no I am talking about how Sean Peann won a upset win over Mickey Rourke last year.

Clearly the audiences and critic think otherwise, he was just ginving the award in response to prop 8 in California.

Yeah I think Avatar will take best picture for a few reasons.

A. Inner Politics, Academy is obsessed with increasing ratings. None of the other films have mainstream support like Slumdog (which did replace TDK as people's favourite). So the big blockbuster, with all the momentum goes and loses. It will be seen as a huge upset and a lot of people likely hating on the Award show for a long time.

B. Momentum, is strong now and with it heading to an all time gross, I think Academy will go with a safe choice. Up in the Air and Hurt Locker will still go strong but Avatar coming in steals their thunder.

C. It is winning award which gives it a good chance and usually when a mainstream blockbuster films starts to get award it usually wins.



About Sandra I think Resse Witherspoon win for the Walk the Line, shows she actually has a great shot.

Oh please. Penn is a celebrated actor and his performance in Milk received many awards and glowing critical notices. I'm not denying there is a strong and friendly connection between the LGBT community and Hollywood, but it's so grotesque to re-write history and portray Penn's win as a wounded liberal Prop. 8 pity vote. He gave a damn good, immersive performance and was recognized for it.

I don't get this reasoning. Clooney has picked up 13 awards this season nearly double his closest rival which happens to be Jeff Bridges (7 wins)

A lot of critics absolutely adore his performance as much as Kendrick and Faminga's. So I don't see how they steal anything from him.

And I cant for the life of me understand the point of "well this person had x amount of nominations so they are more likely to win". Its like everyone forgets Peter O'Tooles recent 8th nomination.

I think Bridges probably has it but I wouldn't rule out Clooney just yet.

It's kind of silly for a film to win Best Picture while not winning Best Director and not even being nominated for writing or acting.

Avatar looks great and is lots of fun and I liked it, but give it 10 years and there will be lots of films that look that good.

This is like giving Best Picture to The Matrix or Terminator 2 simply because they were fun and looked better than other films at the time. A Best Picture should be a bit more than that.

Hmm Clooney was the favorite when the buzz started and till then Crazy Heart was released in minimal theaters thus Clooney got most of the initial awards but when it came to more recent and bigger award show it seems that Bridges leads the count.

Critics did love his performance but he is not a stand out in the movie there are other actors doing well in the same movie that makes the movie acting favored whereas Crazy Heart shows how much an actor can perform in a simple role and stand out from the others. Though there is no chance that Anna and Vera can steal Clooney's glory (except for each others )

There is something called being in the industry for such a long carrier of good roles but never being awarded for that. You can also call that Mercy Vote. That applied last year to Kate Winslet (and I mean only one or two votes the rest are for her performance for sure ) when Meryl was stealing the show elsewhere.

OK Clooney and Bridges are still front runners even in my category but what I said there was "MY PREDICTION"

I do not agree on two points. First Best Picture and Best Director are separate categories, why would someone give two awards if every Best Picture has to win Best Director?? And even if they give Best Picture and Director this year to the same movie, we should learn that Best Picture can be different than Best Director. The same argument goes for writing as well. There can be better written movies but not properly executed by Director or Producer and thus not qualify for those. Thus Best Picture does not guarantee Best Writing or Directing

There are loads of movies that did not even qualify for acting. Take Titanic for instance, Leonardo was not nominated for that as well. Thus it is not that those actors are not good enough but the others performed much better.

Well you can speculate that Titanic was also a fun movie and there was already another older version of it. But JC was the one who broke his own record after 13 years. I don't say that history is going to repeat itself but from what I have heard in one of the interviews from Peter Jackson quote "JC brought people back to theaters. People in our times were more interested then they are now". Though your argument could be true but it could be wrong as well so I would let time tell the tale, but I guarantee one thing that nothing in 2010 will likely match what Avatar has done. Past 10 years we had close calls but none did cross JC eh

Not at all. Best directed film and best film are by far not the same thing.

There are many examples in which Film A is better than Film B, but the direction of Film B is better.

Be reasonable...

your telling me Crash will be remember for eons and forever.


Do you think crash and Slumdog will have any impact 10 years from now? The Matrix and terminator 2 are now seen as some of the best films ever.


I think if we award film that are forgotten so fast, it makes the awards pointless.

The Matrix and Terminator2 were better than the films (1999 American Beauty, 1991 Silence of the Lambs) that won BP in there years I don't consider this matter debatable.

Terminator 2 is not better than Silence of the Lambs. But it is better than almost any other BP nominee that year.

I like that Avatar won. It's better than The Hurt Locker.

I especially like the Downey Jr. win for Sherlock (though I think Law is still the better part of the duo).

sometimes the people's choice is sometimes the right choice.

The Best actor or best film does not have to be a small indie film or a film about a serious topic.

Always the same arguments with film snobs, just coz it's not a tedious drama it's not worthy.

I agree. I do think Prop. 8 helped it a bit, but his performance was not undeserving. Rourke was great (and I even loved The Wrestler), but he was basically playing himself. IMO, Penn was more impressive. It did not help Rourke either that a lot of people hated him.

Exactly! THE HURT LOCKER is a great movie, but not even one of my top 5 of the year, and yet Bigelow would be my #1 pick for Director. I haven't been as impressed by any directing all year as I was by the skill displayed in THE HURT LOCKER.

Oh right, this sets in now. "Give it to the big, fun action movies, HELL YA! Not those stupid dramas they show in nursing homes, with those pesky... plots."

Avatar has an A-/B+ grade plot executed at A+ levels thanks the JCs godliness

A great example of a good film with some of the best directing ever is..

Once Upon a Time in the West.

Sure the film is way to slow, but the direction by Sergio Leone is some of the best ever.





A films storyline does not have the high lite of the film for a film to deserve an award.
The acting does not have to be the best ever for it deserve best Picture.
Visuals aren't the only reason a film should win.

If a film has some of the best visuals you have ever seen and than has a good story and good acting, it deserves to win.

Rarely do films exceed on all levels.

oh shut up manny

Avatanic exceeds on all levels

[quote]trixster
Not a Snob[/quote]

I disagree...


To say all the Oscar films exceed on all levels (acting, visuals, story) is silly...

They all have a flaw. Its just my opinion but Avatar is a well rounded film and so is The Hurt Locker.

I think though Avatar is way more epic so it should win.

Not so much Crash, but Slumdog Millionaire will certainly be remembered ten years from now. The Indian film industry is growing very fast. Just like Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon ten years ago, Slumdog Millionaire has played a major cultural role in getting more interest from Hollywood and mainstream audiences.

The film itself might not be as remembered, but the legacy of the film will certainly be remembered...

yes the film is heartwarming, but forgettable.

However its effect on Bollywood has been huge.

I think it was better than Bugsy and The Prince of Tides.

The first two Terminator films are character-by-character, scene-by-scene 100% superior to Avatar. For example, no one in Avatar's character arc comes close to matching the emotion and intensity of Sarah Connor's. Stephen Lang's villain in Avatar is solid and intimidating, but, again, nowhere near as memorable or terrifying as the evil Terminators, be it Ahnuld's or Robert Patrick's.

Terminator is also old, and it's always easier to look upon old movies favorably just because they're classics. I'm not saying Avatar is better, just to give it a fair amount of time before making comparisons.