Login  
 
 
Go Back   Chamber of Secrets > Forum Archives > Post DH References

What would it take to get Deathly Hallows an Oscar? Awards season thread



 
 
Thread Tools
  #541  
Old February 27th, 2012, 6:59 pm
merrymarge's Avatar
merrymarge  Female.gif merrymarge is offline
Hogwarts Graduate
 
Joined: 3927 days
Posts: 2,159
Re: What would it take to get Deathly Hallows an Oscar? Awards season thread

I was disappointed at first that the movies didn't win any awards. But, fans know the movies are good, because they went to see them in theaters and then bought the d.v.d.s. The cast and crew knew the movies were good. No one quit because they didn't like the movies; so, they didn't win any awards, that isn't important.


Sponsored Links
  #542  
Old February 27th, 2012, 10:34 pm
DeathlyH's Avatar
DeathlyH  Male.gif DeathlyH is offline
Defender of Dogs
 
Joined: 4623 days
Location: In a dream
Posts: 2,129
Re: What would it take to get Deathly Hallows an Oscar? Awards season thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by merrymarge View Post
I was disappointed at first that the movies didn't win any awards. But, fans know the movies are good, because they went to see them in theaters and then bought the d.v.d.s. The cast and crew knew the movies were good. No one quit because they didn't like the movies; so, they didn't win any awards, that isn't important.
I agree wholeheartedly. Some Oscar wins would have been nice, but they never were necessary in validating the worth of the Harry Potter films, or any films. As David Heyman said, the fans' indignation on behalf of the Academy is enough for the cast and crew of all eight movies. At the end of the day, the Harry Potter franchise was still an incredible success, both financially and film-wise. People might gripe about things, certain deviations from the books, and I agree that the films were far from perfect. But they were still very good, and didn't totally flop like other adaptations of popular fantasy novels have (Eragon, Golden Compass).

To put in perspective the significance of the Academy Awards (or lack thereof), Lord of the Rings won 17 with three films, and Harry Potter won zero. Yet both franchises still have incredibly strong fan bases, and both are the movies that people will be watching fifty years from now. They will not be watching most (if any) of the movies that won awards last night.


  #543  
Old March 1st, 2012, 3:02 am
Wimsey's Avatar
Wimsey  Male.gif Wimsey is offline
Curse Breaker
 
Joined: 5429 days
Location: What day is it?
Posts: 7,036
Re: What would it take to get Deathly Hallows an Oscar? Awards season thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by MsJPotter View Post
It didn't even make A. O. Scott's list of 10 best movies for 2012.
Which effectively falsifies your premise that critic's Top 10 lists (or Top 20 lists, as in the case of Scott) represent what they think the Oscar nominees should be. This is because these lists usually represent a lot of indy films and (in the case of Scott) documentaries, which are not nomination material. Indeed, if you parse Scott's 20 films down, then there were 5 films of the sort that get considered for Oscar nominations.

So, Scott's editorial (as well as comments by people like Peter Travers) that Hallows 2 should have gotten a nomination is not inconsistent with the fact that they left these films off their annual "Top X" lists. When these guys talk about what films should get Oscar nominations 4 weeks later, they provide largely different lists. (Part of the reason for this is that they are trying to call attention to indies, documentaries and little-known films; the Oscars call attention to the widely distributed ones.)


Pearl addresses most of the flaws in the remainder of your arguments. Again, this gets back to the earlier observations: you are confounding what you like with what audiences, critics and members of award-granting bodies consider to be "good." Now, these could be the same: after all, most films that critics and/or Academy members like get really good audience ratings.

However, we really have an empirical test of your particular concept of "good movie" that you are insisting the Academy and critics truly must be adhering. Ten years ago, we essentially had a controlled experiment that tested your premise about what people (audiences, critics and organizations like the Academy, BAFTA, the Hollywood Corps, etc.) consider to be a "good movie adapted from a novel." Both Fantasy Films A and B had fairly large numbers of people who had read them (albeit small numbers relative to the size of a blockbuster audience). Both had a bit of hype in advance and were expected to sell a lot of tickets simply because of that publicity.

From here, things get different. Film A adheres to your criteria for a "good movie": it sticks closely to the narrative details of the source material, with almost no streamlining of characters or plot elements. Film B clearly fits your "debacle" scenario: it cut major portions of the original text, deleting many major characters and background explanations, deleting some plotlines and expanding the roles of some lesser characters.

The two films and their subsequent franchises go on to suffer two very different fates. One film:
  1. received tremendous critical acclaim;
  2. exceeded box office expectations by over 10%;
  3. enthralled audiences so much that the audience for the next film was typically 5% larger in the major markets;
  4. got not just Oscar buzz, but major nominations (and is still listed as "should have won" by many people!);
  5. several years later, is still remembered as a great film, scoring in the Top 55 of Empire's all-time films ever based on surveys of movie audiences, movie critics and industry people (i.e., the triumvirate spanning all movie acclaim) and still with spectacular scores at places like IMDB;
  6. saw the final film in the franchise get just about everybody on two islands thanked for all the awards and acclaims heaped upon it.

The other film:
  1. Got above average critical reviews initially, but was panned for failing to communicate a story;
  2. fell short in box office expectations by 20%;
  3. turned off enough people that the audience dropped an average of 20% in most of the major markets;
  4. got zero Oscar buzz, even for adapted screenplay;
  5. was nowhere to be found several years later on the triumvirate's survey of all time and has unspectacular audience marks at places like IMDB, and with only one of the successor's being dubbed by the triumvirate as in the Top 500 of all time;
  6. had successors with no luck garnering even nominations for major awards, despite several films that received critical and audience acclaim similar to the film above.

According to your model, Film A should be the first one and Film B should be the 2nd one. However, in reality, Film A was the 2nd one and FIm B was the 2nd one.

So, let's return to the original question: what would it have taken for Harry Potter to get serious Oscar consideration? We know two things. One, the answer is completely different from the answer to "what does it take to make a film that MsJPotter likes?" In fact, it borders on "do the opposite!" Two, and much more relevantly, from the start, Stone would have had to have been like Lord of the Rings (or Atonement or True Grit or any of the other adapted films that got major nominations: a film devoted to telling a story (be it the story told in the novel or otherwise) and that told a story well. The reason why Film A's list is as it as is because, despite adhering to all of the novels minor details, it omitted the gestalt entity that should have arisen from them: story.

Now, WB learned their lessons and avoided the debacle of the 2nd list after the 2nd film. It was not quite in time to rescue the box office: ticket sales never got higher than 80% of the original's again. (First impressions….) In the end, Hallows 2 did a great job of telling a story. That is, there was some concept that unified and transcended the collection of plot points and narrative elements, which is what a story is. (OK, "Undying Devotion" was not the "Wrestling with the Greater Good" story that the novel told: but nobody in the Academy either knows or cares about that.) That did not matter: as soon as "Harry Potter" is mentioned, it seems that all the Academy remembered is some kid gaping blankly in an overlong scene that never added up to anything.

And that brings us back to the answer I suggested years ago: a TARDIS.


Quote:
Originally Posted by DeathlyH View Post
To put in perspective the significance of the Academy Awards (or lack thereof), Lord of the Rings won 17 with three films, and Harry Potter won zero. Yet both franchises still have incredibly strong fan bases, and both are the movies that people will be watching fifty years from now. They will not be watching most (if any) of the movies that won awards last night.
Again, I would call attention to Empire's 500 Top movies of all time. Now, this came out in 2008, so only 5 of the HP films were out. Just to remind people, this was based on a survey of all three facets of "popularity" for films:
  1. Movie audiences;
  2. Movie critics;
  3. Movie industry people
In other words, popular acclaim, critical acclaim and peer acclaim, all averaged out. Even if you want to think that one or two of them are not what is important, well, there really isn't anything else beyond the third.

All three Rings films were in the Top 55. Only one of the Harry Potter films, Prisoner, made the Top 500, coming in the 400's. Now, Hallows 2 got even better critical reviews than Prisoner and even higher audience marks from an audience that was about 7% larger; so, it might wind up there when Empire does this again in another few years. However, Stone, Chamber, Goblet and Order already had failed to make the cut: and as the esteem of films basically only drops over time, do not expect to see them ever listed as "classic" films. (Prince and Hallows 1 came out afterwards, but both got lower critical and audience responses than Prisoner, so I wouldn't bet on either turning up.)


__________________
(It doubles for The Hobbit, too!)
If in the first act you have hung a pistol on the wall, then in the following one it should be fired. Otherwise don't put it there. - A. P. Chekhov, Gurlyand's Reminiscences, and who knew why the Dog was long before the Shack!

Last edited by Wimsey; March 1st, 2012 at 3:19 am.
  #544  
Old March 1st, 2012, 9:57 am
MsJPotter  Undisclosed.gif MsJPotter is offline
Banned
 
Joined: 3174 days
Posts: 526
Re: What would it take to get Deathly Hallows an Oscar? Awards season thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wimsey View Post
Which effectively falsifies your premise that critic's Top 10 lists (or Top 20 lists, as in the case of Scott) represent what they think the Oscar nominees should be. This is because these lists usually represent a lot of indy films and (in the case of Scott) documentaries, which are not nomination material. Indeed, if you parse Scott's 20 films down, then there were 5 films of the sort that get considered for Oscar nominations.
I cut your quote down a bit. I looked at Scott's list of films for 2011, the only film that really jumped out at me on his list was 'Bridesmaids'. He really seems to have liked that film. Yeah, there's seems to be a lot of documentaries on the list, but there's at least 12 films that ain't. So it seems that Mr Scott, like a heck of a lot of journalists ain't above saying two different things in print.

I never said that critic's think their top 10 list represent what the Academy Awards should nominate. I said the critics top ten lists are what they think are the top 10 films of any given year. DH2 didn't make A. O. Scott's list for top 20. I think that kinda shows good taste.

My posts represent what I think about any given thing. I'm not saying that you have to agree with me or Pearl should agree with me or MerryMarge should agree with me. I'm saying that IMHO, DH2 was a lousy adaptation and it didn't deserve to win any award and I'm kinda happy that the award givers agreed with me.

I kinda hope that if the films are remade in the future that they're remade with a bit more respect for the actual plot in the books and they leave out the fanfictiony tendencies in the garbage where IMO, they belong.
I also said that I'm pleased as punch that Christopher Plummer got the Oscar. He was great in that film and he deserved it and I backed him from the beginning.

Now you can quote financial stats and audience stats till the cows come home. I won't disagree that DH2 took a shed-load of money at the box office. I will say that so did Pirates of the Caribbean 12 or whatever number it was, and so did Transformers 2. They didn't get my money and reading the reviews all I could say was I've never been so happy about something. I am very unhappy that Warner Bros did get my money for DH2. That's my final opinion. I can truthfully say they won't get my money for the DVD, and my family have been warned that I don't want it for a gift. That worked for Christmas, here's hoping it works for all the other gift giving things this year.



Last edited by Hes; March 1st, 2012 at 3:41 pm. Reason: proper quote tags added
  #545  
Old March 1st, 2012, 2:37 pm
Charlotte_Snape  Female.gif Charlotte_Snape is offline
Second Year
 
Joined: 3076 days
Location: City of Ember, Wonderland, USA
Posts: 170
Re: What would it take to get Deathly Hallows an Oscar? Awards season thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by MsJPotter View Post
I never said that critic's think their top 10 list represent what the Academy Awards should nominate. I said the critics top ten lists are what they think are the top 10 films of any given year. DH2 didn't make A. O. Scott's list for top 20. I think that kinda shows good taste.

My posts represent what I think about any given thing. I'm not saying that you have to agree with me or Pearl should agree with me or MerryMarge should agree with me. I'm saying that IMHO, DH2 was a lousy adaptation and it didn't deserve to win any award and I'm kinda happy that the award givers agreed with me.
It's possible that the award givers & critics agreed only on the conclusion that it did not deserve any awards. I doubt that many - if any - are die hard fans of the book series & decided that DH2 was unworthy solely on the basis of being a "lousy" adaptation of the books. Perhaps DH2 simply didn't stand up to the rest of the field for best picture in terms of overall composition, and therefore didn't merit a nomination. I happen to think that DH2 did not make anyone's shortlist because it was considered teen fare, & part of a children's franchise:

Quote:
From AMC's filmsite.org
Least Likely to Be Nominated (or Win) For Best Picture: Action-adventures, family-oriented animation, "popcorn" movies, suspense-thrillers, science-fiction, superhero films, horror, comedies (including teen comedies), Westerns, foreign-language films, and spy thrillers are mostly overlooked, as are independent productions and children's films (although there have been a few exceptions).
I underlined the ones I think apply to DH2. Sci/Fi I highlighted simply because it's usually lumped together w/fantasy, which HP is. And as much as I love HP, I don't think the series was as well-made as LotR, which won best pic for the final installment.

Well IMO, the Oscars are a joke anyway, so I don't really care that HP didn't win

Quote:
Originally Posted by MsJPotter View Post
I kinda hope that if the films are remade in the future that they're remade with a bit more respect for the actual plot in the books and they leave out the fanfictiony tendencies in the garbage where IMO, they belong.
Rly? My favorite thing about DH2 is The Prince's Tale


__________________
Viva La Glittelution!

Severus Snape ~ The Boy Who Loved
  #546  
Old March 1st, 2012, 3:51 pm
MsJPotter  Undisclosed.gif MsJPotter is offline
Banned
 
Joined: 3174 days
Posts: 526
Re: What would it take to get Deathly Hallows an Oscar? Awards season thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlotte_Snape View Post
It's possible that the award givers & critics agreed only on the conclusion that it did not deserve any awards. I doubt that many - if any - are die hard fans of the book series & decided that DH2 was unworthy solely on the basis of being a "lousy" adaptation of the books. Perhaps DH2 simply didn't stand up to the rest of the field for best picture in terms of overall composition, and therefore didn't merit a nomination. I happen to think that DH2 did not make anyone's shortlist because it was considered teen fare, & part of a children's franchise:
Could be, or it could be the voters thought it was a lousy film and it didn't matter to them what genre it belonged to.



Quote:
I underlined the ones I think apply to DH2. Sci/Fi I highlighted simply because it's usually lumped together w/fantasy, which HP is. And as much as I love HP, I don't think the series was as well-made as LotR, which won best pic for the final installment.
I certainly believe that. There is no comparison.

Quote:
Well IMO, the Oscars are a joke anyway, so I don't really care that HP didn't win
[staff edit]

Quote:
Rly? My favorite thing about DH2 is The Prince's Tale
Well as Rowling wrote The Prince's Tale I don't think it can ever qualify as fan fiction. For me it was just the part of the book that explained Snape's bad choices and how he wasted his life, but that's all it was. One chapter out of 37. I found Dumbledore's back-story much more fascinating. Mainly because he learnt from his mistakes and moved on while Snape chose to blame other people for his mistakes and never moved on. And of course the film ignored these elements completely. One would think from watching the film that telling a complex story was beyond the film makers capability, probably was. They obviously never watched an Alfred Hitchcock film



Last edited by Alastor; March 1st, 2012 at 6:10 pm. Reason: rude
  #547  
Old March 1st, 2012, 4:00 pm
Wab's Avatar
Wab  Undisclosed.gif Wab is offline
The Next Great Adventurer
 
Joined: 5827 days
Location: Mornington Crescent
Posts: 15,280
Re: What would it take to get Deathly Hallows an Oscar? Awards season thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlotte_Snape View Post
I underlined the ones I think apply to DH2. Sci/Fi I highlighted simply because it's usually lumped together w/fantasy, which HP is.
An enduring myth. Particularly given that one of the very few movies to receive Oscars for best picture, actor, actress, director and screenplay is a spec fic film: Silence of the Lambs.

When you look closely spec fic (fantasy/skiffy/horror) films do quite well compared to other genres.


__________________
A patriot is someone who wants the best for his country, including the best laws and the best ideals. It's something other people should call you -- you shouldn't call yourself that. People who call themselves patriots are usually liars. -- Donald Woods

You got what anybody gets . . . You got a lifetime. -- Death of the Endless
  #548  
Old March 1st, 2012, 4:01 pm
Hes's Avatar
Hes  Female.gif Hes is offline
Embroidered by imaginatio
 
Joined: 5383 days
Location: One second out of sync
Age: 38
Posts: 5,979
Re: What would it take to get Deathly Hallows an Oscar? Awards season thread

I think this thread has run it's course especially since for some people it's very difficult to a) be polite b) remember the topic at hand c) respect each other's opinion and d) the ocars are over.

Please discuss the HP movies in their respective threads. Any general oscar talk can be done in it's thread in Cinema and General Movie discussion provided it doesn't focus on the HP movies entirely.



Last edited by Hes; March 1st, 2012 at 4:05 pm.
 
Go Back  Chamber of Secrets > Forum Archives > Post DH References

Bookmarks


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 9:07 pm.


Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Original content is Copyright MMII - MMVIII, CoSForums.com. All Rights Reserved.
Other content (posts, images, etc) is Copyright its respective owners.