Oscar Oscar!

Tuesday, January 25, 2005

Well, the Oscar nominations are out, and they’re a bit of a yawn.  But every year I try and see all of the films with major nominations (picture, direction, acting, writing).  This year I have more to catch up on than usual.  I’ve crossed out the ones I’ve already got under my belt:

==

  • The Aviator
  • Finding Neverland
  • Million Dollar Baby
  • Ray
  • Sideways
  • Vera Drake
  • Hotel Rwanda
  • Collateral
  • Closer
  • Being Julia
  • Maria Full of Grace
  • Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind
  • Kinsey
  • Before Sunset
  • The Motorcycle Diaries
  • The Incredibles

==

I’ve got a lot of catching up to do… And speaking of the Oscars, is it just me or is this year’s poster and art direction absolutely hideous?  Mixing Frutiger with Compacta? I guess the designer just chose fonts at random…

Poster77.jpg

But I suppose it’s better than last year, when apparently the theme was “digital clip-art circa 1993"…

poster_76.gif


Comments


1-25-05 · 1:49 pm

FInk says:

I gotta agree John. The Oscar poster design the past couple of years has been shockingly bad.

I thought the Aviator was not nearly as good as reviewers said it was. Gangs of New York was way better.

The movie I enjoyed the most this year was The Incredibles. It’s been slim pickins otherwise.
-----

1-25-05 · 2:23 pm

Lisa says:

Both posters are simply atrocious. Then again, maybe they’re quite appropiate considering the lack of truly award-worthy movies.

1-25-05 · 8:10 pm

Candy says:

The clipart comment made me snort. The posters are lame lame lame, considering the scope of the event and the talent to which they have access. Here’s the shocker: I haven’t seen a single movie on the list. This is because I live in a cave. I’ll probably claw my way out to the surface and watch Finding Neverland soon, though, because Johnny Depp = RAWR.

1-25-05 · 11:05 pm

Eva says:

I am NOT ready for the Oscars!!! I have only seen Eternal Sunshine from that list. 
Of the Spotless Mind.
(I always feel guilty abbreviating it, because nobody else ever does)
Of the rest, I want to see at least The Motorcycle Diaries, and Finding Neverland, and possibly Vera Drake and Maria Full of Grace.

1-26-05 · 10:19 am

mat says:

perhaps the only movie i have seen that you haven’t is collateral. i know it’s no use, but i recommend you give it a miss.

oscar definitely needs a new graphic designer.

1-26-05 · 11:32 am

Melanie says:

collateral, not worth much. however the directing was very good and jamie foxx stole every single one of his scenes.

closer, incredibly good! clive owen deserves his nomination.

maria full of grace, i would completely recommend just for the disturbance factor.

1-26-05 · 12:42 pm

Marisa says:

Finding Neverland is beautiful, and Johnny Depp sports a wonderful accent throughout.  Go now, see it!

1-26-05 · 12:59 pm

Robot Johnny says:

Finding Neverland is on the top of my list of ones to see that I haven’t yet…

1-26-05 · 3:53 pm

Simon says:

Info on the designer of this year’s poster...while it explains the poster it doesn’t explain why is was selected. 

“Brett Davidson, who has been on staff at the Academy for 10 years and currently serves as the organization’s information systems support specialist, was competing against dozens of established artists who submitted designs for the 77th Oscar poster.

Davidson’s design was chosen through a blind selection process by Academy executives and members of its Board of Governors.”

1-26-05 · 5:07 pm

Robot Johnny says:

Thanks for the info, Simon!  I guess I should now put quotations around “designer”!

1-27-05 · 10:30 am

james says:

Oh yeah, their site makes my eyes bleed. We’ve seen all the ones you have, and also Kinsey, Closer and Hotel Rwanda. I’m just not that interested in seeing Ray, and although Brooke saw Million Dollar Baby, I’m not bothered. Finding Neverland is probably pretty good, but again, I’m not running to see it. But see Les Choristes if you can (nominated for Best Foreign Film). Which reminds me, I need to see Motorcycle Diaries. TOO MANY MOVIES!!

2-7-05 · 12:26 am

Robert says:

“Davidson’s design was chosen through a blind selection process by Academy executives and members of its Board of Governors.”

Design by committee, gotta love it. With execs making design decisions, no wonder it blows…

2-9-05 · 1:09 am

Jason says:

For starters, the fonts are Abadi MT Condensed Extra Bold for the word “OSCAR” and Impact for the date and “www.oscar.com” snipe.  This according to the Academy’s graphics CD, which included the poster fonts.

In addition, most of you are only judging what you see online, but the color does not translate very well to the web, because it is not possible to digitally recreate an 8-color process; Davidson’s poster was run on an 8-color press...if you ever get to see the actual poster, I think you will be quite surprised at how much more striking it is in person.

I, too, am from the classical mode of thinking; that the Oscar poster should be this sophisticated piece of fine art. But if you look at the direction the poster has taken in the past few years (Butron Morris’ “Papparazzi” for the 76th Oscars, Alex Ross’ Batman inspired “Gold Knight” for the 74th Oscars), you’ll see a more youthful, energetic direction.

This year’s poster is no exception. The treatment of Oscar is both nostalgic and modern. It creates a bold, arresting image - it’s the biggest Oscar ever on the poster - and it is completely different than any other poster. The one thing you cannot deny is that it is unique.

And just as an informational point, although it was not reported in the Academy’s press release, the designer studied graphic design at both University of Miami and University of Southern California. In addition, there were almost 50 posters in that blind competition - some from well-known designers - and seven people unanimously chose Davidson’s design.

Perhaps you would have made different choices, but Davidson’s poster is the winning design this year… where’s YOUR work?

2-9-05 · 12:01 pm

Robot Johnny says:

The font is Impact?  Even worse!!

2-9-05 · 12:07 pm

Robot Johnny says:

Seriously tho, just because someone studied graphic design and had their work chosen by a commitee of 7 people, doesn’t mean I can’t think it’s ugly.  And I hate when people use the word “unique” as if that automatically translates as “quality”.  The concept isn’t bad at all—I like the concept.  It’s the execution that fails.

I maintain that the fonts don’t match, and that I personally find the poster unattractive.  Ain’t nothin’ wrong with that. 

My work can be found on my portfolio page if you look hard enough.

2-19-05 · 6:31 pm

Alex Rain says:

Well I would expect deviance of opinions,
I think the poster is hundred fold better then the last year. Fonts are ok, although white rim on white background does not excite me.
And background reminds me old bad Microsoft Windoors.
p.s. by the way Costello rulez

3-2-05 · 2:18 pm

Anonymous says:

Johnny,

This years Oscar poster is more a decoration rather than a design.  The guy who did the poster is more of a decorator and colorist that a designer.  Definitely not an artist.  Without a computer he’d be lost.  Still, it’s harmless enough.  The Burton Morris Oscar Poster took alot more ingenuity and effort .  It is more commonly referred to as THE DICK TRACY OSCAR POSTER

3-10-05 · 3:50 pm

Derek R. says:

I studied Design at Parsons and both posters are horrid and are freshman quality work. What problems were solved in either? Burton Morris is an artist, a scam artist who has nothing to say and has very little draftsmanship quality.  Davidson isn’t much better. But again, what do we expect from the “cheap shallow nothing to say,” Hollywdood world of crud?