Jump to content


Photo

Academy Awards-Best one yet?


  • Please log in to reply
16 replies to this topic

#1 James Steven Beverly

James Steven Beverly
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4199 posts
  • Director
  • El Paso, Texas

Posted 05 March 2006 - 11:33 PM

I have to say I usually just kinda listen to the awards but this year I found it to be the most entertaining one I can remember. What's your opinion?
  • 0

#2 Nathan Milford

Nathan Milford
  • Sustaining Members
  • 692 posts
  • Director
  • New York, NY

Posted 05 March 2006 - 11:40 PM

I really enjoyed Jon Stewart...

What I didn't enjoy was the cutting-off of a few of the award winners' speaches. I don't care what your network restrictions are or about the old jabs at the show's length.... that evening is for the cast and crew and it is absolutly cruel to do that to them.
  • 0

#3 Alessandro Machi

Alessandro Machi
  • Sustaining Members
  • 3318 posts
  • Other
  • California

Posted 05 March 2006 - 11:55 PM

I have to say I usually just kinda listen to the awards but this year I found it to be the most entertaining one I can remember. What's your opinion?


I was thinking the same thing. All the montages, wow.

I also didn't like when they cut off the women after saying two words after the guy got to talk for a whole minute, that wasn't right.
  • 0

#4 Craig Knowles

Craig Knowles
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 182 posts
  • Director
  • Cleveland

Posted 06 March 2006 - 12:04 AM

The worst "cut-off" was at the end when female producer of "Crash" was speaking. For cripes sakes, they just won BEST PICTURE OF THE YEAR - the Academy's highest award. Can't you budget more than 1 minute for them to talk about their fricken film?

Overall I thought the show was very good, though.
  • 0

#5 benspo111

benspo111
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 14 posts

Posted 06 March 2006 - 12:09 AM

Yea it was really good, what happened to Don Knotts being in the Memory montage?
  • 0

#6 David Mullen ASC

David Mullen ASC
  • Sustaining Members
  • 19761 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 06 March 2006 - 12:14 AM

Yea it was really good, what happened to Don Knotts being in the Memory montage?


Maybe the cut-off is the end of 2005, so Don Knotts would be in next year's montage. I mean, you also had Dennis Weaver and Darren McGavin die recently... On the other hand, didn't Chris Penn die in 2006? He was in there -- maybe it took a month to edit the montage, I don't know.

I wonder how the editors managed to get Ziyi Zhang to present their award, when we cinematographers got John Travolta...
  • 0

#7 Trevor Greenfield

Trevor Greenfield
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 162 posts
  • Director
  • North Idaho

Posted 06 March 2006 - 12:39 AM

I really enjoyed it tonight from the production side. The set was very very cool too. The cutoffs were awful, but that's happened before too.
  • 0

#8 Sean Azze

Sean Azze
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 145 posts
  • P.A.

Posted 06 March 2006 - 01:33 AM

I echo everyone's sentiments. The cutoffs were uncalled for. They could have easily lost those montages that were pointless and had little to do with the theme of the show aside from the fact they were about cinema! <_< Then they would have left more time for these people who will probably never have another chance like that again to thank all the people that helped make that moment possible.

Also, let me just say - Jon Stewart for Pres, 08'. One of the funniest hosts in a long time. What was remarkable was the way he sustained his presence throughout the entire show. So many times a host will open with a great monologue and then just sort of disappear with lame little introductions between each segment. Jon Stewart ad libbed stuff that was just as funny as the pre-written sketches. (The joke about 3-6 Mafia fighting with Isaac Pearlman's posse was friggin' hilarious).

Speaking of - Big Ups to 3-6 Mafia. Unbelievable. First Eminem, now them. Incredible that these cat's with tattoos on their bodies and golds in their mouth received a statuette alongside Hollywood's elite. Just another step in legitimizing a genre of music that was considered a fad just a decade ago. Plus it was funny to see these grown men jumping up and down onstage like a little league team that just took the pennant. I just hope they thanked Craig Brewer (I'm not sure if I heard his name)

Finally, Brokeback got ripped. Crash...you have got to be kidding me. Oh wow, bigots have a reason for their prejudices, everybody's capable of good and bad, people are multifaceted, bla bla bla. Why all the hoopla? Its been done before in every complex character study. I think two gay cowboys in a heartbreaking story about love denied is more novel, more engaging, and was impeccably executed by Ang Lee and co. WHATEVA ACADEMY <_<
  • 0

#9 James Steven Beverly

James Steven Beverly
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4199 posts
  • Director
  • El Paso, Texas

Posted 06 March 2006 - 02:43 AM

I didn't think the cutoffs were nearly as bad as other years plus if you let them some people would drone on and on for hours. I think honestly they were very fair about it except when there were several people accepting at the same time. They should have adjusted the amount of time so everyone had a chance to speak for a reasonable time.

I LOVED the fake smear ads though, those were great! I wish I had bet on Crash, I'd be cleaning up right now. I was kinda pulling foe Good Night and Good Luck, but what the hey. Speilberg sure got ignored, I mean yeah, he's won before but I thought Munich would win SOMETHING.

I also was hoping Felicity Huffman would have won but I also love Reese Witherspoon so it's ashame there can only be one award. Broke Back did do pretty well and it was nice to see minorities didn't walk away empty handed. Over all great show

Edited by Capt.Video, 06 March 2006 - 02:46 AM.

  • 0

#10 Brad Grimmett

Brad Grimmett
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2660 posts
  • Steadicam Operator
  • Los Angeles

Posted 06 March 2006 - 04:07 AM

I didn't really like that Travolta said, "If you want the best cinematographer, you call one of these nominees". That may not be a direct quote, but you get the idea. There are so many good cinematographers around that saying that those 5 are the "best" is a bit silly, and maybe a bit insulting. Maybe I'm just over-reacting. What do you guys think?
  • 0

#11 Mark Allen

Mark Allen
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 591 posts
  • Director
  • Los Angeles

Posted 06 March 2006 - 04:32 AM

Jon Stewart for Pres, 08'


I've been pushing for this in all seriousness to get into the general conscious for a couple years.

as for "If you want the best cinematographer, you call one of these nominees" I don't think it's as offensive as it is just a lame thing to say at an awards ceremony and I do think that you wouldn't say "if you want the best actor, you call one of these nominees." - but mostly it's just offensive for being empty banter.

And... just to add to the noise noise - yeah - be a tad more lenient on speeches. I don't think the winners realize when the clock starts on their speeches - I don't know if there is a big clock for them to watch the timing down or not. It is very unsatisfactory to see people get cut off.
  • 0

#12 Matt Lazzarini

Matt Lazzarini
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 53 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Toronto, ON

Posted 06 March 2006 - 01:07 PM

I have to say I usually just kinda listen to the awards but this year I found it to be the most entertaining one I can remember. What's your opinion?



Guess I'll buck the trend here and say I didn't really enjoy it. Stewart on his show can be funny, but after a while he gets tedious, like a sarcastic friend who nevers stops.

I was quite happy that Wallace & Grommit won for best animated feature, good for them.

And I found the push to 'see films in theatres' (by both the MPAA prez and the 'epic' montage) was a little much. Funny how most of those 'epic' films were made quite a while ago; maybe the studios should start making films worth forking over 13-14 bucks to go see?
  • 0

#13 Brad Grimmett

Brad Grimmett
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2660 posts
  • Steadicam Operator
  • Los Angeles

Posted 06 March 2006 - 03:47 PM

as for "If you want the best cinematographer, you call one of these nominees" I don't think it's as offensive as it is just a lame thing to say at an awards ceremony and I do think that you wouldn't say "if you want the best actor, you call one of these nominees." - but mostly it's just offensive for being empty banter.

A lame thing to say.... That hits the nail on the head.
  • 0

#14 Dominic Case

Dominic Case
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1357 posts
  • Other
  • Sydney Australia

Posted 06 March 2006 - 06:34 PM

NO, it was the most underwhelming Oscars ceremony I've seen in years.

Mostly vacuous, air-head speeches from the "talent". Though when they did have something to say, (especially when there are more than one person) then they should have been allowed a little more time. Some of Jon Stewart's (who?) pauses (waiting for a laugh?) were longer than the nominees were allowed.

And the hollowness of the system was highlighted by Robert Altman's honorary Oscar, since no-one ever thought to give him a real one - not for Mash, not for Nashville, not for Gosford Park, not for The Player.
  • 0

#15 Robert Edge

Robert Edge
  • Sustaining Members
  • 401 posts
  • Other

Posted 06 March 2006 - 10:27 PM

I'd like to know how many people watched the Oscars this year and how many of them were more interested in the red carpet than in the films.

I'd like to know whether the people who watched the Oscars had as negative reaction as the international press.

I'd like to know whether the general public reacts to the Oscars the same way as my social set does, which is that almost nobody I know, other than me, watches it anymore.

I'd like to know whether I am right in my opinion that the quality of the films has been steadily deteriorating, contrary to the opinion of those who think that the films are getting better.

For example, Good Night and Good Luck reminds me of an extended version of Charlie Chaplin's ill-advised diatribe at the end of the Great Dictator, except that Chaplin had more sense than to harangue his audience for 94 minutes.
  • 0

#16 Tim J Durham

Tim J Durham
  • Sustaining Members
  • 742 posts
  • Director
  • East Coast, Baby!

Posted 07 March 2006 - 12:46 AM

I'd like to know whether the general public reacts to the Oscars the same way as my social set does, which is that almost nobody I know, other than me, watches it anymore.

I'd like to know whether I am right in my opinion that the quality of the films has been steadily deteriorating, contrary to the opinion of those who think that the films are getting better.

For example, Good Night and Good Luck reminds me of an extended version of Charlie Chaplin's ill-advised diatribe at the end of the Great Dictator, except that Chaplin had more sense than to harangue his audience for 94 minutes.


I went to an Oscar party in Hollywood and for about the first half hour, everyone was in chairs around the big screen TV watching. Then people started to peel away and would look over as they announced winners.

The same guy has been producing that show for years now and even John Stewart could not rescue this guys rundown. Try as he might've. So I watched some and looked over for the rest. Mostly pretty tedious with some downright embarrassing moments, as usual.

As for the quality of the films, I thought this year was a good one in being a very good year for political thrillers and politically motivated films in general, such as "The Constant Gardener" which I'm sure was overlooked because of the inane title (although Rachel Weisz won) also "Syriana", "Good Night and Good Luck" which was a much needed critique pointed at our sheepish national press establishment, "Munich" and "Enron- The Smartest Guys in the Room" which did not win but should have as best documentary.

So I felt the quality of the films was pretty high this year. No "Lawrence of Arabia" or "Battle of Algiers" but some good films. I don't know what you consider a great film so it's hard to comment on whether I'd agree that quality is deteriorating generally.
  • 0

#17 Matt Sander

Matt Sander
  • Guests

Posted 07 March 2006 - 02:17 AM

NO, it was the most underwhelming Oscars ceremony I've seen in years.

Mostly vacuous, air-head speeches from the "talent". Though when they did have something to say, (especially when there are more than one person) then they should have been allowed a little more time. Some of Jon Stewart's (who?) pauses (waiting for a laugh?) were longer than the nominees were allowed.

And the hollowness of the system was highlighted by Robert Altman's honorary Oscar, since no-one ever thought to give him a real one - not for Mash, not for Nashville, not for Gosford Park, not for The Player.


Agreed - the Academy hasn't got much right for many many years.
  • 0


Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Rig Wheels Passport

Wooden Camera

Willys Widgets

Visual Products

Aerial Filmworks

Ritter Battery

FJS International, LLC

CineTape

Paralinx LLC

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

CineLab

Tai Audio

rebotnix Technologies

The Slider

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Abel Cine

Metropolis Post

Glidecam

Opal

Technodolly

CineTape

FJS International, LLC

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

CineLab

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Visual Products

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

rebotnix Technologies

Wooden Camera

Abel Cine

Metropolis Post

Rig Wheels Passport

Willys Widgets

Opal

The Slider

Glidecam

Paralinx LLC

Tai Audio

Aerial Filmworks

Technodolly

Ritter Battery