|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Mar 08, 2010 3:32 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Mar 08, 2010 6:22 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Mar 08, 2010 11:44 am
|
|
|
|
It didn't win Sound Mixing, which it deserved. Actually, it won the award I think it would have deserved THE LEAST (Granted, it had the worst visual effects of the three films nominated. I put Avatar down in the pool, though District 9 should have won because not only were its effects more realistic, but done on such a miniscule budget by comparison. Only 35 mill, which is cheap as hell for a summer blockbuster).
I only watch the Oscars because I gamble. Mad 42 bucks out of a possible 50. I know the Oscars are, and have always been pretty meaningless. But there is always one category that is just so off with its winner that you want to vomit.
This year (and often times, it is...) Best Short Subject, animation. I have seen all the animated Shorts and the Winner, Logorama, may be nonstop laughs, but it's also a glorified Web Cartoon. I've seen similar work on the same scale done by two or three animators in class. Point is, what is exceptional about it?
"A Matter of Loaf and Death" was a much more complex animation, technique wise and story wise, and is probably the best made (though not the best written) of the Wallace and Gromit shorts.
Then again, the winners every year pretty much come down to cheap gag cartoons and things that might as well be videogame cutscenes anyway....
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Mar 08, 2010 1:58 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|