@agentgray: Agreed. On LotR, I'd say it's mostly because the Rohan were a stronger presence than the Gondorians, but it goes beyond that. Fellowship is more enjoyable visually, Two Towers is more visceral, and Return just...finished things up. Several times over, but that is how the story was written, and it's what people who have read the books will expect to see.
The key difference here is that I don't know if anyone will be able to top this Joker. He's the go-to Bat-villain for a reason, and Ledger went leaps and bounds beyond anything we saw from the other three major villains so far. Granted, part of that is simply the fact that the character of the Joker actually allows that sort of freedom, but frankly I'm a bit disappointed in Neeson's Ra's. You know, aside from the fact that he can't even pronounce his own name.
Sorry to spoil the party, but am I the only one out there who thinks The Dark Knight was a good movie but not great? It was very enjoyable and far better than other films in the genre, but there are other films this year that were snubbed harder than TDK. I mean, at least they gave the guy over 200 million to make it! Yes, Ledger was awesome, but I could think of 5 actors who did better with more screen time this year that were snubbed. And Nolan did a fine job directing a huge picture but I for one can not wait until he returns to smaller films with more heart. I really think Nolan and Raimi are wasting their finest years directing better than average action movies when they have the talent (at least Nolan) to be ranked alongside the greats by directing original material. If anything, he derserves more acclaim for The Prestige and Memento than for TDK. Both were better films than TDK.
@LostMythos: A lot of that stuff is debatable, but, from a technical standpoint, it's hard to convince me that the Reader was better than the Dark Knight (re: the best director category).
@LostMythos: I think a lot of it has to do with backlash as well. As soon as anything gets too popular, too quickly (especially among teens) it loses credibility.
Nature of the beast. If Dark Knight came out in September or so it would have won best pic.
@Paul_Is_Drunk: And with competition from the long-awaited return of new TV episodes, coupled with the fact that the younger fans were back in school, they might have ended up the second-highest grossing film...of 2008.
@guibom & SonOfAsgard: The first half was a really interesting sci-fi/post-apocalyptic story, but the second half was a rather directionless social commentary. And I mean _seriously_ directionless. As in people can't agree on whether it's supposed to be warning us of what we're becoming, or suggesting that we'd have no trouble straightening ourselves out even if we did.
@Purple Dave: "The first half was a really interesting sci-fi/post-apocalyptic story, but the second half was a rather directionless social commentary. And I mean _seriously_ directionless. As in people can't agree on whether it's supposed to be warning us of what we're becoming, or suggesting that we'd have no trouble straightening ourselves out even if we did."
OR MAYBE...its supposed to just be telling a story?
@twDarkflame: Watch the Wall-E commentary and you'll understand why the back half fell short for many people. The short version is that they produced the Earth half before even coming up with a basic plot synopsis for the Space half. And the Earth half was an idea that the writer/director had been chewing on for a few decades, while the Space half was basically just filler.
@Purple Dave: perhaps said people can't agree on what the message of wall-e is because they're trying to force it to have only one interpretation? being multifacitied is part of what elevates wall-e beyond the typical, aseops fabel, beat-you-over-the-head-with-one-message paradigm that is the typical animated film for children.
@goldfarb: Even the professional critics seemed shocked by the Best Picture announcements. Not only did they leave out what was probably the highest rated movie of 2008 on RottenTomatoes, but they threw in some movies that had pretty low ratings and pathetic box office hauls. That means that neither the critics nor the customers cared for that movie, but it still gets a shot at claiming to be the Best Picture of 2008? Yeah, that's why people are bitching about this. Well, except the people who made Gladiator. It's entirely possible that they might no longer be considered the worst movie to win Best Picture in a few months...
@B: well I think it's still valid. You could make the whole argument that Heath is just getting nominated because of the unfortunate circumstances surrounding the movie.
I'm glad to see that Hellboy II got a nomination for best makeup, but I'm disapointed that it seems to have been snubbed in the Visual Effects category.
the list of nominees for best animated feature film leave me wondering why the academy needs to go through the formality of pulling 'wall-e' out of an envelope. if bolt and kung fu panda comprise the remainder of the field for 'best' animated film it really makes one question the need, in the US, for an award in this category.
@tetracycloide: There are better animated films from the last year, like Waltz With Bashir and Persepolis, but because they weren't made for the kids, they were ignored. And because of the assumption that Wall-E only plays for kids, they(The Academy) ignored Wall-E for best picture, which it deserves.
@Cjay79: that was partly my point. there are a half dozen or so animated films of 2008 that were not produced for children that were more worthy of mention than bolt or kung fu panda. the mere fact that persepolis doesn't even get a nod for adapted screenplay is insulting. if they're only going to nominate run of the mill kids films along side good films that could be mistaken for run of the mill kids films why have the category at all?
People are still shocked when good things get passed over for other things? Are these same people shocked when they see the sun rise in the morning too?
I continue to be very depressed about the existence of the Best Animated Feature category. I have no doubt that without it, Wall-E would have been nominated for Best Picture.
Wall-E is every bit as fabulous and notable and ground-breaking as Beauty & The Beast (the first cartoon to get a Best Picture nom, and certainly the last now that there's the Animated Feature category).
@Elizabeth Weinbloom: and how. the least they could do is put a tiny bit more thought into the throw away noms in the best animated category to make it looke less like it's express purpose is to be a built in excuse to deny brilliant animated theater a position in the runnings for best pic.
@Evil Tortie's Mom: I know, it's just insulting to Wall-E to put it up against such unworthy adversaries. The world has no need for an Animated Features ghetto when in a good year there is exactly one top-notch animated feature. Sigh.
I am kinda a disappointed in some of those choices... As one of the guys in the office just said to me, The Academy seems scared to be critisized for just putting just big budget blockbusters up there. Isn't that what people want to see???
The above being said, TDK deserves best picture nod, as it broke how many records? If it was that terrible a movie, how did it accomplish that?
And onto a bit of a rant, where did Milk, The Reader and Slumdog Millionaire come from?? I have heard nothing of those movies, no tv promotion, nothing at the theatres when I was there, or looking over the theatre website to see what time a particular movie is playing... oh wait, those seem like they are artsy indy movies... They may have got rave reviews from critics, but who really saw them?
@imonfyre: Milk and Slumdog Millionaire have been pushed, in primetime no less. This has been more recent as they came out in late 08. I agree in not hearing about the Reader.
@imonfyre: I've seen a few TV ads for "Slumdog" (not till after it opened, though I heard about it on the net) and a boatload of them for "Milk" starting even before the first opening in LA and NYC only. Ditto "The Reader", which I have seen ads for way more than I could possibly care to.
I haven't seen "Slumdog" but it's apparently the little guy makes good and gets the girl feel-good movie of the year (TM) so plenty of "normal people" should enjoy it.
I think this just adds to the belief that releasing a movie later in the year is the way to go if you want to rack up awards. It seems people have forgotten a bit about the Dark Knight. I believe every movie nominated for Best Picture came out near the end of the year.
The Reader is the big shocker in Best Picture. It got some good reviews, but nothing great (60% at Rotten Tomatoes). Just another sign that the voters are out of touch with the average movie fan.
@Radkeen: That's pretty typical - the fall is generally the Awards Season. I remember that's why the Road was supposed to be released last December, and why sometimes we'll see films release with only two theaters, then opening wide later on.
Benjamin Button certainly deserves the nominations, and it's a far superior film to The Dark Knight, IMO. I am really surprised that it didn't get best Original Score, because that was a fantastic soundtrack to it.
01/24/09
Much like Peter Jackson for LoTR. I thought The Two Towers was the best one, but Return got the win. It's like he won for a culmination of success.
I wouldn't not be surprised that if the third movie was as successful that it won or was nominated.
Of course, this is the internet and it feeds off conjecture.
01/25/09
Agreed. On LotR, I'd say it's mostly because the Rohan were a stronger presence than the Gondorians, but it goes beyond that. Fellowship is more enjoyable visually, Two Towers is more visceral, and Return just...finished things up. Several times over, but that is how the story was written, and it's what people who have read the books will expect to see.
The key difference here is that I don't know if anyone will be able to top this Joker. He's the go-to Bat-villain for a reason, and Ledger went leaps and bounds beyond anything we saw from the other three major villains so far. Granted, part of that is simply the fact that the character of the Joker actually allows that sort of freedom, but frankly I'm a bit disappointed in Neeson's Ra's. You know, aside from the fact that he can't even pronounce his own name.
01/24/09
01/24/09
01/24/09
Nature of the beast. If Dark Knight came out in September or so it would have won best pic.
01/25/09
And with competition from the long-awaited return of new TV episodes, coupled with the fact that the younger fans were back in school, they might have ended up the second-highest grossing film...of 2008.
@guibom & SonOfAsgard:
The first half was a really interesting sci-fi/post-apocalyptic story, but the second half was a rather directionless social commentary. And I mean _seriously_ directionless. As in people can't agree on whether it's supposed to be warning us of what we're becoming, or suggesting that we'd have no trouble straightening ourselves out even if we did.
01/25/09
OR MAYBE...its supposed to just be telling a story?
[/radical concept]
01/25/09
Watch the Wall-E commentary and you'll understand why the back half fell short for many people. The short version is that they produced the Earth half before even coming up with a basic plot synopsis for the Space half. And the Earth half was an idea that the writer/director had been chewing on for a few decades, while the Space half was basically just filler.
01/26/09
01/24/09
I find it sad that when the Academy recognises a favorite everyone cheers and says "See! It won an Oscar!"
but when they don't - the Academy Award suddenly becomes an irrelevant symbol of a small, out of touch group of people.
01/24/09
Can't it be both?
01/25/09
Even the professional critics seemed shocked by the Best Picture announcements. Not only did they leave out what was probably the highest rated movie of 2008 on RottenTomatoes, but they threw in some movies that had pretty low ratings and pathetic box office hauls. That means that neither the critics nor the customers cared for that movie, but it still gets a shot at claiming to be the Best Picture of 2008? Yeah, that's why people are bitching about this. Well, except the people who made Gladiator. It's entirely possible that they might no longer be considered the worst movie to win Best Picture in a few months...
01/25/09
Another movie already did.
It was called "Crash".
01/24/09
01/25/09
Took me three tries.
Meanwhile, I've watched [i]Iron Man[/i] about a dozen times!
I like my movies to have something likable about them.
01/25/09
01/22/09
01/22/09
01/22/09
01/22/09
01/22/09
01/22/09
01/22/09
01/22/09
01/22/09
01/22/09
01/22/09
01/22/09
Wall-E is every bit as fabulous and notable and ground-breaking as Beauty & The Beast (the first cartoon to get a Best Picture nom, and certainly the last now that there's the Animated Feature category).
01/22/09
01/22/09
i am ashamed...
01/22/09
I did like hearing the Academy guy say "WAall-eeeee".
01/22/09
01/22/09
The above being said, TDK deserves best picture nod, as it broke how many records? If it was that terrible a movie, how did it accomplish that?
And onto a bit of a rant, where did Milk, The Reader and Slumdog Millionaire come from?? I have heard nothing of those movies, no tv promotion, nothing at the theatres when I was there, or looking over the theatre website to see what time a particular movie is playing... oh wait, those seem like they are artsy indy movies... They may have got rave reviews from critics, but who really saw them?
01/22/09
01/22/09
01/22/09
I haven't seen "Slumdog" but it's apparently the little guy makes good and gets the girl feel-good movie of the year (TM) so plenty of "normal people" should enjoy it.
01/22/09
01/22/09
(I know it's a urban legend)
01/22/09
The Reader is the big shocker in Best Picture. It got some good reviews, but nothing great (60% at Rotten Tomatoes). Just another sign that the voters are out of touch with the average movie fan.
01/22/09
01/22/09
01/22/09
01/22/09