January 27, 2004
Initial Thoughts on the Oscar Nominations
Yay for surprises. The announcement of the 76th Academy Awards nominations were not the snoozefest we thought they would be, thanks to some shockers. Some thoughts on the categories:
Best Actress
Keisha Castle Hughes, youngest lead acting nominee ever, for Whale Rider; the film has been criticized for being heavy on cliche, but many films are (Lord of the Rings, for instance, though epic, is part of the adventure tradition) - it's the acting, directing, and other work around it that elevate it - and her performance was the heart of the film
Samantha Morton, for In America; Morton has shown an impressive, fearless body of work in a short time (Minority Report, Morvern Callar), and probably the British contingent in the Academy (versus SAG, which is an American organization) pushed her over the top
Naomi Watts, for 21 Grams; she did get the SAG nod, but it's nice that she's being acknowledged by the Academy, especially after they snubbed her for her work in Mulholland Drive
Best Actor
No surprises: Johnny, Bill, Jude, Ben, and Sean
Best Supporting Actress and Actor
No huge surprises, just the narrowing down from actors saluted by earliers awards, though the inclusion of Djimon Hounsou notes a pocket of support for In America. And it seems like Alec Baldwin's hustling has paid off with his nomination for The Cooler; this plus his Razzies nomination for The Cat in the Hat...it's a banner year!
Best Director
Well, Harvey Weinstein, you got a Best Director nomination, just not the one you thought (Anthony Minghella), so kudos to Fernando Meirelles, for an admittedly showy job of directing City of God but even better one of shaking things up
Sofia Coppola was expected to be nominated for Lost in Translation, but it's still nice point out that she's only the third woman to ever be nominated
A few other interesting things:
Micheal McKean and Annette O'Toole getting Best Song nominations for "A Kiss at the End of the Rainbow" in A Mighty Wind
Benoit Charest's and Sylvain Chomet's nominations for Triplets of Belleville, for Best Animated Film and Best Song.
The Academy loves Denys Arcand.
And though it's the most nominated film, The Lord of the Rings wasn't nominated for Cinematography (City of God, Cold Mountain, Girl With A Pearl Earring, Master and Commander, and Seabiscuit were).
And the lack of Cold Mountain...well, a friend put it best when she said, "If Cold Mountain doesn't appeal to people like us, then who will like it?" Us being people who would rather see a puff of a romantic comedy than hours of pseudo serious perfectly lit Transylvania as North Carolina with Civil War battles and Nicole Kidman trying to farm. But Gothamist likes the idea of Elvis Costello performing his nominated song, "Scarlet Tide."
|
Seems like the usual suspects were nominated. The one I'm disappointed by is that Spellbound wasn't nominated for best documentary. Great drama, funny, moving, entertaining. Anyone else surprised that this was overlooked?
The THIRD woman ever to be nominated, eh? Ah those liberal elites in Tinseltown. A buncha lefties
Spellbound was actually eligible last year and was nominated then.
Not only is she only the third woman ever to be nominated, she is the first American woman ever to be nominated.
HOW could they not nominate Sprllbound?!! one of the best i saw last year. that's really disappointing.
Jen - LOTR is about 99.9% digitally enhanced, to give it a cinematography nomination would be like giving the Twinkie a nod for outstanding achievement in farm fresh butter.
HA ooops guys, sorry
I understand the point about LOTR being digitally enhanced, but the first one actually did win an Oscar for cinematography; maybe the Cinematographer's branch thought it paid LOTR its dues, but since Return is tipped to win Best Picture, it's just interesting.
thanks, jen, for the spellbound update. how dare they not nominate it again this year! ;-)
I'm so pleased to see Keisha Castle Hughes nominated for Whale Rider. Her performance was wonderful. I'm also liking Johnny Depp's nomination for Pirates of the Caribbean, Sofia and Murray for Lost in Translation, Triplets of Belleville for animated film and best song (so catchy!), and The Fog of War for best documentary. But, but, but...Seabiscuit for best picture? No way.
Also, Spellbound was nominated last year and lost to Bowling for Columbine.
What specifically about Lord of the Rings is cliche? Is it cliche to you because of the whole, 'I am not a man' thing is reminiscent of MacBeth? Or is it cliche to you because most of the fantasy elements are the source material for many, many cliched works afterward? That's like if a movie version of Neuromancer came out and you said it was cliched because it had a 'Matrix' in it.
Farm Fresh Butter Guy.
Jen, addressed it already, so there's no point. But, Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.
Okay, I'm starting to sound like the Comic Book Guy from the Simpsons, so I'll stop now.
i love me lots of LOTR, but i agree with jen. much of the movie was digitally graded and enhanced. the nod should be given to a movie that doesnt rely as much on post-production.
neither of the matrixes got a nom for visual effects...odd.
*meant i agree with um..."icbinpp"
Seabiscuit, to some degree, benefits from being the most traditionally made Hollywood picture of the bunch: It's very feel good, it's backed by a major studio (Universal), it's very all American. Mystic River and Master and Commander are big studio films, but they are either dark or British. LOTR is a different category, the luckiest gamble New Line made, and it's 99% Kiwi. Then Lost in Translation is the indie film that could.
Master and Commander had a lot of digital manipulation...they shot the boat in the tank where they did Titanic and they shot the sea separately. What's too much digital manipulation?
I hear they're going to give the "Janeane Garofalo Award for Taking Every Offered Movie Role" this year to Steve Harvey for his outstanding work in "The Fighting Temptations", "Love Don't Cost a Thing" and "You Got Served". He narrowly beat out Colin Farrell, ("The Recruit", "Daredevil", and "SWAT") and Kate Hudson ("How to Lose a Guy in 10 Days", "Alex and Emma", "Le Divorce"). What a slugfest.
Though not a fan of Seabiscuit, I like that it got a nom as a big F. you to Harvey. Though I guess he did have his hand in LOTR. And Peter Jackson thanked him at the Globes. Oh well.
So, I know we mentioned that Sophia and Spike were the first husband and wife (divorce still pending) that had received best director nominations but I guess that Francis and sophia are also the first father and daughter to hold that honor as well.
Yah, Cinematography is not only shooting, but development and post prod as well. Movies that have won or been nominated in the past, like Titanic use PLENTY o' CG or digital post prod. It's more about the finished product. Special effects aren't limited to the Minas Tirith/Mount Doom variety.
re:doshin. i agree...its not necessarily about whether you use cg, but the complete process. LOTR had nice cinematography, but so did alot of other movies last year. i actually thought that the cinematography was more conservative than the first one.
1. Do these nominees follow the Zapf distribution? It seems like they're either mega-blockbusters or tiny independent films. Granted, many so-called "indie" films are made by the studio-owned mini-majors, aka Dependents, but still.
2. I'm burning through like $10/day on Google ads for people who misspell Sofia Coppola. She's now famous enough to have her name spelled correctly. I'm sure the kids from Spellbound would agree, if they weren't all in some rehab program for washed up child stars.
3. Is Cold Mountain the first movie edited with Final Cut Pro to be nominated for Best Editing?
For me, I was hoping that "The Station Agent" would pull out some nominations for Best Actor, Best Actress, and Best Original Screenplay. However, that "American Splendor" got an Adapted Screenplay nod is one of a few nice surprises (such as Benecio Del Toro's for Best Actor, Shohreh Aghdashloo for Best Actress, and "The Triplets of Belleville" for Best Song).
And although "Finding Nemo" is a (justified) lock for Best Animated Film, I like the fact that "The Triplets of Belleville" was also nominated (strangest movie I saw last year). However, how the hell "Brother Bear" got nominated (were there NO other animated films last year?) is beyond me.
Seabisuit was the soggiest piece of hackneyed treacle I saw last year. Perfect for a best picture nominee. If Bill Murray can summon up some more of that dry wit for his inevitable Oscar acceptance speech then that alone will be enough to justify sitting through the Academy self-congratulation fest.
Did anyone else get the impression that Murray was expressing some frustration from working with Wes Anderson on the new movie when he made that glib remark at the Globes? Unless they've changed the working title to "Death Ship."
I'm torn on the animation award. Would Nemo be nominated for Best Picture if there were no separate award for it?
Also, I like the nod to Seabiscuit. Nothing too flashy, just a good-looking movie with a solid story and solid casting. Nothing jumps out as "the greatest thing you've ever seen," but it doesn't really fail on any level. The story is simple, and very American - but I like that about it.
Wasn't Anna Paquin 11 or 12 when she won an Oscar?
Anna won for Best Supporting Actress. And I think Tatum O'Neal, winning Best Supporting Actress for Paper Moon, is the youngest.
Tatum O'Neal is indeed the youngest Best Supporting Actress winner. The Academy used to hand a special award for "best juvenile performer" (officially known as the Honorary Juvenile Award), which was discontinued in 1960. If we go by this award (which I don't), then Shirley Temple is the youngest recipient. She was 6 when she won an Oscar in 1934 for "outstanding contribution to screen entertainment in the year 1934." She made 12 films that year, or thereabouts.
sofia - questionable talent - & she's definitely ridden the coppola coat-tails & slid into similar ego-excess as her progenitor. completely over-rated, but then power & name certainly work in this town. go ahead & read "easy riders, raging bulls" for reference.
I'm a bit confused about the lord of the rings being nominated for best orginal score. I thought last year the academy had ruled that the second movie was not eligable because it was not 100% orginal (some music comming from the first movie). Did I miss something?
ooh! i'm very excited about the barbarian invasions' screenplay nom. perhaps i will break my own record and watch in excess of ten minutes of the oscars this year.
I saw "In America" last night and was blown away. That the academy would nominate "Seabiscuit" in its place is further proof that the organization is either without taste or on the take. I dunno.
What a pity the 'In America' soundtrack / song wasn't nominated. The film itself should have got a nomination as well. (It's surprising how much of a real disappointment it is when the composer's a friend. Normally all this Oscar baloney's just some fun.) The theme song was up for a Golden Globe but lost to the damn hobbits.
sofia - questionable talent - & she's definitely ridden the coppola coat-tails & slid into similar ego-excess as her progenitor. completely over-rated, but then power & name certainly work in this town.
Sofia made a very good film, regardless of her last name. When I exited the theatre after seeing Lost in Translation, the last thing on my mind was how great The Godfather was (or how bad Jack was). Certainly quite a few of the Academy members know her and her family (name one industry that doesn't work like that), but the quality of the film still stands on its own.
I agree with Jason. It's too easy to say Sofia only got her film made because she had the Coppola last name, but lots of people in Hollywood are working there because of their parents/relatives/etc. Of people nominated for Oscars in the past (some winners), think Anjelica Huston, Zooey Deschanel, Kate Hudson, Jane Fonda, Peter Fonda, Angelina Jolie, Michael Douglas...
Also, her film was well-received not only by the Academy, but many critics and the public (though maybe a limited one) as well. Some think it's bad, but some think Mystic River is one of the towering achievements of film in recent history and I personally think it's okay. Who knows what the longevity of Sofia's career will be, but the fact that she did write, direct, and produce a film that struck a chord in many does mean something.
And above all, the Oscars are in no way the best gauge of what talent is - it's what Hollywood thinks talent is. Sometimes they get it right, sometimes they never give an Oscar to Alfred Hitchcock or Cary Grant, or, currently, Martin Scorsese or Robert Altman, or recognize scores of females working behind the scenes.
I disagree with those that think Sofia Coppola is only directing because she is a Coppola. Might be some true in that but her work has been very interesting so far.
She is much more concerned about atmosphere and mood than any other American director I can think of.
Plus: great, great musical taste
What I don't understand is how Seabiscuit got nominated. Not only the movie sucked, but neither the director nor any of the actors got a nomination.
My pick for most overlooked, or really, ripped off, person? Paul Giamatti, for American Splendor. Best performance by an actor I saw all year, bar none, and zippo. Couldn't they have moved someone like Johnny Depp into supporting actor, bumped out one of the mediocre performances from that category, and put Giamatti in? American unSplendor.
Anyone know why City of God didn't get a Best Foreign Film nod? I thought that was a surprise, considering the three other nominations.
Seabiscuit was the most painful movie I watched this year. At no point did I find it the least bit entertaining (well, William H. Macy did a good job). It is the most utterly predictible, boring, and hokey film I have ever seen. If it wins Best Picture, I'm pretty sure I will have a heart attack.