While I have yet to see Slumdog, it seems to be far to often the jurors sit and contemplates who will get best motion picture of the year, then pile on 5-6-7-8-9-10-11 awards for that movie automatically.
It won for both original score (wasn't Slumdog nominated twice in this category? WTF?) AND original score.
I think Oscars are again proving to be bullshit. If you look back into history, Oscars are mostly given to the most popular (among the jurors/academy), not necessarily the best. So it's quite pointless.
To be brutally honest, if you are daft enough to watch the tripe that Hollywood spurts forth then what else can you expect?
Shallow,pointless movies with little or no acting ability. If you want real,soulful acting then you should support the independant film makers from your own country. Not a film industry thats bloated with moronic 'actors' that are chosen for thier pretty looks and little else.
Hollywood is like the mainstream music industry, filled with talentless idiots. Branch out and watch something worthwile.
It happens quite often that jury members cannot separate talent from context. If the subject matter is poignant enough then it helps the performances look that much better. After all, it's all about emotions and if a viewer is moved by a film then it must be good. Notice the large number of WW2 movies that win. Not saying all were undeserving but it is just disproportionate.
On the other hand, if you were in favour of heath ledger winning the oscar then you shouldn't complain about this one. That, in my opinion, was another example of people getting carried away by their emotions.
Let me rant for a second. A few of the awards these years were COMPLETE HORSESHIT!! Penn? Fuck that, can't stand this dude. It's like with every role he only tries to win an Oscar. Used to like him, but now can't stand him. Winslet and Cruz? Give me a break. Slumdog Millionaire in cinematography? Come on. The Curious Case of Benjamin Button in art direction? Horsediarrhea. And Jackman was awful in my opinion, especially after John Stewart.
Sorry for the use of bad words, but this year the Oscars were a disgrace.
yeah, i don't remember the oscars doing anything else.
pretty sad to think that some take that shit seriously and actually think those are "good" movies. they must have little contact with anything remotely interesting
Let me rant for a second. A few of the awards these years were COMPLETE HORSESHIT!! Penn? Fuck that, can't stand this dude. It's like with every role he only tries to win an Oscar. Used to like him, but now can't stand him. Winslet and Cruz? Give me a break. Slumdog Millionaire in cinematography? Come on. The Curious Case of Benjamin Button in art direction? Horsediarrhea. And Jackman was awful in my opinion, especially after John Stewart.
Sorry for the use of bad words, but this year the Oscars were a disgrace.
Well I liked Milk, thought Penn was pretty good in it (ofc the oscar should have gone to Rourke) ... and Cruz was really good in Vicky Christina Barcelona.
I have a bit of a hard time evaluating Slumdog's cinematography, since the dvd screener I watched looked like blurry crap.
And yeah, Jackman and all his singing and dancing bullshit was shit.
But that's why uwe boll still makes movies cause people still go see them
that's why you got shit directors taking over potentially good movies; like Valkyrie.
That's why in the next 5 years you're gonna have a shit load of movies with poor kids becoming something. With bad acting. Average cinematography.
Possibly set on foreign soil.
The man deserves an oscar but not for this!! FUCK!!!
Millions had far better acting.
I have a bit of a hard time evaluating Slumdog's cinematography, since the dvd screener I watched looked like blurry crap.
cinematography don't improve in high def. it just looks sharper. There were really only 2 / 3 good awesome stellar shots in that movie. And that's that Fuck.
I have a bit of a hard time evaluating Slumdog's cinematography, since the dvd screener I watched looked like blurry crap.
cinematography don't improve in high def. it just looks sharper. There were really only 2 / 3 good awesome stellar shots in that movie. And that's that Fuck.
sometimes I couldn't even tell exactly what was going on since blur and pixelization increased with any camera movement. I would imagine that evaluating the cinematography of a movie would be much easier at the cinema compared to a half-assed dvdscr.
Looks like the jurors just wanted to give a bunch of prices to their "little sister" Bollywood.
WaldoJ wrote:
cinematography don't improve in high def. it just looks sharper. There were really only 2 / 3 good awesome stellar shots in that movie. And that's that Fuck.
Are you kidding? Watching a screener vs. watching a xvid vs. watching a dvd-r vs. watching a bluray (if you have the right setup).
The difference between a dvd and a blu doesn't make or break a movie (the movie does), but the viewer experience drops to bottom if you watch crap video quality.
If you have low standards and like screeners or xvids, then of course you are "ok" with the result: the cinematography gets watered out (colors and lighting means a lot)
yeah yeah yeah, all horseshit movies. Ok the oscars are not holy or something like that. But saying they are stupid chicks etc is plain stupid.
Im completely fed up with those people that have to be so non-conformistic that it becomes ridiculous just to feel themselves better than anyone else...
I know some guys from back in school. They read crap 'experimental' books, they dont have a tv and they only read 'intellectual' books or magazines. They only watch 'foreign' movies in some fancy cinema and only listen to 'real music'. And then they think they are so much better and so much cooler and so much more intelligent.
Well, my little literate friend called me a month ago if i had a job for him, he knew i was doing a PhD and he wanted to do one as well, in the magnificent interesting field of medieval literature. Well, you can be cool and hate the modern world, but dont shit on people who are happy with the modern world.
I have seen some of those 'intelligent foreign movies'. 90% of the time i fall asleep. I agree that not every movie with an oscar is diserved, but saying all oscar movies are crap is crap as well. I bet that the people who hate the oscars now will try to act 'intelligent' when someone asks them in 20 years if they saw 'The Departed' or 'Crash' or 'Slumdog millionaire' they will say 'yeah, it won an oscar in year xxx and do some fancy namedropping'.
I have also reat the more 'intelligent' books. Dude i once read a book about an alzheimer patient. It started with interpunction missing and then words were missing and in the end only 10 words per page. 'To simulate alzheimer' Well Fuck Off with those so called intelligent books. 90% of the people who say they loved the books probably havent read the book, and only have it on their shelf.
My ex gf had some off those retard parents, who were born with a bag of money and felt the need to shit on my all the time because i was watching movies in the cinema (!). People of their standing watched more intelligent movies. Too bad i was like 10 times smarter than them. I went to university my 1st year and came back with a magna cum laude, then their explanation was 'you are doing an easy thing' right...
Anyway, now the thing. They once bought a statue, like horrible ugly. They asked me if i liked it and i said, no it is horrible. It looks like a cheap Rhodin when he was already rich. Just start a statue and stop in the middle, i hate it.
Their answer was "Rhodin is cool and this statue cost like 2000 euro, you have to like it". I mean, what a retarded answer that was.
I myself have like 1000-2000 DVDs, havent counted then in a while. And i am not the type that only watches action movies with A actors. But saying that all those oscar movies are shit?
I saw vicky cristina barcelona in the cinema and that was the first movie in a while that had me entertained from start to the end. I came out of the cinema, just ask my gf, and i said "Penelope might get a nomination for this one".
I agree with you that not always the best movie wins, but the nominations are mostly ok. Once the nominations are out, the marketing pushes towards a winner, but you have to get a nomination first. (And i agree that dark knight was not that good, but he is dead, people love dead people, get over it).
What do you expect to win a movie price? Some stupid Chinese movie that is cool because Chinese is cool because the Wall Street Jounral or NY times writes it? Or some boring 7h experimental filming of some boring subject.
You cannot deny that those oscar nominees are better movies than pure commercial shit such as Jumper or Cloverfield. But on the other hand, a crap movie winning a price for best music or best special effects, i have no problem watching those.
Come ihzr, give me some titles of movies you like. 2000+ and no indian or chinese or taiwanese thing...
my problem with oscars is that they're all oh-so-dramatic, not that they're too mainstream. i can watch mainstream movies without any problems, if they're smart or funny or have cool action scenes (not michael bay sort of movies that take themselves absurdly seriously, but more b-ish, lighthearted stuff, like the latest punisher, for example).
see, thing is that i don't mind some drama in a movie, once in a while, but the movies that usually get an oscar seem specifically tweaked to milk every last emotion from the public, and i hate being played around with like that. if a movie has a cool script that can drag you in and make you care for the characters it's ok to feel empathy or whatever. but shit engineered to make people cry i can't stand (hence my chick comment). that's what i was complaining about in regards to the oscars, they all feel like this. i'm sure there are exceptions, but most of the oscar stuff that i've seen has been that way.
some new more mainstream movies that i liked were in bruges and tropic thunder. some less mainstream ones were oss 117, fido, severance and black sheep.
maybe i came off as an elitist dumbass who disregards anything that isn't authored by some other pretentious lamers. that's not really true. i'm not into art or experimental movies. i enjoy stuff like that only if it's short enough for me not to lose my attention span. i can watch a short experimental movie if i'm high, but if i'm sober i usually find them boring.
Quote:
Im completely fed up with those people that have to be so non-conformistic that it becomes ridiculous just to feel themselves better than anyone else...
i know perfectly well what sort of people you're talking about, but don't let some assholes turn you away from "intelligent foreign movies" as you like to call them, heh. as with other, "normal" movies, some are good, some not. there's a lot of pretentious tripe out there, but it's worth digging through them, because the chances of finding a gem are higher than when you wade through hollywood's produce. that sort of stuff is pretty easily avoidable, if you read some comments about them. even if people praise the movie, you can usually tell if the movie's gonna actually have something going for it or if it's gonna be just another mish-mash of muddled and half baked ideas that doesn't go nowhere.
anyway, i usually watch b-movies and less serious stuff, since i'm high while i'm at home, so i'm not often faced with the problem of distinguishing a cool artsy movie from a crap artsy one
yes, your ex's parents might have been idiots. yes, the alzheimer book might have been dumb and the statue thing was most definitely dumb.
and yes, there are a lot of boring experimental movies, but that doesn't mean that all of them are boring and that all people that don't watch mainstream are pricks. i know a lot of that sort, thanks to my ex, who was in art school. i couldn't stand most of her friends, which is one of the reasons the relationship failed.
i guess i got a bit sidetracked. i think my point was that you shouldn't dismiss less commercial movies based on you seeing them as too high-brow or because you know a lot of idiots who are into artsy movies. they usually go for the crap artsy movies anyway, hehe. check out oss 117, for example. it's smart, hilarious, has extremely likable characters and is also totally unpretentious.
when someone asks them in 20 years if they saw 'The Departed' or 'Crash' or 'Slumdog millionaire' they will say 'yeah, it won an oscar in year xxx and do some fancy namedropping'.
Signature/Avatar nuking: none (can be changed in your profile)
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
Notice the large number of WW2 movies that win. Not saying all were undeserving but it is just disproportionate.
