It's funny. I was watching Norbit the other day and realized this: This is what Eddie Murphy does!
What he did in Dreamgirls was wonderful and definitly deserving of recognition, but I think expecting him to turn into some serious actor just because of the political aspects of the Oscars and not giving him the award for doing what he's always done was stupid on the public and the Academy's part.

I never said it was fair. It was a stupid choice, though.

I don't think it matters if Eddie Murphy was in Norbit or not..seriously.the award is based on performance, not some other trashy movie you have out..I'm sure over the years we could find several actors or actresses that won a award for one movie and had some piece of beep yarn film they starred inwhew boy!!!

Apparently most of his fellow actors feel that he had an award worthy performance, since he won the Screen Actors Guild award.

Maybe Eddie and those close to him didn't see him as the lock that the rest of us did and didn't think of his chances being helped or hurt by any other projects that he was in. Tough to believe but maybe they were just oblivious to all of this. I mean, Eddie himself thought that the Academy would never give him the award, nominated or not.

"Well maybe Eddie shouldn't have been a little movie called, "Norbit" "
I stated that earlier. It isn't really fair; the award should, of course, be based upon the performance in that film alone, but if you look at "Dreamgirls" as Eddie's attempt to be taken seriously, and he follows it up with the less-than-usual Eddie Murphy fare, it does, in fact, reflect badly on him. I'm not saying he should have followed it up with "Macbeth", but a well-chosen follow-up would have given him the award. (or a delay in the release of "Norbit", which should have been a no-brainer to all involved.)

Well maybe Eddie shouldn't have been a little movie called, "Norbit"

This message has been deleted.

Hey. I always liked eddie, his films gross well over 100 million Domestic. Eddie murphy stoled the show. Also he was robbed! Wait! I hope he didn't go up against forest whitaker? That's a hard one. Mikey!

Eddie deserved it, but they probably gave it to Arkin because he is very old and this might be his last chance at an award. Eddie has years to take home the award if he can just lay off the crappy comedies where he plays all of the characters. That's another reason also. Norbit sucked big time. If he'd postponed the release date another month or so, his chance of winning would have been much bigger.
The greatest trick the devil ever pulled off, was convincing the world he doesn't exist

This message has been deleted.

I agree with you, although Eddie gave a good performance in this movie.

I disagree with you. I think Eddie dominated the musical parts of Dreamgirls completely and just nailed this character on the head.

This message has been deleted.

I am also apparently in the minority, but I was not impressed with Eddie Murphy's performance. Oscar worthy? Not in my opinion.
I think he was talented enough to deserve the role, and I think he performed decently. He got some valuable experience here, and he can take it and put it to use in another role, and maybe that role will be Oscar worthy.

Nothing Personal,..but to d1esel6, it was Alan Arkin and NOT Alan Alda (T.V. MAS*H) Fame who was in LMSS. Eddie more than deserved this one, and I think the Academy outta be ashamed!
The Smoker You Drink, The Player You Get!

haha, theres no "Doubt" in your mind Amy deserved the Oscar. She also deserved one for Doubt

They may not see every film before the nominations. It is a big part of the studios to promote and push the films and stars they think have a shot of getting a nomination. That is where the term "for your consideration" comes from.
However, voters are required to watch every nominated film in a category they are voting for, otherwise they are not supposed to submit a vote for that category. They do not just watch a few clips.

It is certainly true that the voters do not watch every performance. I am convinced that if everyone had seen "Junebug", Amy Adams would have a best supporting actress oscar. There is no doubt in my mind about it.

The proof of a good actor is when you no longer see the actor, but only see the character. Case in point, Will Smith in Pursuit of Happyness. He was fabulous. Even though I knew I was watching Will, all that I saw was Chris.
Eddie, as good as he was, wasn't that good in this film. There were some good scenes, but overall, he was not good. You can't even compare him in the same breath as Jamie Foxx who won my heart in Any Given Sunday. He has the power to convince you that he is someone else; Eddie just doesn't show that, all of the time, in EVERY scene.
Alan Arkin was fabulous in his role. I had to keep reminding myself that this was the same actor usually known for doing madcap comedic roles. He deserved the award.
Finally, please realize that the voters do not usually have the time to watch every single performance. What they vote on is the one scene that is presented to them. I don't know who picks that scene, but if you recall from the Oscars, the scene picked from DG for Eddie was not a significan role for him. At the same time, there is no doubt that the voters are biased by other events at the time. Thus, Eddie's poor decision to play and film a stereotypical, obscene movie such as Norbit, most likely hurt his chance, little as it was.
How people can find it acceptable that Eddie Murphy play such a stereotypical, and cruel intended movie about obese people, and then have people say he is robbed for an Oscar because he is black, please. It had nothing to do with his color of skin, but of his choice in roles. Had he wanted to win an oscar, he should be a bit more choosy in his role choices. Or, be happy being a comedic actor.

This is what happened, and I'm not saying it's fair: Eddie Murphy probably was a shoo-in for the part. He was putting himself out there as a serious actor and Hollywood has a tendency to reward that. The problem was that while Academy members were voting, Eddie did "Norbit" which, although a moneymaker, was awful. Eddie totally lost his credibility as a serious actor in a flash and voters fell back on the less deserving (not undeserving, but certainly less deserving) Alan Arkin.
Keep in mind the supporting actor oscars are a bit of a crapshoot anyway Kate Hudson was a favorite and deserved the Oscar for "Almost Famous" and Lauren Bacall should have been the winner for "The Mirror Has Two Faces."

Thanks, I a gree with you!
Alan was great in LMS.

Blah, blah, blah.

I totally agree Djimon Hounsou was excellent. Eddie was ok. Actually Eddie's performance looked like an old SNL sketch of him impersonating James Brown. Djimon's performance showed depth and layers of his character with passion. He is the one who was robbed.