2012 Oscars Catch-All

If I had my way, Best Picture noms would've included Dragon Tattoo, Drive, Ides of March, Shame and Take Shelter...with acting noms to go with. I look back at the year and think it was weak, but I think that's due to the nominees in the entire awards circle. When thinking about it more thoroughly, I see that it truly was an amazing year as well. Just the picks in general felt...meh. Midnight deserves a writing nod, but not BP. War Horse, Artist, Incredibly Manipulative and Moneyball, for me, have no business being in BP category, though I'd give Moneyball writing for sure.

I dunno...the only thing I took with gusto was Meryl. Nothing else really pissed me off. Next year though, man alive, that's gonna give me some gray hairs I can tell already. Such great films coming out...both Oscar worthy or just plain entertaining:

Dark Knight Rises
Avengers
The Master
Lincoln
Prometheus
Spiderman (I'm curious)
Django Unchained (Tarantino!)
Hunger Games
Bourne Legacy
Hobbit
Skyfall (James Bond 007)
Total Recall (skeptic, but curious)
Great Gatsby
Brave (Pixar hasn't failed me yet)
World War Z
Gangster Squad
Wettest County
Cogan's Trade
Gravity
Arbitrage

Can't wait!!!

kexx wrote:

Lincoln

Even if the movie is bad I fully expect to see Daniel Day-Lewis nominated for best actor.

The pictures that have come out of him in makeup look so incredibly much like Lincoln it's almost disturbing, and from the sound of it he's doing his now standard completely disappear into the role you're playing routine.

I know! Daniel Day Lewis is fantastic in everything I've seen him. He blew me away when I first saw him in In The Name of The Father...ever since, I don't care what he makes, I want to see it. Plus the movie includes Joseph Gordon Levitt, Tommy Lee Jones, and directed by none other than Spielberg, so maybe this is his comeback. I fully expect a longlist of nominations for it, obviously, including DDL.

Comeback? Hasn't he won 2 Oscars in the last 8 years?

Never mind. Didn't win, apparently. Weird.

Well yeah, he has 3, 2 for directing, one for movie (Schindler's List), but still, it feels he hasn't really been doing stuff for the longest time. Last movie of his I thought was decent was Munich, and that was 2005. What has he directed since? Tin Tin, Indy 4 and War Horse. And from what I've come to expect from someone like him, those 3 movies feel like fluff, like he's not really trying, or like he's not really into the movies he's directing. So Lincoln gives me that vibe. It feels like he cares about this one. Like he's into it. Back to form. I have high expectations, so that's a risk for me I'm aware, but we'll see what comes out of this. Spielberg and Daniel Day-Lewis sounds like a powerhouse combo. Gangs of New York wasn't as succesful for Marty, but DDL's performance there was amazing.

EDIT: No, not in the last 8yrs. He won for Schindler in 94 and Private Ryan in 99, and hasn't won jack since...Nominated, yes, for Munich in 2005 and that's it. He's been busy being a producer for Transformers and other crapfests in recent years.

You say that Pixar hasn't failed you yet... I felt the same way until Cars 2, and now the trailers and images for Brave have me more apprehensive than I ever thought I'd be for a Pixar film.

I saw Ides of March in the weekend, and couldn't say I was really impressed. I was surprised by the lack of supporting actor nods for Albert Brooks in Drive, though.

I always forget Cars and Cars 2, you're so right. I stand corrected, Pixar has failed me...I thought Cars was dreadfully awful, and there's just no way I'm watching Cars 2...Brave? I'm hopeful...

kexx wrote:

EDIT: No, not in the last 8yrs. He won for Schindler in 94 and Private Ryan in 99, and hasn't won jack since...Nominated, yes, for Munich in 2005 and that's it. He's been busy being a producer for Transformers and other crapfests in recent years.

I actually thought you meant Daniel Day Lewis.

And I was thinking of Gangs of New York and There Will Be Blood.

El-Taco-the-Rogue wrote:

I saw Ides of March in the weekend, and couldn't say I was really impressed. I was surprised by the lack of supporting actor nods for Albert Brooks in Drive, though.

I thought Ides of March was a decent film, but also certainly not amazing. I didn't expect it to be so cynical and dark, though, so that was interesting. And yeah, Albert Brooks was snubbed like crazy this year.

I guess what it comes down to is that the Oscars have lost their lustre for me. As a long-time film buff (and I used to be really into film about a decade ago), I used to get excited about them every year, and now it just seems like the whole thing is a farce that has to do with internal politics or easy manipulation. I pay more attention to critic end-of-year lists or guild associations. Mind you, maybe the Oscars were always like that and I just didn't accept it until now.

kuddles wrote:

I thought Ides of March was a decent film, but also certainly not amazing. I didn't expect it to be so cynical and dark, though, so that was interesting.

Main reason I liked it was that it was cynical and dark.

kuddles wrote:
El-Taco-the-Rogue wrote:

I saw Ides of March in the weekend, and couldn't say I was really impressed. I was surprised by the lack of supporting actor nods for Albert Brooks in Drive, though.

I thought Ides of March was a decent film, but also certainly not amazing. I didn't expect it to be so cynical and dark, though, so that was interesting. And yeah, Albert Brooks was snubbed like crazy this year.

I guess what it comes down to is that the Oscars have lost their lustre for me. As a long-time film buff (and I used to be really into film about a decade ago), I used to get excited about them every year, and now it just seems like the whole thing is a farce that has to do with internal politics or easy manipulation. I pay more attention to critic end-of-year lists or guild associations. Mind you, maybe the Oscars were always like that and I just didn't accept it until now.

Well, the membership hasn't changed significantly in a while. It's like 95% old white people.

So, Hugo was...not that much fun to watch. The movie kept going between realism and fantasy at seemingly random points that just feels discomforting. The visuals matched this feeling: For a film that wanted to celebrate Melies with his illusionary movie magic and elaborate fantastical scenarios, costumes and sets, it's quite disappointing to just stick to occasional flashes of pretty generic-looking CGI. Made me wish Michel Gondry had directed this film or something.

Plot points are added and then immediately dropped, there was a shocking amount of sloppy inconsistencies for a Scorsese film (both major and minor), and there are also weird asides with no discernible purpose, or whose only purpose is to make a reference to an old film. For instance, out of the blue the Station Inspector just races up a ladder using nothing but his upper body strength. First of all, that's a wholly ridiculous and unbelievable feat in general, especially after they tried to establish him as being incredibly clumsy. They never show why he needed to climb that ladder. It never comes into play later on in the film. It's just there...