I don't think their nominations are ever an issue Pagoda, they're usually on the money with whom people want to see nominated. It's just often the "wins" come off as feeling set up. At least they are often a bit predictable but in a good way, at least it's someone you know did good.

And there were many rumors floating about the last few days that Eastwood would be a surprise nominee edging Giamatti out. Guess it happened.

I find the Oscars to be kind of gross....how is it much different from the grammys?

Dios mio! La actriz de arriba debe ganar el premio. Expuso un humor perfecto para la pelicula... Aunque tenia y tengo todavia algunas criticas negativas sobre ella (la pelicula, no la actriz). Pero, dudo que le galardonen a ella con el Oscar.

Tambien, se dio el pie a Mi Primer Gran Viaje (version cinematica) sin razon ninguna.

Aparentemente, los gusanos morenos de la America Latina son buenos para trabajar en los jardines de los galacticos de Hollywood, pero esos mismos galacticos no pueden galardonar a ellos mas que un dolar y cincuenta centavos por hora.

They aren't rigged like the Grammy's. The Grammy's mean nothing. The performers nominated don't have to be talented, just sell a lot of records for the labels. And the ceremony is tasteless at times.

The Oscars celebrate and hold dear the tradition of honoring the best in films for that particular year. They actually pick people with talent and the films are most often then not, films that didn't gross 100 million at the box office.

yeah, i saw it and liked it okay - not best or anything. javier bardem is amazing in any role, though. and the leading lady was good too. i found it to be a little difficult to thoroughly enjoy because of the subject matter (quadriplegic fighting for the right to die), but that's not any fault of the actors. they were great. i believe i saw it was nominated for foreign film and make-up. i don't quite get the latter, other than javier bardem looking 30 years older than he really is for most of the film.

hey there's no santa claus.

Maybe, Charli, but there is a tendency for it to be a big popularity contest or dependent on how much a studio is willing to push it's movie upon the Academy. Also, why is it that some actors are made to pay their "dues" before they win? The best actor nod should go to the best performance in a given year whether it is a grizzled old actor that has been around for decades or some youngster making their debut.

Steve

Especially recent female wins ie Rene Zellweger, Julia Roberts, Halle Berry. I felt like it was fucking bid night at elite film star sorority.

I'm mostly referring to when the category of actors nominated is very strong and it would be something near impossible to choose who really was the best. I think it eventually does boil down to for those choosing which actor has been around longer and never been nominated or been nominated and never won. And that's what I believe is going to happen most especially with the Supporting actress category.

And in the case of supporting actor, if you read the raves and the reviews of Sideways, most commonly mentioned regarding performance were Madsen and Giamatti. I think Giamatti being snubbed may actually hurt Haden-Church's chances.

And as for the Swank comment I made earlier, meh, I've just never been overly fond of her and the ONLY thing I liked about Eternal was Kate Winslet. She was amazing and I'd just love to see her win finally.

I think that just becomes an issue for many people nowadays because they're so high profile and you can't pass a magazine stand without seeing their personal life splashed across every tabloid cover.

Julia, yeah, I don't get that win. I've seen some of Monsters Ball and can get the Halle Berry win, plus she is pretty damn good in some of her earlier dramatic roles.

And Renee, I hate her generally, but damnit if I don't have to admit that she WAS the best part of Cold Mountain and she deserved the Oscar.

This year's nominations are a joke. How could the Academy totally snub a movie like Before Sunset when it was on every critic's year end list. And Eternal Sunshine, where is the best picture nomination. The Oscars are a joke.

Do the people who nominate these catagories only have a 3 month memory? I haven't seen them but it seems like just because The Aviator and Finding Neverland were released in the last quarter of 2004 they automatically get nominated. What about the films released in January and February?

As a Colombian-American, I am quite thrilled that Catalina Sandino Moreno was nominated for her performance in Maria Full of Grace. There's no way in hell she'll win, but I'm still quite proud.

Viva, Colombia!

Nothing is impossible Oscar night.

Don Cheadle was excellent in Hotel Rwanda. Everyone's saying how little violence there is in that movie, but what it has is pretty damn effective.

While it would be if either Cheadle or Foxx won, Foxx winning for "Ray" would probably give me that same "eh...." reaction that I got from hearing about Halle Berry and Denzel Washington's wins...is that wrong?

why is no one even mentioning Christian bale in the Machinist?

Perhaps the Academy didn't feel Bale's character was fleshed out enough.

(Yes, you have permission to kick me in the "coin purse" for that one.)

Duh.

That being said, it's nice to see Mike Leigh get some recognition. However, it's got to be Marty's year. They owe him big time for giving Kevin f'in Costner Best Director for DWW over Marty for Goodfellas. Then there was Raging Bull, etc etc...

I don't give a toss about the other categories.

Hollywood circle jerk. Fuck the Oscars.