Oscars and Lord of the Rings

Empire Magazine have on their website a special entitled "The Night Lord ofthe Rings Swept the Oscars"- its mainly a bunch of quotes from people about the night. Some I found quite interesting andpossible quite telling.

Jackson: A few things went against the actors getting nominations (for the third film): one of the main things was the ensemble nature of the movies. It is such a big cast and they are so good together that no single performance rises above the others. Either for Actor or Supporting Actor. So maybe that influenced things. And because they are hobbits, or in Ian’s case, a wizard, just makes it that little bit harder to take seriously.


Or maybe it was becasue the third film forgot all about character development and for most of the cast there was not a huge amount of acting required in the third film, as Viggo would later say.

Monaghan: People called it boring. Fuck that, we won 14 Oscars! Alright, 11.

I'm not sure if he is referring to them winning all night or the film!

Bernard Hill: I thought it was ridiculous that Return Of The King won everything and the rest got nothing. It’s nonsense that it won for the whole trilogy. The first film is the first film! They hadn’t seen the other two! I wasn’t at the Oscars. Only certain people were allowed to go.


That seems pretty shoddy to me- he wasn't even invited?!

Viggo Mortensen: I watched the entire Oscar ceremony with friends and family. This was the first time I’d watched the ceremony since the early days of my career as an actor. I had long before become disenchanted with what I felt was the pointlessly competitive nature of prize awarding, the glaring omissions of creatively significant work. Although I still feel that the award ceremony is in some ways little more than a popularity contest geared to help a select group of star actors and directors — as well as television and movie executives — make a lot of money, I was quite moved to see so much praise and goodwill for The Return Of The King.

A carefully worded, diplomatic comment if ever I've read one!

Serkis: It had been such a phenomenon that it kind of felt it would be unjust if it hadn’t gone our way, because of the sheer size and beauty of the entire thing.

I very much felt this myself- that the awards LotR's got were never really for their individual merits but a sort of pressure exerted by the fact they had been made at all.

John Rhys-Davies: I was not at the Oscar ceremony, and I was somewhat miffed about it, because I am actually a member of the Academy. But there is such a demand for these things that you have to go on the ballot... And I didn’t get on the ballot. I was in LA, and we did go to the parties though. Oscar time is something that every actor should experience at least once or twice. There was a great welcoming of The Lord Of The Rings tribe at the parties afterwards. Nothing succeeds like success!

Again interesting wording- especially that last line- no actors coming out claiming the victory based on any artistic merit except occasionally for the visual look of the film.





You can read the rest here- its not very long-

http://www.empireonline.com/features/lord-of-the-rings-oscars

Ah okay, I'll be the first to jump in on this one.

Yes, RoTK won a slew of Oscars to acknowledge that with all their flaws, the films were a cumulative, massive achievement. (personally I think the special effects were the greatest accomplishment, and not something to be looked down upon either.) It's possible that they could have been made in more of an art film vein, would only be recognized in hindsight, and would have won nothing. The Princess Bride, though not exactly an art film, was completely true to it's roots, and is now acknowledged as a classic. But it didn't make much money and was ignored by the awards.

If your point is that it didn't deserve any awards, I disagree. "Best Director" needn't be just about bringing out the human interest side of a story. It can also be about the superhuman task of pulling all the strings together on a job like this. It was an accomplishment...perhaps more of logistics than artistic merit, but an honorable accomplishment nonetheless.

As far as artistic accomplishment goes, I think many of us are colored by our love of the books. Some of the great moments in the movie were deviations from the book: the discussion of death between Pippin and Gandalf, Pippin's song in Denethor's court (okay, the bursting tomato was a bit heavy handed), even Aragorn saying 'for Frodo' before running to the attack (though no doubt many purists may cuss a blue streak, the fact was it worked well).

The eleven oscars RotK won were:

Best art direction-set decoration
Best make up
Best costume design
Best director
Best film editing
Best music, original score
Best music, original song (For the song "Into the West")
Best picture
Best sound mixing
Best visual effects
Best writing, adapted screenplay

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0167260/awards

I don't know which other films were nominated, but I think RotK deserved several of these (from a subjective point of view, mind, I'm too fond of the film to say something objective). Best adapted screenplay was pushing it, though

If your point is that it didn't deserve any awards, I disagree.- Halfwise

No I have always said its visual side deserved recognition as it is a beautifully crafted film visually, from set builders to costumes and all the rest.

I just thought some of the quotes were worth commenting on as they are diplomatic in the sort of way politicias usually need to be, less so normally for actors.
Of the awards it got Best Director I'd have some quibbles with, I have always rated PJ's invention with a camera but on a film of this size I always think (and not just for LotR's) to much emphasis is put on the main director when most big modern films have at least 2 directing units. Best Directors would be a better award.

Best Film Editing- having pulled the films apart I cant believe it won for this, its actualy quite shoddy in quite a few places with a huge amount of continuity errors as well as hastily stuck together scenes and interjected material at a later date (all the Gothmog shots for example).

Best Picture- how RotK can win Best Picture when its not even the best of the tirlogy I don't know.

Best writing/adapted screenplay- one has to assume either no one on the judging panel had read the book or they were having a laugh. Even of the three films RotK is the worst adapted and furthest away from the source, almost none of the same events occur except in their very broadest sense and most of the main character arcs are just left and never resolved.

No idea if it was deserving of best edit. Obviously got best picture because it was an amazing movie. Got best adapted screenplay because it was an awesome film. In fact I have no quibbles with any of the the awards it won, though to be fair I can't really remember that many films from 2003!

Clearly Petty should have won Best Edit for all his work in recutting the films.

No way, I bet his version omits some of my favourite comedy moments!

Almost certainly Ally! LotR's is not and should not be a comedy. EVER! (Which is not to say it cant be comedic in its own way- just definetly not in PJ's way)

It's not until they are removed that I truely understood how much was played for laughs. But I would back a campaign for Pettys oscar nod!

Just curious, Petty, which would you say was the best of the trilogy?

If you ignore the books entirely I'd say TT because the siege of Helm's Deep is perhaps the most exciting battle scene ever put on film.

If you don't ignore the books, well, there's some people out there you may want to swing around by their ankles till their soft organs explode, but we won't get into that. They all suffer from an Aragorn that acts well but to my eye is rather scrawny, though I've learned from bitter experience not to mention that within 50 feet of any red-blooded woman.

Interesting question Halfwise. When I saw them at the cinema Fellowship without a doubt. TT and RotK are just too full of awful non-Tolkieness for me to bear.
However if I was picking from my own edits its either TT ot RotK. With TT edging it.

halfwise wrote: They all suffer from an Aragorn that acts well but to my eye is rather scrawny, though I've learned from bitter experience not to mention that within 50 feet of any red-blooded woman.

Sorry in my eyes they always suffer from an Aragorn that isn't Sean Bean!

Sean Bean! sigh!

Aragorn, scrawny? I had never thought of that. He seemed right for someone always on the move and having to eat what he could. And with no junk food to sustain him , just the basics he would be very very lean, don't you think?

We quit watching television period about eight years ago, even the adverts are dreadful and we wanted our littlest one to have none of it until she is older and chooses it, so the Oscars mean nothing to me. I think such things are always heavily biased and a lot of politics and money are the real deciders so ..........i have my own opinion and it means nothing to them.

Well, duh obviously they are biased! The deciding group is the film industry itself! So a popular person within the film community is much more likely to be successful at the Oscars! Nothing to do with the quality of them movie either, it's all about the genre and theme! So that obviously devalues the worth of those oscars to LOTR, but still, I think the films were culturally relevant at the time; there was a new outbreak of fantasy films, and I feel that was down to the success of Pj's LOTR!

Obviously though, I am amazingly biased.

Nothing to do with the quality of them movie either- ally

That admittedly does explain LotR's winning!

In honor of the Oscars tonight and Billy Crystal

I've never watched the Oscars but that makes me want to now.

Also, damn, I forgot what a great year 2003 was for movies.

I decided against sitting through all five hours of the telecast but I caught the last three awards. I was happy for The Artist that it won, but mainly happy that it wasn't The Tree of Life. Also, while I didn't see it except on YouTube, I was thrilled for Bret McKenzie of Figwit and Flight of the Conchords fame for winning Best Original Song.



On another note, the Harry Potter franchise struck out again. After 10 years, 8 movies, and 12 nominations, the whole series ended up with a whopping 0 wins. I honestly think that it deserved to win one or two, but not for the last movie. The whining from HP fan websites is already getting annoying. They're almost as bad as the JC Avatar fans a few years back.

Eldorion wrote:
On another note, the Harry Potter franchise struck out again. After 10 years, 8 movies, and 12 nominations, the whole series ended up with a whopping 0 wins.

(sorry, Eldo )

No need to apologize! Honestly, I have trouble caring about HP Oscars anymore. After seeing MuggleNet.com and others whine for three months about how Deathly Hallows Part 2 was totally as good as Return of the King and how the series as a whole is totally like LOTR I almost wanted them to lose out.

As much as I love Harry Potter I have to say I don't want them to win an Oscar.. The fifth movie was so horrible! long live the book!

I haven't seen Hugo, but I thought for sure Planet of the Apes should have won for (special effects was it?) and NOT Hugo. If not that, then that's the award I think Harry Potter should have won

If Harry Potter films made by that muppet Yates won any Oscars I think I would despair for any justice or discernment when it comes to those who vote for this tripe. I detest what he did to HP. I thought the first three were the best, I know people slate Columbus, but he established the perfect casting and the great music and the magical atmosphere which is so sadly lacking from Yates. I hate Yates as much as Petty hates PJ, no maybe more.

Not sure thats technically possible Mrs Figg!