| World of KJ http://www.worldofkj.com/forum/ |
|
| The year's blockbusters http://www.worldofkj.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=16&t=50925 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | Tyler [ Sat May 02, 2009 9:07 pm ] |
| Post subject: | The year's blockbusters |
So, after the Academy's stunning retreat back into the abyss of geriatric industrial masturbation, we know they aren't giving out anything major to films outside their preconceived notions. But still, TDK grabbed 8 nominations and Wall-E, 6, so they certainly made an impression to some. Iron Man got 2, as well. So how will this year's blockbusters perform? We have Star Trek getting extremely positive reception and well on its way to restoring some credibility and relevance to the franchise. The most nominated film in the series prior has been The Voyage Home from '86, which got four nominations (Cinematography, Sound, Sound Editing, Score). The rest of the series has also been nominated in Art Direction, Visual Effects and Makeup at one point or another, but has never won a single Oscar. As long as the reception stays where it is and it makes $150 million total (which looks guaranteed now), I can certainly see something like three or four nominations in the techs, maybe Score, but I'm not sure where that is now. Five is really the upper limit, though. Up should at least manage five barring less-than-great reviews. But I doubt that's happening. I think doubting an annual Screenplay nomination for any Pixar film with universal acclaim is foolish at this point, and they always seem good for the Sound categories as well. I'm not sure if there's a song, though. Giacchino needs to win one of these days. Transformers 2? The year's POTC2, but I still don't see it winning Visual Effects over Avatar. Three nominations. Harry Potter...I've noticed it will get a token few nominations as long as the film is considered an improvement over the last. The last one pissed some off, got nothing. Chamber Of Secrets, even I consider it to be far superior to the first, got nothing and was considered slightly worse for...some reason. But as long as Yates tows the line, and with a guy like Delbonnel lensing it, maybe a Cinematography nomination. Art Direction is a possibility, considering the magic-muggle world transition. Visual Effects will be tough, though. Sherlock Holmes is also an interesting-looking project. As long as Downey keeps away from the extreme mediocrity and hard drugs, I think he'll nab an Oscar and certainly another nomination over the next few years. If it's actually very good, and he charms the shit out of us again, Costume Design and if the competition stumbles enough and the stars align, Actor. And for the biggie, Avatar. No, it's not getting a Picture nomination. But the Academy DOES love James Cameron. He won 3 Oscars for Titanic, and though it only touched the major categories with an Actress nom, Aliens sort of pulled a Dark Knight and managed to get seven nominations. Don't forget Terminator 2, which won 4 Oscars and was nominated for 6. The only thing limiting it from absolutely devouring the competition in the technical categories is the mysteriousness of the project. None of us actually know what it looks like or exactly what and how tech things are applied in it, so that can definitely limit it to just the Sound categories and Visual Effects (Art Directors could get cold feet on the apparent lack of sets). But of course, to wonder if James Cameron will not deliver on a technical angle is denialism. |
|
| Author: | billybobwashere [ Sun May 03, 2009 2:02 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The year's blockbusters |
Funny People for Best Original Screenplay, perhaps? Public Enemies could maybe pick up a few, although I don't know if any of them will be major categories. Of the real "blockbusters," Avatar and Star Trek should be the two biggest winners. |
|
| Author: | Tyler [ Sun May 03, 2009 2:12 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The year's blockbusters |
billybobwashere wrote: Funny People for Best Original Screenplay, perhaps? Public Enemies could maybe pick up a few, although I don't know if any of them will be major categories. Oh yeah, forgot Funny People. Could be Apatow's first nomination. I'm not sold on Public Enemies. Art Direction, Costume Design, sure. But Michael Mann is not a consistent director and the film itself looks...eh. |
|
| Author: | roo [ Tue May 05, 2009 2:56 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The year's blockbusters |
The only out-of-band major nomination chance beyond screenplay could be Gambon for supporting for Potter. It is rather juicy role and Gambon is pretty well known and respected. Not that I think it will happen. |
|
| Author: | Argos [ Tue May 05, 2009 3:00 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The year's blockbusters |
Gambon is a calamity. |
|
| Author: | GuybrushX McMurphy [ Tue May 05, 2009 3:07 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The year's blockbusters |
A Calamity Jane |
|
| Author: | Tyler [ Wed May 06, 2009 6:34 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The year's blockbusters |
Christ, those Trek reviews are great. Could see six or seven nominations, at this rate. |
|
| Author: | roo [ Thu May 07, 2009 9:49 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The year's blockbusters |
Argos wrote: Gambon is a calamity. Fits right in with the Oscars then, by my estimation. |
|
| Author: | Dr. Lecter [ Thu May 07, 2009 5:01 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The year's blockbusters |
Jon Tyler Lyrik wrote: Christ, those Trek reviews are great. Could see six or seven nominations, at this rate. Casino Royale had equally terrific reviews. Well almost. And got zero noms. |
|
| Author: | Tyler [ Thu May 07, 2009 5:04 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The year's blockbusters |
Dr. Lecter wrote: Jon Tyler Lyrik wrote: Christ, those Trek reviews are great. Could see six or seven nominations, at this rate. Casino Royale had equally terrific reviews. Well almost. And got zero noms. The reviews have gone back down to earth a bit now. Point taken, but Bond films aren't generally technical monsters. Art direction, visual effects are rarely special, and even the sound or editing aren't generally that flashy. This one should be good for Art Direction or something of the ilk at the very least. |
|
| Author: | Dr. Lecter [ Thu May 07, 2009 5:06 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The year's blockbusters |
If it weren't for Avatar, I believe this would have taken the Effects Oscar home (over Transformers 2). |
|
| Author: | xiayun [ Thu May 07, 2009 5:20 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The year's blockbusters |
I think Star Trek will get between Iron Man and TDK in terms of # of nominations. |
|
| Author: | Tyler [ Thu May 07, 2009 6:22 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The year's blockbusters |
Visual Effects Art Direction One, MAYBE two sound awards MAYBE Cinematography MAYBE Makeup |
|
| Author: | snack [ Sun May 10, 2009 1:50 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The year's blockbusters |
0 |
|
| Author: | Dr. Lecter [ Sun May 10, 2009 9:49 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The year's blockbusters |
Not sure about Art Direction. Make-Up was dodgy at some spots, so it'll only get in if competition is weak. I'm thinking: Sound Editing Sound Mixing Visual Effects That's probably it. |
|
| Author: | David [ Sun May 10, 2009 11:28 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The year's blockbusters |
I don't know if it's considered a blockbuster, but any thoughts on The Wolfman's prospects? Will the fact Rick Baker already won for An American Werewolf in London hurt his chances here? |
|
| Author: | Tyler [ Mon May 11, 2009 12:08 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The year's blockbusters |
Makeup is probable (nothing is a lock in that weird, fucked-up category). Nothing else barring very good reception and box office. |
|
| Author: | billybobwashere [ Sun May 17, 2009 1:58 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The year's blockbusters |
Funny People is "an award-level thing". I would be overjoyed if this could sneak into the Picture race. An Original Screenplay nod now sounds very likely. |
|
| Author: | Tyler [ Sun May 17, 2009 2:13 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The year's blockbusters |
Original Screenplay, yeah. Picture, well, maybe if it makes $230 million. The Truman Show didn't get nominated, after all. An Actor/Original Screenplay combo is what it will have to make due with, I guess. |
|
| Author: | Chippy [ Sun May 17, 2009 9:03 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The year's blockbusters |
Maybe Sandler will finally get his due. Or he'll end up with Carrey... Stuck in comedy forever because they don't get rewarded for their great dramatic roles. |
|
| Author: | billybobwashere [ Mon May 18, 2009 10:29 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The year's blockbusters |
Tyler wrote: Original Screenplay, yeah. Picture, well, maybe if it makes $230 million. The Truman Show didn't get nominated, after all. An Actor/Original Screenplay combo is what it will have to make due with, I guess. |
|
| Author: | Tyler [ Tue May 19, 2009 2:28 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The year's blockbusters |
Well, Sandler's playing a dying man. So did Carrey, but Man On The Moon bombed. |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|