»

[tempted]

Well a lot of you saw the Oscars last nigh and some of you like me were up until almost 6 o'clock in the morning to see it ...but in my opinion it was worth the one night without sleeping just to see LOTR Return of the king taking it all,every single one that it was nominated for 11 oscars out of 11 possible...man i was so happy that finally they won best movie...anyway what did you guys think of the last night winners i know that most of them were predictable but still..give us your opinion....

In my opinion this one deserved every single oscar that it won....


https://img25.photobucket.com/albums/..._king_ver7.jpg

[Spank-A-Thon]

There is no doubt that LOTR was a fantastic acheivement. The sheer scope of what was attempted and the technical excellence in how it was executed deserves tonnes of praise... but Best Picture...?

Gimme a break.

As a stand alone film, ROTK does not succeed. You need to have seen the first two to put it into context. Dialogue between characters was reasonably ropey for the most part and most of the film was action (i.e. non-dialogie) based anyway.

It's no more deserving of Best Picture than The Matrix or even any Star Wars film would be. It's a great fantasy film - but that's it.

This is the first time since Titanic (another film I enjoyed) that I have not agreed with the Academy. But hey, that's what it's all about! Things would be boring if everyone agreed all the time!

- S

[Vicious_2003]

It's no more deserving of Best Picture than The Matrix or even any Star Wars film would be. It's a great fantasy film - but that's it.

Wha ?. I can see what you based that on but c mon. The movie was 3 and a half hours long and thier was plenty of dialougue even with the ample action sequences. LOTR : Return of the king was VERY deserving of Best Picture in my eyes. But I have yet to see a couple of the other movies nominated...so could my opinon change, sure. Will it...probably not.

I would have liked ot see Depp or Bill Murray win best actor. Just because I think both of them have been GREATLY under appreciated for thier abilities simply because they havent been in alot of serious dramatic roles (Seems to be the only roles that earn oscars ) And because they were both excellent in thier most recent endevours. But I cant say that Seann Penn didnt deserve it more because..well..I never saw Mystic River.

[Spank-A-Thon]

Originally posted by Vicious_2003

Wha ?. I can see what you based that on but c mon. The movie was 3 and a half hours long and thier was plenty of dialougue even with the ample action sequences. LOTR : Return of the king was VERY deserving of Best Picture in my eyes. But I have yet to see a couple of the other movies nominated...so could my opinon change, sure. Will it...probably not.

So because the film was 3.5 hours long it deserves Best Picture? The action sequences were great, it was beatifully filmed and edited, the costume was great, special effects superlative.... but character and dialogue-wise it was simply not engaging. Any time a character opened their mouth I was wishing for the next action scene to hurry up (and this is coming from someone who loved the dialogue-heavy Reservoir Dogs).

The Hobbits were particularly un-likeable (I found it very hard to sympathise with the moaning, whiney gimps) and whilst the dwarf (can't remember his name right now) was effective in providing comic relief it was hard to fully attach and support the main characters. Legolas was particularly hard to comprehend with his breathy... stuttered... one.... word... per... minute... speech.... and whilst Aragon was suitably stoic as the silent, reluctant hero - again it's hard to like someone so distant and aloof.

There is no doubt it deserved most of the Oscars it received - but definitely not Best Picture. As an example of all that is technically good in film-making there is nothing that comes close to the sheer perfection the trilogy presents. As an example of a film that will enchant and draw in the viewer. forge a bond between the on-screen characters and the viewer and basically entertain the view - for me, it fails horribly.

But hey, different strokes for different folks!

- S

[Vicious_2003]

So because the film was 3.5 hours long it deserves Best Picture?

I said that ? Friad not chief. But you as though it had no dialougue because it was mostly action. Thats simply not true. The action sequences didnt dominate the movie. It was 3.5 hours long....you really think there was 2 plus hours of action in this movie ?. It had just as much dialouge as your average full liegth feature film

but character and dialogue-wise it was simply not engaging. Any time a character opened their mouth I was wishing for the next action scene to hurry up (and this is coming from someone who loved the dialogue-heavy Reservoir Dogs).

Your entitled to your opinion..just know that its not a very poular one. OBVIOUSLY the acedemy doesent agree. And I know tons of people whove seen it and not ONE thought the dialouge was bland. I have never heard or seen a review from any critics that thought that either. I personally felt that the dialouge was excellent. What more could you ask. It was well written and well acted.

It was hard to fully attach and support the main characters

You found it hard to support the main characters ?. The characters in LOTR are some of the strongest stand alone characters ive EVER seen. The whole movie rotates around the trials and tribulations of its characters. I found myself caring deeply for the welfare of the characters and found myself especially inthrawled in the relationship between sam and frodo. Those so called "Whining Gimps" as you called them

Legolas was particularly hard to comprehend with his breathy... stuttered... one.... word... per... minute... speech....

You sure you actually saw the movie ? I saw Return of the king 3 times and I dont remember legolas speaking in such a manner.

forge a bond between the on-screen characters and the viewer and basically entertain the view - for me, it fails horribly

If any movie in history has achived this its Return of the king. Im sorry...I just dont see your point here

But hey, different strokes for different folks!

Absolutely, I just enjoy a good debate

[tempted]

Originally posted by Vicious_2003

Absolutely, I just enjoy a good debate

It's stonger than you isn't it..lol...

Anyway i don't agree with Spank's point of view either to me it definetly earned the oscar for best picture but i'm not the debate kind of people so...i'll leave that to you....

[Vicious_2003]

It's stonger than you isn't it..lol...

Yes...im afraid to admit. I...am a man without willpower. I try and fight it but it has me in a strangle hold. I try and supress the urge to retort, but the attempts are futile. Please...I need help

[Rei]

I agree with Spank on the "Best Picture" debate. He said more or less what I thought hearing LOTR won. Also, if there is a trilogy, which in reality is a single movie (LOTR trilogy was shot as a single movie, then later divided into the three episodes after the editing and post-production process) I don't think it's reasonable to consider as "Best Picture" the last movie only. BTW, to me the last part is slightly worse than the other two. This is personal taste, obviously.

[Spank-A-Thon]

Originally posted by Rei

I agree with Spank on the "Best Picture" debate. He said more or less what I thought hearing LOTR won. Also, if there is a trilogy, which in reality is a single movie (LOTR trilogy was shot as a single movie, then later divided into the three episodes after the editing and post-production process) I don't think it's reasonable to consider as "Best Picture" the last movie only. BTW, to me the last part is slightly worse than the other two. This is personal taste, obviously.

Gah! I knew I'd forgotted something else! I too heard about how its really only 1 film, but that the Academy felt obliged to reward Jackson for it....

Anyway, I know millions of people were enthralled by the LOTR trilogy - for me it bored the living hell out of me. There's 12+ hours of my life I'm never going to get back...

But then again, I can't understand how people don't love the classic Star Wars trilogy...! Each to their own hey!

- S

[Pu the Owl]

Christopher Lee said he was going to leave the Academy if Jackson wasn't going to win this year. There are big interests behind the Academy's choices. LOTR didn't deserve 11 awards, especially the best picture, best achievement in editing and best achievement in directing ones. The choices of the Academy are very limited most of the time. When a movie starts a trend, like it happened for Titanic too, or for Chicago last year, you can be sure that the movie will win even when it doesn't fully deserve it. It's not simply a reason of "good" and "bad" movies. As Spank and Rei said, it's simply senseless to give this kind of awards to a movie like LOTR, that instead deserved all the special and visual effects, make-up etc. awards. And I can't see why a movie like 21 Grams wasn't among the nominees for the editing category. You can like or dislike it, but that movie's editing is simply genial, while LOTR's one is pretty average and linear. Another example: I could think more of Clint Eastwood win the prize for the achievent in directing, because at least his movies always show an actual view and peculiar style of the director. Making a movie like Mystic River speaking of directing efforts is different than making a neutral movie as LOTR IMO. I mean, the director of a spectacular movie like LOTR has probably less control over the movie's direction, due to productive issues, to the impressive amount of staff members, to the fact the greatest part of the work is done during the post-production process, which is not in the hands of the director, as everybody knows. I think Star Wars is a different case. All the movie is in Lucas' hands, because he's at the same time the creator, the producer and (in some cases) the director. Star Wars and LOTR are movies which, apart from their spectacular aspects, are born from completely different methods of work and production.

[merylsilverburg]

Well, I'm pretty much late to this thread only because I saw the Oscars last night (taped it, didn't have time to see it until yesterday) and I must say that this is one of the worst Oscars in history. My God, you wouldn't believe how thankful I was that I taped it, so I was able to skip through hearing LOTR's name announced at every few minutes. The entire crew should've just stood up there. I'm not saying that LOTR didn't deserve a few of the awards (like visual effects, costume, etc.), but to win every award was just bizarre.
As for Sophia Coppola winning for Best Screenplay (or was it Director?), I wanted to punch the TV...oh sure, give her an Oscar just because she's Francis Ford's daughter, yeah that's fair. "Lost in Translation" isn't the best film in the entire damn world! The film is completely filled with ignorance, lack of emotion, and is just plain boring. Now she has two awards she doesn't deserve: the Oscar and the Independent Film Award.
"Finding Nemo" winning the Best Animated category pissed the hell outta me, even though it was obvious, so I won't go further into that.

These are the only things that I can remember.

Originally posted by Panuru

When a movie starts a trend, like it happened for Titanic too, or for Chicago last year, you can be sure that the movie will win even when it doesn't fully deserve it.

Ah, well I really liked "Chicago" because to me, that was one of the freshest films to hit the screen in a while. Maybe it's not exactly the most original film, but it was a pretty nice film.

[Pu the Owl]

Originally posted by merylsilverburg

Ah, well I really liked "Chicago" because to me, that was one of the freshest films to hit the screen in a while. Maybe it's not exactly the most original film, but it was a pretty nice film.

Of course, I'm not saying the movies that win a great number of awards are trash, as I said it's not even a question of "good" or "bad" in these cases. Just that maybe last year there was a wider choice and give some of the awards to Chicago wasn't the right thing to do...

As for Lost in Translation, I think I already expressed my opinion in the other thread, and the Best original screenplay award won't change it. You know, it's not a great surprise that Sofia Coppola won, considering her father "owns" Hollywood and Coppola's "clan" members work everywhere there (just think about another very famous Coppola: Nicholas Coppola aka Nicholas Cage... I'm envious: I'd like to be a Coppola too, so that I could work in the movies industry without moving a finger...). Regarding Finding Nemo... there weren't many other choices this year

[Redpyramidhead]

No LOTR did not deserve all of those 11 Awards even if I consider it to be one of my favorite film trilogies of all time. Other movies certainly deserved much more recognition this year, but I am not surprised. "The Academy" has been biased beyond belief for ages now and if you just realized that I have news for you: everything in mainstream culture is fixed to make the most amount of people happy. Popularity contests abound.

Either way, the more we go in this direction, the less Awards mean each and every year. Sooner or later, the masses may catch on and the self proclaimed "Academy" will be left scratching their heads.

Film is an artform. And it should be appreciated as such. Trophies mean nothing. A film-makers vision and everything between that and an audiences reaction, no matter what size, means more than anything else by far.


_RED_ stuff