Potter - when will it get the recognition it deserves? FFS

[RichWS]

Others here have a much greater appreciation of the cinematography than I do. It was fine, but I don't quite see what's Oscar worthy about it. It wasn't a notable element that stuck out in my mind when I left the theater, as it did with the four other nominees (excluding War Horse).

[Jessie]

Your all moaning that potter hasn't got a BP nod. What about Warrior? It's more emotional, has better acting and has the ingredients for a best picture contender. That film got snubbed, not the film that made way over a billion. Potter doesn't need a best picture win seeing as its one of the highest grossing movie out there yet you all moan like it deserves even more.

[Noctis]

Others here have a much greater appreciation of the cinematography than I do. It was fine, but I don't quite see what's Oscar worthy about it. It wasn't a notable element that stuck out in my mind when I left the theater, as it did with the four other nominees (excluding War Horse).

What did you think of the cinematography in HBP and DH1?

[Shawn Robbins]

Your all moaning that potter hasn't got a BP nod. What about Warrior? It's more emotional, has better acting and has the ingredients for a best picture contender. That film got snubbed, not the film that made way over a billion. Potter doesn't need a best picture win seeing as its one of the highest grossing movie out there yet you all moan like it deserves even more.

I actually agree, Warrior was seriously overlooked.

[DAR]

In 50 years what are people going to remember more, the Artist or Harry Potter? I think the recognition Potter has received has just been fine, it doesn't need any awards to validate it's place in film history.

[Noctis]

No one is doubting that the Potter films will be the most remembered series of this generation (ala SW), but it's just that it would be very nice to see them actually win awards.

[CoolioD1]

I actually agree, Warrior was seriously overlooked.

+1! If it had a release date closer to the end of the year and it made a bit more money it would be in there for Best Picture. I'm just glad Nolte got in. I was unsure he would for a little while. Edited January 24, 2012 by CoolioD1

[The Creator]

Winning an Academy Award doesn't prove that a film is of high quality. It just proves that the film is too niche and artsy to be recognized by the general public. Harry Potter transcends niches and will be remembered for ages in the cinematic world for everything it accomplished in mainstream culture...something that can't be said of any of the Academy Awards nominees this year, or mostly any other year for that matter.

[4815162342]

+1! If it had a release date closer to the end of the year and it made a bit more money it would be in there for Best Picture. I'm just glad Nolte got in. I was unsure he would for a little while.

+2

[DAR]

No one is doubting that the Potter films will be the most remembered series of this generation (ala SW), but it's just that it would be very nice to see them actually win awards.

But why does it need to win awards? Or even get nominated for them. I'll bet very few people remember Star Wars was nominated for Best Picture. And I'll bet very few people as the years go by will remember that Return of the King won Best Picture.

[Kvikk Lunsj]

Sorry I forgot rotten tomatoes decides what films are good and what are not.The academy seems to agree with me

They also gave ELIC a BP nomination

[Shawn Robbins]

I'll just present this again: would there even *be* any expectations for Potter to be nominated for more awards if it weren't for Lord of the Rings?We're talking about the two most popular and ever-lasting film franchises of our era (though Nolan's Batman may not be terribly far behind if TDKR delivers). One simply out-did the other when it came to critics and older audiences, but in terms of the rest of the world they each have cemented places in history that can't really be topped -- only matched.Harry Potter has joined the ranks of Star Wars, Lord of the Rings, and Indiana Jones. That's about the best accomplishment I think any series can achieve as a whole. Awards are secondary to that.

Edited January 24, 2012 by ShawnMR

[acsc1312]

I still say HBP is the best cinematography of the series. Then DH1/DH2

[Noctis]

I still say HBP is the best cinematography of the series. Then DH1/DH2

DH1 has the best cinematography to me, HBP and DH2 tied for second. They're all visually stunning, but my favorite has to be DH1.

I'll just present this again: would there even *be* any expectations for Potter to be nominated for more awards if it weren't for Lord of the Rings?We're talking about the two most popular and ever-lasting film franchises of our era (though Nolan's Batman may not be terribly far behind if TDKR delivers). One simply out-did the other when it came to critics and older audiences, but in terms of the rest of the world they each have cemented places in history that can't really be topped -- only matched.Harry Potter has joined the ranks of Star Wars, Lord of the Rings, and Indiana Jones. That's about the best accomplishment I think any series can achieve as a whole. Awards are secondary to that.

When you put it like that...

[vc2002]

I dont think HP, as a movie franchise, has joined the league with SW. HP is book-based franchise, and if you ask people about it, most of them will remember the book first.Note this is not to dismiss HP. I just think that original franchises like SW and Jones are in a much higher league.

[egoplant]

But why does it need to win awards? Or even get nominated for them. I'll bet very few people remember Star Wars was nominated for Best Picture. And I'll bet very few people as the years go by will remember that Return of the King won Best Picture.

No one will remember you in 1000 years, why don't you kill yourself?

[vc2002]

LOL is that a joke? ROTK won 11 Oscars, which only 3 films in the history did that, and few people will remember it?

[Shawn Robbins]

I dont think HP, as a movie franchise, has joined the league with SW. HP is book-based franchise, and if you ask people about it, most of them will remember the book first.Note this is not to dismiss HP. I just think that original franchises like SW and Jones are in a much higher league.

I see what you mean. I think they go hand-in-hand, personally. Relative to their era, each movie series did something that none had before.

[Noctis]

Potter's largest factor to its popularity will always be the books - and I think I can very safely say that the books themselves will last far more than the Star Wars films. That's what will make Potter last longer than Star Wars in the end - the books. These books have become classics, and they can be adapted into film with each new generation. The same cannot be said for Star Wars (unless they make new ones, of course).Even when comparing the film series, Potter in many countries has always been a larger cultural event than Star Wars - including the OT (Germany, France, Australia, Russia (obv), Japan, China, etc). As for the Potter books, they were, in the end, a larger cultural event than the Star Wars films. I mean, 400m copies sold in 11 years (450m now), that's just staggering. But even in films, The Lord of the Rings isn't something that can beat Star Wars or Potter. It's true, because there have been countless people who work at stores that said parents buy those two series to introduce to their children. As much as I love LoTR, and as large as the films were, they never had the cultural impact of those two.

[Noctis]

I'm not saying LotR didn't penetrate the mainstream, because it obviously did. But not to the point of Potter and Star Wars.