[degsyhufc]

What if a film has two main leads and they both give amazing performances. Why should one be judged to be thest best and another to be best supporting.

Why not have best duo or leads?

e.g. If De Niro and Pacino gave the performances of their lives in Heat and both deserved to be nominated and awarded Best Actor why not say, you guys are awarded the best leads.


btw, i'm aware that some awards do give an award for best ensemble cast.


PS. I've noticed the odd use of capitals in my post. No, I don't know why i've typed like that either

[little-monster]

I think Animated performances should be allowed to be recognised

[gashead]

Originally Posted by degsyhufc

What if a film has two main leads and they both give amazing performances. Why should one be judged to be thest best and another to be best supporting.

Why not have best duo or leads?

The serious awards already do, although they don't call it Best Duo of course (I think the MTV Movie Awards called first dibs on that ). If two leading performances are deemed worthy of nomination by the members, then they are, and sometimes both win, as happened at the Oscars with One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest and Silence Of The Lambs. I can't confirm that all awards do it, but as a general rule it's certainly not the case that a film can only have one nomination for, for e.g. Best Actor, and any other role has to be for Supporting.

Originally Posted by little-monster

I think Animated performances should be allowed to be recognised

By that, I take it you mean motion capture performances, as opposed to, say, Buzz's 'performance' in Toy Story?

This was a big hoo-ha with Andy Serkis and Avatar, but I disagree. A 100% 'live' performance was performed exactly as you see on screen. With a CGI enhanced animation, anything that the actor didn't quite 'nail', such as expression, emotion, voice etc can easily be altered, so you can't be sure how much is digital FX and how much is actual acting.

[darthbibble]

There should be an Oscar for "best ensemble cast"

LA Confidential is good reason for this. As Guy Pearce, Russell Crowe and Kevin Spacey all gave Oscar worthy performances, but with them all being in the same film there was an argument at the time they split the vote whereas if only one of them was that good they might have stood a chance.

[degsyhufc]

Originally Posted by little-monster

I think Animated performances should be allowed to be recognised

Originally Posted by gashead

By that, I take it you mean motion capture performances, as opposed to, say, Buzz's 'performance' in Toy Story?

This was a big hoo-ha with Andy Serkis and Avatar, but I disagree. A 100% 'live' performance was performed exactly as you see on screen. With a CGI enhanced animation, anything that the actor didn't quite 'nail', such as expression, emotion, voice etc can easily be altered, so you can't be sure how much is digital FX and how much is actual acting.

My first thoughts when I read that was Robin Williams in Aladin.

[degsyhufc]

Originally Posted by gashead

The serious awards already do, although they don't call it Best Duo of course (I think the MTV Movie Awards called first dibs on that ). If two leading performances are deemed worthy of nomination by the members, then they are, and sometimes both win, as happened at the Oscars with One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest and Silence Of The Lambs. I can't confirm that all awards do it, but as a general rule it's certainly not the case that a film can only have one nomination for, for e.g. Best Actor, and any other role has to be for Supporting.

Are you meaning Best Actor and Best Actress won?

What I mean is what if two males are the leads and both nominated.
They could have an award for Best Main Leads in a Film and both the actors win the award together.

[little-monster]

Originally Posted by gashead

The serious awards already do, although they don't call it Best Duo of course (I think the MTV Movie Awards called first dibs on that ). If two leading performances are deemed worthy of nomination by the members, then they are, and sometimes both win, as happened at the Oscars with One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest and Silence Of The Lambs. I can't confirm that all awards do it, but as a general rule it's certainly not the case that a film can only have one nomination for, for e.g. Best Actor, and any other role has to be for Supporting.


By that, I take it you mean motion capture performances, as opposed to, say, Buzz's 'performance' in Toy Story?

This was a big hoo-ha with Andy Serkis and Avatar, but I disagree. A 100% 'live' performance was performed exactly as you see on screen. With a CGI enhanced animation, anything that the actor didn't quite 'nail', such as expression, emotion, voice etc can easily be altered, so you can't be sure how much is digital FX and how much is actual acting.

No i mean animated voice over performances. It is still acting, but not doing in a physical way.

[Everlong Girl]

Originally Posted by darthbibble

There should be an Oscar for "best ensemble cast"

LA Confidential is good reason for this. As Guy Pearce, Russell Crowe and Kevin Spacey all gave Oscar worthy performances, but with them all being in the same film there was an argument at the time they split the vote whereas if only one of them was that good they might have stood a chance.

I agree that there should be a best ensemble cast Oscar

Too many times someone who gives an outstanding performance in a film alongside other outstanding performances get over looked.