Apparently "The Hurt Locker" has detail issues.
- Thread starter Pookie
- Start date
NC17z
Well-known member
lol!!!
The Sarlacc
Well-known member
Who cares. It shouldnt have any bearing on what awards it wins, and for the most part it didnt.
Except for cinematography. It just really proved that people have no clue what the DP does.
By the way, Hurt Locker was shot on super16...best picture, not a 3D money making machine...hell yes.
Mark Harris
Pain in the ass
Whoa, there IS a God...and his name isn't Jim.
J.R. Hudson
Spirit Animal
So stoked for Katherine
My goal is too meet and marry her by 2011
My goal is too meet and marry her by 2011
Blaine
Mr. Hollywood
Hard to believe she's pushing 60 isn't it...
HorseFilms
Look ma no hands
They're all really bad.
The Sarlacc
Well-known member
what are you talking about? with the exception of VFX and Cinematography it was probably one of the better ones in years. They stopped worrying about time and the production was great. I really liked Martin/Baldwin.
The live direction/editing of the Oscars sucked a fat one.
The Sarlacc
Well-known member
They are all really political.
And for once a lot of people actually spoke out against that on stage. That was great. No kept their mouths shut this year.
Heh? it was a 2 1/2 hour borefest, YAWN! Not one joke made me laugh and I'm a funny guy. If anyone is on the east coast I'm sorry the network reinstated the broadcast to you guys, it was painfull.
I knew everyone in Holywood hates Cameron but all 6000 Academy members must hate him too, Avatar should have won best pic, the screeners the academy sent out for it were in 2D, go figure.
The Sarlacc
Well-known member
If Avatar had won best picture it would signified that the Oscars is nothing but political and the academy only cares about the big money winners.
In no WAY was Avatar the best picture of the year. I can easily rattle off titles out of the 10 that are a hundred times better than Avatar.
Batutta
Major Contributor
I wasn't making that case...I just found it ironic. I've never thought Avatar was a great film or worthy of best picture, but to be honest I wasn't totally floored by Hurt Locker either. I thought it was very well crafted all around and I respect it as a film, but it's not something I'll watch many more times. It's a film I admire more than really like...Another side note; The Hurt Locker is the lowest grossing best picture winner of all time.
Last edited:
Chamber005
Carbonite Member
Man, Avatar got exactly what it deserved -- NOTHING (except some SFX award, which, 300 million dollars spent on SFX? I sure hope you win!)
Avatar will go down as the highest grossing, highest costing...movie.
That's pretty much it. Crap from back to front Avatar never should have received any of the accolades it did. The drones came out in force because the marketing told them to.
Avatar was a crapfest. Thank god the Academy came out in force against it. Reminding us once again how dumbstruck and popularity-driven the Golden Globes really are.
Happy day.
(and btw, how sad is it that THESE were the best pictures of the YEAR? I mean, this is it? This is the best that's coming out of Hollywood? Really? District 9? Basterds? Hurt Locker? Really? IMO this entire decade has been about 1% quality and 99% craptacular. It's funny that Tom Hanks mentioned the last time they had to expand the Best Picture category to 10 films -- it's because they HAD TO, because there were simply too many great movies. Just sad.)
Avatar will go down as the highest grossing, highest costing...movie.
That's pretty much it. Crap from back to front Avatar never should have received any of the accolades it did. The drones came out in force because the marketing told them to.
Avatar was a crapfest. Thank god the Academy came out in force against it. Reminding us once again how dumbstruck and popularity-driven the Golden Globes really are.
Happy day.
(and btw, how sad is it that THESE were the best pictures of the YEAR? I mean, this is it? This is the best that's coming out of Hollywood? Really? District 9? Basterds? Hurt Locker? Really? IMO this entire decade has been about 1% quality and 99% craptacular. It's funny that Tom Hanks mentioned the last time they had to expand the Best Picture category to 10 films -- it's because they HAD TO, because there were simply too many great movies. Just sad.)
Gohanto
Veteran
Avatar was good entertainment, and it took as many risks as a ~$300 million movie can (you can't really make an art film when you're gambling that amount of money). Plus it won cinematography and art direction, both are extremely surprising based on the level of 3D involved and that the academy has always favored live-action films for those categories.
And personally I just find it extremely naive that people think Avatar was only big because of "marketing". It didn't do anything that different from other Hollywood blockbusters, but it resonated with an audience that loved it.
And marketing, at best, gives you a good opening weekend. Which Avatar didn't break any real records during. It does hold the #1 record for 2-8 weekends, which is word of mouth.
And while I agree that there really weren't any "great" movies this year, it's been pretty rare in all of film history to get "great" films every year. I think it's too easy to romanticize past Hollywood.
Last edited:
Chamber005
Carbonite Member
I've said it from day one, that word of mouth was dictated by the marketing. If you actually listened to the marketing for Avatar there was always a deliberate message that if you didn't see it you were somehow less of a person, an outcast, an oddball, which is tolerable, but then they turned the movie into some economic statement which started to be repulsive. And then Cameron goes on talk shows and tries to pass off this piece of steaming dung as an ECO MOVIE!!!
WTF?!
Dude, you cannot have an environmental message (a FICTIONAL message, mind you) and preach ownership of the land on both sides of the argument and then say that you're movie is ABOUT THE ENVIRONMENT. Can't happen. That is the EXACT OPPOSITE of environmentalism. Environmentists acknowledge that we own NOTHING of the planet that we're just an ASPECT of it, and yet these blue-tailed cromags would rather destroy their home in war than to allow for coexistence -- or some drilling under their tree, their land?
The brass ones on Cameron are so beyond the scope of reason I can't even quantify them.
And NO ONE I know who has seen Avatar thought it was a good movie. The only people I've heard of who liked the movie are people online. So let's say I know 20 people who saw Avatar. The first 5 didn't like the movie, but they still felt compelled to tell the other 15 that they should see Avatar because the marketing told them that they should. The marketing acted like Avatar was the friggin moon landing. When it was really Osmosis Jones with CGI animation.
NO ONE I know who has seen Avatar thought that the effects looked at all realistic. Even in 3D it still looks like a friggin cartoon.
What I think is really funny is that people thought that as far as the Academy was concerned Avatar and Hurt Locker were duking it out for best picture. I'm sorry, but I think Avatar was probably somewhere at the bottom of the pile, somewhere underneath Up.
Man, I could go on all day about how bad Avatar sucked, but that would make my Monday too awesome and I have stuff to do.
:bath:
Batutta
Major Contributor
You already have...REPEATEDLY...now you're just gloating over what you perceive as a victory because Avatar lost best picture, ignoring the fact THAT IT WAS NOMINATED IN THE FIRST PLACE!!! A lot of people thought Avatar was good enough to be nominated for best picture, which disproves your conspiracy theory that everyone was brainwashed into seeing it, liking it and spreading the word. An impossible thought for you to comprehend, I know. That people have tastes different from your own. That can't be possible. No, what's more likely is that we have all been hypnotized like mindless lemmings.