Page 3 of 4
Posted: Sat Jul 08, 2006 10:06 am
by Hustler
As far as I know, AMPAS had begun to publish and spread its press releases related to invited members since 2004. Am I in the certain thing?
Posted: Sat Jul 08, 2006 1:11 am
by Damien
I don't know about Justin Henry, but the star who beat him for the Golden Globe as 1979's Newcomer Of The Year -- Ricky Schroeder -- was an Acadeny member after the release of The Champ.
Posted: Sat Jul 08, 2006 12:39 am
by Big Magilla
I don't think lapsed members get invited back. I think they have to beg. I'd almost bet the ranch on Hayley being invited to fill her father's slot.
Good point about Osment, though. I forgot about him.
Posted: Fri Jul 07, 2006 10:53 pm
by anonymous1980
Another possibility on the case of Hayley Mills: Perhaps her membership expired? I know you're a lifetime member as long as you pay your yearly dues, but what if she hasn't and got her membership expired since she is, after all, relatively inactive the past couple of decades.
As for Dakota: Haley Joel Osment was around her age when he got invited. Of course, he was an Oscar nominee. (Was Justin Henry invited or is a member even?)
I wonder if Macaulay Culkin and Elijah Wood also got invited when they were her age.
Posted: Fri Jul 07, 2006 8:23 pm
by Big Magilla
I wonder if the Academy is so red-faced over the exclusion of Hayley Mills all these years that they are over-compensating by inviting Dakota Fanning to join so pre-maturely. I do think the dropping of Sir John Mills from their roster due to his death last year at the age of 97 is what caused them to realize Hayley wasn't a member.
Posted: Fri Jul 07, 2006 4:32 pm
by Hustler
When over 60 million people vote for someone, you can't possibly say they are all stupid
Honestly criddic, this is a very stupid consolation. the biggest number of persons does not offer any certainty on the topic. On the other hand have you heard of sick societies?
Posted: Thu Jul 06, 2006 11:02 pm
by Nik
criddic3 wrote:Arrrgh! I don't exactly like being called stupid. When over 60 million people vote for someone, you can't possibly say they are all stupid. It's not possible, or at least incredibly unlikely.
Says who?
This may shock you but I think a large number of Americans are incredibly stupid and/or at the very least ignorant about politics/other countries/history/economic realities/racial discourse/science...heck you name it, and America has made an ass of itself before it. Our national average in a variety of subjects and tests prove this as well as the incredibly insipid and odious things that come out of American teenagers mouth constantly whenever they're being interviewed etc.
Also I guess it's fair to see that a stupid act does not make you a stupid person overall which is probably the distinction I should have made earlier. Either way, it's my opinion. If I think this particular Republican administration serves only itself and uses bigotry to create an umbrella that can include a larger group of disparate people and get them to vote against their economic interests, and if I think that it is quite willing to lie to its people and the international community, cheat, steal, exploit, engage in illegal wars, rape the earth, ignore the plight of the poor, undermine the economy so that the tax burden shifts from the wealthy to the working class (in order to benefit the obscenely wealthy), denigrate its minority citizens, inflame hatred and prejudice, and generally commit any number of atrocities a political fiction conspiracy author of the worst kind couldn't possibly dream up - if I think all of these things (and I do) - then it is perfectly reasonable for me to deduce that anyone who voted for this Administration (in 2000 or in 2004 or - worse - BOTH times) was either stupid, or committing a really stupid act.
The 60 million thing hardly means it's right. A lot of people thought your Lord and Savior should be nailed to a cross. Does that make it right? Personally, I think he just needed to get laid. Would have helped with the voices in his head.
Posted: Thu Jul 06, 2006 10:38 pm
by dws1982
criddic3 wrote:Arrrgh! I don't exactly like being called stupid. When over 60 million people vote for someone, you can't possibly say they are all stupid. It's not possible, or at least incredibly unlikely.
Maybe not stupid, but misguided.
Posted: Thu Jul 06, 2006 10:22 pm
by criddic3
On the reverse side, it was awful to hear people like Sarah Jessica Parker proclaiming proudly that she had not seen "Brokeback" and would still be voting in the Best Picture category (insinuating, for some other film). It was like finding out that a sweet family member had voted for Bush. Just a hypothetical mind you, no one in my family would be that stupid. And if they were, I'm sure my mother would find a way to disinherit them.
Arrrgh! I don't exactly like being called stupid. When over 60 million people vote for someone, you can't possibly say they are all stupid. It's not possible, or at least incredibly unlikely.
Posted: Thu Jul 06, 2006 9:27 am
by Mister Tee
The Hayley Mills one is a real puzzler: why not before? And why NOW?
You have to figure some of these people have turned it down in the past, esp. those with previous nominations. Carriere was, I believe, nominated for both Bunuel films and Unbearable Lightness; Dolly Parton had her nod in 1980; and surely Phoenix would have been made an offer after his big year in 2000.
As someone wrote elsewhere, Fanning isn't even old enough to see most contenders -- let alone appreciate them. She should have waited as long as Hayley.
Posted: Thu Jul 06, 2006 8:03 am
by Hustler
And what about Jorge Drexler? Are they planning to add him in the near future?
Posted: Thu Jul 06, 2006 12:51 am
by Nik
Damien wrote:Dakota Fanning?!!! :p I guess the Academy figured it hadn't embarrassed itself enough by giving Best Picture to Crash. I say let her vote in the goddamn cartoon category and leave the other awards for the supposed adults.
"Supposed" is right. Everyone who voted for "Crash" last year should be given that treatment along with Dakota. The real adults were the ones who voted for "Brokeback" or "Good Night and Good Luck."
You know, for years I've found Jack Nicholson a bit insufferable but when he said after the Oscars that he expected "Brokeback" to win and then added "and that was the one I voted for" I warmed to him a lot. He may be an ass sometimes but his heart and his politics have always been in the right place.
On the reverse side, it was awful to hear people like Sarah Jessica Parker proclaiming proudly that she had not seen "Brokeback" and would still be voting in the Best Picture category (insinuating, for some other film). It was like finding out that a sweet family member had voted for Bush. Just a hypothetical mind you, no one in my family would be that stupid. And if they were, I'm sure my mother would find a way to disinherit them.
Posted: Thu Jul 06, 2006 12:43 am
by Damien
Dakota Fanning?!!! :p I guess the Academy figured it hadn't embarrassed itself enough by giving Best Picture to Crash. I say let her vote in the goddamn cartoon category and leave the other awards for the supposed adults.
Posted: Wed Jul 05, 2006 11:03 pm
by OscarGuy
I highly doubt that...She's a relative newcomer and someone would have to check the archives but I believe she hasn't been on any of the last few lists.
Dakota Fanning's QUITE different from Osment and Castle-Hughes. She doesn't have an Oscar nominations and yes, both have received invitations in the past few years.
Still, my question is where is Santaolalla?
My guess on Hayley Mills is that she turned down Academy membership in the past and they finally decided they'd try to use this new method of coercing people to join as an opportunity to get her in the ranks.
Posted: Wed Jul 05, 2006 9:35 pm
by anonymous1980
flipp525 wrote:I would've liked to have seen Michelle Williams on this list.
Do you think the reason she's not on the list is that she already is a member?