Author Topic: SAG Awards thread (Sunday - January 29)  (Read 80091 times)

Offline coguaro

  • Jack + Ennis
  • *
  • Posts: 2381
  • Gender: Male
Re: LIVE THREAD - SAG awards Sunday - January 29, 7 pm Eastern
« Reply #360 on: Jan 30, 2006, 04:25 AM »
I couldn't saw SAG show from here Italy.. reading your posts is seems that the was a true defeat for BBM... :-[
I don't know what's importance and meant of different awards (Venice Gold lion, Oscar, SAG....).. but I found very strange that could be a so different evaluation between different awards.. how can change like this the evaluation of a film or an actor? Could you explain it to me? Is there any political choice?
You give a lot of importance to the way that Heath and Jack attended the show.. is it so fundamental? What they was judging was the film, actors performances or what?

let me know
coguaro
I swear... I will never mistake again...

Offline rabjr1

  • Ennis
  • ******
  • Posts: 1886
  • Gender: Male
Re: LIVE THREAD - SAG awards Sunday - January 29, 7 pm Eastern
« Reply #361 on: Jan 30, 2006, 06:18 AM »
Insite into Golden Globes Awards: 

 I googled PIA ZADORA and Golden Globe Award (don't know how to thread(?) to this forum.  Anyways the GGA have been in the past rife with scandal.  The Oscars are voted on by all the members of the Academy of etc etc etc.  NOW, not ALL of them see all the pictures that they are casting theri votes for (another Hollywood dirty little secret) thus the reason for all the Oscar ads from the producers etc.  The Academy does not want the GG to tell them what to vote for so sometimes what gets a GGA does not always get an Oscar.  As far as SAG is concerned I don't have enough info to have an informed opinion about the voting pattern/bias of SAG.
RAB aka Raoul The Really Rotten

Offline jAcK_i_SwEaR

  • Cassie
  • *
  • Posts: 2
  • Gender: Male
Re: LIVE THREAD - SAG awards Sunday - January 29, 7 pm Eastern
« Reply #362 on: Jan 30, 2006, 06:53 AM »
I'm so sad BBM didn't win...
 >:(
 :'( :'( :'(
This is one of the best movie ever... Me so sad :(

Offline hidesert

  • Alma
  • ****
  • Posts: 488
  • Gender: Male
Re: LIVE THREAD - SAG awards Sunday - January 29, 7 pm Eastern
« Reply #363 on: Jan 30, 2006, 08:46 AM »
Insite into Golden Globes Awards: 

I googled PIA ZADORA and Golden Globe Award (don't know how to thread(?) to this forum.  Anyways the GGA have been in the past rife with scandal.  The Oscars are voted on by all the members of the Academy of etc etc etc.  NOW, not ALL of them see all the pictures that they are casting theri votes for (another Hollywood dirty little secret) thus the reason for all the Oscar ads from the producers etc.  The Academy does not want the GG to tell them what to vote for so sometimes what gets a GGA does not always get an Oscar.  As far as SAG is concerned I don't have enough info to have an informed opinion about the voting pattern/bias of SAG.

Yeah GGAs are given by a small group (about 85) of Hollywood foreign press writers while SAG is a huge organization of screen actors.   Some SAG members also belong to the other guilds because they are also produccers, directors, writers etc.   

SAG awards, as was mentioned during the telecast, are young awards they started in 1994.  I think they looked around and thought all the other guilds (producers, directors, writers etc) give out awards and we need to do it.  The other guilds are smaller but have a long history.

Since they are giving awards to their peers it appears in general that they go for older more experienced actors - reward your buddies.  "Crash" was on some SAG prediction lists because it has an ensemble of "74" actors (mentioned during awards) and many well established actors were part of the ensemble.  On the other hand,  the BBM cast is composed of young actors with the exception of Randy Quaid.  It's just depressing that BBM got so many SAG nominations and walked away with nothing.

As a predictor of Oscars it looks like the BBM cast could get nominated in the acting categories but not win any of the acting awards.  Even an Oscar nomination though is an honor and is a career enhancer.  And a "nomination" is used like a "win" in maketing credits - "Academy Award Nominee...". 

At 5:30 am (Pacific Standard Time) the AMPAS (Oscar) nominations will be announced in Hollywood and the marketing machines for all of the studios kick into high gear. 

By the way, did anyone notice that there was a commercial for BBM during the SAG awards last night ?  I live on the West Coast so it might have only run in this market.   
 
« Last Edit: Jan 30, 2006, 10:17 PM by hidesert »

Offline bnjmn3

  • Jack
  • *****
  • Posts: 555
  • Gender: Male
  • BBM: The Best Picture Show
Re: LIVE THREAD - SAG awards Sunday - January 29, 7 pm Eastern
« Reply #364 on: Jan 30, 2006, 10:07 AM »
Crash, with its large ensemble cast, is a perfect choice for the Ensemble award.  Other winners Lost and Desparate Housewives are large ensemble as well. I don't think the SAG will affect BBM in terms of Best Picture , Director, Adapted Screenplay or Cinematography...I read today that Heath won a Cinefile Society Best Actor Award.  But I expect many BBM Oscar nominations...that will be great for all the fans...
We can't change it. We will have to stand it.

Offline francis.shim

  • aka Jack Nasty who loves you!!!
  • Alma
  • ****
  • Posts: 258
  • Gender: Male
  • Brokeback Mountain, I swear...
Re: LIVE THREAD - SAG awards Sunday - January 29, 7 pm Eastern
« Reply #365 on: Jan 30, 2006, 10:28 AM »
I just watched the tape again and got me thinking if they had any rehearsal?

The intro for BBM sounded like it was written by some third rate romance novelist on some bad drugs.  Still, if I'd been Heath, I think I would have tried to maintain my composure a little bit better. Heath did look embarass that he had to read it.  And yes, he should've tried to maintain his composure. I could understand why some of you are disappointed on their behaviors.

You know, honestly, I think Heath was really being awkward, shy, uncomfortable, etc.  It may not be the first time they've spoken in public, but it may be the first time a really bright spotlight shown so closely on them.  That awkward hand gesture HAD to be one of Heath's many weird quirks (why would ANYBODY do that deliberately?)  I think it made Jake crack up, and they ended up having a ridiculous fit of the giggles.  I wouldn't take it more seriously than that.

I will agree by the time the Oscars get here, they had BETTER grow up, but lets hope the producer of the show is smart enough NOT to select Heath as a presenter. If I saw someone so uncomfortable being on stage before a live audience (and millions of TV viewers) I'd spare him the embarassment and let him sit (un)comfortably in his seat for the duration of the show.

They should be proud of what they have done and not shy away from what this movie is about. Age does bring experiences and they will learn like we all do.

Just my two cents. To me, they and we are all winners and I hope to see many of you at the Oscar.

Many thanks, Ethan...

I saw postings that showed many members were upset by Heath's behaviour; however, like you said I hope it was just a hiccup on their part... and I do agree that Heath is very "volatile" and was probably very nervous...

I am just praying that they realize their impact...

Again thanks!

Peace,
Frank

JerBear418720

  • Guest
Re: LIVE THREAD - SAG awards Sunday - January 29, 7 pm Eastern
« Reply #366 on: Jan 30, 2006, 10:56 AM »
OK, I'd like to revisit the presentation of BBM at the SAGS in the clear light of day.

I think that when BBM was created, everybody concerned thought that what they were making was a modest indy film based upon a wonderful piece of writing.  NOBODY expected that it would evolve into the entertainment and sociological phenomenon that it has become.  We now have a situation where some very young (albeit wonderfully talented) actors find themselves in the position of having to be spokespersons for something that is no longer a movie, but a force - and they have to do it again, and again, and again in all kinds of situations where the harsh light of public scrutiny is shined right on them.  That is a LOT to pile on the shoulders of people who lack the life experience to be asked to consistently uphold high standards for this enormous responsibility.

I'm going to dismiss the presentation of BBM at the SAGS as an anomaly. and I hope that you will, too.  Heath Ledger clearly is very uncomfortable under the spotlight, and that can be an agonizing thing to have to endure.  He deserves our sympathy and support - he's an actor and a human being, not some paragon of perfection.  There are people who function on a very high level in work or social situations that are highly structured, but they painfully crumble and retreat inwardly when the public expectation is more of a "free-fall" type of thing.  Heath may very well be one of them.  IF that is true, I would hope that those involved with BBM will get him a PR consultant and/or mental health specialist to HELP this man.

Let's keep our eyes on the ball.  Despite any human failings or quirks (and who doesn't have them?), Heath gave us the wonderful gift of one of the great performances in movie history.  That will remain true regardless of the outcome of ANY awards ceremony.

Damn, I'd REALLY like to see him shine luminously at the Academy Awards!  I think that for Heath the man, that would be the biggest victory of all.

JerBear

P.S.  I know that many forum members are very young people.  I apologize if any of this sounded patronizing to you.  Yeah, some of us get older and acquire a degree of wisdom, but some of us just get OLDER - LOL!

Offline francis.shim

  • aka Jack Nasty who loves you!!!
  • Alma
  • ****
  • Posts: 258
  • Gender: Male
  • Brokeback Mountain, I swear...
Re: LIVE THREAD - SAG awards Sunday - January 29, 7 pm Eastern
« Reply #367 on: Jan 30, 2006, 11:04 AM »
OK, I'd like to revisit the presentation of BBM at the SAGS in the clear light of day.

I think that when BBM was created, everybody concerned thought that what they were making was a modest indy film based upon a wonderful piece of writing.  NOBODY expected that it would evolve into the entertainment and sociological phenomenon that it has become.  We now have a situation where some very young (albeit wonderfully talented) actors find themselves in the position of having to be spokespersons for something that is no longer a movie, but a force - and they have to do it again, and again, and again in all kinds of situations where the harsh light of public scrutiny is shined right on them.  That is a LOT to pile on the shoulders of people who lack the life experience to be asked to consistently uphold high standards for this enormous responsibility.

I'm going to dismiss the presentation of BBM at the SAGS as an anomaly. and I hope that you will, too.  Heath Ledger clearly is very uncomfortable under the spotlight, and that can be an agonizing thing to have to endure.  He deserves our sympathy and support - he's an actor and a human being, not some paragon of perfection.  There are people who function on a very high level in work or social situations that are highly structured, but they painfully crumble and retreat inwardly when the public expectation is more of a "free-fall" type of thing.  Heath may very well be one of them.  IF that is true, I would hope that those involved with BBM will get him a PR consultant and/or mental health specialist to HELP this man.

Let's keep our eyes on the ball.  Despite any human failings or quirks (and who doesn't have them?), Heath gave us the wonderful gift of one of the great performances in movie history.  That will remain true regardless of the outcome of ANY awards ceremony.

Damn, I'd REALLY like to see him shine luminously at the Academy Awards!  I think that for Heath the man, that would be the biggest victory of all.

JerBear

P.S.  I know that many forum members are very young people.  I apologize if any of this sounded patronizing to you.  Yeah, some of us get older and acquire a degree of wisdom, but some of us just get OLDER - LOL!

Touche!   Like I said, we can only sit back and cross our toes!

Peace,
Frank

Offline ethan

  • Administrator
  • Jack + Ennis
  • ***
  • Posts: 11210
  • Country: us
  • Gender: Male
Re: SAG Awards thread (Sunday - January 29)
« Reply #368 on: Jan 30, 2006, 11:55 AM »
Hello everyone, a new topic has been created for your reaction and thought from SAG.

Please post them HERE
Remembering Pierre (chameau) 1960-2015, a "Capricorn bro and crazy Frog Uncle from the North Pole." You are missed

Offline rabjr1

  • Ennis
  • ******
  • Posts: 1886
  • Gender: Male
Re: SAG Awards thread (Sunday - January 29)
« Reply #369 on: Jan 30, 2006, 12:54 PM »
I believe that on the Oprah show Heath and Jake said they would not have done this movie if they knew it woa going to produce this amount of buzz.
RAB aka Raoul The Really Rotten

Offline Toadily

  • Mod-ChickY Brigade
  • Jack + Ennis
  • *
  • Posts: 2777
  • Gender: Female
  • "Friend, we got ourselves a situation here"
Re: SAG Awards thread (Sunday - January 29)
« Reply #370 on: Jan 30, 2006, 02:02 PM »
I believe that on the Oprah show Heath and Jake said they would not have done this movie if they knew it woa going to produce this amount of buzz.

JAke said that, I sort of don't believe it but I do also know what he means.  They approached it like it would be an art house movie with a small following.  It's sort of like if you wrote poetry for your town and it became a hit, you would be pleased but also like "Wow I wrote that for a few people" and you feel exposed a bit.
"it's Love, Blockhead!"
-Pierre Marivaux  The Triumph of Love

"To love an idea is to love it a little more than one should."  -Jean Rostand

Offline ranchgal

  • Lureen
  • ***
  • Posts: 120
Re: SAG Awards thread (Sunday - January 29)
« Reply #371 on: Jan 30, 2006, 03:08 PM »
I don't think that their introduction will have any effect on their carreers as such.
BUT First they should fire the writers that wrote that script---it was awful----no wonder Heath and jake were having problems getting through it!!  Going on about sheepherding, and the language was NOT something any of the cast or crew would have said any time---it was really lame.   They should have let H/J just talk about the film the way they have been over all the interviews---what ever happened to just descibing--like "force of nature"  tragic and lots of other key words that were not used for this intro that should have been.  Those writers should be shot.

BUT  either way, they each needed more rehearsal for it, and they should have had it on paper.
I think those monitors may have either been too low or very hard to see--as they were NOT the only ones to have problems seeing/reading the scripts.   

I really think IF Heath would have had his written on paper like Peter Graves did, he would have come off much better, and not so unprepared.  Would have been better if he would have memorized and recited back, and not let the material get personally too him/them.
I feel bad that they couldn't "cowboy up" and just stand at attention, too bad Heath couldn't have acted like he was still Harry Haversham, and stood straight till he got it over with.
I know they were very nervous, and that the script sucked, but they have to get more professional about their delivery, it really came off that Heath really couldn't take it seriously, and that comes off as negative to your peers.   They are very young, but they let the moment steal the situation, and it really got away from them.

Offline ranchgal

  • Lureen
  • ***
  • Posts: 120
Re: SAG Awards thread (Sunday - January 29)
« Reply #372 on: Jan 30, 2006, 03:13 PM »
I believe that on the Oprah show Heath and Jake said they would not have done this movie if they knew it woa going to produce this amount of buzz.

JAke said that, I sort of don't believe it but I do also know what he means.  They approached it like it would be an art house movie with a small following.  It's sort of like if you wrote poetry for your town and it became a hit, you would be pleased but also like "Wow I wrote that for a few people" and you feel exposed a bit.

I think what he meant was IF they would have had a clue as to people's reaction, the movie could have turned out very different, because of all the buzz----they would have been under much more pressure as to how to make it, and what their input to the characters should be.

not that they wouldn't have made the movie, but that any added pressure would have changed how they approached the material, and it wouldn't have been the same.
plus they are all getting sick of stupid questions, and the fact that too many people concentrate on the physical between the men, and not the concept of the story---which is what drew them into it in the first place.

Offline hidesert

  • Alma
  • ****
  • Posts: 488
  • Gender: Male
Re: LIVE THREAD - SAG awards Sunday - January 29, 7 pm Eastern
« Reply #373 on: Jan 30, 2006, 10:15 PM »
We now have a situation where some very young (albeit wonderfully talented) actors find themselves in the position of having to be spokespersons for something that is no longer a movie, but a force - and they have to do it again, and again, and again in all kinds of situations where the harsh light of public scrutiny is shined right on them.  That is a LOT to pile on the shoulders of people who lack the life experience to be asked to consistently uphold high standards for this enormous responsibility.

I'm going to dismiss the presentation of BBM at the SAGS as an anomaly. and I hope that you will, too.  Heath Ledger clearly is very uncomfortable under the spotlight, and that can be an agonizing thing to have to endure.  He deserves our sympathy and support - he's an actor and a human being, not some paragon of perfection.  There are people who function on a very high level in work or social situations that are highly structured, but they painfully crumble and retreat inwardly when the public expectation is more of a "free-fall" type of thing.  Heath may very well be one of them.  IF that is true, I would hope that those involved with BBM will get him a PR consultant and/or mental health specialist to HELP this man. 


I agree with you.  Jake Gyllenhaal admitted in the Oprah interview that if they knew the media attention the movie would bring, that they might not have done it.  Part of it of course are the expectations of movie viewers, but the actors were also not ready for the barrage of fans and press interviews.  Michelle and Heath are a bit shy while Jake and Anne are outgoing - they are just people and styles will vary.

Don't know if Heath was a bit tipsy or just nervous, but I too hope he overcomes it at the Oscar ceremony.  Jake looked at him funny a few times.  A Xanax and a Beta Blocker should temporarily help. :-)

If the actors don't win any Oscars, they still had parts in a trend setting film that will go down in the movie history books.  And it will add some stars to their portfolios.

         
« Last Edit: Jan 31, 2006, 12:02 AM by hidesert »

Offline Jack_ME

  • My philosophy
  • Lureen
  • ***
  • Posts: 152
  • Gender: Male
  • Jack in Maine
Re: LIVE THREAD - SAG awards Sunday - January 29, 7 pm Eastern
« Reply #374 on: Jan 31, 2006, 06:47 PM »
Crash, with its large ensemble cast, is a perfect choice for the Ensemble award.  Other winners Lost and Desparate Housewives are large ensemble as well. I don't think the SAG will affect BBM in terms of Best Picture , Director, Adapted Screenplay or Cinematography...I read today that Heath won a Cinefile Society Best Actor Award.  But I expect many BBM Oscar nominations...that will be great for all the fans...

You know of course I am biased toward "our" film at the moment, but I have to voice my opinion about the idea that an "ensemble" award SHOULD go to a huge cast....which it seems is the implication being made here. At first blush, I would say exactly the opposite with this rationale. The more actors the more "stories"(threads) within a film; and the more stories/threads, the more content for an audience to see and absorb. With more to absorb, the sheer variety is "interesting" and attention getting. And in the end, the greater the number of actors, the less responsibility or pressure or expectation that anyone of them has to carry the film. Whereas, take my train of thought here, and turn it on its head. The less actors in a film the greater the responsibility and pressure on each of their performance to carry the film. So in the end, I would say that a huge cast is a potential case of "get lost in the crowd", whereas with a cast of the number from "our" film, who DO all work together as an ensemble is far more deserving of an award if that is successful, as it is in "our" movie.

I'm am NOT dissing the movie Crash or its actors here. I'm speaking about a point of view.

Jack in Maine
MY PHILOSOPHY DISCLAIMER: All my comments concern the MOVIE and the content and inferences obtained there. All interpretations, projections, speculations, and opinions about plot and characters are based SOLELY on the content of the movie. They can not be argued or debated by quoting the printed short story. A comparison of the two media is an interesting discussion but must be a separate discussion.

Offline Jack_ME

  • My philosophy
  • Lureen
  • ***
  • Posts: 152
  • Gender: Male
  • Jack in Maine
Re: SAG Awards thread (Sunday - January 29)
« Reply #375 on: Jan 31, 2006, 06:55 PM »
I believe that on the Oprah show Heath and Jake said they would not have done this movie if they knew it woa going to produce this amount of buzz.

JAke said that, I sort of don't believe it but I do also know what he means.  They approached it like it would be an art house movie with a small following.  It's sort of like if you wrote poetry for your town and it became a hit, you would be pleased but also like "Wow I wrote that for a few people" and you feel exposed a bit.

I think what he meant was IF they would have had a clue as to people's reaction, the movie could have turned out very different, because of all the buzz----they would have been under much more pressure as to how to make it, and what their input to the characters should be.

not that they wouldn't have made the movie, but that any added pressure would have changed how they approached the material, and it wouldn't have been the same.
plus they are all getting sick of stupid questions, and the fact that too many people concentrate on the physical between the men, and not the concept of the story---which is what drew them into it in the first place.

Ranchgal, I agree. That's what I thought Jake meant, and I think Anne Hathaway said something very similar. As you say, if they had expected it to be such a social phenom, such a message movie, they would have felt pressure to do it "right" which would have created different performances by the actors. Just paraphrasing you here.
I agree. So thank goodness it did turn out as it has...in fact that is probably an element which went into the performances (the lack of expectation of a large audience) and so the performances ended up creating this phenom. (Along with the great idea, the great scrrenplay, the great directing, the great editing, the great music, the great........)
Jack in Maine
MY PHILOSOPHY DISCLAIMER: All my comments concern the MOVIE and the content and inferences obtained there. All interpretations, projections, speculations, and opinions about plot and characters are based SOLELY on the content of the movie. They can not be argued or debated by quoting the printed short story. A comparison of the two media is an interesting discussion but must be a separate discussion.