Comments on: ‘The Hurt Locker’ Bests ‘Avatar’ In The 2009 PGA Awards

By: Kacie

Kacie — Fri, 29 Jan 2010 15:17:27 +0000

Being a good producer is about doing the absolute best you can with what you have. Kathryn Bigelow, as a director, is not going to be handed the same amount of money as James Cameron. She and her producing team did what they came to do. Let's remember that the estimated production budget was $11 million, so for them to make $16 worldwide, that is certainly not failure. Obviously a film with a marketing budget of over $200 mill is going to have a bigger box office than The Hurt Locker.
Give it a rest.

By: Eliza

Eliza — Mon, 25 Jan 2010 20:07:06 +0000

To cineastejohn: There is a lot of "producing" which has nothing to do with the marketing, distribution, and exhibition of a film, which is where box office comes in.

And for the record, if Avatar wins the Oscar, I will vomit all over my living room.

By: A Baby Named Jesus

A Baby Named Jesus — Mon, 25 Jan 2010 13:30:59 +0000

Crash was just the anti-BBM. BBM was a film that divided a lot of people, mostly because of its content but also because of its hype. That drew the backlash.

Crash didn't start off as any kind of favorite, except for Roger Ebert who kept beating its drum. In the lead up to the Oscars though, Crash began making an impression in some circles and won the BEST CAST ENSEMBLE award at SAG. Thus, it became the only film which could dethrone BBM.

All the people who didn't want BBM to win, plus the small group already praising Crash and a clever Oscar campaign by Lionsgate, put it over the top and it beat out the Oscar favorite.

I'll say one thing about this years Oscar race, compared with past years, it's a lot more exciting not knowing who the winner is going to be by the middle of January.

By: Rafaela

Rafaela — Mon, 25 Jan 2010 13:11:23 +0000

Years where the PGA and Oscars have differed have been with populist fare: "Crash" over "Brokeback Mountain," etc. etc.,

I'll never understand that. Because who exactly did that appeal to? I don't remember anyone talking about that movie before it won the Oscar, it clearly seemed to be a slot filler, and it made a lot less money than Brokeback. Maybe by populist you're only talking about dumbed down, but shouldn't it have been, you know, actually popular to merit that title?

By: Davey Morrison

Davey Morrison — Mon, 25 Jan 2010 05:30:21 +0000

Yeah, it really has nothing to do with box office whatsoever.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Mon, 25 Jan 2010 05:10:44 +0000

Best produced film doesn't mean highest-grossing film. The PGA is supposed to go to the film of the greatest quality. Whether the film 'gets out there' should be addressed at an award for marketing, not one meant to measure film quality. And the 'simple numbers' can be ignored. Otherwise, why not just award the film's box office numbers and forget everything else.

By: cineastejohn

cineastejohn — Mon, 25 Jan 2010 04:21:08 +0000

That's not at all what I'm saying. I think everyone agrees on that from looking at Transformers 2 box office alone. I'm saying that box office is a large part of being a producer and working to have your film get out there and get seen, and The Hurt Locker producers failed at that to an extent during it's theatre run. Is this 100% part of what should be considered? No of course not. But you can't ignore those simple numbers.

And I disagree that it's solely quality of film, because these are the guild awards, who reward those individuals for their technical skills and merit. Best Director in DGA's don't always signify best film (although it's the most closely related). I'd guess that rarely does the ACS winner win best picture. With the Oscars, Best Picture is sole quality of film (or at least it's supposed to be).

By: rodrigoperez

rodrigoperez — Mon, 25 Jan 2010 04:02:27 +0000

you got it all wrong, bub. It's quality of film. And I hate to break it to you, but biggest box-office does not mean best film. Though clearly in your world it does.

By: cineastejohn

cineastejohn — Mon, 25 Jan 2010 03:59:46 +0000

The Hurt Locker winning over Avatar is the most ridiculous thing I’ve ever heard. Isn’t making money a BIG part of producing a film? The Hurt Locker made $16 million WORLDWIDE, while tomorrow Avatar will become the highest grossing film of all time and will most likely cross the $2 billion mark. It simply makes no sense. Hurt Locker was the lowest grossing film on the entire PGA nomination list. You cannot possibly give an award for failure in that sense. You’re not truly rewarding the best “produced” film of the year and only making a mockery of yourself.

This isn't saying The Hurt Locker is a bad movie, cause it's obviously not. But best produced of the year is laughable.