You seem to delight in repeatedly highlighting my typo.. which shows me you're really not interested in an intelligent discussion that could add to the conversation about the awards or sound in general.
Why do you think there are 5 nominees both for editing and mixing? Only one film is worthy in a year to be considred?
So yes, I think there is room for commentary about those films and their mixes merits over Inception (and IMO I really think in the Chris Nolan body of work that "The Prestige" is a shining example of the use of sound as a story telling mechanism.. I really like TDK, Inception and TDKR but The Prestige is still my personal favortie)...
The point of this thread is focused on a narrow aspect of sound for film, and I always find it enlightening to see what is goiing on with my peers work.
I always try and look at how the sound as a whole helps tell the story... in the case of our conversation about Slumdog, a majority of the voters that year felt that the mix of SM helped tell the story through sound better than they thought for TDK.... it was a majority opinion, and there is room for those that voted for TDK.. neither one is more "right...." it was an opinion.... but you seem to only have room for absolutes.
Our company did the sound editorial for "Prometheus" (it was mixed at Fox by the same crew that did "Life of Pi") and it was stellar work, and yes, those are my "friends" (who are currently finishing IM3, which I cannot wait to hear). I was lucky to work with Mark on "Law Abiding Citizen" and "We Werer Soldiers" and he is truly an amazingly talented supervisor, and leads a great crew of collaborators (designers and editros..) He's also responsible for "Star Trek" among many others..
What I did and didn't nominate is none of your business.. and I have a really good understanding of why it didn't get a nomination (in additon to the other great bodies of work that did receive recognition from the Academy vying for those 5 spots)...
Snarky comments like that say more about you than they do about me or the Academy..
As I said earlier, the award represents a majority opinion...
Since you're not in the film business, are not in the sound business, and have no experience what so ever in evaluating sound editing vs. the mixing of said effects, there's nothing for you to agree to disagree with me about, is there?
And as a member of AVS for almost 14 years, vs. your 3, I've seen it all..
Bellowing insults at other members follow an all too familiar pattern, and I expect this line of discussion will end no differently.
I find my membership on this site a priviledge.
I love interacting with and learning from all the other member who share my passion of the techology of presenting film and music in the home..
I usually don't engage with replies to comments as you've made.
However, to come on here and disparage the awards and the membership behind them is most certainly against the spirit of AVS, whose reputation you are trying to hide behind..
I encourage any following this debate (and I'm sorry for the thread derail) and who has access to the two films (TDK and SM) to listen with an ear to telling the story through the mix..
The use of music, the sense of space and place, dialog mixing, scene and time transitions, complexitiy of the dialog tracks, timbre of the spoken word, overall complexity of the tracks (not just 1 or 2 minute FX sequences...)
While I certainly can see how people find TDK a great go to disc in terms or volume, power and LFE, SM was rather well reveiwed upon release.
Both films are amazing examples of beautful craftsmanship and artistry with sound... I'm not advocating for either... I'm just trying to help point out how they can both be seen as "Best."
(And my post might contain typos again... feel free to point them out...)
In a bit of a rush...
Edited by FilmMixer - 3/24/13 at 4:50pm