|
Vintersorg posted:Maybe Selma is a bad movie? I haven't seen it yet. And as others said, isn't really inaccurate in regards to Lyndon Johnson and his support? I personally enjoyed Selma, it's a very Christian movie though (as in spiritual and explicitly Christian). It's also less inaccurate than Lincoln at least, in that they actually bothered to include LBJ in the film.
|
#
¿
Jan 16, 2015 00:59
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 16:11 |
|
|
Elephanthead posted:This that academy just put the nail in their coffin. They are now to old to be relevant to anyone under 40. There are not enough 20 something hosts they can hire to fix old people voting. Said every year for at least the past 25 years.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 17, 2015 04:16
|
|
|
Ego-bot posted:Whenever people point to certain year regarding the best picture award and say 'this film should have won instead of that film', usually the two most common years I see are 1976, where Rocky won over Taxi Driver, and 1989, where Driving Miss Daisy won over Do the Right Thing. A common one is Shakespeare in Love over Saving Private Ryan (or The Thin Red Line). and I guess Chicago over Gangs of New York too.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 18, 2015 18:27
|
|
|
Howling Man posted:
Avatar didn't, that was Hurt Locker year.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 18, 2015 22:13
|
|
|
Pirate Jet posted:Let's just give everything to Imitation Game and Theory of Everything. gently caress it, right? Let the Oscars eat themselves. Are either of those actually good (even for Oscar Bait) or are they just relying on the usual stuff to get nominations everywhere?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 18, 2015 22:47
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
Maxwell Lord posted:It was the first year they had the "up to ten nominees" rule. And they also had both "Up" and "Up in the Air" nominated.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 25, 2015 05:02
|
|
|
OneThousandMonkeys posted:That's all fine, but your docudrama doesn't get to be diametrically opposed to what actually happened because it's about black people. And yet Lincoln's sins were much more easily forgiven.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 30, 2015 13:52
|
|
|
Thinking on it some more it's actually incredibly important that a character like LBJ in the film was in Selma. In the Civil Rights Era, there were three main groups of white people (and I apologize if the terms are slightly different from convention) - the liberal, the conservative, and the moderate. The White Liberal was devoted to the Civil Rights cause to a degree rivaling the actual minorities - they would risk their life and limb to go down and aid minorities, even if they weren't part of the movement from the beginning. The White Conservative is the segregationist, determined to keep minorities in their place even if it means violating any and all laws. As for the White Moderate, King himself sums them up fairly well: MLK posted:Over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro’s great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen’s Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to “order” than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: “I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action”; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man’s freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a “more convenient season.” Note the bolded phrase. In Selma, or any depiction of the Civil Rights movement, you should logically expect to see all three of these groups, unless it's solely devoted to a specific region with no outside influence (and this film wasn't an example of that). The examples of White Conservatives in the film are so numerous I don't think I have to elaborate. The White Liberals are characterized by the people who come down to participate in the march, specifically the Reverend James Reeb who is depicted as being attacked and killed on screen by the Conservatives. What then of the moderates? How do you accurately depict people who are characterized as not wanting to rock the boat? At this point, it's important to put a bit of historical context in. The film is set in 1965, and LBJ has just won re-election, one of if not the most lopsided victory in US history. The US at the time was extremely white, around 88% of people falling in that category. The question then becomes "who are these white people that voted for LBJ?" The most important thing about this election is that LBJ won without his traditional powerbase - the South. Texas and Florida went his way, but the traditional "Deep South" did not, the first time they hadn't voted for a Democrat in 100 years. It's safe to say from this that White Conservatives (as I defined them) were not a significant part of his electorate. It's also safe to say that White Liberals were not a majority, though probably larger than the Conservatives, because otherwise there would have been much more extreme legislation passed earlier. That leaves the White Moderate. LBJ in the film is a living representation of the Moderate. He uses the same phrase MLK alludes to earlier - that blacks made some progress and "just need to wait" for a better time to focus on the next battle. It is extremely important that that perspective is shown in the film, because that was the prevailing white opinion outside of the South. Most people didn't care one way or the other how blacks were treated because "We treated them okay" but what was being asked was getting dangerously close to upsetting the Northern/non-Southern order as well. Remember that the following pic took place in Boston, not Birmingham:  It makes perfect sense that LBJ would be characterized as this white moderate, who only concedes at the end due to legacy/reputation because the President is the avatar of the US Government and the US Government was primarily elected by moderate Whites.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 31, 2015 15:50
|
|
|
Corek posted:LBJ would be hard pressed to be influenced by this picture because it took place 4 years after he died, 8 years after MLK died, and 11 years after Selma. This is a complaint about historical accuracy? Good job not reading my post, but tl;dr - this is the sentiment that was common in most of America from the end of the Civil War until Selma (and really through today).
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2015 19:34
|
|
|
cat doter posted:I think the more that's done to show that the Oscars are basically the Grammy's of the movies the better because the oscars loving suck, it's sad how much influence they have Most people (read: movie companies) just care about nominees which haven't been absurdly terrible (in general).
|
|
#
¿
Feb 21, 2015 14:08
|
|
|
KingKapalone posted:Think there is a way to watch this online with decent quality? I have access to a cable account if that matters. I think it's on ABC, maybe try their website?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 22, 2015 22:46
|
|
|
whoa
|
|
#
¿
Feb 23, 2015 03:17
|
|
|
I need a gif of Oprah now
|
|
#
¿
Feb 23, 2015 03:18
|
|
|
I honestly forgot about Into the Woods but it looked really interesting, hopefully I can catch it on Netflix sometime soon
|
|
#
¿
Feb 23, 2015 03:57
|
|
|
Happy Noodle Boy posted:Every movie in this category owned.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 23, 2015 04:04
|
|
|
the Planet of the Apes movie should've won but Interstellar looked amazing
|
|
#
¿
Feb 23, 2015 04:05
|
|
|
DutchDupe posted:Hasn't it grossed money to the point of being like...the third highest animated grossed movie? It's not even the highest grossing nominee
|
|
#
¿
Feb 23, 2015 04:15
|
|
|
Looper posted:None of you even watched the other three animation nominees, did you I actually didn't see any of the animation nominees but I do want to see Kaguya
|
|
#
¿
Feb 23, 2015 04:19
|
|
|
Rageaholic Monkey posted:Attenborough too, Jesus I was thinking of the wrong Attenborough and got really confused
|
|
#
¿
Feb 23, 2015 04:39
|
|
|
Rageaholic Monkey posted:Man, a song from Selma is being performed but the movie itself is gonna be totally snubbed. How's that happen? They apparently didn't have any screeners until very late in the nomination process.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 23, 2015 04:59
|
|
|
Timett posted:Was there actually a reason to do Sound of Music or just because 50th Anniversary
|
|
#
¿
Feb 23, 2015 05:20
|
|
|
Alfred P. Pseudonym posted:It would be Oscars as gently caress if they started playing him off when he talked about attempting suicide. It already happened well, a woman talking about her son committing suicide, but same thing
|
|
#
¿
Feb 23, 2015 05:37
|
|
|
he was pretty good in Jupiter Ascending too
|
|
#
¿
Feb 23, 2015 05:51
|
|
|
WMain00 posted:He's in Jupiter Ascending. Jupiter Ascending is amazing though. And even if most people think it's bad, no one cares because it came out like two weeks ago and no one remembers it now.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 23, 2015 13:33
|
|
|
Lurdiak posted:I don't think you can just call every movie that isn't dumb action "oscar bait". Theory of Everything, that's Oscar Bait. Birdman is not. Birdman is actually creative and interesting. Yeah, the prime example of Oscar Bait is Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close, which did terrible in the box office (well, it covered its budget) and critically but still got a Best Picture nomination.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 25, 2015 02:32
|
|
|
morestuff posted:I don't get it Apparently JGL looks like an anime character.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 25, 2015 04:41
|
|
|
Steve Yun posted:Usually they wait a year or two before doing their poo poo role though It worked for Jennifer Lawrence I guess (I thoroughly enjoy The Hunger Games though).
|
|
#
¿
Feb 25, 2015 20:16
|
|
|
Alfred P. Pseudonym posted:I think that it would be nice if movies were actually released in more than like 4 theaters in New York and LA before the nominations are announced. Like how am I supposed to give a poo poo that a movie is nominated if I can't even see it until February? That's intentional, it's so you can go to the theater and see "Nominated for Best Picture Selma" etc.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 26, 2015 14:08
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 16:11 |
|
|
DrVenkman posted:There are few things I hate more than the casual dismissal of movies as 'Oscar Bait'. And I hated Theory of Everything and Imitation Game, but to say they existed solely to reap an Oscar is ludicrous. That's not how movies are made. Sure when marketing gets involved that's a whole different thing, but a movie isn't produced on the rare chance that it might actually win an award. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z_quK9SEGYE
|
|
#
¿
Mar 3, 2015 13:43
|
|