The romantic fantasy "The Curious Case of Benjamin Button" led Academy Awards contenders Thursday with 13 nominations, among them best picture and acting honors for Brad Pitt and Taraji P. Henson, and a directing slot for David Fincher.
Other best-picture nominees are "Frost/Nixon," "Milk," "The Reader" and "Slumdog Millionaire."
As expected, Heath Ledger had a supporting-actor nomination for "The Dark Knight" on the one-year anniversary of his death from an accidental overdose of prescription drugs. But the Batman blockbuster was shut out for other top categories such as best picture and director.
"Slumdog Millionaire" lived up to its rags-to-riches theme, coming in second with 10 nominations, including a directing spot for Danny Boyle and two of the three song slots.
Real-life couple Pitt and Angelina Jolie both will be going to the Oscars as nominees. Jolie had a best-actress nomination for the missing-child drama "Changeling."
The acting categories were loaded with surprises. Kate Winslet won two Golden Globes, best dramatic actress for "Revolutionary Road" and supporting actress for "The Reader." But she was nominated for lead actress at the Oscars for "The Reader" and shut out for "Revolutionary Road."
Actors considered longshots also sneaked in, among lead-actor nominee Richard Jenkins for "The Visitor," best-actress contender Melissa Leo for "Frozen River" and supporting-actor pick Michael Shannon for "Revolutionary Road."
Winslet reunited with "Titanic" co-star Leonardo DiCaprio for "Revolutionary Road," but he also was shut out for a nomination on that film.
Other best-actress nominees were Anne Hathaway for "Rachel Getting Married" and Meryl Streep for "Doubt."
Joining Pitt and Jenkins in the best-actor category were Frank Langella, "Frost/Nixon"; Sean Penn, "Milk"; and Mickey Rourke, "The Wrestler."
Other acting snubs included Clint Eastwood for "Gran Torino," Sally Hawkins for "Happy-Go-Lucky" and Kristin Scott Thomas for "I've Loved You So Long."
But perhaps the biggest surprise overall was the so-so results for "The Dark Knight," which had been picking up momentum as one Hollywood trade guild after another picked it as one of the year's best films.
The largest blockbuster in years, "The Dark Knight" had eight nominations, but other than Ledger's honor, its scored only in technical categories such as cinematography, visual effects and editing.
whomod said: I generally don't like it when people decide to play by the rules against people who don't play by the rules. It tends to put you immediately at a disadvantage and IMO is a sign of true weakness. This is true both in politics and on the internet."
Other than Ledger (how evil would they have to be not to get at least THAT one right?), all the DK nominations are the usual irrelevant stuff that only serves the purpose of putting "8 Oscar Nominations" on the DVD cover. The one that amuses me the most is "Sound editing". A movie like Juno sounds just as good as Titanic, yet only blockbusters get nominated for that shit.
Oh, and it's a fucking shame Robertdowneyjr and Ledger are on the same category.
Blockbuster films usually have a bunch more sound effects, which is why they sweep the category. There's more to create and put together for, say, Star Wars than Juno.
whomod said: I generally don't like it when people decide to play by the rules against people who don't play by the rules. It tends to put you immediately at a disadvantage and IMO is a sign of true weakness. This is true both in politics and on the internet."
big_pimp_tim-made it cool to roll in the first damn place! Mon Jun 11 2007 09:27 PM-harley finally rolled with me "I'm working with him...he's young but, there is much potential. He can apprentice with me and then he's yours for final training. He will remember the face of his father...
Some day, Knutreturns just may be the greatest of us all...."-THE bastard
Between these nominations and the likelihood of at least half the winners making some petty political speech about gay marriage or Obama I think I'll be avoid watching this year.
Blockbuster films usually have a bunch more sound effects, which is why they sweep the category. There's more to create and put together for, say, Star Wars than Juno.
I don't know, sound design is still a pretty complicated area. There's probably more work to be done in a blockbuster than an indy film (with bigger and better machines, though), but it's the end result what's important, right? As long as the sound serves the purpose it's supposed to serve, whatever that may be, I think the achievement is the same. The category is called "sound editing", not "sound effects", so it's kinda silly that it comes down to that.
Besides, I think indy directors care more about using sound editing in creative ways, you can tell some of them put a lot of thought into it. I remember the sound editing in Pi was really good and played a big part in creating the claustrophobic atmosphere the movie has. And David Lynch! I'd say 40% of the creepiness in his films is thanks to the treatment in sound. Has he ever won an Oscar for that? I can't be arsed to check, but I bet he's lost to big movies every time. Why? Because they need to say "8 Oscars" in the cover.
Between these nominations and the likelihood of at least half the winners making some petty political speech about gay marriage or Obama I think I'll be avoid watching this year.
if TDK was nominated for any of the big stuff i probably wouldve watched just to see what it won. i dont usually care to much for the oscars anyways...
big_pimp_tim-made it cool to roll in the first damn place! Mon Jun 11 2007 09:27 PM-harley finally rolled with me "I'm working with him...he's young but, there is much potential. He can apprentice with me and then he's yours for final training. He will remember the face of his father...
Some day, Knutreturns just may be the greatest of us all...."-THE bastard
Wow. It looks like I'll be able to keep my eight-year streak of not watching the Oscars going on for a ninth. I'll watch again when they get off their faux-artsy/intellectual high horse.
whomod said: I generally don't like it when people decide to play by the rules against people who don't play by the rules. It tends to put you immediately at a disadvantage and IMO is a sign of true weakness. This is true both in politics and on the internet."
just read that apparently "The Reader" is the movie that edged out TDK for the best film/director/screenplay noms. thats gay
big_pimp_tim-made it cool to roll in the first damn place! Mon Jun 11 2007 09:27 PM-harley finally rolled with me "I'm working with him...he's young but, there is much potential. He can apprentice with me and then he's yours for final training. He will remember the face of his father...
Some day, Knutreturns just may be the greatest of us all...."-THE bastard
It makes me laugh that the people in the industry cant even decide what is a lead and supporting role. The globes classified Winslet as a support actress in the Reader, but the Oscars classified her as lead actress for the same film!
It makes me laugh that the people in the industry cant even decide what is a lead and supporting role.
At one point, right after "Pulp Fiction" came out, there was talk of quantifying or somehow "standardizing" which was which, because some people were pissed that Travolta was nominated as "lead" actor while Jackson, who had approximately the same number of lines in what was actually an "ensemble cast," was nominated as "supporting" actor.
The Oscars, SAG, and other industry awards use actual screen credit for category, while the Golden Globes and People Choice type things make their own guidelines.
It's been a bad coupl'a years for Adolf. The Cowboys continue to miss the Superbowl. HD-DVD falls to blu-ray. And now this. Hell, I even heard that he led an attempt at a message board raid and was easily routed by a group of people who not only mocked him of their boards, but ran him off his own boards. Hopefully he found or created a new message board where he can keep in touch with his friends...
Uschi said: I won't rape you, I'll just fuck you 'till it hurts and then not stop and you'll cry.
MisterJLA: RACKS so hard, he called Jim Rome "Chris Everett." In Him, all porn is possible. He is far above mentions in so-called "blogs." RACK him, lest ye be lost!
"I can't even brush my teeth without gagging!" - Tommy Tantillo: Wank & Cry, heckpuppy, and general laughingstock
the Hollywood table-talk this year has been much less about Oscar prospects and more about the process. And an overriding theme is this: The movie prize cycle had better become shorter, brighter and more popular in its bent — or some major players are pulling back.
The conventional wisdom has it that “Slumdog Millionaire,” the big-hearted little film made in Mumbai and distributed in the United States by Fox Searchlight, locked up the best-picture award months ago. The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, whose voting membership is about 5,800, is increasingly foreign- and indie-oriented.
The fellow best-picture nominees are “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button,” from Paramount and Warner Brothers; “Frost/Nixon,” from Universal; “Milk,” from Focus Features; and “The Reader,” from the Weinstein Company. These films have supposedly been along for an expensive ride, competing for an odd Oscar in other categories while burning up millions of marketing and promotional dollars. But they are widely reckoned to have no real hope of winning the big prize, and most have not quite hit their targets at the box office.
For executives, filmmakers and publicists, the real shock came with the exclusion of “The Dark Knight” from this year’s list of best-picture nominees.
Insiders read the snub more as a rejection by the academy, once comfortably regarded as an adjunct of the industry that created it, of what the inner circle does best: Build complex, monumental films that move millions.
To keep the mood here from curdling wouldn’t have taken much of a bow toward the audience. A best-picture nomination for “Wall-E,” from Walt Disney and its Pixar Animation unit, if not “The Dark Knight,” from Warner Brothers and Legendary Pictures, might have done it. Even an acting nomination for Clint Eastwood, whose crusty appearance in “Gran Torino,” from Warner, turned out his biggest box office to date, would have helped.
But the academy gave no points for popularity. And the company folks noticed.
Some executives, speaking on condition of anonymity to protect their relationships with those who vote for prizes, have said in the last few weeks that they do not expect their studios to make any movie in the foreseeable future as a specific Oscar bet.
If honors happen to come, as they came to “The Departed,” a Warner film that was a surprise best-picture winner in 2007, so be it. But few are looking to make the next “Frost/Nixon,” a smart, critically acclaimed film that got Ron Howard a nomination as best director this year.
“Frost/Nixon” has taken in less than $20 million at the domestic box office, and may not make a profit when the cost of its long Oscar-season promotional campaign is added to its relatively modest $25 million budget.
AS little as a year ago, the prestige that came with an Oscar contender could seem worth at least a small financial loss to studios that could always make up for it with their summer hits.
In tougher times, not so.
Already, 20th Century Fox and Columbia Pictures have become only occasional players in the Oscar game, allowing associated specialty units, Fox Searchlight and Sony Pictures Classics, to be contenders with relatively small films.
If companies like Paramount, Universal and the now-smaller DreamWorks also step back, the academy — protective of an enterprise that brings it more than $70 million a year — will almost certainly start looking for adjustments to a system that still needs big stars and the big studios that pay them.
The last significant structural change to the Oscars occurred in 2004, when they were moved up a month, to late February from late March. The shift was meant to lighten the expense and fatigue factor of a movie awards season that was then consuming nearly half the year. The next step could well be Oscars in January. That idea has been popping up in conversation here lately.
One version suggests compressing the Oscars into the tail end of a two-week, festival-like Hollywood awards event that would include the Golden Globes and all the various guild awards, and take place in early to mid-January.
Studios could fly in their talent just once, instead of three or four times. And companies could generate a whole new kind of excitement by throwing all their dollars into one concentrated burst of movie awards advertising.
After the season just past, even the academy’s old hands may be willing to give a hearing to that idea.
The people who put on the Academy Awards are in a flopsweat panic as the hours tick away before this year's big broadcast
producers are privately complaining that the biggest movie stars in the world like Jack Nicholson, Nicole Kidman, Angelina Jolie, George Clooney, and Kate Winslet gave them reasons galore -- some serious, some trivial -- for why they didn't want to present awards, once considered a huge honor.
the producers lost Peter Gabriel who refused to sing his Best Original Song from Wall-E, "Down To Earth", in what he claimed was the insulting allotted time of only 65 seconds for each of the 3 tunes in a medley. The producers also have dissed last year's actor winners by deciding that France's Marion Cotillard (Best Actress for La Vie En Rose) and Spain's Javier Bardem (Best Supporting Actor for No Country For Old Men), Scotland's Tilda Swinton (Best Supporting Actress for Michael Clayton) and even England's Daniel Day-Lewis (Best Actor for There Will Be Blood) weren't big enough names to carry on the time-honored tradition of announcing this year's winners by themselves.
Meanwhile, a group of online bloggers has led an audience boycott of the Oscars among the predominantly male fans of The Dark Knight because of the Academy voters' snub of the $1 billion-in-worldwide-grosses comic book caper for a Best Picture nomination and its Chris Nolan for Best Director. And that's yet another problem that hurts viewership: this year, too, the most popular movies aren't in contention for the major category Academy Awards. That drives away younger viewers. So it's little wonder that ABC in this economic freefall scrambled to drop prices for 30-second ads and replace two of the key sponsors for its Sunday broadcast, General Motors and L'Oreal. Not even the prospect of 30+ million U.S. viewers could lure advertisers who've cut their TV budgets to the bone. Prices for Oscars spots averaged $1.7 million last year, but now are going for as cheap as $1.4 million. The result is that, in a departure from tradition, parent company Walt Disney had to let its rival movie studios buy time on the telecast.
big_pimp_tim-made it cool to roll in the first damn place! Mon Jun 11 2007 09:27 PM-harley finally rolled with me "I'm working with him...he's young but, there is much potential. He can apprentice with me and then he's yours for final training. He will remember the face of his father...
Some day, Knutreturns just may be the greatest of us all...."-THE bastard
I used to enjoy them very much. Now not so much. Cause they suck ass.
exactly
big_pimp_tim-made it cool to roll in the first damn place! Mon Jun 11 2007 09:27 PM-harley finally rolled with me "I'm working with him...he's young but, there is much potential. He can apprentice with me and then he's yours for final training. He will remember the face of his father...
Some day, Knutreturns just may be the greatest of us all...."-THE bastard
I think it has to be said that an Oscar is no longer held in much regard by anyone these days. The simple fact that a bunch of turds decide what is and isnt good enough, counts for little when you consider bums in seats.
I am sure Warner would rather take the money earned by Dark Knight over a shitty golden statue.
You have to say, its the public who have already decided which is the best movie etc of the year, as they are the ones who voted with their wallets at both the cinema and the DVD outlets!
I think it has to be said that an Oscar is no longer held in much regard by anyone these days. The simple fact that a bunch of turds decide what is and isnt good enough, counts for little when you consider bums in seats.
I am sure Warner would rather take the money earned by Dark Knight over a shitty golden statue.
You have to say, its the public who have already decided which is the best movie etc of the year, as they are the ones who voted with their wallets at both the cinema and the DVD outlets!
Fuck the oscars, its a pile of Snarf!
big_pimp_tim-made it cool to roll in the first damn place! Mon Jun 11 2007 09:27 PM-harley finally rolled with me "I'm working with him...he's young but, there is much potential. He can apprentice with me and then he's yours for final training. He will remember the face of his father...
Some day, Knutreturns just may be the greatest of us all...."-THE bastard
dear lord. getting your ass handed to you in the politics forum wasnt enough was it?
big_pimp_tim-made it cool to roll in the first damn place! Mon Jun 11 2007 09:27 PM-harley finally rolled with me "I'm working with him...he's young but, there is much potential. He can apprentice with me and then he's yours for final training. He will remember the face of his father...
Some day, Knutreturns just may be the greatest of us all...."-THE bastard
![[Linked Image from i6.photobucket.com]](http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y203/JoeMama13/RedSoxBanner05.png)
