View Full Version : 2002 Oscars
02-12-2003, 12:18 AM
"Chicago" has the edge right out of the nomination shoot because of its bright, jazzy, unlifting beat and it's time for a musical to receive the best picture award after Moulin Rouge's nomination last year.
Michael Caine in "The Quiet American" is the dark horse sleeper for best actor, but politically the movie is ripe for recognition as war is around the corner and Caine has been around a while, close but never quite there. Known as an actor's actor he is well respected. He could slip through in an upset.
If "Chicago" gets the best picture nod, Nicole Kidman might benefit for being passed over last year for "Moulin Rouge." She still has the sympathy vote and her role distinquishes her from her past characters - like she had to really act in this one. She upsets Renée Zellweger for best actress.
Ed Harris for best supporting actor, though all the nominees deserved the award. Again Harris was passed up in "Pollock." Chris Cooper loses out in a close vote.
Meryl Streep for bes supporting actress as a tribute to both her many nominations, her acting, and the movie "Adaptation" which gets passed over.
Martin Scorsese for best director because he wants it so much and worked for so long for it. A balanced distribution of awards this. The politically nice thing to do this year.
Of course, Adaptation gets the best adapted screenplay award.
The rest, take your pick.
02-12-2003, 01:03 PM
All in all, I thought it was a pretty bland selection. No real surprises and once again the omissions are frustrating: Alan Arkin in 13 Conversations, Dennis Quaid in Far from Heaven are better choices than Paul Newman or Ed Harris I feel. And there were fresher, more lively, unique performances like Adam Sandler and Emily Watson in Punch Drunk Love, James Spader and Maggie Gyllenhaal in Secretary, Hugh Grant in About a Boy, and Samantha Morton in Minority Report. And Todd Haynes' s direction of Far from Heaven not being acknowledged in favor of Rob Marshall's clumsy work for Chicago is unforgivable. (Queen Latifah's nod is a joke as well.) Oh well.
02-12-2003, 02:07 PM
I'm a little shocked that About Schmidt is not up for best picture. It's been replaced by The Pianist, so I'll just shut up on that.
I think Chicago has a huge shot at the top film prize. It would be nice to see it and GONY win, but I'm gonna go loco and say that The Hours will this year.
Jack's got the acting prize. It's locked. If he doesn't, I will be choking on my beer again in March. His only competition is Dan Day-Lewis, and i think the voters would rather see Jack in his sunglasses ripped to the tits than a sober serious Irishman politely speak & leave the stage. (Sorry, but it's true)
Nicole Kidman for Best Actress. I got $50 on her taking it.
Martin Scorsese for Best Director.
John C. Reilly for best supporting actor, Meryl Streep for supporting actress. Those are the biggies, and i think My Big Fat Greek wedding will win for original screenplay.
02-12-2003, 02:20 PM
"Ripped to the tits."? That's hilarious! I hope Reilly and Streep get it -Walken would be good too- but I'm holding out for Julianne Moore for Best Actress (even though I don't think she really stands a chance in Hell) and either Caine or Day-Lewis for Best Actor. If anybody else wins I guess I'll get "ripped to the tits"!
02-12-2003, 08:24 PM
I think that dave durbin has a point with the absence of Adam Sandler and Emily Watson in Punch Drunk Love, James Spader and Maggie Gyllenhaal in Secretary, Hugh Grant in About a Boy from the Oscar nomations. While I didn't see Punch Drunk Love, I did see both Secretary and About A Boy. The performances and movies themselves had intelligence, entertainment, and a solid substance in their genres that deserve recognition. I do feel a twang of regreat that they didn't get nominated, especially now that you pointed it out - Maggie Gyllenhaal who really had an inside track based on the attention she was getting from other awards she'd received.
02-12-2003, 09:11 PM
I agree. Punch-Drunk was too "alternative" I think.
02-22-2003, 05:59 PM
Jake Gyllenhaal. Of course his sister, Maggie, was delicious in "Secretary," but Jake's performance in "The Good Girl" illustrated quite a lot of depth. I almost thought that when the film was released, Jake Gyllenhaal was a shoe-in for a Best Supporting Actor nod.
02-22-2003, 08:14 PM
If The Two Towers wins best picture, I'll be speechless. Not from anger, but from amazement that the Academy forgot to issue the memo that any non-event, non-dramatic film be allowed to win Best Picture... Someday, I would love for a foreign film to win BP, just to see a day in which the entire American film industry admits that the best film made in a given year was not made by them. They'll hand out Director's awards, and the occasional acting or screenwriting nod, but it would be true generosity and stunning honesty (dependent upon the circumstance) for a foreign film to win Best Picture.
02-22-2003, 11:13 PM
2002 is an appropriate year for a foreign language film to win best picture. Nine different english language films were named Best Picture by the critics associations in the US because there were many very good movies but not a single one for the pantheon. In my dream world, L'emploi du Temps(Time Out) or Atanarjuat(The Fast Runner) would win best picture. On the other hand, isn't Pedro actually nominated for Best Director? Could he win just like he did at the European Academy Awards? He has accepted so many awards worldwide for All About My Mother and Talk to Her that he is learning not to make an ass of himself on T.V. Forgive him for assuming we'd understand a single english word he said(kinda) at the 2000 ceremony.
02-23-2003, 08:07 AM
You know, I started thinking this morning about the categories that no-one really pays any attention to, like best original song. Everyone has an opinion on best actor or best director, but what would we all like to win best original song? Personally, I'm putting my cross next to Paul Simon's 'Father and Daughter' from The Wild Thornberrys. I dare say U2'll walk away with it, though, through sheer force of pomposity.
And what about best short film? Personally, I felt the snubbing of Chris Morris for My Wrongs 8245-8249 and 117 was... well, it was entirely predictable, actually. But it would have been nice to see him get up on stage and make an acceptance speech as brilliant as his BAFTA acceptance speech for 'The Day Today', where he caused VT editors to go into cardiac arrest with one unbroadcastable reference to Meat Loaf's crack habit. :D
02-23-2003, 10:55 AM
Personally, I have enjoyed Philip Glass and his different musical strains and melodies for many years, and I hope that he will be recognized as a unique and talented composer that he is at this year's Academy Awards for Original Score.
I haven't been interested in Eminem and have had great reservations about who he is, but I can't deny that his song in ''Lose Yourself,'' from ''8 Mile,'' Music by Eminem, Jeff Bass, and Luis Resto; Lyric by Eminem has a strong message and a great resonance. Any song from "Chicago" would be fine with me.
02-23-2003, 11:05 AM
There have been very few signs of true life at the Academy Awards the past oh, I don't know, 30 years or so. My favorite moments have been Robin Williams singing 'Blame Canada' from South Park, Woody Allen's surprise visit last year, Whoopi Goldberg's in-joke about Sharon Stone putting her husband in a cage with a Komodo dragon which in turn attacked him, moments like that. The only thing I'm looking forward to seeing this year is Eminem's performance; it's bound to be the highlight of the entire show even though I doubt he'll win.
02-24-2003, 04:03 AM
Incidentally, is Steve Martin the host this year? I thought his performance at the 2000 ceremony was funnier than any film he's made since the late 80s.
02-24-2003, 10:55 AM
Yes, Steve Martin is hosting the Oscars this year.
02-24-2003, 11:16 AM
Good stuff. Anyone who wilfully abuses his position as Oscar host to insult Tom Hanks and Russell Crowe is alright by me. ;)
02-24-2003, 10:04 PM
It's also good that Whoopi Goldberg is not hosting this year's Oscar now. I can't stress how tired I am of seeing her host. Not that I don't think she's funny but I'd just like seeing someone different for a change.
02-25-2003, 03:12 PM
I like Eminem. He and I are the same age & we both listened to old school rap growing up. (He decided to make it a career-I decided to be a worker drone and listen to The Doors)
His role in 8 Mile was tailored for him but it was obvious he concentrated on making a good movie (keepin' it real, y'all).
If you saw the "Up in Smoke" tour video, you would have seen a rapper who knows what he's doing. He was AWESOME on that first tour. I think he should stick to rapping. No more acting please, Em. You were good in Hanson's tribute to trailer trash, but..
Best song this year? "All That Jazz" from Chicago. It's just a barnstormer. "The Hands That Built America" is great too, but it's sung by an Irishman- not an American. Bono & co. were hired guns. Why not have Eddie Vedder sing it?
02-27-2003, 06:19 AM
'Hands' is a great tune, but aren't the lyrics a bit embarrassing? I always get this mental image of Bono reading that full-page Variety ad Scorsese took out that reprinted the lyrics and thinking "Christ, they needed an extra draft."
03-10-2003, 02:34 PM
Last night Roger and Richard bestowed their votes for the oscars this year:
BEST PICTURE: both picked Gangs of New York
BEST ACTOR: both picked Nicolas Cage
BEST ACTRESS: Roger picked Julianne Moore
Richard picked Diane Lane
BEST Sup. ACTOR: Roger picked Chris Cooper
Richard picked Chris Walken
BEST Sup. ACTRESS: Roger picked Kathy Bates
Richard picked Catherine
anybody agree? disagree?
03-10-2003, 03:14 PM
I have lost my faith in Ebert.
I could go with Nick Cage, Julianne Moore and Chris Cooper. Those all seem like reasonable choices. Gangs as best picture?? Well... I found it historically interesting but not a terribly compelling story. That seems like a pat on the back for big industry filmmaking. But whatever, that's their bread and butter. They wouldn't be on tv if they weren't picking films people have seen right?
03-10-2003, 05:22 PM
Well, I don't know how anyone could think "Gangs of New York" would be as moving as "The Pianist" but that's their taste so I can't force them. However, Ebert's choice for "Gangs of New York" to win Best Picture is rather strange. He didn't really praise the film but he did give it a very good review. He said it wasn't amongst Scorsese's best. In "The Pianist," Ebert gave a much greater review. Plus "The Pianist" seems to be right up in Ebert's alley as far as his tastes.
I don't know but this is one of those times where I feel Ebert has really lost it. After his positive review to Crocodile Hunter: Collision Course (and his review of the film on the Chicago Sun Times is perhaps the worst written review he's ever given to a film), I began to wonder if he was feeling ok.
03-10-2003, 08:26 PM
Well I thought Nicolas Cage has accomplished his best performance since "Leaving Las Vegas," but I still wonder why Ebert would pick him over Adrien Brody. I didn't see the "If We Picked the Winners" special but I've seen "The Pianist" three times already and I'd pick Brody. He's taken a lot more chances than any of the four nominees amongst him, even Michael Caine. Surely I do believe Nicolas Cage has done a good job in "Adaptation" in creating a portrait of a lonely, shy, would-be screenwriter but there are lots of performers out there who could play that role. How many people can play Mr. Szpilman? Not very many. Out of all the nominees in the Best Actor category, Brody has convinced me much greater in being physical in performing. Even his facial expressions are far more memorable and frightening.
03-11-2003, 09:22 AM
I wonder if Ebert and his cohort were actually picking their favorites, or were trying to predict the winners via the Academy. I think this may be Scorcese's "pity year" to win his awards that the Acadaemy has long-denied him. "Just turn in something credible, Marty, and we'll do the rest..."
03-11-2003, 02:30 PM
The Pianist was the best film of the year. I will go on record that it won't win a damn thing. Why? because Roman gave the middle finger to all his detractors. AGAIN. He did it with Tess 20 years ago. He's labelled as an "enfant terrible" and then delivers gorgeous works of art. I love the man. Did you see his taped acceptance speech while skiing on a swiss mountain by his daughter? He just says his piece and flies down the mountain! Great! It's like saying "kiss my ass".
The oscars always have winners where you just shake your head:
Stanley Kubrick never won for best director or picture. Unforgivable. The French Connection was better than A Clockwork Orange? The craftsmanship was astounding. Anybody can film a car chase-just strap a camera to a car and put your foot on the gas.
Who thought Redford's Ordinary People was better than Raging Bull? HOUSEWIVES! that's who!
Or how about Rocky over Taxi Driver? Too violent?
Who in film schools (besides steadicam cinematographers)looks at Rocky?
A rule of thumb for oscar pools: bet on films that grandma might like and you have your winners. If it's popular, non-political and has lots of good looking actors in it, chances are it'll win. Chicago wouldn't be a bad choice to sweep.
The "excellence in film" motto is a load of tosh.
I can't wait to shout at my TV on the 23rd.
03-11-2003, 08:49 PM
Surely I do believe Nicolas Cage has done a good job in "Adaptation" in creating a portrait of a lonely, shy, would-be screenwriter but there are lots of performers out there who could play that role.
I find this observation odd because it seems to be missing half of the movie's leading actor total performance. I might agree with pipsorcle, except when you factor in the two roles Nicholas Cage portrayed then you get twice the acting talent to consider and use to justify Nicolas Cage for Best Actor. Creating a portrait of a loud, boyish, confident successful screenwriter in addition to the "lonely, she, would-be screenwriter" in the same film is remarkable acting.
03-11-2003, 10:15 PM
Tabuno, thanks for pointing out the Donald Kaufman character Nicolas Cage plays besides Charlie Kaufman, Donald's brother. I will stand firm and say this is absolutely the greatest duel-role playing I've ever seen on film, especially when the Kaufmans interact with one and another. Before it used to be that characters who were played by the same actor/actress could appear in scenes together and their lines would come one after another, not simultaneously. Nicolas Cage certainly has proved himself to be a virtuoso in this regard. In fact, he has been able to create these Kaufman characters not so much into stereotypes but more grounded in how such characters would in fact behave in real life.
However, there's something just extraordinary about how Adrien Brody pulls off Whadyslaw Szpilman as a person. I myself am an artist besides a filmmaker and I swear, this is the greatest performance I've seen of an artist suffering tremendously. When I compare Nicolas Cage towards Adrien Brody, I'm referring to the types of characters in different worlds and situations. For an artist, especially a marvelous pianist such as Szpilman to have to suffered so much, loosing the home that he was raised in, dealing with his homeland going to the rocky bottom, having to hide his amazing ability behind so he could try to survive in the world without it, nearly dying of hunger, having to be constantly on the run. There is such conviction Brody brings to his role and so much realism, that I thought he was literally Szpilman, not an actor. The amazing part is when Szpilman's friend, the Polish singer, arrives in the apartment he's hiding out at with her husband and finds out he's been plagued with a terrible disease due to hunger. I've seen a lot of performances of people acting as if they had diseases in films before but this one by Brody just seems too true, it's frightening. I mean, you look at Nicolas Cage, Michael Caine, Jack Nicholas, and Daniel Day-Lewis, they didn't have to suffer anything (or did they?) to play their roles. They just had to work REAL hard and project their performances believable enough. Adrien Brody on the other hand, in preparation for playing Szpilman, went through a diet much similar to those Jews who lived in Poland during the time of the Holocaust and had little money to get a well balanced meal. I'm sure there are actors that would think this is too much to deal with when just giving a performance for a movie but Brody was brave enough to bare with it.
I wouldn't say Nicolas Cage's performance wasn't as great as Adrien Brody's. Their performances are in much different contexts than each other.
If I rank each actor in the Best Actor in a Leading Role category, I'd say in order of best performance as follows...
1. Adrien Brody
2. Nicolas Cage
3. Jack Nicholson
4. Michael Caine
5. Daniel Day-Lewis
03-12-2003, 10:07 AM
There's also the matter of Cage getting twice the screentime (technically) to convinve us of his brilliance, though I still think he did a great job...
As for the suffering part, it didn't help Tom Hanks much in Cast Away... Then again, it was Cast Away...
Brody may just win it because he hasn't gotten one yet, either. And if Polanski is denied the director and best picture nods, which I suspect will happen, Brody's win could be the Academy's way of saying, "Here's the best award we can give a film that would have won more if it weren't directed by Roman Polanski."
Also note that the Supporting awards generally go to actors and actresses in films that would win bigger awards were those awards not co-opted by box-office champions. (See: Jim Broadbent in Iris last year... Then again, I thought Connelly was winning her Oscar because A Beautiful Mind was going to lose everything else, which in retrospect makes her win even more puzzling. Marisa Tomei syndrome, I suspect...)
03-15-2003, 01:32 PM
Jennifer Connelly, Halle Berry, Cuba Gooding, Jr., Whoopi Goldberg, Robin Williams,Marisa Tomei,and others who know who you are:
enjoy that trophy, cuz it's the only one you'll ever see. Your housekeepers should have no trouble keeping it dust free for years. 2 seconds and you're mantle is clean! Too bad you were the "flavors of the month".
03-15-2003, 11:46 PM
I still have this feeling that drama is a much easier genre to make into an Oscar performance than Comedy/Satire/Humor. I've always been able to do drama, but when it comes to comedy, now that take's talent. If one starves oneself, it's not too difficult to imagine that the reality of the performance would come out of that experience, but to truly act, it's the ability to catapault into a role without such help and where it would come from, I have no idea.
03-24-2003, 02:30 AM
The reason being is because everyone experiences drama 24 hours a day. Comedy, on the other hand, is something that makes people feel better. To have someone laugh hard at a stand-up routine after this person has been going through grief is a great thing.
Until Ebert & Roeper gave high recognition for Nicolas Cage on their special show, I didn't realize the uniqueness of his performances. Then I began to think and then I understood that he was making completely fresh and interesting characters, even when both characters act simulatenously.
In other news, the Academy Awards have balls! They gave Best Director to Roman Polanski!
Powered by vBulletin™ Version 4.0.0 Copyright © 2013 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.