Cool News
The Group Narrows To 7 for the nominees for BEST MAKE-UP Oscar!
Hey folks, Harry here... As often happens in the speciality areas of the Oscars - the field gets smaller and smaller till the final group nominated comes out at the end of this month. This time, its the nominees for BEST MAKE-UP. According to Variety the field currently includes:
THE CHRONICLES OF NARNIA: THE LION, THE WITCH AND THE WARDROBE
CINDERELLA MAN
A HISTORY OF VIOLENCE
THE LIBERTINE
MRS. HENDERSON PRESENTS
THE NEW WORLD
STAR WARS: EPISODE III: REVENGE OF THE SITH
Now personally - I'd give the award to THE NEW WORLD, their Indian make up was nothing short of breathtaking. But if I had to further narrow it down, I suppose I'd choose NARNIA and SITH. It is a bit of a shame that those scary as hell natives from SKULL ISLAND didn't score some love - and as much as I'd love Ed Harris' make up from HISTORY OF VIOLENCE to pick up some love, I just don't see the Academy being that cool. Who knows, eh?
-
+ Expand All
-
Marv's make-up was sweet, no love there?
-
Anakin's burn makeup was courageous for a "Star Wars" flick, a great reproduction of the Emperor, bridging Obi Wan from "Clones" to "A New Hope," the Wookiees, that Nosferatu guy Bruce Spence played, the different Jedi. And agreed I would put "Sin City" over "Narnia."
-
Either Narnia or Ep. 3 should get it. I'm pissed that LXG or "Van Helsing" weren't nominated in their respective years.... And "Braveheart"? What the hell? People do that in FOOTBALL GAMES!
-
and didn't anyone see george lucas get his awards from none other than han solo himself? how ironic is that?
-
...the Academy didn't nominate Land of the Dead and maybe try to give it to Romero as some bullshit lifetime achievement award.
However, I'll go Sith on this one. -
Yeah, because that would happen.
-
(The Voice) "Presenting this year's Oscar for best Make-Up are real-life friends who've probably spent time in a tent together, Oscar winners Matt Damon and Ben Affleck--- "Brokeback's Make-Up effects wizards would transform actors Jake Gyllenhaal and Heath Ledger in a grueling, four minute process everyday from dark, rugged Marlboro Men to fair, pasty, pink-lipped effeminates creating that right dose of seething sodomite lust and creepy homosexual glint."
-
Bummers.
-
In fact, Ep 3 for ANY Oscar other than visual effects? This isn't LOTR, kids; everyone hates Star Wars now, don't expect some sort of fairytale.
-
Jan 11, 2006 8:50:35 AM CST
On high end fantasy films like "Revenge of the Sith" and "Chroni
by excaliburffolkes
Unless the filmmakers themselves are giving out point by point guides to the Academy members, how do they really know when they go to vote?
-
Is this the end of Talkback?
Annoying someone via the Internet is now a federal crime.
It's no joke. Last Thursday, President Bush signed into law a prohibition on posting annoying Web messages or sending annoying e-mail messages without disclosing your true identity.
In other words, it's OK to flame someone on a mailing list or in a blog as long as you do it under your real name. Thank Congress for small favors, I guess.
This ridiculous prohibition, which would likely imperil much of Usenet, is buried in the so-called Violence Against Women and Department of Justice Reauthorization Act. Criminal penalties include stiff fines and two years in prison.
"The use of the word 'annoy' is particularly problematic," says Marv Johnson, legislative counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union. "What's annoying to one person may not be annoying to someone else."
It's illegal to annoy
A new federal law states that when you annoy someone on the Internet, you must disclose your identity. Here's the relevant language.
"Whoever...utilizes any device or software that can be used to originate telecommunications or other types of communications that are transmitted, in whole or in part, by the Internet... without disclosing his identity and with intent to annoy, abuse, threaten, or harass any person...who receives the communications...shall be fined under title 18 or imprisoned not more than two years, or both."
Buried deep in the new law is Sec. 113, an innocuously titled bit called "Preventing Cyberstalking." It rewrites existing telephone harassment law to prohibit anyone from using the Internet "without disclosing his identity and with intent to annoy."
To grease the rails for this idea, Sen. Arlen Specter, a Pennsylvania Republican, and the section's other sponsors slipped it into an unrelated, must-pass bill to fund the Department of Justice. The plan: to make it politically infeasible for politicians to oppose the measure.
The tactic worked. The bill cleared the House of Representatives by voice vote, and the Senate unanimously approved it Dec. 16.
There's an interesting side note. An earlier version that the House approved in September had radically different wording. It was reasonable by comparison, and criminalized only using an "interactive computer service" to cause someone "substantial emotional harm."
That kind of prohibition might make sense. But why should merely annoying someone be illegal?
There are perfectly legitimate reasons to set up a Web site or write something incendiary without telling everyone exactly who you are.
Think about it: A woman fired by a manager who demanded sexual favors wants to blog about it without divulging her full name. An aspiring pundit hopes to set up the next Suck.com. A frustrated citizen wants to send e-mail describing corruption in local government without worrying about reprisals.
In each of those three cases, someone's probably going to be annoyed. That's enough to make the action a crime. (The Justice Department won't file charges in every case, of course, but trusting prosecutorial discretion is hardly reassuring.)
Clinton Fein, a San Francisco resident who runs the Annoy.com site, says a feature permitting visitors to send obnoxious and profane postcards through e-mail could be imperiled.
"Who decides what's annoying? That's the ultimate question," Fein said. He added: "If you send an annoying message via the United States Post Office, do you have to reveal your identity?"
Fein once sued to overturn part of the Communications Decency Act that outlawed transmitting indecent material "with intent to annoy." But the courts ruled the law applied only to obscene material, so Annoy.com didn't have to worry.
"I'm certainly not going to close the site down," Fein said on Friday. "I would fight it on First Amendment grounds."
He's right. Our esteemed politicians can't seem to grasp this simple point, but the First Amendment protects our right to write something that annoys someone else.
It even shields our right to do it anonymously. U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas defended this principle magnificently in a 1995 case involving an Ohio woman who was punished for distributing anonymous political pamphlets.
If President Bush truly believed in the principle of limited government (it is in his official bio), he'd realize that the law he signed cannot be squared with the Constitution he swore to uphold.
And then he'd repeat what President Clinton did a decade ago when he felt compelled to sign a massive telecommunications law. Clinton realized that the section of the law punishing abortion-related material on the Internet was unconstitutional, and he directed the Justice Department not to enforce it.
Bush has the chance to show his respect for what he calls Americans' personal freedoms. Now we'll see if the president rises to the occasion.
Biography
Declan McCullagh is CNET News.com's Washington, D.C., correspondent. He chronicles the busy intersection between technology and politics. Before that, he worked for several years as Washington bureau chief for Wired News. He has also worked as a reporter for The Netly News, Time magazine and HotWired. -
Jan 11, 2006 9:01:18 AM CST
I don't give a shit if everyone hates Star Wars now or not,
by citizen arcane
And everyone doesn't hate Star Wars, just the pretentious internet fanboys who think they're supposed to.
-
That law's unenforcable and is never going to hold up to the courts. You panicky, off topic bitch.
-
Jan 11, 2006 9:26:38 AM CST
nairbnyllednavkr, the fact that you merely copied and pasted tha
by holodigm
now give me your name or i'll send vic mackey after your ass. troll.
-
http://www.wattographs.com/shop/artwork/spense01.jpg
-
http://img214.exs.cx/img214/7701/episode3novelpixvader10cs.jpg
-
Remember the Fight Club-Oscar-desaster? One fucking nomination for the sound F/X!
-
Sin City used Special prosthetic make-up to help give the film a visual edge, and there were at least 3 characters in there that wore Heavy character enhansing Make-up. History of Violence had what, the guy who had the coffee pot in the face, and Ed Harris with a contact and scar make-up. Thats not right, and very dissapointing as a SPFX make-up artist. Who the hell picks these choices? KNB without a doubt in my mind should have been nominated for Sin City. Anyone who thinks different needs to pro's aid their mouth shut.
-
Jan 11, 2006 10:45:36 AM CST
Only two used make-up out of the ordinary,,,but in general...er.
by negative man
-
you ask who picks the nominations. professional make-up effects people who are members of the academy, that's who.
-
it's just Variety speculating.
-
Are you some kind of Ogre? Or perhaps a Skinny Puppy?
-
Jan 11, 2006 11:05:59 AM CST
Oh...and nairbnyllednavkr, *YAWN*...so sue me. Idiot. Don't
by negative man
...calls to court from you, Harry, Eli Roth, Kevin Smith and several others calling me to court by the time I wake up. Good GOD, the French would be Hell to answer to alone after my hate filled reviews of HIGH TENSION. All those French investors after me and me not understanding a word... Mostly because I don't understand Queefspeak, yet I enjoy where it comes from. (Man...I'm up early and in a foul mood. Which is slightly better than a fowl mood because I would have to beware of that darn Bird Flu...) Can anyone count how many people I've offended so far? I need to figure what Government Grants I can draw from to pay for my pending legal fees...
-
Where the hell is SIN CITY on this list. That's by far the best use of make up and prosthetics that I've seen all year. Micky Rourke's make-up job was brilliant. And Yellow Bastard was crazy as hell. Also, no one I talked to about the film even recognized Benecio Del Toro. SIN CITY not only belongs on this list, but it should win the damn award.
-
oh, and the natives from Kong? are you fucking retarded? I remember liking Hitchhiker's Guide's FX. and Sin City.
-
Ooooooh, I am so annoyed with your posts, you anonymous fucks. I'm going to tell on you.
Please sir, Mr. Bush, these anonymous posts annoyed me, so send them away for two years.
OK, lock the bums up, heh heh. We ready to bomb Eeran yet?
-
I know that this is a bit late, but isn't the New Year's movie survey that AICN has up missing two very obvious New Year's films: "Strange Days" and "When Harry Met Sally"? Of course, "Strange Days" would be the odds-on geek favorite, as it ends with a "future" New Year's Eve celebration, and "When Harry Met Sally" of course culminates with Harry rushing off to kiss Sally on New Year's. Oh, and "Sin City" should be on the Oscar's list for make-up. As far as "A History of Violence" goes, I think they are noting all of the shoot-em-up gore in the gun scenes, which were brief, but memorable. The effect of the film violence was certainly enhanced by the make-up in those cases, and the critics liked the film a lot. Last, "Return of the Sith" also does deserve a nomination, for God's sake. Just because many are pissed at Lucas should not detract from the skilled crafts-people who do such excellent work on his films...just one man's opinion...
-
History of Violence was OK, but it was somewhat over-rated. Many critics liked it because it came across as a "thinking man's film" about violence, which I think is bull-shit on some levels. I think there are many people who act as if they are too sophisticated to admit to liking action and violence in movies, and mixing more serious dramatic themes in with action and violence, like History of Violence, provided many of these people an excuse to admit to liking just that sort of stuff. Anyway, it was a decent film; I was just somewhat underwhelmed, because of all of the critical praise I heard before seeing the movie, I expected a better film. For me, a much better version of a "serious" film with violence was "Road to Perdition", which, interestingly, was also based upon a graphic novel like "History of Violence". Anyhow, I was a bit underwhelmed by the movie.
-
Jan 11, 2006 12:08:01 PM CST
Interesting, and are they going to herd the nominees up on stage
by axelfoley
Aside from that, thank goodness there's another host and not Chris Rock. Holy shit did be blow chunks last year. Good god. -
also deserves to be mentioned.
-
Star Wars Episode 3, Chronicles of Narnia, The New World
-
Jan 11, 2006 12:28:36 PM CST
NO KONG!!!1 FUCK THIS SHIT MAN! I can see kong getting no oscars
by silentbobafett2
-
You are the geek to end all geeks. I can't think of another human who would find Indian makeup "breathtaking". Like- oww migod- look at the detail on that indian- the auburn skintone- the feathers- the... the... ohmigod- ungggh!
-
Palpatine's makeup during that horrible transformation scene? Gimme a break, he looked like a Star Trek Deep Space Nine reject... History of Violence makeup was only ok. I think Narnia will get it, which is cool cuz its my boys Nicotero and Berger.
-
Wow are the Oscars not gay afterall?
-
There was no improvement over the 50,000 other zombie movies released in the last couple years. It wasn't even that gory. Vader in Sith had much better gore makeup than anything in LotD.
-
What a piece of shit movie with wack ass effects. Seriously, that shit looked like it was directed by Uwe Boll, but since it's Romero everyone is sucking his cock. The Dawn Remake blew his shitty film out the water.
-
that are saying that Sin City got robbed. The make-up effects in that film were great. And I see a lot of people talking about Marv, but That Yellow Bastard's make-up was top notch.
-
Ep 1 goes to The Matrix. Ep 2 goes to Two Towers. Ep. 3 goes to King Kong. Sad, really, considering the sheer imenseness of the virtual world Lucas and Co. created for those movies. C'est la vie. And also SIN CITY WUZ ROBBED!!
-
open your eyes citizen...if you think Star Wars is as universally well loved as it used to be the general public you are seriously delusional.
-
It's really difficult to apply all that mascara and end up looking fabulous. Uh, I mean, that's what I've heard.
-
That is all.
-
Jan 11, 2006 2:06:57 PM CST
slappy jones, I'm not going to get into a big thing with you
by citizen arcane
The movie was #1 of the year by an enormous margin. Let go of the hate already. It's over.
-
...liked it, but face it.... the make-up sucked! That Yellow Bastard looked like a rejected design from Dick Tracy... "Urine Top"! At least they didn't nominate Fantastic Four with it's "Hey look, my big, fake rubbery rock hands don't move" Thing makeup. Wonder if the Razzies have a makeup category?
-
Jan 11, 2006 4:41:48 PM CST
Does anyone recall which film won the Oscar for make up the year
by vibrocount
Ignoring the fact that Moonwatcher & the other "2001" prehumans were actors, not apes -- the Charlton Heston "Planet of the Apes" won that year... meaningless...
-
I had tried prostethics a few times (Werewolf ears, Herr Fantom's burn, which was actually gelatin) and those are pretty damn hard to work with, even though they do end up looking cool. In the future, I'm getting the professional stuff for Herr Fantom and prolly incorporate it into other ones I've thought about. (Wolfen nose for Were-Velkan, Vincent from "House of Wax", La Phanteana...maybe the loathy lady from the Sir Gervain story. I think that one is dying to be done IRL...) Thus, it justifies my "Braveheart" rant. Why the hell nominate and give an award to something that doesn't even take much skill or effort?!
-
Jan 11, 2006 6:29:08 PM CST
I reckon Braveheart won Makeup because the gore effects were on
by chickychow
Everyone remembers the bloody battles from that film and everyone was blindsided by how effectively gruesome and convincing they were, thus, your oscar...
-
Seriously, Sith got nominated over Sin City? Next you are going to tell me that Sin City won't get nominated for special effects. Then again, it might lose out to Kong but still...
-
Jan 11, 2006 6:43:45 PM CST
Kong will probably sweep FX-wise as a consolation for not being
by hypeendshere
-
Apparently it IS still loved by everyone, as it was voted best film in two categories at the People's Choice last night. That doesn't validate it in terms of the film's worth, but the fact that Sith was the box office champ (grossing over $75 million more than Clones) AND the recipient of those audience awards, plus a very fresh rating on Rotten Tomatoes means that they did something right. In 20 years no one's going to make a big stink about the prequels except bitter old men.
-
Burned-up Anakin looked decent, however any points gained there are taken away (and then some) by that horrible, horrible Sidious make-up. Are you kidding me with that? Kudos for the Mace Windu make-up though. They made that wooden puppet look like a real human.
-
Jan 11, 2006 7:22:36 PM CST
How could I forget the blood and carnage of "Braveheart"?
by anna valerious
I think everyone remembers the warpaint from that film the most...
-
...well said Lazarus Long. The fact that folks are still bitching and whining about how they didn't like the prequels and how they like to pretend that everyone else hates them too is really quite amusing. Whatever makes them feel better and whatever helps them feel like their opinion has been validated, I guess. Most people I know enjoyed the new Star Wars flicks and most people I know think ROTS kicked ass. The only time I ever encounter negative hate-filled rants about the prequels is on the net. I guess some people just have a problem accepting that other people had fun with these movies...which was the whole point of them. The folks who were expecting the seconds coming will probably always remain bitter...they still seemm to be ignoring the reality of how well recieved these movies actually are.
-
Jan 11, 2006 9:38:22 PM CST
Kong will win best F/Xs at the Oscars. Becausethe critics awards
by orionsangels
Kong is the stand out F/X film this year, as in breaking new ground. That's what the Oscars love, now don't get me wrong ILM did a fantastic job on ROTS and deserves in an award as well, but the oscar panel sees it as ILM just doin their thing again, playing by the numbers.
-
and I don't hate star wars. but seriously tell me this...in 14 years time do you really think a 20 year anniversary theatrical re-release of phantom menace would be as anticipated as the re-release of the original trilogy was?
of course not. in fact you could probably re-relase the ot in twenty years and it would do well....these new ones? as john matrix said at the end of commando when he asked if he will put a new team together..."no chance"...roll credits...cue closing music "I WILL PROTECT YOU...NOTHING CAN HURT YOU"
the closing song in commando is fantastic...but not as good as the montage music for the karate tournament in karate kid "you're the best around nuthin's ever gonna bring you down"
now thats good stuff....
and at the end of the day we can all say what we like about star wars and rings and kong etc etc surely we all agree that that the weirdest franchise death was the matrix trilogy....what in the fuck happened there.....the first one is a great film...i love it.....the second is just useless ("i want you to kiss me the way you kiss her"?!?!?!)and when i finally got around to seeing the third one i couldn't believe my fucking ears and eyes....amazing collapse to what could have been a great legacy. -
But no, of course the prequels aren't going to be as celebrated as the original trilogy. In fact, forget for a second that the prequels sucked as much as you think they sucked. Pretend that the prequels were exactly as cool and as awesome as you always imagined they could be. They still could never reach the level of excitement and awe of the first Star Wars film. If you know anything at all about recent film history, you'd know that no film will ever reach that level of excitement and mania again. Not until we invent holodecks. Star Wars was at the right place at the right time with the right level of FX and wonder. No giant monkeys or crying midgets are ever going to reproduce what people felt when Star Wars first came out. So the prequels, of course never stood a chance to measure up to the originals. The original point however, was someone saying that no one cares about Star Wars anymore and to that point, I disagreed. As with the aforementioned Matrix sequels, people aren't that loyal to a franchise. To many, The Matrix was considered the second coming of genre film. It fell just shy of The Phantom Menace but was widely considered cooler and the future of Sci-Fi. Part 3 made about $100 millions domestically, ie chicken feed. The lesson? If the prequels sucked so much, Episode III wouldn't have made the bank it did. So someone, somewhere still likes Star Wars. Then again, I really don't care. I was a SW fan in the late 80's when no one knew what SW was so I'm delighted that it's off the radar.
-
Personally I love Sin City but its very existence is a huge Fuck You to the hollywood establishment. I'd be very surprised if they gave it any nominations, no matter how richly deserved.
-
If Frank Miller and Robert Rodriguez took out "For Your Consideration: Best Director" ads in Variety.
-
I soooo wanted to love that movie. I was prepared to buy the special extended edition in December even before it came out (I missed it in theater). I was on a business trip and watched in my hotel room because there was nothing else to do. Talk about a disappointment! Usually I am right with everyone with the "cool" factor movies but not that one. Makeup goes to Sith.
-
'revenge is such a vast body of work.All the nominies up ther are deserving but this is the last chapter for star wars. If nothing else i'm glad they at least got a nod but the creature department and Trisha B. work is teriffic.
-
Well, we all know what happened when "2001" was not even freaking nominated for make-up, because they FREAKING THOUGHT THOSE WERE REAL APES! How much bumber can anyone get? Or did they hate creative people like Kubrick so much and decided to give an oscar to planet of the apes anyway? These people from Hollywood are the one who belive that polar bears are the most dangerous animals in the amazon forest. As Tourette Guy would say: "Do you know about the porcupine balls? They are small... and they don't give a shit!"
Readers Talkback
User Login
Top Talkbacks
- Quint sees some DJANGO UNCHAINED footage at CANNES!!! -- 257 total posts 257 posts
- A Fire Definitely Rises In The New DARK KNIGHT RISES One Sheet!! -- 179 total posts 178 posts
- "I Don't Remember An Episode." The Teaser For THE MASTER Is Here!! -- 143 total posts 143 posts
- "Some Men Are Coming To Kill Us. We're Going To Kill Them First." Teaser To SKYFALL! -- 239 total posts 122 posts
- Charlize Theron thinks it is pretty badass to be in a Ridley Scott Space Movie! PROMETHEUS featurette -- 79 total posts 79 posts
- UPDATED!!! TWO Teasers For ANCHORMAN 2 Are Online And On Top And Filled With Cream!! -- 85 total posts 73 posts
- Peter Weir Will Enter THE KEEP! -- 67 total posts 67 posts
- Tonight Brings The Last HOUSE Ever!! The NBC Premiere Of AMERICAN NINJA WARRIOR!! More Stern On AGT!! And More!! THE LAST MONDAY OF SWEEPS!! -- 95 total posts 60 posts
- The Infamous Billy The Kidd Chats With Director Joe Carnahan About THE GREY And His Vision For DEATH WISH!! -- 57 total posts 57 posts
- Tom Cruise Saddles Up For A Remake Of THE MAGNIFICENT SEVEN!! -- 59 total posts 57 posts