The awesome Oscars 2010 discussion. SPOILERS*List of Winners updated*

[QUOTE="gaming25"][QUOTE="SaintLeonidas"] What, what? No idea what you are talking aboot buddy. The idea of Inception winning anything was what I found to be so funny.

SaintLeonidas

And I am asking you what about his directing wasnt worthy of being nominated for an Oscar? People have bought up criticisms about the script for some reason, but never the directing.

[QUOTE="gaming25"][QUOTE="Niff_T"]

This has nothing to do with it being popular. This has to do with the fact that the cinematography of Inception was bland and uninspired, especially when compared to the other nominees.

sammyjenkis898

[QUOTE="iloverikku11"]

Inception wasnt about fairies and pixes, the cinemetagraphy was great for the type of dream movie it was.gaming25

what the **** does that mean? Watch True Grit or Black Swan or Social Network and it would be impossible to say Inception had better shots than any of those films.

This has nothing to do with it being popular. This has to do with the fact that the cinematography of Inception was bland and uninspired, especially when compared to the other nominees.

[QUOTE="SaintLeonidas"][QUOTE="gaming25"] You didnt answer the question. What would make him winning best director be funny? gaming25

And I am asking you what about his directing wasnt worthy of being nominated for an Oscar? People have bought up criticisms about the script for some reason, but never the directing.

Generally, what does a director do? He is not the cinematographer, editor or actor/actress... so what does he do? He directed the scene... and the scenes were poorly acted, written, shot and editied... so thats on him...

[QUOTE="sammyjenkis898"][QUOTE="gaming25"] Inception wasnt about fairies and pixes, the cinemetagraphy was great for the type of dream movie it was.SaintLeonidas

[QUOTE="SaintLeonidas"][QUOTE="gaming25"] You didnt answer the question. What would make him winning best director be funny? gaming25

And I am asking you what about his directing wasnt worthy of being nominated for an Oscar? People have bought up criticisms about the script for some reason, but never the directing.

[QUOTE="SaintLeonidas"]

[QUOTE="sammyjenkis898"] Not really. The film didn't differentiate itself visually between dreams and reality, the camera work was dodgy, etc. It was a fairly bland looking film. There was nothing exceptional about the cinematography in Inception. Matthew Libatique or Roger Deakins should have won.gaming25

[QUOTE="SaintLeonidas"]

[QUOTE="sammyjenkis898"] Not really. The film didn't differentiate itself visually between dreams and reality, the camera work was dodgy, etc. It was a fairly bland looking film. There was nothing exceptional about the cinematography in Inception. Matthew Libatique or Roger Deakins should have won.gaming25

[QUOTE="gaming25"]

Um I don't know, maybe the fact that he wasn't best director... :lol:SaintLeonidas

And I am asking you what about his directing wasnt worthy of being nominated for an Oscar? People have bought up criticisms about the script for some reason, but never the directing.

Generally, what does a director do? He is not the cinematographer, editor or actor/actress... so what does he do? He directed the scene... and the scenes were poorly acted, written, shot and editied... so thats on him...

[QUOTE="gaming25"][QUOTE="SaintLeonidas"] It is sad that the Academy in the last two years has mistaken "spectacle" as good cinematography.

Lockedge

Avatar wasnt as criticially acclaimed. So when I say that many people think it was the best film ever, I mean it.

[QUOTE="Lockedge"][QUOTE="gaming25"] Inception wasnt nominated for as many awards as people thought it would be since many people thought it was the greatest film ever.gaming25

Avatar wasnt as criticially acclaimed. So when I say that many people think it was the best film ever, I mean it.

[QUOTE="gaming25"][QUOTE="SaintLeonidas"] It is sad that the Academy in the last two years has mistaken "spectacle" as good cinematography.

SaintLeonidas

Ignore the fact that it had gotten some of the highest critical ratings of last year.

[QUOTE="iloverikku11"]

[QUOTE="gaming25"] Inception wasnt about fairies and pixes, the cinemetagraphy was great for the type of dream movie it was.gaming25

what the **** does that mean? Watch True Grit or Black Swan or Social Network and it would be impossible to say Inception had better shots than any of those films.

The Black Swan Dance scene (Was mostly why I wanted Black Swan to win cinematagrahpybut it was overall great anyway)> The Bridge scene.

It wasn't long ago that Avatar was the best film ever. :P Just laying out a comparable.Lockedge

Avatar wasnt as criticially acclaimed. So when I say that many people think it was the best film ever, I mean it.

[QUOTE="ManUtd4life096"]

[QUOTE="Niff_T"]

I agree.

Also, Inception winning best cinematography was truly hilarious.

cmdrmonkey45

What is it about a popular Summer blockbuster that makes people so biased against it? Just because it's an action movie, and not a riveting drama, people feel the need to bash on it.

The fact is, Inception is without doubt one of the most innovative movies of all time, like it or not.

More like one of the dumbest, most overhyped movies of all time.

The dream world concept has been done and done better.

[QUOTE="SaintLeonidas"][QUOTE="gaming25"]

Avatar wasnt as criticially acclaimed. So when I say that many people think it was the best film ever, I mean it.

gaming25

[QUOTE="Lockedge"][QUOTE="gaming25"] Inception wasnt nominated for as many awards as people thought it would be since many people thought it was the greatest film ever.gaming25

Avatar wasnt as criticially acclaimed. So when I say that many people think it was the best film ever, I mean it.

[QUOTE="gaming25"][QUOTE="SaintLeonidas"] Avatar received more critical acclaim then Inception...SaintLeonidas

[QUOTE="SaintLeonidas"]

[QUOTE="gaming25"] Youre joking right? That just simply isnt true at all. The only thing that Avatar had over Inception as far as critical reception was the Golden Globe. But by and large inception has been rated on average higher than avatar.Pixel-Pirate

Inception's plot was't even original.Bloodseeker23

[QUOTE="Bloodseeker23"]Inception's plot was't even original.gaming25

But it was a bad film... very bad... and it tricked a lot of people into thinking it was smart and arty, when in fact it was pop-psychology nonsense and mass media predictability...

[QUOTE="gaming25"][QUOTE="Bloodseeker23"]Inception's plot was't even original.heysharpshooter

But it was a bad film... very bad... and it tricked a lot of people into thinking it was smart and arty, when in fact it was pop-psychology nonsense and mass media predictability...

yay. brits win.

[QUOTE="gaming25"][QUOTE="Bloodseeker23"]Inception's plot was't even original.heysharpshooter

But it was a bad film... very bad... and it tricked a lot of people into thinking it was smart and arty, when in fact it was pop-psychology nonsense and mass media predictability...

Why does this matter either way. It's FICTION.

A lack of realism is the worst argument against a movie's quality of all time.

[QUOTE="heysharpshooter"]

[QUOTE="gaming25"] Even if that was true, that wouldnt make it a bad film.789shadow

But it was a bad film... very bad... and it tricked a lot of people into thinking it was smart and arty, when in fact it was pop-psychology nonsense and mass media predictability...

Why does this matter either way. It's FICTION.

A lack of realism is the worst argument against a movie's quality of all time.

Where did I mention realisim? Pop-psychology is very real... but its non-sense...

And yes its fiction... very bad ficition...

[QUOTE="789shadow"]

[QUOTE="heysharpshooter"]

But it was a bad film... very bad... and it tricked a lot of people into thinking it was smart and arty, when in fact it was pop-psychology nonsense and mass media predictability...

heysharpshooter

Why does this matter either way. It's FICTION.

A lack of realism is the worst argument against a movie's quality of all time.

Where did I mention realisim? Pop-psychology is very real... but its non-sense...

And yes its fiction... very bad ficition...

This whole statement is a contradiction. If you criticize it for being nonsense, that is saying it isn't realistic, like that matters. And, hold on, let me get this straigt.........it's bad fiction.......because it's "nonsense"..............or to say, not realistic.......made up..........

:|

Inception's plot was't even original.Bloodseeker23

[QUOTE="heysharpshooter"]

[QUOTE="789shadow"]

Why does this matter either way. It's FICTION.

A lack of realism is the worst argument against a movie's quality of all time.

789shadow

Where did I mention realisim? Pop-psychology is very real... but its non-sense...

And yes its fiction... very bad ficition...

This whole statement is a contradiction. If you criticize it for being nonsense, that is saying it isn't realistic, like that matters. And, hold on, let me get this straigt.........it's bad fiction.......because it's "nonsense"..............or to say, not realistic.......made up..........

:|

Since when does nonsense mean not realistic? Is english your first language? Nonsense is something that does not make sense, but it might be real, just non-sensical...

You are taking one word from my statement and saying my statement is false...

[QUOTE="789shadow"]

[QUOTE="heysharpshooter"]

Where did I mention realisim? Pop-psychology is very real... but its non-sense...

And yes its fiction... very bad ficition...

heysharpshooter

This whole statement is a contradiction. If you criticize it for being nonsense, that is saying it isn't realistic, like that matters. And, hold on, let me get this straigt.........it's bad fiction.......because it's "nonsense"..............or to say, not realistic.......made up..........

:|

Since when does nonsense mean not realistic? Is english your first language? Nonsense is something that does not make sense, but it might be real, just non-sensical...

You are taking one word from my statement and saying my statement is false...

Okay then: in what way is Inception at all possibly nonsense as a WORK OF FICTION.

[QUOTE="heysharpshooter"]

[QUOTE="789shadow"]

Why does this matter either way. It's FICTION.

A lack of realism is the worst argument against a movie's quality of all time.

789shadow

Where did I mention realisim? Pop-psychology is very real... but its non-sense...

And yes its fiction... very bad ficition...

This whole statement is a contradiction. If you criticize it for being nonsense, that is saying it isn't realistic, like that matters. And, hold on, let me get this straigt.........it's bad fiction.......because it's "nonsense"..............or to say, not realistic.......made up..........

:|

A plot does not have to be unrealistic to be illogical.

[QUOTE="789shadow"]

[QUOTE="heysharpshooter"]

Where did I mention realisim? Pop-psychology is very real... but its non-sense...

And yes its fiction... very bad ficition...

IAMTHEJOKER88

This whole statement is a contradiction. If you criticize it for being nonsense, that is saying it isn't realistic, like that matters. And, hold on, let me get this straigt.........it's bad fiction.......because it's "nonsense"..............or to say, not realistic.......made up..........

:|

A plot does not have to be unrealistic to be illogical.

Except there isn't any reason why it is "illogical".......

[QUOTE="Pixel-Pirate"][QUOTE="SaintLeonidas"] Not really actually. In terms of the nations top critics Avatar received more praise (83 on Metacritic) than Inception (74). It also appeared at the top of more critics top ten lists, won the Golden Globe, received more Oscar nominations. They are nearly equal it terms of critical praise but Avatar leads, and unlike Inception, many predicted Avatar was going to win the Best Picture Oscar.SaintLeonidas

[QUOTE="heysharpshooter"]

[QUOTE="789shadow"]

This whole statement is a contradiction. If you criticize it for being nonsense, that is saying it isn't realistic, like that matters. And, hold on, let me get this straigt.........it's bad fiction.......because it's "nonsense"..............or to say, not realistic.......made up..........

:|

789shadow

Since when does nonsense mean not realistic? Is english your first language? Nonsense is something that does not make sense, but it might be real, just non-sensical...

You are taking one word from my statement and saying my statement is false...

Okay then: in what way is Inception at all possibly nonsense as a WORK OF FICTION.

Because fiction can still make sense intellectually... ficition can't merely fall back on being ficiton when its plot makes no sense...a story that is not true cannot fall back on being original ficition if it is filled with plot holes... if it does, it is not good ficition, its bad ficiton...

[QUOTE="789shadow"]

[QUOTE="heysharpshooter"]

Since when does nonsense mean not realistic? Is english your first language? Nonsense is something that does not make sense, but it might be real, just non-sensical...

You are taking one word from my statement and saying my statement is false...

heysharpshooter

Okay then: in what way is Inception at all possibly nonsense as a WORK OF FICTION.

Because fiction can still make sense intellectually... ficition can't merely fall back on being ficiton when its plot makes no sense...a story that is not true cannot fall back on being original ficition if it is filled with plot holes... if it does, it is not good ficition, its bad ficiton...

And the science used in the movie has nothing to do with plot holes.......

[QUOTE="heysharpshooter"]

[QUOTE="789shadow"]

Okay then: in what way is Inception at all possibly nonsense as a WORK OF FICTION.

789shadow

Because fiction can still make sense intellectually... ficition can't merely fall back on being ficiton when its plot makes no sense...a story that is not true cannot fall back on being original ficition if it is filled with plot holes... if it does, it is not good ficition, its bad ficiton...

And the science used in the movie has nothing to do with plot holes.......

Okay, first of all, it is taking you like 3 seconds to respond to my posts... its creepy, are you lurking this thread?

Secondly, your statement made no sense... it was NON-SENSICAL... it was a REAL statement, but NON-SENSICAL...

Inception deserved its technical awards because it is an impressive film, but as far as the story goes, its an illogical piece of doodoo.

They explained the painfully obvious while leaving blank explanations behind things such as the machine.

Just because something is ridiculously complicated does not make it a good idea, it does not matter how many dreams within a dream you can have.

I've also not understood the whole point of limbo, or its omnious portrayal, as escaping it seemingly is very easy towards the end if it only takes (dream) death...

Inception deserved its technical awards because it is an impressive film, but as far as the story goes, its an illogical piece of doodoo.

They explained the painfully obvious while leaving blank explanations behind things such as the machine.

Just because something is ridiculously complicated does not make it a good idea, it does not matter how many dreams within a dream you can have.

I've also not understood the whole point of limbo, or its omnious portrayal, as escaping it seemingly is very easy towards the end if it only takes (dream) death...

IAMTHEJOKER88

Why does this NEED an explanation? Do you need everything explained? Why is it bad that you are allowed to wonder about how it works?

[QUOTE="789shadow"]

[QUOTE="heysharpshooter"]

Because fiction can still make sense intellectually... ficition can't merely fall back on being ficiton when its plot makes no sense...a story that is not true cannot fall back on being original ficition if it is filled with plot holes... if it does, it is not good ficition, its bad ficiton...

heysharpshooter

And the science used in the movie has nothing to do with plot holes.......

Okay, first of all, it is taking you like 3 seconds to respond to my posts... its creepy, are you lurking this thread?

Secondly, your statement made no sense... it was NON-SENSICAL... it was a REAL statement, but NON-SENSICAL...

Point: the science, or psuedo-science, Inception is based on has no bearing over it's plot quality.

[QUOTE="IAMTHEJOKER88"]

Inception deserved its technical awards because it is an impressive film, but as far as the story goes, its an illogical piece of doodoo.

They explained the painfully obvious while leaving blank explanations behind things such as the machine.

Just because something is ridiculously complicated does not make it a good idea, it does not matter how many dreams within a dream you can have.

I've also not understood the whole point of limbo, or its omnious portrayal, as escaping it seemingly is very easy towards the end if it only takes (dream) death...

789shadow

Why does this NEED an explanation? Do you need everything explained? Why is it bad that you are allowed to wonder about how it works?

Thats the problem... the characters spent most of the movie trying to explain the process, to explain the science... and they do a bad job, because the science makes no sense...

It would have been a much better movie had they left the process of how it works a mystery as opposed to trying to explain a poorly written plot every 2 minutes...

[QUOTE="IAMTHEJOKER88"]

Inception deserved its technical awards because it is an impressive film, but as far as the story goes, its an illogical piece of doodoo.

They explained the painfully obvious while leaving blank explanations behind things such as the machine.

Just because something is ridiculously complicated does not make it a good idea, it does not matter how many dreams within a dream you can have.

I've also not understood the whole point of limbo, or its omnious portrayal, as escaping it seemingly is very easy towards the end if it only takes (dream) death...

789shadow

Why does this NEED an explanation? Do you need everything explained? Why is it bad that you are allowed to wonder about how it works?

It demands an explanation when the film is prepared to explain other things that are painfully obvious... as i said. It is being picky, inconsistent and it is a sign of lazy writing. I don't NEED IN CAPTIAL LETTERS everything explained, but i feel there are certain things that do.

You know what helps? Bit--ing about it.