Award archives...

News, People and Events, including Awards, Festivals and Tributes
Post Reply
User avatar
AV Founder
AV Founder
Posts: 20700
Joined: October 22nd, 2004
Location: London, UK

Post by Ben » February 6th, 2009, 5:27 pm

So...basically as I was trying to say, if bashir had been in a top five, it wouldn't have won. Therefore, even at three nominations, the bottom two (Bashir and Horton) would have been least voted on.

I know it's still "nice" for those films to be recognised, but again since there are so few animated films in the marketplace, having more of a competition means the films that are nominated deserve their kudos. After all, what would be the point in nominating all the major releases and then just picking one?

Having three entries means a clear decision process has already taken place and that these three <I>really</I> deserve their spots. As you say, this is the downside of a particularly good year...Shark Tale certainly doesn't belong in that category, which is why I would prefer three strong, deserving contenders.

:)

User avatar
AV Founder
AV Founder
Posts: 20700
Joined: October 22nd, 2004
Location: London, UK

Post by Ben » February 7th, 2009, 5:11 pm

The Hollywood Reporter is running a decent series on the nominees this year.

Profile Of Ed Catmull:
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/con ... 0effba8fe9

Animated Shorts:
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/con ... 0806565c4e

User avatar
AV Founder
AV Founder
Posts: 20700
Joined: October 22nd, 2004
Location: London, UK

Post by Ben » February 12th, 2009, 7:25 am

More on THR's series on the nominees.

Animated Features:
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/con ... 0a2d839fea

Banned
Banned
Posts: 10
Joined: February 14th, 2009
Location: San Jose California

Post by aaron45 » February 16th, 2009, 5:18 am

American_dog_2008 wrote:Good luck Bolt!
I totally agree! :P
From Mittens in the movie Bolt....
Nah, Don`t worry about it being a regular dog is like the greatest gig in the world, Okay?

AV Founder
AV Founder
Posts: 7455
Joined: October 16th, 2004
Contact:

Oscar suggestions

Post by James » February 23rd, 2009, 12:13 pm

There's been a lot of talk about fixing the Oscars lately. I thought it might be fun to hear ideas from us regular people!

I'll start off with this Time article that has a really interesting idea: make the vote tallies public during the broadcast.

http://www.time.com/time/arts/article/0 ... ml?cnn=yes

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 415
Joined: October 22nd, 2004

Post by PatrickvD » February 23rd, 2009, 5:45 pm

I actually don't want to know the vote tallies.

It'll only expose politics and such. I loved last night's show. It was the best in years. How were the ratings anyway?

User avatar
AV Founder
AV Founder
Posts: 20700
Joined: October 22nd, 2004
Location: London, UK

Post by Ben » February 23rd, 2009, 6:59 pm


AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 875
Joined: July 9th, 2008
Location: Australia

Post by Bill1978 » February 24th, 2009, 3:32 am

I don't think the OSCARS really need fixing. I think the main issues affecting the OSCARS are really out of their control. It's more to do with the studios.

Firstly, I think the movie studios need to rethink their movie practices. Over the past 5 years the gap between popular movies and critically loved movies has widened. So studios need to go back to the drawing board and create more movies like Titanic/Braveheart/Shakespeare In Love. Movies that both critics AND the public like in massive numbers.

Now you could begin to argue that WALL-E and The Dark Knight fits the bill and that brings up my second suggestion. I understand that studios are in it for the money but these days it is just about the summer box office. I would love to visit an alternate reality where WALL-E and The Dark Knight were released in November. I have a sneaky suspicion that at least one would have got a Best Picture Nod. I mean it helped Bolt beat Horton Hears A Who/Waltz With Bashir to a surprise Animation Nod. I believe that that the holiday season can still bring in the dough, so why not release your intelligent blockbuster in November instead.

Thirdly I believe there is a link between Original Song and the decline in ratings. For this I want you to think back to the last true movie song that dominated charts. By this I want you to honestly think about the last movie song that when you hear it, you instantly think of the movie it was from. The 90s was filled with them - all the Disney hits, My Heart Will Go On, I Don't Want To Miss A Thing, There You'll Be there are heaps and they were all nominated for an OSCAR. These days that category is very weak. And maybe I'm in the minority but I love seeing the songs performed in the ceremony. So maybe if the studios put more thought into their song choices you'll see the audience return. The song category seems to be about trying to either recognise the current trend in music (Lose Yourself, It's Hard To Be A Pimp), hop on a treand (I Need To Wake Up) or embrace diversity (On The Other Side Of The River, Jai Ho). Give me songs that have lyrics written to the main theme and get them on the radio NOW!!

Fourthly, I think the OSCARS suffer from Awards season overkill. As a kid the only other Award Show I knew about was the Golden Globes, while they were a good indicator there were still lots of cool surprises especially for things like Costune Design, Sound Editing that The Golden Globes don't cover. These days with all the guilds holding awards and every critic group holding awards, by the time the OSCARS arrive we pretty much can predict the way the show will go. Now I know this can't be changed, but sometimes I wished I loved in a cave and knew nothing about Award seasons, just so it's exciting for me.

User avatar
AV Founder
AV Founder
Posts: 20700
Joined: October 22nd, 2004
Location: London, UK

Post by Ben » February 24th, 2009, 9:15 am

One question: how come "Oscars" seems to warrant capitals every time you mentioned it? It's not an acronym (like WALL-E or, indeed, AMPAS). :)


On the topic: I do quite like how the Oscars bring an end - for the most part - to the heated awards season...we get all this build up and the inevitable predictability but then in one glorious (or not so glorious this year) evening it all comes to end with the biggest bash of them all.

It's like whatever came before is almost wiped out by this ultimate final event: for instance, in years to come no-one will care that Mickey Rourke was a sweep at every other Supporting Actor prize; all that will matter is Sean Penn's Oscar win.

That's not exactly "fair", but it's a way that the Oscars make themselves the definitive say so on the matter, for good or bad, right or wrong.

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 39
Joined: February 7th, 2007

Post by surfnspy » February 24th, 2009, 11:58 am

The problem with the AA show is that it is just too long. All those montages? What's the point? Think how interesting the show would be if it ran 90 minutes.

BUT the show is STILL second only to the Superbowl in terms of ratings. Which means big ad sales. SO if you ran a studio, wouldn't you want to sell ads with big rates for a show that ran as long as possible? Thus, the four hour block of time devoted to the show. Thus, dance numbers, themed montages and mindless patter.

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 1698
Joined: December 16th, 2004
Location: Burbank, Calif.

Re: Oscar suggestions

Post by droosan » February 24th, 2009, 1:49 pm

James wrote:There's been a lot of talk about fixing the Oscars lately.
Heck, people have been saying the Oscars are 'fixed' for years!

:lol:

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 875
Joined: July 9th, 2008
Location: Australia

Post by Bill1978 » February 24th, 2009, 4:37 pm

Ben wrote:One question: how come "Oscars" seems to warrant capitals every time you mentioned it? It's not an acronym (like WALL-E or, indeed, AMPAS). :)
I would like to blame advertising for my stupidity. Every time there is anything in a print ad, tv ad or internet ad, it's spelt with capital letters. Doesn't matter that every word in the ad has capital letters, my brain has just been taught to put it in capital letters. LOL Thank you though for the re-educating ;-)


surfnspy wrote:The problem with the AA show is that it is just too long. All those montages? What's the point? Think how interesting the show would be if it ran 90 minutes.
That's a major gripe that I actually have. They have endless montages but try to reduce the songs into a 3 minute medley. Montages can be nice but when you actually have 3-5 songs that are actually part of the award process, why not use them as the entertainment to break up the awards. It would make sense to me.

User avatar
AV Founder
AV Founder
Posts: 20700
Joined: October 22nd, 2004
Location: London, UK

Post by Ben » February 24th, 2009, 7:49 pm

Yep, totally agreed. :)

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 442
Joined: November 22nd, 2006
Location: Boston, MA

Post by Rodney » February 25th, 2009, 11:32 pm

Hmm...I think that Bill has a point about blockbusters being released in the summer. However, I think there's another issue at hand. I think TV is partially to blame for the type of movies we are getting from Hollywood. Think of how popular some crime movies would be if we didn't have a dozen great crime TV shows. Why pay for something that is playing constantly on regular network TV? The same applies to most dramas. People right now really want to see things they are not getting on TV. This, however, doesn't really apply to the Oscars where they're still voting for similar films. There's a sort of disconnect, but that's not really their fault. Public tastes have just shifted, and it's probably cyclical.

As for the ceremony, I don't mind the montages and the musical numbers. I think they are pretty entertaining in a nostalgic sort of way. I don't mind the length of the show. I always felt like watching the Oscars was sort of a privilege. After all, they don't NEED to televise the event. It would continue to happened even if it wasn't on TV. The reason it's on TV is that people, in general, actually want to watch what happens. The ceremony existed before TV, after all. I do agree with you guys on the nominated songs though. I prefer it when they're performed (and by their original performers if possible).

As for my tastes, I usually agree with whoever wins the Oscar (the movies are usually on my top ten list for the year) and I tend to agree with most nominations (this year I loved 2 out of the 5 films and really enjoyed 2 others).

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 875
Joined: July 9th, 2008
Location: Australia

Post by Bill1978 » February 26th, 2009, 5:20 am

Don't get me wrong, I quite enjoy the montages and extra musical numbers as well. In fact I loved Hugh's opening number and didn't mind the musical number - I could have done without Beyonce for that one. But too often they try to justifying the cutting of the nominated songs to just snippets by claiming they are trying to reduce the length of the show. I personally think the songs should take precedent over a montage or a made up musical sequence.

You make a very valid point about TV Rodney, I hadn't thought of that and I do think it plays a role in the success of movies these days. I know my flatmate and I will often say - oh that movie looks good but we'll wait for video as you don't need a big screen to really enjoy it. Which is probably us subconsciously thinking that it just looks like a great episode of our favourite drama/comedy.

Post Reply