Community Forums => General Chat => Topic started by: Svevan on February 25, 2008, 07:31:35 AM
Title: Oscars wut
Post by: Svevan on February 25, 2008, 07:31:35 AM
I don't really want to discuss the Oscars cuz I don't care about them but it's the only thing I did today so I might as well start the topic, wait for someone to say something dumb, then jump on their ass like the jerk that I am.
On second thought, I think I'm going to become a new man. Maybe this time, instead of telling everyone what they SHOULD think, I'll just tell them what I think in an un-condescending way, so as to share thoughts and opinions, encourage multiculturalism, and dispel the animosity that comes naturally with Internet discourse and me.
Maybe I'll become a learner instead of a fighter, and be known as the most peaceful intellect on the planet. I'll fly to the moon to teach seminars and go to Washington D.C. to support the next honest presidential candidate. Maybe I'll make movies that are argued about, but the people arguing love each other despite their differences. Maybe I'll learn French. And then move to France. Then I'll come home and direct plays and fight poverty and build houses with no nails.
it's a worthwhile dream to have i think
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: ShyGuy on February 25, 2008, 07:39:34 AM
[q]I don't care about them but it's the only thing I did today.[/q]
Irony has taken over everyone's lives. Or maybe that was sarcasm, I can't tell.
I cared about the Oscars once. Then a girl broke my heart.
I didn't see any of the movies, but I like the Coen brother's films, so I'm glad they won.
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: that Baby guy on February 25, 2008, 07:45:05 AM
My roommate cares far too much about the Oscars. If the person/people/project won that he wanted to win, he'd shout out "Yeah! Alright! I knew it!" If this person/project/group didn't win, you'd hear "Jesus! Dangit!" He was excited the whole show because the awards were either going to whomever he predicted or whomever he favored, but he was upset, because at the end, the Best Picture went to No Country For Old Men, rather than one about the screaming, crazy bowler.
It struck me as odd, because with SAG, he wanted NCFOM to win everything, but he seems to have pulled a 180 over his position on what awards the movies should win.
As for me, I wanted Ratatouille to win every category. Including the ones it wasn't nominated for.
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: Nick DiMola on February 25, 2008, 10:39:49 AM
No awards for Superbad means the Oscars are made of fail.
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: nitsu niflheim on February 25, 2008, 11:06:48 AM
I haven't seen any of the movies from the Oscar's. I don't remember the last time I went to the theater to see a movie, but I think it was Spider-Man back in 2002, it seems like that was the last time I saw a theatrical showing and not on DVD.
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: wandering on February 25, 2008, 11:58:16 AM
Jon Stewart was pretty funny, but I'm disappointed he wasn't as hard on Hollywood as he was last time.
I'm happy that the winner for Best Original Song was decent. How often does that happen?
My favorite Best Picture nominee (There Will Be Blood) didn't win, and my favorite two films of last year (Persepolis and Ratatouille) weren't even nominated...but I like the Coen brothers so I'm not too shaken up.
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: THE Princess on February 25, 2008, 12:04:22 PM
I did not watch the Oscars because they bore me to death. I don't understand how people become so wrapped up in something so idiotic. Whether or not a movie wins an award or not is not going to change my mind about whether or not I liked that movie. Oh and lets not get started on how people become obsessed about how people were dressed. Noo thanks.
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: Deguello on February 25, 2008, 12:04:44 PM
Yeah. It's unfortunate that an animated film as good as Ratatouille just can't seem to threaten Best picture. there's some kind of anti-animation bias just for that one category.
But other than that, I liked it. Especially with Jon Stewart opening the show by playing Wii Tennis. Man how does this game stay relevant?
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: that Baby guy on February 25, 2008, 12:09:27 PM
He didn't open the show with it, that's how they came back from a commercial break. Yeah, I can't get worked up about them. I really don't care if the movies, actors, or directors I may like get awards. The funniest category is the editing one. Yeah, I'm certain we've all seen all of the completely unedited footage of a film to find which one wound up edited best.
I played Professor Layton through the thing, actually. I'm on chapter 3 or something around there now, thanks to the Oscars!
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: Deguello on February 25, 2008, 01:17:08 PM
Oh heh. I actually didn't see either the opening or the Wii Tennis Part. I just assumed it was the opening.
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: vudu on February 25, 2008, 02:43:54 PM
I'm happy that the winner for Best Original Song was decent. How often does that happen?
I was psyched for that, as well. Most people here probably haven't seen it, but I highly recommend Once for the music alone. The rest of the movie isn't bad, either. But there are 4 or 5 really excellent songs in that movie.
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on February 25, 2008, 02:44:24 PM
Stewart found something better to spend his time on.
Stewart VS. Colbert would've rocked the house.
No, I didn't watch the Oscars. At all.
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on February 25, 2008, 02:57:49 PM
The oscars were boring and predictable. It is hard to be dissapointed or overjoyed with the winners though, all the show is about is about stars telling each other how great they are, and how important they are. Personally the whole Hollywood scene is ridiculous and self centered. Yeah I have respect for some stars but I would never worship them like so many seem to do. Oscars are just an extension of this egotism.
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: Plugabugz on February 25, 2008, 03:06:58 PM
Did anyone watch the brits? Huh Huh?!
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: Ian Sane on February 25, 2008, 05:40:10 PM
Quote
I'm happy that the winner for Best Original Song was decent. How often does that happen?
I hadn't heard any of the songs prior to the awards but when I heard the performance of that song I was immediately rooting for it. It was a great song so I wanted it to win and I didn't think it would. I figured that gospel song would win because it was from some movie that dealt with people in Harlem having a rough life and stuff. It's the sort of preachy issue stuff that the Academy likes to reward like how last year that horrible Melissa Etheridge song won purely because of the global warming message attached to it. So I was estatic to see the best song win. And then after they cut off the girl's mic before she could thank anyone Jon Stewart brought her back on. That was great! The stupid orchestra always f*cks over the non-actors because of the star factor. I hate it when someone doesn't get to say ANYTHING on their big moment because they're not famous so I loved seeing that actually getting addressed for once, and having it tie in with the deserving song made it all better.
In fact the Oscars were largely not very controversial this year which is probably why no one is really talking about it today but for me I enjoyed it more. No obvious deserving winners getting screwed over. No "it's their turn" crap where someone gets an award merely because they should have won one years ago for something better. No "we're famous so our opinion is obviously worth more" political message.
In fact the only part of the show that made me mad (and typically there's always one moment that pisses me off) was when they were showing the montages of past winners and they showed Cuba Gooding Jr.'s long embarrasing acceptance speech. I've ALWAYS thought he never deserved that award for a nothing performance over William H. Macy. But then the guy's career has amounted to sh!t like Snow Dogs so karma balanced everything out in the end.
I think a fair amount of people don't like the Oscars because it doesn't fit what they're interested in. There are only four actor awards so people who just want to see the stars are bored through most of it. While others probably have the opposite reaction. They don't like the attention celebrities get and thus don't like what they see as Hollywood patting itself on the back. Others probably find the awards too pretenious as they've never seen most of the films being nominated. I like the Oscars because I have an interest in film-making. I don't care about stars but I do like actors and, yes, there's a big difference. I find the less popular awards like for costume design or writing interesting. And though I typically haven't seen many of the films being nominated it does help me discover some great films that I otherwise wouldn't be familiar with because they're not some mainstream oriented blockbuster.
Though I have a question for Americans. In Canada, by law, if a Canadian channel is showing the same show as an American one our cable provider automatically re-routes us to the Canadian one (as a result I NEVER see the Superbowl commercials everyone talks about the next day). I noticed some goofy stuff and I'm wondering if that was a specific Canadian feed issue or an overall problem. First the opening video looked like a 3D image but I didn't have the glasses on. Everything looked doubled. Second, and I noticed this LAST YEAR and figured the Oscars would have the attention to detail to fix it, often in montages I couldn't read any text because the image on the big screen at the show was widescreen but my TV isn't and the sides of the image were getting chopped off and usually that was where the text was. Were these dumb CTV screw ups or were they problems with the feed everywhere?
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: Caliban on February 25, 2008, 06:37:38 PM
Don't watch much tv other than the weather channel. Yup. Let's see how cold it's going to be tomorrow in the morning... -2 degrees celsius, no wind-chill. Yay, it's no longer -20, -30 with wind-chill.
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on February 25, 2008, 06:52:04 PM
Don't watch much tv other than the weather channel. Yup. Let's see how cold it's going to be tomorrow in the morning... -2 degrees celsius, no wind-chill. Yay, it's no longer -20, -30 with wind-chill.
Probably much more exciting than the Oscars were, which may be the least viewed Oscar show.
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: Caliban on February 25, 2008, 06:53:59 PM
And it took me only 1 minute to watch such weather forecast. The oscars are overrated, confirmed.
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: DAaaMan64 on February 25, 2008, 07:05:27 PM
Shouldn't this thread have a better title?
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on February 25, 2008, 07:08:28 PM
In fact the only part of the show that made me mad (and typically there's always one moment that pisses me off) was when they were showing the montages of past winners and they showed Cuba Gooding Jr.'s long embarrasing acceptance speech. I've ALWAYS thought he never deserved that award for a nothing performance over William H. Macy. But then the guy's career has amounted to sh!t like Snow Dogs so karma balanced everything out in the end.
Don't forget Daddy Day Camp!
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: vudu on February 25, 2008, 11:03:16 PM
Thank you for that insightful post that contributed to the topic at hand. Your keen grasp on the matters currently discussed have enlightened and entertained us all. Somebody give this poster a point.
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: THE Princess on February 25, 2008, 11:06:07 PM
^evil.
I cannot discuss the oscars in an intelligent manner because I think they are pointless. The end. :P
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on February 25, 2008, 11:12:01 PM
Thank you for that insightful post that contributed to the topic at hand. Your keen grasp on the matters currently discussed have enlightened and entertained us all. Somebody give this poster a point.
Be nice Vudu.
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: vudu on February 25, 2008, 11:15:02 PM
Am I ever nice? You wanted to claw my eyes out for a while. Perhaps you still do?
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: wulffman04 on February 26, 2008, 12:02:50 AM
My only complaint, is how the hell did The Golden Compass get the award for Visual Effects over Transformers, i mean come on people... really?
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: Stogi on February 26, 2008, 01:45:43 AM
I didn't watch a lot of it (maybe a good 30 minutes total; and BTW Marion Cotillard is hot as ****).
I loved No Country For Old Men. I literally wanted to stay in the theater after I watched it to watch it again, but that was the last showing.
The movie was absolutely brilliant, so I'm glad it won picture of the year. I'm also glad that Havier (creepy dude) one best supporting actor because he made the movie.
That said, I wish Jon Stewart was on stage more cuz the dude's hilarious. Him and Colbert never cease to amaze me.
EDIT::: Oh ya, I forgot to mention that I think Daniel Day-Lewis is a bad ass. I've only seen one movie of his and that is Gangs Of New York and he does that movie proud. I want to see There Will Be Blood mainly cause of how bad ass he was is GONY.
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: Dasmos on February 26, 2008, 09:29:47 AM
I agree with wandering, There Will Be Blood would have been my choice. Daniel Day Lewis was just phenomenal in that film. i'm glad he won best actor.
My only complaint, is how the hell did The Golden Compass get the award for Visual Effects over Transformers, i mean come on people... really?
Because Transformers is a Michael Bay film. It shouldn't have even been nominated.
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: Deguello on February 26, 2008, 01:10:01 PM
That and there's more to visual effects than just making a bunch of good looking 3D models.
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: THE Princess on February 26, 2008, 01:54:41 PM
Thank You Golden Phoenix ;)
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: Khushrenada on March 02, 2008, 04:38:44 AM
No Country for Old Men won 4 Oscars. The Bourne Ultimatium won 3 Oscars. All other movies won 2 or less Oscars.
That means The Bourne Ultimatium was the second best movie of the year. Though who can tell for sure. Maybe if it had been nominated in more catagories it would have won the most Oscars. It won every catagory. Something you can't say about No Country for Old Men.
Go Bourne.
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: Plugabugz on March 02, 2008, 08:58:43 AM
So nobody watched the brits :(
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: vudu on March 02, 2008, 09:56:11 AM
That means The Bourne Ultimatium was the second best movie of the year.
Even though I know you're joking, I feel the need to step in the correct. Bourne Ultimatium was only nominated (and therefore only won) for categories that don't matter all that much. Who really cares about best sound editing?
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: IceCold on March 03, 2008, 02:53:03 AM
I'm happy that the winner for Best Original Song was decent. How often does that happen?
I was psyched for that, as well. Most people here probably haven't seen it, but I highly recommend Once for the music alone. The rest of the movie isn't bad, either. But there are 4 or 5 really excellent songs in that movie.
I wanted the ending song from Ratatouille to win.
Ah well.
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: Svevan on March 03, 2008, 09:41:32 PM
The ending song from Ratatouille was great, but it wasn't nominated (the score was, and it was as great as anything else Michael Giacchino has done; for reference, go watch Cloverfield and stay through the credits). Though I am not a lover of the film Once, I did find it to be charming and the music catchy. The win was entirely appropriate next to the other stuff nominated.
I appreciate that more and more people are saying that the Oscars don't matter. This is great; they don't! But this year, for once, the nominations were almost all-around superb (best actor might be an exception, maybe). The five films nominated for Best Picture are all fantastic (of course I have my caveats, but meh, this is a good selection), and the winners of the acting awards were all deserving. If this is the way the Oscars went every year, I'd care more! But considering that this decade we've seen Crash, A Beautiful Mind, Gladiator, and Chicago all win Best Picture, having a Coen bros. film win is probably going to go down as a bizarre fluke.
I have heard some (outsider, ridiculously uneducated, and stupid) commentators say that the Oscars don't matter cause they don't line up with public taste. This is the most ridiculous thing ever: public taste sucks.
Of the three awards that Bourne Ultimatum won, Best Editing is a MAJOR award and usually indicates who will win Best Picture that year. Since Ultimatum was not (and had no chance of being) nominated, I want to say that it is a ringing endorsement for the quality of the pic. No Country or There Will Be Blood deserved it more, but it's great to me that Paul Greengrass's quality shaky-cam and editing is being recognized while so many lesser imitators are ignored.
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on March 03, 2008, 09:47:43 PM
I appreciate brutal, violent movies, one with little to no message winning along with the movie series I will forever know as "Hey I can do these camera shots on my handheld camcorder" winning best editing. It is too bad that they don't actually pick movies for movie of the year that people, you know, actually enjoy watching. Besides Gladiator (one of my favorites) they always seem to be semi-obscure or less popular movies. To me, if a movie can bring in people and get those people to enjoy, it should be deserving of a nomination. If you have a "fun" action movie or an animation, you are screwed.
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: IceCold on March 04, 2008, 01:36:42 AM
I'm glad There Will Be Blood didn't win.
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: Deguello on March 06, 2008, 12:07:29 AM
I think the Oscars are important, if only because it's a time when an entertainment industry self-reflects and ponders what they thought was the best movie. It may not always line up with with most of the viewers think, but hey, I like cartoons and animated films more than live action ones, and thought Ratatouille was the best picture in 2007, and I know for a fact that an animated film will never win Best Picture. But that doesn't bother me much, because I don't invest so seriously in who wins.
I do like to notice trends in what gets named and nominated Best Picture, mainly because I consider the nomination good enough. Of note was 2006's, where basically all of the Best Picture movies were films with protest messages, like Good Night and Good Luck against Senatorial Blacklisting, Brokeback Mountain against anti-gay sentiments, Capote somewhat against mixing truth and fiction in Non-fiction novels, Crash against racism, and Munich against retaliatory terrorism. I've notice they're starting to move away from the larger-than-life stuff from a decade ago into more personal and focused things. It must be a different mood they're in these days.
Oh and Crash only won because the gay Academy voters were split between Brokeback and Capote. This allowed Crash to win through divide and conquer. I personally would have rather seen Good Night and Good Luck take it, but meh.
But ugh, people saying they should reflect public taste. If that happened you'd have garbage like Domino and Jumper getting any recognition whatsoever. Ugh, that's a nightmarish thought.
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: NWR_insanolord on March 06, 2008, 01:11:51 AM
I'm gonna start campaigning now for Star Trek to win Best Picture two years from now.
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: Khushrenada on March 07, 2008, 12:09:00 AM
I appreciate brutal, violent movies, one with little to no message winning along with the movie series I will forever know as "Hey I can do these camera shots on my handheld camcorder" winning best editing. It is too bad that they don't actually pick movies for movie of the year that people, you know, actually enjoy watching. Besides Gladiator (one of my favorites) they always seem to be semi-obscure or less popular movies. To me, if a movie can bring in people and get those people to enjoy, it should be deserving of a nomination. If you have a "fun" action movie or an animation, you are screwed.
Yeah. Because no one enjoys watching the Bourne movies.
And I doubt you could make a Bourne movie with your handheld camera. Please, prove it to me. I do invite you. Will your movie be able to suspend my disbelief and make me feel like this is really happening? That I'm experincing the crashes or the fights?
My brother made an interesting point awhile ago when we were watching Bounrce Supremacy again. There's a scene where Bourne is driving a vehicle in Germany and he looks at a wall with posters and the camera also moves over to that wall for a brief moment to show what he is looking at. One of the posters is of a rally that is scheduled to happen in a public square that day. It's something I missed the first few times I watched the movie. But as you watch the movies again, you see more of the details of how Bourne planned things and why this or that happened. That's good editing. That's why I was hoping Ultimatium would win and was glad it did since it incorporated those same feelings and clues.
If you think the movie series is all about movie the camera wildly in a scene, you are very mistaken. Or is that you are upset Bourne beat the Transformers movie at some of these awards?
Khushrenada. Lover of the cheap shot.
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on March 07, 2008, 12:49:00 AM
I appreciate brutal, violent movies, one with little to no message winning along with the movie series I will forever know as "Hey I can do these camera shots on my handheld camcorder" winning best editing. It is too bad that they don't actually pick movies for movie of the year that people, you know, actually enjoy watching. Besides Gladiator (one of my favorites) they always seem to be semi-obscure or less popular movies. To me, if a movie can bring in people and get those people to enjoy, it should be deserving of a nomination. If you have a "fun" action movie or an animation, you are screwed.
Yeah. Because no one enjoys watching the Bourne movies.
And I doubt you could make a Bourne movie with your handheld camera. Please, prove it to me. I do invite you. Will your movie be able to suspend my disbelief and make me feel like this is really happening? That I'm experincing the crashes or the fights?
My brother made an interesting point awhile ago when we were watching Bounrce Supremacy again. There's a scene where Bourne is driving a vehicle in Germany and he looks at a wall with posters and the camera also moves over to that wall for a brief moment to show what he is looking at. One of the posters is of a rally that is scheduled to happen in a public square that day. It's something I missed the first few times I watched the movie. But as you watch the movies again, you see more of the details of how Bourne planned things and why this or that happened. That's good editing. That's why I was hoping Ultimatium would win and was glad it did since it incorporated those same feelings and clues.
If you think the movie series is all about movie the camera wildly in a scene, you are very mistaken. Or is that you are upset Bourne beat the Transformers movie at some of these awards?
Khushrenada. Lover of the cheap shot.
Oh yeah that is it, give me a freaken break. The only Bourne Movie I enjoyed was the first. Shaky camera has been so abused that it isn't even creative anymore (if you wanted to call it creative back when it was first used). It is disorienting and it looks sloppy to me, regardless of how the scenes are edited together. But I see this is one of those elite movies that if you don't like it you are ignorant. So please, quit the elitist crap. I realize it is more than just the camera shots, but the camera ruined my enjoyment the two sequels for me, the acting was great, and the plot was great but the camera removed me from it, it didn't make me feel anything. It was nauseating, and what I do enjoy is hearing people defend Bourne for its camera but something like Transformers they rip for its shakey camera, oh wait is it "point of view" camera? Regardless I hated the shakey camera in BOTH the movies, though Transformers wasn't nearly as bad. Also what would I be upset with Bourne winning over transformers? Sound editing? Oh no, such an important award? I am not even sure what that entails, and not sure if I care.
Oh yeah since you felt like being a smart ass, maybe you should learn to read, I was talking about the movie of the year awards in general I was NOT talking about Bourne in that line. I realize people like it, but I frankly don't see what is so great about the camera, and it ruins the experience for me. If it doesn't for you, great, but it has nothing to do with Transformers (which I might add was vastly more successful).
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: Kairon on March 07, 2008, 01:45:04 AM
As for shakey camera, it obviously isn't for everybody. Just like Moulin Rouge is a great movie as long as you don't get motion sickness at all those spinning shots and throw up in the seat right next to me. Still, when it isn't overused, it's pretty neat because it makes me realize or empathize with the narrator, or the imagined narrators in the movie. You know, just like how unreliable narrators make me realize that the truth has multiple angles to it and not to always believe what I see or hear, shakey cams help me realize something too: that unlike in Turok 2, Real Life has no option to turn off head-bob.
But sometimes unreliable narrators just suck. And sometimes shakey-cam does too. What are we talking about again?
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on March 07, 2008, 02:03:59 AM
As for shakey camera, it obviously isn't for everybody. Just like Moulin Rouge is a great movie as long as you don't get motion sickness at all those spinning shots and throw up in the seat right next to me. Still, when it isn't overused, it's pretty neat because it makes me realize or empathize with the narrator, or the imagined narrators in the movie. You know, just like how unreliable narrators make me realize that the truth has multiple angles to it and not to always believe what I see or hear, shakey cams help me realize something too: that unlike in Turok 2, Real Life has no option to turn off head-bob.
But sometimes unreliable narrators just suck. And sometimes shakey-cam does too. What are we talking about again?
I've never really been a fan of shakey camera or erradic action where it cuts from one scene to another. I've always been someone gets more involved in movies with relatively steady camera shots and ones that let the action play out without getting fancy with different angles.
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: Serialcode on March 07, 2008, 06:29:04 AM
No awards for Superbad means the Oscars are made of fail.
Or, perhaps, higher quality films.
Anyway, 2007 didn't really have any spectacle hits in my opinion. I don't see the appeal of No Country for Old Men, but with hipster-dom reaching new levels of pervasiveness (look at the Wii), the Cohen Brother's weirdness is likely to appeal to a large following. I can appreciate a departure from the norm of Hollywood like anyone else, but when the entire grand point of your film has nothing to do with the characters the audience gets to watch for over 80% of it-- I tend to be disappointed when all is said and done.
The Bourne Ultimatium for Best Editing is a bunch of bull****. The film is barely watchable. The level of shaky cam and face and body shots that touch the camera is present in retarded amounts.
Actually wait, I take it back. Piecing together all of those ****ty, shaky takes into a semi-cohesive product is an achievement worth merit!
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: ShyGuy on February 22, 2009, 08:42:37 PM
I'd like to bump this thread just to say that I miss Evan. :(
Plus, Heath better win.
Edit: Heath won! Yay!
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: mantidor on February 22, 2009, 10:34:43 PM
Of course he was going to win, nothing better than to pander to sentimentality to boost the failing ratings, the oscar are worthless and irrelevant, and he won for all the wrong reasons. He didn't get the oscar for his much better performance in brokeback mountain so its just stupid he gets one now, but at least is not like his acting was terrible in TDK so is not as irritating, still, urgh...
you know this past year was terrible for movies when this award is probably the only one who will turn people's heads, no one cares about the rest.
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on February 23, 2009, 03:03:40 AM
A matter of opinion, I think his Joker role was very tough and quite unique. He deserved it and would have received it regardless. Though these Oscars were beyond lame, once again animated films are snubbed from contention for film of the year.
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: ThePerm on February 23, 2009, 03:11:30 AM
i think he was much greater in tdk than most people are in most movies. When I first found out he died, i was like "wait, hold up fucker can't die unless he finishes batman..did he? ok good". Then I watched the movie and it was actually better than I had expected. It was the opposite of having your hopes let down, it was having pretty good hopes and then having them surpassed. My favorite 4 characters in movies before TDK were Hannibal Lector, Alex the Droog, Alex the Rapist(house at the edge of the park), and Tyler Durdan. Now I have a 5th to add to the list and thats Heath Ledger's Joker. I'm not so sure its that the movie was just well written, or his acting was just really good. I've read the script itself and I can see how it could have been played in different ways. When the joker walks on screen its the joker, not a man playing joker. He just melts away into the part. He's sick, vicious, and creepy. He could have been just a typical mob guy in clowns makeup or he could have been some cornball lamo, he ended up being a Mephisto, a devil who walks into a situation and gives the protaganist impossible choices. It could be the writing though, the grounding in realism I think was the way to go(much like all the anarchist buddhist stuff tyler durden and Bodhi from Point Break used to throw out i think alot about the philosophy of the character..of course thats the writing nopt the acting) . I've been organizing my new room, and what i've been doing while doing it just so i can have some sound in the backround is put on the older batman movies. My dvd player was broken for the last couple of weeks(until i got bored and took it apart and amazingly fixed it) and all i had was vhs tapes. As good as everyone loves the last series of batman(im talking about Burtons..and schumachers) they have corny dialog(both directors) and theres really no connection to how one thing leads to another
In TAS Mark Hamil was a great Joker as well. The nice part about having episodes on a tv show is that you can tweak the personality of a character each and every appearance. However, in a movie its hard to capture who joker is. Jack Nicholson was great, but i can see his routine. He plays mob boss(which jack just does well especially in The Departed..god i hope he's not retired) and then smiles to fit into the joker character. Cesar Romero played a cornball..although i have to say he could be pretty good at times..the character at that point was obviously dumbed down for kids..or at least television.
I remember when they were picking who was going to be the Joker during pre-production, and there were fan speculation ablaze. I found it quite funny that they zoomed in on Adrien Brody, because he was one of the fan's top contenders
http://comics.ign.com/articles/679/679631p1.html
heck in some of my searchery it looks like some of the plot of the movie is similar to Joker's first appearance...wrapped around Harvey Dent's back story, and getting rid of lame gem story to fit in with what batman did with Falcone in the first movie.
I think he deserves it to be honest, whether he got it for the right reasons it up in the air(but your probably right,it probably is because he died). If Ledger was not deserving than certainly the Nolans were...although i haven't seen Slumdog Millionaire or The Curious Case of Benjamin Button(i need to), so its hard for me to fully assess.
also agreed Wall-E was quite great, and so was Kung Fu Panda. If only there was a best CG voice actor award. Jack Black certainly deserved it. I do agree about Wall-E beating KFP, because it was better(but not by much).
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: mantidor on February 23, 2009, 09:37:05 AM
Oh I'm not saying he didn't deserve it, I'm saying if he wasn't dead he wouldn't had won it. And the TAS Joker is like a million times better than the TDK joker for me.
I don't care, WALL-E is still my movie of the year and beats the crap out of the others.
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: Spinnzilla on February 23, 2009, 11:51:19 AM
I don't care, WALL-E is still my movie of the year and beats the crap out of the others.
I 100% agree with you. While Cloverfield was my personally favorite movie (i'm a huge giant monster/kaiju fan), I felt Wall-E was a fantastic accomplishment as a film and for Pixar.
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: Stogi on February 23, 2009, 12:06:21 PM
Wait.
Wall-E didn't win?
Are you kidding me?!
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: Ian Sane on February 23, 2009, 12:20:27 PM
That was easily the worst produced Oscars I've ever seen. First there were like almost NO CLIPS of the movies being nominated. For the actor awards they had all this verbal blowjob crap and yet no actual CLIP OF THE PERFORMANCE. I don't care about famous people gushing over other famous people. I just want someone to list the nominees and show a little clip of their performance. I have a major interest in films and yet I was absolutely BORED during most of the show. Some people think award shows are always boring but I never found Oscars boring, until last night.
Plus they filmed a TV screen for the tribute to people who died and half the time I couldn't read the name of the person being honoured. And when showing clips for the best picture nods they mixed them with clips of other past films. Who thought all of this was a good idea? The whole presentation felt like some arsty-farsty director wanting to do everything different because he could. I hope he NEVER works on this show again. It's just a fucking awards show. Don't get cute. Do it in a conventional way.
The only part I really liked was the Pineapple Express scene. That was really funny. :)
As for the awards themselves. Rourke got robbed and we get the usual Academy Awards big political message as usual. At least it wasn't about global warming this time, from people that fly in private planes. I wasn't too interested in the films this year. Too much Oscar bait. But the production of the show is what really hurt it for me.
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: Spinnzilla on February 23, 2009, 12:21:36 PM
It won best animated film. But didn't even get a nom for overall best picture.
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: ThePerm on February 23, 2009, 12:36:50 PM
Quoting IAN "Plus they filmed a TV screen for the tribute to people who died and half the time I couldn't read the name of the person being honoured. "
yeah that pissed me off, i couldn't read a third of the names
the pinapple express part was funny. Set Rogan has sure lost a lot of weight, i wanna see Green Hornet.
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on February 23, 2009, 04:57:13 PM
It won animated movie of the year. It got beat everywhere else by Slum Dog Millionaire and of course, it wasn't nominated for best movie because, well, I dunno I guess animated movies can't be great like live action ones or something stupid like that.
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on February 23, 2009, 05:31:17 PM
The Academy was threatened by non-casual movie fans after the Beauty & The Beast fiasco.
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on February 23, 2009, 05:32:52 PM
When you think about it, Wall-E and animation films threaten the public prosperity of people-face celebrities and other stage "artists."
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: Ian Sane on February 23, 2009, 07:22:28 PM
Quote
When you think about it, Wall-E and animation films threaten the public prosperity of people-face celebrities and other stage "artists."
Pixar releases one really good animated film a year and everyone else makes **** like Shrek and Kung Fu Panda. Real-life movies have nothing to fear. Neither do celebrities as these days there appear to be celebrities that don't really do, well, ANYTHING.
Oh I forgot to mention that it was really cool to see Heath win the Oscar for Joker. I hope he won it for merit though and not just because he died. He did a fantastic job.
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: vudu on February 23, 2009, 09:13:26 PM
As surprising as it sounds, Kung Fu Panda was excellent. I went in with zero expectations and walked away thoroughly entertained.
Was it Oscar material? No. But it's definitely not ****.
Also, I think this is the first time you've said **** instead of sh!t.
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: mantidor on February 23, 2009, 09:41:57 PM
I have to see this slumdog millionaire because I find REALLY hard to believe it was better in the sound department thatn WALL-E.
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on February 23, 2009, 09:47:26 PM
Also. Kung Fu Panda shouldn't even deserve to be mentioned with the Pixar films. Sure, it's entertaining and well animated, but it ends there. There's nothing in the movie which elevates it past a generic kids animated movie. That's what separates Pixar from Dreamworks.. A movie like Ratatouille transcends the kids animation genre, whereas Kung Fu Panda barely does anything original.
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: ThePerm on February 23, 2009, 11:55:08 PM
i really liked Kung-Fu panda IMO, if i were to qualify cg films its upper middle class. There is a lower class of cg animation that we all have seen commercials for and don't even want to bother mentioning. Pixar films do have a magic to them that does put them above the rest. Speaking of generic animated characters..the first thing I did think about when i heard of kung fu panda was http://www.ninjaturtles.com/toys/1990/panda.htm (http://www.ninjaturtles.com/toys/1990/panda.htm)
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: Stogi on February 23, 2009, 11:58:47 PM
Also. Kung Fu Panda shouldn't even deserve to be mentioned with the Pixar films. Sure, it's entertaining and well animated, but it ends there. There's nothing in the movie which elevates it past a generic kids animated movie. That's what separates Pixar from Dreamworks.. A movie like Ratatouille transcends the kids animation genre, whereas Kung Fu Panda barely does anything original.
I agree, but like Stogi said, it's definitely not ****.
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: ShyGuy on February 24, 2009, 02:13:43 PM
This is now a thread about good, non-Disney, domestic animated feature films.
The Contenders: Fire and Ice Secret of Nimh An American Tale All Dogs go to Heaven Land Before Time Iron Giant Shrek 1 Kung Fu Panda
What say you, NWR??
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on February 24, 2009, 02:19:22 PM
Bolt is supposedly quite good as well but I've never seen it.
I loved Iron Giant. I also enjoyed Land Before Time and Shrek 1 (though I prefer 2).
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: Stogi on February 24, 2009, 02:19:54 PM
An american tale is fantastic and so is Shrek 1 (by far the best out of the series). I haven't seen Fire and Ice, Secret of Nimh, and Iron Giant. Out of the three I haven't mentioned, All Dogs go to Heaven takes the cake.
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on February 24, 2009, 02:34:56 PM
Iron Giant is fantastic.
Cue Ozzy theme song.
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: IceCold on February 24, 2009, 02:35:23 PM
GP, Bolt is Disney too. Not Pixar but still..
ShyGuy, I can't believe you forgot the Nightmare Before Christmas. Speaking of which, is Coraline any good?
As for foreign animated movies, of course the Ghibli ones. But the Wallace and Gromit movies (and Chicken Run) are amazing too. And Persepolis. Can't forget that.
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: Stogi on February 24, 2009, 02:41:00 PM
Coraline is suppose to be FANTASTIC. I love Tim Burton. He's the fuckin' man. He seems to always have a creative skew on the movie art form and Coraline in no different; it's his first true 3D project.
RottenTomatoes has it at 87%.
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: ThePerm on February 24, 2009, 04:39:20 PM
Secret of Nimh is a favorite of mine, i read the book too
and Land before Time did anyone else Turn around and see Land Before Time VIII at the store and think "well now i remember there being a part II, but VIII?!! now their getting into final fantasy numbers where were the other VI! Now their on XIV!
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: Plugabugz on February 24, 2009, 04:40:21 PM
Kung Fu Panda was good. But not that good. It was good enough to warrant me going to the cinema to watch it, but (thankfully) i would have been frustrated to have paid money to see it. I went and watched Wall-E three times tho because its just that good.
I'm now refusing to watch Wall E again unless its the blu ray version and on my brothers 52" tellybox.
A frustrating annoyance of mine (usually with academy awards) is how canadian-produced stuffs get so quickly ignored, and then science fiction in general gets ignored faster. So canadian produced science fiction is a real no no. Ian should be ranting about this more.
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: Stogi on February 24, 2009, 04:52:22 PM
Wall-E in BDR is hard to beat. It's so deliciously crisp.
Oh and the intro movie to Wall-E should have won an oscar.
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: ThePerm on February 24, 2009, 05:03:09 PM
Coraline is suppose to be FANTASTIC. I love Tim Burton. He's the fuckin' man. He seems to always have a creative skew on the movie art form and Coraline in no different; it's his first true 3D project.
RottenTomatoes has it at 87%.
i like Tim Burton, but not universally. I like the stuff that pretty much are his exclusively, but not so much when he gets his hands on other properties.
Pee Wee (it was great, first duo of Danny Elfman and Burton i think) Batman(its still good, but he didn't have total creative control..which might be a good thing) Batman Returns(he had too much creatrive control..and it seems more like Tim Burton then batman) Beetle Juice (love Beetle Juice) Edward Scissorhands (loved Edward Scissorhands) Ed Wood(loved ed wood) Mars Attacks (great, not quite his own, but you know he was the only fan of the property growing up) Sleepy Hollow(haven't seen it) Planet of the Apes (i don't hate this movie as much as other people, but it isn't as good as the original) Big Fish (it was alright, but not his greatest) Charlie and the Chocolate Factory(Burton takes his own take on it, the original is way better this one is not terrible though by any means. There is a sick joke every 3 seconds on the original..you have to be fast to pick it up) Corpse Bride (great movie) Sweeny Todd (visually great, but i wasn't too fond of it...i would say i don't like musicals, but i do. I haven't seen the original source so i can't say its his fault)
and Nightmare before Christmas he was a writer, producer and character designer, he was not the Director. Although if you control the top and bottom of a process then you still have more creative control than the director. Claymation is a different medium than regular film. He didn't sit around clay all day, but he sure made all the decisions. He did for Corpse Bride though.
Coraline is Directed by Henry Selick, its sort of misleading in the commercials that say from the Director of the Nightmare before Christmas..because its a Tim Burton movie, but from the looks of it Burton has nothing to do with this movie. Henry Selick also Directed James and the Giant Peach which Burton Produced.
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on February 24, 2009, 05:28:28 PM
Sweeney Todd was my favorite movie last year, loved that film!
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on February 24, 2009, 05:32:30 PM
So Coraline is like a "Jime Henson film" without Jim Henson working on it?
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: Stratos on February 24, 2009, 05:52:21 PM
@ThePerm Is that the Sleepy Hollow that Jonny Depp was in? I think it came out in the mid-to-late 90's.
Secret of Nimh is a favorite of mine, i read the book too
and Land before Time did anyone else Turn around and see Land Before Time VIII at the store and think "well now i remember there being a part II, but VIII?!! now their getting into final fantasy numbers where were the other VI! Now their on XIV!
I remember loving the first one. It was worked on by both George Lucas and Steven Spielberg. Then the second one came out and less than five minuets in they bust into an awkward song. I just walked away. I don't think they number them anymore. There are also sing-a-long shows and a television series. My little-little sister gets them at the library to watch.
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: blackfootsteps on February 24, 2009, 06:15:05 PM
Yeah I actually had the misfortune to watch Land Before Time XXVII or whatever. It made me feel like my childhood had been taken away by horrible pogo bouncing dinosaurs.
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: ShyGuy on February 24, 2009, 06:26:57 PM
IceCold, Nightmare before Christmas came out under the Disney label.
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: ThePerm on February 25, 2009, 12:21:40 AM
back @ Stratos on Sleepy Hollow yeah, I never got a chance to see it. From the list he's one of the few directors where I've seen about every feature film they've made...i just need to see sleepy hollow and his upcoming endeavors
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: Stratos on February 25, 2009, 01:10:35 AM
He's one of the people that I need to see more of his stuff. I love what I have seem and so I need to go out of my way and have a Burton marathon or something.
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: Spinnzilla on February 25, 2009, 10:36:52 AM
I think Burton is incredibly overrated.
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: Ian Sane on February 25, 2009, 12:04:13 PM
Quote
A frustrating annoyance of mine (usually with academy awards) is how canadian-produced stuffs get so quickly ignored, and then science fiction in general gets ignored faster. So canadian produced science fiction is a real no no. Ian should be ranting about this more.
Canadian produced stuff is even ignored HERE in Canada. Seriously like at best one Canadian film gets any notice maybe once every five years. I can probably count the amount of Canadian movies I've ever seen on one hand.
Which thinking about it probably pretty bad for an aspiring Canadian film maker like myself. The funny thing is I never really thought of myself as making Canadian films. I always associate that sort of thing with movies funded by the Canadian government about Aboriginals or Quebec. The Canadian films that do become mainstream hits here are rarely associated with being Canadian. They're just considered good movies. Same with any Canadian TV show. So much stuff on CBC for example is total CRAP that most people never watch and assume only gets broadcast to meet government requirements of Canadian content. So that's what people think of when they think of Canadian movies or TV. When something bucks the trend and is really good we tend to associate it more with the good American movies and TV that we actually like.
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: ShyGuy on February 25, 2009, 12:13:50 PM
Are all those shows filmed around Vancouver considered Canadian? Like Smallville?
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on February 25, 2009, 01:06:05 PM
I can see it now: Arnold impaling someone with a flag pole; "Get out of my country!"
Seriously though, Canadian movies may suck but some of their TV shows are absolutely hilarious.
On another note, what's everyone's primarily thought on "UP"? It looks good, but can it top Wall-E?
Every Pixar Film's initial teaser trailer fails to impress me. Ratatouille was the most extreme. I thought the film would flop. After I saw it and how amazing it was I now have a high level of faith in Pixar movies. Their teaser trailers never impress me but they have not once had a miss in my book since the first Toy Story. Wall-E, Incredibles and Ratatouille are my three favorites by them though. Don't ask me to rank them.
@Ian What type of films are you interested in making? Action flicks? Romantic comedy? Sci-Fi? Drama? Or perhaps an epic TV series a la Heroes, Lost or 24?
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on February 26, 2009, 12:20:43 AM
Pixar films are quite hard to shove into a short teaser, they are not built on a ton of action scenes, or jokes. They are movies that need to be watched from beginning to end to be able to "understand" the appeal. It has to be a nightmare for someone to put together a teaser trailer in the first place for them!
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: ThePerm on February 26, 2009, 02:30:44 AM
as far as Canadian movies go, i can see why Canadian films are so lacking. Canada is the bizarro world of the U.S., its 80% the same thing(i assume..i've never quite visited, i've been to Mexico various times..which i would say is 40% the same thing). Most of the time we don't even know some the great actors are Canadian. Hollywood is like an acting vector. It sucks them in. Think about it William Shatner, Chevy Chase, Mike Meyers, Dan Akroyd, Pamela Anderson. Even great directors like David Cronenberg and James Cameron are Canadian.
idk. I've moved around into different regions of the U.S and even they seem different(80% the same thing though). I've lived in the South, lived in Idaho, I've lived in Arizona, I've visited California many times, I've Visited Texas, Minnesota,I've been to Luisinanna(but never was there long enough to really get a feel), On the east coast I've never been further North than South Carolina (i would like to see ny, nj, and philly, and dc) Although everyone from the ny/nj area has always been very different.
What i want to know from someone whose visited Canada(or visited the states to compare) is how different is it? Different like a whole country different..or different like how regions are different, and i'm not really counting Quebec..just the English speaking part.
and Pap, what about Puerto Rico? From what i understand every couple of years its in between being independent and becoming a state.
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: NWR_insanolord on February 26, 2009, 02:52:42 AM
Has anyone ever seen the movie Canadian Bacon? Some of the discussion in this thread is reminding me a lot of parts of that movie.
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: IceCold on February 27, 2009, 02:14:36 AM
What's this I hear about people insulting Canadian movies? Have you guys watched any Cronenberg ones (his two latest ones, Eastern Promises and A History of Violence, are among his best)? Or "The Sweet Hereafter"? Or "Away from Her"? Or "Jesus de Montreal"?
Oh, and Juno was shot in Canada with a Canadian director and both leads being Canadian. But it was distributed by Fox Searchlight so apparently it can't be considered "Canadian".
Title: Re: Oscars wut
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on February 27, 2009, 03:42:16 AM
