120 responses so far

• 1 1-22-2009 at 6:47 am
  
  Casey Fiore said...

  i just crushed the skull of a small child. this is ridiculous. any complaints about the dark knight cant possibly measure up to the sloppy preachy porno that beat it

• 2 1-22-2009 at 6:52 am
  
  Bryan said...

  As disappointed as I am, I’m so happy that Oscar told Clint to get off their lawn. Better The Reader than Gran Torino (but still…ugh).

  And yay for Michael Shannon…at lest Revolutionary Road got some kind of love.

• 3 1-22-2009 at 6:53 am
  
  Jeremy said...

  I’m disappointed about “The Dark Knight” snub as well, but I’ll be That Guy and claim that “The Reader” wasn’t a bad movie. I found it challenging and thought-provoking, with well-developed characters and an impressively depressing story, not to mention a terrific performance (as usual) from Kate Winslet (David Kross was a standout as well). It isn’t a perfect movie, but it has some truly great moments — the courtroom scene where Winslet’s character says that she wrote the report is devastating.

  Anyway, the biggest surprise for me is “Gran Torino” getting completely shut out. I thought that movie was building up steam, and I was expecting at least a screenplay nod if not an acting nomination for Eastwood.

  Also, disappointed as I am that “Wall-E” didn’t get a Best Picture nomination (as expected), let’s give kudos to the Academy for the screenplay nomination.

  Poor “Revolutionary Road”.

• 4 1-22-2009 at 6:59 am
  
  Joe.F said...

  I must say, even im at a level of shock, I opened the imdb page and seen the Reader and went “wow… so thats what ended up dethroning Frost/Nixon” then suddenly seen Frost/Nixon and had to double take. Im personally on the Wall-e band wagon, I was starting to believe that wall-e would dethrone a film that everyone thought was good, but i cant name one person who felt it was the best film of the year (Frost/Nixon), i actually already assumed Dark Knight was starting to be a lock (while i dont agree, i can see why) But the fact that The Reader slipped by both of them truly is a crime.

  So we officially have one of the most boring best picture races in awhile. Im pretty happy with the In Bruges nom and Wall-e’s six. Shocked at Angelina Jolie over Sally Hawkins and the Wrestler music shaft.

• 5 1-22-2009 at 7:03 am
  
  Henry said...

  I’ll leave aside the obvious for a second. “The Wrestler” missed Best Song? Really? Did the voters have their earphones on backwards?

• 6 1-22-2009 at 7:03 am
  
  adam said...

  I’m not that bothered by the Best Picture snub but no nomination for Nolan in Best Director?

  Was Gus Van Sant’s direction really better than Christopher Nolans?

• 7 1-22-2009 at 7:03 am
  
  Kristopher Tapley said...

  Sorry for the commenting slowness guys. Things should level out now.

• 8 1-22-2009 at 7:04 am
  
  Jonathan Spuij said...

  May shocks, and they’ve all bought into Weinstein dangling champagne and fancy gift bags in front of their noses. That’s how it feels. He must’ve bought them again. On the other hand I had a feeling they wanted to choose at least one of those many Holocaust movies out this year. Just because they had to. And it’s true, the ratings will be even more abysmal then in previous years. And it’s all their own fault again.

• 9 1-22-2009 at 7:05 am
  
  Brent said...

  I just find it funny how every year there is an upset, and everyone says “we have learned a serious lesson in predicting”.

  but the next year we all are heard calling “there ya go…PGA WGA DGA lineup….so that’s it….5/5 locks, what a boring year”

  and when nominations come out….BAM…a massive shock, and we start all over.

  next year we will hear the same stuff: “what a predictable year”

  I for one picked The Wrestler. I was wrong, but hey, the only thing for sure is that there will be surprises.

• 10 1-22-2009 at 7:05 am
  
  Ryan Hoffman said...

  Here’s a rule change:
  If you haven’t worked on a film for 5 years, in the capacity that you’re vote is counted (i.e. Cinematographer) than you lose your inclusion in the Academy.
  Get those fucking 80 year olds who are out of touch and see a movie about the Holocaust or Nixon and their dicks go from 6 to 8.

• 11 1-22-2009 at 7:05 am
  
  James D. said...

  The Dark Knight isn’t a big deal to me. I was hoping that The Wrestler would sneak in, but it didn’t. Does anyone believe that The Reader is better?

  Sally Hawkins and Kristin Scott Thomas get to be snubbed so Meryl Streep can play a cartoon character and Angelina Jolie can be a walking corpse. Terrible.

  And how does Springsteen not make it? How?

• 12 1-22-2009 at 7:06 am
  
  andrew said...

  Am I the only who wasn’t completely surprised by the Reader nom? BAFTA, Globe, some critic awards…I personally liked it a lot, and the only thing that makes me upset about the Dark Knight is who pissed off people are and how its going to be everywhere for a loooong time

• 13 1-22-2009 at 7:06 am
  
  Casey Fiore said...

  van sants direction was excellent. daldry’s was comletely misguided and all over the place. i find it strange that he’s made 3 films, all of which scoring director nominations, and the best one didnt get a pic nomination. the only good one in my opinion

• 14 1-22-2009 at 7:07 am
  
  Tina said...

  While I agree that “The Dark Knight” should have been nominated instead of “The Reader” I am incredibly offended by this comment from the author of this article, “A pornographic account of a sympathetic Nazi.” How utterly ridiculous. Heaven forbid there is nudity in an American film. Was it mentioned that this was used as a tool to show just how intense the affair was for the boy and this is one of the reasons it haunted him for so long? Or that this was a great adaptation of a great novel, that by god included nudity. No, instead comments are made about “pornography.” The “Dark Knight” was a better film but making comments like that about “The Reader” is lazy. Also, once and for all, it is NOT a holocaust film.

• 15 1-22-2009 at 7:08 am
  
  Patrick W. said...

  Kris I think you’re being really, really unfair on ‘The Reader’. Fine, you might not like it. But a ’sloppy pornographic film about a sympathetic nazi’?? Really?! Really?!

  Come on, man. That’s a crock of crap, right there.

  I’m glad it got a BP nomination as I think it was really worthy of it. I’m just sad a film like ‘Frost/Nixon’ got in there too, at the expense of ‘The Dark Knight’.

• 16 1-22-2009 at 7:09 am
  
  Guy Lodge said...

  “The Dark Knight”’s chances of a Best Picture nod were always touch-and-go, but not nominating Christopher Nolan is stunning.

  I mean, Stephen Daldry? Whatever your thoughts on the film, it was hardly the director’s showcase “TDK” was.

  Mortifying.

  Anyway, congrats to Harvey for neatly securing wins for both his ladies. Well played.

• 17 1-22-2009 at 7:09 am
  
  Average Joe said...

  I actually liked The Reader quite a lot (nowhere near my top 10 though), but I’m even puzzled as to how it could have gotten nominated. Where is the passion for this film coming from? Did Rex Reed convince everyone on the Academy that it was a masterpiece.?

  And then there was Winslet getting nommed for the wrong film like DiCaprio in 2006, and Deakins getting snubbed for Revolutionary Road. They always find ways to disappoint.

• 18 1-22-2009 at 7:09 am
  
  Michael Rogers said...

  How LAME………..

  Atleast TDK was replaced by The Reader so I can now focus all my hatred upon it.

  TDK snub + The Boss snub = Old farts.

  The final mathematical proof (if there was another needed) that the academy is outdated.

• 19 1-22-2009 at 7:11 am
  
  Jackass said...

  Celebrate good times! c’mon!

  Oh taffy.. you represent all that I hate about you dark knight fanboys… it’s so awesome to see you weep!

  celebrate!

• 20 1-22-2009 at 7:13 am
  
  red_wine said...

  Yipeeeeeeeeee! Yi! The Oscars sure know how to say FUCK OFF.

• 21 1-22-2009 at 7:15 am
  
  R.J. said...

  I’m more shocked than I am up pissedor upset about any of the nominees. While seeing Kate Winslet being nominated for “The Reader” instead of “Revolutionary Road” was surprising, I wouldn’t say I was pissed when I saw it. The only thing that really upset me was the snubbing of “The Dark Knight” (for “The Reader”…really?) in both the Best Picture and Best Director fields. The surprises in the acting categories (Michael Shannon, Robert Downey Jr., Richard Jenkins, and Melissa Leo) were actually very pleasant surprises.

• 22 1-22-2009 at 7:16 am
  
  Jorge said...

  Get a grip. I don’t know what history will say in a few years about The Reader of about The Dark Knight. But I do know that in a few years you will read your rant about the Dark Knight and feel embarrassed for yourself.

  Is it really worth that much anger? And why against the Reader? Why not acknowledge that another movie (maybe Frost/Nixon) got in that shouldn’t have, and that the Reader is a great film?

  It’s hard to take someone seriously if they are so personally offended by a snub – there are *always* snubs in the Oscars.

• 23 1-22-2009 at 7:17 am
  
  alynch said...

  I’ll let other people discuss the snub of The Dark Knight.

  Other observations: Can getting Winslet nominated as a lead for The Reader at the expense of Revolutionary Road be considered Weinstein’s ultimate “fuck you” to Scott Rudin? Also, with Winslett out of the way, is Cruz now basically a lock for the win? Lastly, hurray for Kay Howard.

• 24 1-22-2009 at 7:18 am
  
  john said...

  Kris, unfortunately Cate Blanchett was n’t nominated for Benjamin Buton, what’s your opnion on that ?

• 25 1-22-2009 at 7:19 am
  
  Steve said...

  he rejection of “The Dark Knight” in favor of “The Reader” is a truly ridiculous choice. However, I am not one of the hardcore “TDK” fans like many here. I certainly would have put on my personal Oscar ballot for Best Picture, but I can understand the reasoning behind others’ skepticism toward the film. But “The Reader”? Really? It’s a fine film and all, but if someone was going to knock of “TDK”, couldn’t it have been “Doubt” or “Revolutionary Road” or “The Wrestler”? All were superior films to “The Reader” in my mind. Likewise, does “Curious Case” really need 13 noms? I gave up hope a while ago that all the hype would die down and it would be properly honored as a nice piece of visual effects work, but now that everything’s official, I’m still a little disappointed. Bottom line: “Slumdog Millionaire” is going to dominate the field in most or all of the major categories its nominated, as it rightfully should. At least I don’t have a problem with that.

• 26 1-22-2009 at 7:20 am
  
  Mark Kratina said...

  Red Wine: And that is exactly what I’ll be doing on Feb. 22- I won’t be watching. What a joke.

• 27 1-22-2009 at 7:21 am
  
  Patrick F said...

  It was a strange morning. I knew they’d find a way to screw this up. “Let’s just see how far we can make the ratings drop this year. We’ll just blame it on the digital conversion.

  Still, this isn’t entirely the Academy’s fault. Aside from an initial FYC muscle, WB pretty much threw The Dark Knight under the bus. From all I can tell, they canceled the re-release, they focused all ads towards selling Blu-Ray disks. This coincidentally coincided with the ramping up of Gran Torino publicity. Gran Torino got shut out, in case anybody didn’t notice.

  I’m not at all bothered by The Boss getting snubbed. He’s another “rocker” but he won. You can’t argue that the academy is averse to him. He won for that ghastly song from “Philidelphia” and by now, he’s old new. This is completly different than Eddie Vedder, and I’d really like to see Peter Gabriel win this one.

  I don’t know if you covered this or not, but did anybody think Woody would get snubbed? I mean, It’s easy lifting for Woody, but that was a damn good script. I can’t complain, because I still feel their script choices were truly inspired this year.

  What I’m happy about:
  Clint gets snubbed
  In Bruges suprise screenplay nod
  Richard Jenkins
  Craft nominations for The Duchess
  I’m happily wrong about the Van Sant Snub
  The Lone Costume Nomination for Australia

• 28 1-22-2009 at 7:21 am
  
  Kate said...

  Wow, I’ve honestly never been more disappointed with the Academy. Where to start? Jolie. Really?? I mean really?? Over Scott Thomas and Hawkins. Her performance ruined The Changeling for me. I love Meryl Streep but she didn’t deserve to be nominated for Doubt. The Reader?? Over TDK, The Wrestler, Happy-Go-Lucky? Ugh. And what’s up with the Bruce Springsteen snub? And don’t get me started on Stephen Daldry over Chris Nolan, Darren Aronofsky or Sam Mendes. Good lord, what the fuck were they smoking this year?? Benjamin Button was one of the worst and most pretentious movies of the year, so of course it gets 13 nominations.

  The only bright spots were Michael Shannon, Marisa Tomei, Mickey Rourke and In Bruges for screenplay. The rest is shit.

• 29 1-22-2009 at 7:22 am
  
  Kristopher Tapley said...

  Patrick: “The Reader” is sloppy and rushed. I said that from the start.

  john: It was expected by this point, right? One of the year’s best performances. Another reason AMPAS sucks I guess.

  Jorge: No I won’t. Sorry. I’ve been doing this a long time and this rant is rather tame in comparison. And “Frost/Nixon” is, frankly, a much better film than “The Reader.”

  And wait, you can’t take someone seriously who is passionate about a film? Sad.

  Jackass/Dan: Have you not recognized that the majority of the readers have ignored your endless, wrong-headed, uneducated sniping? Hopefully you will soon.

• 30 1-22-2009 at 7:24 am
  
  Bill said...

  I’ve been watching the Oscars since I was in grade school (which was a long time ago.) I learned a long time ago after let down after let down not to expect my favorite movies to all be nominated. You had to look at what the Oscar movies were for that year and form opinions about one vs. the other. I started seeing a lot of movies I wouldn’t otherwise have seen starting at an early age. I mean, how many middle schoolers counted Leaving Las Vegas as one of their favorite movies?

  It’s when the Academy goes against the precursors and critics awards that I have the most potential to still be disappointed, and when they don’t nominate the best movies according to their own very narrow definition of what an Oscar movie is that I’m just baffled. The Wrestler, for example, is a small melodrama full of tears and death. But it blew me away. The Dark Knight, of course, really was historic on the order of Star Wars (nominated) or Psycho (nominated for Director) and while I might not have expected it to have much shot the guild awards and critics awards did seem to qualify it as an Oscar movie this year. Shut out. Slapped hard. Instead we get Frost/Nixon, which had a great performance but was otherwise a relatively lackluster transplant of the original, and The Reader, which most people won’t have heard of even by the ceremony and very few will remember afterward. Even Milk would have perhaps been best recognized in other categories (actor, screenplay.)

  The omission of The Wrestler for Best Original Song looked like a misprint the first few times I read it. I can’t guess what happened there. Gomorrah for Foreign Film. Waltzing with Bashir for Best Animated! Amazing that they preferred both Kung Fu Panda AND Bolt. You would have thought those two would split the vote. I’d have loved to see Rachel Getting Married for Best Screenplay, and I thought nepotism might actually lead to justice in a roundabout way there. But I know that one’s more quirky on my part.

  My one pleasant surprise was Michael Shannon for Revolutionary Road. Really well deserved, I think. But otherwise this list just doesn’t compute for me – almost the way that Romeo + Juliet not getting a Best Picture nomination didn’t compute for me when I was in high school – because even though I’ve learned to set my expectations realistically, apparently realistically now means throwing darts at a board or taking a low sum and subtracting half.

  I think the fact that the headline doesn’t read “The Reader nominated for Best Picture!” it reads “The Dark Knight snubbed” says it all. The Academy has defined itself not by what it is but by what it isn’t, and made this less of a celebration than a proud exclusion from the party.

• 31 1-22-2009 at 7:26 am
  
  Robin said...

  Ugh, sadly I’ve been seeing The Reader’s nomination coming for the past week, it just reeked of Atonement. BFCA + Globe + Scripter + ASC + BAFTA + baity prestige pick = Oscar. The Brit vote trumps the Guilds time and again, and if you’re a holocaust related movie, poor reviews mean squat (Life is Beautiful). Diasspointed sure, but I was prepared, and I’ll just settle for seeing Heath win, and enjoying the smackdown between two other films I love: Slumdog and Button.

• 32 1-22-2009 at 7:27 am
  
  Hans said...

  Currently listening to:

  “Epiphany” – Sweeney Todd

  “They all deserve to die.”

• 33 1-22-2009 at 7:28 am
  
  Chris said...

  I’m really neither surprised nor sad about the “TDK” snub. I never thought it would be nominated anyway, and I wasn’t that impressed by it. All in all this year has been such a huge disappointment with my favourites getting the shaft everywhere: “Gomorrah”, “Waltz with Bashir”, Revolutionary Road”, “Il Divo”, “Wendy and Lucy”, “Paranoid Park”, “A Christmas Tale”.

  And why does the Academy have to fuck up Original Song every single damn year? As happy as I am that M.I.A. is an Academy Award nominee, I honestly wouldn’t have thought they’d be stupid enough to leave out Bruce Springsteen. Apart from that my favourite original song, again, wasn’t anywhere close to being nominated: “Dracula’s Lament”.

  So, I’ll just stop whining now and say: here’s to Academy Award nominee Werner Herzog. Finally.

• 34 1-22-2009 at 7:29 am
  
  Matthew Lingo said...

  Wow. Fuck you, Harvey.

• 35 1-22-2009 at 7:31 am
  
  Michael W. said...

  Well too bad that I didn’t have the balls to guees The Reader in place of The Dark Knight in best picture. With the Globe and Bafta snub for TDK in favor of the The Reader it was on the horizon and I had Daldry as best director instead of Nolan. I just thought it had better chances in picture after all.

  And seriously folks. Cheer up. The Dark Knight doesn’t lose any of it’s qualities just because it isn’t nominated for a best picture Oscar. Great if people think it’s the best of the year. But not everybody shares that opinion. It’s in my top 10 but not my top 5 so I guess I’m an old (29 year old) stupid fart too ;-)

• 36 1-22-2009 at 7:32 am
  
  Erik said...

  Oh, I’m not pissed. I’m actually quite content that “The dark knight” got only mentioned where it was deserved. A lot of people would agree with me on this, most would pull their hairs out, but that’s not important anyway. All this picks and films will be judged by history, usually a better judge than the Oscars, especially in the main categories. Still I say “The dark knight” is absolutely overrated by critics and connoseiurs, and probably history would chuckle if it hears it was ever treated as a bold, smart masterpiece by other than fans or casual moviegoers.

  The original song category is tricky. This is not the Grammys. The reward should be for the dramatic impact or collaboration of song and film, not for quality of song or performace (though that helps, sure). You should be upset if you think the song from “The wrestler” was an outstanding contribution to the film (haven’t seen it so I can’t judge). You should not be upset becasue the Boss got the shaft. This is funny: The usual criticism of this category is that songs get nominated because of the artists who wrote/perform it. And yet here is the world screaming because Springsteen isn’t listed. Miley fans should be screaming the same right now.

  Anyway, I think it was an awful year for movies, from what I’ve seen, and considering the list (although I haven’t seen “The reader”), a Slumdog lovefest seems like the most desirable thing. Good that it will happen. Right?

  Strange: Apparently John Williams’ every-year nomination was not automatic.

  Congrats for your blog/page. I’ve been a reader for years, but I think this may be the first time I comment. Will keep on visiting. And please don’t quit over this snub. ;-)

• 37 1-22-2009 at 7:33 am
  
  Jeremy said...

  The one thing I’ll say about the Springsteen snub is that his song played over the credits. It’s a great song, but I always prefer nominations for songs that play during the course of the movie. I’m with Chris, I would have loved to see a nomination for “Dracula’s Lament”. (Not to mention Russell Brand, but never mind.)

  Of course, you could make the same argument about “Jai Ho”, but that still felt like part of the movie to me. I saw “Slumdog Millionaire” twice in theatres, and in both cases, no one even considered moving toward the exit during that triumphant Bollywood number.

• 38 1-22-2009 at 7:34 am
  
  Mark Kratina said...

  I think we can add TDK’s snub to that EW list of the 100 worst Academy snubs……………….

• 39 1-22-2009 at 7:35 am
  
  KA.TO said...

  YES!!! No Patel!!! And Kate for “The Reader” in Best Actress!!

• 40 1-22-2009 at 7:35 am
  
  bigherbs said...

  I couldn’t agree more Kris. By snubbing The Dark Knight, the Academy turned its nose at a film that will be long remembered as the defining movie event of this decade: a commercial and critically acclaimed powerhouse that soared beyond the confines of its genre.

  As deserving as Ledger is of Oscar, at this point his nomination feels perfunctory. The fact that the film was relegated to technical awards suggests the Academy views The Dark Knight as nothing more than middling summer fare.
  I’m not saying The Dark Knight should have won Best Picture, or Nolan Best Director, but dammit, they deserved nominations.

  Other thoughts on the nominees: I’m glad Marisa Tomei was recognized for her work in The Wrestler, but flabbergasted that Springsteen was ignored for the title track.

• 41 1-22-2009 at 7:36 am
  
  Sebastian said...

  Well, I have to say that I’m not pissed about the Batman snub. I belive it’s a way overated film. I cannot belive the love it gets everywhere. And althogh I have not seen The Reader, I love every single movie Daldry has made to date.

• 42 1-22-2009 at 7:36 am
  
  Jorge said...

  I think there’s a difference between liking a film passionately (I think we all do, as film fans) and liking it so obsessively that words like “tragedy” are used.

  That seems exaggerated, at least under my understanding of the word “tragedy.” No one died. The world will continue.

• 43 1-22-2009 at 7:37 am
  
  D said...

  Hey Kris,

  What are the odds Ledger doesn’t win now? I think there’s a 80% chance he doesn’t win. This whole thing is laughable.

  It’ll be funny if someone does a little investigative journalism and discovers that the Weinsteins bribed their way to this nomination. As if the Academy’s credibility couldn’t get any lower, that would officially plunge them into complete irrelevance. LOL.

• 44 1-22-2009 at 7:43 am
  
  N8 said...

  The Good:
  “In Bruges” for screenplay

  The Bad:
  Costume design snub for “Changeling”

  The Ugly:
  Major bitch slap to Christopher Nolan. Eight nominations for his film and not ONE for him. Un-fucking-believable.

• 45 1-22-2009 at 7:45 am
  
  face-it said...

  The LA , NY critics and NSFC on their way to complete irrelevance

• 46 1-22-2009 at 7:45 am
  
  Patrick W. said...

  It seems to me Kris is trying to demote the status of ‘The Reader’ to some sort of ‘Chocolat’ level of shameful inclusions, when in fact the film is actually a very accomplished piece of work (admittedly not in his opinion).

  People like the film Kris, so it’s not going to work. A huge amount do not think it’s ’sloppy and rushed’. And that it is a lot better than ‘Frost/Nixon’.

• 47 1-22-2009 at 7:47 am
  
  Jackass said...

  oh taffy! i know it stings! don’t worry! i’m sure tdk blue-ray discs will continue to sell!

• 48 1-22-2009 at 7:48 am
  
  John Foote said...

  No Dark Knight, no Springsteen…what the fuck!!!! So much for honoring the best in arts and sciences man. And Kris, thank you for making clear to Jackass that he is making no friends here and his comments…I skip past.

• 49 1-22-2009 at 7:48 am
  
  Michael Rogers said...

  I think people who are defending the Dark Knight snub are missing the point. The oscar nominations aren’t an individuals top 5 list, how can a film that grossed over $500 million in the US alone and score a metacritic rating of 80+ (higher than more than a couple of BP WINNERS of new millenium) not get nominated?

  The only conclusion most are drawn to: crusty, old and out of touch academy members.

  Just my two cents.

• 50 1-22-2009 at 7:49 am
  
  Jackass said...

  oh johnny, keep working on those sentences! you’ll make something worth reading in no time! =D

• 51 1-22-2009 at 7:49 am
  
  Ryan said...

  I’m a Dark Knight fanboy just as much as the next guy, but people need to relax on all the fire and brimstone upon The Reader.

  I mean wasn’t The Reader one of the films that people were championing to upset The Five? And look it did. Don’t make it apologize for replacing The Dark Knight instead of Benjamin Button, Frost/Nixon, or Milk. And who’s to say IT was the #5 film. It could’ve easily been Frost/Nixon as well.

  And look the Dark Knight has a hefty 8 nominations and will win a few of them. Calm down.

• 52 1-22-2009 at 7:51 am
  
  D said...

  Michael,

  It’s either the crusty, old, and out of touch members or the corrupt members. As the Joker would say, “You choose.”

• 53 1-22-2009 at 7:51 am
  
  Michael Rogers said...

  BTW TDK also maintained and even strengthed in the hearts of many for 6 months. I wonder what people will think of some of the BP nominees come 6 months time.

• 54 1-22-2009 at 7:51 am
  
  Bill the Bear said...

  Patrick W., I agree with you about “The Reader.”

  I’ve wondered all along if “The Dark Knight” would have had all the hype it’s gotten if Heath Ledger hadn’t died. It’s not really all that great of a film.

  “Doubt” getting four acting nominations rather surprised me; I’d figured that Amy Adams would have been left out. Is four acting nominations for the same film a record?

• 55 1-22-2009 at 7:52 am
  
  BobMcBob said...

  so much for high Oscar ratings

• 56 1-22-2009 at 7:53 am
  
  Jeremy said...

  “Doubt getting four acting nominations rather surprised me; I’d figured that Amy Adams would have been left out. Is four acting nominations for the same film a record?”

  “The Godfather” received four acting nominations. Brando won for lead, while Pacino, Duvall, and Caan were all nominated for supporting (but lost to Joel Grey for “Cabaret”). I believe there have been others, but that’s the first that comes to mind.

• 57 1-22-2009 at 7:53 am
  
  Alejandro Leza said...

  What a big bad day………. Personally Im writing a email to academy memebers expressing my dissapointment and telling them I wont follow the brodcast this year. How in this world is possible that the second most embraced film by critic was snubbed?

  I ask you everyone to email or feelings to these blind academy members.

  Once again, the most important film of the year was considered not enough good for a chance for being recognized as the best film of the year.

  Such a big common thing among those “pseudoexperts” at members academy mob.

• 58 1-22-2009 at 7:55 am
  
  Batman fanboy said...

  Don’t tell me to calm down! For THE DARK KNIGHT is the greatest achievement in cinema since it’s very birth. Comparing THE DARK KNIGHT to the rest of those feeble nominated films is like comparing an aquarium to a blue sheet of construction paper. I just cannot take anymore of this. AAHHHH!

• 59 1-22-2009 at 8:00 am
  
  Andrew said...

  It’s been a few years since we’ve seen a few films get so many nominations. Last year we had “No Country” and “Blood” leading with 8 apiece.
  This year, we have:
  Ben Button – 13
  Slumdog Millionaire – 10
  Milk – 8
  Dark Knight – 8
  WALL-E – 6
  Frost/Nixon – 5
  Reader – 5
  Doubt – 5
  Rev Road – 3
  Changeling – 3
  And a bunch with 2 – Wrestler, Duchess, Iron Man, Wanted (?!), Frozen River

  So, there was definite love from the techs for “Dark Knight” and “Wall-E”. Why didn’t they name it their Best Picture? Why didn’t they vote it as their Number 1? We can guess that instead, they voted for the true tech sweeper: Benjamin Button. “The Reader” must have been named as the favourites for the English voters, which as we all know, makes up a significant portion of the Academy.

  I think it’s wrong to say that it’s the older generation that results in the embarrassments for the Academy. Remember, this is the same generation that was part of the New Hollywood in the 60’s and 70’s. You know, bloody works such as “Bonnie and Clyde”. Hell, look at this: “Milk” has 8 nominations. So is it the old croneys of the Academy? Maybe not.

  Maybe, just maybe, people didn’t vote “The Dark Knight” as their number 1 choice because:
  a) They thought it was garanteed/”other people will vote for it” i.e. Dreamgirls
  b) It was their number 2/3 behind Ben Button and Slumdog i.e. the Tech voters

  In one breath, we want to blame the crotchety old Academy for not nominated the hyper-modern “The Dark Knight” or “Wall-E”. But then again, they didn’t nominate either of Eastwood’s films, “Doubt”, or “Revolutionary Road”… all of them more Oscar bait than “The Reader”.

• 60 1-22-2009 at 8:00 am
  
  Marshall said...

  And I thought my jokes were bad…

• 61 1-22-2009 at 8:01 am
  
  Silencio said...

  I feel a need to post a list of the things I’m PLEASED about:

  1) Richard Jenkins. I haven’t seen it, but I love that the “little guy” made it in. Over Clint, for that matter.

  2) They resisted the power of The Clint. And I’m a Clint fan.

  3) IN BRUGES got nommed! That’s f-ing great.

  4) I liked The Reader a lot. It made my top 10.

  5) Kate Winslet in LEAD for The Reader, just like I asked. Now for the win. Or maybe just give it to Meryl so ppl don’t hate on Kate.

  6) BOLT in Animated! Thank you, ye gods…

  7) Melissa Leo. Same rationale as Richard Jenkins.

  8) RDJ for Tropic Thunder. Tell me this isn’t the hippest move they’ve made since, well, Heath Ledge as The Joker.

  9) A.R. Rahman truly gets his due. Both songs deserve it. Plus the score.

  So there you go, a few things to smile about after the initial fury has subsided. At least for me.

• 62 1-22-2009 at 8:03 am
  
  AdamL said...

  Delighted that The Dark Knight missed out on eth undeserved noms many were hoping for/predicting.

  Disappointed that The Reader was the beneficiary though. Anything else would have been much better.

• 63 1-22-2009 at 8:04 am
  
  Marvin said...

  Get over it.

• 64 1-22-2009 at 8:05 am
  
  Michael W. said...

  Michael Rogers said…

  The oscar nominations aren’t an individuals top 5 list, how can a film that grossed over $500 million in the US alone and score a metacritic rating of 80+ (higher than more than a couple of BP WINNERS of new millenium) not get nominated?

  - – -

  I don’t get that. Doesn’t academy members vote for 5 films? Why would I put down my no. 7 of the year (The Dark Knight) instead of my no. 5 of the year (Milk) just because TDK made much more money. That makes no sense at all.

• 65 1-22-2009 at 8:05 am
  
  mike said...

  Well obviously there are snubs, but I am glad with the Ben Button love.

  First Eddie Vedder last year and now Bruce, I REALLY don’t get that.

  I do have a question, if Rahman has 2 noms for best song, are those 2 songs not included in his score? If that is the case then his score really isn’t that good IMO, the songs for Best Song are really the strongest in the score I think and without them I do not really feel the in the music that well. Sure it works in the film with the fast movement and editing, but on its own I feel it is mediocre (kind of like bad club/dance music). That is especially the case if his O… Saya and Jai Ho are not included in the Score. Like the Original Song category, are they supposed to choose the song within its context on the film or as a standalone piece as well?

  Any clarifications would be appreciated.

• 66 1-22-2009 at 8:06 am
  
  BurmaShave said...

  So, Kate Winslet was a lead in THE READER. We can all agree now?

• 67 1-22-2009 at 8:08 am
  
  Michael W. said...

  So what I’m trying to say is that if not enough membes had TDK in their top 5 – then it doesn’t get nominated. It’s wuite simple. But it doesn’t mean that people hate it and think less of it. We don’t know if it was no. 6.

• 68 1-22-2009 at 8:08 am
  
  Michael Rogers said...

  @ Michael W.

  I understand the confusion. However what I meant is that it is not one individuals list, it is nearly 6000 individuals top 5 lists. So you would think that a film that has all the positives that I pointed out would get nominated.

  Hence I do make sense, thank you.

• 69 1-22-2009 at 8:09 am
  
  AdamL said...

  “… all of them more Oscar bait than “The Reader”.”

  @Andrew,

  NOTHING is more Oscar bait than The Reader!

• 70 1-22-2009 at 8:09 am
  
  Batman fanboy said...

  you. You just couldn’t let me go, could you? This is what happens when an unstoppable force meets an immovable object. You are truly incorruptible, aren’t you? Huh? You won’t kill me out of some misplaced sense of self-righteousness. And I won’t kill you because you’re just too much fun. I think you and I are destined to do this forever.

  I was considering writing to my congresshero about putting up a statue of THE DARK KNIGHT in my local townsquare. Oh, it will be ever so gorgeous to look out my window and see all the wee ones gather near the statue to pray. Goodness me. I must get started on it, posthaste.. for THE DARK KNIGHT needs it!

• 71 1-22-2009 at 8:14 am
  
  Patrick F said...

  I sense much anger in this board.
  I haven’t seen the Reader yet, so I’m going to have to try to ignore the ill will towards it.
  I think it would have been easier to be angry if it was Gran Torino. The Academy ends up paying the price. Without a 100 mil grosser (pending Benjamin Button) once again, mainstream audiences will continue to be alienated by the ceremonies. Hugh Jackman can’t help the ratings either. He hasn’t exactly done wonders for the Tony’s numbers.

  I thought that if they had gotten TDK and WALL-E both in, it would help little.
  When they finally turn this corner, it will be too late.

  I look at it this way:
  We got a good 5 years without the Weinstein Machine shoving something like this down our throats. There were no unequivocal masterpieces this year. WB missed an opportunity. so did the academy. We as an audience didn’t. I will remember the midnight screening of TDK for the rest of my life.

  That’s one think Harvey can’t take away from me.

• 72 1-22-2009 at 8:19 am
  
  JM said...

  I too want to defend The Reader. Anyone who says it’s a film about the holocaust or Nazi sympathy is so far off, it’s a joke. The film’s message is perhaps too subtle for its own good, but it’s not a ‘holocaust’ movie, and if you think it is, I’ve got to wonder about your film analysis skills.

  I think The Reader and The Dark Knight both deserved nominations. So, why is everyone hating on The Reader? There were four other films The Dark Knight could’ve bumped out. So why not hate on the undeserving Frost/Nixon or The Curious Case of Benjamin Button?

• 73 1-22-2009 at 8:23 am
  
  Dario said...

  I’m baffled over The Dark Knight snub — of course I understand that the Weinstein Co. are masters at this game (they invented the game as it is, for that matter), but hasn’t WB put a great deal of campaigning behind the Knight? Not being there, I only see the banner ads and the FYC scans, but those were aplenty!

  No, I’m inclined to believe this wasn’t a campain thing, it was a generational thing. The PGA, the WGA and the DGA have shown thamselves to be much more on the pulse of moviemaking; the Academy is just what its name says. A bunch of old men, who probably just shrugged of the possibility of a guy with pointy ears or a little trash compactor or Mickey Rourke or a film not many understood or a film shot with handycams or a violent foreign film making the top five.
  So they went for the Reader! Frost/Nixon! I can’t judge those films, but I have a feeling they’re less than topical.

  So there. One of the most exciting years has just turned into the most boring awards race ever. If only one of the abovementioned films had been nominated, it would’ve been enough to breathe some life into the decrepit corpse that is the Oscars. But that corpse seems to be perfectly happy laying there in the corner, rotting away in full display.

  I know I’m not going to watch come February. And why should anyone? It’s irrelevant, it’s lame and it’s painfully more obvious than ever that those five aren’t the five best films this year. Not in the States, and definitely not in the world.

• 74 1-22-2009 at 8:26 am
  
  Rjneb2 said...

  Wow. Stephen Daldry has made only 3 films and he’s been a Best Director nominee for all 3. Is this some kind of record?

• 75 1-22-2009 at 8:31 am
  
  actionman said...

  “A pornographic account of a sympathetic Nazi, rushed through post-production and ultimately a sloppy piece of drama, rightly abandoned by its initial producer at a crucial time on the basis of principle on one hand, politics on the other — this is one of the Academy’s five Best Pictures of the year.”

  Kris, while I agree that there were better films this year than The Reader (The Fall, Synecdoche, NY, Rachel Getting Married, TDK, Snow Angels all come to mind), it’s not a terrible film by any stretch. Calling it a “porno” is short-sighted. And I don’t know about you, but I found ABSOLUTELY NOTHING about Winselt’s character in the film to be sympathetic. It’s a challening film, one that provokes thought, and it was extremely well crafted, written, acted, and directed.

• 76 1-22-2009 at 8:31 am
  
  Silencio said...

  Mike has a good point actually. O Saya and Jai Ho are indeed part of the score, to my understanding. I think the confusion is there because Rahman’s score is so stylistically different than typical Hollywood scores. He actually writes songs, in addition to “score” music.
  So thinking about it, it’s like John Williams could have been nominated for the Schindler’s List score as well as having the theme be nommed as a piece on its own. Or can instrumentals even be nommed as original songs?

• 77 1-22-2009 at 8:36 am
  
  Leo said...

  I still don’t get the hype about “The Dark Knight”.

• 78 1-22-2009 at 8:41 am
  
  Chad said...

  The only two things the Academy should really be ashamed about is the snub of Sally Hawkins in Best Actress and The Dark Knight in Best Score.

• 79 1-22-2009 at 8:46 am
  
  Eunice said...

  Finally, it’s here! I’ve been waiting for it all day! Here’s my take.

  The Best:

  1. Richard Jenkins. I admit, I was barely hanging on to this longshot, but the Academy knows how to pull off a pleasant surprise.

  2. Score and two songs for A.R. Rahman? What a red letter day for the guy!

  3. Doubt getting acting nods for all its four leads. It’s not unprecedented, but whatever you say about the rest of the movie, it was a great actors’ showcase. Rooting for Streep and Davis.

  4. Slumdog Millionaire having 10 nods. Yes, Mr. Boyle, it is written. Or at least I hope.

  5. Michael Shannon. Just when I thought they were going to shelve him, the Academy brings him back. Again, another nice surprise. Sorry for the rest of Revolutionary Road, though.

  6. Melissa Leo hanging in there. Same rationale as #s 1 and 5. You’ve got to admire someone who manages to keep her place in the unpredictable awards circuit.

  7. Heath Ledger. It’s been going on for almost a year, but this I have to say: This one really is written.

  8. Gran Torino not making it. (Because not every Clint Eastwood-directed movie is a masterpiece.) You’d half-expect the Academy to bow down to Clint, but then it veers off and leaves the movie in the dust. Well.

  9. Robert Downey Jr. for Tropic Thunder. Way to go, dude. Seriously, that brought a grin to my face I didn’t even know I had on.

  10. Defiance sneaking into its category. Now if they could only nominate Liev Schreiber for something.

  The Worst:

  1. The Dark Knight snub. I’m no fangirl, but I thought the film elevated the standards for its genre, and should be rewarded for doing just that. After all, aren’t the Oscars given to recognize the achievements in film?Also, why the snub for Christopher Nolan? He did a great job with the movie, Christian Bale’s annoying growling aside.

  2. Sally Hawkins. Were those critics’ awards a consolation prize? She could have easily taken Angelina’s spot, I’m sorry to say.

  3. Boring Best Picture and Director races. I’m sorry, but I was hoping they’d shake it up.

  4. Three songs for Original Song? Wasn’t Bruce Springsteen supposed to be in here somewhere? Oh, and you could have made the show more watchable by nominating a High School Musical song somewhere. Just saying.

  5. Best Animated Feature. Why even bother? In terms of content alone, I know I’d go for Wall-E. The least the Academy could have done is give the film some competition. Like, I don’t know, Waltz with Bashir?

  The Baffling.

  1. The Reader. Wow. I haven’t seen it, but it obviously seems to be a love it or hate it movie. Won’t comment on that. What I do want to comment on is this: Harvey Weinstein must be feeling really smug right now. I mean, I won’t be surprised if I see the guy interviewed with a smile super-glued to his face.

  2. Where is Angelina Jolie’s steam coming from? I’m really interested because I haven’t seen Changeling. Don’t blame me–it just began its theatrical run in my time zone.

  3. No big risks taken whatsoever. Well, maybe except for The Reader, but that’s a highly debatable subject that I won’t get into since I haven’t seen it yet. Good luck on the ratings, Academy.

  4. Where is the list of presenters? I’d love to get excited about something aside from the actual award-giving.

  5. The Academy’s consistent insistence on disappointing its viewers.

  There you have it. Hope everyone’s wishes are granted in some shape and form, and if you ever find yourself frustrated, just remember: it’s the Academy. It’s bound to make you scratch your head at some point.

• 80 1-22-2009 at 8:46 am
  
  mike said...

  Silencio,

  Yes that is def a part of my question, to me it would seem odd that a score can feature songs and they can be treated as separate entities and also together as 1 larger piece.

  One could see those 2 “songs” being a score tracks really, becuase, they are almost like chanting (is that wrong to say). Then I guess could be thought of as a score, but then it goes to the question are instrumentals considering songs in the Academy’s eyes?

• 81 1-22-2009 at 8:46 am
  
  Mr. F said...

  I’m not going to rant about TDK not getting nominated because too many people are already doing that, but why didn’t Standard Operating Procedure get nominated for Documentary? It is probably the third biggest snub of the day.

• 82 1-22-2009 at 8:56 am
  
  Dean Treadway said...

  I Posted this on another article, but it has a better home here:

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

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

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

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

  And the contention that the lack of major noms for TDK signifies a fault in the Academy regarding lifetime memberships, as Kris puts forth, is ageism pure and simple. I’m assuming Kris is between 30 and 35, if not younger. It seems that ALL people this age have problems with ANYONE who is older. The older they are, the stupider they are. The fact is, this is often quite the opposite. Lemme let you in on something: Older people know MORE; they’ve seen it all; you can actually LEARN something from them. Yeah, sometimes they go for lame-o tea-party movies like CHOCOLAT and NICHOLAS AND ALEXANDRA. But sometimes they really DO know what they’re talking about. I don’t see the 80-year-olds who still vote just drooling into a cup all day. They got to where they are because they earned it…and I don’t care whether or not you find the movies they did boring. Maybe it’s YOU who have the problem.

  Look. So what that TDK has an 18-wheeler flipping over headfirst and some not-so-clear things to say about the present state of the world (is the Joker supposed to represent the terrorists? If so, the film displays a remarkably simple-minded worldview). So is this supposed to impress us old fusty fuddie-duddies? (for the record, I’m 42). Why??? Look, give me any one of the blockbusters mentioned above any day over TDK. I don’t have problems with it because it made a lot of money; it’s not even that it’s a superhero film (a genre I find boring, frankly); it’s that it simply wasn’t worthy of a Best Picture nod. I would have preferred to see THE WRESTLER in there, but I understand the numbers regarding these things–Aronofsky’s film is not really a technical showcase, so not a lot of non-Actor Acad members voted for it. (very surprised by the Springsteen snub, but that guy already has an Oscar anyway).

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

  Anyway: HAPPY ABOUT Wall-E love, Rourke and Tomei love, Amy Adams, Mike Leigh, In Bruges, MIA nommed for Best Song (how cutting edge is that?), Menges and Deakins for Cinematography, Richard Jenkins, and Melissa Leo / Courteney Hunt.

  SAD ABOUT: the lack of even one nomination for WENDY AND LUCY, SYNECDOCHE NY or THE FALL. Too bad, but I’ve come to expect this sort of disappointment from the Academy. All three of these movies–and THE WRESTLER–are possibly just too adventurous for the Academy. But aging has taught me not to complain, and not to be surprised by disappointment–only to take joy in these great movies themselves.

• 83 1-22-2009 at 8:59 am
  
  Patrick W. said...

  I agree with actionman. What is sympathetic about Winslet’s character in ‘The Reader’? Initially Kris it was you yourself that said she probably wouldn’t get nominated on grounds that the character was distant and icy, I seem to recall.

  Are we going back on that then?

  Stop hating on ‘The Reader’ unnecessarily just because your favourite was overlooked.

• 84 1-22-2009 at 9:02 am
  
  Blackbird said...

  Hurra for THE READER!

  STEPHEN DALDRY is the best director ever!

  love Kate Winslet!

  love all Daldry’s movies!
  Good for it!

  I think that the only overvaluated movie here es Slumdog Millionaire, and it’s an certainty will be the winner of the night. Must be in its position The Dark Knight.

• 85 1-22-2009 at 9:20 am
  
  Sophie said...

  Sally Hawkins as I do not understand, won almost all the critics awards, but no big prize, only mysteries. This is unprecedented because both SAG, BAFTA, OSCAR not recognized his work and I do not think that the nomination for original screenplay for his film is a consolation, because this is so much injustice .
  compensation?
  Angelina snub now nominated last year, Kate Winslet never won win now, Melissa Leo should be nominated by 21 deg. ??

• 86 1-22-2009 at 10:50 am
  
  Kristopher Tapley said...

  Batman fanboy/dan/Jackass: A charade like that is difficult to pull off when I can, uh, see your IP address.

• 87 1-22-2009 at 10:52 am
  
  Kristopher Tapley said...

  actionman: The book is hardly infused with that much eroticism. Porn. And the character as sympathetic, by that I mean the portrayal of a Nazi as illiterate, she didn’t know what she was doing, we should forgive her, oh how sad, she…well I won’t give away the ending. Sympathetic.

• 88 1-22-2009 at 12:10 pm
  
  Guy Lodge said...

  “STEPHEN DALDRY is the best director ever!”

  Not to be rude, Blackbird, but how many movies have you seen to make a statement like that?

• 89 1-22-2009 at 12:32 pm
  
  JC said...

  “The Godfather, Jaws, Star Wars, ET, Raiders of the Lost Ark, Forrest Gump, Titanic, The Lord of the Rings:ROTK”

  Forrest Gump and Titanic aren’t even close…barely watchable, at this point. The Empire Strikes Back is the only Star Wars film that approaches some semblance of artistic greatness, and it was snubbed. Jaws and Raiders are fun, but lack emotional and thematic depth. The last sections of Return of the King were taken to task easily as much, if not more, than TDK, by critics and the general public.

  I still can’t believe you brought up Forrest Gump…ugh. Talk about a film that goes on forty minutes too long, into increasingly treacly territory.

  Anyways, no one’s all that surprised by the TDK snub. And though Kris might be going a bit overboard in criticizing The Reader, it’s not like many of the reviews for it out there don’t support his view. Heck, compared to Manohla Dargis in the New York Times, Kris used the kid gloves.

• 90 1-22-2009 at 12:37 pm
  
  Chris said...

  Truly disappointing list for the most part. The only things I am glad about is Milk getting nominated for picture, director, screenplay, actor and supporting actor. I think it will surely win original screenplay.

  Not happy AT ALL about TDK getting snubbed. After all the critical and financial success they actually didn’t nominate it. They just lost millions of viewers on February 22nd.

• 91 1-22-2009 at 12:40 pm
  
  Steven said...

  Kris, as I remember it, the book had just as much eroticism if not more. It’s just more graphic when it’s shown.

  I didn’t find The Reader to be conventional at all. It’s one of the most complicated movies I’ve seen in a long time. There is hardly a resolution and there are messy relationships mixed with horrid crimes. The movie is neither sympathetic nor redemptive. I personally loved the movie and am glad that it was recognized this morning. In fact, I wish it were nominated in more categories, including supporting actor (twice), supporting actress, original score, and art direction. Bravo to Daldry, Winslet, Hare, et al. Well deserved.

  Slumdog continues to be overrated. Now there’s a movie that I didn’t get. The movie was fine, but seriously, was that the best of the year? What’s “feel-good” about it? You could see that ending a mile away (the title gives it away), but I didn’t “feel good.” I guess I wasn’t entranced by the “ethnic” vibe of the movie… I am, after all, an Asian-American. I don’t fawn over anything just because it’s exotic. (See also: Babel)

  The only Best Picture nominee I’ve yet to see is Frost/Nixon, and right now, my vote would go for The Reader by a mile. Milk is also a worthy nominee. The other two are just fine, but WALL-E and The Dark Knight were light years better than those two.

  ~Steven

• 92 1-22-2009 at 12:51 pm
  
  Steven said...

  Also, Kris, it seems that you mostly have problems with the plot of The Reader, which is no fault of the filmmakers. The film was an amazingly faithful adaptation. Therefore, it seems that all of your rantings are aimed at Bernhard Schlink. And just ask him if we should feel sympathetic towards a former Nazi guard.

  The overarching theme of both the book and film is guilt and how to deal with that guilt. Who’s to blame? Michael feels guilty for loving an older woman. He feels guilty for loving a Nazi. He feels guilty for loving her even after knowing her crimes. He feels guilty that his countrymen have done these horrific crimes. Hanna’s faults lie in her inability to grasp with the guilt, and in turn, she is self-destructive in every way. Sympathetic? No. The film is complicated and thought provoking.

  ~Steven

• 93 1-22-2009 at 2:10 pm
  
  Kristopher Tapley said...

  Steven: If you knew Scott Rudin’s vision of this thing (which some of us are privy to), you’d maybe be singing a different tune. My issues aren’t with the plot. There was a lot more subtlety to be conveyed and a rushed post-production schedule did away with that.

  I don’t call it “pornography” arbitrarily. There is no emotion base for the intimacy, at least in this version of the film. There were much deeper levels to reach and Harvey Moneyfingers has never been accused of fragility with his products.

  That’s all I’m saying. I like the plot just fine. But in this form, the sympathy we’re meant to feel toward this woman feels totally manipulative and ultimately false.

• 94 1-22-2009 at 2:20 pm
  
  Kristopher Tapley said...

  Mr. F: RE: S.O.P., it was rather bad timing since “Taxi to the Dark Side” is such a similar film. Plus, Morris never gets his due respect.

• 95 1-22-2009 at 2:22 pm
  
  Troy said...

  I don’t know about you guys, but I’m more disappointed with the inclusion of Howard and F/N than I am with Daldry and The Reader.

• 96 1-22-2009 at 2:26 pm
  
  andrew said...

  How puzzling that the vitriol over TDK is being directed at The Reader?? How do you know The Reader came 5th and TDK 6th?? TDK may have come even lower down. Get a grip.
  And roll on Slumdog steamtrain- Patel missing out a small disappointment but 3 noms for Rahman makes up for it

• 97 1-22-2009 at 2:48 pm
  
  Lane said...

  And I thought my jokes were bad.

• 98 1-22-2009 at 2:54 pm
  
  Jonathan Spuij said...

  Hell now I know what this all is:
  It’s the alternate ending where the ferries did get blown up and the town had no people ready to believe in good. Chaos.

• 99 1-22-2009 at 3:14 pm
  
  Patrick W. said...

  I still disagree with you about ‘The Reader’ Kris. It had all the subtlety I needed, neither too much nor too little. And the graphic sex scenes were necessary for me, not because they were trying to suggest intimacy (for me that was implicit in David Kross’s performance), but rather because we need to see the intensity of Hanna’s effect on Michael. And her control. Not intimacy. I still think ‘pornographic’ is one of the most absurd things I’ve read for absolutely ages.

  And whatever Scott Rudin’s vision of the film was, that’s not the film that transpired. I’m sure any number of people would have adapted the book differently, but it’s besides the point.

• 100 1-22-2009 at 3:25 pm
  
  Big Braveheart said...

  oscars = JOKE!
  Dull, boring, unimaginative & hate the public.
  They SNUB we SNUB, only fair.

• 101 1-22-2009 at 3:29 pm
  
  Xavi Rodriguez said...

  My feelings:

  The Good:

  1. Finally Kate Winslet will win for her best Performance. For me, her Hanna is a lot better that her April (I found her in RR a little bit annoying and over-the-top). I don’t think why she was nominated for her wrong role, even when the film isn’t perfect but she’s exquisite, beautiful and marvelous.

  2. I’m glad for M.I.A.! ;) I know it would be a decision for ratings but I’m glad for HSM3 snub

  3. Richard Jenkins and especially Melissa Leo. They deserved it.

  4.Surprising Original Screenplay Line-up. Milk (The Only WGA nominee!!) and Wall-E did it. Surprising In Bruges and Frozen River got the Oscar Nomination.

  5.Taraji P. Henson: She’s lovely in the film.

  The Bad:

  1.James Franco snub: I know he’s a long shot, but for me, he’s better than Michael Shannon, Robert Downey jr. (I think he’s a little bit overrated and he SHOULD be nominated last year for “Zodiac”) and even Josh Brolin. I hope he’ll return soon to another Oscar role. he deserves it!

  2.The Dark Knight snub: I think this film is better that Frost/Nixon. The Reader is not perfect but I like it and more that Revolutionary Road (One of my biggest deceptions of the year).

  3.Bruce Sprinsteen snub: ‘Nuff said

  4.Why Waltz With Bashir got an only Oscar Nomination??!!

  5.Amy Adams’s nomination: Well, she was competent but Rosemarie DeWitt and Debra Winger deserved that place.

• 102 1-22-2009 at 3:39 pm
  
  Aaron said...

  Let me get this out there–I, too, was very disheartened to see The Dark Knight snubbed in nearly every major race. But, looking at all these comments–and I read every single one–it’s even more disheartening to see the bitter rage TDK fans have over the Academy.

  Calm down.

  I can’t really fault the five Best Picture lineups. They’re all fine films. Would they have been mine? No, but that doesn’t take away their right to be there.

  I thought the Reader was a terrific film. And I’m completely ecstatic that they nominated Kate Winslet in the lead actress category…it’s a much better performance than Revolutionary Road (IMO). And I take offense at people’s criticism that it’s “another Holocaust movie”! Umm…have you seen it??? It truly is unlike anything I’ve seen this year. It’s thought-provoking, hauning, beautifully written, directed, and acted.

  And “pornographic”? Never once did I remotely find this film the least pornographic. I don’t understand where this critique is coming from. And I didn’t for one second find the film manipulative–especially involving Kate Winslet’s character. I thought the script did a great job highlighing the ambiguity of her character. You truthfully didn’t know how to feel about her.

  Also, I’m very excited to see nominations for Heath Ledger, Marisa Tomei, Amy Adams, and Richard Jenkins. Personally, I would have rather seen Sally Hawkins instead of Melissa Leo, but Leo did a fine job in Frozen River.

  Also sad Woody Allen didn’t receive a screenplay nod for Vicky Cristina Barcelona :( ….but the man has won multiple Oscars, so I think he’ll live.

  Otherwise, we all need to calm down a little. The Academy can’t accomodate everyone’s film tastes.

• 103 1-22-2009 at 3:59 pm
  
  Gustavo said...

  BATMAN isn’t the greatest thing ever. INDIANA JONES should’ve been up for Best Picture. It wasn’t, and that’s why AMPAS embarassed itself today.

• 104 1-22-2009 at 4:46 pm
  
  Tina said...

  Can we finally settle this…If you have seen “The Reader”, you know that it is NOT holocaust film!

• 105 1-22-2009 at 5:06 pm
  
  Chad said...

  Trivia Time! Films used to garner four acting nominations with more regularity pre-1965 but since then a couple have managed it. “Doubt” is the first film since “Chicago” and before that, “Reds”.

  Also, with Penelope Cruz’s nomination, surely Woody Allen can lay claim to directing the most Oscar nominated performances right? Wrong. Here’s the list of the top 10 LIVING directors and how many performances from their films were nominated.

  1. Martin Scorsese 20
  2. Sidney Lumet 18
  3. Mike Nichols 18
  4. Woody Allen 16
  5. Francis Ford Coppola 13
  6. Norman Jewison 12
  7. Clint Eastwood 11
  8. James L. Brooks 9
  9. Mark Rydell 9
  10. Steven Spielberg 9

  The all-time champ is still, and forever will be, William Wyler with 35.

• 106 1-22-2009 at 6:57 pm
  
  andrew said...

  As much as I love Slumdog, despite its astonishing success in the precursors, it doesnt seem like the sort of film the academy will vote for Best Picture. I’m afraid that Button is much more your stock standard winner (although I suppose you could argue that something like Atonement was more typically oscar-bait than No Country last year). I’m trying not to read too much in to Patel not getting an acting nomination. I hope Slumdog ramps up the campaign as the academy voters decide…

• 107 1-22-2009 at 7:46 pm
  
  PJ said...

  I don’t know why we all get our hopes up so high come nomination time, but we do, and are consequently disappointed, enraged and depressed. It’s not much comfort, but keep in mind that it could have been a lot worse (”Gran Torino” anyone?) By such a stretch, I’ll take the “The Reader.”

• 108 1-22-2009 at 8:06 pm
  
  Alejandro Leza said...

  I’m so dissapointed, that nothing would make me happier than see “live on broadcasting” the TDK teammates rejecting the Oscar in case of winning it. After all, if TDK and Chris Nolan, wasn’t good enough for deserving a nomination, so neither all team members, that would be a great lesson for that Academy Members Mob

• 109 1-22-2009 at 10:12 pm
  
  Glenn said...

  It would be something special if somebody from the Dark Knight crew who wins publicly shamed the Academy. “If you wake up tomorrow Academy members and discover only ten million people watched your show YOU KNOW WHY!” would particularly go down a treat.

• 110 1-23-2009 at 4:13 am
  
  Eunice said...

  I just saw Slumdog Millionaire and I’m hopping fully on the Slumdog train. I guess the truth of it resonates with me, especially being where I live, even though the truth shown in the film is admittedly not a hundred percent pretty. I cringed and closed my eyes at a few scenes, but it’s not a complete downer. Boyle manages not to overdo it, though, and for his restraint and creativity, I applaud him so much. If there’s anyone aside from Chris Nolan who deserves the Best Director award, it’s this guy.

  I didn’t see the last question coming, probably because I was so invested in it by the time it was asked, but man, why wouldn’t it be hard to sympathize with someone who finally wins an important game like that–and maybe the game of Life as well–when he’s suffered so much?

  Also, the cinematography and score were awesome. Rooting for ‘Jai Ho’ on Oscar night.

• 111 1-23-2009 at 6:40 am
  
  Marshall said...

  “I hope he’ll return soon to another Oscar role. he deserves it!”

  James Franco is currently filming as Allen Ginsberg, something tells me they won’t be able to resist him going homely in a biopic. Especially since he gave two of the best performances of 2008 and got passed over. I wonder how things would have gone if they’d campaigned him for Supporting in PINEAPPLE?

• 112 1-23-2009 at 10:23 am
  
  Sam said...

  Look…assman…The Dark Knight is NOT the great picture you seem to think it is…and secondly, the Academy members, for the most part have EARNED their status for life by doing something other then an Oscar blog.

  The Reader is a better movie to just as many people who think that TDK is.
  I have a friend in the academy…after he saw The Reader, he called me and told me to see it. He said it was the best picture of the year and believe me, Harvey Weinstein had NOTHING to do with his feelings. If anything, he would want to hate it because of Weinstein.

  Get over your damn self, and your damn movie and accept that we don’t all see things the same.

• 113 1-23-2009 at 4:55 pm
  
  Glenn said...

  “assman”? What is this, a Seinfeld episode?

• 114 2-03-2010 at 9:46 am
  
  movieman said...

  I thought I’d look back at this and comment on the nominees…

  “Slumdog Millionaire” was 2008’s most overrated film in my opinion. It felt completely dishonest. Replace it with “The Wrestler.” “Frost/Nixon” was good, but stagy and claustrophobic. Replace it with “Synecdoche, New York.” “Milk” and “The Reader” were both solid, effective films, but neither made my top ten. Replace them with “Cloverfield” and “The Dark Knight.”

  As far as animated film goes, I was not blown away by “Bolt,” “Kung Fu Panda,” or “WALL-E,” but all were solid. “WALL-E” was clearly the winner before it won, and even though I didn’t like the second half, I had no problem with this.

• 115 2-03-2010 at 9:48 am
  
  movieman said...

  Oh but “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button” was 2008’s most perfect achievement. I had absolutely no problem with it being nominated. It easily should’ve won.

Name

Email

Web site

Notify me of followup comments via e-mail