Oscar Nominees 2010! First time 10 movies in Best Picture category.

[Chamillitary Click]

If Christoph Waltz doesn't win Best Supporting Actor, then fuck the Academy.

I would even try and find a way to nominate him as the lead actor if i was the Academy. He was more the leading role then anyone else in the movie.

true that, he was in more scenes than anybody else.

[Jaydc]

What a terrible list.Garauanteed avatar will clean up,even though I think its a mediocre film.Its a big flashy picture that just so happens to be a run of the mill generic action movie at heart.

Christopher Waltz deserves that award by far,his perfomance in the movie was amazing and really,for me anyway was the only real redeeming feature in an otherwise average film.

[Teddy Roosevelt]

The best actor vs. best supporting actor has to do with screen time rather than wether you were in a lead role or not. If you look at The Godfather, Marlon Brando wasn't in too many scenes (Al Pacino was in more), but he was nominated (and won) because he was in enough mintues.

[Teddy Roosevelt]

Was it ever explained why there are 10 nominations this year? I bet it was so they can include the most overhyped film of the century (Avatar).

[Shallow]

The best actor vs. best supporting actor has to do with screen time rather than wether you were in a lead role or not. If you look at The Godfather, Marlon Brando wasn't in too many scenes (Al Pacino was in more), but he was nominated (and won) because he was in enough mintues.

In 1980 Ordinary People starred Donald Sutherland and Timothy Hutton. Timothy Hutton was the lead as in he was in the most scenes and the most minutes but he was nominated for Supporting and won, while Sutherland was nominated for Lead (didn't win).

[white Boy]

The best actor vs. best supporting actor has to do with screen time rather than wether you were in a lead role or not. If you look at The Godfather, Marlon Brando wasn't in too many scenes (Al Pacino was in more), but he was nominated (and won) because he was in enough mintues.

In 1980 Ordinary People starred Donald Sutherland and Timothy Hutton. Timothy Hutton was the lead as in he was in the most scenes and the most minutes but he was nominated for Supporting and won, while Sutherland was nominated for Lead (didn't win).

so your point is that the academy is retarded?

[Shallow]

The best actor vs. best supporting actor has to do with screen time rather than wether you were in a lead role or not. If you look at The Godfather, Marlon Brando wasn't in too many scenes (Al Pacino was in more), but he was nominated (and won) because he was in enough mintues.

In 1980 Ordinary People starred Donald Sutherland and Timothy Hutton. Timothy Hutton was the lead as in he was in the most scenes and the most minutes but he was nominated for Supporting and won, while Sutherland was nominated for Lead (didn't win).

so your point is that the academy is retarded?

I was just looking for an explanation for that. Hutton was easily the lead actor in that film. My guess is they wanted him to win but didn't want him to win lwd actor at that age for his first major role, so they gave him the supporting nod.

[eS El Duque]

Hurt Locker - great movie! i hope they win something

same here

[Javier]

Was it ever explained why there are 10 nominations this year? I bet it was so they can include the most overhyped film of the century (Avatar).

It's done for animated, comic book, and indie movies to get in the list.  Avatar would have made it for sure if it was only 3 movies lol

[white Boy]

is there something wrong with me... the hurt locker did nothing for me... i was soooo bored..

[Shallow]

is there something wrong with me... the hurt locker did nothing for me... i was soooo bored..

Nah, it was decent but not great. A little cliche in parts. I'm not saying it's bad but it's not something I'd make a stink about not being nominated if there were only 4 or 5 films. Haven't seen Precious and don't even know if it was good but I could see it winning.