Aside from the technological aspects (for which there are individual categories) what did Avatar bring to the table. Without 3d, Avatar isn't a top 10 movie of all time nor an Oscar BP nom. Fact.

True. If it were five it would have been:

Avatar
Hurt Locker
A Serious Man
Precious
An Education

It's a popularity contest. That fact doesn't change no matter what picture wins, good or bad. And Hurt locker has been the hot pick for months. It's not a surprise at all.

I think it's good. Maybe more people will see the movie (like me - I still haven't and I've wanted to for almost a year now). It's not like Avatar is going to have to give back any of the 2.5 billion dollars it's grossed.

This times 1000

In any previous year, i think the only 5 that would have made it were:

A Serious Man
An Education
Hurt Locker
Avatar/Up (too close to call)
Precious

Mo'Nique won the Oscar for "Best Supporting Actress".
What are you talking about?

I just like that a Star Trek film won an Oscar. I don't care that it was makeup or whatever. A Star Trek film won an Oscar. It's like bizarroworld.

FWIW -- The Hurt Locker is better than Saving Private Ryan but I don't know why the dirk made the comparison in the first place (unless he made it out of a reductive "both have something to do with the military" line of thought.

I think A Serious Man was just thrown in because the Coens have won a lot of Oscars in the past, I dont think it had a serious chance of winning. I think IB gets nominated before it. I liked both movies a lot though.

Maybe its just my opinion getting in the way though, I though Inglorious Basterds was the best movie of the year.

I think Hurt Locker mostly won because a lot of people didn't really want Avatar winning because it was so trite, and that was the movie that got rallied around.

On what level would you argue that The Hurt Locker is better than SPR?

The Hurt Locker is a great movie I am not going argue about that and it is definitely worth seeing multiple times.

Wow, is that the first one?

I looked it up and II, IV, VI and First Contact were nominated for stuff but didn't win anything.

If I was going to rank Top Military\War Movies it might make Top 5...maybe

Of course this is all personal preference

Bill Simmons was pretty hilarious to follow on twitter tonight

sportsguy33: Did @thecousinsal and I wager that the Best Actress winner will cry during her speech tonight (-150 odds)? Yes. Yes we did.

sportsguy33: Cry! Cry Sandy! Cry! CRY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

sportsguy33: YES!!!!!!!!!!!!! YEE HAH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Pretty cool if true.

Bill Simmons as in Body for Life guy?

True.

I would love to get Barbara Streisand and Quentin Tarantino, put them in a car that is controlled by remote control, add plenty of wireless cameras all around the inside, then drive the ****er off the side of the grand canyon.

First douse it in gasoline and light it on fire.

You're thinking Bill Phillips, Body for Life.

THL isn't a Military/War movie. Its a totally different kind of film than the others you would rank it against.

I'd have to watch SPR again to make a sustained argument. SPR never resonated with me; I always found it to be earnest to the point of near-cliche.

I was actually just watching Hurt Locker, walked upstairs, and my wife told me it won best picture. I've now seen 7 of the nominees. It was very good, and deserving of accolades. Best Picture? Hmmmm, I don't think I turned the movie off thinking I'd just seen something special like I did when I walked out of Avatar. Bottom line is that they were both very good for very different reasons.

What kind of movie is it then?

Clooney acted strange all night.

I'm pretty sure that it's the first time an actress has won both the Oscar & Razzie the same year.

I think it was just part of the plan for the night.

There were moments of levity. The Vecchio story, Alice Jardeen, even small things like Paul Giamatti trying to eat an apple in the middle of a fire fight.

SPR, to me, encapsulates nearly everything that a war text could. It is an epic film.

It is.

http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=224501

Can't believe she won it.

I'm glad a movie that I saw and liked won. Although I watched Hurt Locker and Moon on the same evening, and frankly I liked Moon better. It didn't get nominated for a goddamn thing, did it?

Avatar already won Best Picture when it was called Dances With Wolves.

Nope. Not even score. And it was a year where sci-fi wasn't completely dismissed. I probably preferred Moon as well and it definitely stuck with me much longer after seeing it.

Nope. I agree with ya on Moon. I actually think Sam Rockwell should have been nominated in the best actor category and I think he should of won too. He did a brilliant job in the movie. Poor shame really that he wasn't recognized for his efforts. :banghead:

I think it mostly suffered from being a limited release, British indy flick that didn't manage to gain enough popular attention before these award shows started. Sam Rockwell was ****ing outstanding in it.

i'm keeping this one.

Shakespeare in Love won that year because there were two legitimate Best Picture nominees - Saving Private Ryan and Life is Beautiful. The two legitimate films split the vote, and the No. 3 movie took the prize. Sucks, but that's what happens in voting sometimes.

Still pretty unusual since that was one of the random years they let a foreign language film in for best picture consideration.

Saving private ryan looses 20 points having Sam Malone in the middle of the ****ing movie

Buldyke getting an oscar for Blind Side is pretty embarrassing....

I missed the Oscars again??

damn.

A character study. The movie is set in a war, sure, but it makes no commentary on war and is apolitical. It uses the setting to excellent dramatic effect but the film is about its characters and nothing more.

For everyone decrying the lack of nominations for Moon: I liked Moon an awful lot and I think that it should have gotten nominations consideration. BUT Sony apparently didn't think the same. Sony didn't send any Moon screeners out for awards consideration whatsoever.

Eek. She looks too much like Odo from "DS9".

http://broadwayworld.com/photoops/pi...gyllenhaal.jpg

http://www.nf.au.dk/~startrek/sfaab/pictures/odo-s1.jpg

.

Well, last night went pretty much as expected by most people.

Bridges and Bullock. Did they really deserve their awards? Maybe. Maybe not. You can't help but feel they both got them more as "lifetime achievement awards". Especially in Bullock's case. If Helen Mirrin wasn't so critically acclaimend, and if Meryl Streep wasn't so critically acclaimed, and if the other two weren't "who dat?"s, there's no way Bullock wins. (Side note: that girl from "Precious", holy crap, man.... that's one big woman. Mo'Nique sat behind her probably 'cause she said, "This is the only person in the room I look skinny when I sit behind." LMAO)

Bigelow. Another one where you can debate it. Her work before this was pretty uninspiring. Did she win because she's a woman? Did she win because no one wanted to see Cameron up there again? :shrug:

"The Hurt Locker". Again, people seem split on this film. Some love it, a few think it whacks it, and even a lot that enjoyed it think it's not worthy of an Oscar. Did "Avatar" get a backlash because it made so much money? Or maybe it's a technological thing. "Tron" was blacklisted for an effects award 'cause the Academy said they "cheated" by using computer graphics, LOL. "Beauty and the Beast" might have been the best picture in its year but they weren't going to give an Oscar for Best Picture to a cartoon at that point in time. Maybe, 10 years from now, an "Avatar"-style picture might win. But IMO right now it's too new and unusual and unknown for people to vote for it. (Hell, half probably didn't vote for it out of some irrational fear that "computer-animated films will take all of our acting jobs away", which totally isn't true if you know anything about how they made the film.) But, as has been mentioned, "Avatar" already won when it was "Dances With Wolves", and while "Avatar" was a very enjoyable film, I don't think it was "robbed" the way "Saving Private Ryan" was. Cameron's got his "Titanic" Oscars and his mattress full of Benjamins to console him.

The dual-hosting thing was okay. Funny in spots, flat in spots. I still don't think anyone's done it better than Billy Crystal, but that's JMO.

It kind of amazes me that we live in a world where Sandra Bullock has won an Oscar but Sigourney Weaver hasn't. :spock:

I didn't like Hurt Locker. watched it last night.

Ing Basterds was my favorite movie so far.....one of the best I've seen in a while actually.

Avatar was cool, but it was pretty much Pocahontas in Sci-Fi

Bullock deserved an oscar for that tight little ass she still has at her age.

There you have it folks.
Posted via Mobile Device

This happens frequently. They both deserved it. Even if Bullock resume to this point hasnt been that great.

Shes been solid for a looong time. Even if most of her movies have been "geek/cult" hits up till now.

IMO, the best films nominated last night were Up and Basterds.

So Farrah Fawcett, who was very famous and did a bunch of movies (albeit bad ones), as well as TV shows, got no mention in the Academy's "In Memoriam" roll... but Michael the Child Molester, who was in ONE film ("The Wiz"), got a moment. F**king scumbag upstaged Farrah on the day she died, and did it again at the Oscars...

Yeah, that sucked. I flipped off the TV when they did that.