Oscar Nominees Announced

[RockinAkin]

Shame on the academy for having Spiderman nominated for Visual Effects!
Minority Report was completly downright robbed.

Samantha Morten should have gotten a Best Supporting Actress nod as well.

-DivideByZero-

[noisewar]

if Daniel Day Lewis doesn't take Best Actor, I'll never watch Oscars again.

[RockinAkin]

Originally posted by noisewar
if Daniel Day Lewis doesn't take Best Actor, I'll never watch Oscars again.
Agreed. :thumbsup:

-DivideByZero-

[Mazer]

Ed Harris nominee for suporting role? Is that because of the way he supports Xsi ?:applause:
And I think the best supporting role chould go to Scrat from Ice Age :p he rocks:airguitar

Just messing around...

[elfufu]

i remember george lucas saying in an interview in the episode 1 cinefex mag, "ILM is at least 10 years ahead of other studios"

this is the deciding moment i guess.

i think yoda finally met his match.. gollum is gonna kill someone

[Mazer]

One question: Do you guys believe in Oscars? I mean it looks to me that the choices have not much to do with movies and mutch more with marketing, money and even politics...
How exactly does the voting works?

[SheepFactory]

I cant believe eminem got nominated , i have no respect for the oscars anymore.

:annoyed:

[BrandonD]

I'm more interested in the VES awards. I think to many of us it would mean more to be recognized not by the overall Academy, but instead by your peers in the industry.

[elfufu]

Originally posted by Sheep Factory
I cant believe eminem got nominated , i have no respect for the oscars anymore.

:annoyed:

have you even seen 8 mile? cause its actually ok

[noisewar]

he didn't get nominated, the movie got a best song nomination. his acting was ok, the movie was actually decent.

and WHY WASN'T GOLLUM NOMINATED?!!?

[coboman]

Gollum for best suporting actor !!!, I can't believe Nicolas Cage is nomated again, I hate the way he acts.

Someone knows of a link to check "The Cathedral"? I've been wanting to see that short for months.

[beaker]

>>Someone knows of a link to check "The Cathedral"? I've been wanting to see that short for months

There is just a trailer for it on his web site:
http://www.platige.com/katedra/eng_/strona_glowna.html
You can't screen an animation(or any film for that matter) on the internet in whole otherwise you can be disqualified for the academy awards.

[Mazer]

Beaker, I prety sure I've seen 100% gray before it was nominated last year. I'm I wrong?

[JamesDeschenes]

Originally posted by Mazer
Beaker, I prety sure I've seen 100% gray before it was nominated last year. I'm I wrong?

Hey yeah thats true isn't it.. I remember downloading it and then seeing on the oscars and thought "hey thats 50% grey!"

[moovieboy]

Originally posted by Mazer
One question: Do you guys believe in Oscars? I mean it looks to me that the choices have not much to do with movies and mutch more with marketing, money and even politics...

I'm not sure what you mean by the Oscars not having much to do with movies? I hope that feeling for you and others here isn't derived from the Academy not picking the films you liked...

Sure, there's a lot of marketing involved... But it usually amounts to nothing more than our Daily Variety's being buried in "For Your Consdieration" ads from December until the ballots are turned in...

That and lots of free screenings for WGA, SAG, AFTRA, AMPAS, DGA, etc, members... Oh, and lots of free screener videos (Finally got to see "Signs" and show my wife "Road to Perdition" that way...)

There's around 5,600 Academy Members. Many of them (if memory serves) are older, the majority are actors, and many of them are from Orange County, California. (Knowing what this means helps you A LOT when voting on Oscar Ballots in your local pool!)

Depending on the category, peers vote for the nominees: Directors choose directors, etc... Some are by commitees made up of a range of professions and the Best Picture noms come from the whole Academy...

Now, granted, from this point on, the ads get more intense and there is some backbiting, backlashes (like that against "a Beautiful Mind") as different films try to shine better in their spotlights... but it's given much more weight by the Hollywood Press than is warranted... :hmm:

-Tom

[Mazer]

Yes it whas 50% not 100% :blush:

[Mazer]

moovieboy I'v just seen your post.

I'm just saing that some things are realy strange, like last year it seemed llike if Hollywood whas rediming himself of the way they treated black actors for decades giving too nice oscars to too politicaly corect African American actors.
Maya is getting an Oscar it seems, well Some years ago it was Softimage...maybe next year Houdini?
It all just seems strange from the outside...they might be 5600 menbers but they seam to all think the same way about everithing...

[moovieboy]

Well, keep in mind that you never see the voting results... So you NEVER see how close any race really was.

For example, Halle Berry could have had only ONE more vote than Nicole Kidman or Sissy Spacek... This is how many explain the "Marisa Tomei fiasco" of 1993 :D

Again, folks try to read too much into the results. No one knows how ALL of the Academy feels on any of the Awards... and we never will. All that matters is the winne- AHEM- the one the Oscar goes to... :D

-Tom

[beaker]

>>Beaker, I prety sure I've seen 100% gray before it was nominated last year. I'm I wrong?

he never released the entire finished thing to the web, only early drafts of it.

>>Maya is getting an Oscar it seems, well Some years ago it was Softimage...maybe next year Houdini? It all just seems strange from the outside...they might be 5600 menbers but they seam to all think the same way about everithing...

That's the Scientific Oscars. It is a totally different group of people voting on it.

[lricho]

they might be 5600 menbers but they seam to all think the same way about everithing...
hehe. sounds like these guys are the auditors from terry pratchett's discworld novels

[Luke Werhli]

I'm with Merryl Strip, she was the most nominated actress in Oscar history and she's not givin a shit for them because she understands how the industry works.

My country, Brazil, was also not represented in the Oscar, but it was running in the Golden Globe. And the movie City of God was awarded in several film awards.

Besides that, the Oscar show is one of the most boring events in TV and shows only what the american comercial elite wants to see and sell.

[RockinAkin]

Originally posted by beaker
>>Beaker, I prety sure I've seen 100% gray before it was nominated last year. I'm I wrong?

he never released the entire finished thing to the web, only early drafts of it.

Actually, the entire final movie WAS posted on the net months before the oscars.
I'm 100% sure of this.

-DivideByZero-

[moovieboy]

originally posted by Luke Werhli
My country, Brazil, was also not represented in the Oscar, but it was running in the Golden Globe. And the movie City of God was awarded in several film awards.

So, are you saying that "CITY OF GOD" is much better than "EL CRIMEN DEL PADRE ", "HERO", "THE MAN WITHOUT A PAST ", "NOWHERE IN AFRICA", and "ZUS & ZO"?? Did you see any of these other films?

-Tom

[moovieboy]

Plus, if it were the "american commercial elite," then the nominees for the Best Picture would read:

"Spider-man", "Star Wars Episode II: AOTC", "Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets", "Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers" and "My Big Fat Greek Wedding"... :D

-Tom

[Gentle Fury]

Originally posted by beaker
>>Beaker, I prety sure I've seen 100% gray before it was nominated last year. I'm I wrong?

he never released the entire finished thing to the web, only early drafts of it.

>>Maya is getting an Oscar it seems, well Some years ago it was Softimage...maybe next year Houdini? It all just seems strange from the outside...they might be 5600 menbers but they seam to all think the same way about everithing...

That's the Scientific Oscars. It is a totally different group of people voting on it.

actually thats not true.....i saw it on his 3dluvr site long before the oscars....then i saw it at siggraph this past year.

and it was the whole thing.

[keithlango]

Yes, "Fifty Percent Grey" was shown in it's entirety (or near entirety) online. But that doesn't necessarily disqualify a film. From the Oscars rules page itself:
(http://www.oscars.org/74academyawards/rules/rule19.html)

- - - - - - - - - - - - - -

2. To be eligible for award consideration for the 2002 awards year, a short film must fulfill (within two years of the film's completion date) one of the following criteria between December 1, 2001and October 31, 2002:

(a) The film must have been publicly exhibited for paid admission in a commercial motion picture theater in Los Angeles County for a run of at least three consecutive days (no fewer than two screenings a day). Student films cannot qualify in this manner.
OR
(b) The film must have participated in a "recognized" competitive film festival and MUST HAVE WON THE BEST-IN-CATEGORY AWARD. Proof of award must be submitted with the film print. "Recognized" competitive film festivals comprise those established film festivals on the Academy's Short Films Awards Festival List which may be obtained from the Academy.

Television or internet exhibition anywhere does not disqualify a film, provided such exhibition occurs after its Los Angeles theatrical release, or after receiving its festival award.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -

So long as "Fifty Percent Grey" had met it's nomination eligibility criteria BEFORE the film was put online, then the film was not disqualified. I recall Raurie's film winning some juried award at a film festival. This most likely qualified the film for Academy consideration. For a list of which Film Fests are on the Academy's list of Short Film Festivals that qualify a film, go here.
( http://www.oscars.org/74academyawards/rules/rules_shortfest.html)

You'll note that SIGGRAPH is included on the list, which is probably how "The Cathedral" got it's qualifications this year (I can't recall if it won any other festival). Theoretically, "The Cathedral" could have been shown online as early as the day after SIGGRAPH and it still would have been qualified.

Hope this helped.
-k

ps: there's a bitter sweet side to getting nominated if you're a small independent. The Academy requires that you submit a 35mm film print for the archives upon nomination (quote from the rules page again: "Every award shall be conditioned upon the delivery to the Academy of one print of every film nominated for final balloting for all Academy Awards, and such print shall become the property of the Academy, with the proviso, however, that the Academy shall not use such print for commercial gain."). So if you get nominated based on a video presentation (like at Siggraph), you're suddenly on the hook to try and come up with the thousands of dollars necessary to get a film version and hand over a print or risk losing your nomination. Oy!

[roromx]

The Mexican nominees really suck

Its better the brazilian film than "el crimen del padre amaro" from Mexico

[Gregwid]

Yes Daniel Day Lewis,"The butcher" deserves it totally.Peter Jackson is still the best director in my opinion,no matter what anyone tells me.:beer:

[Earthborn]

"Peter Jackson is still the best director in my opinion,no matter what anyone tells me..."

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Speaking of PJ, can anyone explain to me how a movie can be nominated for Best Picture WITHOUT the director being nominated as well. The same thing happened last year with, if I'm not mistaken, 'Moulin Rouge'. This to me is like the Academy saying "the movie is a brilliant, Oscar-worthy masterpiece...but unfortunately your directorial talents didn't cut it this year." Huh?? Isn't the director one of the main, if not THE main, reasons why a film is a success or failure? If 'the Two Towers' is not being nominated due to its direction OR acting ( come to think about it, I don't even think it was nominated for best adaption for film ), then what pray tell is it being nominated for?? I'm as much a visual effects fan as anyone else...but please don't tell me it was nominated because it LOOKED good. You know how the Academy lo-o-oves those epic films!

[bkroll]

In my book, Adaptation was the best movie of the year. I think the movie was too smart for Hollywood. Too bad is didn't receive noms for Picture / Director. But all 3 actors have a good chance of winning.

[moovieboy]

@Earthborn:

As I mentioned earlier in the thread... The Director nominees are chosen by fellow directors and Best Picture noms are chosen by the entire membership of the academy. That's how you get the problems of "films that direct themselves." :rolleyes:

-Tom

[Luke Werhli]

moovieboy, you should receive an Oscar for the most fanatic Oscar guy in the world.

Special achievement.

[moovieboy]

Hmmmmm... Well, I guess they don't call me "moovieboy" fer nuthin' :D

-Tom

[Luke Werhli]

hehhehe.

[Savage_Henry]

I think Adrian Brody's going to take Best Actor. I was in absolute awe of him in the Pianist.

And on a side note- If any of you read www.aintitcool.com you probably saw that Knowles voted Sympathy for Mr. Vengence as his top pick for last year. "WTF is that?" you say? It's a little known Korean film, I gotta tell you guys...don't forget about this movie. It's just plain FANTASTIC.


P.S.- SUPER tight race between Frida and TIME MACHINE for best makeup...I'm on the edge of my seat.

[bkroll]

For the telecast itself, I wish they would forgo lip-synching the song nominees and actually show the Best Animation Short Film nominees. These shorts deserve to be seen by the world and sadly, most will not be seen outside the CG industry.

[Earthborn]

Thanx for clearing things up for me, Moovieboy.

I did read your earlier post...but I guess it went in thru one eye and out the other ;)

[ilasolomon]

:surprised You really care about Oscar Show?! I can't believe! :hmm:

[jussing]

Originally posted by Mazer
One question: Do you guys believe in Oscars? I mean it looks to me that the choices have not much to do with movies and mutch more with marketing, money and even politics...

The Oscars are so ridiculous they're funny. -Mostly because of the completely insane choices of who wins and who loses, and how seriously everyone in Hollywood takes it, celebrating themselves.

Alfred Hitchcock never won an oscar for best directing. So what does "best director" mean? Better than Hitchcock?? Um, yeah, sure. Ugh.

-And they use that as a quality stamp in trailers... "Academy Award ("tm") winner This, Academy Award ("tm") winner That"... Doesn't it make you puke? Remember how the voiceover in the trailer for "Changing Lanes" advertised "Academy Award ("tm") Winner Ben Affleck"... HE WON FOR SCRIPT-WRITING, NOT ACTING, for chrissakes. No matter, he won an Awademy Award ("tm"), and that's good publicity, which is all those awards were ever good for.

The whole thing is insane...

IF, theoretically, the choices made any remote sense, the show would still be a ridiculous, commercial meat parade, but at least it'd have credibility.

Alone the fact that they cut off people's speeches, proves the show has nothing to do with honoring the winners.

Not even visual effects - which would be the most important category :) - means anything anymore: Gladiator won over Hollow Man... surely no mortal soul in this forum would put any credibility in the Oscars after that? :surprised

How exactly does the voting works?

If one was less lazy than I am, one could propably find the voting systems on www.oscars.org...

But regarding VFX I believe it works like this:

a) each contestant makes a presentation of the visual effects for the visual effects branch of the academy (or maybe the whole academy?)

b) the visual effects branch alone then vote for which movies get nominated.

c) the whole academy then vote who wins.

Cheers :),
- jonas

[beaker]

>>Alone the fact that they cut off people's speeches, proves the show has nothing to do with honoring the winners.

I remember one year where they didn't do that. The show went till 3am. I fell asleep on the couch at 1am and woke up at 2:30 and it was still going. Nothing like an awards show that goes 6 hours. :) I think there is a point where they just had to put their foot down.

[jussing]

Originally posted by beaker
>>Alone the fact that they cut off people's speeches, proves the show has nothing to do with honoring the winners.

I remember one year where they didn't do that. The show went till 3am. I fell asleep on the couch at 1am and woke up at 2:30 and it was still going. Nothing like an awards show that goes 6 hours. :) I think there is a point where they just had to put their foot down.

There's a point there, I must admit.

Still, cutting people off strikes me as unbelievably rude, when they use a huge amount of time on commercials 'n' bull... :shrug:

Cheers,
- jonas

[CGTalk Moderation]

This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.