2013 Oscar Nominations Make Ben Affleck Sad

This year’s Oscar nominations were announced this morning by ‘Ted’ director Seth MacFarlane (who will also host the telecast on February 24th) and ‘Amazing Spider-Man’ star Emma Stone. While, on the one hand, the Academy hasn’t offered up too many big surprises among the nominees that made the cut, bigger shocks came from the people and movies left out. I also don’t see many clear-cut winners.

Steven Spielberg’s historical bio-pic ‘Lincoln’ leads the competition with 12 nominations, including major categories Best Picture, Best Director, Best Actor, Best Actress, Best Supporting Actor and Best Adapted Screenplay. Yet, and maybe this is just my perception, I haven’t seen all that much enthusiasm for the film among critics or audiences. Even its positive reviews and word-of-mouth seem to be mostly polite applause. Admittedly, I haven’t seen the movie yet, but it looks like the kind of dull, stodgy Oscar bait designed for no other purpose than to win Spielberg and Daniel Day-Lewis their third trophies respectively.

Ang Lee’s fantastical CGI-fest ‘Life of Pi’, about a boy and his digital tiger trapped together on a raft, follows with 11 nominations. Its underwhelming box office will probably limit the odds of the film taking home very many of those.

Keep in mind that I have a very poor track record for predicting award winners.

Best Picture
  • ‘Amour’
  • ‘Argo’
  • ‘Beasts of the Southern Wild’
  • ‘Django Unchained’
  • ‘Les Miserables’
  • ‘Life of Pi’
  • ‘Lincoln’
  • ‘Silver Linings Playbook’
  • ‘Zero Dark Thirty’

All of these films were acclaimed over the year. All of them were talked up as potential nominees. None of them stands out to me as being best of the year material. If ‘Lincoln’ does well in other categories, it will probably sweep Best Picture as well.

If you’d asked me yesterday, I would have said that the heavily-buzzed ‘Zero Dark Thirty’ stood a good chance of winning here. However, the lack of a nomination for director Kathryn Bigelow makes that unlikely now. (Oscar likes to tie the Best Director and Best Picture awards together.) That would also rule out ‘Argo’, ‘Django Unchained’ or ‘Les Miserables’.

Best Director
  • Michael Haneke, ‘Amour’
  • Ang Lee, ‘Life of Pi’
  • David O. Russell, ‘Silver Linings Playbook’
  • Steven Spielberg, ‘Lincoln’
  • Benh Zeitlin, ‘Beasts of the Southern Wild’

Why would I say in the headline that today’s announcements make Ben Affleck sad, when his movie ‘Argo’ got a Best Picture nomination? The poor guy’s been passed over yet again for a Best Director nom, even though all three of his directorial efforts have put him as part of that conversation. While nobody expected him to actually win the trophy, ‘Argo’ seemed like his best shot at finally landing a nomination. I guess he’ll have to console himself with the Best Original Screenplay statue already on his shelf.

This is the category with the most surprises. In addition to snubbing Affleck and Bigelow, the Academy also ignored previous winner Tom Hooper and perpetual runner-up Quentin Tarantino. Of those who did make the cut, both Haneke and Zeitlin are “It’s nice to be nominated” consolation nods. Russell also seems like a long shot, considering the backlash that has already formed against ‘Silver Linings Playbook’.

On the face of it, this looks like a lock for Spielberg. However, he already has two Best Director trophies, and the Academy may give this one to Ang Lee as an apology for slighting his ‘Brokeback Mountain’ in favor of the obviously-unworthy ‘Crash’. [Whoops. As Julian points out, I’d forgotten that the Academy did give Ang Lee the directing award in 2006, even though his film lost Best Picture.]

Best Actor
  • Bradley Cooper, ‘Silver Linings Playbook’
  • Daniel Day-Lewis, ‘Lincoln’
  • Hugh Jackman, ‘Les Miserables’
  • Joaquin Phoenix, ‘The Master’
  • Denzel Washington, ‘Flight’

Again, ‘Lincoln’ seems like the front-runner in this contest. Yet Daniel Day-Lewis also already has two Oscars. So does Denzel Washington. I think this may be Hugh Jackman’s year.

Best Actress
  • Jessica Chastain, ‘Zero Dark Thirty’
  • Jennifer Lawrence, ‘Silver Linings Playbook’
  • Emmanuelle Riva, ‘Amour’
  • Quvenzhané Wallis, ‘Beasts of the Southern Wild’
  • Naomi Watts, ‘The Impossible’

Jessica Chastain has been Hollywood’s “It Girl” for the past few years, and I think the Academy has been waiting for an excuse to give her an Oscar. None of the other nominees in this category look like formidable challenges. (Jennifer Lawrence will certainly be nominated again at some point.)

Best Supporting Actor
  • Alan Arkin, ‘Argo’
  • Robert De Niro, ‘Silver Linings Playbook’
  • Philip Seymour Hoffman, ‘The Master’
  • Tommy Lee Jones, ‘Lincoln’
  • Christoph Waltz, ‘Django Unchained’

I find it interesting that every single one of the nominees in this category has already won at least one Oscar. Almost everyone who’s seen ‘Lincoln’ has said that Tommy Lee Jones steals the picture, so I think he’s the most likely victor here.

Best Supporting Actress
  • Amy Adams, ‘The Master’
  • Sally Field, ‘Lincoln’
  • Anne Hathaway, ‘Les Miserables’
  • Helen Hunt, ‘The Sessions’
  • Jacki Weaver, ‘Silver Linings Playbook’

Supporting Actress is the category where the Academy often likes to throw in a wild-card nominee, but not this year. While there are fewer previous winners here (just Sally Field and Helen Hunt), all of the contenders have been nominated at least once before.

My Magic 8 Ball says that Anne Hathaway will claim this prize. I’ve been hearing people blather about her “one unbroken take” musical number in ‘Les Mis’ for weeks now.

The Snubs

I’ve already talked about the lack of nominations for Ben Affleck and Kathryn Bigelow. Despite being Wes Anderson’s most accessible film yet and my favorite movie of the year, ‘Moonrise Kingdom’ only garnered a token Best Original Screenplay nomination. (The Academy apparently favored fellow indie sensation ‘Beasts of the Southern Wild’.)

Paul Thomas Anderson’s highly-anticipated 70mm epic ‘The Master’ drew mixed reviews and fizzled at the box office. It only drew some acting nominations, none of which it’s likely to win.

I half expected Jennifer Lawrence to pull a nomination for her star-making turn in ‘The Hunger Games’, rather than the much lesser-seen, (in my opinion) less interesting, and certainly less likely-to-win ‘Silver Linings Playbook’.

Also shut out completely was Christopher Nolan’s mega-blockbuster ‘The Dark Knight Rises’. While comic book movies generally aren’t expected to win important awards, the Academy took so much flak for failing to nominate ‘The Dark Knight’ for Best Picture in 2009 that a make-good nomination seemed highly probable this year. (‘Rises’ even failed to score any noms in technical categories.) Of course, ‘The Dark Knight Rises’ isn’t half the movie that ‘The Dark Knight’ was, as far as I’m concerned.

Pleasant Surprise

It may have proved divisive among readers of this site, but the latest James Bond entry, ‘Skyfall’, was easily one of my favorite movies of the year. It landed five nominations, including highly-deserved nods for Best Cinematography (Roger Deakins) and Best Original Score (Thomas Newman), as well as one for the theme song by Adele.

Find the full list of nominees on the official Oscars web site. Which of this year’s picks surprise you? Which do you find the most deserving? What do you think will win? Tell us in the Comments.


  1. Some 007 fan ought to know this, but how many other James Bond songs have been nominated?

    The Simpsons got their first nomination in the short animated film category.

    I am disappointed that no Anderson got nominated for director or their picture for best picture. Moonrise Kingdom and The Master were two of my favorites. And when will the Resident Evil films get recognized?

    • Josh Zyber

      “Live and Let Die” (Paul McCartney), “Nobody Does It Better” (Carly Simon, for The Spy Who Loved Me) and “For Your Eyes Only” (Sheena Easton) were previously nominated. None won.

      Given that this year’s Oscar ceremony will feature a tribute to Bond’s 50th anniversary (a year late, but whatever), I think Adele is probably a lock.

  2. Mike

    I have no enthusiasm for Spielberg movies anymore. They have such a shake and bake quality. Get this writer. Get tons of big stars (didn’t he used to avoid that to some extent?) Have Janusz slather the images with that murky Janusz look (remember when he used to use different DPs from time to time?) There’s no life in his films anymore. The only draw is Lewis, and even then, the chameleon angle has gotten dull with him too.

  3. Ian Whitcombe

    Also, “The Look Of Love” from the original Casino Royale unofficially marked Bond’s debut in the Best Song category.

  4. Please don’t ever post an article about what a movie “seems” like. Sheesh. Either watch it or reserve judgment. The movie is extremely well directed, as were Munich and some of his other recent movies. Glad to see Hoffman and Phoenix nominated for the Master. I thought the movie was incredibly pretentious but the acting was great.

  5. Hey Josh, Ang Lee did win a Best Director Award for “Brokeback Mountain”. And rightly so!

    The Production Design/Art Direction nomination for “Anna Karenina” is super deserved.

    Belgium got one nomination for “Best Short Film (Live Action)” for “Death of a Shadow”, again starring Matthias Schoenaerts (from last year’s “Bullhead”).

  6. Movies Deakins has been nominated for, but never won:

    ‘The Shawshank Redemption’
    ‘O Brother, Where Art Thou?’
    ‘The Man Who Wasn’t There’
    ‘No Country for Old Men’
    ‘The Assassination of Jesse James’
    ‘The Reader’
    ‘True Grit’

    How has he not won an Oscar yet?

    • Alex

      I was surprised about that. I was kind of hoping the Academy would be in a playful mood and give Whedon a writing nod. Not that I expected him to win, mark you, but there’s some choice dialog in that flick.

  7. Great comments, Josh! I tend to agree with your reviews on this site often and even when we do disagree (such as in the case of ‘Prometheus’ and ‘The Dark Knight Rises’) I still enjoy your comments and respect your opinions.

    The Oscar nominations this year were particularly disappointing for me. I feel like they were safe and boring; maybe even more so than usual. I was saddened to see both ‘Moonrise Kingdom’ and ‘Bernie’ go almost completely unrecognized though I can’t say I was surprised as I expected them to be ignored for the most part. Also, I thought ‘The Perks of Being a Wallflower’ was a great little film (well reviewed, too) that might be a dark horse contender.

    Now, some things that did catch me off guard (and even irked me a bit in certain instances): No supporting actor nod for Leonardo DiCaprio in ‘Django Unchained.’ No actor nomination for Richard Gere in ‘Arbitrage.’ Not a single nomination for ‘Rust and Bone.’ Also, ‘Looper’ was completely ignored. Matthew McConaughey did some of his finest work in ages in three different films this year and doesn’t even get a mention. And the most shocking/offensive of all … Kathryn Bigelow gets truly and ridiculously robbed! What the hell were they thinking?

    The Academy also missed out on a huge opportunity by not nominating even one blockbuster. People always complain the Oscars are out of touch and only nominate boring movies nobody sees. I disagree; for the most part, big budget blockbusters don’t really deserve a great deal of artistic recognition. However, when a film does happen to make hundreds of millions of dollars and ALSO deserves artistic recognition, then it should get it. One could mount strong arguments for either ‘Skyfall’, ‘The Dark Knights Rises’, or ‘The Avengers’ scoring a nomination this year.

    That being said, ‘Lincoln’ will probably win. Lame! Spielberg would get my vote for one of the most overrated directors of all time. Of the nominated films, I’d go with either ‘Zero Dark Thirty’ or ‘Beasts of the Southern Wild.’ Both are original, thought provoking, entertaining, and offer insight into other people’s worlds in a way only great filmmaking can.

  8. Rob

    I tend to agree with most of your predictions or expectations on this list. You didn’t want to throw any guesses out for the technical nominations though?

    Aaron – ‘The Avengers’ at least got a nomination for ‘Best Visual Effects’, so don’t be sad that it was left out. I’d hope that it wins over the other films in that category.

  9. Scott

    Steven Spielberg is the most overrated director of all time? Compare his body of work to any director working today … Yep, thought so.

    • Josh Zyber

      The Lost World: Jurassic Park
      The Terminal
      Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull

      I’m looking at his body of work, and I see plenty of duds on that résumé.

    • Well, Josh actually beat me to the punch here, but yeah … what he said! I think the list of movies he mentioned pretty much sums up why I consider Spielberg to be consistently overrated. ‘The Lost World’ and ‘Kingdom of the Crystal Skull’ are categorically two of the most disappointing sequels, if not movies in general, ever made.

      It’s not just that he makes duds from time to time; all directors do. It’s that so many of his films are safe. They are typical. You know where they’re going before they get there because everything is wrapped up with a pretty red bow tied around an unearned, unrealistic happy ending.

      Compare his films to those of David Fincher, Martin Scorsese, Paul Thomas Anderson, Christopher Nolan, The Coen Brothers, Steven Soderbergh, Stanley Kubrick, Quentin Tarantino, Ridley Scott, David Lynch, Tim Burton, Oliver Stone, Robert Altman, Sam Raimi, or David Cronenberg. All those guys have made duds, too but they never felt safe. At least when they fail, they do so in brave, glorious, over-the-top fashion.

      • “One man’s slacker is another man’s cracker”. “Hook” and “A.I.” are in my personal top-10 of all time. De gustibus et coloribus etcetera …

  10. Drew


    If you really that Tim Burton films aren’t safe, you’re insane. Burton hasn’t taken a risk, or made anything that wasn’t safe in close to two decades, now! It doesn’t get any safer than a Tim Burton film. His movies are the epitome of assembly line/cookie cutter filmmaking. He grabs his quasi-wife, Depp, Elfman, some strange costumes, some emo makeup… throws them in a food processor, and bam! Let’s see what it churns out.

    A lot of what you’re saying about Spielberg is accurate, but be careful when you’re naming other directors, when comparing. Spielberg might be safe, but ‘Lincoln’ is leaps and bounds better than anything Burton, or some of the other directors you mentioned, have made in a very long time.

    • Mike Attebery

      Spielberg and Burton are two directors I think have branded their own shake and bake systems for churning out films. No matter the property, they add the same ingredients over and over.

  11. JM

    ‘Lincoln’ = Tony Kushner.

    It’s 1998 all over again.

    Personally, I fear the suffocation of ‘Amour.’


  12. Barsoom Bob

    That is a little harsh critique of Mr. Spielberg filmography I think. First, I would remove A.I. from that list and possibly The Terminal and 1941. Those aren’t bad movies, just not what people were expecting.

    Lincoln, again not the bio pic people were expecting, but an intelligent and emotional drama about a President faced with a divided nation and a dysfunctional government, that is fighting, above and below board, to do the enlightened thing and at the same time trying to hold the country together. Oh, I don’t know, where might we have seen that recently ?

    Hook however is a bad movie, a very bad movie.
    (But someone will pop up and say that it is their favorite childhood movie)

    But the good to great movies :

    Close Encounters
    Temple of Doom
    Last Crusade
    Empire of the Sun
    Color Purple
    Jurrasic Park
    Schindler’s List
    Private Ryan
    Minority Report
    War of the Worlds
    Warhorse (a vast imnprovement over the play)

    Not mention producing such things like
    Back to The Future I II III
    Roger Rabbit
    The Pacific
    Band of Brother
    Amazing Stories

  13. RollTide1017

    I laugh at Skyfall’s score nomination, that was one of the most bland and boring scores of the year. I have no problem with the other score noms and am rooting for Williams to win for Lincoln (best score of the year IMO).

    I would have rather seen a number of other scores nominated instead of Skyfall: Silvestri’s The Avengers, Desplat’s Rise of the Guardians (better then Argo IMO), Shore’s The Hobbit, Horner’s The Amazing Spider-man, Giacchino’s John Carter or Doyle’s Brave. Any of those are far better scores then Skyfall.

  14. Mike Attebery

    Sounds like Spielberg just pulled the plug on Robopocalypse. Wonder who will take that over.

    What’s weird with him is that his movies just don’t seem like ONLY HE could have made them anymore. Since 1998, and even before then, there’s a weird pattern of 1 or 2 sci-fi movies, then a big IMPORTANT movie, then some sort of fluff, then another BIG IMPORTANT movie, and if that doesn’t hit, do another one, then sci-fi, repeat.

    • JM

      Spielberg re: ‘Robopocalypse’

      “We found that the film was costing a lot of money and I found a better way to tell the story more economically but also much more personally. I found the personal way into ‘Robopocalypse’, and so I just told everybody to go find other jobs, I’m starting on a new script and we’ll have this movie back on its feet soon.”

      Lower budget. More Spielbergian.

      That’s totally the way to go. He should probably bring in David Koepp.

      • Josh Zyber

        According to various insider reports, Spielberg blew close to $250 million on his romantic comedy The Terminal because he wanted to build an entire airport from scratch to shoot in. That isn’t reflected in the official production budget ($60 million) because DreamWorks used creative accounting to spread the cost across other productions that would reuse portions of the set later.

        So, yes, Spielberg knows how to waste money when he feels like it.

  15. Scott

    Casey … Youre honestly going to say that Spielberg is the most overrated director of all time and the list Paul Thomas Anderson, Christopher Nolan, Steven Soderbergh, Stanley Kubrick, Ridley Scott, David Lynch, Tim Burton, Oliver Stone, Sam Raimi, and David Cronenberg. As your argument. I said look at his entire filmography and compare that to directors working today … And when they fail it bravely a brave, glorious, over-the-top fashion.

    I am a fan of Paul Thomas Anderson but he literally makes the same movie over and over again as well as Burton. As long as Johnny Depp is available you can be sure to find a burton movie in production. Steven Soderbergh hasnt made a good movie since out of sight and Stanley Kubrick has paths of glory, dr. Strangelove and a
    Clock work orange which I consider brilliant. Thats it. Ridley Scott continues to play it
    Safe and he couldnt even get a prequel to arguably his best film right. David Lynch, really? There is nothing in his filmography remotely close to Spielberg on a bad day. Why is he here? Oliver Stone hasnt made a good movie sinve born on the fourth of july and Sam Ramis made what is quite possibly the worst sequel of all time which of course is spider man 3. It was so bad and cost so much money, name a Spielberg movie that has cost $500 million to make, hell, name one that has cost over $200 million, that the studio cancelled a fourth and rebooted the entire franchise instead. Im a big fan of fincher and anticipate all of his movies. But nolan, which again i am a fan of, has not made anything of substance. His best movie is the prestige and inception loses its luster with repeat viewing. when Fincher and Nolan have a resume as impressive as Spielbers then you can compare.

    You went ahead and listed his duds which is fine. Like you said, all directors have them. But when your hits are duel, jaws, close encounters, all the Indy films, the color purple, empire of the sun, ET,
    Jurassic park, schindlers list, amistad, saving private Ryan, Munich, minority report, war of the worlds, war worse and Lincoln. When the directors you listed have the likes of these in their resumes then you have an argument. You hate Spielberg which is fine, its the hip thing to do now a days, but don’t say he’s overrated. Without him many of the directors you listed would never have gotten into the movie business. He is, and always will be, one of the greatest directors that ever lived. There will never be another Spielberg so I would just enjoy his movies, both past and present because he makes them for us, the audience.

    • Wow! Didn’t know I’d stir up so much emotion by saying I thought Spielberg was overrated. That being said, I still stand by my opinion that he is, in fact, overrated. I’m not saying he isn’t talented, successful, or doesn’t deserve respect for his work, I’m just saying I think he gets a lot of automatic credit for being “Spielberg,” when it’s not really deserved. And, more specifically, I think that is true of his films over the last 10 to 15 years.

      @ Drew & Mike Attebery – lol okay, fair enough! You both make valid points about Burton. He can be guilty of that same “shake and back” style of filmmaking that Spielberg also often relies on. I will say this though; I think Burton has an unmistakable visual style and viewpoint that are always readily apparent in his films but I don’t think they all have the same “theme” or “ebb and flow” like a Spielberg movie does. I’ve never felt Burton’s films were riffs on the same song. Looking back over the last decade, he’s made ‘Alice in Wonderland’, ‘Sweeney Todd’, ‘Corpse Bride’, and ‘Big Fish’ for example. And yes, while they all looked like a Burton movie, I think they were all interesting, unique, and varied greatly in themes and styles.

      @ Barsoom Bob – if my critique of Spielberg came across as overly harsh, that certainly wasn’t my intention. Again, I think he’s very talented and deserving of respect, I just think his films sometimes get a free pass because of who he is. And, we will just have to agree to disagree about ‘Lincoln’. I didn’t find it to be an, “intelligent and emotional drama” at all. I thought it was exactly what I expected it to be walking into a film about Lincoln directed by Spielberg: predictable and safe. In the end, I thought it was a great cast and great acting, but not a great movie.

      My biggest problem with his work over the last 10 to 12 years is that with the exception of ‘Munich’ and ‘War of the Worlds’, nothing has touched me, moved me, surprised me, or really impressed me. ‘Munich’ was a straight up great film … subtle, thought provoking, violent, moody, and incredibly well acted and ‘War of the Worlds’ was, until its rather sudden happy ending, dark and really pessimistic about the nature of humanity, not something you often see in a Spielberg movie.

      @ Scott – yes, I will still say Spielberg is overrated while offering up that list of directors who stand in sharp contrast to his, in my opinion, safe and predictable style of filmmaking. I am at a loss as to how Paul Thomas Anderson makes the same movie over and over again; I just don’t see that.

      Since ‘Out of Sight’, Soderbergh has made ‘The Limey’, ‘Traffic’, ‘Ocean’s Eleven’, and ‘Magic Mike’ just to name a few. So, I’d argue he’s made some VERY good movies since then.

      In the last decade Ridley Scott has made ‘Gladiator’, ‘Hannibal’, ‘Black Hawk Down’, ‘American Gangster’, ‘Body of Lies’, and ‘Prometheus’. I know that last one was very polarizing, but I don’t think any of them are particularly safe or boring. David Lynch, Oliver Stone, and David Cronenberg are wildly uneven, I’ll give you that. But, they’re never safe or predictable and, most importantly, I think they are always swinging for the fences which is to be admired even when they fail miserably.

      In regards to Sam Raimi and ‘Spider-Man 3’, you are right; it was a hot mess. Nobody wanted to love that train wreck of a movie more than me and I just couldn’t. But, “worst sequel of all time?” No way! ‘The Lost World’ and ‘Kingdom of the Crystal Skull’ easily beat it for that title. They were wretched!

      In sum, I think many of the directors I listed have made movies in the last decade that far surpass anything Spielberg has done in that same time. As examples, I offer you the following: ‘The Social Network’, ‘No Country for Old Men’, ‘There Will be Blood’, ‘Black Hawk Down’, ‘Traffic’, ‘A History of Violence’, ‘Kill Bill’, and ‘The Departed’.

      I want to again reiterate, I don’t hate Spielberg. I respect him and like a number of his movies. I just happen to think he’s overrated not because it’s “the hip thing to do now,” but for the many reasons I’ve listed here. I think your last sentence above perfectly illustrates why we feel so differently about him and his work. You said he makes films, “for us, the audience” to just enjoy. For me, that’s the problem. He often makes movies for us to enjoy instead of movies that challenge or inspire us, that provoke thought and reflection. I prefer directors that make films for themselves, for the art of filmmaking, that want to take the audience down a path they might not always enjoy instead of wrapping everything up neat and tidy, cheesy, predictable, patriotic, and with a perfectly bookended opening and closing.

      In a nutshell, that’s why I find Spielberg safe and predictable and, yes … overrated. 🙂

      • Barsoom Bob

        I think you provide your own answer, ” I got exactly what I was expecting.”
        Lincoln is the best Spielberg movie since Munich. even though I am aware of our history, it was a revelation how similar the circumstances between that time and present are. I had no ides before going into the movie that the “noble” President Lincoln would resort to modern political practices as lobbying, statistical analysists, good old fashion arm bending and back room deals to fight for his vision. Tony Kushner wrote an intelligent and insightful script. I personally am very distressed by the current state of our government and our society in general and I am not ashamed to say I actually welled up tears more times watching Lincoln than I did while watching Les Miserables. It was emotional to me. It also helped that Spielberg was remarkably restrained for this film and did not indulge in any of his signature schmaltz or cuteness. everyone is entitled to their own opinion, I am sorry that is not what you saw while watching the movie.

  16. Mike

    Lincoln marks the first time I’ve heard anyone really discuss a Spielberg movie in years. Even then, they usually talk about Lewis. No one I know has ever mentioned War Horse, and I know a lot of movie fanatics. Be curious to see how his box office has been over the last 15 years.

  17. Scott

    The terminal cost $60 million to make and what they did was build an entire, functioning air port. All the stores on screen paid to have there stores appear on screen which helped to off shoot the cost of the film. Not sure where you got $250 million from but thats not accurate. The film grossed $220 million world wide so even when you double it, for advertising, it turned a decent profit. Spider man 3 cost $258 million. when you factor in advertising expenses the movie cost close to $500 million to make … Can anyone see where that money went? Titanic cost $200 million to make and they reconstructed the entire boat. Spielberg movies always come in on time and under budget. And don’t reference jaws or 1941. Jaws became the highest grossing movie of all time and since 1941, which Spielberg learned a lot from, his movies, again, have come in on time and under budget. Can’t wait to see what he does with robopocalypse and yes … Although delayed, it is going to be made.

  18. cyrollan

    I for one am not surprised that the Dark Knight Rises wasn’t nominated for anything. Like you said, it’s not half the movie Dark Knight is. So if the superior film wasn’t nominated, logic dictates that the inferior won’t either.

    BUT because TDKR was less fun than The Avengers, I definitely expected it to be nominated BEFORE The Avengers. The Academy typically doesn’t like fun movies.