MovieChat Forums > The 79th Annual Academy Awards (2007) Discussion > Hudson shouldn't even have been nominate...

Hudson shouldn't even have been nominated


Jennifer Hudson shouldn't even have been nominated, much less win. This one will go down in the annals of underserved Oscars. There was no depth or shading at all to her performance.

The annoying part is that her nomination shut out a more desrving actress from consideration. There were several who were far better choices.

Meryl Streep should not have been nominated either..It was the usual exaggerated comedy "villain", not in the least Oscar worthy.

Some people can just phone it in and get nominated.

reply

Most people know and agree with this, that is why the AA doesn't hold the prestige it once did....back in the 50s.





It's not a lie if you believe it.

reply

Well, I don't know about any of this because I didn't see her performance in the movie and I didn't see her competitions' movies either. I didn't even see her win the award, but I did see her singing performance and I'll say this much: She sure knows how to accentuate her big breasteses.

reply

I agree, Jennifer Hudson shouldn't have even been nominated. What were they thinking when they voted for her. I feel bad for the other actresses that have put in years and she comes along with her ok performance and gets the oscar. She's a really good singer but a very mediocre actress.


___________________________
Ferris Bueller, you're my hero.

reply

RACISTS!!!!!!!


Only fools are enslaved by time and space.

reply

[deleted]

The Taxi Driver: She's a terrible actress and didn't win American Idol so she can't be that great of a singer!


I didn't watch Jennifer Hudson's season on American Idol but if she lost during the voting competition (after the final 24 have been selected) that just means America didn't like her. This girl has some amazing pipes and can belt out ballads with the best of them (i.e. her performance on stage with Beyonce) but this doesn't necessarily translate to gaining votes on AI. You have to have stage presence and a personality to hang tough and back then I don't think she had either which cost her a chance to win. Now she knows who she is and where she stands but....

...I strongly believe the Academy made a huge mistake when they even thought of nominating her for an Oscar. Hudson's performance as a singer in the film was out of this world but as an actress she's still a little green. Giving her an award at such an early stage in her career puts her in an awkward position: down the road she might give a better performance but will be overlooked during Oscar season because she's already won once.

Hudson winning an Academy Award proves that the MPAA voters are motivated by (lower case p)olitics and not by performances. The fact that Scorcese won Best Director for "The Departed" and the film went on to win Best Picture was partly due to his talent but mostly because he was overlooked multiple times in the past for far better films ("Raging Bull," "Goodfellas"). The Academy felt so pressured to vote for him this year that "The Departed" could have had the worst reviews from critics and fans alike and he still would have won.

The real reason networks fight to broadcast the Academy Awards is to hawk the latest fashion in-between high-end commercials so the company can maximize their profits for the year. Television is a business. Film is a business. Both don't have anything to do with displaying cinematic art. It's sad but true.

"Have I told you about my condition?" -Leonard Shelby, "Memento"

reply

that's because there arent any decent movies to choose from anymore. good movies these days are few and far between. the academy only look at those that are submitted for consideration instead they should be actively looking for the year's best.

they should also have a set level of standards that are met before a nomination is considered instead of forcing themselves to come up with 5 noms every year. if there arent any good films to choose from then so be it. only then will the integrity return to the process and the oscar will actually mean something again. too many mistakes have been made in years past and especially recent years.

why wasnt steve carrell nominated for little miss sunshine? his performance was awesome.

reply

Yeah, I thought Steve Carrell should have been nominated also.

And I love Martin, but the "Best Director of the Year" should actually go to the BEST director of the year, not one who is overdue to win.

reply

this was one of those times where some1 overdue did something to deserve the win tho. Had he won for, saay, gangs of NY, that would have been bad. But this movie was a return to form for Marty, and was definitely worthy of best director.

If not him then the British guy that did 9/11 better than Oliver Stone (aka United 93's Paul Greengrass)

Big
Infallible
Book of
Lies and
Excuses

reply

[deleted]