(no subject)

[3pipeproblem]

Um. Why the fuck was Johnny Depp nominated for an Oscar for fucking PotC?

Hmm, I think Keller had a hand in writing that.

Now that I've gotten that out of my system, Mystic River!!!!!11111111111 I can't abide Tim Robbins' personal politics, but I still hope he wins. Same goes for Sean Penn. And Laura Linney totally got shafted.

Working on my storyboard now. It's not as hard as I thought it'd be.

Comments

[3pipeproblem.livejournal.com]

Yes, I tend to agree. I'm not saying Johnny Depp did a bad job--on the contrary, I think he did a wonderful job, especially considering the material he had to work with. I just question whether his performance is deserving of an Oscar nomination. Clearly, the publicity surrounding that film had a lot to do with the nomination. Although the Academy tends to be pretty gimmicky about their nominations anyway. It's probably the year of "look, we recognize quirky comic performances!"

As for Sean Astin...Supporting Actor is a hard category to discuss. Looking over the nominees, I can't help but think that a lot of them could have a valid shot at Best Actor. Benicio Del Toro and Tim Robbins, for instance, had huge roles in their films. Best Supporting Actor has become almost the category for people the studio isn't sure could win Best Actor. The classic example, of course, is Timothy Hutton's win for Ordinary People. He's the main character, for crying out loud. Coming back to the point...I think Sean Astin did a wonderful job (hell, he made me cry). But given the circumstances, his receiving a nomination would have been a miracle (and I know McKellen recieved one for FotR, but he's a highly respected actor with years of experience).

Maybe the problem is that everyone assumes the Oscars will be fair, and that they have to do with talent. They don't. And here I could whine about Ralph Fiennes, Gary Oldman, and James Spader, but I'll let you go :)

[lilithraevyn.livejournal.com]

*chuckles* I can agree. The Oscars aren't driven by talent or fairness.