Oscar Confusion!!!!

jonno

I've been thinking about this for ages now and I'm still confused so I'm looking for opinions.

The Best Director oscar and the Best Picture oscar!
Should the winner of both be the same. Isn't the director the main man behind the film? I know there's alot of different things involved in a film but isn't it all governed by the director. I mean anything he doesn't want in it won't be in it in most cases. So if film "X" wins best film, should the director of film"X" win best director.

EvilGeorge

Best picture in my opinion is everything , ie actors, design, what it takes in at the box office all that stuff , where best director is the style of the movie - did he get his point across.
Personally I see a difference - maybe I'm wrong and they just pull names out of a hat.

Irish_Ranger_IR

your right evilgeorge.

theres a big difference, they have awards for everything !

Goodshape

The director does have an awful lot of input. A good director often leads to good acting, design, style and all the rest. Hence it’s not very often that that the awards go to two different films.

At the same time though, its not set in stone. The judges could simply see it as the work of good actors / set designers / producers / whatever and feel they need credited. It’s a separate award.

I think FotR deservers both though. It's hard to fault anyone on that film. Least of all Peter Jackson.

Karl Hungus

Originally posted by Goodshape
I think FotR deservers both though. It's hard to fault anyone on that film. Least of all Peter Jackson.

Agreed...
It's downright impossible to fault on any level.

But as Evil George says, Best Picture is everything. It's the big generalization, so as I see it it, in includes everything.

So I'd say that the more categories a film wins, or is nominated for, the better it's chances for Best Picture.



And if Lotr: Fotr doesn't win everything it's nominated for, someone should be SHOT!

Elmo

He should accept the best picture award with the producers and the cast.