Was Star Trek Snubbed By The Academy? February 2, 2010
by Anthony Pascale , Filed under: Paramount, Star Trek (2009 film) , trackback
The nominations for the Academy Awards were announced a couple hours ago (see previous report). Although Star Trek picked up four technical nominations, it didn’t get a nod for Best Picture. Although not considered a shoe-in, the film had received a lot of buzz and many are already calling ’snub’, especially due to one of the films that did make it in. [UPDATE: More 'Star Trek Snub' buzz]
No Best Pic for Trek? – Is it a snub?
Going into the nominations, Star Trek had shown up on a number of industry watcher lists for a nomination for Best Picture, including Entertainment Weekly’s and the USA Today. The film was also nominated by the Producers Guild, which usually is a good gauge of the Oscar nods. However, Star Trek and Clint Eastwood’s Invictus were the only films that didn’t make both lists, replaced by The Blind Side and A Serious Man.
| PGA Best Picture |
Academy Best Picture |
| Avatar | Avatar |
| District 9 | The Blind Side |
| An Education | District 9 |
| The Hurt Locker | An Education |
| Inglourious Basterds | The Hurt Locker |
| Invictus | Inglourious Basterds |
| Precious | Precious |
| Star Trek | A Serious Man |
| Up | Up |
| Up in the Air | Up in the Air |
The exclusion of Star Trek has got some notice (and even riled some up):
[UPDATED quotes list]
Ten f–king slots for Best Picture, and not a-one of ‘em for JJ’s STAR TREK? That list can’t have TWO giant sci-fi movie’s on it?
- Director Kevin Smith (via Twitter)
That a nomination did not go to Star Trek was a shock to many on the Facebook Livestream, which indicates how the public’s going to respond to the news of the list. Moreover, will the Star Trek snub impact Oscar ratings?
- SF Gate
Surprises: Trek got shafted, UP nommed for Best Film AND Best Animated!
- Pop Culture Zoo (Twitter)
In a 10-movie Best Picture field that had room for box office hits as well as indie darlings, I was surprised Golden Globe winner The Hangover, Star Trek, or (500) Days of Summer didn’t sneak in.
- Entertainment Weekly
STAR TREK might have peaked too early; also, it had such a zippy, fleet feel to it that maybe voters didn’t take it as seriously as the others? Honestly I do not know. But I agree that it deserved a nod.
- Washinton Post (critic Ann Hornaday from chat)
"Star Trek" – Did the Academy learn nothing from its egregious omission of "The Dark Knight" last year? The fact that the Best Picture field was expanded to 10 films and included another sci fi film, "District 9," makes "Star Trek’s" snub that much more painful. The clever and entertaining reboot of the popular franchise was crafted well. It deserved better than its handful of technical nominations.
- Zap2it
And what about the geek fave Star Trek directed by J.J. Abrams? Somebody at the Academy is not on board the Enterprise for sure.
- Urban Wire
What, no "Star Trek?" The news of today’s Oscar nominations from Los Angeles shot around the world, leaving critics and film buffs shaking their heads over snubs made by Academy Award voters.
- CTV
More Star Trek exclusion talk from:
- USA Today and again at USA Today
- Yahoo
- LA Times
- E Online
- Access Hollywood
- Cleveland Plain Dealer
- Examiner.com
- TheWrap
- IndieWire
- FilmStage
- Hollyscoop
The Blind Side over Star Trek? Really?
The inclusion of The Blind Side appears to be a total surprise. The Sandra Bullock led film about a family that adopts a homeless teenager has been a bit of a sleeper hit, earning $237M domestically. However, The Blind Side only scores a 58% rating on Rotten Tomatoes (Top Critics), and didn’t appear on any of the critic top 10 lists compiled at Metacritic (Star Trek has a 92% rating and is on 21 lists). Cinemablend called the nomination of The Blind Side for Best Picture (over Trek and other contenders) one of "Five things to be horrified by" with this years Oscars. The Detroit Free Press notes the
Blind Side pick is "a victory for the sort of blockbuster films that ticket buyers embrace more than critics." The Blind Side seems to be benefiting from the performance of Sandra Bullock, who was also nominated for Best Actress and already has won the Golden Globe and Critics Choice Award for her performance in the film.
"Blind Side" made it onto the Best Pic list, but "Star Trek" did not
Loading ...
Comments»
YES! Star Trek was snubbed but whats new??? The academy knows nothing when it comes to good theater.
definitly a bias against trek
As interesting as the movie was it is just not “Best Film” material.
knew?
Disappointing, for sure. Unexpected, not really. I’m sure the Academy has plenty of back-door politics going on, like everything else. A Star Trek nomination was certainly deserved, as much as Avatar or District 9.
I think its a snub for sure, at least a nomination would have been nice
.
Defently a Snub, Star Trek was Best Film Material and the Academy need to wake up!
Boborci…
You live in hollywood or at least work there. Who are the people who nominate movies into any given category? Do you know any of these people? What are the politics behind it all?
“The Blind Side” was okay…not great. But it’s the type of inspirational movie that is widely embraced that would get a lot of academy votes.
A movie with Houston Dale Nutt in it gets a nominated for best picture, and J.J. Abrams gets the shaft. What’s next?
The Scifi fans get ignored and a movie about football gets nominated. To quote Johnney Cage “This is like being back in Highschool”
Star Trek Deserved to be in the Best Picture nomination, I don’t know why they didn’t put it in, it was an awsome Movie!
Somehow I wasn’t too hopeful, but when I first saw this movie, I was like why wouldn’t it? I’m disapointed, but who ,knows…we still have a sequel that could?
As much as I love Trek, I do think ‘Blind Side’ is a good nomination. I really enjoyed it. It really is too bad Star Trek didn’t make the list, because some of those other movies were just awful.
It’s “Annie Hall” over “Star Wars” all over again.
#10. Two sci-fi films were nominated. “Star Trek” just didn’t make the cut.
Let’s not forget that today is Brent Spiner’s birthday. Please Trekmovie, do not forget.
Happy Birthday Brent!
“The Blind Side” isn’t even out yet in many parts of the world. O_o
A) Who cares, these awards are meaningless self-congratulation and B) Yes? No? Avatar was nominated, so stupid movies clearly “count” as “Best Picture” material.
I pick A.
One more media reaction: from Washington Post film critic Ann Hornaday, during a chat on the newspapers website immediately after the Oscar nominations were announced:
“STAR TREK might have peaked too early; also, it had such a zippy, fleet feel to it that maybe voters didn’t take it as seriously as the others? Honestly I do not know. But I agree that it deserved a nod.”
Who cares to be honest, these awards have always been slightly pointless because they only ever focus on films the general public by and large really couldn’t care about.
Avatar however good it was – i did enjoy it – was hardly i feel worthy of a best picture nomination – visual effects sure by several miles it stood out for me but where as Star Trek made no bones about being part of the larger 43 year history of Trek and yet took the reboot format and made it into something original and exciting and with a story that was as Star Trek as ever, Avatar promised to be original, never before seen but ran like an over-bloated CGI-ed to the max version of Pocohontis(SP?)/Ferne Gully/Smurf’s – which while visually stunning, for me failed to deliver on the most important promise – originality.
Yes it was — “Snub Trek 2010″!
Was it a bit too full on with the punk kid thing to get a nod?
Definately a shame, but not unexpected. I think there is still a bit of a stigma attached to the brand which may have left a sour taste in the mouth of the more snooty voter. For me the film sucessfully resolved this, but hey.
Still, the sequel will give the academy members something to vote for ;-)
In all fairness, NuTrek was a fun romp at a certain level, but it had absolutely nothing to say to its audience. Expecting a “Best Picture” nomination simply because its institutional fan base enjoyed it is, it is fair to say, rubbish.
Sincerely,
C.S.Lewis
Star Trek 2009, as good as it was, it is still too silly to be deserved an Oscar nomination. Star Trek has been & always be a TV show…
It’s true, we have lived this long without getting respect… we didn’t get a nod even when TWOK came out, and our soundtracks though awesome typically get shafted too. This is just a pain.
Hopefully boborci and others on the ’supreme court’ can simply continue what they’re doing so that we can no longer be ignored. We were still victorious in 2009, remember that.
What’s a snub? It was just outvoted by academy members. I’m disappointed, but I don’t suspect a conspiracy. And I’m excited that scifi movies are included in the extended playing field. I <3 Star Trek but Avatar is going to sweep everything anyway, going by the trends. At least I hope so.
I don’t think it’s a snub, personally. I really really love the film but I still don’t feel it was one of the best of the year. Plus, the Academy has a history of ignoring movies like Trek so it shouldn’t be surprising.
24 I disagree that Star Trek has been and always be a TV show. Star Trek 09 was a motion picture based on TOS TV show. now Star Trek The Motion Picture was a TV episode (a very expensive one) brought to theaters. It was actualy the pilot for the proposed new Trek series “Star Trek: Phase 2″. Big Difference.
Best film of the year??
It wasn’t even the best film of the month …
Then again…
I am surprised that Avatar was nominated for best picture O_O
Honestly guys, do you really think it was good enough to deserve that?
Now I think I know why some people believe Trek was snubbed.
First, “C.S. Lewis” is so wrong that his statement almost came back around to being right again.
Second, I can’t believe that D9 got a nomination over Star Trek.
Trekkers don’t need Oscars. Fans worldwide have given JJ + team + cast the best recognition ever. I hereby symbolically hand over the ‘Golden Nacelle’ to mr. Abrams and staff for the ‘Best Trek Movie Ever’. And that’s that!
‘Inglorious Basterds’ is NOT a great movie. It’s a so-so collection of the confusing tricks employed by Quentin Tarantino in past movies. It’s a piss-poor history. It’s a mediocre actioner. It does have one great performance by Christopher Waltz as the main Nazi baddie. The rest is pretty frothy, if bloody, stuff.
Sorry, but it gets old being told how great some truly middlin’ players are.
As for Trek not making the top ten… meh. I like most of the five I’ve seen; as usual, The Academy has filled (overfilled with ten??) the list with movies that appeal more to the spurious idea of greatness than to the gut-response of a truly fun night at the movies.
I wouldn’t mind if Avatar sweeps. But, I can’t say Oscar’s tastes match mine all the time, so I’m not worried about it.
thanks for the catch beerwriter, found the link and added to above
#27 – I didn’t think that history was going to change just because of the 2009 film, even though I loved it so very much, and even though it was certainly very important to me as a fan of a franchise that so many people were deriding as “dead” or “on life support.”
But we have the right to not think much of the Academy and to ignore their decisions, and I’m going to reserve that right as I always have. As a moviegoer, I have never paid much attention to the Academy Awards because I have always believed that the only opinion that really matters is that of the customers – mine, yours, ours.
(And personally, I think the Academy is corrupt. But that’s just my opinion, and it’s also likely to be an irrational one, so let’s not talk any further about that.)
You’re all over the top. ST9 was fun. The new cast was fantastic. I’m eager to see their fresh faces in many more Trek adventures… But best picture? Whether it’s more or less deserving of a nomination over say the Blind Side, isn’t really the point. In essence, Abrams forged ahead with a flawed narrative. He’s even admitted as such. That doesn’t mean it was bad. It was a good reboot, it bodes well for future entries, but it’s far from deserving of best picture.
How does a movie like “The Blind Side” that belongs on the Lifetime Network get nominated over Star Trek?
Star Trek wasn’t the best film of the year, but it is much better than “The Blind Side”, “A Serious Man” and “An Education”
Avatar is overrated.
May be the powers to be (with STAR TREK) can get Sandra Bullock to play a villian in the sequel so she can get us a Oscar nod. LOL
#1 – I agree with you all the way. That’s why I don’t take the Academy very seriously and probably never will.
No doubt about it Star Trek got snubbed…
From Yahoo
Best Picture Snub- “Star Trek”
“It’s an outer space adventure filled with dazzling special effects and featuring a largely unknown cast with a standout performance by Zoe Saldana. Yes, that description fits the Best Picture nominee “Avatar,” but it just as well could be talking about the snubbed “Star Trek.” While J.J. Abrams’ new take on the sci-fi classic didn’t create an entirely new world like James Cameron’s epic did, but instead it accomplished a feat that is even more impressive. The movie took a 40-year-old franchise and made it brand-new again, without alienating the fans who have adored it for decades”
Washington Post
“STAR TREK might have peaked too early; also, it had such a zippy, fleet feel to it that maybe voters didn’t take it as seriously as the others? Honestly I do not know. But I agree that it deserved a nod”
Lets boycott the Oscars for snubbing Trek
This isn’t unexpected. I was hoping it would make the list but I’m glad other great films made it. Like Inglorious Basterds, District 9 (which had more substance then NuTrek) and Up! That’s great for Pixar! I actually hope they win both best animated and best picture.
But I’m guessing Avatar will dominate the Oscars. Which is alright I guess but Avatar was a visually dominating film but in terms of story? Nothing grabbed me about the story.
And if Up doesn’t win, Inglorious is my runner up!
And by the way, has Star Trek picked up any technical moms yet? Or when do those get told to us?
C.S. Lewis,
It isn’t about the fan base. It never would have made the money it did if that were the case. And it was a darling with real critics…not just the fan base. The overall critical “ranking” for Star Trek was higher than just about every film on the list that did make the cut. (So qualified, unbiased critics seem to disagree with your assessment that the movie had nothing to say to the audience.) Take away box office (because we know that doesn’t matter to the academy) and focus just on critical acclaim. A movie not getting in on its superior critical merits alone?….that is, by definition, a snub.
(nuTrek? Ohhhhhh….you’re one of THOSE fans.)
I don’t think Star Trek deserved the oscar nomination for best motion picture to begin with, so this news doesn’t really bother me.
After seeing all three sci-fi films this year, my feelings are:
1. “Avatar”: game changer for the movie industry, and an entertaining film, but we won’t be quoting lines from it like we still do from “Aliens.” On par with “True Lies” in the Cameron ouvre, as in, good, but not one of his best.
2. “Star Trek”: Wildly entertaining and a real fun experience in the theatre. Not sure it deserves a Best Picture nod, though. A Best Director nod for J.J. Abrams seems more appropriate, as he single-handedly has reinvented the visual style we expect from this storied franchise, and that deserves recognition.
3. “District 9″: The only film out of the three I have seen twice in the theatre. Brilliant movie that absolutely deserves a Best Picture nomination. It has something to say, and says it well, yet is incredibly entertaining… and moving. It certainly deserved the Best Screenplay nomination as well, although Sharlto Copley was robbed of a Best Actor nomination.
Wow I guess it bothers some people to realize not everyone drinks the kool-aid..
oh well.. cheers!
I just posted this in the other thread, but I think something’s wrong here. I read two reports yesterday that included Trek in the best picture category, both from Associated Press. What the f**k gives???
The expansion to ten slots is probably the only reason that more than one fantasy film had a shot at a nomination. Were it still only five, “Avatar” would probably have been the only sf nom. Now, they had room for “Up” as well as the more seriously-intentioned “District 9,” so they satisfied whatever public demand they’ve been sensing for more popular fare on the list.
Except for being more successful than some others, there’s not that much to distinguish Star Trek from a number of other Summer 2010 popcorn flicks and so no reason to suspect the Academy of “snubbing” it.
I have seen Avatar and Up in the cinemas and liked them. I’ve read about District 9 and Inglourious Basterds. In contrast to this I haven’t heard anything of the other movies before. Like usual a lot of well known popular movies aren’t nominated.
I think it is much more important how much money a movie makes in the cinemas than how many nominations and awards it gets. So this list is much more important:
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/yearly/chart/?view2=worldwide&yr=2009&p=.htm
2009 WORLDWIDE GROSSES
1 Avatar $2,042.7
2 Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince $934.0
3 Ice Age: Dawn of the Dinosaurs $884.5
4 Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen $835.3
5 2012 $767.9
6 Up $723.0
7 The Twilight Saga: New Moon $704.2
8 Angels & Demons $485.9
9 The Hangover $467.3
10 Night at the Museum: Battle of the Smithsonian $413.0
11 Alvin and the Chipmunks: The Squeakquel $399.9
12 Sherlock Holmes $394.6
13 Star Trek $385.5
14 Monsters Vs. Aliens $381.5
15 X-Men Origins: Wolverine $373.1
16 Terminator Salvation $372.0
17 Fast and Furious $343.0
18 A Christmas Carol (2009) $323.6
19 The Proposal $314.7
20 Inglourious Basterds $313.6
MESAGE TO ANTHONY: the REAL awards based on the public opinion and that are not rigged are the MTV Movie Awards so you should emphasize that in future articles and such
It’s a great year when two science fiction films can get Best Picture nominations. I would have liked to have seen Trek get a few more nominations but I also agree that this one did not have the “message” aspect that voters look for and which District 9 and Avatar delivered, whether you liked them or not. I think we just had a great year for science fiction and if the Trek sequel improves on its predecessor maybe it’ll get another shot.
I’ve seen 8 of the 10 Best Picture nominees (haven’t seen “Precious” or “An Education” yet, but will soon). Of the eight I’ve seen, the one that I don’t think really deserves one is “The Blind Side.” I would have much preferred something else, like “(500) Days of Summer,” “Crazy Heart,” “Where the Wild Things Are,” or “Star Trek.”
31. SChaos1701 – February 2, 2010 and
44. “Check the Circuit!” – February 2, 2010
So far as this correspondent could decipher the meaning of NuTrek, it was,
“Family and dear friends are a good thing and worth risking lives to save; even though bad guys have families and dear friends, sometimes we have to kill them.”
While true, it didn’t seem to move many people to depths of profundity. NuTrek’s appeal was clearly its action-adventure format. Not that yours truly is a follower of Academy Awards, but isn’t it true that dramas typically win the more prestigious awards?
Sincerely,
C.S. Lewis
I’ve tried watching “District 9″ twice now, and fell asleep both times. *yawn*
shame shame shame, Avatar will get it but would have been nice to be at least nominated. Sometimes, I wish the critics and fans voted for best picture. The Academy doesn’t have a clue sadly.
KHANNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN!!!!!!!!!!
Michael Giacchino and Michael Kaplan should feel pretty miffed in particular.
Did you really expect Star Trek to get nominated for best Picture?
Star Trek got overlooked in the past, just because JJ Abrams directed did not mean things were going to change.
back in 1997 I wanted First Contact to get nominated for best pic oscar and for Patrick Stewart as Best Actor but it never happened and I accepted Trek gets overlooked in these categories.
But did you really expect things to change?
The Academy awards are voted for by invited members of the academy, who are generally speaking, professional film-makers and film technicians. There’s a lot of Academy bashing here, but to be fair, these guys n gals make the films we enjoy, I don’t think we can discount their opinion and professional expertise.
Other awards are voted for differently, whether it is public opinion or a larger voting pool – for me this gives a good variety of opinions and makes for interesting watching.
Still think they should invent a “best trailer” category though. Trek trl3 would surely be up there…;-)
It’s not so bad that Trek got snubbed, it’s expected from the snooty bunch at the oscars. It’s the caliber of films that WERE included that make Star Trek such a glaring omission. Shame on you oscars, your street cred is waning.
#56. I shudder to think of something like “Twilight” getting an Oscar if we put it up to fans to decide.
I am only now noticing that Up got nominated for Best Picture :D That’s wonderful for animation fans like me.
I suppose you can call it a snub but personally, I call it a victory when *two* science fiction films were nominated. That’s a first.
Frankly, I am not surprised. The same Academy also didn’t mention DeForest Kelley when he passed.
Now THAT was a snub.
#64. Agreed. Massively.
Anyway my friends just relax, in the alternate time line Trek ‘09 did get nominated and actually won!
Meanwhile closer to home, maybe Kirk Prime coming back as a Borg and now CEO of The Academy had something to do with not being nominated??
There’s a reason The Blind Side and the other films are on that list:
They’re just simply better! Honestly, there have been far better Trek films in the past, but are any of you pissed that *they* didn’t make it into the Best Picture category?
I haven’t sen the Blindside yet, but I have heard it is superior to the new movie.
#62. Indeed. Only the second time an animated film has been nominated for the top prize.
Was I the only one to fall asleep during Up in the Air?
I thought the entire time that it was going to be District 9 OR Star Trek in the 10 at the end of the day so while I wish it was the latter I am just as happy for the former.
No, it didn’t get snubbed. Just treated fairly.
If only it was possible to nominate the first hour of a movie, then “Star Trek” would not only be deserving, it would be a front runner.
Abso-F**king-Lutely!! With 20 films nominated, including animated and foreign, The Trek didn’t sqeak in?? You BET it was snubbed! If you’re not 5 feet tall, have a beard and put a cute little beeping droid in your movie, ya get no respect!!
Yes, Star Trek (2009) was disrespected by the Academy. The fan in me says: DEFINITELY!
If I thought about it, I would be angry at the Academy.
But, that said, the movie was nominated for four such awards, and for that we should be grateful.
I am much angrier, right now, at President Obama. As I said in my blog, his latest proposal threatens to ruin manned spaceflight; in August of 2008, as noted in my blog, his promises seemed exactly the opposite.
My interest in Star Trek is related to my interest in spaceflight. Far from what the Academy or any other Hollywood institution thinks of Trek, the more pressing concern is how Star Trek and its hopeful message of universal peace and expansion of humanity’s presence int he world should fare. I ask all fans to consider this as they think about the consequences of REAL-WORLD space developments today.
What the Academy does or does not do, at this point, is relatively trivial.
Star Trek lives.
Quoting my latest Twitter post…
“Ponyo” and JJ Abrams’ “Star Trek” both got screwed by the Academy today. What do you expect from fuddy-duddys like AMPAS?
Plain and simple.
Well there are the Saturn Awards…
Star Trek is much too conservative for the Academy.
The Academy likes bold.
The Academy likes controversial.
Unfortunately, Star Trek 2009 was neither.
Honestly, what really hurt Star Trek was its lack of promotion by Paramount through awards season.
This site has a gallery of “For Your Consideration” ads put in the trades:
http://www.awardsdaily.com/FYC/gallery/
Of the ten nominees for Best Picture, this is the ad count:
- Avatar (13)
- The Blind Side (6)
- District 9 (3)
- An Education (9)
- The Hurt Locker (10)
- Inglourious Basterds (6)
- Precious (14)
- A Serious Man (14)
- Up (7)
- Up in the Air (0)
Paramount also released Up in the Air and didn’t bother putting out any ads for it. But that one didn’t need much support. In fact, Paramount only put out ONE FYC ad…for Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen.
Cameron, the Hollywood darling, will clear the board when all his friends vote for Avatar
Well, Star Trek deserved it, so did Ponyo and for that matter I though Coraline was good enough. That’s too bad, but this Blind Side move it has a 58% from top critics on Rotten Tomatoes (Star Trek: 92) and on Metacritic a 53 (Star Trek: 83)
Don’t blame the academy members. They probably gave up when they had to read the comics to understand what the heck happened in that movie….
We all know genre work gets snubbed in awards shows, be it the Oscars or the Emmys. Although it is absolutely right to argue Star Trek’s merited a nomination, it’s intellectually dishonest to suggest that it comes as a surprise.
But Bob and Alex are laughing all the way to the bank; they are currently the premiere writing team in Hollywood with a Midas touch. And their peers appear to have a large chip on their shoulder about it. See this story:
http://www.deadline.com/hollywood/another-reason-to-hate-kurtzmanorci/
It wouldn’t surprise me to find that some of the Academy’s snubbing also has to do with resentment over their success. I’d take their kind of professional success over a little gold statuette any day of the week. And, I suspect, so would their peers.
Keep it up, Bob and Alex. Maybe soon, your peers’ heads will start exploding with all of their pent-up envy.
Seems to me UP and AVATAR ought to be competing in the same category for best ANIMATED FEATURE.
But at least Avatar HAD some actors acting. It’s pure chronic numbskull to nominate UP in a best picture category when the type of film it is has it’s OWN category.
You see, every year when a movie takes home the best animated feature award it’s also winning an award for best picture — but of the ANIMATED variety.
But WAIT, that’s NOT all folks!!!
Not ONLY is UP nominated for best picture, but yep, it’s ALSO nominated for BEST ANIMATED FEATURE, thus having potentially TWO wins for best picture in two different categories.
So how is NOT nominating Star Trek NOT a snub when they put UP on two different best picture lists?
That’s Hollywood. No respect for boundaries.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/82nd_Academy_Awards
In no way is Star Trek Best picture worthy
If any Science Fiction movies was this year it’s District 9, because it had relevant message and wasn’t just a popcorn movie.
100% NOT a snub. I loved Star Trek. I think its great! My favorite new movie in a long time. But it does not deserve a Best Picture nom. While i’m at it…District 9 was a not fantastically wonderful film either. And Basterds was good. but still probably doesnt deserve BP nom. Avatar was good too and quite an impressive piece of art overall.
Remember, the best movie of the year doesnt mean the best movie YOU SAW this year. Not does it mean your favorite movie of the year.
“favorite” and “best” can be two different films.
STAR TREK IS NOT THAT GOOD!
Considering that most movies that win Academy Awards make me want to slit my wrists with boredom, I’d consider it an honor NOT to get nominated.
@83: LOL. I read that. I’ll bet real money that animus towards Bob and Alex’s success DOES have something to do with Star Trek not being on that list.
#51
Elsewhere you’ve noted that Viacom which owns Paramount also owns MTV. MTV also owns SPIKE. You don’t think those award shows are the least little bit biased towards not challenging Viacom’s bottom line?
Wait, what?!?
How can they nominate Up in TWO best picture categories?
Either it’s a best animated movie, or it’s a best movie. It can’t be both!
If that’s the case, get rid of the animated category again! Didn’t they add the animated category because too many people were complaining that there were so many good animated movies but they weren’t getting nominated for best picture?
Well, maybe the Academy should get rid of the 10 best picture slots (which they were supposed to fill with fan favorites in response to “Dark Knight” getting snubbed) and instead create a best blockbuster category instead?
F- the Academy
Im just gonna say that it was clearly a Snub and F the Academy of fake awards Good movies mean nothing to them its all about whose who in Hollywood… Somewhere someone dosnt want to see Star Trek win any sort of awards or even see Star Trek be nominated.
some of the more fun reasons why Trek didn’t get a Best Picture nod in the above talkback:
a) Someone at the Academy is out to get them
b) animus towards the success of bob and alex
c) Up was nominated twice
d) genre work gets snubbed
e) its too conservative
f) Academy is corrupt
I’m with #32 assimilator47
Anthony: How about an award from the fans to the Star Trek (2009) crew? Make with the golden nacelle!
Screw the awards, long-term staying power is the ultimate winner, as the original series has proven by remaining popular and contemporary long beyond other Emmy-winning 1966-69 shows or their stars.
Star Trek didn’t win an Emmy award in any of its three seasons, despite being nominated as best drama for 1966-67, and Leonard Nimoy nominated as best supporting dramatic actor all three years. Trek did lose to other good shows, but “I Spy” and the original “Mission: Impossible” are watched today mostly as period pieces. And “Gunsmoke’s” Doc was no Spock.
It’s not a snub, ST is just not a very good movie.
It’s under-written but competantly performed- nothing outstanding for the ages, here.
Even the FX nom is pure kindness considering how little care was taken with scaling and such.
It should hve gotten an editing nom, though, for the sheer amount of cutting I had to endure as a viewer.
Ferngullytar: The Last Planet shows the things boborci left out of the Star Trek script.
–An environmental message. Remember how ST4 was received. “Oooers, save the whales!” If only James T. Kirk had saved the Ozone Layer, or prevented Vulcan-Caused Global Planet-Swallowing, or Romulan Bun Warming.
–A bunch more “g*d d*mn” and other obscenties. See, have more dialogue from Dr. McCoy, and a drunken Scotsman next time.
–Ridiculous astrophysics. Pandora simply CAN NOT exist. Read the book by Dr. Neil Comins, “What If The Earth Had Two Moons?”, which leads off with a chapter on “What If The Earth Were A Moon?”… Yes, I know Star Trek “can’t exist” either, but it doesn’t pretend it’s got “good science”. Pandora is a piece of crap joke. It can’t exist, and if it did, it would have some very peculiar astrophysics, which Cameron wouldn’t have a clue about. Mountains “floating”? WTF? At least Star Trek had a real astrophysicist on hand. The representation of the Enterprise above Titan was spot-on, and an all-time beautiful creation.
–Evil military types. Gene wanted Starfleet to be filled with good loyal people in service to one another (which we all agree got a bit too much with TNG). But damn, not only does Ferngullytar make corporation types evil, it does military at the same time. Honestly, Ferngully already did this.
–More blue aliens. Star Trek missed its chance to have Andorians and Bolians all over the screen. Then everyone would have realized the original blue aliens were Trek, and Cameron lifted that. That cover art for the DS9 novels 10 years ago, with the blue Andorian woman…. I’m sure that was his “concept” piece for the Pandorans.
–Calling the “Academy” and Academy is a joke. It’s a nomenklatura of left-leaning lemmings, pure and simple.
I don’t think Star Trek deserved the nom, frankly, though I do love the movie dearly.
However, I would have been less surprised to see it nominated than The Blind Side. That’s just weird.
Its no surprise that “Star Trek” didn’t get the best pic nomination.
Even though it was a better movie than ‘Avatar”(I did enjoy that movie as well), it has the stigma of being, well, being Star Trek. James Cameron has a lot of supporters with the Academy and it is why his film will win at least 5 awards, possibly best picture. District 9 deserves the nom, as does Up. “The Blind Side” is nominated because of two things a) the strong performance of Sandra Bullock. b) the feel-good story of an athlete overcoming adversity to reach his goals is quintessential Oscar material.
“The Hurt Locker” deserves the nomination as well. I do think the race is between the “Hurt Locker” and “Avatar”. The other possible winner would be “Precious”. While I don’t think “Star Trek” was the best picture of the year, I thought it deserved a nomination. As for the technical awards, “Avatar” will dominate and the best make-up award will most likely go to “The Young Victoria”. As for the possible future chances of a Star Trek best pic nomination, I doubt that will happen. It was going to be this year or never. Even if the sequel is better, the Academy will still vote the same way they usually do. “The Dark Knight” being the victim of Oscar “politics”. Anyway, at the end of the day, we the fans have a lot to celebrate. Such as the return of Star Trek to the mainstream. The overwhelmingly positive critical and fan response to the new film. And the fact that there will be a sequel.
One final thing. I do expect “TrekMovie.Com” to garner a whole bunch of best internet site nominations. Whoever hands out these types of awards need to recognize Anthony and his hardworking staff. It doesn’t bother me that “Star Trek” was “snubbed” by the Oscars. After last year’s “The Dark Knight” debacle, I wasn’t surprised. The Oscars are irrelevent in what I consider what makes a great movie. However, I do think almost everyone who visits this site can agree that Anthony and his staff deserve a few awards. If “TrekMovie.Com” and Anthony are snubbed, I and a lot of others will be none-too-pleased. So without further ado, I subit my vote for “Best Website”. And it goes to “TrekMovie.Com” :-)
I’m relieved that Avatar isn’t considered above reproach on these boards, because I was unimpressed with it as a whole. Yes, even though the FX were groundbreaking, the story was found wanting; which brings me to its Best Picture nod. I believe it will (…and should) sweep every technical category, but I’m lost on how its story– which was a rehash of Pocahontas and Dances with Wolves– got a nomination. Now, before someone tells me that every story is retold in some form or fashion (…and you would be correct) and that even Star Trek itself is a Western wrapped in Sci-fi clothes, consider that Avatar was too much by the numbers. Most of us can spot an homage and pastiche, but when it is so heavy-handed that you are taken out of the story on more than one occasion? Bad writing. There. I. Said. It.
I loved The Terminator, but even then Mr. Cameron wasn’t– for lack of a better word– clever enough to diffuse the source material he used and he wound up with a lawsuit with Harlan Ellison over two of his Outer Limits stories. So, while Avatar was ‘purty’, Star Trek- a reboot- was by far a better story.
95-
“It’s under-written but competently performed”
That pretty much sums it up….great cast, unremarkable script. Not Best Picture material.
I hope for better next time around, especially with an enormously gifted writer like Damon Lindelof more heavily involved.
Kevin- “That list can’t have TWO giant sci-fi movie’s on it?”
Giant doesn’t mean good Kevin.
Pop Culture- “Surprises: Trek got shafted, UP nommed for Best Film AND Best Animated!”
Let me double check this. “Up” has a character named Carl who sets out on a mission to where he’s never gone before, explores strange, unknown environments, encounters new forms of life and overcomes physical and emotional obstacles and becomes a better character as a result. And they did all of that without product placement, scenes of characters in their underwear, sexual harassment, racial insults, or a substance that does whatever the plot needs it to do.
That, and I like the design of Carl’s house with all the balloons more than I like the NuEnterprise. They didn’t shoot any of that in a brewery.
- Urban Wire: “And what about the geek fave Star Trek directed by J.J. Abrams? Somebody at the Academy is not on board the Enterprise for sure.”
Who would want to? I wouldn’t want to be on a ship full of nothing but cheating arrogant a**holes.
Zap2It- “The fact that the Best Picture field was expanded to 10 films and included another sci fi film, “District 9,” makes “Star Trek’s” snub that much more painful.”
Really? You want to put Star Trek in the same category as District 9? I got a challenge for ya. Make a movie that features some seriously butt ugly aliens who don’t speak english and find ways to have the audience care and root for them. While you’re at it, make them actually look alien while being photorealistic. You will also be working with only 30 million dollars and nothing but unknowns in the cast. You’re an unknown director, working with a story that’s not an attractive audience grabber and certainly not merchandise material. Well, director Neill Blomkamp did it and he did it in spades.
Heck, with Star Trek’s big ‘alien’ moment coming in the form of a regular looking human with fake CGI eyes, surely that justifies the big 150 million dollar budget right there.
Hollywood usually awards “crap”over “craft”. No big surprise to me.
Even with the Academy adding 5 more movies, I still have see only one of the nominees and that is” UP”.
The Academy added more films because the past few years, the nominees have been films the public did not see. That made the TV show boring, not to mention very long with all those thank yous to people we don’t even know or care about. Remember the Academy is made up of film stars and the like who do the voting, not the general public. Can you imagine what would it be like if the Academy nominated films were done by the public???
Plus the films aways seem to be from the latter half of the year, it might very well be true that ST XI was too early and the Academy moved on to the latest fad film. They always seem to go for films with a message or what ever is on peoples list of concerns.
After Saving Private Ryan lost to Shakespear in Love, the Academy Award show lost me as a fan. Besides, ST XI will pick up a Saturn or two which is what really counts in my book.
Both Avatar AND District 9 deserve to be on that list — and so did JJ’s Trek!
I feel badly for the whole crew of ST09, they did such a wonderful job, I felt at least a nomination was in order for best movie and/or director. I was very disappointed though not suprised this morning when the lists were read.
I disagree with the other posters about the movie not being best film worthy, but respect your opinions. I won’t post my reasons again as I have done so many times in the past. I won’t even blast the Academy, but have came to my own conclusions about them as well.
Although I am glad for the other four nominations,
I stand by ST09 as being worthy of at the minimum a nomination for both best movie and/or director.
101. Jeyl
You sound pretty pleased that Star Trek didn’t get nominated. Why, then, should it matter to you if there are others who think differently? You mean people are not entitled to their opinion? I think Star Trek was a terrific film, and, while I don’t really care if it was nominated, or even wins an award, it is a film that I really dug. Don’t insult my intelligence with your snobbery, please. Sure, District 9 deserves whatever attention it gets. Star Trek deserves the attention it gets. And then let the cards fall where they may.
I liked the pic, but don’t believe it was best film or best director worthy…
Up….screw up, its only because the name Disney is associated with it. Disney is too big and powerful for its own good, and is poisoning us. I just love the south park episode making fun of Disney. The ignorance of a child, I loved Disney, now I dry heave every time I hear the name Disney.
That’s another great point, it only received technical nods…..very insulting considering what Star Trek stands for and the vision it offers. The academy board should be ashamed of itself, but I would imagine few people who live or work in hollywood have a conscience. Proud to be Canadian…what does that have to do with it you ask? Nothing…everything.
It wasn’t a snub. There isn’t a single alternate universe, even one where Spock sports a goatee, where Spock would dry hump Uhura on a transporter pad. Why would the members of the Academy want to reward writing that sullies the legacy of TOS?
For the Academy Awards is not good to have 3 science fiction movies. So ST is out.
Whether Star Trek “deserved” the nomination from a crowd that nominated a computer cartoon in TWO best picture categories, i.e., best picture AND best animated feature, seems like the less interesting question to ask.
So to those who might defend the academy while saying Star Trek was just not that good — and UP was? Good enough for TWO best pic nominations?
Yeah, they should follow an explosive clip from The Hurt Locker with a clip of the talking dogs from UP so the audience can get a feel of how tough the competition is this year.
I don’t get it, what is the big deal about the Academy (Oscars) supposed to be? They soiled their own legitimacy with blatant prejudice a long time ago, and save only a few, many of the films chosen for awards have not been widely applauded by consumers. Exactly who (which I could italicize) is supposed to benefit from these Oscars? As I see it, only a few among circles of internal politics, otherwise they are completely worthless (unless the Oscars are enjoyed merely for entertainment value. To each their own, I guess).
#105
And you, P, seem astoundingly ready to discount that the majority of academy members simply have an opinion that differs from yours.
Your mention of back-door politics hints that you believe there’s some cabal that’s actively sabotaging Trek noms for the 2009 movie. I’d love to hear your list of suspects for their leader.
#114
Make that #106 instead of #105
RE: #46 – I agree with your assessment, Marvin, especially regarding Sharlto Copley. He gave one heck of a performance that deserved a nomination.
I only disagree with your comments on Star Trek; I didn’t find it as enjoyable as you did, though clearly many did.
Scott B. out.
I’m not sure the vast number of contributors here complaining about the Academy get it that a significant amount of the movie’s crew were Academy members.
It is also (perhaps unintentionally) quite a slam to say that the 4 noms that 2009’s ST crew got are not “important” enough to bother tuning-in and offer support.
i got a great idea guys for the sequel, bob, listen up, this’ll get ya an award for sure
Ok ok, here it is, the Enterprise warps into the poverty sector, an area of space consisting of slum planets and crime kids. Kirk and co beam down and find a wandering black alien kid (no offense to black alien kids intended). Nurse Chapel being Christian and all (possible character development for Nurse Chapel) takes a liking to this black alien kid and things he might make a pro fizbin player (definite action sequences could ensue). They beam this kid up to the Enterprise and they have thanksgiving replicator dinner around the briefing room table.
This alien kid attempts to run away and find his mommy, but Nurse Chapel convinces Kirk to send the Enterprise after him. Chapel beams down with her medkit and there’ a couple of other tough looking black alien kids lounging around. The start taunting her, and as she walks back to the beam up spot, turns around as one of them yells out b*tch to her. She then turns around, and threatens them with a hidden phaser in her medkit (more character development showing her strong willed nature). She then walks off and finds her adopted kid. She takes him back to the Enterprise and then enrolls him in Starfleet academy, where a fizbin coach has taken interest in him and promises a great future. The movie could wrap up with them walking on the grounds of Starfleet Academy, and Chapel threatens that if he should get a lady, no matter species, laid, she would warp from 10 systems away and caught off his 5 different private parts in his sleep. She then goes into her shuttle. The adopted kid comes up and knocks on the window and she rolls it down. He then makes her give him a good bye hug. The movie ends with real footage of the adopted kid being traded in the International Fizbin league and then go into credits.
Call me Bob when Paramount gives you the green light, I’ll take 20% of whatever you make :)
101-
What racial insults are you referring to?
I am not saying it isn’t there.
I am just curious because I seem to have missed it.
With the exception of DS9’s context specific “Far Beyond the Stars,” I can’t recall any human in the Star Trek universe disparaging other humans on the basis of race. It is one of the scared cows they just don’t touch. There’s plenty of bigoted attitudes towards aliens that one might interpret as “racist” though.
ST09 was a fun film and I liked it, but geez … a snub? I don’t think we need our tinfoil hats and secret handshakes, here. It’s just that there were a LOT of movies better than ST09 last year. It was a pretty good movie year; let’s be thankful for that.
i am so sick of trolls like Ross
did you even look at the links above, this isn’t some off the wall thing just for trek fans, people in the media are talking about the ‘trek snub’ and the weird inclusion of ‘blind side’
I was going to be ok with trek not getting a nod until i saw they gave one to blind side. Talk about a thin movie full of stereotypes. I mean if it was the above list but 500 Days of Summer or something else worthy, sure, but that Bullock movie, puleez
103 -
I’m sorry, but if you’ve only seen one of the nominated films, the failure is on your part. If you haven’t seen Avatar, District 9, The Hurt Locker, or Inglourious Basterds, I can only conclude that you don’t like movies, or you have extremely narrow tastes.
What would the Best Picture nominations look like if the public voted? Transformers 2 and New Moon would be in the running.
Despite the Academy’s problems, I’ll put more stock in their judgment than the “average moviegoer” who refuses to watch movies made before he was born and has a new “all-time favorite” every three months.
Every year there are “snubs.” The “snub” wasn’t invented in 2009 for Star Trek. But this year Star Trek happens to be the lucky recipient of the annual AMPAS groupthink brainfart award as the movie whose best awardable features went ignored.
I don’t think Star Trek should win Best Picture, but it was better than District 9 (though that was excellent). District 9 devolved into generic action sci-fi in it’s final act. Can’t comment on Blind Side since I didn’t see it.
In my heart, I wish Star Trek would have made the list; it would’ve been such a coup. But no matter how good a lot of us thought it was, the preferential system of ballot counting in the Academy would’ve effectively killed Trek’s chances anyway. Take the time to read the nitty-gritty of how the ballots are counted,
Link – Revealed: How Oscar nominee ballots are counted
and then re-assess Trek’s chances of getting in. It wasn’t very good from the start. :(
i didn’t expect trek to win best film, but i really think it was good enough for a nomination, it was by far better then about half of the films on their list
Needless to say the 2010 Academy Awards are a complete write off.
Makes me wonder if its the same people who snubbed The Dark Knight for best picture. Basically thinking that common sense is punishable by life in prison.
We all know who is going to win. Avatar simply because it’s James Cameron and everyone loves James Cameron. Star Trek had an okay storyline, but it was told so very well. In the end it’s all political
The Academy expanded the Best Picture nominees from five to then because of the reaction they got from not nominating ‘The Dark Knight,’ so I find it odd that they chose not to nominate this year’s most highly-acclaimed live action nationwide release. It’s almost as though they expanded the number of nominees all for nothing. Who the hell is running the Academy, NBC?
And what is it with the Academy’s sudden need to nominate movies that have received largely mixed critical reaction? Last year, they nominated ‘The Reader,’ this year it’s ‘The Blind Side.’ I know the only reason ‘The Reader’ was nominated is because two of its producers (Sydney Pollack and Anthony Minghella) died earlier in the year, but I don’t understand the need to nominate ‘The Blind Side.’ I think they just wanted to have one that was out of left field, so they chose the aptly-named ‘Blind Side.’
Of course, the Oscars are renowned for nominating movies as Best Picture that they don’t really deserve it (’The Reader,’ ‘Babel,’ ‘Seabiscuit,’ ‘Moulin Rouge,’ ‘Sixth Sense,’ ‘Titanic,’ etc.), so I guess nominating something like ‘Blind Side’ is not out of the ordinary. But the thought that ‘Blind Side’ may have bumped ‘Trek’ out of the Best Picture category kind of ticks me off. Oh, and the pointless decision to nominate ‘Up’ as both Best Animated Feature (where it will likely win) and Best Picture (where it stands zero chance of winning) also pisses me off. “Hey, we have ten nominees now, let’s waste one of them!” Nice job, Academy.
Meh. Star Trek was fun and a very good movie, but it isn’t what I would consider “Best Picture” fare. The plot was sort of hokey and unoriginal, to be honest, and while as Star Trek fans, we’re all hugely into it, it just wasn’t dramatically and thematically as good as many of the movies on the list.
I will say that Inglorious Bastards was a bit of a surprise. I think Avatar and The Hurt Locker are the main contenders though.
131. Lendorien
Not sure how ‘Basterds’ getting a Best Picture nomination is a surprise to you since it was pretty much guaranteed to get one. The only movies on the list that can qualify as surprises are ‘Blind Side’ and ‘District 9.’ The former was never really expected to be nominated, while the latter was a possibility but a long shot, much like ‘Trek.’ ‘Up’ being nominated as both Best Picture and Best Animated Feature was also a surprise.
131. Lendorien
Having said the above, I agree, the race is definitely between ‘Avatar’ and ‘The Hurt Locker.’ ‘Up in the Air’ is kind of the odd-man out, while the others have a zero percent chance of winning. They’re pretty much there to give the illusion that they were seriously considered. :-P
Addendum to 133 — “Odd-man out” was not the right choice to describe ‘Up in the Air.’ What I was trying to say is that the battle will be between ‘Avatar,’ ‘Hurt Locker,’ and ‘Up in the Air,’ with the latter the least likely of the three to win. ‘Avatar’ and ‘Hurt Locker’ are definitely the front-runners.
Agree with those who say Star Trek was not snubbed, but appreciate so much those who feel that way on our behalf.
May we all live long and prosper
If Avatar wins, I’m rioting!
Star Trek was not snubbed. Stop being such babies!
Do you people even have the remotest idea of how Hollywood operates?
Do you realize who it is that actually votes on the nominations for the Oscars?
Well, it ain’t the general public, Rotten Tomatoes, et al, but people inside the industry who are actually in the business of making, directing and starring in the very movies you watch, complain, groan, bitch, moan and continually wring yourselves over. And they ain’t gonna lose any sleep or overpriced real estate if you either boycott them or the Oscars.
God.
Hooray for Hollywood.
For the record…
I caught JJ’s Star Trek on a friend’s DVD recently.
First, my eyes are still recovering from the lens flares.
Second, nice opening with Chris H. as George Kirk. Now, THAT was James T. Kirk in any reality. Too bad he didn’t get the role. But…eh.
After that…
It’s a miracle Lucas hasn’t sued.
Pine’s is really Anakin Skywalker.
Avatar deserves the Oscar nom, if not the ultimate win.
If Star Trek XI did get the nomination would it have pissed off the hard core Trek fans?
Some mentioned before. It’s a great popcorn movie. Good to watch when you want to watch a fun movie. But story wise it wasn’t better then a movie like District 9. That movie had much more of a story. ST09 was more about high speed action and good SFX. Nothing more.
In terms of telling a story that makes everybody care, The Blind Side is a better film. Star Trek told a story that made everybody interested, and made some people care. I loved both films, I’m just calling it as I see it. Let’s hope the next Trek film makes everybody care.
A NOTE TO MR. ORCI: Sir, I think it’d be a good idea to go for something with the emotional impact of, say, TNG’s “The Drumhead.” That’s a universal story. Another fine example of a story that reaches all is “The Visitor,” second episode of season four of DS9. Now, granted, ST12 will be a summer movie, so it will need a fair amount of action, but that doesn’t mean it can’t have a very powerful story to go along with it. Witness “In the Pale Moonlight,” of DS9. Witness “The City on the Edge of Forever,” from TOS. Witness DS9’s “Homefront” and “Paradise Lost” two-parter. This is why Star Wars succeeds: it too is a universal story. ST12, if given one, would, in my opinion, almost certainly be in the running for Best Picture next year, maybe for both Oscars and the Academy Awards.
Very true. The movie’s story might have had more value, had better judgement been used during the editing phase, they never should have done that to save time. Remember James Cameron’s 3 hour Titanic movie? Avatar, another Cameron movie just beat it. They’re both the best grossing movies of all time, even having beaten Star Wars.
When making a movie, you either do it right and do so to reach for excellence, or you make a movie to make a movie. Star Trek is a movie made, to make a movie.
Yeah, the Blind Side is the one movie on that list that surprises me. It’s a crowd pleasing, cliche-riddled schlock-fest. Kind of like Avatar but without the amazing 10-foot tall smurfs! At least I can justify Avatar though. I don’t know if Star Trek should’ve taken its place but The Blind Side? Really?
They should of never done an alternate timeline! Either it should of been a clean slate, reboot. Or connected to the Prime timeline. Either way the final decision of an alternate timeline is and was a stupid idea! i
in the end of the day it has done nothing different than past Trek movies
Yet the box office speaks for itself regarding movie
#146. “in the end of the day it has done nothing different than past Trek movies”
Except destroy the concept of cadence.
I watched UP, I thought it stunk. I even fell asleep at one point. It was even depressing. (spoiler!) The man’s wife dies, he loses his house and land. His wife never got to do what she wanted.
Avatar was great CGI but just an OK story. Tree hugger movie to me.
With the logic that prevented Star Trek from being nominated for best picture, I’m surprised that they didn’t nominate Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen or G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra for best picture.
I don’t like Film Academies or their award ceremonies; I speak as someone who’d say this even if Star Trek had won everything under the Sun.
First, despite what we’re led to believe, there’s no such thing as ‘objective classification’, e.g., the ‘best picture of 2010,’ simpliciter. We wouldn’t have a panel of ice cream ‘experts’ tell us what is the best ice cream every year and treat it with respect and authority. Nor should we do so for films. We all know what we like. And that is all there is to it. To suggest that, say, Slumdog Millionaire is a great film, the best film of the year, and that you should like it is as ludicrous as suggesting that vanilla ice cream is the best flavour of ice cream; and if you happen not to like it at all, or as much as I, the ice cream god, then you’re wrong – and objectively wrong.
Second, these academies, panels, and ceremonies tend to just be a bunch of overpaid snobs who spend several hours caressing each others egos whilst sipping expensive champagne. Third, I don’t think much of the talent out there. Of course there are some (few and far between) talented actors and directors out there. But I would suggest that the talent today is nowhere near the level it was, say, 30-50 years ago; I say this as a relative young-person who encourages others to have a look at the cinema from this period. Take the modern phenomenon of Avatar. You could capture the essence of this ‘story’ on the back of a used stamp. Sure, the graphics and effects are very impressive. But I want to see a great story unfold with great actors telling it. I don’t want to have the experience of, essentially, watching someone else play a really good computer game. Avatar is really just an improved version of the Star Wars prequels and still leaves much to be desired.
131: “The plot was sort of hokey and unoriginal,”
An apt description of AVATAR.
Films like Titanic and Avatar win because the people voting get swept up in the current of groupthink that surrounds epic sized pictures when most of what they have going for them is sheer size. But its the job of professionals not to get carried away by a single aspect, like technical achievements, to the exclusion of all others.
Avatar was a really good movie, and they ought to make a special category for films like Avatar, to award best technical achievements, and rather than giving that award out automatically every year, to give it out only when a film comes along like Avatar which truly deserves it. Because something like Avatar stands alone for what it did, and Cameron deserves credit for another startling achievement in technical wizardry. And if they made an award like that I’m sure James Cameron would be taking it home for every year it was awarded.
But a film is more than just that. And as much as I liked Avatar, I didn’t think it was great in any other way. It was technically great, and average everywhere else, including the music. I thought Giacchino did a much better job for Star Trek than Horner did for Avatar.
And I’m not saying this because Bob comes in and reads this stuff or because I want to be Bob’s buddy, because it took me a couple of viewings to really come around to liking Star Trek, and once I got over the shock of not seeing on the screen what I would’ve done, I started to realize how good what they gave us really was. I think the challenges that Bob and Alex faced with bringing not just Star Trek but the ORIGINAL crew back in a way that both respected canon and made the future of these beloved characters unwritten, and in such an entertaining way, was a rewardable achievement. And I would’ve liked to see them get a nomination because after a string of Enterprise D sized disasters at the box office, it would’ve been SO easy to screw ST.09 up. Instead, they produced a story as noteworthy as anything up for nomination this year.
Perhaps the absence of a pack of funny talking dogs in the movie hurt their credibility with the AMPAS crowd, who nominated UP for BOTH best animated feature AND best picture.
I’m surprised people are surprised. Awards like this are more about a party than you know… awards.
Invictus got snubbed! I’m angry too.
#121: “i am so sick of trolls like Ross”
I’m a “troll” because I discount a conspiracy theory? Since Anthony seems to be allowing personal attacks today, I’m tempted to respond in kind but you know what? I think it’s better just to highlight your own poor behavior and let it stand at that.
District 9 was an interesting premise that completely fell apart in it’s final 3rd with pointless gore. It certainly deserves some measure of recognition, but an Oscar is overkill. Not that it will win, anyway. They might as well have left it at 5 nominees because the additional 5 are easy to spot and we all know they won’t win.
Pure and simple, IMHO, Trek was not a good enough movie to earn a best picture nomination.
117. Disinvited
You’re puttin a lot of spin on that ball. First, if you read my post, I said I didn’t care whether Star Trek was nominated for, or even won, any awards. The awards, ultimately, mean nothing, apart from someone having something to put on their mantle. Plenty of people have won awards in the past, and I didn’t agree with those choices either. Am I upset because the voters opinion differed from mine? Hardly, and I could care less… apart from the fact that I acknowledge everyone, including Jeyl and you, are entitled to think whatever you want. Jeyl said the Trek characters were a “bunch of cheating arrogant a**holes,” and he’s entitled to make such a sweeping statement, eh? Well, I think there are many, many other people who share my opinion, and I haven’t spoken to every one of them, nor have I ever ran a petition. We don’t think the characters were a bunch of etc. etc., and we’re entitled to think that.
Yes, my opinion is mine, period, and I always own up to it. If my opinion happens to fall in line with many others, well, yay for me. If not, then I’ll play with my opinion in my own room.
I happen to agree that UP need not have been nominated for both best picture and best animated. What, specifically, is the purpose behind that? If it wins best animated, it is certainly deserving, since it is animated, after all.
As for back-door politics, I am an admitted cynic. I believe there is nothing that is exactly what it appears to be. That’s just me, and I’m owning it. Does everyone think there are back-door politics at hand? I’m guessing you don’t think so, but it doesn’t change my mind. I live in RI where there isn’t a single thing in government that doesn’t go on behind closed doors, so, perhaps, I’m a bit conditioned. But if it happens in something as important as government, I’m sure it can happen a lot easier in something as frivolous as the Academy Awards, and even the movie industry, in general.
But please don’t take anything I say too seriously. I’m not all that serious about it, I’m just playing along. In the absence of Star Trek, I wouldn’t mind seeing District 9 get the vote, but I don’t expect it to, do you? My money is on The Hurt Locker.
Bob Orci looking forward to what you have to give us in 2012!
ST-2009 was a big movie event of the year, whatever you may think of it.
It got so many people excited and enraptured.
That would be my criteria for popular Best Picture Nom. Yes, think it should have been included.
I love Avatar more and will root for it to win. But ST deserved a nod.
#158
As long as you admit to not being serious about it, I’m sort of really interested in your nominations for Cabal leader in depriving Trek of nominations, i.e. someone that hates it so much they’d spend real money to undermine it.
The only one that comes to my mind is Les Moonves as he has been on record in the past as saying he doesn’t understand it and that he hates it, at least with respect to televised Trek. How odd that circumstances turned so that he became essentially the head of STAR TREK?
I can admit over the decades that I’ve felt there were factions in old Paramount that didn’t understand ST and were actively trying to undermine it in a misguided attempt to divert funds to their pet projects, but this is NuParamount and I don’t sense anything like that there.
I suppose my point is to acknowledge that toying with conspiracy theories can be fun as long as you don’t take it TOO seriously.
it’s funny reading posts here about how trek shouldn’t have been nominated because it was unoriginal, yet they’re ok with avatar being nominated. isn’t avatar far more unoriginal, i mean, take away the 3d and CGI and nothing’s there. Trek was done much better overall then avatar, trek had far superior editing, sound, visuals, acting, story, music (yeah, why wasn’t giaccino nominated for best soundtrack for trek, trek was better then up). I think hollywood is just seeing all the glamour of Avatar because it’s a record breaker, but I’m interested to see what the true numbers are lke when the calculate ticket prices and take into effect they’re more expensive
#162: I think there’s a lot of conflation going on (in the usual way) between “originality” and mere novelty. Avatar and Trek fail pretty much equally on novelty … they’re both made of 100% post-consumer recycled materials (with earthy brown flecks added to help market it to the white-collar types).
The difference, I think, isn’t the flashy expensive 3-D visuals (though I find it kooky and delightful that we have multiple 3-D movies up for Best Picture) but just that Avatar is _heartfelt._ It feels like Cameron _means_ it, really means it in that childlike, I-scribbled-this-out-in-my-notebook-in-social-studies way. It has a sense of wonder that stems from its sincerity, its willingness to have a stance on something despite being aimed at broad audience, and its balls-to-the-wall enthusiasm. Avatar is old hat on paper, but on the screen it’s genuine and specific to James Cameron. Its language is cliche, but its substance is real emotion from the filmmaker.
ST09, by contrast, is … well, there’s no point to ticking down the list of opposites. The short version is that it’s cynical, safe, marketable and about as genuine as the “butter” on the cineplex popcorn. It’s a fun ride. Only just.
163: “The difference, I think, isn’t the flashy expensive 3-D visuals (though I find it kooky and delightful that we have multiple 3-D movies up for Best Picture) but just that Avatar is _heartfelt._ It feels like Cameron _means_ it, really means it in that childlike, I-scribbled-this-out-in-my-notebook-in-social-studies way.”
And when you are 16 years old and in social studies, that’s sweet, but when you have as much gray hair as Cameron has and especially when you are known for being a prick to the people who work for you, it’s cornball dementia. Titanic was the same way. So was Abyss.
But at least now we know that you CAN be charitable.
When someone complains that Star Trek is merely a fun popcorn movie, I think that’s so funny. That’s like a healthy person hiring a nurse to wipe your butt, and then complaining about how lazy she is for not wiping your butt.
Volumes have been written about DaVinci’s Mona Lisa. And that’s just a static picture in a frame that doesn’t change! Problem is people get out of a piece of art what they put into it.
Tell me, what does a painting “do” for anyone? Answer: NOTHING! If you are not reflecting on what’s in the picture, i.e., taking an active role in your experience of the painting, then to you it’s just some weird picture hanging on the wall so what’s the big fuss?
But just because YOU can’t write a paragraph about it doesn’t mean someone else can’t look at the same thing and come out with a book!
So Star Trek was much better for me than Avatar exactly because the visuals of Avatar were not enough to mask the poverty stricken Blue Pocahantas story that I’ve actually seen done better (Pocahantas, The New World) without all the expensive visuals and three years of hype, while Star Trek gave us an intelligent origin story with such a subtle take on the cosmic rebirth theme that the people who came out rasping about how much damned fun! }:( it was didn’t seem to notice anything deeper at all.
The world now knows what ST really is. Not just parody jokes anymore. My youth group(inner city thugs) loved it. Just keep it real and true to TOS and who gives a bleepidy bleep about the oscars.
At all those saying Up can’t be both the Best Animated Picture and Best Picture.
I hate this. I hate this so much, because it somehow indicates that animated movies and non-animated movies are fundamentally different. Amongst animation fans the very idea of the “Best Animated Picture” is considered an offense because it segregates the two (live-action and animated) arbitrarily. There’s no “Best Live-Action Picture” after all. Or “Best Science Fiction Picture.”
My guess is the Academy is trying to throw two bones – one to the sci-fi crowd with District 9 (I imagine Avatar would have been nominated anyway, given Cameron’s popularity in Hollywood) and one to the animated crowd with Up.
For the record, I don’t think Up was the best picture of the year (and I think Coraline was the better film). But don’t suggest that somehow Up can’t be both the best animated film and the best film. That’s just narrow-minded.
“. . . while Star Trek gave us an intelligent origin story with such a subtle take on the cosmic rebirth theme that the people who came out rasping about how much damned fun! }:( it was didn’t seem to notice anything deeper at all.”
Maybe that’s because there was nothing deeper. At all.
Mr. Ross, as usual–word.
I would agree that Sandra Bullock’s popularity in the industry probably plays a bigger role in her film being nominated than the product itself; but to say that Star Trek in any way shape or form deserves to be on a list of the best films of the year when there was no dirth of worthwhile contenders blows my mind. It was a well executed crowd pleasing film. Was there anything particularly novel in the way they told the story, the story itself, or how it changed one’s perception of what a movie is? No F’ing way!!! Contrast that with Cameron who at least reaffirms if not reinvents the idea of what can be commercially succesful, brings in new technologies and showcases them in a novel way where the new technology creates an immersive reality rather than eye candy effects. Okay, between that, the marketting effort, the $$$ signs that film implies for future budgets, and how many people voting were on salary for that film I can understand why Avatar is there. But with films like Hurt Locker there what business does Star Trek have being in the oscar race? For special effects, maybe; for sound and set designs, okay; but as a complete piece it’s not up there. Why insult the film by implying that it was trying to be an Oscar worthy film. Let the next film from script to inception live up to that dream if this team thinks they can deliver it.
“But don’t suggest that somehow Up can’t be both the best animated film and the best film. That’s just narrow-minded.”
It’s not narrow minded it’s logical. If you have a problem categorizing things go take it up with your local philosopher. If an animated film is equal to or better than the competition for a given year then you can call it the best picture. Unfortunately this isn’t a pushover year for the competition so that something like UP actually deserves nominations in TWO best picture categories.
So no one is saying an animated film CAN’T be the best picture of the year, but when you actually have a category especially FOR animated feature films — and UP IS an animated feature film that fits that category perfectly — then it makes as much sense to nominate a cartoon for best picture as it does to nominate a documentary for best picture (When IT TOO has its own category). So the dual nomination of UP is about as fair and sensible as Dr. McCoy on a cordrazine overdose, especially when that nomination bumps films like Star Trek or Invictus.
“My guess is the Academy is trying to throw two bones – one to the sci-fi crowd with District 9 (I imagine Avatar would have been nominated anyway, given Cameron’s popularity in Hollywood) and one to the animated crowd with Up.”
And throwing bones around to keep the dogs off your haunches is politics.
That’s something other than giving awards based on quality. They created the categories and they refuse to live by them at the same time that they expect people to trust their judgment when they are not making those judgments on the quality of the films.
And there’s a good reason for having a best animated feature award. And they can show that reason by following the sniper scene from The Hurt Locker with the Buddy-the-talking dog-spots-a-squirrel! scene from UP.
Or maybe it’s better to just put it in language AMPAS can understand:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ueZ6tvqhk8U
167: “Maybe that’s because there was nothing deeper. At all.”
And maybe that’s because the shallowness you perceive in Star Trek is really your own and you are just not capable of looking deeper into things at all.
But hey, nobody can make you think or force you to enjoy things and far be it from me to suggest otherwise. But it does seem there’s a few people who are determined to turn that Onion piece from parody to prophecy.
We got a few folks who insist on going to the party and saying: “This party SUCKS! This party SUCKS!” while the other people are apparently too stupid to know they shouldn’t be having a good time.
What’s even funnier is that the complainers keep going to the party day after day to let people know how bad the party is.
If I wanted to do the same thing I’d go to an Avatar blog and bitch about the film’s flaws every day. But I don’t see where that’s attractive.
“And maybe that’s because the shallowness you perceive in Star Trek is really your own and you are just not capable of looking deeper into things at all.”
LOL. Yeah, whatever. I’ve been a fan of speculative fiction, sir, for most of my life, with tastes that have ranged from Heinlien, Vonnegut, Niven, Silverberg, LeGuin and much that lies in between. Somehow, I suspect my sensibilities are equal to keeping up with the subtleties of a summer commercial blockbuster. (In other words, in terms of your own classy metaphor, I’m well-accustomed to wiping my own ass.) Unfortunately, for all of its sense of fun and adventure, in terms of drama and thematic complexity Trek ‘09 not only falls far short of just about every film that made the Academy list, but many of the best entries in the Trek franchise (and even the last two New Voyages episodes, for God’s sake) done on a fraction of the budget and resources, as well as sorely lacking Avatar’s sense–whatever its own narrative deficiencies–of genuine awe and wonder. A successful popcorn flick may be great for the resumes of those involved in the production, as well as the Viacom shareholders, but it’s a far cry from what I was hoping for when Abrams Trek was announced back in 2006–and saying so is certainly no less appropriate for this particular forum topic than “We wuz robbed!”
#164: “But at least now we know that you CAN be charitable.”
I’m a science-fiction and fantasy fan, Mr. Duncan. I will gush lovingly and in detail about the things that have satisfied, enriched and impressed me. Avatar qualifies in the sum of it’s (admittedly shopworn) parts. The whole satisfies, so the nits are left unpicked.
Though memories seem short around here when it comes to positives, I also have _dozens_ of kind things to say about ST09 … its brisk pacing, that excellent opening sequence, the parts where the comedy worked, the parts where the action zipped. I defend it on many grounds where others complain … the Spock/Uhura ’shipping, Keenser, the brewery set, the music in the car, etc … and as I have said repeatedly, I think it’s a good movie and a fun movie. But since I don’t praise it _unconditionally,_ a certain species of fan decides that I’m a hater or complainer or whatever they’re calling that mythical boogeyman this week. Such is fandom; this is not news :) I went through the same thing with TNG and that was stretched out over a much longer time.
“But just because YOU can’t write a paragraph about it doesn’t mean someone else can’t look at the same thing and come out with a book!”
I think we’ve safely established that _all_ of us here can write a good many paragraphs about ST09. ;)
172: “I’ve been a fan of speculative fiction, sir, for most of my life, with tastes that have ranged from Heinlien, Vonnegut, Niven, Silverberg, LeGuin and much that lies in between. Somehow, I suspect my sensibilities are equal to keeping up with the subtleties of a summer commercial blockbuster.”
Bravo to you. But how is that relevant to Star Trek? You sound like a SF snob who came out of the theater with the same attitude that you took in, and who is getting no more and no less than his expectations.
“Unfortunately, for all of its sense of fun and adventure, in terms of drama and thematic complexity Trek ‘09 not only falls far short of just about every film that made the Academy list,”
Okay, show me the data. Did you create a spreadsheet of comparative thematic features among all the nominees that shows Star Trek’s position regarding those features relative to all the other contenders, and listed in descending order from “most complex” to “least complex,” with Star Trek near or at the bottom?
Or was the mere assertion that Star Trek was inferior intended to cause retreat?
173: “But since I don’t praise it _unconditionally,_ a certain species of fan decides that I’m a hater…”
You’re no hater, St. John. And if I blamed you for enjoying a little innocent mayhem I’d be a hypocrite.
“Bravo to you. But how is that relevant to Star Trek? You sound like a SF snob who came out of the theater with the same attitude that you took in, and who is getting no more and no less than his expectations.”
Um, no.
Let’s be clear on this, if nothing else: I love Star Trek, and have loved it since getting addicated as a teenager to the syndicated reruns of TOS back in the Seventies. In that pre-cable era the closest station to us that broadcast them was KCOP-13 out of Los Angeles, and perversely our only set that would receive them at all in our home in Huntington Beach was an old black-and-white clunker in our garage that could occasionally pull the signal in through the static. I spent long hours out there bending that TV’s antenna every whichway trying to get my fix (when I should have been studying, natch). . . that’s how much Trek meant to me back then. And still does.
And in all honesty I had every expectation that I would like the Abrams film. If you look back through this site’s forums, dmduncan, you’ll see that unlike posters such as “Stanky McFibbish” I had no problem with the original crew roles being recast, was not particularly hung-up on issues of canon (or even consistency), and fully recognized that the entire approach to the franchise needed to be rethought for modern audiences. I liked the work of J.J. Abrams (especially Lost) that I had seen, and of course Leonard Nimoy’s endorsement, which he hadn’t been shy about withholding in the past, was very encouraging indeed. With the exception of J.J. Abrams and his “Supreme Court,” I doubt that anyone was more excited by the film being greenlit than I was.
So I was very hopeful, and came to this site just about every day, seeking out the latest news and rumors about what I could expect. (Something I most assuredly didn’t do, btw, with respect to Avatar. In fact, up until a couple of months ago, I knew virtually nothing about that film, including the plot, aside from stories about its record budget. So much for hype.) Even as the first images were released on this site and I found myself less than thrilled with the look of the new Enterprise and other aspects of the production, I was still in line for the very first screening (again, something that didn’t happen with Cameron’s film), fully expecting to have a great time. Unfortunately, that didn’t happen–even in a year of some profound personal and professional disappointments, Trek ‘09 stands out. I won’t go into the reasons why; you’ve heard them already, and if you have a great time watching the film, who am I to want to take that from you by convincing you that it sucked? I don’t much like killjoys myself. But credit me with this much: far from going in as a snob with low expectations, in fact wanted very much to like this film, touted as the rebirth of a dream that has meant so much to me through these last decades of my life.
#163 & 173, god love you S. John Ross. As usual _exactly_!
#172. Agreed. Anyone can find meaning in anything if they look hard enough.
The little old devout Catholic woman who sees Jesus in a corn chip, when no one else does, proves absolutely nothing about Jesus, or the corn chip. Further, it proves nothing about the people who failed to see the divine image, nor those who saw a hippopotamus instead, and especially offers no proof about the devotee who saw Jesus in the first place, nor any other’s who may eventually see it too.
Where you been anyway Michael? This place is a little one-sided without you! ;-)
Red–
You didn’t respond to my earlier proposal of marriage, so I went off and sulked. Now I feel like eating corn chips for some reason. ;-)
176: “if you have a great time watching the film, who am I to want to take that from you by convincing you that it sucked?”
And of course you can’t do that. I actually DIDN’T like the movie first time I saw it. It was only during subsequent viewings that I saw more and more and began to understand it in a way that I totally missed the first time, and the record of my comments on this site will reflect that change of heart. I don’t know what your case was like, but for me I didn’t start to enjoy it until I was able to let go of my own preconceptions of what I wanted to see. I ruined my enjoyment of the film, and I repaired my enjoyment of the film.
What I can thank Bob, Alex, and JJ for within that process is giving me objective, identifiable aspects of the movie to remodel my opinion around and to see my own narrow mindedness as the real cause of my initial displeasure with the film which took me three viewings to understand.
It hasn’t been since I was 12 years old when a piece of Star Trek challenged me to think so much about what I had seen, and this film did that. So I’m thankful for ST.09. I’m grateful when a film challenges me to think about things for the first time or in a different way.
Nor is it an issue of seeing what I want to. It’s an issue of seeing what’s there to be seen. And I’ve pointed those things out specifically.
But EVEN IF I am merely making things up, “seeing what I want to,” so what? I’ll take the new neural linkages that occur as a result of that HOWEVER I can get them rather than being a lump of flesh wheel barrowed in for two hours of passively absorbed entertainment with the only takeaway lesson being some absurd explanation involving Jesus and cornchips as to why some people noted features others missed.
If you didn’t see what I saw, just say so, and don’t say “it’s just not there.” Because when you say it’s not there you are making a demonstrably false claim. I mean, if I have to write four pages mapping out all the plot features and dialogue which indicate ST.09 is a modern cosmic rebirth story, then I’ve sort of proved the point that there’s more there than meets the eye which sees pure shallow fun alone.
And rest assured that I can do that. And maybe someday I’ll put all of it in a nice long essay with lots and lots of precisely identified examples directly from the film itself. But not today.
#175: “You’re no hater, St. John.”
And I’m no saint, I promise. The S. stands for Samuel :)
#177: “Anyone can find meaning in anything if they look hard enough.”
And it’s what Star Trek fans are going to do no matter what. :) I mean, Trek fandom can take a single background character – some blue-skirted lieutenant that walks in the background for 6 seconds – and explore her epic saga in a 750,000 word fanfic that spans half the galaxy, weaves her into the crucial backstory for ten other episodes, explains every pet inconsistency the author’s ever had a second thought about and ultimately makes her responsible for saving the Federation ;)
That kind of investment, that level of imbuing every detail with meaning it never had to begin with, is something that’s included free* with every official Star Trek logo stamped on something.
- – - – - – - – - -
* Plus or minus a g’jillion-dollar franchise and relevant licensing fees.
180: “Trek fandom can take a single background character – some blue-skirted lieutenant that walks in the background for 6 seconds – and explore her epic saga in a 750,000 word fanfic that spans half the galaxy, weaves her into the crucial backstory for ten other episodes, explains every pet inconsistency the author’s ever had a second thought about and ultimately makes her responsible for saving the Federation ;)”
That’s true, but that’s also not what I am doing. And I’m actually self aware enough to tell the difference between seeing “Elvis” on a slice of toast and seeing an actual picture of Elvis on the side of an album cover. (Of course leaving out the possibility of commercially available Elvis-image emblazoning toasters).
That’s called pareidolia. I usually know what it is, when something clearly is and is not a case of pareidolia, and even cases where it isn’t clear either way and more data is needed.
So I find the victim-of-apophenia explanation one of the more amusing that I’ve read lately.
180: “And I’m no saint, I promise. The S. stands for Samuel :)”
Dirty wrestler’s need ironic stage names. But if you insist on your real name…I suppose…
And by the way, because I cringe every time I get close to nearly typing a winky eyed smiley face, I usually don’t post them.
Star Trek dident dident get an oscar nomination? I dont care, im just happy to have it around
#181: “That’s true, but that’s also not what I am doing.”
Alas. I try to think the best of people, though, so I’ll stick to that for the sake of fellowship :)
“And by the way, because I cringe every time I get close to nearly typing a winky eyed smiley face, I usually don’t post them.”
Yar ;)
#178. You proposed marriage!? Really!? I’m flattered, but missed it, where did you do that? I’m sure this is a first for Anthony … and yet another feather for his propaganda cap … “Trekmovie unites fans in love!” LOL
And for the record, I make it a habit to eat as many corn chip acheiropoieta as possible. ;-)
#180. I think your example is not entirely what I meant, though I don’t think you missed the point. But the association of that woman in blue standing behind Uhura as foreshadowing her relationship with Spock, or say a woman in yellow as an homage to Uhura’s first appearance in 1966, might be a little closer borrowing your example. It’s the idea that every single thing in the film_means_something, intentionally implied by the writer’s.
I used a religious example, because it seems like the most applicable example as the bible has had more ancillary works written about it and analyzing it, than any other publication. And there are more disparate opinions about what it means than any Star Trek debate, though I suspect Star Trek comes close ;-) Wars have been fought over the interpretation of single passages. But who is right? Simply put, no one may ever know the original writer’s intent. And if their intentions were ever to be known, the great religious minds might find that they are all wrong. Yet volumes have been written which offer incontrovertible evidence about the objective correctness of literally every line of the book from almost as many different perspectives as there are scholars. So who is ultimately correct? Most likely nobody. And since there is no way to prove one interpretation is more correct than another (at least in this life), the whole argument would be moot if not for all the pain and suffering such disputes cause. So everyone picks a side and satisfies themselves that their interpretation is beyond reproach so that they can sleep at night knowing their souls are safe, which means defending their beliefs to the teeth. In the end, as long as their specific beliefs improve their lives without harming others, then so much the better.
Personally, I think the bible is the ultimate self-help book with a lot of good ideas, more than a few bad ideas, and many with clumsy execution. It also makes for some entertaining drama (though in places it is as boring as heck), nice action sequences, good characterizations, a little preachy, but overall a good read, not great.
Then again, The Ten Commandments was nominated for an Oscar. ;-)
#185: “Simply put, no one may ever know the original writer’s intent.”
Of course, with the current situation we get kind of the opposite problem. In most cases, the film screams its intent directly in the face of the viewers, and in any case of suspected subtlety we have one of the writers handy …
I do not doubt for an instant that the writers _intended_ for ST09 to (for one example) to explore some of the themes of parent-child relationships and their effects on our lives. The movie clubs the audience repeatedly over the head with this intent, in a way that I’d feel comfortable describing as clownish. “Hey look! Here’s one of our THEMES! See it? There it was! Here it comes again! Lookit! Lookit! Just like in the movies! Huh-yuk!”
But rather than exploring or engaging with its _intended_ themes, ST09 merely pays them a kind of mocking, parodic lip-service as the comedy-action sequences whiz past … so the question of authorial intent, even when it’s plain for multiple reasons, becomes almost beside the point, scuttled by other factors (possibly entirely seated in the director’s chair; I don’t know).
Best picture? Are you serious? Even Avatar should not have gotten a nod. Sensational special effects do not a good movie make. Come on.
#181
Hmmm…while I generally consider science-fiction something more than what is generally regarded as “art”, I don’t think I entirely partake of it as something that is not art – especially a movie. And if art is a property with which the film is imbued, isn’t it by this very nature somewhat of a subjective experience for each that experiences it?
I know you have said it took you multiple viewings to discern these properties that you are certain are there, but were you claiming that it is now somehow possible to parse art, or is this something you discovered merely in the structure of the words alone that contributed to building what I believe you now regard as a “masterpiece?
i have a propaganda cap? what does it look like?
Was not surprised at what happened to the movie re:Best Picture nom. At least Avatar and District 9 got nominated. And that should be celebrated, because it’s two Sci-Fi movies competing for Best Picture, with one of them possibly winning-something that should have happened with 2001: A Space Odyssey, Star Wars, and E.T. The Extra-Terrestrial, but as we all know, never did. Now, it’s going to happen because Avatar is unavoidable due to it’s big box office gross! And that, my fellow Trekfans, is something to be celebrated despite Star Trek’s being snubbed for a Best Picture Oscar nomination.
Besides, there are other ‘Best Of Year’ awards that Star Trek can get:
*Best Dramatic Presentation (Hugo Awards)
*Best Film Of The Year Award (MTV Movie Awards) plus others in other categories on the show
*Best Film Of The Year (Saturn Awards) plus others in other categories on the show
*Best Film Of The Year (Spacey Awards [Canada's Space: The Imagination Station]) plus others again
*Best Film Of The Year (People’s Choice Awards) plus others
So, it isn’t all bad.
#189, Ha ha, wrong choice of words. Re-reading it I get a picture of Joseph Goebbels wearing some kind of Alpine fedora with huge feathers proudly sticking out of the back. LOL I should have used “PR” instead, which I imagine as another kind of Clark Kent-type fedora with a press card sticking out of the band. ;-)
@166.
You might call it logical, but it’s not. But then again, in my mind, it’s not logical to have a separate category for animated films at all.
Let me put it this way… would you like a separate category of Oscars be created for science fiction and fantasy? No doubt Trek wouldn’t have been snubbed for a nomination in that category, but it would still be patronizing, as if to say, “science fiction films don’t count as ‘real’ films.”
And whoever said the Oscars wasn’t about politics? That’s the whole reason they expanded the list of nominees this year.
#190 “*Best Film Of The Year (People’s Choice Awards)”
The ship has already sailed on that for 2009’s STAR TREK. It didn’t win that or any other People’s Choice award.
Very Upsetting! Come on ! District 9 Over Star Trek and 500 days of Summer. I look foreword to the Academy Awards every year. I will not care to watch it this year. The Academy obviously does not no how to pick them. They seem to be a bunch of 65 year old people who watch the life time channel to much. Star trek broke the mold this year. It was the most entertaining movie of the year by far. It was character driven and it stepped outside the box with great story telling, special effects, and music, and it was about the human spirit which I hope JJ Abrams will keep it about. I have never seen anything like it before. I wonder why the Academy and people like Rodger Ebert are so against Star Trek. They just don’t get it I guess? Oh…Avitar will win this year even I think It’s Hiped up and over rated in my opinion.
#51 MTV awards are rigged. Otherwise New Moon woudn’t make the cut.
I know! Alice in Wonderland got nominated at MTV awards over the likes of Star Trek and Sherlock Holmes
At least Star Trek won one Oscar (for Best Make Up)
Up in the Air, A Serious Man, District 9 and An Education were all shut out.