Comics Creators

Oscars and Other Movie Awards


“but can’t help to think that Nolan is robbed.”

I really like Del Toro so I’m fine with it not being Nolan this time. Since every movie that he makes ends up an event, he’s sure to get it one day. He’s never going to be forgotten about when it’s time for the nominations. He’s Chris Nolan.


They should cut it down to 2 hours. Cut the bullshit, only 3 songs and cut the Oscars no one cares about. And modernize for Christ’s sake. It feels like a glam country club dinner. It makes Hollywood insufferably out of touch. This should be the big industry advert for the year. Instead it’s self felation and surface deep politics.

Oscars have become increasingly irrelevant and they really should want to right that course.


In my own little corner of the universe, not everyone is happy that ‘Blade Runner 2049’ got the VFX Oscar;


I think he’s got a point, but that’s the way it goes sometimes.

I saw about half the Best Picture nominees, none of them knocked my socks off, I liked ‘Shape of Water’ the most so I’m ok with it winning, but only ‘Three Billboards’ was one I’d’ve been disappointed to see win Best Picture.


For a comics board I’m very disappointed that no-one has mashed up these two yet.


Nolan will, that’s for sure. But Hollywood rarely gave award to someone who really deserved it. Scorsese earned the statue for The Departed, but in all honesty, he did much stronger movies before. Same with his frequent collaborator Leonardo DiCaprio… like someone said “let’s give him the Oscar, or he’d commit suicide tonight”.



If visual effects includes includes everything achieved practically then Blade Runner could surely win on the strength of the miniatures alone? The apes were pretty flawless but I struggle to see the seams in 2049. Everything worked together to convince me.


I’m so disappointed that Shape of Water won.
Best Director? Sure. Best Film? It just pains.


Anything can win. ‘Ex Machina’ was a little film that won on the strength of a single character.

The models in ‘Blade Runner 2049’ are excellent, but so are those in ‘Dunkirk’.

I think that the multitude of photoreal apes incorporated into ‘War…’ is more than enough to get them the Oscar. but the Acadamy disagreed.


Good god. Just the preview of the list makes me want to vomit. No way I could take the thing itself seriously.

Although I have zero interest in seeing Shape of Water. I would recommend, however, Jonathan Case’s Dear Creature graphic novel.


How distantly “adapted” from the source does a screenplay have to be before it becomes “original”? I mean, is Logan adapted because it uses characters from another property even though it’s an entirely original story using those characters? By that criteria, The Last Jedi (or indeed any sequel) was an adapted screenplay. How about something “adapted” from reality, like Dunkirk?


Yes, all sequels count as adapted screenplays under Academy rules, as silly as that might sound. I seem to remember that’s why Toy Story 3 was placed in that category instead of Best Original Screenplay.

If based on original work it can be an original screenplay, like Spotlight in 2016. If based on an existing work covering those events, it can be an adapted screenplay, like last year’s Lion or Hidden Figures.


That’s really interesting, I had no idea it worked like that. On the face of it it sounds silly, but I can see how it’s easier to follow a global rule like that than to individually try to judge whether a script has deviated “enough” from the other uses of its characters.


Well, to be fair, the Toy Story sequels are among the most blatant rehashes of the original ever created, the third one egregiously so. (I never understood the love for that one. As far as I’m concerned, it’s the exact moment Pixar became “too big to fail.”)


It’s not anything to do with how close to the plot of the original they are, it’s the fact that they make use of pre-existing characters and concepts at all. So all sequels are by definition Adapted Screenplays, as far as the Academy is concerned.


Some of this is about people getting paid. If the studio makes a sequel then the people who created that world and those characters get a fee. The new film is built on the foundation they laid down. That contractual fact has been part of how “original” work is defined.


As Dave says they are very strict on this. Adapted includes pretty much any pre-existing concept (but not directly from real life).

They are similarly strict on ‘original’ screenplay. There was a lot of fuss a few years ago that a soundtrack from Johnny Greenwood was disqualified because a small sequence he had released previously, even though he wrote it himself.

It can seem a bit petty at times but as you say I think it’s really there to make clear what the distinction is and remove grey areas. The Golden Globes fall foul of those grey areas all the time and don’t seem to have much of a grasp on what a comedy is or when a TV show is a mini series or not.


As far as I know, everything that isn’t stand-alone developed material is considered as “adapted” story. If I write a story about some superhero I created from scratch in my head, solely for feature film, then it’s original. If that superhero is based on other work or work that I did for a comic, or a sequel, is considered adaptation.



They should have just one screenplay Oscar. They’re too fragmented in their awards as it is (long and short documentaries, animated feature & short, documentary feature and short, costume, production and hairstyling, sound editing and mixing, score and song, foreign film, live action short and best picture). I get that the whole thing is marketing, but as marketing I don’t think it works any more. A handful of movies get a slight bump, but the numbers are irrelevant to the whole industry.