What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

OSCARS - 88th. Leo finally. Spotlight = best movie. (1 Viewer)

Best Picture

The Big Short
Brad Pitt, Dede Gardner and Jeremy Kleiner, Producers

Bridge of Spies
Steven Spielberg, Marc Platt and Kristie Macosko Krieger, Producers

Brooklyn
Finola Dwyer and Amanda Posey, Producers

Mad Max: Fury Road
Doug Mitchell and George Miller, Producers

The Martian
Simon Kinberg, Ridley Scott, Michael Schaefer and Mark Huffam, Producers

The Revenant
Arnon Milchan, Steve Golin, Alejandro G. Iñárritu, Mary Parent and Keith Redmon, Producers

Room
Ed Guiney, Producer

Spotlight
Michael Sugar, Steve Golin, Nicole Rocklin and Blye Pagon Faust, Producers

Best Actor

Bryan Cranston, Trumbo

Matt Damon, The Martian

Leonardo DiCaprio, The Revenant

Micheal Fassbender, Steve Jobs

Eddie Redmayne, The Danish Girl

Best Actress

Cate Blanchett, Carol

Brie Larson, Room

Jennifer Lawrence, Joy

Charlotte Rampling, 45 Years

Saoirse Ronan, Brooklyn

Best Supporting Actor

Christian Bale, The Big Short

Tom Hardy, The Revenant

Mark Ruffalo, Spotlight

Mark Rylance, Bridge Of Spies

Sylvester Stallone, Creed

Best Supporting Actress

Jennifer Jason Leigh, The Hateful Eight

Rooney Mara, Carol

Rachel McAdams, Spotlight

Alicia Vikander, The Danish Girl

Kate Winslet, Steve Jobs

Directing

The Big Short, Adam McKay

Mad Max: Fury Road, George Miller

The Revenant, Alejandro G. Iñárritu

Room, Lenny Abrahamson

Tom McCarthy, Spotlight

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I wonder what it was about Sicario the Academy didn't like. One of the best movies I have seen in the last few years. I guess there were two or three too few car chases for them. ;)

They have up to 10 to use, and I am honestly surprised Sicario, Inside Out, or even Hateful Eight aren't on the list.

 
No Carrell, No Ridley Scott, no Sicario.

Is this the MLB HOF committee making the selections?

 
I've seen only one of the Best Picture nominees (mad max - meh)

Some interest in seeing Big Short and Room

Mild interest in Leo Gets Eaten By A Bear and Castaway 2: Electric Boogaloo

The rest sound like boring drivel

 
Will read more later, my random thoughts:

Don't know if they will let the same guy win 2 in a row so that hurts The Revenant and Iñárritu.

Sounds like Spotlight is the early favorite, little interest in seeing another movie about the Catholic Church being sleazy. I'm sure it's really good and all.

Leo is probably the biggest lock in any category. Will check odds when they come up.

Everyone seems to say Brie Larson will win actress, haven't seen that one. I have only seen her in 21 Jumpstreet and Trainwreck.

I thought they would hook up Michael Keaton because of history and a lot of people thought he would win last year.

Glad to see Mad Max got a nom. Still don't get why people don't get on board with this, great movie. Has zero chance of winning.

 
Will read more later, my random thoughts:

Don't know if they will let the same guy win 2 in a row so that hurts The Revenant and Iñárritu.

Sounds like Spotlight is the early favorite, little interest in seeing another movie about the Catholic Church being sleazy. I'm sure it's really good and all.

Leo is probably the biggest lock in any category. Will check odds when they come up.

Everyone seems to say Brie Larson will win actress, haven't seen that one. I have only seen her in 21 Jumpstreet and Trainwreck.

I thought they would hook up Michael Keaton because of history and a lot of people thought he would win last year.

Glad to see Mad Max got a nom. Still don't get why people don't get on board with this, great movie. Has zero chance of winning.
"Won't let the same guy win two years in a row" I agree it will be a consideration, however stupid. Why is it so hard to give out awards that actually reward the best work in the field each year?

 
I've seen only one of the Best Picture nominees (mad max - meh)

Some interest in seeing Big Short and Room

Mild interest in Leo Gets Eaten By A Bear and Castaway 2: Electric Boogaloo

The rest sound like boring drivel
Spotlight is fantastic. It should win.

 
Will read more later, my random thoughts:

Don't know if they will let the same guy win 2 in a row so that hurts The Revenant and Iñárritu.

Sounds like Spotlight is the early favorite, little interest in seeing another movie about the Catholic Church being sleazy. I'm sure it's really good and all.

Leo is probably the biggest lock in any category. Will check odds when they come up.

Everyone seems to say Brie Larson will win actress, haven't seen that one. I have only seen her in 21 Jumpstreet and Trainwreck.

I thought they would hook up Michael Keaton because of history and a lot of people thought he would win last year.

Glad to see Mad Max got a nom. Still don't get why people don't get on board with this, great movie. Has zero chance of winning.
"Won't let the same guy win two years in a row" I agree it will be a consideration, however stupid. Why is it so hard to give out awards that actually reward the best work in the field each year?
Agree. I always read about how much politics are involved. One of Gervais' funny lines during GG was something about the studios essentially all buy these awards then they immediately cut to Harvey Weinstein

 
This....this is the year that I will watch the nominated movies and have an informed opinion. This is the year.

 
Go MARTIAN!!!

- guy who has $ on it at 16-1 to win best picture

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I wonder what it was about Sicario the Academy didn't like. One of the best movies I have seen in the last few years. I guess there were two or three too few car chases for them. ;)

They have up to 10 to use, and I am honestly surprised Sicario, Inside Out, or even Hateful Eight aren't on the list.
Why did you like it so much? I went to the theaters to see it but felt disappointed. Did not care for Brolin and Emily much and that was 2/3 of the characters. And Del Toro was good but some of the motives and the way he carried things out, felt confusing to a degree.

 
Ex machina and hateful 8 got screwed here.

Would have loved to seen a bold nomination for my favorite movie of the year, Dope, which also would have taken some minority heat off them but I might be pipe dreaming.

 
Ex machina and hateful 8 got screwed here.

Would have loved to seen a bold nomination for my favorite movie of the year, Dope, which also would have taken some minority heat off them but I might be pipe dreaming.
Mad Max over Ex Machina? WTF, Issac and Gleeson were phenomenal what a joke.

 
So do they only do the people who passed away in the calendar year of 2015, or do they go with people since last Oscars? With Bowie and Rickman passing this week, wondering if they will be there.

 
Ex machina and hateful 8 got screwed here.

Would have loved to seen a bold nomination for my favorite movie of the year, Dope, which also would have taken some minority heat off them but I might be pipe dreaming.
Mad Max over Ex Machina? WTF, Issac and Gleeson were phenomenal what a joke.
It's not really "over" they could have put up more noms I believe.
They can max out at 10 noms. Room for two more if they had wanted.

 
I wonder what it was about Sicario the Academy didn't like. One of the best movies I have seen in the last few years. I guess there were two or three too few car chases for them. ;)

They have up to 10 to use, and I am honestly surprised Sicario, Inside Out, or even Hateful Eight aren't on the list.
Why did you like it so much? I went to the theaters to see it but felt disappointed. Did not care for Brolin and Emily much and that was 2/3 of the characters. And Del Toro was good but some of the motives and the way he carried things out, felt confusing to a degree.
Oh, none of the characters were great people to "care" about for sure. You loved Hateful Eight, so that can't be a requirement. ;)

For starters, I think I was sucked into that world and the tension that was created from the first scene. I was on the edge of my seat for the whole ride. Whiplash had the same effect on me last year. I also thought the writing and the setup was fantastic. Blunt is our gateway to this world, and we are kept in the dark just as much as she is. As she is scrambling and trying to figure out people's motives and what is happening, so are we. I love it when movies are able to do that successfully.

To me this was a movie that hit all the requirements for a great movie - acting was good even though the characters were unlikeable, direction was fantastic, it looked great - it had some nature and sunset shots that would make Malick hard, the action and violence was great, score was unsettling as hell, and it didn't over-explain things or try to dumb it down for the audience.

Speaking of the score - I was listening to a podcast and they said the director purposely cut and edited the movie without any music in it. He wanted to make sure the tension was there without it, and then added the music on top to ramp up the tension even more. Nice touch.

 
They should really go back to 5 noms. Nothing good has come of broadening the field and it cheapens the big rub you used to get of being a nominee. People used to make point of seeing all five films but now do you really need to run out and see a film like the Room when it has no chance of winning?

 
So do they only do the people who passed away in the calendar year of 2015, or do they go with people since last Oscars? With Bowie and Rickman passing this week, wondering if they will be there.
The ####### answer is that it probably depends how famous they were. I thought we had the same thing happen when PSH passed. I think they included him in that year's memorial even though he died in Feb. of the same year.

 
They should really go back to 5 noms. Nothing good has come of broadening the field and it cheapens the big rub you used to get of being a nominee. People used to make point of seeing all five films but now do you really need to run out and see a film like the Room when it has no chance of winning?
See, but the point is that movies like Room are what was usually nominated and people hated that. They opened it up more so the Avatars and Mad Max movies of that year could get a nod and it would drum up interest from a different crowd.

ETA: I honestly don't think the people who used to make a point of seeing the nominations are deterred from seeing a couple more.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
ETA: I honestly don't think the people who used to make a point of seeing the nominations are deterred from seeing a couple more.
Yeah, my wife and parents both like to see all the movies nominated and I think they like the expansion. Of course, now all three of them will have to see the Mad Max movie, which there is no chance in hell they would have seen otherwise.

 
ETA: I honestly don't think the people who used to make a point of seeing the nominations are deterred from seeing a couple more.
Yeah, my wife and parents both like to see all the movies nominated and I think they like the expansion. Of course, now all three of them will have to see the Mad Max movie, which there is no chance in hell they would have seen otherwise.
It has gotten a crapload of critical acclaim too, but I wonder if it will have the opposite reaction for people who are usually a fan of Oscar movies. Just like people revolting against the Tree of Life/Birdman type of movies from one side, now people that usually like that will have to sit down and watch Mad Max.

 
They should really go back to 5 noms. Nothing good has come of broadening the field and it cheapens the big rub you used to get of being a nominee. People used to make point of seeing all five films but now do you really need to run out and see a film like the Room when it has no chance of winning?
See, but the point is that movies like Room are what was usually nominated and people hated that. They opened it up more so the Avatars and Mad Max movies of that year could get a nod and it would drum up interest from a different crowd.

ETA: I honestly don't think the people who used to make a point of seeing the nominations are deterred from seeing a couple more.
If you're a relatively casual viewer, or you live maybe not close to a great cluster of theaters, and I'm still considering this a theatrical game, the idea is to get people to the theaters if at all possible, I think seeing five movies in a month is a lot easier than doing 8. Theatres near me used to do a marathon screening of all the noms on the Saturday before the Oscars but thats a tall order now to sit through 8 movies. Now granted, thats a fraction of a flea's nut of business but people will say, eh I'll catch up with it later.

A movie like Amour lost out because of the glut of nominees in my opinion.

The Academy and the business needs to figure how what and how they're doing things. I LOVED Mad Max, LOVED IT. But it doesn't need to get an oscar nomination, it simply doesn't, as it has not been the structure to reward that type of film. Therefore, that audience does not exist to value and prioritze the oscar.

Hell, a fifteen year old kid doesn't even deliniate, and probably PREFERS television over film. Oscar ratings are down because it just doesn't mean as much as it once did to the casual viewer.

I mean, Mad Max gets nominated but there are no straight comedies nominated. Mad Max is gorgeous, but is there any real emotional pang or angst in that film? What does it build to or creshendo with?

If the academy wanted to broaden things, rather than deviating from their structure, I would have either a best comedy or somehow do best popcorn movie award. Maybe in that, give out one single award, for best PERFORMANCE in any of those movies, one category, man or woman. Then you haven't needlessly added a layer of nominations, but maybe you get more of the super casuals or young people in.

Why should animation have its own category? I mean how many animated films get released each year? A dozen? Twenty? Claimed by people who lets face deliver no ratings star power. Although this year was a brutal year as an example. You would be looking at Trainwreck.

 
They should really go back to 5 noms. Nothing good has come of broadening the field and it cheapens the big rub you used to get of being a nominee. People used to make point of seeing all five films but now do you really need to run out and see a film like the Room when it has no chance of winning?
See, but the point is that movies like Room are what was usually nominated and people hated that. They opened it up more so the Avatars and Mad Max movies of that year could get a nod and it would drum up interest from a different crowd.

ETA: I honestly don't think the people who used to make a point of seeing the nominations are deterred from seeing a couple more.
If you're a relatively casual viewer, or you live maybe not close to a great cluster of theaters, and I'm still considering this a theatrical game, the idea is to get people to the theaters if at all possible, I think seeing five movies in a month is a lot easier than doing 8. Theatres near me used to do a marathon screening of all the noms on the Saturday before the Oscars but thats a tall order now to sit through 8 movies. Now granted, thats a fraction of a flea's nut of business but people will say, eh I'll catch up with it later.

A movie like Amour lost out because of the glut of nominees in my opinion.

The Academy and the business needs to figure how what and how they're doing things. I LOVED Mad Max, LOVED IT. But it doesn't need to get an oscar nomination, it simply doesn't, as it has not been the structure to reward that type of film. Therefore, that audience does not exist to value and prioritze the oscar.

Hell, a fifteen year old kid doesn't even deliniate, and probably PREFERS television over film. Oscar ratings are down because it just doesn't mean as much as it once did to the casual viewer.

I mean, Mad Max gets nominated but there are no straight comedies nominated. Mad Max is gorgeous, but is there any real emotional pang or angst in that film? What does it build to or creshendo with?

If the academy wanted to broaden things, rather than deviating from their structure, I would have either a best comedy or somehow do best popcorn movie award. Maybe in that, give out one single award, for best PERFORMANCE in any of those movies, one category, man or woman. Then you haven't needlessly added a layer of nominations, but maybe you get more of the super casuals or young people in.

Why should animation have its own category? I mean how many animated films get released each year? A dozen? Twenty? Claimed by people who lets face deliver no ratings star power. Although this year was a brutal year as an example. You would be looking at Trainwreck.
You bring up a lot of great points. I am sure they are scrambling to figure out the right balance and how to make people still care about the Oscars. People still tune in and have parties, but I would bet 1/2 of the time it's to watch the fashion and glamour, talk about who's hottest, and just have an excuse to drink some wine.

IMO they would go a long way to having people caring as much about these awards as I do if they would switch some things up (I realize they would never do most of these things, but what the hell..)

- Stop showing as many of the awards live and make sure the stars that people are tuning in to see win have a chance to freakin' talk. I think one of the biggest beefs I hear with these shows is they focus on having every song performed, have their 1/2 hour memorial, and let the winners at the start of the show seemingly have more time. Then we get to the end of the show and the Leos of the acting world get 30secs before they start the music.

- Change the scheduling of when the cutoff is to qualify, when the noms are announced or the release of movies on disc/Netflix. I know this is a business and movies do get a bump in the theaters after awards come out. But like you said, 1/2 the time most of the movies are still in the theater by the time the awards show comes around, and I am sorry, but people just aren't running out to see Brooklyn in the theaters. If they want butts in the theaters, they probably should have the cut off in November for releases and noms and then give people the holidays and New Year to watch some of these. Too many times they have something like The Revenant that is released in 1 city on Dec. 31st just to qualify for that year's awards and then get released later (with little chance it is available any other way before the show). The other part to this and/or would be to make sure that all the nominees are out in another format before the show so people have a better chance to watch them all. Instead of using the show as a vault to make people watch a couple more movies after they win something, make it so people can watch them and root for something beforehand. Sorry, but the times have changed as to what people are going to see in the theater and what makes money. IMO they would be better off focusing on the home viewing aspect somehow to increase interest.

- Give the audience a %of a vote for the winners. Never going to happen, but they would get so much more activity and interest if the Academy accounted for 70% of the vote and the audience 30% or something like that.

- If they are going to keep all the categories, find a way to educate a little more as to WTF they are during the show. Have some fun with it. I guess maybe they will never care, but how many people watching the show know the difference between sound mixing and sound editing for example? I always thought it would be fun to have a few minutes of behind the scenes as they show what goes into this stuff. Show a snip of a movie without the sound or score. Show a scene edited a different way. It doesn't have to be a 30min presentation, but it could be done in a quick, fun way and give people something else to look for while they are watching movies.

- Stop with the political #### and voting for something just because it hasn't won before. This isn't 2nd grade soccer, we don't all have to win. Let's get the best of each category a win and have a discussion about why.

- Not sure how to do it, but yeah, they would probably benefit from lightening up for an award or two. I am sure they think it's a fine line between what they are doing and going all MTV movie awards and having best kiss or best explosion. Maybe combine a couple of my ideas and have the audience just vote on one category and have it an award for someone who hasn't before and should have.

 
I haven't seen it yet but wasn't Black Mass with Johnny Depp as Whitey Bulger supposed to get a ton of nominations?

 
We'll see if the academy makes it 3 years in a row of Best Pictures that I completely disagree with - 12 Years A Slave and Birdman were not good choices in my opinion.

I would have gone with Captain Philips (or Dallas Buyers Club) 2 years ago and The Imitation Game (or Grand Budapest Hotel) last year.

 
We'll see if the academy makes it 3 years in a row of Best Pictures that I completely disagree with - 12 Years A Slave and Birdman were not good choices in my opinion.

I would have gone with Captain Philips (or Dallas Buyers Club) 2 years ago and The Imitation Game (or Grand Budapest Hotel) last year.
I don't often agree with what they give the best pic to, but I also don't look at the nominees and think "wtf are you doing?".

 
Revenant leading in noms? It wasn't *that* good.

Weak year for movies. Nothing was great.
Others have argued with me but I think only 8 best film nominations when they can go 10 only shows it was a weak year for films.

H8 was nominated for score, cinematography, and a best acting nod with Jennifer Jason Leigh, should have gotten a nomination for best film and best original screenplay IMO, that would have been 5 overall. As is I think it will still walk away with 2 big Oscars for score and also for JJL which I can't wait to see her accept the award. I have always always always liked her and I know she ain't cute to everyone but I always had a crush on her as a kid.

 
They should really go back to 5 noms. Nothing good has come of broadening the field and it cheapens the big rub you used to get of being a nominee. People used to make point of seeing all five films but now do you really need to run out and see a film like the Room when it has no chance of winning?
Totally agree. If you keep the acting noms at 5 a piece, just go with that for the films as well. That's what makes it a big deal to get the nomination in the 1st place...but now everyone has to get a blue participation ribbon.

 
They should really go back to 5 noms. Nothing good has come of broadening the field and it cheapens the big rub you used to get of being a nominee. People used to make point of seeing all five films but now do you really need to run out and see a film like the Room when it has no chance of winning?
Totally agree. If you keep the acting noms at 5 a piece, just go with that for the films as well. That's what makes it a big deal to get the nomination in the 1st place...but now everyone has to get a blue participation ribbon.
Well, not everyone...

 
The only unforgivable year was giving the Oscar to Crash... that movie is so middling, how it was even nominated is mind boggling. Think it beat out Brokeback too, so much for liberal hollywood.

Also, 12 years a slave is weak, swept along for politcal reasons.

 
Revenant leading in noms? It wasn't *that* good.

Weak year for movies. Nothing was great.
Others have argued with me but I think only 8 best film nominations when they can go 10 only shows it was a weak year for films.

H8 was nominated for score, cinematography, and a best acting nod with Jennifer Jason Leigh, should have gotten a nomination for best film and best original screenplay IMO, that would have been 5 overall. As is I think it will still walk away with 2 big Oscars for score and also for JJL which I can't wait to see her accept the award. I have always always always liked her and I know she ain't cute to everyone but I always had a crush on her as a kid.
Not even close, imo. And Im a QT fan.

 
Revenant leading in noms? It wasn't *that* good.

Weak year for movies. Nothing was great.
Others have argued with me but I think only 8 best film nominations when they can go 10 only shows it was a weak year for films.

H8 was nominated for score, cinematography, and a best acting nod with Jennifer Jason Leigh, should have gotten a nomination for best film and best original screenplay IMO, that would have been 5 overall. As is I think it will still walk away with 2 big Oscars for score and also for JJL which I can't wait to see her accept the award. I have always always always liked her and I know she ain't cute to everyone but I always had a crush on her as a kid.
Not even close, imo. And Im a QT fan.
H8 was a top notch made film. Just the actual making of it, even the snow and the snow flurries coming in the cracks of the wood inside the cabin looked real. Everything looked very real to me.

We can agree to disagree, saw the H8 in the 70MM and thought the look of the film was pretty awesome. I am also a big fan of MMFR and want to see Leo's film this coming weekend.

 
Smack Tripper said:
The only unforgivable year was giving the Oscar to Crash... that movie is so middling, how it was even nominated is mind boggling. Think it beat out Brokeback too, so much for liberal hollywood.

Also, 12 years a slave is weak, swept along for politcal reasons.
Nah, Goodfellas not winning was unforgivable.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top