Gold Bugged

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 NEXT
 

Stabby Joe:

...also I liked Silver Linings Playbook. Awards worthy? Not really although since I don't care about the Oscars I kind of want to see it win big now just to see Bob's reaction.

Is today "Spite MovieBob Day"?

Daria.Morgendorffer:
The Avengers was about putting all your action figures in your dream battle and going "Pow! Pow! Pow! Hulk SMAAAAASH!" all afternoon.

I see nothing wrong with that :)

RedDeadFred:
[quote="hentropy" post="6.398249.16284084"]I`m hoping that Brave doesn`t win best animated film. I love Pixar but this is their worst movie IMO. It was just mediocre. Still, I can't say I liked the others in the category much more so I guess I'll understand if it wins.

*cough* Cars 2 *cough*

uneek:

RedDeadFred:
[quote="hentropy" post="6.398249.16284084"]I`m hoping that Brave doesn`t win best animated film. I love Pixar but this is their worst movie IMO. It was just mediocre. Still, I can't say I liked the others in the category much more so I guess I'll understand if it wins.

*cough* Cars 2 *cough*

Oh wait... you're right. I guess I banished that movie from my mind.

In what universe is Zero Dark Thirty going to be studied by film students? Boal and Bigelow's Hurt Locker was essentially one long set up for a minor punch line. But it was entertaining and exciting, so people bought into it. ZD30 though is just boring with a far blander protagonist. And yes, I know, she's supposed to not have a personality (Because the manhunt has consumed her sooo much you see!). But I say this over and over again. Just because something is supposed to be shit, doesn't make it not shit.

"No, you don't get it. It's supposed to be corny and stupid. It's a commentary." Well then, they should've showed me how much better they can do it over the corny and stupid.

Crying shame that Cloud Atlas didn't get ANYTHING. I mean, on the minor level, it should've at least gotten some consideration for Film Editing and quite possibly Best Original Score - on a personal note it should've also been up for Best Picture and possibly Best Director, though that's tricky because of the whole triple-director thing. But I guess you only recognize how flawlessly the film editing and music are pulled off if you're actually enjoying it.

It really amuses me how some of the reviews trashing Cloud Atlas claimed you'd only be able to understand it if you'd read the book, when it is actually a very different creature, what with simultaneous presentation of the stories and TOTALLY different (much more pessimistic) connotations to the endings of the individual stories.

This is ridiculous. Every year, the same undeserving film just pops up in every single award category while all the good movies of the year go to waste. You know, screw it. I was going to give a big long explanation to this, but I'm just going to go ahead and say it. As of this year, the SpikeTV Video Game Awards officially hold more merit than the Oscars. Come at me.

PunkRex:

Safaia:
I said it on your blog and I will say it again; at least ParaNorman got a best animated feature nomination (that it won't win).

And there I was about to make a standard 'Don't want to/havn't seen any of these' comment (except for Django but thats not out in the UK till next week) when you tell me they actually reckonised that amazing film!

Whats it up against:
Brave
Wreck-It Ralph
Frankenweenie
ParaNorman
The Pirates! Band of Misfits.

...hrrrm, 'Wreck-It Ralph' is STILL not out here in the UK and 'Frankenweenie' was out for all of one week so I missed it *annoyed mumbling*, id like to think the academy better then to just go for Pixar what with it being the safe option as 'Brave' had alot of issues but still... ParaNorman was freaking amazing.

The Pirates! are the only ones that deserve to win. Theirs was probably the funniest of the bunch, although it didn't lack gravitas. It's not fuckin Toy Story 3 when it comes to the heartfelt stuff, but it still had its moments

What? Argo's not nominated for best director or best Actor? WHAT THE DEUCE?! I thought Ben Affleck knocked it out of the park! And Zero Dark Thirty getting shafted like it did just confirms my suspicion about the Academy, if not most of Hollywood: they hate the CIA. So why not take it out on the two movies that show CIA agents not only doing their job, but accomplishing something too?

Honestly, I find I've stopped caring what the Academy thinks. When I see an actor, I don't think "ooh, they won an award for ___!", I think "ooh, they're really good in most of their stuff, I like seeing them onscreen." I know how amazing Lord of the Rings, The Dark Knight, and Cloud Atlas are, I don't need them winning a tiny statue of a dude to show it. Watch, as all the fucks I give about this practice blow off into the wind...It didn't take long. There aren't a lot of them.

I forget which year it was that I stopped caring about the Oscars. It was the year Mickey Rourke didn't win for "The Wrestler", "Milk" won for "best original screenplay" (how can it be original if it's based on history?), and "Hellboy 2" lost best make-up to "Benjamin Button" (despite Benjamin Button using CGI, not make-up).

That being said, the lack of acknowledgment towards movies like "Argo", "Cloud Atlas", or "Zero Dark Thirty" is very peculiar.

I'd also say that "Rise of the Guardians" was a significantly better animated film than "Brave", so I have no idea why it wasn't nominated for contention.

irishda:

PunkRex:

Safaia:
I said it on your blog and I will say it again; at least ParaNorman got a best animated feature nomination (that it won't win).

And there I was about to make a standard 'Don't want to/havn't seen any of these' comment (except for Django but thats not out in the UK till next week) when you tell me they actually reckonised that amazing film!

Whats it up against:
Brave
Wreck-It Ralph
Frankenweenie
ParaNorman
The Pirates! Band of Misfits.

...hrrrm, 'Wreck-It Ralph' is STILL not out here in the UK and 'Frankenweenie' was out for all of one week so I missed it *annoyed mumbling*, id like to think the academy better then to just go for Pixar what with it being the safe option as 'Brave' had alot of issues but still... ParaNorman was freaking amazing.

The Pirates! are the only ones that deserve to win. Theirs was probably the funniest of the bunch, although it didn't lack gravitas. It's not fuckin Toy Story 3 when it comes to the heartfelt stuff, but it still had its moments

'The Pirates!' was damn good, then again it is Aardman so that was obvious, the third act in particular was all sorts of daffy goodness but ParaNorman just clicked for me. 'Pirates!' stands a good chance but I get the feeling it would be selected due to who made it opposed to whats in it.

Living in Mexico, most of the big Oscar films are usually crammed into January and February, which means I still haven't seen Lincoln, Django or ZDT. It kinda sucks.

I've been meaning to ask Bob why he hated "Silver Linings" (haven't seen it) and why it's such a critical darling. Apparently, it's plot is reminiscent of a sitcom and a lot of critics seem to be fixated on Jennifer Lawrence's character, which is apparently THE solution to Bradley Cooper's character's condition.

News today, for the umpteenth time old men choose movies they like and give out gold statues of a naked man to those that were in / made to what the majority of old men voted for.

Public enthralled, many internet users cynical and crabby.

MovieBob gets more promised material to work with. Make us proud Bob.

Thats close enough to the gist of it.

It was really just obvious that Les Mis would get a nomination in most catagories. And that's the thing that upsets me the most. A musical will beat better stories with better Actors and better characters. Thanks Academy Awards. Thanks for proving that good stories are meaningless.

DVS BSTrD:

Rainboq:

Sixcess:

I can't shake the ugly suspicion that this is at least part of why Cloud Atlas has been so thoroughly snubbed. Oh, the Wachowskis have enough clout in Hollywood that noone in the business is going to say it to her face, but I'm sure there there are some amongst the older and/or more conservative elements of the Academy who don't want to give 'that sort of person' the recognition of even a nomination.

This, oh so very much this.

OT: I honestly stopped paying attention to the Oscar's a long time ago, they tend to give a lot of (often unmerited awards) to thin and shallow attempts at pandering to them. Its kind of sad, really.

I don't think it's so much that they're offended by Wachowski, as much as it is they don't want anybody else to be if they nominate her. Mustn't rustle the jimmies
image

If it's true that Lana's gender has to do with it, I think this would be their excuse rather then the true reason to be honest.

Kurt Cristal:
This is ridiculous. Every year, the same undeserving film just pops up in every single award category while all the good movies of the year go to waste. You know, screw it. I was going to give a big long explanation to this, but I'm just going to go ahead and say it. As of this year, the SpikeTV Video Game Awards officially hold more merit than the Oscars. Come at me.

I will.

Even if I loathed all of the Academy's choices, I'd still say that was a ridiculous claim. As of now, the VGA's have had exactly ONE broadcast that wasn't complete and utter shit designed to market products. At least the Oscar's have some credibility. The VGA's have consistently appealed to the stupid dudebro crowd; the Oscar's at least try to celebrate the art of cinema.

because her character - a magical imaginary girlfriend pastiche (semi-punk/goth, nymphomaniac, bisexual, unstable but in a cute "quirky" way that brings her significantly older male counterpart out of his shell - appears to be the number one reason that otherwise sensible film people have lost their damn minds over Silver Linings. Repeat after me, fellas: Tiffany isn't real. I know she reminds you of every baby bird with a broken wing enchantress who's ever fluttered through your life just out of reach ... but she's not real

*clutches heart

Augh...gah..ugh.... it hurts...

it hurts...

;_;

wow... i have seen zero of these movies... guess i can skip this year

Silver Linings Playbook isn't much story-wise and probably shouldn't win Best Picture, but it was very well-acted. Probably the best endorsement I can give it is from my mother, who as a social worker has lots of experience with patients suffering from bipolar disorder and other mental illnesses, and who said that the film's portrayal of mental illness was spot-on. You can make other criticisms about the film (everything that happens to Pat and Tiffany after the dance competition is a bit hard to believe, for instance) but the actors sure knew what they were doing.

I could argue that MovieBob has no business saying that The Avengers deserves a nomination when he thinks Les Mis and Silver Linings Playbook shouldn't. Not because of the relative quality of the movies, but because The Avengers really doesn't have much more depth than the other two. You can make the case that they're all "fun" or "lightweight" movies in some sense: Avengers and Les Mis get a rise from the audience for having beloved characters on the big screen for the first time; Playbook and Avengers rely on humor, charm, and in Avengers' case action.

Given the nominees, I'd like to see Life of Pi win some sort of recognition (Direction or Cinematography) for the spectacular things it did with water. The middle two-thirds of that movie would win Best Picture on aesthetics alone, but the rest drags it down. Lincoln would be a fine if obvious winner, but I still want to see Django and Beasts of the Southern Wild and I'd kind of love to see Quvenzhane Wallis become the youngest Oscar winner just because.

The Gentleman:

PsychedelicDiamond:
I find the lack of Cloud Atlas really, really sad.

I was checking a ballot and I was shocked that there wasn't even a nomination for best make up (there's only three choices where every other category has five).

That said, much like Zero Dark Thirty, the Academy appears to want to avoid controversy if it can. Cloud Atlas was a "love it or hate it" film with a lot of concerns over the casting in terms of race. Giving them a nod in the form of a nomination, especially for make-up, would likely set a very negative precedent for future movie makers ("hey, you don't need minority actors, just good ones you can make-up into minorities, and you may even snag a pity Oscar for your troubles").

There were plenty of minorities casted. you might as well say "hey , you dont need white actors, just minorities you can make-up into whites" because it happened just as much. Cloud Atlas may not have award-worthy makeup but Im shocked that such an original, ambitious movie isnt winning something.

Am i the only one who thought Zero Dark Thirty was boring? Really people will study it. Its like 2001 all over again with this.

Can someone remind me again why we still pay attention to the meaningless rubbish that is the Oscars?

Having just gotten home from Zero Dark thirty I am absolutely staggered that Katherine Bigelow didn't get a nomination. The only movie on the best directors list that i've seen thus far is life of pi, but she is easily 3x more deserving of a nod than Ang Lee. Life of Pi was hardly his best work, and Zero Dark Thirty is nothing short of unforgettable.

What was so impressive about The Hulk?

Moreover, I can't really understand people being disappointed about a lack of recognition for The Avengers. It's quite amazing that it wasn't the disaster it so easily could have been, but otherwise it's not particularly noteworthy in what it achieves. It's fluff, which is perfectly fine, but it's not the best fluff I've seen anyway.

Does anyone take the Oscars seriously anymore? Every category carries to tagline "if you're into that sort of thing" and everyone knows it.
Come to think of it, why has The Avengers not been mentioned? What? Too fun for you old people? Oh wait, I know, it's too colourful, isn't it? You like movies that are pale and washed out, mostly brown and sunshine yellow, maybe with some rotting wood green.
And Le Miserables was always going to get a ton of nominations regardless of whether or not it was any good.

Calm down Bob... Only pretentious people care about the Oscars. It's alright to be angry but you will have to deal with it sooner or later.

Hey Bob, do you see the possibility of the Oscars losing prestige and relevance among the audience by the clear dissonance between what the elderly voters chose and the informed audience actually like?

In response to the 'Why do they keep saying "Marvel's The Avengers"', I could be mistaken, but I thought it was called 'Marvel's The Avengers' or 'Avengers Assemble' in the UK because of a popular classic British TV series and subsequent movie about a crime-fighting duo called 'The Avengers'. They have to include 'Marvel' in the title to avoid confusion/copyright issues I suppose. Probably the former.

Froggy Slayer:

Sixcess:

MovieBob:
Still, not only would I say a nomination would be utterly deserved, it would've been of tremendous historical note as Lana Wachowski would've become the first transgendered Oscar nominee.

I can't shake the ugly suspicion that this is at least part of why Cloud Atlas has been so thoroughly snubbed. Oh, the Wachowskis have enough clout in Hollywood that noone in the business is going to say it to her face, but I'm sure there there are some amongst the older and/or more conservative elements of the Academy who don't want to give 'that sort of person' the recognition of even a nomination.

The thought that the Academy, who are still kind of looked up to as the authority on film would be THAT out of touch with society is a worrying sentiment.

Except they really arent that out of touch with wider society - non obviously city liberal opinion.

Elexia:
In response to the 'Why do they keep saying "Marvel's The Avengers"', I could be mistaken, but I thought it was called 'Marvel's The Avengers' or 'Avengers Assemble' in the UK because of a popular classic British TV series and subsequent movie about a crime-fighting duo called 'The Avengers'. They have to include 'Marvel' in the title to avoid confusion/copyright issues I suppose. Probably the former.

That ^^ It was massive in the 1960's-1970's

For the life of me I'd like to know what exactly is different between Cloud Atlas and Life Of Pi, when both films seem to be crying out, "Ask me what it means, ask me what it means! I'm ever so profound and smart! Ask me what I mean!"

One thing cross my mind: Avengers was an undisputed triumph. Marvel gambled massively and it shouldn't have worked, it should have been an anti-climax after four years of building up to it. Then Joss Whedon happened. No Best Director, no Best Screenplay. The question I'm left with is "How much better would the Avengers have had to be to get academy recognition?". It wasn't just good 'for what it was' but good overall and able to be enjoyed by casual and fan audiences. what didn't the academy like about it? That's right- the fact that it was a crowd pleaser, kills any film's chances stone-dead. Had Heath Ledger not died, lending gravity to the sub-text of his TDK performance, he probably wouldn't have won Supporting Actor for that year, simply because the film was actually liked by audiences. I'm feeling Django is only there for the context of slavery, except that if the main character was instead that of a Chinaman used for much the same purpose in the wild west; the academy wouldn't give a crap.

The academy is irrelevant now, a marketing tool and bugger all else. No sentiment, no glamour, no pulse.

Agree with Bob. Though other then it being the big awards for movie, why should we care. I don't get why it matters. It lost its power of meaning years ago, and now is just the old Hollywood people patting themselves on the back. Hell it is rare for it to look like it is a chance to be anything worth while gets the awards. The movies that end up being loved or praised for being good, that is why people remember them years afterwards. Shouldn't the movie being good, be good enough?

Arec Balrin:
The question I'm left with is "How much better would the Avengers have had to be to get academy recognition?"

As the third highest grossing movie of all time it probably should have got some more nods, given that the Academy loves to reward box office success, but The Avengers doesn't really aspire to be anything other than a really good superhero movie. I don't say that as a criticism - as Samuel Goldwyn once said, "Pictures are for entertainment, messages should be delivered by Western Union."

But the only two movies to have been bigger hits, both of which did clean up at the Oscars, did have something that gave them a veneer of 'respectability' - Titanic was a romantic costume drama and Avatar - although part of the despised sci-fi ghetto - had its eco-friendly message, as well as being directed (again) by James Cameron, who is very much a favourite of the Academy.

That said, this is still a really conservative year for the Academy. Perhaps they'll poke their collective heads out of their shells in 2015 long enough to give Peter Jackson some awards for the final instalment of the Hobbit trilogy, but I wouldn't even count on that given this year's nominations.

The odd thing is that the sci-fi ghetto is a relatively new thing. In addition to the technical awards it won Star Wars got nominations for Best Director, Best Film and even Best Supporting Actor (for Alec Guiness) way back in '77. You'd think that 35 years on the genre would be more respected, not less.

Zero Dark Thirty should only be a contender for best adapted screenplay, since the original was fed to Bigelow and Boal by CIA agitprop. Again, the film, nor the acting in it, was all that good, even excluding the bad politics.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Registered for a free account here