Animated Feature Field

Posts: 591
Joined: Sat Jul 01, 2006 1:41 pm

Postby dreaMaker » Mon Nov 22, 2010 2:28 pm

I totally agree with OscarGuy

Posts: 2650
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:28 pm
Location: Edmonton, AB

Postby Okri » Thu Nov 18, 2010 12:36 pm

1. I think that the winners of best animated film have been better than the winner of best picture for the most part.

2. I can understand the fundamental issue that dws has a problem with. I just don't see it as a big deal. Additionally, I don't think dws' two exceptions (Up in Toy Story 3) really means that that animated films will get the recognition they do (or don't) deserve. I'm not all that interested in the best picture line-up now we have ten films, frankly.

3. The foreign film analogy makes a degree of sense. Especially when you consider the arguments Uri has made in the past. 5 out of 65 foreign films will be nominated.

User avatar
Site Admin
Posts: 12622
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 12:22 am
Location: Springfield, MO

Postby OscarGuy » Wed Nov 17, 2010 1:01 pm

Technically, in Foreign Film, we're nominating 5 out of 70/80-something submitted. It's a different thing altogether.

So, if the nominees were Toy Story 3, How to Train Your Dragon and The Illusionist, you guys would complain that they had no quality contenders to choose from? In a year where something like Osmosis Jones can actually compete, I might agree with you, but in this case, I think we have at least three solid contenders, maybe more. Whether we agree with the category or not, there has been a marked improvement in the quality of animated features in release since the category was created.

But you can argue all you want, but it's no different than the Visual Effects category recognizing only five of a set of potentially 20 films that would even qualify for their criteria. And are we seriously saying that just because there are 300+ movies a year, fewer than 10% of which are probably any good, that we're really comparing effectively? It's like comparing apples to oranges.

But let's also consider this. Animated Features aren't crafted in the span of a year whereas many major motion pictures are only in production for that long, maybe a little longer depending on the project. Animated features can take three to five years to produce and considering there are significantly fewer gifted artists that can produce these items compared to artists who don't need to know how to draw who can create movies and you have a medium that requires a longer production period to put together and thereby inhibits the number and quantity of productions that can feasibly be generated in one year. Add to that the sparse number of animation studios compared to live-action bankrollers, indie productions and so forth and it's no wonder there's a dearth of eligible contenders.

And while you may think the bias against animated films doesn't exist and they should be able to compete effectively in Best Picture, we all know that they will not Pixar is a special case and even in their greatest years, they never managed to get films nominated for Best Picture. The argument against animated feature existed long before the 10-nominee field, so using the 10-nominee field and Up's nomination last year as a reason to say it isn't needed is rather silly. Up was nominated 18 years after the first and only other Animated Feature got nominated. And had it been a five-nominee year, Up wouldn't have been picked. So, there is still a heavy bias against animated features in general, which makes the category a still-relevant one. If these arguments had JUST started last year, then I might not have an issue with it.

Would you even be agreeable to a change to the category to call it best animation where artists are recognized instead of the director? Let's also remember that Animated Feature does not go to the producer of the film like Best Picture does, it goes to the director of the film. By that rational, Animated Feature is the equivalent of Best Director and since we know the Directing branch isn't about to nominated an animated film director for their award, the category still has some measure of relevance. Were it given to the producer instead, a better argument could be made to eliminate it.

And one last argument in favor of the category. The rules do not required 3 nominations in the category. They may nominated a MAXIMUM of 3 nominees. They can even say they wish to recognize none. So, while we have come to expect the maximum number of nominees making it in each year, there is no requirement. So while there may be 15 eligible, they could elect to choose only one of the films or even none of them to receive recognition. We know that won't happen, but it's inclusion in the rules should be taken into consideration with any of these arguments.
Wesley Lovell
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." - Benjamin Franklin

Posts: 3495
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 3:57 pm
Location: Illinois

Postby FilmFan720 » Wed Nov 17, 2010 11:47 am

But OscarGuy, what I think DWS is trying to say is that there aren't enough contending films to really justify the category. Just like we have gotten rid of Song Score because there aren't enough contenders, this year 20% of all animated films will get nominated as the best of the year...isn't that a little ridiculous? If a film is good enough, it can contend with other films. If it isn't, it won't. But this category is a little obscene.

In the foreign language category, we are nominating five out of thousands of foreign films every year.

Edited By FilmFan720 on 1290012521
"Go into the world and do well. But more importantly, go into the world and do good."
- Minor Myers, Jr.

User avatar
Site Admin
Posts: 12622
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 12:22 am
Location: Springfield, MO

Postby OscarGuy » Wed Nov 17, 2010 11:17 am

Except that apart from the occasional Pixar release in competition for Best Picture, none of the others will have any opportunity.

But by your rational, we shouldn't have a Best Foreign Language Film category because occasional foreign language pics get nominated in Best Picture.

What they are recognizing is not that it's a great picture or not, they are recognizing the art that goes into making such a film. Just like Visual Effects recognizes the best visual effects of the year, Best Animated Feature often recognizes the best long-form animation of the year.
Wesley Lovell

"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." - Benjamin Franklin

Posts: 3059
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 9:28 pm
Location: AL

Postby dws1982 » Wed Nov 17, 2010 8:01 am

This category really needs to be eliminated. With 3 nominees out of 15 eligible films, that's like having between 50 and 60 Best Picture nominees.

And you can't say anymore that this gives animated movies recognition they wouldn't otherwise get, because one got nominated for Best Picture last year, and one almost certainly will this year. People say animated movies can be just as good as regular ones, and we shouldn't treat them like they're inferior. Well fine, let's start treating them like regular movies by not giving them some "special" category, and put them on a level playing field with everything else.

Posts: 890
Joined: Fri Jan 10, 2003 4:50 pm
Location: Colombia

Postby HarryGoldfarb » Tue Nov 16, 2010 9:11 pm

Two of these films feature the last performances (voice)of veteran actors: Alpha and Omega (Dennis Hopper) and My Dog Tulip (Lynn Redgrave).
"If you place an object in a museum, does that make this object a piece of art?" - The Square (2017)

Tenured Laureate
Posts: 8323
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 11:14 am
Location: Islamabad, Pakistan

Postby Reza » Tue Nov 16, 2010 12:55 am

Sabin wrote:The winner is the foregone conclusion of this year's race. Whatever fatigue might set in at the notion of Pixar winning yet again, Woody and Buzz have never won.

Woody and Buzz deserve to win !!

Posts: 5340
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 10:03 pm
Location: Manila

Postby anonymous1980 » Mon Nov 15, 2010 11:16 pm

How to Train Your Dragon
The Illusionist
Toy Story 3

Although Despicable Me or Tangled could still sneak in there.

Tenured Laureate
Posts: 7628
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 12:52 am

Postby Sabin » Mon Nov 15, 2010 9:13 pm

The winner is the foregone conclusion of this year's race. Whatever fatigue might set in at the notion of Pixar winning yet again, Woody and Buzz have never won.

It's between Despicable Me, How to Train Your Dragon, Megamind, Shrek Forever After, and Toy Story 3 as the animated titans of the year. They usually nominate something from left field, either Sylvain Chomet's The Illusionist or Zach Snyder's The Legends of the Guardians.

So my picks are:
'How to Train Your Dragon'
'The Illusionist'
'Toy Story 3'
"If you are marching with white nationalists, you are by definition not a very nice person. If Malala Yousafzai had taken part in that rally, you'd have to say 'Okay, I guess Malala sucks now.'" ~ John Oliver

Mister Tee
Posts: 6715
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 2:57 pm
Location: NYC

Postby Mister Tee » Mon Nov 15, 2010 7:36 pm

Only 15 qualified, meaning a three-nominee slate this year.

“Alpha and Omega”
“Cats & Dogs: The Revenge of Kitty Galore”
“Despicable Me”
“The Dreams of Jinsha”
“How to Train Your Dragon”
“Idiots and Angels”
“The Illusionist”
“Legend of the Guardians: The Owls of Ga’Hoole”
“My Dog Tulip”
“Shrek Forever After”
“Summer Wars”
“Tinker Bell and the Great Fairy Rescue”
“Toy Story 3”

Return to “83rd Nominations and Winners”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest