Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The 1st Annual Commie Awards

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • I'll agree about sunshine...

    zodiac wasn't in any of these movies class...yes, it was a good film but that's about it...maybe last year it would have gotten some nominations...

    I really think the only nomination it should have got, if at all is Mark Ruffalo- Best Supporting Actor

    Comment


    • Originally posted by JagHombre22 View Post
      I'll agree about sunshine...

      zodiac wasn't in any of these movies class...yes, it was a good film but that's about it...maybe last year it would have gotten some nominations...

      I really think the only nomination it should have got, if at all is Mark Ruffalo- Best Supporting Actor
      Zodiac is definitely in my top 10, I don't see how it's not in the same class. Elaborate please.

      BoneKrusher

      Comment


      • Originally posted by HChu View Post
        Zodiac is definitely in my top 10, I don't see how it's not in the same class. Elaborate please.
        Jake Glyenhal (sp?) was just ok in it...Mark Ruffalo completely out did him on that front...it was a tad on the long side and seemed to drag on...

        I'm not saying it wasn't a good movie, because I believe on any other year it would be nominated...I just don't see how it is better than any of the best picture nominations this year..

        Atonement- maybe on different levels, but atonement is there for the cinematic effect

        Michael Clayton- too many great actors with a great story

        Juno- dark horse of the whole oscars, I believe it has a legitimate shot...(not really, but eh)

        There Will Be Blood- Daniel Day-Lewis made that movie and it had great directing

        No Country for Old Men- see michael clayton...


        Like I said before...it should have only gotten one nomination and that should have been for best supporting actor- Mark Ruffalo

        Comment


        • Originally posted by JagHombre22 View Post
          Jake Glyenhal (sp?) was just ok in it...Mark Ruffalo completely out did him on that front...it was a tad on the long side and seemed to drag on...

          I'm not saying it wasn't a good movie, because I believe on any other year it would be nominated...I just don't see how it is better than any of the best picture nominations this year..

          Atonement- maybe on different levels, but atonement is there for the cinematic effect

          Michael Clayton- too many great actors with a great story

          Juno- dark horse of the whole oscars, I believe it has a legitimate shot...(not really, but eh)

          There Will Be Blood- Daniel Day-Lewis made that movie and it had great directing

          No Country for Old Men- see michael clayton...


          Like I said before...it should have only gotten one nomination and that should have been for best supporting actor- Mark Ruffalo
          Well I haven't seen Michael Clayton, so I can't comment on that. But I'm not even going to get into why I think Atonement is garbage.

          BoneKrusher

          Comment


          • while I too think that Atonement was and is garbage...it's the whole cinematic effect, people like to see love stories with romance mixed in, along with great footage....great landscapes and general directing....the acting was pretty good but not the greatest certainly not as good as the company they were expected to be in.......

            but, Zodiac just came at the wrong time...that's it...

            Comment


            • Originally posted by JagHombre22 View Post
              while I too think that Atonement was and is garbage...it's the whole cinematic effect, people like to see love stories with romance mixed in, along with great footage....great landscapes and general directing....the acting was pretty good but not the greatest certainly not as good as the company they were expected to be in.......

              but, Zodiac just came at the wrong time...that's it...
              Yeah, February can't be a worst time to release a great movie.

              BoneKrusher

              Comment


              • Radiohead rocker Jonny Greenwood and Eddie Vedder both missed out on a Best Score Oscar nomination for There Will Be Blood and Into The Wild, because both soundtracks were ruled ineligible. Many Oscar watchers were left stunned when the rock stars' movie score efforts were seemingly ignored by voters, but Oscar rules left both stars compositions out of the running. Greenwood's music for There Will Be Blood missed out because officials at the Academy Of Motion Picture Arts And Sciences decided that a large part of it was not written specifically for the film, which picked up eight Oscar nominations on Tuesday . A proportion of the soundtrack was taken from Greenwood's Popcorn Superhet Receiver composition, which was commissioned by the BBC, and won him a British Composer Award in 2007. And Pearl Jam singer Vedder's soundtrack for Sean Penn Into The Wild was also deemed ineligible for an Academy Award nomination - because the score is too "song-based."



                Haha, how ridiculous is that.




                Comment


                • That is BS because the score to There Will Be Blood is one of the best ever, IMO.


                  Originally posted by Halsey
                  I don't have to watch it to know it was not interesting.

                  Comment


                  • Seriously, how the **** does Norbit get an Oscar nomination and Zodiac doesn't get a single one?

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Turtlepower View Post
                      It's not like they are nominating those movies for best picture. They are nominated for what they were. Norbit might be a horrible movie, but you can't complain about the make-up. It was actually a well touched-up film make-up wise as far as it looks. And for Transformers, it was one of the most visually stunning films of 07.
                      Visually stunning? Only if you like shakey wobble cam and extremely tight close-ups for every action sequence and cartoonish CGI that makes robots look like scrapmetal in a blender.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Ewing View Post
                        Visually stunning? Only if you like shakey wobble cam and extremely tight close-ups for every action sequence and cartoonish CGI that makes robots look like scrapmetal in a blender.
                        really?

                        Transformers was a visually stunning movie with great CGI...it's kindof hard to make robots look anything but cartoonish...but they pulled it off with ease...I think it's deserving of it's oscar nod...

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X

                        Debug Information