You are viewing an archive of the old fxhome.com forums. The community has since moved to hitfilm.com.

Oscars 2005: Best Picture

Best Picture

The Aviator22%[ 13 ]
Million Dollar Baby8%[ 5 ]
Finding Neverland31%[ 18 ]
Ray27%[ 16 ]
Sideways12%[ 7 ]

Total Votes : 59

Posted: Thu, 27th Jan 2005, 11:43am

Post 1 of 33

Simon K Jones

Force: 27955 | Joined: 1st Jan 2002 | Posts: 11683

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User

FXhome Team Member

It's a real mixture this year and the field is wide open. The Aviator would seem to be the obvious choice but, after last year's clean sweep by an epic film, the Academy might be looking more towards the smaller, more intimate films.

Sideways has had massive positive buzz throughout the year and Ray and Million Dollar Baby both have Academy-baiting elements. Finding Neverland would seem to be the outside choice, but it could still sneak up from behind.
Posted: Thu, 27th Jan 2005, 2:01pm

Post 2 of 33

Waser

Force: 4731 | Joined: 7th Sep 2003 | Posts: 3111

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

SuperUser

as I've always said, Sideways has my vote, because it's the best movie that was nominated, but I think Life Aquatic was the real best movie of the year.
Posted: Thu, 27th Jan 2005, 2:16pm

Post 3 of 33

Simon K Jones

Force: 27955 | Joined: 1st Jan 2002 | Posts: 11683

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User

FXhome Team Member

I have yet to see Life Aquatic, it's not quite out here yet. The trailer looks fantastic, though. Am I right in thinking that Henry Selick did the underwater sequences?

It was a toss-up betwen Ray and Sideways for me, both of which films I absolutely love. The Aviator is a superbly well-made film, but it didn't really engage me on an emotional level. Ray and Sideways both hit the spot, but I think Sideways just pips it by a smidgeon...but I find it almost impossible to choose between the two.
Posted: Thu, 27th Jan 2005, 3:57pm

Post 4 of 33

jstow222

Force: 970 | Joined: 28th Oct 2002 | Posts: 1146

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User

Gold Member

Tarn wrote:

I have yet to see Life Aquatic, it's not quite out here yet. The trailer looks fantastic, though. Am I right in thinking that Henry Selick did the underwater sequences?
Tarn yes, he did do them and it looks fantastic.
Posted: Thu, 27th Jan 2005, 5:56pm

Post 5 of 33

ben3308

Force: 5210 | Joined: 24th May 2004 | Posts: 6433

VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

'Ray' has my vote. I went to see it with a group of people, not really wanting to, and...wow. That movie was so powerful. I think it deserves to in. Jamie Foxx was just awesome in it.
Posted: Thu, 27th Jan 2005, 7:13pm

Post 6 of 33

Aculag

Force: 8365 | Joined: 21st Jun 2002 | Posts: 8581

EffectsLab Lite User VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

This is the first year I can remember that I didn't see at least one of the nominees. However, I did see some incredible films this year, so these nominees must be flawless in every aspect.
Posted: Thu, 27th Jan 2005, 8:09pm

Post 7 of 33

Mellifluous

Force: 5604 | Joined: 6th Oct 2002 | Posts: 3782

EffectsLab Pro User Windows User

Gold Member

I'd love it if Sideways won. Million Dollar Baby second.
Posted: Thu, 27th Jan 2005, 9:01pm

Post 8 of 33

sidewinder

Force: 4937 | Joined: 5th Aug 2001 | Posts: 2453

FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Sideways contained a story that had no reason to be put into film. A well made movie about nothing important.
Posted: Thu, 27th Jan 2005, 11:57pm

Post 9 of 33

Simon K Jones

Force: 27955 | Joined: 1st Jan 2002 | Posts: 11683

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User

FXhome Team Member

Define 'important'. It hit me on several emotional and thought-provoking levels. Sure, it didn't tell me the meaning of life, but it was damn entertaining and made me reconsider a few things from a new point of view. Plus it's got me extremely interested in wine. So, for me, it could be called important.

But since when do films have to be 'important' in order to be good?
Posted: Fri, 28th Jan 2005, 12:06am

Post 10 of 33

Waser

Force: 4731 | Joined: 7th Sep 2003 | Posts: 3111

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

SuperUser

Rating: +1

I think why I, and so many people, loved sideways, was because they identified with the main character. many people, myself included, saw a part of them up on the screen, and in that way it was important to them.
Posted: Fri, 28th Jan 2005, 2:46am

Post 11 of 33

TimmyD

Force: 2646 | Joined: 18th Feb 2004 | Posts: 2507

EffectsLab Lite User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

Ray was so emotional. It was nice to be able to be a part of such a beutiful and touching story for like, 2 hours or whatever it was. I loved it for its story.
Posted: Fri, 28th Jan 2005, 4:27am

Post 12 of 33

sidewinder

Force: 4937 | Joined: 5th Aug 2001 | Posts: 2453

FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Oh, sure, we all identify with the main character in Sideways, but what I'm saying is that what happened to him is a more or less a very generic relationship story. There's no twist. Nothing to make the story unique. It's a guy who's depressed and falls in love with someone, and a few comical happenings in between. Why is that story worth putting into film? Why would I want to watch it?

I mean, don't get me wrong, the movie was executed practically flawlessly...except what they executed was more or less a story that usually happens to everybody at some point in their life. And I know someone's going to throw in the point of how that makes the movie great, but when putting a story into a film, I feel that the story needs to somehow warrant being put into film. It needs to be unique, original, something unusual, something I can't expreience on my own, and need the medium of film to see it.

...And the bartender appeared to pour the wine incorrectly.
Posted: Fri, 28th Jan 2005, 4:46am

Post 13 of 33

Frozenpede

Force: 630 | Joined: 28th Jan 2004 | Posts: 1113

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User

Gold Member

havnt seen a single one of those..........
Posted: Fri, 28th Jan 2005, 5:59am

Post 14 of 33

Waser

Force: 4731 | Joined: 7th Sep 2003 | Posts: 3111

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

SuperUser

sidewinder wrote:

what I'm saying is that what happened to him is a more or less a very generic relationship story. There's no twist. Nothing to make the story unique.
I disagree, but maybe that's because I don't really watch much romance. I thought that what happened in the movie was really unique for a love story, especially with how it ended.

SPOILERS
In my opinion, if this were any other movie, his book would have been puublished and the film would have closed with him and her embracing...and stuff. But I thought that the love in the movie was very realistically depicted, but again, you are probably right sidewinder, as I can't even name more than 5 love movies I have seen.
Posted: Fri, 28th Jan 2005, 7:21am

Post 15 of 33

BobErnest

Force: 0 | Joined: 20th Apr 2004 | Posts: 21

Member

Frozenpede wrote:

havnt seen a single one of those..........

Neither have I.
Posted: Fri, 28th Jan 2005, 10:14am

Post 16 of 33

Mellifluous

Force: 5604 | Joined: 6th Oct 2002 | Posts: 3782

EffectsLab Pro User Windows User

Gold Member

A story doesn't have to be unique, IMO. It seems to be a prescribed view in filmmaking & screenwriting circles that stories must always tell of some kind of "extraordinary" occurrences which the protagonist are pit against, & the film is about how the character deals with these.

I think this is constricting. I'm not necessarily saying that all films should tell of mundane, uninteresting things, just that not all films have to conform to this rule. Sometimes I think there's a beauty in telling of the everyday, rather than over-fictionalised stories devoid of reality.
Posted: Fri, 28th Jan 2005, 10:56am

Post 17 of 33

Simon K Jones

Force: 27955 | Joined: 1st Jan 2002 | Posts: 11683

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User

FXhome Team Member

Sure, the basic story in Sideways was generic, but that's only if you're looking at it on a very superficial level. Sideways isn't about plot, it's about character and specific situations. The unique and brilliantly portrayed and nuanced characters is what made the film such a joy, combined with putting them in increasingly funny situations. Sure, I'd seen the general story before, but I'd never seen it told in that way before, with those characters.

It's also worth noting that I generally loathe romantic comedies. Can't stand the things. So for Sideways to have worked for me, it must have been doing something notably different in its execution.

I think about 90% of my DVDs tell a story I've seen before somewhere; it's the way that story is told that is important.
Posted: Fri, 28th Jan 2005, 3:36pm

Post 18 of 33

ben3308

Force: 5210 | Joined: 24th May 2004 | Posts: 6433

VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Tarn wrote:

I think about 90% of my DVDs tell a story I've seen before somewhere; it's the way that story is told that is important.
I understand completely what you're saying. I saw Papparazzi yesterday and I said, "Hey. This is exactly like Enemy of the State, except it's an actor and some evil photographers instead of a lawyer and some rogue NSA guys." I liked both movies, even though they pretty much had the same things happen in them.
Posted: Fri, 28th Jan 2005, 4:03pm

Post 19 of 33

sidewinder

Force: 4937 | Joined: 5th Aug 2001 | Posts: 2453

FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Sure, the basic story in Sideways was generic, but that's only if you're looking at it on a very superficial level.
No, but that's just it. It's a personal thing, don't get me wrong, but I despise drama/romantic/character movies that make due only using their characters, and not trying to tell a story whatsoever. It's never appealed to me to watch a film where nothing else happens other than seeing a character, however interesting, just more or less go though life. I respect a well developped story more than a well developped character. The fact that I think this movie was decent says a lot about how well they did just running on the characters, but it certainly wouldn't be my pick for best film of the year. To tell the truth, I don't even have an urge to ever see Sideways again.

Now earlier on, I mentioned having a twist in the plot, something to make it unique. What I mean by this, is I still enjoy character driven movies, but only when that character is presented with something unusual. Take "The Terminal", for instance. You couldn't really say that movie had much of a plot. It was just interesting events that happened to an interesting guy. The thing is, the movie was unique because the guy was trapped in an airport. That was what made the story worth telling. Sure, the characters in Sideways were interesting, but, as I said before, they more or less were just going about life. There was nothing presented to them that was out of the ordinary.


And another thing- The movie had like five full-length montages. Honestly, what gives?
Posted: Mon, 31st Jan 2005, 8:14am

Post 20 of 33

sthach83

Force: 210 | Joined: 19th Mar 2004 | Posts: 21

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

so i saw sideways tonight, quite frankly...it was a HUGE let down! The movie sucked! Million dollar Baby ALL THE WAY!
Posted: Mon, 31st Jan 2005, 8:20am

Post 21 of 33

Aculag

Force: 8365 | Joined: 21st Jun 2002 | Posts: 8581

EffectsLab Lite User VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

I saw The Aviator tonight, and thought it was very good, although I was kinda disappointed, and I felt like something was missing from it.

Great performances all around, but nothing like Daniel Day Lewis in Scorsese's last picture Gangs of New York.

Everyone acts like Scorsese is a phenomenal director, and in a sense, he is, but The Aviator is in my opinion the best film he's made, and I just don't like most of his work. The man is a genius, and he really knows film and knows what he's doing, but I just find that something is missing from his films. The ones I've seen anyway.

I hope to see the rest of the nominees sometime.
Posted: Mon, 31st Jan 2005, 5:38pm

Post 22 of 33

LtMcMurphy

Force: 1105 | Joined: 8th Jan 2003 | Posts: 583

Windows User

Member

Ive only seen the aviator so I voted for that!
Posted: Mon, 31st Jan 2005, 8:32pm

Post 23 of 33

TimmyD

Force: 2646 | Joined: 18th Feb 2004 | Posts: 2507

EffectsLab Lite User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

Wow, i saw million dollar baby yesterday. That is an unbelievably fantastic film. I wish i could change my vote sad.
Posted: Tue, 1st Feb 2005, 11:14pm

Post 24 of 33

no mercy

Force: 410 | Joined: 16th Jun 2004 | Posts: 28

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

In a perfect world...i would have been able to vote for SAW
Posted: Wed, 2nd Feb 2005, 10:33pm

Post 25 of 33

LtMcMurphy

Force: 1105 | Joined: 8th Jan 2003 | Posts: 583

Windows User

Member

no mercy wrote:

In a perfect world...i would have been able to vote for SAW
H*LL YEAH
Posted: Sun, 6th Feb 2005, 2:27am

Post 26 of 33

Two Gunned Saint

Force: 918 | Joined: 1st Sep 2002 | Posts: 1269

Member

"The Aviator is in my opinion the best film he's made, and I just don't like most of his work. The man is a genius, and he really knows film and knows what he's doing, but I just find that something is missing from his films. The ones I've seen anyway. "

Wow someone else who shares my opinions, I thought I was the only one who thought that.

I also find that hardly anyone ever walks away from a film remembering the story, only the characters. This I believe to be a general rule.

Speaking of rules, is it against them for foreign movies to be nominated for best picture academy awards? 'cos I can only ever remember Hollywood mainstream/independent flicks up for it?

"2046" is pretty much the peak of cinema I've seen this year. Viva Faye Wong!!!! But the early stuff in "The Aviator" I found to be incredibly inspirational. 3 years on one movie and ludicrous demands for tiny details, weather cooperation and reshoots. The past 2.5 years for me have been like that, only with less money and people and a crappy job, and no Josie Maran and I don't look like Leonard DiCappucino.
Posted: Sun, 6th Feb 2005, 9:45am

Post 27 of 33

Waser

Force: 4731 | Joined: 7th Sep 2003 | Posts: 3111

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

SuperUser

Two_Gunned saint wrote:



Speaking of rules, is it against them for foreign movies to be nominated for best picture academy awards? 'cos I can only ever remember Hollywood mainstream/independent flicks up for it?

Life Is Beautiful was nominated for best picture back in '97 if I'm not mistaken
Posted: Sun, 6th Feb 2005, 10:42am

Post 28 of 33

Mellifluous

Force: 5604 | Joined: 6th Oct 2002 | Posts: 3782

EffectsLab Pro User Windows User

Gold Member

Ya, 'twas nominated for both Best Picture & Best Foreign Film, & won the latter.
Posted: Mon, 7th Feb 2005, 12:23am

Post 29 of 33

Two Gunned Saint

Force: 918 | Joined: 1st Sep 2002 | Posts: 1269

Member

Okay, cool. Thanks.
Posted: Mon, 7th Feb 2005, 12:35am

Post 30 of 33

pzgamer825

Force: 140 | Joined: 2nd Jan 2005 | Posts: 194

Windows User

Member

After seeing Phantom of the Opera yesterday, I really don't see why it wasn't nominated. No matter what anyone says, I thought that was very well done. Very superb.

The music was awesome too biggrin .

Last edited Mon, 7th Feb 2005, 1:57am; edited 1 times in total.

Posted: Mon, 7th Feb 2005, 12:46am

Post 31 of 33

TimmyD

Force: 2646 | Joined: 18th Feb 2004 | Posts: 2507

EffectsLab Lite User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

pzgamer825 wrote:

After seeing Phantom of the Opera yesterday, I really don't see why it was nominated. No matter what anyone says, I thought that was very well done. Very superb.

The music was awesome too biggrin .
It wasnt nominated.
Posted: Mon, 7th Feb 2005, 1:49am

Post 32 of 33

AndrewtheActorMan

Force: 1859 | Joined: 31st May 2003 | Posts: 1477

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

pzgamer825 wrote:

After seeing Phantom of the Opera yesterday, I really don't see why it was nominated. No matter what anyone says, I thought that was very well done. Very superb.

The music was awesome too biggrin .
Maybe he meant to say "I really don't see why it wasn't nominated"?

That movie was awsome tho. I wish it was nominated.

Andrew biggrin
Posted: Mon, 7th Feb 2005, 1:57am

Post 33 of 33

pzgamer825

Force: 140 | Joined: 2nd Jan 2005 | Posts: 194

Windows User

Member

Oops... Typo.

Sorry about that.