The Awards Season has been heating up in recent days with a number of critics groups announcing awards or nominations. JJ Abrams Star Trek movie has been getting some notice, including five nominations today from the Broadcast Film Critics Association. Star Trek also picked up an award from the Boston Critics Association. More details below. [UPDATE: Added more critics lists links]
Five nominations from BFCA
This morning the Broadcast Film Critics Association announced nominations in over two dozen categories for their 15th annual Critic’s Choice Movie Awards. Star Trek picked up nominations in five. They are:
- Best Ensemble
- Best Makeup
- Best Visual Effects
- Best Sound
- Best Action Movie
Star Trek’s Michael Giacchino was also nominated for his Up score, but not for his Star Trek score.
Inglourious Basterds led the BFCAs with ten nominations. Other genre films include Avatar with nine nominations, District 9 with five and Up with four. The full list of nominees is available at bfca.org. The winners of the BFCA Awards will be announced in a ceremony to be broadcast live on VH1 Friday January 15 at 9:00 PM ET. Kristen Chenoweth will be hosting.
Boston & St. Louis critics honor Trek
Over the weekend the Boston Society of Film Critics announced the winners of their 2009 movie awards, and Star Trek tied (with Precious) for the win for Best Ensemble. The full is available at thebsfc.org.
UPDATE: The St. Louis Film Critics posted nominations for their awards and Star Trek was nominated for Best Visual Effects.
Star Trek’s ensemble honored by Boston Critics
No nods from other weekend announcements
As noted before, this week a number of groups are announcing nominees or winners for various awards. Here is a list of announcements over the last few days that did not include Star Trek.
- AFI Top 10 Films
- Alliance of Women Film Journalists – Winners
- Los Angeles Film Critics – Winners
- New York Online Film Critics – Winners
- New York Film Critics Circle – Winners
UPDATE: 2 more Monday no-Trek
Coming up next
Up later this week there are three more milestones in the Awards Season
- 12/15 – Golden Globe Nominations
- 12/17 – SAG Nominations
- 12/21 – Chicago Film Critics Awards
Oscar Watch – Expansion will lead to ‘more of the same’
Over the summer with the Best Picture category was expanded to 10 films, there was some buzz from the Entertainment Press that Star Trek and other big box office films could end up on the list. This idea was bolstered by Star Trek ending up on the top 10 National Board of Review list earlier this month. However, a new article in the LA Times ‘Envelope’ awards blog seems to pour water on the notion of popular films in the gold race. The LA times reports that despite the expansion "the process appears rooted in familiar terrain." And according to insiders "many of the lead contenders look the same as they have in recent years: dark, character-driven films that have garnered niche audiences." industry consultant Tony Angellotti summed it up saying:
There are people in the academy who saw [the expansion] as a chance to bring other kinds of movies into the fold. Instead it’s been an opportunity to recognize more of the same.
Do I smell an Oscar coming?
Nah, that’s just the beans I had last night.
Because, the day that a Trek movie gets an Oscar for anything besides effects will be the day that the dead rise and walk the earth.
@3 Isn’t it Froderick?
@2 Bourbon and beans; an explosive combination
I wouldn’t expect the Alliance of Women Film Journalists to acknowledge Trek, being a mostly male ensemble with women in very mini-skirts. Still, the others should not have ignored Trek. JJ, make them pay!
“Do I smell an Oscar coming?”
Not for best movie.
It was a great movie when compared to Indiana Jones: Kingdom Of The Crystal Skull, or other “popcorn” flicks but here’s hoping the next movie REALLY justifies the re-boot.
They’ve done a pretty good job so far.
More of the same old boring Oscars that no one realy cares about. LLike I have posted before. The great films everypne likes will never get nomanated. The films that no one likes or cares about will get nomanated. Same ole! Same ole!!!. Trek may get Visual and such. But that is expected.
#6: “Still, the others should not have ignored Trek. JJ, make them pay!”
Let’s hope he “makes them pay” by delivering a smashing followup film.
Surprised “Moon” didn’t make the AFI list.
#7 “It was a great movie when compared to Indiana Jones: Kingdom Of The Crystal Skull”
In fairness, a YouTube video of some guy arm-farting is a great movie when compared to Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull.
“The line must be drawn HEAH! This far, no farther!”
“They will PAY for what they’ve done!”
[ / PIcard]
they added animated movie, because many of them are better than some live action films (Beauty and the Beast far superior to Silence of the Lambs), the least they could do is add blockbuster category, or action film category, forget adding 5 entrants to the highbrow only my brother’s best friend’s uncle twice removed saw that cerebral film about narcolepsy for best picture.
AGAIN…an Oscar for Leonard Nimoy for Best Actor in a Supporting Role!!
For those of us who enjoyed Star Trek, we have a lot to like. The best thing, IMO (and a few others’), is the new cast. These actors have IT, close to the same IT the original actors had. I was one of those fans who accepted the fact that the original cast was being replaced, but could not conceive of any one other than Shatner as Kirk, Nimoy as Spock, and so forth. The new cast have really captured the essence of Kirk, Spock, McCoy, etc., while making the roles their own, in a natural and comfortable way.
The visual look of the film is exactly right, helping to give Star Trek a sharper, edgier look. It is a grand, epic film that manages to bring excitement back to Trek, the kind of excitement we had while waiting for TSFS, TVH, etc. While I don’t think any other composer will ever top Jerry Goldsmith, I liked Giacchino’s score very much, and found it to evoke the vastness of space in much the way Goldsmith’s score did.
I hope the film wins many awards, but I really don’t think it matters whether Star Trek wins anything, or not. The film succeeded in its mission: to bring Star Trek back to life. And it did so in a big enough way to warrant more Trek. If Star Trek manages to secure a future of movies, and, possibliy, a new life on tv, then WE win.
Last night, I listened to the Orci/Kurtzman Commentary on the Blu-Ray dvd of TVH. Sounded like they have a pretty good grasp of Trek, to me.
Uh-oh! Starting to look like the realities of an Oscar nom for Best Picture are creeping in on our high hopes. The Hollywood Highbrow just keep pushing more of the same. (I hardly recognized any of the titles on the AFI list.) They still want to be considered ARTists that add meaning and value to the great masterpieces of modern culture. They can’t be seen as supporting fluff films that only the lowest common denominator of the masses make popular.
(The Hangover being the exception to the rule. FUNNY movie though!)
I’m a bit surprised JJ didn’t get a director nod. Did I miss something?
You guys who Really think this film (which I greatly enjoyed, certainly) is worthy of an Oscar for best picture are severely disillusioned, IMHO.
#11 – that’s hilarious, and true.
@17–
Yeah, he’s not that great of a director. He should stay where he belongs, WAY behind the scenes. i.e: strictly as a writer or producer.
#15… agree 100%! Well said!
“frederick von fronkensteen –
Because, the day that a Trek movie gets an Oscar for anything besides effects will be the day that the dead rise and walk the earth.”
Well, Spock did rise from the dead and is not only walking the earth, but there was two of him walking around Star Fleet HQ in San Francisco (that’s on Earth by the way). :D
Even if Avatar doesn’t live up to its hype, with this kind of hype it is almost a certainty that it will overshadow Star Trek for Oscar consideration in all categories. Avatar’s is getting Oscar reviews. Star Trek’s reviews were enthusiastic, but nothing like these. Personally, I see it as a stretch that more than one Sci-Fi film would be nominated by the academy considering all the other oscar deserving films out there, which most of the people who post on this website are unlikely to ever see. And given that the only sci-fi films ever to be nominated for best picture are Star Wars and ET, the bar has been set pretty high for what will be included in that field. Avatar seemingly comes as close as anything to that criteria. As much as I loved Star Trek, I really don’t see it in the same category as the precedents that have been set. Frankly, it’s been almost 30 years since one was nominated – if one is going to ever win, this surely seems like the year with Avatar.
I see NBR nominations being announced before all the films of 2009 were released as jumping the gun in favor of Star Trek. Therefore, we should all be happy that Star Trek has gotten the buzz it has and the time in lime light before Avatar hit the stage. What is it they say, it was an honor just to be nominated? Considering where Star Trek has come from, I say it is an honor just to be talked about being nominated. ;-)
Why does everyone hate Indy IV so much? How is it any worse than Temple of Doom?
#23: “Why does everyone hate Indy IV so much?”
I don’t hate it. It was just crap, is all. Hardly worthy of _hatred,_ just sad dismissal. It was nice to see Harrison Ford in a wool-felt fedora again, and nice to see Marion again, too … shame they didn’t have a decent movie.
“How is it any worse than Temple of Doom?”
I don’t recall anyone in this thread specifically saying it was. Temple of Doom is crap, too, last I checked.
Raiders of the Lost Ark is one of the greatest (if not THE greatest) genre-action movies ever made, but with sequels, it has no track record to be proud of. I think the best thing I can say about Last Crusade, even, is that it’s a passable apology for Temple of Doom, and not much more (it benefits by comparison, but I haven’t had the energy to apologize for it in many years).
I think the TV show is the most respectable tie-in, honestly. But where are you seeing hatred for Indy IV? Is this like the mythical “haters” of ST09 so many talk about but nobody can get anything but a fuzzy long-range photo of? :)
it would be nice if leonard got a nomination…
I just watched Raiders of the Lost Ark the other day to remind myself why I loved Indiana Jones as a kid.
How times change.
It seems like every franchise has to have another go at it because we’ve got all these crazy computer graphics capabilities, when maybe we should slow down on all the re-make re-boot re-hash business.
As much as I’d love for this to get a Best Pic nod, I’m already getting the feeling that Star Trek is falling behind. Had it turned up on the AFI top ten this past weekend, I’d feel better about its chances. Same if the reviews for Avatar were poor. However, so far they are far from it.
Nothing from LA and NYC. Oscar buzz this time of year is pushed by these smaller critic circle winners. Imagine each film getting pushed by a wave and with each win, it’s pushed farther and farther towards shore and Oscar gold. For example, this weekend The Hurt Locker got a BIG push to pretty much frontrunner because of its wins.
However, they ARE critic’s circles and while many critics liked Star Trek very much, they loved other films more. And admittedly, many of these circles don’t publish a top ten, just a lone winner.
So I hope there’s still a chance. :-)
I hate to say this folks, but “Star Trek” doesn’t stand a chance of being nominated in any category, never mind “Best Picture”. “Avatar” WILL win best visual effects, make-up etc. I’ll bet that crap like “Transformers 2” and “New Moon” will take precedence over “Star Trek”. The following movies will be nominated for “Best Visual Effects”: “Avatar”, “Transformers 2”, “New Moon”, “Terminator Salvation”, ‘Night At The Museum 2″, etc. The point being, when one considers the possibilty of their favorite movie beding nominated, you can count on the opposite. An example would be “The Dark Knight”. Many people had the film pegged for a best picture nomination and Christopher Nolan for best director but neither were nominated. The film did win some technical awards and best supporting award for Heath Ledger’s performance, but clearly the film was snubbed. The new “Star Trek” wasn’t as good as “The Dark Knight” and probably shouldn’t be nominated for best picture, but the movie deserves a best director nod as well as technical category nominations. I have said this before, there should have been a “Best Action/Sci-Fi” category years ago, but the Academy Awards people have chosen to bury their heads in the sands.
“Lord of The Rings: The Return of The King” and ‘Titanic” being the exceptions.
They only nominated three films for visual effects anymore. And from what I saw in its trailer, New Moon’s effects looked terrible.
And I don’t think splitting Oscars up into different genre awards is such a good idea.
#29 What’s wrong with a “Best Action/Sci-Fi” category? They have a “Best Animated Film” category. The smaller, independent, sentimental, weepy films will always dominate the “Best Picture” category anyway.
#30
Animation isn’t a genre, it is a genre, it is a technique.
And why lump Action and “Sci-Fi” together? Would you put Moon and The Hurt Locker in in the same category? And if you’re going to have that category, you’d also need Best Comedy, Best Romance, Best Historical Film, etc. etc.
And you think the ceremony is too long now.
Correction, “Animation isn’t a genre, it’s a technique.”
How about a edit comment option?
Not exactly the same thing.
You’re advocating for separate genres. Best Animated Film category awards a particular style of filmmaking i.e. non-live action. As we’ve seen with previous winners, there are animated sci-fi films, animated fantasy, animated superhero films etc.
Even then, I’m not particularly fond of the category. Seemed like a way of making sure they’d never have to nominate one for regular Best Picture.
Animation may be a technique but it is also a genre. And just because I said there should be a “Best Action/Sci-Fi” category doesn’t mean there should be a bestcomedy or romantic or historical category. All I’m saying is that an historical film or comedy or an epic romance has a better chance at being nominated or even winning than a movie such as “Avatar”, even though that movie is getting excellent reviews. The animation category came in after it became obvious that great animated films were being snubbed in favor of dramas. And yes, I do realize that “Best Action/Sci-Fi” is a bit broad, and perhaps a little contrary to itself, but I was just trying to make an example. But perhaps “Best Blockbuster” would suffice and have it limited to 3 or 4 films to prevent it from becoming diluted. Clearly, viewers have been tuning out for a number of years(although last year’s numbers were up but only slightly) and the Academy has to do something to bring in more viewers. The reason for the long length of the show is because of the number of musical performances(although I could be wrong on that) the time-wasting of not-funny people trying to be funny when reading the nominations, and having 3 minutes plus of commercial time every 5 minutes.
#33 I do understand where you are coming from. I realize the Oscars are categorized more by the technical aspects of filmmaking than genres. But it is this mentality that will never allow a science fiction movie to win best picture. When “Lord of The Rings: The Return of The King won, it was
probably at least a partially cynical move by the Academy. They probably wanted a drama to win, but couldn’t figure out which one should win so TROTK “won” by default. As great a movie as that one was, it would not be nominated today if it came out this year instead of 6 years ago. Case in point: “The Dark Knight”. Instead, they decided to nominate a Kate Winslet film that got only mixed reviews. It’s the same thing when they chose “Shakespeare In Love” over the war movie “Saving Private Ryan”.
That movie won on the strength of Judy Dench’s performance and style over the substance of “Saving Private Ryan”. And alot of people would agree that “Star Wars” should have won in ’78.
#35: “And alot of people would agree that “Star Wars” should have won in ‘78.”
Ye gods. Speaking as a lifelong Star Wars fanboy with a heartful of action figures and a mind where the Millenium Falcon soars forever: Annie Hall was the better film, and not just by a little.
Now, I’d put Raiders of the Lost Ark over Chariots of Fire (by a bit) … I’d put Crouching Tiger over Gladiator (by far) … I’d put Fellowship of the Ring over A Beautiful Mind (by WAY far) but as much as I love Star Wars … Annie Frickin’ Hall, man. Annie Frickin’ Hall.
I don’t think I ever really thought Star Trek could get nominated for best picture, but all the hype has gotten me to hope. Although I’m pretty sure it will get nominations on other categories.
And no matter what gets nominated for best picture, in my mind, Star Trek is the best film of the year.
Wow. Totally snubbed by the Golden Globes. Not one nomination. Avatar got 4 nominations including best picture, director and score. Wow. Sadly that’s pretty much it for Trek. The Globes are a pretty good indicator of how the Oscar’s go and Avatar is likely going to overshadow Trek in all categories where Trek might have otherwise been considered. Oh well, easy come easy go.
Has Avatar been released internationally already? How can a movie get nominated for Golden Globe awards before it’s even released?
#39: “How can a movie get nominated for Golden Globe awards before it’s even released?”
Kind of creepy, isn’t it? :(