2014 BOX OFFICE AWARDS: Nomination Period Now OVER, Thanks For Participating

[Jack Nevada]

My supporting actress list is alarmingly short. 

[CoolioD1]

not gonna watch it again

even thinking about that scene makes me cry 

Idk if I will ever be able rewatch it 

My wildest dream is this making nominations list tomorrow (which wont happen obv cause life is unfair)

I got it in my predictions in the game. I kinda know it won't happen, but whatever.

[The Stingray]

If I get to see Wolf this weekend, I'll make a list. If not, then f**k it!

[Gopher]

If Short Term 12 was accepted to Sundance (the fact that it wasn't is embarrassing) then I think Focus or Roadside would've picked it up and it could get a legitimate release, have screeners sent to Academy members and become a legitimate contender.

[CoolioD1]

I said this in the Actress thread. I'm sure at the very least Brie Larson would've been nominated in that "Sundance indie spot" in Best Actress like Jennifer Lawrence in Winter's Bone or the girl from Precious or Melissa Leo in Frozen River or whatever.

Edited January 15, 2014 by CoolioD1

[ecstasy]

What is this Short Term 12?

[Sam]

My supporting actress list is alarmingly short. 

My top choices are Lupita, Margot Robbie, and ScarJo. Contemplating between June Squibb, Nicole Kidman, and Octavia Spencer on the rest.

[Films]

My supporting actress listKidmanMenzelOprahAdding in margot robbie for about time and n'yongo for 12YAS to replace my double bill of Isla fisher

[The Stingray]

Nicole Kidman is always awesome. She deserves more love.

[DAR]

What is this Short Term 12?

 

An abbreviated version of 12 Years A Slave

[CoolioD1]

Love Kidman, but For Stoker? I thought she was laughably bad in that, and I liked the movie!

[Ezen Baklattan]

Love Kidman, but For Stoker? I thought she was laughably bad in that, and I liked the movie!

I thought she was really excellent and dark. 

[ecstasy]

An abbreviated version of 12 Years A Slave

 

Don't play with me.

[4815162342]

Her was great. Can't nominate ScarJo though. She was very good, but knowing that all of Joaquin's acting was done against Samantha Morton deflates the power/impact of the performance.

[Dementeleus]

Her was great. Can't nominate ScarJo though. She was very good, but knowing that all of Joaquin's acting was done against Samantha Morton deflates the power/impact of the performance.

 

I think it makes it even more impressive. She had to fit her performance into timing and beats established by another actor months earlier; she didn't have the assistance of being part of the original shoot.

[4815162342]

I disagree, because all of the impact made by the character on Joaquin was done by someone else. It lessens the meaning of the performance because it is purely reactionary rather than part of a give-and-take.

[Dementeleus]

I disagree, because all of the impact made by the character on Joaquin was done by someone else. It lessens the meaning of the performance because it is purely reactionary rather than part of a give-and-take.

 

Interesting. So you view a performance not solely on itself, but how it influences/is influenced others? What about something like GRAVITY, where each actor was basically isolated?

[Films]

Love Kidman, but For Stoker? I thought she was laughably bad in that, and I liked the movie!

I thought she was good in it but the weakest cast member though the supporting actress category is so weak for me this year

[4815162342]

I personally think the strength of a performance lies in part with how it connects with the performers around him or her at the time the performance is done.For Gravity, I don't know enough about the production schedule to answer. If the Bullock/Clooney acting was done together in real time, then it's more impactful than if they filmed separately with one filming later and reacting to lines spoken some weeks earlier. Because even if they were physically isolated, they were still acting and reacting together to lines in the instant after being spoken, which gives it a natural, effortless, organic quality that delayed line recording can never match 100%.

Edited January 15, 2014 by 4815162342

[Dementeleus]

I personally think the strength of a performance lies in part with how it connects with the performers around him or her at the time the performance is done.For Gravity, I don't know enough about the production schedule to answer. If the Bullock/Clooney acting was done together in real time, then it's more impactful than if they filmed separately with one filming later and reacting to lines spoken some weeks earlier.

 

I get what you're saying. You do realize, though, that in many cases (though it varies), when you've got dialogue close-ups the actor may not be reacting to the other actor in the scene, but merely someone reading their lines back to them (sometimes with a stand-in for eyeline, sometimes not even that). It could be an amazingly powerful scene when it's edited, but the actors aren't necessarily reacting to each other nor even the audio of the other performance.