The Tulsa Forum by TulsaNow

Wow. It looks like the Academy is going to go ahead and let a huge box office draw and money maker, have a chance at one of their precious awards.
I guess I better watch the Hurt Locker so I can see why it beats out Avatar.
I hate to seem senicle but thats usually what the stuffed shirts of Hollyweird do.
Anything that makes money and is popular is usually left to just be satisfied with its personal gain.

Dude, 19 of the last 20 films that won Best Picture grossed well over 100 million dollars. The one that missed the mark grossed $98 million -- not exactly chump change.

Eighteen of the last 20 Best Pictures grossed $200 million.

The Academy apparently very much likes box-office hits. Where are these stuffed shirts that you claim?

I don't doubt that, but the question now is how much of that box office was made AFTER it won Best Picture.  That would be an interesting statistic.

That's true.  Some of those flicks were pretty obscure before awards season.  No one knew about "Slumdog Millionaire" until it won.

Although, getting back to Dolfan's point, Titanic was a huge grosser well before the Oscars and yet it still won best pic.

Is it just my imagination, or is this the first year they have had 10 best pic nominees?  Tell me they aren't doing that in every category this year.  :-\

No, it's just Best Pic they're doing that in.  I remember hearing about it earlier this week, and the reasoning, but I can't remember why now.  Damned age...

Well, as a movie buff, I can tell you the Best Picture movies from the past 20 years that were hits before the Oscars:

Big hits:

“Dances with Wolves”
“The Silence of the Lambs”
“Schindler's List”
“Forrest Gump”
“Braveheart”
"Titanic"
"Gladiator"
“The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King”
"The Departed"
"Unforgiven"

Sizable hits

“Million Dollar Baby”
"Slumdog Millionaire"
“A Beautiful Mind”
“Chicago”
“American Beauty”
“The English Patient”
“Shakespeare in Love”
"No Country for Old Men"

One that did only OK before the Oscars:
“Crash”

All but one of these movies found a large and appreciative audience before the Oscars. Half of the list consists of big, popular movies. And even the one that supposedly didn't do well was a relatively low-budget film that got back all of its investment in one week and wound up earning more than 10 times its cost.

The trade mags have reported that reason the Best Picture field was expanded because a bunch of folks were mad that "The Dark Knight" wasn't a nominee last year.

(And I concur that its omission was a big mistake. It may have been a superhero movie, but it was positively Shakespearean as a human tragedy.)

The Academy thought the risk of having too many Best Picture nominees was better than having too few.

I hope we can agree to disagree here.  Although I liked DK, I don't think it was BP material.

Honestly...would the hype have been so big had Heath Ledger not passed right after it's filiming?  I seriously wonder...

I don't think it would have mattered. The movie got such a powerful word-of-mouth the first week of its release, it was unbelievable. The Ledger death angle became secondary by then; his extraordinary performance overshadowed that.

Let's put it this way ... I went in with fairly high expectations, and it exceeded them in ways I didn't expect -- the sophistication of the script and the tortured ambiguity of the choices many of the characters had to make.

After reading what I just wrote, yeah, it was Best Picture material.

I've seen Braveheart and Chicago.

rwarn,
How could you put Unforgiven on that list, then leave off Grand Torino??

Back to thread;  Avatar was/is great.  It deserves to get big crowds.  I think I would have preferred without the 3D crap.  It just ain't here yet.


But - there always has to be a "but"...
It follows the time proven concept of white man as saviour to the poor downtrodden savage.  It is "Dances With Wolves" in space.

And "Broken Arrow" (1950 James Stewart and Jeff Chandler)

Because "Gran Torino" did not win Best Picture. All of the movies I listed were Best Picture winners from the past 20 years. All of them, with the possible exception of one, were box-office successes before the Oscars. About half of them were downright blockbusters.

I'm not sure why "Hurt Locker" hasn't made much money yet. Haven't seen it yet, but every description I've read indicates it is a thriller, Hitchcock suspense style. No one would ever accuse it of being a ponderous, plodding film.

I've seen quite a few movies this year. This is the best film sequence I saw in 2009:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GroDErHIM_0[/youtube]

I tend to think the movies that win awards are the ones you will watch over and stand the test of time. Like Gone with the Wind, the Wizard of Oz and Star Wars. Of the last 20 yrs winners, almost all are a "watch once" or as DVD reviewers would rate it, a "rent."

One indicator about how re-watchable a movie is, is box office. Here are the first and second highest grossing movies or each of the last 20 years. Compare the previous list to this one:

Home Alone / Ghost
Terminator 2 / Robin Hood
Aladdin / Home Alone 2
Jurassic Park / Mrs Doubtfire
Forrest Gump / Lion King
Toy Story / Batman Forever
Independence Day / Twister
Titanic / Men In Black
Saving Private Ryan / Armageddon
SW: The Phantom Menace / Sixth Sense
The Grinch / Cast Away
Harry Potter / LOTR: The Fellowship of the Ring
Spider Man / LOTR: The Two Towers
LOTR: The Return of the King / Finding Nemo
Shrek 2 / Spiderman 2
SW: Revenge of the Sith / CON: The lion, The Witch and the Wardrobe
POTC: Dead Man's Chest / Night at the Museum
Spider Man 3 / Shrek 3
The Dark Knight / Iron Man
Avatar / Transformers 2


Now keep in mind, I'd never suggest Home Alone should win an Oscar, but memorable movies, that are rewatchable, and advance the trade should be honored.

What also needs to be adjusted is timing. I believe the oscars should only include movies that hit major release in the previous 6-18 months. The end of the year is known as "Oscar movie time" as the veteran actors with the more deep philosophical pictures launch then. Consider this year, Avatar and Star Trek were both lauded by critics and have near-identical rating and are both in the same genre. However, Avatar is in theaters at the time of the nominations. One is the frontrunner to win, the other didn't make the top ten. Why? I say it's largely timing. Avatar came out in December and Star Trek in May.

Last year they had 5 nominees and all 5 were movies released in the last 7 weeks of the year. That can't be coincidence. This year, they upped it to ten slots, but there is still a lean:
Q1: 0 nominees
Q2: 2 nominees
Q3: 2 nominees
Q4: 6 nominees

Film producers and distributors know when the best timing is to release a pic for Academy recognition if that's what they are worried about.  Money is the primary driver of the film industry.  Egos are a close second and awards are third, if you ask me.  I really don't worry too much about the awards programs it's just a self-love fest anyhow.

I'm shocked, SHOCKED by your assertion.  :D

My post was just a observation of the artsy side of my so called stuffed shirts of Hollywood.
rwarn you are da-man of Hollywood films. I give it up to ya, and or two thumbs up.
My point being. These little gems(Which I have not seen) probably wasnt burning up the box office sales.
Ordinary people, Terms of Endearment, Out of Africa, The English Patient, Shakespeare in Love, American Beauty and A Beautiful Mind.
Im not much on musicals, Dancing and or culture type films. Foreign flicks or having to read the dialog. Martial art movies tend to get boring quick also.
Suffice to say, I wouldnt be able to write reviews for any publications due to my lack of appreciation for the so called finer films.

Trying to stimulate more conversation on the boards other than politics, I thought I'd list some of the movies I felt could or should have been winners or ones that the winner puzzled me.  I'd love to hear other's "shoulda beens"

Even though I don't pay a whole lot of attention to it, I was looking through the list over the last 25 to 30 years and came up with some of the movies I felt should have won best pic that did not:

Listed by year, film I thought was best and the winner

1986- Room With A View/ Platoon

Room had some stunning cinematography in it, Platoon had a great cast and wonderful acting, but I honestly did not feel it was that well written of a movie, nor that earth-shattering in genre

1989- Dead Poet's Society/ Driving Miss Daisy

DPS was such a moving screenplay and Robin Williams delivered an amazing performance

1990- No problem with Dances With Wolves, I was simply shocked that POS of a sequel Godfather III was even nominated, man that was a horrible flick.  GF I & II are two of my all time faves and I love FFC's work.

1991- JFK/ The Silence Of The Lambs

This was the Oliver Stone movie I felt was best pic worthy, although Silence Of The Lambs has proven itself to be a durable classic.

1994- This was as good a year as there was, Forrest Gump, Shawshank, Pulp Fiction- those are three of my favorite all time movies.

1996 and 1997 also produced some great nominees, though I still scratch my head when I see Jerry McGuire as a best pic candidate

1998- Saving Private Ryan/ Shakespeare In Love

Shakespeare just didn't strike a chord with me, not my usual genre and as much as I didn't see Platoon as anything Oscar- worthy, I felt Spielberg got a war movie right with this one.

1999- The Green Mile/ American Beauty

While I agree Kevin Spacey really deserved best actor for his role in American Beauty, I simply did not find the movie as compelling as Green Mile.

2004- I loved Million Dollar Baby but could not believe The Aviator recieved a nomination, horrible screen play, Leonardo DiCaprio was so out of his element as Howard Hughes it was distracting.  Ghack!

2005- I felt Crash was finally an acceptance of the movie-making style that Quinton Tarrantino pulled off so well in Pulp Fiction, though Brokeback or Capote were justifiable winners in my mind as well.  I honestly figured the Academy would give it to Brokeback simply for the social statement and novelty of a gay cowboy movie.

2006- The Departed- I felt any of the other nominees were better-qualified.  The casting and acting were great in the flick, but this was just another ho-hum Scorsese gangster flick, one of my favorite genres, but never Oscar-worthy with the possible exception of Goodfellas. I simply didn't see anything as special in this pic as I did in Babel (Yet another try with the Pulp Fiction/Crash formula-though I thought a bit disjointed), Little Miss Sunshine, or Letters From Iwo Jima

2007- That was a great Oscar class.  I saw four out of the five, There Will Be Blood being the only one I didn't see and I thought any of the four were worthy.  Though the ending of Coen Brothers movies often frustrate me.

True enough.  I guess I am biased because I think Grand Torino deserves one too.  It is right there with Unforgiven as two of Eastwood's best movies.  Both exceptional.

I'm fine with that. I think Clint Eastwood is America's finest director right now, and I'll stand on Martin Scorsese's coffee table and say that. Quentin Tarantino's coffee table, too. (And I like both directors very much.) I think the work Eastwood has done in the past 20 years or so is as good as anyone's on the planet.

(Although Jason Reitman is coming up fast.)

I know Eastwood is a conservative, but the usual blabbermouth pundits don't crow about him because he makes films that are often morally ambiguous and complex. Eastwood doesn't see things in stark, black-and-white terms, which is one of the reasons that he's a great director.

One would have never figured for the sort of roles he played for years that the guy is as deep as he apparently is.  His work as a director is amazing and I concur, the best in America.

I've seen most of Eastwood's movies (acting and directing) and I think his best work was on Unforgiven.  I still watch that movie at least twice a year.  I need to get a Blu-Ray of it (if it's available).  Morgan Freeman was spectacular in that movie, as was Gene Hackman.  Not your typical western.  His dialogue as he was leaving town toward the end of the movie was great.

"You better bury Ned right, or I'll come back and kill every one of you sons of b!+ches"

"All right, I'm coming out. Any man I see out there, I'm gonna shoot him. Any sumb!+ch takes a shot at me, I'm not only gonna kill him, but I'm gonna kill his wife, all his friends, and burn his damn house down."

^^^^
Favorite line of the movie.

Speaking of Westerns, I saw Appaloosa for the first time last night.  I was pleasantly surprised.  I didn't realize how good an actor Viggo Mortensen was until I saw this.  Another one I need to find on BR, along with just about any of the Costner Westerns (Dances With Wolves, Open Range to name a couple).

Conan
He has always been pretty brilliant in the roles he played.  Subtly over the top in the sphagetti westerns.  The depth showed up big time when he could do things like Dirty Harry, Play Misty for Me, and Bronco Billy - pretty serious range.

Unforgiven and Gran Torino just stand out big time to me.  I guess there is a particular resonance.

If you want to see a great Viggo Mortensen flick, rent Hidalgo.  You won't be sorry.

I was thinking along the lines of Harry Calahan and Philo Beddo, same ensemble casts, plays a likeable tough-guy not a whole lot of depth to the character, which I thought was pretty much playing himself.  Sort of like Burt Reynolds.

Don't need to.  Seen that one also.  He's good in films that feature horses.  Damn you.  Now I need to find that one on Blu-Ray.  I'll be broke before my next paycheck!

He was also good in 28 days with Sandra Bullock.  Of course, I've got a thing for Sandra so I might be biased on that one.

Me too.  While the movie wasn't great, for Sandra value you can't beat Demolition Man.  Sandra in spandex...mmmmmm

He really met his meat.

Ok boys. This is it. Who takes it tonight, Avatar or Hurt Locker ? Sandra or Meryl ?
Jeff or George ? etc.etc.
This is the first time I have actually cared. Must be a age thing. Im gowing up.

My money is on Iron Chef Symon to take out Spike Mendohlson on Iron Chef America.

Congrats to Sandra and Jeff, I was glad for both of them.
Just as I thought. James take your Billions and go home, oh and one more thing.
Your Ex-Wife gets your award too. Better luck in ten years.
Im not mad The Hurt Locker won, its just that I already knew it. I like the film its just in my opinion, its not as good as Avatar.
Slow but fun show.