Interstellar - Part 4

[DA_Champion]

The bigger snub was Nolan for Inception.

The King's Speech – Iain Canning, Emile Sherman, and Gareth Unwin
127 Hours – Danny Boyle and Christian Colson
Black Swan – Scott Franklin, Mike Medavoy, and Brian Oliver
The Fighter – David Hoberman, Todd Lieberman, and Mark Wahlberg
Inception – Christopher Nolan and Emma Thomas
The Kids Are All Right – Gary Gilbert, Jeffrey Levy-Hinte, and Celine Rattray
The Social Network – Dana Brunetti, Ceán Chaffin, Michael De Luca, and Scott Rudin
Toy Story 3 – Darla K. Anderson
True Grit – Ethan Coen, Joel Coen, and Scott Rudin
Winter's Bone – Alix Madigan and Anne Rosellini

Though The King's Speech was clearly not the best movie, it's not obvious that Inception was.

 

[The Chris]

Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe Nolan was not nominated for director for Inception, and even when that happened I scratch my head.

 

[jmc]

I actually think the bigger crime was it didn't get an editing nomination. If any film lives and dies by it's editing it's Inception.

 

[slumcat]

It was that snubbing that changed the Oscars forever. I guess that's a small victory.

That's an urban myth on an unprecedented scale. Though a popular one amongst fans. The Academy was mulling the change for a very long time. It just happened to come out in that year.

Helll Vertigo was not nominated for Best Picture. And recently critics voted it as the greatest film ever made. Or The Searchers wasn't nominated. Or 2001: A Space Odyssey. Or Singing In The Rain. Movies which are cornerstones of cinema itself. If the Academy did not change their rules for those films, sure as hell they werent going to change for a comics movie.

The fact is no one film was responsible for the change. It was organically considered for many years and then implemented in 2009. That they again did not find Nolan worth nominating for directing for Inception shows how much the Academy cares about Nolan and his films.

And eitherways, the masterpiece of 2008 that all the critics were clamoring for was Wall-E.

 

[Deserana]

The Dark Knight definitely influenced the change to 10 Best Pictures. Unlike the other movies you mentioned TDK came out in a post internet age where the backlash was unlike any other, it was from both public and critics.

Heck the "reason" many academy people say it changed was to allow the bigger films that normally get looked over a chance to be recognized which is exactly TDK what happened to TDK.

 

[Batman jr.]

I don't know why, but I laughed really hard at that.

I'd love to see a 4th Batman by him, son.

 

[BatLobster]

I actually think the bigger crime was it didn't get an editing nomination. If any film lives and dies by it's editing it's Inception.

Agreed. Nolan himself said the assembly cut was an incomprehensible mess. Lee Smith deserves a ton of credit.

 

[QBComics]

Nolan was at least nominated for screenplay, although I think the direction in Inception is infinitely more impressive than The King's Speech. 2010 is one of my favorite years in film, and they award the top prize to such a safe pick. And so it goes with the Oscars.

That's an urban myth on an unprecedented scale. Though a popular one amongst fans. The Academy was mulling the change for a very long time. It just happened to come out in that year.

Helll Vertigo was not nominated for Best Picture. And recently critics voted it as the greatest film ever made. Or The Searchers wasn't nominated. Or 2001: A Space Odyssey. Or Singing In The Rain. Movies which are cornerstones of cinema itself. If the Academy did not change their rules for those films, sure as hell they werent going to change for a comics movie.

The fact is no one film was responsible for the change. It was organically considered for many years and then implemented in 2009. That they again did not find Nolan worth nominating for directing for Inception shows how much the Academy cares about Nolan and his films.

And eitherways, the masterpiece of 2008 that all the critics were clamoring for was Wall-E.

I'm pretty sure there's a quote out there by some member of the Academy where they were discussing the rule change, saying something like "I'd be lying if The Dark Knight was not mentioned in those conversations." Not saying TDK was the sole reason for the change, but it definitely had an impact.

That said, Wall-E and The Dark Knight both deserved a Best Picture nomination that year, in my opinion.

 

[Batman jr.]

Gary Oldman has never won an oscar, but Gwyneth Paltrow has.

Goodbye.

 

[terry78]

Gary Oldman has never won an oscar, but Gwyneth Paltrow has.

Goodbye.

Well, that was probably her best role to date. Oldman has too much **** to choose from so it'd be moot. That's how you have to think of awards.

 

[slumcat]

The Dark Knight definitely influenced the change to 10 Best Pictures. Unlike the other movies you mentioned TDK came out in a post internet age where the backlash was unlike any other, it was from both public and critics.

Heck the "reason" many academy people say it changed was to allow the bigger films that normally get looked over a chance to be recognized which is exactly TDK what happened to TDK.

Does. Not. Compute.

Just the next year, the Academy handed the Best Picture to a film with a 13 million as opposed to a film that earned 2.7 billion dollars. The Academy cares jack**** about "bigger films". They did not nominate Skyfall, or Avengers or TDKR or Hunger Games for Best Picture in 2012. Instead what did they nominate? A difficult French language drama about 80 year olds dying in their house. Another was an American film made for less than 2 million dollars and shot in swaps and slums.

The Academy doesn't give a **** about "bigger" movies or Nolan as they have shown by their attitude towards both after the rule change. Had they suddenly started favoring Nolan or big movies after the rule change then this argument would hold but that is clearly not the case.

 

[weezerspider]

Does. Not. Compute.

Just the next year, the Academy handed the Best Picture to a film with a 13 million as opposed to a film that earned 2.7 billion dollars. The Academy cares jack**** about "bigger films". They did not nominate Skyfall, or Avengers or TDKR or Hunger Games for Best Picture in 2012. Instead what did they nominate? A difficult French language drama about 80 year olds dying in their house. Another was an American film made for less than 2 million dollars and shot in swaps and slums.

The Academy doesn't give a **** about "bigger" movies or Nolan as they have shown by their attitude towards both after the rule change. Had they suddenly started favoring Nolan or big movies after the rule change then this argument would hold but that is clearly not the case.

In all fairness to them, TDK and Peter Jackson's LOTR are the only 'big blockbusters' worthy of Best Picture in recent memory. It's not like they added more slots and all of a sudden were gonna turn into the MTV awards.

 

[slumcat]

In all fairness to them, TDK and Peter Jackson's LOTR are the only 'big blockbusters' worthy of Best Picture in recent memory. It's not like they added more slots and all of a sudden were gonna turn into the MTV awards.

I think neither were worthy. I would say only Wall-E, Incredibles, Toy Story 3 and Gravity are the blockbusters worthy of winning Best Picture.

 

[Deserana]

Does. Not. Compute.

Just the next year, the Academy handed the Best Picture to a film with a 13 million as opposed to a film that earned 2.7 billion dollars. The Academy cares jack**** about "bigger films". They did not nominate Skyfall, or Avengers or TDKR or Hunger Games for Best Picture in 2012. Instead what did they nominate? A difficult French language drama about 80 year olds dying in their house. Another was an American film made for less than 2 million dollars and shot in swaps and slums.

The Academy doesn't give a **** about "bigger" movies or Nolan as they have shown by their attitude towards both after the rule change. Had they suddenly started favoring Nolan or big movies after the rule change then this argument would hold but that is clearly not the case.

I'm not saying they stuck by what they said but somebody from the academy did say this and you could probably find the quote or I'll just do it later. They said it was an opportunity for films that may get overlooked to have a chance. It never meant whatever big blockbuster coming out was going to get a shoe in.

The Dark Knight has been singled out because of how out of the genre it was. People weren't merely calling it just a great CBM they were calling it a great crime film. Nothing else like it has transcended the genre in the opinions of many critics and average joes. It genuinely had all the traits of a great film. You can't really say that about many if any CBM's since. It wasn't because it was the hit film that people crapped on the snubbing it was because a genuinely worthy nomination was completely overlooked in favour of The Reader and Benjamin Button, which just looking at their RT scores, didn't.

Yes the Oscars may have been looking for a change anyway but for it to happen after not nominating TDK and receiving backlash (in an internet age) from all sides is either a hell of a coincidence or has something to it. Increasing the Best Pic to 10 wasn't the Oscars declaring that Transformers suddenly has a chance it was just so the films like TDK or District 9 or animation or the low budget indie films have a chance to be recognised, not win necessarily. TDK may not have been THEE reason but it went a long way and I can't see how you can just brush it off. I'm one of the people who thought TDK should have been nominated but I didn't for one second think it would.

 

[Rocketman]

It's becoming more apparent over the years that TDK is a monumental masterpiece of cinema - probably regarded as one of the greatest movies of the past 25 years. It's just generally agreed upon that it's a near-flawless, well-made film, with its dark tone, its Post-9/11 themes, Heath Ledger's performance, its almost Shakespearean Tragedy of Harvey Dent... You'll be hard-pressed to find someone who isn't a ******** internet fanboy who tells you that this ISN'T the greatest superhero/comic book movie ever made. It has consistently ranked #4 on IMDB's Top 250... for six years. It's "The Godfather" of this genre. It's the "Citizen Kane".

Yeah, I'm preeeeety sure it should've been nominated for Best Picture. It didn't need to win, but it should've had the nomination. A lot of people make it look like TDK was typical Hollywood fare like Independence Day or Transformers. The movie was revolutionary. It's BY FAR the movie Nolan will always be remembered for.

 

[Travesty]

"Near-flawless"

 

[slumcat]

I'm not saying they stuck by what they said but somebody from the academy did say this and you could probably find the quote or I'll just do it later. They said it was an opportunity for films that may get overlooked to have a chance. It never meant whatever big blockbuster coming out was going to get a shoe in.

The Dark Knight has been singled out because of how out of the genre it was. People weren't merely calling it just a great CBM they were calling it a great crime film. Nothing else like it has transcended the genre in the opinions of many critics and average joes. It genuinely had all the traits of a great film. You can't really say that about many if any CBM's since. It wasn't because it was the hit film that people crapped on the snubbing it was because a genuinely worthy nomination was completely overlooked in favour of The Reader and Benjamin Button, which just looking at their RT scores, didn't.

Yes the Oscars may have been looking for a change anyway but for it to happen after not nominating TDK and receiving backlash (in an internet age) from all sides is either a hell of a coincidence or has something to it. Increasing the Best Pic to 10 wasn't the Oscars declaring that Transformers suddenly has a chance it was just so the films like TDK or District 9 or animation or the low budget indie films have a chance to be recognised, not win necessarily. TDK may not have been THEE reason but it went a long way and I can't see how you can just brush it off. I'm one of the people who thought TDK should have been nominated but I didn't for one second think it would.

It seems an entirely absurd notion to me that one single film would make the Academy change something they have had for decades. I mean seriously for TDK? Its not even the most critically acclaimed or the est of its year much less of 50 years to make the Academy change its rules.

Its an fan notion to me. Specially like I said that the Academy did not in any way honor on its supposed intention to let in "more popular" films. People said it was 5 films earlier nominated that were Academy type. We instead now have 9-10 Academy type movies nominated.

Neither the quality of the movie in question nor the Academy's choices post the change indicate that said movie was responsible. Hell they changed the best picture system again in 2011 after 2009. Tells you how much a single movie has an impact.

I could mention Mike Leigh's Happy Go Lucky and say it wasn't nominated for Best Picture so Academy changed its rules. Its neither here nor there. One Academy member does not reflect the sentiments of the entire Academy nor has the power to change rules.

The Academy is absolutely immune to public pressure or critical pressure. Favorites of critics and GA routinely fall by the wayside in the Oscar race.

Again I find it entirely absurd that - that one single film (TDK at that) triggered the Academy into changing their rules - is found to be a believable notion in any way.

 

[Rocketman]

"Near-flawless"

Awesome contribution! Thanks for the insight!

 

[Travesty]

Heh, ok?

 

[slumcat]

It's becoming more apparent over the years that TDK is a monumental masterpiece of cinema - probably regarded as one of the greatest movies of the past 25 years. It's just generally agreed upon that it's a near-flawless, well-made film, with its dark tone, its Post-9/11 themes, Heath Ledger's performance, its almost Shakespearean Tragedy of Harvey Dent... You'll be hard-pressed to find someone who isn't a ******** internet fanboy who tells you that this ISN'T the greatest superhero/comic book movie ever made. It has consistently ranked #4 on IMDB's Top 250... for six years. It's "The Godfather" of this genre. It's the "Citizen Kane".

Yeah, I'm preeeeety sure it should've been nominated for Best Picture. It didn't need to win, but it should've had the nomination. A lot of people make it look like TDK was typical Hollywood fare like Independence Day or Transformers. The movie was revolutionary. It's BY FAR the movie Nolan will always be remembered for.

The IMDB Top 250 is hogwash.

Here is a list that collates thousands and thousands of critics list since the turn of the century to come up with a Top 250 of the new century.

http://www.theyshootpictures.com/21stcentury_allfilms_table.php

It does not have TDK amongst even the Top 150 films made since 2000 (nor in the Top 10 of 2008).

Just pointing this out to show that fan opinion is not necessarily compliant with critics opinion. Maybe blockbuster audiences might think TDK is a masterpiece but it is likely that general cinephiles who watch various types of movies might find TDK unremarkable.

 

[Rocketman]

It seems an entirely absurd notion to me that one single film would make the Academy change something they have had for decades. I mean seriously for TDK? Its not even the most critically acclaimed or the est of its year much less of 50 years to make the Academy change its rules.

Its an fan notion to me. Specially like I said that the Academy did not in any way honor on its supposed intention to let in "more popular" films. People said it was 5 films earlier nominated that were Academy type. We instead now have 9-10 Academy type movies nominated.

Neither the quality of the movie in question nor the Academy's choices post the change indicate that said movie was responsible. Hell they changed the best picture system again in 2011 after 2009. Tells you how much a single movie has an impact.

I could mention Mike Leigh's Happy Go Lucky and say it wasn't nominated for Best Picture so Academy changed its rules. Its neither here nor there. One Academy member does not reflect the sentiments of the entire Academy nor has the power to change rules.

The Academy is absolutely immune to public pressure or critical pressure. Favorites of critics and GA routinely fall by the wayside in the Oscar race.

Again I find it entirely absurd that - that one single film (TDK at that) triggered the Academy into changing their rules - is found to be a believable notion in any way.

Dude, it was the biggest movie ever since Titanic (1997). No movie had a bigger cultural impact in over 10 years at the time. You're forgetting the unprecedented buzz that film had. It was bigger than Burton's film. "Batmania" was on full-force. The Academy was not just recognizing critics and box office, they were recognizing the impact it had in general. They nominated Avatar for Best Picture for those very same reasons... Which was the better film? Avatar or TDK? Is Titanic better than TDK?

 

[The Shape]

I swear, sometimes I feel like Bill Murray in Groundhog Day when visiting the Hype.

 

[georgec]

I swear, sometimes I feel like Bill Murray in Groundhog Day when visiting the Hype.

 

[Travesty]

Oh god, the Titanic comparisons again. "More Bat-mania than B89"?

I'm sorry, but I'll keep heheing all the way home.

 

[Rocketman]

Okay, so apparently TDK wasn't a big deal then?
I'll just go ahead and agree with you guys. You're all correct. TDK was just a regular movie. I'll stop posting on the matter.