Biggest Oscar Failures?

[Howard Alan Treesong]

yeah, Transformers fucking sucked even from a VFX standpoint

[Human Snorenado]

This thread is awesome. 

Pee Dee, how about this:  any argument made from ignorance is invalid.  Because you're ignorant, even if you stumble onto a correct argument (and you haven't in this thread) it doesn't mean that you're smart or correct- it just means that you're an intellectual parrot.

On topic, the biggest Oscar failure this decade will probably be Children of Men not winning cinematography.  Or not even being NOMINATED for best picture.  SHAME ON YOU, ACADEMY.

[AdmiralViscen]

So was Golden Compass undeserving or what? I didn't see any of the nominated movies.

[The Fake Shemp]

Transformers was bad from a VFX standpoint? You guys are insane.  What you're complaining about is art direction, TVC - not special effects.  Regardless of how you hate the designs, the visual effects were fantastic.

[TVC15]

Transformers was bad from a VFX standpoint? You guys are insane.  What you're complaining about is art direction, TVC - not special effects.  Regardless of how you hate the designs, the visual effects were fantastic.

The aesthetic appeal of the special effects has to come into the award at some point.  Who cares if the special effects are technically great when they still look terrible?

So was Golden Compass undeserving or what? I didn't see any of the nominated movies.

I probably wouldn't have even nominated it--not because it was bad, but because it didn't really leave an impression at all.  Like Narnia and Potter and LOTR, it was a fantasy movie with janky CG, aka par for the course.

[Bloodwake]

This thread is awesome. 

Pee Dee, how about this:  any argument made from ignorance is invalid.  Because you're ignorant, even if you stumble onto a correct argument (and you haven't in this thread) it doesn't mean that you're smart or correct- it just means that you're an intellectual parrot.

On topic, the biggest Oscar failure this decade will probably be Children of Men not winning cinematography.  Or not even being NOMINATED for best picture.  SHAME ON YOU, ACADEMY.

Truth, although Pan's Labyrinth has some damn good cinematography

I also though Pan's Labyrinth should have won Best Foreign Language Film, but then I saw the Lives of Others, and I understand their choice.

[Bloodwake]

Transformers was bad from a VFX standpoint? You guys are insane.  What you're complaining about is art direction, TVC - not special effects.  Regardless of how you hate the designs, the visual effects were fantastic.

Let's just put it this way: if Transformers would have won ANY Academy Awards, it would have been an injustice of epic proportions.

Transformers is probably one of the worst films this decade, only being topped by shit like Soul Plane (this decade, right?) and Van Helsing. It doesn't deserve shit from the top awards ceremony in the land. If it would have won, it would have been a travesty of epic proportions.

AND the visuals weren't that great. They were very pretty, I will give you that, but that was totally destroyed by the horrible editing the film got. The audience had no time to appreciate any of the robots in action sequences because of the quick-bang editing the film was exposed to. So, fuck Transformers inside and out. It deserves NOTHING AT ALL EVER.

[Howard Alan Treesong]

Transformers was bad from a VFX standpoint? You guys are insane.  What you're complaining about is art direction, TVC - not special effects.  Regardless of how you hate the designs, the visual effects were fantastic.

The actual direction was as bad as the art direction. The robot designs were terrible and the movie was confusing and unpleasant to the eye. How can special effects be "good" if they fail at communicating what's going on the movie? Good SFX enhance the reality of a movie. Transformers's, on the other hand, destroyed that reality. And my reality.

[Mandark]

Nobody's mentioned L.A. Confidential yet?  Come on!

Also, Memento not winning screenplay.

Yeah, I like neo-noirs.  Ya wanna fight about it?

[DJ_Tet]

Can't wait to hear Michael Bay's comments about the VFX upset. I mean, you know he will have something to say.

Golden Compass over fighting robots?  Get the fuck out of here, seriously.

I never in my wildest imagination thought about real life giant robots fighting on screen in warzones, fucked up designs be damned.  It looked amazing and was truly a feat combining a LOT of real footage blended in seamlessly with GIANT FUCKING ROBOTS!

But yeah, Golden Compass 

Transformers looked like ass.  I've said this from day 1.  Whether they were technically more proficient or not is beside the point when the effects look unpleasing.  The terrible faux-organic-inspired design made the robots look like messes when they were grappling together on the screen.  As I've said before, it was difficult to tell where one robot ended and another began in that final sequence.  I think there's only one truly impressive sequence in the movie (the desert fight with the military peeps.  Not the opening one; the one after).

Transformers does nothing well.  It might actually be Bay's worst movie.

Unfortunately, most of what you write is true.  It took me several viewings before I could recognize the subtlety and nuances in the designs.  They were bad, but there were details to be had.  It was just confusing with the fast cuts and different shots during the fights, it shouldn't take several viewings to understand what you just saw.

That said, the amount of planning and destruction that took place in real life, combined with there looking like there are giant real life mech's fighting and flying around deserves merit and recognition.

I think it's unlike any other special effects movie I've ever seen in that regard.  It got robbed by cgi polar bears.




BUT, it's not a travesty on the lines of say, Children of Men not even being nominated for Best Picture.  In the overall scheme of things Transformers was a small snub.  I just think it was a lot more of a technical marvel than it's given credit for, and I haven't even seen another Michael Bay movie to be honest. 

[Howard Alan Treesong]

on the subject of failures

I was reminded last night when looking through recent Oscar picks that Crash won Best Picture (!) in 2006

it's only two years on and that choice looks way more distinguished mentally-challenged than it was even then

[The Fake Shemp]

Patel, I just hear you complaining about Transformers as a film.  Visual effects can only be good if they're conveyed through good direction?  Please.  You might as well retroactively take half the visual effects Oscars away from their respective winners on that ridiculous theory.

There are a lot of bad films out there with great visual effects.  The quality of the film has no bearing on the quality of the visual effects.  You can fault Transformers for a lot of things, but visual effects?  C'mon.

[Howard Alan Treesong]

I stand by my original point--the purpose of VFX is to enhance the movie. Transformer's detracted. Period, end of discussion.

[The Fake Shemp]

No, they really didn't.

[TVC15]

And thus Willco's defense of Transformer's visual effects turns into "NO U R!"

[The Fake Shemp]

I'm going to guess that you do since you're a film buff...but why are all other forms of emotional response ok except for shedding a tear?  To say that you don't cry during movies/books shouldn't also mean that whomever does is an emo-cigarillo.

Good jokes are good jokes.  Exciting adventures are fun to read.  But to make a person cry requires that they legitimately feel loss, which is something I don't when reading or watching fiction.  Have I cried watching real footage?  Sure.  But fiction?  Nope.

[Bloodwake]

on the subject of failures

I was reminded last night when looking through recent Oscar picks that Crash won Best Picture (!) in 2006

it's only two years on and that choice looks way more distinguished mentally-challenged than it was even then

When I heard it won, I wasn't too sad, because I thought all the films were basically on the same level (except for Munich, which was extremely boring and unlike anything I've seen from Spielberg).

However, at the time I hadn't seen Good Night and Good Luck or Capote. Honestly, those two films were superior to Crash, but not by much. Brokeback was good, but not great. Honestly, the entire year was a toss-up for me, so I can't really say that any of the films were any better than each other enough to where it actually mattered. No Country AND There Will Be Blood stomped the shit out of that year's entire selection. Hell, THE DEPARTED was better than everything in 2006 that was nominated for Best Picture.

[Mandark]

I always get a little misty when I see the Marseillaise scene in Casablanca.

[The Fake Shemp]

And thus Willco's defense of Transformer's visual effects turns into "NO U R!"

There's nothing to defend.  The VFX were Oscar-nominated and on that basis alone, you know they're pretty damn good.  I'm not going to get into a lengthy debate with someone that goes, "No, I'm right - end of discussion!"  But, of course you're not going to call Patel on that, because you're both in the same warped boat.  It's not a terribly good movie.  I don't own it.  I've seen it once.  And I think it's fun.  I can fault almost everything from production, including art direction, but the visual effects and the integration of CG into the environments was nothing short of an achievement.

They look like big robots fighting.  Now, you can argue that look like big, ugly robots fighting, but - hey! - that's fine.

[TVC15]

I just think it would be ironic if a visually terrible movie won anything that indicated it had the best visuals in any regard.  I don't care how many hours a render farm spent toiling on a big shiny turd.  If it doesn't look good, it doesn't make sense that it should be getting any best visuals awards.

With that said, I just looked and none of the nominees had particularly compelling visual effects, so I guess in the end it's a wash.
OOPS

[The Fake Shemp]

"One anything" has to be your greatest Internet type of all-time!

Whether or not the robot designs are ugly is completely subjective (although I do agree that they were confusing at times in the movie), but the actual moving parts, interaction with the setting, integration with other effects (like explosions, jets, etc.) and the animation were are incredibly well done.  It was a landmark achievement for ILM.

The Academy hasn't really awarded the most deserving film for this particular category within the past several years.  Past winners include King Kong, Spider-Man 2 and all the Lord of the Rings films (over one or two probably more deserving flicks).  You could make a case that Superman Returns got robbed, but I think the job on Davy Jones in Dead Man's Chest is reason enough that it deservedly won over Bryan Singer's underwhelming spandex flick.

[Mandark]

I could see Transformers getting an award for the engineering side of the SFX.  The first discussion I had about the movie was with someone who works with 3D animation, and his take was "Those guys did really good work, and they must be pissed at how the shitty cinematography and editing butchered their work."

[TVC15]

The Academy hasn't really awarded the most deserving film for this particular category within the past several years.  Past winners include King Kong, Spider-Man 2 and all the Lord of the Rings films (over one or two probably more deserving flicks).  You could make a case that Superman Returns got robbed, but I think the job on Davy Jones in Dead Man's Chest is reason enough that it deservedly won over Bryan Singer's underwhelming spandex flick.

I think the wording on the description of the award probably needs to be tinkered with.  Aside from Davy Jones, I don't really think any of that is particularly compelling.  I find the extremely organic CG of EVILBOREAN BEST MOVIE EVER The Aviator much more impressive than fakey CG fests.

[The Fake Shemp]

The Aviator wasn't even nominated.  I'm talking about within nominees.  I agree with you that The Aviator should have been nominated, but then Children of Men should have also been nominated.  So should several other flicks over the past few years.

I really dug the visual effects on Batman Begins.  The model work is excellent and some of the CG use is incredible.  The flying shots look fake, but there were CG shots I didn't even know were CG shots until recently (when Batman jumps down the stairwell through the bats and lands and starts walking - it's all fake!).  But that film wasn't even nominated.

[TVC15]

The Aviator wasn't even nominated.  I'm talking about within nominees.  I agree with you that The Aviator should have been nominated, but then Children of Men should have also been nominated.  So should several other flicks over the past few years.

Which is why I think the award should be rethought.  Or just renamed into Best CGI Orgasm.

[Mupepe]

I always get a little misty when I see the Marseillaise scene in Casablanca.

[DJ_Tet]

It's one thing to say Transformers doesn't deserve to win, but it lost to cgi polar bears.

I mean, that was awesome, in 1991.



Anyway, yes the robots look too similar to each other.  Point taken.  Where is my 'Go Bots' movie then?  What other movie has accomplished what Transformers accomplished with fighting robots?  King Kong fighting dinosaurs, sure, but that's not transforming robots.

The technical detail that went into some of those shots is mind-boggling.

[AdmiralViscen]

The Aviator wasn't even nominated.  I'm talking about within nominees.  I agree with you that The Aviator should have been nominated, but then Children of Men should have also been nominated.  So should several other flicks over the past few years.

I really dug the visual effects on Batman Begins.  The model work is excellent and some of the CG use is incredible.  The flying shots look fake, but there were CG shots I didn't even know were CG shots until recently (when Batman jumps down the stairwell through the bats and lands and starts walking - it's all fake!).  But that film wasn't even nominated.

What?! Holy shit.

[DJ_Tet]

Batman Begins impressed me for the very opposite reasons actually, so many of the stunts were real!

[The Fake Shemp]

What?! Holy shit.

Yeah, that revelation was mind bottling to me.  I was cruising through the special features on the Deluxe version CrystalGemini has, and they have a whole segment on how it's a digital double for Bale/Batman.  Now, I obviously thought they have bats composited into the scene, but the fact that even Bale/Batman was fake was pretty awesome.  Including the part where he starts to walk towards the asylum corridor.  The animation usually gives that type of stuff away.  There are a few instances where the computer imagery is that good.  The bit where Crane sees Batman through his own toxin is also some great CG.

And I agree with DJ_Tet, I dug Begins for the very practical stunts and model work.  It really gives the film a gritty feel, especially since they use so many minatures.

[DJ_Tet]

Yeah the features on the HD version of Batman Begins had a lot of mindblowing stuff about how they set up different shots.  Things I assumed were real were cg and lots of things I assumed were cg were actually real.

I had no idea there was a cg batman until I watched one of the featurettes on it.  They claimed they sat Nolan down with a lot of others and showed a real Batman and a digital Batman.  They said Nolan could tell the difference but most couldn't until they knew what they were looking for.  Much more impressive than say, Yoda.

[The Fake Shemp]

Yeah, it's definitely one of the few instances I have been fooled by computer imagery.  Nolan is such a hardliner about realistic looking imagery that he made it possible.  The sequences that look computer generated (and not horribly, like on Spider-Man or anything) are things that he pretty much could not do in real-life.  Like having Bale glide over Gotham.

[The Fake Shemp]

Speaking of actual Oscar failures, since Clooney did not get any awards for Michael Clayton - I'm going to watch it today.

[Phoenix Dark]

Eh the effects of Transformers were good. The art direction sucked. Like Perfect Dark

[brawndolicious]

on the subject of failures

I was reminded last night when looking through recent Oscar picks that Crash won Best Picture (!) in 2006

it's only two years on and that choice looks way more distinguished mentally-challenged than it was even then

When I heard it won, I wasn't too sad, because I thought all the films were basically on the same level (except for Munich, which was extremely boring and unlike anything I've seen from Spielberg).

However, at the time I hadn't seen Good Night and Good Luck or Capote. Honestly, those two films were superior to Crash, but not by much. Brokeback was good, but not great. Honestly, the entire year was a toss-up for me, so I can't really say that any of the films were any better than each other enough to where it actually mattered. No Country AND There Will Be Blood stomped the shit out of that year's entire selection. Hell, THE DEPARTED was better than everything in 2006 that was nominated for Best Picture.

Crash was shit.  Don't be stupid.  Munich was a little boring but I have a hell of a lot more respect for Spielberg showing he has balls.  I never saw brokeback but I would still choose that over crash just out of principle.  I mean, crash was so cheap in how it tried to pry emotions out of you and every line was an example of how not to write a scene about racial tension.

I'm sorry, but I respectfully shit on your opinion.

[Mupepe]

Crash isn't too bad... just cheesy lolz

[Human Snorenado]

Crash isn't too bad... just cheesy lolz

It's certainly not best picture caliber.  They should stop letting all the young, dumb actors vote for best picture if that's the shit we're gonna get stuck with.