View Poll Results: Which Film Should Win The Best Picture Oscar?

Voters
82. You may not vote on this poll
  • Amour

    5 6.10%
  • Argo

    30 36.59%
  • Beasts of the Southern Wild

    3 3.66%
  • Django Unchained

    2 2.44%
  • Les Misérables

    13 15.85%
  • Life of Pi

    8 9.76%
  • Lincoln

    12 14.63%
  • Silver Linings Playbook

    3 3.66%
  • Zero Dark Thirty

    6 7.32%
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 55
  1. #21

    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Enjoying purple crocuses.
    Posts
    4,630
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    32174
    Hated Beasts of the Southern Wild, Silver Linings Playbook was okay, not Oscar worthy, Argo the same. Liked Lincoln quite a bit and loved Life of Pi. So that's where my vote goes. Have to confess I haven't seen the others. Also liked Skyfall.

  2. #22

    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    24,270
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    42715
    I saw a part of Piers Morgan tonight (may have been a rerun), with Jennifer Lawrence and the director of Silver linings (David Russell). She is pretty awesome. I still would prefer Jessica win the Oscar, but Jennifer has a fantastic movie career ahead of her, regardless of what happens at the Oscars this time.

  3. #23
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    SoCal!
    Posts
    1,784
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Affleck won the DGA Award tonight. Typically, the DGA predicts Best Director, so...that'll be interesting.

  4. #24
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Close to Normal, IL
    Posts
    1,657
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Fascinating. These Oscars should be interesting because some of the big awards are really not predictable. Best Supporting Actor, the battle of the two J's for Best Actress, and who the heck will win Best Picture?! I still contend that it won't be Argo because the Academy seemed determined to bury it, but who knows. Backlash is a powerful thing. And I wonder how the winner of Best Director will feel knowing they won th Oscar but NOTHING else? Lol! Drama abounds!

    Anyway, it makes Affleck's snub so much more bizarre. I'm sure it's hard for him to feel bad with his armful of prestigious awards, but there's still a huge "what if" that has got to bother him. A Best Pcture win would go a ways to fixing that but still, it ain't the same!

  5. #25

    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    at FSU
    Posts
    3,923
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    2790
    Quote Originally Posted by victoriaheidi View Post
    Affleck won the DGA Award tonight. Typically, the DGA predicts Best Director, so...that'll be interesting.
    I wonder how embarrassed the Academy are now for shunning Affleck? Me thinks Argo will win best picture.
    I guess the hard thing for a lot of people to accept is why God would allow me to go running through their yards, yelling and spinning around.


  6. #26
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    3,842
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Ozzisk8tr View Post
    I wonder how embarrassed the Academy are now for shunning Affleck? Me thinks Argo will win best picture.
    This is what confuses me a bit, because movie directors are the ones who nominate the directors for the Oscars (you can only give your nomination picks for the category you work in, but then every member can vote for the winner of every category). Obviously the directors like Ben, since he won the DGA, so it's very confusing.

    I haven't seen Argo, but if it wens, Ben does get an Oscar (as a producer) so it would be a sort of consolation prize for him, since he really wanted that Oscar for directing. And I think he will get that reward.

  7. #27

    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    24,270
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    42715
    Quote Originally Posted by victoriaheidi View Post
    Affleck won the DGA Award tonight. Typically, the DGA predicts Best Director, so...that'll be interesting.
    Shame on the academy for not recognizing the excellence of Affleck as Director. I am wondering if they wanted to make sure that Spielberg will get his third Oscar by not nominating Affleck and Bigelow? They were his main competition. I am not saying Spielberg is not deserving of the honor, but this award should have an asterisk (*) against it.

  8. #28
    Briber of judges
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    near St Louis
    Posts
    15,857
    vCash
    2574
    Rep Power
    14593
    Quote Originally Posted by Spareoom View Post
    Fascinating. These Oscars should be interesting because some of the big awards are really not predictable. Best Supporting Actor, the battle of the two J's for Best Actress, and who the heck will win Best Picture?! I still contend that it won't be Argo because the Academy seemed determined to bury it, but who knows. Backlash is a powerful thing. And I wonder how the winner of Best Director will feel knowing they won th Oscar but NOTHING else? Lol! Drama abounds!

    Anyway, it makes Affleck's snub so much more bizarre. I'm sure it's hard for him to feel bad with his armful of prestigious awards, but there's still a huge "what if" that has got to bother him. A Best Pcture win would go a ways to fixing that but still, it ain't the same!
    I doubt "Argo" would win only the Best Picture trophy; if/when it wins, it will likely be like "Crash" several years ago and take the top prize, perhaps screenplay, and a very good shot at editing. Affleck, as someone else mentioned, is one of the producers. So if it wins Best Picture, he won't go home empty handed despite not being nominated for director.

    Quote Originally Posted by screech View Post
    This is what confuses me a bit, because movie directors are the ones who nominate the directors for the Oscars (you can only give your nomination picks for the category you work in, but then every member can vote for the winner of every category). Obviously the directors like Ben, since he won the DGA, so it's very confusing.
    There are a lot more DGA members than directors who are members of the Academy. DGA includes TV (including commercial) directors. Of the 14 branches of the Academy, the Directors branch is much smaller than the actors, writers and producers branches.

    It's also possible that when then Academy members voted, they assumed Affleck would get a nod and individuals pushed up a less likely director (Russell, Haneke, and Zeitlen) they hoped to see get a nomination. Even if they voted for Affleck on their ballot as a fourth or fifth choice, with the weighted ballot it may have been too little-too late.
    I meant to take the high road.... but I missed the exit.

  9. #29
    Blergh
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    I Want to Go to There
    Posts
    9,266
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    16981
    Quote Originally Posted by Vash01 View Post
    Shame on the academy for not recognizing the excellence of Affleck as Director. I am wondering if they wanted to make sure that Spielberg will get his third Oscar by not nominating Affleck and Bigelow? They were his main competition. I am not saying Spielberg is not deserving of the honor, but this award should have an asterisk (*) against it.
    Then which nominee would you personally kick out of the Best Director category and thus not giving them any deserved recognition as well?

    I'm getting tired for the Poor Affleck story because he's anything but "poor." I think what got lost is that this past year was simply a strong year for movies and reasonable minds differ on who should be in and should be out.

    If the Best Director winner at the Oscars is going to have an asterisk on it, then will every winner who upsets the favorite (that has won most of the precursors by a wide margin) not be deemed a "proper" winner? What about all the wins Affleck has? If we're going to argue that the Oscars lost credibility for not nominating him, then one can argue that him being snubbed by the Director's Branch (but not by the entire Academy as Argo was nominated for a generous amount of awards) helped him win those awards as they wanted to give him a consolation prize a la Spielberg for The Color Purple and Ron Howard for Apollo 13.

    I think I'm just annoyed because I watched all the movies and it's a shame that people are sort of dismissing the nominees who did get in all for the Affleck story (and ignoring Bigelow in the process). I know the Globes, Broadcast Critics, DGA gave Affleck best Director, but does that mean the Academy is truly wrong in maybe placing him 6th or lower and instead nominating the Haneke for Amour or Behn Zeitlin for Beasts of the Southern Wild? Although I hated SLP, enough people like it enough to explain how David O. Russell got in and are they wrong for nominating him just because I personally didn't care for his work in SLP?

  10. #30
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Rejecting your reality and substituting my own
    Age
    30
    Posts
    10,870
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    There was similar uproar when Chris Nolan didn't get noms for BP or BD for The Dark Knight despite being nominated for all the guild awards. (It was a big reason why the Academy switched up the BP voting.) So this is not the first time it's happened, although Nolan did not win the DGA that year and make the Academy look especially stupid.

  11. #31
    drinky typo pbp, closet hugger
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    c'est genifique!
    Posts
    29,677
    vCash
    325
    Rep Power
    14834
    I've only seen 4 of the Best Picture nominees....pretty sure Lincoln is going to win, but I don't think it's the best picture at all. Would love to see Amour or Beasts of the SOuthern Wild win, but my vote went to Zero Dark Thirty. I really liked Argo, but that ridiculous airport scene kinda killed it.
    Q: Why can't I read the competition threads?
    A: Competition forums on the board are available to those with a Season Pass or a premium membership How to View Kiss & Cry

  12. #32

    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    24,270
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    42715
    Quote Originally Posted by VIETgrlTerifa View Post
    Then which nominee would you personally kick out of the Best Director category and thus not giving them any deserved recognition as well?

    I'm getting tired for the Poor Affleck story because he's anything but "poor." I think what got lost is that this past year was simply a strong year for movies and reasonable minds differ on who should be in and should be out.

    If the Best Director winner at the Oscars is going to have an asterisk on it, then will every winner who upsets the favorite (that has won most of the precursors by a wide margin) not be deemed a "proper" winner? What about all the wins Affleck has? If we're going to argue that the Oscars lost credibility for not nominating him, then one can argue that him being snubbed by the Director's Branch (but not by the entire Academy as Argo was nominated for a generous amount of awards) helped him win those awards as they wanted to give him a consolation prize a la Spielberg for The Color Purple and Ron Howard for Apollo 13.

    I think I'm just annoyed because I watched all the movies and it's a shame that people are sort of dismissing the nominees who did get in all for the Affleck story (and ignoring Bigelow in the process). I know the Globes, Broadcast Critics, DGA gave Affleck best Director, but does that mean the Academy is truly wrong in maybe placing him 6th or lower and instead nominating the Haneke for Amour or Behn Zeitlin for Beasts of the Southern Wild? Although I hated SLP, enough people like it enough to explain how David O. Russell got in and are they wrong for nominating him just because I personally didn't care for his work in SLP?
    Too bad you did not feel Affleck was great as Director for Argo. Any of the nominees other than Spielberg and Lee could have been dropped to get Affleck the nomination. He was better than them. The reason you are seeing such an uproar over his omission in this category is that he is winning just about every other award for Director. We are not seeing such an uproar over Bigelow's omission, possibly because she won a Best Director Oscar very recently. I do believe the Academy was completely wrong in not nominating Affleck for Argo. You cannot make a great movie without a great director. I did not care for SLP and it wouldn't have been totally wrong if he had been dropped (actually I would have liked to see Tarrantino dropped because I hate that kind of direction based on blood).

  13. #33
    Blergh
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    I Want to Go to There
    Posts
    9,266
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    16981
    Tarantino wasn't nominated.

    The directors who "took Affleck's spot" were Michael Haneke for Amour who won critical praise and many critical awards for his work, Behn Zeitlin for Beasts of the Southern Wild which also won praises including a big win at the Cannes Film Festival and nominated for many more, and David O. Russell for Silver Linings Playbook which was also critically lauded and won the audience award OVER Argo at that the Toronto Film Festival.

    Your argument that a movie is nothing without its director is valid and on-point. But when people reward directing, they see many things. Is a director just a manager of all the little nuts and bolts that make a movie and does his/her best to do damage control? Is a director one who has a real point-of-view and does a great job symbolizing what that is? Is he/she an auteur who advances film to a new level in the way he/she builds up the tension, sets up the camera, paces the story, etc.? Does a director have to have an obvious style or does he/she need to lie back and let the story and actors do their job?

    Also, all the directors that were nominated in place of Affleck also directed films that were nominated for Best Picture. So, why shouldn't they also have a valid claim to a nomination?

    I never said that Ben Affleck was not great as a Director for Argo. I just think it was reasonable for him or anyone else to be left out or nominated because it really was a strong year.

    Don't get me wrong, we all have our bias and and it gets the better of us (for me Crash vs. Brokeback) and films make us passionate. However, I do think it's a bit much when people are saying how the Broadcast Film critics (tv critics) and Hollywood Foreign Press Association (like 100 foreign "journalist" who nobody really knows but have a reputation of being star-bangers), and the DGA (a great union but it includes EVERYBODY such as second-assistant directors who aren't the creative force behind a film and Adam Sandler) making fools of the Academy just because they had a difference opinion.

    People complain all the time that the Oscars were too predictable and it only follows what the other awards are doing. Now, the Academy shook it up, but people don't like it because it hurt their fave film. I personally thought Bigelow should have been in there in the place of David O. Russell and should be considered a top contender for the award. However, the Academy disagreed with me as do many people.

  14. #34

    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Home in England!!
    Posts
    2,236
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    57
    Quote Originally Posted by Vash01 View Post
    Shame on the academy for not recognizing the excellence of Affleck as Director. I am wondering if they wanted to make sure that Spielberg will get his third Oscar by not nominating Affleck and Bigelow? They were his main competition. I am not saying Spielberg is not deserving of the honor, but this award should have an asterisk (*) against it.
    Why does the academy - or in reality the academy members who were entitled to nominate the best director i.e. other directors - need to ensure Spielberg gets a 3rd Oscar? I do think that he is the odds on fav especially with Affleck and Bigelow missing out on the nomination but I don't get that the academy members need to manipulate the process like this - if in fact they have.

    Does anyone reckon that Argo will get the sympathy vote for Affleck to get an Oscar for best film as he has missed out on the best director nod? I think more of the general academy members may well throw a best film vote Argos way because of the lack best director nomination.

  15. #35

    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    24,270
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    42715
    Quote Originally Posted by Lorac View Post
    Why does the academy - or in reality the academy members who were entitled to nominate the best director i.e. other directors - need to ensure Spielberg gets a 3rd Oscar? I do think that he is the odds on fav especially with Affleck and Bigelow missing out on the nomination but I don't get that the academy members need to manipulate the process like this - if in fact they have.

    Does anyone reckon that Argo will get the sympathy vote for Affleck to get an Oscar for best film as he has missed out on the best director nod? I think more of the general academy members may well throw a best film vote Argos way because of the lack best director nomination.
    You can't be serious. The Oscars have been the most political awards for several decades. Many times we have seen a deserving actor/actress or a picture not winning for reasons other than the performances. Then at a later date that actor/actress gets a consolation prize/Oscar for a lesser performance. Manipulations are not uncommon at all. Some may be due to marketing, and some are due to politics within the academy. That is why awards like the Director guild, screen actors guild, etc. are more for the actual work.

  16. #36
    Blergh
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    I Want to Go to There
    Posts
    9,266
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    16981
    Quote Originally Posted by Vash01 View Post
    You can't be serious. The Oscars have been the most political awards for several decades. Many times we have seen a deserving actor/actress or a picture not winning for reasons other than the performances. Then at a later date that actor/actress gets a consolation prize/Oscar for a lesser performance. Manipulations are not uncommon at all. Some may be due to marketing, and some are due to politics within the academy. That is why awards like the Director guild, screen actors guild, etc. are more for the actual work.
    Those latter awards are just as political (maybe even moreso since they hit closer to home). Ask Harvey Weinstein. He uses those other awards to gain traction because what he really wants is the big Oscar win. Think of those awards as the GP events and Continental championships leading up to Worlds/Olympics.

    The thing is you may be convinced that the Director's Branch manipulated it so that Spielberg can win, but you really don't have any proof of that. I just think that what happened was many took for granted that Affleck would get nominated and ranked him lower, while promoting the directors for smaller films higher because they thought someone like Zeitlin and Haneke had a much more difficult time securing a nomination.

    Many pundits are saying Argo is going to win Best Picture because it's the consensus pick...the movie that nobody really hates and most do really enjoy, but nobody is truly passionate about while the other films will lose because they have strong passionate supporters, but none of them have united the different factions to secure a win. Thus an Argo win. Basically, it's an ordinal system and Argo may win with the most 2nd and 3rd place votes because the others with more 1st place votes will also suffer from having 6-9 place votes as well.

    In the other categories, Argo isn't the favorite to win and we can see for the first time in history a movie winning Best Picture and only Best Picture.
    Last edited by VIETgrlTerifa; 02-10-2013 at 07:09 PM.

  17. #37

    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Home in England!!
    Posts
    2,236
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    57
    Quote Originally Posted by Vash01 View Post
    You can't be serious. The Oscars have been the most political awards for several decades. Many times we have seen a deserving actor/actress or a picture not winning for reasons other than the performances. Then at a later date that actor/actress gets a consolation prize/Oscar for a lesser performance. Manipulations are not uncommon at all. Some may be due to marketing, and some are due to politics within the academy. That is why awards like the Director guild, screen actors guild, etc. are more for the actual work.
    OK I worded my comment wrong - what I meant to say is why would the Academy - according to your observation - seem bent on Spielberg getting a 3rd Oscar? That is what I don't undertand. If he hadn't won one I could undertand the manipulation - but he has 2 already!!

  18. #38
    Blergh
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    I Want to Go to There
    Posts
    9,266
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    16981
    BAFTA (British Oscars) are going on right now.

    Skyfall just beat Les Miserables for Best British Film.

  19. #39

    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    5,335
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    45792
    Quote Originally Posted by VIETgrlTerifa View Post
    Those latter awards are just as political (maybe even moreso since they hit closer to home). Ask Harvey Weinstein. He uses those other awards to gain traction because what he really wants is the big Oscar win. Think of those awards as the GP events and Continental championships leading up to Worlds/Olympics.

    The thing is you may be convinced that the Director's Branch manipulated it so that Spielberg can win, but you really don't have any proof of that. I just think that what happened was many took for granted that Affleck would get nominated and ranked him lower, while promoting the directors for smaller films higher because they thought someone like Zeitlin and Haneke had a much more difficult time securing a nomination.

    Many pundits are saying Argo is going to win Best Picture because it's the consensus pick...the movie that nobody really hates and most do really enjoy, but nobody is truly passionate about while the other films will lose because they have strong passionate supporters, but none of them have united the different factions to secure a win. Thus an Argo win. Basically, it's an ordinal system and Argo may win with the most 2nd and 3rd place votes because the others with more 1st place votes will also suffer from having 6-9 place votes as well.

    In the other categories, Argo isn't the favorite to win and we can see for the first time in history a movie winning Best Picture and only Best Picture.
    Yes, Argo is now the bookies favourite. Would still like Les Misérables to win though

  20. #40

    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    24,270
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    42715
    Quote Originally Posted by Lorac View Post
    OK I worded my comment wrong - what I meant to say is why would the Academy - according to your observation - seem bent on Spielberg getting a 3rd Oscar? That is what I don't undertand. If he hadn't won one I could undertand the manipulation - but he has 2 already!!
    I have no idea. I cannot read their minds, just like in other cases (e.g. why they waited for 20+ years to allow Mery Streep win her third Oscar, or why they wanted Sandra Bullock or Julia Roberts to win an Oscar).

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •