2013 Oscar Nominees

SimonKJones
SimonKJones ModeratorWebsite User, HitFilm Beta Tester Posts: 4,450 Enthusiast
edited January 2013 in General
The 2013 Oscar Nominees have just been announced! Check them out over on the official site: http://oscar.go.com/nominees
In the VFX category the noms this year are:
The Hobbit
Life of Pi
The Avengers
Prometheus
Snow White & The Huntsman
I've only seen Avengers and Prometheus out of those, and I think I'd have to go for Prometheus of those two.

Comments

  • MasterWolf
    MasterWolf Website User Posts: 369
    I must be really out of touch, I only recognize 2 of the titles on the list for best picture
  • MichaelJames
    MichaelJames Website User Posts: 2,038 Enthusiast
    Im still waiting on all my movie award screeners. SAG-Aftra mailed me Argo and I kept off buying tickets to that because I knew they were going to send that out. Everyone has been giving rave reviews of it.
  • Aculag
    Aculag Website User Posts: 708 Just Starting Out
    edited January 2013
    I've heard nothing but bad things about Les Miserables from people who are familiar with the stage musical, so I'm kind of surprised to see it on there, but also not surprised at all, since this is the Oscars we're talking about.
    I'm rooting for Life of Pi, but I'm guessing it's going to be Argo, Lincoln, or Zero Dark Thirty, because those are prime Oscar fodder. I doubt it'll win VFX either, even though it's easily the most impressive film of the nominees.
  • jawajohnny
    jawajohnny Website User Posts: 143
    edited January 2013
    I'm going to save my vote until I've seen more of the nominees (Zero Dark Thirty and Silver Linings aren't playing in my area yet), but here's my initial reaction:
    I'm shocked, and quite frankly disgusted with some of these nominations. How on earth could Ben Affleck, Tom Hooper, and Kathryn Bigelow all get snubbed for Best Director? In my book (and in many others), they were the top three favorites to WIN the category. Likewise, their films were all major favorites to WIN Best Picture. Having seen Argo and Les Mis, I definitely think Affleck and Hooper deserved to be in there. And while I haven't seen Zero Dark Thirty, I can safely say that Kathryn Bigelow deserved a nomination as well... considering how acclaimed her film is.
    Oscar Nominees:
    David O. Russell, (Silver Linings Playbook)
    Ang Lee (Life of Pi)
    Steven Spielberg (Lincoln)
    Michael Haneke (Amour)
    Benh Zeitlin (Beasts of the Southern Wild)
    DGA Nominees:
    Ang Lee (Life of Pi)
    Steven Spielberg (Lincoln)
    Ben Affleck (Argo)
    Kathryn Bigelow (Zero Dark Thirty)
    Tom Hooper (Les Misérables)
    Usually the Academy is right in line with the DGA... but this year three of the nominees are different. Very odd.
    Since Best Director nearly always wins Best Picture, it's not likely that Argo, Les Mis, or Zero Dark Thirty will win. That leaves Lincoln/Steven Spielberg and Silver Linings Playbook/David O. Russell as the two favorites right now. Haven't seen either one yet, but I'm planning on going to both in the coming weeks.
    Overall, I don't think I've ever seen such a wide open year. In addition to Picture/Director, I think the acting races are going to be really competitive... with the exception of Supporting Actress. That is Anne Hathaway's to lose.
    For Visual Effects, I've seen all of them except for Snow White. For me, it's between The Hobbit and Life of Pi. All the CG creatures and sets in The Hobbit looked freaking amazing --- especially Gollum. Gollum has to be the most convincing CGI character I've seen yet. Life of Pi is equally impressive, though. I had no idea when Richard Parker (the tiger) was real, or CGI.
    [quote name="Aculag"]I've heard nothing but bad things about Les Miserables from people who are familiar with the stage musical, so I'm kind of surprised to see it on there, but also not surprised at all, since this is the Oscars we're talking about.[/quote]
    Really? I've heard the exact opposite from people familiar with it. Most of the ones I've talked to (except for my mom) have loved it.
  • SimonKJones
    SimonKJones Moderator Website User, HitFilm Beta Tester Posts: 4,450 Enthusiast
    The nominees have mainly reminded me how rarely I've managed to get to the cinema in the last 6 months. :)
    Surprised - and not surprised at all - that Cloud Atlas isn't anywhere to be seen. That seems to have been received very positively everywhere else.
  • Andrew
    Andrew Website User Posts: 379 Enthusiast
    edited January 2013
    I follow Oscar season, watch, rankings, and film very, very carefully- and I've seen pretty much all the nominees listed in every category, so I thought I'd weigh in a little on this.
    Why should Tom Hooper deserve a nomination over any of the others? Les Miserables was a poorly-shot, poorly-made movie that soured critics from a filmmaking standpoint as being 'meh' and die-hard fans of the musical for not being up to expectation/anticipation. That, and it was filled with unremarkable acting performances held together by the individual strengths of Hathaway and Hugh Jackman. It's the best of 'serious dramatic musical attempts' on film, which is admirable- but still fairly unremarkable. And the cultural (lack of expected) response and dismal RT scores for what was initially projected show that.
    Affleck and Bigelow (the two perceived 'frontrunners' the past several weeks), on the otherhand, are huge snubs. As is the full-list shut-out for The Dark Knight Rises, Marion Cotillard for Best Actress, DiCaprio for Best Supporting Actor, Looper for Original Screenplay. Those are snubs. Stuff like John Hawkes not making the cut on Best Actor, or Helen Mirren on Best Actress- sure, it's unfortunate. But it isn't a 'rob' from them. Neither is anything Les Mis-related. That just wasn't a good movie. It just wasn't.
    Affleck's the real victim here. Most-especially because of how hard he seems to be working to revive and re-instate his career as an accomplished person in the industry.
    But it's hard to fault anyone but the procedural, dull work of recent-Spielberg movies, including Lincoln, for shutting him out. Beasts of the Southern Wild's Benh Zeitlin, though I didn't quite care for the film as a whole, is absolutely amazing in the way he captured the southern marshland and was able to draw two of the best performances of the year out of two non-actors.
    Silver Linings is one of the first movies in many, many years to have solid nominees in every acting category- and it's the only movie with nods in all acting, directing, writing, and picture. If anything, it's now seen as Lincoln versus SLP for Best Picture. But more than that, it's a testament to David O. Russell- who wasn't recognized at the DGA and got a deserving nod (and likely win) here. You don't cash-out with career-best performances from your two main actors and a solid-bet win for DeNiro.
    Ang Lee constructed a film with a non-actor and a CGI tiger that felt heartwarming and well-told.
    Don't doubt the importance and necessity of directing actors as the means to nods and wins in the Academy. It is, after all, largely comprised of veteran actors- people who appreciate the ability of nominees and potential candidates to have solid grounding in both storytelling and commanding strong performances out of their actors. That's been key in the past several decades of Oscar- and I bet it will be a determining factor here.
    All in all, I'm pretty happy with the nominees. Lots of range, lots of interest, a fair amount of well-known movies- and others that I would assume go under or totally unappreciated like Beasts. And that's refreshing to see. Say what you will, there's a lot going for a lot of these, and it's an unclear and intriguing Oscar race to check out this year. Lots of great cinema, mostly strong, solid, engrossing choices to be watched by an intrigued public.
    But let's also get one other thing straight- Lincoln was a terrible movie. Boring, unimaginative, procedural, anticlimatic, scientific and cold to character depth, and all-around forgettable. It astounds me that it has gotten by practically completely on the laurels of being material with big names about a big historical name. That's how it got its RT score, that's how its been playing the Oscar game. And it's a shame, because even War Horse was a stronger and more emotionally-resonant film than it.
  • SimonKJones
    SimonKJones Moderator Website User, HitFilm Beta Tester Posts: 4,450 Enthusiast
    I don't mind not seeing TDKR on there. It's a film which is deteriorated in my opinion over the last few months each time I've thought back to it. It really is very sub-par for a Nolan film, and gets by almost entirely on his awesomely consistent style and filmmaking charisma.
  • Aculag
    Aculag Website User Posts: 708 Just Starting Out
    I enjoyed DKR, but it definitely pales in comparison with TDK.
    The animated feature category continues to be very uninteresting. I know they usually just put the most popular animated films of the year in that category, but I thought ParaNorman was extremely bland. It looked nice, but compared to Frankenweenie, the animation was extremely sterile and generic. Brave was alright, with some incredible animation, but also somewhat generic, especially for a Pixar film. I didn't see Pirates! or Wreck it Ralph, so I can't say how they stack up.
    I'd root for Frankenweenie to win that category, but I'm also a bit surprised it was nominated, considering how utterly bizarre and dark it is. That said, I think it's probably Burton's best film since Big Fish. It's got a ton of charm, it's weird and creepy, and the voice acting is mostly great. I thought it fizzled out a bit toward the end, and got a little over complicated, but it was a lot of fun. I used to watch the old live-action short as a kid, so it was really cool to see that expanded, and improved on.
  • jawajohnny
    jawajohnny Website User Posts: 143
    edited January 2013
    [quote name="Andrew"]Why should Tom Hooper deserve a nomination over any of the others? Les Miserables was a poorly-shot, poorly-made movie that soured critics from a filmmaking standpoint as being 'meh' and die-hard fans of the musical for not being up to expectation/anticipation. That, and it was filled with unremarkable acting performances held together by the individual strengths of Hathaway and Hugh Jackman. It's the best of 'serious dramatic musical attempts' on film, which is admirable- but still fairly unremarkable. And the cultural (lack of expected) response and dismal RT scores for what was initially projected show that.[/quote]
    Why should Tom Hooper deserve a nomination over any of the others? Because I think Les Misérables succeeds almost entirely due to his directorial decisions. Insisting on having the actors sing every take live, with no studio dubbing. Insisting that the film be almost entirely sung through... and removing most of the extra dialogue written for the film. Shooting the songs in tight close ups --- and some of them in single takes. All were genius decisions. Hooper has made a film that transcends the genre, and is my opinion, the best film I've seen so far this year. I also don't agree that it was poorly received by the fans of the musical. In fact, with those I've spoken to both online and in person, they're the ones that seem to enjoy it the most. Some of the "purists" are upset with the singing, but the reception from fans has been pretty good overall. In its opening weekend, it made almost as much money as The Hobbit and Django Unchained did, despite playing in significantly less theaters. Plus, it nabbed an "A" Cinemascore from audiences. 'I'm not denying the film isn't controversial... I'm just saying it wasn't quite as poorly received as you're making it out to be.
    While we might agree to disagree on Les Mis, I totally agree that Affleck was snubbed. It's a shame, because I think his first two directorial efforts (Gone Baby Gone and The Town) were also overlooked. If he can't get nominated for a film like Argo, what more does he have to do, dammit?!
    Very surprised The Dark Knight Rises wasn't nominated in any category. Thought it would get a few technical nods. I think the cinematography, sound, and original score were all more than worthy. As far as the actual film goes, I watched it again the other day and thought it held up pretty well. While there are still several plot holes, a lot of the issues I had disappeared on second viewing. Overall it's a superb ending to the trilogy, even if it's not quite as good as the first two. Think "Return of the Jedi".
  • Fox
    Fox Website User Posts: 89 Enthusiast
    edited January 2013
    Foreign Language Film : A royal affair by Nikolaj Arcel - Denmark
    A Royal Affair is a 2012 historical drama film directed by Nikolaj Arcel, starring Mads Mikkelsen, Alicia Vikander and Mikkel Følsgaard
    Based on the true story how democary was born in Denmark. (Contains som great CG work showing Copenhagen in the 17th century)
    The relationship between the queen of Denmark and the German doctor who is her husband's trusted advisor leads to sweeping changes in the country. Married as a teenager to the mentally unstable King Christian VII, Queen Caroline Mathilde finds herself drawn to the compassionate and intelligent Johann Friedrick Struensee, and the two are soon in love and working together to reform Danish society.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!