CelticsStrong

Other Discussions => Entertainment => Off Topic => Movies => Topic started by: celticmaestro on January 22, 2009, 11:41:34 AM

Title: Academy Awards 2009
Post by: celticmaestro on January 22, 2009, 11:41:34 AM
Nominations. (http://www.empireonline.com/news/story.asp?NID=24054)

My thoughts (albeit written by by someone else). (http://www.empireonline.com/empireblog/Post.asp?id=351)

Thoughts?
Title: Re: Acadamy Awards 2009
Post by: StartOrien on January 22, 2009, 11:54:03 AM
I was real dissapointed to see that The Dark Knight wasn't nominated for Best Picture.

Also, I never really understood the hype for Robert Downey Jr in Tropic Thunder. I thought everything about the movie (with the exception of the opening ten minutes) was fairly marginal.

edit: missed Mickey Rourke.
Title: Re: Acadamy Awards 2009
Post by: ACF on January 22, 2009, 11:56:28 AM
My thoughts:

I don't watch enough movies  :-\
Title: Re: Acadamy Awards 2009
Post by: Shots on January 22, 2009, 11:58:10 AM
I think the nominations in general seem pretty reasonable, but I'm a bit shocked that The Dark Knight didn't get a nomination for best picture. Even though I'm sure it would never win the award, it deserves the recognition, as I'm sure most would agree it's one of the best movies of 2008.

I also think it's a bit strange that Fincher got a nomination for The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, but didn't get any for Fight Club or Se7en. This isn't his best movie or direction so far, at least not in my oppinion..
Title: Re: Acadamy Awards 2009
Post by: celticmaestro on January 22, 2009, 11:59:12 AM
Mickey Rourke was nominated - haven't yet seen that. As for Robert Downey Jr., he was just sensational. I loved Tropic Thunder and thought he and Tom Cruise was fantastic in it. But Best Supporting Actor has to go to Heath Ledger.

The disregard of the Dark Knight is a disgrace though.
Title: Re: Acadamy Awards 2009
Post by: StartOrien on January 22, 2009, 12:04:30 PM
Mickey Rourke was nominated - haven't yet seen that. As for Robert Downey Jr., he was just sensational. I loved Tropic Thunder and thought he and Tom Cruise was fantastic in it. But Best Supporting Actor has to go to Heath Ledger.

The disregard of the Dark Knight is a disgrace though.

My bad, missed the Rourke. I watched it the other night, the movie is pretty good not great. He's incredible in it though. And I'm never the type to really notice a great "acting performance"
Title: Re: Acadamy Awards 2009
Post by: Amonkey on January 22, 2009, 12:07:48 PM
I was surprised to see Vicky Barcelona to be nominated for Best Supporting Actress.  I started seeing that movie with my girlfriend since the movie is set in the town she spend a semester in Spain, but the movie was awful even for a chick flick.  The lines were completely cheesy and unimpressive, the actors didn't have much to work with since they had to go along with the stereotype (the spanish artist was as cheesy and stereotypical of a Spaniard lover that was just a joke).

I bring this up to you that if you come across that movie as an option of chick flicks, just think this.  Even my girlfriend, who is a chick flick junkie, hated it and couldn't finish the movie.
Title: Re: Acadamy Awards 2009
Post by: Redz on January 22, 2009, 12:09:08 PM
Is there any way in hell they won't give Heath Ledger the supporting actor Oscar?
Title: Re: Acadamy Awards 2009
Post by: celticmaestro on January 22, 2009, 12:15:35 PM
Is there any way in hell they won't give Heath Ledger the supporting actor Oscar?

I think that sort of thing takes away from the performance. That was a truly great performance and it's tragic that he wasn't around to actually witness it himself.

If they don't give it to him, it has to be Downey Jr.
Title: Re: Acadamy Awards 2009
Post by: Redz on January 22, 2009, 12:27:17 PM
Is there any way in hell they won't give Heath Ledger the supporting actor Oscar?

I think that sort of thing takes away from the performance. That was a truly great performance and it's tragic that he wasn't around to actually witness it himself.

If they don't give it to him, it has to be Downey Jr.

Absolutely.  He's deserving, but so many times the Academy gives the award to the person who would make the best story for receiving it.
Title: Re: Acadamy Awards 2009
Post by: crownsy on January 22, 2009, 12:27:48 PM
dark knight getting snubbed because its a comic flix is a traveisty.

Ive seen slumdog millionar, and IMO, its a decent movie thats gettign the traditional "oh la dee da, here's our indy arts flix you've never seen!!" nod. it easily could have gone to dark knight. Milk is also meh.

Title: Re: Acadamy Awards 2009
Post by: celticmaestro on January 22, 2009, 12:32:01 PM
Is there any way in hell they won't give Heath Ledger the supporting actor Oscar?

I think that sort of thing takes away from the performance. That was a truly great performance and it's tragic that he wasn't around to actually witness it himself.

If they don't give it to him, it has to be Downey Jr.

Absolutely.  He's deserving, but so many times the Academy gives the award to the person who would make the best story for receiving it.

Very true, Denzel Washington for Training Day is a prime example. Russell Crowe in A Beautiful Mind was so much better that it should never have been a contest. If only he hadn't attacked that paparazzi guy.

dark knight getting snubbed because its a comic flix is a traveisty.

Ive seen slumdog millionar, and IMO, its a decent movie thats gettign the traditional "oh la dee da, here's our indy arts flix you've never seen!!" nod. it easily could have gone to dark knight. Milk is also meh.



I'm more concerned with Th Reader's nomination - huh??
Title: Re: Acadamy Awards 2009
Post by: LarBrd33 on January 22, 2009, 12:53:35 PM
The Dark Knight probably wouldn't have won anyways so it doesn't really matter.

Best Actor:   I thought Benjamin Button was fairly boring.  Pitt was alright, but honestly there wasn't anything terribly interesting about his character.  I'd have to go with Rourke.  Saw the movie a couple days ago and he was solid.  Haven't yet seen "Milk", so I don't know how great Penn was.

Supporting Actor:  Gotta figure it'll be Ledger.  I thought Downey Jr was fun in Tropic Thunder, but I wouldn't consider it oscar worthy.  That movie in general was pretty stupid.

Lets see...

Wall-E should be a lock for best animation.

Benjamin Button should be a lock for best makeup.  I've never seen "aging" makeup come off so believable.

Best Movie:  I really don't think it should be Button.  That movie was pretty average.  I'll watch Slumdog tonight.  Seems like most folks have it at the top of the list.

Basically my only thoughts.

I'm happy to see that "love Guru" was nominated for a bunch of razzies.  Some chick dragged me to see that crapfest.  I took her to see Wall-E a few days before and she thought it was "extremely boring".  "Love Guru" was a painful, painful experience.  Possibly the worst movie I've ever seen in my life.   She thought it was hilarious and planned on buying the DVD as soon as it came out.  I haven't gone out with that nutcase since.

Title: Re: Acadamy Awards 2009
Post by: KCattheStripe on January 22, 2009, 12:57:28 PM
dark knight getting snubbed because its a comic flix is a traveisty.

Ive seen slumdog millionar, and IMO, its a decent movie thats gettign the traditional "oh la dee da, here's our indy arts flix you've never seen!!" nod. it easily could have gone to dark knight. Milk is also meh.



The Dark Knight was a very good movie that should have been two excellent movies.
Title: Re: Acadamy Awards 2009
Post by: LarBrd33 on January 22, 2009, 12:59:20 PM
dark knight getting snubbed because its a comic flix is a traveisty.

Ive seen slumdog millionar, and IMO, its a decent movie thats gettign the traditional "oh la dee da, here's our indy arts flix you've never seen!!" nod. it easily could have gone to dark knight. Milk is also meh.



The Dark Knight was a very good movie that should have been two excellent movies.

That's interesting.   Hmm.  How bout that.  You could be right.

I loved the Dark Knight as much as everyone else, but I kinda felt like the Bruce Wayne/Batman character was missing something.  Ledger made the whole movie.  As long as he wins his award it doesn't really matter.
Title: Re: Acadamy Awards 2009
Post by: KCattheStripe on January 22, 2009, 01:03:13 PM
dark knight getting snubbed because its a comic flix is a traveisty.

Ive seen slumdog millionar, and IMO, its a decent movie thats gettign the traditional "oh la dee da, here's our indy arts flix you've never seen!!" nod. it easily could have gone to dark knight. Milk is also meh.



The Dark Knight was a very good movie that should have been two excellent movies.

That's interesting.   Hmm.  How bout that.  You could be right.

I loved the Dark Knight as much as everyone else, but I kinda felt like the Bruce Wayne/Batman character was missing something.  Ledger made the whole movie.  As long as he wins his award it doesn't really matter.

I thought that they rushed the Harvey Dent storyline, when it could have been more powerful. If they had allowed Two-Face to be the main villain for the third movie and used the ending of TDK for that movie, it would have made for a brilliant trilogy.
Title: Re: Acadamy Awards 2009
Post by: eddietours on January 22, 2009, 01:11:25 PM
wow no CHE is a well Done movie  :(
Title: Re: Acadamy Awards 2009
Post by: CDawg834 on January 22, 2009, 01:24:43 PM
OK, I am gonna be "that guy" and point out that the title of this thread is spelled incorrectly...it's a pet peeve I had to be a jerk and point it out  ::)

I find that year after year, I have seen, at the most, 1 or 2 of the best picture nominees when Oscar time comes around.  I am one of those people who hates going to the movies (with rare exceptions, for example saw Dark Knight at IMAX and that was well worth it - but in general, who wants to pay $11 a ticket for a movie that may or may not be any good, while the 14 year-olds in front of you never shut up the entire time), so I often don't see movies I want to see until well after they are out on video.

I do hope to see The Wrestler soon...but I fully agree with the other posters about Tropic Thunder...it was entertaining, but not much Oscar-worthy about it.
Title: Re: Academy Awards 2009
Post by: Redz on January 22, 2009, 01:32:01 PM
OK, I am gonna be "that guy" and point out that the title of this thread is spelled incorrectly...it's a pet peeve I had to be a jerk and point it out  ::)

There, I fixed it so the thread title will at least show up correctly spelled in the forums.  I do that from time to time if I pick it up.
Title: Re: Acadamy Awards 2009
Post by: indeedproceed on January 22, 2009, 01:34:37 PM
dark knight getting snubbed because its a comic flix is a traveisty.

Ive seen slumdog millionar, and IMO, its a decent movie thats gettign the traditional "oh la dee da, here's our indy arts flix you've never seen!!" nod. it easily could have gone to dark knight. Milk is also meh.



The Dark Knight was a very good movie that should have been two excellent movies.

That's interesting.   Hmm.  How bout that.  You could be right.

I loved the Dark Knight as much as everyone else, but I kinda felt like the Bruce Wayne/Batman character was missing something.  Ledger made the whole movie.  As long as he wins his award it doesn't really matter.

I thought that they rushed the Harvey Dent storyline, when it could have been more powerful. If they had allowed Two-Face to be the main villain for the third movie and used the ending of TDK for that movie, it would have made for a brilliant trilogy.

I agree, the Harvery Dent character, which Aaron Eckhart (i think?) was absolutely rocking, would've been an awesome villain.
Title: Re: Acadamy Awards 2009
Post by: Chris on January 22, 2009, 01:40:12 PM
dark knight getting snubbed because its a comic flix is a traveisty.

Ive seen slumdog millionar, and IMO, its a decent movie thats gettign the traditional "oh la dee da, here's our indy arts flix you've never seen!!" nod. it easily could have gone to dark knight. Milk is also meh.



The Dark Knight was a very good movie that should have been two excellent movies.

That's interesting.   Hmm.  How bout that.  You could be right.

I loved the Dark Knight as much as everyone else, but I kinda felt like the Bruce Wayne/Batman character was missing something.  Ledger made the whole movie.  As long as he wins his award it doesn't really matter.

Yeah, it was missing good acting.  I can't stand Christian Bale.  He has absolutely no personality, and it makes it painful to watch. 

I agree that Ledger made the movie.  I think without him, it wouldn't have even been an average movie, it would have been terrible (although I did like the Dent character as well, but that was not enough to make up for Bale).

They really need to find someone else to play Batman. 
Title: Re: Academy Awards 2009
Post by: CDawg834 on January 22, 2009, 01:44:01 PM
OK, I am gonna be "that guy" and point out that the title of this thread is spelled incorrectly...it's a pet peeve I had to be a jerk and point it out  ::)

There, I fixed it so the thread title will at least show up correctly spelled in the forums.  I do that from time to time if I pick it up.

TP for you, thx Redz
Title: Re: Academy Awards 2009
Post by: Redz on January 22, 2009, 01:47:21 PM
OK, I am gonna be "that guy" and point out that the title of this thread is spelled incorrectly...it's a pet peeve I had to be a jerk and point it out  ::)

There, I fixed it so the thread title will at least show up correctly spelled in the forums.  I do that from time to time if I pick it up.

TP for you, thx Redz

I've mellowed out with being anal about it, but I do try to fix up spelling in the titles. When I first became a mod I started making all of the thread titles properly capitalized...I had to drop that habit as it was becoming far too compulsive ::)

It's not easy being me sometimes ;D
Title: Re: Acadamy Awards 2009
Post by: LarBrd33 on January 22, 2009, 01:58:04 PM
OK, I am gonna be "that guy" and point out that the title of this thread is spelled incorrectly...it's a pet peeve I had to be a jerk and point it out  ::)

I find that year after year, I have seen, at the most, 1 or 2 of the best picture nominees when Oscar time comes around.  I am one of those people who hates going to the movies (with rare exceptions, for example saw Dark Knight at IMAX and that was well worth it - but in general, who wants to pay $11 a ticket for a movie that may or may not be any good, while the 14 year-olds in front of you never shut up the entire time), so I often don't see movies I want to see until well after they are out on video.

I do hope to see The Wrestler soon...but I fully agree with the other posters about Tropic Thunder...it was entertaining, but not much Oscar-worthy about it.

Hey you don't necessarily have to go to a movie theater to see the movie.  I don't think "The Wrestler" technically has even even had a wide theater release yet... but I watched it a couple nights ago... wait.. brb... i think the FBI is at my door...

Anyways... 

One last thing about "The Dark Knight".   I liked aspects of "Batman Begins" a lot more.  I thought the cinematography and the villain were a lot more interesting in "The Dark Knight", though. 

So yeah
Title: Re: Acadamy Awards 2009
Post by: celticmaestro on January 22, 2009, 02:31:01 PM
OK, I am gonna be "that guy" and point out that the title of this thread is spelled incorrectly...it's a pet peeve I had to be a jerk and point it out  ::)

Yeah thanks for that. I make a grammatical/spelling error 0.01% of the time and the one time I do it's picked on? Thanks :'(
Title: Re: Acadamy Awards 2009
Post by: LarBrd33 on January 22, 2009, 03:20:07 PM
OK, I am gonna be "that guy" and point out that the title of this thread is spelled incorrectly...it's a pet peeve I had to be a jerk and point it out  ::)

Yeah thanks for that. I make a grammatical/spelling error 0.01% of the time and the one time I do it's picked on? Thanks :'(
My facebook app says that I type 93 WPM with 0 errars
Title: Re: Academy Awards 2009
Post by: pearljammer10 on January 22, 2009, 03:47:32 PM
The Dark Knight not getting a nod over frost/nixon or the reader is quiet BS in my opinion...My predictions however,

Best Picture - I go Slumdog first, Benjamin Button second, and Milk third.

Director - Boyle first with Fichner a close second...I think Button should win both director and film but i think the academy will choose Slumdog because of its underdog status.

Actor - I'll say Rourke because of all the hype surrounding and the Golden Globe nod, but i wouldnt count out Penn. His performance was magnificent in Milk.

Actress - Winslet or Streep

Supporting Actor - Ledger no doubt, although Brolin played an incredible part in Milk as well.

Supporting Actress - So glad Henson got the nod her acting was excellent. She should absolutely win.

Animated - Wall - E

And I think the Dark Knight deserves to sweep the rest. They can at least give them those to make up for the lack of a best film nod.
Title: Re: Academy Awards 2009
Post by: bostonfan23 on January 22, 2009, 04:05:04 PM
Shameless bragging for a second: my uncle has a vote for the Academy Awards, so they give him all the nominated DVDs... he left them with us when he visited from California a few weeks ago-we had ones that weren't even coming out for a while. I never even knew that he had a vote. Pretty cool.
Title: Re: Academy Awards 2009
Post by: indeedproceed on January 22, 2009, 04:08:17 PM
anyone even seen Frost/Nixon? With all the Bush talk my mom (a "radical" in the late 60's) has gotten really nostolgic about how much she hated/distrusted Nixon, and is really looking forward to the movie.
Title: Re: Academy Awards 2009
Post by: Brickowski on January 22, 2009, 04:12:30 PM
Who Should Win (with the caveat that I have not seen The Dark Knight)

Best picture:  Slumdog Millionaire

Best Director: Gus Van Sant, Milk.  He should have won for Good Will Hunting or Elephant.

Best Actor:  Sean Penn, Milk, Mickey Rourke, the Wrestler.  Both performances deserve it.

Supporting Actor: Heath Ledger will probably get it posthumously.  I have no selection here, since I did not see his performance.

Best Actress:  Melissa Leo, Frozen River.  I also liked Jolie in Changeling

Supporting Actress: Marisa Thomei, The Wrestler.

Adapted Screenplay: John Patrick Shanley, Doubt

Original Screenplay: In Bruges, Martin McDonagh.  Very powerful dialogue.


Title: Re: Academy Awards 2009
Post by: celticmaestro on January 22, 2009, 04:38:09 PM
I'll chime in with predictions.

Who should win (who will win):

Best Picture: Slumdog Millionaire (Slumdog Millionaire).

Best Director: David Fincher (David Fincher).

Best Actor:  Sean Penn, Mickey Rourke and Brad Pitt were all awesome so I'd have no complaints either way. (It'll be one of them surely.)

Supporting Actor: Heath Ledger (Heath ledger) Honorable mention to Robert Downey Jr.

Best Actress:  Angelina Jolie (Kate Winslet).

Supporting Actress: Marissa Tomei (Marissa Tomei).

As I've said, I'm really disappointed with the nominations. Why does the Academy hate Leonardo DiCaprio? Why didn't they have the balls to nominate the Dark Knight? The Best Picture this year would have lost to any of last year's nominations.
Title: Re: Acadamy Awards 2009
Post by: CDawg834 on January 22, 2009, 04:42:24 PM
OK, I am gonna be "that guy" and point out that the title of this thread is spelled incorrectly...it's a pet peeve I had to be a jerk and point it out  ::)

Yeah thanks for that. I make a grammatical/spelling error 0.01% of the time and the one time I do it's picked on? Thanks :'(

I simply pointed it out (only because it was in the title) and Redz fixed it, I don't know...I wouldn't consider that picking on
Title: Re: Academy Awards 2009
Post by: indeedproceed on January 22, 2009, 04:42:40 PM
Who Should Win (with the caveat that I have not seen The Dark Knight)

Best picture:  Slumdog Millionaire

Best Director: Gus Van Sant, Milk.  He should have won for Good Will Hunting or Elephant.

Best Actor:  Sean Penn, Milk, Mickey Rourke, the Wrestler.  Both performances deserve it.

Supporting Actor: Heath Ledger will probably get it posthumously.  I have no selection here, since I did not see his performance.

Best Actress:  Melissa Leo, Frozen River.  I also liked Jolie in Changeling

Supporting Actress: Marisa Thomei, The Wrestler.

Adapted Screenplay: John Patrick Shanley, Doubt

Original Screenplay: In Bruges, Martin McDonagh.  Very powerful dialogue.




I also thought In Bruges was very good, but I wonder how much the strong performances from Colin Farrel, Ralph Fiennes and Brendan Gleeson (one of my favorite supporting actors) had to do with it?
Title: Re: Acadamy Awards 2009
Post by: celticmaestro on January 22, 2009, 04:45:24 PM
OK, I am gonna be "that guy" and point out that the title of this thread is spelled incorrectly...it's a pet peeve I had to be a jerk and point it out  ::)

Yeah thanks for that. I make a grammatical/spelling error 0.01% of the time and the one time I do it's picked on? Thanks :'(

I simply pointed it out (only because it was in the title) and Redz fixed it, I don't know...I wouldn't consider that picking on

Obviously I was joking.
Title: Re: Academy Awards 2009
Post by: celticmaestro on January 22, 2009, 04:49:53 PM
Who Should Win (with the caveat that I have not seen The Dark Knight)

Best picture:  Slumdog Millionaire

Best Director: Gus Van Sant, Milk.  He should have won for Good Will Hunting or Elephant.

Best Actor:  Sean Penn, Milk, Mickey Rourke, the Wrestler.  Both performances deserve it.

Supporting Actor: Heath Ledger will probably get it posthumously.  I have no selection here, since I did not see his performance.

Best Actress:  Melissa Leo, Frozen River.  I also liked Jolie in Changeling

Supporting Actress: Marisa Thomei, The Wrestler.

Adapted Screenplay: John Patrick Shanley, Doubt

Original Screenplay: In Bruges, Martin McDonagh.  Very powerful dialogue.




I also thought In Bruges was very good, but I wonder how much the strong performances from Colin Farrel, Ralph Fiennes and Brendan Gleeson (one of my favorite supporting actors)?

All three actors were superb in that. I can't see them ever being nominated (duh) but I certainly hope they were at least considered. Probably not.
Title: Re: Acadamy Awards 2009
Post by: CDawg834 on January 22, 2009, 04:52:28 PM
OK, I am gonna be "that guy" and point out that the title of this thread is spelled incorrectly...it's a pet peeve I had to be a jerk and point it out  ::)

Yeah thanks for that. I make a grammatical/spelling error 0.01% of the time and the one time I do it's picked on? Thanks :'(

I simply pointed it out (only because it was in the title) and Redz fixed it, I don't know...I wouldn't consider that picking on

Obviously I was joking.

I had a feeling, but I thought I would err on the side of caution..I have seen a few threads get real crazy over stuff that began innocently enough  :P
Title: Re: Acadamy Awards 2009
Post by: celticmaestro on January 22, 2009, 04:58:14 PM
OK, I am gonna be "that guy" and point out that the title of this thread is spelled incorrectly...it's a pet peeve I had to be a jerk and point it out  ::)

Yeah thanks for that. I make a grammatical/spelling error 0.01% of the time and the one time I do it's picked on? Thanks :'(

I simply pointed it out (only because it was in the title) and Redz fixed it, I don't know...I wouldn't consider that picking on

Obviously I was joking.

I had a feeling, but I thought I would err on the side of caution..I have seen a few threads get real crazy over stuff that began innocently enough  :P

True, no worries have a TP.

Back on topic though, the nominations this year are shameful.
Title: Re: Academy Awards 2009
Post by: LarBrd33 on January 22, 2009, 04:59:59 PM
Who Should Win (with the caveat that I have not seen The Dark Knight)

Best picture:  Slumdog Millionaire

Best Director: Gus Van Sant, Milk.  He should have won for Good Will Hunting or Elephant.

Best Actor:  Sean Penn, Milk, Mickey Rourke, the Wrestler.  Both performances deserve it.

Supporting Actor: Heath Ledger will probably get it posthumously.  I have no selection here, since I did not see his performance.

Best Actress:  Melissa Leo, Frozen River.  I also liked Jolie in Changeling

Supporting Actress: Marisa Thomei, The Wrestler.

Adapted Screenplay: John Patrick Shanley, Doubt

Original Screenplay: In Bruges, Martin McDonagh.  Very powerful dialogue.




I have to figure there is someone more deserving than Marisa Thomei in "The Wrestler".  The only memorable part about her performance is that she is naked in 90% of her scenes and has a ghastly fake skank tattoo covering her entire back. 
Title: Re: Academy Awards 2009
Post by: celticmaestro on January 22, 2009, 05:01:01 PM
^ I still would though...



:-[
Title: Re: Academy Awards 2009
Post by: Shots on January 22, 2009, 05:05:37 PM
I just watched Slumdog Millionarie, and eh.. I don't get what all the fuss is about, honestly. It's a good movie, a feel good movie by an excellent director (I love Danny Boyle, especially Trainspotting). But it was so predictable, everyone knew what would happen in the end. From what I had heard this was a "City of God"-ala film, just in India - But seriously? In my oppinion it's not even fair to compare them.

In my previous post I wrote that I didn't get why The Dark Knight wasn't nominated and in contrast to this, I'm totally stunned.
Title: Re: Academy Awards 2009
Post by: indeedproceed on January 22, 2009, 05:13:43 PM
two things:

1) Is anyone else's favorite Danny Boyle movie "28 days later"?

2) Now I know why I love Brendan Gleeson (the guy with the big club in Gangs of NY, Mad Eye Moody in Harry Potter, and the father in 28 Days Later)! Its because of a short movie from 2006: Six Shooter, also written by Martin McDonagh. Kind of the same thing where its actually really funny one moment even though you don't want to laugh, then desparately sad the next, then just desparately sad then funny.
Title: Re: Academy Awards 2009
Post by: Redz on January 22, 2009, 05:23:58 PM
two things:

1) Is anyone else's favorite Danny Boyle movie "28 days later"?



I loved that movie, but actually liked the 2nd one even better.  Maybe my all time favorite opening scene.
Title: Re: Academy Awards 2009
Post by: RebusRankin on January 22, 2009, 05:43:35 PM
Well I have to see a bunch of them as many just opened or are opening tomorrow where I am.

I agree The Dark Knight should have been nominated as it was a great film. I enjoyed Benjamin Button but a friend summed it up best, its good but not best picture good.

I think Rourke wins Best Actor as he's the best story (I'm going to go try and see it soon). Slumdog Millionare will likely win best picture (its this year's feel good picture/Artsy Indie film).

I think Leo will get nominated and win nest year for Shutter Island, if the film comes close to capturing the book. Speaking of nominees past and present, Clooney didn't deserve his last year.
Title: Re: Academy Awards 2009
Post by: MattG12 on January 23, 2009, 01:34:33 AM
The Academy Award nominations outdo the Golden Globes as usual.

Movies were so much better last year.
No Country For Old Men
There Will Be Blood
The Assassination of Jesse James By The Coward Robert Ford
Atonement
etc...
Title: Re: Academy Awards 2009
Post by: celticmaestro on February 21, 2009, 09:58:25 AM
I watched Slumdog Millionaire last night, and it's not Oscar worthy. I thought the first 90 minutes of the film were great and the end was extremely disappointing.
Title: Re: Academy Awards 2009
Post by: celticinorlando on February 21, 2009, 10:00:25 AM
i agree about slumdog....not sure why it has gotten all of the hype
Title: Re: Academy Awards 2009
Post by: Chief on February 21, 2009, 10:58:40 AM
I predict this will be the lowest rated Academy Awards show ever. The average movie fan goer will have no desire to watch Slum Dog Millionaire win all the awards. Dark Knight (Best Picture) and Clint Eastwood (Best Actor)should have been nominated just to get people to watch.

The show has turned into studios campaigning for films that have no chance on making big money without a nomination. Why should Warner Brothers campaign for Dark Knight? It's already made a billion dollars worldwide. It makes much more economic sense to promote Benjamin Button to get people to watch it.

Title: Re: Academy Awards 2009
Post by: Amonkey on February 21, 2009, 11:17:36 AM
I watched Slumdog Millionaire last night, and it's not Oscar worthy. I thought the first 90 minutes of the film were great and the end was extremely disappointing.

I saw Slumdog and I thought it was a great movie, def the best movie of 2009.  I watched with low expectations since I didn't really know what it was all about, but it was a great movie.

Why it was good: the plot was original, the music was good and well timed, the perspective was great (seeing something completely different) and it was deep (there are a lot of symbolisms in the movie).

The thing about this movie too is that a story about a poor guy potentially moving up his social class in the USA is not necessarily a big deal here in the USA, but in India, that is almost impossible.  So there is a great degree of extra insight about this story.

So in the end, I don't want to overate it.  Don't go with high expectations and you will like it.  If you go in expecting this movie to literally change your life, then you'll be greatly disappointed.
Title: Re: Academy Awards 2009
Post by: KCattheStripe on February 21, 2009, 11:30:14 AM
Who Should Win (with the caveat that I have not seen The Dark Knight)

Best picture:  Slumdog Millionaire

Best Director: Gus Van Sant, Milk.  He should have won for Good Will Hunting or Elephant.

Best Actor:  Sean Penn, Milk, Mickey Rourke, the Wrestler.  Both performances deserve it.

Supporting Actor: Heath Ledger will probably get it posthumously.  I have no selection here, since I did not see his performance.

Best Actress:  Melissa Leo, Frozen River.  I also liked Jolie in Changeling

Supporting Actress: Marisa Thomei, The Wrestler.

Adapted Screenplay: John Patrick Shanley, Doubt

Original Screenplay: In Bruges, Martin McDonagh.  Very powerful dialogue.




I also thought In Bruges was very good, but I wonder how much the strong performances from Colin Farrel, Ralph Fiennes and Brendan Gleeson (one of my favorite supporting actors) had to do with it?

Read McDonaugh's work for the stage, it wasn't the actors, he's a brilliant writer.
Title: Re: Academy Awards 2009
Post by: Redz on February 22, 2009, 09:13:52 PM
OK, I got sucked in.  Was hoping to watch the Tivo'd C's game

Hugh Jackman's opening act was pretty humorous.

Now I have to keep watching to see my favorite part...when they show the montage of people who have died in the past year.  Always amazed to see how many familiar faces pass on.
Title: Re: Academy Awards 2009
Post by: Kwhit10 on February 22, 2009, 09:34:27 PM
I'm liking Ben Stiller's impersonation.
Title: Re: Academy Awards 2009
Post by: Redz on February 22, 2009, 09:35:26 PM
I'm liking Ben Stiller's impersonation.

Spot on
Title: Re: Academy Awards 2009
Post by: Redz on February 22, 2009, 10:08:26 PM
Heath was a layup
Title: Re: Academy Awards 2009
Post by: celticinorlando on February 22, 2009, 10:22:54 PM
very classy the way the award was accepted for ledger....hugh jackman is a pretty talented guy.
Title: Re: Academy Awards 2009
Post by: celticinorlando on February 22, 2009, 10:30:12 PM
unreal the dark knight wasn't nominated for best picture.
Title: Re: Academy Awards 2009
Post by: RAcker on February 22, 2009, 11:06:50 PM
unreal the dark knight wasn't nominated for best picture.
I hate to speak ill of the dead, but Heath Ledger's performance was nothing more than a Jack Nicholson immitation.  I thought this was the most over-hyped movie in a looooong time.  I've never cared much about awards so I won't argue the fact that you think it deserved a nomination, but the fact that Oliver! beat out 2001: A Space Odyssey for Best Picture in 1969 ought to tell you something about how much the golden trophy actually means.   ;D
Title: Re: Academy Awards 2009
Post by: MattG12 on February 22, 2009, 11:11:38 PM
OK, I got sucked in.  Was hoping to watch the Tivo'd C's game

Hugh Jackman's opening act was pretty humorous.

Now I have to keep watching to see my favorite part...when they show the montage of people who have died in the past year.  Always amazed to see how many familiar faces pass on.

Here it is Redz!
Title: Re: Academy Awards 2009
Post by: Amonkey on February 22, 2009, 11:22:25 PM
This stinks, because Slumdog is getting all the awards, it's quickly becoming the most overated movie which is just too bad since it is a really a good movie but now it's gonna be overshadowed by its overatedness.
Title: Re: Academy Awards 2009
Post by: KCattheStripe on February 23, 2009, 12:05:46 AM
OK, I got sucked in.  Was hoping to watch the Tivo'd C's game

Hugh Jackman's opening act was pretty humorous.

Now I have to keep watching to see my favorite part...when they show the montage of people who have died in the past year.  Always amazed to see how many familiar faces pass on.

Here it is Redz!

Latifah can sing!
Title: Re: Academy Awards 2009
Post by: Cman on February 23, 2009, 12:28:33 AM
Quick thoughts:

-Mickey Rourke was robbed.
I think Sean Penn is one of the best actors of our time, and it was close, but I think it should have gone to Rourke.
(but Sean Penn's shout out to Rourke was classy).

-Anne Hathaway should have won best actress.

-Glad Heath Ledger won for Dark Knight.

-Glad Wall-E won something!
Title: Re: Academy Awards 2009
Post by: jimmehx on February 23, 2009, 01:00:25 AM
OK, I got sucked in.  Was hoping to watch the Tivo'd C's game

Hugh Jackman's opening act was pretty humorous.

Now I have to keep watching to see my favorite part...when they show the montage of people who have died in the past year.  Always amazed to see how many familiar faces pass on.

Here it is Redz!

Latifah can sing!

hmm yeh she can sing. but did you notice all the digital enhancement? she sounded semi-robotic. i'm not a big fan of that type of thing.
Title: Re: Academy Awards 2009
Post by: LarBrd33 on February 23, 2009, 02:30:26 AM
OK, I got sucked in.  Was hoping to watch the Tivo'd C's game

Hugh Jackman's opening act was pretty humorous.

Now I have to keep watching to see my favorite part...when they show the montage of people who have died in the past year.  Always amazed to see how many familiar faces pass on.

Here it is Redz!

Latifah can sing!

hmm yeh she can sing. but did you notice all the digital enhancement? she sounded semi-robotic. i'm not a big fan of that type of thing.

definitely noticed that.

Also wasn't impressed with Beyonce's lip synching.

I liked Huge Jackman's opening number

Slumdog Millionare was a good movie, but it's pretty overrated.  "City of God" is a better movie that didn't get this kind of overkill hype when it came out.
Title: Re: Academy Awards 2009
Post by: Redz on February 23, 2009, 08:11:14 AM
OK, I got sucked in.  Was hoping to watch the Tivo'd C's game

Hugh Jackman's opening act was pretty humorous.

Now I have to keep watching to see my favorite part...when they show the montage of people who have died in the past year.  Always amazed to see how many familiar faces pass on.

Here it is Redz!

I gave up...Ran out of steam...So who died?
Title: Re: Acadamy Awards 2009
Post by: Bankshot on February 23, 2009, 08:38:20 AM
My thoughts:

I don't watch enough movies  :-\

Same with me.  I haven't even heard of most of the movies.  I mostly watch sports and news.
Title: Re: Academy Awards 2009
Post by: Amonkey on February 23, 2009, 10:28:30 AM
OK, I got sucked in.  Was hoping to watch the Tivo'd C's game

Hugh Jackman's opening act was pretty humorous.

Now I have to keep watching to see my favorite part...when they show the montage of people who have died in the past year.  Always amazed to see how many familiar faces pass on.

Here it is Redz!

Latifah can sing!

hmm yeh she can sing. but did you notice all the digital enhancement? she sounded semi-robotic. i'm not a big fan of that type of thing.

definitely noticed that.

Also wasn't impressed with Beyonce's lip synching.

I liked Huge Jackman's opening number

Slumdog Millionare was a good movie, but it's pretty overrated.  "City of God" is a better movie that didn't get this kind of overkill hype when it came out.

Isn't if funny that when the Chinese girl lypsynched, people were absolutely outraged and now, we have Oscars and Super Bowls being blatantly lypsynched by our top artists and nobody says anything.
Title: Re: Academy Awards 2009
Post by: Andy Jick on February 23, 2009, 10:31:29 AM
so was the apparent goal last night to push forward the homosexual agenda?

i gave up on them...i can't stomach these egomaniac blowhards.
Title: Re: Academy Awards 2009
Post by: celticmaestro on February 23, 2009, 10:36:16 AM
so was the apparent goal last night to push forward the homosexual agenda?

I thought that. I could say a few controversial things about the Oscars, but I wont.

As for the awards. Not sure about them. The three I definitely agree with are Heath Ledger and Penelope Cruz and Danny Boyle for Directing. Slumdog was good but not Oscar worthy.

I just think the Academy shot itself in the foot with the nominations.
Title: Re: Academy Awards 2009
Post by: CelticsWhat35 on February 23, 2009, 10:36:31 AM
OK, I got sucked in.  Was hoping to watch the Tivo'd C's game

Hugh Jackman's opening act was pretty humorous.

Now I have to keep watching to see my favorite part...when they show the montage of people who have died in the past year.  Always amazed to see how many familiar faces pass on.

Here it is Redz!

Latifah can sing!

hmm yeh she can sing. but did you notice all the digital enhancement? she sounded semi-robotic. i'm not a big fan of that type of thing.

definitely noticed that.

Also wasn't impressed with Beyonce's lip synching.

I liked Huge Jackman's opening number

Slumdog Millionare was a good movie, but it's pretty overrated.  "City of God" is a better movie that didn't get this kind of overkill hype when it came out.

Isn't if funny that when the Chinese girl lypsynched, people were absolutely outraged and now, we have Oscars and Super Bowls being blatantly lypsynched by our top artists and nobody says anything.

I'm of the opinion that lip-synching during a live event is pretty weak, especially if you're not doing any dancing.  But the outrage about the Olympics was that it was a totally different girl singing.
Title: Re: Academy Awards 2009
Post by: Amonkey on February 23, 2009, 10:42:33 AM
OK, I got sucked in.  Was hoping to watch the Tivo'd C's game

Hugh Jackman's opening act was pretty humorous.

Now I have to keep watching to see my favorite part...when they show the montage of people who have died in the past year.  Always amazed to see how many familiar faces pass on.

Here it is Redz!

Latifah can sing!

hmm yeh she can sing. but did you notice all the digital enhancement? she sounded semi-robotic. i'm not a big fan of that type of thing.

definitely noticed that.

Also wasn't impressed with Beyonce's lip synching.

I liked Huge Jackman's opening number

Slumdog Millionare was a good movie, but it's pretty overrated.  "City of God" is a better movie that didn't get this kind of overkill hype when it came out.

Isn't if funny that when the Chinese girl lypsynched, people were absolutely outraged and now, we have Oscars and Super Bowls being blatantly lypsynched by our top artists and nobody says anything.

I'm of the opinion that lip-synching during a live event is pretty weak, especially if you're not doing any dancing.  But the outrage about the Olympics was that it was a totally different girl singing.

It was a different girl, but still, it's not that much different.  Some people might say that it's wrong because they used a cuter girl, but most of the singers in our events today are there because of looks first, singing abilities second.  I just think it's pretty hypocritical to be crying shame when it's the Chinese people trying do adapt to the Western culture but it's perfectly acceptable when we have our artists lypsinching.
Title: Re: Acadamy Awards 2009
Post by: Cman on February 23, 2009, 10:56:09 AM
My thoughts:

I don't watch enough movies  :-\

Same with me.  I haven't even heard of most of the movies.  I mostly watch sports and news.

I hear you on this!  Frankly I usually wait until stuff comes out on video so that I can afford to see it.  $10 a pop for a movie these days is ridiculous (if I bring my wife it is $20 + $5 popcorn....).
Title: Re: Academy Awards 2009
Post by: Cman on February 23, 2009, 11:28:23 AM
Also, I rarely see all five movies in a category, so I can't really comment on which was the best.  That doesn't stop me from having an opinion though !
Title: Re: Academy Awards 2009
Post by: RAcker on February 23, 2009, 11:54:51 AM
so was the apparent goal last night to push forward the homosexual agenda?

i gave up on them...i can't stomach these egomaniac blowhards.
I love how Sean Penn acts like those that supported Prop 8 are so intolerant and he just insulted them on national television for their beliefs.  He regularly proves himself to be the most intolerant person in Hollywood.  What a tea bag. 

As I see it, Prop 8 was up for a vote and the Yes side beat the No side.  So, what's the problem again?  Maybe more homosexuals and their supporters should have gotten to the polls?  Stick that in your liberal pipe and smoke it, Milk.
Title: Re: Academy Awards 2009
Post by: StartOrien on February 23, 2009, 12:01:57 PM
OK, I got sucked in.  Was hoping to watch the Tivo'd C's game

Hugh Jackman's opening act was pretty humorous.

Now I have to keep watching to see my favorite part...when they show the montage of people who have died in the past year.  Always amazed to see how many familiar faces pass on.

Here it is Redz!

Latifah can sing!

hmm yeh she can sing. but did you notice all the digital enhancement? she sounded semi-robotic. i'm not a big fan of that type of thing.

definitely noticed that.

Also wasn't impressed with Beyonce's lip synching.

I liked Huge Jackman's opening number

Slumdog Millionare was a good movie, but it's pretty overrated.  "City of God" is a better movie that didn't get this kind of overkill hype when it came out.

Isn't if funny that when the Chinese girl lypsynched, people were absolutely outraged and now, we have Oscars and Super Bowls being blatantly lypsynched by our top artists and nobody says anything.

I'm of the opinion that lip-synching during a live event is pretty weak, especially if you're not doing any dancing.  But the outrage about the Olympics was that it was a totally different girl singing.

It was a different girl, but still, it's not that much different.  Some people might say that it's wrong because they used a cuter girl, but most of the singers in our events today are there because of looks first, singing abilities second.  I just think it's pretty hypocritical to be crying shame when it's the Chinese people trying do adapt to the Western culture but it's perfectly acceptable when we have our artists lypsinching.

I think the reason that this was such a big story was because the girl who sung the song wasn't allowed to perform it because she wasn't cute enough.
Title: Re: Academy Awards 2009
Post by: KCattheStripe on February 23, 2009, 12:08:11 PM
so was the apparent goal last night to push forward the homosexual agenda?

i gave up on them...i can't stomach these egomaniac blowhards.
I love how Sean Penn acts like those that supported Prop 8 are so intolerant and he just insulted them on national television for their beliefs.  He regularly proves himself to be the most intolerant person in Hollywood.  What a tea bag. 

As I see it, Prop 8 was up for a vote and the Yes side beat the No side.  So, what's the problem again?  Maybe more homosexuals and their supporters should have gotten to the polls?  Stick that in your liberal pipe and smoke it, Milk.


Had Every Athenian citizen been a Socrates; every Athenian Assembly would still have been a mob.

-James Madison, Federalist 55