Jump to content
 
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Awards season 2019-2020


Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, LornaHansonForbes said:

I'm surprised I can still work up enough emotion and interest over the OSCARS still, but on hearing the nominations this morning, I kind of have to say that I am really outright disgusted by the SUPPORTING ACTOR nominations, which has four former winners, three of whom were BEST ACTOR winners and- JOE PESCI aside- is a list of four actors who have been around forever and are LEADS.

I'm not talking about their movies for which they are nominated- which I have not seen- but just the fact that HOPKINS, PITT, HANKS and PACINO are LEADS. BIG NAMES. NOT SUPPORTING ACTORS AND NOT WHO THIS CATEGORY WAS INTENDED.

I honestly think the most annoying trend in the OSCARS of the past 20 years has been the outright manipulation of the SUPPORTING CATEGORIES to be slots for BIG NAMES.

apologize if this seems hostile to the thread, just venting out loud here.

Actually, all five Best Supporting Actor nominees are previous Oscar winners. Pitt (pictured below with the British filmmaker Steve McQueen) won as a producer of "12 Years a Slave," the Academy Award winner for Best Picture of 2013. By the way, he is tremendous in "Once Upon a Time...in Hollywood."

See the source image

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, jakeem said:

Actually, all five Best Supporting Actor nominees are previous Oscar winners. Pitt won as a producer of "12 Years a Slave," the Academy Award winner for Best Picture of 2013. By the way, he is tremendous in "Once Upon a Time...in Hollywood."

 

How much screen time does he have? is he in over half the movie? would you consider him supporting?

(just curious)

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, LornaHansonForbes said:

I'm surprised I can still work up enough emotion and interest over the OSCARS, but on hearing the nominations this morning, I must say that I am really outright disgusted by the SUPPORTING ACTOR LINE-UP, which has four former winners, three of whom were BEST ACTOR winners and- JOE PESCI aside- is a list of four actors who have been around forever and are LEADS AND huuuuuuuuuuuuuuge stars.

I'm not talking about their movies for which they are nominated- which I have not seen- but just the fact that HOPKINS, PITT, HANKS and PACINO are LEADS. BIG NAMES. NOT SUPPORTING ACTORS AND NOT WHO THIS CATEGORY WAS INTENDED TO RECOGNIZE WHEN IT WAS CONCEIVED.

I honestly think the most annoying trend in the OSCARS of the past 20 years has been the outright manipulation of the SUPPORTING CATEGORIES to be slots for BIG NAMES.

apologize if this seems hostile to the thread, just venting out loud here.

No problem. I wasn't suggesting you aren't justified in your wrath. It's obvious that DiCaprio and Pitt are co-leads in "Once Upon a Time...in Hollywood." This is the Academy's way of making amends to Pitt for previous performances for which he didn't win. Same deal with Hanks, who hadn't been nominated since 2001.

See the source image

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, LornaHansonForbes said:

How much screen time does he have? is he in over half the movie? would you consider him supporting?

(just curious)

 

Just look at the opening titles -- or the poster. They're co-leads and both deliver memorable performances. If DiCaprio hadn't finally won the Best Actor Oscar for "The Revenant," he'd probably be the front runner this year.

Image result for once upon a time in hollywood poster

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/12/2020 at 12:23 AM, jakeem said:

as usual he was wrong and per usual probably copied his predictions again

Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, jakeem said:

No problem. I wasn't suggesting you aren't justified in your wrath.

See the source image

 

THANK YOU. I try to always make sure my wraths are not only justified but also built on high and solid ground.

 

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

while i'm on one though, perusing the five SUPPORTING ACTRESS nominees, i found- as usual- four former BEST ACTRESS nominees. I *think* you have to go all the way back to 1999 to find a supporting category with no former lead nominees in it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, LornaHansonForbes said:

THANK YOU. I try to always make sure my wraths are not only justified but also built on high and solid ground.

People will be talking about numerous snubs today. Among them:

  • Mary Steenburgen's song "Glasgow (No Place Like Home)" from "Wild Rose" failed to receive an Original Song nomination.
  • Ditto for Queen Bey and her song from "The Lion King."
  • JLo didn't make the cut in the Best Supporting Actress category.
  • Once again, a film directed by a woman was nominated for Best Picture, but she didn't get a Best Director nod.  Add Greta Gerwig to the list of female filmmakers who directed two Best Picture nominees, but were only nominated once for Best Director (it happened to Kathryn Bigelow, too).
  • The veteran costume designer Ruth E. Carter finally won the Oscar for her contributions to "Black Panther" last year. She was poised for a second nomination because of her acclaimed 1970s designs for "Dolemite Is My Name." Somehow, she won't get a chance to repeat last year's win.
  • "Frozen II" appears to be a bigger blockbuster than its 2013 predecessor. But it wasn't nominated for Best Animated Feature.
  • "Apollo 11" received numerous critics' awards, but was left off the Best Documentary category.
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

the BASTARDIZATION of the SUPPORTING CATEGORIES  sort of started  with TOM CRUISE in MAGNOLIA, then got full blown with CATE BLANCHETT and ZELLWEGGER in the mid-aughts and it's just out of control lately.

(funny, because i used to complain about how many ABSOLUTE NOBODIES got nominated!)

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, jakeem said:
 Best Director: 
  • Sam Mendes, "1917"
  • Martin Scorsese, "The Irishman"
  • Todd Phillips, "Joker"
  • Quentin Tarentino, "Once Upon a Time...in Hollywood"
  • Bong Joon-ho, "Parasite"

I have seen all five of these, all very well deserved.

If it were up to me I give it to Tarantino, mostly because I think Once Upon A Time In Hollywood was the best film. I was impressed by the work of all these directors.

Mendes gave us a stunning technical achievement.

Scorsese held my attention for 3 1/2 hours

Phillips created a bleak, fascinating world

Bong Joon ho managed to change mood and genres and make it work.

However, Tarantino made IMO the best film of the 21st century

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Det Jim McLeod said:

I have seen all five of these, all very well deserved.

If it were up to me I give it to Tarantino, mostly because I think Once Upon A Time In Hollywood was the best film. I was impressed by the work of all these directors.

Mendes gave us a stunning technical achievement.

Scorsese held my attention for 3 1/2 hours

Phillips created a bleak, fascinating world

Bong Joon ho managed to change mood and genres and make it work.

However, Tarantino made IMO the best film of the 21st century

You actually watched "The Irishman" in a single sitting?

See the source image

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Det Jim McLeod said:

I sure did, in a NYC movie theater, didn't move the entire time.

You're a better man than I am! I watched it at home, but decided to break it down to Saturday night and Sunday morning segments.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I loved 1917 and The Irishman. I thought Joe Pesci was particularly fine.

One thing that surprises me: George MacKay, who is so brilliant in 1917, is not mentioned as a candidate for Best Actor, in any of the awards lists.

Screen-Shot-2020-01-09-at-1.24.46-PM-998

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Swithin said:

I loved 1917 and The Irishman. I thought Joe Pesci was particularly fine.

One thing that surprises me: George MacKay, who is so brilliant in 1917, is not mentioned as a candidate for Best Actor, in any of the awards lists.

Maybe it's because of the same reason he and co-star Dean-Charles Chapman (King Tommen on "Game of Thrones") were hired.  The latest edition of Time magazine says it was important to the movie that relative unknowns were cast in the  lead roles. As director Sam Mendes said: "If one of those actors is Leonardo DiCaprio, you know he ain't going to die."

Perhaps "1917" will put the young actors on the road to major stardom and they'll get nominated for their work.

See the source image

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, jakeem said:

Maybe it's because of the same reason he and co-star Dean-Charles Chapman (King Tommen on "Game of Thrones") were hired.  The latest edition of Time magazine says it was important to the movie that relative unknowns were cast in the  lead roles. As director Sam Mendes said: "If one of those actors is Leonardo DiCaprio, you know he ain't going to die.

Perhaps "1917" will put the young actors on the road to major stardom and they'll get nominated for their work.

 

George MacKay is known, though not a superstar. I saw him a few years ago  in a production of The Caretaker at the Old Vic, which also starred Timothy Spall.  He had a major role in the film Pride.  He's been on screen since he was a child. But no, he's not DiCaprio. (Btw, I have no idea who Cynthia Erivo is.)

In any case (MAJOR SPOILER AHEAD), Chapman is killed off before the half-way point in 1917, It is MacKay who is the star and who carries the film so beautifully, with his performance, from the opening shot to the end of the film.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Swithin said:

. (Btw, I have no idea who Cynthia Erivo is.)

Check out my lead story on the Oscars. Erivo is nominated in two different categories.

See the source image

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder if PESCI will go back to managing the restaurant for another 20 years only to re-emerge with his fourth nomination in 2040.

(I'm not disparaging BTW, I like him and I'm thrilled to see him nominated again, it is just my understanding he enjoys the restaurant business much more than acting...)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I also have to say- not having seen any of the films- I am really really happy ANTONIO BANDERAS got nominated for something finally. he has been a terrific part of a lot of terrible movies (and the occasional good one) for a longassed time now.

JONATHON PRYCE has always reminded me a little of RAYMOND MASSEY, but it's also nice to see him in that RICHARD JENKINS spot.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, LornaHansonForbes said:

I'm surprised I can still work up enough emotion and interest over the OSCARS, but on hearing the nominations this morning, I must say that I am really outright disgusted by the SUPPORTING ACTOR LINE-UP, which has four former winners, three of whom were BEST ACTOR winners and- JOE PESCI aside- is a list of four actors who have been around forever and are LEADS AND huuuuuuuuuuuuuuge stars.

I'm not talking about their movies for which they are nominated- which I have not seen- but just the fact that HOPKINS, PITT, HANKS and PACINO are LEADS. BIG NAMES. NOT SUPPORTING ACTORS AND NOT WHO THIS CATEGORY WAS INTENDED TO RECOGNIZE WHEN IT WAS CONCEIVED.

I honestly think the most annoying trend in the OSCARS of the past 20 years has been the outright manipulation of the SUPPORTING CATEGORIES to be slots for BIG NAMES.

apologize if this seems hostile to the thread, just venting out loud here.

 

3 hours ago, LornaHansonForbes said:

ALSO, THE GUY WHO PLAYS MR ROGERS IN THE MOVIE ABOUT MR ROGERS IS SUPPORTING?????????

I know what you mean, and I agree that Brad Pitt is a co-lead in Once Upon a Time in Hollywood. I knew he'd be up for supporting, though, as he has been throughout the awards season, and he's almost certain to win.

However, regardless of their stature in the industry, the other 4 are nominated for what I would call supporting roles. 

The Irishman is De Niro's film, and Pesci and Pacino are both supporting without question.

The Mr. Rogers movie really isn't a Mr. Rogers movie/biopic, but rather about a cynical reporter played by Matthew Rhys assigned to interview Rogers, and how it changes the reporter's life.

And The Two Popes is Jonathan Pryce's show. While Hopkins has the second leading role, and the only other role of substance, the story is told from Pryce's character's POV, and Hopkins is there only in the way he affects Pryce's character, if that makes any sense.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I managed to see more of the nominated films before the ceremony than I have in 25 years:

  • Once Upon a Time in Hollywood
  • Joker
  • The Irishman
  • The Two Popes
  • Marriage Story
  • Judy
  • I Lost My Body
  • American Factory
  • Rocketman
  • The Lighthouse
  • Avengers: Endgame
  • Ad Astra

And I even managed to see a couple of the animated shorts (Hair Love and Kitbull) thanks to a link from Mr6666 on the message boards.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Det Jim McLeod said:

I have seen all five of these, all very well deserved.

Phillips created a bleak, fascinating world

 

He didn't create a world, he copied it from Taxi Driver and The King of Comedy.  I can understand Phoenix getting a nomination, even though it's clearly the least of the four nominations I've seen (I haven't seen Pryce), and even more so than the unnominated De Niro.  But better cinematography over A Hidden Life?  Of the actresses, I've only seen Johansson, and she clearly was not as good as the unnominated Lupita Nyong'o.   That Sam Mendes has a better shot of getting his second directing oscar over Scorsese does not sound promising.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
© 2020 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...