DVDs & Films Forum - RE: James Cameron`s Avatar - Page 9

Quote:
Was this film better than "Titanic" with its 11 Oscars?

Yes

Well at least Titanic had some fact based truth in it

Quote:
Was this film better than "Titanic" with its 11 Oscars?

Yes!
Don't really get that argument. The award is 'Best Picture' (of 2009), not 'Best Picture Directed by James Cameron' (of all time).

Quote:
Don't really get that argument. The award is 'Best Picture' (of 2009), not 'Best Picture Directed by James Cameron' (of all time).
I was trying to state that Titanic won an oscar against
L.A. Confidential", "As Good As It Gets", "Good Will Hunting", "The Full Monty
Did it deserve its win?
No
Does Avatar - No - but it is better than Titanic

BTw 'Best Picture Directed by James Cameron' - Abyss!

Quote:
Well at least Titanic had some fact based truth in itAnd 'Best Picture' needs 'fact based truth'?........... Why does having that mean a film is more or less deserving of the Oscar?

Ste
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
We will pay the price but we will not count the cost..

Avatar certainly had the best visual experience of the year but the most accomplished film was The Hurt Locker by a considerable distance. Avatar should pick up the technical gongs, but nothing else.

Nosferatu.MyReviewer.com
My DVD Collection

I'm actually a little confused by the studios getting p***ed off that the actors didn't get a nod. Really, that was acting? Sam worthington is a competant actor, but the fact is his visual performance, although motion-captured, wasn't him, and could have been altered at any time in post.

In fact (and I mentioned this on the other thread) I'd have put Avatar firmly in the 'Best Animated Feature' rather than best picture class, and here's why;

Wall-e - Best Animated Feature. 90 minute movie that showed more heart and depth than Avatar, PLUS it had Fredd Willard and some extras acting as themselves is parts of the movie, no difference from the underlying format of Avatar

Monster House (nominated) - 80 minute, Completely CGI movie, yet the actors were motion-captured for their entire performance (t-pose).

There's no difference in the creation of these 2 movies than what Cameron's done with Avatar. I'll never disagree that Cameron's changed the technology with which movies can now be made (if only the script was so up-to-date), but Pixar's been doing that since Toy Story. Maybe Cameron's name behind the title rubbed the academy up the right way, plus the billion or so he's made for the industry. money talks, 9-foot-tall blue smurfs walk.



============================
  ▲
▲ ▲
Tri-Forcin's easy when you know how


Writer's Release
My Collection

This item was edited on Saturday, 6th February 2010, 15:17

Well, Avatar is only 60% CGI, whereas Monster House and WALL-E were completely CGI animated, apart from Fred Willard in the latter.

As for the lack of acting noms, I think the fact that the actors are masked by the CG makes the performances more believable to the audience, as they can suspend their disbelief much more easily and disconnect the actor from the character. However, this also has the negative impact of awards voters not really thinking of the actors when it comes to awards season. Of course, it could simply be that they thought there were better performances in other films. That said, Zoe Saldana is better in Avatar than some of the other best actress nominees this year IMO.

Also, I thought The Hurt Locker was vastly overrated. Moon - now there's a film that is vastly superior to everything else in 2009 (including a performance by Sam Rockwell that truly was snubbed by most awards bodies).

------------------------------------------------

This item was edited on Saturday, 6th February 2010, 16:09

============================
  ▲
▲ ▲
Tri-Forcin's easy when you know how


Writer's Release
My Collection

I liked Hurt Locker, it was an interesting take on the war film genre, but it really lost me in the final 3rd. As soon as he became a detective and the nature of the film changed, my attention started to go.

A very good film, granted, but I don't think it's the best film of the year. Personally I preferred Inglorious.

-------------------------------------

"Why should YOU go to jail for a crime someone else noticed?" - Bob Loblaw