startrekrcks
Fleet Captain
It's never going to win
Star Trek Receives Four Oscar Noms...all Technical Awards
- Thread starter MvRojo
- Start date
- Status
I feel sorry for you
Oh really? Why?
Are these your words? I think he was asking you personally.
Yes, they are my words.
I'm certainly happy that a 'Star Trek' movie is receiving any Oscar nomination, let alone four. The hard-working crews in those areas deserve them. I'm also not surprised that it didn't receive a Best Picture nomination - there were worthier films in that area.
That being said, Best Picture nominations are not normally judged against the criteria of logic, scientific accuracy, or consistency. They seem to be judged on a combination of studio lobbying, critical acclaim, popular awareness and box office. 'Star Trek' excelled in the last three areas but I'm not sure how much studio lobbying was done.
RT.
That being said, Best Picture nominations are not normally judged against the criteria of logic, scientific accuracy, or consistency. They seem to be judged on a combination of studio lobbying, critical acclaim, popular awareness and box office. 'Star Trek' excelled in the last three areas but I'm not sure how much studio lobbying was done.
RT.
The awards process is hugely flawed, and the reason it has been so publicly boycotted by recipients who held it in contempt.
As for nuTrek, I can generally accept weak writing, silly McGuffins, melodramatic presentation, militarism, scientific ignorance, or any of the many other failures in this film. But when they are all in the same movie, it's simply too much...for me.
On another thread, the distinction between significant and insignificant plot holes and other defects is mentioned - the key seems to lie in how we decide whether something is significant. I think the most reliable method takes advantage of both the "popular consensus", of people focused on the best "logical and scientific" analysis.
Films winning Best Picture because they had the most people working on them is deceptive false advertising as far as many people are concerned, and I would agree. At the very least "Industry's Most Popular" would at least seem a bit accurate.
As for nuTrek, I can generally accept weak writing, silly McGuffins, melodramatic presentation, militarism, scientific ignorance, or any of the many other failures in this film. But when they are all in the same movie, it's simply too much...for me.
On another thread, the distinction between significant and insignificant plot holes and other defects is mentioned - the key seems to lie in how we decide whether something is significant. I think the most reliable method takes advantage of both the "popular consensus", of people focused on the best "logical and scientific" analysis.
Films winning Best Picture because they had the most people working on them is deceptive false advertising as far as many people are concerned, and I would agree. At the very least "Industry's Most Popular" would at least seem a bit accurate.
Last edited:
Have there been films winning awards based on the number of people working on them? I wasn't aware of that and would agree that it's a silly criteria. The Oscars are entertaining to watch but I gave up long ago any pretense of trying to understand its process.
RT.
- Status
Similar threads
