Originally posted by darthmaul1My god, that Sean Penn thing was the one that REALLY got to me. I was waiting the whole time to hear Depp's name and then...SEAN!
The oscars doesn't have any dignity anyway.
That one year when Helen Hunt won best actress in as good as it gets, what a load of crap.
then randy newman winning best song for monsters inc just becasue he's due. over enyas LOTR, what a load of crap.
and then Sean penn winning best actor for mystic river because he is due too,(he was good but nothing great) it should of gone to Johnny depp for pirates of the carribean.
In my opinion given most of the crap movies out there and for a change ROTS should be nominated for best picture just as ANH was
F*CKERS!
Originally posted by DeVi| D0do
I think the wins were deserving. The VFX in The Matrix were much better than TPM... and LOTR was better than AOTC by far.I don't think ROTS deserves to win this time either... WOTW had much better VFX, as (I suspect) will King Kong and Harry Potter.
arnt the visual effects in these movies all by ILM
I mean Harry Potter and Star Wars i know are by ILM
but im not sure about LOTR, King Kong , and The Matrix
Originally posted by Jedi Priestess
Actually it will probably win Oscars for special effects, it's major competition will be War of the Worlds but I think the construction of Vader will probably blow WOTW out of the water there. Unfortunately that should be about it. No acting awards. 🙁 Possibly one for Willaims for soundtrack since he's never won for Star Wars.
John Williams won an Oscar for the first Star Wars.
War Of The Worlds came and went. It made some big money , but barely more than half of ROTS' take. The reviews for Sith were also better, overall. Nothing in that film was particulary groundbreaking to me; many shots had that Close Encounters felling, turned upside down. Spielberg and Cruise made it in a big hurry, and it shows. John Williams didn't even stand out; I think it's best shots at the Oscars are for it's disturbing sound design. As far as who's in, Hollywood I'm sure is quite fed up with Tom Cruise's current behavior, and Spielberg may ruffle some feathers with his Xmas project about the Mossad assasinations following Munich in 1972.
So I say the main competition for VFX is King Kong, and we'll see what that's like.
Well, we are talking about what kind of climate is in the current air; Oscar is political. The Phantom Menace should have won, but people were too mixed of mind about it. The Matrix seemed very fresh and new and cool, so it won. When the two sequels were released, there was such negative backlash, neither got a single nomination. George Lucas has found favour again, though he is not widely liked in Hollywood for his independence, so that comes into play why Sith can win this time.
I'd agree with you if we were talking about the Best Picture, Director, or acting awards, but for the technical ones I think the Academy is usually very fair.
The Matrix had far better FX than TPM and was more revolutionary... And the Matrix sequels weren't nominated simply because their VFX sucked.
The VFX Award has nothing to do with Lucas, so your last statement doesn't make sense... unless of course you're talking about Sith winning Best Picture award. And I know you're not that stupid...
No way the first Matrix had better FX; there was so many breakthrough in CGI in TPM, from CG characters to sets etc. It was this kind of breakthrough that led the way for The Lord Of The Rings to look as good as it did. The Matrix was just funky and different, with one invention: bullet-time photography, brought from commercial making. TPM just looked big and super-real everywhere; there were effects we didn't even notice. The Matrix experimental look just caught fancy for a while, but has falled into cliche now.
Originally posted by roughriderI couldn't agree less...
No way the first Matrix had better FX; there was so many breakthrough in CGI in TPM, from CG characters to sets etc. It was this kind of breakthrough that led the way for The Lord Of The Rings to look as good as it did. The Matrix was just funky and different, with one invention: bullet-time photography, brought from commercial making. TPM just looked big and super-real everywhere; there were effects we didn't even notice. The Matrix experimental look just caught fancy for a while, but has falled into cliche now.
Originally posted by roughriderAnd this would be reflected in the fact that ILM has won 14 Oscars and been nominated an additional 16 times in the VFX category..?
And the VFX has everthing to do with George Lucas beacuse he owns ILM; awards, in Hollywood's mind, mean honouring him and his empire.
ROTS' effects were far better than WOTW; there were more of them and they were of higher quality.
And I would have liked to see more of LOTR's effects, but I slept through half of the films... Jackson seriously needs an editor. Plus those extraneous Lotr love scenes and dialogue were so putrid I wanted to choke on my popcorn.
Oh come on. I cringed so often in the Lotr love scenes I felt like it was an Afterschool Special. With those gauzy curtains and cheezy lines it felt like a femine protection commercial! Not to mention the fact that those scenes are nowhere in the books, and the whole AOTC love story is, like in fact, kinda crucial to the entire saga!
While I agree the WOTW effects were very good, the number and quality of them in ROTS is enough to give Lucas the hardware. And by quantity I mean the opening space battle, the bridge battle, GG's escape, landing of the ship, yoda's closeup, the opera house, wookie battle, Utapah battle, Mace's battle, order 66 masacres, and the final battles.
IMHO The opening space battle won it for Lucas right there, but there were so many more. The sense of wonder was with Lucas, not Spielberg.