Comments on: Oscars

By: Brian Greenberg

Brian Greenberg — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 16:51:43 +0000

I guess it comes down to whether you consider the director as “controlling” only the actors, or everything that appears on screen. Given how much control he had over the entire process (and how much of the technology he had a hand in inventing/designing), I tend to give him more credit than the movie itself.

I can easily see how you’d classify the exact same sentiment as “best picture” but not “best director,” though.

Maybe there should be an Oscar for most popular movie? Or I guess the People’s Choice awards covers that…

By: Ilya

Ilya — Mon, 08 Mar 2010 22:29:26 +0000

We'll agree to disagree on Avatar, gentlemen. I don't know what your definition of the "best" movie is, but I am pretty sure it should include the measure of the film's popularity and a consideration of its impact. And when those two are so outsized as they are with Avatar, I don't think any amount of brilliant acting or gripping story-lines can outweigh them. I actually do not think Cameron has done such great directing job here precisely because the acting performances were middling. But the overall impact was undeniable. No movie in a longest time comes close. You are entitled to a different measure system, of course.

By: Kisintin

Kisintin — Mon, 08 Mar 2010 20:22:27 +0000

I have watched the opening and it was uncofortable, although Neil patrick Harris was good. I’ve DVRed the show, but I think with so much stuff already recorded I am going to skip it this year.

By: Brian Greenberg

Brian Greenberg — Mon, 08 Mar 2010 18:43:34 +0000

I'm with Vince on Avatar. As I said in my review, I found it a technically excellent presentation of a mediocre movie. If they wanted to honor James Cameron for revolutionizing movies (which I do believe he did), then Best Director was the award to give him. Instead, it went to his ex-wife, also for The Hurt Locker. I haven't seen the film, so I have no basis to judge, but the fact that they had Barbra Streisand present the award (and rather obnoxiously declare ahead of time that the woman and the African-American were more "historic" choices than the white, male visionary) lead me to believe that this was more about the academy connecting with its politically correct identity than it was a true choice for Best Director. Kudos to Kathryn Bigelow for shunning the "modifier," as she calls it, and yearning for a day when it's a moot point. It's a shame that Babs' speech, along with the nomination of such a popular and innovative director, makes me feel the way I do - especially if Bigelow really did deserve the award. Maybe one day I'll see the movie and decide for myself...

By: Vince

Vince — Mon, 08 Mar 2010 18:18:00 +0000

While I pretty much don’t care about the Oscars, I would have to disagree with you about Avatar. I don’t think it deserved Best Picture, or even being considered for best picture. Yes, it set the standard for CGI and 3-D, and that’s no small accomplishment. But quite frankly I thought maybe George Lucas had written the script. And the acting was OK, but not outstanding.

Like the Grammys, the Oscars are often a poor measure of actual quality. And so is popularity.

By: Dr. Phil

Dr. Phil — Mon, 08 Mar 2010 18:09:44 +0000

Actually the Oscars officially started at 8:30pm EST, not 8pm, which is why after half an hour, they finally got around to awarding the Best Supporting Actor. 8pm was the Red Carpet Show, which I usually avoid. (grin)

Dr. Phil