Inception, The Social Network, TS3 Get Oscar Noms

Among the Best Picture nominations this year are Inception, The Social Network and Toy Story 3. In addition to TS3, the Animation category has How to Train Your Dragon and The Illusionist. Also getting a nod in documentary was Exit Through the Gift Shop, which is worth your time if you are into that sort of thing. You'll have to wait a month to find out who the winners are... and to find out what the stars will wear on the red carpet. Or to play the Oscar speech drinking game.

Comments

Everyone here should go see

[geekoid]

the King's Speech. I think most people here will relate to it.

Re:Everyone here should go see

[Amorymeltzer]

Indeed. We DO curse a lot and have a general distaste for being in public.

Re:Everyone here should go see

[xMrFishx]

As the King myself, I resemble those comments.

Re:Everyone here should go see

[MonsterTrimble]

Agreed, although not for the reason you spoke of. I watched it over the weekend and was probably one of the best movies I've seen in years. Rush, Bonham-Carter & Firth were great and the script was rock solid. Definitely worth the money to see it on the big screen.

Re:Everyone here should go see

[Seumas]

It doesn't matter, because The Social Network or that stupid Ballet movie will win, anyway.

Of course, it also doesn't matter, because nobody with a lick of sense gives a damn about a stupid fucking industry award. I mean, really, there couldn't be anything less relevant to our lives than an award given by a bunch of celebrities to a bunch of other celebrities about who plays pretend the best.

Also, you can tell you're getting old when you look at the entire Slashdot submission and say "didn't see it, didn't see it, didn't see it, didn't see it, didn't see it, and didn't see it".

Re:Everyone here should go see

[Anrego]

Amen.

The fact that a large majority of people (even some very smart people) really get into this stuff depresses me. The whole celebrity worship thing is quite disturbing. I just don't understand the attraction!

Re:Everyone here should go see

[Seumas]

I can get the fact that someone might really dig a movie, but why anyone would give a fuck about an event to award people in an industry that they're not even part of is beyond me. If you sell vacuums, you might be super keen on who the Vacuum Engineer/Salesman/Manager of the year is. Otherwise . . . well . . . who cares? Even though I own and use a vacuum, it's irrelevant to me.

Of course, as the ratings reportedly show, people care less and less every year, so . . . good.

Re:Everyone here should go see

[Anonymous Coward]

Everyone here should go see..

OK I will download it later. :P

Re:Everyone here should go see

[slim]

Even those with a healthy distaste for the institution of monarchy?

Re:Everyone here should go see

[krou]

I wouldn't say a rock solid script and good acting make a film worth the money to see on the big screen (at least, not any more). A film like Inception, which has the visuals to match, sure, but the vast majority are just as good, and far more cost-effective, in the comfort of your own home. I stopped watching films in the cinema years ago because it's just way too expensive here in the UK. For just a bit more than the price of a single ticket (less, if it's a 3D film), I can buy the DVD brand new if I wait a few months. Since I'm married, and that means two tickets, the DVD is always way, way cheaper, and that's before even considering buying popcorn etc. (Never mind the fact that the cinemas almost always run the same garbage week after week, unless you're lucky enough to live near an independent cinema). It's a pity, because going to the cinema was one of my greatest joys as a kid. And I just wish those damn kids would get off my lawn.

Re:Everyone here should go see

[mibe]

If you don't understand celebrity worship, you've basically missed a huge chunk of human history.

Re:Everyone here should go see

[ocdscouter]

I'll believe it when I see the gold lame' suit.

Re:Everyone here should go see

[MonsterTrimble]

I agree with all your points, but this film was worth it.

I'm a married father as well and a date night costs about $40 for tickets and snacks ($25 for the second run show) plus another $40 if we go out to dinner afterwards, and that doesn't include babysitting and the like. It was still worth it.

Re:Everyone here should go see

[Anonymous Coward]

Because Slashdotters are really boring and unjustifiably think highly of themselves? I agree.

Re:Everyone here should go see

[Sockatume]

No, you know you're getting old when you look at the submission, say that, and then log in to post about it. Give it a few years and you'll be writing scathing letters to local politicans about the state of the roads and just how much it costs to gas up.

Re:Everyone here should go see

[slim]

I stopped watching films in the cinema years ago because it's just way too expensive here in the UK. For just a bit more than the price of a single ticket (less, if it's a 3D film), I can buy the DVD brand new if I wait a few months. Since I'm married, and that means two tickets, the DVD is always way, way cheaper, and that's before even considering buying popcorn etc.

I stopped because a big enough chunk of the public has forgotten how to behave in a cinema. There's nothing quite like being in a full screen, where everyone is gasping or laughing along with each other. But in the last 5 years or so, whenever I've been in a reasonably full UK cinema, other patrons have been happy to chat with each other at normal speaking volume, during the film.

Ironically, there was a period when they showed an anti-piracy ad, in which someone watches a grainy version of a film, in which a silhouette of a cinema punter getting up to go to the toilet spoils the film. This has never happened to me with a DVD, *nor* with a BT download -- but of course it's happened for real in the cinema.

So, for less money, I can see the film at home, with better sound (5.1 DTS without strangers' chat), equivalent size (if I want to sit close enough, that is) for less money.

I have made an exception for 3D -- Toy Story 3 was OK. Jackass 3D was well worth it -- with 8 other people in the auditorium, giving the film their full attention and cackling like idiots. :)

Re:Everyone here should go see

[coolmoose25]

WRT the nobody caring about industry awards, the winner of that should go to George C. Scott... who was nominated for Best Actor for Patton, and won it. He didn't go to the ceremony and returned the Oscar to the Academy. When asked if he would watch the ceremony on TV, he said he was going to watch a hockey game, which apparently he did. He later said that the award should be sent to the Patton museum, but since he didn't put it in writing, it was never delivered. The award is now at the Virginia Military Institute, where generations of Patton's have attended...

Re:Everyone here should go see

[Duradin]

Was it don't-need-snacks-to-pass-the-time good?

Re:Everyone here should go see

[dhammond]

I agree with you about the performances. The script was mostly good, but it fell into many of the usual melodramatic cliches that make me cringe. How many times have we seen the hero, after finally triumphing over adversity, receive a slow build-up of applause at the end of the movie? It's a very successful formula, but it makes me a little queasy every time I see it.

Re:Everyone here should go see

[MonsterTrimble]

Yes. I didn't have anything beyond the opening scene.

Re:Everyone here should go see

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm going to get off your lawn before I get shot.

Re:Everyone here should go see

[SmlFreshwaterBuffalo]

If you can look at a Slashdot submission and say "didn't see it", then you just don't read Slashdot often enough. Kind of like the editors.

Re:Everyone here should go see

[damien_kane]

If, by "that stupid Ballet", you mean Black Swan, it was a really good movie.
Darren Aronofsky's work (Pi, Requiem for a Dream, The Wrestler) has always pleased me in the past, and this was no exception.
It's not a movie about ballet at all, except that it happens to be told through a ballet dancer.

Dumbing it down like that is like calling Full Metal Jacket "that stupid war movie", or The Godfather "that stupid gangster movie".

"didn't see it, didn't see it, didn't see it, didn't see it, didn't see it, and didn't see it"

Therein lies your problem. It's Oscars time, DVDSCR rips are all over the internet, at least take the time to download something and watch it before you pass judgment.

Re:Everyone here should go see

[Anonymous Coward]

Really, the Slashdot crowd can relate to being a king? It looks boring to me. What it really needs is an injection of Michael Bay!!!

Re:Everyone here should go see

[mr_lizard13]

That film could have been a whole lot shorter if there wasn't so much stammering by the lead actor.

Re:Everyone here should go see

[curunir]

...but why anyone would give a fuck about an event to award people in an industry that they're not even part of is beyond me.

It's for the same reason that people who know better buy lottery tickets. It's not because they think they can win, it's because they enjoy fantasizing about what would happen if they did.

Similarly, the appeal watching the Oscars and paying attention to the Hollywood lifestyle is in the fantasizing about being part of it. The vast majority of the people in the world are not pretty enough, creative enough or otherwise talented enough to make it in that world. But nearly all the jobs are relatable enough to imagine yourself doing them, which makes it easy to imagine yourself living with all the perks of that life. You can imagine what it would be like to live in their expensive houses, drive their expensive cars and date their gorgeous girlfriends/boyfriends. And those fantasies, however improbable, are pleasant to have. So people tune in to live vicariously through those who are able to live that way.

Re:Everyone here should go see

[mattack2]

One of the Webby awards is an industry award. Do you care about that?

There are tech 'celebrities'. Do you care about them?

I think there are a lot of vapid 'famous for being famous' people, but there are also a lot of actors (and directors) who make entertaining movies and are entertaining in interviews.

Re:Everyone here should go see

[MicktheMech]

I find it odd that the film with the most nominations didn't make it into the summary, but a couple of kids movies did. Does Taco think /. readers are a bunch of kids just because we live in our parents' basements?

Nom nom nom Cookies!!

[Anonymous Coward]

I LOVE Cookies!!

Nom nom nom nom nom

Missing nominee for best movie

[Mbraz]

The People Vs. George Lucas

You know...

[Pojut]

...despite some of the huge names that came out last year, overall the new movie scene was a bit boring. There were some big ones that were awesome (Tron, Inception), but overall, there wasn't a lot of variety to be excited about as a moviegoer.

Re:You know...

[geekoid]

Tron was not awesome. It was visually appealing for a daft punk music video.
If ther eis only one post, and it was closed, how was the pager paged?
WHy was the son of the previos movie bad guy specifically pointed out, and then ignored?
What was with all the 'big luboski' talk?

When talking about his zen bullshit his son should have called him out for what it was "Fear to make a decsion".

And what was with Tron?

And why talk about the special light cycle and then do NOTHING with it?
And did they even bother to consulting any computer scientists??
A drunken hobo? WTF? At least they could have made it a 'Zombie' process.

I can overlook a lot of things in TRON. It's a custom computer, with a custom OS. But within that context, it was still week.

But there where so many more things they could have done. When in the plane, Flynn should have been fixing it on the fly. That would have been cool.

Re:You know...

[Amorymeltzer]

Maybe not as nerd (I hear you live with one), but looking at the Best Picture nominees:

“Black Swan”
“The Fighter”
“Inception”
“The Kids Are All Right ”
“The King’s Speech”
“127 Hours”
“The Social Network”
“Toy Story 3
“True Grit”
“Winter’s Bone”

A moving story about the British Monarchy, a dark-art psychological thriller, the only movie ever to try to portray a gay family as normal, an animated children's film, a dude who cuts his arm off... and that's only half of them. That's plenty of variety - far better than last year, of which half relied in part on something as pedestrian a topic as guns.

Re:You know...

[Anonymous Coward]

It's a custom computer, with a custom OS. But within that context, it was still week.

You're wrong. It was totally month.

Re:You know...

[Pojut]

That is an impressive list to be sure, but I wasn't referring strictly to the nominees...I meant in general.

I remember even just a few years ago being able to go to the movies a couple of times a month and having to DECIDE between what to see...now, there's barely anything every couple of MONTHS that I want to see :/

I'm hardly becomming jaded...I'm technically watching more movies than ever (yay 8-at-a-time Netflix!), it's just that newer stuff seems, as a whole, to be fairly weak.

Re:You know...

[Seumas]

Wow, I haven't even heard of half of those films.

I sometimes think I'm the only person on earth who hasn't seen Inception. However, I also feel like there is absolutely no reason to see it. I've heard enough comments that I can probably recite the plot and be 80% accurate just from my fifth hand osmosis.

Re:You know...

[operagost]

the only movie ever to try to portray a gay family as normal

Key word is "try". Having to wait until 18 to find your sperm-donor dad is not a good thing, no matter the reason. Neither is infidelity, even when it's apparently a PURELY IMPOSSIBLE affair by a "lesbian" with said sperm donor. I guess this is why it's Hollywood.

Re:You know...

[Anonymous Coward]

Sweet Jesus, man...

What was with all the 'big luboski' talk?

Because he talked that way in the original? It's not "Big Lebowski" talk.

When talking about his zen bullshit his son should have called him out for what it was "Fear to make a decsion".

See previous answer.

And why talk about the special light cycle and then do NOTHING with it?

They DID do something with it! He stole it when he went back on the grid!

And did they even bother to consulting any computer scientists??

Why the hell would they? It's a fantasy movie that just happens to be set in a computer. Hint: Computer Scientist would point out that you can't actually put yourself in a computer. A lot of your other questions are mangled enough that I'm not even sure what you're asking.

Re:You know...

[Enderandrew]

Sitting around and giving answers to minor questions isn't entertaining. Half of my friends complained there was too much plot and not enough action, and the other half complained it was mindless action with not enough plot. Trying to strike a good balance is always tricky.

They didn't explain how the pager was reached. We're assuming the computer powering the grid had ZERO connection to any other computer, phone line or data line. Yet this is the most important project in Flynn's life. You're saying he didn't replicate data or do backups somehwere? There was probably one connection to the outside world that they weren't aware of most of the time. And it took them ages to find that connection, or figure out how to do anything with it. We're talking about an ancient computer on a custom OS interacting with the rest of the world. This is a minute detail. Does this destroy the viewing experience of the movie?

Why was the son pointed out? Because they're planning sequels.

What was the Big Lebowski talk? What specifically are you talking about? Are you asking why Flynn was a bit of a hippy, then you missed the overall message of the movie.

The first movie was akin to Star Wars, rebels fighting against this evil empire of sorts. That wasn't the case here. This was Flynn struggling to come to terms with his own creation, and why the pursuit of perfection isn't always a good idea. Obsession with the big picture means losing sight of everything else.

Flynn was afraid to do anything initially, and really he was right. He could accept that he and his son was trapped, or he could risk releasing an army on the real world. In the big picture, not taking that risk is the way to go. But it makes for a boring movie, so we have the brash son to push the story along.

The fact that it was a special lightcycle is the reason that people identified Flynn Jr.

As for consulting any computer scientists, the movie is consistent with its own universe. Programs in the grid have personalities, despite being programs. They represent the people who programmed them. Tron is a representative of Alan for instance. This isn't realistic, but reality is boring.

Who says the drunken hobo wasn't a zombie process? He lost his parent thread (job) and is unemployed, siphoning away resources while sitting there and doing nothing.

Who says the nightclub wasn't a repreesntation of Flynn's playlist?

If Flynn can fix anything immediately, then he is God. He is never in danger and there is no dramatic tension. They establish when he fixes Qora, that it is difficult for him to do so, and that it takes time.

Learn how to spell Lebowski and weak, then come back with your next round of pointless criticisms that have little to nothing to do with whether or not the film was entertaining or meaningful.

Re:You know...

[E IS mC(Square)]

>> There were some big ones that were awesome (Tron, Inception)

Really? Inception was still okay (not the story, the special effects). But Tron??? Awesome???

Re:You know...

[Pojut]

Yes, both as a continuation of the first film and as a film by itself. It was really entertaining, it did a good job of putting the audience in the character's heads, it maintained consistency with the real-world representation in the computer world, and naturally it looked awesome. Basically, it was good for the same reasons the first one was good.

People seem to forget how slow-paced and badly-written/acted the original was.

Re:You know...

[stms]

Yeah man the last few years have had terrible movie schedules. It looks like 2011 is shaping up to be an improvement and 2012 will blow the last few years out of the water. I really wish movie studios would do something to try and stop the schedule from clumping up like this.

Re:You know...

[Adult film producer]

Is a Serbian Film up for best picture ?

Re:You know...

[Andy Smith]

Why not just watch it? It's a good film, you'd probably enjoy it.

Re:You know...

[SputnikPanic]

I went to see Tron Legacy with the missus and had occasional geek-out moments but overall I thought the movie was just okay. I'm old enough to have seen the original in the theaters and to me, the experiences just didn't compare. Not that I ever expected them to. Tron Legacy may have been the superior movie -- maybe -- but there's really a lot to be said for seeing a fantastical movie at the right age. I saw the original Tron when I was something like 10 years old, and it blew me away. Similarly, Raiders of the Lost Ark. Raiders might not be the best movie I've ever seen (although it's still very high up on my list) but no movie-watching experience will ever match seeing it on the big screen at 10 years old.

As for the movies this year, I didn't get out to see very many of them, but I did catch Inception and really enjoyed it. Between Dark Knight and Inception, Nolan has quickly put himself on my "go see whatever he makes" list.

Re:You know...

[nabsltd]

That's plenty of variety - far better than last year, of which half relied in part on something as pedestrian a topic as guns.

Although last year also had the expanded nominations, I'm sure we all know that the extra 5 (and maybe 6, since usually one of the 5 in the past was this way, too) are merely filler that can't possibly win, but it makes the Academy look like they actually pay attention to movies released before December.

Inception may have a shot because it was so critically acclaimed, but it's probably the only "popular" movie on the list that does have a chance.

Re:You know...

[Duradin]

"What was with all the 'big luboski' talk?

When talking about his zen..."

In the 80's Japan was going to take over the world. Flynn was in the real world during the 80's. Flynn being influenced by Eastern thought is very 80's.

Re:You know...

[Altus]

I liked Tron Legacy quite a bit, and I thought it was frankly better than Inception, more fun to watch, great visuals and sound track, the characters were a lot more fun while just about everyone in Inception blended together.

But I wouldn't call either of the "Awesome" other than perhaps the impressiveness of the special effects. I suppose I could call them good movies but awesome takes a bit more than that.

Re:You know...

[Maxo-Texas]

Inception was exception for the lack of modern effects.

It looked real and impressed you because it was real.

The fortress was not CGI and it was not a small scale model.
The hotel corridor battle had no CGI at all.
The hotel restaurant had no CGI except the view out windows
The floating elevator scenes (and others) were not CGI.

In your gut, you knew they were real and in your head, you knew they were impossible.

Re:You know...

[ekgringo]

Yes, he stole the special light cycle that his Dad built that's faster than every other light cycle in the grid, used it for a boring commute into town, then gave it away to a digital hobo. He could have used his Dad's old beater (if he had one, of course) with the same result. Granted, they avoided the standard movie trope of introducing something special so that it can be used at a crucial point, but they basically forgot about it 5 minutes later. Hell, they could at least have added a throw-away scene like the hobo going on to win some race (or selling it) and getting his life back, but they didn't even do that.

Re:You know...

[Ecuador]

At least it was not a bad year for animated features. Most notably Toy Story 3 lived up to the previous installments (hard feat) and I was very pleasantly surprised by "How to train your dragon".
Speaking of Tron though, I don't understand how it is only nominated for Sound Editing. Visually it was an amazing experience (and hybrid 2D/3D depending on which world you were helped), but where it excelled was the soundtrack which was a masterful mixture of classical with electronic sound and was in complete harmony with what was going on in the picture. In fact, my wife who is quite the opposite of a computer geek (classical philologist) considered Tron the most entertaining movie of the year.
Back to the soundtrack, it is one of the few which when I listen to I immediately "see" the scene that went with each track. And I am a big fan of Hans Zimmer, but the best moments of the Inception score are similar to just a small part of the Tron soundtrack, which builds much much more. Note that I am not accusing Daft Punk or Hans Zimmer for copying (Inception came out earlier, but Daft Punk had been working 2 years before on the Tron score so who knows if either heard the other), I am just saying that the Tron soundtrack was similar style but so much more, so I can't understand why Inception was nominated for original score instead of it.
Well, ok, I do understand why, Daft Punk is not exactly "mainstream", so it was rather rhetorical... but it is still not fair.

Re:You know...

[Alamais]

Huh, I didn't realize that so little CGI was used, but I'm sure you're right about that helping it be so visually interesting and consistent.

I had the first Transformers film on TV in the background the other day, and was noticing the same thing. Say what you will about Michael Bay and the totality of that movie, but I certainly support his commitment to using real sets and locations, with real actors, and things actually blowing up. Sure there were giant CGI machines kicking each other's asses, but even those felt more 'real' when the ass kicking was taking place within the confines of a real place, shot on film, and the human actors were seeing actual fireballs.

Re:You know...

[xystren]

I am of the same mind. I think he exemplifies the ability to use special effects to compliment the story - it is a refreshing change that has been long overdue from typical Hollywood.

If you haven't already, you should check out some of Nolan other works. Memento was particularly unique and interesting.

Re:You know...

[Maxo-Texas]

If you look really close in the elevator scene you can see two teeny straps or zippers hanging at a 90 degree angle to what they should Everything else- even the 'greased down hair and the 'bun hair' on the girl' was fastened down.

I find CGI for "the big impressive scenes" to be pathetic. It's still not good enough. You can see the knife barely missing the neck isn't real. The huge drop isn't real. they do pull it off from time to time. The cliffhanger opening scene with stallone climbing was a shot that worked-- real cliff, he's really climbing. but he's climbing on a 20' high cliff that's mapped into the 1000' high cliff well enough to hide the seams.

I hadn't read the christianity parallel before (elsewhere in this thread). That was really interesting.

Re:You know...

[mattack2]

Special Effects: Story, you're very good.
Story: Thank you, Special Effects.

Re:You know...

[Xaositecte]

Why the hell would they? It's a fantasy movie that just happens to be set in a computer. Hint: Computer Scientist would point out that you can't actually put yourself in a computer. .

For the same reason the movie "The Core" had a science advisor.

Re:You know...

[Xaositecte]

Note that I have no idea what that reason is, only that it would be the same one.

Re:You know...

[Thing 1]

a PURELY IMPOSSIBLE affair

Those Hollywood cheats figure anyone can cheat on anything?

Re:You know...

[Anonymous Coward]

Because it stars that annoying little boy-man Leo DiCaprio.

Re:You know...

[Andy Smith]

You may not feel that way if you'd seen his last few films. Leo was a no-no for me until the trailer for Shutter Island caught our eye, so we went to see that and my opinion of Leo certainly changed. Him being in Inception didn't spoil it at all for me. Don't get me wrong, I still can't say I like him much, but he doesn't spoil a film for me anymore.

I vote for Inception...

[realsilly]

Not that the other contenders weren't good, but Inception really was quite the unique story with a very interesting twist. It was the talk of the town for the first 4 months+ of 2010.

I'm not a big DeCaprio fan at all, but his role was well done along with the others within the movie.

Re:I vote for Inception...

[spud603]

And this emphasizes the Academy's priorities. They care about making a popular TV event much more than awarding great movies. Just because a movie was "the talk of the town" for a long time doesn't make it good.
Inception was fine, but not exactly 'best movie of 2010' material.

Re:I vote for Inception...

[Anonymous Coward]

Inception was logically inconsistent, and the action sequences were just a bunch of guys shooting each other with mundane guns.

Re:I vote for Inception...

[OzPeter]

[Most Hollywood Action Flicks] are logically inconsistent, and the action sequences were just a bunch of guys shooting each other with mundane guns.

FTFY

Re:I vote for Inception...

[wjousts]

but Inception really was quite the unique story.

It's all a dream? That's a unique story? I remember our grade school English teacher forbidding us from doing that trick when writing stories because so many kids would do it as soon as they'd reached the required number of pages.

Re:I vote for Inception...

[billcopc]

Great, thank you. All this time I thought I had seen the wrong movie, while everyone I know raved about it, I thought it was just a whole lot of flashy nonsense, barely strung together by screenwriters who clearly didn't understand the subject matter they were trying to present.

I'm quite convinced there's an official step in screenwriting titled "Let's make up a bunch of random bullshit. People think weird nonsense is cool"

Re:I vote for Inception...

[Enderandrew]

I haven't seen Black Swan or The King's Speech yet. Let's assume most of the movies nominated were worth all the buzz. That doesn't change the fact that Inception is a masterfully crafted movie.

The beginning of the movie is chaotic with no explanation, and Nolan very slowly unravels his tale while interspersing action sequences without making them feel obligatory. He also edits between multiple layers cleanly. He tells a complex story without overt exposition. This is far harder than most people realize. He gets great performances from a number of actors, and pushes the visual barrier as well.

In the age of CGI and mammoth budgets, finding a way to show people something on film they've never seen is becoming harder and harder.

If that wasn't one of the five best directing perforances this year, then I don't know what to say.

For my money, Nolan is one of the best directors working today (along with Aranofsky, Boyle, Soderberg, and Spielberg) and this may have been his finest movie to date, and his most impressive directing work specifically.

And before someone goes screaming about the brilliance of the Cohen Brothers, or Clint Eastwood, or Polanski or anything like that, those guys can put together a fine drama. But their overall directorial acumen does pale compared to someone like Nolan.

Re:I vote for Inception...

[spud603]

I definitely agree that Inception was very well directed. I'd also like to point out that there's a whole category called "Best Director."
My biggest complaint about the movie is its plot. While a good story is not sufficient to make something the best movie of the year, it certainly is necessary.

Re:I vote for Inception...

[ukyoCE]

"It's all a dream"? You must have watched a different movie than me. Not only was it not "all a dream", but it was also nothing like the grade school "I-don't-know-how-to-resolve-this-so-lets-make-the-main-character-wake-up-and-it-was-all-a-dream" hack that you're referring to.

Re:I vote for Inception...

[ukyoCE]

The hotel loss-of-gravity action scene was a bit unique, but the action was still weak overall. It sort of felt like Nolan wrote the plot, took it to the studio, and they said "ok great whatever, it needs more action to sell". So they went back and added in the bits about dream defense force and threw in some guns and, unfortunately, probably sold more tickets as a result.

I'd be interested to hear what you thought was logically inconsistent about it, while you're at it.

Re:I vote for Inception...

[Enderandrew]

I apologize if I wasn't clear. When I said, "If that wasn't one of the five best directing perforances this year..." I was referring to the fact that it didn't get nominated for Best Director.

Re:I vote for Inception...

[Anonymous Coward]

Am I the only person on slashdot who thought Inception was rather horrible? There were too many holes in the storyline to keep me interested.

Re:I vote for Inception...

[Anonymous Coward]

College Humor summarised a couple of the plot holes in an amusing manner.

Movies like Inception can be considered great in spite of their plot holes, sub-par storytelling or horrendous acting, though, if they spark an idea in your mind that wasn't there before (see: Star Wars). Perhaps the only point these awards have is to stimulate debate about great movies among the legion of people who believe they were distributed inaccurately.

Re:I vote for Inception...

[cyberon22]

Respectfully, I don't think you understood Inception... let me try to explain:

Inception opens with a shot of children building a castle on the beach. This is a biblical reference to Matthew 7.24 and the parable of the wise and foolish builders. The film closes when Cobb's real children tell us they are building a castle “on the cliff”. So we start and end with a biblical story about how getting to heaven requires faith in God. This encourages us to read Inception as an allegorical journey towards redemption through faith, not an action film. Having failed to “buy his way” to heaven, Cobb gets there by taking a “leap of faith”.

If you are confused by the spinning top or self-referential nature of the movie (films are also dreams, and who is to say what message the audience will find in the safe?), that's because you aren't thinking critically about what you saw. People who argue about the spinning top for instance miss the point. The ending of the film is a heaven sequence depicting Cobb’s reunion with God. We have the forgiveness of sins (immigration), the family reunion and the return to the heavenly garden. In order to get there Cobb simply needs to forgive himself (for his complicity in his wife's death) and sacrifice his own life to rescue Saito from limbo. The point of the spinning top is that Cobb ignores it -- he has faith.

One more paragraph because in case you still think that this is a stretch, consider that Michael Caine plays a master architect (creator). Or consider the scene where Cobb stops by Paris to ask his father for guidance. After being chided for his worldliness and corruption (“I never taught you to steal”), Cobb argues he is doing the best he can in a fallen world. But when he asks for help, help is given in the form of a woman whose mythological name suggests her role is guide Cobb out of the maze that is the mortal world (“all dreams are mazes”).

Given that the film has lines like "you have to die to wake-up" I don't think Nolan can be accused of subtly. But if he's made a film that goes over the heads of most filmgoers, it can only be because people have been trained out of having any expectations from movies by the very sorts of films you criticize. So whatever you want to say about Inception go ahead, but calling it a logically inconsistent film with mundane action sequences is about as far off-mark as you can get. This is a film about ideas (it doesn't always give answers -- where does Cobb get the "genesis" of the idea of salvation). If you watch it with the right mindset, I think you'll have a lot more fun and realize how much better it is than anything else released this year!

Re:I vote for Inception...

[corbettw]

it [was] not "all a dream"

Are you sure about that? Maybe you should spin your top and see if it falls (or whatever it is you use).

Re:I vote for Inception...

[Enderandrew]

Pretty much any movie on the planet has plot holes. The question is whether or not the holes are so glaring they overshadow the rest of the film.

The Death Star didn't really need 30 minutes to navigate around a planet when they could have just blown it up, and then blown up the moon base immediately after.

Does that make Star Wars a terrible film?

Re:I vote for Inception...

[cyberon22]

I'm not sure what the plot holes are. The film is a Christian parable and the plot makes sense if you take it at its word.

I thought the linked video was funny, but if people are complaining seriously about whether "kicks" transcend levels in shared dreamspace is silly. The film deals with all of this stuff on the level of metaphor anyway.

Re:I vote for Inception...

[Anonymous Coward]

Spielberg?

Re:I vote for Inception...

[jgtg32a]

I agree with the holes but Nolan left them there intentionally so he could have an ambiguous ending; which is something I despise.

However the movie itself had my undivided attention for the full 2.5 hours or so. It was afterwords I was a little annoyed with it.

Re:I vote for Inception...

[Altus]

I'm not sure I would go as far as to say it was horrible, but I think its highly over rated. Plot holes, rather obvious twists and ending and acting that made most all of the characters blend together. It certainly didn't do it for me.

Re:I vote for Inception...

[Altus]

Fair enough, but how many popcorn actions films win best picture?

Re:I vote for Inception...

[Enderandrew]

That was supposedly a favor to the recently deceased Kubrick, where Spielberg finished Kubrick's project, as Kubrick wanted it done.

Some of Spielberg's later films don't have great endings, but those are all script flaws. Spielberg's track record also isn't perfect overall, but his resume is still pretty hard to ignore.

And his overall skills as a director are just top-notch.

Re:I vote for Inception...

[Rakarra]

I would rank Clint Eastwood towards the top of the list for his overall stunning directorial work.

Well, I would if The Hereafter didn't suck so much. :(

Re:I vote for Inception...

[Anonymous Coward]

College Humor summarised a couple of the plot holes in an amusing manner.

If the plot holes need to be pointed out to you, then they're irrelevant.

Re:I vote for Inception...

[Rary]

It's all a dream

Says who? We don't know if the top fell or not, so we don't know if he was dreaming or not. Realistically, when you piece it all together, it's more likely not a dream, but there is just the suggestion that maybe, just maybe, it is. But that's not even the point. The point is that Cobb didn't stick around to find out. It was reality to him. His children finally turned around. He was home. It doesn't matter if "home" is real or not. Either way, it's "home" to him.

Re:I vote for Inception...

[LateArthurDent]

films are also dreams, and who is to say what message the audience will find in the safe?

I think your interpretation of the movie proves that point. I think that many of the things you've mentioned were not in the film for the reasons you state, but you've glued them together in a coherent form.

That's not a bad thing. Art isn't about the intent of the artist, it's about what the audience get out of it. Even if I disagree with aspects of your interpretation, I found it extremely interesting. I do have a singular problem with it:

People who argue about the spinning top for instance miss the point. The ending of the film is a heaven sequence depicting Cobb’s reunion with God. We have the forgiveness of sins (immigration), the family reunion and the return to the heavenly garden. In order to get there Cobb simply needs to forgive himself (for his complicity in his wife's death) and sacrifice his own life to rescue Saito from limbo. The point of the spinning top is that Cobb ignores it -- he has faith.

Cobb didn't put the spinning top down and walk away. He looked at his family, he let them go on ahead of him, then he spun the object on the table and stared intently at it. When he was satisfied that it would stop spinning, as it slowed down for a bit, that's when he walked away to join his family.

Here's the catch: he didn't actually wait for it to stop spinning completely. A small amount of hope was sufficient. It's less about faith and more about knowing that he could be happy there, whether it's real or not. Once he had enough room to accept the possibility that it was real, he didn't want to ruin it by finding out it's not. Ignorance is bliss. This really was the problem his wife had all along...she suspected the world she was living in wasn't real, but who cares? She was living a good life with someone she loved and he loved her back. Why even try to wake up from that?

Re:I vote for Inception...

[bravecanadian]

For my money, Nolan is one of the best directors working today (along with Aranofsky, Boyle, Soderberg, and Spielberg) and this may have been his finest movie to date, and his most impressive directing work specifically.

For my money Christopher Nolan is the best director today, period.

He has a technical mastery of his art but never lets the technical get in the way of the story.

He is also equally adept at arthouse pictures (Following, Memento) and blockbusters (Batman, Inception).

I've been a huge fan since Memento and he hasn't disappointed yet.

Even his "weaker" movies are good. (Insomnia for example - which on a second viewing recently I actually enjoyed Pacino's performance more)

Re:I vote for Inception...

[garompeta]

You can get a religious interpretation from anything. You can even interpret Lolita as a biblical allegory, because the bible is just that: a book of metaphors and myths that attempts to explain our human condition. Throw anything to the screen and it CAN become a biblical allegory/analogy. And hanging from words like "genesis" is simply childish, it merely a latin word... please don't greek and latin words as christians. If you think it is a reference to the book of Genesis, you clearly are forcing it making a collage of biblical references without any coherence. Genesis just means "origin", and clearly they use this word to describe a process of how original ideas are generated becoming the roots of our convictions. Please don't usurp greek and latin words, monopolizing them as christians references. Dying to wake-up? Humans have been playing with this idea independently from Christianity and Judaism, by just revising ancient Greek philosophers you will find tons of references. If you are decided to see a Christian allegory, you will see it... And you are missing the most important "cliff", the cliffhanger. We will never know if the kids in the end are real or imaginary, and here we have a very interesting point to start a metaphysical debate about the movie.

From my psychological perspective, Inception is a very amusing exploration of our unconscious, with a lot of metaphors that describe real psychological processes (taking some licenses, of course) The intervention of the real phenomenas and its effects in our dreams is a known phenomena, the water pouring into the dream when DiCaprio gets "the kick" in the bathtub is a beautiful representation of this effect. The "inception" of an idea, can be traced to the real life effect of planting false memories and later having cryptomnesia.

Re:I vote for Inception...

[ukyoCE]

If you go into a movie trying to hate it, you're pretty much guaranteed to hate it. I'd bet your supposed plotholes were explicitly explained in the movie if you had bothered to pay attention instead of spending the whole time grasping at straws.

Re:I vote for Inception...

[ukyoCE]

The ending was unambiguous - the top didn't fall, and indeed, couldn't have. The movie was explicit that dying wouldn't wake them up because of the sedatives. Saito shot Cobb. He woke up in limbo imagining that he made it home, thanks to Saito convincing him (an inception) that he could get Cobb through customs.

Saito may have been planning to shoot Cobb into limbo all along, but that isn't completely clear. It's likely though, since Saito insisted on going along with them.

Re:I vote for Inception...

[Anonymous Coward]

LOL, you're a moron.

Re:I vote for Inception...

[Maxo-Texas]

Well, as far as the top goes, Nolan stays on the top until it starts to wobble. Nolan could have cut .5 seconds earlier and there would have been no wobble. That was an intentional editing choice.

Re:I vote for Inception...

[Cederic]

Inception was good, but I found it a little bit overrated - much of the buzz is from people who thought that because they couldn't understand it first time it must be special.

It is good, but it's not special. It's great that it's a commercial success, and that it's broken the trend of braindead blockbusters, but it's still a blockbuster.

I'll concede though that I'm not a great fan of Nolan. He's professional and competent and clearly highly successful, I'm just not drawn to his films the way many people are.

Aronofsky on the other hand knows how to reach inside me and twist. I saw Black Swan tonight (it's only just opened here in the UK) and although I left the cinema three hours ago I'm still reeling. The plot is trivial - particularly in comparison to Inception - but the acting, the direction, the pacing, the tension and the music are just stunning. By far the best film I've seen at the cinema for years.

Re:I vote for Inception...

[Cederic]

Eastwood has a fantastic sensitivity and humour in his direction. The Outlaw Josey Wales and A Perfect World both mix sad humour in amongst their action, and Unforgiven is a masterpiece.

Re:I vote for Inception...

[Cederic]

Hmm, no. There are many directors I'd rather watch than Nolan.

Scorcese, Scott (Ridley _and_ Tony), Aronofsky, Eastwood, Cameron, Gilliam, Fincher, Rodrigues, von Trier, Park, even Spielberg and Tarantino. And those are just the directors I look out for, I've seen films I've enjoyed far more than any Nolan films by other directors that aren't as consistently good.

He has a technical mastery of his art but never lets the technical get in the way of the story.

I accept this - he's clearly talented. So are the Coen Brothers, and I've yet to enjoy a movie by them either. I'm clearly just strange.

Re:I vote for Inception...

[Enderandrew]

Wow. Anyone who must have liked it must have been so stupid as to not comprehend the movie?

That isn't an elitist statement. Your opinion is such irrefutable fact that others who feel differently must be intellectually challenged.

Re:I vote for Inception...

[Cederic]

I didn't state whether I understood the film on first viewing or not. I didn't state whether understanding or not was an indicator of intelligence.

I merely pointed out that people assume that a film they can't understand must be good because everyone's talking about it to try and understand it.

There are films that are good that aren't easily understood - Donnie Darko is one of my favourites - but incomprehensibility is not an automatic indicator of quality.

Wow. Anyone who must have liked it must have been so stupid as to not comprehend the movie?

Your sarcasm is unwarranted and implies a degree of defensiveness - what's the matter, failed to understand the movie and feel inferior?

Re:I vote for Inception...

[Enderandrew]

Spy Kids and Once Upon a Time in Mexico Rodriguez?

He is a very efficient filmmaker. He shoots very quickly. He has a very good grasp of cinematography. I don't think he has a very good idea of what makes a good film. In trying to follow up El Mariachi, he made it progressively worse with each new take.

Watch one of the director's cuts of T2 and note how James Cameron was fighting for surreal dream sequences that would have destroyed the pacing of thankfully the amazing action film the studio delivered. Cameron also took two horror franchises and turned them both into action franchises. I'm not sure he understands the differences. He also this week ripped Hollywood for how unoriginal their scripts are, despite the fact that his writing is uninspired and derivative.

Tarantino is all style and no substance. There is always at least one scene in each film he drags out way too long. He is also a plagiarist and a self-professed auteur. He believes in taking credit for the work of others.

Tony and Ridley Scott have turned in a few great films, but they blend together because they can't seem to escape the same style of filmmaking. They are one-trick ponies.

Gilliam is very up and down, probably because he takes so many risks.

Several of Lars von Trier's films have been universally panned as terrible movies. You're going to have a hard time convincing me you're one of the five best directors working today when you constantly put out bombs.

I've never seen a Chan Woo Park film. I can't really comment.

I won't rip Scorcese, Eastwood or Fincher. They're amazing, but second-tier directors in my book. Aronofsky made my top 5.

Nolan's LOWEST rated movie on Rotten Tomatoes (an aggregate of all reviews) is The Prestige at 75%. The "twist" end turned some people off, but again it was masterfully directed. For my money, it was the single best movie that year.

Re:I vote for Inception...

[Enderandrew]

For someone so arrogant in assuming the rest of the world can't comprehend a movie, you didn't comprehend my post.

Re:I vote for Inception...

[Cederic]

Several of Lars von Trier's films have been universally panned as terrible movies.

A lot of people hate his entire body of work, but Breaking the Waves is excellent, Dancer in the Dark horrifyingly brilliant and Dogville was inventive, brave and viscious.

He does cock it up at times, but he's pushing boundaries and creating films to challenge his audience, not to draw a big box office. I respect that, and that's why I'll always pick one of his films ahead of Nolan.

Haneka has a similar challenging approach, and creates very watchable films; his peaks just aren't as high.

I've never seen a Chan Woo Park film. I can't really comment.

I greatly enjoyed his Vengeance trilogy - maybe start in the middle with Old Boy, it has a very unpredictably convoluted plot but surrounds it with beautifully nuanced scenes, some extremely dark humour and several good acting performances.

Nolan's LOWEST rated movie on Rotten Tomatoes (an aggregate of all reviews) is The Prestige at 75%.

I have friends that consider The Prestige one of his better ones and consistently rate his films very highly. I just disagree.

Re:I vote for Inception...

[cyberon22]

If the film started and ended with a reference to Plato's Republic, I agree it would make sense to discuss Greek philosophy on Slashdot. Otherwise... let us just agree that there is a lot of water in the film.

There is so much water in fact that someone who took film seriously might even ask if it is being used symbolically. Perhaps it isn't coincidental that the opening shot to Inception is basically the same as that to A.I.. or that water has been a standard literary symbol for the subconscious since the nineteenth century. Maybe it isn't accidental that Nolan even has his characters talk about the "shores of our subconscious" while the camera is showing a shot of the ocean.

So no... I don't worry about over-interpreting when I see a film about death and faith reference a well-known parable about death and faith. Where I wonder if I'm over-interpreting is when I notice things like it being a glass of water that sends Fischer to sleep on the plane.

Re:I vote for Inception...

[Thing 1]

The multiple layers part was what did it for me. I've had 3-layer dreams, back in high school: I "woke up" and got ready for school, walked outside and got hit by the bus. Then I "woke up" and said "dammit I already got ready for school!", and got ready for school, walked outside and got his by the bus again. Woke up, "the fuck man, this is the third time" and jumped away as the bus narrowly missed me.

So, was it just coincidence, or were my dreams a series of premonitions saving me from the bus? Dunno, but now my printer is on fire.

Re:I vote for Inception...

[Thing 1]

Or rather, "people feel weird nonsense is cool."

Re:I vote for Inception...

[cyberon22]

Cobb didn't put the spinning top down and walk away. He looked at his family, he let them go on ahead of him, then he spun the object on the table and stared intently at it.

Watch the ending again:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XQPy88-E2zo

Cobb walks in and spins the top, then sees his family and walks away. We get the line about the kids building a house on the cliff (nonsensical in any other interpretation) and then everyone disappears. The camera closes on the spinning top in an empty room.

Once he had enough room to accept the possibility that it was real, he didn't want to ruin it by finding out it's not.

The seduction offered by Mal (malevolent?) in limbo is exactly what you describe above. I'm paraphrasing here, but what she essentially says to him is, "you don't *know* there is anything else out there, so why not enjoy being here with me and the children." Cobb rejects it, and we see the wisdom of this as Limbo is subsequently destroyed as per the parable.

Re:I vote for Inception...

[cyberon22]

Of course it was intentional.... He deliberately asks "is this real or a dream" because he wants you to think about it.

You only get to the answer "neither" by understanding the film. :)

Re:I vote for Inception...

[stewartjm]

The top is (potentially) a red herring. We're explicitely told that totems(the top) let their owner determine if they are in someone else's dream. If the whole movie was Cobb's(or Mal's) dream, then Cobb's totem would tell Cobb whatever he(she) wanted it to. Also Cobb has another Totem, watch for his wedding ring.

I think the whole movie is meant to be open to interpretation each viewer, and I like it that way.

Re:I vote for Inception...

[Maxo-Texas]

Yes, I know about Cobb's wedding ring and confirmed on a rewatch that it does disappear and appear suitably.

It would be subject to the same concern tho as the totem behaves consistently with the ring when he thinks to check it and isn't interrupted.

I think of the Ring as Nolan's ultimate clue to reality and non-reality but it could just as easily be "the top level dream vs the lower level dreams".

A key factor (for me) tho is that we have scenes of characters interacting where Cobb isn't present. That overcomes the possible unreliable narrator and says they must be real.

I know who will get it

[Anonymous Coward]

If it's as political as last year it'll be The Social Network that gets it. Think about it. American Dream, baby! What better way to appease the masses than by reminding them that they shouldn't mind all the injustice and hardship because they too can be the next winner of the American Lotte^H^H^H^H^HDream.

Re:I know who will get it

[siride]

Slashdotters really need to learn to use stty properly.

Re:I know who will get it

[Mbraz]

Dream by dream, Inception will gonna get it.

Re:I know who will get it

[operagost]

Sour grapes much? We have a half-black man who grew up poor and was ultimately abandoned by both parents as the President of the USA, and you think success in America is all luck?

Re:I know who will get it

[Steauengeglase]

Honestly, I was pleasantly surprised by it. It wasn't really about worshiping Zuckerberg's success, but that he neither walked away from his success with his self-respect in tact, nor did it buy him friends. Granted that is probably far from the truth, but that's the flaw with moral fables.

Also from the coder's perspective, it was probably one of the least condescending films I've seen in years. Granted that gets a stretched more and more as the movie progresses (can't say I've ever had any success with programming based drinking games or had a boss who expected me to code while surrounded by stoned half-naked coeds), but I never had the urge to throw something at the screen and scream.

Re:I know who will get it

[Anonymous Coward]

American Dream, baby! What better way to appease the masses than by reminding them that they shouldn't mind all the injustice and hardship because they too can be the next winner of the American Lotte^H^H^H^H^HDream.

You can't win if you don't play, so don't cry about it while pissing away time on free software and the Internet.

Re:I know who will get it

[wed128]

Yea, clearly success in America is promising things you can't deliver!

Re:I know who will get it

[corbettw]

Best. Post. Ever.

Wait...what?

[Anonymous Coward]

I was hoping to find some relevance in the article.

There wasn't any.

Not very excited this year

[elrous0]

Maybe I'm just getting old, but I haven't been very interested in most of the Oscar films in years. Every now and then I'll see a movie that really impresses me, but they almost never get Oscar nom's (occasionally they'll get Independent Spirit nominations). But some of my favorite movies/TV shows of the last decade never got any attention at all from any of these awards shows. Session 9 was the best horror film of the decade and never got any attention from any award show. Did Firefly or Battlestar Galactica ever win an Emmy? Nope.

Re:Not very excited this year

[TheReij]

BSG won a Peabody which is FAR more prestigous than any Emmy nomination.

Re:Not very excited this year

[Anonymous Coward]

Oscars are just a marketing tool to squeeze a bit more money out of a few select movies. "select" meaning chosen based on business considerations.

I don't think any film I'd categorise as outstanding ever won an Oscar. Not that I care, since the Oscar isn't an award for quality anyway.

Re:Not very excited this year

[Seumas]

I've *never* cared. For the same reason that I don't care about the Employee of the Month or Employee of the Year at wherever it is you work. Or why I don't care about MVP for some sports team. Or the same reason I don't care who wins the Best Real Estate Agent of the Year award from the Realtor industry.

Re:Not very excited this year

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe I'm just getting old, but I haven't been very interested in most of the Oscar films in years. Every now and then I'll see a movie that really impresses me, but they almost never get Oscar nom's (occasionally they'll get Independent Spirit nominations).

Really? Some nominations that I thought were good (and sawing in the cinema): Inception, Up in the Air, Inglorious Basters, No Country for Old Men, Juno, Lost in Translation, LotR, The Pianist, Gosford Park, Gladiator, etc.

Did they all win? Of course not, but it's certainly a good way of weeding out a lot of the crap (though not always: Shakespeare in Love? Over Life is Beautiful? Really?).

Re:Not very excited this year

[MightyMartian]

What I don't like is it's overtly, almost proudly American-centric view of the cinema. They've got the Best Foreign Film category, but come on, look at a giant like Kurosawa, who made a half-dozen films that are ranked as being among the greatest ever made. He won a best Foreign Film nod, as well as a Lifetime Achievement Award (which is sort of a sucker prize for great filmmakers or actors who the Academy has ineptly never given proper recognition for).

Re:Not very excited this year

[asylumx]

Because you don't want to work hard enough to win one yourself?

Re:Not very excited this year

[HungWeiLo]

There was a time when the rap group Three 6 Mafia had an Oscar, and Martin Scorsese did not.

Re:Not very excited this year

[LSD-25]

Did Firefly or Battlestar Galactica ever win an Emmy? Nope.

Battlestar Galactica (reimagined) won twice for special visual effects, once for sound editing, and one for a "Razor" featurette.

Re:Not very excited this year

[Cederic]

Call me sad, but I enjoyed Shakespeare in Love. As trashy plagiarised romances go it was professionally made :)

How to train: yaay!

[MobyDisk]

As a fan of animation and kid's movies, I think How to Train Your Dragon was hugely underrated. It is one of those movies that even a 2 year old can sit through and comprehend, which is a rarity for a full-length movie. But the subtlety of the characters is great and the emotions were well acted and realistic. The main character also appeals to the inner geek. There is certainly nothing mind-blowing in it, and the CG is average. But if you like this style of movie and have never seen it I highly recommend it.

Re:How to train: yaay!

[Wulfstan]

Yep I totally agree! I watched it at the with my son on the big screen and actually found it lovely and moving - although unfortunately I have a feeling it lacks the star appeal to get itself top billing for an Oscar. Storyline was great, I found the script a bit weak in places, but for junior geeks I thought a great message about brains over brawn.

Oh, and thanks a lot, you useless reptile :-)

Re:How to train: yaay!

[Stenchwarrior]

I really liked HTTYD, but I felt that Jay Baruchel was not the best choice for the main character. Don't get me wrong, I like the guy and he plays a great geek, but his voice just didn't seem to fit the movie.

Re:How to train: yaay!

[wkurzius]

The amount of advertising that this movie put out during the Olympics was offensive. I figured it had to be horrible if they were pushing it that much. Perhaps I was wrong.

Re:How to train: yaay!

[MobyDisk]

I guess it depends on what you watch. I made this post because I had never heard of the movie until we were looking for kid safe movies and thought we would try it out. I figured nobody had ever heard of it until now.

Re:How to train: yaay!

[Anonymous Coward]

Try Cloudy With A Chance Of Meatballs then.

Re:How to train: yaay!

[kellyb9]

I agree - How to train your dragon was one of the best animated films I've seen in years. It really seemed to come out of nowhere.

Re:How to train: yaay!

[Anonymous Coward]

I agree with you on your first point (that it is a great film). On your second, though -- the CG is amazing in that movie. What 3D film has done better? Did you see the water/fx/dragons/amazing cgi? That movie had some incredible work done on it.

Re:How to train: yaay!

[MobyDisk]

I'm not criticizing it, I just don't want someone to go out and watch the movie with the expectation of being blown away by the CG. It isn't photo-realistic and it isn't intended to be. The water and fire effects were awesome. The forests and mountains and fog were beautiful. The characters were sufficient.

What 3D film has done better? The Animatrix, the Final Fantasy movies.

Re:How to train: yaay!

[TheFlyingGoat]

Agree 100%. Not only is it the best animated feature of the year (Toy Story 3 was good but not great), but probably one of the best animated features ever. It does a better job of character development than most movies and the main character is easy to relate to, especially for those of us that are categorized as nerds (social outcast, smart, good with gadgets, likes the hot chick, etc). My almost 3 year old son loves it and I don't mind watching it with him dozens of times.

As for the other movies, I have yet to see most of them, but will eventually. I did see The Social Network in the theaters and thought it was good considering the topic, but not on the same level as previous winners. It's worth watching, but I don't think it's worthy of winning.

Re:How to train: yaay!

[BonquiquiShiquavius]

This! I really liked the movie too, but every time that kid opened his mouth, I cringed a little. Whiny little runt.

Re:How to train: yaay!

[Cederic]

Maybe I'm a few decades too old, but that wasn't a good film.

Re:How to train: yaay!

[Anonymous Coward]

Then I'd say what you didn't care for was the art direction, which is a different department :-)

Re:How to train: yaay!

[pocketcookies]

I agree. How to Train your Dragon completely surprised me with how good it was. It was incredibly moving and well-told. I think it could easily compete with other movies especially those in the Animation category.

Re:How to train: yaay!

[antdude]

I enjoyed it. I hope the sequels will be good too. I also want a pet dragon too. Wait, I sort of do... ;)

Re:How to train: yaay!

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't care how the movie turned out; I simply refuse to reward those advertising dollars by having anything to do with the picture.

You'll have to wait a month...

[bobdotorg]

... to find out the winners.

But only a week for the screeners to hit Usenet!!! Yay!!!

Re:You'll have to wait a month...

[leamanc]

Okay, I see you don't know how screeners work. They are sent out to the Academy members so that they can decide who to nominate, i.e., the results of which were announced today. Therefore, the screeners have been out for quite some time (since at least December). On Usenet, probably. And your favorite torrent tracker.

Exit through the gift shop

[OzPeter]

I saw this recently and was astounded by 2 things: 1) How a weird guy (Thiery) could convince a bunch of people to basically give him a boatload of money for questionable "art" - he seemed to out-Warhol Warhol! and 2) Seeing Banksy hanging his work in the Tate and nobody realizing that they had an extra image or two on their walls!

Re:Exit through the gift shop

[Seumas]

I would give anything for Netflix to get the mother fucking clue, already. I can't tell you how many times I have clicked the "DO NOT FUCKING RECOMMEND THIS PIECE OF SHIT TO ME" button and yet it keeps popping up EVERY time as a suggestion. I said I didn't give a shit about this Banksy fucktard yesterday and I still don't care about him today. STOP SUGGESTING IT TO ME!

The only thing even nearly as annoying is how it keeps suggesting fucking stand up comedy films to me. Comedians are boring assholes. How many times do I have to vote down comedian films before you figure me out, you shitty fucking algorithm! GAAAAR!

Re:Exit through the gift shop

[slim]

It's a fantastic film -- I'd recommended it to anyone, even if they're not "into that kind of thing" (by which I assume, street art).

But let's not assume too much about its veracity, eh?

Re:Exit through the gift shop

[OzPeter]

But let's not assume too much about its veracity, eh?

I don't think that that film had a budget big enough to fake Thiery's "accomplishments", or the line of people waiting to see his "art". But Banksy is pretty well documented

Re:Exit through the gift shop

[Anonymous Coward]

calm down

Re:Exit through the gift shop

[slim]

Well, I wrote a bit about it, but then I deleted it because it had too many spoilers.

Suffice to say that I think the LA show was a bit of a Candid Camera stunt, with the punters as the stooges.

Re:Exit through the gift shop

[OzPeter]

Well, I wrote a bit about it, but then I deleted it because it had too many spoilers.

Suffice to say that I think the LA show was a bit of a Candid Camera stunt, with the punters as the stooges.

Thats what I mean about Thiery taking the Andy Warhol theme and running with it to the extreme (and I think even that point was basically covered in the film). I can see that LA show playing out exactly as shown and people reacting exactly as they did, and spending all their $$$

Re:Exit through the gift shop

[slim]

Mmm, but I think Thiery may be a work of fiction to some extent -- and more Banksy's creation than his own.

Inception and TSN, perhaps.

[a Flatbed Darkly]

But I heavily doubt that anyone could state TS3 worthy of an Oscar were it not for the drought of good "mainstream" cinema. The rest of the nominees are mostly above average, I'd say, but in no way is TS3 deserving of an Oscar. This is, though, an undeniable step up from last year's glut of cheap action movies and thrillers.

Re:Inception and TSN, perhaps.

[bigstrat2003]

Well, neither is the damn Facebook movie, so it's in good company if what you say is true (haven't seen TS3, so I don't have an opinion).

Re:Inception and TSN, perhaps.

[atrain728]

"Toy Story 3" was a hell of a lot better way to spend 2 hours than "The Kids are All Right." That movie was just dreadful, and yet I keep seeing it nominated for things.

Re:Inception and TSN, perhaps.

[Sockatume]

They have to nominate something in the animated category, and TS3 was very well-received. I'd like to see The Illusionist get it though.

Re:Inception and TSN, perhaps.

[adwarf]

It was nominated for Best Picture as well, which is what GP was complaining about.

Re:Inception and TSN, perhaps.

[Cederic]

I heavily doubt that anyone could state TS3 worthy of an Oscar were it not for ...

A well respected film critic in the UK rates TS3 as the best of the trilogy, and indeed rates the trilogy as the best trilogy in cinema.

Note that he also rated Inception as his film of the year, so he'd probably back it ahead of TS3 for the Best Picture award, but I suspect he'd also support TS3 for the Oscar nomination and for the Best Animated Feature award.

Me, I'm nearer to your position: TS3 was frankly shite.

Oscar Speech drinking game

[Anonymous Coward]

For any North-American recipients, drink a shot when they do NOT rattle off a whole list of names they want to "thank"

For any European recipient, drink a shot when they do NOT have some witty story/interesting anecdote to tell

Re:Oscar Speech drinking game

[Whalou]

For any North-American recipients, drink a shot when they do NOT rattle off a whole list of names they want to "thank"

For any European recipient, drink a shot when they do NOT have some witty story/interesting anecdote to tell

I haven't watched the Oscars in a long time but that actually looks to me like the AA version of a drinking game.

Re:Oscar Speech drinking game

[Opportunist]

Now why the heck would I want to watch the awards sober?

Re:Oscar Speech drinking game

[DMUTPeregrine]

Sober! Why, most north americans will spend at least 10 seconds before they start thanking people. If you can't get a minimum of four shots in then you haven't lined up the pre-poured shots right!

Re:Oscar Speech drinking game

[Opportunist]

But I can only drink when they do NOT do that.

Teamspeak

[jpedlow]

For a brief second, I thought that TeamSpeak3 got an oscar Nomination.
I was (not so) shocked to see ventrilo was left out of the running. :P

Technology?

[mutherhacker]

How is this news for Geeks? I don't get it.

Re:Technology?

[Stenchwarrior]

Because How to Train-- casts Jay Baruchel...the ultimate geek.

Re:Technology?

[slim]

Because of Natalie Portman's hot grits scene in Black Swan?

Re:Technology?

[damn_registrars]

It's here because its about facebook. And CmdrTaco wishes that this site was as ubiquitous as facebook, so he'll cover any story that references facebook in an attempt to bring back some of the prestige (and traffic) that this site once had. Of course, Taco might also be just a little jealous over the fact that facebook kid managed to make zillions of dollars by selling snake oil through his web site, while Taco is still driving an old Geo Metro...

Re:Technology?

[gman003]

I would place this under the "Stuff That Matters" category. These awards, while not important on the long-term grand scheme of things, are at least important enough that people will be talking about them for a week or so, and will possibly be discussed years from now by film students (I know for a fact that "Citizen Kane lost at the Oscars" still pops up in film history books, and if one of this year's picks ends up as "the greatest movie ever", the same could happen).

The score

[PhrostyMcByte]

The movie was good, but John Powell's score to How to Train Your Dragon was phenomenal. Almost year later and it still gives me goosebumps to hear it. I don't expect it to win Best Score (Inception and The Social Network are just too popular), but it certainly deserves it.

Re:The score

[MobyDisk]

Agreed. We bought the soundtrack too.

TSN? Gimme a break

[ggambett]

I honestly don't understand the hype surrounding The Social Network. It's an OK movie at best. Not bad, but nothing memorable either. Inception should beat it in every category, yet everybody is talking about TSN. WTF?

Re:TSN? Gimme a break

[fpp]

My opinion only of course, but The Social Network is the best film of the year, followed closely by Inception. That opinion is not based on what anyone else says, that's based on me seeing it without knowing much about it when I went in. The reason why The Social Network comes first? Excellent directing, dense, rapid-fire, intelligent script, a great score, sharp, effective editing, and effective casting and performances all around. Hell, even the cinematography is excellent, especially when you see it on Bluray. There are few films that hold my attention all the way through. Most of them slow down or get down right boring during the saggy middle act. Not The Social Network. It was riveting all the way through. It's very difficult to create a good movie about anything, and it's damn near impossible to create a good movie that's mostly someone talking or typing on the keyboard, or telling a complex story cohesively. The Social Network does it all extremely well. I liked Inception, but I had difficulty following the plot. For that reason alone, it goes to my number 2 spot.

Re:TSN? Gimme a break

[kellyb9]

I liked Inception, but I had difficulty following the plot.

Of course you had trouble following the plot, it's a science fiction movie.

The Illusionist?

[Anonymous Coward]

While I really liked The Illusionist (had a lot of The Prestige) wasn't it a 2006 movie?

News for Nerds?

[bobbocanfly]

I feel to see how this falls under the topic of "News for Nerds?". A glossy Disney pop-scifi remake of an old cult nerd film is about the only nerdy thing on there. The Social Network was an overhyped fictitious story which had very little of the technological aspect. Toy Story 3 is just a kids film, a very good one at that, but in no way really nerdy.

127 hours too

[ideaz]

Hey even 127 hours got 6 nominations i guess...

Inception: where do I get those tank treads?

[LordNacho]

If you watched the movie, you might have noticed in the snow scenes, there's a vehicle that has 4 triangular tank tread kinda things, instead of normal, round tyres. What are they called, and are they commercially available?

Re:Inception: where do I get those tank treads?

[mikestew]

I don't recall exactly the machine they were running in the movie, but yes, the tracks are commercially available. Since /.'s paste functionality is broken, punch "articat triangular snow tracks" into Google and click the second link.

Re:Inception: where do I get those tank treads?

[LordNacho]

Sweet! Thanks for that link.

Re:Inception: where do I get those tank treads?

[Marc_Hawke]

Not only are they available, but checking their main page, http://www.mattracks.com/ they are advertizing their role in Inception. I wonder which direction that relationship came from. Did the director want the tracks, or does Mattracks actively court films trying to get some product placement in there?

Oh boy here we go

[McTickles]

Seen all three movies, thankfuly didn't pay for them:

- Inception: interesting premise (has been done before however) but absolute crap execution. Expected a deeply philosophical movie, ended up with an Matrix-ish action flick. A wasted opportunity.
- Toy Story 3: ok, deja vu, but ok entertainment, nothing exceptional.
- The Social Network: absolutely boring all the way thru, wasn't entertained for even a second. this has to be one of the most overhyped movies of all time. a very bad movie, even if it wasn't about
one of the worse assholes on the planet (Zuckerberg) it would still be a bad movie. A boring movie about the life of an asshole... wonderful...

Re:Oh boy here we go

[Anonymous Coward]

Seen all three movies, thankfuly didn't pay for them:

Is it safe to assume you are boasting of your piracy? If so, then your opinion on the movies is meaningless.

I was in a candy shop in the mall, and a girl came up and took a candy and started eating it. She said it was horrible and put it back. The cashier walked up and took the candy and went to throw it away. The girl then interrupted and asked if she could have it, since they were just going to toss it out anyway. This person's opinion of the candy is as worthless as the review of a pirate, and for the same reasons.

(If you meant that someone else paid for your ticket, or some other interpretation of "didn't pay" then the above paragraph does not apply to you.)

Re:Oh boy here we go

[mibe]

You expected a deeply philosophical movie from Inception? Based on what? It was hyped for its stunning special effects and action sequences and directed by the guy who had just done two Batman movies. Inception delivers unless you went into it with ridiculous expectations.

Re:Oh boy here we go

[McTickles]

Well sorry but when you have a theme/story like that the least the director can do is not turn it into an action flick. It is just ridiculous to waste that sort of
story on yet another action flick.

I remember Nolan solely for The Prestige and this wasn't an action flick, if anything it was Nolan's only good movie I can remember.

If Nolan wants to waste his talent on action flicks then he is free to do so, but not mislead the public with the promise of a good plot...

Re:Oh boy here we go

[ukyoCE]

Eh, they had to add in action for it to sell tickets. Kinda lame. But it still had a great story underpinning it.

I'm still surprised how few people figured out that Saito incepted Cobb (with the idea he could get through customs into the US) and sent him to limbo on purpose (when he shot him at the end). I guess the plot really was too complicated -- we have only Nolan to blame for not being more blunt about it.

Most people instead sought a simple explanation for the movie's ending despite it being inconsistent, and then complained that the movie had plotholes or was inconsistent. Doh.

Inception: The Social Network

[cdp0]

First I read it as "Inception: The Social Network", and I was wondering if this is the next generation social network, to which you will connect in your dreams.
That would've put Facebook to shame.

TSN shouldn't be there.

[JustAnotherIdiot]

Lets be totally honest, if you made the exact same movie in an alternate universe where no one cared about facebook, the movie would have bombed. The /only/ reason that TSN did as well as it did wasn't because it was a great movie, but because every idiot facebook user went "lololololol lets go see that facebook movie"

Inception?

[judoguy]

It was OK at best. Not bad, but not groundbreaking like so many people have told me. It's basically a sting/complex heist movie where some team members are hustling the mark, other team members are trying to get through some problem while the clock runs out, etc.

The dream aspect added a little, but not a really innovative film.

If Inception wins...

[Anonymous Coward]

I think the acceptance speech should simply be the horn that played throughout the trailer.

BWWWWWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHH.

Coolest Interpretation of Inception.

[Maxo-Texas]

A man (Decaprio) gets on a plane, first class to america.

The movie starts with his really vivid dream about the other people in 1st class.

He wakes up, gets off the plane and goes home to his children.

Toy Story 3 was perfect

[Maxo-Texas]

There is just no other way to put it.
Perfect voice acting, perfect writing, perfect plot.

It was truly the third act and just incredibly well done.

I think I will watch it again several more times in my life.

Fuck the Oscars

[Latinhypercube]

No nomination for original score for Tron ??!!!! You must be fucking crazy. No visual effects are art direction for Tron ??!!!! Fuck the Oscars. Wish Ricky Gervais could be there to shit on your parade.

Thanks

[snowwrestler]

I loved Inception and appreciated it as a commentary on the movie making and movie watching experiences. But I had never considered it from an allegorical perspective, probably because I am not religious myself. Thanks for your great comment.

Re:Thanks

[cyberon22]

Thanks for the reply. I agree the self-referential bits about movie-making were actually the best parts.... :) I only caught the Matthew 7:24 reference because I was seeing it in translation and the last line by the kid was subtitled. What bizarre dialogue, I remember thinking and then had one of those moments of realization where it is like something hits you.

A fantastic movie anyway. And a blast to watch even without thinking about the intellectual side at all!

Excuse me?

[damn_registrars]

if one of this year's picks ends up as "the greatest movie ever"

I don't know what kind of crack you're smoking to come up with the possibility of that alternate reality.

Re:Excuse me?

[gman003]

"Citizen Kane", which is the current most popular pick for "best movie ever", was received rather poorly on release. It was nominated as an "arty" film, not a broadly-appealing one. It wasn't really until decades later that it was considered a masterpiece. The same could happen this year, as with any.

Jacki Weaver for Animal Kingdom

[AHuxley]

I hope she wins. Animal Kingdom projects an amazing image of aspects of Australian crime.

Incendies

[yanos]

That film is nominated in the foreign film category and I would like to advise anyone who is even remotely interested in cinema to see it. Powerful stuff, to say the least. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1255953/

I am Sorry

[wmthomsen]

I am sorry what your guys opinions are, but Social Network doesn't deserve to win any of the awards, the movie is not that good of a movie, movie wise. I could give a care less about how facebook started. I like movies that actually are awesome like inception.