Massassi Forums Logo

This is the static archive of the Massassi Forums. The forums are closed indefinitely. Thanks for all the memories!

You can also download Super Old Archived Message Boards from when Massassi first started.

"View" counts are as of the day the forums were archived, and will no longer increase.

ForumsDiscussion Forum → So what do you think about Star Wars getting snubbed?
12
So what do you think about Star Wars getting snubbed?
2006-01-31, 10:34 PM #1
I know a lot of people don't like the prequels.. Episode 3 was amazing beyond all belief IMO (but that is not hte point of hte discussion)..

But I think that Star Wars not getting nominated for best special effects is pretty bad.

I just dont see how it did not even get nominated. That's pure bs.
2006-01-31, 11:11 PM #2
Yeah. I was wondering that. That and makeup effects too.
Pissed Off?
2006-01-31, 11:22 PM #3
It did get a makeup nomination, Avenger. However, I admit that it probably should have received a visual effects nomination too.
2006-01-31, 11:23 PM #4
Yea, I was wondering why no special effects nomination...

EDIT: What the hell, it totally beat Narnia's special effects.

I'm torn between Good Night and Good Luck and Crash for best picture. Both were really good.
2006-01-31, 11:29 PM #5
They rewarded Peter Jackson spending 300 million dollars of someone else's money and 5 years to make three movies with 11 oscars (well, more like 17 when you add 'em all up).
What does George Lucas get for spending 28 years and 400 million dollars of his OWN money to make 6 movies? Best makeup.
Well... it was good makeup.
The cliff guy was really well done. The teeth were crazy.

-*sigh* If it's not Woody Allen, it's gay cowboys.
2006-01-31, 11:37 PM #6
Originally posted by Wuss:
It did get a makeup nomination, Avenger. However, I admit that it probably should have received a visual effects nomination too.



Don't know how I missed that.
Pissed Off?
2006-01-31, 11:45 PM #7
Maybe it didn't get nominated because it was just too crappy of a movie to be considered?

I kid, I kid. But really, I was suprised that it didn't get a special effects nom at least. Narnia's effects were hardly better than Ep3's. Other than special effects and makeup, though, it doesn't really deserve anything else.
2006-01-31, 11:51 PM #8
Isn't it not if the effects are pretty but what they do with the effects? (like enhance the plot, etc.)
SnailIracing:n(500tpostshpereline)pants
-----------------------------@%
2006-01-31, 11:53 PM #9
No doubt. Maybe they figured the SW franchise had been nominated enough the past few years.
Pissed Off?
2006-02-01, 12:00 AM #10
Well Narnia was ILM, too.
$do || ! $do ; try
try: command not found
Ye Olde Galactic Empire Mission Editor (X-wing, TIE, XvT/BoP, XWA)
2006-02-01, 12:37 AM #11
I hated Narnia.

Special effects? Not on the scale of EP3.
2006-02-01, 12:55 AM #12
I'm far more angry that Sin City didn't get the nomination than EP3.
omnia mea mecum porto
2006-02-01, 1:40 AM #13
I think the reason Ep3 didn't get nominated is because it's the same old CG special effects in every movie. It gets stale when the entire movie is nothing but CGI.
"Well ain't that a merry jelly." - FastGamerr

"You can actually see the waves of me not caring in the air." - fishstickz
2006-02-01, 3:59 AM #14
Originally posted by bearded_jarl:
They rewarded Peter Jackson spending 300 million dollars of someone else's money and 5 years to make three movies with 11 oscars (well, more like 17 when you add 'em all up).
What does George Lucas get for spending 28 years and 400 million dollars of his OWN money to make 6 movies? Best makeup.


The original trilogy recieved many oscars.

Star Wars: A New Hope

* Best Art Direction-Set Decoration
* Best Costume Design
* Best Effects, Visual Effects
* Best Film Editing
* Best Music, Original Score
* Best Sound
* Special Achievement Award For Sound Effects
* also nominated for Best Director, Best Picture, Best Supporting Actor, and Best Writing (Screenplay Written Directly for the Screen)

The Empire Strikes Back

* Best Sound
* Special Achievement Award For Visual Effects
* also nominated for Best Art Direction-Set Decoration, and Best Music (Original Score)

Return of the Jedi

* Special Achievement Award For Visual Effects
* also nominated for Best Art Direction-Set Decoration, Best Effects, Sound Effects Editing, Best Music (Original Score), and Best Sound
"If you watch television news, you will know less about the world than if you just drink gin straight out of the bottle."
--Garrison Keillor
2006-02-01, 4:01 AM #15
Originally posted by bearded_jarl:
What does George Lucas get for spending 28 years and 400 million dollars of his OWN money to make 6 movies?


A worldwide gross of $850 million? I looked it up.

Hell that's probably more than the grosses for Brokeback Mountain, Capote, Good Night and Good Luck, Crash, and Munich combined. And that's just Episode III, the whole prequel series grossed something like $2.5 billion.
The Massassi-Map
There is no spoon.
2006-02-01, 4:40 AM #16
You are gross.
Was cheated out of lions by happydud
Was cheated out of marriage by sugarless
2006-02-01, 4:42 AM #17
Then you have to factor in the merchandise profits...

So he didn't get nominated for an extra oscar, he'll buy himself a couple Gulfstream's to comfort himself. :p

While ROTS I feel did have better effects than AOTC and TPM, the oscars are just a joke.
"We came, we saw, we conquered, we...woke up!"
2006-02-01, 6:22 AM #18
Wow, you've all missed the biggest one. MUSIC! Where is the nomination for Mr. Williams. Out of the prequels, Episode III has some the best music, and it is jsut so fantasitc, it is close if not touching the original Trilogy music.

Anyone agree?

Oh yeah, and War of the Worlds sucked, Star Wars owns it.
The right man in the wrong place can make all the difference in the world.

-G Man
2006-02-01, 7:57 AM #19
I think this shows how much of a joke the Oscars are. They are just a circle-jerk of people who pat each other on the back for snubbing the "establishment". On the list of most profitable movies last year(aka most popular) you have to go clear down to number 48 to find the first Best Picture nomination. The Pacifier and Sky High were more popular than all the nominations for God's sake!
Democracy: rule by the stupid
2006-02-01, 8:30 AM #20
Kieran, it's hardly the Academy's fault that the establishment has poor taste in movies and is unwilling to take an interest in difficult subject matter. :p
2006-02-01, 8:40 AM #21
Perhaps the Oscars have a bias against independents like George Lucas who aren't entrenched in the Hollywood culture or industry. I don't know, but it seems that if the movie involves gays, the disabled, or some other special theme, Oscars are almost guaranteed.

As far as John Williams is concerned, he doesn't need a nomination for RotS. He has 2 for original score for Munich and Memoirs of a Geisha.

RotS still deserved a special effects nomination, though. WTF.
2006-02-01, 8:41 AM #22
Originally posted by KnightRider2000:
Wow, you've all missed the biggest one. MUSIC! Where is the nomination for Mr. Williams. Out of the prequels, Episode III has some the best music, and it is jsut so fantasitc, it is close if not touching the original Trilogy music.

Anyone agree?

Oh yeah, and War of the Worlds sucked, Star Wars owns it.


yes i agree... it is the BEST music of the prequel trilogy
eat right, exercise, die anyway
2006-02-01, 9:19 AM #23
Originally posted by KnightRider2000:
Wow, you've all missed the biggest one. MUSIC! Where is the nomination for Mr. Williams. Out of the prequels, Episode III has some the best music, and it is jsut so fantasitc, it is close if not touching the original Trilogy music.

Anyone agree?

Oh yeah, and War of the Worlds sucked, Star Wars owns it.


I think they're just trying to share the wealth. Williams DID recieve a nomination for Munich, which had far better music than episode III, with the same, rehashed themes. He has had 45 oscar nods, Second place for oscar noms for all time, behind only walt disney.
"If you watch television news, you will know less about the world than if you just drink gin straight out of the bottle."
--Garrison Keillor
2006-02-01, 9:20 AM #24
The Oscars are just lame in general, for the reasons mentioned above. The only reason to watch is to find out who died the previous year (at least I think that's the Oscars..).
$do || ! $do ; try
try: command not found
Ye Olde Galactic Empire Mission Editor (X-wing, TIE, XvT/BoP, XWA)
2006-02-01, 10:50 AM #25
[QUOTE=Kieran Horn]I think this shows how much of a joke the Oscars are. They are just a circle-jerk of people who pat each other on the back for snubbing the "establishment". On the list of most profitable movies last year(aka most popular) you have to go clear down to number 48 to find the first Best Picture nomination. The Pacifier and Sky High were more popular than all the nominations for God's sake![/QUOTE]

It's not supposed to be about which one was more popular though. That has nothing to do with it. The point of the Oscars is to recognize difficult and above the norm aspects of movies, not reward them for being the most popular. The Pacifier and Sky High may have been popular, but there was nothing exceedingly difficult about making them. Were the cotsumes, makeup, music, sets and special effects especially difficult for either of those movies? It's like comparing classical music to Britney Spears. Yes, she is more popular, but music teachers recognize the classical stuff.

That being said, I know nothing about the nominations for this year, but I'm surprised that they weren't nominated for more.
Fincham: Where are you going?
Me: I have no idea
Fincham: I meant where are you sitting. This wasn't an existential question.
2006-02-01, 11:18 AM #26
Quote:
It's not supposed to be about which one was more popular though. That has nothing to do with it. The point of the Oscars is to recognize difficult and above the norm aspects of movies, not reward them for being the most popular. The Pacifier and Sky High may have been popular, but there was nothing exceedingly difficult about making them. Were the cotsumes, makeup, music, sets and special effects especially difficult for either of those movies? It's like comparing classical music to Britney Spears. Yes, she is more popular, but music teachers recognize the classical stuff.



Not really. If that was the case, Star Wars would have been nominated for best special effects.

Not because it's popular and star wars, but beacuse each and every Star Wars movie that has come out has pushed the special effects to the max in the year that it is released. Each film has made some kind of innovation on Special Effects to achieve what you see in the movie's. Episode 3 is beyond beautiful. The Coruscant scene's are absolutely brilliant. There's so much color in the film, you could have no actors and no words and the effects alone would bring it to life. THAT is why it should have gotten a nomination. And THAT is why the Oscars are, and always will be, a ****ing joke.
2006-02-01, 11:50 AM #27
We're talking about the same Academy that gave a special effects nomination to the first Spiderman. I expected EP3 to get snubbed.

What really pisses me off is the fact that a History of Violence and Cinderella man got snubbed so badly. These days it seems all you have to do is make some sentimental tacky bull**** and you get best picture. I bet each member of the Academy has a box of tissues next to them so they can cry and simultaneously whack off each time one of these movies is released.

I'm pulling for Munich in best picture and directing.
>>untie shoes
2006-02-01, 12:01 PM #28
Honestly, I didn't like the effects in the prequels.
Ep3 was the best of the three for certain, but as I watched it I couldn't help but notice that I was watching CG. granted it was really good CG but the purpose of CG is to not see it. to simply believe that it's real.

LotR really impressed me, there were times that it was noticably CG looking but the for majority, I really believed what I saw and was decently supprised when I looked through the special features and saw exatcaly what was real and what wasn't.
On a Swedish chainsaw: "Do not attempt to stop chain with your hands or genitals."
2006-02-01, 12:03 PM #29
Doesn't bother me that much.
Star Wars: TODOA | DXN - Deus Ex: Nihilum
2006-02-01, 12:38 PM #30
Originally posted by djwguitarman:
LotR really impressed me, there were times that it was noticably CG looking but the for majority, I really believed what I saw and was decently supprised when I looked through the special features and saw exatcaly what was real and what wasn't.


I can definitely agree with that. LotR was amazing, because most of the time you couldn't tell what was CG, what was a model, and was was real. I didn't even think about Shelob being CG until I saw RotK for the second time; the first time I saw it I was just so completely immersed that I was convinced that what I was seeing was real. That's good special effects. Ep3, on the other hand, if it's not a human actor, then it's CG. And it's often painfully obvious that what you're looking at is just CG.

A lot of you are putting down the Academy because they didn't nominate your precious Star Wars. Maybe you should get over the fact that Star Wars, especially the prequels, really aren't that great.

Also, remember the award is for "Achievement in Special Effects." What did Ep3 achieve? It's just more of what we saw in Ep2. Not much is new.
2006-02-01, 12:40 PM #31
Originally posted by Temperamental:
Not really. If that was the case, Star Wars would have been nominated for best special effects.

Not because it's popular and star wars, but beacuse each and every Star Wars movie that has come out has pushed the special effects to the max in the year that it is released. Each film has made some kind of innovation on Special Effects to achieve what you see in the movie's. Episode 3 is beyond beautiful. The Coruscant scene's are absolutely brilliant. There's so much color in the film, you could have no actors and no words and the effects alone would bring it to life. THAT is why it should have gotten a nomination. And THAT is why the Oscars are, and always will be, a ****ing joke.


Oh I'm definitely not arguing that point, and I'm also not saying that they're great and always right or any of that other crap. I'm just saying that Kieran's insinuation that they're supposed to be based off popularity is wrong; that's not the point of the awards.
Fincham: Where are you going?
Me: I have no idea
Fincham: I meant where are you sitting. This wasn't an existential question.
2006-02-01, 1:12 PM #32
Originally posted by Bill:
We're talking about the same Academy that gave a special effects nomination to the first Spiderman. I expected EP3 to get snubbed.

What really pisses me off is the fact that a History of Violence and Cinderella man got snubbed so badly. These days it seems all you have to do is make some sentimental tacky bull**** and you get best picture. I bet each member of the Academy has a box of tissues next to them so they can cry and simultaneously whack off each time one of these movies is released.

I'm pulling for Munich in best picture and directing.

Were History of Violence and Cinderella Man good?
2006-02-01, 1:16 PM #33
Yes. Very.
>>untie shoes
2006-02-01, 1:22 PM #34
I think I was more stunned by the fact that Keira Knightley received an acting nomination.
Xbox Live/PlayStation Network/Steam: tone217
http://twitter.com/ourmatetone
2006-02-01, 3:11 PM #35
I hate the Oscars because Walk the Line did not get best Picture Nominated.

It should be a hoe down between WtL and BM.
Epstein didn't kill himself.
2006-02-01, 4:16 PM #36
Originally posted by KnightRider2000:
Wow, you've all missed the biggest one. MUSIC! Where is the nomination for Mr. Williams. Out of the prequels, Episode III has some the best music, and it is jsut so fantasitc, it is close if not touching the original Trilogy music.

Anyone agree?

Oh yeah, and War of the Worlds sucked, Star Wars owns it.

Yeah, ROTS definitely deserved a music nomination. Its music is easily better than all of the other movies with the possible exception of ESB.
"It is not advisable, James, to venture unsolicited opinions. You should spare yourself the embarrassing discovery of their exact value to your listener."
"Rationality is the recognition of the fact that nothing can alter the truth and nothing can take precedence over that act of perceiving it."
2006-02-01, 7:18 PM #37
Probably out of anything, I think War of the Worlds should win. King Kong looked f****** amazing, and I'm not downlplaying it, but it's almost as if I suspected it to look that good. I KNEW it was going to be that good, knowning that WETA was behind it.

War of the Worlds blew me out of the water. The shot where the interstate just gets demolished was stunning.

As for the other categories, I'm kinda pulling for Munich to win, even though it won't. And Walk the Line DEFINITILEY should've been nominated.

Don't worry people, don't worry. Everything will return to equilibrium once Snakes on a Plane sweeps the Oscars for 17 categories, including Best Motion Picture Drama
"His Will Was Set, And Only Death Would Break It"

"None knows what the new day shall bring him"
2006-02-01, 7:23 PM #38
War of the Worlds had awesome visual moments. The first time the tripod comes out of the ground is amazing. Granted it's the music and such that also contributes, but that angle, looking up at that thing.... Ahhhh, it was huge, that was badass, it was menacing as hell.

(plus that noise they make, mmmm)

Another great part is when they're getting on the boat, they turn around, and there's one just standing there perfectly still, and it blows it's horn... mmm. delicious.
2006-02-01, 7:25 PM #39
That movie did have kickass effects.

I hope Munich gets top honors... but it won't.
>>untie shoes
2006-02-01, 7:36 PM #40
Originally posted by AKPiggott:
I think I was more stunned by the fact that Keira Knightley received an acting nomination.


Well, people were saying she would nominated after her performance in Pride and Prejudice.
SnailIracing:n(500tpostshpereline)pants
-----------------------------@%
12

↑ Up to the top!