2013 Oscar Discussion Discussion Thread

[EricJ]

Originally Posted by TheForce8686

Im just having a discussion. I just find it hard to believe that so many movie buffs who in large part flock to the discussions of every Star Wars,LOTR,Harry Potter etc type thread, and many of which have list in their singatures of their favorite movies (many of which include films like Avengers, and Dark Knight) are so willing to sit back and see these films left of the discussions of Best Films of the year by movie critics.

I like onion rings--make that love onion rings, if they're cornbreaded--but I don't serve them at the White House banquet.

[TheForce8686]

Originally Posted by Walts Ghost

There's a difference between favorite movies and movies that are the best made. Sometimes they cross and connect, but I do love the movies the academy chooses for different reasons I love my favorite films.

Again for 2 people who love Disney so much I find it odd that we disagree so much. My favorite movies are considered the best movies to me. My favorite foods are considered the best foods by me. Same for songs and anything else like that. I won't listen to music, or eat foods, or watch movies I dont like because a critic says they are good. Movies are meant to be watched so the ones I watch the most are the best. The foods I eat the most are the best. The songs I listen to the most are the best. Why would I watch, eat, or listen if it wasn't? I will always try new things but in the long run the best are the best for a reason.

[Ernest Rister]

Originally Posted by TheForce8686

Again for 2 people who love Disney so much I find it odd that we disagree so much. My favorite movies are considered the best movies to me. My favorite foods are considered the best foods by me. Same for songs and anything else like that. I won't listen to music, or eat foods, or watch movies I dont like because a critic says they are good. Movies are meant to be watched so the ones I watch the most are the best. The foods I eat the most are the best. The songs I listen to the most are the best. Why would I watch, eat, or listen if it wasn't? I will always try new things but in the long run the best are the best for a reason.

Fantasia is my favorite movie of all time, but I don't think it is the best film ever made, and don't even think it is the best Disney animated film ever made. It's my favorite because I love it's ambition and what it tried to achieve in animation.

As for the Oscars - two things you need to understand. A long time ago, the category for "Best Picture" was instead called "Best Production". In other words, the award doesn't go to the "best movie of the year", it goes to the producers for the best production job of the year, which is why, to this day, the award for Best Picture goes to the producers, not to the director.

Second, the Academy Awards are an industrial trade show, and the function of the telecast is to celebrate the American film industry. The purpose is to make the industry look intelligent, important, relevant, sensitive, all the while pumping out crap like Texas Chainsaw 3D. This is why controversial films have zero chance of winning Best Picture, why edgy cutting edge films have no chance, why obscene or overly violent films have no chance. They don't represent the industry, they don't improve the image of the industry. I hear people seriously talking about Django Unchained winning Best Picture, and I can only think they must have no idea how the Academy works.

Finally, the largest demographic in the Academy consists of the Actor's branch, and actors gravitate to movies that celebrate acting. You really want to crack the "Oscar code", just go look at the films in the running of a given year that focus on acting versus stylized direction, remove films with over the top violence and sex, and think about which film is well produced and also makes the industry look important and progressive and noble and sensitive and intelligent...there's your Oscar winner.

From where I sit, this is a death match between Lincoln and Les Miz, and as Lincoln has been a dream project for Spielberg for over a decade, and actors are prominent, and it's well produced, and it makes the industry look important...I think the race is over. Of course, the Academy has a beef with Spielberg, or did when he was younger. We'll see.

[chris_sc77]

Originally Posted by TheForce8686

Again for 2 people who love Disney so much I find it odd that we disagree so much. My favorite movies are considered the best movies to me. My favorite foods are considered the best foods by me. Same for songs and anything else like that. I won't listen to music, or eat foods, or watch movies I dont like because a critic says they are good. Movies are meant to be watched so the ones I watch the most are the best. The foods I eat the most are the best. The songs I listen to the most are the best. Why would I watch, eat, or listen if it wasn't? I will always try new things but in the long run the best are the best for a reason.

Well right there I would not agree with you. I can admit when I truly think something is good even though I do not like it.

But to be more on topic I do believe it is inherently wrong that the filmmakers who make the coolest films of all time;That connect and interest me most (Leone, Michael Mann, Spike Lee, Tarantino, etc.) have gone so unrewarded while lesser filmmakers. Even with Tarantinos weakest film (whatever it may be to you, to me it is Reservior Dogs) it is still 100 times more watchable than Hurt Locker, Slumdog Millionaire , Crash, Chicago, the Artist. nobody will be saying in 10 years :"Oh let's watch the Artist that movie is so great". No one.

I cant tell you what won Best Picture in 1966 but I can tell you that whatever it was it wasn't the Good The Bad and the Ugly and that film and Leone should have won.
Yes it is all subjective but it is horrible crusty old white geezers have to ruin movies that are cool and fun and feel alive and instead award routine, manipulative, drivel.

[chris_sc77]

Originally Posted by Ernest Rister

I hear people seriously talking about Django Unchained winning Best Picture, and I can only think they must have no idea how the Academy works.

I think that the problem is that Django and other impressive fun productions of the year (for some it may be Skyfall for others Dark Knight RIses) are not gonna stand a realistic chance to win Best Picture and that is the problem. To me Django Unchained is the only worthy film in serious contention to be nominated that should be nominated. That and CLoud Atlas are the only two films of the year that I personally feel deserve the title of Best Picture for the effects that they had on me. For the story they told and how successfully and impressively they were told, That should mean something. But somehow it does not and we will get something that wins Best Picture that no one is really gonna be excited about.

[Ernest Rister]

Originally Posted by chris_sc77

I think that the problem is that Django and other impressive fun productions of the year (for some it may be Skyfall for others Dark Knight RIses) are not gonna stand a realistic chance to win Best Picture and that is the problem. To me Django Unchained is the only worthy film in serious contention to be nominated that should be nominated. That and CLoud Atlas are the only two films of the year that I personally feel deserve the title of Best Picture for the effects that they had on me. For the story they told and how successfully and impressively they were told, That should mean something. But somehow it does not and we will get something that wins Best Picture that no one is really gonna be excited about.

A) it's the Academy, and they are representing the industry as a whole.
B) it's best production, not really "best thing made in the world this year"
C) the voters are primarily actors, hence they vote for their own and for films that focus on actors and acting
D) they have a thing that represents what you're talking about - it's called the People's Choice Awards. If I'm not mistaken, I think they chose Home Alone as Best Picture once. Oops, just checked...it's even worse than that...

http://search.peopleschoice.com/devi...m?q=Home+alone

[Ernest Rister]

"Nominations for the 85th Academy Awards® will be announced by the show’s host, Seth MacFarlane, and actress Emma Stone on Thursday, January 10. This will be the first time since 1972 that an Oscar show host has participated in the nominations announcement."

[Snicket]

Originally Posted by Ernest Rister

"Nominations for the 85th Academy Awards® will be announced by the show’s host, Seth MacFarlane, and actress Emma Stone on Thursday, January 10. This will be the first time since 1972 that an Oscar show host has participated in the nominations announcement."

It begins!

[EricJ]

Originally Posted by Snicket

It begins!

(And McFarlane's Oscar career ends!)

[Snicket]

Originally Posted by EricJ

(And McFarlane's Oscar career ends!)

I actually think he will do just fine. He has a very theatrical sense of that old Hollywood charm. His musical numbers are sure to entertain.

[EricJ]

Originally Posted by Snicket

I actually think he will do just fine. He has a very theatrical sense of that old Hollywood charm. His musical numbers are sure to entertain.

They don't know him from Adam, and he doesn't know them. Chris Rock, Pt. II.

[Shanderson88]

Originally Posted by Snicket

I actually think he will do just fine. He has a very theatrical sense of that old Hollywood charm. His musical numbers are sure to entertain.

I agree with this, as long as he doesn't do or say something stupid that upsets people, I have a feeling he will be a pretty solid host.

[chris_sc77]

Chris Rock was rather good. Seth cannot possible be worse than Franco and Hathaway from a couple of years ago. That was a travesty. Last years show was horrendous as well.

[Darth Marcus]

Originally Posted by Ernest Rister

Fantasia is my favorite movie of all time, but I don't think it is the best film ever made, and don't even think it is the best Disney animated film ever made. It's my favorite because I love it's ambition and what it tried to achieve in animation.

As for the Oscars - two things you need to understand. A long time ago, the category for "Best Picture" was instead called "Best Production". In other words, the award doesn't go to the "best movie of the year", it goes to the producers for the best production job of the year, which is why, to this day, the award for Best Picture goes to the producers, not to the director.

Second, the Academy Awards are an industrial trade show, and the function of the telecast is to celebrate the American film industry. The purpose is to make the industry look intelligent, important, relevant, sensitive, all the while pumping out crap like Texas Chainsaw 3D. This is why controversial films have zero chance of winning Best Picture, why edgy cutting edge films have no chance, why obscene or overly violent films have no chance. They don't represent the industry, they don't improve the image of the industry. I hear people seriously talking about Django Unchained winning Best Picture, and I can only think they must have no idea how the Academy works.

Finally, the largest demographic in the Academy consists of the Actor's branch, and actors gravitate to movies that celebrate acting. You really want to crack the "Oscar code", just go look at the films in the running of a given year that focus on acting versus stylized direction, remove films with over the top violence and sex, and think about which film is well produced and also makes the industry look important and progressive and noble and sensitive and intelligent...there's your Oscar winner.

From where I sit, this is a death match between Lincoln and Les Miz, and as Lincoln has been a dream project for Spielberg for over a decade, and actors are prominent, and it's well produced, and it makes the industry look important...I think the race is over. Of course, the Academy has a beef with Spielberg, or did when he was younger. We'll see.

I wouldn't say controversial films have zero chance of winning, as the Academy has chosen controversial films in the past (Midnight Cowboy, American Beauty). The same can be said for films with gratuitous violence (Braveheart, Gladiator). I will agree that they are trying to play it safe more often than usual as of late. As far as picking films that represent acting over production values, the example which exemplifies your comments the most would be the Academy picking Shakespeare in Love over Saving Private Ryan. But from what I've seen, it really depends on what agenda they are trying to push. Whether they are trying to honor a film directed by a female (The Hurt Locker), or giving a legendary director his due (The Departed), or sticking their nose up to superhero films (not nominating The Dark Knight). I would say Django Unchained would have a better chance of winning were it not for Lincoln. Lincoln does not showcase gratuitous violence or explicit language throughout the film like Django does, and since Lincoln deals with slavery in a much milder way, it does have a better chance of winning than Django. But the Academy has gone on record stating that they've become "too predictable" as of late, so who knows.

[Walts Ghost]

Originally Posted by chris_sc77

Chris Rock was rather good. Seth cannot possible be worse than Franco and Hathaway from a couple of years ago. That was a travesty. Last years show was horrendous as well.

Man, the Franco/Hathaway show was brutal. I liked Crystal well enough last year, I really did. It was more of a throwback show, for better or for worse, but nothing is worse than the former. I wish they'd get Neil Patrick Harris to host, or bring Hugh Jackman back. Now that was a damn good show.

[chris_sc77]

The Crystal show last year was certainly better than Franco/Hathaway but it as still so lame, and safe and unimpressive. I dont really like Crystal but I thought he had done a lot better in past shows. e seemed really phoning it in and had no good material.

[Ernest Rister]

Originally Posted by Darth Marcus

As far as picking films that represent acting over production values, the example which exemplifies your comments the most would be the Academy picking Shakespeare in Love over Saving Private Ryan.

The list is actually much longer than that - see the all the snubs given to films directed by someone who has no intention of being "invisible" in the classic Hollywood style, versus films either directed by actors, or featuring acting prominently, while the director takes the back seat. This has been going on for a very, very long time, it isn't a recent phenomenon.

Personally, I don't even think they should pick winners at the Oscars. I think it would stop a lot of endless bickering among film fans if they just celebrated the five best in the respective categories, and call it a night.

[Kevin Holly]

Originally Posted by Darth Marcus

I wouldn't say controversial films have zero chance of winning, as the Academy has chosen controversial films in the past (Midnight Cowboy, American Beauty). The same can be said for films with gratuitous violence (Braveheart, Gladiator).

Braveheart and Gladiator have "gratuitous" violence now?

[Darth Marcus]

Originally Posted by Ernest Rister

The list is actually much longer than that - see the all the snubs given to films directed by someone who has no intention of being "invisible" in the classic Hollywood style, versus films either directed by actors, or featuring acting prominently, while the director takes the back seat. This has been going on for a very, very long time, it isn't a recent phenomenon.

Personally, I don't even think they should pick winners at the Oscars. I think it would stop a lot of endless bickering among film fans if they just celebrated the five best in the respective categories, and call it a night.

It's not a recent phenomenon, but they have been playing it safer more recently than late. But again, it depends on what agenda that the Academy is trying to push. And I do agree with you that Lincoln has a better chance of winning than Django, simply because people would complain about the gratuitous violence and language if they chose Django.

Originally Posted by Kevin Holly

Braveheart and Gladiator have "gratuitous" violence now?

Splitting heads like watermelons and cutting people in half with spears attached to wagon wheels isn't gratuitous violence? I'm not advocating against movie violence, because it is entertaining. But it is gratuitous.

[Cinemach]

Some thoughts, without quoting:

-- Seth McFarlane will do fine if he stays above the juvenile. As mentioned he has much of the old-school 'style' to himself that does well at these proceedings.

Okay...maybe one 'Ted' joke could make its way in...

-- This will not be as bad as Franco/Hathaway. Not at all.

--I think Lincoln and Zero Dark Thirty, controversy notwithstanding, are the frontrunners for the top prize, with Les Miserables, Argo as strong contenders and Silver Linings Playbook possibly waiting in the wings. Possibly.

For the rest of the films in the field - and I do believe we'll have a full field this year, now - it will truly be an honor to be nominated. I'm not thinking Django Unchained makes the cut.

But hey, I'm just a guy on the internet.