Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Locked thread
Vintersorg
Mar 3, 2004

President of
the Brendan Fraser
Fan Club



I think it's like anything out there (music, games, etc.) in that people take someone not liking a movie as an offence to them personally. Once you realize this you can start not really caring that your favorite movie lost and acting offended. It's just fun and games for rich assholes to get these Oscars.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

computer parts
Nov 18, 2010

PLEASE CLAP

Vintersorg posted:

I think it's like anything out there (music, games, etc.) in that people take someone not liking a movie as an offence to them personally. Once you realize this you can start not really caring that your favorite movie lost and acting offended. It's just fun and games for rich assholes to get these Oscars.

And even there, the nomination is where the real money is made, everything after that is icing.

Egbert Souse
Nov 6, 2008

Since when is Driving Miss Daisy crap? It goes in the same group of excellent "drat good acting" films like Marty, All About Eve, and Kramer vs. Kramer. At least it wasn't Dead Poet's Society that year.

Raxivace
Sep 9, 2014

TrixRabbi posted:

Rocky isn't better than Taxi Driver, but that's because Taxi Driver is one of the greatest films ever made. But by no means is it winning an upset in the sense of crap like Driving Miss Daisy or Crash winning. Rocky is a fantastic film in its own right that's often misremembered as being more jubilant and inspirational that it actually is. Rocky is a mean, brutal film about poverty and depression and trying to do something worthwhile with a life you feel is worthless. That Rocky makes him losing a triumphant moment is a testament to how expertly crafted it is.

Not better than Taxi Driver, but not it's not a case of fluff winning over serious art or anything.

One thing that really got to me the last time I watched Rocky was how Rocky loses to Apollo Creed when Apollo wasn't even at the top of his game. The guy had not even been taking the match seriously before it actually started, and Rocky still lost despite putting huge amounts of effort in. He was only able to go the distance when Apollo was slacking. The movie really does seem to be about accepting inevitable defeat, which is a far cry from the message of all the sequels except maybe Rocky V and Rocky Balboa.

HUNDU THE BEAST GOD
Sep 14, 2007

everything is yours

Raxivace posted:

One thing that really got to me the last time I watched Rocky was how Rocky loses to Apollo Creed when Apollo wasn't even at the top of his game. The guy had not even been taking the match seriously before it actually started, and Rocky still lost despite putting huge amounts of effort in. He was only able to go the distance when Apollo was slacking. The movie really does seem to be about accepting inevitable defeat, which is a far cry from the message of all the sequels except maybe Rocky V and Rocky Balboa.

I think that's what makes it so drat raw and awesome, that it doesn't set up Apollo as a strawman. Especially when you come to the original after having seen the sequels as a kid and Apollo is essentially a sidekick. I think that's what they were going for with Clubber in III, but by then it was already a cartoon.

Acht
Aug 13, 2012

WORLD'S BEST
E-DAD

computer parts posted:

Are either of those actually good (even for Oscar Bait) or are they just relying on the usual stuff to get nominations everywhere?

Hm. I'm surprised at the reactions about The Imitation Game. I really liked this one and would happily see Cumberbatch win the Oscar. Calling it bait feels pretty unfair to me.

Raxivace
Sep 9, 2014

Yeah. Apollo is pretty great example of a classic film "antagonist" that you can't really call a villain either, because he's not one. The worst thing you can say about him is that he's cocky I guess.

God drat, Carl Weathers is great.

Timeless Appeal
May 28, 2006
The Oscars will redeem themselves to me entirely if they do one of those dumb cartoon character presents an award moments with Groot.

sbaldrick
Jul 19, 2006
Driven by Hate

computer parts posted:


and I guess Chicago over Gangs of New York too.

I'd say DiCaprio ruined Gangs because he is just too young for the character he's playing. He doesn't come off tough or hard.

They should have given it to Two Towers and Fellowship the year before so Return of the King didn't stomp all over everything in what was a good movie year.

RaspberrySea
Nov 29, 2004

Watch out! A POIsonous snake!

Timeless Appeal posted:

The Oscars will redeem themselves to me entirely if they do one of those dumb cartoon character presents an award moments with Groot.

Only if he opens up the envelope and reads "I am Groot," and you don't know who won until they get up on stage to get their statue.

Timeless Appeal
May 28, 2006

MorgaineDax posted:

Only if he opens up the envelope and reads "I am Groot," and you don't know who won until they get up on stage to get their statue.
That was implicit.

TrixRabbi
Aug 20, 2010

Time for a little robot chauvinism!

I actually wouldn't be surprised if they did it with Groot and Rocket Racoon. Groot "reads" off the winner. Then Rocket says "What!? Gimme that!" and reads the real winner.

It will be for Visual Effects.

Carrier
May 12, 2009


420...69...9001...
The imitation game was awful and if it wins any awards its a travesty.

aslan
Mar 27, 2012

Egbert Souse posted:

Since when is Driving Miss Daisy crap? It goes in the same group of excellent "drat good acting" films like Marty, All About Eve, and Kramer vs. Kramer. At least it wasn't Dead Poet's Society that year.

I don't know if I'd say crap, but it became dated almost immediately. Marty and All About Eve's scripts still hold up. All About Eve's script is still widely considered one of the best of all time! They have more going for them than just acting.

I said come in! posted:

Screeners were sent out for Selma.

They were, but not until December 17th, which means
a) lots of people didn't get them before their offices closed for the holidays, and those who did didn't have the time to watch them with all the holiday festivities going on, and
b) nobody got them in time for the guild awards, which is where a lot of the Oscar buzz is built, and
c) keep in mind that most Oscar campaigns begin in November, which means by the time Selma sent out screeners, the vast majority of people already knew who they were leaning toward ,and Selma would have had to work extra hard to change anybody's mind.

I don't know that the screener issue explains all of Selma's snub, but I think it explains more than people are giving it credit for.

And the "snub" (insofar as you can be snubbed after being nominated for Best Picture) is probably one of the best things that could possibly happen for Selma's long-term reputation. If it had been nominated for Best Actor/Best Director, people would have treated it as a middlebrow Oscarbait historical drama featuring an uncontroversial social justice issue that white people could vote for and feel good about themselves. Since it wasn't, it's being treated as a subversive critique of the way the Civil Rights Movement has been depicted in American history, etc. that white people found too controversial to vote for but will probably develop a greater appreciation for in the coming years. That's a much better way to go out.

BeanpolePeckerwood
May 4, 2004

I MAY LOOK LIKE SHIT BUT IM ALSO DUMB AS FUCK



sbaldrick posted:

I'd say DiCaprio ruined Gangs because he is just too young for the character he's playing. He doesn't come off tough or hard.

They should have given it to Two Towers and Fellowship the year before so Return of the King didn't stomp all over everything in what was a good movie year.

I loving hate LoTR by now, and Return was the weakest in the trilogy by far, but 2003 was a perfect year for Jackson to get his due so he would just go away forever. The only movie I find particularly memorable from that year is City of God. Above all, Mystic River is dreadful, dreadful poo poo.





VVVVVVV I'm going to reiterate that Eastwood needs to gently caress off and die already

BeanpolePeckerwood fucked around with this message at 03:27 on Jan 20, 2015

Name Change
Oct 9, 2005


American Sniper just made a shitzillion dollars over the weekend, way above what anyone was expecting, which may affect its Oscar candidacy.

HUNDU THE BEAST GOD
Sep 14, 2007

everything is yours

second-hand smegma posted:

I loving hate LoTR by now, and Return was the weakest in the trilogy by far, but 2003 was a perfect year for Jackson to get his due so he would just go away forever. The only movie I find particularly memorable from that year is City of God. Above all, Mystic River is dreadful, dreadful poo poo.

Do you hate it as in Jackson has poisoned the well by now, or do you just never want to see any of those movies again? I'm kinda with you on this.

Magic Hate Ball
May 6, 2007

ha ha ha!
you've already paid for this
2003 was a pretty wimpy year, and City of God was barely in it anyways.

Kull the Conqueror
Apr 8, 2006

Take me to the green valley,
lay the sod o'er me,
I'm a young cowboy,
I know I've done wrong
If Oscars were about justice, Master and Commander would have destroyed that year.

BeanpolePeckerwood
May 4, 2004

I MAY LOOK LIKE SHIT BUT IM ALSO DUMB AS FUCK



HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:

Do you hate it as in Jackson has poisoned the well by now, or do you just never want to see any of those movies again? I'm kinda with you on this.

I think everyone eventually comes to terms with their lovely childhood taste. An example might be Star Wars. In the 4th grade it was all I cared about, and it had an almost mythological sway over my preferences. I'm sure I felt offended by the poor quality of the prequels for about 5 minutes, but by then I had realized that I was more fond of the cinematic qualities that the original trilogy was aping from earlier art and film, and I was aware that Star Wars (as a phenomenon) sort of represented the bulldozer that had opportunistically destroyed the culture of risk-taking experimental and auteur cinema from the 60s and 70s. I still have nice memories of the original movies but I also recognize that they played a huge part in the standardization of everything I loathe about studio culture nowadays (and over the last 25 years).

The Lord of The Rings is sort of like that. I read the books when I was in my teens and at the time they felt really deep and original and emotional (probably because I had very little depth as a person), not something easily translatable to cinema. I was simultaneously excited and nervous about seeing the first movie, and I bought the 4 disc version because it looked like a book and some such poo poo. But by the time I had seen and collected The Two Towers, the formula of the experiences, the music, CG, commercials, and consumer paraphernalia started to feel like a habit rather than a mystery. RotK winning 11 oscars was a total farce to me, but mostly I was just happy that I'd never have to hear about Peter Jackson's vision ever again. Until, you know, The Hobbit came along. I haven't seen more than 30 minutes of that 'trilogy' but I feel bored out of my mind just thinking about it. The Peter Jackson style has seeped into all the cracks of contemporary blockbuster cinema and I think, by this point, I'm even pretty sour on the books.

Not that it's all I read, but I find myself going back further and further in search of good sci-fi or fantasy like Lem, Bester, or Sturgeon (since they've already licensed the Phillip K Dick extensively, and poorly) in order to find anything that hasn't been franchised to death, and mostly I've just realized that the further back you go the better it gets. Star Wars and LotR are just the moldy topcoat.

edit; I'm still fond of Dune, as well, and I'm amused that it has managed to defy multiple efforts at translation.

BeanpolePeckerwood fucked around with this message at 06:44 on Jan 20, 2015

Name Change
Oct 9, 2005


second-hand smegma posted:

I think everyone eventually comes to terms with their lovely childhood taste. An example might be Star Wars. In the 4th grade it was all I cared about, and it had an almost mythological sway over my preferences. I'm sure I felt offended by the poor quality of the prequels for about 5 minutes, but by then I had realized that I was more fond of the cinematic qualities that the original trilogy was aping from earlier art and film, and I was aware that Star Wars (as a phenomenon) sort of represented the bulldozer that had opportunistically destroyed the culture of risk-taking experimental and auteur cinema from the 60s and 70s. I still have nice memories of the original movies but I also recognize that they played a huge part in the standardization of everything I loathe about studio culture nowadays (and over the last 25 years).

The Lord of The Rings is sort of like that. I read the books when I was in my teens and at the time they felt really deep and original and emotional (probably because I had very little depth as a person), not something easily translatable to cinema. I was simultaneously excited and nervous about seeing the first movie, and I bought the 4 disc version because it looked like a book and some such poo poo. But by the time I had seen and collected The Two Towers, the formula of the experiences, the music, CG, commercials, and consumer paraphernalia started to feel like a habit rather than a mystery. RotK winning 11 oscars was a total farce to me, but mostly I was just happy that I'd never have to hear about Peter Jackson's vision ever again. Until, you know, The Hobbit came along. I haven't seen more than 30 minutes of that 'trilogy' but I feel bored out of my mind just thinking about it. The Peter Jackson style has seeped into all the cracks of contemporary blockbuster cinema and I think, by this point, I'm even pretty sour on the books.

Not that it's all I read, but I find myself going back further and further in search of good sci-fi or fantasy like Lem, Bester, or Sturgeon (since they've already licensed the Phillip K Dick extensively, and poorly) in order to find anything that hasn't been franchised to death, and mostly I've just realized that the further back you go the better it gets. Star Wars and LotR are just the moldy topcoat.

edit; I'm still fond of Dune, as well, and I'm amused that it has managed to defy multiple efforts at translation.

You could just have said "I'm a huge movie hipster" and be done with it.

Jean Eric Burn
Nov 10, 2007

If fantasy has died, poisoned by commercialism, it died by the 90s.

Did LotR mess with the genre? Yep. Would that genre exist today without it? Probably not.

Neo Rasa
Mar 8, 2007
Everyone should play DUKE games.

:dukedog:

second-hand smegma posted:

I think everyone eventually comes to terms with their lovely childhood taste. An example might be Star Wars. In the 4th grade it was all I cared about, and it had an almost mythological sway over my preferences. I'm sure I felt offended by the poor quality of the prequels for about 5 minutes, but by then I had realized that I was more fond of the cinematic qualities that the original trilogy was aping from earlier art and film, and I was aware that Star Wars (as a phenomenon) sort of represented the bulldozer that had opportunistically destroyed the culture of risk-taking experimental and auteur cinema from the 60s and 70s. I still have nice memories of the original movies but I also recognize that they played a huge part in the standardization of everything I loathe about studio culture nowadays (and over the last 25 years).

The Lord of The Rings is sort of like that. I read the books when I was in my teens and at the time they felt really deep and original and emotional (probably because I had very little depth as a person), not something easily translatable to cinema. I was simultaneously excited and nervous about seeing the first movie, and I bought the 4 disc version because it looked like a book and some such poo poo. But by the time I had seen and collected The Two Towers, the formula of the experiences, the music, CG, commercials, and consumer paraphernalia started to feel like a habit rather than a mystery. RotK winning 11 oscars was a total farce to me, but mostly I was just happy that I'd never have to hear about Peter Jackson's vision ever again. Until, you know, The Hobbit came along. I haven't seen more than 30 minutes of that 'trilogy' but I feel bored out of my mind just thinking about it. The Peter Jackson style has seeped into all the cracks of contemporary blockbuster cinema and I think, by this point, I'm even pretty sour on the books.

Not that it's all I read, but I find myself going back further and further in search of good sci-fi or fantasy like Lem, Bester, or Sturgeon (since they've already licensed the Phillip K Dick extensively, and poorly) in order to find anything that hasn't been franchised to death, and mostly I've just realized that the further back you go the better it gets. Star Wars and LotR are just the moldy topcoat.

edit; I'm still fond of Dune, as well, and I'm amused that it has managed to defy multiple efforts at translation.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O-kHB2fWUS8

BeanpolePeckerwood
May 4, 2004

I MAY LOOK LIKE SHIT BUT IM ALSO DUMB AS FUCK



OneThousandMonkeys posted:

You could just have said "I'm a huge movie hipster" and be done with it.


Oh, my bad.

edit; I see I've encountered the denizens of Cinedisco's The Hobbit thread.


Jean Eric Burn posted:

If fantasy has died, poisoned by commercialism, it died by the 90s.

Did LotR mess with the genre? Yep. Would that genre exist today without it? Probably not.

I'd agree with the first point. Care to elaborate on the second?

BeanpolePeckerwood fucked around with this message at 08:05 on Jan 20, 2015

Magic Hate Ball
May 6, 2007

ha ha ha!
you've already paid for this

second-hand smegma posted:

I'd agree with the first point. Care to elaborate on the second?

It's probably something like "Hollywood likes money".

twerking on the railroad
Jun 23, 2007

Get on my level

Acht posted:

Hm. I'm surprised at the reactions about The Imitation Game. I really liked this one and would happily see Cumberbatch win the Oscar. Calling it bait feels pretty unfair to me.

It is 100% Oscar bait, because the movie does not give a gently caress about Alan Turing.

I feel like when people talk about a film being historically inaccurate it feels pretty abstract, so maybe here it would be good to be brutally honest.

1) Alan Turing did not decide who lived and who died and which boats got sunk in WWII. No one hid the cracking of ENIGMA from WINSTON loving CHURCHILL.

2) Alan Turing was not an Aspergers case, or if he was it was pretty far from the Big Bang Theory caricature described in the film. He was a Cambridge snob and he was a little weird but he got along fine with everyone he ever worked with, aside from sometimes making passes at men he was interested in. He was not bullied in any substantial way, at least not past age 10 or so.

3) Alan Turing was incredibly open about his sexuality, because he was used to living in the Cambridge bubble. Everyone who met him knew it, especially Joan who he was not in love with. He proposed to her for social reasons and then cut it off because he decided he couldn't put her through a loveless marriage. He had many boyfriends during his life, starting with his crush on Christopher at age 16, instead of 10 or whatever age they were going for in this movie. His openness was his downfall as when he was robbed he more or less gave up his sexuality immediately. NO ONE EVER ACCUSED ALAN TURING OF BEING A TRAITOR.

I don't know what kind of inaccuracies exist in Selma, but there is no way they come close to that. Unfortunately, unlike previous US presidents, mathematicians do not have PR teams.

And if you just plaster a generic Hollywood spy-thriller on the story of a real person who had struggles with being gay and don't even try to adapt that story then it's the worst, most cynical kind of Oscar bait.

Now if you talk about Cumberbatch, well he was clearly doing the best he could with that putrid screenplay. But then Best Actor also involves picking good scripts, doesn't it?

twerking on the railroad fucked around with this message at 12:18 on Jan 20, 2015

mobby_6kl
Aug 9, 2009

second-hand smegma posted:

I think everyone eventually comes to terms with their lovely childhood taste. An example might be Star Wars.

:laffo:

OneThousandMonkeys posted:

American Sniper just made a shitzillion dollars over the weekend, way above what anyone was expecting, which may affect its Oscar candidacy.

I was all for this film but apparently the movie takes the book at face value and does nothing with the fact that the guy was a loving nutjob. I thought it'd try to do something unforgiven at least.

PS. Mystic River was pretty good.

mobby_6kl fucked around with this message at 17:08 on Jan 20, 2015

Raxivace
Sep 9, 2014

As far as 2003 goes, I would have been ecstatic to see Lost in Translation winning over RotK. That movie is pretty great.

The REAL Goobusters
Apr 25, 2008
Yeah everything I've read up on the American Sniper guy makes him seem like a loving crazy person.

Echo Chamber
Oct 16, 2008

best username/post combo

Skeesix posted:

And if you just plaster a generic Hollywood spy-thriller on the story of a real person ... most cynical kind of Oscar bait.
I agree that Argo was cynical Oscar bait that was a spy thriller that literally made Hollywood the hero of the story. It had little to do with being gay, but it had plenty of whitewashing.

Edit: Sorry. I said "Don't get me started." My bad.

Echo Chamber fucked around with this message at 15:20 on Jan 20, 2015

Name Change
Oct 9, 2005


mobby_6kl posted:

:laffo:


I was all for this film but apparently the movie takes the book at face value and does nothing with the fact that the guy was [/spoiler]a loving nutjob[/spoiler]. I thought it'd try to do something unforgiven at least.

PS. Mystic River was pretty good.

As was put on display during the last Republican Convention, Clint Eastwood is a huge and only semi-coherent right-winger, so this is not unexpected. The neoconservative tone of the film could also have negative impact on its Oscar chances.

Cnut the Great
Mar 30, 2014

mobby_6kl posted:

:laffo:


I was all for this film but apparently the movie takes the book at face value and does nothing with the fact that the guy was [/spoiler]a loving nutjob[/spoiler]. I thought it'd try to do something unforgiven at least.

PS. Mystic River was pretty good.

Wasn't Spielberg set to direct this sniper movie at one point? I wonder how he would have handled it.

weekly font
Dec 1, 2004


Everytime I try to fly I fall
Without my wings
I feel so small
Guess I need you baby...



Cnut the Great posted:

Wasn't Spielberg set to direct this sniper movie at one point? I wonder how he would have handled it.

He added the evil brown sniper character.

I said come in!
Jun 22, 2004

OneThousandMonkeys posted:

American Sniper just made a shitzillion dollars over the weekend, way above what anyone was expecting, which may affect its Oscar candidacy.

I have way too many feelings about this awful movie and the horrible psychopath it tries to paint as a hero. People need to be made aware that Chris Kyle joined the military because he viewed all muslims as savages (that's what he called them in his book) and he admitted in his book that he enjoyed killing people. He was batshit crazy and should never have been allowed to enlist.

mobby_6kl
Aug 9, 2009

OneThousandMonkeys posted:

As was put on display during the last Republican Convention, Clint Eastwood is a huge and only semi-coherent right-winger, so this is not unexpected. The neoconservative tone of the film could also have negative impact on its Oscar chances.

That convention thing was weird but I really thought he had a slightly better grip on reality than that - what with Unforgiven, Baby and Letters from Iwo Jima. Did he really go downhill since then? I still can't get too mad at him as he's way more coherent than my grandma who's about the same age, though.

Edit: Haven't seen those two. Anyway, there's an AS thread now so I'll stop making GBS threads up this thread.

mobby_6kl fucked around with this message at 17:20 on Jan 20, 2015

HUNDU THE BEAST GOD
Sep 14, 2007

everything is yours

mobby_6kl posted:

That convention thing was weird but I really thought he had a slightly better grip on reality than that - what with Unforgiven, Baby and Letters from Iwo Jima. Did he really go downhill since then? I still can't get too mad at him as he's way more coherent than my grandma who's about the same age, though.

Watch Invictus or J. Edgar and you tell me.

BeanpolePeckerwood
May 4, 2004

I MAY LOOK LIKE SHIT BUT IM ALSO DUMB AS FUCK



Cnut the Great posted:

Wasn't Spielberg set to direct this sniper movie at one point? I wonder how he would have handled it.

Pre-title sequence would have been shot in black and white.

weekly font
Dec 1, 2004


Everytime I try to fly I fall
Without my wings
I feel so small
Guess I need you baby...



mobby_6kl posted:

That convention thing was weird but I really thought he had a slightly better grip on reality than that - what with Unforgiven, Baby and Letters from Iwo Jima. Did he really go downhill since then? I still can't get too mad at him as he's way more coherent than my grandma who's about the same age, though.

Edit: Haven't seen those two. Anyway, there's an AS thread now so I'll stop making GBS threads up this thread.

His speech at the convention is either someone who was really sure he could wing political comedy in front of thousands live and millions on TV, suddenly realizing he could not; or someone with the beginnings of dementia.

sbaldrick
Jul 19, 2006
Driven by Hate
American Sniper is the movie that everyone expected from a man that ruined his reputation as an actor and director by yelling at a chair for 20 minutes on live tv. When he dies the clip that's shown will not be Dirty Harry or the man with no name, it will be that.

It's going to be super funny with Jesse Venture ends up with most of the money from the book and the movie even if he is a jackass.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

I said come in!
Jun 22, 2004

sbaldrick posted:

It's going to be super funny with Jesse Venture ends up with most of the money from the book and the movie even if he is a jackass.

Eh, he gave the Kyle family a chance to admit the statements about him were false and was 100% willing to drop the case if that happened.

  • Locked thread