Closer and Garden State in Screenplay and Paul Giamatti (Should have been in instead of Depp).

I know it was Miramax, but I was saying that those two studios are whores.

AAAAARRRRRGGGGGHHHHH...

How many of you liked Finding Neverland?

What caused you to like this film?

Exactly. You know it was Johnny Depp. Not the direction, not the weepy, sappy moments, but Depp. (And Winslet).

I'm so sick of people thinking that the only thing worthy of an Oscar is a boisterous performance. That's why Penn won. That's why Theron won. That's why Crowe run. That's why Washington won. That's why Berry won. That's why Spacey won. That's why Swank won. Isn't it possible to win accolades for a turn as a quieter fellow? Don't you think it's just as hard to pull off? It doesn't leave an audience member awestruck, but that's because of the nature of the performance. Frankly, can't we appreciate the Scottish accent, too? And, what about Depp's ability to not make the "playing with teh children" scenes and the title scream Michael Jackson? He doesn't come off as a pedophile. His habits don't come off as unnatural. He gets the audience to sympathize with him even with the quirky and reserved state of his character. IRL, many of us would jeer at a man playing with children 25 years younger. And, somehow, we don't even consider that in Finding Neverland.

I'll admit. This is one of Depp's weaker performances. That's only because he's excellent in everything and some stand out more than others (for example, Pirates and Fear and Loathing). But his performance was still better than half of the other people considered for the award, including Cruise, Law, Spacey, Neeson, and others. Giamatti might've been good, but in the world of Oscar, Leonardo DiCaprio, Johnny Depp, Clint Eastwood, and Paul Giamatti all deserve a nomination.

I'm not mad with Depp's nominations. I love him, I think he's great.

But if we're talking about more subtle performances then Joaquin Phoenix in The Village and Paul Giamatti were better in Sideways.

Clint Eastwood's performance is also controlled.

I think the thing I object about Finding Neverland as a piece is that it is so subtle it doesn't really register with me as entertainment, drama, character study, etc.

I still say Giamatti should have been in instead of Depp. I dunno what it was, but he rubbed me the wrong way in FN. I thought both Kate and Freddy were better than he was, however they got left out. I find performances like these rather boring, and not what I consider "Oscar-caliber work." Sure, I guess it would be hard to be subtle and show hardly any emotion, but that is just not something I consider good acting as opposed to showing lots of emotion. (Theron, Penn, Roberts, Washington, Berry, Jolie, Swank and to a lesser extent Connelly, Robbins, Spacey and Crowe.)

I can think of at least ten actors who gave a better individual performance this year than Depp. I think through most of the movie, Depp gave a pretty mediocre and unserious performance, overshadowed by Freddy Highmore and Radha Mitchell, of all people (but he was definitely better than Kate Winslett in her career-worst turn). But, near the end of the film, when it actually counts, Depp actually decided to act and stepped up in a huge way to almost single-handedly boost the film into the next level. In a way, it was almost necessary that he gave such a unimpressive performance throught most of the movie so that the transformation in the end would be that much better. This was exactly what Bill Murray did in Lost in Translation, and for that, I don't mind his nomination.

Collateral for Cinematography. Beforehand everyone had it as the winner, but not even a nomination. Paul Giamattis omission also gets points...

Biggest snubs:


1. The Polar Express for Best Animated Feature
2. Collateral for Best Sound and Cinematography
3. House of Flying Daggers in most techies
4. Uma Thurman for Best Actress
5. David Carradine for Best Supporting Actor