Uh, How Did Brave Beat This?

Because it's Pixar. So naturally they are going to win because they're bias. Of course you might say "well maybe because the academy is more attracted to old Scottish landscapes as opposed to high tech stuff." If that was the case, How to Train Your Dragon would have won over Toy Story 3.


"Frying pans! Who knew right?"

Yeah I was baffled as well. Brave was the least deserving of all of the nominees for "Best Animated Picture".

No one really knows.

I enjoyed "Brave", but I agree that it did not deserve to win.

Half-Blood 15 has spoken

Pixar is definitely the UPA of today. [UPA was the studio who in the 50s, similiarly got awards for revolutionizing animation and like Pixar had a Disney connection-their being a Spin-Off of Disney, formed by rogue animators from the Mouse House during WWII [anti-Commie issues] and then UPA in 1948 would create Mister Magoo, the lovable symbol with the nearsightedness, of UPA, voiced by Jim Backus then brought back by Leslie Neilsen in a DISNEY movie.]

UPA took in about 5 Oscars in the 50s. First for another longlasting character [and one who is "Tiny Tim" in the 1962 TV "Mr.Magoo's Christmas Carol"], Dr.Seuss's "Gerald McBoing Bping" then some more for theatrical Magoo shorts. They became among the most versatile and active movie and TV studios of the whole dang 50s-60s! Some may find them REAL obnoxious, more so than Pixar, due to their own self-importance and elitism, but their place can't be denied anymore than Pixar.

But still I understand some disappointment that Disney's own studio gets upstaged at Oscar time [especially after so many years since 1932 for "Flowers and Trees", their first color cartoon and the first [not a feature yet] to win an OScar. [Disney's many Oscars even include a special set for the landmark thirties first feature "Snow White & 7 Dwarves" in 1937-38, presented by none other than Shirley Temple!]

Amanda Bynes is hot, and Lindsay Lohan is not.

WHAT!? Brave is a freaking masterpiece compared to this eye candy. Get it? Candy? Anyway, Brave made you laugh and cry and cheer, where as I liked Wreck it Ralph, it didn't make me laugh at all and the story was solid but not exceptional. I admit I teared up a bit there at the end.

Brave I'll watch again and again but this is a one time view. Just an alternate opinion for you guess to chew on. Get it? Chew... like candy...? well soft chewy candy not jawbreakers...

I'll let myself out.

It's simple. The animation is superior in Brave, as is the script. It's a conventional idea that was well executed. Wreck-It Ralph was a bit too ambitious for its own good.

That's easy, the majority of academy members who vote for best animated feature voted for Brave not Wreck-It Ralph. Personally, as much as I liked Wreck-It Ralph. I liked Brave more.

It probably has something to do with the target demographic too. Most of the Oscar voters are over the age of fifty, and probably did not grow up with video games. The people who tend to enjoy Wreck-it Ralph are kids, teens and young adults who can get all of the gaming references. Meanwhile, Brave seems to be marketed towards a slightly larger and less inclusive audience. If I were to show my grandmother both Brave and Wreck-it Ralph, she'd probably like Brave more. I doubt that she'd "get" anything about Wreck-it Ralph and think it's too loud. Brave has a more timeless setting, moral and plot.

Does that make Brave the better movie though? No way. Sure, I think Brave's animation (mostly due to the fact that it takes place in medieval Scotland and is very lush and pretty, a safe environment for an animated film) and music is better (that could be another reason why the Academy voted for it), but Wreck-it Ralph's story, characters and humor are just superior. Ralph has good animation and music too, but Brave's is just better.

In my opinion though: A well-written animated film > A "pretty" animated film.

Why does life have to be so ironic?!