Oscar winner for Best Picture this year?
Feb 4, 2010 at 1:36 PM Post #46 of 63
Feb 4, 2010 at 3:12 PM Post #47 of 63
IB is a materpiece, Avatar will win just from all the Hype. The opening scenes in IB are amazing!!!
 
Feb 4, 2010 at 3:40 PM Post #48 of 63
I don't think it was a great year for film, but imho the best of the nominees is A Serious Man. Will that win? No, although surprisingly they gave the Coens the award last year for No Country (when TWBB should have won
tongue.gif
).

I didn't see Avatar (and don't really have any desire to), but from what I've heard it really wasn't that great of a movie outside of the special effects. So give it the award for best special effects, best art direction, etc. but keep it out of the best picture category. Same for Hurt Locker, which seemed more like a video game than a movie. The direction was pretty good, but the movie itself was implausible and overrated.

And how films like "Up," "Up in the Air," or the "Blind Side" even get nominated for Best Picture is beyond me. Either standards are really falling fast, or else the movie industry is just trying to appeal to more viewers by nominating these LCD or otherwise predictable and mediocre films. All I have to say is that if Sandra Bullock wins for best actress instead of Meryl Streep for her portrayal of Julia Child, then it's true that the Oscars definitely have no credibility left. It's hard to believe they're not rigged anyway -- e.g., Avatar will almost certainly win, with Serious Man or the very enjoyable Inglourious Basterds not even close.
 
Feb 4, 2010 at 7:43 PM Post #50 of 63
I really don't think Avatar is going to win. I think the academy is smart (and old) enough to see through the hype and recognize that Avatar doesn't really embody the strong characterization and storytelling that has defined Best Picture winners over the years. I could be wrong, but voting often tends toward the conservative when it comes to winners - they prefer prestige films. I was pretty Amazed when Lord of the Rings won (and glad), but that was truly an epic produced over the course of several years, and a retelling of a literary classic. Avatar, although flashy, isnt much more than an average action film. I'm sure the academy will recognize that.
 
Feb 4, 2010 at 7:54 PM Post #51 of 63
Quote:

Originally Posted by userlander /img/forum/go_quote.gif
I don't think it was a great year for film, but imho the best of the nominees is A Serious Man. Will that win? No, although surprisingly they gave the Coens the award last year for No Country (when TWBB should have won
tongue.gif
).

I didn't see Avatar (and don't really have any desire to), but from what I've heard it really wasn't that great of a movie outside of the special effects. So give it the award for best special effects, best art direction, etc. but keep it out of the best picture category. Same for Hurt Locker, which seemed more like a video game than a movie. The direction was pretty good, but the movie itself was implausible and overrated.

And how films like "Up," "Up in the Air," or the "Blind Side" even get nominated for Best Picture is beyond me. Either standards are really falling fast, or else the movie industry is just trying to appeal to more viewers by nominating these LCD or otherwise predictable and mediocre films. All I have to say is that if Sandra Bullock wins for best actress instead of Meryl Streep for her portrayal of Julia Child, then it's true that the Oscars definitely have no credibility left. It's hard to believe they're not rigged anyway -- e.g., Avatar will almost certainly win, with Serious Man or the very enjoyable Inglourious Basterds not even close.


I agree with a lot of this... TWBB definitely should have won last year. I don't agree that A Serious Man should win, though. I think it was an interesting period piece and character study, but ultimately flawed.

I don't think Up deserves a nomination... but I do think Wall-E should have been nominated.

and Avatar most likely will win, and most definitely should not.
 
Feb 4, 2010 at 8:41 PM Post #52 of 63
Hopefully Inglourious Basterds, that's a damn fine movie that should age well.

I liked District 9 a lot, and I'm not one for movies oriented on 3d effects. But I thought it all came together nicely with a fresh take on sci-fi. Still a few pegs short of best picture, the plot felt like they were aiming for something much bigger to happen, or they were telling the story in a much bigger way than it really was.

Still haven't seen Avatar, no desire to.
 
Feb 4, 2010 at 9:22 PM Post #53 of 63
Quote:

Originally Posted by TheBigCW /img/forum/go_quote.gif
It's a shame Michael Stuhlbarg didn't get nominated.

But seriously, what a genius ending. There was thinking on very, very deep levels involved in making that film. All the illusions to duality, Schrodinger's cat, perspective... genius.


Ethan Coen picked up a degree in philosophy from Princeton - it shows, doesn't it? I can't wait to see what they do with "True Grit," though I do hope they film some of the other Portis books eventually. "Norwood" or "Dog of the South" would suit them perfectly.

I completely agree about Stuhlbarg - he deserved a nod. Though at least he's gotten some attention and should be able to pick up other good roles now. I hope he does, since I'd like to see more of his work.

Also, I completely agree with you about "Moon." What an excellent movie! Too bad it didn't get more exposure. As soon as I told everyone to go see it, it was gone. Managed to pick up the DVD the other day, too. It'll be making the circles of friends and family for awhile.
 
Feb 5, 2010 at 11:23 PM Post #54 of 63
Quote:

Originally Posted by Uncle Erik /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Also, I completely agree with you about "Moon." What an excellent movie! Too bad it didn't get more exposure. As soon as I told everyone to go see it, it was gone. Managed to pick up the DVD the other day, too. It'll be making the circles of friends and family for awhile.


The real tragedy about Moon is how truly remarkable of a performance that Sam Rockwell gave in that picture, despite the fact no one noticed it, and it was snubbed for a Best Actor nom. It was really, really emotional acting and a brilliant picture. I was surprised to find it was directed by David Bowie's son yet received such little promotion. It was a great movie, I wish it was promoted more.

To me, it will be in the category of great thinking-man's sci-fi with films such as 2001: A Space Odyssey, Solaris, and, more recently, Sunshine. Which, by the way, you should check out (Sunshine that is) if you liked Moon.
 
Feb 5, 2010 at 11:49 PM Post #55 of 63
Quote:

Originally Posted by chadbang /img/forum/go_quote.gif
I really don't think Avatar is going to win. I think the academy is smart (and old) enough to see through the hype and recognize that Avatar doesn't really embody the strong characterization and storytelling that has defined Best Picture winners over the years. I could be wrong, but voting often tends toward the conservative when it comes to winners - they prefer prestige films. I was pretty Amazed when Lord of the Rings won (and glad), but that was truly an epic produced over the course of several years, and a retelling of a literary classic. Avatar, although flashy, isnt much more than an average action film. I'm sure the academy will recognize that.


It's either Avatar, or Hurt Locker. And either he or his ex-wife are probably going to take best director, too. Probably whichever one takes best picture, they'll give best director to the other one.
tongue.gif
 
Feb 6, 2010 at 1:46 AM Post #56 of 63
If you loved Avatar in 3D, watch it in 2D and see how 3D was its only real merit. It'll probably win solely for its technological advancement, which may or may not be a good thing.

I think Inglourious Basterds deserves it. Such a great story with excellent characters and a perfect atmosphere. Too bad it'll probably be robbed though.
frown.gif
 
Feb 6, 2010 at 1:54 AM Post #57 of 63
Quote:

Originally Posted by SonicArmada /img/forum/go_quote.gif
If you loved Avatar in 3D, watch it in 2D and see how 3D was its only real merit. It'll probably win solely for its technological advancement, which may or may not be a good thing.

I think Inglourious Basterds deserves it. Such a great story with excellent characters and a perfect atmosphere. Too bad it'll probably be robbed though.
frown.gif



If he didn't win it for Pulp, he's not going to win for IB.

The guy who played the nazi officer "Hans Landa" should win for best supporting actor - he was great! Brad Pitt was really good, too.
 
Feb 6, 2010 at 3:43 AM Post #59 of 63
Quote:

Originally Posted by userlander /img/forum/go_quote.gif
If he [Tarantino] didn't win it for Pulp, he's not going to win for IB.


Sadly, this is what I see. I loved Inglorious Basterds and feel strongly that it should win Best Picture this year; but I also fear that the Academy is not going to let that happen seeing that Pulp Fiction didn't win when it was up.

Frankly, Avatar (which I loved for its effect) will probably come back with a fair amount of swag, but I very much doubt it will take Best Picture either. I did not enjoy District 9 and don't feel that should win at all.
 
Feb 6, 2010 at 4:51 AM Post #60 of 63
Quote:

Originally Posted by AmanGeorge /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Meh, D9 may have had a marginally more creative plot and more unique writing etc., but the argument for Avatar wouldn't hinge on those things (it's probably at the bottom of the pile if these are all you take into consideration) - it would rest on Avatar's significance, for lack of a better word, in the grand scheme of moviemaking, thanks to it meaningfully and truly pushing the boundaries of what we think is possible in film.


Exactly. Movie folks love this kind of crap.

For this reason Avatar will win despite being a completely mediocre film. I don't really have a preference for "best film of the year" this year, so it doesn't bother me too much
biggrin.gif
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top