Capo
Administrator
Posts: 7,847
|
Post by Capo on Feb 13, 2008 1:29:27 GMT
Here are some of my current choices for nominations, without much thought and without ranking them (I can be persuaded towards that system, though I think it becomes political when nominations are weighted differently):
Best Picture There Will Be Blood Zodiac No Country for Old Men The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford I'm Not There
Best Director Paul Thomas Anderson David Fincher Joel & Ethan Coen Andrew Dominik Cristian Mungiu (ahead of Haynes for reasons I cannot yet articulate)
Best Lead Actor Daniel Day-Lewis for There Will Be Blood Casey Affleck (?) for The Assassination... Brad Pitt for The Assassination... Mark Ruffalo for Zodiac John Cusack (Grace is Gone)
(With Javier Bardem and Josh Brolin for No Country for Old Men, Seth Rogen for Knocked Up, Viggo Mortensen for Eastern Promises, and Adrien Brody and Owen Wilson for The Darjeeling Limited close behind.)
Best Supporting Actor Paul Dano for There Will Be Blood Richard Gere for I'm Not There (?) Heath Ledger for I'm Not There (?) Ben Wishaw for I'm Not There (?) Vlad Ivanov for 4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days
|
|
|
Post by svsg on Feb 13, 2008 4:06:58 GMT
I am in favor of doing away with "supporting actor" category as it currently exists. I think a supporting character must be a role that is less challenging to portray, but given really small screen time to justify it.
(a)Small screen time, less challenging role => best supporting actor category - example: Henry character in TWBB is eligible (not saying the actor who played that deserves) for this slot
(b)Small screen time, challenging role => best actor category - example: HW's role in TWBB is eligible for the slot.
(c) Long screen time, challenging role => best actor category - self explanatory I guess.
(d) Long screen time, less challenging role => Does not merit anything - example: A bodyguard might be all the time around a main character (thus occupying a huge screen time), but the character does nothing but carry a gun and stand beside the chair.
What do you think?
|
|
Kino
Published writer
Posts: 1,200
|
Post by Kino on Feb 13, 2008 4:48:22 GMT
I think a supporting character must be a role that is less challenging to portray Totally disagree. Kevin J. O'Connor is brilliant as Henry. Like PTA said, it's like dude is of that time in the story-world. Amazing. I think best supporting actors can play challenging roles. Casey Affleck's Robert Ford was a ridiculously difficult role. Keep the supporting actor categories.
|
|
|
Post by svsg on Feb 13, 2008 5:03:26 GMT
Kevin J. O'Connor is brilliant as Henry. Like PTA said, it's like dude is of that time in the story-world. Amazing. OK, I can't argue with that. It has to be subjective I guess. I think best supporting actors can play challenging roles. Casey Affleck's Robert Ford was a ridiculously difficult role. Why not call Casy Affleck the Best actor this year (if indeed he was)? You did not answer my point on how actors act differently for a smaller role? Why this artificial divide? We are rewarding the acting process, not the chance event of a particular actor landing in an important/unimportant role.
|
|
Kino
Published writer
Posts: 1,200
|
Post by Kino on Feb 13, 2008 7:02:00 GMT
Why not call Casy Affleck the Best actor this year (if indeed he was)? Edit: Oh, okay. I see why you asked this. I think best supporting actors can play challenging roles. Casey Affleck's Robert Ford was a ridiculously difficult role. Jeffrey Wright had 2 difficult supporting roles in Angels in America. I consider Affleck a lead, but am only putting him in supporting b/c I want him to get an award b/c I have a feeling DDL is gonna take it here. I'm mixing myself up! Plus, I have the flu. I don't get that question anywhere in here: I am in favor of doing away with "supporting actor" category as it currently exists. I think a supporting character must be a role that is less challenging to portray, but given really small screen time to justify it. (a)Small screen time, less challenging role => best supporting actor category - example: Henry character in TWBB is eligible (not saying the actor who played that deserves) for this slot (b)Small screen time, challenging role => best actor category - example: HW's role in TWBB is eligible for the slot. (c) Long screen time, challenging role => best actor category - self explanatory I guess. (d) Long screen time, less challenging role => Does not merit anything - example: A bodyguard might be all the time around a main character (thus occupying a huge screen time), but the character does nothing but carry a gun and stand beside the chair. What do you think? So please expound b/c I don't understand what question you want me to answer. The only question I got was "What do you think" and I answered that - I said keep the supporting category. What artificial divide? I don't understand what you're saying to me here. Where in my posts about my nominees and nominees in general do I talk about differentiating b/w important and unimportant roles?
|
|
Capo
Administrator
Posts: 7,847
|
Post by Capo on Feb 13, 2008 16:53:28 GMT
Wey hey: I'm seeing La Vie en Rose in a fortnight or so! Only seeing it for the benefit of these awards, though.
|
|
Capo
Administrator
Posts: 7,847
|
Post by Capo on Feb 13, 2008 16:57:54 GMT
And to chip in: a supporting role isn't less challenging than a lead role. (If it was, why celebrate "less challenging performances"?) I think the distinction between the two is one of character prominence? How significant is their character to the narrative? Narrative, for me, is the film's envelope in which its story is wrapped. Which, for me, comes down to screen time.
Paul Dano, for instance, is a major character in There Will Be Blood's story, but in its narrative, he's supporting Day-Lewis.
|
|
Capo
Administrator
Posts: 7,847
|
Post by Capo on Feb 13, 2008 17:03:55 GMT
|
|
jrod
Ghost writer
Posts: 970
|
Post by jrod on Feb 13, 2008 21:21:06 GMT
as long as we do it better then the academy. drives me crazy....Jaime Foxx, Jennifer Hudson, and Casey Affleck were the most prominent and main characters in Collateral, Dreamgirls, and Assassination of Jesse James respectively. Yet all were considered "supporting". Yet Anthony Hopkins is in Silence of the Lambs for 16 minutes of screentime and wins best actor.
Maybe its a little mathmatical, but I wish the Academy had a screentime threshold (percentage of the runtime perhaps?) that is the distinguishing factor between "lead" and "supporting". Too confusing
|
|
|
Post by svsg on Feb 13, 2008 21:29:43 GMT
I consider Affleck a lead, but am only putting him in supporting b/c I want him to get an award b/c I have a feeling DDL is gonna take it here. I am not sure I agree with that. What if I feel that in a given year there were three extraordinary performances - should another category be created to accomodate that actor somehow? Of course my question is rhetorical, but you get where I am going with this.... Bad luck for actors who are competing with the best. I don't get that question anywhere in here: So please expound b/c I don't understand what question you want me to answer. Not your mistake. I typed some questions and later edited them out before posting and I forgot about it. The question is: Are the actors who play supporting characters acting in a different way than if they were playing main characters? Acting need not be divided into main and supporting categories IMO. That is an artificial divide. The character importance is a function of the script and not an acting decision. Similarly I do not favor having a separate musical or comedy category as some awards (golden globes I guess) do. Where in my posts about my nominees and nominees in general do I talk about differentiating b/w important and unimportant roles? How do you define a supporting actor without bringing in the notion of the characters they are playing? I never found out what your definition is - maybe a good time to know now!
|
|
Kino
Published writer
Posts: 1,200
|
Post by Kino on Feb 13, 2008 22:09:47 GMT
I consider Affleck a lead, but am only putting him in supporting b/c I want him to get an award b/c I have a feeling DDL is gonna take it here. I am not sure I agree with that. What if I feel that in a given year there were three extraordinary performances - should another category be created to accomodate that actor somehow? Of course my question is rhetorical, but you get where I am going with this.... Bad luck for actors who are competing with the best. Essentially, I am accomodating Affleck, but I'm not creating a category specifically for him so that he can win some sort of award. Ya know? So, no, to answer your rhetorical question, don't create a category to accomodate 1 or 2 of the 3 actors in your example. I'm not sure why the Academy, Screen Actors Guild, and Golden Globes has put him in at Supporting, but maybe they feel it's because AOJJ they feel is about JJ who is the main character. I disagree w/ them, but I can see why they think that way. It can also be strategic on their part like me (i.e., Affleck gets a better chance of winning something if only TWBB wasn't released before the Oscar eligibility deadline.) It can also be strategic on the part of the studios. Studios do campaigning for their own movies. And perhaps think like I am in regards to Affleck. No, but the distinction is Acting Performance in a Supporting Role as opposed to Acting Performance in a Lead Role. It's an award given to an actor for a performance in a role that is either leading or supporting. There's a tangible difference not in acting, but in the role the acting is done in. I don't. I take it that characters is synonymous w/ roles in its use there. Out of laziness, I've been typing "Supporting Actor" instead of "Best Performance in a Supporting Role" which is what I mean and what I assume everyone who says "Supporting Actor" means.
|
|
Kino
Published writer
Posts: 1,200
|
Post by Kino on Feb 15, 2008 9:57:51 GMT
Hey, Wetdog, how many lead roles do you think is in Private Fears In Public Places?
|
|
RNL
Global Moderator
Posts: 6,624
|
Post by RNL on Feb 15, 2008 15:03:44 GMT
None, I suppose.
|
|
Kino
Published writer
Posts: 1,200
|
Post by Kino on Feb 15, 2008 21:08:38 GMT
Persepolis is amazing!
For animated films, I like it better than Ratatouille and much better than Paprika.
|
|
Kino
Published writer
Posts: 1,200
|
Post by Kino on Feb 16, 2008 20:26:47 GMT
99.9% sure this is my list for BPBAAIALR and BPBAAIASR
BPBAAIALR 1. DDL - TWBB 2. CA - TAOJJ 3. JB - NCFOM 4. VM - EP 5. TL - LC
BPBAAIASR 1. MvS - TDBATB 2. PD - TWBB 3. HH - ITW 4. JCL - Zodiac 5. VI - 4M3WA2D
|
|
RNL
Global Moderator
Posts: 6,624
|
Post by RNL on Feb 16, 2008 23:31:50 GMT
Jesus that is some cryptic shit.
|
|
|
Post by svsg on Feb 17, 2008 19:55:20 GMT
Best Actor in a Leading Role Daniel Day Lewis - There Will Be Blood Javier Bardem - No Country For Old Men Mark Ruffalo - Zodiac
Best Actor in a Supporting Role James Franco - Spiderman 3 Dillon Freasier - There Will Be Blood
Best Director Coen Brothers - No Country for Old Men PT Anderson - There Will Be Blood
Best Picture There Will Be Blood Across The Universe
Best Cinematography No Country For Old Men Zodiac Across The Universe
Best Music There Will Be Blood Across The Universe
Best Sound There Will Be Blood
Special Effects and Animation Live Free or Die Hard Ratatouille
|
|
Kino
Published writer
Posts: 1,200
|
Post by Kino on Feb 19, 2008 3:33:22 GMT
Best CinematographyNo Country For Old Men Zodiac Across The Universe There Will Be Blood? Try renting Assassination of Jesse James, too. (Sorry, if you already watched it; don't remember if you did.)
|
|
Capo
Administrator
Posts: 7,847
|
Post by Capo on Feb 19, 2008 11:32:28 GMT
I'm downloading The Man From London with the unlikely hope it has subtitles attached. People need to download You, The Living from eMule. Illegal, sure, but free; and the only way to see it thus far. Er, get ur abbrevs right, man: TAOJJ BTCRF. Did anyone find the Haggis stream helpful? I'll be watching Control and Paranoid Park the same way - the latter is actually playing at my local arthouse today, but I'm skipping it to see Distant Voices, Still Lives on campus.
|
|
RNL
Global Moderator
Posts: 6,624
|
Post by RNL on Feb 19, 2008 16:22:06 GMT
I'm downloading The Man From London with the unlikely hope it has subtitles attached. It has a big semi-opaque banner across the image.
|
|