RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 145,372
Posts: 5,724,038
Members: 25,782
Currently online: 388
Newest member: GregroxMun

TrekToday headlines

Star Trek Uniform Laptop Bag And Fanny Pack
By: T'Bonz on May 26

Star Trek: The Fifty Year Mission
By: T'Bonz on May 26

Where No Garden Gnome Has Gone Before
By: T'Bonz on May 22

Scotland Yard Trekkie Fear
By: T'Bonz on May 22

Koenig Joins Captain Pike Project
By: T'Bonz on May 22

Retro Review: Ex Post Facto
By: Michelle on May 22

Smallwood: Creating The Xindi
By: T'Bonz on May 21

Greenwood Joins O.J. Simpson Series
By: T'Bonz on May 21

The USS Enterprise Building
By: T'Bonz on May 20

Wheaton Guests On Mission Log Podcast
By: T'Bonz on May 20


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Entertainment & Interests > TV & Media

TV & Media Non-Trek television, movies, books, music, etc.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old March 8 2010, 11:49 AM   #676
firehawk12
Fleet Admiral
 
firehawk12's Avatar
 
Location: EXILE + ATTON = GUUUUUUSH!!!! (pic by aimo)
Re: The 82nd Annual Academy Awards - discussion thread

Really, Up should have won and leave it at that.
__________________
The best reason to watch Curling:
Johnson Sisters!

"How do you trust a nation that's invented Karate? They're standing there in their pajamas... then they kick you in the balls!"
firehawk12 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 8 2010, 11:50 AM   #677
Roger Wilco
Admiral
 
Roger Wilco's Avatar
 
Re: The 82nd Annual Academy Awards - discussion thread

Hurt Locker is hardly an "art film". I thought it's primary attribute was "bland".
And saying it's the best movie about the Iraq war is about as meaningful as "funniest Saw movie".

I "stole" it sometime last summer I think, watched it and thought it's utterly unremarkable.
__________________
Don't be a douche.
Roger Wilco is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 8 2010, 01:05 PM   #678
Kelso
Vice Admiral
 
Kelso's Avatar
 
Location: On the destruct button until the last minute!
View Kelso's Twitter Profile
Re: The 82nd Annual Academy Awards - discussion thread

I liked The Hurt Locker, so I have no problem with it winning.

But Sandra Bullock won for The Blind Side? WTF? That movie was awful.
Kelso is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 8 2010, 01:26 PM   #679
ElimParra
Fleet Admiral
 
Location: Newcastle, Australia
Re: The 82nd Annual Academy Awards - discussion thread

It's rather interesting watching the ceremony again. I'm looking forward to see The Hurt Locker tomorrow.
ElimParra is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 8 2010, 06:27 PM   #680
777
Lieutenant Commander
 
Location: Milky Way Galaxy
Re: The 82nd Annual Academy Awards - discussion thread

No offense meant to anyone, it is my own personal preference.

I find "real life" war flicks boring. if I want to see war or other "current event" stuff, i can turn on the news. I won't bother seeing it even when it comes around on TV.

OdoWanKenobi wrote: View Post
777 wrote: View Post
How predictable....some boring arthouse dreck that won't be remembered in a year's time wins best picture...*yawn*
You have just revealed that you didn't see The Hurt Locker. It was a riveting, edge-of-your-seat action film.
777 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 8 2010, 06:33 PM   #681
777
Lieutenant Commander
 
Location: Milky Way Galaxy
Re: The 82nd Annual Academy Awards - discussion thread

I've read up enough on it to know this film is not remotely my cup of tea. But hell, given the variety of films that could have gotten best picture this year, they played it safe and went with the predictable.

I am *!$%* p***ed off over this. If you like it, great, and I hope i have not upset anyone over my thoughts.

Axiom wrote: View Post
777 wrote: View Post
How predictable....some boring arthouse dreck that won't be remembered in a year's time wins best picture...*yawn*
It's obvious you haven't even seen the trailer, as the trailer for The Hurt Locker is action packed. Hell, the posters used for the movie has soldiers, images of war and explosions on it. There isn't a drop of "Art House" in this entire movie. So, since you're yawning, maybe you shouldn't have slept through all of those details before making a comment that shows a lack of understanding about the contents of the movie you just spoke of with great disdain.
777 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 8 2010, 06:40 PM   #682
Nick Ryder
Fleet Captain
 
Nick Ryder's Avatar
 
Location: Milwaukee, WI Da Brew City
Re: The 82nd Annual Academy Awards - discussion thread

I won't deny that Hurt Locker sounds like a good film, but really... its not exactly groundbreaking or particularly special. Its another war film. And honestly I think that's all it will ever be... another Iraqi/Afghanistan war film. In 10 years no one will care about the Hurt Locker. It'll just be another one of those films that people go "oh yeah it won Academy Award for Best something or other... " and they'll probably confuse it with Saving Private Ryan or Blackhawk Down or one of the Matt Damon films.

I'm sure it's good as far as war films go, but... when you think about some of the films we got 2009... and it was "really" the Best Film? I mean Slumdog winning was sorta kinda one of those "okay the little film that could." but honestly when I think of the Best Picture category I think of movies that really stand out, that really grab you by the balls. Something people will talk about for a long long time.

As for the technical awards... why? I mean... why? When its paired up next to stuff like Avatar or Star Trek and a war film gets best mixing or editing or something... WHY? Gee like we haven't heard explosions and war sounds in a movie before. But all the hard work guys like Ben Burtt and whoever did Avatar's stuff put into the movies, making sounds for things that don't exist in real life... and they're snubbed. But oh hey let's give it to the guys who mixed sounds that exist in real life and anyone with a good recording package can create... lets give it to them. They're the 'true artists'.

Bah
__________________
"Here you are in the club with your bottle full of Bud, you got grillz you got bling, but playa you don't know a thing..." Alice Cooper - Disco Bloodbath Boogie Fever
Nick Ryder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 8 2010, 06:53 PM   #683
Hermiod
Admiral
 
Hermiod's Avatar
 
Re: The 82nd Annual Academy Awards - discussion thread

^Burtt is one of the reasons why I think Star Wars should have beaten Annie Hall.

George Lucas had a very talented, intelligent and creative group of people working for him on that movie that invented new technologies and vastly improved on existing ones, changing the way movies are made.
Hermiod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 8 2010, 07:51 PM   #684
23skidoo
Admiral
 
Location: Fifth Circle of Hell
Re: The 82nd Annual Academy Awards - discussion thread

Nick Ryder wrote: View Post
I won't deny that Hurt Locker sounds like a good film, but really... its not exactly groundbreaking or particularly special. Its another war film.
Fair enough, but the Oscars are not intended to honor "groundbreaking" films. Otherwise, to be honest, most of the winners would indeed be art house films no one has ever seen because most of the innovation goes on in that venue.

The Oscars (in theory - because anything with a voting system is a popularity contest to a degree) are supposed to honor excellence in either a particular field, or a "whole enchilada" situation for Best Picture. "It's another war film". Perhaps, but it may have been another war film with outstanding ensemble performances, great lines of dialogue, emotional impact, originality (hey, anyone who thinks Avatar is original...), pretty pictures, good costumes, etc. The fact it's just another war film -- frankly a lot of people myself included consider Avatar to be just another SF film, albeit one with more pretty pictures than the average.

And honestly I think that's all it will ever be... another Iraqi/Afghanistan war film. In 10 years no one will care about the Hurt Locker. It'll just be another one of those films that people go "oh yeah it won Academy Award for Best something or other... " and they'll probably confuse it with Saving Private Ryan or Blackhawk Down or one of the Matt Damon films.
If you really think Saving Private Ryan is being mistaken for Blackhawk Down, clearly the genre is of no interest. The same could be said for Annie Hall, It Happened One Night, Marty, Chicago and the dozens of Best Picture winners who, to somebody, is "just another" comedy, drama, musical, etc...*

As for the technical awards... why? I mean... why? When its paired up next to stuff like Avatar or Star Trek and a war film gets best mixing or editing or something... WHY? Gee like we haven't heard explosions and war sounds in a movie before. But all the hard work guys like Ben Burtt and whoever did Avatar's stuff put into the movies, making sounds for things that don't exist in real life... and they're snubbed. But oh hey let's give it to the guys who mixed sounds that exist in real life and anyone with a good recording package can create... lets give it to them. They're the 'true artists'.
Clearly spoken by somebody who is not in the industry and who does not understand what goes into sound and editing and all of that. I'm not in the industry either, and occasionally I do wonder why you'll see Oscars for, say, best costumes given to films in which everyone wears suits and ties or cowboy outfits that look like they were bought off the rack at Wal-Mart. Or make-up for some unremarkable modern-day drama. What we don't know is that the people behind Hurt Locker's sound, say, might have gone beyond the call of duty to create the sound scape, and that an educated ear listening to the sound mix might go "holy s*it!" and just go "meh" to something like Avatar or Star Trek. To say that one group of people are "true artists" and one group is not is like someone trying to argue that Da Vinci was a true artist and Picasso was not. And vice versa.

The fact is, Avatar may be the biggest movie in history. But that does not make it the best movie in history, or even the best movie of 2009. If you feel box office is a 100% accurate arbiter of a film's quality, then you have to take into account the fact that The Tooth Fairy last I heard was still in the Top 10 nearly 2 months after it was released...

Alex

* I know Saving Private Ryan didn't win Best Picture. A comedy, Shakespeare in Love did. I'm sure someone griped about Shakespeare being "just another comedy", too.

Last edited by 23skidoo; March 8 2010 at 08:08 PM.
23skidoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 8 2010, 08:47 PM   #685
Admiral Buzzkill
Fleet Admiral
 
Re: The 82nd Annual Academy Awards - discussion thread

Nick Ryder wrote: View Post
its not exactly groundbreaking or particularly special.
Which makes it a pretty typical "Best Picture" nominee. What's your point?
Admiral Buzzkill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 8 2010, 08:49 PM   #686
Admiral Buzzkill
Fleet Admiral
 
Re: The 82nd Annual Academy Awards - discussion thread

firehawk12 wrote: View Post
I still find it awesome that Bigelow has basically turned her career around with one movie. That's just insane.
Yeah. Cool.
Admiral Buzzkill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 8 2010, 09:12 PM   #687
Admiral Buzzkill
Fleet Admiral
 
Re: The 82nd Annual Academy Awards - discussion thread

TIME has a cute, (somewhat) tongue-in-cheek analysis of how this Best Picture stuff works:

Remember, to win Best Picture you don't have to make the best picture; you have to make the picture that appeals to the voters, who are older, politically liberal and artistically conservative.
.
.
.
For the Oscar voters, who are at the senior end of the demographic spectrum from the mass audience, which most movies are made for, the most convenient way to see the nominated films is on screeners at home, where The Hurt Locker plays just fine. A Lourdes miracle would be needed for the Academy geriatrics to throw away their walkers and actually go to a theater — the only place Avatar can be appreciated in all its 21st century splendor. Filmmakers rushing to the 3-D format had better learn to be satisfied with the boodle they earn at the box office and not expect to win Oscars for a project that doesn't look like an HBO movie.
.
.
.
...the membership has shown a fondness for small dramas with an obvious social message and a prejudice against gigantic science-fiction pictures that use pioneering techniques to create a compelling new world — albeit with their own obvious social message. Avatar is every bit as political as The Hurt Locker in its eco-friendly theme, and much more boldly anti-military: by the end of the movie, viewers are meant to be cheering for the deaths of the U.S. soldiers trying to occupy Pandora. It didn't help. The Oscar voters saw Avatar (if they did watch it) as just another genre film.
.
.
.
Not to generalize about old people, like the typical Academy member, but every one of them is resistant to change or novelty. Anything new in movies seems less like progress and more like a renunciation of the artistic standards they were nurtured on. Consider that in 1942, the Academy gave its top awards, Best Picture and Director, to John Ford's How Green Was My Valley, a poignant evocation of a Welsh mining town. Fine, honorable, fully worthy. The film it beat: Citizen Kane...Thus the Academy blew its chance to give due homage to what is still considered the greatest American movie.
Admiral Buzzkill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 8 2010, 09:38 PM   #688
Too Much Fun
Commodore
 
Too Much Fun's Avatar
 
Re: The 82nd Annual Academy Awards - discussion thread

It's weird to see Sandra Bullock win an Oscar. I had a huge crush on her as a kid, ever since "The Net", which I saw on a birthday when it came out in 1995. Then I looked back at her previous two films "Demolition Man" and "Speed" and the crush became even stronger.

I went on to watch every single movie she made from 1996-2004, except "Gun Shy", "Murder By Numbers" and "Divine Secrets of the Ya Ya Sisterhood". Starting with "Speed 2" in 1997, most of the movies she was in were either mediocre or terrible, but I kept watching them anyway, because she was my childhood celebrity crush and I felt obligated to. I stopped going out of my way to see her flicks when I stopped being a teenager in 2003.

Her output since 2005 has seemed to maintain her streak of mediocre flicks. I once complained about it on another message board saying it's a shame that someone so beautiful with such a great screen presence is wasting her career on junk. People told me, "Well, I doubt she cares if her movies suck...she's probably laughing all the way to the bank".

She became a poster girl of sorts for crappy 'romantic comedies' (I just heard a line on "How I Met Your Mother" where a character says the proof that he knows how to endure the rigors of marriage is in the fact that he's learned how to sit through Sandra Bullock movies), and now she's won a best actress Oscar.

I guess it's like with Julia Roberts. She was kind of "America's Sweetheart", who people had become comfortable seeing in lowbrow 'romantic comedies', then she acts in a movie with a serious story and puts on a southern accent and they give her the award basically for all the years of charming them in vanilla movies. So I have mixed feelings about it.

It's cool that an actress I was infatuated with in my youth has come this far, but it really looks like she won a popularity contest more than anything else. Oh well, at least her speech was nice. Much better than Lebowski's disappointingly dull one. I was ecstatic that THE DUDE won, but it's too bad he had nothing touching, insightful, or funny to say.
Too Much Fun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 8 2010, 09:43 PM   #689
RobertScorpio
Pariah
 
Location: San Diego
Re: The 82nd Annual Academy Awards - discussion thread

Too Much Fun wrote: View Post
It's weird to see Sandra Bullock win an Oscar. I had a huge crush on her as a kid, ever since "The Net", which I saw on a birthday when it came out in 1995. Then I looked back at her previous two films "Demolition Man" and "Speed" and the crush became even stronger.

I went on to watch every single movie she made from 1996-2004, except "Gun Shy", "Murder By Numbers" and "Divine Secrets of the Ya Ya Sisterhood". Starting with "Speed 2" in 1997, most of the movies she was in were either mediocre or terrible, but I kept watching them anyway, because she was my childhood celebrity crush and I felt obligated to. I stopped going out of my way to see her flicks when I stopped being a teenager in 2003.

Her output since 2005 has seemed to maintain her streak of mediocre flicks. I once complained about it on another message board saying it's a shame that someone so beautiful with such a great screen presence is wasting her career on junk. People told me, "Well, I doubt she cares if her movies suck...she's probably laughing all the way to the bank".

She became a poster girl of sorts for crappy 'romantic comedies' (I just heard a line on "How I Met Your Mother" where a character says the proof that he knows how to endure the rigors of marriage is in the fact that he's learned how to sit through Sandra Bullock movies), and now she's won a best actress Oscar.

I guess it's like with Julia Roberts. She was kind of "America's Sweetheart", who people had become comfortable seeing in lowbrow 'romantic comedies', then she acts in a movie with a serious story and puts on a southern accent and they give her the award basically for all the years of charming them in vanilla movies. So I have mixed feelings about it.

It's cool that an actress I was infatuated with in my youth has come this far, but it really looks like she won a popularity contest more than anything else. Oh well, at least her speech was nice. Much better than Lebowski's disappointingly dull one. I was ecstatic that THE DUDE won, but it's too bad he had nothing touching, insightful, or funny to say.
I like Jeff Bridge's acceptence speech. I think he did just fine, and I liked how he dedicated it to his mother/father. Bridges is a hold over from another time, so I am glad he won; finally.

Rob
RobertScorpio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 8 2010, 09:49 PM   #690
Too Much Fun
Commodore
 
Too Much Fun's Avatar
 
Re: The 82nd Annual Academy Awards - discussion thread

Yeah, I'm glad he won too. I actually just saw his debut "The Last Picture Show" last year and it was one of the best movies I saw that whole year. I also loved his work in "Starman" (one of my favourite sci-fi movies) and the underrated "Tron", which I hope is discovered by more people now that its sequel is on the way. I suppose my post makes it sound like I don't know much about Bridges besides his iconic 1998 role, but it's my familiarity with his whole career that partially influenced my disappointment with how little he had to say.

I just think these speeches where people just rattle off a bunch of names have got to go. I read a news story that the Oscars were going to save that for a backstage camera and encourage actors to give speeches with more meat than ones that are mostly just thanking names when they're on stage. What happened to that?
Too Much Fun is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
academy awards, oscars

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:29 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.