Academy Awards and Star Wars

Lucas saying that he wasn?t happy with the effects - does not mean he has no respect for the artists themselves.

The Academy doesn?t matter anyway.

No one can really predict what will catch on and what will not. How many times have we seen a film lauded as a ?classic? or ? the next Star Wars? & a film win a ton of awards only to be forgotten a year later?

What is the point of giving awards to art? It?s not like maths where an answerer is merely right or wrong ? nor is it like sport where it is a matter of who runs/jumps the fastest or scores the most goals.

 

That's absolutely right. And remember before he won the Oscar for Schindler's List, the Academy awarded him the Irving Thulberg Award. I mean, what was THAT for? The Thulberg Award is supposed to be for producers, not directors. It literally screamed, "Here, take this consolation prize, Steven!!"

Couldn't agree more. It is not just about Lucas.

*tee hee* I love the Evil Dead!

 

I'm sorry, but the previous editions no longer had his blessing by the time the DVDs were gearing for release; he abandoned them, throwing the work in them to the curb saying that they're out there "if anyone wants them." How is that not abandoning? Simply because he's been saying it for thirty years? A husband can threaten to leave his wife, and if he finally does, it is not leaving because he's been saying so for so long? Face it, he abandoned the films because the effects were not up to his standards, and abandoning is a severe form of disrespect.

Even if the artists were frustrated with the work, it was still a finished piece of work, a work of art. If you draw your mother a picture at age 7, is it alright for her to throw it away thirty years later because she has access to a laser printer and the ability to produce perfect photographs from her laptop? Time and effort went into the drawing, it may not have been perfect, it represents what you're capable of at the time, and you were limited to what you had, is it okay for her to tell people "Anyone can have this, if they want it."

No, months of work went into those movies, and even if the outcome may not have looked perfect, they still conveyed the magic that is Star Wars, they got the job done.

I doubt Muren painted every model, arranged every set piece, applied and designed the makeup, and so on. Simply because Muren participated in the SEs, doesn't mean he had the consensus of every the artists who worked on the originals. Just because he does it, doesn't make it so. I mean, have you ever had a boss whose decisions you always agreed with?

Please don't tell me this is another "Academy hates Lucas" conspiracy approach. As was mentioned earlier in another thread, I think, it was mentioned that the Academy nominated Raiders of the Lost Ark for Best Picture in 1982, well after Lucas had left the Guilds. If the picture had won, the production team, ie producers, would have gone up to accept the award, ie, Lucas had a shot at recieving a trophy. As was also mentioned, does this mean people are going to have to start revising that conspiracy theory?

 

Loco, all you are doing is arguing in support of your opinion. I?m not interested in arguing with you in that respect. Your opinion is your opinion and you?re entitled to it. I was commenting on you trying to pass your opinion off as fact?. By all means, have whatever opinion you like..

Okay, that?s interesting? now we?re comparing Star Wars to a picture drawn by a seven year old? Whatever?.

Go back and read what I said. I never said or implied that Muren painted every model, arranged every set piece, applied and designed the makeup, and so on. I said he was the head of the Special Effects team on the OT. And the comments you have just made seem to agree with the point I was making. Muren, as the head of the Special Effects Team, was the boss of all those Special Effects artists working on the OT - So... if your opinion is factual as you claim, then wouldn?t Muren also be disregarding all their work by working as a Visual Effect Supervisor on the SE. Therefore, I will ask the question again. Are you now going to accuse Dennis Muren of not caring and respecting the work put in by HIS team on the OT???

Ah, no it?s not. You have obviously neglected to read all my other posts in this thread and my very strong opinions relating to all things Academy. I suggest you scroll back and read them before making assumptions on my opinions.

 

ROTS got nominated only for customes???? First, why did it even get nominated in this catagory?

Come on Stryphe you remember all the customes in ROTS, and AOTC, and TPM. What's sad is I don't think it one.

Second, why weren't effects or sound-editing nominated?

I don't know. But I also really don't care there have been a lot of odd things that they Academy Awards has done. Things that have made me really mad. I have given up on them.

 

...Umm, that's kind of the point of an argument...

...to support an opinion you believe in...

When have I ever said that my opinion was fact? I'm well aware my opinion is an opinion.

It applies.

Work goes in, one does the best they can, it may not be perfect, but it shows how well one could do at that point in time with the resources they have. A child's drawing shows how limitations and lack of "perfection" are not reasons to abandon a work. Would it be alright to throw a child's picture, or anything that had a lot of time someone else poured into it, away?

If you can't respond to that, I'll understand. It seems as though my posts are becoming the point of your responses instead of my point.

Ummm, I didn't say you did. But it seemed like the only reason you brought Muren up was to show that someone "on the floor" agreed with Lucas' decision, and that if someone who was responsible for effects were okay with it, EVERYTHING is magically okay.

Otherwise, what was your point in bringing up Muren?

My point is, just because Muren supports Lucas' decision to alter the OT, doesn't mean it's okay. Muren does not represent everyone who worked on the OT. Just because he's giving the thumbs up, doesn't mean a thing. I know he didn't paint every model and so on, that's my point; he didn't, that was all someone else's work, so I feel he has no right to sign off on someone else's work either. So, even though I thought it was PAINFULLY OBVIOUS, I'll make it EXTRA CLEAR FOR YOU:

DENNIS MUREN DID NOT RESPECT THE WORK PUT IN BY HIS OWN TEAM ON THE ORIGINAL STAR WARS TRILOGY EITHER.

Oh, almost forgot:

IN MY OPINION.

Well, you did say something about Meryl Streep and such, but what "grudge" would the Academy have against Lucas? Hmmm?

 

well Lucas's films did make a ****load of cash during a "slump" year.

As for the SEs? well in you?re opinion lucas et all disrespected the original artists so the new artists don?t deserve to be awarded ? in you?re opinion.
Well good for you Loco!!!!! & BFW!!!!!! For the rest of us!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Yes...they've made money, and that means what exactly?

Yes, it certainly is my opinion...

...thank you for stating the obvious...

 

FINALLY!!! But that?s not what you said in your other posts when I continually addressed the issue of fact via opinion or assumption. If you had have said that two pages ago, this thread wouldn?t be four pages long...

Call it whatever you like ? this is a discussion board after all. As for the seven year old?s drawing reference, No, I?m not going to respond because I stated in my last post that I wasn?t interested in arguing your opinion. If I did, we could be here all year?

No, actually that?s not the reason at all.

Thank you!! It only took me having to repeat the question and press the issue that you finally answered the question. I was curious to see what your feelings were towards Muren in this matter. You?ve spent all your time in this thread continuously running Lucas into the ground but not anyone else. And given your opinion on this particular subject, Dennis Muren should have also been in your firing range given his involvement, but surprisingly, he was not.. That is why I raised the issue with you. *Now, surprisingly he is....* Hhhhhmm..

I just want to add, that seeing as I didn?t think Lucas disrespected anyone?s work, I certainly point no blame at Dennis Muren either. The man is a legend!

I never said the Academy had a grudge against Lucas. But, I certainly said much more about the Academy in this thread than just ?Meryl Streep and such?

 

I guess I lost my momentum after being banned, so excuse me tracking back a couple of pages to pick up where I intended to all along...

This is a truthful, but pointless, statement. You're merely running the discussion in a closed circle. Your original comment that I was responding to was: "Well, it's arguable, but the Academy felt ROTK was strong on all fronts." You said yourself: "it's arguable." I agreed and proceeded to argue the case. Yet you chose to repeat yourself. I don't like this condescension, Loco. The presence of a tongue smilie doesn't alleviate; it exacerbates. You're telling us all what we already know and arguing in a simplistic manner: "well, the Academy did this, so it's this way and that's final". Argument from authority is a logical fallacy.

You have a point here, but again, there is an air of condescension. You may slip these things past some people, but you can't slip them past me. A statement like, "more of the same top-notch acting the Academy likes," is clearly a dig at the prequels, as what the Academy does and doesn't like, or more accurately, what represents "top-notch" artistic endeavour and what does not, is the basis of this entire thread.

Again: argument from authority is a logical fallacy. The point of this thread is not, as your statement implies, to factually catalogue the official nominations and awards given by the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, but rather, to debate and discuss those nominations and awards, and those films that received them and those that did not, as it pertains to the six "Star Wars" motion pictures.

Your original statement that I responded to reads as cosmological fact; not as the logical summation of the subjective preferences of the Academy. There is a major difference between the two. Of course, if we are talking about the Academy, then your rhetorical question holds sway: why would the Academy give anyone a nomination if they didn't feel they deserved one? Again, h

 

These types of films just don't get the actor nods like others do.
It doesn't matter how old/young some of the actors were.
The Academy does not discriminate b/c of age.
All of the names below were nominees or winners and were children or very young:

Justin Henry - age 8 - Kramer vs Kramer [nominee]
Tatum O'Neal - won at age 10 for Paper Moon
Quinn Cummings - age 11- Goodbye Girl [nominee]
Anna Paquin - won for supporting The Piana - age 11
...... Jodie Foster 14 nominee
Haley Joel Osment

Those are just the very young.
There are more who were late teens to early 20's as well.

 

Well said, Boba16. I think this is very much true--only the older actors in the PT actually handled the dialog well. Neeson, August, McGregor, McDiarmid and Lee were by far the stand-outs of the film and not surprisingly they are all over 40 (except for McGregor, but even he was pretty lame in TPM). When people said the acting was wooden it was mainly due to the weight placed on the shoulders of the young cast, namely Jake Lloyd, Hayden Christenson and Natalie Portman, who occupy the vast majority of screentime in the films.

 

Damn, I forgot about Pernillia August, another fine performance in the PT. Also, how could I forget Liam Neeson, he carries TPM.

If you think about it, the PT probably had more acting talent overall than the OT, but again it is the two leads Natalie & Hayden, that have to bring the movies together in a dramatic fashion, and that is where it becomes average to me.

 

Um, what is it you're trying to say exactly? Pin-pointing the "digs" I make at the Prequels? I'm not going to hide my opinion of the Prequels, and I don't water down my views nor how I express them, and I think it's quite clear as to where I stand in regards of Lucas and the Prequels. So, other than stating the obvious, what is it you're trying to accomplish by pointing out my prose style? I'm not trying to be confrontational, but I really want to know what it is you're going for with this.

Yes, but to discuss the nominations of the Star Wars films, one would have to discuss the standards of the deciding party, in this case, the Academy. In this thread, has the Academy's past not been brought up for scrutiny? Anyone who seeks to make a point should at least try to establish a body to base their assertions on. I'm using the Academy's past nominations and awards to back up what I say, trying to see where they come from in making their decisions, and how it pertains to Star Wars. I'm very clear that all of this is from my own opinion, and I'm hypothesizing the Academy's view. I'm using words like "felt" and such to show my own lack of intimate knowledge on the Academy, that it's my own assu

 

I'm sure someone's said it, but, a couple things:

Episode IV got all the big nominations. It was between IV and V that George pissed off Hollywood, withdrew from the guilds and refused outside production money, etc. The "snubs" mainly came AFTER the first film.

It looks a lot worse, 30 years later, that ANH didn't win Best Picture but consider it this way: it was very very popular in 1977 but at least half of its praise grew out of the barriers it broke (broken barriers that didn't become apparent for years and years after). Its real impact couldn't be gauged the following spring at the Academy Awards, so, don't use ANH's failure to win Best Picture against the Academy as some sort of snub. Annie Hall was also a very popular movie that was more conventional for winning a Best Picture award. But, honestly, it'd be like the Matrix winning Best Picture a couple years ago.

Since then, yes, there has been a tremendous contingent of Academy people who still hold Lucas's "I can do it myself" attitude against him and it was very clear in the Prequels but also, the popular reception of the films (completely unwarranted bashing of the films by "lifelong fans") affected the votes, also. The Academy would much rather be criticized for picking the wrong film, out of the nominees (like Lord of the Rings over whatever else), than picking a film that shouldn't be nominated at all to not only be nominated but to WIN.

It's also likely that they never gave the Prequels a fair shake, beyond categories like costumes, effects, sound, etc. They knew Lucas was behind them and knew they didn't like him so they just sent their costume, effects and sound people to watch the films and determine whether they were worthy of nominations for the "less glamorous" awards.

But seriously, Ep. III not getting at least a VFX nomination is a joke. I think they need to understand that nothing but some set pieces existed. There was no location. NONE. All those clone troopers? NONE OF THEM EXIST. And John Williams gets a nomination for Memoirs of a Geisha but not Episode III? Really?

Oh well, forget it. People who don't recognize all the films as probable Academy Award caliber films (at least III-VI) are just in denial or are completely braindead.