Originally Posted by Frazod:
I saw Once Upon a Time in Hollywood. I thought it was awesome. I typically really enjoy well done period pieces, and it was definitely that. Loved the off the rails ending.
But it's not in the same league as 1917.
I'm guessing you and I should never do a movie night. :-)
Dune (1984) was Oscar nominated for Best Sound [Reply]
Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud:
Thanks, man. I'm so lame that I've had Knives Out for like 9 months and still haven't made time to watch it yet.
Knives Out is a bit contrived but it's feather-light, killer entertainment.
Do you enjoy watching about 15 great, hilarious actors chew scenery?
Ocean's Eleven is the best comparison. The film is very contrived in its details but the draw is just having a beer and watching 15 actors being hilarious and chewing scenery together. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Deberg_1990:
This reached its apex this year when Parasite won best pic. I’ve not seen it, but I understand it’s really good.
But how did it win best pic and not best foreign language film?
Did the nomination process change? Because there have been lots of great foreign language films over the years that could have won best picture but weren’t nominated in that category
Parasite is fucking terrible. Well, not terrible, but not even remotely close to Best Picture. Well, actually, the 2nd half of the film is terrible.
Originally Posted by Direckshun:
Knives Out is a bit contrived but it's feather-light, killer entertainment.
Do you enjoy watching about 15 great, hilarious actors chew scenery?
Ocean's Eleven is the best comparison. The film is very contrived in its details but the draw is just having a beer and watching 15 actors being hilarious and chewing scenery together.
I had very low expectations for Knives Out, and was pleasantly surprised. Fun watch. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud:
I explained it in an earlier post but it's an attempt at more diversity in filmmaking but the criteria for doing so is weak at best.
When I look at the actual criteria you posted, it looks to me like what it really does is create more opportunities for not only recognition, but upward mobility, for the crew, rather than diversifying the casts, although there is some of that too. [Reply]
Originally Posted by htismaqe:
When I look at the actual criteria you posted, it looks to me like what it really does is create more opportunities for not only recognition, but upward mobility, for the crew, rather than diversifying the casts, although there is some of that too.
Well, that's the hope, anyway but I think it'll take years before big budget blockbuster films adhere to anything other than C & D in their criteria.
With that said, I'm absolutely certain that the smaller Indie films and Art House films will try to meet every aspect of the criteria and hope this leads to more opportunities and upward mobility. [Reply]
So maybe I’m just being suspicious of “Hollywood elites” but why do they need rules for award eligibility if they’ve spent the last decade plus preaching to the general public about all of their failures in society that need fixing? Is this a subtle admittance they major players are hypocrites and haven’t been inclusive and have been purposely excluding people of color or is this just something to state to win internet points and attract more viewers? [Reply]
Originally Posted by mr. tegu:
So maybe I’m just being suspicious of “Hollywood elites” but why do they need rules for award eligibility if they’ve spent the last decade plus preaching to the general public about all of their failures in society that need fixing? Is this a subtle admittance they major players are hypocrites and haven’t been inclusive and have been purposely excluding people of color or is this just something to state to win internet points and attract more viewers?
To answer your question directly, there is a schism between the current industry and the Oscar voters.
They awarded that honor to people in the past for life, and some have remained in the industry and others have doddered off into old age or left coast oblious hedonism.
So half of the voters don't even WATCH the films, let alone put effort into thoughtful votes.
For every Tom Hanks and Oprah Winfrey casting a vote, there's a key grip who last stepped on the lot when John Huston was making epics casting one as well.
A little hyperbolic, but the problem is essentially that the Academy electorate has an outsized demographic of disinterested or detached voters. [Reply]
