Oscar nominations

[Hitch 57]

I only hope Sir William Shatner gets the Lifetime Achievement Award.

[Morlock 11]

But do they give it to him for his work as actor, director, or singer?

[Miguel Andrade 1,264]

Singer, of course!

[TIEfighter 0]

But do they give it to him for his work as actor, director, or singer?

Or maybe for his World Of Warcraft Commercial?

[Hitch 57]

Priceline....compare, shop.....saaaave.

[scissorhands 16]

Of all 6 scores of JNH in 2007, they had to choose the worst one...

[Morlock 11]

Full list at Oscar.com.

Best score:

Atonement (duh)

Kite Runner (duh)

Ratatouille (nice!)

3:10 to Yuma (VERY nice!)

and....Michael Clayton (WTF?!?!?!?!)

[Hitch 57]

Full list at Oscar.com.

Best score:

Atonement (duh)

Kite Runner (duh)

Ratatouille (nice!)

3:10 to Yuma (VERY nice!)

and....Michael Clayton (WTF?!?!?!?!)

Dario Marianelli to win.

[BurgaFlippinMan 7]

Of all 6 scores of JNH in 2007, they had to choose the worst one...

Its piggybacking on the film

[Hitch 57]

Who cares about JNH? My money's on the Italian.

[scissorhands 16]

Who cares about JNH? My money's on the Italian.

Beltrami? Giacchino? Marianelli?

[Morlock 11]

Marianelli has this one in the bag. Also one the most talked about of the bunch, and also sympathy votes for the film, which is gonna be locked out in most of the other cataegories. I'm thrilled that Bletrami got it. Probably my favorite score of the year within it's film.

I'm happy Roger Deakins got two noms.....but that means he's splitting his chances. Kaminsi or Elswit have a real shot.

[Miguel Andrade 1,264]

I don't care anymore about the Oscars.

[Hitch 57]

Could this be Kevin O'Connell's year??? His 20th nomination...this year for Best Achievement in Sound (for TRANSFORMERS) and the poor fella's yet to win an Oscar. If he doesn't, I don't know what I'll do with myself.

[Richard Penna 3,696]

I don't care about the Oscars in a real sense (the politics ruined them years ago), but my mouth literally hung open when I saw the score nominations.

My heart jumped for a second when I saw JNH, but Michael Clayton???? I might give this score another quick listen, but I don't think he has any chance with this.

Giacchino did a good job on Ratatouille I felt, and deserves it. I kinda liked 3:10 to Yuma but not oscar worthy IMO. I respect Marianelli's score, but ultimately that specific style of music just isn't for me. (haven't seen either of the latter two films - keep meaning to, so my opinion may change)

[QMM 4]

Woo Giacchino!

[Ollie 1,059]

Well in my mind this proves what a poor year for film music 2007 was.

Congrats to Giacchino getting a nomination but Ratatouille wasn't one of his better scores.

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

Not one single nomination I even care about.

[Morlock 11]

Assuming one could possibly care about the nominations, that means a whole lot more about you than about the oscars. A lot of worthy nominees out there.

[Trumpeteer 302]

Could this be Kevin O'Connell's year??? His 20th nomination...this year for Best Achievement in Sound (for TRANSFORMERS) and the poor fella's yet to win an Oscar. If he doesn't, I don't know what I'll do with myself.

Plus, his mom died a week after last year's show. No one deserves to be holding an Oscar this year more than Kevin O'Connell.

By the way, did you notice the three nominations for "Enchanted" in the song category? Awesome! Can't wait to see Amy Adams perform. But I'm pulling for "Falling Slowly." And I'm glad they didn't hitch onto the Eddie Vedder bandwagon.

As far as the score nominees, I'm pulling for Marianelli, which means he won't win. This year's list of score nominees, "Atonement" aside, is quite pedestrian. Next year, as we know, it will get more interesting.

[Morlock 11]

3:10 to Yuma is hardly pedestrian. It's quite unexpected, actually. That and Beaufort being nominated (Israeli film, I think the first ever to be nominated) were the most pleasant surprises.

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

Assuming one could possibly care about the nominations, that means a whole lot mroe about you than about the oscars.

Huh?

[Morlock 11]

Yes, I did not figure out how to phrase that one correctly. My meaning was: Assuming you cared about nominations to begin with (which is implied, if you are unimpressed with the selection), than the fact that these selections are unimpressive to you merely shows that you either haven't seen too many of the nominees, or have a very eccentric view on film. The nominations represent a respectable bunch of the best work done in film in 2007.

[Romão 2,274]

Well, I for one I'm very happy about Menken.

It's great to see James Newton Howard getting nominated, but they had so many great scores to chose from.

I'm happy for Blanchett and Kaminsky too.

[John Crichton 4]

Good for Giacchino. Too bad he has too much competition in the silly name department to pull away with this one.

[Luke Skywalker 1,796]

Congratulations for Giacchino!

[Neimoidian 14]

I'm crossing my fingers for Marianelli as I have been doing for quite a long time since I first heard this score.

My second choice would be Giacchino's "Ratatouille" (it's also one of my favourites from last year).

I am happy that Beltrami finally got some recognition, because I follow his (unfortunatelly slow) career since his score to "Scream". On the other hand, his compositions work all right in the movie, but I find them uninspiring outside (except Morricone-inspired finale tracks).

Iglesias' "The Kite Runner" was somehow disappointing in my book. Not that it was bad, but it's just not my cup of tea.

The utter surprise is Howard's "Michael Clayton". Though I haven't heard it yet, I haven't heard any positive comment about it either.

I am also very happy about nominations for Polish filmmakers - to begin with Andrzej Wajda's "Katyń" as one of 5 best foreign movies. Kaminski's cinematography for "The Diving Bell And The Butterfly" is highly acclaimed, but I would be surprised if he wins over McGarvey's "Atonement".

EDIT: Where the F are the nominations for Lee's "Lust, Caution" (including Desplat's charming score)???

[Morlock 11]

I don't think McGravey is in the running. He is seriously out-classed by Deakins, Kaminski and Elswit. I've yet to see Kaminski or Elswit's work, but Deakins is long, long, long overdue, and his work on Robert Ford is stunning.

[Richard Penna 3,696]

The utter surprise is Howard's "Michael Clayton". Though I haven't heard it yet, I haven't heard any positive comment about it either.

It's more total disbelief for me. They picked possibly the dullest score he's ever done - it has to be riding on the popularity of the film.

[Neimoidian 14]

I don't think McGravey is in the running. He is seriously out-classed by Deakins, Kaminski and Elswit. I've yet to see Kaminski or Elswit's work, but Deakins is long, long, long overdue, and his work on Robert Ford is stunning.

It might be, I haven't seen the other nominees' work.

[Lurker 5]

Full list at Oscar.com.

Thanks for the convenient link.

Neil

[JoeinAR 1,949]

or Little Golden Guy

Time mag had an article saying what I've been saying for years, get rid of all the sub categories for the main telecast and stick with the big ones.

No need to see best short live or annimated awards,

Just go with Best Actor, Actress, Sup. Actor, Sup. Actress, Director, Picture, Annimated Picture, Editor, Cinematographer, Film Score, Song, Sound and Editing, Special Effects(but only when they are special which excludes this year), don't do away with any just put them on another night, the majority of viewers don't care about the others. Cut the telecast to two and 1/2 hours and let the winners speak.

[Lurker 5]

or Little Golden Guy

"Oh my"

Neil

[Ollie 1,059]

Since I'm at work is that a warning not to click on Joe's link? <_<

[Hlao-roo 389]

As Christian Clemmensen notes, this is only the second time since the '60s that Williams has failed to pick up a nomination in consecutive years. It'll be interesting to see whether the Academy will nominate Williams in 2008, particularly if Spielberg's only directorial release is Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull. Given the Academy's nebulous, ever changing restrictions on scores that use previously composed material, will Williams's score even be deemed eligible?

[Morlock 11]

Full list at Oscar.com.

Thanks for the convenient link.

Neil

Well, I need to supply you with something to do 'round these parts. Two perfectly good Neil posts, and all because I didn't think people would care about having to type 8 letters and a period.

Given the Academy's nebulous, ever changing restrictions on scores that use previously composed material, will Williams's score even be deemed eligible?

Depends on the popularity of the film/score. If it is well-liked, it will be in there. Just like LoTR. 2002 was deemed as one where LoTR was out of favor, 2003 was deemed as the year the Acadamy was gonna bend over backwards to award it, even though one score is no more orless eligable than the other.

[JoeinAR 1,949]

Since I'm at work is that a warning not to click on Joe's link? <_<

no Mark its a very work safe site, but they don't have the nominees up yet surprisingly, but its the best site for past oscar winners.

[MrScratch 294]

the majority of viewers don't care about the others

The same could be said of best original score, editing or cinematography. No, the Academy Awards are what they are and I want to see the whole damn thing. Viewers can tivo it if they like or just check the results in the morning if they don't have the attention span.

[Hitch 57]

All I can say about this years Oscars is "THE IRISH ARE COMING" <_<

[JoeinAR 1,949]

the majority of viewers don't care about the others

The same could be said of best original score, editing or cinematography. No, the Academy Awards are what they are and I want to see the whole damn thing. Viewers can tivo it if they like or just check the results in the morning if they don't have the attention span.

that does nothing for the viability of the show however.

and I do agree about those 3 categories as well.

[Taikomochi 1,136]

And Norbit got an nomination for make-up!? That's an atrocity that such a poor movie could get a nomination!

[Morlock 11]

Hey, it ain't Rick Baker's fault the movie sucked.

[JoeinAR 1,949]

see this is another example, makeup shouldn't be an annual award, it should be an award for really special work.

Norbit's makeup was very good, but it was nothing we have't seen before.

[Morlock 11]

I agree. Rick Baker's brilliant with makeup, but he's already won this type of work. Literally so, with Nutty Professor.

[Taikomochi 1,136]

and they keep nominating crappy movies! Click was terrible.... and yet it was nominated...

[MrScratch 294]

And Norbit got an nomination for make-up!? That's an atrocity that such a poor movie could get a nomination!

You would't say such a thing if John Williams had been nominated for the score to Monsignor, which is a damn fine score and better than A LOT of actual nominees. By your reasoning, it shouldn't have even been considered because the movie is terrible. Gee, can you think of other bad movies with great scores that should have been considered? Your statement contradicts the usual complaints I see around here about why this score or that score wasn't nominated.

The makeup for Norbit was very good, why shouldn't that be considered with all the other films? The movie itself wasn't nominated just the makeup work.

see this is another example, makeup shouldn't be an annual award, it should be an award for really special work.

Norbit's makeup was very good, but it was nothing we have't seen before.

Just because it isn't groundbreaking innovative work they shouldn't be recognized? That's ridiculous. These guys should be nominated and awarded every year for what they do. It's sad that MOVIE fans are talking this way, whatever you think of the awards the Oscars are an annual celebration of movies and there is nothing wrong with that. And, it gets lesser known films and names out in the public eye, again what is wrong with that.

that does nothing for the viability of the show however.

When does catering to the masses ever result in quality? Right, it doesn't.

[Luke Skywalker 1,796]

As Christian Clemmensen notes, this is only the second time since the '60s that Williams has failed to pick up a nomination in consecutive years.

I would be more shocked if Williams had managed to get a nomination in 2006 or 2007... <_<

[JoeinAR 1,949]

And Norbit got an nomination for make-up!? That's an atrocity that such a poor movie could get a nomination!

You would't say such a thing if John Williams had been nominated for the score to Monsignor, which is a damn fine score and better than A LOT of actual nominees. By your reasoning, it shouldn't have even been considered because the movie is terrible. Gee, can you think of other bad movies with great scores that should have been considered? Your statement contradicts the usual complaints I see around here about why this score or that score wasn't nominated.

The makeup for Norbit was very good, why shouldn't that be considered with all the other films? The movie itself wasn't nominated just the makeup work.

see this is another example, makeup shouldn't be an annual award, it should be an award for really special work.

Norbit's makeup was very good, but it was nothing we have't seen before.

Just because it isn't groundbreaking innovative work they shouldn't be recognized? That's ridiculous. These guys should be nominated and awarded every year for what they do. It's sad that MOVIE fans are talking this way, whatever you think of the awards the Oscars are an annual celebration of movies and there is nothing wrong with that. And, it gets lesser known films and names out in the public eye, again what is wrong with that.

that does nothing for the viability of the show however.

When does catering to the masses ever result in quality? Right, it doesn't.

sorry but I completely disagree. The makeup and special effects did not used to be an annual award but an award for special achievement in that medium. Makeup and effects are not the same as acting or directing which is always different, Norbit is just ordinary makeup these days, and it doesn't look any better than that in those Martin Lawrence Momma movies.

[Taikomochi 1,136]

And Norbit got an nomination for make-up!? That's an atrocity that such a poor movie could get a nomination!

You would't say such a thing if John Williams had been nominated for the score to Monsignor, which is a damn fine score and better than A LOT of actual nominees. By your reasoning, it shouldn't have even been considered because the movie is terrible. Gee, can you think of other bad movies with great scores that should have been considered? Your statement contradicts the usual complaints I see around here about why this score or that score wasn't nominated.

The makeup for Norbit was very good, why shouldn't that be considered with all the other films? The movie itself wasn't nominated just the makeup work.

I'm not saying it shouldn't be. I'm saying it's awful such a bad movie recieved such a great honor. And yes, i'd say that about Williams. Had he been nominated for 1941, i would complain about that too.

[indy4 155]

And Norbit got an nomination for make-up!? That's an atrocity that such a poor movie could get a nomination!

You would't say such a thing if John Williams had been nominated for the score to Monsignor, which is a damn fine score and better than A LOT of actual nominees. By your reasoning, it shouldn't have even been considered because the movie is terrible. Gee, can you think of other bad movies with great scores that should have been considered? Your statement contradicts the usual complaints I see around here about why this score or that score wasn't nominated.

The makeup for Norbit was very good, why shouldn't that be considered with all the other films? The movie itself wasn't nominated just the makeup work.

see this is another example, makeup shouldn't be an annual award, it should be an award for really special work.

Norbit's makeup was very good, but it was nothing we have't seen before.

Just because it isn't groundbreaking innovative work they shouldn't be recognized? That's ridiculous. These guys should be nominated and awarded every year for what they do. It's sad that MOVIE fans are talking this way, whatever you think of the awards the Oscars are an annual celebration of movies and there is nothing wrong with that. And, it gets lesser known films and names out in the public eye, again what is wrong with that.

that does nothing for the viability of the show however.

When does catering to the masses ever result in quality? Right, it doesn't.

Best thing said in the thread today. I agree with every single word.

And Norbit got an nomination for make-up!? That's an atrocity that such a poor movie could get a nomination!

You would't say such a thing if John Williams had been nominated for the score to Monsignor, which is a damn fine score and better than A LOT of actual nominees. By your reasoning, it shouldn't have even been considered because the movie is terrible. Gee, can you think of other bad movies with great scores that should have been considered? Your statement contradicts the usual complaints I see around here about why this score or that score wasn't nominated.

The makeup for Norbit was very good, why shouldn't that be considered with all the other films? The movie itself wasn't nominated just the makeup work.

I'm not saying it shouldn't be. I'm saying it's awful such a bad movie recieved such a great honor. And yes, i'd say that about Williams. Had he been nominated for 1941, i would complain about that too.

The movie itself is not being honored by getting a nomination like make-up. Williams' score to 1941 was fantasitc, and deserved to be honored (shame it wasn't). Had it been nominated, it would only have glorified 1941's score, NOT the entire film. If the score's good enough, give it a nomination or a win, end of story. Why should factors that have absolutley NOTHING to do with score quality bring the score down?

Why should all the extra artists be punished becasue the screenplay and directing is terrible? The Oscars are supposed to be about reocgnizing a certain artist for their good work, despite other qualities of the same film.