2015 Academy Award Nominations

[Khev]

the guy playing Hawking was pure Oscar bait.

Oh absolutely. And while Redmayne clearly appeared to do a great job with the role I can never help but be reminded of when Clint Eastwood presented at the Oscars about 10 years ago or so and he commented in front of everyone that he was glad that whoever won that year wasn't just another actor getting acclaim for playing an "imbecile."

While Hawking is anything but that he's still a guy who is seriously disabled and therefore easy bait for a win.

 

[marker2037]

Did Eastwood say that?

I agree about Redmayne and the character in general. Especially since it's based on a real person which lets you easily compare how well or not well an actor portrays that person. In that respect, it's a bit of a cheat for Redmayne as well since all he needed to do was seemingly copy the countless hours of film of Hawking. I'm not saying he did a bad job, I'm sure he did a good one (I haven't seen it yet), but I'm saying when you're mimicking someone else versus completely creating a character like Keaton did, I feel it may be an easy advantage.

 

[Fia2k9]

Same argument could be made about posthumous Academy Award winners

 

[karamazov80]

My favorite Academy acceptance speech:

 

[pturtle]

Oh, that's a much easier issue to tackle IMO. It's because, as Fabio said, the guy playing Hawking was pure Oscar bait. On the other side of the coin, and a bit ironically, if not for Keaton's involvement, and Birdman being his real career resurgence vehicle, it's very unlikely Birdman would have received the attention and acclaim that it has. So that's a case where it may not be the best film, but gets acknowledged for other factors that affect how it is viewed by the Hollywood community.

Yup, most of the time the frontrunners play an imbecile or make for a great comeback story. That's why Gyllenhaal didn't get a nomination, there was nothing interesting outside of the great performance he gave that could boost the Oscar hype.

 

[Deckard]

Why are we not talking about how weird John Travolta was?

How did John Travolta get so creepy? Yet another weird Oscars moment - The Washington Post

 

[DiFabio]

People are taking the Keaton Oscar loss too personal in my opinion. I can't believe how many people on the news and internet feel gutted, calling it a snub. How about the guys from Selma and Nightcrawler who didn't even get nominated? Those are snubs. Keaton still got the glory with the nomination and being a perceived front runner for months on end.

I knew as soon as Redmayne won the SAG that Keaton was out of the Oscar game, even with all the awards and praise Keaton had propelling him for months on end. Yeah, the Academy giving the gold to Birdman for Best Picture, Director, Cinematography and Screenplay but not best actor is sort of a slap to Keaton who is the face and voice of Birdman (he carried the entire film on his shoulders, presentation wise as Riggan Thomson), but what's done is done.

Redmayne wasn't bad at all. Baity role and obnoxiously campaigning himself in the oscar circuit Anne Hathaway style? Sure. But it's not like an awful actor/performance won last night. The Oscars are political and wins are usually used to propel an actor or director or studio forward. Being a veteran who is still active, Keaton doesn't really need that. The guy has had an impressive run. He doesn't seem like the guy who likes all this spotlight anyway. I thought it was funny when everyone went up on stage for the Birdman Best Picture win, he tried standing in the back of the line but the cast and producers were pushing him up to the center. That's a testament to how humble and laid back the guy is I think.

 

[dw316]

Why are we not talking about how weird John Travolta was?

How did John Travolta get so creepy? Yet another weird Oscars moment - The Washington Post

I did find that whole segment/bit that Harris brought up with Idina Menzel hilarious

 

[The Clown Prince of Crime]

So do you think every time a director wins his actor's should also?


Directors have made great films without great acting.

Not necessarily, but it's not uncommon for a director to win the Oscar, at least one of the actors to receive a win as well. Not always though. However, the acting on Birdman was one of the strongest parts of the film. Keaton got an Oscar nomination for the first time, Emma Stone got one as well for the first time, and actors like Zach Galifianakis were very good.

Yes, directors have made great films without great acting (terminator), but did they win best director or the film best picture? Probably not. So basically, a film without great acting does not win best picture or best director at the Oscars.

 

[Sidewinder]

Did Eastwood say that?

I agree about Redmayne and the character in general. Especially since it's based on a real person which lets you easily compare how well or not well an actor portrays that person. In that respect, it's a bit of a cheat for Redmayne as well since all he needed to do was seemingly copy the countless hours of film of Hawking. I'm not saying he did a bad job, I'm sure he did a good one (I haven't seen it yet), but I'm saying when you're mimicking someone else versus completely creating a character like Keaton did, I feel it may be an easy advantage.

I disagree on this considering do you know how hard it is to portray someone else and get it so completely right? Keaton had nothing to work with so he could play the character as he saw it. Redmayne had to do his homework and get every single detail correct when portraying Hawking. That is not easily done.

Now I think Keaton did a fantastic job in the role, but I think he's being overly pushed to the forefront by a lot of Batman fanboys.

People are just getting pickier with who wins these days. If Forrest Gump came out today, Tom Hanks would not win Best Actor.

The biggest mistake in my mind I can remember was giving Gwyneth Paltrow best Actress over Cate Blanchett back in 1999.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Sidewinder]

Not necessarily, but it's not uncommon for a director to win the Oscar, at least one of the actors to receive a win as well. Not always though. However, the acting on Birdman was one of the strongest parts of the film. Keaton got an Oscar nomination for the first time, Emma Stone got one as well for the first time, and actors like Zach Galifianakis were very good.

Yes, directors have made great films without great acting (terminator), but did they win best director or the film best picture? Probably not. So basically, a film without great acting does not win best picture or best director at the Oscars.

Well Titanic won best picture and best director without winning either acting awards either.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Khev]

Well Titanic won best picture and best director without winning either acting awards either.

As did Return of the King.

 

[Khev]

Why are we not talking about how weird John Travolta was?

How did John Travolta get so creepy? Yet another weird Oscars moment - The Washington Post

ScarJo lets guys feel her up on the red carpet so you know you're hella creepy if even she is not amused with you.

 

[Sidewinder]

I did find that whole segment/bit that Harris brought up with Idina Menzel hilarious

That look on Scarlett's face lol.

Speaking of Scarlett, when did she Miley Cyrus her hair?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[The Clown Prince of Crime]

Well Titanic won best picture and best director without winning either acting awards either.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

As did Return of the King.

I said not always, but those films still had quality acting. Kate Winslet was nominated for best actress for Titanic, and LOTR had great acting. A lot of critics though Andy Serkis deserved a nomination.

 

[Khev]

I said not always, but those films still had quality acting.

Of course, no one is suggesting that films are going to win Best Picture with outright bad acting across the board. Yes those films had "quality" acting, but based on nominations, Birdman had significantly more. So obviously there's a precedent for Birdman winning Directing and Picture if movies with fewer acting nominations have done that very thing.

 

[Sidewinder]

Birdman had 3 acting nominations didn't they? None won, but all in the top 5 of the year. I would say that is pretty successful directing.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[EVILFACE]

ScarJo lets guys feel her up on the red carpet so you know you're hella creepy if even she is not amused with you.

Why didn't she spring up and flip him to the floor or knock him out with her hair?

 

[jnmx2000]

I will say that the only win I'm surprised about is Big Hero Six, I fully expected How to train your dragon 2 to win as I felt it was the much better film, Six was good, just didn't think it was oscar good. Everything else doesn't surprise me.

 

[marker2037]

I disagree on this considering do you know how hard it is to portray someone else and get it so completely right? Keaton had nothing to work with so he could play the character as he saw it. Redmayne had to do his homework and get every single detail correct when portraying Hawking. That is not easily done.

Now I think Keaton did a fantastic job in the role, but I think he's being overly pushed to the forefront by a lot of Batman fanboys.

People are just getting pickier with who wins these days. If Forrest Gump came out today, Tom Hanks would not win Best Actor.

The biggest mistake in my mind I can remember was giving Gwyneth Paltrow best Actress over Cate Blanchett back in 1999.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

what on earth makes you think this