Avatar not winner: A sign of warmongerism?

Reuters: Why Oscar chose "Hurt Locker" over "Avatar"

Quote:

---

There also is the parallel question of whether "Avatar" and distributor Fox contributed to their own demise in the best-picture race. The sci-fi epic had been critically acclaimed, far more widely seen and was widely heralded for its breakthrough technology. And it boasted the deep-pocket backing of a major Hollywood studio. Could it be explained as the ultimate example of the split personality in Hollywood, where movie choices are mostly driven by the need to make large amounts of money but where the people behind the camera still want to be seen as making art? And was it hurt by attacks from the political right on the movie's plot, which was seen as a dig on America's Iraq incursion?

---

I watched Hurt Locker and to me it seems an average episode of a war TV show.
It was only about a man would stood close to bombs, and thrill was achieved by the presence of a bomb, not by any serious acting. You could see just a series of dangerous situations and the portrayal of characters was weak.

My bet is that ideological warmongerism is behind this awards' choice.

Who knows. The "Academy" is an elite group, from inside the industry. The public just likes to watch the stars and what they wear on the red carpte. The awards are mostly for the movie industry by their peers.

Box office receipts probably reflect the public's favorite movies better than Oscars.

The only nominated movies I saw were Inglourious Basterds and Hurt Locker. I liked both, a bit haunting, snuck up on me.

Yeah Alpha, we know how jingoistic Hollywood is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ar81

not by any serious acting.
[...]
You could see just a series of dangerous situations and the portrayal of characters was weak.

---

You talking about Hurtlocker or Avatar?

Avatar was pretty, but it didn't add anything to the whole "white man to rescue!" that beens done to death.

Besides, I thought Avatar was supposedly "war" related also....

Its been called anti-war, almost an anti-current-american-attitude movie.

From Cameron himself:

Quote:

---

“greed and imperialism tend to destroy the environment" he said in a recent interview. “It’s a way of looking back on ourselves from this other world.”

---

It's a sign of it being a mediocre movie with great special effects. Shocking!

I know it was compared to Pocahontas in plot. Still involved fighting/battle, protagonist, etc.

If AR is suggesting Hollywood is pc political tho, wouldn't that mean Avatar could win, if it's anti-war and all those librul hippies in Hollywood would love it?

:noob:

Meanwhile, I have to wonder how any of you can qualify a thread about what movie wins an award a serious topic that belongs in D&D.

If people aren't going to bother to differentiate between the two sections, there is very little point in having them separate at all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer

Its been called anti-war, almost an anti-current-american-attitude movie.

From Cameron himself:

---

Anti-war does not equal anti-American.

Quote:

---

Göring: Why, of course, the people don't want war. Why would some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best that he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece. Naturally, the common people don't want war; neither in Russia nor in England nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a Parliament or a Communist dictatorship.

Gilbert: There is one difference. In a democracy, the people have some say in the matter through their elected representatives, and in the United States only Congress can declare wars.

Göring: Oh, that is all well and good, but, voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country.

Interview with Gilbert in Göering's jail cell during the Nuremberg War Crimes Trials (18 April 1946)

---

Easily movable then. It's not like we've got so much traffic that anyone here is confused.....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GGT

I know it was compared to Pocahontas in plot. Still involved fighting/battle, protagonist, etc.

If AR is suggesting Hollywood is pc political tho, wouldn't that mean Avatar could win, if it's anti-war and all those librul hippies in Hollywood would love it?

:noob:

---

Wait, are you insinuating that a post by Ar81 is a jumbled mishmash showing no logic whatsoever? Oh, and the Hurt Locker isn't exactly war-mongering.

Avatar didn't win because it's a fluffy movie--looks great, but not much to stick to your ribs. Sort of like Splenda. Titanic was Hegel by comparison (and Titanic wasn't all that great either). Cameron makes big spectacles that are skin deep. Now, if he'd had some Aliens dialog in Avatar.... But apparently that phase is long behind him.

Sorry, I thought this was going to be about politics in movies, ie propaganda disguised as entertainment? :noob:

Sure, if AR's thesis had a leg to stand on.... But he essentially accused Hollywood of Warmongerism, which is preposterous on two levels. First, the failure of Avatar to win best picture is based on its being a mediocre picture. It deserves tech awards only, which is what it got. Second, Hollywood gave an Oscar to the Hurt Locker, which is hardly a warmongering movie (not unless you consider, say, Saving Private Ryan to be warmongering as well.)

So, idiotic thesis, don't be surprised that nobody takes it seriously.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ']['ear

Sure, if AR's thesis had a leg to stand on.... But he essentially accused Hollywood of Warmongerism, which is preposterous on two levels. First, the failure of Avatar to win best picture is based on its being a mediocre picture. It deserves tech awards only, which is what it got. Second, Hollywood gave an Oscar to the Hurt Locker, which is hardly a warmongering movie (not unless you consider, say, Saving Private Ryan to be warmongering as well.)

---

Hurt Locker is also a mediocre picture. It demanded no serious acting effort, and it was even boring.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ar81

Anti-war does not equal anti-American.

---

No, but it has been called both. Göring has nothing to do with that...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Flixy

No, but it has been called both. Göring has nothing to do with that...

---

Yes, as long as common people are dragged into war.

Maybe The Hurt Locker was simply a better film?

I know, I'm reaching, but think about it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ar81

I watched Hurt Locker and to me it seems an average episode of a war TV show.

---

I disagree completely.

But what's your opinion on Avatar?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ziggy Stardust

But what's your opinion on Avatar?

---

It proposes an alternate and a more batural way of living outside the concrete cages where we live in captivity.
In a way it reminds me the contrast you could see in the movie "The emerald forest".
For me, the forest has a special meaning, and I seize every time I can to visit the forest.
I seem to feel peace there, it is more like where we humans belong.

From a certain point of view, nature is the most hi-tech environment yo could ever dream, because it is our life support system.
I have done some research and I found that processes of nature are the most efficient for recycling purposes.
And this is why NASA is doing research on how to emulate an ecosystem in a closed environment if a trip to other planets is to be attempted.

For me, soldiers are just people trained to kill.
I have seen enough war movies, and this one has nothing extraordinary in the acting or the filiming.
Avatar on the contrary is a piece of art. Visually it is amazing, and the story not only delivers entertainment, but also reminds us that we belong to nature.

That's why they have categories for editing, special effects, screenplay, cinematography, sound, makeup, costumes and documentary.

It's undoubtedly vastly different to "direct" an animation than live actors. Best Film is supposed to incorporate all the elements. That you didn't notice Hurt Locker's subtle plot or any of the above elements (and thought it boring), might mean it really was the best film.

I often disagree with Academy Awards, nor am I saying that Hurt Locker was great. I haven't even seen it, though critics seemed to have multiple orgasms. I'm just saying that I would havethrown up in my mouth had Avatar won, because it is so clearly NOT a Best Picture. It's a decent sci fi flick with revolutionary effects. A film should NEVER win Best Picture merely on the strength of effects. That would be a travesty.

Oh, and :down: for Hollywood and its 10 nominees. Nothing quite like BS inflation to boost ratings and revenues. Just means twice as many rental boxes with "Nominated for Best Picture" on them. Devalues the meaning for those that are actually good.

Considering that James Cameron (director of Avatar) and married to Kathryn Bigelow (director of Hurt Locker), I wonder what it was like in the household last night and this morning.

EDIT: Oh, they are divorced. Not sure how I missed that.

Yes, that makes it yummier. :)

Don't get me wrong. I like Cameron, AFAIK. I've enjoyed his movies. But I think that Titanic was not worthy of a Best Picture, and Avatar much less so. Fact is, the huge grossing movies are rarely exceptional movies. Appealing to the widest possible audience almost guarantees a certain degree of mediocrity, doesn't it?

I know Lewk disagrees. He thinks that whatever makes the most money is best.

It won because its a better movie maybe? O_o ( One of my top favorites now actually, though EOD never goes out alone like that)

Avatar was beautiful ground breaking feat that made James Cameron the Director King of the world again... Cameron the writer however, deserves a razzie, I mean seriously, I guess he has never heard of subtlety, nor Character developement, still I WANT TO GO TO PANDORA :*(

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spenni

Avatar was beautiful ground breaking feat that made James Cameron the Director King of the world again... Cameron the writer however, deserves a razzie, I mean seriously, I guess he has never heard of subtlety, nor Character developement,

---

:up:

I keep wondering to myself, "If Avatar was Cameron's brainchild 10 years in the making, how could he not sign on a better lead man than Sam Worthington?"

Like Tear, I would have been disgusted if Avatar had won. I haven't seen either, yet, but I feel like I don't need to see Avatar to understand that it's Dances With Wolves in 3D, and everyone I've asked about The Hurt Locker has loved it. Now I definitely need to see the latter, in addition to Crazy Heart and A Serious Man.

I was happy with the 10 nominations for Best Picture this year; it was nice to see lesser known movies get a nod. Sometimes we get so latched onto the big names that we don't give movies like District 9 and An Education their fair chance at the spotlight.


Also, does anyone in the film industry look as quintessentially evil as James Cameron? Right outtuva bad Bond movie, I swear.

Hey, don't get me wrong. Avatar is very worth the ticket price to see the spectacle. I'm always of that belief for movies which are particularly lush visually. I see most movies at home on DVD, but I make a point of going to see the truly sensual ones, and IMO Avatar is worth that.

Which, BTW, I'd bet is part of its amazing gross. Most people knew that it was groundbreaking visually. And, I'd argue that's why Cameron played the 3D gimmick card.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ar81

It proposes an alternate and a more batural way of living outside the concrete cages where we live in captivity.
In a way it reminds me the contrast you could see in the movie "The emerald forest".
For me, the forest has a special meaning, and I seize every time I can to visit the forest.
I seem to feel peace there, it is more like where we humans belong.

From a certain point of view, nature is the most hi-tech environment yo could ever dream, because it is our life support system.
I have done some research and I found that processes of nature are the most efficient for recycling purposes.
And this is why NASA is doing research on how to emulate an ecosystem in a closed environment if a trip to other planets is to be attempted.

For me, soldiers are just people trained to kill.
I have seen enough war movies, and this one has nothing extraordinary in the acting or the filiming.
Avatar on the contrary is a piece of art. Visually it is amazing, and the story not only delivers entertainment, but also reminds us that we belong to nature.

---

Right.

And the Hurt Locker was just an average episode of a war TV show.

Key-riced!

In fact, you're not determining who deserves the Oscar going by any kind of cinematic criteria. You have the false impression that the Hurth Locker glorifies war, and Avatar glorifies elves, so Avatar must be the better film. I can tell you either did not see The Hurt Locker, or you had very preconcieved notions.

If you say about the Hurth Locker as criticism: "the portrayal of characters was weak.", and then continue to praise Avatar, someone isn't judging something with one standard.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NGS

I keep wondering to myself, "If Avatar was Cameron's brainchild 10 years in the making, how could he not sign on a better lead man than Sam Worthington?"

Like Tear, I would have been disgusted if Avatar had won. I haven't seen either, yet, but I feel like I don't need to see Avatar to understand that it's Dances With Wolves in 3D, and everyone I've asked about The Hurt Locker has loved it. Now I definitely need to see the latter, in addition to Crazy Heart and A Serious Man.

I was happy with the 10 nominations for Best Picture this year; it was nice to see lesser known movies get a nod. Sometimes we get so latched onto the big names that we don't give movies like District 9 and An Education their fair chance at the spotlight.


Also, does anyone in the film industry look as quintessentially evil as James Cameron? Right outtuva bad Bond movie, I swear.

---

So you'd be disgusted by a movie winning an award even though you've never seen the movie? And you'd be happy for another movie to win even though you've never seen that movie either?

And so this leads to the question: What was it about Sam Worthington's performance that you disliked so much?

Oh that's right, you haven't seen the movie.

:rolleyes:

As for AR - please do yourself a favour and go live in the forest. :up:

For me Avatar not winning mostly meant that a pretty looking but otherwise mediocre film didn't win. I haven't seen this Hurt Locker film so I can't say if the win was justified. I didn't Avatar to win from the start by the way. I thought Precious made a good chance.