Avatar Golden Globe win mean an Oscar breakthrough for SF?
- Thread starter 23skidoo
- Start date
Except that Avatar was rubbish.
Sorry, someone had to say it.
That's ok. I'm sure there are people who think that Star Wars is rubbish too.
I think that mentality of theirs sucks, that only one sci-fi/fantasy film is needed to get a nod to represent their genre. Of course theyll probably do the same with animated films and comedies too.
Well, before the Golden Globes I was going to say that the battle was between Avatar and Precious. That completely changed when James Cameron won Best Director. I pegged Kathryn Bigelow to win for The Hurt Locker (and apparently so did Cameron) and then for Precious to win Best Picture for a drama. When Avatar won Best Picture, I threw away my score card.
I still think Precious has a good chance at winning, and is probably the underdog that could steal the Best Picture Oscar away from Avatar. This reminds me of the 2005 Oscars when everyone pegged Brokeback Mountain to win Best Picture. Ang Lee nabbed Best Director and then Crash won for Best Picture. The same could happen here. James Cameron could win Best Director, and Precious could win Best Picture. However I think the momentum is leaning towards Avatar at this point.
There's no chance in hell Crazy Heart will win Best Picture. I have not seen the film, but I think Up in the Air, The Hurt Locker and Inglourious Basterds all have bigger chances at winning Best Picture than Crazy Heart. I guess we'll know more when the nominations are announced.
I am happy for James Cameron, and all of the effort he and thousands of others put into Avatar, but I saw better films and certainly better sci-fi films last year. Up in the Air was just an extraordinary film, and I was so glad that co-writer Jason Reitman won for Best Screenplay at the Globes over Quentin Tarantino. The Hurt Locker was a taut suspense thriller. Moon, which won't get nominated, is more deserving than any of the aforementioned films in my opinion to win Best Picture over Avatar. Hell, I think District 9 also falls into this category, albeit slightly a bit further behind.
But, it doesn't matter, because Avatar is the frontrunner right now and my bet is that it'll win Best Picture.
I still think Precious has a good chance at winning, and is probably the underdog that could steal the Best Picture Oscar away from Avatar. This reminds me of the 2005 Oscars when everyone pegged Brokeback Mountain to win Best Picture. Ang Lee nabbed Best Director and then Crash won for Best Picture. The same could happen here. James Cameron could win Best Director, and Precious could win Best Picture. However I think the momentum is leaning towards Avatar at this point.
There's no chance in hell Crazy Heart will win Best Picture. I have not seen the film, but I think Up in the Air, The Hurt Locker and Inglourious Basterds all have bigger chances at winning Best Picture than Crazy Heart. I guess we'll know more when the nominations are announced.
I am happy for James Cameron, and all of the effort he and thousands of others put into Avatar, but I saw better films and certainly better sci-fi films last year. Up in the Air was just an extraordinary film, and I was so glad that co-writer Jason Reitman won for Best Screenplay at the Globes over Quentin Tarantino. The Hurt Locker was a taut suspense thriller. Moon, which won't get nominated, is more deserving than any of the aforementioned films in my opinion to win Best Picture over Avatar. Hell, I think District 9 also falls into this category, albeit slightly a bit further behind.
But, it doesn't matter, because Avatar is the frontrunner right now and my bet is that it'll win Best Picture.
JacksonArcher, I don't think Precious doesn't have a chance.
IMO There are only 4 real contenders for BP, and I'd rank their chances as follows:
1. The Hurt Locker
2. Avatar
...
3. Up in the Air
4. Inglorious Basterds
The rest are just also-rans... Happy to be nominated. (still a great achievement)
IMO There are only 4 real contenders for BP, and I'd rank their chances as follows:
1. The Hurt Locker
2. Avatar
...
3. Up in the Air
4. Inglorious Basterds
The rest are just also-rans... Happy to be nominated. (still a great achievement)
No. I think Avatar will win. But I won't be surprised if Precious does.
This sounds about right (well, I'm not as convinced about the big lacunae, but whatever.)
Not I. Avatar deserved it.
I don't think that Lord of the Rings movie winning really signalled a new era of sci-fi or even just genre movies getting more Oscar love. I think that movie won mostly because it was part of a trilogy that was so critically acclaimed as well as commercially successful for three years in a row, and therefore Oscar voters thought they oughta give the people behind those movies something out of respect for all their hard work and success.
I don't think "The Dark Knight" was a better movie than "Slumdog Millionaire", but I do think it definitely deserved a best picture nomination, especially in a world where a Lord of the Rings movie could get one, and the fact that it didn't get one just proves that the Oscar voters are still snobs who are always going to pick sentimental stories and/or Oscar bait melodrama over genre flicks, no matter how superior they may be.
If anyone has the clout to win for a sci-fi movie, however, it's Cameron. "The Hurt Locker" sounds more much more original, uncommercial, and mature than "Avatar". This is probably why it'll lose, but I can envision it winning and me being pleasantly surprised. 10 nominations means some genre flicks should get nominations, but I can't see any winning.
I don't think "The Dark Knight" was a better movie than "Slumdog Millionaire", but I do think it definitely deserved a best picture nomination, especially in a world where a Lord of the Rings movie could get one, and the fact that it didn't get one just proves that the Oscar voters are still snobs who are always going to pick sentimental stories and/or Oscar bait melodrama over genre flicks, no matter how superior they may be.
If anyone has the clout to win for a sci-fi movie, however, it's Cameron. "The Hurt Locker" sounds more much more original, uncommercial, and mature than "Avatar". This is probably why it'll lose, but I can envision it winning and me being pleasantly surprised. 10 nominations means some genre flicks should get nominations, but I can't see any winning.
Oh come on, are we going to enter a scifi/fantasy debate? Personally I think Avatar is more fantasy than anything, and to say that it could make films of that genre get recognised as serious award winners is not taking LotR into account. That was the one that got the best movie award at the Oscars first.
And..."eh"? What's not to understand? My phrasing isn't that mysterious. Jesus.
ROTK is skiffy, Avatar is skiffy - it's all the same thing. The real difference is that Avatar doesn't have a base of popular enthusiasm and general social familiarity built over a period of decades as LOTR did - the trilogy is almost respectable literature to lots of folks who don't otherwise read scifantasy. 
Point taken, and therefore I stand corrected. Tolkien's main interest lay in historical philology anyway.
I don't think Precious has much of a shot at winning Best Picture. Same goes for Inglorious Basterds. The winner is highly likely to be one of three films: The Hurt Locker, Up in the Air, or Avatar - in that order of likelihood. Anything else would be a major upset.
Really? Precious seemed to be getting a lot of critical acclaim and support up until the Golden Globes. I didn't really see The Hurt Locker or Up in the Air as real contenders, and still don't, even though both are terrific films and I would love to see either win Best Picture at the Oscars. I don't think either have a chance before Avatar, though.
