Will Sci-Fi Movies ever win an Oscar ??? (1 Viewer)

[Terry St]

Gattaca was wonderfully written, directed, and the acting was simply top notch. Unfortunately, it was marketed as an action-packed sci-fi popcorn flick and fell into obscurity because it had almost no action at all. The trailers for this film were nothing short of criminally misleading.

 

[Seth Paxton]

it's not something that most of the people in the audience are used to wrapping their brains around; the ideas are too abstract.

I agree that this is exactly the problem.

There is a certain level of programming in society. Not that ominous Orwellian type of programming, but the programming that you use to function. You learn rhythms and patterns of how info comes in and how you react to it. Phone rings, you answer "Hello". You don't spend 40 minutes trying to understand what the cute music means.

And so it is with films. We learn how to digest the info in films, and to be honest Jason is dead-on in saying that we just don't get enough serious SF to allow audiences on the wide-spread level to learn how to fully digest such films.

That means that they will continue to be held at a distance for the most part. Many people see the surface level, the "crutch" of the SF gimmicks, and discount any serious themes being introduced by such methods as weaker because of this. SF fans recognize this flaw in thinking, but general audiences don't watch enough SF, or watch too much other stuff to ever start to pick up and learn the SF patterns on a deeper level.


Try this sometime, take a class or create your own class in which you watch, read about, and discuss only one genre of film. Don't integrate any other genres during this period. You will find yourself growing a much deeper apprecation of that genre's nuances, and the art within that genre will go beyond the genre's general defining characteristics. SF fans do this inherently by simply spending more time with SF than any other genre. No different than crime/detective nuts or film noir nuts or musical nuts focusing in on their favorite styles.

The point is that without that sort of learned focus it's hard to really appreciate any genre.

What we need is 10 Gattaca's or AIs PER YEAR so that the genre can become more fully established. Honestly, I just don't think there are that many good SF oriented filmmakers out there, at least at the Hollywood or big budget indy level.

Musicals might be the oddity now too, but they have long since been established with the older Academy crowd who grew up with these as a fundamental genre (just like westerns). Potentially there could come a time in 25 years where the musical or western stopped getting serious respect by the sheer absence of quality releases, which would allow future voters to never really learn about those genres or how to appreciate them. For now it appears that the musical is making its comeback so it might yet stick around after all. We could note that the western had its late 80's/early 90's comeback as well.

The only SF genre that has been established is the camp or action sub-genres. It will take an awful lot to push those stereotypes aside for the more thoughtful SF films to gain appreciation.

 

[Seth Paxton]

Following that up in regards to The Matrix, this is a classic cyberpunk film. Cyberpunk being the genre that won a Hugo award in the 80's with Gibson's "Neuromancer" novel. It is a deeply cerebral sub-genre of SF that strongly represents the modern cultures views of how technology will affect and be affected by society in the near future.

In that regard there are very serious themes at hand, deeply difficult moral questions being raised. If The Hours introduces us to the idea of caring for someone who is living only to satisfy our need to care about them, Matrix introduces a slew of moral dilemmas and questions about our own humanity.

We are talking about serious metaphysical philosophy being brought up. "I think therefore I am" takes on a whole new meaning when considering the Matrix storyline. And we know that the Wach Bros were directly referencing even current philosophers such as postmodernist Jean Baudrillard, who wrote "Simulations and Simulacra" which is Neo's hiding spot book (and the source of the "desert of the real" quote).

But Matrix will never be seen in that way because of it's shiny wrapper. In the end the film is seen as nothing but an actioneer, and is partially to blame for that itself. And the irony of it all is that the action aspect is what the film was most lauded for, so it's not like in this case it was the SF production holding the rest of the film down. You had a tightly wound narrative, beautiful filming techniques, fresh uses of technology for Viz FX, AND all this serious philosophy being touched upon.

Yet the film is seen as a shallow diversion because of its ability to entertain on the surface. Gee, just like Raiders of the Lost Ark. It often seems that if a film is working on several levels rather than flat out exposing it's dry underbelly of drama that it ends up being regarded only by its catchy surface layer.



And BTW, is Minority Report really the best SF/F film that will be overlooked for Best Pix this year? What about Spirited Away which is shamefully also "just" animation (or so I hear, I've yet to see it).

 

[Steve Christou]

The greatest SF film of them all '2001 A Space Odyssey' wasn't even nominated for Best Picture in 1968, so what chance has any other SF film got of winning the big one?

I don't consider 'Silence of the Lambs' a horror film, its closer to 'Se7en' than to 'Psycho' in my opinion, 'Psycho' scared the crap out of people in its time and still has a creepy, uneasy effect. While 'Silence' is more of a psychological thriller/action flick.

As far as the cinema of the fantastic is concerned, 'Star Wars' and 'ET' must have come close in 1977 and 1982 in winning Best Picture, but the Academy always wimps out and plays it safe, 'Lord of the Rings' should have walked away with the whole lot last year IMO, but noooo Ron Howard's 'A Beautiful Mind' had to win, does anyone even remember what Beautiful Mind was about?

 

[Jason Seaver]

And BTW, is Minority Report really the best SF/F film that will be overlooked for Best Pix this year? What about Spirited Away which is shamefully also "just" animation (or so I hear, I've yet to see it).

No, Osamu Tezuka's Metropolis is. Spirited Away is also excellent, though; I think in the top 10 thread I say something about how I rank Metropolis and Minority Report above Spirited Away because I prefer science fiction to fantasy.

 

[Stephen_L]

Sadly, IMHO the Academy of Motion Picture Sciences rarely judges a film, actor, or directors work on its pure merit. Too many other elements come into play. For example, the Academy likes to think of itself as a 'serious' organization and therefore likes to award 'serious' dramas over almost any genre including comedy, horror, science fiction, fantasy or animation. Comedy is judged as frivolous compared to 'weightier' drama (If my memory serves me, only four comedies have won best picture: "It Happened One Night", "Annie Hall", "Shakespeare in Love", and one whose title escapes me) Same goes for animation with only one animated film nominated for best picture ("Beauty and the Beast") Best actor, actress, and director contests are strongly influenced by insider politics, and the 'career recognition' factor. (Awarding an actor with a history of unawarded stellar performances for a lesser film: examples, Russell Crowe for "Gladiator" rather than the superior "Insider", Paul Newman for "The Color of Money" instead of a dozen legendary roles) In view of these impediments it seems very difficult for a non-serious film to win the prize.

 

[Mark Pfeiffer]

While I don't share the passionate embrace of Equilibrium like some here--I liked it but found it to be strictly a minor work--don't blame the critics or the Academy for a bigger fuss not being made over it. (FWIW, Ebert, probably the most well known critic in the US endorsed it.)Miramax/Dimension dumped it and put no support behind it. As a member of the press, I didn't learn of its opening until the day before--two at most--it hit theaters. Ad campaigns were practically nonexistent.

 

[Adam_S]

What will it take for a Sci-Fi flick to win an Oscar???

it will probably require an enormous effort, almost as much as it would take for a SciFi or fantasy book to win a Pulitizer or a Nobel Prize.

Actually I think it won't take much, hopefully Return of the King will take home the top prize next year, unless Warner's push hard enough that Matrix Reloaded or Revolutions makes the top five cut as well and cancels ROTK out. That would also necessitate that Matrix Revolutions be a very good film as well, especially if next year winds up as good as this oscar season was.

As others have said, Scifi and Fantasy as a genre are more important, more interesting, and more thoughtprovoking than most of the mere dramas or comedies released. both dramas and comedies are already digested, everything you need to know about the film is easily accessible no thought required, just a cat, put up a tree, then the cat gets down. 99% of all dramas just summed up, great three act structure. btw this is sarcasm. ) Unfotunately most genres also have a stigma to overcome because a lot of bad stuff has been written/filmed. Unfortuately all the Tolkien copiers such as Terry Brooks, Robert Jordan, Piers Anthony etc have glutted the market so that artists such as Robin Hobb, George RR Martin, and Tad Williams go unnoticed by the mainstream, and even to an extent by the genre fans themselves. The same happens in scifi, but to a lesser work because there is not really an equivalent seminal work such as Lord of the Rings in scifi which has an enormously more broad scope, although that is unfortunate, since there is an equal infinite possibility in the world creation aspects of fantasy as there are in the unlimited horizons of scifi.

ahh I"ve already rambled to long and not as well as others in this thread, although I hope that someday scifi/fant will be as accepted as westerns and musicals

Adam

 

[Ray Chuang]

Personal opinion: I think after The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King is released in December 2003, AMPAS voters will likely nominate RoTK for multiple Oscars--and it's very likely that RoTK could win Best Picture and Best Director more or less as a cumulation award for the excellence of all three Lord of the Rings movies. It'll be the first time a science fiction/fantasy movie won Best Picture.

(A little aside--Annie Hall has just as much serious elements in the movie as its comedic elements. But it was a much-liked movie that had critical and moviegoer acclaim.)

 

[Eric Scott]

Steve,

I couldn’t help but to notice your no-nonsense, straight forward, to the point, matter of fact comments. Didn’t ‘Silence’ make your mouth water a bit? To be honest, Jodie kinda gave me an appetite for a little tasty, juicy, woolly lamb chop…

'A Beautiful Mind' was about a guy who didn’t take his medication. Reminds me, I need a refill! Btw, what do they have you on?
:frowning:

 

[Steve Christou]

Eric! by Cthulhu's tentacles, how long has it been dude? We all missed you here at the institute.

is Minority Report really the best SF/F film that will be overlooked for Best Pix this year?

Minority Report wasn't that great IMO, I mean the first 105mins was excellent, but the last 30mins was pretty naff, I remember looking at my watch wondering if it was ever going to end, but as a SF fan I'd rather have that nominated for Best Picture than some friggin' musical or 'tragic, tearful' drama, yes I is biased.

 

[Eric Scott]

how long has it been dude?

51 weeks. I finally escaped, I was fortunate to get out with my laptop and it's pedestal.

 

[Holadem]

Holy Cow Eric, it's been a while! I remember wondering what happened to you, as I remember you stopped posting at a date uncomfortably close to 9/11/01.

Welcome back!

--
Holadem

 

[Seth Paxton]

No, Osamu Tezuka's Metropolis is.

Well, I have seen Metropolis and would politely disagree with the idea that it is better than Minority Report. It's a beautiful picture, but it isn't even trying to be the fully accessible film that a Best Pix film generally is/should be.

That's not a fault because I don't think every film SHOULD try to be a best pix type of film. But I do think some fantasy/SF/adventure films have fit that bill already. Namely Raiders and Star Wars, though the loss to Annie Hall is understandable.

The thing is, Gladiator is enough of a stretch from reality to be partially considered adventure/action/fantasy, and it won the whole thing only to have people (like me) complain about it's win.

 

[Seth_S]

I also agree that Minority Report wasn't that great. Besides its plot holes (the fact that they've been so hotly debated is proof enough of how controversially they are), it was pretty obvious who and why was behind it all after the green house scene (of course it was obvious from the trailers who the bad guy was - think German accent). Basically, the film's mystery wasn't nearly as clever as the filmmakers thought. Furthermore, the end was worst than a bad 50s western, with good/the law triumphing despite the odds, and everything working out perfectly for the good guys.

 

[Bill J]

with good/the law triumphing despite the odds, and everything working out perfectly for the good guys.

 

[Seth_S]

Bill J,

Would you mind at least saying how so? If you're going to argue the
"it's all a dream" theory, there is almost now evidence for that, especially considering that the film was made by the man who removed the guns from ET, because even that was too dark for him.

 

[Walter Kittel]

Well, I can't speak for Bill, but regarding Minority Report:

When you consider the almost perfunctory manner in which the film wraps up, and how that contrasts with everything that took place previously in the film, for me it signals a change in film's tone that at least hints at a possible imaginary finale.

Compare the color in Gideon's face at 02:01:20 , as he tells Anderton that 'all your dreams will come true' - the final line of the film before the color change BTW - to the same character's face, in the same room, at 02:06:18 - when Anderton's wife confronts Gideon. While the film's grain is still present, the blue, washed out color scheme is now missing. This may signal a change in the film's 'reality'.

Some argue that Speilberg made the finale arbitrary enough to support either intepretation; and that may have some merit as well. I favor the 'dream' ending for the above reasons.


- Walter.

 

[DonMac]

Steve Christou wrote:

As far as the cinema of the fantastic is concerned, 'Star Wars' and 'ET' must have come close in 1977 and 1982 in winning Best Picture, but the Academy always wimps out and plays it safe

While Gandhi winning in 1982 probably was playing it safe, Annie Hall winning in 1977 definitely wasn't because it's one of the few Comedy Films to win the Best Picture Oscar (...and Comedy is a genre that gets about as little respect from the Academy as Science Fiction does).

.

 

[Seth_S]

Walter Kittel,

The sudden change in tone comes off as being poor screenwriting to me, than a possibility for an alternate reality, especially considering all the prior plot holes. Spielberg wanted a happy ending, but backed himself into a corner. I also think that he goes too far with the ending for it to have the possibility of being a dream, such as neatly wrapping up what happens to the pre-cogs in a voice over. Now if some of the gaping plot holes took place after his incarceration and escape, I'd say the dream ending would then hold water.