11 oscars = overrated

[Ross_Geller]

AccyD wrote:

KennyR wrote:
Worth an oscar. Maybe two. Not eleven.

That's right.

Nowadays most people seem to go on the hype that a film has raised, rather than its technical merits.

For example, as Mikeymike has said Titanic is a good film, but not brilliant, anyone with a modicom of film experience will realise that it does not compare to the classics (a la Ben Hur).

But at the time the media hype meant it was virtually guaranteed the max number of Oscars.

Most of the Oscars for Return of the King were based on its technical merits.

And who here thinks that Ben-Hur didn't get a comparable hype in 1959 as Titanic or any Lord of the Rings film has had in the present?  Ben-Hur would have been pushed as hard as MGM could have pushed it.  Just because the movie is hyped doesn't mean it doesn't deserve the Oscars it got (Titanic deserved most, but definitely not all, of them).
Also, Ben-Hur had it slightly easier in 3 Oscar categories (Best Cinematography, Best Art Direction-Set Decoration and Best Costume Design) because they were actually split into two sub-categories: Colour and Black & White, thus removing some possible competition.  
In the "Best Effects, Special Effects" category there was only one other nominee, "Journey to the Center of the Earth"!  Ben-Hur had at least a 50/50 chance of getting an Oscar there, it was hardly a hardearned win.

The same us true of Lord of the Rings, whilst it may be a good film (I have not seen it) it is not as good as Ben Hur or the other classic films, merely the media has carried the film.

How do you know any of the Lord of the Rings films aren't as good as Ben-Hur when you haven't even seen the LotR films?

Yet again, the Oscasrs/Brits/BAFTA's etc. etc. has merely turned into a backslapping event for the film industry rather than a constructive view of the previous 12 months of films, - but then again what are we to expect from this industry?

I'm not sure how many parts of the industry would be happy with a set of films that were made with a crew that aren't members of their unions, filmed in a location that is outside of their country (and thus not putting any money into their economy through usage or exposure), hired thousands of foreigners to play the extras, and in the end could take some business away from their shores?  The only non-New Zealanders that could be happy with this is New Line, the people making the merchandise and the publishers and royalty holders of the original books.  I certainly can't see much for the American or British film industries  to backslap for.

[mikeymike]

Oh joy.  PJ is doing "The Hobbit" now.

The pun was initially unintended, but I see it's quite apt :-)

[odin]

I thought he was going to do a King Kong remake first :-?.

[that_punk_guy]

mikeymike wrote:
Oh joy.  PJ is doing "The Hobbit" now.

Hmm, I have that as an audio book somewhere. I think I'll put it on my MP3 player and "read" it at work one day.

[mikeymike]

odin wrote:
I thought he was going to do a King Kong remake first :-?.

Yup.

[angrybrit]

Star Wars 1 & 2 were good films (not up to the first trilogy's standard though.)

Lord of the Ring. :-o  :elvis:  :-D

[Speelgoedmannetje]

But what about really beautiful movies, like:
"Amelie Poulain"
"Rabbit proof fence"
"Billy Elliot"

or a more sinister movie, like:
"Raise the red lantern"

[Glaucus]

Speelgoedmannetje wrote:
But what about really beautiful movies, like:
"Amelie Poulain"
"Rabbit proof fence"
"Billy Elliot"

or a more sinister movie, like:
"Raise the red lantern"

Or perhaps the one movie that clearly captured the finiest moment of movie making in our life time:



Dumb and Dumber

:-D

  - Mike

[Glaucus]

You mean you have to pay the film company twice to three times the normal amount you'd pay to go see a film.

Actually, DVDs are a great deal. There's many people these days who have excellent home theater setups at home and don't even bother watching movies in real theaters any more. If you look at it that way, what would it cost for a family of 4 to see a movie in the theater + ridiculously over priced popcorn & drink, as opposed to buying the extended DVD box set (and I mean the 4 disc set, the 5 disc set just has extra gimmicks, but the movie edit is the same). And if you consider the fact of multiple views with the DVD set, you simply can't go wrong! Not only that, if you find that the movie sucks you can always sell your collectors edition of the movie on e-bay and recoup most of your losses - something tough to do at a theater. Ripoff is hardly what I would call it (unless of course they release the DVD set only in FULLSCREEN (4x3) rather then anamorphic/letterbox WIDESCREEN (16x9) ;-) )

  - Mike

[aardvark]

Ripoff is hardly what I would call it (unless of course they release the DVD set only in FULLSCREEN (4x3) rather then anamorphic/letterbox WIDESCREEN (16x9)

That would be a ripoff :-)
I refuse to buy any movie that only comes in a fullscreen version. For example Moonlighting (with Cher) or The Secret of N.I.M.H. Sometimes Blockbuster (spit) only orders in DVDs in Fullscreen (Kangaroo Jack (not that great a movie, but it's the principle of the thing)) I don't mind movies that have both, usually on two-sided disc, but widescreen is the only way to go.
I finally returned the 7 day rental of the extended Towers version three days late! And I still never got to look much at disk 3 or listen to the audio commentaries.  It was enough to tide me over until I purchase the 5 disk version with the Gollum statue.  Just waiting until it drops way below the sale price of around CDN$88.00 available many places. I got the bookends version of Fellowship for about $60 and now it's back up to the List price of over $100 8-)

[Speelgoedmannetje]

Glaucus wrote:

Speelgoedmannetje wrote:
But what about really beautiful movies, like:
"Amelie Poulain"
"Rabbit proof fence"
"Billy Elliot"

or a more sinister movie, like:
"Raise the red lantern"

Or perhaps the one movie that clearly captured the finiest moment of movie making in our life time:



Dumb and Dumber

:-D

  - Mike

Hm, explain.
Actually, have you ever seen these movies I mentioned :-)?