|
|
Post by Vice honcho room temperature on Jan 7, 2010 23:23:23 GMT -5
Usually there would be at least a handful off the top of my head. But not this year.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kroot bringing Justice on Jan 7, 2010 23:26:01 GMT -5
Who else despises the term Oscar Bait? Seriously it's gotta be one of the lamest excuses for getting mad over something winning a award.
|
|
|
|
Post by Vice honcho room temperature on Jan 7, 2010 23:27:59 GMT -5
It's because the movie studios put it out at the end of the year and peg the movies as such
|
|
|
|
Post by Young Game on Jan 7, 2010 23:29:14 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by toddpolt on Jan 7, 2010 23:32:02 GMT -5
Usually there would be at least a handful off the top of my head. But not this year. I disagree. Sorta. I liked alot of them, others not seen (or bothered with) but these I would consider to be part of the stereotypical "Oscar Bait": Invictus (pretty decent) Away We Go Precious Up in the Air (pretty good) An Education A Serious Man A Single Man The Lovely Bones Nine (hated it) Crazy Heart 500 Days of Summer The Young Victoria Bright Star The Maid And so forth. Heck, even The Hurt Locker, probably the best movie of the year (and better action cinema than Transformers 2, at probably 1/10th the cost) could be considered "Oscar Bait" in that its a war movie. And war pictures have won tons of Oscars. I wouldn't, but you could argue this. This year though is odd. Except Precious and Up in the Air, the other serious Major Oscar contenders are Avatar, The Hurt Locker, and Inglorius Basterds. And those three have a stronger shot of winning than the "friendly" Oscar bait. Nevermind that TEN nominations for Best Movie will muck up handicapping. Heck we could even see usually non-major Oscar titles like Star Trek and District 9 sneak in. |
|
|
|
Post by Kroot bringing Justice on Jan 7, 2010 23:46:08 GMT -5
Was a pretty damn good movie and deserves awards. |
|
|
|
Post by toddpolt on Jan 7, 2010 23:48:47 GMT -5
Was a pretty damn good movie and deserves awards. Really? Thats good to hear. Was it truely moving while serious food for thought, or just a TV melodrama* that escaped to theatres? *=You know, like Crash. |
|
|
|
Post by Bob Schlapowitz on Jan 7, 2010 23:56:31 GMT -5
I really think the 10 nominees for Best Picture idea is horrible.
|
|
|
|
Post by toddpolt on Jan 7, 2010 23:59:45 GMT -5
I really think the 10 nominees for Best Picture idea is horrible. I love it. Surely maybe 5 are only serious contenders, the rest are token invites. But that was true with the 5 rule, for usually only 2-3 were contenders. Sure Seabiscuit and Letters From Iwo Jima got invited, but they never had a serious chance of winning. Besides, wouldn't it be nice for most average, noncinemaphile people to tune into the Oscars on TV and see movies compete that they might have actually seen? Thank you The Dark Knight. You fathered this change.  |
|
|
|
Post by thwak is T.hawk on Jan 8, 2010 0:01:43 GMT -5
as someone who's thought of doing videos about bad oscar bait, the term is used when you make a movie SPECIFICALLY so it'll get oscars instead of making, you know, a good movie.
See: Tom Zwick's entire filmography.
|
|
|
|
Post by Vice honcho room temperature on Jan 8, 2010 0:02:24 GMT -5
I think it should be nominate as many as necessary inbetween 5-10.
|
|
|
|
Post by Non Banjoble Tokens on Jan 8, 2010 0:04:00 GMT -5
I've got my fingers crossed for Zombieland to win Best Picture.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bob Schlapowitz on Jan 8, 2010 0:06:38 GMT -5
I think it should be nominate as many as necessary inbetween 5-10. Bingo. If you look through Oscar history you'll see that the number of nominees in most categories varies. Some years, some categories only had two nominees, but had three or five in other years. |
|
|
|
Post by toddpolt on Jan 8, 2010 0:14:38 GMT -5
I think it should be nominate as many as necessary inbetween 5-10. Bingo. If you look through Oscar history you'll see that the number of nominees in most categories varies. Some years, some categories only had two nominees, but had three or five in other years. Yup. A good example is Best Animated Feature, which is done like that fluctuation template because some years, many cartoon/CGI pictures get released. Thus we can (if I'm not sure its been done yet), we can like 5 noms. But usually its 3 because not that many were released. The weirdest one I remember was like 2001, when Sound Effects Editing was between Monsters, Inc and Pearl Harbor. How random. |
|
|
|
Post by Red Impact on Jan 8, 2010 0:15:20 GMT -5
Oscar Bait is a fairly harsh term, as many of the movies are quite good in their own right. Yeah, certain movies are released at certain times for award consideration, but that's just so there aren't pictures that are lost in the summer blockbuster mayhem.
And the move to 10 wasn't there to help even any playing field, it's there for advertisers to put
BEST PICTURE
nominee
in trailers and on the DVD case to help boost sales. The movie industry doesn't care about a movie like Dark Knight getting awards for best picture, they care about being able to advertise on as many movies as possible.
|
|
|
|
Post by Sickfit, King Of The Fits on Jan 8, 2010 0:29:25 GMT -5
Was a pretty damn good movie and deserves awards. I disagree. I thought it was ridiculous and sort of manipulated the viewer into thinking they knew Precious just because of all the trauma she went through. {Spoiler}Seriously, I was laughing out loud during the scene when Ms. Rain just says "Write" while Precious tries to explain that she's freakin' HIV POSITIVE. I was completely turned off from the movie from that point on. |
|
|
|
Post by Lair of the Shadow MaDaBa on Jan 8, 2010 0:30:18 GMT -5
Here's my idea--what if they bumped it to twelve nominees, with every nominee coming from a different month of the year? For instance, by the end of the first week of February, the Academy will make an announcement on their web site like "the January 2009 Nominee for Best Picture is..."
That way, they won't have to discriminate between movies that were released in November and December, production companies can release Oscar-worthy movies whenever they feel without worry or calendar prejudice, and the audiences who like that stuff will be entertained. Everybody wins.
|
|
|
|
Post by toddpolt on Jan 8, 2010 0:30:29 GMT -5
Oscar Bait is a fairly harsh term, as many of the movies are quite good in their own right. Yeah, certain movies are released at certain times for award consideration, but that's just so there aren't pictures that are lost in the summer blockbuster mayhem. And the move to 10 wasn't there to help even any playing field, it's there for advertisers to put BEST PICTUREnomineein trailers and on the DVD case to help boost sales. The movie industry doesn't care about a movie like Dark Knight getting awards for best picture, they care about being able to advertise on as many movies as possible. Absolutely, that and RATINGS.Oscar ratings have been in the toilet for the last many years. The last "good" ones ratings-wise was when that Lord of the Rings picture won it all, and Titanic, since most people saw both. Thus if "popular" movies get invited (Avatar, District 9, Star Trek), then more people will bother to tune in. And Oscars will still continue to be irrelevant. |
|
|
|
Post by mrwednesdaynight on Jan 8, 2010 1:07:14 GMT -5
This is the time of the year when the Oscar Bait is thrown out there. I'm guessing that due to the bad economy, studios couldn't afford to throw out movies that lose money and no one has any interest in seeing just to get something nominated. This will probably be a year where independent movies and foreign films that all of 15 people have seen will take all the awards.
As for Oscar Bait being a dirty term, there are tons of movies that are examples of making a movie to please the critics and academy but no one else. Milk is my perfect example. That was not a very good movie. But it fit the template for Oscar nominee perfectly.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 8, 2010 1:44:27 GMT -5
I really think the 10 nominees for Best Picture idea is horrible. I agreed with this until the last years horrible choices for best picture nominees. But my opinion is just as irrelevant as their's and yet I'm still suckered in by these award shows. I haven't seen many of the Oscar bait movies this year but Up in the Air was really good. This is the time of the year when the Oscar Bait is thrown out there. I'm guessing that due to the bad economy, studios couldn't afford to throw out movies that lose money and no one has any interest in seeing just to get something nominated. This will probably be a year where independent movies and foreign films that all of 15 people have seen will take all the awards. As for Oscar Bait being a dirty term, there are tons of movies that are examples of making a movie to please the critics and academy but no one else. Milk is my perfect example. That was not a very good movie. But it fit the template for Oscar nominee perfectly. I disagree I thought Milk was really good and I think Sean Penn is very overrated actor. My favorite definition of "Oscar Bait" is the movies that wins tons of awards during those months and then really forgotten about the public and critics after the awards are done. Many people and critics remember and prefer Raging Bull over Ordinary People, LOTR over Chicago, or Fargo over The English Patient, etc. |
|
