Quote:
“Let’s also remember that Slumdog Millionaire 8 Oscars last year. It was hugely popular with the Academy and some considered it the year’s best, but so far not many have really looked back fondly on the film.”

I’m not sure who you meant when you say ‘not many’. Most of the people I know (both commercial and arthouse film buffs) do remember Slumdog fondly and were in agreement that it well-deserved its Oscar last year. The other film that people seemed to remember well was ‘Milk’. I recall reading that you love ‘Benjamin’ but I haven’t talked to anyone that liked it that much.

In any case, I (and my friends) do agree with you about Braveheart. It was a terrible best picture winner. cheers

That may be true, but one thing I’ve learned is that when people like us talk outside of our film group circles to the general masses, the conversations become reversed. Brokeback Mountain is not as well liked and Braveheart is very near and dear to a lot of people. I’m fairly sure that for every person that you have talked to that has disliked Braveheart, I can think of about five people off of the the top of my head that list it as one of their favorite movies.

As far as The Hurt Locker is concerned, I think it will age well because of the fact that it refused to make a typical “war statement” and just let it be a character portrayal of soldiers who become addicted to the adrenaline rush of war. Anyone who has ever known people who have grown up on Playstation and games like Call of Duty knows that this kind of character portrayal is very resonating. Personally, I would have voted for Inglorious Basterds because it is just a celebration of everything cinematic and everything good about Tarantino’s style. It’s tense, it’s well crafted, it’s uncomfortably hilarious and it is uncompromisingly unlike any other World War II film that has ever been made. The Hurt Locker is a worthy runner up in my opinion and Avatar would have to come behind Up in the Air, Up and District 9 for me, but it is still a cinematic event that makes seeing a movie in the theater something special, which we haven’t seen in a long time and for that alone, I give it credit.

As for the show itself, it was not very good at all. There were aspects I liked, such as Neil Patrick Harris’ opening number and the idea of a duo as clever as Steve Martin and Alec Baldwin. But overall, the treatment of each of the technical categories was downright insulting. Visual Effects, Make-Up, Costumes and Set Design were awesome as always, but when it comes to the songs, I like to see them performed all of the way through, for sound, I like to see clips of the movies showing off their sound work, maybe even a nice Behind the Scenes for Sound Effects to show how they were created. But Film Editing and Cinematography were just wasted. We could see a snippet of the way something was lit like during the 2006 awards or for Film Editing, we usually see the cutaways and the final product. Then there was that God-awful dance sequence. When they started doing the robot to Up, I got up and left just so I could picture better images other than the crap I saw. The Academy should have learned their lesson from back in 1998 when dancers came out on stage tap dancing to Saving Private Ryan. Memo to the academy: no more dance routines.

I believe The Hurt Locker is a great film, mostly because is a film about Irak that manages not to say anything political about the situation there.

It’s just soldiers doing their jobs and everybody wants to leave except jeremy Renner’s character. Because he’s gotten used to what he’s good at. I don’t think that War is a Drug. I think we can only be happy with doing what we’re good at, and sometimes what we do is so dangerous we put other people in danger without us knowing.

I think what makes the movie imperfect is that’s just a character study. A very well written and directed character study, but nothing more. No other character is developed and there’s no more than the initial message. That’s why probably Avatar or Up in the Air or even Inglourious Basterds normally win best picture in the oscars.

I’m still happy if either of them would have won

I think what will eventually bear out is this: In 1977, Close Encounters of the Third Kind and Star Wars both released. One was obviously more successful than the other, but even today they are both well remembered. And I would guess that outside of Star Wars fanboys, Close Encounters ranks higher in most estimations than Star Wars.

And Blade Runner was not positioned very well back in the ’80s and while some have faulted problems with the film, there is no denying it has become something of an important film in science fiction.

Thank you for that eloquent analysis. I agree entirely with everything you said. And I think you’re directly on the money with your analysis of Jeremy Renner’s character, Ssgt. James.

The Deer Hunter, though certainly a more realistic depiction of the Vietnam War than its Oscar competition, Coming Home, had problems that were obvious from the get-go: the extreme length, the too long pre-war scenes and the shocking Russian Roulette sequences, extremely effective dramatically, but as fake as anything in Inglourious Basterds and extremely racist in retrospect.

The film’s reputation was further damaged by Heaven’s Gate, director Michael Cimino’s follow-up fiasco which caused numerous critics to wonder if they hadn’t overpraised his earlier film.

Another Oscar winner that The Hurt Locker compares favorably to is The Best Years of Our Lives, still the definitive film about soldiers returning to an indifferent world after war had changed them. The difference was that at the end of World War II, the returning soldiers had no option other than to find their niche in civilian life. At the end of The Hurt Locker, Jeremy Renner’s character has been so desensitized by his time in Iraq that he can’t relate to even the simplest everyday things like deciding which cereal to buy. Unlike Dana Andrews and company in The Best Years of Our Lives, however, he has the option of returning to war, his drug of choice. It’s as horrific an ending as if he would have died or worse, killed someone else.

The problem with your approach to the movie is your interpretation that this is all the film had to say. The reason why it’s a great film, and why it not only won Best Picture, but why it won’t just be forgotten, or fade into obscurity, is because its message is deeper than just that. It’s true, that’s one of the overriding messages of the film, but it encompasses so much more. Just looking at the character of Eldridge makes that clear to my mind.

I agree about Crash, and agree it never should have won. As for Avatar, the reason it won’t fade into obscurity is because it made over $2 billion at the box office. It’s also interesting that you feel District 9 won’t fade into obscurity, but contend that The Hurt Locker will. I liked District 9, a lot. I thought it was a very good film, but if we’re talking about simply looking back on recent memory and judging, District 9 has definitely lost some of its original “glory” so to speak. I see people speaking less highly of the film than they used to, regularly. I disagree, but… Just saying.

We’ll see where things go and what happens, but I see Platoon as a better comparison to The Hurt Locker than The Deer Hunter.

I would have thought that that was an extremely important point to make.