February 2, 2010, 8:34 am The 82nd Annual Oscar Nominations
THE NEW YORK TIMES…The 82nd Annual Oscar Nominations The stage is set for a David vs. Goliath battle at the Oscars, as independently made Iraq-war drama “The Hurt Locker” faces off with the most expensive movie of all time, “Avatar.” Both movies were nominated for nine Academy Awards, including best picture in a newly expanded field of 10, and best director.
Other best picture nominees include “Precious – Based on the novel ‘Push’ by Sapphire,” “Inglourious Basterds,” “The Blind Side,” “District Nine,” “An Education,” “A Serious Man,” “Up,” and “Up in the Air.” In the top categories, “Up in the Air” scored the most nominations with 5, including Best Picture, Best Director, Best Adapated Screenplay, as well as Best Actor, for which George Clooney was nominated, and Best Supporting Actress nods for both Vera Farmiga and Anna Kendrick.
Avatar and The Hurt Locker Both Received 9 Oscars Nominations
Here Goes The Nominations…
Best Picture… “Avatar” “The Blind Side” “District 9″ “An Education” “The Hurt Locker” “Inglourious Basterds” “Precious: Based on the Novel ‘Push’ by Sapphire” “A Serious Man” “Up” “Up in the Air”
Best Direction… “Avatar” — James Cameron “The Hurt Locker” — Kathryn Bigelow “Inglourious Basterds” — Quentin Tarantino “Precious: Based on the Novel ‘Push’ by Sapphire” — Lee Daniels “Up in the Air” — Jason Reitman
Actor in a Leading Role… Jeff Bridges in “Crazy Heart” George Clooney in “Up in the Air” Colin Firth in “A Single Man” Morgan Freeman in “Invictus” Jeremy Renner in “The Hurt Locker”
Actress in a Leading Role… in a Leading Role Sandra Bullock in “The Blind Side” Helen Mirren in “The Last Station” Carey Mulligan in “An Education” Gabourey Sidibe in “Precious: Based on the Novel ‘Push’ by Sapphire” Meryl Streep in “Julie & Julia”
Actor in a Supporting Role…Matt Damon in “Invictus” Woody Harrelson in “The Messenger” Christopher Plummer in “The Last Station” Stanley Tucci in “The Lovely Bones” Christoph Waltz in “Inglourious Basterds”
Actress in a Supporting Role… Penélope Cruz in “Nine” Vera Farmiga in “Up in the Air” Maggie Gyllenhaal in “Crazy Heart” Anna Kendrick in “Up in the Air” Mo’Nique in “Precious: Based on the Novel ‘Push’ by Sapphire”
5 Animated Feature Film instead of 3… “Coraline” “Fantastic Mr. Fox” “The Princess and the Frog” “The Secret of Kells” “Up” Art Direction “Avatar”
— Art Direction: Rick Carter and Robert Stromberg; Set Decoration: Kim Sinclair “The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus”
— Art Direction: Dave Warren and Anastasia Masaro; Set Decoration: Caroline Smith “Nine”
— Art Direction: John Myhre; Set Decoration: Gordon Sim “Sherlock Holmes”
— Art Direction: Sarah Greenwood; Set Decoration: Katie Spencer “The Young Victoria”
— Art Direction: Patrice Vermette; Set Decoration: Maggie Gray
Cinematography
— Mauro Fiore “Avatar”
— Bruno Delbonnel “Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince”
— Barry Ackroyd “The Hurt Locker”
— Robert Richardson “Inglourious Basterds”
— Christian Berger “The White Ribbon”
Costume Design “Bright Star” — Janet Patterson “Coco before Chanel” — Catherine Leterrier “The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus” — Monique Prudhomme “Nine” — Colleen Atwood “The Young Victoria” — Sandy Powell
Documentary (Feature) “Burma VJ” “The Cove” “Food, Inc.” “The Most Dangerous Man in America: Daniel Ellsberg and the Pentagon Papers” “Which Way Home”
Documentary (Short Subject) “China’s Unnatural Disaster: The Tears of Sichuan Province” “The Last Campaign of Governor Booth Gardner” “The Last Truck: Closing of a GM Plant” “Music by Prudence” “Rabbit à la Berlin”
Film Editing * “Avatar” Stephen Rivkin, John Refoua and James Cameron * “District 9” Julian Clarke * “The Hurt Locker” Bob Murawski and Chris Innis * “Inglourious Basterds” Sally Menke * “Precious: Based on the Novel ‘Push’ by Sapphire” Joe Klotz
Foreign Language Film * “Ajami” Israel * “El Secreto de Sus Ojos” Argentina * “The Milk of Sorrow” Peru * “Un Prophète” France * “The White Ribbon” Germany
Makeup * “Il Divo” Aldo Signoretti and Vittorio Sodano * “Star Trek” Barney Burman, Mindy Hall and Joel Harlow * “The Young Victoria” Jon Henry Gordon and Jenny Shircore
Music (Original Score) * “Avatar” James Horner * “Fantastic Mr. Fox” Alexandre Desplat * “The Hurt Locker” Marco Beltrami and Buck Sanders * “Sherlock Holmes” Hans Zimmer * “Up” Michael Giacchino
Music (Original Song) * “Almost There” from “The Princess and the Frog” Music and Lyric by Randy Newman * “Down in New Orleans” from “The Princess and the Frog” Music and Lyric by Randy Newman * “Loin de Paname” from “Paris 36” Music by Reinhardt Wagner Lyric by Frank Thomas * “Take It All” from “Nine” Music and Lyric by Maury Yeston * “The Weary Kind (Theme from Crazy Heart)” from “Crazy Heart” Music and Lyric by Ryan Bingham and T Bone Burnett
Short Film (Animated) * “French Roast” Fabrice O. Joubert * “Granny O’Grimm’s Sleeping Beauty” Nicky Phelan and Darragh O’Connell * “The Lady and the Reaper (La Dama y la Muerte)” Javier Recio Gracia * “Logorama” Nicolas Schmerkin * “A Matter of Loaf and Death” Nick Park
Short Film (Live Action) * “The Door” Juanita Wilson and James Flynn * “Instead of Abracadabra” Patrik Eklund and Mathias Fjellström * “Kavi” Gregg Helvey * “Miracle Fish” Luke Doolan and Drew Bailey * “The New Tenants” Joachim Back and Tivi Magnusson
Sound Editing * “Avatar” Christopher Boyes and Gwendolyn Yates Whittle * “The Hurt Locker” Paul N.J. Ottosson * “Inglourious Basterds” Wylie Stateman * “Star Trek” Mark Stoeckinger and Alan Rankin * “Up” Michael Silvers and Tom Myers
Sound Mixing * “Avatar” Christopher Boyes, Gary Summers, Andy Nelson and Tony Johnson * “The Hurt Locker” Paul N.J. Ottosson and Ray Beckett * “Inglourious Basterds” Michael Minkler, Tony Lamberti and Mark Ulano * “Star Trek” Anna Behlmer, Andy Nelson and Peter J. Devlin * “Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen” Greg P. Russell, Gary Summers and Geoffrey Patterson
Visual Effects * “Avatar” Joe Letteri, Stephen Rosenbaum, Richard Baneham and Andrew R. Jones * “District 9” Dan Kaufman, Peter Muyzers, Robert Habros and Matt Aitken * “Star Trek” Roger Guyett, Russell Earl, Paul Kavanagh and Burt Dalton
Writing (Adapted Screenplay) * “District 9” Written by Neill Blomkamp and Terri Tatchell * “An Education” Screenplay by Nick Hornby * “In the Loop” Screenplay by Jesse Armstrong, Simon Blackwell, Armando Iannucci, Tony Roche * “Precious: Based on the Novel ‘Push’ by Sapphire” Screenplay by Geoffrey Fletcher * “Up in the Air” Screenplay by Jason Reitman and Sheldon Turner
Writing (Original Screenplay) * “The Hurt Locker” Written by Mark Boal * “Inglourious Basterds” Written by Quentin Tarantino * “The Messenger” Written by Alessandro Camon & Oren Moverman * “A Serious Man” Written by Joel Coen & Ethan Coen * “Up” Screenplay by Bob Peterson, Pete Docter, Story by Pete Docter, Bob Peterson, Tom McCarthy
Here Goes The Link To The CarpetBagger Blog For The Complete List of Nominations
Carpetbagger Blogs N.Y.Times
Question: What Film or Films Do You Think Should Have Been Nominated of The Ten Film Nominated? What Films Do You Think Shouldn’t Have Been Nominated?
By the way, Punxsutawney Phil saw his shadow…6 More Weeks of Wintry weather. Well…Depending On Where You Live…Happy GroundHog Day!
Click on names for archives
Writers/Founders
My biggest objection is to the nomination of DISTRICT 9. The film squanders its potential by getting the apartheid analogy all wrong. In reality, the indigenous South African population was the aggrieved party in the conflict, not the invading party like in the film. This makes the real world crime much more heinous than the one softpedaled for the screen.
I also find the depiction of blacks in the movie to be monolithic in its racism. The Nigerians are ALL portrayed as superstitious voodoo practitioners, something with little to no basis in reality that I’m aware of. And the connection between South African blacks and insects just reinforces the stereotypical depiction of the black person as “the other.”
Your argument is a thoughtful one Tony, and I’m very appreciative you have launched the discussion here on Dee Dee’s exhaustive post. But the ‘man’s inhumanity to man’ theme came off quite compellingly in DISTRICT 9, leaving me to personally set aside those reservations you pose. But fair enough.
All due respect, Tony, I think the stereotyping in District 9 is sort of the point. We (those in power, in this case the white middle- and upper-class) fear “the other” as you put it, deny them their individuality and chances to prove us wrong. The assumption in sci-fi films is usually that we either fight the superior invaders’ might with humanity’s best and brightest in a last stand for the planet or that they are kind and gentle, enlightened superior beings full of wisdom and grace that we before too long have the insight to appreciate–our fear is supplanted by our awe. We don’t need District 9 to be an exact, perfect analogy to apartheid re: the indigenous v. invading argument we bring up. We already know apartheid. But what District 9 does is put those dynamics–which I think are more compelling and far-reaching than the specifics of South Africa’s historical situation–to play on a completely different genre. How do people in power deal with overwhelming fear of the other? What if that other is REALLY Other? It makes a very compelling argument for why humanity’s ugliest side might become the de facto solution, in stark contrast to how almost every other major film has ever portrayed human-alien interaction. Sam’s quite right that this is a larger theme of man’s inhumanity to man (and/or alien). The portrayal of the Nigerians is stinging, yes, but also very fitting within the socioeconomic logic of the film; why wouldn’t these violent subcultures arise to challenge the “order” imposed on them? In a culture this steeped in fear, and in this setting, how believable would it be to portray happily well-adjusted black professionals? It would raise the question, if the government and people can reconcile in this instance, why not in that one? In short, District 9 takes South Africa’s setting and cultural rifts and makes them through science fiction and fantasy, quite literally, universal. Fascinating stuff.
I disagree, jennybee. I find the disregard for accuracy in the analogy irresponsible and a result of lazy writing. The fact that the aliens ARE invaders leaves a huge plothole open for one to be able to make a good case that these are ALIENS to our planet, and thus our fear can be justified by any of a number of sound concerns over unknown side effects that present itself when something foreign enters our biosphere. Were one to carry THAT analogy then to racial separation, it becomes problematic indeed. Surely ideas like this can be explored in better-developed scenarios, and in fact they have. Which brings us to the second strike against the film.
It is an inferior film derivative of better thought provoking works such as ALIEN NATION (the film… not the series), Kafka’s METAMORPHOSIS, and V, among others. Verhoeven’s STARSHIP TROOPERS did a far better job of making the same point in a far more entertaining way. You can read more of my thoughts here if you’re interested.
So where does that leave us Tony? You are are voicing an “opinion” here and nothing more, a opinion which Jenny Bee and I do not share. There have been tons of positive reviews for the film across the blogosphere and in the professional ranks that disavow your criticisms, (not that your opinion is not the equal of anyone else’s) or at least don’t remotely mitigate the deep emotional resonance that this film accomplishes, and by well-earned craftsmanship I might add. You have a problem? Fair enough. But I don’t. I am grateful that you posted here as I always am, and I respect your astute judgement, but frankly as I loved this film, I find the criticism here inconsequential, as the film worked for me. And BTW, those other films you mentioned there are inferior to this one in my book. It’s always amazing how two people can look at the same film and come away with such different perception. But this is the nature of cinema and art in general.
Sam, you seem to be really annoyed by my dissenting opinion. This is a forum for debate (as set up by yourself when you wrote, “What Films Do You Think Shouldn’t Have Been Nominated?”). You may disagree with me, but as I’ve stated before elsewhere, an argument like Jennybee’s with concrete opinions of her own that she can explain logically holds a lot more water with me than simply citing the critical cognoscenti (unless you cite a specific quote that reinforces your own points). Simply citing critics as a monolithic entity can be irresponsible, as the same monolithic entity can come around and bite you on a movie you like and they don’t.
In any case, I feel as strongly about my opinion on this film as I do with others. But I don’t disrespect any one else’s, no matter how much I disagree with them.
Tony, I am really sorry you are taking it this way. I am not remotely annoyed by your dissenting opinion, and I furthermore encourage more of the same on these threads. However, I feel I am entitled to voice my own views politely and respectfully on same threads. Your position is well-defended for sure, and you are an established and gifted internet force in film criticism, but this is just one instance where I don’t agree, which in the large scheme of things doesn’t mean all that much I’ll admit. I think both you and Jenny superbly presented the conflicting positions.
Fair enough, Sam. My apologies. I misunderstood.
No need to apologize Tony. My biggest fault remains my use of general critical opinion for leverage. I have gotten into trouble many times as a result of this. I greatly appreciate receiving you comments here.
Tony Dayoub:
I would have to respectfully disagree. My biggest objection would be that THE BLIND SIDE got a Best Picture nod?!! Well, it certainly confirms the coming of the apocalypse and an oh-so obvious appeal to get people to watch the Oscars this year. It’s depiction of blacks is even more offensive than DISTRICT 9, IMO.
J.D. I am with you here. I actually liked DISTRICT 9 quite a bit, and have always dreaded a Best Picture nomination for THE BLIND SIDE, which is every bit as offensive as PRECIOUS.
You may be right about BLIND SIDE’s (and PRECIOUS, for that matter) depiction of blacks. But DISTRICT 9 was about all the ignorance I could take this year so I skipped the other films. I therefore cannot give an informed opinion on the matter.
I’m just fascinated by the fact that the Academy couldn’t nominate IL DIVO for Best Foreign Film (did Italy even submit it?), but gave it a nomination for Best Makeup. I’m also happy that Mirren and Plummer got nominated for THE LAST STATION, since that means it’ll probably play in my city now. As for the Best Pictures, I’ve only seen three of them (Locker, Basterds, Up) so I can’t judge the rest — though I can root for Locker to win.
Thanks Samuel. Both Mirren and Plummer deserved the nods they received for sure. Tht Makeup nomination for IL DIVO without a Best Foreign Film nod, is indeed bizarre. I’d say THE HURT LOCKER is the favorite at this point to win the top two awards.
Something is amiss (or dare I say not amiss) when weak films like An Education and Up in the Air get nominations…
Ah Tony, you again hit pay dirt with that comment. I am no big fan of AN EDUCATION, but UP IN THE AIR is rather a travesty. Of course THE BLIND SIDE may be the most dire of all the Best Picture nominees, at least from an artistic standpoint. The best films of the lot that did get nominated I would say are AVATAR, UP, A SERIOUS MAN and DISTRICT 9. But most bloggers would definitely add INGLOURIOUS BASTERDS to that shortlist.
Sam, such “gems” as The Blind Side and Precious haven’t opened here yet, so I rely on your sober judgement…
Well, this is neat and all and will make for much discussion around these parts and it’s the discussion that is interesting and fun.
But I’m actually curious as to how many people still watch the Oscar telecast itself? Am I the oddball who can’t stand the whole affair?
And that goes for all award shows — I love movies, never watch the Oscars. I love TV, wouldn’t dream of wasting my time on the Emmys. I love music, but watching the Grammy’s is like getting hit in the head with a shovel (although the type of music I love isn’t really represented by the Grammy Awards). I love sports, but ESPY’s are about the stupidest thing ever.
I’ll stop my curmudgeonly grumbling now and get back to work…
The Oscars is the only award show I do waste my time watching (only because betting is involved…same goes for my viewing of the Super Bowl…ha) but I agree…it is a torturous affair.
Yes David, the “Oscar Pool” is a regular endeavor here as well.
Troy, believe me I am with you all the way, but I still find that Oscar night is a fun time for my family and friends to enjoy and annual get-together with food, comeraderie and predictions. I’ve been doing it for about 25 years! Ha! When it comes to awards, I pay far more serious attention to the New York Film Critics Circle, the Los Angeles Film Critics Association and the National Society of Film Critics, whose choices are informed with far greater taste and expertise, but the Oscars are that eternal guilty pleasure.
I still watch the Oscars but the real fun awards show is the Indie Spirit Awards. They always have an outrageous host and they’re allowed to curse. Plus, there are actually films that I want to see that are nominated!
The biggest travesty is the nomination of PRECIOUS not just for Best Pic but also Lee Daniels as best director! One could argue there is a good message in the film and it is well acted…but I don’t understand how anyone could think it was well-directed! It was a Z-level student film in terms of the direction. Those slots should’ve gone to Campion and her BRIGHT STAR — the accomplished work of a seasoned veteran.
Though I know it has no chance…I’m stoked A SERIOUS MAN slipped in there for Best Pic! I don’t think that would’ve happened with only 5 nominees.
And I actually think it is cool something like DISTRICT 9 was invited to the dance as well.
It’s nice to see THE WHITE RIBBON get a best cinematography nod as well.
All in all…I think opening up to 10 Best Pic Slots allowed both big and small films to get in that would’ve otherwise slipped through the cracks.
David:
Yeah, I’ll have to agree with you on PRECIOUS, which for whatever attributes it does boast, does not deserve inclusion with any ‘best lists’ or awards compilations. But Monique certainly has many impassioned supporters, and I really can’t criticize her electrifying performance, only the character she plays. Oddly enough I do agree with you on the business with the ten nominees. Yeah it waters things down, but it enabled A SERIOUS MAN to get in, which is rather a great thing!
And by the way, thanks Dee Dee for this terrific post, which has generated some frank discussion! And I was asking people about the ground hog this morning, but you have provided the answer! Thank You!
I’m gonna probably vent a lot more about the nominations on my blog later this week, but man did these nominations disappoint. I think a good number of people thought having ten nominations would give more independent/critic favorite films a chance at the Oscar, but obviously that’s not the case. Sure its nice to see District 9 and Inglourious Basterds and A Serious Man (my pick for number 1) to get a nomination but The Blind Side? An Education? Precious? what happened? What about a film like Goodbye Solo (arguably the years best independent film) or Adventureland (a film that has been on enough top ten list to warrant recognition) or god forbid a foreign film (Its not like the Academy hasn’t done so before with great films like Cries and Whispers and The Grand Illusions getting nominations before and in a year like this where great foreign films like A Prophet, Mother, and White Ribbon being released it would have been nice to see). Also why did the Last Station get so many nominations? Did anyone like that movie? And while a Serious Man got nominated, where’s The Coens’ nomination for director or, and more importantly, Michael Stuhlbarg’s. Also I truly believe that Sam Raimi’s great Drag Me to Hell (the year’s most critically acclaimed horror film) should have gotten a spot. But of course its a horror film, so who cares? The Academy has always passed on horror films when it comes to best picture nominations. Dawn of the Dead, The Shinning, Repulsion, Suspiria, Rosemary’s Baby…this list goes on. Also why is there an animation category if Up is already nominated for best picture? well again, I’ll rant more later on my site this week.
Anu, I’ll definitely be checking up at your place for that commentary. Thanks for the heads-up. I liked Raimi’s DRAG ME TO HELL, but I would go with HOUSE OF THE DEVIL (which releases tomorrow on blu-ray) for the year’s best horror film. But so much of what you say here is dead-on. The nominations of THE BLIND SIDE and AN EDUCATION for Best Film were ludicrous, and I might also agree on PRECIOUS, though that film does have considerable critical backing. As you point out, the wider scope allowed A SERIOUS MAN, UP and DISTRICT 9 to secure berths, but the expense here may have been too prohibitive. I would have liked STAR TREK to get in ahead of THE BLIND SIDE for sure, and of course as David Schleicher mentioned above, the omission of Jane Campion’s BRIGHT STAR in a number of categories including the big one, was artistically scandelous. I will say though, the the two acting nominations won by THE LAST STATION for Helen Mirren and Christopher Plummer were well deserved. I saw that film and thought it exquisite. I agree with you that a foreign-language film should have gotten in. When you see none and again think about THE BLIND SIDE, you have to shake your head.
Sam Juliano said,”And by the way, thanks Dee Dee for this terrific post, which has generated some frank discussion! And I was asking people about the ground hog this morning, but you have provided the answer! Thank You!”
Sam Juliano, You’re very welcome…I’am surprised that Janet Patterson’s “Bright Star” Catherine Leterrier’s “Coco before Chanel” and Michael Haneke’s “White Ribbon” weren’t nominated for Oscars@…after your very positive reviews of these three films.
Cont…
EXACTLY. I mean EXACTLY what you and I predicted ove the phone three nights ago Sam. There is not one surprize here at all. THE HURT LOCKER, Bigelow, Bridges, Bullock, Waltz and Monique are your winners. The only upsey could be in ACTRESS. If Bullock comes up short, then it’ll be Carey Mulligen. I hope the spread is super-duper at this years party because the show itself is gonna be a BORE!
Hi! Troy Olsen,
Troy said, “Well, this is neat and all and will make for much discussion around these parts and it’s the discussion that is interesting and fun.”
…”But I’m actually curious as to how many people still watch the Oscar telecast itself? Am I the oddball who can’t stand the whole affair?”
Troy, I agree with you completely…because some bloggers, focus mainly on films and the Oscar@ telecast is the jewel in the crown for those bloggers whom “eat, sleep and drink” films 24/7…while waiting for the Oscar@ telecast.
Therefore, that is a good question and I most definitely, would like to see a poll where that question is asked and why they don’t watch the Oscar@ telecast.
…”And that goes for all award shows — I love movies, never watch the Oscars. I love TV, wouldn’t dream of wasting my time on the Emmys. I love music, but watching the Grammy’s is like getting hit in the head with a shovel (although the type of music I love isn’t really represented by the Grammy Awards).
I understand exactly, what you are saying here and I even agree with you to a certain extent, but in this life and in this world I feel that it’s a “game” that “we” play…Par”dom” my digression, but I feel the same way about certain holidays…it games that we “play” year after year…generation after generation.
Now, when it comes to the Oscar@ I think that can be used to a certain extent as a good learning tool for past, present and future generations (Especially, among “film lovers” who are interested in films…) The “present generation” to look back and reflect why certain films were nominated and others were overlooked.
On the other head, for “future generations” to look back and wonder why the “past generation” nominated these certain films.
I was once enrolled in a film course and that was exactly, what my instructor did…looked back at films that were nominated for Oscar@ and questioned why certain films were…“overlooked” from the silent era to the present.
…”I love sports, but ESPY’s are about the stupidest thing ever.”
Now, I don’t know about the ESPY’s awards…since I have never watched the ESPY’s awards, but on the other hand, I was going to voice my “true” feeling about sports, but I feel that the majority of men (Who post here…perhaps) would have my head on a… “platter!” (On the other hand, if a push come to shove at least ask Sam Juliano, to ban me for the rest of my… lifespan! )
…”I’ll stop my curmudgeonly grumbling now…”
I do not think that you are “grumbling” nor being “curmudgeonly,”
I think that you are just voicing your opinion about the Oscars@
telecast.
Thanks, for sharing!
DeeDee 😉
DeeDee
I suspect for many cinephiles not watching the Oscars is like a football fan not watching the Super Bowl. I actually do tune in around the 3 hours in to the Oscar telecast, just to find out who the big winners are.
But it’s the seemingly neverending bad comedy bits and song and dance numbers and commercials that make the thing feel like it drags on ad nauseum. Of course, I’m sure many say the same thing about the Super Bowl 🙂
One thing I’ve not tried is watching it on my DVR on an hour or so delay…I do the same thing for sports so I don’t have to watch all the commercials, so maybe I’ll give that a try.
Hi! Sam Juliano, Allan, Tony and WitD readers…
Just a little info(rmation) about why the Academy of Motion Picture Arts & Sciences may have nominated five additional films this year.
N.Y. Times Article: 10 Nominees for Best Picture Instead of Five…Nominations.
“On Friday night, the Academy of Motion Picture Arts & Sciences will host a reception for the opening of a cool-sounding new exhibit in its Grand Lobby promoting this year’s controversial move to 10 best picture nominees. Titled “The More The Merrier: Posters From The Ten Best Picture Nominees, 1936-1943” the exhibit will run through April 18 and feature not only original posters from such classics as “The Wizard Of Oz” and “Casablanca” but extremely rare foreign versions from South America and Europe as well.
The Academy’s title, ‘The More The Merrier’ comes from one of the 10 nominated movies in 1943 and explicitly and cleverly sends a message to the community that moving from five to 10 is the right thing to do for the Oscars. In addition, of course it is designed to get everyone in a ‘merry’ mood for the first group of 10 best picture contenders in 66 years.”
Here goes a link to the posters of some of the ten films that were nominated between 1936-1943…
Oscar Exhibitions…at the AMPS
Given its heritage and worldwide fame, The Oscars have the opportunity to be a magnificent celebration of film. However, they disappoint time and again.
I cannot criticise the choices as such, because opinions are opinions. BUT if Oscar has pretensions of being the major awards show on the planet why does it continue to ignore (that is the only conclusion one can draw) non-English language film?
There is an extraordinary bias that goes some way to invalidating the whole enterprise.
Personally, I’m sad that PONYO didn’t get nominated for animated film – it’s better than those put forward. I hope AVATAR wins best film. It is head and shoulders above the other nominees and I think only ANTICHRIST made more of an impact on me this year.
Still, whatever the criticisms of the process, it’s still exciting (though less so for those in the UK who like their sleep) to pull for your favourites amongst the chosen and hope…
Stephen, I think the Academy Awards are primarily an American institution – while foreign films are eligible for the top prize, their emphasis is going to be on homegrown product, much like the British Academy Awards or the Cesars or so forth. That the Oscars have more of a reputation is simply because they were among the first and because the American film industry has virtually always attracted the most worldwide attention.
As such, to me at least, their emphasis on American films is the least of their many, many problems.
Well, I agree with every point made here by Joel.
Fair enough, MovieMan.
But isn’t the problem that foreign films ARE eligible and therefore should be given a level playing field?
It would be better if the Oscars were open to only American films rather than pretend that they are inclusive and perpetuate this cosy bias. The Baftas here in the UK are just as guilty, as you say.
Stephen, this is the first time I was appraised that you were British. Anyway, your argument here is sound methinks.
Well, the idiot in the New York Post predicted that if there is going to be an upset, then it’ll happen in BEST ACTOR. He feels Clooney will prevail in the end. I’d like to know what drugs this asshole is doing cause I’d like to live in La-La land too. To think, even suggest that the Academy would snub a 40 year veteran like Jeff Bridges, in one of his best performances, is the delusional thinking of an idiot and someone who really never studied the politics of the Oscars. Bridges has been, consistantly, one of the most reliable and likeable screen actors for 4 decades. He’s nominated 4 times prior and never won. Yea, I’ll believe they’ll throw him over for Clooney the same day that Sam re-organizes his DVD collection. Bridges is the biggest lock of the night. Bet on it!
I would have to agree with Dennis. I think the harbinger of the Best Actor race was the SAG award Bridges won. This would seem to indicate that the actor’s branch, which is by far the largest in the Academy in numbers favors Bridges.
Joe, I wouldn’t count out Clooney, although I agree that Bridges is still the best bet.
I think Bridges has it, no question. But there are 5 weeks to go. If Clooney’s campaign gains momentum, that could create a scenario in which Bridges and Clooney split the vote and Jeremy Renner comes right up the middle for his chance to liplock Halle Berry (or in this case, Kate Winslet).
My money’s still on Bridges, though. Five-time Oscar nominee, no wins. Plus, he’s The Dude. He deserves a golden dude of his own.
I think the experiment with the ten nominess in the main category has failed. First of all, to have ten in only one category and then five or less in all the others makes little sense. Everyone knows that the films without director nominations have no chance. But aside from that the quality has been compromised, especially in a year as weak as this one.
Here, Here, FRANK GALLO. This WAS a terrible year in film. But, what makes it all the more sad is that with more nominations, one would think the Academy would cull more films from the plethora of critical darlings. Certainly UP was bound for a slot, the ten slots practically rolled out a red carpet for it. This PIXAR gem garnered almost perfect praise. But, THE BLIND SIDE???? The film was received with luke warm responses at best and, after seeing it, know its forgettable fare. Where was BRIGHT STAR, THE LAST STATION? STAR TREK received superlatives all round. Even that would have been justified. I agree with you Frank. Ten sucks. Go back to FIVE….
Give credit where its due: PRECIOUS for BEST PICTURE is less than mildly worthy. Its a pretentiously obvious film that would play better on TV. But, MONIQUE deserves the accolades. Her performance is simply ferocious. Although lighter in substance than the other four, Streeps performance might not be Oscar material but, she nails Julia Child in every way shape and form (sans height). Its another transfomation she can be proud of. I gotta think that those first perfect silent twenty minutes in UP were what sealed the deal on the Academys affections for the film to nominate it for BEST PICTURE. I defy anyone to name a more breath-taking opening this year, aside from the tense farm-house opener in INGLOURIOUS BASTERDS, that could whallop the audience so quickly. In my mind, that was the single most brillianty constructed sequence the movies saw in an entire twelve months. Finally, say what you want about THE LOVELY BONES, but Stanley Tucci’s creepy turn as the nerdy killer stays with you.
And, I’m sure Sam will aid me here, would someone help rejoice over the nomination for Colin Firth’s brave and brilliant performance in Tom Ford’s wonderful debut film, A SINGLE MAN. Firth inhabits Christopher Isherwoods protagonist with alternating charm, humor and despair with lightning speed. I know Jeff Bridges is gonna win. He deserves the award on merit, his performance is great and his clout doesn’t hurt either. But, had this been any other year, Firth would be running for the finish line without too much competition. My, favorite performance, though, should also be applauded.. Jeremy Renner’s heart-breaking and brutal bomb-squad leader in THE HURT LOCKER is both shattering and real. Instead of getting lost in the cliche’s a movie like this could produce, he plays the part with frightening reality. Renner is someone whose career is about to explode. Keep an eye on this kid, he’ll go far….
Finally: Let’s give a round of applause the the Academy for nominating Micheal Giaccino’s music for UP. The clear-cut-winner in my mind. Giaccino’s music is, literally, all over the musical map. His pathos threaded Americana in that brilliantly realized silent opening is perfectly challenged by the almost tribal inspired native jungle chords he uses to breath-taking effect during the chase to save Kevin (the big bird). Giaccino could be one of the most inspired composers in film in 10 years and his track record proves it. His score for THE INCREDIBLES is a jazzy mind-blower. His French themed RATATOUILLE garnered him a nod a few years back. And his work for JJ Abrams (ALIAS-LOST and, most recently, STAR TREK) is both allegiac and creative. Nobody in the category deserved the nom (or the win) more than Mike Giaccino…
Troy Olsen said,”But I’m actually curious as to how many people still watch the Oscar telecast itself? Am I the oddball who can’t stand the whole affair?”
Troy, here goes a link to a website that kind of took a survey of the numbers of viewers during the Oscar@ telecast last year…and according to a fellow blogger, who provided me with this link it appears as if viewership was/is waning, but you have to keep in mind that these statistics are from last year award show.
academy-awards-show-ratings
Cont…
I think it goes without saying that few people really take the Oscars seriously anymore. It’s a mutual back-slapping annual ritual, where industry people campaign for the chance to make more money and gain notoriety. There is good and bad with the expanded field. When one says that it’s watered down, I think that’s beside the point. It was never a lot of prohibitive quality in the first place. But I can see Sam’s point of it being a time or an excuse for movie fans to have a party.
Frank Gallo said,”I think the experiment with the ten nominess in the main category has failed. First of all, to have ten in only one category and then five or less in all the others makes little sense. Everyone knows that the films without director nominations have no chance. But aside from that the quality has been compromised, especially in a year as weak as this one.”
Hi! Frank Gallo, Sam Juliano, Allan and WitD readers…
I agree with every word that you have said, but most importantly,
the following article that I linked here is one of the most scariest articles that I have read…
Well, not that scary, but it may answer the question why some films that should have been considered for nominations were overlooked. Its-hard-out-here-for-an-oscar-voter-deadline-to-find-10-movies-
DeeDee 😉
That was an excellent link there Dee Dee! I just now finally got over to it.
I’ll bash the Oscars any chance I can get, horrid choices (for the most part) as usual.
Do serious film fans even care about the Oscars though? Even in HS I didn’t bother…
Oh wow, a wonderful discussion I see. My internet connectivity has been intermittent, thanks to my computer having blown up. I haven’t seen a single movie the whole week. I will be catching up with all the posts soon. Cheers!
I had a sentimental attachment to the Oscars, and I don’t think I’ve missed a show (or at least the opening hour or taped-broadcast-from-the-night-before) since 1991, when I was 7. I won’t be watching this year, primarily because they’ve done away – to my understanding (and correct me if I’m wrong) – with broadcasting the Honorary tributes and awards. An institution which disregards its own history is worth less than nothing – and this was the one area where the Academy usually got it right.
I see this is another step in American cinema severing itself from its history and that, to paraphrase Tony, is the true travesty.
I’ll wade into the debate on District 9 with some trepidation, as it’s late. Tony, I don’t quite understand why it’s so important to have a perfect analogy to the reality of South Africa, as you mention. This film isn’t about that.
Regarding Jeremy Renner, I agree he’s very good, but at 39 he’s no kid. If there’s any chance of an upset in that category, my guess would be Renner on the strength of his performance and of the film’s Oscarability.
Though Precious has some powerful moments, I think it’s ultimately an excessive, unevenly directed mess that’s at least 45 minutes too long.
Loathe as I am to admit it, I was moved by The Blind Side despite its many flaws and excesses.
[…] Sam’s predictions and picks: Best Actor Best Actress Best Supporting Actor Best Supporting Actress Nominees are announced […]