Unofficial Academy Awards Discussion Board

anonymous1980 wrote:

ksrymy wrote:Like The Tree of Life and War Horse, this is one of those films the Academy thinks it should like so they nominate it because they can't think of anything else.

Not true at all under this year's voting system. All the nominees, even Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close has passionate supporters within the Academy because of this weighted voting system where a film must get a minimum number of ranked #1 votes in order to qualify for the Best Picture nomination. So all Best Picture nominees this year have passionate supporters.

Or had enough people put as number one on their ballot not because they "loved" it but felt like it "should" be at the top of their ballot.

ksrymy wrote:Like The Tree of Life and War Horse, this is one of those films the Academy thinks it should like so they nominate it because they can't think of anything else.

Not true at all under this year's voting system. All the nominees, even Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close has passionate supporters within the Academy because of this weighted voting system where a film must get a minimum number of ranked #1 votes in order to qualify for the Best Picture nomination. So all Best Picture nominees this year have passionate supporters.

I actually didn't have any problem with the kid's performance in the film. If you accept that he has Asperger's Syndrome, the performance was quite interesting. I just hope that the kids character in the book also mentions the Asperger's Syndrome situation and it is not a line Daldry added when he saw what kind of performance his actor was giving. lol

It's like The Reader II: 9/11!

ITALIANO wrote:

mlrg wrote:

ksrymy wrote:
Like The Tree of Life and War Horse, this is one of those films the Academy thinks it should like so they nominate it because they can't think of anything else.

I haven't seen War Horse yet, but the Tree of Life nomination is probablu, IMO, the best picture nominated for the top category of the last 35 years.

It certainly belongs to a completely different universe than the one Stephen Daldry's movie belongs to. They don't have anything in common, really - quality-wise especially.

I agree.

The War Horse nomination just proves that Spielberg has far too many friends amongst Academy voters. When he gets ''serious'' the voters notice.

mlrg wrote:

ksrymy wrote:
Like The Tree of Life and War Horse, this is one of those films the Academy thinks it should like so they nominate it because they can't think of anything else.

I haven't seen War Horse yet, but the Tree of Life nomination is probablu, IMO, the best picture nominated for the top category of the last 35 years.

It certainly belongs to a completely different universe than the one Stephen Daldry's movie belongs to. They don't have anything in common, really - quality-wise especially.

ksrymy wrote:
Like The Tree of Life and War Horse, this is one of those films the Academy thinks it should like so they nominate it because they can't think of anything else.

I haven't seen War Horse yet, but the Tree of Life nomination is probablu, IMO, the best picture nominated for the top category of the last 35 years.

ksrymy wrote:I have never found a child protagonist to be more annoying. "Succotash, my ballsack?" The word 'fuck' every other second. "My dad is lying in the shit in the park." What kind of young child says that? Thomas Horn always punctuates his sentences to sound angsty and it's terrible. He accentuates every other word and it sounds completely stupid. This is the worst Best Picture nominee we have this year (and probably ever) and you all have (assumably) seen my hatred for The Help.

I almost put my fist through my computer screen during his, "LOUD THINGS, THINGS WITH WINGS, SCARY THINGS, PEOPL WITH BAD TEETH, BAGS WITHOUT OWNERS, SHOES WITHOUT OWNERS, DON'T BE DISAPPOINTED IN ME" 'monologue.' I attempted suicide every time he called 9/11 "the worst day." This kid's voice is nails-on-chalkboard horrendous. His stupid monologue about burying the empty coffin is annoying. If any child acted like he did, he would be beaten into submission. Every single "Lie #whatever" is more annoying than the previous one. His annoyingly fast monologue to Max von Sydow is so disgustingly whiny. He screams at a store owner when he's well past close. He belittles von Sydow's character for not doing everything he wants as perfectly as he wants it. He destroys, smashes, and breaks things throughout the film in an unnecessary fashion. This kid is one of the worst characters the screen has ever seen. Terrible child acting. Terrible. Fuck this movie.

This is the biggest waste of celluloid ever filmed and two hours of my life I'd like back. The has to be one of the worst films I've ever seen and this is especially sad since I really enjoy Stephen Daldry's work and even Max von Sydow couldn't save this film as there have been dozens of better silent performances. I wouldn't even have nominated him. It's a sentimental vote that goes to the veteran actor who hasn't yet won.

My, my your monologue almost sounds like the kids' in the film. However, I know what you mean. You're absolutely correct in your assessment of this child actor. Lol.

I have never found a child protagonist to be more annoying. "Succotash, my ballsack?" The word 'fuck' every other second. "My dad is lying in the shit in the park." What kind of young child says that? Thomas Horn always punctuates his sentences to sound angsty and it's terrible. He accentuates every other word and it sounds completely stupid. This is the worst Best Picture nominee we have this year (and probably ever) and you all have (assumably) seen my hatred for The Help.

I almost put my fist through my computer screen during his, "LOUD THINGS, THINGS WITH WINGS, SCARY THINGS, PEOPL WITH BAD TEETH, BAGS WITHOUT OWNERS, SHOES WITHOUT OWNERS, DON'T BE DISAPPOINTED IN ME" 'monologue.' I attempted suicide every time he called 9/11 "the worst day." This kid's voice is nails-on-chalkboard horrendous. His stupid monologue about burying the empty coffin is annoying. If any child acted like he did, he would be beaten into submission. Every single "Lie #whatever" is more annoying than the previous one. His annoyingly fast monologue to Max von Sydow is so disgustingly whiny. He screams at a store owner when he's well past close. He belittles von Sydow's character for not doing everything he wants as perfectly as he wants it. He destroys, smashes, and breaks things throughout the film in an unnecessary fashion. This kid is one of the worst characters the screen has ever seen. Terrible child acting. Terrible. Fuck this movie.

This is the biggest waste of celluloid ever filmed and two hours of my life I'd like back. The has to be one of the worst films I've ever seen and this is especially sad since I really enjoy Stephen Daldry's work and even Max von Sydow couldn't save this film as there have been dozens of better silent performances. I wouldn't even have nominated him. It's a sentimental vote that goes to the veteran actor who hasn't yet won.

Like The Tree of Life and War Horse, this is one of those films the Academy thinks it should like so they nominate it because they can't think of anything else.

ksrymy wrote:Foer may have hated the adaptation so much he refused to talk about it.

Very possible.

ITALIANO wrote:Didn't he have anything to say about the film version of his novel? That would have been interesting.

They kept focus on the book. Once again it's all marketing: get the people to buy the book then pay to see the film. They also talked about the book because Cooper listed it as one of his five favorite books he read last year. They may have avoided the film to, like I said, make people read it then see it, or Foer may have hated the adaptation so much he refused to talk about it.

My favorite quote about this film is from Andrea Peyser of the New York Post. She called it "extremely, incredibly exploitive" and a "quest for emotional blackmail, cheap thrills and a naked ploy for an Oscar."

Didn't he have anything to say about the film version of his novel? That would have been interesting.

ITALIANO wrote:This isn't just any movie about 9/11

What's interesting is that Foer was interviewed by Anderson Cooper on his morning show and Foer didn't even have 9/11 in mind when he was writing it. One of the editors asked him if that's what it was about since Oskar is afraid of skyscrapers and public transportation so Foer wrote it into the novel. The 9/11 aspect is a marketing scheme used to play on American patriotism.

I just finished watching this terribly dull film. I'm surprised nobody here mentions just how annoying the kid is throughout. He really bugged me from start to finish and I kept wanting Sandra to slap him across his face to shut his endless chatter.

You know that you can't really take a movie seriously when it stars BOTH Tom Hanks and Sandra Bullock - it might be about the most important, most serious subject ever, still you know that you can't take it seriously. So I went to this one expecting more or less what I'd get (I knew the director's name, too, of course), and I got it. It's basically a forgettable movie - not worse than The Help and The Descendants though.

It's possible that the novel it's based on is a very good one, I have no idea - but what may be believable in a book doesn't necessarily work in a movie, and even taken as a contemporary fairy tale (the only way one can see it) it doesn't make much sense. And one can only hope that the much-praised Jonathan Safran Foer wrote something edgier than what would seem, from this movie, nothing more than conventional-tearjerker material.

A tearjerker without tears, by the way. Or maybe it was just me - it's possible that Americans, for obvious reasons closer than me to the real events that this movie deals with, found it, or will find it, very moving. I always respect tears - but sometimes I respect less what produces tears, and honestly this is a case when you are told even too precisely (by the music, but not only) that and when you MUST cry. By then, though, your connection with the movie will most probably be long gone.

For a film with such a young protagonist, it lacks any real insight into the world of childhood, and while obviously not realistic, it lacks magic, too. The young actor is admittedly well-directed (Stephen Daldry did it before, and with even better results), but I'd say too carefully directed - it is, basically, a Tatum O'Neal-type performance. Good, but never really spontaneous. But good or not good, his character is the most precocious "precocious child" ever, and since he's in every single scene of the movie, it gets irritating after a while.

This isn't just any movie about 9/11 - it's a Stephen Daldry movie about 9/11, so there are countless other issues too, and most of these issues are quickly touched and then left. The character played by Max Von Sydow is a typical example - more than a human being, it's a literary concept, a walking symbol (so it's maybe appropriate that it's played by the man who played chess with Death) - and of course it's always nice to see one of the greatest living actors, and one of the most expressive faces, in a movie, but still... Well, let's say that before seeing this movie I felt that Von Sydow could very possibly win Best Supporting Actor, but now I'm not so sure anymore. If Christopher Plummer doesn't have much to do in Beginners, Von Sydow has even less to do here - basically, just a few reaction shots. Reaction shots a la Scandinavian, so more intense than the movie probably deserves even, but not much more than that. He will still get many votes for his career, definitely, but I guess not enough to lead him to the podium.