Beverly Hills, Ca
The Academy Awards are doubling the number of best-picture nominees from five to 10.
Academy President Sid Ganis said at a news conference that the academy's board of governors made the decision to expand the slate. Ganis said the decision will open the field up to more worthy films for the top prize at Hollywood's biggest party.
The change takes effect with next year' Oscars on March 7.
The move is a return to Oscar traditions of the 1930s and '40s, when 10 nominees were common.
Sounds like a waste to me because there are already so many analyzers of the awards that there is only a real race between a few films instead of all five. Some are the nominees are just nominal recipients and not true challengers. Extending the list to 10 will allow Hollywood to start putting on some popular films that have no chance to win, but their mere nomination could bring in more viewers. Or Hollywood can be decent and start including more obscure choices to represent greater diversity in the filmmaking world.
Holy shit. I don't know how I feel about this. On one hand, it's good that more films will get recognized, but on the other, it's just another way for Hollywood to overrate even more films that totally suck while overlooking even more truly great films.
^^ same here, i don't really know how I feel about, in written it seems like a good idea (kinda), because...
- what better year to begin this than 2009? coincidence of course
- also i wonder if with that many films nominated some foreign films might make it to the list
OTOH, this 10 nominations will prove for the nth time the academy's shitty taste.
I don't even think there were 10 good movies last year. This year is shaping up awesome.
82, huh.. the perfect year to finally wise up and kick my addiction to the Oscars. :ponder:
I don't like this idea. Not only is it going to make the longest goddamn show of the year even longer, it dilutes the prestige that comes with a best picture nomination.
I don't know why anyone is complaining. The show is already long, and the length of the show has no long-term impact on the prestige of being nominated for a Best Picture Oscar. Besides, big deal. I like the length of the show, it happens once a year. Who cares?
Second, this only increases the chance that documentaries, animated films, and foreign films will be nominated, even comedies. Having so many spots, I think people start to think, "Oh yeah, let's nominate Wall-E for Best Pic." I think the purpose is to be able to recognize films other dramas. They'd be sharply criticized if they just filled out these five new spots with more undeserving bullshit.
As a marketing tool, seriously, who gives a shit? If it's nominated for Best Sound Editing, the movie's going to use it on the DVD cover, so why complain about that? At least a film with a more honor-worthy nomination will get to say that it was a Best Pic nominee.
I think this is great.
Quote from: Gamblour. on June 24, 2009, 05:17:24 PM
I don't know why anyone is complaining. The show is already long, and the length of the show has no long-term impact on the prestige of being nominated for a Best Picture Oscar. Besides, big deal. I like the length of the show, it happens once a year. Who cares?
Nah I meant when there are 10 best picture nominees, it kind of makes getting nominated a little less impressive. Like "yay, we got nominated for best picture!" Yeah you and 9 other assholes.
Quote from: ©brad on June 24, 2009, 06:41:56 PM
Quote from: Gamblour. on June 24, 2009, 05:17:24 PM
I don't know why anyone is complaining. The show is already long, and the length of the show has no long-term impact on the prestige of being nominated for a Best Picture Oscar. Besides, big deal. I like the length of the show, it happens once a year. Who cares?
Nah I meant when there are 10 best picture nominees, it kind of makes getting nominated a little less impressive. Like "yay, we got nominated for best picture!" Yeah you and 9 other assholes.
A top 10 hasn't hurt AFI's credibility.
Plus, it's not like the Academy ever picks the 5 best movies. They just pick the 5 most accessible that also happen to have a bit of artistic credibility.
Maybe now they'll pick at least a few movies that are actually deserving even if they don't win.
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi409.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fpp176%2Fzetecgt2%2FFunny%2FMr__Horse_by_Ren_and_Stimpy_Club.jpg&hash=255d1f9db628ab26e026def88b32804eff8bb462)
Oscar tweaks best song standards
Academy aims to 'improve quality' of music in movies
Associated Press
No Academy Award will be presented for best song at next year's ceremony if none of the tunes is considered good enough, Oscar organizers said Friday.
Rules for the 82nd Oscar show next March will require that at least one song must achieve a minimum score of 8.25 on a scale of 6 to 10 in voting by members of the academy's music branch.
"We're trying to improve the quality," said composer Bruce Broughton, who heads the music branch of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences. "There's been a lot of talk about the songs in films, the lack of memorability compared to songs in the past, the almost forgetability of some of them. ... This is an attempt to really make the songs as good as possible."
In another significant change for next year's show, the academy is moving its honorary Oscars out of the Academy Awards ceremony itself and presenting them at a separate event.
The two changes come days after the academy made its most drastic Oscar change in decades, doubling the number of best-picture nominees from five to 10.
The music branch has about 230 members, who rate songs after viewing them in a marathon screening or on a DVD compilation of the tunes as they appear in the films.
If no song achieves the minimum score, there will be no best-song Oscar awarded. If only one song scores that well, then it and the tune with the next-highest score will be the category's two nominees. The number of nominees in the category can range from two to five depending on how many hit the minimum score.
Broughton said while the change sets minimum standards songs must meet, he doubted that there would be a year when the category would be scrapped because no tunes rated highly enough.
Starting this awards season, honorary Oscars for career achievement will be presented at a black-tie dinner in November, along with the academy's Irving G. Thalberg Memorial Award and Jean Hersholt Humanitarian Award.
Academy overseers said that will allow more time to pay proper tribute to recipients without crowding those awards into the Oscar ceremony, which often draws criticism for a running time that has topped four hours some years.
The academy board of governors "noticed that subtracting the honoraries from the broadcast would help reduce its length, but that really wasn't the motivation that was driving the change," said Bruce Davis, the academy's executive director.
Sid Ganis, academy president, said creating a separate event will insure "that each honoree will be given his or her full due."
Won't people just inflate a songs' rating to make sure it gets nominated?
Best Picture voting gets a makeover
Oscar nominees to be ranked in order of preference
Source: Variety
Voting for the Best Picture Oscar nominees is set for a sweeping shift with voters ranking the 10 films in order of preference, rather than the decades-old practice simply voting for a single nominee.
Monday's announcement by the Academy of Motion Picture Arts & Sciences came two months after the board's surprise decision to double the category to 10 nominees. AMPAS had not previously disclosed the specifics of how the votes would be tabulated.
Under the new system - which will only be employed in the Best Picture category -- voters will be asked to rank each of the 10 nominees.
The process calls for PricewaterhouseCoopers to first determine if one nominee has more than 50% of the first-place votes and then begin eliminating the films which are ranked first on the fewest number of ballots. When a film is eliminated, the film ranked second on those ballots will be accorded a first-place vote until a single film has over 50%.
I wonder if this will work, lets say there are clearly two films for the gold race, one is from your friend ronnie howard the other is from this lonely guy terrence malick that nobody has seen in 30 years, what will he/she do? put ronnie 1st and malick in 10.
Academy sets honorary Oscars
Producer John Calley to get Thalberg
Source: Variety
Veteran studio exec and producer John Calley has been tapped to receive the Academy of Motion Picture Arts & Sciences' prestigious Thalberg Award.
Lauren Bacall, Roger Corman and cinematographer Gordon Willis have also been selected for honorary Oscars. The awards will be presented at a Nov. 14 ceremony at the Acad's inaugural Governors Awards event, to be held in the Grand Ballroom at Hollywood and Highland.
Calley began his career as an exec at Filmways in 1960. He went on to hold top posts at Warner Bros., United Artists and Sony Pictures Entertainment. As a producer, he has shepherded such pics as "The Da Vinci Code," "Angels and Demons," "Postcards From the Edge," "The Remains of the Day" and "Closer."
The Irving G. Thalberg Memorial Award is given to producers whose work "reflects a consistently high quality of motion picture production."
Bacall is a legend of the bigscreen but has earned only one Oscar nom, for supporting actress in 1996's "The Mirror Has Two Faces."
Producer Corman is known for his prolific output of low-budget pics for more than five decades. His productions gave early breaks to such luminaries as Francis Ford Coppola, Martin Scorsese, James Cameron, Ron Howard and Jonathan Demme.
Willis served as d.p. on landmark pics ranging from "The Godfather" and "The Godfather: Part II" to "All the President's Men" and "Annie Hall." He's earned two career Oscar noms, for 1983's "Zelig" and 1990's "The Godfather: Part III."
"These four individuals have each, in their own unique way, made lasting impressions on the motion picture industry and audiences worldwide," said AMPAS prexy Tom Sherak.
I haven't watched the awards in the last few years, but this news may get me to watch it....
LOS ANGELES – Steve Martin and Alec Baldwin are taking on the Oscars.
The two Hollywood veterans will share hosting duties at the 82nd Academy Awards, the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences said Tuesday.
Telecast producers Bill Mechanic and Adam Shankman said Martin and Baldwin are "the perfect pair of hosts for the Oscars." The producers have said they hope to resurrect Oscar's ratings and make the show more fun by building on the changes introduced at February's ceremony, which tinkered with the way awards were presented and featured Broadway-style musical interludes.
Bringing in a pair of hosts, while not unprecedented, continues that theme of change.
"Very early on, we talked about a pairing as part of our concept of the show, having tradition and also freshness walking hand in hand," Shankman said in an interview Tuesday. "Steve anchors it in so much tradition and Alec ... besides being a former Oscar nominee, he is just hot, hot, hot right now. And the two of them I know adore each other."
A pair of hosts helmed the inaugural Oscar ceremony in 1929: Douglas Fairbanks and William DeMille, then president and vice president of the film academy, co-hosted the show. The last time multiple hosts graced the Oscar stage was in 1987, when Chevy Chase, Goldie Hawn and Paul Hogan shared hosting duties.
"In the modern television era, this is the first time there will be two co-hosts on the same stage," academy spokeswoman Leslie Unger said Tuesday.
Hugh Jackman sang and danced as host of last year's Academy Awards, which saw a ratings boost from the previous year. The 41-year-old actor declined to reprise his hosting role before Mechanic and Shankman were named as producers.
Splitting hosting duties between two funny fellows ups the show's fun factor, Mechanic said — "taking a little starch out of the shirts, so to speak."
"We can move things along more easily by taking out some of the stilted banter that goes on between presenters and let the hosts guide us through the evening," he said Tuesday.
Martin has hosted the show twice before, in 2001 and 2003, and has appeared as a presenter several times. Baldwin is a first-timer as Oscar host, but was a co-presenter in 2004.
Baldwin, 51, who stars on NBC's "30 Rock," called the Oscar gig "the opportunity of a lifetime." He was nominated for an Academy Award in 2003 for his supporting role in "The Cooler."
Martin said that he is "happy to co-host the Oscars with my enemy Alec Baldwin." The 64-year-old entertainer is currently on tour in support of his latest banjo album. He and Baldwin share the screen in Nancy Meyers' film "It's Complicated," due in theaters next month.
Besides the dual-host approach, the 2010 Oscars have already undergone a major makeover. The academy moved its honorary Oscars, often a long-winded affair that bogged down the ceremony, to a separate event in November.
And in the biggest change in decades, the academy doubled the number of best-picture nominees from five to 10. Academy overseers hope that might open the top category to a wider range of films, including commercial movies that could attract more TV viewers.
Telecast plans are shaping up well, said Mechanic, who made three promises about the 82nd Academy Awards ceremony on March 7, 2010: "It will be more fun this year, it will be faster this year and it will be the best of the best."
Best Picture
"Avatar" James Cameron and Jon Landau, Producers
"The Blind Side" Nominees to be determined
"District 9" Peter Jackson and Carolynne Cunningham, Producers
"An Education" Finola Dwyer and Amanda Posey, Producers
"The Hurt Locker" Nominees to be determined
"Inglourious Basterds" Lawrence Bender, Producer
"Precious: Based on the Novel 'Push' by Sapphire" Lee Daniels, Sarah Siegel-Magness and Gary Magness, Producers
"A Serious Man" Joel Coen and Ethan Coen, Producers
"Up" Jonas Rivera, Producer
"Up in the Air" Daniel Dubiecki, Ivan Reitman and Jason Reitman, Producers
Actress in a Leading Role
Sandra Bullock in "The Blind Side"
Helen Mirren in "The Last Station"
Carey Mulligan in "An Education"
Gabourey Sidibe in "Precious: Based on the Novel 'Push' by Sapphire"
Meryl Streep in "Julie & Julia"
Actor in a Leading Role
Jeff Bridges in "Crazy Heart"
George Clooney in "Up in the Air"
Colin Firth in "A Single Man"
Morgan Freeman in "Invictus"
Jeremy Renner in "The Hurt Locker"
Actress in a Supporting Role
Penélope Cruz in "Nine"
Vera Farmiga in "Up in the Air"
Maggie Gyllenhaal in "Crazy Heart"
Anna Kendrick in "Up in the Air"
Mo'Nique in "Precious: Based on the Novel 'Push' by Sapphire"
Actor in a Supporting Role
Matt Damon in "Invictus"
Woody Harrelson in "The Messenger"
Christopher Plummer in "The Last Station"
Stanley Tucci in "The Lovely Bones"
Christoph Waltz in "Inglourious Basterds"
Directing
"Avatar" James Cameron
"The Hurt Locker" Kathryn Bigelow
"Inglourious Basterds" Quentin Tarantino
"Precious: Based on the Novel 'Push' by Sapphire" Lee Daniels
"Up in the Air" Jason Reitman
Writing (Adapted Screenplay)
"District 9" Written by Neill Blomkamp and Terri Tatchell
"An Education" Screenplay by Nick Hornby
"In the Loop" Screenplay by Jesse Armstrong, Simon Blackwell, Armando Iannucci, Tony Roche
"Precious: Based on the Novel 'Push' by Sapphire" Screenplay by Geoffrey Fletcher
"Up in the Air" Screenplay by Jason Reitman and Sheldon Turner
Writing (Original Screenplay)
"The Hurt Locker" Written by Mark Boal
"Inglourious Basterds" Written by Quentin Tarantino
"The Messenger" Written by Alessandro Camon & Oren Moverman
"A Serious Man" Written by Joel Coen & Ethan Coen
"Up" Screenplay by Bob Peterson, Pete Docter, Story by Pete Docter, Bob Peterson, Tom McCarthy
Cinematography
"Avatar" Mauro Fiore
"Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince" Bruno Delbonnel
"The Hurt Locker" Barry Ackroyd
"Inglourious Basterds" Robert Richardson
"The White Ribbon" Christian Berger
Film Editing
"Avatar" Stephen Rivkin, John Refoua and James Cameron
"District 9" Julian Clarke
"The Hurt Locker" Bob Murawski and Chris Innis
"Inglourious Basterds" Sally Menke
"Precious: Based on the Novel 'Push' by Sapphire" Joe Klotz
Sound Editing
"Avatar" Christopher Boyes and Gwendolyn Yates Whittle
"The Hurt Locker" Paul N.J. Ottosson
"Inglourious Basterds" Wylie Stateman
"Star Trek" Mark Stoeckinger and Alan Rankin
"Up" Michael Silvers and Tom Myers
Sound Mixing
"Avatar" Christopher Boyes, Gary Summers, Andy Nelson and Tony Johnson
"The Hurt Locker" Paul N.J. Ottosson and Ray Beckett
"Inglourious Basterds" Michael Minkler, Tony Lamberti and Mark Ulano
"Star Trek" Anna Behlmer, Andy Nelson and Peter J. Devlin
"Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen" Greg P. Russell, Gary Summers and Geoffrey Patterson
Visual Effects
"Avatar" Joe Letteri, Stephen Rosenbaum, Richard Baneham and Andrew R. Jones
"District 9" Dan Kaufman, Peter Muyzers, Robert Habros and Matt Aitken
"Star Trek" Roger Guyett, Russell Earl, Paul Kavanagh and Burt Dalton
Foreign Language Film
"Ajami" Israel
"El Secreto de Sus Ojos" Argentina
"The Milk of Sorrow" Peru
"Un Prophète" France
"The White Ribbon" Germany
Animated Feature Film
"Coraline" Henry Selick
"Fantastic Mr. Fox" Wes Anderson
"The Princess and the Frog" John Musker and Ron Clements
"The Secret of Kells" Tomm Moore
"Up" Pete Docter
Art Direction
"Avatar" Art Direction: Rick Carter and Robert Stromberg; Set Decoration: Kim Sinclair
"The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus" Art Direction: Dave Warren and Anastasia Masaro; Set Decoration: Caroline Smith
"Nine" Art Direction: John Myhre; Set Decoration: Gordon Sim
"Sherlock Holmes" Art Direction: Sarah Greenwood; Set Decoration: Katie Spencer
"The Young Victoria" Art Direction: Patrice Vermette; Set Decoration: Maggie Gray
Costume Design
"Bright Star" Janet Patterson
"Coco before Chanel" Catherine Leterrier
"The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus" Monique Prudhomme
"Nine" Colleen Atwood
"The Young Victoria" Sandy Powell
Documentary (Feature)
"Burma VJ" Anders Østergaard and Lise Lense-Møller
"The Cove" Nominees to be determined
"Food, Inc." Robert Kenner and Elise Pearlstein
"The Most Dangerous Man in America: Daniel Ellsberg and the Pentagon Papers" Judith Ehrlich and Rick Goldsmith
"Which Way Home" Rebecca Cammisa
Documentary (Short Subject)
"China's Unnatural Disaster: The Tears of Sichuan Province" Jon Alpert and Matthew O'Neill
"The Last Campaign of Governor Booth Gardner" Daniel Junge and Henry Ansbacher
"The Last Truck: Closing of a GM Plant" Steven Bognar and Julia Reichert
"Music by Prudence" Roger Ross Williams and Elinor Burkett
"Rabbit à la Berlin" Bartek Konopka and Anna Wydra
Makeup
"Il Divo" Aldo Signoretti and Vittorio Sodano
"Star Trek" Barney Burman, Mindy Hall and Joel Harlow
"The Young Victoria" Jon Henry Gordon and Jenny Shircore
Music (Original Score)
"Avatar" James Horner
"Fantastic Mr. Fox" Alexandre Desplat
"The Hurt Locker" Marco Beltrami and Buck Sanders
"Sherlock Holmes" Hans Zimmer
"Up" Michael Giacchino
Music (Original Song)
"Almost There" from "The Princess and the Frog" Music and Lyric by Randy Newman
"Down in New Orleans" from "The Princess and the Frog" Music and Lyric by Randy Newman
"Loin de Paname" from "Paris 36" Music by Reinhardt Wagner Lyric by Frank Thomas
"Take It All" from "Nine" Music and Lyric by Maury Yeston
"The Weary Kind (Theme from Crazy Heart)" from "Crazy Heart" Music and Lyric by Ryan Bingham and T Bone Burnett
Short Film (Animated)
"French Roast" Fabrice O. Joubert
"Granny O'Grimm's Sleeping Beauty" Nicky Phelan and Darragh O'Connell
"The Lady and the Reaper (La Dama y la Muerte)" Javier Recio Gracia
"Logorama" Nicolas Schmerkin
"A Matter of Loaf and Death" Nick Park
Short Film (Live Action)
"The Door" Juanita Wilson and James Flynn
"Instead of Abracadabra" Patrik Eklund and Mathias Fjellström
"Kavi" Gregg Helvey
"Miracle Fish" Luke Doolan and Drew Bailey
"The New Tenants" Joachim Back and Tivi Magnusson
Up, Inglourious Basterds, A Serious Man, Hurt Locker, District 9 = Yay.
The Blind Side = Invalidated.
If there had only been 5 Best Pic nominees it would have been Avatar, Hurt Locker, Precious, Up In The Air and ???
Ha to Avatar and The Blind Side, the only 2 Best Pic nominees NOT nominated for screenplay.
Why is In The Loop adapted? Because the characters already existed? I guess the same thing happened with Before Sunset. It does seem an odd definition of adaptation though.
What a weird year.
Quote from: MacGuffin on February 02, 2010, 07:50:24 AM
Best Picture
"The Blind Side" Nominees to be determined
WELL I hope the only nominee is Sandra Bullock because the film has no nomination in writing, directing, sound, cinematography or anything else. So Sandra Bullock must be so FUCKING good that she makes the movie the best of the year just by her wondrous acting. She should get a lifetime achievement award for this film, really.
jk all the Oscars I've watched sucked it's like the Grammys really so I'm not surprised.
worst year ever.
i noticed that too pas and LOLd. it's like they hav no idea who made the movie. i'm sure they'll cut to her anyway when the worthless nomination is announced.
only interesting category is supporting actor, and that's cos waltz is such a shoe-in that it could easily be an upset on par with rourke or something, not that i give a shit if waltz gets it or even think he deserves it. the whole thing is such a weird combination of deserved and non-deserved nominations. even with the expanded pic category it still feels like the kind of nominations you'd get after a last minute ballot at the xixax awards. where you just write the films you remember best even if u didn't see them. there's nothing at all interesting here, the song list will be the most boring thing ever.
invictus wtf. oh right, oscars.
weak year.
any of those perennial snubs could've made a film this year and swept everything.
It was a good year, but they fucked it up as usual.
Avatard is officially the most overrated movie ever.
Yes!
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ftwitchfilm.net%2Freviews%2FA%2520Prophet_poster.jpg&hash=383206ffc7c619770f5866dc3536058e950ae5e2)
Quote from: Stefen on February 02, 2010, 11:43:37 AM
Avatard is officially the most overrated movie ever.
Is it, though? It's talked about a lot but I don't know anyone who thinks it's the greatest. It's not really sweeping the awards or anything--it gets nominated in Best Picture and Best Director, then technical stuff, mostly. Yeah, it got nominated for best score, but that's because none of the voters could think of anything else, so it's a default nomination, because when stuck, they always just nominate James Horner, Hans Zimmer, or John Williams.
And even when it is nominated, the film doesn't win all the time. The Hurt Locker's been winning nearly as many of the major directing and best picture awards. Bigelow even won the DGA award over Cameron. Up in the Air also won some major best picture stuff toward the beginning, but it seems like the buzz on that has died down.
Anyway, I think that there have been other movies that were way more overrated. I don't even think that Avatar will win best picture this year. The Hurt Locker seems to have a better shot at this point, and the appeal of giving the directing award to a woman for the first time instead of to James Cameron for the second time, plus the fact that she's been "legitimized" by the DGA, makes me think that the odds are in Bigelow's favor.
The trajectory of The Hurt Locker is a bit like Crash, where nobody was talking about it when it was released and now suddenly people are taking the movie seriously. The Hurt Locker is a lot better than Crash, if only by virtue of not being Crash, but the quality of a movie is really a non-factor when we're talking about the Oscars.
Everything about Avatard screams overrated. It's good for what it is and now I think my initial overrating of it comes from the fact that I was 99% sure it was going to be fucking stupid, and when it wasn't completely stupid, I fell for it.
It's not very good. It's actually not good at all. It's pretty fucking stupid, but it's pretty kick-ass and that doesn't constitute the best picture of the year. I know the Academy fucks this up more often than not (actually ever), but this one just bugs me because it really reinforces that fact that if it makes money, it must me good. Blind Side too. WTF?
Quote from: Stefen on February 02, 2010, 12:35:33 PM
It's not very good.
Part I: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uJarz7BYnHA
Part II: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dLzKwTcGO_0
haha, yeah, pretty much.
WTWTA didn't even get a nod for visual effects? Stupid stupid stupid
Quote from: modage on February 02, 2010, 12:37:32 PM
Quote from: Stefen on February 02, 2010, 12:35:33 PM
It's not very good.
Part I: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uJarz7BYnHA
Part II: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dLzKwTcGO_0
Haha, funnier than the Phantom Menace review.
Anyone else feel like 2009 was a really weak year for movies? From the best picture category, there are at least 5 films (An Education, The Hurt Locker, Precious, A Serious Man, Up in the Air) on that list which you could label as inaccessible to the general public. I've seen a lot of them but most of the general public haven't. Oh and normally I've seen at least one, sometimes two of the documentaries nominated for an AA. I haven't even heard of the nominees this year.
I think it's actually been a great year. If you judge it by what the academy thinks, it was fucking terrible, but there's been some good stuff this year that maybe didn't appeal to upper class old white people.
Treeless Mountain, Moon, The Girlfriend Experience, Dear Zachary, Anvil!, Tyson, Two Lovers, Bad LT II, Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs, Drag me to Hell, Gomorrah (08?), Away We Go, Advenureland and those are just the ones I've seen.
There are still lots of great stuff that I haven't, like everything.
I've enjoyed this year more than most, but you wouldn't be able to tell by the wasps choices.
Quote from: Myxo on February 02, 2010, 02:15:04 PM
Anyone else feel like 2009 was a really weak year for movies? From the best picture category, there are at least 5 films (An Education, The Hurt Locker, Precious, A Serious Man, Up in the Air) on that list which you could label as inaccessible to the general public. I've seen a lot of them but most of the general public haven't. Oh and normally I've seen at least one, sometimes two of the documentaries nominated for an AA. I haven't even heard of the nominees this year.
Maybe it's been a good year for movies, and a bad year for publicity/advertising. The turds were polished up and put out there while the pearls remained trapped inside the oyster. I guess we, as movie lovers, have a responsibility to rip those oyster shells the fuck open ourselves and take those goddamned pearls. If we can collect enough pearls, we can string them together as a necklace and watch them drape between a woman's breasts. Then, she will finally fuck us. And she won't even care that we can't make her cum, because she'll think we're rich. It doesn't matter that she'll find out that we're not rich, because we only have to fuck her once, and then we can jerk off to that memory forever.
... What were we talking about? Oh yeah, fuck the Oscars!
These nominations are great news for people who hate surprises.
Nothing for Moon or Where the Wild Things Are?
The rest was very predictable and I hate having 10 best film nominees. Five is enough. Perhaps 6. But TEN? No.
I'm glad the Argentinean film "El Secreto de Sus Ojos" made it because its an amazing film. You should watch it if you can find it. Not sure when it will come out in the USA.
It's just weird to have 10 films nominated. It looks as if everything got the nomination.
Everything and nothing.
I was hoping that if there were going to be 10, they could throw us at least a couple bones, but nope. 10 most popular.
Quote from: kal on February 02, 2010, 03:41:52 PM
I'm glad the Argentinean film "El Secreto de Sus Ojos" made it because its an amazing film. You should watch it if you can find it. Not sure when it will come out in the USA.
Is this something you saw on a festival circuit, or do you live in Argentina/a country which regularly receives Argentinean films? I haven't seen this movie, I'd love to see this movie, and for various reasons it looks like I will get the chance to soon. I did just watch Fabián Bielinsky's The Aura which also stars Ricardo Darín.
Related to this, did you see Pablo Trapero's Lion's Den? A great great women in penitentiary film which would be an awesome double feature with the Oscar nominated A Prophet.
Quote from: Captain of Industry on February 02, 2010, 06:52:38 PM
Quote from: kal on February 02, 2010, 03:41:52 PM
I'm glad the Argentinean film "El Secreto de Sus Ojos" made it because its an amazing film. You should watch it if you can find it. Not sure when it will come out in the USA.
Is this something you saw on a festival circuit, or do you live in Argentina/a country which regularly receives Argentinean films? I haven't seen this movie, I'd love to see this movie, and for various reasons it looks like I will get the chance to soon. I did just watch Fabián Bielinsky's The Aura which also stars Ricardo Darín.
Related to this, did you see Pablo Trapero's Lion's Den? A great great women in penitentiary film which would be an awesome double feature with the Oscar nominated A Prophet.
Somebody gave it to me a while back.
And nope, I have not seen the Trapero film yet but I also have the DVD somewhere. I have to watch it.
Quote from: polkablues on February 02, 2010, 03:25:42 PM
These nominations are great news for people who hate surprises.
i said almost that exact thing to someone this morning.
it's like that episode of futurama When Aliens Attack, Lurr from the planet omicron persei 8 is watching Single Female Lawyer and it cuts off and he comes to destroy earth if they don't make the final episode again, and then fry makes the final episode cos he actually made it cut off if you remember a thousand years back and then he only writes about half a script so when it gets to the end Leila has to make up the ending and she improvises "I"M QUITTING LAW AND GETTING MARRIED" something like that, which she considers pretty good cos it's clever and unexpected. but fry thinks it's shit and this is what he says:
"that's not why ppl watch tv, clever things make ppl feel stupid and unexpected things make them feel scared".
that's why invictus is there, that's why crash won, that's why the blind side is there, and that's why hurt locker is actually going to win, not cos it's actually the best movie but cos it's the good movie that all the scared and dumb ppl agreed to get behind, they had to ALL get behind it, otherwise they'd hav to defend their own tastes instead of resorting to "well everyone else liked it".
the docos list is good tho, all those are great and the cove should win (i've seen it!).
After repeat viewings I've come around to really liking Inglourious Basterds. However -
"We're going to win Best Picture. This is the movie people love and it's Quentin's time. We are going for it and we are gonna get it," says Harvey. (http://nymag.com/daily/entertainment/2010/02/inglourious_basterds_to_win_be.html)
Fuck this movie in the face. I hope Up wins. Or District 9, or anything else.
come on.
it's bigelow's time.
that's it.
tarantino will maybe win the writing awards but that's that for him personally. too many people think he's a spoiled full of himself egomaniac, unlike all those down to earth gentle geniuses like wes anderson, pta, james cameron, spielberg, scorsese, allen, nolan...
Artists behind Oscar-nominated songs won't perform
LOS ANGELES - Some of Oscar's most memorable moments have come during performances of nominated songs.
Among them: rap group Three 6 Mafia surrounded by streetwalkers as they performed "It's Hard Out Here for a Pimp" from "Hustle & Flow" in 2006, and Celine Dion's resplendent performance of the "Titanic" hit, "My Heart Will Go On," in 1998.
Don't expect such musical moments at the 82nd Academy Awards.
The artists behind the year's five nominated songs will not perform during the Oscar telecast. Instead, the songs will be showcased with clips from the films that featured them, "which is how most nominated achievements are featured within the show," Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences spokeswoman Leslie Unger said Wednesday.
That means Randy Newman won't get to take the stage for his two nominated tunes, "Almost There" and "Down in New Orleans" from "The Princess and the Frog."
Marion Cotillard won't reprise her sexy, heart-wrenching performance of "Take It All," written by Maury Yeston for "Nine." Reinhardt Wagner and Frank Thomas can't bring their "Loin de Paname" from "Paris 36" to life.
And "The Weary Kind (Theme from Crazy Heart)" won't be performed by "Crazy Heart" star Jeff Bridges or writers Ryan Bingham and T Bone Burnett.
"We haven't been invited," Bingham said, seeming a bit surprised.
Yet there will still be dancing on the show. Producer and choreographer Adam Shankman announced on his Twitter page that he cast 69 dancers for the show's production numbers, though he hasn't revealed exactly what he has planned.
The Oscar troupe includes at least a dozen dancers from the Fox reality show "So You Think You Can Dance," where Shankman serves as a judge.
"All there for the movies!" he tweeted.
The Academy Awards will be presented March 7 at the Kodak Theatre and broadcast live on ABC.
Quote from: MacGuffin on February 17, 2010, 11:41:27 PM
Artists behind Oscar-nominated songs won't perform
LOS ANGELES - Some of Oscar's most memorable moments have come during performances of nominated songs.
Among them: rap group Three 6 Mafia surrounded by streetwalkers as they performed "It's Hard Out Here for a Pimp" from "Hustle & Flow" in 2006, and Celine Dion's resplendent performance of the "Titanic" hit, "My Heart Will Go On," in 1998.
Don't expect such musical moments at the 82nd Academy Awards.
The artists behind the year's five nominated songs will not perform during the Oscar telecast. Instead, the songs will be showcased with clips from the films that featured them, "which is how most nominated achievements are featured within the show," Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences spokeswoman Leslie Unger said Wednesday.
That means Randy Newman won't get to take the stage for his two nominated tunes, "Almost There" and "Down in New Orleans" from "The Princess and the Frog."
Marion Cotillard won't reprise her sexy, heart-wrenching performance of "Take It All," written by Maury Yeston for "Nine." Reinhardt Wagner and Frank Thomas can't bring their "Loin de Paname" from "Paris 36" to life.
And "The Weary Kind (Theme from Crazy Heart)" won't be performed by "Crazy Heart" star Jeff Bridges or writers Ryan Bingham and T Bone Burnett.
"We haven't been invited," Bingham said, seeming a bit surprised.
Yet there will still be dancing on the show. Producer and choreographer Adam Shankman announced on his Twitter page that he cast 69 dancers for the show's production numbers, though he hasn't revealed exactly what he has planned.
The Oscar troupe includes at least a dozen dancers from the Fox reality show "So You Think You Can Dance," where Shankman serves as a judge.
"All there for the movies!" he tweeted.
The Academy Awards will be presented March 7 at the Kodak Theatre and broadcast live on ABC.
What a sore defeat for Randy Newman. He sure had his game going. Now it's back to the skids. :yabbse-sad:
Oscars favorite in trouble over campaign blitz
LOS ANGELES (AFP) – Iraq war drama "The Hurt Locker" has been engulfed by controversy in the final sprint to the Oscars finishing line but should still win the coveted best picture prize at the awards extravaganza, analysts said Sunday.
The gritty independent film about a US army bomb disposal unit in Baghdad had emerged as the overwhelming favorite to win the top honor at next Sunday's 82nd Academy Awards after winning a string of other honors this year.
However the film's relentless procession towards best picture has been jolted in the past few days after it emerged that one of the movie's producers, Nicolas Chartier, had broken strict rules concerning negative campaigning.
Chartier could face censure from the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences after sending emails to swathes of Oscar voters urging them to vote for "The Hurt Locker" instead of a "500-million-dollar film."
Chartier's emails was seen as a direct attack on a best picture rival, James Cameron's big-budget science-fiction blockbuster "Avatar" -- a clear breach of Academy rules which forbid negative campaigning.
Frenchman Chartier was forced to issue an embarrassing apology for his initial email, describing it as "inappropriate and stupid."
"My email to you was out of line and not in the spirit of the celebration of cinema that this acknowledgement is," Chartier wrote. "I was even more wrong, both personally and professionally, to ask for your help in encouraging others to vote for the film and to comment on another movie.
"As passionate as I am about the film we made, this was an extremely inappropriate email to send, and something that the Academy strongly disapproves of in the rules.
"My naivete, ignorance of the rules and plain stupidity as a first time nominee is not an excuse for this behavior and I strongly regret it."
A spokeswoman for the Academy declined to comment on what action -- if any -- might be taken against Chartier.
Analysts have speculated that sanctions could range from withholding tickets to the Oscars show for individuals connected to the film all the way to the nuclear option of eliminating the film from the best picture race.
Pundits however are skeptical that the controversy will adversely impact "The Hurt Locker's" Oscars hopes, noting that the furore erupted only days before Tuesday's 5:00pm deadline for final ballots.
"When it's this late in the game, most of the ballots or a good percentage of them will be in," said Pete Hammond, Maxim magazine film critic and an awards season expert with the Los Angeles Times.
"It takes time for a story like this to permeate into the Academy. Will it have any effect? I doubt it. The bottom line is I think people still tend to vote for the film they like the best."
Veteran Oscarologist Tom O'Neil, from the Los Angeles Times's theenvelope.com agreed.
"I'd say around three-quarters of the ballots were done by the time this broke," O'Neil told AFP. "The widespread consensus is that 'The Hurt Locker' has it in the bag and that even these issues aren't going to trip it up."
This year's Oscars, which take place at the Kodak Theater, will see eight other films vying for best picture along with "Avatar" and "The Hurt Locker."
Other nominees include South Africa's acclaimed science-fiction thriller "District 9," Pixar's animated "Up", sports drama "The Blind Side," and Quentin Tarantino's World War II revenge fantasy "Inglourious Basterds."
Recession-era drama "Up In the Air" is also nominated along with low budget films including "An Education," "Precious" and "A Serious Man."
Like the best picture race, clear favorites have emerged across most of the other major categories.
Kathryn Bigelow is widely expected to become the first woman in Oscars history to win the best director prize for her work on "The Hurt Locker," while Jeff Bridges and Sandra Bullock are poised to take the top acting awards.
Bridges, 60, is expected to win for his portrayal of an alcoholic country singer trying to rebuild his life in the drama "Crazy Heart" while Bullock is the favorite to edge out Meryl Streep for her performance in "The Blind Side."
"It looks as if all the top award races are locked in now," said O'Neil. "It looks like there will be virtually no suspense.
"Usually you can feel the rumblings of a possible upset at this stage. But there's been nothing like that so far."
To Protect James Cameron's Feelings, Sacha Baron Cohen's Avatar Sketch Is Cut From Oscar Telecast
* 3/2/10 at 5:37 PM
NYmag
Just a week ago, Sacha Baron Cohen — the alter ego of Borat and Brüno — was announced as an Oscar presenter by the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences. Now, suddenly, Baron Cohen has vanished from that list. Why is he gone from the show? Because one of the broadcast's producers was scared he might offend gazillionaire Best Director nominee James Cameron.
An insider familiar with the Oscar telecast tells Vulture that an Avatar sketch planned by Baron Cohen and Ben Stiller was nixed yesterday by show producer Bill Mechanic, who worried that Cameron would be so offended by it that he might even walk out of the Oscar broadcast on live TV.
So what skit could possibly so incense the HMFIC?
Our insider informs us that Baron Cohen planned to appear onstage as a blue-skinned, female Na'vi, with Stiller translating "her" interplanetary speech. As the skit went on, though, it would become clear that Stiller wasn't translating properly, because Cohen would grow ever more upset. At its climax, an infuriated Baron Cohen would pull open "her" evening gown to reveal that s/he was pregnant, knocked up with Cameron's love child, and would go on to confront her baby daddy as if s/he were on Jerry Springer.
Mechanic, now both a producer of motion pictures and of this year's Oscar telecast, was head of Twentieth Century Fox when Cameron's Titanic famously went massively over budget and over schedule, so he's well acquainted with Cameron's sense of humor — or lack of it. "Let's just say that Cameron isn't known to be, shall we say, 'self-deprecating,'" explained one insider familiar with the decision to cut the sketch.
Academy spokesperson Toni Thompson would only confirm that Baron Cohen was no longer presenting, but Baron Cohen's spokesman, Matt Labov, tells Vulture that "I hate to use the term, because it's so ubiquitous, but there were 'creative differences.' Nothing acrimonious, but both sides felt that since they couldn't agree, [Cohen] might as well remain in London." (Calls to Mechanic's office were not returned at deadline.)
So in case you're ranking celebrity senses of humor at home, you can now safely put Cameron below Eminem.
--
FOLLOWUP:
James Cameron to Oscars: Go Ahead and Make Fun of Me
Wed., Mar. 3, 2010 10:27 PM PST by Cristina Gibson
eOnline
At least one person wouldn't mind an Avatar spoof at the Academy Awards this Sunday.
James Cameron.
The Oscar-nominated director told me this exclusively tonight at the Global Green party at Avalon. Cameron said he wasn't aware that a proposed Avatar sketch involving Ben Stiller and Sacha Baron Cohen had been cut from the show, presumably to avoid upsetting the director.
"I don't know anything about that...I don't produce the Oscars. If they want to poke fun at Avatar Sunday, that's OK by me," said Cameron.
As far as he's concerned, he told me, jokes are just another element of Hollywood's big night. And he's fine with it.
"The Oscars are a celebration of movies...even the gaffes and out-of-bounds stuff are all part of the fun."
---------------------
sounds like he stole the sketch from the treehouse of horror episode where marge is impregnated by Kang (or Kodos):
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fthumbnails.hulu.com%2F12%2F279%2F49287_512x288_generated__PyXQ8OaG00eAUTJFhYSr9w.jpg&hash=708a1993dcc4f009cdb023b1499fd7d7d5bc2b42)
^hah!
So everyone needs to take 15 minutes and watch Logorama (http://www.garagetv.be/video-galerij/buzzing_bees/De_kortfilm_der_logo_s.aspx) which is nominated for best animated short. It's pretty inspired, very funny, and Ronald McDonald fights the Michelin Man with a machine gun.
Yes, Logorama is fantastic. I've seen all the nominated shorts, which are all quite good, and it's clear that Logorama ought to win (this coming from a big Wallace & Gromit fan!). It's images that we know, shown in ways that we never thought we'd see. That's partly because it doesn't even seem legal to show some of this stuff; I have no idea how the makers aren't getting sued 1000 times over. Perfectly done and absolutely hilarious.
ok i watched Logorama and i gotta say it's pretty entertaining but has some flaws that really put me off. i'll get to that in a second but first i wanna point out that the credit listed in the original nominations post is wrong, according to the full credits on imdb (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1563725/fullcredits) there is no one by the name Nicolas Schmerkin involved in the film.
Quote from: MacGuffin on February 02, 2010, 07:50:24 AM
"Logorama" Nicolas Schmerkin
for what it's worth, it seems to be a french production, much like a lot of the other finalists. below i've posted links to all the shorts i could find online.. and my review of each.
ANIMATEDFrench Roast (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iskBfH6bv3c) 8min.
this is actually a better film than Logorama. its look is not simply gimmicky, it's extremely clever. there's a great use of a mirror wall to build tension and to do something that could only be done easily in animation since there is no actual camera there. the only flaw it has which is common to most short films is a predictable ending. even so, i'm pretty sure this is a incisive commentary on the modern financial system. this excellent overtone makes it timely and in a way similar to what Logorama is trying to accomplish but achieved much more simply and without the unnecessary recourse to excessive foul language.
Granny O'Grimm's Sleeping Beauty (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cIDv1jJhoxY) 6min
quite funny but cannot escape the flaw i mentioned above about predicatibility. short films are all about the punchline, and here the major achievement is only portraying an amusing old granny character who is batshit crazy and ruining this kid's nights. this was evident from the first freakout and by the end it needed something extra -- maybe it should have been established that the kid has not slept in many days since his granny started visiting. i mean, in short films like in anything there doesn't have to be meaning.. but if there is some substance to the story or theme it makes it a step above a mere "calling card" for directors who want to move onto bigger things. that's all this is unfortunately.
The Lady and the Reaper (La Dama y La Muerte) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A9CQDKt8LVo) 8min
see this film has meaning. it's one joke of course that is beyond literally realised in the tug of war between the doctor and death, but it's interesting in that it switches the roles quite naturally. the doctor is trying to prevent death (for his own benefit) and death is trying to prevent suffering (for the old woman's benefit). it's as profound as a short film needs to be, it's one point, it's one idea that is covered easily and comprehensively in this short. i hate predictable use of music but there's no time to waste in short films so We Meet Again (TWO VERSIONS!) is passable but really pushing the limit of what's allowed.
Logorama (http://www.garagetv.be/video-galerij/buzzing_bees/De_kortfilm_der_logo_s.aspx) 16min
great great great idea. but why do they have to swear so much? i know, cbrad and everyone who doesn't have a problem with this kind of stuff will easily defend it, it works and most of all its COOL. i mean this is what i hate about Quentin Tarantino, and his influence is the worst part of this film. it takes his pop sensibilities to an excellent and logical limit but it feels so forced when characters randomly say fuck and shit for no reason at all, i mean that kid and the cops, their dialogue sometimes just consists of a random "fuck" just to remind ppl that this movie is
COOL.
the oil flood makes no sense, and i only recognized maybe 100 out of the thousand brands that were used. it's the biggest case of "calling card" short film you could possibly make. it's the director saying hey look i KNOW BRANDS, i can use them in a narrative.. sort of.
Wallace and Gromit: A Matter of Loaf and Death (http://tv.fooyoh.com/fooyohtv_videos_viral/6061481) 29min
this is such a classic timeless style that everytime i see a wallace and gromit film i cannot ever remember when it was made. this one is hilarious as to be expected and the story is TIGHT.. and best of all, no excessive cool bullshit! it wins its audience with CHARM and CLASS, something that is very rare these days. it's what Pixar has, and dreamworks doesn't. i saw this on TV and i never expected to find it online, but the link i've posted is actually the exact showing i saw on australian tv.. cool!
it's the deserved winner out of sheer talent and all the good commedable things i've mentioned, but it suffers from familiarity. if Logorama wins i won't be suprised. dark horse is definitely French Roast.
LIVE ACTIONThe Door (http://vimeo.com/9758104) 16min
DO NOT WATCH - WHAT A WASTE OF TIME. no, this isn't a sequel to THE ROOM, that might be worth watching. it's about a family that has been evacuated form a chernobyl-type disaster zone and i guess they are all going to die. one of them dies and is buried and the movie ends. ok great, dedicated to or based on a true story apparently.. not much of interest at all, very slow. it's russian, but it's no Stalker.
Instead of Abracadabra (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KjTKMdeaEy4) (trailer only)
looks funny in a napoleon dynamite kinda way. trailer is thousad times more watchable than THE DOOR.
Kavi (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QZS718v6FIc) (trailer only)
looks emotionally wrenching. makes the next film look like a piece of shit, since it looks like a believable story of a child in danger and with real problems to overcome. if anyone can find this and the above film i'd really appreciate it.
Miracle Fish (http://en.qoob.tv/video/clip_view.asp?id=15787) 17min
directed by this australian dude who works with Blue Tongue films, which made that bob dylan video recently where there's a house party.. meaningless and pointless intro to a meaningless and pointless film. i don't get it.. it fails in the casting stage where you have a story -- like MANY short films -- that rely on the acting ability of a little boy. the kid here is completely out of it, which i guess they thought would serve the story since it's about a kid alone at school after something mysterious has happened.. and then the ending is useless, there is no way in hell any kid or adult or conscious person would react like that especially after the money shot.
i get what they were trying to do, they were trying to establish some kind of tone where abstract ideas can work with marginal relation to real events. the thing is the real events don't add up.. is that what the character means when he keeps repeating the line about 65 cents? i hate short films that use coarse or extreme imagery or language as a shortcut to some kind of emotion.. this is guilty of all of the above.. and the emotion is murky at best. total fail from my country.
The New Tenants (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ITE7Nshd3SM) (trailer only)
this looks heavy handed and no more than an actors showcase. dude wants to work in films, whoever he is, someone hire him already so he doesn't keep making what looks like completely boring shorts about ppl "on the edge". sheesh, have some imagination! be interesting! be fun without appeasing meat heads and artistic without appeasing pretentious jerks! that's my wishlist.
winner of live action: probly Kavi or Abracadabra cos the rest look miserable.
I wish I could like logorama because cbrad, I hate to be that guy who dislikes what you dislike and have you be all folksy about it and say something like, I dunno what's wrong with you guys can't you like anything.
to me, it felt like family guy meets scary movies. scary movies because it just references one thing after another without any clear punchline or thought. family guy because it just takes something we've seen before as cute and turn it into an elaborate action movie. It's also like every art opening I've been to when some guy makes some sculpture out of optimus prime and his friends can't believe how crazy he is.
I mean, people like Frederic Back have won the animated shorts category, this feels like something someone did at animation school.
I know I can't convince anybody that it's funny if they didn't think so, but I'd like to discuss a bit of how I understood Logorama. I see it as a satire of American action movies of a particular sort, especially after Tarantino's influence, such that all the profanity is not meant to be cool, but to make fun of movies that do this to be cool (and the introduction of the cops talking about zoos is a reference to the banality of the Royale with Cheese scene in Pulp Fiction). A lot of what made me laugh was how spot on it was regarding the way that action movies are constructed, from the screenplay to how it was shot and edited. I think that part of the point is that it is 100% derivative, which for me built effectively into being overwhelmed by all these things that I recognized, simply in the plot and construction of the film, independent of the logos.
From there, the world of logos do link smoothly into the idea of being overwhelmed by all these things that I recognize. This may have varying effects on different audience members, depending on how many of the logos you recognize. The effect that it had on me was surprise over how much I did recognize. Unlike P, I felt like there were only a few that I didn't recognize.
Obviously, one of the main ideas of Logorama is how these corporate logos make up our world now--they're everywhere. I also felt that it was appropriate that all of the characters were also logos, because the majority of characters in mainstream American movies have "types," rather than being someone recognizably human. Every single character in Logorama was a clear reference to a "type" of character in these sorts of movies.
For me, the logos worked beyond being a clever gimmick, because toward the end I became frightened at the idea of how dense my experience of the world is with memorable marketing. It wasn't so much a lesson--I am logically aware of the influence of the many corporations, large and small, that are not only constantly selling to me, but already have sold me the modern living experience--it was a strong image that grew into something scary. There are only going to be more and more logos eeking their way into our consciousness, and it becomes not ridiculous that nearly every thing will be branded and associated with corporations. How far can we go in that direction before it changes what we are in relation to our environment, before we, too, build ourselves up into only being an instantly recognizable thing? Doesn't that already happen? Again, I don't think it's that the film teaches a lesson or that these are new ideas, but I feel that the imagery is effective and relevant to my own quest of figuring out my relationship to all these things around me. I've talked about these ideas before, but I've never had such a clear visceral experience about these ideas.
The earthquake made sense to me on an intuitive level--wanting to see this logo-world destroyed. The film takes place in L.A., where an earthquake of incredible magnitude is guaranteed to hit any time within the next few decades... could be today, could be 50 years from now, so why not during a shootout with Ronald McDonald? There's also the obvious thing of nature vs. human-made stuff, and nature always wins. That said, I couldn't tell you why the whole universe was made out of logos. Maybe that was the filmmakers being too cute. Or maybe I've overestimated the entire movie and it was never meant to be anything other than cute. But I'm sticking with what I've said.
Finally, I didn't feel like it was a calling card film, though it may have been. Most of that is because I watched the film wondering how they got away with using all these logos, and having read that the film was made over the course of four years by a small "French collective," I imagined that this was a gleeful "fuck you" to the notion of copyrighted logos. I don't think this stuff falls under fair use, as I think that trademarked images count as intellectual property and that some of the stuff in this film could be seen by the companies as actionable slander (Ronald McDonald shooting people and kicking a child in the head). I'm really not sure about the legality of it all, but it thrilled me to think that the filmmakers were just willfully breaking the law.
After I watched it, I read that the filmmakers are a French graphic design collective called H5... the very kind of people that companies would hire to create logos. That doesn't really take away from the film, because there's nothing about the film to suggest that they want you to think that logos are bad. Their notion that a logo-dense universe is simultaneously funny (because it's true) and scary (... because it's true) works for me. I guess I didn't feel like it was a calling card film because it was made over 4 years by a group of people regarding something that was intimately connected with what they work with. I think of calling card films as movies made without any passion or ideas by film students that really just wanted to get hired to do a feature, so they wouldn't put anything like 4 years into it, and I did feel like Logorama was a whole thing unto itself. It felt more like "we made this thing," than "please hire us to make your thing."
As a side note, they consulted with David Fincher and Andrew Kevin Walker (writer of Seven) regarding movie conventions. Walker ended up doing some uncredited writing on the script, I think, and Walker and Fincher are the voices of the two Pringles guys.
I wish I could like logorama because pete, I hate to be that guy who dislikes what you dislike. :yabbse-smiley:
Quote from: pete on March 05, 2010, 01:04:59 AM
I wish I could like logorama because cbrad, I hate to be that guy who dislikes what you dislike and have you be all folksy about it and say something like, I dunno what's wrong with you guys can't you like anything.
Well I often hate myself for being that guy because it's such a lame, lazy argument. "If you don't love this thing I hate you!" Hah, whatever cbrad.
P I have a similar disdain for excessive use of profanity pretty much in general. It's particular annoying on a lot of the HBO/Showtime stuff because you get the feeling they're using it as a crutch, or doing it because they can and after a while it just comes off crass. "Fuck" is a word that cuts, that when used properly can knock you on your ass but when you use it 6200 times in a 60 minute show or screenplay, it dilutes its power. In regards to Logorama, I think the reason I found the cussing pretty funny is that unlike the crude little bastards on family guy and south park, these brand mascots are avatars for corporate purity, and they put up a pretense of companies being all clean and wholesome. For someone who once sat through a 18-page powerpoint presentation solely on what the jolly green giant was allowed and not allowed to say, and who once got yelled at by a brand director for suggesting we put a little straw hat on the pillsbury doughboy ("you can't make the doughboy look like a hippie!") watching these little guys curse and smoke and shoot each other up was kind of a dream come true.
Logorama suffers for me in its length. I'm not sure the "plot" warrants a 16-minute run time, as you kind of get the point after the first few minutes. I will say it is pretty scary when you think about how they really weren't exaggerating that much. LA and parts of New York City really do look like that. And per my nonsensical rant on advertising a while back, not only are we visually polluting our cities but we're also eroding the collective mental health of the world. Am I the only one who had a headache at the end of this?
(P thanks for posting the other nominations and for your reviews by the way. Now I have something to do this afternoon!)
Watched most of P's links. Thanks, P!
I agree with a lot of what P said with the animated shorts (I didn't watch all of the live action). Logorama is good and it's impressive from a visual standpoint, but boy is it not funny.
And I'm sorry Matt, I don't buy all of what you're putting on this thing. I don't buy that the dialogue is atrocious and unfunny on purpose. I can buy that it's intentionally bad movie conventions, but the jokes are so obviously trying to be real jokes that you actually laugh at and they're just really forced and dull and the only jokes that work are the purely visual ones.
Anyway, the dialog ruins it. Even when you ignore the obnoxiously excessive cursing.
I can't see the Wallace and Gromit link, but I totally believe it's the best one since W&G are always just super charming shorts.
Outside of W&G, I'd say French Roast is the best for all the reasons P lists. The only thing that takes away from it is how Pixar-y it feels.
Granny Grimm was a snooze to me. The fairy-tale parts have some enjoyable colors and designs, but the 3D section is super dull. I don't buy the old woman's voice... it feels too strained... it's cold and poorly acted. That and it just wasn't funny to me.
Lady and the Reaper was super fun. I love a good cartoon chase, one that's swift and constantly surprises you with its cartoon logic. I like that the story was sweet yet dark. Second place after French Roast (not including W&G in the list since I didn't see it).
so strange that the some of the most thought out posts in weeks/months on this board have been on (relatively stupid) animated shorts :yabbse-huh:
there's this huge shorts festival near my hometown, it's getting really popular. All around Quebec for the last 10 years it's been all about shorts when it comes to festivals. I never understood what people like about them. They always seem longer than a real movie to me. You'll watch a film and if it's boring you start to look at the time after 20 minutes minimum. A short, you can easily check the time at 1 minute because you're already bored out of your mind.
The worst are those where there's barely any dialogue or music or anything going on, and that's like 99% of them.
RK, I can definitely see your point, because I can't argue that the jokes are actually well written. I guess the simple fact that the dialogue was coming out of these corporate logos was enough to make me laugh. I don't really know how to argue whether something is funny or unfunny. I just kept thinking that the point was maximum derivation that was mashed up and shown in a way I hadn't thought of before, and this idea just really made me laugh, and also made me think the most as to why I was laughing.
I understand the comparisons to Family Guy, which is also a completely derivative show, but I can't really explain why Family Guy doesn't make me laugh while Logorama does. I tried to explain why it made me laugh, somewhat, but I guess I didn't really succeed. Not once did I think that the writing was good, but I did think that practically every line was something that would be in one of those lousy action movies, so in a weird way I just kept thinking: "They sure did nail that terrible dialogue!" Something about the irony of that idea made me laugh. But that's such a delicate source of humor that I could also believe that it was just genuinely bad dialogue. Whatever the intent was, though, it did make me think of all that stuff that I discussed in my previous post.
I'm also beginning to feel bad that I dismissed Wallace & Gromit. I haven't seen it for over a year, when it first aired on BBC over Christmas 2008. I remember loving it.
French Roast is also really great. Other than Granny Grimm, which was mildly amusing to me, I really liked all of them and would like to talk about them, but I spent way too much energy talking about Logorama to parse out my ideas right now, and I also have some work to do.
Quote from: Pas Rap on March 05, 2010, 12:35:39 PM
so strange that the some of the most thought out posts in weeks/months on this board have been on (relatively stupid) animated shorts :yabbse-huh:
Give me a break, Pas.
First, you say that these are all "relatively stupid". This tells me you discounted them immediately before even watching them (did you?). These all (even the ones people don't like as much) have a LOT put into them.
You're also basically saying you don't get why people like short films. That seems like a very ridiculous thing to say. Why do you like ANY films? Obviously the majority of movies suck so that percentage is going to apply to shorts as well.
thanks to cbrad for starting this and p for following brilliantly. that along with some of the comments put this thread on another level, it would be great if posting the shorts ppl find becomes a trend every year so we can discover/discuss them.
haven't seen all, so far i liked logorama, lady and the reaper, french roast.
wallace and gromit was adorable and at the perfect length, i love that they didn't try to stretch that idea to make a feature and cash in.
i loved waltz's hands shaking as he walked off
boring and predictable as ever, a few surprises - one very big disappointment.. eh, i watched it, i can't complain:
kiss ass much?
christoph waltz - his schtick was cute but it fell flat. it was so scripted that it just brought attention to the total predictability of his win.. this pretty much established the tone for the whole nite's events.
EVERY OTHER FILM WAS BETTER
The Secret of your Eyes or whatever the fuck it was called. foreign film category is officially something the academy has absolutely NO idea about. did they SEE A Prophet? this shit that won looked so boring i couldn't even finish watching the trailer. everything else that i didn't see at least looked REALLY good.. i mean, this was really the biggest upset of the nite - not that anyone watching even gave a shit or had any idea who pedro almodovar was.
OH FUCK PLEASE CUT AWAY FROM THAT RIGHT NOW
eli roth. haha how scary and disgusting did he look when they cut to him giving someone a lone standing ovation. very scary.\\\
--
can't even think of any other highlights. just general boredom with the official results, when it must be obvious to everyone in the room that almost none of the winners will ever be seen again.. i mean Sandra Bullock even acknowledged this when she said something like "this is a once in a life time experience -- and we all know it is.. " i was thinking, yeah you got that right. sheesh.
Winner
alec and steve, easy.
I actually watched a majority of this. A couple of quick comments....
If they can ever get Robert Downey Jr. and Tina Fey to host the Oscars, that would be amazing.
Didn't like when all the best actors/actresses stood on stage together at the beginning.
Did like when past actors came out to each introduce each best actor/actress. Usually brought up good stories and reactions, but some of the gushing was too much. It caught my attention because I was wanting to click off the broadcast and see who won later, but I really liked some of the comments.
Too much attention paid to John Hughes. I don't remember Ingmar Bergman or Michelangelo Antonioni getting that kind of attention when they died, but a living monument was paid to Hughes onstage and in montage when I don't think he ever got any consideration from the Academy ever.
Liked Tom Hanks super quick Best Picture announcement.
Only surprise was Precious winning best adaptated script so not much for surprises.
Quote from: Gold Trumpet on March 07, 2010, 11:46:32 PM
Only surprise was Precious winning best adaptated script so not much for surprises.
oh yeah the only surprisegiacchino for UP! excellent, shame the idiots presenting mispronounced his name. spit out the gum Sam Worthington, you are NOT the king of the world, what a jerk.
also loved the dancing they did for the score nominations. that was really amazing dance..
What was up with that lady who bum-rushed the show when Best Doc Short won? Was like a Jewish mom who stole her son's spotlight.
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fd.yimg.com%2Fa%2Fp%2Frids%2F20100308%2Fi%2Fr1656363444.jpg&hash=98ba896d0d79a7bc0fbc615d135a16c96076dc08)
P, u invalidate some of the things you say with retarded remarks. Did you see 'The Secret in her Eyes'? It's an incredible film so before you bash something acting like you know what you're talking about, you should watch it.
The awards are boring and long for the most part. Everyone is so polite and kissing each others ass. I hate all the compliments because when you actually get to know some of these people you know the majority of them hate each others guts.
Anyhow, its always the same thing. Either we accept it or stop caring/watching.
this was not good. i'm okay with the insanely predictable wins mostly because i've known they would be predictable for a while. what i think is most disgraceful about this ceremony is the editing of clips.
the best way to present the acting categories is the simplest: you show an uninterrupted clip from the performances, giving a glimpse of why they deserved the recognition. seeing a somewhat contextualized, good acting moment--something you can't see in trailers/normal marketing--is part of why i used to love watching. why do they feel the need to add music and then cut to out-of-context dramatic moments?? it's embarrassing! it makes the performances look stupid! and the particular way these were edited was RETARDED. woody harrelson's look away after being told he'd gotten someone pregnant seemed unintentionally comical. and nearly all those montages involved major spoilers. it's a good thing i'd already seen most of them.
the same "logic" has been applied to the best picture intros. make a random montage instead of showing an extended clip. granted, this is more valid for representing an entire movie, but again, whoever edited those was a Fucking Idiot. they tried to sell A Serious Man like it was a straight-up drama. it's a total misrepresentation of the spirit of that movie. and then they include a random part from the dream sequence!!! like it actually happens in the movie!!! WHAT THE FUCK?!?! cut to Ethan Coen, one of the best editors alive. he gives a look of 'that was bullshit.'
then for lead performances they repeat the horrible idea of having other actors describe how great the actors are. granted the speeches this year were much better than last year and they got rid of the music, but it's still a terrible, terrible concept. especially now when the oscars need to draw in a new audience. the main reason so many people are turned off by the oscars seems to be because it makes a 'really big deal out of something that is not the most important thing in the world'. basically, they're an overblown ass-kissing/pat on the back. having long speeches about how awesome these actors are does nothing but contribute to that idea.
finally, sandra bullock winning. i knew this was coming but it still hurts. if sandra bullock had not made three high-grossing movies this year, and by that i mean just the blind side, and it had only made a modest amount of money, i guarantee she would not have won. this is an award for money. the only reason she's the actress of the moment is because she made a lot of money three times in the same year. it's the closest i've seen to an oscar being bought.
i just want winning an oscar to seem important again. oscar shows of the past have had a real sense of prestige because they weren't so freaking dumbed-down. they trusted the audience to have an attention span. the quickest way to become less important is to go 'look at me! i'm important!' and that's exactly what's happening to the ceremony.
Quote from: kal on March 08, 2010, 12:58:51 AM
P, u invalidate some of the things you say with retarded remarks. Did you see 'The Secret in her Eyes'? It's an incredible film so before you bash something acting like you know what you're talking about, you should watch it.
fair enough, i'll watch it. (only cos i HAVE to)
and yeah pic, the ass kissing was out of control this year. that new way of introducing main acting awards even LOOKS like a group jerk-off: a group of ppl stand on stage and gush praise at a particular person down below, while everyone is forced to guzzle it down their throats, it's so forced it feels pornographic.. Meryl Streep must have had a shower as soon as she got home to get that stench off..
and oh yeah, i guess Nicholas Shmerkin is a real person (he accepted the award for Logorama as producer).. i'd rather hav seen the directors come up wearing balaclavas or something. that woulda been cool.
it is TOTALLY acting prestige porn. and i forgot to mention, the inclusion of such speeches make acting seem disproportionately like THE most important category. why isn't it also being done for directors/screenwriters? there are tons of other directors who'd be able to talk about how great the nominated directors are. it's just so wrong in so many ways.
I won $210 in an Oscar pool at a friends house so it helped remove me somewhat from the horror of things like the interpretive dance numbers, what was in Molly Ringwald's cheeks and Sandra Bullock getting an Oscar for The Blind Side. The only real surprises were Precious for Screenplay and Hurt Locker for a few of the technical awards.
shitty moment of the night
giving the cove ppl only 20 secs. these guys should have had way more time to talk about something that really matters.
wtf james cameron
i didn't know james cameron married a walking corpse.
otoh...
most beautiful woman
Kathryn Bigelow, damn she looked stunning. and women (and men) in the 'biz' should take note from her and see you don't need to butcher your face to 'look younger', please grow old gracefully.
Christoph Waltz is a fucking poet. :)
Quote from: Fernando on March 08, 2010, 10:17:28 AM
wtf james cameron
i didn't know james cameron married a walking corpse.
She's in Titanic, right? Man, she's fucking old.
Quote from: MacGuffin on March 08, 2010, 12:09:26 AM
What was up with that lady who bum-rushed the show when Best Doc Short won?
The Story Behind The Oscars' 'Kanye Moment'Source: Cinematical
The appeal of the Oscars telecast is the giddy hope that follows any live show or broadcast -- we want a train wreck (figuratively, not literally, unless you're a sicko) to happen. In the 21st century, the Academy Awards have passed by in relatively boring splendor, the days of streakers and Cher gowns forgotten. But this year, shock came in the most unexpected of places: Best Documentary Short. Music by Prudence won, director Roger Ross Williams began to thank everyone, and then a loud lady in a purple dressed jumped on stage. Chaos reigned for 30 seconds and was hastily shooed off for the next category.
The woman in purple was revealed to be Elinor Burkett, producer of Prudence, and Salon immediately investigated. Burkett was more than happy to reveal why she crashed the stage, and declared it was all Williams' fault. "The director and I had a bad difference over the direction of the film that resulted in a lawsuit that has settled amicably out of court. But there have been all these events around the Oscars, and I wasn't invited to any of them. And he's not speaking to me. So we weren't even able to discuss ahead of the time who would be the one person allowed to speak if we won. And then, as I'm sure you saw, when we won, he raced up there to accept the award. And his mother took her cane and blocked me. So I couldn't get up there very fast."
Burkett claims the documentary was supposed to center on all the members of Liyana, not just the band's front woman, Prudence Mabhena. It was her idea (she claims the director "had never even heard of Zimbabwe"), and when the documentary took a different direction, she sued, though she remained credited as producer. According to Burkett, Williams had refused to speak to her or pass on any of the pre-Oscar party and event invitations. "I felt my role in this has been denigrated again and again, and it wasn't going to happen this time."
Williams' story is a bit different. He insists only one person is allowed to accept the award, and that the decision was handled by the Academy's publicist. He claims Burkett had removed herself from the project though she still qualified to receive a producer's credit and an official nomination. "I own the film. She has no claim whatsoever. She has nothing to do with the movie. She just ambushed me. I was sort of in shock." He also denies that his mother tried to block Burkett with her cane.
But to Williams' credit, the scuffle over the microphone doesn't diminish the award. "Absolutely not. It's such a career achievement, to win an Academy Award. This is what the business is. There are times when there's disagreement and dispute and you always hope that people will rise up to the occasion. It doesn't diminish it. She disowns it and doesn't want any part of the film. I'm so proud of the movie."
Only those in the know can say whether Burkett was a spoilsport, or someone muscled out of her moment. But Williams certainly acted with a lot of grace, and kept up a smile despite being in shock. Frankly, the real winner is Music By Prudence who is getting a lot more digital ink than most documentary shorts can claim, and the members of Liyana will benefit by extension. Isn't that what winning the gold statuette is really all about?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dAZUKDnZfbw
I wish for Nic Cage to strangle her windpipe until she shits her pants and dies from excreting her innards. Act your old fucking age please.
Complaining about the Oscars is a tradition I've lost the energy for... I think I've just accepted it by now that they'll suck and I like watching the train wreck.
I like Sandra Bullock... I don't think she's a great actress (certainly doesn't deserve an Oscar, but she knew that) and I think I hate all of her movies, but she seems like a good person. It's cool that she went and accepted her Razzie right before heading over to get an Oscar.
I was a little surprised that Avatar didn't win a lot more awards... that's how little faith I have in the Oscars.
Quote from: IchLiebeTisch on March 08, 2010, 12:38:37 PM
Quote from: Fernando on March 08, 2010, 10:17:28 AM
wtf james cameron
i didn't know james cameron married a walking corpse.
She's in Titanic, right? Man, she's fucking old.
She played the old lady's daughter; now she looks like the old lady. :shock:
Quote from: RegularKarate on March 08, 2010, 03:03:33 PM
Complaining about the Oscars is a tradition I've lost the energy for... I think I've just accepted it by now that they'll suck and I like watching the train wreck.
I like Sandra Bullock... I don't think she's a great actress (certainly doesn't deserve an Oscar, but she knew that) and I think I hate all of her movies, but she seems like a good person. It's cool that she went and accepted her Razzie right before heading over to get an Oscar.
I was a little surprised that Avatar didn't win a lot more awards... that's how little faith I have in the Oscars.
she gave a shitload of money to haiti too, she's alright
she's a cool person. she just doesn't deserve the win this year in any measure except for box office earnings.
Quote from: picolas on March 08, 2010, 04:57:56 PM
she's a cool person. she just doesn't deserve the win this year in any measure except for box office earnings.
No one is arguing that
So to recap, re: Sandra Bullock... we would totally hang out with her, but it would get awkward when she asks what we thought of her movies.
I didn't want to Sandra Bullock to win because I loved Meryl Streep's performance, but I also couldn't criticize Bullock because I hadn't seen the film. Has everyone here seen the movie and kept silent until now?
Quote from: RegularKarate on March 08, 2010, 05:35:03 PM
No one is arguing that
i know. i wanted to post that i'm not anti-bullock as a person. it's not completely her fault she won.
yes, polka. i would not know what to say if i ran into her. "nice.. persona you've got there. outside of films. and in some from a while ago.."
Quote from: Gold Trumpet on March 08, 2010, 05:43:49 PM
I didn't want to Sandra Bullock to win because I loved Meryl Streep's performance, but I also couldn't criticize Bullock because I hadn't seen the film. Has everyone here seen the movie and kept silent until now?
I saw 'the blind side'. Really subpar film but the performance is phenomenal. I'm not going to buy it, or 'precious' which I also saw so that's saying something.
Quote from: SiliasRuby on March 08, 2010, 07:12:31 PM
I'm not going to buy it, or 'precious' which I also saw so that's saying something.
lol
"You're really changing that boy's life."
"Nah... he's changin' maahn."
DISQUALIFIED
that's how Real people talk
Quote from: Gold Trumpet on March 08, 2010, 05:43:49 PM
I didn't want to Sandra Bullock to win because I loved Meryl Streep's performance, but I also couldn't criticize Bullock because I hadn't seen the film. Has everyone here seen the movie and kept silent until now?
I saw it. It's exactly what you think it is.
As I wrote in the Avatar thread, I'm just not sure the average movie goer let alone Oscar voters had the stomach for Cameron's liberal beating heart message within a SF film. I think the back half (tree raid on) cost him Best Picture. Good movie with a not-so-subtle message disguised as an escape. Despite the spectacle I've still yet to hear from anyone who say they loved it. Many who say they liked it a lot.
Kind of with RK in that bitching about the Oscars is almost as lame as the show itself but I really need to get this off my chest because this year's show pissed me off more than usual. Internet friends, if you would indulge me..
In one word? Abysmal. So uninspired. So boring. Sloppy production. Baldwin and Martin were wooden, underused, and generally not funny. The majority of the people there looked bored as fuck. And I don't know if it's simply a nature of the films this year or pre-oscar buzz mania gone bezerk but the show is absolutely devoid of any real tension. It's so predictable now, so safe. This 10-best picture nominees doesn't do jack shit because just like before only 2-3 of the films have any real buzz and therefore any serious shot at best picture (HL, Avatar, and IB in this year's case).
Pic I so agree on the editing of the clips. And did you see the part when they talked about the jew hunter from IB and then awkwardly cut to Ethan Cohen? What the fuck. Bullock's win was horrendous, although she did give probably the best speech, but whatever. And oh oh - Mo'fucking'nique talking about how glad she was that her win was based on performance and not politics? Hah, bitch please. Your win was just as much about politics as any other, if not more so.
You guys covered everything else. I'm happy for Kathryn I guess, but if someone could coherently explain to me what the Hurt Locker was about I'd love to hear it because I watched that thing dead sober on Saturday and I haven't a clue, beyond the force-fed (with an opening titlecard no less!) "war is a drug" message.
we all wanted to watch it here at home, of course it was only me that stayed up that late...
but the media and everybody was so excited about having an argentine movie nominated for an oscar,
even the ceremony was on the local channel. it's a bit silly. but winning an oscar here, is pretty much like winning a football match (real football, you call it soccer i think).
im glad El Secreto won, Campanella and Darin are a good team and i loved all of their movies, Darin is awesome...think El aura is my favorite of his movies. Tho i now really want to see the german one, the white ribbon, they said here it was a lot better.
anyway, that was it.
Quote from: a.santi on March 08, 2010, 09:10:28 PM
Tho i now really want to see the german one, the white ribbon
Yeah, definitely check it out as soon as you get the chance.
Oscar Winner's Speech Interrupted for Second Time
Aside from his Oscar win, documentary filmmaker Roger Ross Williams can't seem to catch a break. He's now better known for being ambushed onstage by former co-producer Elinor Burkett (now nicknamed "Lady Kanye") during his acceptance speech, rather than for his film, "Music by Prudence," which won for best documentary short. The day after the Oscar incident, Williams attempted to give the speech he wrote in a public forum, and again he was interrupted.
Because of the speech-hijacking incident, Larry King invited Williams on his show last night. After discussing the "Kanye moment" for a few minutes, King announced, "We wanted to give him a chance to give his speech, uninterrupted." Williams walked over to the side of the stage, where a microphone had been set up. Holding his speech in his hand, he began speaking as if he were still in front of the Oscar audience and had just learned his film had won. ("Oh my god, oh my god.")
Less than a minute into the speech, however, Williams suddenly looked confused and distracted. It appeared that something was happening off camera, most likely that he was being signaled by a staff member to end the speech. Before King said, "Don't cha have anything left," he referenced that they were running out of time. As Williams began a synopsis of the rest of the speech, King said, "Quickly...we have 20 seconds."
The Oscar incident has already become a running joke on other late-night shows. Last night, both "The Daily Show with Jon Stewart" and "The Late Show with David Letterman" parodied the incident, with Letterman actually getting his own "Lady Kanye" to ambush his monologue.