-
The new B5TV.COM is here. We've replaced our 16 year old software with flashy new XenForo install. Registration is open again. Password resets will work again. More info here.
Lord of the Rings Shorted
- Thread starter QMCO5
- Start date
dawnchild
Regular
Personally I am overjoyed to see LoTR : The Two Towers get as many nominations as it got , among them in the very prestigious Best Picture-category. There were many good films last year and I thought it might get snubbed alltogether.
Great recognition of what will be a brilliant movie-saga!
Go LoTR!!
Great recognition of what will be a brilliant movie-saga!
Go LoTR!!
A_Ranger
Regular
I have to disagree there. I'm not goign to say one was a better movie than the other, because all 3 are essentially one movie. I think TT deserves the Best Picture Award, esp since it had a lot more character development this time around. Hell I'd give it the award if all it had was the Frodo/Sam/Gollum-Smeagol thread!
Oh I definitely think it should have been nominated for Best Picture... I'm just saying that I think Fellowship was a better movie and deserved more nominations. In my mind, Fellowship (while not 100 percent faithful) captured the heart of that book. While I liked the TTT, the movie just seemed to lose some of it's heart...
PillowRock
Regular
But it isn't a matter of the Academy saying "This movie is worth X nominations" and then figuring out what categories to give those nominations in. It is a category by category decision. So which categories that you thought FotR deserved last year did you think TTT did not deserve this year?
From what I have read it sounds like the music branch has decided that music from a sequel is by definition derivative and therefore ineligible for either the score or the song categories. This is true regardless of how much new music is written. Does that sound right to you? That was two nominations (and one win) that FotR got that TTT didn't.
Similarly, the hair and makeup branch decided that TTT (and presumably RotK next year) was ineligible on the grounds that everything they did was just an extension / recreation of what they did for FotR. Never mind that there were many new characters and makeup effects relative to what appeared in FotR. Do you agree with that decision?
I can see it being argued that Ian McKellen didn't put on as impressive of a performance in TTT as in FotR, largely because he wasn't asked / required to do as much.
For Directing, I seems to me that the challenges in putting TTT together were even greater than those of FotR. This is due to the distributed nature of the story and getting the large group / huge army scale battles done well. Or did you think that PJ did a less skillful job of keeping the movie together this time than last?
I have no idea happened in the cinematography category. They won last year and didn't even get nominated this time.
From your earlier comments, it sounds like you agree with TTT not getting an adaptd screenplay nomination.
FotR also got a costume nomination. I have seen a quote from one of this year's nominees saying that TTT seemed to them to be an "odd" omission.
That's 8 categories where FotR was nominated where TTT wasn't. On the other hand TTT got nominated for Sound Effects Editing where FotR was not. Naturally, it can always be argued that some of those nominations fell away not because of anything to do with Lord of the Rings or how it is perceived but just because this was a stronger year than last year in some categories. Maybe that's what happened in cinematography.
And, of course, no matter how good RotK turns out to be it will get fewer nomination than FotR because it won't be eligible in 3 categories and I don't see it being able to make up for that in the other categories.
From what I have read it sounds like the music branch has decided that music from a sequel is by definition derivative and therefore ineligible for either the score or the song categories. This is true regardless of how much new music is written. Does that sound right to you? That was two nominations (and one win) that FotR got that TTT didn't.
Similarly, the hair and makeup branch decided that TTT (and presumably RotK next year) was ineligible on the grounds that everything they did was just an extension / recreation of what they did for FotR. Never mind that there were many new characters and makeup effects relative to what appeared in FotR. Do you agree with that decision?
I can see it being argued that Ian McKellen didn't put on as impressive of a performance in TTT as in FotR, largely because he wasn't asked / required to do as much.
For Directing, I seems to me that the challenges in putting TTT together were even greater than those of FotR. This is due to the distributed nature of the story and getting the large group / huge army scale battles done well. Or did you think that PJ did a less skillful job of keeping the movie together this time than last?
I have no idea happened in the cinematography category. They won last year and didn't even get nominated this time.
From your earlier comments, it sounds like you agree with TTT not getting an adaptd screenplay nomination.
FotR also got a costume nomination. I have seen a quote from one of this year's nominees saying that TTT seemed to them to be an "odd" omission.
That's 8 categories where FotR was nominated where TTT wasn't. On the other hand TTT got nominated for Sound Effects Editing where FotR was not. Naturally, it can always be argued that some of those nominations fell away not because of anything to do with Lord of the Rings or how it is perceived but just because this was a stronger year than last year in some categories. Maybe that's what happened in cinematography.
And, of course, no matter how good RotK turns out to be it will get fewer nomination than FotR because it won't be eligible in 3 categories and I don't see it being able to make up for that in the other categories.
taichidave
Regular
All true.
I'm hoping though, that next year will be the payoff for LOTR. Best Picture, Best Director, etc. It could be that I am just an optimist.
Side note: I'd hate to have to choose between LOTR:TTT and SW2:AOTC for visual effects.
I'm hoping though, that next year will be the payoff for LOTR. Best Picture, Best Director, etc. It could be that I am just an optimist.
Side note: I'd hate to have to choose between LOTR:TTT and SW2:AOTC for visual effects.
PillowRock
Regular
My opnion?
TTT gets it on the strength of Gollum.
taichidave
Regular
Oh I'm not saying you're wrong. I just have the whole inner debate going on.
Two Towers is best. Just look at Gollum.
Yeah, Gollum was unbelievable, but I thought some Ent shots were dodgy.
Does it say "dodgy?"
And CGI Yoda was no slouch, either.
No, my precious! The nice hobbitses should win, not the nasty Jedis!
It kinda goes downhill from there...
Two Towers is best. Just look at Gollum.
Yeah, Gollum was unbelievable, but I thought some Ent shots were dodgy.
Does it say "dodgy?"
And CGI Yoda was no slouch, either.
No, my precious! The nice hobbitses should win, not the nasty Jedis!
It kinda goes downhill from there...
Best Director for one.
Yes, I wholeheartedly belive that.
Doesn't that depend on the relative strengths of the other movies that are released this year? From what I've heard, this year will be a pretty weak as far as Oscar-worthy films. If PJ can knock it out of the park with RotK, then he should do well next year.
PillowRock
Regular
Not if RotK is deemed ineligible for some of the categories that FotR got nominated for. Frankly, I don't see much of any likelyhood of RotK getting any more acting nominations than FotR (which got one for McKellen). Sound Effects Editing can make up for one of the 3 ineligibilities (if that's a word), but FotR got nominated in basically every other category that it (or RotK) could be nominated for. The only way that RotK could even equal the total nominations of FotR would be for it to get 3 nominations from among the 4 acting categories. Do you see that happening? If so, who do you think will get them?
Of course, RotK could very easily top FotR in terms of wins (especially major wins).
PillowRock
Regular
That depends on how you define that.
From the POV of the studio and distributor marketing people, it gets a lot of people talking about the movies. It also creates an extra surge of buisiness for a number of movies. It does these things without them having to spend many millions on ad campaigns.
From their standpoint, I think everyone has to concede that they do some "good".