Comments on: So Why Didn’t The #1 Critically Rated Film Of The Year Get Nominated For Best Picture? http://themovieblog.com/2008/01/so-why-didnt-the-1-critically-rated-film-of-the-year-get-nominated-for-best-picture The Official Home of Correct Movie Opinions Fri, 10 Feb 2012 20:43:17 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: probitionate http://themovieblog.com/2008/01/so-why-didnt-the-1-critically-rated-film-of-the-year-get-nominated-for-best-picture#comment-175792 probitionate Thu, 11 Dec 2008 14:34:13 +0000 http://themovieblog.com/2008/01/so-why-didnt-the-1-critically-rated-film-of-the-year-get-nominated-for-best-picture#comment-175792 I finally saw 'Ratatouille' recently. And kept an open mind throughout. But at the same time, was mindful of what you had been saying all along about it being worth of Best Picture Oscar consideration. Uh, no. The litmus test I did was to ask 'If this wasn't animation...if this wasn't done in this way...would it still be so highly regarded? Uh, no. A nice enough story, but really... Connect-the-dots plot, cut-out characters... Honestly, I was constantly reminded of watching 'The Bugs Bunny-Roadrunner Show'. Animated films have their place. Just not in the Best Film category. I finally saw ‘Ratatouille’ recently.

And kept an open mind throughout.

But at the same time, was mindful of what you had been saying all along about it being worth of Best Picture Oscar consideration.

Uh, no.

The litmus test I did was to ask ‘If this wasn’t animation…if this wasn’t done in this way…would it still be so highly regarded?

Uh, no.

A nice enough story, but really… Connect-the-dots plot, cut-out characters… Honestly, I was constantly reminded of watching ‘The Bugs Bunny-Roadrunner Show’.

Animated films have their place. Just not in the Best Film category.

]]> By: The Other James Taylor http://themovieblog.com/2008/01/so-why-didnt-the-1-critically-rated-film-of-the-year-get-nominated-for-best-picture#comment-118964 The Other James Taylor Mon, 04 Feb 2008 19:29:31 +0000 http://themovieblog.com/2008/01/so-why-didnt-the-1-critically-rated-film-of-the-year-get-nominated-for-best-picture#comment-118964 It's because it's a cartoon, and cartoons will never be taken seriously over live action films. Never. Unless they stop making live action films altogether which will never happen. I personally think Grindhouse should have had a shot at best picture, but I would also root for Pirates 3 which made about $340 million more than Ratatouille. It’s because it’s a cartoon, and cartoons will never be taken seriously over live action films. Never. Unless they stop making live action films altogether which will never happen. I personally think Grindhouse should have had a shot at best picture, but I would also root for Pirates 3 which made about $340 million more than Ratatouille.

]]> By: tobor68 http://themovieblog.com/2008/01/so-why-didnt-the-1-critically-rated-film-of-the-year-get-nominated-for-best-picture#comment-118869 tobor68 Mon, 04 Feb 2008 03:27:02 +0000 http://themovieblog.com/2008/01/so-why-didnt-the-1-critically-rated-film-of-the-year-get-nominated-for-best-picture#comment-118869 "In many ways, the work of a critic is easy. We risk very little, yet enjoy a position over those who offer up their work to ourselves and our judgement. We thrive on negative criticism, which is fun to write and to read. But the bitter truth we critics must face is that in the grand scheme of things, the average piece of junk is probably more meaningful than our criticism designating it so. But there are times when a critic actually risks something, and that is in the discovery and defense of the new. The world is often unkind to new talent, new creations. The new needs friends." -nuff said “In many ways, the work of a critic is easy. We risk very little, yet enjoy a position over those who offer up their work to ourselves and our judgement. We thrive on negative criticism, which is fun to write and to read. But the bitter truth we critics must face is that in the grand scheme of things, the average piece of junk is probably more meaningful than our criticism designating it so. But there are times when a critic actually risks something, and that is in the discovery and defense of the new. The world is often unkind to new talent, new creations. The new needs friends.”

-nuff said

]]> By: takata http://themovieblog.com/2008/01/so-why-didnt-the-1-critically-rated-film-of-the-year-get-nominated-for-best-picture#comment-118846 takata Sun, 03 Feb 2008 23:42:35 +0000 http://themovieblog.com/2008/01/so-why-didnt-the-1-critically-rated-film-of-the-year-get-nominated-for-best-picture#comment-118846 I LOVE Pixar movies but common john! The last 2 ones was preety weak. Im afraid pixar have the conception that all they have to do is pick the wierdest idea to make a character and make a emotional history off it. Cars had already a weak front character . But on RATATOUILLE maaann ...its a rat who thinks it can turns into a masterchief cook in france!!! I know thats not the ponit of the movie. i have to agree with the others above ,its not even that good. Personal taste of mine aniway,but no matter either is ficcional or not,a bunch of rats running a kitchen its not a compelling image no matter how much the central character is simpatetic or not. I LOVE Pixar movies but common john!
The last 2 ones was preety weak.
Im afraid pixar have the conception that all they have to do is pick the wierdest idea to make a character and make a emotional history off it.
Cars had already a weak front character .
But on RATATOUILLE maaann …its a rat who thinks it can turns into a masterchief cook in france!!!
I know thats not the ponit of the movie.
i have to agree with the others above ,its not even that good.
Personal taste of mine aniway,but no matter either is ficcional or not,a bunch of rats running a kitchen its not a compelling image no matter how much the central character is simpatetic or not.

]]> By: zach http://themovieblog.com/2008/01/so-why-didnt-the-1-critically-rated-film-of-the-year-get-nominated-for-best-picture#comment-118602 zach Fri, 01 Feb 2008 20:19:20 +0000 http://themovieblog.com/2008/01/so-why-didnt-the-1-critically-rated-film-of-the-year-get-nominated-for-best-picture#comment-118602 to be honest i didnt think ratatouille was that great pixars movies are vastly over rated to be honest i didnt think ratatouille was that great
pixars movies are vastly over rated

]]> By: Andrew James http://themovieblog.com/2008/01/so-why-didnt-the-1-critically-rated-film-of-the-year-get-nominated-for-best-picture#comment-118596 Andrew James Fri, 01 Feb 2008 19:54:04 +0000 http://themovieblog.com/2008/01/so-why-didnt-the-1-critically-rated-film-of-the-year-get-nominated-for-best-picture#comment-118596 I think that's close to correct Troy. But Persepolis was entered by France as their entry for best foreign film. The voters chose not to let it pass on to the "next round" aka the short list. So is it possible Sony Pictures didn't put enough "for your consideration" flyers up, or campaigning promotion, etc? I suppose, but I think it was just overlooked because it was animated. Not sure how the studio went about pushing Ratatouille, but it can be up for both best animated and best picture at the same time. I recently wrote to a studio head complaining about Casey Affleck being nominated in the supporting category instead of the lead role (which is complete bullshit). The rep got back to me stating that while the studio makes a "recommendation" as to where to place a nominee, it is ultimately up to the Academy Awards (voters) to choose which category it goes in. So I think Ratatouille and Persepolis <i>could've</i> both been up for best picture, but the voters chose not to put them there.... for whatever reason. I think that’s close to correct Troy.

But Persepolis was entered by France as their entry for best foreign film. The voters chose not to let it pass on to the “next round” aka the short list. So is it possible Sony Pictures didn’t put enough “for your consideration” flyers up, or campaigning promotion, etc? I suppose, but I think it was just overlooked because it was animated.

Not sure how the studio went about pushing Ratatouille, but it can be up for both best animated and best picture at the same time.

I recently wrote to a studio head complaining about Casey Affleck being nominated in the supporting category instead of the lead role (which is complete bullshit). The rep got back to me stating that while the studio makes a “recommendation” as to where to place a nominee, it is ultimately up to the Academy Awards (voters) to choose which category it goes in.

So I think Ratatouille and Persepolis could’ve both been up for best picture, but the voters chose not to put them there…. for whatever reason.

]]> By: Troy http://themovieblog.com/2008/01/so-why-didnt-the-1-critically-rated-film-of-the-year-get-nominated-for-best-picture#comment-118589 Troy Fri, 01 Feb 2008 19:33:08 +0000 http://themovieblog.com/2008/01/so-why-didnt-the-1-critically-rated-film-of-the-year-get-nominated-for-best-picture#comment-118589 @#33: Drewbacca What I was trying to explain to John and company was that the Academy isn't the one that places the movies into the categories. There are categories and you have to meet certain criteria to be in them, but the studios are the ones that make the decision. When the argument began on the audio edition I was bothered by the general lack of knowledge in placing blame...or asking the question why? and trying to find a conspiracy. Then when it was posted for replys and I could not keep this explanation contained anymore. Ratatouille was eligible for best picture, BUT Disney/Pixar chose not to persue that category...they hedged their bets figuring Academy voters would not take it seriously versus such other posssible nominees as "There We Be Blood" and "No Country For Old Men" (THESE WERE BEST PICTURE CONTENDERS SINCE THE MIDDLE OF LAST YEAR) and had it placed in "Animated Film", hoping to lock in a win, figuring the other contenders would be "Beowulf" and other such titles. "Persepolis" also was eligible for best foreign film, BUT Sony Pictures chose not to persue that category...they hedged their bets, against projected nominees (Cannes winning "4 Months, Weeks, 2 Days" and "La Vie En Rose") NEITHER OF WHICH WOULD BE INVITED TO THE BIG DANCE and had it placed in "Animated Film", hoping to lock a win. It's all about judging your strengths versus your possible competition's strengths. @#33: Drewbacca

What I was trying to explain to John and company was that the Academy isn’t the one that places the movies into the categories. There are categories and you have to meet certain criteria to be in them, but the studios are the ones that make the decision.

When the argument began on the audio edition I was bothered by the general lack of knowledge in placing blame…or asking the question why? and trying to find a conspiracy.

Then when it was posted for replys and I could not keep this explanation contained anymore.

Ratatouille was eligible for best picture, BUT Disney/Pixar chose not to persue that category…they hedged their bets figuring Academy voters would not take it seriously versus such other posssible nominees as “There We Be Blood” and “No Country For Old Men” (THESE WERE BEST PICTURE CONTENDERS SINCE THE MIDDLE OF LAST YEAR) and had it placed in “Animated Film”, hoping to lock in a win, figuring the other contenders would be “Beowulf” and other such titles.

“Persepolis” also was eligible for best foreign film, BUT Sony Pictures chose not to persue that category…they hedged their bets, against projected nominees (Cannes winning “4 Months, Weeks, 2 Days” and “La Vie En Rose”) NEITHER OF WHICH WOULD BE INVITED TO THE BIG DANCE and had it placed in “Animated Film”, hoping to lock a win.

It’s all about judging your strengths versus your possible competition’s strengths.

]]> By: James http://themovieblog.com/2008/01/so-why-didnt-the-1-critically-rated-film-of-the-year-get-nominated-for-best-picture#comment-118569 James Fri, 01 Feb 2008 17:18:21 +0000 http://themovieblog.com/2008/01/so-why-didnt-the-1-critically-rated-film-of-the-year-get-nominated-for-best-picture#comment-118569 How about <b>Beowulf</b>? Even if it wasn't nominated for Best Animated Film, I'm still surprised that it wasn't at least acknowledged in some technical category for the CGI and performance capture. While not a seamless example of performance capture (and what is really?), no one can deny that the film was impressive enough in many areas to warrant a nom. How about Beowulf?

Even if it wasn’t nominated for Best Animated Film, I’m still surprised that it wasn’t at least acknowledged in some technical category for the CGI and performance capture. While not a seamless example of performance capture (and what is really?), no one can deny that the film was impressive enough in many areas to warrant a nom.

]]> By: Stormy70 http://themovieblog.com/2008/01/so-why-didnt-the-1-critically-rated-film-of-the-year-get-nominated-for-best-picture#comment-118559 Stormy70 Fri, 01 Feb 2008 16:27:04 +0000 http://themovieblog.com/2008/01/so-why-didnt-the-1-critically-rated-film-of-the-year-get-nominated-for-best-picture#comment-118559 You got to pay to play at the Oscar's. If you don't pimp your film, you don't get nominated. The Oscar's have flat out sucked for several years now. Sucked. You got to pay to play at the Oscar’s. If you don’t pimp your film, you don’t get nominated.

The Oscar’s have flat out sucked for several years now.

Sucked.

]]> By: 1651 http://themovieblog.com/2008/01/so-why-didnt-the-1-critically-rated-film-of-the-year-get-nominated-for-best-picture#comment-118557 1651 Fri, 01 Feb 2008 16:11:00 +0000 http://themovieblog.com/2008/01/so-why-didnt-the-1-critically-rated-film-of-the-year-get-nominated-for-best-picture#comment-118557 23131 23131

]]>