Oscars 2014

[NightOfTheLiving_Sam]

Interesting line up they have for this year. Who knows what will happen this year, I never get upset by the winning's really. They're just interesting to watch. Everyone on this list has interesting plot stories and did a lot of work. Believe too many people get overally upset by who win's and who doesn't. To me it's simply an Hollywood event. Everyone's a winner in my eyes; but that's just my opinion. The movie "Her" though does seem very odd to me though and I was never was interested in seeing the movie when I saw the trailer.

[ferretchucker]

Originally Posted by Sculpt

I know what you mean, Ferret. Film enjoyment, like all art enjoyment, is intrinsically a subjective endeavor. So naturally critiques, ratings and awards are also intrinsically controversial. I know you know I'm stating the obvious. But look at it this way, it's a way to discuss and appreciate the work and the artists. I think feeling hurt by a perceived "snub" for an award is form of envy.

Hmm... thinking about it, disagreeing with a rating or critique really need not involve any hurt/nagative feelings; since it's obvious we all have different opinions. Actually feeling hurt/angry/etc about a poor rating or critique... the bad feeling is probably envy for the praise of acknowledging one's own good taste. Some of us like to say it's loyalty to the art/artist, but that might be a masking of feelings, especially if the artist isn't around to hear it. But I digress.

You may be right about personal film industry profits being too personally tied to the Oscars. I don't know enough about it myself. I know film industry artists vote. And film sales get a boost by receiving an award; and films going for that tend to be released just before the Globe/Oscar consideration. There's a lot going on. I think of any names off hand, but I have heard of a many nominations for films that were early in the year. Not sure about winners though.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that critcism of art per se is bad. Just that when Roeper or Kermode grade a film it is understood that THEY are grading it. It's just like having a very well informed friend give you their opinion.

The Academy, however, is - to the average person - essentially an abstract entity. And the way it, presents itself and is presented, it is seen as an almost omnipotent and objective figure.

And likewise, they're not saying what's good or bad, but what is the BEST. But take best cinematography for example. What makes something the best? Most inventive? Most ambitious? That which imparts the most meaning? In Classical Hollywood style the best would be the least notable for it's invisbility. It differs in all cultures, genres, times etc. A written review can explain WHY something is GOOD. But to just reduce the entire years output into one single best is ridiculous.

[urgeok2]

Personally, I think the Oscars are an annual freak show where regular folk sit at home watching, in the hopes that they'll see famous people embarrass themselves by doing or saying something inappropriate or stupid so they can talk about it on facebook the next day.

the same way other people watch car races for the crashes and hockey for the fights.

We all know art is subjective so it usually ends up being a popularity contest

[ferretchucker]

Originally Posted by urgeok2

Personally, I think the Oscars are an annual freak show where regular folk sit at home watching, in the hopes that they'll see famous people embarrass themselves by doing or saying something inappropriate or stupid so they can talk about it on facebook the next day.

the same way other people watch car races for the crashes and hockey for the fights.

We all know art is subjective so it usually ends up being a popularity contest

Anne Hathaway's train-wreck speeches definitely felt like watching a Victorian freak show...

[Sculpt]

Originally Posted by ferretchucker

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that criticism of art per se is bad. Just that when Roeper or Kermode grade a film it is understood that THEY are grading it. It's just like having a very well informed friend give you their opinion.

The Academy, however, is - to the average person - essentially an abstract entity. And the way it, presents itself and is presented, it is seen as an almost omnipotent and objective figure.

And likewise, they're not saying what's good or bad, but what is the BEST. But take best cinematography for example. What makes something the best? Most inventive? Most ambitious? That which imparts the most meaning? In Classical Hollywood style the best would be the least notable for it's invisibility. It differs in all cultures, genres, times etc. A written review can explain WHY something is GOOD. But to just reduce the entire years output into one single best is ridiculous.

Ya, I know what you mean. I look at it as more of reminiscing about the films of the year. The nominations grab memorable moments and films. And we just say, yeah, that was meaningful.

So which Best Picture Winner years bothered you the most? These are some that bugged me:

For 1981 Chariots of Fire won best picture over Reds, On Golden Pond and Raider of the Lost Ark (all of which were much better). Bogus. And Atlantic City was nominated for best picture. That film sucked -- a dispicable film about dispicable people, without meaning.

[The Villain]

Damn am i the only one who likes watching these things? To me it doesn't really mean anything, it's just for fun and entertainment. I also like seeing movies that i enjoyed win the awards which is why i usually try and watch all the nominated movies each year.

So far i've seen Gravity, American Hustle and 12 Years a Slave. My pick to win so far would be Gravity, an amazing movie that blew me away.

I shared my feelings for American Hustle on here before and as for 12 Years a Slave, it was ok but it didn't impress me or wow me like a Best Picture movie should. The acting was great and i think Michael Fassbender and Chiwetel Ejiofor have a good chance of winning their respective awards but the movie didn't move me in the way that a movie like that should. It was long, slow, and a lot of the scenes fell flat with me. It was ok but nothing special.

[roshiq]

Damn! And again I haven't seen a single nominated film of this year so far

[Angra]

Originally Posted by Angra

"Gravity" 9/10

Best picture, best director, best visual effects, best cinematography. And then some.

^^

[neverending]

Gravity will not win any of the big 6, and I'm not making any comment on the quality of the film- just on its chances of winning one of the top 6 awards.

[Angra]

Originally Posted by neverending

Gravity will not win any of the big 6, and I'm not making any comment on the quality of the film- just on its chances of winning one of the top 6 awards.

It's not so much a prediction as it is my personal opinion/wish.

But you're probably right. Gravity is not based on a true story.