Has there ever been a best actor/actress oscar go to someone in such a god-awful film as The Iron Lady before? I mean, compare the quality of a film to the quality of the lead performance - Streep/Iron Lady must be at opposite ends of the scale in that regard.
I just don't recall such adoration for a single performance in such a dog of a film before. Can anyone else?
Oscar Academy voters must be the laziest bunch of people ever.
Why give a picture one or two awards, when you can save time and give each one 4 or 5?
Hugo really didn't deserve all those technical awards, (come on sound editing better than Drive?) and The Artist picked up a couple (costume design, score) that it wouldn't of done if it hand't won best picture.
Oscar Academy voters must be the laziest bunch of people ever.
Why give a picture one or two awards, when you can save time and give each one 4 or 5?
Hugo really didn't deserve all those technical awards, (come on sound editing better than Drive?) and The Artist picked up a couple (costume design, score) that it wouldn't of done if it hand't won best picture.
I'm baffled to, as to how the makeup in The Iron Lady was better than the makeup in Harry Potter. I mean, anyone can do normal make up, but the range of makeup required in Harry Potter was virtually flawless when put in practise!!
I'm baffled to, as to how the makeup in The Iron Lady was better than the makeup in Harry Potter. I mean, anyone can do normal make up, but the range of makeup required in Harry Potter was virtually flawless when put in practise!!
That is what i thought too
Crafting an old lady compared to the likes of Goblins and strange mystical beings is hardly unique.
I'm baffled to, as to how the makeup in The Iron Lady was better than the makeup in Harry Potter. I mean, anyone can do normal make up, but the range of makeup required in Harry Potter was virtually flawless when put in practise!!
Have to say I agree too. What won special effects? Its hard to beieve that the Potter films were once again passed over when the special effects/makeup/costumes/sets were all so well done.
I'm baffled to, as to how the makeup in The Iron Lady was better than the makeup in Harry Potter. I mean, anyone can do normal make up, but the range of makeup required in Harry Potter was virtually flawless when put in practise!!
I've not seen the film, but it was more than just the usual lipstick and the like. To show Thatcher at different ages it was essentially almost a full head prosthetic at times. The fact that most people thought it was just regular makeup shows why they won the Oscar.
Have to say I agree too. What won special effects? Its hard to beieve that the Potter films were once again passed over when the special effects/makeup/costumes/sets were all so well done.
Hugo, which cleaned up on technical Oscars inc visual effects. Again, the trick here was that it wasn't immediately obvious which shots in Hugo *were* effects shots.
I've not seen the film, but it was more than just the usual lipstick and the like. To show Thatcher at different ages it was essentially almost a full head prosthetic at times. The fact that most people thought it was just regular makeup shows why they won the Oscar.
You mean as opposed to the prosthetics used to make believable goblins, werewolves etc. in Harry Potter?
Exactly. Someone looks at a goblin on HP and says "nice prosthetics". Someone looks at Meryl streep in IL and says "she looks a lot like Thatcher", not "nice prosthetics" because they don't *realise* they're looking at prosthetics. That's why IL won makeup.
Comments
Just a publicity stunt for his next movie. How is it tasteless?
Your overreaction makes it sound as if he took out his todger and started waving it around while singing My Boy Lollipop. Get a grip...
You answered your own question there.
I just don't recall such adoration for a single performance in such a dog of a film before. Can anyone else?
I could really see her doing Marie Colvin...
I highly enjoyed his other hostings, however.
Not sure what happened there but I didn't get a PM from you, sorry
Why give a picture one or two awards, when you can save time and give each one 4 or 5?
Hugo really didn't deserve all those technical awards, (come on sound editing better than Drive?) and The Artist picked up a couple (costume design, score) that it wouldn't of done if it hand't won best picture.
I'm baffled to, as to how the makeup in The Iron Lady was better than the makeup in Harry Potter. I mean, anyone can do normal make up, but the range of makeup required in Harry Potter was virtually flawless when put in practise!!
That is what i thought too
Crafting an old lady compared to the likes of Goblins and strange mystical beings is hardly unique.
Have to say I agree too. What won special effects? Its hard to beieve that the Potter films were once again passed over when the special effects/makeup/costumes/sets were all so well done.
I've not seen the film, but it was more than just the usual lipstick and the like. To show Thatcher at different ages it was essentially almost a full head prosthetic at times. The fact that most people thought it was just regular makeup shows why they won the Oscar.
More:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/culturevideo/filmvideo/8993474/The-Iron-Lady-Meryl-Streeps-Margaret-Thatcher-make-up-secrets.html
Hugo, which cleaned up on technical Oscars inc visual effects. Again, the trick here was that it wasn't immediately obvious which shots in Hugo *were* effects shots.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13772_3-57386138-52/why-rango-and-hugo-won-at-the-oscars/
You mean as opposed to the prosthetics used to make believable goblins, werewolves etc. in Harry Potter?
Exactly. Someone looks at a goblin on HP and says "nice prosthetics". Someone looks at Meryl streep in IL and says "she looks a lot like Thatcher", not "nice prosthetics" because they don't *realise* they're looking at prosthetics. That's why IL won makeup.