But the Razzies have always been more about taking cheap shots than actual criticism.
That bugs me about them, Jessica. It's not like they ever nominate anything that's a sacred cow, or that even requires them to see and evaluate movies on heir own -- it's just "here are the movies Jay Leno has been joking about for eight months!"
Yawn.
she's amazing.
In that case, and if Bening's film is weak, I might change my prediction to either her or Staunton. But really it seems like a tough category to call, especially since I've only seen Winslet's performance.
There are a lot of Oscars that boil down to "Oops, you did great work last year (or even years ago), so here's the statue retroactively."
As ecstatic as I was over all the Oscars dumped on Return of the King, I also feel like giving them all the statues they were nominated for was more a reward for the effort of the whole project, rather than awards for the merits of RotK itself.
I'm also wondering if Swank might win again. On the one hand, I think she's too young to deserve a second Oscar, and I can't believe the voters wouldn't feel the same, especially since she didn't do much interesting work between "Boys Don't Cry" and now. On the other, her part is the type most likely to win an Oscar (overcoming obstacles, no glamorous makeup, etc.)
I think that might be the main thing against her, because the Academy voters do seem to think that way sometimes. But I wouldn't be surprised if she won.
Has Laura Linney ever won?
more a reward for the effort of the whole project, rather than awards for the merits of RotK itself.
Perhaps. But I think that the LotR movies were something of a special case. In a sense it's one really, really, really long movie subdivided for the sake of people's butts.
As ecstatic as I was over all the Oscars dumped on Return of the King, I also feel like giving them all the statues they were nominated for was more a reward for the effort of the whole project, rather than awards for the merits of RotK itself.
Absolutely. (I mean, I was glad to see the trilogy win, but I thought RotK was by far the weakest film of the three.)
I also feel like giving them all the statues they were nominated for was more a reward for the effort of the whole project, rather than awards for the merits of RotK itself.
It saved them having to give PJ awards in more than one year. And although it's not the
point
of the Oscars, LotR was very much a cumulative work, released in instalments. So I'm good with it.
In a sense it's one really, really, really long movie subdivided for the sake of people's butts.
And don't think my butt isn't grateful.
So I'm good with it.
Oh, I was all kinds of good with it too. But that was one of their many recent cases of awarding Oscars for reasons that go beyond the piece actually receiving the nomination.
