I think the Oscars are basically an ass kissing event.

I've remember hearing in the past that in some categories the some of the judges hadn't even seen all the films that were nominated! How can they vote if they haven't seen them all?!??!

And why is it the best actor/actress is just about never from a comedy film (granted this year may be an exception)? It seems like it always has to be a serious role. Or if you are an attractive female actress, to get yourself nominated you just have to make yourself ugly in the film, and that will be judged as an amazing performance!

But my vote is for Johnny Depp to win best actor!!! He was fantastic as Jack Sparrow!
Best film could be RotK (just to get back on topic!!).

I agree, the oscars generally are a self gratifying pat on the back within the industry.

As far as I can see, there has always been a level of snobbery in there. Typically, as Degen has said, comedy and action films do tend to get swept aside at these things in favour of more 'intelligent' films. Admittedly, actions films do not usualy demand great action skills, however, comedy depends on it greatly - however, with films like As Good As It Gets, oscars were deserved, however you see a certain type of comedy as being preferred (Diane Keating is nominated for Somethings Gotta Give, which is very similar to As Good As It Gets).

Johnny Depp is a surprise and I would love to see him get that award, though I have a feeling that it will go to Ben Kingsley or Sean Penn. not seen either of those films, but I just have this gut feeling. I would also point out that Bill Murry was great in Lost In Translation, unfortunately I do not see him winning either, again, gut feeling.

I would really like to see Lost In Transaltion get something from the awards, I think it has a good chance for the WRITING (ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY) category.

Visual Effects, I think this will go to Master and Commander, the Oscars have always seemed highly rate the effects that are not obvious. In this case, creating waves, ships, weather, etc is more natural than Orcs, undead and ghosts. I remember Forrest Gump getting this award, beating Jurassic Park (I think), the key shot shown being one on how they made the guy look like he didn't have any legs! Subtle effects that we wouldn't really have noticed, I think that will weigh heavily in favour of Master and Commander. On the otherhand, LOTR is a powerhouse franchise, that also helps!

I always think that the small number of films that show in the awards is an indication of the inbred nature of the industry. In the whole nomination list, there are around 10 or 12 films covered (not including the Short films), yet I'm sure that you can all think of a few others that may have deserved at least one nomination. Seems that most films get lots of nominations, or none.

As ever though, I'll be hoping for a sci-fi/action heavy result list, LOTR and Pirates of the Carribean being my favourites, and would be good to see Lost In Translation get a win - in case you haven'y guessed, I really liked that film, was a great change of pace and very enjoyable! Scarlett Johansson is also very gorgeous!

Anyway, we'll know in the morning how it goes!

Gollum is not so ground breaking, Jar Jar was there first as a CG character integrated with live action (or if we want to go further back, Who Framed Roger Rabbit, though he wasn't CG!)
Then again, Gollum is the first one to actually look believable and really blur the lines.

I really enjoyed both Final Fantasy and Toy Story, I would disagree about not being great to watch - both were had amazing levels of imagery and were both consistent through out, that is the key factor in good CG, consistency (you should know that!). Toy Story characters and FF characters are not good enough to fit in with live action (neither is Mr I! ), however in their own 'world', they can be believable if everything is consistent.

agreed, as we have said several times in this thread, LOTR is a good example of what happens when everything is good. Many films we enjoy even although they have a few flaws, LOTR does not appear to have any flaws in my mind (unless you count not following the book word for word, but for book to movie, I think that is good!)

yeah, he's had a good start, though better watch that he doesn't go the same way as Mark Hammil!

however, landing in Pirates of the Carribean was a very good move on his part.

And back to Matrix Revolutuions - loved the film! techincally, the face deforming punch against Smith was a master piece. Very complex and pulled off fantastically!

Luke Skywalker! I hope you were joking!

If not, it kind of proves my point. After Star Wars, Mark Hamill pretty much disappeared. Has actually had a lot of roles, but all fairly low key.

One reason that Matrix Rev could have been 'forgotten' for the Oscars was that the Matrix franchise was kinda ruined a little in the sequels. The sequels became far more style over content, and popularity for the franchise declined. The opposite appears to be the case for LotR. It got more and more popular with each film. So with the Matrix films not being looked on as well anymore, it would have been a far more popular decision for them to go with LotR.

Think Mark Hamill also disappeared a little because he was involved in a car accident (or something like that) in which he was quite badly injured, I think...

Degen, kind of proves the point about the oscars not exactly being a fair process.

however... 11 Oscars, definately a good night. And Lost In Translation got the screen writing award, nice one!
Shame about Johnny Depp

Sound mixing is the way sounds blend into together (I think it must be one of those rewards to pass the time of the show!). Lord of the Rings got 11, but I really don't think some of them should have gone to them! I do think they should of got some sort of acting award.