Poll: Best Picture? (Academy Awards) [Archive]

macFanDave

Feb 23, 2004, 12:09 PM

I missed Master and Commander...

I think I'd bet on Lord of the Rings, but I think Mystic River is a better movie.

I'd give "The Emperor With No Clothes Award" to Lost In Translation. I thought it really sucked. It had very few funny parts and wasn't even a very gripping drama. And it really didn't have much to do with the clash between Eastern and Western cultures. Highly overrated and I'll be very disappointed if it wins. It reminded me of Dead Poets Society in that the trailers made you think it was a Robin Williams comedy when in the full-length film, he made little more than a cameo appearance in an otherwise dramatic movie.

I liked Sea Biscuit a lot, too.

bennok

Feb 23, 2004, 12:09 PM

damn....i didn't see ANY of those movies!

Sir_Giggles

Feb 23, 2004, 12:12 PM

What made Master and Commander great for me was there wasn't any use of non-diagetic music in the entire film. Watch MC, then watch some Hollywood crap like Pirates and you'll see what I mean.

The opening battle scene in MC is a masterful display of top notch moviemaking.

jrv3034

Feb 23, 2004, 12:13 PM

The only one I haven't seen is Lost in Translation. All the others are good, but LOTR is by far the best of the bunch.

This is the year of the Trilogy. ;)

Awimoway

Feb 23, 2004, 12:18 PM

I did indeed see all five movies, and my favorite is Lost in Translation, although Mystic River is a very close second.

I thought Depp getting the SAG last night was interesting. Although no one takes Disney movies seriously, he was indeed quite good. I wouldn't be surprised if he gets the Oscar, as many of the voters are the same.

arn

Feb 23, 2004, 12:30 PM

I thought Lost in Translation was excellent.

arn

killmoms

Feb 23, 2004, 12:52 PM

Definitely Lost in Translation. That movie was fan-fscking-brilliant. I <3 Sofia Coppola with a passion.

I need to see Mystic River though. I've heard good things.

--Cless

macMaestro

Feb 23, 2004, 12:52 PM

Originally posted by Awimoway
...I wouldn't be surprised if he gets the Oscar, as many of the voters are the same.

This is the Academy we're talking about. Depp was good, but not good enough to convince the Academy to 'Think Different'. A Disney movie doesn't warrant best supporting actor in the Academy's stubborn minds and never will.

Voted for LOTR. I'm a big fan though, so I'm a little biast.

wordmunger

Feb 23, 2004, 12:54 PM

I thought ROTK was pretty good except for the boring thirty minutes they tacked on to the end after it was all over. Haven't read the book, though--apparently Tolkein wastes even more time finishing the thing off.

Awimoway

Feb 23, 2004, 12:57 PM

wordmunger

Feb 23, 2004, 01:03 PM

Originally posted by macMaestro
This is the Academy we're talking about. Depp was good, but not good enough to convince the Academy to 'Think Different'. A Disney movie doesn't warrant best supporting actor in the Academy's stubborn minds and never will.

Voted for LOTR. I'm a big fan though, so I'm a little biast.

The record for most nominations and most actual awards is held by Walt Disney (http://www.oscar.com/legacy/faqs.html). Hmmm...

I think if Depp wins it will basically be a "lifetime achievement" award. Really he should have won for Edward Scissorhands, but he was "too young" then.

Nermal

Feb 23, 2004, 02:34 PM

I voted for LOTR, because it's the only one I've seen :)

jkojima

Feb 23, 2004, 02:49 PM

While I thought Lost in Translation was well done (and I have a crush on Scarlett), if I think 50 years ahead and ask "what movie would be most memorable?" I have to go with LOTR. I personally feel that Oscars should go to movies that are destined to become classics, like Casablanca and Citizen Kane achieved 50+ years ago.

Essefgy

Feb 23, 2004, 02:52 PM

I've seen the five nominees and my heart is with LOTR all the way. Exceptional filmmaking. I've been waiting for a LOTR movie since I read the book in 1976, and the movie(s) more than lived up to those expectations.

Wonder Boy

Feb 23, 2004, 03:20 PM

LOTR is leading...big surprise.

i haven't seen any of them. i don't really care who wins the real thing. ever since spaceballs was overlooked all those years ago, i stopped caring.

slowtreme

Feb 23, 2004, 03:31 PM

I am so tired of the LOTR. I'm just glad it's over. These 3 films were not "Best Picture" but they deserve a lot of credit for costumes and set design.

Each installment I just kept thinking how CG everything looked (sure it's good CG, but when you have 100,000 actors on the screen disbelife sets it). Each movie I sat down really wanting to enjoy it, but instead I just kept looking at my watch.

I voted Lost in Translation. Having lived for 2 years in Japan, it really captured the confusion that can happen to an unprepared person.

ryan

Feb 23, 2004, 03:59 PM

Originally posted by slowtreme
I am so tired of the LOTR. I'm just glad it's over. These 3 films were not "Best Picture" but they deserve a lot of credit for costumes and set design.

Each installment I just kept thinking how CG everything looked (sure it's good CG, but when you have 100,000 actors on the screen disbelife sets it). Each movie I sat down really wanting to enjoy it, but instead I just kept looking at my watch.

Yes, that's exactly how I felt. All that CG is a big reason why these films won't be considered classics in 50 years as someone else said. A classic is a film whose actors and story line drive it, not wizz bang computer graphics. You can argue that the LOTR has a great story line and characters but in the films the story dragged, Frodo was the whiniest character since Luke in "A New Hope," and in the end I didn't care what happened to any of the characters.

CrackedButter

Feb 23, 2004, 04:10 PM

I don't understand the whole hoopla over RoTK, it wasn't that good. It was a poorly edited piece that was rather boring to watch. The first one was the better of the 3.

I'm QUITE SURE WITHOUT A DOUBT that the DVD version will fix all these troubles and it will only cost me £3.00 to witness it!

Yay!

agreenster

Feb 23, 2004, 05:01 PM

Originally posted by Wonder Boy ever since spaceballs was overlooked all those years ago, i stopped caring.

Hah. No kidding!

Just wait until the TenaciousD movie comes out, I'm sure it will get overlooked as well...(taking the hint from your screenname)

agreenster

Feb 23, 2004, 05:03 PM

technocoy

Feb 23, 2004, 05:09 PM

frodo was whiny because he was whiny in the books.

also seen everything except mystic river, and although i think lord of the rings should get it, lost in translation is not far behind.

as for cg, they actually used many more miniatures than most movies these days and that is what set it apart froma fake like star wars. the effects argument holds no water in determining classics. hello, clash of the titans had some of the worst animation and compositing of all times and it is a classic... and the list goes on.

i think that the academy is snobbery and sci-fi fantasy films rarely get the attention they deserve in the best picture category. i felt as though the amount of detail alone in these movies is deserving of the award.

i also believed that in a world where things are pretty grim and the news hits you everyday with reports of death and hatred until you are numb, that lotr brought the books to life and gave many people an escape and a new look at the world in which there is hope and life and bonds with your fellow man, no matter what form, creed, race or color. i think this movie makes people feel good, and just in it's appeal to all sexes, races, ages and backgrounds than more than any other sci-fi fantasy movie of late that this film deserves and oscar for best picture.

we need all the hope and moral reassertion we can get in these sad days.

just my 25 cents... lol:D

wPod

Feb 23, 2004, 05:15 PM

you mean matrix isnt a choice? what good is that????

slightly

Feb 23, 2004, 05:51 PM

Why is there an option for "No opinion"? More to the point, why have people bothered voting for it?

Reminds me of the Jack Dee joke where someone takes a phone-in poll:

"Yes, I'd like to vote.....I'm voting 'C: Don't Know'."

Lost in Translation is my pick, btw. If you can get past the casual racism, it's a really beautiful film.

P-Worm

Feb 23, 2004, 06:03 PM

Originally posted by ryan
Yes, that's exactly how I felt. All that CG is a big reason why these films won't be considered classics in 50 years as someone else said. A classic is a film whose actors and story line drive it, not wizz bang computer graphics. You can argue that the LOTR has a great story line and characters but in the films the story dragged, Frodo was the whiniest character since Luke in "A New Hope," and in the end I didn't care what happened to any of the characters.

Are you seriosly trying to tell me that Star Wars isn't considered a classic?

As for the whole CG thing. You're all right. They should have hired a million people and made armor for every one of them. And then trained them all to fight. :rolleyes:

P-Worm

mrsebastian

Feb 23, 2004, 06:36 PM

hey awimoway,
thanks for that mpeg, that's freakin' great! really cheered me up on a pretty crappy day :D
awimoway-awimoway-awimoway-awimoway!!!!

Jerry Spoon

Feb 23, 2004, 06:54 PM

Originally posted by wordmunger
I thought ROTK was pretty good except for the boring thirty minutes they tacked on to the end after it was all over.
Oh. I'll agree with that. I grabbed for my coat three or four times thinking it was over...and ready for it to be over. I liked it, but come on already.

That being said, I'm sure it will win. Lost in Translation was my choice though. Brilliant movie.

~Shard~

Feb 23, 2004, 06:54 PM

Originally posted by wPod
you mean matrix isnt a choice? what good is that????

Which Matrix movie are you referring to? Surely not Revolutions! The original Matrix was definitely the best of the 3, with Revolutions being the weakest in my opinion. But I'll stop there so this thread doesn't get too off topic. :cool:

revenuee

Feb 23, 2004, 06:57 PM

Lord of the Rings will win

all three were nominated, the third one will win because it'll will sum it up, the third one makes the story complete and the oscar will mean the the entire thing was good, if the first one go it, or the second one, it would mean that the films stood on there own, and i don't think that was the point at all.

why i think it will win?

the academy likes big budget

~Shard~

Feb 23, 2004, 07:02 PM

It's funny - I knew what the results of this poll would be before I even voted - call it a hunch. ;)

I'd have to vote for ROTK as well - although the movie itself may not be "best picture" worthy, the trilogy as a whole is worth recognition. Plus, it would be an amazing gesture to recognize a sci-fi/fantasy film with this award, as the Academy never has before, to my knowledge.

Along the same lines, I think Peter Jackson deserves Best Director as well - his effort, vision and committment towards the LOTR project is amazing and worth recognition.

All that being said, I thought Lost in Translation was an excellent movie as well, but my vote is still for ROTK.

Doctor Q

Feb 23, 2004, 07:34 PM

Remember, asking which picture you think is BEST is not the same as asking which picture you think will WIN AN OSCAR for Best Picture next Sunday.

The best 2003 movie I saw was House of Sand and Fog. It isn't even nominated, so I know that "my opinion is wrong". The Best Picture winners will be Barrie M. Osborne, Peter Jackson, and Fran Walsh for The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King.

Awimoway

Feb 23, 2004, 08:04 PM

Originally posted by Doctor Q
Remember, asking which picture you think is BEST is not the same as asking which picture you think will WIN AN OSCAR for Best Picture next Sunday.

The best 2003 movie I saw was House of Sand and Fog. It isn't even nominated, so I know that "my opinion is wrong". The Best Picture winners will be Barrie M. Osborne, Peter Jackson, and Fran Walsh for The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King.

The best picture I saw in 2003 was American Splendor.

Originally posted by mrsebastian
hey awimoway,
thanks for that mpeg, that's freakin' great! really cheered me up on a pretty crappy day :D
awimoway-awimoway-awimoway-awimoway!!!!

Glad you liked it. The mpeg has made that song my kids' favorite. It's funny every time I watch it. Too bad it was never finished.

mrjamin

Feb 23, 2004, 08:21 PM

LOTR sucks ass

mislabeledstar

Feb 23, 2004, 09:31 PM

it will be lost in translation for best picture

sofia is only the 3rd woman ever nomintaed and 1st american woman......... whther or not it is the best of the choices, she will win on this premise

Jerry Spoon

Feb 23, 2004, 09:42 PM

Originally posted by mislabeledstar
it will be lost in translation for best picture

sofia is only the 3rd woman ever nomintaed and 1st american woman......... whther or not it is the best of the choices, she will win on this premise

Interesting theory. We'll see what happens.

Doctor Q

Feb 23, 2004, 09:43 PM

Originally posted by mislabeledstar
sofia is only the 3rd woman ever nomintaed and 1st american woman......... whther or not it is the best of the choices, she will win on this premise With that reasoning, you might consider that they would give her Best Original Screenplay and figure that's good enough.

Awimoway

Feb 23, 2004, 09:49 PM

Originally posted by Doctor Q
With that reasoning, you might consider that they would give her Best Original Screenplay and figure that's good enough.

Yep, or even Best Director and figure Best Picture is good enough for Jackson.

Daveman Deluxe

Feb 23, 2004, 09:54 PM

Return of the King should win. The Academy owes us nerds big time for choosing "Annie Hall" over "Star Wars" in 1977.

Sir_Giggles

Feb 23, 2004, 10:04 PM

While Lost in Translation was a great movie, notably for it's original screenplay, the movie itself is not deserving because at one point in the movie, when Bill and Scarlett's characters go out partying, it seemed to drag on and on, at one point I was confused how Scarlett managed to have known so many Japanese friends, when earlier in the movie, she seemed "stuck" in her hotel room.

If anything, Bill Murray should win for Best Actor, because he played the part so darn well, and masterfully comedic. I loved the curtain and shower scene, the photoshoots, and the end where some Japanese tourists were clamouring for pictures with him, but all he could think about was Scarlett as she was walking towards the elevator. If you missed the last scene I've described, you need to see it again, because the comedic timing is unbelievably funny.

Sir_Giggles

Feb 23, 2004, 10:05 PM

Originally posted by Daveman Deluxe
Return of the King should win. The Academy owes us nerds big time for choosing "Annie Hall" over "Star Wars" in 1977.

And choosing Ghandi over E.T. in 1982.

And choosing Silence of the Lambs over Beauty and the Beast in 1994.

~Shard~

Feb 23, 2004, 10:28 PM

Originally posted by mrjamin
LOTR sucks ass

Wow, thanks for the intelligent, well thought out, mature assessment of the entire trilogy, and also for displaying your level of intellect for everyone on this thread to observe. I'm sure everyone here finds your insightful and constructive argument very intriguing. :rolleyes:

agreenster

Feb 23, 2004, 11:26 PM

Boy, I tell you what. LOTR may do a lot of things, but it doesnt Suck Ass.

Bringing one of the neatest and widely-read literary works to the big screen was one of the biggest accomplishments any director could do. Can you even phathom the amount of work that went into this film?

Lemme tell ya, CG isnt as easy as pushing a button. Making a film that spans almost a decade of planning and filming isnt a simple task. Creating a CG character from scratch that comes to life, almost to the point of dibelief that it isnt a real creature is an accomplishment certainly deserving of an oscar. Writing a script from a book thicker than three bibles, and making it understandable to the average moviegoer is a feat bigger than any of YOU will ever accomplish.

These films werent just Computer Graphic blockbusters. In fact, should it really matter what medium was used to create the film? If thats the case, then everything should be a documentary, with no makeup artists, or costumes, or actors. Movies are about fantasy, going into an imaginary world and seeing what others are feeling. Peter Jackson took the tools that he possessed and made the best imagery he could possibly make, because he felt that's what Tolkein deserved. Now he is criticized for making it look too good.

Heroism, courage, friendship, loyalty and bravery are just some of the themes that make up The Lord of the Rings, not computer graphics. If you couldnt look past the eye candy to see that, then I pity you.

PretendPCuser

Feb 23, 2004, 11:49 PM

Originally posted by agreenster
Boy, I tell you what. LOTR may do a lot of things, but it doesnt Suck Ass.

Word. I can understand that some people might be tired of the LotR hoopla, but hey, it is a great story made into a great movie.

I would like to see it win best picture, but at the very least, i think Peter Jackson deserves best director. I mean, if you know all of the things he did to make this film work, overseeing nearly everything is a phenomenal accomplishment, and I personally don't see how another director could come close to him for this year.

We got your back PJ, if you don't get the Oscar, we're going to riot!! And by we, i mean me.

Thank you, goodnight!

Sir_Giggles

Feb 24, 2004, 12:14 AM

Do you think Passion of the Christ will win the Best Picture Oscar for 2004?

mms

Feb 24, 2004, 01:26 AM

Damn, haven't seen any of it though. But I was unhappy that neither "Big Fish" nor "Pirates of the Carribean" made it.

Doctor Q

Feb 24, 2004, 01:44 AM

Originally posted by Sir_Giggles
And choosing Ghandi over E.T. in 1982.

And choosing Silence of the Lambs over Beauty and the Beast in 1994. The Wizard of Oz, one of the best pictures ever made, picked the absolute worst year to come out: 1939. It lost to Gone With the Wind, which is also considered one of the best pictures ever made. Among the other contenders that year: Goodbye Mr. Chips, Mr. Smith Goes to Washington, Ninotchka, Of Mice and Men, Stagecoach, and Wuthering Heights.

virividox

Feb 24, 2004, 04:20 AM

i wanted cold mountain to be nominated ugh

Sabenth

Feb 24, 2004, 06:54 AM

all i can say is why dose this poll not intrest me at all :(

i find this whole awards thing a bit crap sorry :(

~Shard~

Feb 24, 2004, 07:17 AM

Originally posted by Sabenth
all i can say is why dose this poll not intrest me at all :(

i find this whole awards thing a bit crap sorry :(

If a poll doesn't interest you, why bother posting and replying to it? Some people are so confusing... ;) :p

ryan

Feb 24, 2004, 08:38 AM

Originally posted by P-Worm
Are you seriosly trying to tell me that Star Wars isn't considered a classic?
When did I say that?

As for the whole CG thing. You're all right. They should have hired a million people and made armor for every one of them. And then trained them all to fight. :rolleyes:

P-Worm I never suggested that, nor did anyone else I believe. My point was that unlike what somewhat else suggested, great special effects does not automatically make a make movie "Best Picture."

revenuee

Feb 24, 2004, 08:54 AM

I thought Lord of the Rings sucked ass...

LOL

alright, now that i'm sure i got your attention enough to read my post ... i know the books are long, but the movies would of easily been done in less then two hours each ... it just dragged on for me ... i tried reading the books and i just couldn't get into it.

i think i'm prejudice toward Hobbits and Wizards -- not a fan of fantasy.

I think LOTR will win, like i said before, they'll do it on the third one because it would of been prejudice toward a trilogy that has be seen as one whole, rather then three individual film -- but i don't think it should win, master and commander or lost in translation were much better films -- and i think Big Fish should of been nominated as well .. but alas the academy and i often disagree - Ridley Scott has been passed up for best director far to many times ... He should of gotten the win for Gladiator, i love Sodenbourgh, and i thought Traffic was fantastic, but i though Scott took on a much greater roll in Gladiator then Sodenbourgh did in Traffic

we'll see what happens this year

revenuee

Feb 24, 2004, 09:03 AM

Originally posted by Doctor Q
The Wizard of Oz, one of the best pictures ever made,

why does everyone say that ... this is my all time hated movie, and story for that matter, of all time.

Judy Garland was awful just as she was in all the movies i've seen with her.

ITR 81

Feb 24, 2004, 09:22 AM

Lost in Translation!

LOTR is too long and boring for my tastes to sit through. LOTR to me is like a grown up ver. of Harry Potter and that isn't saying much.

agreenster

Feb 24, 2004, 09:54 AM

Originally posted by ryan
(...)great special effects does not automatically make a make movie "Best Picture."

That's absolutely correct.

Which is why LOTR should win. Its the perfect combination of story, themes, filmmaking, storytelling, and effects.

This movie never seemed like it was just a showcase for CG effects. And come on, you've seen the movies that are.

I was never a fan of fantasy before seeing this movie, and probably never will be. I've never read the books, and probably never will. But what a great piece of film LOTR was.

But I guess there's no more point in arguing.

sparkleytone

Feb 24, 2004, 10:37 AM

Reading a thread like this really goes to show that the majority of people who watch movies simply view them the same way they watch "Friends" or something along those lines. Lord of the Rings was great, yes, and epic in scope.

However, I know Lost in Translation is one of the best films I have seen in a long time. The humor was sharp, the situations were tense, and the human interaction was REAL. One of my favorite scenes is where Charlotte sends Bob a drink from her table, and her husband is RIGHT THERE not paying attention to her. That movie nailed so many things about the interaction between people that I notice every day.

I haven't seen Mystic River, but nearly anything done by Clint Eastwood is gold in my book. That man is one of the greats.

I just really wish more people would spend the mindpower to appreciate the art of it all more than the instant gratification of cheap thrills and tricks. I LOVED LoTR, but it doesn't hold a candle to films like Pulp Fiction.

wdlove

Feb 24, 2004, 10:53 AM

Well it will all come down to a majority vote. The majority seems to be for LOTR, it will be rewarding a body of great work. Others are allowed to have an opinion. It is also a great honor to be nominated for an academy award.

pimentoLoaf

Feb 24, 2004, 11:56 AM

Hard to believe that M&C didn't get many votes, as LiT isn't that strong a piccie. Comedy and adventure are two different genres and M&C is just as invigorating as King.

agreenster

Feb 24, 2004, 12:06 PM

Originally posted by sparkleytone
I just really wish more people would spend the mindpower to appreciate the art of it all more than the instant gratification of cheap thrills and tricks. I LOVED LoTR, but it doesn't hold a candle to films like Pulp Fiction.

Cheap thrills? Tricks? My god. The last thing that CG is, is cheap, and if you think that making a believeable all CG charatcer (in Gollum) is a TRICK, then MAN. It took artistry beyon what any of us can do, or have ever done.

You do realize Im not just talking out of my butt here.....this is MY profession. This is like saying that a ferrari is nothing but flash and thrills. Yeah, but done with eloquence, style, and precision.

I've studied film all my life, not to mention 4 years of undergrad. Yeah, Pulp Fiction is awesome, and Tarantino is god to many filmgoers, but please dont say that everyone who liked LOTR is in the same mindset as lame sitcom watchers.

LOTR was a feat of monumental proportions.

mislabeledstar

Feb 24, 2004, 12:35 PM

Originally posted by wdlove
Well it will all come down to a majority vote. The majority seems to be for LOTR, it will be rewarding a body of great work. Others are allowed to have an opinion. It is also a great honor to be nominated for an academy award.

Truthfully, though, the Academy Awards aren't really a majority vote wins situation......... there are alot of times when they choose something that isn't the majority's vote because they feel it matches up better than the public's opinion.

ColoJohnBoy

Feb 24, 2004, 12:46 PM

Originally posted by ITR 81
Lost in Translation!

LOTR is too long and boring for my tastes to sit through.

Interesting. I thought the exact same thing of Lost in Translation. I was ready to put a gun to my head and pull the trigger toward the end. Sofia Coppola might as well have engraved the word "SUBTLETY" on a cricket bat and beat me to death with it. Yes, it was nuanced. Doesn't change the fact that it was both mediocre and boring.

And if you consider LOTR nothing but a grown up version of Harry Potter, you completely missed the point.

Doctor Q

Feb 24, 2004, 01:39 PM

Originally posted by revenuee
why does everyone say that ... this is my all time hated movie, and story for that matter, of all time.

Judy Garland was awful just as she was in all the movies i've seen with her. Enduring popularity and its effect on our collective culture would argue in favor of this movie too. As a long-time fan of the 14 Oz books by L. Frank Baum, I did have some gripes with the movie. In the books, Dorothy's Oz adventure was NOT a dream, and having her wake up at the end of the movie was a "never mind" cop out. And Judy Garland was too old for the part. It's too bad that MGM didn't arrange to "borrow" Shirley Temple from 20th Century Fox, a choice that columnists of the time reported as a possibility, but that was apparently not really being considered seriously.

Awimoway

Feb 24, 2004, 01:53 PM

Originally posted by Doctor Q
Enduring popularity and its effect on our collective culture would argue in favor of this movie too. As a long-time fan of the 14 Oz books by L. Frank Baum, I did have some gripes with the movie. In the books, Dorothy's Oz adventure was NOT a dream, and having her wake up at the end of the movie was a "never mind" cop out. And Judy Garland was too old for the part. It's too bad that MGM didn't arrange to "borrow" Shirley Temple from 20th Century Fox, a choice that columnists of the time reported as a possibility, but that was apparently not really being considered seriously.

Shirley Temple singing "Somewhere over the Rainbow"? I'll take Judy, thank you.

(Suddenly feeling sexually insecure...) I think I'll go eat some steak and catch a hockey game. Ahem.

JohnGillilan

Feb 25, 2004, 12:17 AM

My vote goes to "Mighty Ducks 7"

Sabenth

Feb 25, 2004, 04:32 AM

Originally posted by ~Shard~
If a poll doesn't interest you, why bother posting and replying to it? Some people are so confusing... ;) :p

i voted not intrested and seeming i like to vote on the polls i did :D i dont like all the glitz and gitz that goese for these things yes those who do the real work camera sound visual etc they deserve all the praise that they can get stuff the famous faces

~Shard~

Feb 25, 2004, 07:18 AM

Originally posted by Sabenth
i voted not intrested and seeming i like to vote on the polls i did :D i dont like all the glitz and gitz that goese for these things yes those who do the real work camera sound visual etc they deserve all the praise that they can get stuff the famous faces

Alrighty then! ;)

mrjamin

Feb 25, 2004, 11:19 AM

just to add my my lotr comment - it does suck ass, in my opinion. here's my reasons:

1) far too long and monotonous. loads of extraenous scenes that i don't think added anything to the plot.
2) it didn't match my mental image of the books, and it didn't add anything to it either
3) the media team for lotr milked it something rotten. you can gauruntee that there'll be a 12 disc limited edition pack with 6 weeks of unseen, boring footage

IMHO, most books shouldn't be made into films, especially fantasy ones. The whole magic of a book is that you can summon your own mental perception of the look and feel based on the summary the writer provides. As soon as you make a film out of a book, you're watching someones interpretation which can ruin your perception of a book (it did for me).

Don't get me wrong, i loved the books BUT the films have ruined them for me. I know i'm not alone in this position.

Also, i'm just so bored of seeing all the LOTR spinoff promotions everywhere. It seems that the developed world was swamped with it!

It also makes me sick when the budget for films like that is so huge - sometimes several times the debt that a lot of developing countries owe. I'm sure there would be more benefit to the human race if the money made and invested in LOTR went towards helping out a 3rd world country who's development is throttled by the debt they have to coutries who don't even need the money back.

sure, you could say this about a lot of films, or any industry for that matter, but i think the time and money put into lord of the rings was just silly

Doctor Q

Feb 25, 2004, 01:51 PM

Whenever a movie is made based on a fantasy book (Harry Potter, The Wizard of Oz, LOTR, etc.) or a comic book (Superman, Spider-Man, The Hulk, etc.), or a TV show (The Flintstones, Charlie's Angels, Starsky & Hutch, etc.), there will be fans of the original story/characters with strong opinions about how it/they was/were portrayed. They can be the biggest fans of the movie or the worst critics.

When a film is made about a serious historical event, the discussion/controversy about the real event vs. the movie can overshadow the film. Oliver Stone's JFK and Mel Gibson's The Passion of the Christ (which opens today) are good examples.

There aren't many controversies about the movies in the Oscar race this year, other than the big deal some are making about the fact that Cold Mountain wasn't filmed in the U.S.

wdlove

Feb 25, 2004, 02:15 PM

Originally posted by Sir_Giggles
Do you think Passion of the Christ will win the Best Picture Oscar for 2004?

I would really like to see "Passions Of The Christ" nominated for some Academy awards. The controversy will certainly keep it in the fore front of many in the Academy. It being released at the beginning of the year will hurt its chances, there is 11 months until the nominations. The main way that movies get nominated is by heavy lobbying for the movie, publicity. It is going to be a long wait to find the answer. At this point only time will tell.

Awimoway

Feb 25, 2004, 02:23 PM

Originally posted by wdlove
I would really like to see "Passions Of The Christ" nominated for some Academy awards. The controversy will certainly keep it in the fore front of many in the Academy. It being released at the beginning of the year will hurt its chances, there is 11 months until the nominations. The main way that movies get nominated is by heavy lobbying for the movie, publicity. It is going to be a long wait to find the answer. At this point only time will tell.

Gladiator came out in April or May and it got Best Picture. I don't think Passion will be forgotten come Oscar time. As for whether it will get deliberately snubbed, though, I think that might be likely.

~Shard~

Feb 25, 2004, 07:17 PM

Originally posted by mrjamin
just to add my my lotr comment - it does suck ass, in my opinion. here's my reasons:

Thank you for at least providing your reasoning this time. If you would have posted these reasons the first time, instead of simply stating that "lotr sucks ass", you wouldn't have received so much criticism. ;)

Originally posted by mrjamin

1) far too long and monotonous. loads of extraenous scenes that i don't think added anything to the plot.

Ah, but would you have wanted the movies to contain everything the books did? If so, you'd find yourself sitting through 3 5-hour movies at least. ;) Although some of the added scenes in the movie were a little long, I think you'd have to agree that it was a good thing that certain scenes were shortened from the books, as they only would have led to an even longer movie.

Originally posted by mrjamin

2) it didn't match my mental image of the books, and it didn't add anything to it either

Certain things didn't match up with my mental images either, but I still appreciate the interpretation that was displayed on the screen. You can't expect Jackson to read your mind and re-create the movies just as you had visualized them, because then there would countless other millions who could complain as well. I appreciate other people's interpretations of things, as I expect them to appreciate mine - and as a result, I try not to be too judegmental. As a result, I'm sorry you feel you have to say that since the movies didn't match your mental images, they "sucked ass". :(

Originally posted by mrjamin

3) the media team for lotr milked it something rotten. you can gauruntee that there'll be a 12 disc limited edition pack with 6 weeks of unseen, boring footage

Actually the DVD release of the ultimate LOTR collection was announced quite some time ago. Just as every movie was released in December for the past 3 years, next December the ultimate collector's edition will be released with all 3 movies (extended editions) and who knows what else. As for the footage being boring, thanks for your opinion, but I feel there will be many fans of the movies who will enjoy the extra footage. And I'm sure whatever your favorite movie is, many people would call it's DVD's extra footage boring as well. We all have different tastes. :)

No offence by any of the above, just making observations. :cool:

Doctor Q

Feb 25, 2004, 08:23 PM

To read a short description and see a few frames from the movies nominated in the Animated Feature Film and Animated Short Film categories, see the Animation World Network Showcase (http://www.awn.com/oscars04/).

AngryLawnGnome

Feb 25, 2004, 08:24 PM

People only vote for Lost in Translation because of all the hype. LOTR deserves a trophy.

Sir_Giggles

Feb 25, 2004, 08:35 PM

Originally posted by angrylawngnome
People only vote for Lost in Translation because of all the hype. LOTR deserves a trophy.

Yes I agree. I saw Lost In Translation, and while its a very original smart film, I left feeling it was a small film. It's very cerebral, yet it leaves you with your heart half filled.

A great film, and of course one that is derided, was Titanic. That film deserved the Best Picture oscar, because not only was it grand in scope, but you left the theatre feeling emotionally fulfilled, even though the central character died and all hell broke loose on the ship.

There's obviously a backlash against LoTR for the same reasons. Even at a 3 hour plus running time, I've always been amazed at how fast the time files, which is a good sign of a great movie. I felt this way for the Fellowship and it extended to Return of the King. The only two other movies where it didn't feel like 3 hours were Titanic and Dances with Wolves. Those movies were excellent.

Contrast this with the 90-minute running time of Lost in Translation, and I was squirming in my seat wondering when the movie would be finished (definitely not a good sign).

MacFan26

Feb 25, 2004, 09:07 PM

Originally posted by wordmunger
The record for most nominations and most actual awards is held by Walt Disney (http://www.oscar.com/legacy/faqs.html). Hmmm...

I think if Depp wins it will basically be a "lifetime achievement" award. Really he should have won for Edward Scissorhands, but he was "too young" then.

It would be great if Depp won, he's definitely one of my favorite actors, and even though it was a "Disney summer blockbuster," it still was a great movie and Depp was great in acting in it. I think if he doesn't win, he'll definitely win one some year.

agreenster

Feb 26, 2004, 05:20 PM

Well, I enjoyed LOTR for many reasons (as stated above), but mostly because it was so well done.

I think that it satisfied me because I had never read the books, and never will. (I love literature, but egads that thing is too damn long and filled with 30x the boring lineages and nonsense as the films) The movies gave me enough info to completely love the story, characters, history, and detail involved in making this movie, without being a LOTR geek who does nothing but read every stinkin' line written by Tolkein. (talk about boring. I feel really sorry for the folks who treat Middle Earth like real history and sit on panels and what-not)