Standing by…

Posted by · 5:14 am · January 22nd, 2009

…post those last second jitters here if you like.  If you need some reading material, you can read David Carr finally coming around to the fact that the Academy actually dug “Defiance” more than most expected (I’m pretty sure I told you that weeks ago), Noah Forest’s personal Oscar ballot at Movie City News or Fandango’s 20 ways to improve the Oscars.  No energy for a proper round-up.


→ 23 Comments Tags: | Filed in: Daily

23 responses so far

  • 1 1-22-2009 at 5:15 am

    Matthew Lingo said...

    last second best picture predix:
    The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
    The Dark Knight
    Slumdog Millionaire

  • 2 1-22-2009 at 5:18 am

    Casey Fiore said...

    i just really really want Brad to get nominated

  • 3 1-22-2009 at 5:19 am

    PJ said...

    I second the above, but am probably confusing it with my wish list. I sincerely hope not.

  • 4 1-22-2009 at 5:21 am

    Casey Fiore said...

    is it on only abc or every network?

  • 5 1-22-2009 at 5:25 am

    PJ said...

    Apologies, I was referring to Matthew’s comment. I think the press release said ABC, CBS and NBC, Casey, though not being in the US, I’m having trouble with my hastily acquired online livestream :P

  • 6 1-22-2009 at 5:27 am

    Casey Fiore said...

    thanks PJ

  • 7 1-22-2009 at 5:29 am

    Andrew said...

    Where is it online??? I can’t find it, because I’m pathetic!

  • 8 1-22-2009 at 5:32 am

    John K said...

    I’m using this link:

  • 9 1-22-2009 at 5:32 am

    Kristopher Tapley said...

    Ben Lyons is just…oy.

  • 10 1-22-2009 at 5:33 am

    PJ said...

    Hope it works!

  • 11 1-22-2009 at 5:34 am

    Andrew said...

    You two are my favourite people in the world right now. Thank you!

  • 12 1-22-2009 at 5:35 am

    Adam Smith said...

    Good Morning America is driving me nuts!

  • 13 1-22-2009 at 5:37 am

    Glenn said...

    why are they late?!? And why won’t those video streams work well for me?

  • 14 1-22-2009 at 5:39 am

    Jackass said...

    slumdog gets snubbed! glorious day!

  • 15 1-22-2009 at 5:40 am

    Matthew Lingo said...

    Michael Shannon! Awesome

  • 16 1-22-2009 at 5:41 am

    Brian Kinsley said...


  • 17 1-22-2009 at 5:41 am

    Matthew Lingo said...

    In Bruges!


  • 18 1-22-2009 at 5:41 am

    Matt said...

    Is there somewhere that the nominations are being posted simultaneously? I’m not able to access streaming videos.

  • 19 1-22-2009 at 5:43 am

    Brian Kinsley said...


  • 20 1-22-2009 at 5:43 am

    PJ said...

    The Reader!!!

  • 21 1-22-2009 at 6:54 am

    Henry said...

    That’s…. really special. Way to go, Academy. You’re clearly relevant, the sponsors are going to jump on the side of the wagon, the viewers are going to watch and find out about movies like The Reader in big numbers and the box office is going to gradually incline. Oh wait. No it won’t because you nominated the fucking Reader.

    If you were going to pull this shit couldn’t you have avoided the self-parody of nominating a Holocaust movie? Maybe chosen Revolutionary Road or, dare I dream, The Wrestler?

  • 22 1-22-2009 at 8:26 am

    Dean Treadway said...

    If we really look at Academy Award history, there have only been two movies previously nominated for Best Picture that have dealt, at length, with the Holocaust: 1961’s JUDGEMENT AT NUREMBERG and 1993’s SCHINDLER’S LIST. It’s not like they do this every year (yeah, I know…docs and foreign films…but those are different categories).

    I knew, way early on, that TDK wouldn’t make it in the top five. No superhero movie has but, more importantly, no SEQUEL ever has without its predecessor (read: GOING MY WAY, GODFATHER and LOTR) being nominated first. It’s just never going to happen….EVER.

    I think it’s so funny, the sour grapes that the Batfans are inevitably going to have regarding the “snubbing” of TDK. Schadenfruede laffs, really. But the fact is that, while well-produced and featuring an incredible supporting performance, the film just wasn’t on the level of other blockbusters that have made the top five list (i.e. The Godfather, Jaws, Star Wars, ET, Raiders of the Lost Ark, Forrest Gump, Titanic, The Lord of the Rings:ROTK). Whether or not you like all those films I just mentioned, they were all solidly written and acted. Their stories made sense and their action didn’t peter out once the best performance in the film left the screen (which are my main complaints against TDK). Still, after seeing TDK a second time, I don’t get what’s going on in the final third of the movie. It’s just a mess. I think the shoe-horning of the Two-Face story into the mix is the film’s main detriment.

    Anyway, this is all elementary now. I think it shows great restraint on the part of the Academy to ignore the hype and go with the smaller, more serious movie. I find it mystifying, frankly, that fans think their Batmovie deserves awards as well as a billion dollars. Isn’t giving the Oscar to Ledger (who clearly is going to win and clearly deserves it) enough of an award legacy for TDK?

    And the contention that the lack of major noms for TDK signifies a fault in the Academy regarding lifetime memberships, as Kris puts forth, is ageism pure and simple. I’m assuming Kris is between 30 and 35, if not younger. It seems that ALL people this age have problems with ANYONE who is older. The older they are, the stupider they are. The fact is, this is often quite the opposite. Older people know MORE; they’ve seen it all before. So what that TDK has an 18-wheeler flipping over headfirst and some not-so-clear things to say about the present state of the world (is the Joker supposed to represent the terrorists? If so, the film displays a remarkably simple-minded worldview). So is this supposed to impress us old fusty fuddie-duddies? (for the record, I’m 42). Why??? Look, give me any one of the blockbusters mentioned above any day over TDK. I don’t have problems with it because it made a lot of money; it’s not even that it’s a superhero film (a genre I find boring, frankly); it’s that it simply wasn’t worthy of a Best Picture nod. I would have preferred to see THE WRESTLER in there, but I understand the numbers regarding these things–Aronofsky’s film is not really a technical showcase, so not a lot of non-Actor Acad members voted for it. (very surprised by the Springsteen snub, but that guy already has an Oscar anyway).

    In closing, I think all Batfans should take a serious look at themselves. Your movie is loved worldwide. It got 8 Oscar noms. It made a billion dollars. What more do you want? The fact that the film fails to recieve a Best Picture nod, and thus sparks you to rage, actually says a lot more about you than it does about the Academy. It says that, despite it all, you have the sneaking suspicion that you have narrow–maybe even bad–taste.

  • 23 1-22-2009 at 8:40 am

    Kristopher Tapley said...

    I’m curious, would you say the same to the hordes of critics who lined up in support of the film? As much as people want to frame it as a “dumb audience pleaser” or the like, it bridged the gap. I don’t need to take a long look at anything, but the notion that older = wiser is funny, as always.