|
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.
|
# ? Jan 19, 2015 17:57 |
|
|
# ? Mar 28, 2024 11:39 |
|
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.
|
# ? Jan 19, 2015 17:57 |
|
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.
|
# ? Jan 19, 2015 18:13 |
|
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. 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.
|
# ? Jan 19, 2015 18:25 |
|
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.
|
# ? Jan 19, 2015 18:45 |
|
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.
|
# ? Jan 19, 2015 18:48 |
|
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.
|
# ? Jan 19, 2015 18:49 |
|
The Oscars will redeem themselves to me entirely if they do one of those dumb cartoon character presents an award moments with Groot.
|
# ? Jan 19, 2015 20:06 |
|
computer parts 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.
|
# ? Jan 19, 2015 21:39 |
|
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.
|
# ? Jan 19, 2015 22:10 |
|
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.
|
# ? Jan 19, 2015 22:15 |
|
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.
|
# ? Jan 19, 2015 22:22 |
|
The imitation game was awful and if it wins any awards its a travesty.
|
# ? Jan 19, 2015 23:06 |
|
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.
|
# ? Jan 20, 2015 00:21 |
|
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. 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 |
# ? Jan 20, 2015 03:18 |
|
American Sniper just made a shitzillion dollars over the weekend, way above what anyone was expecting, which may affect its Oscar candidacy.
|
# ? Jan 20, 2015 03:23 |
|
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.
|
# ? Jan 20, 2015 05:18 |
|
2003 was a pretty wimpy year, and City of God was barely in it anyways.
|
# ? Jan 20, 2015 05:23 |
|
If Oscars were about justice, Master and Commander would have destroyed that year.
|
# ? Jan 20, 2015 05:49 |
|
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 |
# ? Jan 20, 2015 06:41 |
|
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). You could just have said "I'm a huge movie hipster" and be done with it.
|
# ? Jan 20, 2015 07:12 |
|
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.
|
# ? Jan 20, 2015 07:16 |
|
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). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O-kHB2fWUS8
|
# ? Jan 20, 2015 07:29 |
|
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. 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 |
# ? Jan 20, 2015 07:58 |
|
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".
|
# ? Jan 20, 2015 08:22 |
|
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 |
# ? Jan 20, 2015 11:52 |
|
second-hand smegma posted:I think everyone eventually comes to terms with their lovely childhood taste. An example might be Star Wars. 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 |
# ? Jan 20, 2015 11:53 |
|
As far as 2003 goes, I would have been ecstatic to see Lost in Translation winning over RotK. That movie is pretty great.
|
# ? Jan 20, 2015 12:23 |
|
Yeah everything I've read up on the American Sniper guy makes him seem like a loving crazy person.
|
# ? Jan 20, 2015 14:20 |
|
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. 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 |
# ? Jan 20, 2015 14:48 |
|
mobby_6kl 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.
|
# ? Jan 20, 2015 14:55 |
|
mobby_6kl posted:
Wasn't Spielberg set to direct this sniper movie at one point? I wonder how he would have handled it.
|
# ? Jan 20, 2015 16:08 |
|
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.
|
# ? Jan 20, 2015 16:27 |
|
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.
|
# ? Jan 20, 2015 16:50 |
|
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 |
# ? Jan 20, 2015 17:17 |
|
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.
|
# ? Jan 20, 2015 17:17 |
|
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.
|
# ? Jan 20, 2015 17:27 |
|
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. 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.
|
# ? Jan 20, 2015 17:42 |
|
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.
|
# ? Jan 20, 2015 18:02 |
|
|
# ? Mar 28, 2024 11:39 |
|
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.
|
# ? Jan 20, 2015 18:12 |