Serving up this steaming pile of
Celebrity Gossip
Gay Politics
Gay News
and Pointless Bitchery
Since 1995

The Academy awards are a week away.

Does anyone even care at this point? I mean, really.

by Anonymousreply 5902/23/2013

I couldn't possible care less this year.

by Anonymousreply 102/18/2012

Regardless of the blantant attempt to buy an Oscar for George Clooney and the mediocre, "The Descendents", "The Artist" and "Hugo" will sweep everything, and they should.

by Anonymousreply 202/18/2012

Not much, although, while I don't want to start an old, tired debate - I'm merely trying to answer OP's question - I am excited about a possible Viola Davis win because her performance truly impressed me. I feel the same way about Brad Pitt's performance in Moneyball, but unlike Davis, I don't expect Pitt to be a likely winner.

by Anonymousreply 302/18/2012

This year is a yawn.

There are some good films, but only a couple of great films and they were either ignored or have no chance of winning.

by Anonymousreply 402/18/2012

I'd almos forgotten about them. Didn't think they were for 2 weeks.

They should be in March. Not February. Not a good time.

by Anonymousreply 502/18/2012

I smell the rotting-flower scent of Dearest Glenn. You can always skip the ceremony. No one will notice.

by Anonymousreply 602/18/2012

Watch for Max Von Sydow to upset Christopher Plummer for Best Supporting Actor.

by Anonymousreply 702/18/2012

I do. I can't pass up this schlockfest because the DL thread commentary is an annual ritual for me.

The film are incidental.

by Anonymousreply 802/18/2012

ooops- make that films.

by Anonymousreply 902/18/2012

Yikes, I only have 7 days to care? I'll see what I can do, but I'm not making any promises.

by Anonymousreply 1002/18/2012

Yay! Less Whitney threads, but the same celebretard porn.

by Anonymousreply 1102/18/2012

I'm so NOT looking forward to Billy Crystal hosting. BORING! and after what I witnessed today, the academy should have asked Dionne Warwick to host the Oscars. She was a revelation.

by Anonymousreply 1202/18/2012

There are so many awards shows nowadays it feels like they have already aired.

by Anonymousreply 1302/18/2012

What are you people talking about? Best competition in years. I can't wait.

R13, if you have lost the capacity to prioritize one wonders how you manage to stay awake on Christmas, after all those other days in the year that come before it.

by Anonymousreply 1402/18/2012

I care baby. So much I'm falling all over myself!

by Anonymousreply 1502/18/2012

Hey, Octavia...I made a special pie...just for you!

by Anonymousreply 1602/18/2012


by Anonymousreply 1702/18/2012

Can't wait. Watching the Oscars while posting on DL makes the show less boring.

by Anonymousreply 1802/18/2012

At this point who is the expected winner? Meryl or Viola? George or Jean? I really can't predict.

Plummer and Octavia seem to be locks.

I also can't predict Best Film.

by Anonymousreply 1902/18/2012

This will be the lowest rated Oscars ever.

2011 was a wasteland. This is the first year I haven't cared about any of the nominated films, in any category.

by Anonymousreply 2002/18/2012

[quote] Plummer and Octavia seem to be locks.

Plummer isn't a lock anymore. It is between him and Max Von Sydow.

by Anonymousreply 2102/18/2012

Why is Plummer no longer a lock? He's won everything.

I think it's pretty clear Jean Dujardin is winnIng Best Actor. In fact, it would be an unpleasant shock if Cloonet took it at this point

Still a little but of suspense with Actress, although hopefully Davis will get it. Although Streep and Davis splitting the vote and someone else getting in would be the most fun. I mean, when you know it's going to be Streep or Davis, that's not much of an improvement over "locked " categories.

by Anonymousreply 2202/18/2012

most of the sites that predict are going with The Artist, Jean, Viola, Christopher, and Octavia. (except EW which is still licking Clooney's butt and has him as Best Actor)

by Anonymousreply 2302/18/2012

There's no way Meryl or Glenn are winning. Their respective films were so horribly reviewed that nobody would dare pay money to see them. I hate George Clooney and love Meryl Streep, but today I saw The Descendants because I couldn't fathom sitting through The Iron Lady.

by Anonymousreply 2402/18/2012

but the Academy doesn't pay to see any of the films r24...they get DVD's of all ot them in the mail for free.

by Anonymousreply 2502/18/2012

I hate that they changed it to February. I always loved it in April.

by Anonymousreply 2602/18/2012

I think the choices in R23 are spot on.

I hope there's an upset in at least one of the categories. It's so boring when you know who's winning everything.

by Anonymousreply 2702/18/2012

21 fixes for the Oscars:

by Anonymousreply 2802/20/2012

[quote] Why is Plummer no longer a lock? He's won everything

Because the Academy membership is old, white greying men who will uncomfortable with the subject matter of 'Beginners'.

Max von Sydow is the safer choice, and watch for him to upset Plummer and walk off with the award.

by Anonymousreply 2902/20/2012

[quote]Watch for Max Von Sydow to upset Christopher Plummer for Best Supporting Actor.

Ah, no...the upset will be Jonah Hill.

by Anonymousreply 3002/20/2012

It is Best Picture R19, not Best Film.

by Anonymousreply 3102/20/2012

Max Von Sydow give the performance that Academy members want to award. Older mute guy played by a legendary actor.

by Anonymousreply 3202/20/2012

Are you insane R30?

by Anonymousreply 3302/20/2012

Between Von Sydow and Plummer, it's Max who has given more performances that should have been nominated and were not nominated, in more legendary films. Even in little roles like in DIVING BELL AND THE BUTTERFLY, he brings something extra to everything he's done, and he's horrendously overlooked.

That shouldn't count between performances, and the man deserves an honorary Oscar, but I would love for Max to get it.

by Anonymousreply 3402/20/2012

Why doesn't anyone talk about "Tree of Life"? It was truly brilliant. I think it should win best picture.

by Anonymousreply 3502/20/2012

Has the Meryl loon became the Max von Sydow loon?

by Anonymousreply 3602/20/2012

Ive been more excited by oscars past. With crystal coming back and the ho hum list of presenters its like MEH!

by Anonymousreply 3702/20/2012

Tree of Life confounded too many people.

by Anonymousreply 3802/20/2012

While I'm sure Harvey Weinstein is furiously writing checks to get Best Picture and Best Actor for The Artist, part of me thinks Brad Pitt might be the surprise of the night.

I said this the morning of the nominations, but I'll repeat it: His nomination for "Moneyball" is the equivilant of Julia Roberts for "Erik Brockavich" and Sandra Bullock for "Blind Side"; A bankable star turns in a good performance in a heartwarming movie.

by Anonymousreply 3902/20/2012

I'm going to watch to see if any of these elderly actors fall down.

And to see who can wear the most boring dress; all the gals are so terrified of making the worst dressed list, they always show-up in what looks like a pastel prom dress.

by Anonymousreply 4002/20/2012

I want Max Von Sydow to drop to the floor and do one armed push ups after winning his Oscar.

by Anonymousreply 4102/20/2012

[quote]Why doesn't anyone talk about "Tree of Life"? It was truly brilliant. I think it should win best picture.

It was brilliant for about half an hour, then it spent the next 100+ minutes repeating itself.

by Anonymousreply 4202/20/2012

Loved The Artist but loved Hugo even more. The Help sucked.

by Anonymousreply 4302/20/2012

Just watched My Week With Marilyn. I didn't think I would ever say this but Michelle Williams was perfection. Just amazing. The movie was meh, and Williams doesn't look like Monroe but she completely transformed. Perfect.

Still rooting for Streep though. I think Davis will win though and I'm okay with that.

I'm okay with Close and Mara's nominations but I would have loved to see Dunst and Olsen get recognized.

by Anonymousreply 4402/21/2012

[quote]Does anyone even care at this point?

Actually, OP, I'm praying that I die in time to make the "In Memoriam" segment of the broadcast.

If they go alphabetically by first name, I'll have the cherished position as last person on the list.

That'll show Whitney.

by Anonymousreply 4502/21/2012

The only one I really care about is Plummer. He should have been nominated for playing Mike Wallace in "The Insider," he should have won for his matchless Tolstoy in "The Last Station," and he is magnificent in "Beginners." Von Sydow is every bit his match as an actor, but giving him the award for this role would have been like giving it to "Ruby Dee" for slapping Denzel in "American Gangster" (I mean, who wouldn't want to slap him?)--a lifetime achievement award to a great actor for a paycheck performance.

I also don't think the Academy's notorious homophobia will obtain here--Plummer plays a likable and gentlemanly dad, who remained faithful to his wife through the marriage, finds some happiness for a short time at the end of his life and remains a good, loving father. May be what some of the alte kaker voters would like to think of themselves as.

If Von Sydow doesn't win, look for him to get an Honorary Oscar in the next few years, like Bacall. Von Sydow could have been nominated many other times more worthily and won--but back then the Academy wouldn't have nominated him for those awe-inspiring Bergman films. And the year he was nominated for "Pele the Polo Player," he was up against Hoffman in "Person of Rain," which was the biggest Oscar-bait in history. In retrospect, that's the year Tom Hanks should have won--for his truly amazing work in "Big."

by Anonymousreply 4602/21/2012 1995 the academy had wooed Puck to cater the Governors Ball — in large part because it hoped his presence would inject life into an obligatory post-awards party that had turned into what The Times referred to in 1993 as "the 800-pound gorilla of Academy Awards celebrations."

Such was the status of Puck's culinary stardom that year that he shuttled between the ball at the Shrine and his own party at Spago in a helicopter.

At the time, Puck was the wunderkind of gourmet pizza — a daring chef who wooed new Hollywood by taking the "F" in fine dining and turning it into fun dining. It's a trick that he's happy to return to with this year's Governors Ball, which for the second time in the ball's 54-year history will not be a formal seated affair.

In 2007, it was presented as an open-format supper party with food stations serving up full-sized entrees at the behest of Sid Ganis, former president of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences. But the size of the plates made eating on the go difficult, and some people complained, so the next year a formal seating chart was once again instituted. And the seating chart, according to Puck, has been the most contested aspect of the ball since he's been cooking for it.

For the 84th Academy Awards, at the prodding of the academy's new chief executive, Dawn Hudson, that chart has been chucked in favor of a relaxed, restaurant-style format in which the stars can arrive and be guided by a maitre d' to sit with whom they'd like.

In addition, there will be no main course, only 10 small plates, cold appetizer and sushi platters, and plenty of tray-passed bites. These include Chinois lamb with cilantro-mint vinaigrette; crab and lobster Louie with horseradish panna cotta and marinated tomatoes; Shanghai lobster with coconut curry, jasmine rice and pickled ginger; and gold-wrapped baked potatoes with caviar and crème fraîche.

"Dawn runs the show now, and she wants to have a party — she doesn't want to have a fancy sit-down dinner, which is what I always told them they should do," says Puck. "But they never knew how to do the seating — I fought with them so many times — they were so rigid with the seating. This year, we're going to have low tables, like in a lounge, and we're going to serve small plates — things you can eat with a fork or just with your hands."

Sound familiar? If you've been dining out in L.A. — or any other major metropolitan area — over the last four years, chances are you've been nibbling on plenty of small, shared plates. Puck and Yard say the trend has developed to the point of saturation as diners have become more sophisticated about food in general and would rather have, as Yard puts it, "one dark, deep, decadent bite" of a complex dessert than 10 bites of milk chocolate.

However, Cheryl Cecchetto, who is producing the ball for the 23rd consecutive year, says the thinking at the Governors Ball has always reflected larger societal trends.

"Think of the world. Everything is shorter, faster — is actually in small bites," says Cecchetto, decked out in a sparkly silver dress at the media preview for the ball. "The world is living in small bites. The world wants to keep moving."

That's certainly true of Hollywood's elite, who over the years, Cecchetto and Puck have noticed, would sit in their assigned seats for only a short period of time before hopping up to socialize all over the room, a habit that made serving a hot dinner problematic.

That wasn't always the case, though. Smartphones, Twitter and tablets may have made us restless lately, but such behavior would never have flown during Lazar's reign. As one Times article put it in 1994, the year after his death, "Lazar didn't suffer table hoppers gladly. If you were seated for dinner, you sat."

by Anonymousreply 4702/23/2012

R44, that's funny you write that, I thought the total opposite.

I thought she physically resembled Monroe, and got the speaking voice down perfectly, but not the singing.

But the focus in her eyes was totally wrong. There was no real charm there, like with Monroe, who looked like she needed to be taken care of. Instead I believed they were the eyes of the very intelligent Michelle Williams (who can take care of herself thank you very much) trying to dumb down her eyes a la Marilyn. It was a wrong choice, and I found it distracting. In film, acting is all about the eyes.

by Anonymousreply 4802/23/2012

They did a little synopsis of the nominees and I realized as I read it that I care less and less about the Oscars. There is no more anticipation for me. I will have to figure out why one day since Oscar used to have me in a grip for a few weeks before. I would make sure I had seen all the movies I could and be all prepped. A few times I even had Oscar parties with good friends. I thought as I got older I would be even more spellbound but movies got smaller I guess.

by Anonymousreply 4902/23/2012

[quote] Michelle Williams was perfection. Just amazing.

Ugh.. There's that "a" word again.

by Anonymousreply 5002/24/2012

Guess who will be the last person shown in Memoriam? It should be Elizabeth Taylor but you know it will be Whitney Houston.

by Anonymousreply 5102/25/2012

I finally saw The Artist last night. Very enjoyable, but I couldn't help thinking that people are falling all over themselves for the filmmakers making a movie that back in the studio days was made routinely as a B picture. The dance routine at the end was wonderful, but again, B pictures in the 30s had such scenes routinely and no one was passing out awards.

by Anonymousreply 5202/25/2012

The Artist winning Best Picture just shows how mediocre the rest of the competition is.

by Anonymousreply 5302/25/2012

[quote]Think of the world. Everything is shorter, faster — is actually in small bites," says Cecchetto, decked out in a sparkly silver dress at the media preview for the ball. "The world is living in small bites. The world wants to keep moving."

What a stupid fucking thing to say in reference to food.

by Anonymousreply 5402/25/2012

Hearing people going on and on about these movies no one would notice in a good year (seriously straight-to-video shit) is loony.

Maybe Rob Lowe and Snow White should have hosted?

by Anonymousreply 5502/25/2012

r49, it could be all those endless awards leading up to the Oscars. By the time we get to the Academy Awards, we pretty much know who's going to win.

by Anonymousreply 5602/25/2012

I'm watching it solely for the stars, don't give a shit about any of the movies nominated. 2011 was a bad year for film.

by Anonymousreply 5702/25/2012

I'm curious as to why Republicans hate the Academy Awards so much?

by Anonymousreply 5802/23/2013

R58 I think it had to do with some of the Anti-GOP jokes Billy Crystal was making last year.

by Anonymousreply 5902/23/2013
Need more help? Click Here.

Follow theDL catch up on what you missed

recent threads by topic delivered to your email

follow popular threads on twitter

follow us on facebook

Become a contributor - post when you want with no ads!