This was an excellent film and should've be nominated for Best Picture.
Tree of Life, War Horse, and Moneyball were all better than Albert Nobbs?
I don't think so. It may not be the best Picture winner, but it was snubbed for a best picture nomination.
Unfortunately, Nobbs is not BP quality.
However, Tree of Life, Moneyball and War Horse nominations are a complete joke. I agree with you there.
Challah if you hear me
I don't think Nobbs is best picture quality either. But I had a hard time getting into the movie because the whole time I wondered how all of the characters could actually believe Nobbs and Paige (particularly Paige) were men.
Tree of Life and Moneyball, I think could be.
I really liked Moneyball. The story was solid, interesting, and very well put together. But Jonah Hill for Best Supporting...? What about that scene where he throws the ball at Brad Pitt and yells heads up? That was so painfully awkward to watch cuz it was so poorly done on Jonah Hill's end!
Tree of Life, I mean, the whole time I was wondering what the hell I was watching. But then afterward, after reading about it, I actually did pick up on a lot of the messages that were under the surface and realized that it was a pretty well done piece of "abstract" film. Not normally my taste, but neither is contemporary art and the critics seem to love it. So I wouldn't've put it as BP, but can see why they might've.
I definitely think this should have received an Oscar nod for best picture. It was enlightening, wondrous and heartbreaking all at the same time. One of the best movies of 2011 for sure.
shareIndeed, it was one of the most horrible Oscar years in history. Instead of upping the BP nominations to a ridiculous max of 10, they ought to make the BP optional and for lack of a proper BP, simply declare the BP to be the film winning the most awards in other categories!
***So I've seen 4 movies/wk in theatre for a 1/4 century, call me crazy?**
[deleted]
[deleted]
Ah there's that word again, snubbed. It seems to show up in reference to the Oscars every year, and is almost always inaccurate. The word means to "spurn disdainfully", and has no place in a well-informed discussion of more than 1,000 voters having a variety of opinions. The voters didn't all agree, hence more than one nominee. The voters did not "snub" Nobbs, just not enough of them thought the movie as a whole was as good as some others, but they did feel that two of the performances were excellent.
Now, a few years ago, a film called Did You Hear About the Morgans? could be said to have been spurned disdainfully by Academy members and moviegoers in general. Most of them thought it the essence of mediocrity and no one seriously thought it Oscar-worthy. So it was rightfully snubbed, but no one used that word because pretty much no one suffered the disappointment of thinking it worthy only to see it not nominated. To quote Doyle Lonnegan in The Sting: Do you follow?
I have seen enough to know I have seen too much. -- ALOTOshare