The Oscars Are Going to Suck
- Thread starter MovieBob
- Start date
I really do not see why Oscars matter to anyone our age anymore. Academy voters do not care about us and nor should they. We do not matter to them because the movies we are interested in are beyond what they are used to seeing.
We really should have gotten that hint right around the time Fellowship of the Ring came out. Even though it was fun reading all the calls to not watch the shows and overt snobbery towards the shows, it should have told us that we did not matter to them.
There needs to be someone out there willing to fund and host a movie awards show for our generation and focus on the movies that we care about. Kind of like the MTV VMAsused to appeal to us when we were young and stupid and that particular form of pop music mattered to us was good.
We really should have gotten that hint right around the time Fellowship of the Ring came out. Even though it was fun reading all the calls to not watch the shows and overt snobbery towards the shows, it should have told us that we did not matter to them.
There needs to be someone out there willing to fund and host a movie awards show for our generation and focus on the movies that we care about. Kind of like the MTV VMAs
the first time I watched crash I though it was a good movie. Years later it actually turn out to be aweful, I liked the idea, but the follow through was just plain bad. Slumdog millioniare on the other hand I really liked, but eh to each there own. I think Bob brought up some valid points (although with some uneeded snark) but thats why I love yah bob keep it up.
I have pretty much ignored the Oscars for the longest time since it became apparent what they really were. Which is essentially what MovieBob has been saying about them, except before I knew he existed.
With all those old people on the Oscars committee, maybe someone should make a movie where an old man shouts at kids to get off his lawn.
With all those old people on the Oscars committee, maybe someone should make a movie where an old man shouts at kids to get off his lawn.
Of all those movies listed, I've seen Almost Every one of them (Haven't seen Moon, We Need To Talk About Kevin, or Senna.) Methinks I need to find this Kermode fellow and follow him. Also, I agree with A Scanner Darkly, because until I had seen Requiem for a Dream, I would have called that the best anti-drug movie ever made.coogs42 said:
OT: I watched my first oscars about two years ago, when it was Avatar or Hurt Locker being one of the winners. I remember my sister freaking out because she thought Avatar should have been the winner (to be fair, she was 18, and She hadn't seen the other 9 Nominees. Neither had I, but Avatar wasn't that good.)
I simply cannot understand the nomination of The Tree of Life. It's and awful, awful movie. If you have the chance to watch it, don't! It's simply boring non-sense.
And Andy Serkins not being nominated as best actor... Yes, Oscars suck and probably always did.
And Andy Serkins not being nominated as best actor... Yes, Oscars suck and probably always did.
Do people still watch the Oscars, though? Won't most people just Google the results afterwards, not caring about the pomp of the suspense of an outdated, pointless, contrite show that is continuously wrong? Tastes have changed. Why willingly waste your time watching something you'll know will only serve to annoy you?
Not counting "it's your job", though, because otherwise we'd never get to see Bob tear apart the Twilight movies or Transformers.
Not counting "it's your job", though, because otherwise we'd never get to see Bob tear apart the Twilight movies or Transformers.
I never understood the Oscars, it all seems to be whoever had the lowest budget/most painfully obvious message/had the most cast die that year get the award.
Then again, that's the arts through and through, right?
(I'm a STEM postgrad, my brother's a literature postgrad, sparks *all* the time...)
Then again, that's the arts through and through, right?
(I'm a STEM postgrad, my brother's a literature postgrad, sparks *all* the time...)
Yeah, I haven't cared about the Academy Awards in over a decade. But, my family loves its annual Oscar pool and I hate to be a party pooper so...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VXAaxBdPNtE
I felt that was a fair compromise.
Happy Oscar Sunday everyone! Me? I think I'll do my taxes instead.
Andrew Eisen
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VXAaxBdPNtE
I felt that was a fair compromise.
Happy Oscar Sunday everyone! Me? I think I'll do my taxes instead.
Andrew Eisen
Ditto, this for me was the final straw in the academie's coffin was forest dump beating two of my personal best movies of all time, watching some brain dead moron luck his way thru life blindly in some overly cute optomisitc way was not anywhere near the best most thought provoking or most creative film out that year period.animehermit said:
But all of the "travesties" mentioned on here are exactly right also, goodfellas, driver, saving private ryan, are all much better films than the ones the old men in hollywood deemed safe enough or cute enough to bestow a award upon.
Nevermind the blatant lobbying for these awards by the different studios for their backed movies, which more often than not buy enough votes to get the safe hollywood choice, and when the academy is feeling they have to mix things up, then they pick some safe small picture that noone with half a pulse would want to sit through.
No the whole system is a joke, and i agree kermode awards or even rotten tomatoes are a much better yardstick to judge movies by than any crap hollywood wants to try and put out.
The only reason Shakespeare in Love won was because of its producers launching a smear campaign against Private Ryan. Then again it was a Weinstein film, so of course it was going to be utterly safe, predictable, and swiftly forgotten tripe known only for getting an award it didn't deserve.DressedInRags said:
I have not seen Goodfellas yet, as I have quite a bit of "great films" Netflix backlog to work through yet, but I have seen Awakenings [http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0099077/]. Dances With Wolves was the bigger movie, but Awakenings had better acting and more sincerity, and is better deserving of the award.animehermit said:
Also something I wish would get more and deserved attention: animated feature films. Now that the Best Picture nominees number ten instead of five, the Academy feels more comfortable nominating Up and Toy Story 3 (a year too late for the Academy to be in its comfort zone to include WALL-E among the Best Picture nominees), but I remember the 64th Academy Awards, where Beauty and the Beast was considered good enough to be included in the five-only group. It lost to The Silence of the Lambs. Someday I'll sit down and watch it (and probably also fellow-nominees JFK, The Prince Of Tides, and Bugsy for good measure) and try to find out why, but I have the feeling Anthony-Hopkins-plays-a-crazy-guy will fail to earn as much respect as I give to The Tale As Old As Time.
I present as counterpoint Gone With the Wind. All films, even those set in a different time period, are still subject to the time in which they are made. Gone With the Wind and the book it was based on were both part of an early-20th-Century cultural perception of romanticizing the American Civil War - a collective view of the conflict as the South's noble-but-ill-fated fight to the end and a way for America to say, "Ah yes, it was sad and dramatic, but it's all in the past now, and it really wasn't that bad." The film does not try to say much about the causes and effects of the Civil War itself, but primarily views it more like a natural disaster, inescapable and with almost no warning, through the eyes of the protagonist Scarlett O'Hara. Scarlett's need to survive comes not from an internal strength, but from pure self-absorption. This would make for an intriguing character study worthy of analysis through the years, except that Scarlett goes through no character growth until the last ten minutes of the film, and by this point, it's a marvel anyone still cares about her well-being.Therumancer said:
African-Americans in Gone With the Wind are happy, contented, mostly-invisible slaves before the War, and a dangerous, omnipresent, mostly-invisible menace after the War. Hattie McDaniel would win the Best Performance by an Actress in a Supporting Role Oscar and be the first African-American woman to do so, but her role was "Mammy", a character who was given no other name in the film and who embodies much of the "Mammy" stereotype that the African-American community abhors for more than a few good reasons. [Hattie McDaniel, talented actress with long career, wins Best Supporting Actress for playing a maid. Viola Davis, talented actress with long career, nominated for Best Actress for playing a maid. There's a whole other post somebody can write on how little/much the Academy has changed.]
By the time Ken Burns's documentary The Civil War came along in the 90's, American culture was embracing the viewpoint of, "The Civil War wasn't that bad. It was worse." In another fifty or so years, a feature film or TV documentary about or set in the Civil War will reflect the future's view of the conflict. The Academy does not strive for artistic survivability, as it were, for this only possible in hindsight. If the Academy really did have the ability honor the films that would "stand the test of time", the 1939 Best Picture wouldn't have been Gone With the Wind. It would have been The Wizard Of Oz.
What this man says. The Oscars, like most awards, are for recognising services to the Oscars. I'm sure it's wonderful for those that win them, but they always follow what is "needed" rather than what is "earned".kitz said:
Now the Razzies, they're worth following
