" It's a summer blockbuster. The only thing it would even come close to winning is some Special Effects awards. "Clearly didn't *get* the movie. Anyone else?
" @VelvetLore04 said:There have been 80 awards for Best Picture given out, and you just listed eight winners that were either Comedy OR Science Fiction OR Fantasy. Good job. That makes 10% of the winners from those three genres. 0% from Science Fiction. Sci-Fi and comedy films don't deserve them? I demand that you either get your head out of your ass or acknowledge that this is just a personal bias you have. Also, the Dark Knight was not even nominated for Best Picture. What the fuck? I think this has more to do with a stigma against Comic book movies (just like how Watchmen also won't be nominated for the next one...) than against Science Fiction, but still, what the hell? The Matrix isn't nominated? You know what the most pathetic thing is? When movies like Eternal Sushine of the Spotless Mind don't get considered to be "Science Fiction " films by critics, even though it's premise is based on SciFi. The only real reason seems to be that they liked the film, and therefore it *can't* have been SciFi. That there haven't been any Science Fiction films "worthy" of Best Picture is just another opinion. This opinion is prevalent all throughout the Academy, making it a fucking worthless peice of shit for giving out legitimate awards. It represents the minority opinion of a bunch of pretentious fucktards who don't think something is worth an award if it has the words "Science Fiction" attached to it. And you, my friend, are just another cog in this machine. Go look at imdb. This is the opinion of the general public on the matter. Lots and lots of Sci-Fi films in the top 100. Again, the Academy awards can go suck my dick. I can't wait until they're all dead and then maybe, just maybe we'll get a more representative awards committee. "Comedy: It Happened One Night, You Can't Take it With You, Going My Way, The Apartment, Tom Jones, Annie Hall, Shakespeare in Love SciFi: None Fantasy: Return of the King. Huh. Seems your comedy argument is invalid. Also, seeing as how several best picture winners have been musicals that negates the drama argument as well. The reason comedy and sci fi films don't win best picture is because no comedy or sci fi film has been WORTH the award. The Academy Awards aren't about how much an individual person enjoyed a movie. Otherwise The Dark Knight would've won pretty much everything last year despite it being not so good. The Academy Awards are about the art of filmmaking. Comedy movies are a dime a dozen these days and the sci fi genre hasn't been pumping out anything decent in years. You're quick to jump down the throats of the AMPAS for them thinking that comedy and sci fi aren't art. Maybe it's because there hasn't been a comedy or sci-fi movie that really deserves the award? You're bitching at the Academy for not recognizing sci-fi movies when in fact they DO. For the achievements and advancements they make in the world of film making. Just because they don't win best picture doesn't discount their award winning or nomination status. And it certainly doesn't discredit an entire organization. "
" @Milkman said:I haven't even seen the movie nor was I judging its quality. But I do know that as a general rule for the Oscars, no summer blockbusters will ever be nominated for best picture." It's a summer blockbuster. The only thing it would even come close to winning is some Special Effects awards. "Clearly didn't *get* the movie. Anyone else? The Dark Knight was also apparently just a summer blockbuster. Doesn't change the fact that it was that year's best film. "
" @RsistncE said:Star Wars." @Milkman said:I haven't even seen the movie nor was I judging its quality. But I do know that as a general rule for the Oscars, no summer blockbusters will ever be nominated for best picture. "" It's a summer blockbuster. The only thing it would even come close to winning is some Special Effects awards. "Clearly didn't *get* the movie. Anyone else? The Dark Knight was also apparently just a summer blockbuster. Doesn't change the fact that it was that year's best film. "
It's sad that im going to see the time travellers wife tonight, my cousin doesn't like sci-fi.....
" It's sad that im going to see the time travellers wife tonight, my cousin doesn't like sci-fi..... "
"How about that GI JOE "
This. Sci-fi is NOT just spaceships and aliens and HAL and Phillip K. Dick stories. Science fiction, by definition, is very broad. It does cover outer space, but it also covers alternate timelines...meaning that Watchmen is science fiction. Anything dealing with the future also happens to fall into science fiction, which means I Am Legend falls into the category. The Matrix IS science fiction. However, it is also a LOT of other things. Again, if you look at I Am Legend, there are horror elements mixed in with science fiction. With Watchmen, it's also fantasy, as it takes place in a comic book setting." The Matrix is a post apocalyptic cyberpunk romp set after a machine war involving vats of artificially grown cyborgs living in a virtual reality reconstruction of late 20th century Earth. How is this not SciFi? "
" @PeasForFees said:...make no sense to me. I already know what you'll say: "the Wachowskis said it's a live-action anime". Nonetheless, the key part of anime is ANIMATION. There is only computer animation mixed with live action...therefore it is NOT an anime. It is simply described that way as a form of emulation to what the influence is. That's all." If you think the Matrix was a great Science Fiction film I feel sorry for you "This."
Well, it does deal with minorities, a plot element that appears to be necessary to win an Oscar, but them there minorities be aliens, something which the Oscars don't look to kindly upon.
So District 9 is pretty good... i gotta check it out
" @addictedtopinescent said:yeah, sure" It's sad that im going to see the time travellers wife tonight, my cousin doesn't like sci-fi..... "If you want to get technical, Time Traveller's Wife can be classified as sci-fi since time travel is a big part of science fiction. "
It probably won't win an oscar because the academy has a collective iq that exceeds the double digits.
I generally agree with the nominations and winner of 'Best Picture' so The Oscars are still in my good books.
I didn't say that sci-fi and comedy films don't deserve them, I said that the reason you don't see them up for best picture is because, out of all the movies released in any given year, they may not be the most deserving when put up against contenders that show the best of film making. Just because there are examples of great sci-fi movies doesn't mean that they automatically should get nominated out of every other movie released in a year. For all you know they were, at one point, up for consideration for nomination. You're not a member of AMPAS, you don't know every movie that gets considered for an award. I'm not biased at all towards any genre of film. Comedy movies these days are generally nothing special and the few stand out titles are light fluff and a cheap go-to for ninety minutes of fun. But film awards aren't about how much fun a movie is. There has not been a stand-out sci-fi film in years and along comes District 9, a critical darling. And even if it DOES get nominated for SOMETHING, people are still going to be pissed because they think that it deserves an award because it entertained them more out of any movie they saw recently. And that's not what the Oscars are for. The reason that Dark Knight wasn't nominated for best picture is because Dark Knight wasn't that great. It stood out that year, sure, and it made the most money, yes, but there's more to films than entertainment value and money making. A film could be entertaining but also lacking in any sort of artistic quality. Look at any Michael Bay movie ever, for example. Yeah the guy can frame shots and make shit blow up nice, but compared to directors like Kubrick or Lumet or Bergman or even fucking Scorsese, Bay is like an adolescent given a lot of money and access to explosives and special effects. Watchmen won't be nominated because it was an adaptation of the comic that lacked the majority of the subtlety and undertones that the comic had. Sure it had depth to it, but at the end of the day it's more like a companion piece to supplement the comic. Zack Snyder is a good visual director, but until he starts branching out of his adaptation savvy bubble, he's forever going to be known as a niche director. Adaptations can get nominated for/win best picture, but it depends on the quality of the film and that goes back to the entertainment vs. merit argument. Science fiction movies have been recognized by the Academy before. For best picture and for other merit awards. There isn't a bias towards the sci-fi genre at all. Just because sci fi films aren't common nominations for best picture doesn't mean the Academy is bias against them. If films influenced by sci-fi, like A Clockwork Orange, can be nominated for an academy award, that doesn't mean bias. Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind uses elements of sci fi and surrealism to explore themes of love. That doesn't make it a sci-fi movie. George Lucas based the entirety of Star Wars after old samurai films. That doesn't make Star Wars a samurai movie. A film can have influences from other genres and be a different type of film. It's not uncommon at all. Fight Club has elements of a romantic comedy. Would you consider it to be a romantic comedy upon first watching it? Looking at the IMDB top 250, I see way more drama and action movies than I do sci-fi. And you don't know how many of those votes are by people vote spamming. The Simpsons Movie cracked the top list when it was first released. Using the IMDB top 250 as a way to measure a films quality is like using a bowl to draw a circle. Yeah it'll work but a compass would be more accurate. Grow up and stop thinking that the AMPAS automatically hates a sci-fi film when it's clear that they don't. You're just a bitter sci-fi fan lashing out at some institution that you think has wronged you. I'm not a cog, sir. If people like you were running things we'd have awards going to films like G.I . Joe winning best picture because stuff blows up real good and it's sort of entertaining. Which isn't what the Oscars are about. Go watch BAFTA or the Golden Globes. "
" @VelvetLore04 said:Artistic worth is easily definable. A film like Koyaanisqatsi is full of artistic worth from a visual standpoint. It's full of shots and pans and editing effects and the cinematography is top notch. On a similar tone, Dziga Vertov's 'The Man WIth the Movie Camera' is full of artistic worth in much the same way as Koyaanisqatsi, but on a much smaller scale. Any film can have artistic worth, but not every film can be considered art. There's artistic worth in visual film, in story-driven films, in character-driven films, in CGI explosion fests, even in the brainless summer blockbusters. But would you consider a movie like Transformers 2 to be of artistic worth? Now you said that it's all subjective, but even people that LIKED Transformers 2 would no doubt be hard pressed to consider it a film of artistic worth and quality. It may come down to opinions, but there are certain films that can be unanimously agreed upon to be devoid of or full of artistic worth and merit.I didn't say that sci-fi and comedy films don't deserve them, I said that the reason you don't see them up for best picture is because, out of all the movies released in any given year, they may not be the most deserving when put up against contenders that show the best of film making. Just because there are examples of great sci-fi movies doesn't mean that they automatically should get nominated out of every other movie released in a year. For all you know they were, at one point, up for consideration for nomination. You're not a member of AMPAS, you don't know every movie that gets considered for an award. I'm not biased at all towards any genre of film. Comedy movies these days are generally nothing special and the few stand out titles are light fluff and a cheap go-to for ninety minutes of fun. But film awards aren't about how much fun a movie is. There has not been a stand-out sci-fi film in years and along comes District 9, a critical darling. And even if it DOES get nominated for SOMETHING, people are still going to be pissed because they think that it deserves an award because it entertained them more out of any movie they saw recently. And that's not what the Oscars are for. The reason that Dark Knight wasn't nominated for best picture is because Dark Knight wasn't that great. It stood out that year, sure, and it made the most money, yes, but there's more to films than entertainment value and money making. A film could be entertaining but also lacking in any sort of artistic quality. Look at any Michael Bay movie ever, for example. Yeah the guy can frame shots and make shit blow up nice, but compared to directors like Kubrick or Lumet or Bergman or even fucking Scorsese, Bay is like an adolescent given a lot of money and access to explosives and special effects. Watchmen won't be nominated because it was an adaptation of the comic that lacked the majority of the subtlety and undertones that the comic had. Sure it had depth to it, but at the end of the day it's more like a companion piece to supplement the comic. Zack Snyder is a good visual director, but until he starts branching out of his adaptation savvy bubble, he's forever going to be known as a niche director. Adaptations can get nominated for/win best picture, but it depends on the quality of the film and that goes back to the entertainment vs. merit argument. Science fiction movies have been recognized by the Academy before. For best picture and for other merit awards. There isn't a bias towards the sci-fi genre at all. Just because sci fi films aren't common nominations for best picture doesn't mean the Academy is bias against them. If films influenced by sci-fi, like A Clockwork Orange, can be nominated for an academy award, that doesn't mean bias. Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind uses elements of sci fi and surrealism to explore themes of love. That doesn't make it a sci-fi movie. George Lucas based the entirety of Star Wars after old samurai films. That doesn't make Star Wars a samurai movie. A film can have influences from other genres and be a different type of film. It's not uncommon at all. Fight Club has elements of a romantic comedy. Would you consider it to be a romantic comedy upon first watching it? Looking at the IMDB top 250, I see way more drama and action movies than I do sci-fi. And you don't know how many of those votes are by people vote spamming. The Simpsons Movie cracked the top list when it was first released. Using the IMDB top 250 as a way to measure a films quality is like using a bowl to draw a circle. Yeah it'll work but a compass would be more accurate. Grow up and stop thinking that the AMPAS automatically hates a sci-fi film when it's clear that they don't. You're just a bitter sci-fi fan lashing out at some institution that you think has wronged you. I'm not a cog, sir. If people like you were running things we'd have awards going to films like G.I . Joe winning best picture because stuff blows up real good and it's sort of entertaining. Which isn't what the Oscars are about. Go watch BAFTA or the Golden Globes. "I never said "fun" was the criterion for what should be winning oscars. I understand that multiple fantastic movies can come out in any given year, and they can't all win, but looking back through the Oscars history one can clearly see a bias against Science Fiction and Fantasy films. I personally know lots of people who think that SciFi isn't "real art" in the same way that historical films or straight dramas are. These kinds of people's definition of "art" tends to gravitate towards angst and realism at the exclusion of so called "fun". You've uttered some vague stuff about "fun" not being "artistic worth", but you've not defined what exactly that is. Don't bother, because you can't. This whole deal is entirely subjective, and everybody's criterion for what makes a movie "good" is different. And Excuuuuuse me? Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind is a Science Fiction film. Drama vs Comedy is a tonal difference, but when I say "a drama film" I mean a drama film that does not have any defining sub-genre that it fits into. A film can be multiple genres at the same time - all SciFi is ALSO either Drama or Comedy, for instance. You can also get weird combinations, like Firefly, which was a Science Fiction Spaghetti Western "roaming the earth" five man band series. The point I was making was that the critics in many cases rejected that it was Science Fiction because their limited understanding of what that is was something to the effect of "like star wars and stuff". Hell, "Pattern Recognition" is a Science Fiction novel, despite being set in the real world and with no traditional science fiction concepts. It's like people reviewing that film just didn't understand that Science Fiction could be real art, and when they encountered one that was they just rejected that it was SciFi instead of acknowledging that. And no, G.I. Joe was a steaming pile of shit. I would never vote for it for any award except maybe "most gripping feature length toy commercial", and only because it's only competition this year was Transformers 2, a two and a half hour black hole of douchebaggery with a gravitational pull so strong that no joy can escape. An angry Sci-Fi fan I may be, but that doesn't mean it's not justified. "
I saw it last night and thought it was awesome. I agree it should certainly win something.
By and large, Oscars don't want to have anything to do with movies like this. The Academy Awards are decided by a bunch of folks older than I am, which means they've got both feet in the grave and someone's standing over them with a shovel full of dirt. Bellyache all you want, while people may say the movie is fantastic, by years end when all the films focused on being noticed by the awards season are fresh in theaters, this film will get lost in the buzz of more recent films. True, there are 10 nominees for Best Picture this year, and while that may mean District 9 will get a nod (depending on how much money the movie makes this summer), don't kid yourself into thinking it will win the award. Chances are that will go to some film featuring a hooker, a serial killer or Philip Seymour Hoffman.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment