'Twilight' enters only two Oscars races! Rob Pattinson snubbed!
"Twilight" author Stephenie Meyer may believe that Robert Pattinson's "performance, in my opinion, is Oscar-worthy," but the film's producers don't agree. His name isn't being entered in the race for best actor. Ditto Kristen Stewart: she's not being entered in the best-actress contest.
In fact, even though it looks like "Twilight" will emerge as a big box-officer winner just a month before academy members receive their nomination ballots, it's only being entered in two Oscar races: best music score and song.
Both of those categories make sense. "Twilight"'s hit song "Decode" is written and sung by Paramore. Its larger music score is the handiwork of Carter Burwell, who's never been nominated for an Oscar, but he's well known and highly respected within Hollywood's music circle. Burwell did receive other honors for his scores to "O Brother Where Art Thou?" (BAFTA nomination), "Gods and Monsters" (L.A. Film Critics Assn. Award) and "Before Night Falls" (Venice Film Festival Award).
"Twilight" isn't being submitted for best visual effects, not even as a salute to the fanciful scene where Pattinson and Stewart dance on the tops of pine trees in the wilderness. It's not even being submitted for makeup — and that's a giant shockeroo.
Oscar voters swoon like spellbound victims before vampire films. Two have been nominated for best makeup in recent years: "Shadow of the Vampire" (2000) and Francis Ford Coppola's "Dracula" (1992).
But "Twilight" probably feels that it doesn't measure up in the fangs department. As Manohla Dargis points out in the New York Times, "Edward (Rob Pattinson), you see, burns but doesn’t bite . . . . He keeps his fangs in his mouth . . . . The poor boy has been defanged and almost entirely drained. He’s so lifeless, he might as well be dead — oops, he already is."
Edward Douglas of Comingsoon.net tells Gold Derby: "No, you don't see a single set of fangs or anything. I don't even really consider it a vampire movie. There is a lot of make-up, though. Pattinson wears more eyeliner and lipstick than some women I know."
How have other notable vampire films fared at Oscars past — classics like Bela Lugosi's "Dracula"? Is there really a curse against vampire flicks at the Academy Awards? READ MORE - CLICK HERE!
Photo: Summit Entertainment
You should give Robert Pattinson 2 nomitations: One for the best actor of the year and second for the handsomest actor of a decade!!!!!!!!
Posted by: Japalare | February 20, 2009 at 05:26 PM
I think it's a shame they didn't nominate the movie. I loved the books, I want to know more about them all and you know why? because at least there are no guns, stupid wars, rapes, violence, drugs and alcohol. It's a love story, yes, but also it teaches us to be faithful, honest, to defend and protect our families, to stand up and fight for what you believe. I think this movie is a fresh breath of a nice, uncontaminated story. I really liked it and I think Rob Pattinson, besides being a total and absolute hunk, he did a magnificent acting work. Congratulations Twilight team !!!!!!!!!
Posted by: Japalare | February 20, 2009 at 05:23 PM
That is so stupid twilight is an awesome film and it states in the book the edward does not have fangs so hah lool
They are only moaning cause they are not ''Traditional''Vampires but hey you have t go along with them times
I gives teenagers something else to thnk about rather than Sex and Drugs
So stop Dissing Guys
Posted by: amanda | February 19, 2009 at 09:21 AM
Lets think for one second about movies in the past. I have seen Jonny Depp wear more make-up then Robert Pattinson and not one person questioned his role! Poor Kristian Stewart.. She did an excelent job with the movie and yet she's not being entered either!?!?!?!?! Honestly It did BETTER then Benji Butten! Think about that. Paramore was great but another music group should have had that and possibly Robert there too. He played well in the movie.. (if it was him). Just because your not having to see those dangerous fangs... that doesn't mean that a vampire doesn't have them. Roberts role was not to be the dangerous type so much as the i'm trying to control myself so i can love you type. Thats not his fault take a look at the screen writers... Mrs. Meyers book was perfect for Robert to play and yet the writers almost completely changed Edwards view.
Posted by: Ashley Owens | February 18, 2009 at 02:43 PM
ok.....i know you people think that twilight sucks and all, but it really dosent. the whole point of the movie is that their not the ordinary vampires people always thought of. its like romeo and juliet with a twist(romeo is a vampire). the the chemistry between robert and kristen was natural and perfect. Also for a woman director that was one of the best movies ive every seen! so dont hate twilight because evryone loves it and it was amazing.....
not only was the movie great but the books....omg, i dont even know were to start with the books its the only thing i can ever read. i mean if i try to read another book, i cant, i keep waiting for edward to pop in the story. stephine did an amazing job and totally kicked J.K. Rowllings ass with the twilight saga!
Posted by: chelsea<33 | February 13, 2009 at 07:44 PM
I have read all the books and they are amazing. Im not a big fan of these kind of movies but this movie was also amazing. I think that both Kristen and Robert deserve a nomination. The did a great job portraying the characters from the twilight book, Bella and Edward. I dont think Twilgiht should be compared to other vampire movies becuase it is very much different. I think that this movie is not being seen for what it really is. I think that it is a outstanding movie and it deserves more than what its getting credit for.
Posted by: Jessica | February 10, 2009 at 09:51 AM
Ok, I have read all the comments, I agree that Twilight was a great and entertainment and also that Robert Pattinson did a great job (consider that is his "second" big movie being realized) and he is very attractive and hot; but come on, Twilight is not the kind of movie that is nominated for The Oscars, maybe in music but you can't compare make up of The Curious Case of Benjamin Button with the one from Twilight, such as the acting of Brad Pitt with Robert Pattinson, I think that with time he will receive an Oscar, but don't ask it for a movie like Twilight. I love the books and I think the movie was well addapted, but people seriously you should be objective in this case.
Posted by: ArtemisaMond | February 09, 2009 at 09:27 PM
I personally enjoyed the movie, but i also saw it before i read the books and i think the books are, in a sense, much better than the film... Alot more things are explained (Rosalie's hate for Bella etc) but for a low buget film i think it was done really well... i agree with the comment that edward didnt sparkle "right" but hey, when you have a small budget you do you best with what you have... i dont think its oscar worthy, not when it is up against the other films like Dark Knight, Doubt and the Kate Winslet film, but again, these are big dollar productions... maybe, hopefully, New Noon will be nominated, but i think it has a better chance than twilight becaue of the money behind it...
And as for the JK Rowling comment... ummm Meyers first book! and was NOT written for the intent of being published! i didnt mind the way it was written, it was relatable.
Both Robert and Kristen need to do a lil wok on their acting, just to get the facial expressions right.... some scenes were just not quite executed in quite the right way.. and just cuz he's hot (no denying it) doesnt mean he deserves an oscar.. great acting desrve one ..., GO HEATH!!!!
but good luck for New Moon, may the budget be bigger, effects better, the acting spot on and may the nominations come flooding in.... dont be upset that they didnt this time, theres 3 more to go ;)
Posted by: DragonFly | February 09, 2009 at 01:41 AM
twilight simply rocks !!.though the the book was cooler it does not mean the film was not awesome . wat ever i liked it and it was great............
and loved robert pattinson's acting.
Posted by: shamita | February 01, 2009 at 02:00 AM
uhh... TWILIGHT deserves nothing...
Posted by: julius | January 29, 2009 at 01:19 AM
Um, Twitards?
Please take some lessons on grammar and proper literature, thanks. :)
- PWCS
P.S. Since when has having creepy perv stalkers watching you in your sleep, probably trying to rape you or something, been alright with the Law?
Bombard me with your bashes. I welcome them. :)
Posted by: Person With Common Sense | January 29, 2009 at 01:12 AM
I totally DISAGREE with the artical. Robert P. was the best person to play Edward Cullen. I know some of you people think Heath should have played it. But I have one thing to say to that...
NO!!
I still think twilight was the best featured film of all time. And yes, the people who love the book SHOULD be the only ones who should post comments. Some, actually all, the comments are very hurtful to those who do love it. We are not retards. We all have different opinions.
All the twilight fan probably will agree with me, Twilight rocks!
Posted by: jenn | January 28, 2009 at 08:33 AM
I still think Twilight was the over-all best movie in the history of movies. just because it came out a little late in the year doesnt mean it shouldnt have a chance at being nominated. EVERYONE is saying it made MILLIONS AND MILLIONS of bucks in the box office. What's wrong with nominating THE best movie of all time a little late? It's just not fair.
Posted by: Bella | January 28, 2009 at 08:21 AM
I agree with the article.
I loved the books, but this movie botched my entire image of Twilight.
You movie fans are so stuck on the idea of Edward you can't get past how awful the movie really was.
By the way, using "lyke" and "freekin" to describe your passion for the movie further exemplifies my reasoning that the movie was shit...only tweens seem to have enjoyed the film.
Posted by: Amy | January 26, 2009 at 04:06 PM
I am in love with ROB PATTINSON. But he botched a couple of scenes by using the wrong facial expression, specfcally.- 1) as he was turning away from Angela & Jessica prior to entering the restaurant with Bella at Port Angeles; and 2) the open mouth-smile (aggavated by kristen's expressionless face) while he was fetching Bella from the car at the Park'g lot scene when Edward & Bella go public.
As for Kristen's at La Push with Taylor- acc. to the book she's suppose to flirt info out of Jacob (taylor), but her facial expression was seduction (wrong interpretation of the scene. ANyways....
But I liked her in Panic Room & Messengers. Her other movies haven't been shown in our country yet (e.g Into the Wild).
Can't nominate Twilight for special effects (he did not SPARKLE right). Although the "spider monkey" scene was great ! But the scenery/landscape prior to Edward's piano scene (Bella's Lullaby)- wasn't literally "awesome"- I wanted to be awed by what Edward called his "world". BEST SCENES: a) The baseball scene (w/ SUPERMASSIVE BLACKHOLE playing) b) "The Kiss" scene, c) scenes with Charlie, d) escaping James e), Vampire battle at the gym and the "find the will" part at the end of that scene (Bellas' face distorting and flashbacks) as Edward sucks venom f) and the entry of the Three (3) villanous vampires at the baseball field-AWESOME!!
Posted by: jeannine0422 | January 25, 2009 at 07:28 PM
omg i mean what is wrong with u people twilight deserves to be nominated for every single award, so like get a grip on relity and wake up and smell the coffie, bottom line is that twilight is the best freekin vampire movie evr made. btw rob pattinson is so gorgeous that he should just be nominated for that one fact, same with the rest of the cullen/hales
Posted by: rosalie_hale | January 22, 2009 at 02:43 PM
ok twilight should win a award it has broken so many walls and went above an beyond with the money they had its a great movie that people went to go see. most of the times movies that win no one really likeed and by no one i mean real people no celebs. o and if u dont like twilight why the heck are you reading about it! Twilight=love and you know it
Posted by: monique | January 21, 2009 at 05:47 PM
what the hell are people thinking rob pattinson is so oscar whorthy but he still is not best actor but he better be for new moon
cant wait
Posted by: taylor | January 21, 2009 at 05:04 PM
Twitards, if do you wanna see a REAL vampire love story: Let the Right One it! That's an EXCELLENT film and respect the essence of vampire mithology
Posted by: Boy878 | January 20, 2009 at 01:02 PM
Dude, Robert didn't even wear eyeliner in Twilight. He just wore face makeup and some lipstick, it's not that bad. For God's sake, they had to make him look dead and gorgeous all at the same time, of course they have to use makeup.
As for Oscar nominations, I don't really think anyone deserved acting nominations except maybe Pattinson, I think he's pretty good. But Kristen Stewart, ugh. I, personally, think she is a terrible actress, the same person just altered a little in all her movies. But that's just me. If you want to see acting worth an Oscar, just look at Heath Ledger in The Dark Knight.
Posted by: Kristy | January 19, 2009 at 05:52 PM
What.
The.
Hell.
How on earth are they even considering nominating Twilight? Seriously, there are millions of other things WAY better then Twilight.
Oh yeah, and Twitards? Reality check: You are not the only ones who get to have an opinion. If you think you are, just because you like some book, then... Wow. Just wow.
Posted by: Ali | January 19, 2009 at 09:21 AM
Twilight rules! Forget about Dracula...who wants that ancient vampire crap...garlic, silver bullets, etc. The Twilight Cast ist perfect, acting was cool, the emotions, the longing looks... Kirsten Steward is a natural and the chemistry between them was perfect. Apart from some unnecessary scenes and changes it was a great movie.
Posted by: nefera | January 17, 2009 at 03:11 PM
Hopefully, he will be nominated for "New Moon"
Yes, he'll be nominated, but for the RAZZIES!! Or he needs to be ALONE for winning, because next year we have DiCaprio, Day-Lewis, Mortensen, Depp, Wisham, Gosling, Plummer and other great actors.
I'm sorry, but I saw True Blood and there's a LOT of difference between Toillet (Upps I mean Twilight) and True Blood. True Blood is not perfect but is good and respect the essence of the vampire mithology and the actors are miles better instead Hadwick's piece of garbage.
Stephanie Meyers, in first place isn't a good writer. For almost 40 pages for Twikight, is all about Bella's thoughs and sorrow. WTF?! With her, J. K. Rowling LOOKS like a Nobel Winner... If teen girls and mature pathetic dreamers will follow that garbage, OK...
Posted by: Boy878 | January 16, 2009 at 05:24 PM
"Since when are there rules when writing about creatures who don't even actually exist? Meyer is hardly the first author to turn the vampire legend on its ear: Anne Rice also flouted conventional vampire lore when she created Lestat and Louis. Why shouldn't Meyer also create unconventional vampires?"
Since she created something entirely different than a vampire. Seriously? She should have called the creature something ENTIRELY different for those were not "vampires" AT ALL. "Creative license" generally means that you can alter certain facets of something -- not create something entirely new and slap an old name on it (as in, vampires). Meyer's "vampires" were castrated and declawed versions of the original stories. Though Rice altered some (as did Stoker), much of the same lore remained.
Also, to the person who wrote "THE VISUAL EFFECTS ARE ASTOUNDING" --- They may have been. Circa 1950. They were dreadful. As was the rest of the movie / series.
Posted by: *rolls eyes at Twihards* | January 15, 2009 at 05:12 PM
Ugh. The fact that ANYTHING involved in that monstrosity of a movie (including the Paramore and Burwell songs) have been nominated means they were either desperate for nominations or that they had a DREADFULLY BAD movie year.
Posted by: Teika | January 15, 2009 at 05:07 PM