Oscars

[saintbacchus]

--- In HPFGU-Movie at y..., Allocin <azingam at y...> wrote:

<<
a) yes, HP was snubbed because of what it is - a kid's
movie based on a modern 'cult classic'.
>>

I disagree; according to the AMPAS web site, Walt Disney
has the record for both nominations and wins. Shirley
Temple has won, and The Sound of Music was Best Picture
of 1965. So children's movies can be nominated and even
win, they just have to be really, really good. Harry
Potter isn't, by cinema standards, a good movie. Very
entertaining, but not really...good. (Compare to
multiple-Oscar-winner Traffic, which is technically good
but about as entertaning as eye surgery. Guess which I'll
be buying the day it comes out!)

Anyway, Harry Potter isn't cult anything - cult
phenominons don't get on best seller lists, nor do they
become the second-highest-grossing film of all time.


<<
b) it was up against some blimmin' good films (LOTR, etc.)
Notice that Bridget Jones' Diary, also a blockbuster, got
absolutely nada. Maybe it's a thing against us Brits (*g*,
just kidding).
>>

I agree here. And, as I can't resist pointing out yet
again, there were much better movies than Harry Potter
that were brutally snubbed: The Royal Tenenbaums,
Mulholland Drive, and Memento, for example.

(Not to mention Final Fantasy's total lack of technical
nominations. The thing succeeded on one level only - as a
two-hour advertisement for Maya, Square's CG animation
system - and it doesn't even get a nod??)

I will say that Harry was probably due at least an acting
nod or two...Alan Rickman and perhaps Rupert Grint. But it
was a very strong year for Oscar contenders, so I can't
complain *too* much.

OTOH, it hurts me physically that Sean Penn was nominated
for "I Am Sam" and Gene Hackman was passed over. Likewise,
how can Marisa Tomei get her SECOND nomination when Naomi
Watts goes unsung?

Oh, and no, Robbie Coltrane wasn't nominated for anything.
Renee Zellweger, however, was.
http://www3.oscars.org/74academyawards/index.html


--Anna