Oscar Nominations that made you go "HUH?!?!?!?!"

[ZONEACE]

Posted: 8/7/06 at 12:57am

So, The thread about the OscarWatch top 100 performances, got me looking at the Oscar.com Archives and I found a few nominations that made me go "wtf?" Do you have your own "WTF?" nominations?


So for me, one was Joan Cusack for In & Out. I mean, yeah, it was a cute movie, and she was good, but really? an oscar Nomination???


Johnny Depp for Pirates of the Carribbean. Definately not worthy. Of all his performances, that one was relaly, well, essentially phoned in.

Marisa Tomei My Cousin Vinny? uhh, ok.




thats all for now

[munkustrap178]

Posted: 8/7/06 at 1:07am

Totally agree about Marisa Tomei.

Tom Cruise, JERRY MAGUIRE
Cuba Gooding, Jr., JERRY MAGUIRE
Albert Finney, ERIN BROKOVICH
Halle Berry, MONSTER'S BALL
Ken Wantanabe, THE LAST SAMURAI
Alan Alda, THE AVIATOR
Thomas Haden Church, SIDEWAYS
Jamie Foxx, COLLATERAL
William Hurt, A HISTORY OF VIOLENCE

[ZONEACE]

Posted: 8/7/06 at 1:11am

"Halle Berry, MONSTER'S BALL"

now that one I can't agree with. That performance was by far the best of the year and well deserving of the Oscar.


Oh and yeah, Tom Cruise for anything he's been nominated for.

[StageManager2]

Posted: 8/7/06 at 1:15am

ZONEACE, as I was reading your post I was thinking of Johnny Depp for PIRATES OF THE CARRIBEAN, but you beat me to it. I hated the movie and was quite surprised when he was considered a shoo-in for an Oscar nomination. That same year Jamie Lee Curtis was also being touted for FREAKY FRIDAY, so I didn't take Depp's consideration seriously.

I don't think Reese Witherspoon should have been nominated, let alone win, for Best Actress for WALK THE LINE. If anything, it was more of a supporting role, so she should have gotten her nomination in that category.

That girl who was nominated for WHALE RIDER. I hadn't bothered to watch the movie before because the premise didn't interest me. But after she got the Best Actress nomination, I rented it to see what all the fuss was about. Needless to say, I was disappointed. She only had that one good scene where she is all dressed up in tribal gear and giving a speech, but other than that her performance was nothing great.

Judi Dench for SHAKESPEARE IN LOVE. I don't know how she received a nomination, seeing as she was only in it for like 8 minutes at the most, and her role was nothing to shout about. When she won, I think it was more of a consolation prize for not having been given the statuette the year prior for MRS. BROWN.

I can't think of any more at the moment. But I'll be back, I'm sure.

Updated On: 8/7/06 at 01:15 AM

[broadway86]

Posted: 8/7/06 at 1:21am

SM2...

I totally agree with you about Keisha Castle-Hughes. She had one good speech. Other than that, I was not impressed.

That same year Jamie Lee Curtis was also being touted for FREAKY FRIDAY, so I didn't take Depp's consideration seriously.

I thought Curtis was brilliant, and a nomination would have been well-deserved. No joke.

ZONEACE-
I disagree about all the performances you named in your first post.

Munk...

Cuba Gooding, Jr., JERRY MAGUIRE

Really?

Albert Finney, ERIN BROKOVICH

Whaaa...

Halle Berry, MONSTER'S BALL

Ehhh... Yes and no.

Ken Wantanabe, THE LAST SAMURAI

I'll give you that one.

Thomas Haden Church, SIDEWAYS

Totally disagree.

William Hurt, A HISTORY OF VIOLENCE

This performance polarizes most viewers, but I loved him. Updated On: 8/7/06 at 01:21 AM

[Wanna Be A Foster]

Posted: 8/7/06 at 1:24am

Johnny Depp for Pirates of the Carribbean. Definately not worthy.

D-E-F-I-N-I-T-E-L-Y, people! Jeez.

[Funny Face]

Posted: 8/7/06 at 1:27am

I have to disagree with the Johnny Depp comment. His Jack Sparrow, IMO, was a completely original and fully realized character that he commited himself to 100%. There was never a moment in the whole movie that I thought about Johnny Depp. He completely embodied that character.

I think Chaterine Keener in Capote didn't deserve a nomination. She was merely convincing in a role that was nothing special at all. I even think her role in The 40-Year-Old Virgin was more Oscar-worthy.

[nztheatreluva]

Posted: 8/7/06 at 1:36am

I disagree about Keisha Castle-Hughes. I think she was fantastic.

And I totally disagree about Reese Witherspoon. That was NOT a supporting role and she was absolutely incredible.

[jimnysf]

Posted: 8/7/06 at 1:47am

Best Picture nomination for the boring "Choclolat".

[Rose_MacShane]

Posted: 8/7/06 at 2:03am

Nicole Kidman for "Moulin Rouge." I still don't see how that was Oscar-worthy.

[Funny Face]

Posted: 8/7/06 at 2:51am

Yeah, I think the Academy likes musical performances. Especially when a star does their own singing and they turn out to be pretty good. At least that's what it seems like.

[Type_A_Tiff]

Posted: 8/7/06 at 3:06am

Don't forget that if a smoking hot actress turns "ugly" for a role (and by "ugly", I mean a 7.5 instead of an 11), she's a shoo-in for at least a nom. (Hello Nicole, Renee, Halle and Charlize!) I usually think in those situations, the fact that the star's hotness is common knowledge is what makes their performance so [insert superlative]. Are we actually amazed by their performances or at the transformation? Would a plain-looking no-name actress get the same accolades?

(But on a totally different note, Keira Knightley for "Pride & Prejudice"? HUH???)

[ZONEACE]

Posted: 8/7/06 at 3:19am

Halle Didn't get butched up for her nomination, she played an emotionally challenging role to perfection.

[C is for Company]

Posted: 8/7/06 at 3:25am

How about changing sex? Felicity and Hilary both did so and to unanimous acclaim.

[ZONEACE]

Posted: 8/7/06 at 3:27am

while i still havent seen Felicity's performance, Hillary was amazing.

[Type_A_Tiff]

Posted: 8/7/06 at 3:45am

But the point is she didn't play the sex symbol, and in fact, downplayed her appearance substantially. I'm not saying her performance wasn't good - I'm saying people took notice because it's Halle Berry in a dramatic 180. If a no-name actress whose persona and celebrity we weren't familiar with had done the role, she would not have received those accolades because we wouldn't have a yardstick to judge her range by. On the other hand, the preconceived notion of Halle is as a Bond Girl, Best Dresser, Revlon Spokesmodel, Sexiest Woman Alive, etc., and that's why this completely different role was so impressive.

(And a side note, Felicity was also amazing, and I think should've won the Oscar over Reese by a long shot.)

[ZONEACE]

Posted: 8/7/06 at 3:57am

Well, I believe i would have had the same reaction to the Monster's Ball no matter who the performer, had the performance been as good.

[Type_A_Tiff]

Posted: 8/7/06 at 4:05am

Tough to say. I like to think I would've appreciated Monster if a no-name's performance had been as good as Charlize's, but who knows. I just don't understand how something like Ryan Gosling's astonishing performance (and I don't use that lightly) in The Believer didn't made his career explode but Johnny Depp's turn in Pirates... was treated like the best thing since processed cheese.

[ZONEACE]

Posted: 8/7/06 at 4:08am

I haven't seen The Believer, but the Unite States of Leland was rather impressive.

[Type_A_Tiff]

Posted: 8/7/06 at 4:12am

United States Of Leland was pretty good. Murder By Numbers was a pretty crappy movie but Ryan Gosling and Michael Pitt's performances steal the show. Do check out The Believer though. Ryan's performance is nuanced, complex, multi-dimensional, quietly tortured, and charismatic but not in an overplayed sexual way like Ed Norton in American History X which it is commonly compared to (and is still very good in its own right).

[jam_man]

Posted: 8/7/06 at 4:23am

While I actually really liked Johnny Depp in Pirates, his nomination did catch me a bit off guard. Not because it wasn't a great performance, but because Pirates doesn't strike me as an Oscar-pic at all, other than the visuals. It was a good movie, though. The first one, anyway.


Personally, I didn't like Depp's performance in Finding Neverland at all. I loved everything else about that movie, but I never cared a bit about Depp.

[TonyaFanatic]

Posted: 8/7/06 at 8:05am

why the hell does everybody have such a bitchfit over Marisa Tomei winning the Oscar? She was charming, funny, very well acted and just plain great in that role. Her performance is what Best Supporting Actress is all about.

[melissa errico fan]

Posted: 8/7/06 at 9:13am

Haley Joel Osment for THE SIXTH SENSE: I knew he would be nominated, but he definitely wasn't worthy. His performance was nothing special.

[TheHumanTorch]

Posted: 8/7/06 at 10:17am

i definitely agree about Catherine Keener in Capote,

also... i didn't find ANYTHING special about Reese Witherspoon in Walk the Line

Kiera Knightley in Pride and Prejudice really boggled my mind... i didn't like her in that movie at all

but probably my biggest complaint was when Clint Eastwood was nominated for acting for Million Dollar Baby... i think he is one of the most over-rated actors ever... ughhh, i thought his performance was awful

[blueroses]

Posted: 8/7/06 at 10:41am

broadway86, I agree with everything you said, especially about William Hurt. His screentime may have been all of five minutes, but I thought he was magnificent. And although I thought Rachel Weisz was wonderful, Amy Adams was my pick.

I'm still upset Colin Farrell wasn't nominated for A Home at the End of the World. I can't even believe he got mixed reviews...that performance was one of the most beautiful, moving things I've seen in years.


Updated On: 8/7/06 at 10:41 AM