But, Kathryn Bigelow was gonna KILL BIN LADEN
May 03
The events of 1 May 2011 have drastically changed the plans of Academy Award winning director Kathryn Bigelow’s current project. After her war-based film The Hurt Locker won her Best Director and Best Picture in 2009 she was busy working with the same producers on Kill Bin Laden, a feature film that would fictionally kill the western world nemesis. Now, of course, that has actually happened. The Hollywood Reporter has the details.
Last word from Kathryn and her team was that they were taking a short break from their current development and finding a way to incorporate recent events so their film can accurately portray them. That is, they’re going ahead!
Thankfully this won’t be a rushed TV movie like a certain rushed-in-time-for-a-royal-wedding film that made its timely way to TV & DVD. Shudder.
Yarr: piracy is a crime, especially if you downloaded THE HURT LOCKER
May 19
Internet piracy has always been a fraught venture: there’s the difficulty of finding a good quality file of the right size; finding enough seeders to allow you to download the film in a timely fashion; the monthly internet usage juggling-act, often divided between games, movies and porn; and then the hassle of burning the film onto a DVD so you don’t have to watch it on a crappy little PC monitor (I realise I’m tempting Poe’s Law here, so I’ll just point this out: I’m being sarcastic). As if that weren’t enough, there’s also the small matter of piracy being unethical and potentially damaging to a variety of industries, but that’s been a relatively small issue — until now.
The internet is many things: it is a global stash of porn, easier to hide from your technophobic mother than stolen Playboy magazines; it’s a source of instant knowledge (albeit of dubious authenticity) and breaking news; it’s a place where people with similar hobbies or beliefs can hang out and pat each other on the back in some kind of solipsistic circle-jerk; it is an effective tool of communication; and it is also an unpoliced Wild West-like frontier with few rules and fewer enforcers where you can get anything –literally anything — for free, as long as it exists somewhere in 1s and 0s.
Apparently the internet looks like this.
Now, though, the US has finally decided to criminalise piracy. Piracy has, of course, been illegal all this time, but nobody ever seemed to do anything about it. Now the US Copyright Group is cracking down on movie pirates, starting with those who downloaded The Hurt Locker. In order to catch the people who download movies, the Group requested hitherto-private client information from Internet Service Providers (ISPs) all over the US. That’s right: they know how you surf and they know where you live. Scary, huh? (But, as I’ll explain later, disclosure of your internet usage is actually justified).
If you downloaded The Hurt Locker and you live in the US, chances are you received an email demanding you pay a settlement fee or risk the Copyright Group sueing the rug out from under you. 75% of US ISPs have complied with the Copyright Group’s move (the other 25% have experienced technical delays), and out of all the people contacted regarding their pirate operations, 40% agreed to pay the settlement; the other 60% get one more chance before the Group starts issuing lawsuits.
The reason the Copyright Group is going after pirates is to provide “alternate revenue streams” for studios whose films are heavily pirated. The idea is that for every person who downloads a movie instead of buying a ticket or DVD, the studio loses cash. So to make up for that, lawsuits are being issued. In this case, The Hurt Locker earned approximately fuck-all at the box office, but people pirated it like it was Scarlett Johansson’s secret sex tape, their interest piqued by the film’s nine thousand Oscar nominations. So the Group is trying to recoup some of the perceived monetary losses suffered by studio Venture Pictures, who financed The Hurt Locker.
The problem with piracy is that it’s all so arbitrary, so up-in-the-air. People who pirate movies are usually: too poor or lazy to go to the cinema; scornful of the capitalist system of economy and government; morally deficient; or unable to leave the house, for whatever reason. So the vast majority of pirates wouldn’t have seen The Hurt Locker if they’d had to pay for it / leave their house / contribute to a capitalist society, right? So how much did the studio really lose? Are you sure a limited release and lack of marketing weren’t really to blame?
Recent studies on piracy in PC gaming showed that the average PC pirate downloads dozens and dozens of games each year — many more than they could possibly hope to play in their lifetime — and that piracy rates are inversely proportional to income (that is, unemployed students and people in Russia and India pirate like crazy). It follows that most pirates wouldn’t have bought most of the games they pirated — so how does piracy really affect profits? Most piracy occurs as an idle act of “oh, I’ll take that;” very few pirates single out only the games / movies they really really really want and download only those — say, one every three-to-six months. It’s usually “oh, I heard that movie’s good, and it’s got healthy seeders, so I’ll add it to the collection,” but then they never actually get around to watching the movie. So the MPAA’s annual “we lost $5 billion to piracy this year alone” cry may be somewhat exaggerated.
Let’s say then, conservatively, that piracy loses a film 5% of its profit: 5% of Avatar‘s profit would be $135 million; enough to finance four Hurt Lockers, if not more. In this case, all those pesky pirates are actually gouging a significant chunk of cash out of the film industry. For its part, the film industry is often thought of as a rich, affluent hotbed of extravagent expenditure and fiscal looseness, but this is not the case: most studios only make a profit on a very small number of films, and must use this profit to finance other films, which might not even break even at the box office. Make no mistake: every dollar is precious in Hollywood.
Aside from the strictly financial arguments, it’s pretty obvious that piracy is, at best, a morally grey area (as judged by a society dominated by the ideas of ownership and property). You could argue that you might simply record the movie when it comes on TV in six months’ time, and therefore own a copy without having paid for it; you could argue that the majority of ticket and DVD sales go to the cinemas and electronics stores, respectively (even if that is simply unture); you could argue that capitalism is busted and you want no part of it (in which case you should move to China); and you could argue that that street vendor in Bali flogging Iron Man 2 for $3 was totally legit, man; but in the end, someone, somewhere, is losing dollars, and it isn’t you. Keep that in mind next time you go to download that .rar file.
To come back to my previous point, there’s been some internet backlash against this “breach of personal privacy” thing. But you have to remember: the internet is a tool, not a toy; a privelege, and not a right. If the only way to track down the people who make child pornography, rape videos, snuff films or that gut-churning crush porn is to give up a small percentage of your privacy, then by all means, it’s justified. Piracy may be a lesser crime than those listed above, but it’s still indicative of the “the internet’s here for my pleasure and I’ll do with it whatever I want” attitude that can easily backslide into immorality and illegality.
Besides, what have you got to hide?
Oh, that's all right then -- wait a minute ...
This time I agree with Ebert: 3D sucks
Apr 30
I wrote a few months ago about why I thought 3D movies were crap; but that was before Avatar came out, so I was writing with some degree of optimism. Now that Avatar has come and gone I can safely say that I’m still not on board for 3D. A higher degree of immersion doesn’t negate a boring script or lazy world-building.
If you don’t know who Roger Ebert is, then … you’re missing out on a lot. You could call him a film critic, but you could also call him an unmitigated genius, a pioneer in the technique of criticism. His reviews are often insightful and sincere and leave you feeling like a blind child stumbling through the woods of cinema in comparison.
Ebert recently weighed in on video games, and stirred an absolute storm of controversy in gaming circles by declaring that games aren’t, and never will be, art. In that case I disagreed with him, partly because, for all his powers, I know prescience isn’t one of them, and further, he doesn’t ever seem to have played a game younger than Pac-Man or Space Invaders, so what the hell does he know? My opinion of Ebert suffered a little.
Now, however, my faith is restored. With his usual gentle but powerful rhetoric, he’s gone to great lengths to elaborate on the futility and silliness of the current 3D craze in Hollywood. Specifically, he pinpoints a few key niggles I have with the format: Hollywood seems to be using the 3D projectors mostly for kids’ films (Pixar, Dreamworks, Avatar) or ‘event’ films (Alice In Wonderland, Clash Of The Titans, Avatar), with no consideration for, you know, ‘good’ films (he cites Hurt Locker, Precious, Casablanca, you know, the usual artsy fartsy stuff).
Another niggle he pinpoints is in the business side of 3D. Here in Australia 3D movies only cost a dollar or two more than their 2D counterparts (depending on whether or not you already own the glasses), but Ebert points out that in the US, cinemas are charging $5 – $7.50 extra, which seems borderline criminal (especially if the movie’s Clash Of The Titans). How much of Avatar‘s gross was based solely on the cost of 3D tickets? Not enough to knock it down a peg in the coveted ‘Richest Movie Ever’ runnings, but enough to gouge a few percentage points out and dent the mountain of dosh Jim regularly bathes in.
The final niggle Ebert raises that I find particularly accurate is the overbearing eyestrain caused by 3D. It’s bad enough that we’re all in a dark room with our eyes locked onto a single bright screen for two hours; now you want to shove a centimetre of dark plastic between my face and said screen? Ridiculous. Pile on the fact that the brain has to work overtime to tweak muscles into working to get the 3D right, and 3D seems physiologically implausible as a long-term format overhaul.
Ebert goes on to suggest another alternative: 48 frames-per-second film and projectors. Apparently this quadruples the film image and provides a rock-solid, smooth-as-silk, eye-popping picture. I can’t vouch for this as I’ve never experienced it, but I’m rather attached to 24fps traditional film because it’s, like, filmy, you know? Plus 48fps film would double the reel length of a film and provide untold nightmares for the poor old projectionists running the films.
We’re currently knee-deep in a 3D renaissance; many of the big studios have moved behind the new-old format, and even some ‘good’ directors are trying their hands with the fancy new double-cameras. We still need time to evaluate the impact and merit of 3D cinema, but for now, things look doubtful. Check back with me again in 5 years’ time.
GREEN ZONE review: no country for good men
Mar 29
The War in Iraq, since its inception seven years ago, has become the butt of a dozen jokes, to the point that you don’t even have to make a joke about it any more; merely mentioning the War in Iraq is a punchline in itself, reminding listeners that America dropped the ball bigtime, and the rest of the world isn’t happy with it. While the War on Islam (euphemised “terror”) in Afghanistan is somewhat more justified, the Iraq War has always been confusing and stupid, right from the start. They went in looking for WMDs (I think it’s pronounced ‘womdas’), but pretty soon the public was aware that there were, in fact, no WMDs, and there never were. Whatever the US’ reasons were for invading the troubled country, they didn’t involve WMDs at all, and anyone who’s had access to a television, newspaper or internet connection in the past decade knows this; it’s general knowledge by now, as is the knowledge that the War (like any) should be seen as an almost criminal waste of time, money and life, and that people like Bush and Cheney should be held accountable for their actions.
So why does this Matt Damon / Paul Greengrass movie seek to bash this common knowledge over my head like I’m some kind of moron? This movie could only have been made for one demographic — the brainwashed right-wing conservative American folk who watch Fox News and rail against the rights of women and the gay community – who are too ignorant or misinformed to have known about all this right from the start. However, Green Zone fails not only to be informative, but it fails entirely to be entertaining.
Green Zone focuses on the events immediately following the US’ invasion of Iraq, during which the search for womdas produced no results. Matt Damon plays Chief Miller, whose squad takes site after womda site, only to find them completely devoid of WMD. This frustrates Miller, but we have no idea why. He rails against his superiors, but we have no idea why, and then makes friends with a CIA agent who might be able to help him find out why there are no WMD, but we have no idea why. There is also a reporter involved, but we have no idea why. And Greg Kinnear. By this stage we’ve stopped asking why. Someone fed the military false intelligence reports, someone whose codename is “Magellan.” The script introduces so few characters that Magellan can only be one of about three people, so the half-arsed “reveal” towards the end is completely devoid of impact. In the meantime Matt Damon scampers all over Baghdad making friends with locals and making enemies of the folks he’s supposed to be working for in an attempt to uncover the conspiracy of who Magellan really is and where the WMD really are (SPOILER: there are none).
If you could measure “character” quantitatively, Green Zone‘s would amount to precisely zero. We know nothing about Miller — does he have a family? Has he always been a soldier, or was he born without a gun in his hand and a scowl on his face? Does he go to church? Does he believe in freedom? Does he understand that “freedom” means being allowed to go about your own business without a foreign military force invading your country and enforcing democracy with the barrel of a gun? Sometimes I think the irony of enforced democracy seems lost on Americans. We know nothing about Miller, and his dialogue doesn’t help to shed light on his motivations or characteristics. All the other characters are the same — gruff, tough-guy, macho shells that spout increasingly hostile lines that convey nothing but their need to posture and appear manly. Even the only female character (a reporter, because what else are women good for in a war?) in the movie is macho beyond belief. Nobody says “Hello” or “How are the kids?”, they always initiate conversations with “Whaddaya got?” or “What?” or “You ready to talk yet?” Halfway through the movie I felt stifled by all this macho lack of character, and needless to say, it really hurts the film.
What also hurts the film is the cinematography. Allow me to indulge an analogy. Wut if i wrot lyk dis, in txtspk, n u had to red evrthng with splng mstks n grbld grmmr n i ttly made u try put it tgthr n e way? There is an extra split-second of delay as your brain frustratedly processes my bullshit into English, so you can go about reading what I’m trying to say; director Paul Greengrass does exactly this, but with the camera. Those who’ve had the misfortune of seeing the latter two Bourne films will know what I’m talking about: the camera shakes violently, without reason, to give a sense of “realism” or “it’s-like-you’re-really-there-ism,” but it doesn’t work. Watching grainy, underlit footage (one scene was even out of focus!) is kind of like reading reams and reams of illiterate garbage, and actually serves to distance the viewer from what’s going on, because their brain has to run all kinds of stabilising routines on the image just to make sense of it. There are conventions of storytelling that lend a degree of professionalism to your work, to help you get across the genuine meaning of your piece. Breaking these conventions confuses the meaning and places more emphasis on the style of telling than what is actually being told, and I hate it.
The script is similarly woeful. Besides the complete lack of characters, there is a distinct lack of coherence, tension, or even basic fun. There isn’t a single joke, not a single humanising aspect to the proceedings, and not a single action scene that introduces palpable stakes — we all knows what happened after the movie finishes, so anything that happens in the movie can’t be that impactful, can it? Miller ropes in a local bloke nicknamed Freddie, who claims to want to improve his country for the better, but then for some reason agrees to help the invading army — the audience is obliged to accept Miller’s efforts as morally correct, simply because a) he’s the protagonist and b) he’s played by Matt Damon. The whole movie takes place in a deeply grey area of morality, and the script’s failure to address this hamstrings the potential emotional impact of the narrative. This gets even sillier when Miller is written as the only character in the US forces who has a conscience (this doesn’t count as a character trait because it is automatic and never questioned); everyone else, including the general running the show, are heartless and apathetic to truth and justice, so even if Miller is some kind of hero, there’s nothing he can do because he’s technically employed by the bad guys.
Fixing the movie wouldn’t take a lot of work. First, buy a tripod, and use it. Learn to zoom out (and stay zoomed out). Humanise the main characters with photos of loved ones, or with a brief glimpse of the place where they live, complete with momentos and knick-knacks and whatnot that help define them. Develop the antagonism between Damon’s character and that of Jason Isaacs: maybe they are brothers, or maybe they trained together back at boot camp. Making them once-friends would help to deepen the conflict. As it is, there’s one ruthless macho asshole chasing down another ruthless macho asshole, and there’s no reason to root for either one (in fact, Jason Isaacs’ character actually follows the rules and obeys his orders, so technically he’s a better bloke than Damon’s). Vary the characters a bit — they don’t all have to speak in short, sharp macho-speak. Focus more on the absence of WMD — follow Damon’s Miller to a few more sites but ratchet up the action each time (think The Hurt Locker), and finish the film with the Magellan reveal and the personal showdown between Jason Isaacs and Matt Damon. And then … goodness, the list goes on. On second thoughts, fixing the movie would take a lot of work; it’s very close to unsalvageable.
For me Green Zone failed on every level. Technically, artistically and emotionally it brings nothing to the table. We already know what happened in Iraq, telling it to us again wasn’t requested or required. Making another movie with wild camera-work and incongruous crisp dialogue replacement is insulting. Making an action movie without any action is similarly offensive, and populating said movie with cardboard cut-outs of video game characters based on military cliche is breathtakingly stupid. There is literally nothing to recommend about the film, except that it’s not overly lengthy, but that’s not exactly praise in the usual sense of the word.
Green Zone score
08/100
Thoughts on a ground-breaking Oscars ceremony (82nd Academy Awards)
Mar 08
It used to be that I’d have to endure a media blockout through an entire Monday so I could enjoy the Oscars telecast. As it happens live on a Sunday night in the States, it’s actually around 10AM Monday morning in Australia, and in the past the TV network screening the event wouldn’t do so until the prime time slot later that evening, usually 8 or 9 pm. This meant having to avoid all computers, internet, radio, TV — even friendly text messages from some clueless friends– lest the surprise of who won what be spoiled before I could actually sit down and watch the show.
This year, thankfully, the 82nd Academy Awards were beamed to our shores live in the morning and I was able to kick back on the couch with some hot coffee and toast for breakfast and enjoy the show.
It was tough explaining to my two year old son that he couldn’t watch his cartoons today because Daddy was watching a special show about movies winning awards. My 11 month old was clueless and used the opportunity of me being distracted to get into anything he wasn’t supposed to– drawers, kitchen cupboards, the fridge… you name it. The Oscars are a completely different experience when you’re also running around after two little ones. But there was no way I was missing this telecast!
Neil Patrick Harris opening the show with a surprise musical number did nothing for me. I don’t like that guy much– but he did do an okay job.
I have been looking forward to Alec Baldwin and Steve Martin hosting the show since it was announced last year. No doubting they would deliver some great comedy, they certainly delivered, albeit with the occasional misstep along the way. Steve Martin won the night with his perfectly timed wise-cracks, and Baldwin’s stare-down with George Clooney was a nice touch. Made me think how great it would be to have Clooney guest-appear on 30 Rock.
Speaking of 30 Rock, the best presenters by far were Tina Fey and Robert Downey Jr. who presented the award for Best Original Screenplay. Their comical bit about writers -vs- actors is definitely a keeper. Great pairing. If only they had read out the correct name for the winner — I feel it should have gone to Quentin Tarantino for Inglourious Basterds. But hey, it was a Hurt Locker night.
‘Basterds’ did at least pick up one award and was probably the most deserving award of all the categories. Christoph Waltz winning Best Supporting Actor for his role as The Jew Hunter was a great way to start the show, and ignited a small feeling of victory inside me… perhaps bcause deep-down I somehow knew that would be all the awards ‘Basterds’ was getting. Christoph’s speech was equally winning, but it wasn’t the best of the night. That recognition arguably went to Mo’Nique after winning the Best Supporting Actress Oscar for her role in Precious. “I’d like to thank the Academy for awarding the performance and not the politics.” Take that.
I normally enjoy the In Memoriam section of the show and get a little teary when I think about the great talent that has come and gone. Especially as an old-school Michael Jackson fan, it was great seeing him be represented for his small work with motion pictures. This year the section seemed hurried and under-done. Patrick Swayze was the first Actor shown on the screens while James Taylor sang live beneath the images, but there was hardly enough time to take it in and reflect before the montage hurried on. I didn’t notice the absence of Farrah Fawcett personally, I only read about it afterwards. But that is one pretty horrible oversight by the Academy (that is, unless the family opted for the recognition to be omitted.)
There was a fantastic video package that paid homage to horror movies. Unfortunately I only got several clips into it before I realised my boy was watching and I needed to get him out the room or change channel real quick. I’ll have to find it online at a later date (or watch the delayed replay). From what I saw, it looked great. Nice to see horror as a genre getting a mention at the Oscars, and nice to see The Exorcist get a couple of nods in there, too — I sure hope An American Werewolf In London was featured.
Like last year, the stage was lined with fellow actors (in this case, co-stars) who briefly spoke personally about each nominee in the Best Actor and Actress categories before the winners were announced (Jeff Bridges for Crazy Heart and Sandra Bullock for The Blind Side). I’m a fan of this format. I like that it helps the categories stand out from the rest I like how it’s more formal and often insightful. Yes, it takes longer, but it’s worth it– plus the building of tension never hurts.
I hope next year Pixar don’t win Best Animated Feature. You know, just to mix it up and keep them on their toes. UP was okay and all, but hardly top-shelf Pixar stuff.
Seeing Cameron’s face sitting behind ex-wife Kathryn Bigelow as The Hurt Locker picked up it’s six awards was priceless. Especially as it beat Avatar to the ‘big ones’– Best Picture, Best Director and Best Editing. The time was right for Bigelow to be the first woman in Oscar history to win Best Director. It wasn’t a consolation prize. It wasn’t awarded ‘just because’. The Hurt Locker truly deserves the kudos it received from the Academy and Bigelow certainly deserves her Oscar. On a night where the art of motion pictures is honoured, I feel like they got it right. If Most Box Office Takings were a category, we know what would have won– and Avatar already has won in the ‘real world’, like it or not. But those cracking a sook over how the Academy could overlook a film that is the highest grossing of all time need to back away and look at the whole picture. It’s not just about which films the public likes best — it’s about which films have artistic merit and honour the craft of filmmaking accordingly. Avatar may look spectacular, but in terms of raw performance and honesty on the screen, The Hurt Locker is your winner. And now, that’s a fact.
Here’s a list of all the winners on the night:
Actor in a Leading Role
** Jeff Bridges in Crazy Heart
George Clooney in Up in the Air
Colin Firth in A Single Man
Morgan Freeman in Invictus
Jeremy Renner in The Hurt Locker
Actor in a Supporting Role
Matt Damon in Invictus
Woody Harrelson in The Messenger
Christopher Plummer in The Last Station
Stanley Tucci in The Lovely Bones
** Christoph Waltz in Inglourious Basterds
Actress in a Leading Role
** Sandra Bullock in The Blind Side
Helen Mirren in The Last Station
Carey Mulligan in An Education
Gabourey Sidibe in Precious: Based on the Novel ‘Push’ by Sapphire
Meryl Streep in Julie & Julia
Actress in a Supporting Role
Penélope Cruz in Nine
Vera Farmiga in Up in the Air
Maggie Gyllenhaal in Crazy Heart
Anna Kendrick in Up in the Air
** Mo’Nique in Precious: Based on the Novel ‘Push’ by Sapphire
Animated Feature Film
Coraline Henry Selick
Fantastic Mr. Fox Wes Anderson
The Princess and the Frog John Musker and Ron Clements
The Secret of Kells Tomm Moore
** Up Pete Docter
Art Direction
** Avatar Art Direction: Rick Carter and Robert Stromberg; Set Decoration: Kim Sinclair
The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus Art Direction: Dave Warren and Anastasia Masaro; Set Decoration: Caroline Smith
Nine Art Direction: John Myhre; Set Decoration: Gordon Sim
Sherlock Holmes Art Direction: Sarah Greenwood; Set Decoration: Katie Spencer
The Young Victoria Art Direction: Patrice Vermette; Set Decoration: Maggie Gray
Cinematography
** Avatar Mauro Fiore
Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince Bruno Delbonnel
The Hurt Locker Barry Ackroyd
Inglourious Basterds Robert Richardson
The White Ribbon Christian Berger
Costume Design
Bright Star Janet Patterson
Coco before Chanel Catherine Leterrier
The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus Monique Prudhomme
Nine Colleen Atwood
** The Young Victoria Sandy Powell
Directing
Avatar James Cameron
** The Hurt Locker Kathryn Bigelow
Inglourious Basterds Quentin Tarantino
Precious: Based on the Novel ‘Push’ by Sapphire Lee Daniels
Up in the Air Jason Reitman
Documentary (Feature)
Burma VJ Anders Østergaard and Lise Lense-Møller
** The Cove Louie Psihoyos and Fisher Stevens
Food, Inc. Robert Kenner and Elise Pearlstein
The Most Dangerous Man in America: Daniel Ellsberg and the Pentagon Papers Judith Ehrlich and Rick Goldsmith
Which Way Home Rebecca Cammisa
Documentary (Short Subject)
China’s Unnatural Disaster: The Tears of Sichuan Province Jon Alpert and Matthew O’Neill
The Last Campaign of Governor Booth Gardner Daniel Junge and Henry Ansbacher
The Last Truck: Closing of a GM Plant Steven Bognar and Julia Reichert
** Music by Prudence Roger Ross Williams and Elinor Burkett
Rabbit à la Berlin Bartek Konopka and Anna Wydra
Film Editing
Avatar Stephen Rivkin, John Refoua and James Cameron
District 9 Julian Clarke
** The Hurt Locker Bob Murawski and Chris Innis
Inglourious Basterds Sally Menke
Precious: Based on the Novel ‘Push’ by Sapphire Joe Klotz
Foreign Language Film
Ajami Israel
The Milk of Sorrow (La Teta Asustada) Peru
A Prophet (Un Prophète) France
** The Secret in Their Eyes (El Secreto de Sus Ojos) Argentina
The White Ribbon (Das Weisse Band) Germany
Music (Original Score)
Avatar James Horner
Fantastic Mr. Fox Alexandre Desplat
The Hurt Locker Marco Beltrami and Buck Sanders
Sherlock Holmes Hans Zimmer
** Up Michael Giacchino
Music (Original Song)
Almost There from The Princess and the Frog Music and Lyric by Randy Newman
Down in New Orleans from The Princess and the Frog Music and Lyric by Randy Newman
Loin de Paname from Paris 36 Music by Reinhardt Wagner Lyric by Frank Thomas
Take It All from Nine Music and Lyric by Maury Yeston
** The Weary Kind (Theme from Crazy Heart) from Crazy Heart Music and Lyric by Ryan Bingham and T Bone Burnett
Best Picture
Avatar James Cameron and Jon Landau, Producers
The Blind Side Gil Netter, Andrew A. Kosove and Broderick Johnson, Producers
District 9 Peter Jackson and Carolynne Cunningham, Producers
An Education Finola Dwyer and Amanda Posey, Producers
** The Hurt Locker Kathryn Bigelow, Mark Boal, Nicolas Chartier and Greg Shapiro, Producers
Inglourious Basterds Lawrence Bender, Producer
Precious: Based on the Novel ‘Push’ by Sapphire Lee Daniels, Sarah Siegel-Magness and Gary Magness, Producers
A Serious Man Joel Coen and Ethan Coen, Producers
Up Jonas Rivera, Producer
Up in the Air Daniel Dubiecki, Ivan Reitman and Jason Reitman, Producers
Short Film (Animated)
French Roast Fabrice O. Joubert
Granny O’Grimm’s Sleeping Beauty Nicky Phelan and Darragh O’Connell
The Lady and the Reaper (La Dama y la Muerte) Javier Recio Gracia
** Logorama Nicolas Schmerkin
A Matter of Loaf and Death Nick Park
Short Film (Live Action)
The Door Juanita Wilson and James Flynn
Instead of Abracadabra Patrik Eklund and Mathias Fjellström
Kavi Gregg Helvey
Miracle Fish Luke Doolan and Drew Bailey
** The New Tenants Joachim Back and Tivi Magnusson
Sound Editing
Avatar Christopher Boyes and Gwendolyn Yates Whittle
** The Hurt Locker Paul N.J. Ottosson
Inglourious Basterds Wylie Stateman
Star Trek Mark Stoeckinger and Alan Rankin
Up Michael Silvers and Tom Myers
Sound Mixing
Avatar Christopher Boyes, Gary Summers, Andy Nelson and Tony Johnson
** The Hurt Locker Paul N.J. Ottosson and Ray Beckett
Inglourious Basterds Michael Minkler, Tony Lamberti and Mark Ulano
Star Trek Anna Behlmer, Andy Nelson and Peter J. Devlin
Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen Greg P. Russell, Gary Summers and Geoffrey Patterson
Visual Effects
** Avatar Joe Letteri, Stephen Rosenbaum, Richard Baneham and Andrew R. Jones
District 9 Dan Kaufman, Peter Muyzers, Robert Habros and Matt Aitken
Star Trek Roger Guyett, Russell Earl, Paul Kavanagh and Burt Dalton
Writing (Adapted Screenplay)
District 9 Written by Neill Blomkamp and Terri Tatchell
An Education Screenplay by Nick Hornby
In the Loop Screenplay by Jesse Armstrong, Simon Blackwell, Armando Iannucci, Tony Roche
** Precious: Based on the Novel ‘Push’ by Sapphire Screenplay by Geoffrey Fletcher
Up in the Air Screenplay by Jason Reitman and Sheldon Turner
Writing (Original Screenplay)
** The Hurt Locker Written by Mark Boal
Inglourious Basterds Written by Quentin Tarantino
The Messenger Written by Alessandro Camon & Oren Moverman
A Serious Man Written by Joel Coen & Ethan Coen
Up Screenplay by Bob Peterson, Pete Docter, Story by Pete Docter, Bob Peterson, Tom McCarth
OPINIONS COUNT