Hell, what?

Jesse Bradford is a promising actor?
Paul freakin' Walker?

Gyllenhaal has delivered in the poast. Just think Donnie Darko. Ledger wasn't off to a great start, but his performances were never really bashed by anyone and he did deliver some good ones before BBM as well.

Oh and as for Dreamgirls, I am honestly just following the hype for it and what I read about it, thus giving it a seemingly inevitable nom.

Because personally, I think it looks TERRIBLE.

Flags of our Fathers will get in, IMO. Pretty much because it's Eastwood. But it won't stand a chance at a win. Neither will The Departed, Id guess. It's not Scorsese's yet time, I think.

A Good Year might actually be a good bet. Dreamgirls...I don't think it will win. After the backlash the Academy has received for awarding Chicago, I don't see them giving it to a musical again.

So A Good Year is the only one that has (seemingly) nothing going against it.

My problem with A Good Year, is that the plot is kind of ... yucky.

"An Englishman (Crowe) inherits a vineyard in Provence. Upon arriving at his new property, he meets an American woman who claims that the land is hers.:

Not exactly what I want in a Best Picture winner.

A happier version of House of Sand and Fog.

I agree, it's a bit slight and "meh", but then, some years have nominees that are a bit slight and "meh".

I think the only Oscarish film I'm actually looking forward to at this point is Red Sun, Black Sand, mostly because it's a war perspective we don't usually see in the West.

United 93's Oscar chances, its circumstances and such, are just... weird.

Critically hailed, virtually across the board, but didn't really go anywhere with the public: We've had this before. But we've never had it with this type of film. It was rather low-profile, but at the same time, quite... high-profile.

I don't know what I'm saying. It's befuddling, though.

The only thing I can say about the other potentials is that I'm fairly certain at least one film with the word "good" in the title will make it in. For sure!

I cant wait to see Flags of our Fathers AND Red Sun, Black Sand nominated.

I hear what you're saying but you've a marvellously one-sided way of looking at things, andaroo. Would it kill you to take your own advice?



Well maybe I'm a bit more clued up about these projects than you are. 1) For starters Dreamgirls and Flags couldn't be more different from each other so there's no rivalry in terms of 'which of these two movies on the same subject are we going to push?'. 2) Although Paramount officially own D'works both movies are being handled by the latter. 3) Dreamgirls is a pet project of David Geffen (the 'G' in Dreamworks SKG) and Flags a pet project of Spielberg. Each movie will proceed down its own track, parallel too but seperate from the other. Oh, and if it ever did come to a crunch choice between the two movies the combined weight of Spielberg, Eastwood and Haggis would wipe the floor with Condon. You'd really do better to pin your hopes on the belief that Dreamgirls will be a huge critical/popular success and Flags won't ... because realistically that's the only way Eastwood's film will find itself out of the race.



Where did I say this? I can't seem to find that quote anywhere.



Nope, that's what you're trying to do. To turn your opinion into fact. No matter how much you flail around the simple truth is that Phillipe, Bell, Beach, Bradford et al are promising young actors. That Eastwood has cast them is further proof of that.



Well of course the attention isn't on them at this time because the release isn't til October. But when the publicity machine gears up and you see the cast - which comprises ages ranging from late teens to early 30's - in everything from teen publications to GQ fashion mags then you can invent another excuse as to why you got it wrong.



And Phillipe impressed a lot of people with his performance in Gosford Park and even more so in Crash, Adam Beach was excellent in Smoke Signals and Bradford equally impressive in Soderburgh's King of the Hill. Exactly how are these acclaimed performances any different than your equivalents for Ledger and Gyllenhall? All of these guys have proven that if given the right material they can act and act well. You've got no answer to this except an apparently irrational dislike of the cast that doesn't make much sense.



It's not a leap of faith. How it can be a leap of faith when these actors have demonstrably turned in good performances in previous movies?!! It's going on the evidence, that and the fact that Eastwood, a not untalented director of actors (as you may have noticed), has confidence enough in their abilities to cast them.



You're being disingenuous because the same credit you extend to Ledger and Gyllenhal for their pre-BBM performances you are unwilling to grant the Flags cast. Maybe you haven't seen the movies I listed above in which case I suggest you go and rent them.



While you're chuckling you might find time to recognise that the obligation to acknowledge black actors is a real one. I mean it does have currency within the Academy and within society. However your argument that the Academy are going to blank Eastwood - regardless of the quality of his movie - because 'he only won two years ago' - is simply looney tunes time. Can you actually show me the evidence which proves AMPAS has already decided to blank Eastwood? Show me the evidence and I'll believe you. Until then you're just fantasising.



But the Academy self-evidently doesn't feel under any obligation to award Martin Scorsese so your hypothesis flounders immediately!

Oh, and andaroo? Six months. Don't forget, now.

Like I said limey.

I'm done with you.

I don't feel like getting into a pissing match with someone trying to pass off their snarky opinions as fact based largely on a fanboy/fangirl desires. Someone who claims knowledge, contradicts him/herself, but it really all boils down to an entirely different viewpoint. I gave my outlook based on my beliefs.

I'm not trying to pass off everything as "fact", it's my best guess, and like with Brokeback and Crash, I was ultimately very wrong last year. I don't know how this will will pan out... but you obviously seem to do. That's why they are guesses and predictions.

Man, you've completely took something fun and turned it into absolute garbage. It's the people like you, who take this far too seriously, who just ruin it.

andaroo,


you just lost the argument.

limey - 1

andaroo - 0

Lost what? I could refute all of this as opinion (which it is), but I'd rather go out and go to the zoo today.

It's got nothing to do with being a fan and ever since I've posted here not once, not once, have I ever said that Flags will win. I've simply stuck to saying that it's a solid bet for nominations. If I was as fanboyish as you claim I'd be saying a lot more than that.



How have I contradicted myself? Is the Academy conscious of the importance of acknowledging black performers/movies? Is there pressure on them from special interest groups in society every year for them to do this? Absolutely. How could anybody, for one second, pretend otherwise? Where are the pressure groups and the campaigns for the Academy to exclude Eastwood? They don't exist anywhere except in your imagination. Have Beach, Bradford, Phillipe turned in good performances and received critical acclaim for their acting in other movies? Yes, they have. Yet you persist in denying this for some baffling reason. For heavens sake go and watch Smoke Signals, Crash, Gosford Park and King of the Hill. And fine if you gave your outlook based on your beliefs. It's just that your beliefs are somewhat flawed.

The biggest obstacle to Flags - and the one you've failed to mention in this exchange - is simply that it won't live up to expectations. Hell, I could do a better job of suggesting reasons why Flags could fail than you! For instance when Jeff Wells reviewed the script he described the story as essentially plotless. Now rightaway most people should be able to sense that a war movie without a plot could be a serious obstacle to acceptance from a mass audience. But all this other stuff you've been going on about is for the birds. Seriously.



Look, I'm not claiming to be an Oscar oracle. I don't know how the race will pan out. How many more times do I have to state that I have never ever claimed that Flags WILL win - only that it's a safe bet for nominations.



andaroo, you're the kind of self-pitying whinger who loves to spout his opinion but hates it and screams 'Foul!' when anybody dares to argue with him.

Oh please. You are so completely self serving. I've said, multiple times, that I have no problem with our disagreement, only your claims of "knowledge".

If I was what you claim I would be attacking every single other person in this thread with a vengence for listing anything that disagreed with me.

I've made it clear that the reason why we are arguing at the moment has more to do with your "know-it-all" attitude than anything.

limey, if you are going to fling poo at andaroo, you're going to need a bit more wit to sway any support. at least make it interesting.

Yeah, and the reason you say that is because you're determined to salvage a scrap of respect from an argument that's been so thoroughly crushed! You don't have opinions, andaroo - you have fantasies. Unless of course you can prove to me the Academy are intent on blanking Eastwood or why Dreamworks - with the two frontrunning films in the Oscar pack as of now - would apparently decide that only one of them is worthy of support (wow, you must have good contacts there!) .



Yeah, we've heard this before. It wasn't convincing the first time.



*Yawn*

Im going.....

Flags of our Fathers
The Fountain
Little Children
Zodiac

The last spot is a toss up between All the Kings Men, Bable, Departed, Red Sun Black Sand, Dreamgirls, and The Good Shepard.

Damn fine year for oscar worthy films, atleast there is huge potential.

The Fountain?

Hehehe

Zodiac is still being released in 2007. No mention of a limited release in December.

According to BOM it's going wide in January so im guessing they'll give it a limited release in December.

Whats wrong with The Fountain? It's early word is fantastic, kinda like the opposite of Departed.

An esoteric time-travel movie directed by Aronofsky. That is what's wrong with The Fountain. Even if it makes it into IMDB's all-time Top 50, it won't get a nom.

the prestige for best everything cept special effects.

picture
director
actor-bale
actor-jackman
actress-johanson
supporting actor-caine
costume
cinematography
art direction
score
sound
editing

At this point I'm expecting it to come down to the Prestige, The Good German and Flags of our Fathers. Though that's sight unseen on all of them, not even a trailer for the last 2.

Marie Antoinette seems to be out unfortunately... but we never know - Moulin Rouge might be a better comparison than Memoirs.. both won Costumes and Art Direction though, and I expect this one to walk away with these two awards plus a few technical noms and a possible nom for Kirsten... if it's better received there than it was in Cannes (which was still a good reaction, even with some boo's and the lack of awards), it might still be in contention for Picture and Director


The Fountain seems to be the movie that everyone loves and in the future will be much more remembered than 60% of the nominees this year but we all know that there's no way that Academy could fall for it - but then again, so did Lord of the Rings 5 years ago (not that I want to compare these two..)


Little Children seems to be a safe bet right now, considering that Kate Winslet is the early frontrunner for Best Actress and Todd Field's last movie was the critical darling of that year..

Ditto for Flags of Our Fathers and Dreamgirls - too much pedigree to ignore...


The surprise might come from Running with Scissors, Ryan Murphy (Nip/Tuck)'s first movie with an impressive cast - and another overdue actress (Annette Bening). And talking about impressive casts, let's not forget Bobby's cast which really reminds too much of last year's Crash (both composed by many actors relegated to B-movies who are in a desperate need to be in a hit movie that may rescue their careers...)


My picks:

- Babel
- Bobby
- Dreamgirls
- Flags of Our Fathers
- Little Children

hollywoodland looks pretty good

At this point my 5 are:
Flags of Our Fathers
United 93
Little Children
The Departed
A Good Year

Flags should kill Dreamgirls, The Departed is getting a mixed reaction but I think it can sneak in as the 5th nom with no chance a la Munich. Little Children seems like a good bet, United 93 will get lots of critics list praise and jump in like Crash, A Good Year is a Russell Crowe Oscar movie, + Scott is a treasured director. The win would be between Flags and United if I had to guess now.

Marie Antoniette seems just like Memoirs, artsy but trashed.

The Fountain is sci-fi...heh.

The Prestige is sort of a thriller, and they've never been kind with Nolan. I doubt the chances for that.

Volver and Babel have shots, though they might be too small. I would like it if one of them made it though. Ditto for Hollywoodland, though somehow I feel they won't go for that unfortunatley.

Even though it isnt even out yet, I would think WTC has a MUCH better chance at getting nominated over U93, early word is great like U93 but it's also a more hollywood film with a big name attached to it. Though I still dont think either will get nominated.