Toon Zone Talkback - New York Times Watches Oscar-Nominated Shorts So You Don't Have To

W

whispers

New member
This is the talkback thread for New York Times Watches Oscar-Nominated Shorts So You Don't Have To.

Okay, I'll admit I got little snarky with the headline. I'm sure all the nominated shorts are all beautifully crafted and well worth one's time and attention. I would quickly seize the chance to see any of them.

But Holden does have a way of making them sound like medicine, doesn't he? "This stuff is good for you" seems to be the subtext.

The snide comment "among the animated films nothing resembles a traditional Disney cartoon" also rubs me wrong.
 
Well, he watched shorts that aren't meant to resemble Disney cartoons, what did he expect?

That Holden guy is just so ignorant thinking that Disney is the only company that makes good animation. I mean has he ever watched Anime or at least The Iron Giant?
 
I didn't get the impression that he thought that, I think he was just stressing that they the shorts might not fit mainstream viewers' preconceived notions.

(Although that's still a little dozy, since animated short noms comparatively rarely resemble Mickey Mouse cartoons...)
 
From what I've seen of the Oscars, animated short subjects falls under "category of stuff to quickly get out of the way so we can move on to more 'important' categories" (like "best costume design" or something)... aside from the (annoying) gimmick of some CGI character "accepting"/"giving" an award, I'd assume the average Oscar-analyzer (Entertainment Tonight, reviewers, etc.) doesn't give two flips about this category ("they're just cartoons..."), especially since these days it's mostly foreign films nobody's seen outside of art-film festivals...
 
Back
Top