The 82nd Academy Awards & STAR TREK

[Canadave]

If this movie wins anything but a technical award, something is VERY wrong with this world.

Giacchino doesn't deserve an Oscar for his Star Trek score. If he wins one, then Goldsmith, Horner and Eidelmann should get one retroactively and guys like Danny Elfman, Michael Kamen and Alan Silvestri should get one for each of their movies.

If anything, he deserves a nod for his work on Up. I thought that was a fantastic score.

 

[M'Sharak]

^ i like how Giacchino is wearing a star trek shirt in that photo.

More pics from that session can be found here and here.

 

[Dusty Ayres]

The only awards I care about as far as sci-fi films are concerned are the Hugo's and the Saturns. The Oscars can kiss my black ass.

 

[I am not Spock]

Avatar will probably pick up Best SFX.

ST may win for make-up, or best score.

 

[MvRojo]

Avatar will probably pick up Best SFX.

ST may win for make-up, or best score.

I doubt it.

There was nothing make-up-wise that stood out in this movie. Even Nemesis had more impressive make-up. And even First Contact got beat in that category by Ghosts of Mississippi.

In terms of score, that award has frequently gone to one of the Best Picture nominees or a musical (at least that has how it has gone all but once or twice in the last two decades).

 

[Rackon]

I consider it probable XI will receive a couple noms, at least:

Visual Efffects
Sound Editing
(What's the other Sound award??? Sound Design???)

Maybe also...
Art Direction
Score

Less likely but possible...
Editing


Make-Up is also a remote possibility, but I doubt it. The make-up noms come from that branch of the Academy, and I don't know that XI had enough "new, impressive" stuff to get them excited, even though what make-ups they did were well done. XI doesn't break much new ground here.

Whether XI will win any visual FX statues...I can't say, especially since none of us have seen Avatar yet, which is sure to be a contender. A lot depends on just how good a film it actually turns out to be. This is why I think Tranformers won't win - it's flashy FX in a movie that wasn't well received in the industry and got no critical respect. (Whereas XI was nearly universally loved within the industry and critically well received.)

FYI, the FX branch of AMPAS controls this nomination. In their annual "bake-off" prior to awards season, they select only 3 films for the Visual FX noms, and then the Academy as a whole votes for the Oscar. I certainly think XI deserve to be there...the ST FX were gorgeous, effective and nearly seamless, excellent work all the way around. I think ILM can count on this nom.

Equally, I think the sound design for XI was oustanding - truly creative, immersive and distinctive.

Although I don't get too invested in the Academy Awards, I think it would be nice recognition for the filmmakers and the respective craftsmen/tech people to be nominated in their categories. The Oscars are really more about the film industry than cinema art, so the nom is almost as good as a win. I think the XI is very well crafted and hugely entertaining - it's not Citizen Kane but it certainly doesn't need to win any awards to validate its worth in my eyes.

 

[cooleddie74]

I don't expect it to WIN anything other than one or two technical Oscars. Even if it got an honorary, pat-on-the-back Best Picture nod it stands about as much chance of winning as Joan Rivers does at a Most Natural Face contest.

 

[MvRojo]

On an interesting side-note, 4 James Cameron films have won the Visual Effects Oscars (Aliens, Abyss, T2, and Titanic), and a fifth was nominated (True Lies). That's why I'd put my money on Avatar winning. Based on the teaser trailer released today, it looks very immersive in its visuals.

The Visual Effects nominees will be Avatar, Transformers 2, and something random (Christmas Carol or Where the Wild Things Are). While Trek's visuals were good, they weren't innovative in any way.

The Sound for Trek was very good, and is probably the film's most deserving aspect. Everything else was good, but not award-worthy.

 

[zacharyquintouk]

I think that they will put it up for the FX, music and possibly a couple of Best Supporting Actor/Actress. Not sure if any of them are on screen long enough for Best Actor/Actress

 

[cooleddie74]

Pine and Quinto are almost sure bets for some Blockbuster and MTV Movie Awards...unless the cast of the TWILIGHT sequel cockblocks them.

 

[chrisspringob]

The VFX category only has three nominees. Avatar and 2012 are probably the most likely to be nominated. The third one will be TF2 or Star Trek or possibly even District 9.

Also, while the VFX award is nominally only for FX, the Academy tends to favor FX heavy movies that they also like *as movies*, so if a movie is critically panned, that diminishes its chances of winning. Avatar is the likeliest winner, but if it turns out to be a bad movie, then it could certainly lose the VFX Oscar.

 

[MvRojo]

The VFX category only has three nominees. Avatar and 2012 are probably the most likely to be nominated. The third one will be TF2 or Star Trek or possibly even District 9.

Also, while the VFX award is nominally only for FX, the Academy tends to favor FX heavy movies that they also like *as movies*, so if a movie is critically panned, that diminishes its chances of winning. Avatar is the likeliest winner, but if it turns out to be a bad movie, then it could certainly lose the VFX Oscar.

That is true, and probably one of the reasons none of the SW prequels won. Although "Golden Compass" won and that was a generally panned film.

 

[Sector 7]

^ i like how Giacchino is wearing a star trek shirt in that photo.

More pics from that session can be found here and here.

I like those t-shirts. I'd wear that in public... except for the red ones (might not turn out well for me).

 

[cooleddie74]

Until PHANTOM MENACE, every SW movie won at least one Oscar even if it was only for special f/x. Starting in 1999/2000, the prequels just got shut out each and every time and didn't really get nominated for that many either. The Potter, Rings and Matrix movies seemed to rule the roost.

 

[chrisspringob]

The VFX category only has three nominees. Avatar and 2012 are probably the most likely to be nominated. The third one will be TF2 or Star Trek or possibly even District 9.

Also, while the VFX award is nominally only for FX, the Academy tends to favor FX heavy movies that they also like *as movies*, so if a movie is critically panned, that diminishes its chances of winning. Avatar is the likeliest winner, but if it turns out to be a bad movie, then it could certainly lose the VFX Oscar.

That is true, and probably one of the reasons none of the SW prequels won. Although "Golden Compass" won and that was a generally panned film.

True, though it was up against two movies whose reviews were pretty mixed (Pirates 3 and Transformers). I guess I'd simply say that if the gap in reviews is great enough, it could make the difference.

 

[I am not Spock]

I'd be surprised if Trek even gets nominated, judging by those Academy snobs who didn't even include it in this years hottest trailers segment at the ceremony earlier this year. I was really P.Oed at that.

They did put T:Salvation and Transformers 2 on that reel, though, and look how well received those films were by the industry.

 

[Eddie Roth]

There was nothing make-up-wise that stood out in this movie. Even Nemesis had more impressive make-up. And even First Contact got beat in that category by Ghosts of Mississippi.

"The Nutty Professor", actually.

The Oscars are obviously a relative award, given in a competition. Meaning a film or an achievement therein might be a hundred times better than than last year's winner, yet it would still not get the award if another film is a hundred-and-one times better (in the Academy's estimation, that is). This is what killed Star Trek's Oscar bids in the past. The same will happen this year.

Forget all notions of STXI getting any nominations, much less wins in the big categories such as Best Picture, acting or even film editing. These are reserved, mostly, for the "serious" films of the year.

There are chances for nominations in Sound Mixing and Sound Editing, the latter of which I still see as guaranteed. Everything else is a very long shot, even Visual Effects, since two slots are just about taken by Transformers and Avatar, and the third having a lot of competition and for which my best guess would be The Lovely Bones.

 

[cooleddie74]

True, the alien makeup wasn't overly impressive or original. But makeup comprises more than just creating fake alien creatures and putting pointed ears on Zachary Quinto, you know. It's everyone on camera.

 

[MvRojo]

An interesting commentary from Variety today:

When Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences president Sid Ganis announced the expansion of the best picture category to 10 nominations back in June, everyone was talking about J.J. Abrams' "Star Trek" being the kind of movie that might benefit from a wider field. Critics liked it; audiences loved it: It was the type of sturdy popcorn movie that, if nominated, might give the awards telecast a ratings boost -- or, at least, stem further viewer erosion.

Now, as Oscar season kicks into gear, nobody is talking about "Star Trek" much anymore. And, as audiences and Academy members have seen most of the Oscar contenders, a vague sense of discomfort hangs over Hollywood as some naysayers wonder how they might possibly fill out a ballot that now includes 10 slots. "This is not 1939," says one Academy member, who like most people interviewed for this story, asked not to be identified. "I'm just not seeing stuff that's blowing me away, and it's October. When the year began, I was hoping for masterpieces. Now I'd just take a good midrange drama, and I'm not even getting that."

http://www.variety.com/article/VR1118010642.html?categoryid=3795&cs=1

And this is the counterpoint, from Wednesday

Gervasi's right about both his film's improbable chances and the fact that this year, with a best picture category that has doubled in size, nobody really knows how the race is going to unfold. And that's one reason why many Academy members and Oscar observers couldn't be happier with the decision to nominate 10 movies this year.

"The Oscars have become a little pretentious lately," says blockbuster disaster-movie director Roland Emmerich. "There's a disconnect with the audience. I think it's good to shake things up. Maybe we'll see a good movie like 'District 9,' something that both critics and audiences loved, get in the race."

The sci-fi thriller "District 9," with its allusions to apartheid, could indeed be the kind of smart crowdpleaser that finds its way into the final 10. J.J. Abrams' "Star Trek," James Cameron's upcoming "Avatar" and Quentin Tarantino's "Inglourious Basterds" are also being mentioned as possibilities.

As one Academy insider puts it, "The snarkiest day of the Oscar year is nomination day." With last year's picks, he says, the driving question was, "Where's Batman?" when fans learned that "The Dark Knight" had been snubbed.

But while one, maybe two, commercial movies might make their way to a nomination, boosters of Oscar's expanded field believe that the main beneficiaries of the new math will be foreign-language films, documentaries and small-scale dramas. That prospect is welcome news in a year that has been rife with bad tidings for indie labels.

http://www.variety.com/article/VR1118010516.html?categoryid=3789&cs=1&query=%22star+trek%22

 

[JarodRussell]

LOL, now that's interesting, and it gives me hope. But I'm sure Star Trek will get a nomination for Best Picture, because the world is crazy.