The revenant (1 Viewer)

it was a bore fest

In my experience if the luvvies ooze praise & a film wins an oscar it is best to avoid..

need I say more
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1655442/

loved it all the way through

ita an oscar movie, its all about hoe=w its made and not the entertainment, if you thought it was shit, then you probably find most oscar nom movies shit

Nick said:

Watched this but can't help but think it's over hyped

Click to expand...

Totally agree Nick - didn't like the subdued "natural" lighting one bit - about 30 minutes too long - plot was confusing

cinematography
thats what its all about, the long scenes, the way they use the cameras, the scene when they get attacked at the beginning is 10 minutes long and would have required ultra planning and teamwork, the scrnr when he escapes fro the french, the cameras were freestanding and then attatched to the fake horse mid shoot, all very very clever ways of filming
its the reason forrest gump won all the oscars and pulp fiction and shawshank won shit all in 93, 2 better movies thatll both be lauded for years to come, but they were just filmed like any other movie so didnt earn the oscars

gravity the other year had a 13 minute no cuts scene, used newest techniques, that kinda thing.best film, best cinematography

birdman last year had 3 scenes for the entire movie, and was delicious to look at but really odd, won best cinematography too

citizen kane used all new techniques, and is regarded as the greatest film ever made because of

i love that shit, its more than the movie, its the whole thing they look at, and it isnt for everyone

obviously every now and again this doesnt apply, the locker room won best film over avatar, mainly because the director issue (ex husband lost, ex wife won) for reasons only the insiders know, plus it was a ,massive ploitical landscape at the time, avatar used the first ever 3d ultra high def cameras for the first time ,and should (by their rules) should have won

I watched it with my son on dvd last night and although I didn't get the plot if there was one,I enjoyed it especially the fight scene at the start,and the bear giving him a right pasting was brilliant filming.As someone who loves the outdoors it was stunning I thought,and my lad was laughing as he knew that my next walking/hiking holiday was being planned !

bringbackrattles said:

I watched it with my son on dvd last night and although I didn't get the plot if there was one,I enjoyed it especially the fight scene at the start,and the bear giving him a right pasting was brilliant filming.As someone who loves the outdoors it was stunning I thought,and my lad was laughing as he knew that my next walking/hiking holiday was being planned !

Click to expand...

I have only seen the clips, but it looks stunning. As has been said, it is not just about the story and acting, but is also as much about the look and feel and inventiveness and skill of filmmaking.

called, it
best actor, best cinematography

Pipehitterz said:

called, it
best actor, best cinematography

Click to expand...

DiCaprio was a nailed on certainty though wasn't he.

Best cinematography was not surprise either.

Rylance was nailed on for best supporting actor and Brie Larson was pretty much nailed on too.

Maybe the slight surprises were Spotlight and Alicia Vikander.

Pipehitterz said:

loved it all the way through

ita an oscar movie, its all about hoe=w its made and not the entertainment, if you thought it was shit, then you probably find most oscar nom movies shit

Click to expand...

Which is precisely why I loathe the Oscars & all the more local spin--offs too (BAFTAs, BRITS, PFA etc). By all means have awards for the people interested in how a film (or whatever) is put together - but is the coverage it/they receive justifiable?

I buy a car, house - couldn't give a cock as to who put it together or who designed it - I suspect there are those that do...& they are sufficiently interested to know where & when such ceremonies take place & how to find out the outcomes.

Rare that I go to the cinema but if the critics pan a film that people I know say is good...I might give it a go. The only award that really matters is surely cash generated by how many people go see it?

The luvvies in the entertainment (?) business would otherwise be well paid for making lots of niche movies that in general, people have no desire to see.

...onwards & upwards PUSB

alicia vikander wasnt really a surprise , all the women nods had a chance, it was a pretty weak year for women, the missed out last year for ex machina, where she was amazing

i thought the big short would beat spotlight tho, it was so much better

biggest surprise was sam fucking c**t smith winning, they whining on about gays, c**t

loved it, possibly my favourite film last year, although im totally gay for dominhal gleeson and isaac oscar

SkyblueBazza said:

Which is precisely why I loathe the Oscars & all the more local spin--offs too (BAFTAs, BRITS, PFA etc). By all means have awards for the people interested in how a film (or whatever) is put together - but is the coverage it/they receive justifiable?

I buy a car, house - couldn't give a cock as to who put it together or who designed it - I suspect there are those that do...& they are sufficiently interested to know where & when such ceremonies take place & how to find out the outcomes.

Rare that I go to the cinema but if the critics pan a film that people I know say is good...I might give it a go. The only award that really matters is surely cash generated by how many people go see it?

The luvvies in the entertainment (?) business would otherwise be well paid for making lots of niche movies that in general, people have no desire to see.

...onwards & upwards PUSB

Click to expand...

No, no, no. The most popular is not the best otherwise things like Dumb and Dumber would win Oscars and idiots would win talent contests! Oh wait ...
The awards are chosen by experts.
The masses have no taste. I find these awards shows good recommendations for what to see rather than the crap they put on sky movies. Where the hell do they source their films? The bargain bin?

It is true in many cases. Some of the most watched TV programmes are the worst in terms of writing and artistic merit, skill, production values, invention and creativity.

Isn't the Sun still the top selling paper? Doesn't make it any good.