Musicals.Net
http://musicals.net/forums/

Academy Awards
http://musicals.net/forums/viewtopic.php?f=103&t=55288
Page 1 of 1

Author:  i'm_back [ Tue Jan 23, 2007 2:23 pm ]
Post subject:  Academy Awards

So, I'm not gonna lie, I'm kind of mad that Dreamgirls got snubbed ofr Best Picture.

Author:  Pounce [ Tue Jan 23, 2007 2:35 pm ]
Post subject: 

Yeah, you'd think the Golden Globe for Best Comedy or Musical would have placed it in the Oscar contention.

Author:  jimbothecrab [ Fri Jan 26, 2007 6:32 pm ]
Post subject: 

It's not that the Academy doesn't recognize the wonderfulness of Dreamgirls. I think it's just that Dreamgirls really doesn't fit the profile of previous academy awards best pictures. It's just not in the same genre as Crash and Casablanca. I am glad that they only got snubbed for best picture, Jennifer and Eddie are both forerunners in their categories so best of luck to them.

Author:  MsDivaKate [ Fri Jan 26, 2007 10:14 pm ]
Post subject: 

I don't know...I think Dreamgirls was done much better than Chicago, which was nominated and won. I'm quite picky about stage to screen transitions and I thought this was done quite nicely. If anything, it drew me in even more than the stage production, especially with some of the plot line changes, such as the death of a certain character who I won't mention in case for some odd reason someone reading this thread hasn't seen the film yet. I think it had a broad enough emotional range and some killer acting to at least get a nomination.

I mean come on if freaking BORAT can get nominated for a Golden Globe in the same category as Dreamgirls and get nominated for an Academy Award (something having to do with the screen play or the adaptation or something like that), I think they could at least have given Dreamgirls a nomination, considering it did win the Golden Globe for Best Picture in its category.

Author:  i'm_back [ Sat Jan 27, 2007 1:01 pm ]
Post subject: 

Letters of Iwo Jima............. what the crap?

Author:  Psy4Potato [ Mon Jan 29, 2007 12:50 am ]
Post subject: 

I disagree with the comment about, Chicago was amazing, and a much better musical IMO. And it's a much better done movie. I did really like the movie, I was bored up until Jennifer first got kicked out of the band, then if got really good. Jennifer should be up for Best Actress instead of best supporting actress.....

Author:  MsDivaKate [ Mon Jan 29, 2007 12:01 pm ]
Post subject: 

Psy4Potato wrote:
I disagree with the comment about, Chicago was amazing, and a much better musical IMO. And it's a much better done movie. I did really like the movie, I was bored up until Jennifer first got kicked out of the band, then if got really good. Jennifer should be up for Best Actress instead of best supporting actress.....


Its just that, opinions. I adore Chicago and I love the movie, but Dreamgirls is just chock full of dramatic undertones, which really seems to be what they are going for. Dreamgirls matches up very well to the stage version, its literally like watching the musical but on the screen to some degree. Chicago played around with the whole staging of the musical numbers outside of the actual story, for the most part, which tended to distract.

I agree about Jennifer Hudson and the Best Actress verses Supporting Actress nod, however I think they felt Jennifer Hudson herself fit better in the Supporting Category, not really based on the size of the part she played.

Author:  RainbowJude [ Mon Apr 09, 2007 3:11 am ]
Post subject:  Oscar, Oscar, Oscar, Oscar, Oscar....

I know this is a little after the fact, but there are some things I wanted to say and, since I never keep my mouth shut, here goes.

I wasn't surprised that Dreamgirls didn't get a "Best Picture" nomination at the Academy Awards. I don't think this is about the profile of what a "Best Picture" should be, as at least three of the "Best Picture" nominees this year didn't really fit the kind of profile that jimbothecrab mentions in his post. Incidentally, I don't think Crash should have won. That award, in my opinion, belonged to Brokeback Mountain.

At the end of the day, I think Dreamgirls has a couple of fundamental flaws as a film that were what kept it from being nominated as "Best Picture". One of these is that Condon didn't quite manage to get the non-diagetic singing to work as it should have. Another is that the screenplay catered somewhat, in my opinon, to demands of the stars rather than the narrative. And although the film has some amazing moments and although it is an immensely emotional experience, these aren't don't make up for the gaps left by other elements of the production. And so I certainly wasn't distracted by the changes made to the play.

Insofar as comparing Dreamgirls to Chicago: I think that Chicago is a far more successful film in the way it is executed as a film production. You can, I suppose, debate the adaptation but I think that the transition from stage to screen is excellently conceptualised. Within reason, the film adaptation shouldn't be about how literally faithful or not the movie is to a stage production of a show. Chicago, for me, hit the nail on the head in capturing the metaphor that is inherent in the text of the show and adapting that to the medium of film.

And no, it isn't the emotional experience that Dreamgirls is. But it isn't meant to be. Chicago itself is a colder, more intellectual musical that, like a wolf in sheep's clothing, that is presented in a form that appears more comfortable and appeasing.

Later days
David

Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/