Lucasfilms grand Oscar campaign

[image=http://img308.imageshack.us/img308/8604/starwars30qo.jpg]

It looks like lucasfilm is really trying this time.

 

Is that for real?

In any case, I think it should at least be nominated for:

- Best Supporting Actor: Ian McDiarmid
- Best Cinematography
- Best Original Score
- Best Sound Mixing
- Best Costume Design
- Best Visual Effects

 

I don't think that's real. When Lucas was asked if he'd campagin any of his actors, notably Ian McDiarmid, Lucas said that he doesn't like to do that.

 

that ad has already been replaced with one that only requests consideration for ian in acting category, the following categories were removed: best picture, best director, best original score (john williams)!!!!!!!(why, when RotK won with music from all of its trilogy?), best screenplay, best cinematography (david tattersall)and best editing..... all of those are gone.


and the first ad did not identify the source. the 2nd one with all of the removals did : the logos of both 20th C Fox and Lucasfilm are on the bottom of the ad.

 

No, it's a joke. Out of the first five categories, the only one that has even a snowballs chance of getting an oscar nomination would be best supporting actor, for Ewan McGregor and maybe Ian McDermott - the other four, not a chance.

The picture was made by a very creative, overly optimistic, photoshop wielding, star wars fan. That's all.


(Best Supporting Actor - Sam Jackson?!?! )


Don't get me wrong, I love the film, but the directing and acting were too poor for RotS to get nominations in those fields...they will have to fight for the technical awards.

 

Ian McDermott?

And I don't think Ewan would have a chance either even as cute as he is. He was better in AOTC.

 

that first ad, as far as i can tell, was neither a joke nor fan-made but not officially sponsored either. it ran in the hollywood reporter in the november 4-6 issue. i have it right here, along with the other ad that IS officially sponsored with the aforementioned logos of both Lucasfilm and 20th C Fox.

it deserves nominations in all the categories mentioned, with wins for trisha, john williams (if he was nominated), visual effects, and at least one of the sound categories. best art direction is usually won by a period piece but i would love a win here too. and when you think of the make-up job on the immolated anakin alone, RotS should get the nod here as well. ian was amazing but since many members of the academy don't familiarize themselves with the entire story arc, he probably could not win.

 

i could only see trisha winning for her costume work

 

I fully agree with lovelucas!

Only thing I would add to your suggested list is Best Cinematography.

 

Lovelucas, without proof to the contrary, I will concede your point that it is real, but I still stand by original comment that is it a 'joke'. Intended or not, I got a big laugh out of it.

 

that thing is real it was on oscarwatch.com

 

thank you zam -
and darth: you can check out the validity - the hollywood reporter november 4-6
www.hollywoodreporter.com
perhaps it gave you a laugh but i don't find it funny at all - perhaps a pipedream for all the original nominations but for me it WAS the best picture of the year, with the best score, costume design, effects, etc etc etc. so i appreciated the ad and as i mentioned, i have it in my hands - so it does exist.

john knoll
david tattersall
roger barton
gavin bocquet
roger guyett
ian ewan hayden
rick and george - wonderful work - by them all.

 

I know it's a ridiculous long shot, but I'd love to see RotS nominated for Best Picture. I mean, if Lord of the Rings can win Best Picture, RotS should atleast get nominated. (Yes, I'm bitter about RotK winning. )

 

I don't think it's funny as in "funny ha-ha". Rather I find it funny that we have a campaign for actor/actress catergories, but I don't think there's been one since ANH. I know that there was talk of trying to get Frank Oz's performance, but the restrictions the Academy has, prevented that.

 

Ian IMO deserves top-notch consideration -- but his chances are bleak considering SAG and H-Wood protocols.

ROTS should have no viable competition for FX, even considering WOTW and Goblet of Fire.

Best film, director, actor or actress -- no!

Costumes and makeup -- yes!

Screenplay -- no (too chaotic up front -- 2nd half is superb though!)

Original score -- wild card (too many recycled John Williams themes)

 

If ROTK could win because the other LOTR films were passed over, then Lucas and Star Wars should win for ROTS, if not for the 5 other superb films of the Saga which have been severely passed over during the years. And if Titanic can win, then ROTS should win but it may be too late since Lucas pissed off the many of the guilds long ago.

 

McDiarmid, frankly, SHOULD win BSA. EMG could get a nomination, but that would be stretching it.

Best Visual Effects, yes. Williams could very well win the Original Score award, as a "career achievement" selection.

HC was much, much better in ROTS than AOTC, but nowhere near nomination territory.

NP as Best Supporting Actress is laughable. She's done fine work in OTHER movies, was very good in TPM and decent in AOTC, but her role was reduced to table scraps in ROTJ, and her performance reflected it.

My guess is McDiarmid will win BSA, and there will be 2-3 other "technical category" wins.

 

The film or Lucas will get not one nomination. His relationship with Hollywood will be against him.

 

My wishlist:
ROTS will win:

-Best Picture (if ROTK could win then ROTS surely can, being a much better movie!)
-Best Director
-Best Original Screenplay
-Best Supporting Actor (McDiarmid or McGregor)
-Best Editing
-Best SFX
-Best Costume/ Makeup
-Best Sound
-Best Music
-Best Cinematography
-Best Art Direction

And an additional nomination for Hayden Christensen for Best Actor.


Most likely though I think it'll only get nominated in the technical categories 'cause Hollywood hates Lucas and the big studios spend a lot more time and money on campaigning than Lucas will ever do! So I think the most likely scenario is that ROTS will get robbed at the Oscars, unfortunately...

 

Hayden for best actor and Natalie for best supporting actress? I have to thank GL and crew for the biggest laugh of the day.

The only two actors who have even a remote chance are Ewan and Ian.

 

Ian is the only one with chances IMHO

 

Fat_Bird said: "The only two actors who have even a remote chance are Ewan and Ian."

If both are nominated (Ex-ter-eeeeeeemly remote chance), they will cancel each other out. Ewan is a fine actor, and will receive a nomination in the future. Ian is (for now) a stage pro. Plus his 'range' in ROTS was considerably wider than Ewan's. Ewan was more 'action hero,' while Ian gave an acting lesson or two (or three, or four, or . . . . . ).

I agree with sithrules70!

 

gooooood

 

What the hell else is going to be nominated this year? I'm sorry, but aside from some exceptionally good summer blockbusters this hasn't been the best year for genuinely good films.

Lucas should at least be tossed the "Lifetime Achievement" bone. It'd be a cheap way to recognize his work throughout the decades, but assuredly an accurate one. I mean, if Lucas hasn't earned distinctions for a lifetime of echievement, who has?

I do think ROTS can and should be nominated, and possibly be awarded, with the Oscars for best director, picture, etc. Maybe not the acting categories-- Ian, sure, but Hayden? Natalie?-- but definitely the major creative awards. Peter Jackson won for ROTK, which essentially was just the last part of a fantasy saga, so there's no reason really why Lucas shouldn't win for doing the same. Besides, Lucas deserves recognition for coming up with all of this himself. Star Wars wasn't based on a book, like Lord of the Rings was.

Lucas should be given his due this year. If that doesn't happen the Oscars are all just gonna go to somebody who's gotten them in the past, probably.

 

Here are the actual "For Your Consideration" advertisements, from Oscarwatch.com:

[image=http://www.oscarwatch.com/FYC/images/nov29/starwars2.jpg]

[image=http://www.oscarwatch.com/FYC/images/nov29/starwars.jpg]

McDiarmid, frankly, SHOULD win BSA.

I don?t know whether he should win, but I?d certainly like to see him get nominated (that is not likely, however).

EMG could get a nomination, but that would be stretching it.

McGregor won?t get a nomination; as good as he was in the picture, I don?t think that his acting is of a level that would merit an acting nomination, especially in a year that has given us so many indelible screen performances.

My guess is McDiarmid will win BSA

I don?t think McDiarmid will even be nominated for the award.

and there will be 2-3 other "technical category" wins.

"Sith" could garner a couple of technical nominations, but I think that will be about it.

Hayden for best actor and Natalie for best supporting actress? I have to thank GL and crew for the biggest laugh of the day.

I don?t know how many times we need to go over this, but studios that issue these sorts of campaigns do so in order to maintain a good relationship with their talent. It is not uncommon, then, to see actors who are in no way legitimate contenders for serious awards being "trumpeted" as Oscar "hopefuls." I believe I mentioned in another such thread that in 1999, Universal made "For Your Consideration" ads positioning Brendan Fraser as a Best Actor candidate in "The Mummy," and Sally Kirkland as Best Supporting Actress in "Ed TV." No one, including the studio, believed that those two performers were going to receive nominations for their respective roles, and yet this sort of large, obsequious gesture has become standard practice in recent years.

The only two actors who have even a remote chance are Ewan and Ian.

The only actor I think should even be considered for a nomination is Ian McDiarmid. I enjoyed most of the performances in "Revenge of the Sith" (save for Samuel L. Jackson), but the acting in general is not distinguished enough to warrant serious consideration from the Academy. "Star Wars" pictures have never been known to showcase what the mainstream would classify as being "great" acting; it is heavily derivative and owes much to an antiquated stylization and formality that in contemporary times might appear hokey and discordant Yes, there are some good acting performances, including (in no particular order) Harrison Ford, Liam Neeson, Ewan McGregor, Hayden Christensen, Peter Cushing, and so forth, but the only ones which really strike me as being "great" are those of Frank Oz, Alec Guinness, and Ian McDiarmid. It should also be said that there is also some routine acting from several of the supporting players in any one of the six episodes; ultimately, however, ?Star Wars? is not, nor has it ever, been about acting. People generally attend these pictures for wonder, spectacle, and escapism, not to gain insight into "emotional memory" or "believable truth" ? in other words, these aren?t Stanislavsky master workshops.

What the hell else is going to be nominated this year? I'm sorry, but aside from some exceptionally good summer blockbusters this hasn't been the best year for genuinely good films.

There have been a number of great films in release this year, although many of my personal favorites (including "Grizzly Man," "The Best of Youth," "Murderball," "Sin City," etc.) are not likely to garner Oscar nods. Over the next several weeks, a number of high-caliber pictures are going into release, many of which have a good shot at procuring Oscar nominations: "King Kong"; "Munich"; "Brokeback Mountain"; "Match Point"; "Syriana" (already in limited release, expands December 9th); "Transamerica"; "The New World"; "Memoirs of a Geisha" (although early reviews have been mixed); and so on. The "National Board of Review," one of the most dubious of all establishments (I?m not