2013 Oscar Discussion Discussion Thread

[JavaJulien]

Originally Posted by Hucksta G

Yep, or anything that year over Avatar or The Blind Side.

I wasn't particularly fond of District 9 as well. It still boggles my mind that District 9 escaped all the criticism that Avatar gets.

But yeah, The Blind Side was pure Oscar Bait at it's fullest.

[chris_sc77]

Originally Posted by King Troll

why the hell was Leo snubbed for a best supporting actor nod? instead they give it to mr. boring face I play the same character in every movie why am I not dead yet tommy lee jones

I think you mean Alan Arkin

[Jasonic]

Originally Posted by chris_sc77

I think you mean Alan Arkin

Couldn't agree more.

[animefan77]

Originally Posted by kurtis21

I'm just saying it gets old....the academy seems to always pick the films that no one has seen! The Artist anyone!!!!! And we all know of all of the upsets in Oscar history....

ok, you got to word yourself better
Just because you didn't see it, doesn't equate that "no one" has seen it. I usually only watch half of what is nominated, but this year, i saw all of them except 2. what does that tell?

i actually like when they nominate movies that you call "artsy" Lot of great movies don't have the advertising money like "Transformer", etc. So lot of people can miss them. That doesn't mean it's not good. Ticket sale doesn't equate to good movies. I personally thought Avatar was the worst thing Cameron has directed, but look how that went with box office. Don't get me started on Transformers
I like when oscar nominate lesser advertised movies because it gives me a chance to check it out. And it usually turns out to be worth it. I don't have time to see every single movie out there.

Like others have mentioned, if you want your kind of movie to get nominated, vote it yourself in People's choice award or MTV movie award. I appreciate oscar for what it is, even if it's not perfect. But movie is all relative, no one will like the same thing. I certainly disagree lot of times with who wins, but I like seeing the nomination and my favorite part of oscar is seeing the ones who have passed away.

[Adam_ME]

Originally Posted by Ernest Rister

Recognized for making money? I think it's borderline sick that American culture values works of art based on their revenue grosses versus their contribution to culture in the first place, now you're suggesting we amplify that and give awards to films based on their earnings?

I'm totally on board with complaints about the prejudice against well-produced genre films, simply due to their genre - don't misunderstand - but I'm 100% against giving awards to films simply because boat loads of early-pubescent tweeners and hormonal lonely female teenagers were driven to Twilight by their parents, weekend after weekened.

What's frustrating is that in 2012, we had several billion dollar films that pleased both critics and audiences alike. And we're not talking movies that barely avoided being rated rotten. Skyfall and The Avengers each rated 92% on Rotten Tomatoes. The Dark Knight Rises was slightly behind at 87%. Can the Academy seriously not nominate a single one of those for Best Picture? Even when the casts of Skyfall and TDKR are loaded with Oscar-winning actors?

Shoot, the whole reason we even have the Best Picture category expanded from 5 nominees up to a possible 10 is because of the debacle in 2008 where they ignored The Dark Knight and ended up settling on Slumdog Millionaire for the award(seriously, does anyone even remember that movie a mere 4 years later?).

[kurtis21]

Originally Posted by Adam_ME

What's frustrating is that in 2012, we had several billion dollar films that pleased both critics and audiences alike. And we're not talking movies that barely avoided being rated rotten. Skyfall and The Avengers each rated 92% on Rotten Tomatoes. The Dark Knight Rises was slightly behind at 87%. Can the Academy seriously not nominate a single one of those for Best Picture? Even when the casts of Skyfall and TDKR are loaded with Oscar-winning actors?

Shoot, the whole reason we even have the Best Picture category expanded from 5 nominees up to a possible 10 is because of the debacle in 2008 where they ignored The Dark Knight and ended up settling on Slumdog Millionaire for the award(seriously, does anyone even remember that movie a mere 4 years later?).

+1000000000!!! Amen brother!!!
That's all i'm trying to say!! A nomination would be nice!!

[JavaJulien]

Originally Posted by Adam_ME

What's frustrating is that in 2012, we had several billion dollar films that pleased both critics and audiences alike. And we're not talking movies that barely avoided being rated rotten. Skyfall and The Avengers each rated 92% on Rotten Tomatoes. The Dark Knight Rises was slightly behind at 87%. Can the Academy seriously not nominate a single one of those for Best Picture? Even when the casts of Skyfall and TDKR are loaded with Oscar-winning actors?

Shoot, the whole reason we even have the Best Picture category expanded from 5 nominees up to a possible 10 is because of the debacle in 2008 where they ignored The Dark Knight and ended up settling on Slumdog Millionaire for the award(seriously, does anyone even remember that movie a mere 4 years later?).

I do, and I quite liked it.

Avengers, as much as I liked it, was a popcorn flick, A good movie, but a popcorn flick none the less. It was all about the characters coming together, and the story and character development was pretty much none existent. The Dark Knight Rises plot was a mess.

Of all the "big budget blockbusters" the only one I was pulling for was Skyfall.

And people are ignoring that Django Unchained got nominated. That movie is the furthest thing from the "stereotypical artsy" film.

[stvn1974]

Julia Roberts has an Oscar. They mean nothing. With that I am still happy that The Dark Knight Rises didn't get nomintated in anything major. I won't be watching any of the broadcast but if Jennifer Lawrence were to pop out of her dress when rushing the stage to accept her award I might youtube it.

[Jasonic]

I look at Rottentomatoes all the time too, but it means crap. Every reviewer could rate a movie with a 7/10, which is not great. But is still considered a positive review and end up with 100% on RT. Doesn't happen, but just saying, don't go by RT.

[Jennifer Lawrence Fan]

Oh, *****, *****, *****! - YouTube

What everyone is doing cause their favorite blockbuster film or other fave film wasn't nominated. I haven't seen Avatar but yeah.

[JavaJulien]

Originally Posted by Jasonic

I look at Rottentomatoes all the time too, but it means crap. Every reviewer could rate a movie with a 7/10, which is not great. But is still considered a positive review and end up with 100% on RT. Doesn't happen, but just saying, don't go by RT.

I agree. People always look at the percentage, but all that really is is a ratio of Positive Reviews to negative ones. Take Avengers for example; It as a 92% rating but when you look at the actual average, it is an 8/10.

[Foggy]

The blockbusters have their rewards already, why do they need a statuette above it as well?

[JavaJulien]

To get off of the Best Picture discussion, I know one thing for sure, I hope either ParaNorman or Wreck-it-Ralph wins the animated award.

[Tony208]

Alan Arkin? Completely forgettable role. Dicaprio got robbed. Michael Caine too.

[Jasonic]

I fell asleep before Paranorman ended. I can't remember the last time Ive gotten so bored to that point.

I hope Brave wins, even though I know it won't.

[JavaJulien]

I honestly feel that Brave is one of Pixar's weakest films. The writers liked the side characters too much, and the amount of time spent focusing on them as comic relief hurt the film for me.

[raygendreau]

Nominations and winners are determined solely by the opinions of academy members. There is no small select group sitting around eliminating people or movies from consideration. In this case, the only opinions that matter are the opinions of peers. How the process works: http://voices.yahoo.com/academy-awar...g-1024213.html

How eligibility for nomination is determined: http://www.oscars.org/awards/academy...es/rule02.html

[retablo]

Originally Posted by kurtis21

I'm just saying it gets old....the academy seems to always pick the films that no one has seen! The Artist anyone!!!!! And we all know of all of the upsets in Oscar history....

Dances with Wolves over Goodfellas
Ordinary People over Raging Bull
Shakespeare in Love over Saving Private Ryan
Chariots of Fire over Raiders of the Lost Ark
Crash over Brokeback Mountain
The Hurt Locker over Avatar
The English Patient over Fargo or Jerry Maguire......Just to name a few!!!

The Artist made $133 mil worldwide... yet "no one" saw it? Not to mention the others you listed that were box office hits... Wolves mad a LOT more than Goodfellas, so where's your argument there? Same with Ordinary People over Raging Bull. I mean, since box office seems to be your measurement of what a "great" film is, then those two should've won, and did. C'mon, at least be reasonable with you're trying to make an argument, it'll help you sound more respectable.

[Jennifer Lawrence Fan]

Originally Posted by Foggy

The blockbusters have their rewards already, why do they need a statuette above it as well?

Because according to some people if it makes alot of money, that means alot of people like it. and there fore should win the Oscar to prove it.

[Jasonic]

Originally Posted by JavaJulien

I honestly feel that Brave is one of Pixar's weakest films. The writers liked the side characters too much, and the amount of time spent focusing on them as comic relief hurt the film for me.

I completely disagree. The central story and characters were far stronger than anything else in animation this year by far.

But like I said, it's not going to win, because sadly most people agree with you.


Will probably go to Frankenweenie, another sub-par movie.