nigma
Well-Known Member
i prefer the term opportunist cynicalism.
and i have a soul....just don't have a heart.
and i have a soul....just don't have a heart.
Planet-man
Well-Known Member
Fantastic Mr. Fox had wondeful atmosphere and dialouge, and amazing comic timing.
I'm seeing all these elitist, snobby remarks all over teh Intarwebz about how Avatar better not win.
Snobs HATE anything that the general public likes. It's hilarious. You can't be tortured and misunderstood and a unique flower if everyone likes you.
This is the same criticism I have of Pitchfork. Their whole identity is wrapped up in suffering in the shadows.
Snobs HATE anything that the general public likes. It's hilarious. You can't be tortured and misunderstood and a unique flower if everyone likes you.
This is the same criticism I have of Pitchfork. Their whole identity is wrapped up in suffering in the shadows.
Langsta
Well-Known Member
I thought The Lovely Bones was better than District 9 or Inglourious Basterds.... I was very moved by D9. Basterds was just a mindless blockbuster about Jews slaughtering Nazis; Christoph Waltz's performance is what carried the movie. I'll admit, The Lovely Bones could have been executed better, but it was still a much better movie than the other two. And I really wish Saoirse Ronan was on that list somewhere too. Stanley Tucci's performance was so freaking disturbing and I'm probably going to have nightmares about it tonight, but Saoirse's performance was still very amazing. Sandra *Bollocks* is not a good actress. Also, she's annoying, her voice gets on my nerves and her face looks like it was beaten with an ugly stick.
Nobody likes me.
Nobody likes me.
Last edited:
She always looks like she just got done crying for 3 days straight.
thee great one
Master of TOG-fu.
Avatar is not a best picture. It's not even that good.
Saoirse was great in that movie. But the tones in the movie were too jarring and ruined a lot of the movie. It is no way better then Inglourious Basterds or District 9.
I'm looking at "picture" being the whole package. Was the story lacking? Sure, maybe. But it WAS good and it has already changed how movies are made.
And I didn't mean to say that everyone who doesn't pick it personally feels or is that way. But you can tell the ones who are. And there are plenty of them.
AnTwan
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2006
- Messages
- 499
but if you are looking at best picture as a whole package then you can't leave out a HUGE part of the package. The story was terrible the, dialogue sucked and the characters were flat. Everything that had to do with the script failed. He should win best visual effects, sure, but best picture is for movies people are going to watch for the rest of all time. If tomorrow, a film shot exactly like Avatar but with a much better story came out (and it may not be tomorrow but a film like that will come out) everyone would leave Avatar in the trash heap. I appreciate how it has changed Cinema, but that doesn't make it a good move.
That is not a widely-held belief, at least as far as I've seen. If it was Gigli with great special effects that's a different story, because it was a pretty common opinion that the movie sucked. So I can't see it hurting the movie in that regard.
Planet-man
Well-Known Member
Yeah, in my experience most people seem to have thought that, but say they don't care and it was great anyway. A ton of the "positive" reviews on RT say similar things.
The part I quoted:
What I mean to say is that this movie is not getting beaten up by the critics for those things.
Planet-man
Well-Known Member
Again, - it totally is.
And is and is and is.
And every single one of those is a "positive" review that gives it a high star rating or even perfect score and counts towards the film's "82% Fresh Reviews" rating on RottenTomatoes. So there's a good chance a lot of people voting at the Oscars are following the same line of thinking - the story and characters don't matter but it's all so pretty that it's still a "great movie" - and I think that's crazy.
Last edited:
Okay - I'm not saying that no one is saying that about the film...I'm talking in a lot braoder sense; the buzz around the film. Comedians aren't going around making jokes about what a terrible story it is with great special effects.
Victor Von Doom
Fist of teh Internets.
Mmmmmm......damaged goods.
ProjectX2
Don't expect me to take you with me when I go to s
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2004
- Messages
- 25,007
Viggo Mortensen should have been nominated for Best Actor.
Planet-man
Well-Known Member
Waltz is nominated for Supporting, not lead.
I really wanted to see The Road(with my dad) but after the initial hype its release just seemed to disappear. They stopped advertising for it about two weeks before its release and no theaters near me even played it.
In my experience anyway, there's tons of popular buzz and consensus about the plot being a joke.... Most people I know just say they didn't mind because it was such an "experience", but I've heard no shortage of "Dances With Smurfs", "Pochahontas In Space" etc complaints too plus plenty of comedy, the usual suspects like Cracked've been all over it, CollegeHumor, Colbert, etc. I don't really watch any of the Late Night shows so I don't know what they've been saying but I think "the plot of this VFX film is too simple and shallow" isn't something mainstream audiences even care about.
But the Academy should care since they're specifically supposed to be more analytical than the rest of the world. And I think in terms of the Academy's mentality the critics are way more indicative than comedians and public forums and "great effects/weak story" is VERY much the buzz in film circles. The fact that the Academy didn't think the story was good enough to nominate it for a screenplay award themselves but it's still a hot tip for their Best Picture isn't a good sign.
I really wanted to see The Road(with my dad) but after the initial hype its release just seemed to disappear. They stopped advertising for it about two weeks before its release and no theaters near me even played it.
In my experience anyway, there's tons of popular buzz and consensus about the plot being a joke.... Most people I know just say they didn't mind because it was such an "experience", but I've heard no shortage of "Dances With Smurfs", "Pochahontas In Space" etc complaints too plus plenty of comedy, the usual suspects like Cracked've been all over it, CollegeHumor, Colbert, etc. I don't really watch any of the Late Night shows so I don't know what they've been saying but I think "the plot of this VFX film is too simple and shallow" isn't something mainstream audiences even care about.
But the Academy should care since they're specifically supposed to be more analytical than the rest of the world. And I think in terms of the Academy's mentality the critics are way more indicative than comedians and public forums and "great effects/weak story" is VERY much the buzz in film circles. The fact that the Academy didn't think the story was good enough to nominate it for a screenplay award themselves but it's still a hot tip for their Best Picture isn't a good sign.
Last edited:
