Comments on: No Oscar for Australia, but six for Hurt Locker

By: john meagher

john meagher — Thu, 25 Mar 2010 04:52:26 +0000

The Hurt Locker winning Best Picture, I can accept that as tinkering with high explosives is such a gut wrenching vehicle for drama. But Best Direction? Definately not as the “Doco” camera feel opens the direction up to bordering on Impro action, ie less control. There were many moments when a CU was needed and some deep personal reactions were covered in WS. It looked like the coverage control was left to the DOP. Much of the acting performance (being male myself) bull-like macho stuff that any reasonable male actor could manage. Other nominations this year contained subtleties in character and performance that would have challenged any director. For action, there were displays of poor timing between movements no editor could fix. No, not good directing. Looks like we Aussies missed out on doing the best bomb disposal story ever. It’s in a book about a group of Aussies in the UK during WW11 who disabled more bombs & mines than any other Allied force. Your hands will tremble when you read Softly Tread The Brave.

By: Miguel

Miguel — Thu, 18 Mar 2010 23:03:59 +0000

I think it’s an ongoing challenge for many local film industries, not just Australia. But I also think that the Australian film slate for that year was particularly strong and, in my humble opinion, only a few deserved the ‘depressing drama with no market potential’ label.
The problem is beyond the actual content, it’s about audience perception and awareness, and it requires a coordinated effort from all companies, agencies and business partners involved in film (and even TV) production.
For example, the upcoming I Love You Too is formulaic and imperfect. but guess what? so are most romantic comedies, and people still go to see them. we should not give special treatment to Australian films, but we shouldn’t be harder on them than we are on the many terrible movies that the US (and other countries) send our way.

By: Screen Writer.

Screen Writer. — Thu, 18 Mar 2010 08:36:25 +0000

So what about the appalling stats Miguel – comment?

By: Miguel

Miguel — Wed, 17 Mar 2010 22:23:05 +0000

You’re right about Sandra Bullock, but Halle Berry did it first – not on the same weekend though. she never fully recovered from the Catwoman fiasco.

By: Screen Writer.

Screen Writer. — Wed, 17 Mar 2010 21:45:51 +0000

Memo all aspiring commercial film practitioners.

09 (AUS) figures now out.

AUS commercial sector grossed in excess of $2 billion via box office – sales & rentals – other ancillaries. (but excluding overseas sales).

Local producers? took a mere 5% (of their own local audience?).
Go figure?

Congrats Sandra Bullock – best of both worlds – Razzie & Oscar.

Displaying all the best attributes of her profession (humility) – she showed up – collected – & thanked – both panels.

By: Tone Moore

Tone Moore — Mon, 08 Mar 2010 07:17:01 +0000

When Demi Moore walked out on stage, I was all set for a big tear jerker but I only seen abit of Patrick Swayze as the camera crew failed to switch to the screen camera quick enough. I expected to see an honourary piece done on Swayze’s life and a few more words by Demi on behalf of her former co-star would have been good but NO! The Academy just wanted to flip right through all the dead people and get back to the boring stuff. If they had have put as much effort into the In Memorium segment as they put into the Horror segment it would have been Brilliant!

P.S. I wonder if James Cameron is pissed off his ex-wife beat him?

By: Stephen

Stephen — Mon, 08 Mar 2010 05:45:51 +0000

Oh no! Hurt Locker it is. Glad I didn’t stay up all evening to watch this, like I would if I was in my native Canada. What a waste of an evening it would have been!

By: Jack

Jack — Mon, 08 Mar 2010 05:19:08 +0000

The Hurt Locker – Best Picture?

What a load of propaganda bullshit.

It’s not even a very good story with predictable, average acting.

Maybe it’s America’s way of trying to deal with the fact that they aren’t actually at war, they are an occupying force that invaded Iraq under false pretences (Iraq had weapons of mass destruction and were going to use them against us – not).

The film tries to make us feel sorry for the opressive; occupying force (The Americans) and all the dangers they have to put up with while they ‘occupy’ Iraq and sap and steal their oil.

Imagine if they made a movie about the Germans occupying France for 4 years in the second world war and tried to make us feel sorry for the German guys, who’s job it was to seek out and destroy the French Underground – no one would be interested.

Hollywood and the Oscars is now just another ‘vehicle’ and recruit for the American industrial military complex and its overseas empire building.

See this movie and the Oscar Best Picture award for what it is – propaganda bullshit.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Mon, 08 Mar 2010 05:01:36 +0000

Yes, massively over missed.

By: Miguel

Miguel — Mon, 08 Mar 2010 04:58:24 +0000

They’re doing a decent job, but I don’t think we’ll see two co-hosts again. Alec Baldwin was an odd choice.