|
Director's Guild nominees... WTF?
http://www.dga.org/thedga/aw_announcements-07.php3
BILL CONDON Dreamgirls JONATHAN DAYTON & VALERIE FARIS Little Miss Sunshine STEPHEN FREARS The Queen ALEJANDRO GONZÁLEZ IÑÁRRITU Babel MARTIN SCORSESE The Departed But in what fucking universe is "Little Miss SUnshine" a better directed movie than "Children of Men" which didn't even get nominated? And it's not like this is some uninformed "Peoples Choice Award" kind of shit - this is voted on by other directors, who should know better. |
Originally Posted by slop101
http://www.dga.org/thedga/aw_announcements-07.php3
Okay, none of these are bad directors, per se. But in what fucking universe is "Little Miss SUnshine" a better directed movie than "Children of Men" which didn't even get nominated? And it's not like this is some uninformed "Peoples Choice Award" kind of shit - this is voted on by other directors, who should know better. |
Originally Posted by DVD King
All these awards are just reminding me why 2006 was such a shitty year for movies
Anyway, weird list, certainly, but it looks like they tried to do a variety of films in many different genres. My list would be very different, Cuaron would definitely be on it. |
Should've been: Eastwood (Letters), Frears (The Queen), Greengrass (United 93), Inarritu (Babel), Scorsese (The Departed).
|
Originally Posted by DVD Josh
Only in this forum could Scorcese be "not a bad director, per se". The fucking guy did Taxi Driver for christ sake.
And to be honest, there are two tracking shots in CoM that blow any of Scorsese's tracking shots. But I don't have a problem at all with Departed being on the list - my problem is with CoM (or Pan's Labrynth) not being on it. Oh yeah, and Greengrass shoulda been on there too. |
2006 was a great year for movies. The reason why there was no love for Children of Men is because I don't think most voters even saw the damn thing. Didn't the DGA get rid of screeners? Greengrass most definitely should've been nominated. It's a shame, actually. I would love for someone to explain to me how the Little Miss Sunshine duo did a better directorial job than Cuaron or Greengrass.
|
Originally Posted by slop101
Dude, settle down. Where did I knock Marty? I've been watching and loving his movies since I first saw Taxi Driver back in '83. All I'm saying is that Children of Men is a better directed movie than most of the films on that list.
And to be honest, there are two tracking shots in CoM that blow any of Scorsese's tracking shots. But I don't have a problem at all with Departed being on the list - my problem is with CoM (or Pan's Labrynth) not being on it. |
Originally Posted by Mr. Cinema
t's a shame, actually. I would love for someone to explain to me how the Little Miss Sunshine duo did a better directorial job than Cuaron or Greengrass.
You know how Wes Anderson always does these really head-on shots with the subject centered so everything looks like a nice little tableaux? And half of the time it comes off like he's trying very hard? And you know how Jared Hess tries to do the same thing but it comes off a bit insincere? Well, I think Dayton and Faris do it, and do it well without making it seem like they're yelling "Hey! Look! Look at this scene! Isn't it clever?" Is Children of Men a better movie than Little Miss Sunshine? Yes. Much better. Sadly, there's only room for five movies. :shrug: |
*cough*United93*cough*
|
You can count on every year there being way more deserving nominees than films that get nominated. You can also always count on an established yet under-rewarded director getting a nod and a "come out of nowhere" film like Dreamgirls as well. Those tend to knock out your Children of Mens.
|
Originally Posted by DVD Josh
Hey "dude", I was just quoting you ("Okay, none of these are bad directors, per se."). If that wasn't your intention, then you should edit your original post, but your response to me is inconsistent with what YOU wrote.
And yes, these sorts of shuns happen a lot, but none so egregious as this one, and not by a group that should know better. |
Originally Posted by slop101
That was just an innocuous statement not meant as a knock on anyone in any way. If you took it as a slight, you were reading too much into it, and it's your problem of interpretation, not mine.
Whatever "dude". |
I am surprised to not see Eastwood on the list, unless Letters from Iwo Jima wasn't eligible for some reason (I'm assuming it was)
|
amen, OP, Children of Men is easily the strongest vision of the year.
|
i agree it is sad to see that greengrass is missing off the list -- perhaps United 93 was released a bit too early in the year for appropriate awards "consideration".
|
What did you expect when the only award push this is getting is from fan made trailers?
http://online.wsj.com/google_login.h...googlenews_wsj Fans Build Oscar Buzz Online By JAMIN WARREN, Wall Street Journal January 13, 2007; Page P2 Despite critical praise, the futuristic infertility drama "Children of Men" has grossed only about $14 million. Some worry that Oscar voters will overlook the film as they submit their nominations, due Saturday. But a five-minute Internet film lobbying for the film's nomination gained quick popularity this week. Made by 28-year-old Los Angeles student Blair Erickson last Saturday, the video has been praised on popular Web sites like Digg and Defamer. "I was blown away that I hadn't heard anything" about the film, he says. Bolstered by the spread of video-editing software and the emergence of video-sharing sites like YouTube, amateur video editors' work is becoming commonplace. Last fall, fans created tribute videos for candidates for college football's Heisman Trophy. Universal Pictures, which released the film, heard about the video last week and wasn't involved with making it, says Adam Fogelson, president of marketing. Says Mr. Erickson: "Getting nominated was not the real goal. Really, I just wanted more people to see it." HOW TO FIND IT: Search for "children of men nominated" on YouTube.com. Write to Jamin Warren at [email protected] Besides, every year there's a well deserving film that gets snubbed. learn to live with the fact that an award doesn't mean it's the best film of the year. Even if it's awarded by the very same folks. I mean... look at when CRASH won.. |
I hope that the Oscars don't forget United 93 and Children of Men. Last year Crash won and it wasn't even nominated for a Golden Globe, so I'm hoping the same happens this year.
|
Originally Posted by CloverClover
amen, OP, Children of Men is easily the strongest vision of the year.
Anyhow, I think the Sunshiner's got in because that is a movie that in different hands could have been a trainwreck - if not handled with kid gloves, it could have been National Lampoon's Vacation 5, but Ferris and Dayton made it something more. They got a pitch perfect cast, got great performances out of each of them and melded it together into a funny, moving piece of entertainment that was a crossover hit. It's not that they are BETTER than people like Cuarron or Greengrass (because those directors and their films are brilliant) but you'd EXPECT them to be brilliant, and with their source material, a film that was anything less would be a disappointment. We'll never really know what the DGA is thinking, but I think that has to play a small role. |
Should have been Uwe Boll, IMHO.
;) |
While I love Children of Men and consider it the best film of the year (admitting not seeing Dreamgirls, either Eastwood film, Pan's Laberynth, and possibly other contenders) I understand the nomination for Little Miss Sunshine. I think mdc's post is full of insight... Little Miss Sunshine got great performances and was well put together. Now, if you are giving an award for cinematography... Children of Men hands down. But there is so much more to direction and it is seldom that we can segregate the two. Rarely do such simple, well made films get recognized for their work.
|
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:57 AM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.