OneEightZero
aka ThreeOneFour
MiamiWesker said:Not the aliens, on Wikus.
Um... the aliens were CG. Weta fooled you. ^_^
MiamiWesker said:Not the aliens, on Wikus.
He's obviously too cool for the internet.harSon said:A lot of people? Go to any sports related thread on this forum.
ahoyhoy said:Was I the only one who thought District 9 was robbed? Didn't win a damn thing despite being the best Sci-Fi movie of the last few years.
Monocle said:What's with this sort of attitude? Did James Cameron lay a steaming deuce in your oatmeal or something?
wizword said:It is the #1 film of all time. It is obviously going to be appealing sincen it appealed so well for our generation.
MIMIC said:Before I go to bed:
Congrats on Precious getting its 2 awards. Sucks that Inglourious Basterds only got a Supporting Actor win, but whatever. The Hurt Locker was OK but I wouldn't have given it Best Picture; I thought IB and Precious were superior films.....but NOTHING this year blew me away. Maybe next year.
Didn't see Avatar but it not winning kinda makes things right in the world with me: I HONESTLY wanted to want to go see it (and judge it impartially) but I was never once compelled to see this movie, other than for the "zomg 3D" hype. The technical awards are mightily deserved by most accounts, so congrats to Avatar on that front.
wizword said:Waltz with bashir came out in 2008 and was a much better war film than hurt locker. I came in with no expectations of hurt locker and came out thinking the movie sucked.
harSon said:A lot of people? Go to any sports related thread on this forum.
omg rite said:So you didn't think Avatar should have won either, right?
OneEightZero said:I'll bite. Who should have been nominated/won? ^_^
OneEightZero said:Um... the aliens were CG. Weta fooled you. ^_^
Yeah, I mean, look at all the acting noms it got.border said:If Hollywood is so scared of CG performance capture, why was Avatar nominated in the first place?
LA Times said:Director James Cameron had many reasons to be happy the morning that this year's Oscar nominations were announced; his blockbuster film "Avatar" tied for the most with nine, including best picture and best director. But he was dismayed that his cast, including stars Zoe Saldana, Sam Worthington and Sigourney Weaver, was shut out.
In fact, unlike the great majority of best picture nominees, the "Avatar" actors have not nabbed a single major critic's award, or guild prize. The snubs reflect the apparent ambivalence of the film community -- especially actors -- to "Avatar" and its revolutionary use of "performance capture," a new technology that combines human actors with computer-generated animation to create the blue, 10-foot-tall creatures who are the heart of the movie.
To the uninitiated, it raises basic questions: Is this acting, or is it animation? And, does this suggest that actors could become obsolete? It's an issue that provokes a strong response from Hollywood figures, from best actor nominees Jeff Bridges and Jeremy Renner, to directors Cameron and Steven Spielberg.
"I'm sure they could do it now if they wanted. Actors will kind of be a thing of the past," Bridges told The Times the day nominations were announced. "We'll be turned into combinations. A director will be able to say, 'I want 60% Clooney; give me 10% Bridges; and throw some Charles Bronson in there.' They'll come up with a new guy who will look like nobody who has ever lived and that person or thing will be huge," he said.
Renner, nominated for "The Hurt Locker," put it this way: "Some movies are actors' kind of movies and some movies are more directors' movies. 'Avatar' is a spectacle. It's a beautiful experience, but it's not really an actors' kind of movie. It doesn't really allow for an actor to truly tell a story. The director's telling the story in that one."
Perhaps mindful that actors make up the largest Oscar voting bloc, Cameron fiercely promotes the contributions of his cast to the success of "Avatar." He and other advocates of performance capture (known as "motion capture" in its previous, less sophisticated incarnation), including Spielberg, say not enough actors have experienced the process to appreciate it.
"There's a learning curve for the acting community, and they're not up to speed yet," Cameron said. "We didn't get out and proselytize with the Screen Actors Guild as we probably should have to raise awareness. Not only should they not be afraid of it, they should be excited about it. There is a new set of possibilities, after a century of doing movie acting in the same way."
Squall dies, too.DrForester said:Avatar was a psychological thriller about the mental breakdown of a man who has just lost his only family, and suffered a crippling injury. He creates this fantasy world where he can do anything and finds a new family.
..You didn't think were we supposed to take Floating mountains and blue cat people seriously, did you?
OneEightZero said:Most of it's 'make up' was CG?
methodman said:... Sarcasm fail. Sad that you don't even know NFL-GAF.
DrForester said:Avatar was a psychological thriller about the mental breakdown of a man who has just lost his only family, and suffered a crippling injury. He creates this fantasy world where he can do anything and finds a new family.
..You didn't think were we supposed to take Floating mountains and blue cat people seriously, did you?
yeah and Sandra Bullock should've won best actress....oh wait...Anticitizen One said:Star Trek should have won Best Picture/Best Director
PantherLotus said:That's the point. It's possible that none of them belong but they're the best of what we had. Couldn't have had a worse year to go to the 10 nomination format.
This is why Lord of the Rings would never ever win Best Picture.The Crimson Blur said:Eventually people will bitch about the Academy's anti-CG stance so much that they will give it to some shit remake of Wall-E 10 years from now (and snub Avatar 2 and 3 along the way, of course) and then act like they did us all a favor.
MThanded said:So now that Hurt Locker cleaned up do you think that guy who is suing them has a better or worse chance of getting his money?
oh uuniversalmind said:So glad IB got rolled. What an overrated film.
KHarvey16 said:I don't see the point in rewarding what is essentially a guy setting up these enormous challenges for himself and producing something that excels in one facet of film while doing nothing else that would even get noticed by the lowliest clerk working blockbusters straight to DVD aisle. It's a beautiful film and I enjoyed it for that reason, but that's all it has going for itself. That's it.
WrikaWrek said:Avatar is actually the story of a punk ass bitch that betrayed humanity for a pair of legs.
talking about the awards broham.SabinFigaro said:
Of all the absolutely insane things said in the past couple pages, this takes the cake.universalmind said:So glad IB got rolled. What an overrated film.
Tobor said:District 9 is better than Avatar. District 9 is not better than Star Wars. Therefore...
mac said:The Hangover was only good because of Zach Galifinkis and 'Nard Dawg. The plot, other castmates and story only held them back. It was not great comedy. It was stifling and slow.
Teddman said:Yeah, I mean, look at all the acting noms it got.
Here's some background for you:
'Avatar's' animated acting: Hollywood debates whether film work used by actors such as Zoe Saldana for computer-generated characters deserves equal recognition.
Dresden said:Squall dies, too.
noisome07 said:Bro, we get it. You hate a movie.
i just burst out laughing at work :lolWrikaWrek said:Avatar is actually the story of a punk ass bitch that betrayed humanity for a pair of legs.
Tobor said:District 9 is better than Avatar. District 9 is not better than Star Wars. Therefore...
I know, I just thought this was somewhat relevant.MThanded said:talking about the awards broham.
-COOLIO- said:weren't you guys talking about the best director catagory?
directorially, special effects has very little to do with it.
he had to give a very precise vision for a world that didnt exist, and manage and use new tech. The action scenes were also amazingly well done. they were literally amazing for me.
Archaix said:And, to be honest, this is why there's an argument to give the visual effects award to D9 over Avatar. There was an awful lot in District 9 that I would have believed was done with practical effects and not CG. That's one of the hallmarks of great effects work as far as I'm concerned.
I'm not saying it should have won over Avatar. I haven't seen it (tried to last week before it left Imax, the showing was sold out) but I'm assuming it deserved this win. There's an argument to be made for what District 9 did though.
Teddman said:Yeah, I mean, look at all the acting noms it got.
District 9 is better than Avatar or Star Wars. It obviously won't be loved or remembered like the other two, but as a film, it's better. As a commodity or property, or even as a seperate universe, Star Wars is clearly superior. But asides from Empire Strikes Back, D9 >>> Star Wars.Tobor said:District 9 is better than Avatar. District 9 is not better than Star Wars. Therefore...
The scenes dragged and it could of used some good editing though. James is one for large scale films though and Titanic proved that mashing two storylines together.-COOLIO- said:weren't you guys talking about the best director catagory?
directorially, special effects has very little to do with it.
he had to give a very precise vision for a world that didnt exist, and manage and use new tech. The action scenes were also amazingly well done. they were literally amazing for me.
SpeedingUptoStop said:Of all the absolutely insane things said in the past couple pages, this takes the cake.
Raxus said:This is why Lord of the Rings would never ever win Best Picture.