 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
MrBaggins
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
quote: Typically direction has to do with more than just telling him where to look, where to sit or stand... its to do with getting to compelling performance out of actors, and martialing complex productions... and thats what they award directors for.
Not frame placement, and character cues. |
So should we not give directors who work with good actors that award? I'm sure Peter Jackson didn't have to do anything to get a compelling performance out of Ian McKellan!
|
Ian McKellan isn't going to tell an Peter Jackson... an experienced director how to direct... you're quite correct. If he was working with an inexperienced director, then his performance on the screen would be more due to his skill and experience than the director.
quote:
quote: It was due to win precursors from press associations? |

Please try to follow the argument which has been made for pages. It was due because the previous films did NOT win.
|
First, as an independent film, this episode easily wins Best Picture, in a walk... based on critical, public and professional opinion. Its not even close. So I don't agree with your premise.
Did the film get the benefit of the doubt in a couple of categories, since the entirety of the work is so beloved by the Academy? Not necessarily.
The first you might consider is Editing. Jackson et al, had enough masterful work in this piece to justify this position... the Denethor/Pippin/Faramir scene was the editing that got the most buzz.
The second is screenplay. The field was wide open. Mystic River was rumored to be a favorite as a consolation prize. The Academy didn't feel like awarding consolation prizes, apparently... and why should they? There was certainly a tremendous LOTR screenplay, based on a tremendous source.
There were also a few artistic awards in doubt (costume, makeup, soundtrack and original song,) entirely subjective so you can't make a solid argument as to their validity. The Academies choices in this realm are therefore personal. Why should they spread out these Oscars, if they thought the artistry in ROTK was superior?
So... why is this necessarily about ROTK winning everything because it was due? Its a possible influence... but you could also make an argument that ROTK won entirely on its own merit.
quote:

OH. MY. LORD. I didn't know I had to worship the film in to have the 'majority' opinion. I will go ahead and give my kidney's to Peter Jackson because he is my lord. I must call it the greatest movie of all time. Citizen Kane is nothing compared to this .
If you think 'good' is a put down you are a bigger fanboy than I thought possible. |
I don't know what your definition of good is, but in mine, good is a lot less of a compliment than great.
I never said greatest movie of all time... or worship. I just said great. As in "in the top rank of movie making" which is the message thats clear from reviews, and guild associations.
You say its "good", and I say thats not the majority opinion. I'm not saying that you can't hold that opinion. Just that generally speaking most critics and pro's wouldn't agree with that assessment.
I'd also say that those are better positioned to judge the value of these films, in a comparitive sense.
You're comparing it to Titanic... and theres just no evidence to suggest that its as shallow a piece of film making as that...
Do you have any actual evidence to support any position that this film will be generally viewed in "Titanic" terms in years to come, rather than "Ben Hur" terms?
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Imran Siddiqui

|
 |
The Potterverse
Jan 1970 time: 00:34
|
|
quote: Ian McKellan isn't going to tell an Peter Jackson... an experienced director how to direct... you're quite correct. If he was working with an inexperienced director, then his performance on the screen would be more due to his skill and experience than the director. |
You are assuming that Bill Murray told Coppela how to direct. You still haven't proven it. All you've said is that he improvised a bunch. That's nice.
quote: Did the film get the benefit of the doubt in a couple of categories, since the entirety of the work is so beloved by the Academy? Not necessarily. |
Of course it did. As DD said, sweeping the Oscars shows people voting it because they felt they had to (or else be mocked by fans of the series). It seems too simple that you had at least four artistic awards 'in doubt' as you said and 'entirely subjective' and ROTK sweeps all of them. It seems that if decisions was made simply on merits at least one of them would have gone to another film. Otherwise, it would take a high probability for ROTK to win all four 'in doubt' awards.
quote: The first you might consider is Editing. Jackson et al, had enough masterful work in this piece to justify this position... the Denethor/Pippin/Faramir scene was the editing that got the most buzz. |
The ending... Baaad editing.
quote: I don't know what your definition of good is, but in mine, good is a lot less of a compliment than great. |
So in school when you got a B, you considered it a LOT less than an A?
quote: Do you have any actual evidence to support any position that this film will be generally viewed in "Titanic" terms in years to come, rather than "Ben Hur" terms? |
Mainly because of Lost in Translation, which I feel will be viewed as the Citizen Kane of our generation: getting better over the years. And like Citizen Kane, it wouldn't have won the Oscar, leading to the winner of that award being denegrated for it.
If you want to use the Rotten Tomatoes test, you'll find that LIT compares VERY favorably to ROTK.
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
Tingkai
|
|
To find the Northwest Passage
Aug 2001 time: 13:34
|
|
quote: Originally posted by MrBaggins
Ian McKellan isn't going to tell an Peter Jackson... an experienced director how to direct... you're quite correct. If he was working with an inexperienced director, then his performance on the screen would be more due to his skill and experience than the director.
|
Bill Murray does not seem like one of those egotistical actors who try to tell a director what to do. I think that he would have treated Coppola with respect.
The fact that she has only done one other movie doesn't mean she is inexperienced. She clearly had a vision of what she wanted to create. She also would have naturally picked up directoring tips from being around her father. So she may well know a lot more about directing than other "experienced" directors.
Also, directing is a lot more than just knowing what should be said on film. It's about managing the process, bringing the best out of everyone and getting everyone moving towards the same goal (something that is easier said than done).
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
MrBaggins
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
You are assuming that Bill Murray told Coppela how to direct. You still haven't proven it. All you've said is that he improvised a bunch. That's nice.
|
It's a defacto method of him telling her how to direct. He knows whats funny and what works, since he's done thousands upon thousands of scenes. He just freeforms till they get something that they're happy with.
quote:
Of course it did. As DD said, sweeping the Oscars shows people voting it because they felt they had to
|
DD isn't any more the purveyor of the Academy's intent behind something than you are.
The precursors have been really clear. The press associations gave this show love in ways not seen in the ten years I've been watching the precursors. They had no compelling "need" to reward this film because they hadn't rewarded it before: they had.
The overwhelming great opinion of ROTK was transparently shared by the Academy.
The Guilds echoed this sentiment... and they don't favor the same form of rewarding artists for past work, in quite the same way that the Academy as a whole does.
quote:
(or else be mocked by fans of the series). It seems too simple that you had at least four artistic awards 'in doubt' as you said and 'entirely subjective' and ROTK sweeps all of them. It seems that if decisions was made simply on merits at least one of them would have gone to another film. Otherwise, it would take a high probability for ROTK to win all four 'in doubt' awards.
|
Subjective... but then you can seperate out at least a couple... the music elements, since we know that the sound track was the most compelling, as sofar as being the best selling soundtrack. With the two remaining subjective elements, but those elements were of the highest qualitive factor, so even that is an uneven comparison.
Statistically unlikely for one film with great artistic elements to win those? No.
quote:
The ending... Baaad editing.
|
Given the context of an 11 or 12 hour movie... simply put, no, I disagree.
quote:
So in school when you got a B, you considered it a LOT less than an A?
|
20 percent or so less. Significant.
quote:
Mainly because of Lost in Translation, which I feel will be viewed as the Citizen Kane of our generation: getting better over the years. And like Citizen Kane, it wouldn't have won the Oscar, leading to the winner of that award being denegrated for it.
If you want to use the Rotten Tomatoes test, you'll find that LIT compares VERY favorably to ROTK. |
"I feel" being the critical term here, based on what precident?
Citizen Kane had masterful direction, and a powerful narrative (abeit in parts)... both elements lacking in Lost in Translation.
LiT is viewed in the press as an also ran... certainly not loved the same way that ROTK and the other films have been.
A number of films...some subtle... through the years have gotten only one Oscar, and have been generally admired by the press. They haven't garnered the attention that Citizen Kane has, and mostly forgotten . Why wouldn't Lost In Translation follow that pattern. Its certainly the more statistically certain.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
MrBaggins
|
|
quote: Originally posted by -Jrabbit
Sci-fi and comedy are traditional Oscar Poison genres.
IMHO the first Star Wars is the only one in the series that broke new ground. Reliance on special effects and mediocre (at best) acting pretty much doomed the franchise to be ghettoized into the technical categories. |
I (apparently) incorrectly remembered Imran as a Star Wars fan. He's apparently bitter about Harry Potter instead...
* MrBaggins chuckles
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
MrBaggins
|
|
quote: Originally posted by DinoDoc
If we are going to use that as a standard of proof, why do you expect us to take you seriously? I'm not stating this for a fact but given how the series had been overlooked by the Oscars in the past the sweep feels like them trying to make up for that. |
I don't expect you to do anything, save possibly back up your points with some valid points.
Hint... reverse logic and "feelings" are less valid than the reasonable logic of the massive majority... *gasp*... thinking ROTK was great... in those categories.
There is certainly firm evidence that a huge swath of movie people thought this was great work, that had no need to reward "due"ness... I.E. the critic associations.
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
JohnT

|
 |
Capitalist
Mar 1999 time: 00:34
|
|
quote: Originally posted by -Jrabbit
No, I don't.
So you're saying that this Oscar win is based on factors other than writing, and you're OK with that.
The award is for Original Screenplay. If the actors did a lot of the writing, how can she possibly deserve it??
I think she got it because of who her daddy is. |

You're totally missing the point.
The Academy Awards is a ceremony presented every year by people in the film industry for people in the film industry. The ballots are given only to people in the industry, and only people in the industry get to perform or attend the Oscars. This is a close-knit professional community with most of them living in one of two worlds: LA or NYC (mostly LA). They all have professional, financial, sexual, marital, contractual, and other ties to one another, many of these ties lasting only for the life of the production. The thing is, the Academy isn't a group of insiders in a room somewhere arguing it out, they're a community of about 5,000 people living in the Los Angeles basin who receive these ballots at their home or office.
So the ballots go out. The people get them, they meet at work. What do you think they're going to talk about? When they read that morning's Variety and see 12 pages of ads congratulating various nominees, do you not think it has an effect? Harvey Weinstein throws a few parties with a bunch of lavish gifts, and all of a sudden Private Spielberg is halted halfway out of his chair, stunned and puzzled...that's not my films name. And when people vote, they vote not on technical merit (that's what the nominations are for) but on a host of factors, including:
Who is sleeping with whom?
What film made a lot of people very comfortable or rich?
Who hasn't received one of these?
Who do I not want to offend?
What meds were I on when I filled out the ballot?
And that's the thing about the Academy Awards that frustrates a lot of people: they're not about well-defined artistic achievements, they're more about the Los Angeles film community congratulating itself.
Did Sophia Coppola get a lot of good press because the fact that her dad is Francis Ford Coppola, the director of the Godfather movies, the Conversation, Apocalypse Now? Well, duh! Did a lot of voters get tilted by remembering that she was the baby being baptized in Godfather 1? Probably. Did she get a few "redemption" votes for Godfather 3? More than likely.
Is any of this a reason to give her an artistic award? No.
Is it a reason to give her an Academy Award? Yes.
Last edited by JohnT on 02-03-2004 at 20:16
|
|
|  |
 |
|
MrBaggins
|
|
quote: Originally posted by -Jrabbit
*SNIP*
I was really only trying to find out which other screenplays were truly deserving. No one has filled in that blank... |
OK...
Finding Nemo. Absolutely top notch screenplay... led to tremendous box office run, and massive adulation. Its subject matter and form are looked down upon as low brow however. I think that it was certainly deserving, and could understand the argument that this should win.
In America. A good screenplay, although with a much more narrow focus, and nostalgic twist, than the others. I liked the sentiment of the screenplay, if not all of the implementation.
Barbarian Invasions... I didn't see it but discussed the film at some length, with my brother-in-law. We came to the conclusion that it "tries too hard" to be this profound story, and comes off looking contrived.
Dirty Pretty Things... one of my favorite truly original thrillers... taut, funny and multilayered. If I were in sole charge of the award, this would be my choice... well... this or Finding Nemo... but I would probably have last minute second thoughts about Finding Nemo...
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
lord of the mark
|
 |
FUKCOV - Former United Kingdom Colony of Virginia
Dec 2000 time: 00:34
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Agathon
Imran is just pissed because his love, Harry Potter, didn't win any awards.
Imagine that, a grown man reading children's books. |
I know lots of adults who read Harry Potter. It aint Tolstoy, but its a wonderful set of books with lots of wit, great charecterization, and some really moving things about love, loyalty, depression, etc.
The films thus far have tended toward the mediocre however. Emphasizes once again that filming a popular set of books, with a big budget and good actors, is NO guarantee of making great movies.
Last edited by lord of the mark on 03-03-2004 at 02:55
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:34. Apolyton Time is 00:34. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|