Features
Headlines
Search
Loading ...
Archives
Just moments after I posted about the animated feature Oscar race pushing 18 entrants, the Academy goes and corrects me by releasing the full slate, including Fox’s “Alvin and the Chipmunks: The Squeakquel” (I have to think way too hard about how to spell that damn title) and “The Dolphin: Story of a Dreamer,” bringing the total up to 20 titles in competition and the very real possibility that five nominees will make the cut.
The full list of qualifying titles (which you can also find in our Contenders section):
“Alvin and the Chipmunks: The Squeakquel”
“Astro Boy”
“Battle for Terra”
“Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs”
“Coraline”
“Disney’s A Christmas Carol”
“The Dolphin – Story of a Dreamer”
“Fantastic Mr. Fox”
“Ice Age: Dawn of the Dinosaurs”
“Mary and Max”
“The Missing Lynx”
“Monsters vs. Aliens”
“9”
“Planet 51”
“Ponyo”
“The Princess and the Frog”
“The Secret of Kells”
“Tinker Bell and the Lost Treasure”
“A Town Called Panic”
“Up”
14 responses so far
1 11-11-2009 at 10:11 am
Loyal said...
I’d included Alvin and the Chipmunks: The Squeakquel earlier in the debate and many people thought it wouldn’t be submitted.
The first one was animated enough, so I figured the same for the squeakquel (argh!).
I hope Mary and Max makes the 5.
2 11-11-2009 at 10:16 am
Kristopher Tapley said...
Uh, actually:
http://incontention.com/?p=16643
3 11-11-2009 at 10:21 am
Jilda said...
They should have submitted G-Force! That would have been a surefire contender.
4 11-11-2009 at 10:26 am
Loyal said...
uh, actually:
http://incontention.com/?page_id=145
Didn’t even make your list of 17. Unless you simply forgot to add it.
5 11-11-2009 at 10:50 am
Kristopher Tapley said...
The list is fully updated, Loyal. Was merely waiting on official submissions. Anyway, the point being, we were very much aware of the possibility of it being submitted.
It’s interesting to note that Fox is behind both Alvin and The Dolphin. Might they think there’s a fighting chance for Ige Age 3 to slip in? It is, after all, the biggest earner worldwide (stunningly enough).
6 11-11-2009 at 12:38 pm
Loyal said...
I forgot to ask, I see you moved Mary and Max out of your predictions (I think Cloudy replaced it). Any inside information on M&M?
7 11-11-2009 at 12:43 pm
aspect ratio said...
Nice to see this finally happen after all the speculation. It’s a good year for animation of all kinds too, and like I wrote in an older post, it’s looking very likely that the majority of the nominees will be either traditional or stop-motion animated which is fun after the dominance of digital animation in the last decade.
Barring idiotic choices based on box office success rather than artistic quality (which can certainly happen, it has in the past in this category), I can only really imagine seeing Up and potentially Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs being nominated out of the digitally animated films.. Leaving the rest of the three (or four) slots for Coraline, Fantastic Mr. Fox, Ponyo and The Princess and the Frog (and perhaps even Mary and Max) to battle it out.
Perhaps a little dull that there isn’t going to be any competition/surprise in terms of the eventual winner, but fun nevertheless to see it expanded to five films.
Sidenote:
Why don’t they do this with the visual effects category, anyway? If there are at least 16 films in a given year with visual effects on a level high enough to qualify (as could be determined by a committee at the Academy, like they do for other categories), the category would expand to five nominees. There’s easily five worthy films this year, shame only three will make it.
8 11-11-2009 at 12:49 pm
geha714 said...
I’m second the proposal of aspect ratio to expand Best Visual Effects to 5 nominees.
9 11-11-2009 at 1:12 pm
red_wine said...
Maybe its to protect the adage ‘Oscar nominee’ from being applied to risible junk. With 5 nominees, movies of the level of Transformers 2, G.I.Joe, 2012, Wolverine would all be in the running.
10 11-11-2009 at 1:32 pm
Kristopher Tapley said...
Sometimes they deserve it, red_wine. A film might not have a quality narrative but can’t be denied its below-the-line aspects, if warranted.
11 11-11-2009 at 1:33 pm
Kristopher Tapley said...
And it’s not like any old bloke is voting. The visual effects supervisors are the ones making the calls and I imagine they would never nominate something that looks as bad as “Wolverine,” but “2012″ and others like it are impressive on some level.
12 11-11-2009 at 6:49 pm
aspect ratio said...
Yeah, if we always went by film quality we could probably just as well scrap the visual effects category and just hand out a special award every now and then to the great film with the great effects.
It’s just a shame that it’s really very possible that District 9, which performed visual effects miracles with it’s limited budget, is going to miss out when you have Star Trek, Transformers and Avatar in the running, and frankly that’s just a shame in my opinion.
(Sorry I derailed the conversation!)
13 11-12-2009 at 8:34 am
JJ (formerly John) said...
Unfortunately, I did not care for ‘Mary and Max’.
The animation is great.
But the whole part kid’s cutesy aspect mixing with the serious, morbid story does not work on me; especially in the animated genre. I was so depressed after this was over.
It was utterly predictable, jarring, & weird-for-weird’s-sake. I was not aesthetically ro emotionally moved. But that’s just me. I am in the minority, big time.
14 11-12-2009 at 5:59 pm
aspect ratio said...
Fielding a question in case anyone knows..
Are we likely to see five animated film nominees at the Golden Globes as a result of the Academy Awards expanding to five? Do they have any such similar rules, or will they stick to three?