Actor will probably go to George Clooney. Mr. Giamatti (who I love will get one down the road, I’m sure. Probably Best Actor though. The other three were very good as well. Any one of them would be a worthy winner. William Hurt only had 10 (or so) minutes of screen time so that might work against him.
Ang Lee will finally get a much deserved best Director win and the Screenplays will go to Brokeback Mountain and Goodnight and Goodluck (going by past history here).
I’d love to see Cinematography go to The New World, we’ll see. I did like Pride and Prejudice so I’d like to see it win Art Direction. It deserves that one, I think.
I’ve seen Brokeback and Junebug. I had high expectations for both and was disappointed by both. I won’t be disappointed if Amy Adams wins. However, I will gag if Reese Witherspoon wins and talks about how she’s just a little girl from Tennessee. She acts like she came from the same background as Amy Adams’ Junebug character. :rolleyes:
Unless you have some hankering to sound like the New York Times, i’m not quite sure why you’re doing the whole “Mr” and “Ms” thing. It’s annoying enough when the Times does it.
But if you’re going to do it, at least make sure you get the appelations right.
Frances McDormand is not “Mrs” McDormand. McDormand is her parents’ name, and she is married to Joel Coen.
Frances did not legally change her name after she married Joel Coen, so she is Mrs. McDormand.
Right now I’m rooting for A History of Violence for Best Screenplay (usually the category that contains MY actual favorite movie of the year), and Joaquin Phoenix and Reese Witherspoon for Best Actor and Actress. Other than that, I haven’t seen any of the other major movies, but I did want to see Good Night and Good Luck.
Strangely enough, I don’t think anyone cares. Oh sure, the producers would love to have high ratings, but it’s not as if the Oscars are going to go away if it doesn’t. The numbers this year won’t be artificially inflated by having a blockbuster nominated, like Titanic or The Lord of the Rings movies. The individual Academy members don’t sit around with a pencil in one hand, a nomination ballot in the other, and think “Gee, what movies will bring in the biggest viewership? I’d better check Box Office Mojo to see what made the most money last year before I fill this thing out.”
Individual people vote for nominations, then individual people vote for the final winners. Even though I do it myself, starting sentences with “The Academy…”, there is no Academy mindset. They don’t get together by teleconference calls, e-mail, or some voodoo esp and all decide to stick it to conservatives, or piss off the producers of the show by voting for political and no-name (to the general public) films. They watch the movies. The ones who don’t/can’t watch the movies keep a close eye on the precursor awards, what’s getting buzz. Those who don’t even do that are in the minority, I’d guess, and even they will hopefully give the ballot to someone in their family or staff who does keep up on the buzz.
Low ratings don’t matter. The movies matter. If some people think that Star Wars, Harry Potter, The Chronicles of Narnia, War of the Worlds and King Kong (the top grossing films of 2005) should be the 5 Best Picture nominees, that’s fine, but then the Oscars would be the People’s Choice Awards, and we already have one of those. Money earned and Top Oscar nominations sometimes line up (Titanic, LOTR) but more often doesn’t. And anyway, every one of those films DID get Oscar nominations, and 3 of the 5 got multiple nominations.
People who have seen those movies know that Brokeback Mountain is about much more than “gay cowboys” and that Good Night and Good Luck is about more than one person’s take on the McCarthy witch hunts. Joe Blow might see them as that simplistic, but the Academy members who voted for them didn’t, thank goodness. That’s one reason why they’re Academy members, because most of them know a lot more about movies than Joe Blow. And after all, these are Industry awards, peers rewarding peers.
Maybe we will see a movie about that real story. I’d love to see it. I’m sure conservatives won’t like the truth. But that’s neither here nor there. Clooney’s movie is not about “corruption at CBS,” it’s about Edward R. Murrow, and how a handful of people at their network stood up to the McCarthy steamroller.
Should no period movies ever be made then? Should all movies, or all movies considered Academy Award worthy, be about current events?
Blockbuster numbers do not always equal quality. Quiz Show made $24,822,619 which isn’t anything to sneeze at. It was a quality film in direction/acting/production values, was about a fascinating subject in American and television history, and quite rightly got 4 Oscar nominations. It lost to Forrest Gump in 3 of the 4 categories, which was the Movie To Beat that year. Personally, I was rooting for The Shawshank Redemption or Pulp Fiction.
It just seems like you’re saying that just because a topic isn’t found interesting by a majority of the population, movies shouldn’t be made about it. What does it matter if no one gave a rat’s ass? It was a great topic for a film, turned out to be a great movie, and gives a bit of insight to a specific time, place, and event. What’s wrong with that? That’s what movies, all movies, do.
I liked it fine, but I wish The New World had taken its place in the Best Picture nominations.
good lord, seriously?
Fine.
FRANCES McDormand deserved to be nominated but not CHARLIZE Theron.
Better? sheesh.
No.
You are correct that she didn’t change her name. It is, and always has been, McDormand.
But this makes her Ms. McDormand, not Mrs.
Yep, better.
Cheers.
Bill O’Reilly must be sobbing into his loofah right about now. 
cheers.
(I’m of course referring to mhendo’s post)
Can we stick to the subject at hand, and avoid these hijacks discussing individual posters and whether *you *like their posting style or not?
I think by far the most important thing to remember about Brokeback and Capote isn’t the amount of box office they took in (though that’s not terrible, especially for films that played in so few theaters) but the profit margin. CAPOTE has had, in a word, terrible release- it still hasn’t played in most 2nd and 3rd tier cities- and yet just in arthouse theaters and the small little dinky non-stadium side theaters of megaplexes it took in $15 million, which while that’s nothing in terms of a special effects blockbuster (some of which have promotions budgets worth five times that) it’s incredible for a largely word-of-mouth piece with no A-list actors and a budget of $7 million. It’s taken in twice it’s production costs and 1) is still in theaters 2) hasn’t yet come into DVD 3) will have a major growth spurt with the Oscar nods as it’s released into more theaters. BROKEBACK on the other hand, with its $14 million budget and $51 million (and still going strong) gross to date, will easily see $80 million before it even goes into DVD (it’s only just started to be released overseas- it has yet to play in Germany and Japan, for instance, both of which historically support movies filmed in the American west, let alone those with Oscar buzz). $100 million isn’t only not impossible, it’s not improbable- this will be the most commercially successful unapologetic gay themed film in history. It’s major (though I still say I personally would give it and Capote an A- rather than an A+).
I state the above only to illustrate how ludicrous it is that “nobody wants to see these films”. Were they both box office bombs their quality would remain the same (but as a film lover and a homo I’m quite glad they’re both successful and that Birdcage may lose its crown of most successful gay flick to date).
On the subject of box office = quality regarding these movies, though, I think it’s absolutely silly to say there’s a correlation between a movie’s financial success and its staying power or all around quality. Amadeus won Best Picture in 1984, a year in which Sixteen Candles, Nightmare on Elm Street, Indiana Jones & the Temple of Doom and Police Academy all took in far more at the box office than Amadeus has grossed in 20 years. Would you maintain that any of them were more important or better pictures?
As for why George Clooney doesn’t make movies about Dan Rather, I think that it’s George Clooney’s life, George Clooney (and his investors) money, George Clooney’s time, George Clooney’s production company and George Clooney’s distributors and if he wants to make a movie claiming Castro is the greatest man on Earth or that Ronald Reagan personally had the AIDS virus created to take revenge on a gay cinematographer who made his butt look big in Cattle Queen of Montana then it is precisely George Clooney’s business and right to do as he damned well pleases and that Stephe’s comments tend to ridiculous whinery. I had no interested in seeing Ocean’s 11 or 12 so I didn’t- it never occurred to me to say "Why is Clooney remaking a mafia hanger-ons movie when he could finally bring justice tUo Pat Boone’s flop The Cross & the Switchblade.
The above is in now way meant to imply I would not buy Brokeback Mountain T-shirts and action figures, incidentally (especially if it came with Johnny West like accessories- pup tent, bean cans, fishing poles, tire irons, beer cans, rusty trucks, and of course genuine “push the button on Ennis’s back and he spits” action.)
I wish I could pin an orchid to this post, Sampiro. Thank you.
Anything you say, oh master of the movie universe.
I’ve only seen Paradise Now, and it’s a very good movie. If it wins it’ll be on merit, not because “the Academy” thinks they should give equal time to the Palestinians. It would make a great double-feature with Munich, not because both movies show a Palestinian point of view, but because they’re both about the damage violence (on both sides) does to people’s soul and heritage, and asks questions about the worth of hatred and revenge.
IMHO, and so on and so forth…Brokeback is subtle, but it’s a great film. Junebug is subtle too, but it’s not a great film. However, Amy Adams is great in it, and that’s why I think anyone interested in movies/acting/specific performances/building a character and making it believable/up and coming future stars should see it. Junebug will only be remembered as the film that finally brought Amy Adams to the world’s attention (the world of people who are interested in such things). Quite a feat, when you consider that she’s already been in several high-profile films, including a delightful performance in a Steven Spielberg film (for those who may not remember, she was in Catch Me If You Can, as Leonardo DiCaprio’s would-be wife, the Candy Striper who started off with braces on her teeth).
In Amy’s case, the nomination really was the win, and that’s good enough. The phrase “It’s an honor just to be nominated” isn’t just cynical bullshit, not when you consider all the people who weren’t nominated. It really is true. I don’t think she has a chance, but then the Supporting Actress category has always been one full of suprises, with the frontrunner missing out and someone the general public has never heard of getting the Oscar, so who knows? Juliet Binoche, Marisa Tomei, Mira Sorvino, Anna Paquin, Marcia Gay Harden, the list is long. I’d be delighted if she won, but I’m still rooting for Rachel Weisz, and if not her, Michelle Williams. Catherine Keener is my favorite actress in the bunch, but she didn’t do all that much in Capote. What she did was good, but she always is. There will be many other performances in her future that could get her a more deserving Oscar. I haven’t seen McDormand’s performance. The Supporting Actress “curse” is a whole other thread.
BrainGlutton, thanks for that tip that The New World wasn’t completely shut out. I totally missed that nomination.
The Oscar snub that bothers me the most was a Best Supporting Actor nod to Michael Pena (I don’t know how to put a tilde over the N) in Crash, which was probably my favorite film of 2005.
Then again, I’m pissed that Kiera Knightly got nominated (don’t get me started on typically weak “Best Actress” or “Best Supporting Actress” fields). And I think one of the biggest snubs in recent years was Freddie Highmore for Finding Neverland.