Okay, I hope this one is not a dupe of andaroo's thread. I am not sure. If it is, feel free to lock it.


You know, a long time before GoF came out, actually around the time the first movie came out, I said that if any of the four (by that time it were four) books had Best Picture potential, it'd be the fourth. This is where the series finally turns dark. Certainly, this process started in the third book, but it is in its full-blown glory just in those final 100 pages of GoF. This is where it starts.

In my personal opinion, the Harry Potter series never got better than this either.

Having said that, I am certain that Harry Potter won't be nominated for Best Picture. It's hard to pinpoint why. I mean just to say that Academy doesn't like fantasy would be wrong (see LOTR). I think it's still the best explanation, though. I think films of the fantasy genre really need immense support and need not only to be seen as great, but as excellent. This is why the original Star Wars as well as all LOTR films got nominated. A movie like Ray or A Beautiful Mind doesn't need to have such excellent reviews, as long as they are just very good. It is Oscar bait material. This is much harder for fantasy flicks.

That aside, I am not so sure whether it'd deserve a Best Picture nom anyway, but at least I am sure it'd be a better pick than some that are going to happen this year (that's a prediction, though).


So what is this one going to be nominated for?


Let's look at the past and see how the other Harry Potter flicks have fared at the Oscars.


Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone

3 nominations, 0 wins:

Best Art Direction
Best Costume Design
Best Score

Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets

0 nominations

Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban

2 nominations, 0 wins:

Best Visual Effects
Best Score



Not exactly a great track record so far, but I believe this year will end up as rather lacking in the technical department. I mean there is of course ROTS and there will be Memoirs of a Geisha, Narnia and King Kong but this year's frontrunners are more about plots and performances rather than technical details: Brokeback Mountain, Walk the Line, Good Night, and Good Luck, Munich... That gives Harry Potter a good shot at grabbing some noms in the technical categories. I wish someone from the cast could get a nom, but to be fair, even no one out of ROTK got a nom, so why hoping...

I think that on the visual level, GoF is definitely the best Harry Potter flick so far and that should help.


At the moment I see following nominations:

Best Art Direction
Best Sound
Best Visual Effects
Best Make-Up


That's it. I don't see the score being nominated as I'd say it was weaker than in the third movie. Costume Design is another possibility, but I don't feel it at the moment either. I am fairly confident in those above, though (maybe with the exception of Best Sound). What do all of you think?

LOL. I was planning on making aHarry Potter series Oscar thread basically exploring ideas of how the Academy might reward it, if ever!

You guys think they might nominate the last film for Best Picture if it really is pretty damn fantastic. I mean, every film has been better than the one before it so far... can they keept the momentum going and how high?

Hmmm, nominate? Maybe, but unlikely. Win? No way. The problem with it is that it started out pretty weak and I think that already left a sour taste in many people's mouths. That is also an explanation why the first movie was so huge and the others are close to each other, but way behind the first.

But it would have to be really really really amazing to be nominated.

First of all, I can't believe this thing is standing at 89% at RT. Shit.

Right. I agree with you on the above nominations. I'm not feeling costuming... this time they shied away from the traditional fantasy costumes and went with more modern, trendy clothes even during competitions, you'll note them wearing wind breakers and things like that.

Score doesn't stand a chance. There were a few brilliant moments, but, like you said, the Academy typically shies from the genre, so I don't see any interest....

It stands no chance at a major direction or acting nod, and while BP is weak, Potter just doesn't measure.

It'll be lucky to score a cinematography nomination- I can think of quite a few moments that awed me... the castle was very nicely shot as well.... that's up in the air.

How about best adapted screenplay? While the script wasn't always compelling, it was easily the best of the series thus far. Considering all the material they had to fit in, I felt a decent job was done. I'm not holding my breath, though- it's not quite up to snuff and this year we have loads of stronger pictures vying for this nom...

That seems like it....

Adapted screenplay is too competitive this year. I think it can get a few tech nods such as Sound and Makeup. The only one out of the series that has a chance at any big nominations will be the last one, and even its shot is slim.

Makeup? Who, exactly, got made up (sorry for the crudeness.. it's laaaaate). We didn't see any goblins or monsters (aside from He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named) and a few cuts on Potter occasionally. I don't see that being nom worthy, either.

The cinematography is actually the best I have seen all year, but I think all of them had great cinematography and none got nominated, so I don't see it here either. I think they tend to nominate movies for cinematography that are also nominated for "big" awards.

Make-up doesn't need to be that obvious. More sublte make-up can just as well be nominated if done well.

I think Voldemort's and Moody's make-up's were great.

... Which is bullocks. I mean, how the flip did some littttttle cheapo drama have great cinematography. It peeves me when the Academy hands out tech noms to quiet dramas that REALLY don't deserve them. Potter, to date, certainly deserves a nomination, but I'm not holding my breath.

It also reminds me of that a movie that is nominated for Best Visual Effects AND Best Picture is more likely to win Best Visual Effects than the one that is not nominated for Best Picture.

One year where it annoyed me greatly was when Gladiator won Visual Effects and Hollow Man which I think has one of the best visual effects ever lost.

Loads of examples are slipping my mind, but I can recall movies with all of THREE SFX sequences getting a nod because of their status, while SFX blockbusters were passed over. The bias in the Academy is obvious, and Potter's chances are sketchy at best. It's been a weak year, so any thing's possible.

Aye, maybe they should get a nom. They covered up some not-so-subtle-pimples, didn't they?

Moody was great, and Voldermort was damn creepy. They did a fantastic job covering Ralph Fiennes' gigantic nose, didn't they?

Haha, yes, even though I still couldn't help, but see Fiennes and not Voldemort on-screen during my first viewing, especially because of the voice...

Reminded me a bit of Red Dragon. I thought when he was forming we would see that tattoo..... heh...

He's a great actor, but let's face it- the Potter flicks are too overcrowded to let the talent truly shine- though Gambon, Smith, and especially Gleeson turned in great performances. Even Miranda Richardson was enjoyable.

Yeah. If it was up to me, I'd give Gleeson a Best Supporting Actor nom. He was amazing.

Funnily enough, one of the worst actings (even though still quite decent) goes to Potter himself - Radcliffe.

God, something was wrong with Radcliffe. No more boyish charm... no intelligence, NOTHING. The script left Potter with hardly anything to say. He didn't even bother to think for himself, so it seems. The movie was caught up entirely too much in the action and I really missed some of the personal moments where Radcliffe DOES shine. The only noteworthy scene is the one he shares with Emma Watson over the bridge... which lasts all of ten seconds. Unfortunately, he was overshadowed by everyone else and didnt seem to do much more than give awkward smiles and shrugs. I'm not sure if it's Radcliffe or Kloves, the screenwriter.

Again, I'm being far too critical of Radcliffe's performances - he holds his own, I suppose - but without an epic performance from the movie's lead, all of the Potter films ultimately suffer. Having him, the top billed performer, be the weakest link isn't so good. After a rather good performance in Azkaban, I'm sure he has the chops to do better in the next film...

Despite the fantabulous achievements of the movie, the Academy can easily dismiss this as "kids' stuff" so major nominations can be ruled out. When was the last time a movie geared towards kids got nominated for Best Picture? The only one that comes in my mind is Babe in 1995. Is there a recent one that slipped my mind? LOTR trilogy is fantasy, yet much geared towards adults (something Narnia has to be in order to get Best Picture as well).

But the darker turn/blockbuster status of the movie can definitely resonate with the technical branches of the Academy. Cinematography is fantastic. If there's one award it should get, Cinematography it is.

I suppose you could add E.T. as well.

In other words, it doesn't happen very often.

Should Potter run away with over 375m, I would say its chances at a nomination for BP would double. A commanding gross like that, AND the stunning reviews, might garner some academy attention.

For now, I'm thinking 270m for Potter.....

Double from 1% to 2%, hehe.

If any Potter movie has a chance to gross $300 million again, it'd be the last one.

Oh Okay, way back in 1982... yeah it seems like it doesn't happen very often. (And a lot of experts still consider E.T. the better movie over Gandhi, in terms of accessibility and non-pretentiousness, heh).