Was Hurt Locker really the best film of 2009? What would you have chosen for Best Picture?
You can leave an optional "tip" with Mahalo's virtual currency, Mahalo Dollars. If you are asking a difficult question that might require some research, or if you'd like a wide variety of feedback, a higher tip often leads to more answers to your question.
M$9 Answers
Source: http://www.metacritic.com/film/awards/
According to Rotten Tomatoes, The Hurt Locker was reviewed favorably by 97% of critics, putting it in 7th place. Avatar was reviewed favorably by only 82% of critics, meaning it didn't even make the top 100 of 2009.
Sources:
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/avatar/
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/hurt_locker/
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/top/bestofrt_year.php?year=2009
So from a critics perspective, The Hurt Locker certainly seems to be the better film. Avatar has been lauded for its advances in cinematography, but it has been criticized for its lack of an original story. It seemed to rip off an almost unending list of films, and that probably hurt its chances.
Two other reasons Avatar didn't win best picture though:
1. The academy wanted to finally give a woman best picture.
2. Most of the voters in the academy are actors and actresses, and they might be intimidated by the idea of a movie that was entirely CGI winning best picture.
I am glad The Hurt Locker won though, because despite the fact that almost no one went to see it, it was still a fantastic movie. The Oscars shouldn't be a popularity contest, but instead a measure of what really is the best.
You can leave an optional "tip" with Mahalo's virtual currency, Mahalo Dollars. If you are asking a difficult question that might require some research, or if you'd like a wide variety of feedback, a higher tip often leads to more answers to your question.
M$
If I was giving the awards it would be District 9 for best picture hands down.
You can leave an optional "tip" with Mahalo's virtual currency, Mahalo Dollars. If you are asking a difficult question that might require some research, or if you'd like a wide variety of feedback, a higher tip often leads to more answers to your question.
M$
Hurt Locker, although not a bad film, is a pretty typical war film made more dramatic for hollywood effect- not what should have been best picture I don't think.
If not District 9, why not Precious which brought home some hard hitting social realisms and human hardships.
Or Avatar, beautiful to watch and romantic- kind of like a Sci-Fi version of Titanic in some ways (which won everything BUT best film in its year, 1997)
One great thing about the Hurt Locker winning was that it was the first Oscar to date for a female director, just not sure if it really was the Best Picture of the year.
Even watching the previews, Hurt Locker looks entertaining but District 9 is so much more impressive, much more Best Movie material in my mind.
You can leave an optional "tip" with Mahalo's virtual currency, Mahalo Dollars. If you are asking a difficult question that might require some research, or if you'd like a wide variety of feedback, a higher tip often leads to more answers to your question.
M$
You can leave an optional "tip" with Mahalo's virtual currency, Mahalo Dollars. If you are asking a difficult question that might require some research, or if you'd like a wide variety of feedback, a higher tip often leads to more answers to your question.
M$
You can leave an optional "tip" with Mahalo's virtual currency, Mahalo Dollars. If you are asking a difficult question that might require some research, or if you'd like a wide variety of feedback, a higher tip often leads to more answers to your question.
M$
You can leave an optional "tip" with Mahalo's virtual currency, Mahalo Dollars. If you are asking a difficult question that might require some research, or if you'd like a wide variety of feedback, a higher tip often leads to more answers to your question.
M$
The "Best Picture" award is a symbol, a marker of our history and very heavily brings to mind some strong imagery of winners past and the standards they were held to. I think of "Gone With the Wind", "Casablanca", "The Godfather", "Annie Hall", "Rainman", "Schindler's List", etc. These evoke ideas of cinematic regality and enjoyability. Nearly each and every one of the winning predecessors was a movie that moved a culture and embedded itself in our history. Years from now, people will still be watching "Annie Hall" and "The Godfather".
Ten years from now, will anyone remember what "The Hurt Locker" is? I'm calling it now: There's no way.
Very few will ever see the movie, fewer still will own the DVD/BluRay, and it will be swept under Hollywood's rug within two years.
BUT IT WAS CRITICALLY WELL-RECEIVED! That's the argument I hear from so many people who hold this up as the yardstick for the award being deserved. But here's the thing: A movie can be well-made, unoffensive, even somewhat engaging, and that does NOT make it worth of the "Best Picture" title.
But the gravitas of this title has become lost in recent years. Consider the last 7 years. Up until 2004, the "Best Picture" winners had all been movies that people flocked to see, embraced, talked about, and enjoyed--and not because the Hollywood hype machine told them to. Honest-to-goodness word of mouth was all the fuel and momentum these beautiful movies needed to garner appreciation.
But ever since 2004? The hype machine has gotten out of control. That was the year "Million Dollar Baby" won the award. Not a terrible movie, but not one that we all raced to see. Critics liked it well enough. And people who saw it because of its nomination generally had favorable things to say. But did it impact our culture?? NO.
And since then? Let's list the winners: "Crash", "The Departed", "No Country For Old Men", "Slumdog Millionaire", and now "The Hurt Locker". All studio gems that (with the exception of "Slumdog") weren't at the top of anyone's moviegoing list. No one LOVED these movies, until they were told to love them. No one watched these movies until they were told to watch them. And the awards were only won because that's what the press machine told them needed to happen.
Will we remember "Crash" five years from now? I can't even tell you what it's about.
Will we remember "No Country for Old Men" ten years from now? Doubtful.
Do you own all of these on DVD? Any of them?
Even if you make a strong case against "Avatar" winning (as I myself have mixed feelings about the movie), there were so many other movies this year that made people pause, run to theatres, talk with friends and coworkers, and impacted us so much greater. How about "District 9"? "Inglorious Basterds"?...or even "The Hangover" or "Paranormal Activity"?
Each of these movies defined 2009 in a much more distinct way. Each one altered the cinematic climate, and made us mark the DVD release dates on our calendars. Most of us are still quoting the movies weeks or months later. ("Have you tried the strudel here? It's not so terrible. But wait for the cream.")
"The Hurt Locker"? Is just the movie that Hollywood most wanted us to love. It's a shame that the short-sighted Academy members are re-writing our 2009 history for us so irresponsibly.
You can leave an optional "tip" with Mahalo's virtual currency, Mahalo Dollars. If you are asking a difficult question that might require some research, or if you'd like a wide variety of feedback, a higher tip often leads to more answers to your question.
M$
Nothing stood out as 'amazing' at all. The acting was 'OK', the photography was 'OK' and the sound was pretty much run of the mill. To me it was a solidly mediocre movie, but a truly decent view of what the troops are getting involved in.
D-9 was a very, very good movie whichever way you measure it, if you take into account the lack of budget ($30M) it is even more incredible and should have won the 'more with less' award. Brilliant script, acting, effects and photography.
Avatar was also mind blowing, but you have to watch it several times just to get used to the 'shiny things' and actually concentrate on the story. The effects, sound and photography were memorable.
I get a feeling though that 'Hurt Locker' won for Hollywood political reasons.
You can leave an optional "tip" with Mahalo's virtual currency, Mahalo Dollars. If you are asking a difficult question that might require some research, or if you'd like a wide variety of feedback, a higher tip often leads to more answers to your question.
M$You can leave an optional "tip" with Mahalo's virtual currency, Mahalo Dollars. If you are asking a difficult question that might require some research, or if you'd like a wide variety of feedback, a higher tip often leads to more answers to your question.
M$
I agree with a lot of your points here.
Interesting also according to Rotten Tomatoes: 90% favorable reviews and 89% critic favorable reviews and 90% favorable from the Rotten Tomatoes community for District 9
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/district_9/reviews_users.php
Hurt Locker as you mentioned had higher 97%/97%/91% from RT community
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/hurt_locker/
But when you look at the number of reviews for each movie on RT, Hurt Locker had much, much, much fewer people reviewing it when compared to District 9- loads less people even saw it or cared enough to rate it, which can mess with the stats as well.
If so few people care, how can that be movie of the year?
That is a good point, but lets not confuse popularity with quality. There are a lot of movies and music which are very popular, but also pretty horrible. Plus I like the idea that the Oscars are a measure of critical reception, not popular opinion.
The biggest reason no one went to see The Hurt Locker is that it wasn't advertised and it was released in very few theaters. Many critics probably didn't have a theater close by which was showing the movie. The reason for the limited release probably had something to do with people not thinking the American public wanted an Iraq war movie so soon. However it actually performed very well if you look at money earned per screen it was shown at.
I completely agree with you though that District 9 was an amazing movie, and it deserved much more recognition than it got.