Visual Effects, Sound Editing, and MakeUp have a strange procedure of hosting semi-final BakeOffs, where a committee narrows down the year’s competition down to seven films. Then, the technicians of those seven films create a “bake off reel”, which is essentially a 10-minute (more or less) assembly of the best clips representing that particular category. This is screened in front of the members of the branch of that particular technical field/craft. Essentially, it’s a Greatest Hits presentation.
From there, those seven are then narrowed down to three (or sometimes two) and put on the Oscar ballot where the category is then voted on by the entire Academy membership.
If one film is considered so above-and-beyond the competition that the committee decides to dispense with the nomination slate altogether, then that film is given a Special Achievement Oscar instead (which means it’s automatic; no balloting). This was fairly common in the 70s and 80s, but the last film to get one was Total Recall. Now, even a slam dunk like Jurassic Park goes through the motions of being voted for.
And of course, if the committee decides that no film is good enough for an Oscar, they can dispense with that category for that year altogether (this has happened to MakeUp one or two times since being introduced as a regular category in 1981). That, however, is also extremely rare.
These were the seven films in competition for this year’s Visual Effects Bake-Off (* indicates final nominee): The Aviator, The Day After Tomorrow, Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban, I Robot*, Lemony Snicket’s A Series of Unfortunate Events, Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow, Spider-Man 2**)
It would appear that I’m the only one upset that Sharon Warren did not get a nomination for her portrayal of Aretha Robinson in Ray. While I agree with earlier comments about the inadequacies of the movie as a whole, her performance had me nearly as rivetted as Foxx’s.
Not that I can decide who’d I’d bump from the list, mind you. But it would have been nice.
I’m going to see The Aviator tomorrow, and Hotel Rwanda soon - maybe Thursday. After that, I’m excited to say I’ll have seen almost everything up for a major award (all the Best Pictures, Actors, Supporting Actors and Actresses, all but one of the Best Directors… unfortunately, only two of the Actresses).
My pick for Best Picture is still Ray. It had its flaws (too much pop psychology for one)… there have definitely been more by-the-numbers biopics, though, and I’m expecting The Aviator may be one. I feel somewhat biased in picking it because I’m a music lover. Still, I’m not sure any movie has ever moved me as Ray did. For much of it, I wasn’t sure if I was seeing a movie or a concert, and I liked that too.
By my IMDb ratings, I had Eternal Sunshine second and Million Dollar Baby (which I just saw yesterday) third. I didn’t expect Eternal Sunshine to get much attention. It’s terrific, but it’s odd and it came out a year ago already. And maybe Kaufman makes a the voters feel stupid and uncreative. Still, it deserved more recognition. I don’t like Jim Carrey at all and he easily could’ve been nominated for it. Which of the other guys would you knock off for that?
No, you’re not the only one. I meant to mention her in my list of disappointments. If I had to knock someone off, I’d put her in over Sophie Okonedo, or maybe Laura Linney. I loved both of those performances, but there’s no way I could knock off Blanchett (who will win, who’d better win), Portman (she owned that movie) or Madsen (whose nomination is the win). I’d much rather she had been nominated than Taylor Hackford.
I admit I haven’t yet seen The Aviator, but I have to ask: why does it seem like suddenly everyone’s saying Blanchett’s a shoe-in for the Best Supporting Actress award? Portman beat her at the Golden Globes. That’s got to mean something.
All in all, I’m rooting for Sideways. I have not seen a more romantic, more honest, and more cringe-inducing scene than the extended conversation between Paul Giamatti and Virginia Madsen in Sandra Oh’s house after they return from the bar. I have a hard time understanding people who say they don’t get this movie.
She has enough movies in her resume.
She’s a true acting chameleon, who can (seemingly) play anything (much as De Niro was perceived early in his career).
The voters (who work in the industry) will love her portrayal of Hepburn, whereas the GG voters are journalists.
Over the summer I read a book called Down and Dirty Pictures, which followed the rise of Miramax and the independent film movement. Of the many points the book made, the second loudest (after pointing out that Harvey Weinstein is crazy frightening both as a person and as a businessman) is that the Oscar nominations and victories are so off-the-charts political they shouldn’t be taken seriously.
Example: Weinstein will send his people to convalescent hospitals to track down senile Academy voters and twist their arms into getting them to vote for a Mirimax-distributed movie. (Figuratively speaking, of course. )
If a movie is on the cusp and it is distributed by Mirimax it’s a lock to get nominated. E.g. “Finding Neverland.”
That said, an Oscar nom or win means $-millions and for an “Indie” outfit like Miramax (owned by Disney, of course) that boost allows it to purchase and distribute other hidden gems. When you look at it that way, it’s just a darn awards show and if the politicing (sp?) results in a terrific non-studio movie getting some notice, it’s not such a bad thing. Believe me, Paul Giamatti will find the inner strength to someday act again.
Um . . . maybe seeMillion Dollar Baby, then root for the one you like better? C’mon, you’ve still got a month. You’ll be doing yourself a favor- even if, ultimately, you find you still prefer The Aviator.
Movie making and distributing is a dirty business, and as much as the Weinsteins are scary and borderline ethical, I think that a look at the track record of Miramax, including after Disney bought them, will show they they’ve consistently put out quality film and distributed forreign, quality film in the US. Some movies are better than others, but comparing to what other studios distribute, I’m prepared to cut them some slack. This is a good place to start checking thair back catalog, which includes: Hero, Cinema Paradiso, Clerks, Il Postino, Frida, Pulp Fiction, Sling Blade, Trainspotting, Welcome to Sarajevo. Sure, there are some bombs too, but if I should pick one studio/distributor which has constantly put out above average films to a broader audience, Miramax is it. They’re playing the OScar game to get recognition and get people to see smaller films which don’t have and can never have (through tie ins) the advertising budget of Spider-Man. I have a hard time seeing Seiko doing a deal with them for a Shakespeare in Love watch collection.
So I’ll give them some slack.
Yes, but Academy members might also realize exactly how much worse The Phantom Menance and Attack of the Clones could have been, had a lesser actress than Portman played Padmé Amidala.
I would add that the movie suffers quite dramatically when she leaves about 2/3rds of the way through. By that time, we’re past the Hollywood stuff and start concentrating on Hughes’ gradual deterioration. Blanchett represents life and vitality in the film, and her presence is definitely missed. Voters will often remember that more than a balanced ensemble (no matter how exquisite), none of which dominate a movie more than the other.
If not, then be aware, the Golden Globes voters are not journalists. They call themselves the Hollywood Foreign Press Association, but in fact they’re a bunch of sycophants, starfuckers, and parasitic hangers-on. Seek out this documentary and learn how, for example, the HFPA contacted Michael Phillips, producer of The Sting, and told him they’d make sure Robert Redford would be nominated in the actor category if Phillips could convince him to attend and lend his celebrity cachet to the event. See one prominent HFPA member displaying with pride her wall of snapshots showing her with various famous faces: “Here’s me with Harrison Ford, here’s me with Julia Roberts, here’s me with Meg Ryan, here’s me with Al Pacino…” Hear a Hollywood actress, her identity concealed, describe the pressure put on her and others in her position to attend the event and get their faces on television to promote the studios’ products, with severe consequences for those who refuse to play ball.
The Golden Globes are a joke, and they’re not even a very good one. The Oscars may be frustrating and political, and they may be treated by the studios as exactly the same sort of promotional opportunity, but at least they’re voted on by actual film people. The Globes are an excuse to meet celebrities and schmooze, nothing more, and that they’ve somehow become the number-two awards show is simply incredible.
There’s a reason the big names show up, dress down, get drunk, and cut loose at the Globes: It’s how they deal with being prostituted by the industry.
If I could create my own Oscar category, it would be “Best Scene” and this would easily be one of the top contenders. Virginia Madsen made me feel like I was sitting right next to her during that monologue. It will definitely be the clip that’s shown for her nomination during the broadcast. The other condender would be the beach house scene toward the end of Eternal Sunshine. Both are two of the best scenes I’ve seen on film, up there with the baptism scene in The Godfather.
This thread has also reminded me of how much Cate Blanchett lit up the screen in The Aviator. Portman was excellent, too, though, so I’m not sure who I’m rooting for yet in that one.
Nominal journalists.
I think the only reason the GG have grown big is that it’s a dress rehearsal for the AA. The studios get a change to get a feel for where the wind is blowing, so they’ll know what buttons to push to get the nomination for the AA.
I was mearly saying that a GG win is not gonna cut it in this case. Betting over the internet is stupid, but I will eat the cardbord cover of the Aviator DVD if Blanchett doesn’t win. Bookmark this thread for future reference.
It simply doesn’t matter how good Portman is, she simply isn’t there yet.
I totally agree with this assessment. Seeing her play Hepburn, Blanchett convinced me that she could do anything. I think she could convincingly play Richard Nixon if she had to.
“Starfuckers” is one of my favorite words in the English language.
Still, it deserved more recognition. I don’t like Jim Carrey at all and he easily could’ve been nominated for it. Which of the other guys would you knock off for that?
)