Oscar nominations

Yes it's time for the four hour plus horribly smug circle jerk that is the Oscars. Despite their making enough bad decisions to fill an encyclopedia with, I enjoy seeing who wins etc.

The nominations are:

BEST PICTURE

Avatar
The Blind Side
District 9
An Education
The Hurt Locker
Inglorious Basterds
Precious
A Serious Man
Up
Up In the Air

BEST DIRECTOR

James Cameron, Avatar
Katherine Bigelow, The Hurt Locker
Quentin Tarentino, Inglourious Basterds
Lee Daniels, Precious
Jason Reitman, Up In The Air

BEST ACTOR

Jeff Bridges, Crazy Heart
George Clooney, Up In The Air
Colin Firth, A Single Man
Morgan Freeman, Invictus
Jeremy Renner, The Hurt Locker

BEST ACTRESS

Sandra Bullock, The Blind Side
Helen Mirren, The Last Station
Carey Mulligan, An Education
Gabourey Sidibe, Precious
Meryl Streep, Julie & Julia

BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR

Matt Damon, Invictus
Woody Harrelson, The Messenger
Christopher Plummer, The Last Station
Stanley Tucci, The Lovely Bones
Christoph Waltz, Inglourious Basterds

BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS

Penélope Cruz, Nine
Vera Farmiga, Up In The Air
Maggie Gyllenhaal, Crazy Heart
Anna Kendrick, Up In The Air
Mo'Nique, Precious

BEST ADAPTED SCREENPLAY

Neil Blomkamp, Terri Tatchell, District 9
Neil Hornby, An Education
Jesse Armstrong, Simon Blackwell, Armando Iannucci, Tony Roche, In The Loop
Geofrey Fletcher, Precious
Jason Reitman, Sheldon Turner, Up In The Air

BEST ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY

Mark Boall, The Hurt locker
Quentin Tarentino, Inglourious Basterds
Joel And Ethan Coen, A Serious Man
Alessandro Camon and Oren Moverman, The Messenger
Bob Peterson, Pete Docter, Up

BEST ANIMATED FILM

Coraline
Fantastic Mr Fox
The Princess and the Frog
The Secret of Kells
Up

Predictions/thoughts? I think the following will win:

Film: Avatar (but The Hurt Locker should)
Director: James Cameron (see above)
Actor: Jeff Bridges
Actress: Sandra Bullock (a travesty if she does, The Blind Side looks truly awful)
Supporting Actor: Christoph Waltz
Supporting Actress: Mo'Nique
Animated Film: Up

God I hope Avatar doesn't win Best Film. Mo'Nique and Christoph Waltz are pretty sure to win for Best Supporting Actress/Actor, so is Jeff Bridges for Best Actor. Best Actress is a bit tricky to figure out, though.

Best Director is between Bigelow and Cameron. I hope Tarantino wins for Best Original Screenplay.



EDIT: Also, I'm not sure what to think of 10 films getting nominated for Best Picture.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Breine

EDIT: Also, I'm not sure what to think of 10 films getting nominated for Best Picture.

---

Think they want more box office money.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Breine

God I hope Avatar doesn't win Best Film.

---

I hope Avatar wins Best Picture. Just to piss you all off.

Oh, it's most likely going to. I just like to whine about it. ;}

Why is it whenever all these movie award shows come around, I've never heard of half of the movies? Seriously, it's just stupid and annoying, because I go to the movies like 3-4 times A MONTH.

THE JACKEL

Then you're doing something wrong because I've heard of every single movie on the list and I rarely go to the theater.

I won't exactly kill myself if Avatar wins anyway (and it will, The Hurt Locker just hasn't been seen enough), there'll have been far worse Oscar winners in the past (Driving Miss Daisy, Braveheart, A Beautiful Mind, Chicago and Crash in the last 20 years or so alone). Would be funny if Tarantino stole in to sneak the big prizes, but I can't see that happening.

Best Actress looks very weak this year, but the other categories look decent.

The ten nominees thing for Best Picture is a daft gimmick in my opinion, the Oscars desperate to show they can recognise commercial/genre/animated films. It shouldn't have to take an expansion to ten films for them to acknowledge a film like Up rather than yet another worthy drama about the Holocaust or someone with an illness of some kind.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bunny

Then you're doing something wrong because I've heard of every single movie on the list and I rarely go to the theater.

---

Yeah, same.

Is Avatar really that favored to win? That's disappointing.

Well $2 billion in box office tends to swing a few votes :D - interesting to note how some previous 'biggest films of all time' fared in the Best Picture category:

Jaws - nominated, lost (to One Flew Over the Cuckoos Nest)
Star Wars - nominated, lost (to Annie Hall)
E.T. - nominated, lost (to Gandhi)
Jurassic Park - not nominated (but Spielberg won for Schindler's List anyway)
Titanic - nominated, won

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by charliepanayi

Well $2 billion in box office tends to swing a few votes

---

I also figure thats why people hate on the film so much. I mean seriously, what the hell is wrong with Avatar? I would love to see it win Best Picture instead of typical Oscar bait movies like Precious. Maybe Avatar isn't perfect but its still an accomplished film and very entertaining. And other than the nitpickers on the internet everyone I have met said it was amazing.

Now you lot can go ahead and tell me that the story sucked. Blah blah blah....

It's funny that people say Avatar is the highest grossing film of all time when really when you count inflation it's, I think, number 26 on the list.

Inglorious Basterds should win something.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dreddz

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by charliepanayi

Well $2 billion in box office tends to swing a few votes

---

I also figure thats why people hate on the film so much. I mean seriously, what the hell is wrong with Avatar? I would love to see it win Best Picture instead of typical Oscar bait movies like Precious. Maybe Avatar isn't perfect but its still an accomplished film and very entertaining. And other than the nitpickers on the internet everyone I have met said it was amazing.

Now you lot can go ahead and tell me that the story sucked. Blah blah blah....

---

Well you kind of answered your own question about why some people don't like the film at the end there. I'd rather Precious doesn't win (and it won't) either, but I'd rather something like Up or The Hurt Locker or Up in the Air (or the shamefully overlooked Moon) did.

Inglorious Basterds will win Best Supporting Actor and possibly the screenplay award too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by charliepanayi

Well you kind of answered your own question about why some people don't like the film at the end there.

---

I personally think its quite immature to write off a film based on just one aspect of it.

And yeah, Christoph Waltz deserves to win Best Supporting Actor.

Yeah, writing off a film because you didn't like the script/story - that's really immature! It's only a minor part of the whole thing after all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by charliepanayi

Yeah, writing off a film because you didn't like the script/story - that's really immature! It's only a minor part of the whole thing after all.

---

Avatar has a lot more things going for it than just its story. Thats obvious.

My personal favourite from the nominations list is A Serious Man, even though it has no way of winning it. This 10 nominations thing is a bit much I think. I mean who actually thinks something like The Blind Side has a chance against, well, Avatar (which I didn't like)?

The Blind Side shouldn't be anywhere near that shortlist.

Not many surprises. I was hoping Mélanie Laurent would sneak in there and get a nod since I think her performance in Inglourious Basterds was really fantastic.

Love that UP got nominated for Best Picture, yay Pixar! They've deserved a Best Picture nod for a long time now.

Waltz needs to win.

Oh and even though The Hurt Locker and District 9 are awesome, im now hoping Avatar will win best picture because it does not get enough love on here, screw you all! :p

BEST PICTURE

Avatar
The Blind Side
District 9
An Education
The Hurt Locker
Inglorious Basterds
Precious
A Serious Man
Up
Up In the Air

BEST DIRECTOR

James Cameron, Avatar
Katherine Bigelow, The Hurt Locker
Quentin Tarentino, Inglourious Basterds
Lee Daniels, Precious
Jason Reitman, Up In The Air

BEST ACTOR

Jeff Bridges, Crazy Heart
George Clooney, Up In The Air
Colin Firth, A Single Man
Morgan Freeman, Invictus
Jeremy Renner, The Hurt Locker

BEST ACTRESS

Sandra Bullock, The Blind Side
Helen Mirren, The Last Station
Carey Mulligan, An Education
Gabourey Sidibe, Precious
Meryl Streep, Julie & Julia

BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR

Matt Damon, Invictus
Woody Harrelson, The Messenger
Christopher Plummer, The Last Station
Stanley Tucci, The Lovely Bones
Christoph Waltz, Inglourious Basterds

BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS

Penélope Cruz, Nine
Vera Farmiga, Up In The Air
Maggie Gyllenhaal, Crazy Heart
Anna Kendrick, Up In The Air
Mo'Nique, Precious

BEST ADAPTED SCREENPLAY

Neil Blomkamp, Terri Tatchell, District 9
Neil Hornby, An Education
Jesse Armstrong, Simon Blackwell, Armando Iannucci, Tony Roche, In The Loop
Geofrey Fletcher, Precious
Jason Reitman, Sheldon Turner, Up In The Air

BEST ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY

Mark Boall, The Hurt locker
Quentin Tarentino, Inglourious Basterds
Joel And Ethan Coen, A Serious Man
Alessandro Camon and Oren Moverman, The Messenger
Bob Peterson, Pete Docter, Up

BEST ANIMATED FILM

Coraline
Fantastic Mr Fox
The Princess and the Frog
The Secret of Kells
Up

I wouldn't mind any of the bolded ones winning.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wolf Kanno

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dreddz

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by charliepanayi

Yeah, writing off a film because you didn't like the script/story - that's really immature! It's only a minor part of the whole thing after all.

---

Avatar has a lot more things going for it than just its story. Thats obvious.

---

---

Yeah, Avatar is like a nice sweet looking sports car with no engine... at least its pretty... ;)

For the most part, I don't watch the Oscars anymore, its mostly Hollywood politics nowadays.

I had little interest in any of the films nominated and beyond the Animated section (Must I really choose between Up and Coraline? :( ) I can't say I have much interest in any of the categories. It was mostly an uneventful year for movies for me sadly.

Nowadays? It's always been Hollywood politics! Right back to when Citizen Kane was fobbed off with only a Best Screenplay award (and probably before that too). That's what makes it so fun to poke holes in the decisions they make.

^ Same with Shawshank.

@ charlie: Crash & Braveheart are brilliant films. How can you think they are anything less?

Avatar deserves everything it gets. You people need to wake up and see how much balls it took to make a film on such a grand scale, and pull it off spectacularly. Avatar will still be talked about in 50 years, whereas the Hurt Locker will be forgotten about in 5.

I can't make any good predictions as I haven't seen most of the films nominated.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dreddz

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by charliepanayi

Yeah, writing off a film because you didn't like the script/story - that's really immature! It's only a minor part of the whole thing after all.

---

Avatar has a lot more things going for it than just its story. Thats obvious.

---

Yeah it does. But forgive some people for thinking that a Best Picture winner should be more than just a pretty face with admittedly great action and high production values.

If you ask me, something that actually gets voted best picture should excel in all aspects of what it tried to do. Because of that I don't think Avatar should win because as much fun as it was to watch, it was so predictable that it's hard to like it on any other level than that. It's fun, but there's not really anything else to it even though it tries to be at least somewhat deeper than it is.

Hmm, isn't Up the second animated movie to ever be in the Best Picture category, along with Beauty and the Beast? It doesn't have a chance of winning, but I think putting it there is a statement.

Waltz definitely needs to win. I don't know about the others. I haven't heard of a few of these, honestly. Best part of the Oscars is giving me movies I didn't know existed. Yeah, yeah, I run off and watch critically acclaimed movies, spit on it if you want.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Noctiluca

Hmm, isn't Up the second animated movie to ever be in the Best Picture category, along with Beauty and the Beast? It doesn't have a chance of winning, but I think putting it there is a statement.

---

Yeah, but Beauty and the Beast was nominated before the introduction of 10 nominees in the Best Picture category :)

Every since they introduced the Best Animated Feature category in 2001, there was no way any animated film was going to get a nomination for Best Picture. Wall.E definitely deserved to be considered one of the best films of last year, moreso than UP for this year imho, and it didn't get a nod. It should have.

Every year there's always a few movies up there that seem to come out of nowhere. Are some of those indie films, released only in select theatres, or good straight to DVD movies?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rocket Edge

^ Same with Shawshank.

@ charlie: Crash & Braveheart are brilliant films. How can you think they are anything less?

Avatar deserves everything it gets. You people need to wake up and see how much balls it took to make a film on such a grand scale, and pull it off spectacularly. Avatar will still be talked about in 50 years, whereas the Hurt Locker will be forgotten about in 5.

I can't make any good predictions as I haven't seen most of the films nominated.

---

Crash is horribly melodramatic and unsubtle, it beats you over the head with its message to the point of tedium. As for Braveheart, hilariously anti-English, homophobic, messes with history beyond the point of 'I'll let this slide because it's a film', and has the nauseating sight of Mel Gibson copping off with not one, but two much younger women. And it beat Babe, which is especially unforgiveable.

And The Hurt Locker will be forgotten in 5 years? I'd love to have your psychic abilities. I think it'll go down as one of the best films made about war.

Saying 'Film/Band/Singer X will be forgotten in 5/10/20/100 years' is a daft argument, you have no way of knowing such a thing.

And animation is filed alongside comedy/sci-fi/fantasy - the Oscars will usually ignore it for the big prizes as they're so dull in their choices.

I want Avatar to win SOMETHING, but then again I don't honestly think it deserves it compared to The Hurt Locker, which I have just finished watching. Thing is, I think best director should go to Kathryn Bigelow, but it also deserves best picture.

Its funny that I find Avatar a much better film than Titanic, but oddly neough Titanic was nominated for 14 oscars and won 7!

Ah whatever, i might not even watch the oscars.

Titanic won 11 Oscars, not 7.

Actually watch the Oscars? That's like a form of torture!

I loved Avatar . . . but it's not really "Best Picture" worthy. It's a good popcorn flick . . . but the Oscars usually award art more than fluff.

The only award I really care about is Animated. Coraline should win. But it won't. Up will win. Ugh. I love Pixar. LOVE Pixar. But Coraline is amazing.

Avatar deserves to win some technical awards, as e.g. Art Direction and Visual Effects.

That Visuals Effect category is just a cruel one this year really with Avatar in it XD

I was pleased with the winners for the most part. I'm just glad Avatar didn't take home Best Picture.

I should have known that the movie that bored me the most out of the list of Best Picture would win Best Picture. I was really hoping the awards wouldn't be predictable and wouldn't go for something like The Hurt Locker or Avatar.

I've been pushing forward seeing Hurt Locker but I guess it's time to actually see it now. I'm not big on war movies, hopefully it won't bore me to death.

the night was saved already from the beginning when Christoph won. :) and I'm also happy for Sandra Bullock. Not especially for her act in this movie but for many of her past movies and for finally winning an oscar.

Yeah, Sandra Bullock is such an amazing actress. She's been in so many greats such as The Lake House, Speed, and Miss Congeniality. The Best Actress award is long deserved for her. /sarcasm *throws up in mouth*

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shiny

I should have known that the movie that bored me the most out of the list of Best Picture would win Best Picture. I was really hoping the awards wouldn't be predictable and wouldn't go for something like The Hurt Locker or Avatar.

---

Yeah they should have given it to Up!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bastian

I loved Avatar . . . but it's not really "Best Picture" worthy. It's a good popcorn flick . . . but the Oscars usually award art more than fluff.

---

sif?

The Hurt Locker (global box office $16 million) beating Avatar (global box office over $2 billion) - it's Bigelow's revenge on Cameron! And deserved.

Acting awards predictable (Bullock wins a Golden Raspberry and an Oscar), though by all accounts Christoph Waltz's one is richly deserved.

Precious beating Up in the Air to Best Adapted Screenplay. The Oscars preferring melodrama over sharp, funny dialogue. Nice one.

Wallace and Gromit don't win Best Animated Short :(

As usual when two big guns go head to head for Best Foreign Film (The White Ribbon and A Prophet this year) the Oscars ignore both.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shiny

Yeah, Sandra Bullock is such an amazing actress. She's been in so many greats such as The Lake House, Speed, and Miss Congeniality. The Best Actress award is long deserved for her. /sarcasm *throws up in mouth*

---

Sandy is a GODDESS :irked:

I don't understand why the Oscars weren't simply swept by District 9, Up, and Inglourious Basterds. But at least Waltz got a nod.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by I'm my own MILF

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shiny

Yeah, Sandra Bullock is such an amazing actress. She's been in so many greats such as The Lake House, Speed, and Miss Congeniality. The Best Actress award is long deserved for her. /sarcasm *throws up in mouth*

---

Sandy is a GODDESS :irked:

I don't understand why the Oscars weren't simply swept by District 9, Up, and Inglourious Basterds. But at least Waltz got a nod.

---

District 9 = science fiction (Oliver beat 2001 to Best Picture, which tells you all you need to know about how the Academy treats science fiction)

Up = animation (another genre which the Oscars ignore)

Inglorious Basterds = er...no idea really.

And I think Mark Kermode summed it up about Sandra Bullock:
'She's funny, she's gorgeous, it's impossible not to love her and yet she makes rotten film after rotten film after rotten film.'

James Cameron should have won Best Director.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by charlie

Crash is horribly melodramatic and unsubtle, it beats you over the head with its message to the point of tedium. As for Braveheart, hilariously anti-English, homophobic, messes with history beyond the point of 'I'll let this slide because it's a film', and has the nauseating sight of Mel Gibson copping off with not one, but two much younger women. And it beat Babe, which is especially unforgiveable.

---

I thought Crash was a great film. I really don't see where your getting the unsubtle & melodramatic part from.

Braveheart was great because I'm Irish, and who likes the English? Jokes aside you can say it messes with history but the basis of what happened in the film happened in real life. Scotland won it's independence over England, no?

Quote:

---

And The Hurt Locker will be forgotten in 5 years? I'd love to have your psychic abilities. I think it'll go down as one of the best films made about war.

---

I think it was obvious I wasn't being entirely truthful in my statement. Yeah, who's to know if It will be or not, but after seeing it all I can say is 'good film, but thats it'. Did it strike any emotion in me where It had me thinking about the film after it was done? No.

Quote:

---

Saying 'Film/Band/Singer X will be forgotten in 5/10/20/100 years' is a daft argument, you have no way of knowing such a thing.

---

Again what I said above.

James Cameroon not winning best director is a joke, and Avatar missing out on best film is also. Typical Oscars carry-on taking a massive :bou::bou::bou::bou: on the entire film industry. The Hurt Locker is a well made film - don't get me wrong, but Avatar is just in a league of its own for representing what a film should be all about. It doesn't necessarily bother me too much but after seeing both films and when one too me is clearly better than the other, it's a let-down. District 9 or even Up were much better films.

On the ceremony, I didn't see it yet so I'll see then. Happy for Jeff Bridges too.

'Avatar is just in a league of its own for representing what a film should be all about'

Stunning visuals and a bog standard scipt? I don't think that's what a film should necessarily be all about at all.

And when you say 'this film will be forgotten', how am I supposed to know that the statement is not entirely serious?

As for Crash, it ladles on the RACISM angle to the point where it just gets daft. The one great bit of the film is when Matt Dillon tells the screaming Thandie Newton to shut up. It's one of the weakest ever Best Picture winners.

Perhaps I'm being too harsh on Avatar, when it comes to your average blockbuster, I'd take James Cameron over most directors. But I have a soft spot for the underdog, and so that's one reason why I'm happy for Bigelow and The Hurt Locker.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by charliepanayi

District 9 = science fiction (Oliver beat 2001 to Best Picture, which tells you all you need to know about how the Academy treats science fiction)

Up = animation (another genre which the Oscars ignore)

---

I don't think these genres are ignored otherwise they wouldn't have been nominated. Science Fiction movies have won Oscars before (Star Wars anyone?), but never for Best Picture to my knowledge. You would think out of ten damn movies they'd pick one that was actually good. The fact that Avatar won the Golden Globe for Best Picture and then The Hurt Locker took home the Oscar for the same category really makes me worry about who is choosing these to win.

Also at the people saying how much balls it took to make Avatar: anyone with a computer, an editing program, and two cameras can do 3D. It's not hard. And he essentially used lots of green screen which made things easier as well. He didn't have to worry about shooting on real sets. It's hard to shoot 3D on actual locations -- well harder than shooting on green screen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shiny

Also at the people saying how much balls it took to make Avatar: anyone with a computer, an editing program, and two cameras can do 3D. It's not hard. And he essentially used lots of green screen which made things easier as well. He didn't have to worry about shooting on real sets. It's hard to shoot 3D on actual locations -- well harder than shooting on green screen.

---

Are you kidding me? No offense but you really have no idea what you are talking about. I recommend you watch this interview with James Cameron to get a better idea of how Avatar was made. James Cameron was robbed last night of Best Director. I lost a lot of respect for the Oscars for that.

No I am not kidding you. And I'm not listening to that guy talk. He's a tool. Green screen, Maya, two cameras, a crap script, a few B-movie actors, Final Cut Pro and Pro Tools. There you have Avatar.

The camera they used was actually a 3D camera, and many of them run about 20,000; which would probably be better than using the two cameras to get the same effect.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shiny

No I am not kidding you. And I'm not listening to that guy talk. He's a tool. Green screen, Maya, two cameras, a crap script, a few B-movie actors, Final Cut Pro and Pro Tools. There you have Avatar.

The camera they used was actually a 3D camera, and many of them run about 20,000; which would probably be better than using the two cameras to get the same effect.

---

Watch the interview before you embarrass youself even more. You really know nothing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dreddz

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shiny

No I am not kidding you. And I'm not listening to that guy talk. He's a tool. Green screen, Maya, two cameras, a crap script, a few B-movie actors, Final Cut Pro and Pro Tools. There you have Avatar.

The camera they used was actually a 3D camera, and many of them run about 20,000; which would probably be better than using the two cameras to get the same effect.

---

Watch the interview before you embarrass youself even more. You really know nothing.

---

I heard him speak on a show already. That was enough for me. You may think it's hard to make a film like that because you don't know how to go about doing it or don't have the tools to do it to your advantage. But, like I said it's not when you do. Maya can make the CG you see in the film and there are plenty people I know who work in Maya -- it can be a fun program. It's weird how much you seem to obsess about this guy like he's some sort of God of filmmaking when he makes the most subpar scripts in the history of it. With that said, I did enjoy Avatar. But Best Director he is not. Not this year anyway.

Oh hey, Alice made a bunch of money already. It must be an amazing movie.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shiny

I heard him speak on a show already. That was enough for me. You may think it's hard to make a film like that because you don't know how to go about doing it or don't have the tools to do it to your advantage. But, like I said it's not when you do. Maya can make the CG you see in the film and there are plenty people I know who work in Maya -- it can be a fun program. It's weird how much you seem to obsess about this guy like he's some sort of God of filmmaking when he makes the most subpar scripts in the history of it. With that said, I did enjoy Avatar. But Best Director he is not. Not this year anyway.

---

Well first of all the interview I posted goes much more in-depth into how Avatar was made than other interviews with him. I strongly urge you to watch it before you go on like you know what your talking about.

And I do have a lot of respect for James Cameron and have no idea what peoples beef with him is. He is one of the few directors who isn't just going for a quick buck. He wants to push film making to the next level and for the most part succeeds every time. And as far as his scripts go, well you clearly didn't understand what his intentions were for Avatar. He wanted it to be a commercial film. Family entertainment if you will. I doubt he is looking back at some of the cheesy lines and thinking to himself "I'm so clever for putting that in there". I think it takes a certain degree of honesty to not try and be overly clever with your script. To prove James Cameron can make a decent script, go watch Aliens, arguably the most quotable movie of all time.

While I will agree that Shiny is overestimating how simple it was to make Avatar, I'll have to agree with the points regarding the script (which is more than just dialogue). Aside from the admittedly gorgeous visuals, Avatar is a movie that we've all already seen before. While that's not necessarily a bad thing, it certainly hurts Avatar in the long run. Avatar, quite frankly, isn't everything that it could be. It fails to deliver substance. Sure, it's a technological marvel, and props to Cameron for pushing the envelop visually (and I'll also admit he's one of the few directors these days who seems to have a sense of choreography during action sequences), but that's hardly enough to deserve a Best Picture Oscar. Avatar won the only Oscar it deserved. I found The Hurt Locker very underwhelming, but I understand exactly why it won. If Avatar had won, I would have been extremely disappointed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ouch!

While I will agree that Shiny is overestimating how simple it was to make Avatar, I'll have to agree with the points regarding the script (which is more than just dialogue). Aside from the admittedly gorgeous visuals, Avatar is a movie that we've all already seen before. While that's not necessarily a bad thing, it certainly hurts Avatar in the long run. Avatar, quite frankly, isn't everything that it could be. It fails to deliver substance. Sure, it's a technological marvel, and props to Cameron for pushing the envelop visually (and I'll also admit he's one of the few directors these days who seems to have a sense of choreography during action sequences), but that's hardly enough to deserve a Best Picture Oscar. Avatar won the only Oscar it deserved. I found The Hurt Locker very underwhelming, but I understand exactly why it won. If Avatar had won, I would have been extremely disappointed.

---

This pretty much. There is no way anyone can realistically tell me that Avatar deserved best picture when all it had going for it besides visuals was that they had decent acting, and the script wasn't laughably bad. I'm not going to say whether the Hurt Locker deserved to win because I haven't seen it yet, but Avatar certainly didn't deserve to win over the likes of Up, Inglourious Basterds or District 9 which had more going for them than just their effects.

Avatar was a fun movie to watch, but that's really all it was. It's not something I'd ever hold up as even being an amazing film or even amazing for it's genre when you start looking beyond simply the audio and visual side of things.

You lot are so picky. I reckon the Best Picture should be decided by how much entertainment value is put on screen. Avatar isn't perfect, but its a lot of fun. Just on that basis alone, it deserved the Best Picture award.

Quote:

---

I reckon the Best Picture should be decided by how much entertainment value is put on screen.

---

There you go.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dreddz

You lot are so picky. I reckon the Best Picture should be decided by how much entertainment value is put on screen. Avatar isn't perfect, but its a lot of fun. Just on that basis alone, it deserved the Best Picture award.

---

I reckon it should be on what the best film is (yeah, fat chance I know). And 'entertainment' is a very subjective concept, I found There Will Be Blood (a very slow film that bores most people to tears) far more entertaining than something like Avatar.

And my point about SF and animation is that they will win technical awards, maybe be nominated for big awards, but they will not win Best Picture. A bit like foreign films.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bunny

Quote:

---

I reckon the Best Picture should be decided by how much entertainment value is put on screen.

---

There you go.

---

Aye. The thing is, the Oscars are decided by the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Science. They're concerned more with just whether the movie was a good way to spend three hours.

That said, I don't think deciding that plot is an important part of a movie is being picky. It's not like movies are a narrative medium or anything like that. Clearly we shouldn't want to have a well developed or remotely original plot. That would be ridiculous! And picky!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dreddz

I reckon the Best Picture should be decided by how much entertainment value is put on screen. Avatar isn't perfect, but its a lot of fun. Just on that basis alone, it deserved the Best Picture award.

---

If you're going to go down that road, then I was far more entertained by the likes of Up and District 9. And the difference between movies like those that have more substance behind them and Avatar is that I'd love to watch them again. Multiple times even. Avatar was fun for one, maybe two viewings, but it really starts to lose its luster after that because the only thing it has going for it is how much fun it is to watch that first time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dreddz

You lot are so picky. I reckon the Best Picture should be decided by how much entertainment value is put on screen. Avatar isn't perfect, but its a lot of fun. Just on that basis alone, it deserved the Best Picture award.

---

If it were based merely on popcorn blockbusters winning then movies like Men and Black and oh hey, Terminator would win friggin' Best Picture. Dazzling people with visual effects does not mean it's worthy of getting a Best Picture award. He used the visuals to make up for everything else that was lacking in the film. And he is smart. He knows 3D sells. That's why 3D has come back because filmmakers realize the worth of it.

Most people are going to want to pay extra to see a movie in 3D; which as I said is actually possible for anyone with two cameras and an editing program to do. I am not impressed by that. It was the design of the CG visuals and locations done by the amazing visual effect artists that really made the movie come alive. But, I'm not going to sit here and say pretty movies with no depth and no real plot originality deserve to win big awards.

But anyway the fact of the matter is, popcorn movies like Avatar are made to be mindless, "Ooo that's purty" type of movies with lots of action and romance to keep us interested. He rehashes things and using similitude, but it's not meant to be the type of movie you will sit there and go, "Wow there was a lot intellectual symbolism there." It's not the "makes you think" movie. It's the "makes you go wow" movie. And thus, is not Oscar worthy of Best Picture. The end.

What Avatar won best picture? That was okay for me. I really did enjoy the movi

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shiny

Dazzling people with visual effects does not mean it's worthy of getting a Best Picture award. He used the visuals to make up for everything else that was lacking in the film.

---

Avatar wasn't just good because of its visual effects though. It was well directed, had good cinematography, a good score and some decent performances. If visual effects were the only reason as to why I liked Avatar then surely I must have liked Transformers 2 as well (I didn't). James Cameron has said time and time again that he uses visual effects to serve the story, not the other way around. Thats why Terminator 2 still holds up to this day.

Quote:

---

But anyway the fact of the matter is, popcorn movies like Avatar are made to be mindless, "Ooo that's purty" type of movies with lots of action and romance to keep us interested. He rehashes things and using similitude, but it's not meant to be the type of movie you will sit there and go, "Wow there was a lot intellectual symbolism there." It's not the "makes you think" movie. It's the "makes you go wow" movie. And thus, is not Oscar worthy of Best Picture. The end.

---

Any movie is deserving of Best Picture if it is made well. Is there a written rule that says that the Best Picture should go to a film that "made us think". All movies are made with one goal in mind, to entertain us. Whichever movie achieved that goal the best should win Best Picture. Avatar was worthy of the award. The end.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dreddz

Any movie is deserving of Best Picture if it is made well.

---

True, but since the writing and acting were pretty mediocre, Avatar wasn't as well made as it could have been. Like plenty of people have been saying, myself included, it's not a complete package when it comes to excellent film making. Unlike a number of the other nominees.

I'm very happy that Avatar didn't win for Best Picture, even though I was pretty convinced it was going to take it home. I was also very glad that Bigelow won for Best Director (making Oscar history in doing so).

Overall I'm pretty pleased with the outcome of the awards, albeit the show was predictable and at times somewhat boring. I'm not sure how I feel about Sandra Bullock winning for Best Actress, though. She did have the best speech of the night, that's for sure.

Oh, and Inglorious Basterds deserved more awards.