Media Megaforum

Oscar nominees for Best Animated Feature Film...
lastcall at 4:42AM, Feb. 2, 2009
(offline)
posts: 1,358
joined: 11-3-2007
And the nominees are:

-Bolt
-Kung Fu Panda
-WALL-E


There were fourteen films submitted for this category, but these three are the ones up for an Oscar. All three are 3D computer animation.

What happened to 2D animation? Is it really dead? Will it ever come back? What about Batman: Gotham Knight, Futurama: Bender's Game, or Justice League: The New Frontier? Why weren't they considered? What about the foreign animated films like Waltz with Bashir (Golden Globe winner) or $9.99 (stop-motion)?

When I see nominess like these three, it makes me wonder what they base their choices on. Did someone pay them an ungodly amount of money to pick these three? I mean WALL-E I can understand, but Bolt and Kung Fu Panda? Come on.
last edited on July 14, 2011 1:28PM
Bekefel at 4:45AM, Feb. 2, 2009
(offline)
posts: 4,457
joined: 10-15-2006
Everyone is obsessed with the adventures of a bunch of cute and silly animated 3D animals these days.

How many more tales revolving around a specific animal can we take?
Please, please, you give me too little credit.
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:20AM
confusedsoul at 5:37AM, Feb. 2, 2009
(online)
posts: 269
joined: 1-9-2006
I like Kung Fu Panda mysellf more than I enjoyed WALLE, but they generally pick either the most recently released animated features (how long has Bolt been out for ?) or the biggest name, so it's never really down to quality at all.
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:44AM
isukun at 6:54AM, Feb. 2, 2009
(online)
posts: 2,481
joined: 9-28-2006
First of all, the Oscars only really apply to theatrically released movies. The three you mentioned were direct-to-video so they wouldn't be eligible. Then you also have to consider that the Oscars are more a popularity contest than an actual representation of quality. The unfortunate thing is that while films like Waltz with Bashir and $9.99 may be better movies, I doubt a lot of people in Hollywood actually watched them. They had enough support to be considered, but not enough to be nominated. Don't forget that it is the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences that votes on who wins the Oscars, so these are awards given by Hollywood for Hollywood. You can't always expect them to watch or favor foreign films.

I have a feeling WALL-E will win, but I don't think it deserves it. It was a decent movie, but loses a lot of its charm on subsequent viewings.
last edited on July 14, 2011 1:04PM
Hawk at 7:25AM, Feb. 2, 2009
(online)
posts: 2,760
joined: 1-2-2006
I thought all three of the nominated movies were pretty good. I know there's sort of a trend to think doing it the “old-fashioned way” results in a better film, but I really enjoyed this batch of CGI movies.
last edited on July 14, 2011 12:46PM
isukun at 12:11PM, Feb. 2, 2009
(online)
posts: 2,481
joined: 9-28-2006
I don't think the format has anything to do with the selection of these movies. It has much more to do with them being popular movies from Disney, Dreamworks, and Pixar. I think the problem most people have with the way these things play out is that very little of it has to do with the actual quality of the film. Of those three films, I think WALL-E is the least deserving for the award, but I'd be willing to bet money it will win. It's fun to watch the first time for the novelty and the visuals, but for the most part, it's not a particularly compelling story and that really should be a major criteria in judging film more so than box office returns, especially in a format that is largely believed to appeal primarily to children.

Year after year, though, we see the same basic companies showing up for best animated feature. Every time Pixar has a major movie release, they get nominated. It's almost the same for Disney and Dreamworks. Then you see more worthy movies from the international market get passed up for movies more popular in the box office. It's like the 2004 nominees. Can anyone seriously claim that the only movies released that year that were better than Shark Tale were the Incredibles and Shrek 2? Sure, Shrek 2 was fun, but not really Oscar material and I liked the Incredibles, but there were several foreign films that were pretty spectacular that year, like the more experimental Mind Game, or Kumo no Mukō, Yakusoku no Basho, or Nyócker! to name a few.
last edited on July 14, 2011 1:04PM
Hawk at 1:13PM, Feb. 2, 2009
(online)
posts: 2,760
joined: 1-2-2006
Oh, I'm not suggesting they were nominated due to them being CGI movies, I'm saying that it's possibly why their nominations are being disputed in this thread.

And I won't argue the sentiment that the Oscars overlook a lot of good non-mainstream stuff… I just haven't seen $9.99 or Waltz with Bashir, so I can't tell if they're any more deserving of the award. I loved Wall-E, but I can understand why somebody wouldn't like it, or would only enjoy it once. We'll just have to see which one they choose. I won't be sharpening my pitchfork, though. I enjoyed each one.
last edited on July 14, 2011 12:46PM
NickGuy at 1:16PM, Feb. 2, 2009
(online)
posts: 988
joined: 2-22-2007
it doesnt really matter anyways, everyone knew this was coming. the oscars are a joke.

“Kung Fu Komix IS…hardcore martial art action all the way. 8/10” -Harkovast
“Kung Fu Komix is that rare comic that is made with heart and love of the medium, and it delivers” -Zenstrive
“Kung Fu Komix is…so awesome” -threeeyeswurm
“Kung Fu Komix is..told with all the stupid exuberance of the genre it parodies” -The Real Macabre
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:15PM
Warpedwenger at 6:41PM, Feb. 2, 2009
(offline)
posts: 1,758
joined: 4-3-2007
O.o Fly Me to the Moon was considered…. SERIOUSLY?
last edited on July 14, 2011 4:47PM
isukun at 9:17PM, Feb. 2, 2009
(online)
posts: 2,481
joined: 9-28-2006
Oh, I'm not suggesting they were nominated due to them being CGI movies, I'm saying that it's possibly why their nominations are being disputed in this thread.

I was actually agreeing with you that the films aren't chosen based on the medium, but disagreeing that people automatically assume traditional media is better.

Also, looking at the article again, it looks like $9.99 and Waltz with Bashir weren't eligible by Academy standards, anyway. It's too bad Delgo wasn't eligible, I know one of the director/writers for that movie.
last edited on July 14, 2011 1:04PM
the2ndredbaron at 9:52PM, Feb. 2, 2009
(online)
posts: 706
joined: 11-19-2008
Okay first of all Wall E was fantastic and deserves to win.
And Waltz is up for best foreign film. I am just sad Puyo on the water (or whatever its called).
 
last edited on July 14, 2011 4:16PM
the2ndredbaron at 9:53PM, Feb. 2, 2009
(online)
posts: 706
joined: 11-19-2008
didn't get nominated, sorry forgot to finish that thought.
 
last edited on July 14, 2011 4:16PM
Senshuu at 6:09AM, Feb. 3, 2009
(offline)
posts: 391
joined: 5-23-2006
lastcall
Futurama: Bender's Game

Haw.


Wall-E was absolutely amazing in all of its aspects (except maybe the storytelling, which was in this case substituted for a real message, which was of less impact than most of Pixar's films to me). It'll win.

We don't have enough cool animation these days. I blame the lack of 2D production. I can't wait for Frog Princess, just because I'm so sick of all this 3D.

I found out stuff like Felidae and Rock'n'Rule exists, and yet films like that aren't around anymore…
last edited on July 14, 2011 3:27PM
isukun at 6:58AM, Feb. 3, 2009
(online)
posts: 2,481
joined: 9-28-2006
Wall-E was absolutely amazing in all of its aspects

I wouldn't really say that. Visually, it looks cool, but it wasn't as impressive as their last few films. For the most part the environments were pretty straightforward and simple. Effects were mostly limited to particle effects, which just about any 3D animation studio can do these days. There wasn't a whole lot to worry about in terms of hair or fluid modeling. Environments on the Axiom were mostly sterile. They had some decent texture work on Earth and on WALL-E himself, but the rest seemed pretty simple. Plus, with a majority of the cast being robots, they didn't need to really use all the 12 principles of animation for a lot of the film.

It looks pretty, but I wouldn't say it's the most technically awe inspiring movie they've put out. Honestly, from a technical standpoint, I thought Kung Fu Panda was more impressive. Destructable environments, explosions, fire, water effects, highly expressive characters covered in fur, and a lot more effort had to go into the choreography.
last edited on July 14, 2011 1:04PM
json at 9:23AM, Feb. 3, 2009
(online)
posts: 181
joined: 9-26-2008
so, can someone clue me in on what wall-e was about? i thought the design looked like a rip off of johnny5 from short circuit, so i didn't bother.
last edited on July 14, 2011 1:11PM
the2ndredbaron at 10:28AM, Feb. 3, 2009
(online)
posts: 706
joined: 11-19-2008
isukun
Wall-E was absolutely amazing in all of its aspects

I wouldn't really say that. Visually, it looks cool, but it wasn't as impressive as their last few films.

Please don't tell me you think Cars was better then Wall E
 
last edited on July 14, 2011 4:16PM
isukun at 4:46PM, Feb. 3, 2009
(online)
posts: 2,481
joined: 9-28-2006
It's easier for me to re-watch Cars than WALL-E. The whole “comic duo” theme just worked better. Lasseter seems to struggle more when he moves into new territory. He really should stick with the buddy films and rely on new blood (like Brad Bird) for other ideas.
last edited on July 14, 2011 1:04PM
DRose at 6:22PM, Feb. 16, 2009
(online)
posts: 52
joined: 1-9-2006
I personally loved WALL-E but that just my opinion. Honestly though I would've given the nomination to Tale of Desperaux just for the truly spectacular visuals that completely blow away Pixar (and that is saying something because Pixar does some of the best work I have ever seen). However I think its true that the oscars only really pay attention to big names and not what truly deserves the win. I still remember years ago when I saw Men In Black lose best makeup to Titanic. That was a joke and I've never really taken the Oscars seriously since.

The only way that other forms of animation are going to get into that category is for the big movies to be done in other forms. If Disney's Princess and the Frog is any good (I hope it is I really want to see old school Disney back in theaters) then it will probably get a nomination.

A brief P.S. - I don't think Lasseter directed Wall-E. He did Cars, and Brad Bird did Ratatouille, but I can't remember who did Wall-E.
last edited on July 14, 2011 12:17PM
isukun at 6:48PM, Feb. 16, 2009
(online)
posts: 2,481
joined: 9-28-2006
Andrew Stanton directed WALL-E. He's one of the “good 'ol boys” down at Pixar. Definitely not what I would consider new blood.
last edited on July 14, 2011 1:04PM
Senshuu at 2:41AM, Feb. 17, 2009
(offline)
posts: 391
joined: 5-23-2006
isukun
Wall-E was absolutely amazing in all of its aspects

I wouldn't really say that. Visually, it looks cool, but it wasn't as impressive as their last few films. For the most part the environments were pretty straightforward and simple. Effects were mostly limited to particle effects, which just about any 3D animation studio can do these days. There wasn't a whole lot to worry about in terms of hair or fluid modeling. Environments on the Axiom were mostly sterile. They had some decent texture work on Earth and on WALL-E himself, but the rest seemed pretty simple. Plus, with a majority of the cast being robots, they didn't need to really use all the 12 principles of animation for a lot of the film.

It looks pretty, but I wouldn't say it's the most technically awe inspiring movie they've put out. Honestly, from a technical standpoint, I thought Kung Fu Panda was more impressive. Destructable environments, explosions, fire, water effects, highly expressive characters covered in fur, and a lot more effort had to go into the choreography.

For a movie just full of robots, though, it was amazing. I usually dislike robots and robot-related media. :D I can assume most of what you said is why there weren't a whole lot of interesting extras on the disc, though…

KFP actually didn't wow me very much, for some reason. SOMETHING was lacking. If the whole movie had been like the opening, however, I would have eaten it up nonetheless. :D I liked the characterization though. Po was great.

It's amazing, how far 3D movies have to go to be stunning these days. Simply being in 3D doesn't cut it anymore. But you get the feeling of them “not trying hard enough” a lot lately.
last edited on July 14, 2011 3:27PM
skoolmunkee at 11:12AM, Feb. 17, 2009
(online)
posts: 7,058
joined: 1-2-2006
Wall-E wasn't a very ‘deep’ or technically challenging film, but I loved all the character designs and all the characterisation techniques in the first half. I think they did an amazing job designing all the robots (Wall-E especially) to be machines first and characters second. I love watching the way Wall-E has to articulate his shoulders and wrists to get around the fact that he doesn't have elbows, or how the 4 cogs in his ‘feet’ do different things reflecting to the action.

json- wikipedia would probably give you a better outline of the movie than anyone would take the time to do here :]
  IT'S OLD BATMAN
last edited on July 14, 2011 3:42PM
Senshuu at 2:41PM, Feb. 17, 2009
(offline)
posts: 391
joined: 5-23-2006
I noticed Wikipedia discussions tend to make movie descriptions as dry and boring as possible. It's accurate and neutral but so disheartening!
last edited on July 14, 2011 3:27PM
Dark Pascual at 8:38PM, Feb. 17, 2009
(online)
posts: 498
joined: 1-5-2009
I still haven't watched none of those movies…I reaally want to watch both Wall-e and Kung-fu Panda, but Bolt looks kinda lame…

As for the use of 3D over 2D, as animation student (both traditional and 3D) I only can offer this…3D animation and modeling allows you more impressive results with less time and money…unless you're using 2D CGI…

Actually, Im working in a 3D comic…
last edited on July 14, 2011 12:07PM

Forgot Password
©2011 WOWIO, Inc. All Rights Reserved