MovieChat Forums > For Your Consideration (2006) Discussion > Post Oscar Nomination Interviews...

Post Oscar Nomination Interviews...

posted 17 years ago by jeff-moore5
23 replies | jump to latest

I thought this movie was great (not as hysterical as Best in Show or Waiting for Guffman, but a world above A Mighty Wind), and I was laughing throughout the movie (especially at the "Why don't we call it Home for Easter and make it all about a Bunny!" line).

BUT....

The post Oscar Nomination interviews had me crying I was laughing so hard. I started feeling giddy when they interviewed Parker Posey and Fred Willard kept saying "I guess you can take comfort knowing that people won't be bothering you for your autograph anymore." But as soon as Catherine O'Hara came out of her house all drunk and sloppy, I couldn't stop laughing. That whole scene is one of the funniest scenes in any of Christopher Guests' movies.

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Mister_Scratch 17 years ago

The post Oscar Nomination interviews had me crying I was laughing so hard. I started feeling giddy when they interviewed Parker Posey and Fred Willard kept saying "I guess you can take comfort knowing that people won't be bothering you for your autograph anymore." But as soon as Catherine O'Hara came out of her house all drunk and sloppy, I couldn't stop laughing. That whole scene is one of the funniest scenes in any of Christopher Guests' movies.

I thought that entire sequence of interviews was the worst part of the movie. Why would an entertainment show go out of it's way to find unnominated actors and laugh in their face. There are dozens of Oscar-potential movies that wind up with little or no nominations every year, why would they single out just one. When Guest pokes fun at something (small-town theater, dog shows, folk music) it is always with respect. That sequence of FYC just felt so wrong.

I understand he needed some closure to the characters, some "aftermath" of not getting nominated, but that was a completely wrong way to do it. Here is a better way he could handled it... The entire cast of "Home for Thanksgiving" is booked in advance for Willards show on the day the nominations are announced. Of course, they all end up unnominated except for Brian. So then we'd have an awkward (but still funny) sequence of Willard interviewing all of these unnominated actors, James Lipton style. Instead of being an obnoxious prick like he was in the movie, he's interviewing the troup asking unintentionally hurtful questions and making his usual awful jokes.

[–] futuramafan105 17 years ago

"Why would an entertainment show go out of it's way to find unnominated actors and laugh in their face."

Satires usually exaggerate their targets. Of course no entertainment show would rub salt in their wounds so blatantly, but I honestly wouldn't be horribly surprised if something like this happened on Entertainment Tonight or the like.

[–] charlesadams1 17 years ago

The majority of this film WAS too sad compared to the other films they've made.

I'm glad that O'Hara was just made up to look that bad. Somebody deserves an Oscar for that effect cause it did look too real.

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] psdhart 14 years ago

Yes I noticed that too, that strange look she always had as if she had just sat down on pineapple from the interview on tv with Bierko's caracter

[–] cesardlg 12 years ago

I have to agree...I felt horrible for the actors. It was too sad....hard to watch. Took the funny out of it

[–] michaelm6772000 16 years ago

You remind me of the old Gilda Radner character Emily Litela (?) when she gets confused. You really sound like you watched a different movie and just don't understand this movie.
"why won't they let children watch violins on TV!" emily proclaims....

[–] stevenackerman69 16 years ago

I didn't care for Willard's performance. He didn't seem to want to let others talk. And I'm surprised one of those actors didn't just knock him down when he tried to interview him after they failed to get nominated.

[–] wallismcclain 16 years ago

Do you always have a problem separating fiction and reality?

[–] Kotter7579 16 years ago

I thought that it was a funny sequence, but strange that they would just happen to go after the three from Purim that they felt MIGHT have been nominated.

Marilyn Hack's scene was great, and I thought that Chuck (Willard) had great lines with the Callie Webb part in the booth. What do you mean, who?
Victor Alan Miller was a great sport about it and I thought he had a great line by saying that he thought there may have been a mistake when Chuck showed up.

The film did err in the whole Brian exclusion thing. He gets nominated, and then not a thing from him the rest of the way! They could have at least featured him in the "three months later" segment showing what's happened for him after a nomination (and maybe he would go on to win?)

Q: What is your favorite place?
A: Underneath my Grandmother's dining room table.

[–] psdhart 14 years ago

Good point, I was wondering the same too, what happened to Brian
Maybe it was like cindy's movie show, when they wonder "wahtever happened to..."
(not an exact quote)
one of the best lines in the film:
Q: What is your favorite place?
A: Underneath my Grandmother's dining room table.

[–] heathrydge 16 years ago

You mean you've never met anyone utterly in love with the music of their own voice? Or observed it on TV- I gather you're not ready for the Colbert Report, so I guess I'll have to send you to Oreilly Factor.

[–] stevenackerman69 15 years ago

Don't bother. I don't watch either. I figured you were talking to me here. And yes, I know a person totally in love with his own voice and talent-Reggie Mantle from the Archie Comics. What an ego!

[–] rtol01 15 years ago

Wow that really was an obscure reference. Your head should pop out of a Laugh-In box when you say that.

Jim Norton: (Rich) Vos has more dead pilots than American Airlines!

[–] stevenackerman69 14 years ago

Laugh-In I did catch in reruns in the 1980's. Pretty funny, especially Gary Owens saying at the end something about the program being prerecorded in a funny way.

[–] TheClassRocks 14 years ago

"Why would an entertainment show go out of it's way to find unnominated actors and laugh in their face."

To be funny. That was the whole point, to go in a completely different direction than the normal entertainment show would...

Funny.

And it was!

Watch the entire film again, PLEASE!

"We played Dungeons & Dragons for three hours. Then I was slain by an elf."

-Homer Simpson

[–] fidelio1980 13 years ago

The movie is a satire. You think the point was to go in a completely different direction than the normal entertainment show would? If that's what they were doing, then the movie wasn't a satire at all.

The point of the scene was to parody the way that shows like Hard Copy and Entertainment Tonight callously treat celebrities, by sticking cameras in their faces when they least expect it, and invading their privacy, and asking them rude questions, in the hopes that they'll get them to say something "juicy."

I can understand where the OP is coming from, because it was really over the top. It came across more like Fred Willard being randomly crazy, than anything that Mary Hart would have done on Entertainment Tonight. I get that satire is supposed to be exaggerated, but it was exaggerated pretty damn far. I didn't have a major problem with it, but I could see why someone would.

I like the idea that was brought up earlier in the thread, of Catherine O'Hara and Harry Shearer being booked on the show, because everyone assumed they'd be nominated - and then having to do an incredibly awkward interview, where Fred Willard asks them the same kinds of questions.

[–] stevenackerman69 13 years ago

Archie comics are still around, so it isn't obscure at all.

[–] Kotter7579 13 years ago

Maybe so, but that doesn't mean many folks (especially on these boards) know the last names of the Archie characters!

Judges?

Yes, still obscure.

Circle gets the square. stevenackerman-blocked

Mr. Dobolina ... Mr. Bob Dobolina ...

[–] stevenackerman69 12 years ago

Well, they'd still know who Reggie was, even if they forgot his last name.

[–] erikriveros 12 years ago

o'hara's drunken ramblings while she's taking out/going thru the garbage all disheveled and out of it was absolutely hillarious..more so when you consider how she was/looked when the film began...ahhhh, hillarious

it is better to have a gun and not need it, than to need a gun and not have it

[–] moviefool09 8 years ago

I thought that entire sequence of interviews was the worst part of the movie. Why would an entertainment show go out of it's way to find unnominated actors and laugh in their face

Chris Guest's satires work best when they are anchored in reality. This hounding of the actors who didn't get nominated rings false, because the media doesn't do this. Not even remotely. The only thing close is when the media comes out with "who got robbed", ie, who didn't get a nomination. But the actors are never ridiculed for not getting nominated. If anything, the ACADEMY is ridiculed for "getting it wrong".

Bad scene, bad choice by Christopher Guest, a rare false move for him.

"The future is tape, videotape, and NOT film?"