OneManArmy wrote:I know its shit because anything that wins so many awards after the public hype over it generally means its been made to be commercialistic, and intended for the sole purpose of simply selling the product rather than telling a actual story.
LORD OF THE RINGS - All three films together landed a total 17 of Oscars and had a massive amount of hype. Were they intended for the sole purpose of selling a product rather than telling a story?
SILENCE OF THE LAMBS - Another film with massive hype (you couldn't keep Anthony Hopkins or the name Hannibal out of the media for months) landed the five most prestigious Oscars in 1991. Did you see that film merely as a money making exercise?
GLADIATOR - 5 of the big Oscars, massive hype and is still credited as a great film with artistic merit 10 years after it's release.
THE ENGLISH PATIENT - Not much hype but it won 9 Oscars and is hardly blockbuster material designed for mass consumption.
Going back further into the past, GHANDI won 8 Oscars and dominated the media for ages. Are you going to accuse that film of deliberate commerciality?
Now, as it happens, I do actually agree that Slumdog Millionaire is rubbish, but not for those reasons. For all of it's many, many, many faults, it's not a commercialised film. In fact, a lot of people came out of it saying it was quite depressing and virtually the opposite of what they thought they were going to see.
To make generalisations about films that win lots of awards and get hyped up for the same thing is a bit silly, and I'm sorry for any disrespect here, but to use films like Garage and Breakfast on Pluto makes you come across a little pretentious and most likely missing out on some excellent films because of your ideals.
In recent history the only films I can honestly look at and think they won Oscars etc because of hype are Slumdog (although I disagree it was a commercial film, it was deliberately marketed as one), Titanic and possibly Chicago.
There have been many other films which probably don't deserve to have won awards over other films (Forrest Gump over Pulp Fiction for one) but not because they were designed for greed. More because America likes a nice feelgood film occasionally rather than a brutal thriller.
And while on the subject of deserving, As another example, I firmly believe that when Martin Scorsese won Best Director for The Departed, he wasn't winning purely for that film rather than winning an award almost as an apology for being overlooked so many times in the past.