Oscar nomination for Keira Knightley
We suppose everyone has heard by now, but Keira Knightley was nominated for an Academy Award in the category of Best Actress in a Motion Picture for her performance in PRIDE AND PREJUDICE.
The full list of technical nominations has not been posted yet (slackers) but we understand that the film also was nominated in the Best Art Direction, Best Costume Design and Best Original Score categories.
What, no Best Original Screenplay nomination? </snark>
January 31st, 2006 at 12:40 pm
At IMDB the complete list was available early on after the noms were announced, just follow this lik to Oscar Nominations
LOL on the screenplay comment. But being serious, I think I let out a sigh of relief when I heard the 5 nominees for adapted screenplay. After BAFTA members shook my confidence in their good judgment last week and after hearing that it was for a technival reason that P&P script was not elegible for the WGA and that’s why it had not appeared in their selection, I was very apprehensive at the horrifying thought that it could be a nomination in that category.
January 31st, 2006 at 1:49 pm
Best Costume Design? I thought those were some of the worst Regency period costumes. I think the Academy must feel the need to nominate any period film ever produced just because the costumes aren’t the type of clothes we wear today.
January 31st, 2006 at 2:38 pm
Ouch! Lots of harsh feelings toward P&P3…I guess I’m the minority, but I prefer it greatly to P&P2. Nice to know we all have different opinions
I hope it wins everything it has been nominated for.
January 31st, 2006 at 2:43 pm
Technically, the style at the time was not Regency/Empire but Directoire (being the French term) since the film was set in the late 1790s.
Mags, as for the screenplay: snark is always welcome and appreciated! I think between you and me we could come up with a really decent P&P screenplay. Let’s consider writing one as a “side” project one of these days.
January 31st, 2006 at 2:47 pm
NA first.
P.S. Like I have time for a side project!!!!
January 31st, 2006 at 2:49 pm
This is why side is in quotes. I was being snarky, as well.
January 31st, 2006 at 2:53 pm
Also…
I think it should be MP first: her most overlooked work (well, IMO)
And in out contract, we’d tell the studio that we must have casting approval! *eyeroll*
January 31st, 2006 at 5:25 pm
Dear hearts, I can see your IP numbers, even when you don’t sign your posts. Clueless sock puppets get the Cluebat of Janeite Righteousness right between the eyes.
January 31st, 2006 at 5:26 pm
A big problem I had with P&P2’s costumes were how low-cut some of them were for daytime.
As for P&P3’s costumes, as has been pointed out many times before, older ladies tended to wear fashions from their younger days. Look at Mrs. Musgrove in P2 — the move takes place well into the Regency period, yet she wears clothes that are years, nay decades, out of fashion.
January 31st, 2006 at 5:57 pm
You may have a point about the P&P2, Julie. But I do not think we were here speaking of that (this may sound rude, but I’ve come to notice that sometimes it is those who try to defend P&P3 the ones who always bring to attention mistakes from previous attemps -and I am not only referring to P&P2- and while it is valid, I think previous attemps could also be forgiven much more than recent ones since there were not much information to compare with, and also when criticism on the recent ones are nevertheless valid too on stand point alone).
As for the costumes of the old ladies in P&P3, I do not have anything material to support my opinion, it is only my impression of the characters as created by JA, but I do not see someone as Lady Catherine using outfashioned wardrobe (and she had the money to renovate it), nor Mrs. Bennet (though she might not have had the resources to do so), and Mrs. Gardiner was a young matron, not the old lady portrayed at the film so she neither had to used an old wardrobe. Furthermore, IMHO, also what in her younger days, they might have used the clothes becoming for a young lady, those old dresses may not only have been outdated, but also not at all becoming for an old matron. So I wonder then if they are not then using their mother’s dresses :). Furthermore, I could accept that the fabrics could be re-used, but I would guess that in that time, dresses would be unsewn, then cut into new patterns to make a relatively ‘new’ dress (just as Mrs. Austen’s wedding dress was re-used).
Finally, since I know you hate to read bad writing, I hope you can forgive me for this lenghty and probably poorly written explanation, Julie. I only hope you can forgive it by reminding you that English is not my first language.
January 31st, 2006 at 9:55 pm
Well, I can see both sides for the older fashions on the older women, but I was more taken aback by Miss Bingley’s dresses, which seemed more 1810 in fabric and cut. The first Grecian-influenced Empire (or Directoire ;)) dresses were very simple in cut and mostly made of drapy white fabric, usually muslin, to imitate statuary. It was later that there was more color and different kinds of fabric.
I have a post in reserve (once the discussion dies down about the Oscars) about a costume exhibition currently taking place in Philly and part of it is a perfectly gorgeous white muslin gown from around 1800 embroidered with whitework. Absolutely simple and gorgeous and I bet the lucky owner looked charmingly.
January 31st, 2006 at 10:27 pm
Reese is a shoe-in, so that’s that.
It does seem anything set in historical times gets a best costume nod, whether it deserves it or not. I did think that the Art Direction nomination was deserved. The film was certainly gorgeous to look at whether or not it was true to the source material.
January 31st, 2006 at 11:54 pm
I don’t think Keira’s performance is Oscar worthy…I would be surprised if she wins it.
February 1st, 2006 at 12:01 am
Keira has mannerisms that alternately charm and grate and cloy and appeal.
She’s kind of like Katherine Hepburn in that regard, even though her long neck and rail-thin body gains her more comparisons to Audrey.
I think she’s just too much still the ingenue to be ready for high honors, but perhaps in time she will be.
I don’t enjoy her weird facial expressions. I think she’s best when her face is relaxed and in repose. She’s good acting from the neck down, though. But she went at some of the more delicate scenes in P&P with a sledgehammer.
I think she’s got a lot of potential, but an Oscar would be quite premature considering the talent she is up against.
February 1st, 2006 at 12:31 am
regarding the weird facial expressions…she looks like she has more teeth than the average person…hmmm…maybe its because her face is so bony. I saw her Dr. Zhivago (sp?) and her face wasn’t so bad there…I mean, her teeth looked fine.
February 1st, 2006 at 10:10 am
I am sorry Heidi but I though that this post was about P&P3’s Oscar nominations and not about KK’s “weird facial expressions and bony face.” You may have not liked her in the movie, but I am not sure that you should ridicule someone just because it doesn’t fit your ideal of what Elizabeth Bennet should be like.
February 1st, 2006 at 10:15 am
Good luck Keira! After getting snubbed by the BAFTAS (her own people for goodness sake!) I am really pleased for this young actress. I don’t think she has weird facial expressions at all, I think she has the most beautiful smile. Wish I looked like her put it that way! Tom Hollander won the Peter Sellers Comedy Award at the Evening Standards Awards recently. I expect he gave an exemplary speech! Well done Tom!
February 1st, 2006 at 11:38 am
Still laughing like a hyena on nitrous oxide on hearing “Best Costume” nomination. Still, not as amusing as the BAFTAS’ nomination for “Best Hair and Makeup” (See here for an example of what people wore in the late 1790s http://hal.ucr.edu/~cathy/year/1798.html).
I agree with a previous poster, it seems that there’s an obligatory nod for costumes for any period pic.
February 1st, 2006 at 12:16 pm
I am very happy for Ms. Knightley and her nomination. I thought she did an admirable job as Lizzy. As to the other nominations, Best Costumes, well, if the Costumers from the Academy saw fit to nominate Pride and Prejudice they must see something we do not. After all, it is not the entire academy that votes for Best Costumes only the Costumers who happen to be members of the Academy get to nominate for their category.
One thing I am very happy about is Music-Original Score, I thought that the score to P&P was absolutely breathtaking. While I am happy for John Williams, and I loved the score to Memoirs of a Geisha, it is time for new blood in the Score category. Dario Marianelli, did a wonderful job of composing a truly unique score around the confines of Regency/Empire English music. ~R
February 1st, 2006 at 5:55 pm
These are pics from the movie compared to pics from the 1798 page that somone posted earlier:
1.) Movie: http://walkingindaydreams.com/gallery/displayimage.php?album=322&pos=29
1798: http://hal.ucr.edu/~cathy/images/i-lux/lux16.jpeg
2.) Movie: http://walkingindaydreams.com/gallery/displayimage.php?album=322&pos=35
1798: http://hal.ucr.edu/%7Ecathy/lm/LM1798.html
3.) Movie: http://walkingindaydreams.com/gallery/displayimage.php?album=322&pos=82
1798: http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/eudr/hod_1998.222.1.htm
Looks about right to me. Oh, and were my comments deleted because I forgot to sign the first one or because I didn’t like the costumes from the ‘95 version? I want to know if there was a reason I got the cluebat. I didn’t say anything “bad” and I wasn’t being trollish.
February 1st, 2006 at 6:09 pm
Your comments were deleted because in one comment you signed your name and in two others you did not. In the comment where you signed your name, you were positive, in the others you used vulgar and provocative language. All the signs pointed to sock puppetry, which I do not put up with. I’m all for healthy debate, but take that juvenile crap over to the IMDB boards.
You’ll notice that others have expressed a similar opinion in an adult manner, and their posts remain.
You’ll also notice that the 1995 costumes are not really on topic, as they have not been nominated for an Academy Award. Just saying.
February 1st, 2006 at 7:58 pm
Your snarky comment about an Original Screenplay nomination wasn’t really on-topic either. Just sayin’.
February 1st, 2006 at 8:18 pm
IMHO the snarky comments were on-topic, since we are talking about the Oscar nominations of P&P3, not only about the costume one.
February 1st, 2006 at 9:09 pm
Sure it was.
February 2nd, 2006 at 11:20 am
We have to stay on topic to post?
February 2nd, 2006 at 11:45 am
No, I made my point badly in my response to Caladonia. What I should have said: To respond to those commenting that they thought the costumes in P&P3 did not deserve an Oscar nomination, “Well, the costumes from a television miniseries from 10 years ago suck too,” does not address the original point made; it just distracts attention from it. But that’s the way discussion has gone about this film from the beginning, which I’ve never understood. P&P3 isn’t a remake of P&P2, it (supposedly) is an adaptation of the novel. I was trying to be clever and did not succeed.
Snark, however, is always on topic at AustenBlog. Those who do not understand why can turn in their Oxford Illustrated Editions at the door and go read ThomasHardyBlog, where they will be much happier.
February 2nd, 2006 at 11:54 am
On topic to post? You mean I can’t snark about the musical score either? The dance music with no effort to even vaguely sound like late 18th century dance music? The loud booming piano chords yelling out ‘Emote, emote!’? The time-space conundrum when Mary plays an English square piano with the sound of a Steinway grand? Goes off sobbing P.S. Kiera’s gowns still had more errors than an undergrad’s essay, wrong fabric, wrong cut, even the stiching (since I’ve seen the originals from the film up close).. Nominations for Best Costumes voted by costumers are never a mark of ‘Good costumes’. I’ve seen them nominate costumes where you could see the zippers or purple crushed velvet medieval gowns. So I suppose plastic buttons is no big strech.
February 2nd, 2006 at 11:56 am
Mags, strike out my eyes with a flint knife before making me go to ThomasHardyBlog! Pleeeeeassse! I will be good and mail you a box of chocolates on a daily basis.
February 2nd, 2006 at 3:59 pm
I haven’t seen the film yet (starting to think I never will, at this rate), but with regards to costumes: is it the purpose of the best costumes oscar to reward costumes that most accurately reflect the time-period in which the film is set, or simply the best-looking costumes?
It’s possible that P&P3’s costumes simply aren’t that good (and visible zippers should mean an instant disqualification no matter what the alleged time-period), but if the only argument against them is that they’re not accurate, I’m not quite sure that it should count against them in the competition for this award.
February 2nd, 2006 at 4:29 pm
Personally, I would think accuracy in a period film is a fairly important measure of the quality of a costume.
As to attractiveness, most of the dresses Lizzy wore were hideous: drab colors, unattractive cut, and THEY DID NOT FIT. When portraying an age of hand sewing, that is inexcusable. Except for the pretty white dress she wore to the Netherfield ball, they were all extremely unflattering.
Speaking of hand sewing, I thought it was kind of funny how everyone went on about how the costumes looked “homemade.” They didn’t have sewing machines then, ALL dresses would have been handmade, and genteel ladies of even limited means (such as Jane and Cassandra Austen) employed dressmakers. Labor was cheap in those days, it was the goods that were expensive!
Another thing, and I’m not being snarky here: In the scene where Lizzy is running away from Darcy across the fields at Pemberley, Keira lifted her skirts as she ran and I think she was wearing rubber knee-high wellies. Does anyone know what I’m talking about? That was really jarring. I’m fairly certain that no such item existed for a ladies’ wardrobe in those days. It made sense for filming in the 21st century if one thought one’s feet would not be seen, but didn’t they notice it while filming? And if they weren’t wellies, what were they?
February 2nd, 2006 at 4:46 pm
Speaking of unflattering of Keira’s figure; I assumed this was one of the points of the Oscar nomination. “They dared to make Keira look bad!…” “Gritty Realism!” Something along the lines of the Charlize Theron / Monster thing. And period piece nominated for costume by default.
February 2nd, 2006 at 6:32 pm
Mags I thought those were Wellies, but i just thought it was a trick of the camera angle. Sometimes a pair of leather boots if cut the same way as wellies can look like a pair of galoshes.
~R
February 3rd, 2006 at 2:51 pm
I don’t have so much of a problem with the nomination for “best costumes” as for the one for “best actress in a leading role”. must have been a poor cinematic year…
don’t get me wrong, keira was o.k. - but i saw nothing that made me think “oscar!!”
February 8th, 2006 at 12:05 pm
Under the theory that any version of P&P is better than most of the drivel that comes out of Hollywood, I am glad for the production. However, this was the worst production of P&P that I have seen and Keira K was the worst Lizzie I have seen. Had I been Mr. Darcy’s friend, I would have tried to convince him to forget her - not because of her mother, but because Keira’s Lizzie was almost as silly as her younger sisters, not anywhere near the intelligent, perceptive, clever woman of other productions. Mr. Bennett was, in the book, a gentleman, but in this production he looked more like Aqualung. The clothes that the entire Bennett family wore looked lower middle class and their house didn’t look like it had been painted or refurbished in 100 years (like a house today in 2006 that is being conserved, not a house that, in the 1790s someone would live in). While I didn’t mind the kiss scene at the end, that so many Austen-ites objected to, Lizzie’s goddess comment at the end was the most preposterous line of the film.
February 8th, 2006 at 8:08 pm
HarryD said: While I didn’t mind the kiss scene at the end… Lizzie’s goddess comment at the end was the most preposterous line of the film.
I’m so glad I saw the version that DIDN’T have the kiss or the extended tackiness. (I think the non-kiss version was the one sent out for awards consideration.)