G Martin 87 said:

---

TexAgBolter said:

---

No Apollo 11 for best doc? Obama doc got a nom.

---

Only thing I can figure is that maybe it isn't technically a documentary if it doesn't have a narrator?

---

What else would it be? I also don't think not having a narrator is a disqualifier..

Quote:

---

An eligible documentary film is defined as a theatrically released nonfiction motion picture dealing creatively with cultural, artistic, historical, social, scientific, economic or other subjects. It may be photographed in actual occurrence, or may employ partial reenactment, stock footage, stills, animation, stop-motion or other techniques, as long as the emphasis is on fact and not on fiction.

---

boy09 said:

---

G Martin 87 said:

---

TexAgBolter said:

---

No Apollo 11 for best doc? Obama doc got a nom.

---

Only thing I can figure is that maybe it isn't technically a documentary if it doesn't have a narrator?

---

What else would it be? I also don't think not having a narrator is a disqualifier..

Quote:

---

An eligible documentary film is defined as a theatrically released nonfiction motion picture dealing creatively with cultural, artistic, historical, social, scientific, economic or other subjects. It may be photographed in actual occurrence, or may employ partial reenactment, stock footage, stills, animation, stop-motion or other techniques, as long as the emphasis is on fact and not on fiction.

---

---

Very odd omission from the nominations. I don't see any disqualifiers in that definition either. The restoration and editing of all that original footage surely deserved at least a technical nomination.

I think Editing was rightly won by 1917. The insane skill needed to get that one-shot trick to work as well as it did is pretty impressive.

Rick Dalton said:

---

First thoughts:

OUATIH did great with the only miss being Editing (traditionally an important category for the eventual Best Picture winner) for Raskin. That being said, I still think it's the frontrunner and eventual winner.

---

I feel like you're biased.

FTACof2011 said:

---

I must have really missed the boat with OUATIH and The Irishman. Thought they were both really meh. Rooting for 1917. Will also be watching some of the nominated Netflix movies in the next couple weeks.

---

I thought OUATIH was great and I won't be disappointed if it wins, but I was more impressed with 1917 and JoJo Rabbit. The Irishman was a snooze fest for me; the deaging was too distracting and, frankly, unconvincing.

Quote:

---

I understand what your saying, but the one shot style of 1917 is an achievement in cinematography, not film editing.

---

Why isn't it both?

Unless my thinking is wrong, and there was minimal editing needed because of so few "cuts"?

I figured editing would've been a big part of that, but maybe it's the opposite.

Can someone explain why Hanks & Hopkins are in the supporting actor category? I know the actual reason is just to get Hopkins & Hanks nominations and have them be part of the awards but it doesn't make sense at all to put them in supporting category.

Bunk Moreland said:

---

Can someone explain why Hanks & Hopkins are in the supporting actor category?

---

Can't speak for Hopkins, but did you see A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood? He's absolutely supporting.

Sex Panther said:

---

Bunk Moreland said:

---

Can someone explain why Hanks & Hopkins are in the supporting actor category?

---

Can't speak for Hopkins, but did you see A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood? He's absolutely supporting.

---

Fair. Rhys is the main lead, but I still feel like it was almost a co-lead. Either way it's his first nomination in almost 20 years for Hanks, which is a crazy long time.

fig96 said:

---

amercer said:

---

I actually think Missing Link is one of the worst movies I've ever seen in a theatre. It was formulaic and boring.

---

I get if it's not your cup of tea, but if that's the worst movie you've ever seen in a theater you must not go to the movies much.

The production values alone in Laika films are always worth a watch.

---

I don't go to the movies much. Took the kids and we were all very meh.

Right, but I figured the digital stitching necessary to achieve that would've been considered a check for the Editing box and not Cinematography.

But as you said, there wasn't as many cuts in this movie as there would be in a regular movie. So I see your point. My guess is the editor is getting most of the credit for the above though.

No Sandman?

I'm an idiot. I thought he was not only a shoe in, but an easy winner.

They must have layers and layers of stuff going on in the Academy standards.

I might just miss this one.

Meh.

https://slate.com/culture/2020/01/oscar-nominations-2020-joker-best-picture-no.html

https://variety.com/2020/film/news/jennifer-lopez-adam-sandler-oscar-snubs-awkwafina-greta-gerwig-1203463514/

https://www.rollingstone.com/movies/movie-features/oscars-2020-biggest-snubs-936702/

Rick Dalton said:

---

Glad to see Antonio Banderas get his first acting nom, he was great in Pain and Glory.

---

Where did you watch this? Only place I can find is on Prime but you gotta buy it for $15. Don't mind paying for it but I just couldn't find anywhere else to watch it.

Rick Dalton said:

---

I saw it at my local Landmark Theatre a couple of months ago. It's also currently playing at my local AMC as part of their Artisan Films collection so you may want to check there.

---

I usually go to the local "artsy" theater for these types, but it must've passed through already. Probably just have to buy it on Prime.

It'll be for rent probably in a few weeks. Digital releases for purchase first then rental when the DVD/blu-ray comes out.

fig96 said:

---

It'll be for rent probably in a few weeks. Digital releases for purchase first then rental when the DVD/blu-ray comes out.

---

Good tip. I'll try to wait. Though I'm really anxious to watch it!

I think it's a tragedy that Knives Out was nominated over Uncut Gems for Best Original Screenplay at the minimum.

But the fact that the Safdie Brothers and Sandler didn't get noms is infuriating to me.

Hoping Parasite sweeps along with Kathy Bates winning Best Supporting Actress for Richard Jewell.

TCTTS said:

---

---

Is this your thoughts as well?

Basically, yeah. I'm not a big Todd Phillips fan at all - he comes across as such a tool-cool-for-school assh*le - and the more time that passes and the more love I see Joker getting, the more I kind of despise that movie. It's just not great, and thinks it's way more profound than it really is. But yeah, I would have totally swapped out Phillips for Greta Gerwig and would have swapped out either Banderes or Pryce for Sandler (though, admittedly, I never saw Pain and Glory). I could take or leave J-Lo, but I'd say she deserves a nom more than Bates, as Richard Jewell was serviceable, but ultimately somewhat mind numbing.

What are Leo's odds? He's been my runaway favorite all year (and I'm usually not on the Leo bandwagon like most)