2010 Awards and Critic Lists Discussion Thread

[elixir]

Not like the voters watch the foreign film noms, anyway. It's popped up on a bunch of critic lists and whatnot so I wouldn't be surprised if it made the cut

These 9 films are gonna be screened, so the voters will watch them all I believe. I'm not sure they watched the first shortlist of 65, but these 9, I think they do. I think Dogtooth stands a very good chance of making it, and I sure hope it does.

[soitgoes...]

These 9 films are gonna be screened, so the voters will watch them all I believe. I'm not sure they watched the first shortlist of 65, but these 9, I think they do. I think Dogtooth stands a very good chance of making it, and I sure hope it does.There's a committee that votes on which films will be included for the Best Foreign Film category. After the final five are announced then anyone of the members can vote for a foreign language film only if they attest to having seen all the nominees.

[Ezee E]

There's a committee that votes on which films will be included for the Best Foreign Film category. After the final five are announced then anyone of the members can vote for a foreign language film only if they attest to having seen all the nominees.
They seem to break from the norm a lot though and not go with the obvious pick. Amelie, City of God, and The White Ribbon/A Prophet losing out for instance.

[soitgoes...]

They seem to break from the norm a lot though and not go with the obvious pick. Amelie, City of God, and The White Ribbon/A Prophet losing out for instance.It's interesting how they cull the lists. The initial entry from each country is up to that nation's film institute or what have you. Right there is where a lot of great films get lost. Then from the original list, a vote is made down to 6 films, the viewer needs to see at least 80% of the total films in question. Three films are chosen as wildcards by the Foreign Film Committee to bring the total back up to 9. Then another vote takes place paring it down to five before the Academy votes for the winner, but the voting is limited to only those members who have seen the five nominated, unlike voting in other areas.

You would think that with strict voting protocols, and the use of a specialized committee, that crazy results like last year's would be fewer.

[baby doll]

You would think that with strict voting protocols, and the use of a specialized committee, that crazy results like last year's would be fewer.I think you have to look at it from the industry perspective. First of all, the award is essentially a showcase for local industries outside of the United States and Britain, so the submissions skew towards relatively expensive prestige pictures (typically costume dramas), which is why most of these are movies we've never heard of. And then the people voting on the winners are, after all, the same people who liked Crash and Slumdog Millionaire so much. Of course they liked The Secret in Their Eyes more than Ajami, Un prophète, and The White Ribbon, and Departures more than Entre les murs, Gomorra and Waltz With Bashir, because that's the kind of movie that people in the mainstream film industry want to make. To put it in the most un-nuanced terms possible, the films that win prizes at Cannes tend to be auteur movies, while the Oscars go to more "audience-friendly" fare. (You'll notice that the Iñárritu film made the cut but not Uncle Boonmee Who Can Recall His Past Motherfuckin' Lives.)

[NickGlass]

Not like the voters watch the foreign film noms, anyway. It's popped up on a bunch of critic lists and whatnot so I wouldn't be surprised if it made the cut

Unfortunately, they do watch all the films nominated; in fact, they must watch the films in order to vote (wouldn't it be nice if all categories were like this). Of course, this means that Dogtooth most likely won't get a nomination because (1) it doesn't play off of cheap sentiment and conventional plot machinations, (2) it's audacious, and (3) I love it. I've written numerous columns on this, but the foreign film committee typically chooses films that simply reinforce their notions of Hollywood filmmaking.



They seem to break from the norm a lot though and not go with the obvious pick. Amelie, City of God, and The White Ribbon/A Prophet losing out for instance.

City of God wasn't even nominated in Best Foreign Language Film the year it was eligible. As for the other films, they're "accessible," but not nearly as boorishly sentimental as the eventual winners.

[Ezee E]

My final predictions:

Best Picture:
Black Swan
The Fighter
Inception
The Kids Are All Right
The King's Speech
The Social Network
The Town
Toy Story 3
True Grit
Winter's Bone

Surprise picks:
Noomi Rapace for Best Actress
The Ghost Writer for Adapted Screenplay
Exit Through the Gift Shop for Best Documentary
Dogtooth for Foreign Language

[Adam]

Your best picture noms are probably right on, except I think either Blue Valentine or 127 Hours will get in over The Town

[elixir]

Your best picture noms are probably right on, except I think either Blue Valentine or 127 Hours will get in over The Town

I agree with his picks. I actually try to predict every single category, even the impossible-to-guess ones (I even have an approach to those). Really think Blue Valentine has no shot, but 127 Hours could sneak in there instead of The Town, though I don't think that will happen.

[Briare]

I think Winter's Bone is the vulnerable one here, it missed the PGA, and its buzz has died down quite a bit.

[elixir]

I think Winter's Bone is the vulnerable one here, it missed the PGA, and its buzz has died down quite a bit.

But Jennifer Lawrence is in, I think it will get Adapted Screenplay, and I think Hawkes might even sneak into Best Supporting Actor--he did get nominated for a SAG, which is the largest voting body and their nominations often align with the Oscars (19 out of 20 last year). It's like there are two spots for "indies" now that there are 10--this and The Kids Are All Right. (Whereas with 5, LMS and Juno got noms). I still don't like how there's 10...

[Henry Gale]

I'd like to see at least one or two things slip in for Best Picture that no one really sees coming. There seems to be the seven locks, and then Winter's Bone, 127 Hours, The Town, and even The Kids Are All Right, all seem to be the ones that have floated in and out of everyone's expected ten for the last couple of months, making them less sure things as I see it.

I have no idea what the out of the blue choices would be, but ideally it's something good, or even a documentary or something foreign that got disqualified in their respective fields. Also, I think things like Shutter Island, The Ghost Writer, and Another Year could have enough fans of the people involved to be a bigger possibilites all around than most may think.

[elixir]

But if that slip-in is another The Blind Side...

[elixir]

Oh, and Another Year's "award" might be--I think--an Original Screenplay nom.

[Briare]

But Jennifer Lawrence is in, I think it will get Adapted Screenplay, and I think Hawkes might even sneak into Best Supporting Actor--he did get nominated for a SAG, which is the largest voting body and their nominations often align with the Oscars (19 out of 20 last year). It's like there are two spots for "indies" now that there are 10--this and The Kids Are All Right. (Whereas with 5, LMS and Juno got noms). I still don't like how there's 10...

I hope Hawkes gets the nomination, its an incredible performance and the academy has shown a history of nominating performances like these in this category but I'd still say its the weakest of the bunch. just like last year, in which there was a clear top 5 and the rest were films like Up, The Blind Side and District 9 which were popular and successful. i know this logic can be sxuspect, but just my feeling

[Ezee E]

Would love a John Hawkes nomination. That might be my fave performance of the year.

As for the wild-card movies. Shutter Island, The Ghost Writer, and Blue Valentine seem like the picks there. 127 Hours is the likely replacement for any I get wrong.

[Henry Gale]

I feel like I'm the one person that actually likes them having ten nomination slots. Last year, of the three I actually had on my own top ten list (Inglourious Basterds, A Serious Man and Up) only one of them would have realistically ever been considered for the category had it not been for them expanding it. Sure it meant we also saw things like The Blind Side and An Education get in there when they probably shouldn't have, but for me it's also nice to see something like District 9 (essentially the better telling of Avatar's story, in my mind) be the sole sci-fi film given any recognition by the Academy in ages, let alone that same year.

[RoadtoPerdition]

I feel like I'm the one person that actually likes them having ten nomination slots.

To me, it just seems kind of pointless. Each year, whether there have been 5 nominees or 10, there are really only two, MAYBE three, movies that are actually competing for Best Picture. I guess it makes some people happy to see movies like District 9 get nominated when it wouldn't have been possible in previous years, but it feels more like a condescending "now are you happy?" when everyone knows it doesn't have a chance in hell of actually winning. I don't hate the 10 nominee format, but I prefer the classic 5 nominees; it felt more prestigious to be nominated for Best Picture before the field was doubled.

[DavidSeven]

Yeah, I mean is it even significant that District-9 got a BP nom last year? If it made a cut of five, it definitely would have been (for people who follow these sort of things).

[RoadtoPerdition]

The King's Speech seems to be gaining Oscar steam after the SAG win and with it being Ebert's pick to win. I haven't seen it, but I have a hard time picturing it as the Best Picture with The Social Network having swept pretty much every award up to this point. It's always fun having some last minute drama though when it seems the lock to win may be in danger. I must say, I hope next year's acting races aren't so one-way. Last year and this year, it seems like the same actors have been winning at every award event (not undeservedly, but it makes for very little suspense).

[Ezee E]

The only possible surprise I see is Supporting Actress. Meh.

[Pop Trash]

If The King's Speech wins, it will be the most mediocre flick since Crash to win BP.

[NickGlass]

If The King's Speech wins, it will be the most mediocre flick since Crash to win BP.

It will be a dull winner, and, yes--after picking up the PGA, SAG, and DGA (what were the directors thinking?)--it's now the favorite to win. It's not as rancid or culturally obtuse as Crash or Slumdog Millionaire, though. It's simply a thoroughly mechanical and mediocre crowd-panderer (or "pleaser," whatever). The film isn't disgusting, but its marketing and award haul are.

[Pop Trash]

It will be a dull winner, and, yes--after picking up the PGA, SAG, and DGA (what were the directors thinking?)--it's now the favorite to win. It's not as rancid or culturally obtuse as Crash or Slumdog Millionaire, though. It's simply a thoroughly mechanical and mediocre crowd-panderer (or "pleaser," whatever). The film isn't disgusting, but its marketing and award haul are.

I'm not a big fan of them, but at least Crash and Slumdog Millionaire were at least trying to be ambitious in their own way. And in the case of Slumdog, at least it was showing you people/places that normally don't get lodged in the multiplex. The King's Speech was like an OK-ish BBC production you would see on PBS on a Sunday night. And that sure as hell shouldn't be THE BEST PICTURE OF THE YEAR.

[Ivan Drago]

As much as I like Timothy Spall, he /= Winston Churchill.

[baby doll]

I'm not a big fan of them, but at least Crash and Slumdog Millionaire were at least trying to be ambitious in their own way. And in the case of Slumdog, at least it was showing you people/places that normally don't get lodged in the multiplex. The King's Speech was like an OK-ish BBC production you would see on PBS on a Sunday night. And that sure as hell shouldn't be THE BEST PICTURE OF THE YEAR.I haven't seen The King's Speech, but The Departed was awfully mediocre and Slumdog Millionaire was just awful. (A movie about poverty in India having a "feel-good" ending, in which the hero and his girlfriend get to keep their eyes and win a lot of money, is pretty offensive to say the least.) But more importantly, since when have the Oscars actually picked the best movie of the year? As one reviewer put it, these awards are like trying to order a pizza for more than two people. Sure, I can live with Casablanca, The Godfather, Annie Hall, and Schindler's List (the cinematic equivalent of vegetarian pizza), but I still prefer The Magnificent Ambersons, Red Psalm, Cet obscur objet du désir, and The Puppet Master (which all have a bit of meat on them). Even if The Social Network were to win, it's no Uncle Boonmee Who Can Recall His Past Lives.

[Ezee E]

babydoll, you so crazy.

I really don't see what could be offensive about Slumdog Millionaire. Should it have had a "feel-bad" ending so as to not offend you? I don't get it.

[baby doll]

babydoll, you so crazy.

I really don't see what could be offensive about Slumdog Millionaire. Should it have had a "feel-bad" ending so as to not offend you? I don't get it.The movie starts out as an inventory of third world horrors (abject squalor, religious violence, orphaned children, beggar masters, police brutality), but then we're supposed to forget all of that, as if India's booming economy has magically fixed all its social problems (talk about a fairy tale); at one point we're told that there are condos were there used to be slums, as if there were no more slums in India. The film takes incredibly complex social problems and then simplifies them so the movie can have its bland feel good finale. The plot of the movie is essentially: Boy loves girl, boy needs money to provide for girl (why doesn't she get a call centre job?), boy wins game show, everybody jai hos happily ever after.

[soitgoes...]

But more importantly, since when have the Oscars actually picked the best movie of the year? As one reviewer put it, these awards are like trying to order a pizza for more than two people. Sure, I can live with Casablanca, The Godfather, Annie Hall, and Schindler's List (the cinematic equivalent of vegetarian pizza), but I still prefer The Magnificent Ambersons, Red Psalm, Cet obscur objet du désir, and The Puppet Master (which all have a bit of meat on them). Even if The Social Network were to win, it's no Uncle Boonmee Who Can Recall His Past Lives.The Academy Awards is still an American event. It will choose the American productions first, followed by the rest of the English speaking world. I'm pretty sure most national award shows are like this. The Japanese Academy Awards always chooses a Japanese film. The César Awards hooks up French films. The BAFTA's actually does the best at being cross-national, but it still favors it's own over others.

The point being that the best film of the year isn't likely to be chosen for an Oscar unless that film is an American production. Right off the bat hundreds of films are out of contention. The only way for a foreign film to gain enough attention from the voters is if it has a decent run in the States (Life Is Beautiful, Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon). Really the whole thing is silly, because when has the best film of the year been an unanimous decision? As with your pizza analogy, just because you think Red Psalm is the bee's knees doesn't mean that it's the best film for me (I find it incredibly dull).

[baby doll]

just because you think Red Psalm is the bee's knees doesn't mean that it's the best film for me (I find it incredibly dull).Well that's just wrong.

[Watashi]

I'm no fan of Slumdog, but the whole movie is suppose to be a fairy tale. Did anyone actually think it was giving an indepth look at Indian poverty and politics?

[soitgoes...]

Well that's just wrong.Nice discussion.

[baby doll]

I'm no fan of Slumdog, but the whole movie is suppose to be a fairy tale. Did anyone actually think it was giving an indepth look at Indian poverty and politics?I think the problem is that the film wants to have it both ways. It explicitly claims to represent "the real India," but at the same time, it wants to be a modern fairy tale.

[baby doll]

Nice discussion.Considering what Jancsó is doing with mise en scène and sound, if you find that boring, I can only conclude that you're just not trying very hard.

[soitgoes...]

Considering what Jancsó is doing with mise en scène and sound, if you find that boring, I can only conclude that you're just not trying very hard.You sidestep the entire point of my post in order to tell me I'm not trying hard because my opinion doesn't jive with yours. Fuck you.

[Pop Trash]

I think the problem is that the film wants to have it both ways. It explicitly claims to represent "the real India," but at the same time, it wants to be a modern fairy tale.

Yeah, I think Boyle was consciously (or maybe not-so-consciously) trying to merge Satyajit Ray style social realism with a Bollywood ending and maybe a Bollywood fairy tale plot. Needless to say, it didn't jive with some people. I also found the script (fairy tale or not) to be rather ludicrously schematic.

That said, at least it was often alive, and many of the scenes with the kids were pretty fantastic if you separate them off from the rest of the film. The King's Speech just feels embalmed.

[baby doll]

You sidestep the entire point of my post in order to tell me I'm not trying hard because my opinion doesn't jive with yours. Fuck you.Well, I can't disagree when you say that the Academy Awards is an event for the American film industry, or that there's no such thing as the best movie of the year in an objective sense (that's the point what I was originally trying to get at), so what else is there to talk about? Besides, you haven't said anything to back up your claim that Jancsó's film is dull.

[baby doll]

Yeah, I think Boyle was consciously (or maybe not-so-consciously) trying to merge Satyajit Ray style social realism with a Bollywood ending and maybe a Bollywood fairy tale plot. Needless to say, it didn't jive with some people. I also found the script (fairy tale or not) to be rather ludicrously schematic.

That said, at least it was often alive, and many of the scenes with the kids were pretty fantastic if you separate them off from the rest of the film. The King's Speech just feels embalmed.Stylistically, the film is about as far from Satyajit Ray as it's possible to get. My suspicion is that Boyle's conscious model was City of God.

[soitgoes...]

Well, I can't disagree when you say that the Academy Awards is an event for the American film industry, or that there's no such thing as the best movie of the year in an objective sense (that's the point what I was originally trying to get at), so what else is there to talk about? Besides, you haven't said anything to back up your claim that Jancsó's film is dull.Well this is the 2010 Awards and Critics Lists Discussion Thread so I'm not sure an analysis of a film that was made almost 40 years ago would be best made here.

Mise en scène and sound don't make great films on their own. I can appreciate Jancsó's technical craft in the Red Psalm (though I find his wide-screen b&w look much more aesthetically pleasing), but I'm sorry to say that his quasi-musical socialist film did nothing for me. I don't know how to "back up my claim that Jancsó's film is dull," other than to say that I was bored by it. I'm unaware of a way of proving boredom. I'm sure you have been bored by a film that is classified as being great. Would you then say that you weren't trying hard enough? Or are you above that? To claim that I'm not trying is ridiculous and insulting. I have watched three Jancsó films since, and enjoyed them all to varying degrees, with one being among the best films I've seen.

[chrisnu]

While I can understand wanting to recognize Another Year in some category, this would make the most sense to be nominated in an ensemble acting category, not original screenplay. It would probably be my pick to win such a category this year.

[baby doll]

Well this is the 2010 Awards and Critics Lists Discussion Thread so I'm not sure an analysis of a film that was made almost 40 years ago would be best made here.

Mise en scène and sound don't make great films on their own. I can appreciate Jancsó's technical craft in the Red Psalm (though I find his wide-screen b&w look much more aesthetically pleasing), but I'm sorry to say that his quasi-musical socialist film did nothing for me. I don't know how to "back up my claim that Jancsó's film is dull," other than to say that I was bored by it. I'm unaware of a way of proving boredom. I'm sure you have been bored by a film that is classified as being great. Would you then say that you weren't trying hard enough? Or are you above that? To claim that I'm not trying is ridiculous and insulting. I have watched three Jancsó films since, and enjoyed them all to varying degrees, with one being among the best films I've seen.It's one thing to say, for instance, that I was bored by The Leopard because it's stately to a fault, and despite repeated viewings, I've never been able to engage it, as opposed to just saying I was bored by it and leaving it at that.

[Ezee E]

I think Boyle has even mentioned City of God as an inspiration. It's certainly there.

But he also mentioned, along with whoever the screenwriter was, that they were going for a more universal story. The structure is certainly there. Boy gets girl, boy loses girl, boy gets her back.

The movie never shys away from the slums though. Nothing magically disappears. The poverty is shown throughout the whole movie. Please.

---

And regarding the Oscars, the most I can hope for is that a few actors/actresses get recognition that I want, and that there's some funny stuff during the show. I don't take in to account the winners too much. Although I will check out the nominated movies. Typically, I may not agree, but I usually like them.

Percentage wise, I like the movies a lot more that win then those that do not.

[soitgoes...]

It's one thing to say, for instance, that I was bored by The Leopard because it's stately to a fault, and despite repeated viewings, I've never been able to engage it, as opposed to just saying I was bored by it and leaving it at that.
It's boring because I don't care a lick about a Hungarian peasant revolt set to music. I've stated such before a couple of times. Jancsó goes from films in which he doesn't really take a stand one way or another to a film where he's decidedly for the worker. Jancsó made films that dealt with issues where logic would state that he would have taken a stance, but chose not to, such as The Red and the White where he ignored the Communist-Tsarist angle, and focused instead on the people regardless of politics. That is far more interesting to me then what he gave in Red Psalm.

[baby doll]

It's boring because I don't care a lick about a Hungarian peasant revolt set to music. I've stated such before a couple of times. Jancsó goes from films in which he doesn't really take a stand one way or another to a film where he's decidedly for the worker. Jancsó made films that dealt with issues where logic would state that he would have taken a stance, but chose not to, such as The Red and the White where he ignored the Communist-Tsarist angle, and focused instead on the people regardless of politics. That is far more interesting to me then what he gave in Red Psalm.The Red and the White is certainly a great movie, but I don't think you can completely divorce it from politics, even if Jancsó is equally critical of both sides. Incidentally, apart from one or two characters in Red Psalm who come close to caricature (I'm thinking particularly of the priest and the soldier who talks about about Hungarians being "frank, chivalrous and patriotic"), I don't think the non-peasant characters come off all that bad. In fact, one of film's most sympathetic figures (at least in my view) is the cadet who's ordered to kill one of the peasants but really wants to join in the dancing, but can't really do it anymore than he can bring himself to kill the guitar player.

[soitgoes...]

I Am Love deserves an Oscar nomination, but probably not for costume design. I guess the outfits are nice, Swinton's especially, but art design, editing, sound, direction, cinematography, score and actress are all more deserving here.

[RoadtoPerdition]

The King's Speech seems to be gaining Oscar steam after the SAG win and with it being Ebert's pick to win. I haven't seen it, but I have a hard time picturing it as the Best Picture with The Social Network having swept pretty much every award up to this point.

Okay, so I have now seen The King's Speech and am informed enough to say that I still can't see it winning Best Picture nor should it. It was good; the acting was strong and the writing was above average, but by no means can it be considered the Best Picture of 2010. I will be disappointed if this does win (for the record, to me, The Social Network, Inception, and Black Swan all deserve Best Picture more than The King's Speech).

[Adam]

The Skandies! (http://skandies.org/results/winners?year=2010)

Picture - Dogtooth
Director - David Fincher
Actress - Jennifer Lawrence
Actor - Jesse Eisenberg
Supporting Actor - John Hawkes
Supporting Actress - Olivia Williams
Screenplay - Aaron Sorkin
Best Scene - Pappoulia Flashdances

[Spinal]

Actress - Jennifer Lawrence


Wow. No.

[DavidSeven]

The Skandies! (http://skandies.org/results/winners?year=2010)

Picture - Dogtooth
Director - David Fincher
Actress - Jennifer Lawrence
Actor - Jesse Eisenberg
Supporting Actor - John Hawkes
Supporting Actress - Olivia Williams
Screenplay - Aaron Sorkin
Best Scene - Pappoulia Flashdances

Total case of voting for "best actors in the movies we like the most" syndrome.

[Boner M]

TBH I think Eisenberg's performance is my favorite male lead of the year, with the possible exception of Ryan Reynolds.

[Raiders]

The idea that Eisenberg, who I liked, gave a better performance than Gosling, Reynolds, heck even McGregor, is rather strange to me. But, I find the praise for Lawrence more baffling. The character isn't very interesting, deep or dynamic and despite her conviction and stoicism, she doesn't do much to broaden the character's impact.

[chrisnu]

Wow. No.
Hailee Steinfeld is ranked above Michelle Williams.

[B-side]

TBH I think Eisenberg's performance is my favorite male lead of the year, with the possible exception of Ryan Reynolds.

Along with Gosling, I'm right there with you.

[baby doll]

Total case of voting for "best actors in the movies we like the most" syndrome.Well, isn't trying to divvy up performance from script, direction, and editing for the sake of yearly awards inherently absurd in the first place?

[elixir]

Well, isn't trying to divvy up performance from script, direction, and editing for the sake of yearly awards inherently absurd in the first place?

No. Why is it absurd?

Or do you just mean (yearly) awards in general?

[baby doll]

No. Why is it absurd?

Or do you just mean (yearly) awards in general?For instance, the film that moved me the most last year was Marco Bellocchio's Vincere, and I don't think you can't separate Giovanni Mezzogiorno's performance from how Bellocchio edits her reaction shots, at one point cutting between a scene from The Kid and Mezzogiorno watching it, nor would that sequence be as affecting without everything that happens in the story leading up to it. Not to mention all the unconscious biases that I'm bringing to the film. (Leftist political movies by '60s auteurs, good. Hot European actresses, good. Charlie Chaplin, good, although I didn't see The Kid until shortly afterward.) So to try to pick the best performance of the year independent of the film seems impossible, if not difficult. I mean, maybe Hailee Steinfeld is a fine young actress, but I found her one note precociousness rather grating (although I seem to be in the minority on that one).

[elixir]

For instance, the film that moved me the most last year was Marco Bellocchio's Vincere, and I don't think you can't separate Giovanni Mezzogiorno's performance from how Bellocchio edits her reaction shots, at one point cutting between a scene from The Kid and Mezzogiorno watching it, nor would that sequence be as affecting without everything that happens in the story leading up to it. Not to mention all the unconscious biases that I'm bringing to the film. So to try to pick the best performance of the year independent of the film seems impossible, if not difficult. I mean, maybe Hailee Steinfeld is a fine young actress, but I found her one note precociousness rather grating (although I seem to be in the minority on that one).

Well, yeah, of course it's subjective--I don't think anyone would debate that.

And, yes, every aspect of a film is intertwined and can't be untangled from the rest.

But that doesn't mean certain aspects can't stand out. That doesn't mean that an amazing performance in an okay film can't be better than a very good performance in an incredible film.

For example, I thought Mezzogiornio's performance was perhaps the best last year (although I also loved JeonDo Yeon, if that counts as 2010...), but I didn't love Vincere. So, while your points are certainly valid, I don't think it's absurd to single out certain categories.

[Ivan Drago]

Banksy got banned from attending. Damn.

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/7788934/streetartist_banksy_banned_fro m_oscars.html?cat=40

[Adam]

Because monkey masks have no place at an event as prestigious as The Oscars

http://us.movies1.yimg.com/movies.yahoo.com/images/hv/photo/movie_pix/oscars/72nd_academy_awards_photos/_group_photos/matt_stone21.jpg

[MadMan]

Because monkey masks have no place at an event as prestigious as The Oscars

http://us.movies1.yimg.com/movies.yahoo.com/images/hv/photo/movie_pix/oscars/72nd_academy_awards_photos/_group_photos/matt_stone21.jpgHaha. I completely forgot that they did that one year.

Maybe its because this year hasn't been as awesome as 2009 (at least based on my viewings-hey my opinion could change) but I almost forgot the Oscars were this Sunday. Also probably because I haven't entered any online contests. I'll probably just post guesses for winners before the ceremony....

[baby doll]

Maybe its because this year hasn't been as awesome as 2009...No, this year's pretty bad--at least, if we're talking about movies nominated for the Oscars. When it comes to over-hyped critics' darlings about recent history, I'd say that The Hurt Locker and The Social Network are about par. Similarly, when it comes to over-hyped fanboy favorites, I'm not any more keen on Inception (neat structure but mostly lackluster execution) than I was on Avatar (cool textures and colours but little else). That said, when it comes to indie miserablist movies centering on a poor teenage girl from a broken home that court cultural stereotypes, I prefer Precious for its wacky risk-taking over the relatively staid Winter's Bone. Furthermore, it seems ridiculously unfair to contrast The King's Speech with Inglourious Basterds (both World War II movies), or True Grit (one of the Coens' worst) with A Serious Man (their best so far).

[MadMan]

No, this year's pretty bad--at least, if we're talking about movies nominated for the Oscars. When it comes to over-hyped critics' darlings about recent history, I'd say that The Hurt Locker and The Social Network are about par. Similarly, when it comes to over-hyped fanboy favorites, I'm not any more keen on Inception (neat structure but mostly lackluster execution) than I was on Avatar (cool textures and colours but little else). That said, when it comes to indie miserablist movies centering on a poor teenage girl from a broken home that court cultural stereotypes, I prefer Precious for its wacky risk-taking over the relatively staid Winter's Bone. Furthermore, it seems ridiculously unfair to contrast The King's Speech with Inglourious Basterds (both World War II movies), or True Grit (one of the Coens' worst) with A Serious Man (their best so far).I think that The Social Network>The Hurt Locker, and Inception>Avatar, and I have not seen Precious so I can't say if Winter's Bone is better, although I thought it was great. But I'm 100% certain that I don't need to view The King's Speech to know that its not better than Inglourious Basterds (that's the fanboy in me talking), and I agree fully that True Grit is lesser Coens Brothers, while A Serious Man is fantastic.

Ah the Oscars. Old bad habbits die hard. Sunday I'll be watching the entire thing, peharps with a beer in hand. The King Speech will win way too many awards, and I'll realize that it will end up being one of those Oscar winning movies that I have no desire to ever watch, and I'll just continue bashing it without even bothering to see it like I've done to other movies.

[Spinal]

2011 Independent Spirit Awards:

Best Feature
"Black Swan"

Best Director
Darren Aronofsky, "Black Swan"

Best Male Lead
James Franco, "127 Hours"

Best Female Lead
Natalie Portman, "Black Swan"

Best Supporting Male
John Hawkes, "Winter's Bone"

Best Supporting Female
Dale Dickey, "Winter's Bone"

Best Screenplay
"The Kids Are All Right"

Best Documentary
"Exit Through the Gift Shop"

Best Cinematography
Matthew Libatique, 'Black Swan'

Best Foreign Film
"The King's Speech"

Best First Feature
"Get Low"

Best First Screenplay
Lena Dunham, "Tiny Furniture"

John Cassavetes Award
"Daddy Longlegs"

Robert Altman Award
"Please Give"

[Spinal]

Best Supporting Female
Dale Dickey, "Winter's Bone"


I like this.

[baby doll]

2011 Independent Spirit Awards:

Best Foreign Film
"The King's Speech"Ugh. I mean, it's far from surprising that the movies that win these awards are relatively expensive and mainstream narrative commercial features with A-list stars that are well promoted and which get fairly a wide release (Black Swan, Get Low, The Kids Are All Right, The King's Speech, 127 Hours, Please Give), since apparently the Spirit Awards have a voting system like the Oscars and people vote for what they've seen (or at least what they've heard is good), and furthermore, if they want people to watch the telecast, a bit of Hollywood glamor doesn't hurt (James Franco, Natalie Portman), besides which there's the tendency to reward industry success stories like Black Swan and The King's Speech, which successfully made the jump from limited release to wide release--but as a cinephile, don't you feel vaguely ashamed and sickened by the whole thing? If US independent cinema fell into the ocean tomorrow, would anybody miss it?

[Ezee E]

Daddy Longlegs is the only "true" indie winner there I guess.

Winter's Bone is one too.

I honestly think with the success of lower-budgeted movies like Black Swan, True Grit, and The King's Speech, that Hollywood may be headed into a better direction. Especially with the huge flops that were How Do You Know, Gulliver's Travels, and even Tron to an extent. Yes, the sequels will keep coming, because they're doing fantastic too.

[baby doll]

Daddy Longlegs is the only "true" indie winner there I guess.

Winter's Bone is one too.

I honestly think with the success of lower-budgeted movies like Black Swan, True Grit, and The King's Speech, that Hollywood may be headed into a better direction. Especially with the huge flops that were How Do You Know, Gulliver's Travels, and even Tron to an extent. Yes, the sequels will keep coming, because they're doing fantastic too.I'm afraid I don't share your optimism about Hollywood changing course, in part because I disliked Black Swan, The King's Speech, and True Grit. My own feeling is that, given the cost of a big theatrical roll-out versus the relative inexpense of putting a movie out on DVD, theatrical distribution in North America is essentially dead (notwithstanding a few big cities like New York that have independently run theatres). For instance, if you take a movie like Dogtooth (which gave me more pleasure than the eight Best Picture nominees I've seen combined), it's not the sort of film that's not going to turn up at the local art house in most North American cities, but people are seeing it because of DVD and video on demand. Sure, there are movies that open in wide release that are worthwhile (Exit Through the Gift Shop, for instance), but I find with reviewers' top ten lists and awards, they talk as if the only movies even worth discussing are films that could win an Oscar--i.e., Black Swan, The King's Speech, The Social Network, and a few other well promoted prestige flicks. But if that were all I saw, I wouldn't be as interested in cinema.

[Ezee E]

I'm afraid I don't share your optimism about Hollywood changing course, in part because I disliked Black Swan, The King's Speech, and True Grit. My own feeling is that, given the cost of a big theatrical roll-out versus the relative inexpense of putting a movie out on DVD, theatrical distribution in North America is essentially dead (notwithstanding a few big cities like New York that have independently run theatres). For instance, if you take a movie like Dogtooth (which gave me more pleasure than the eight Best Picture nominees I've seen combined), it's not the sort of film that's not going to turn up at the local art house in most North American cities, but people are seeing it because of DVD and video on demand. Sure, there are movies that open in wide release that are worthwhile (Exit Through the Gift Shop, for instance), but I find with reviewers' top ten lists and awards, they talk as if the only movies even worth discussing are films that could win an Oscar--i.e., Black Swan, The King's Speech, The Social Network, and a few other well promoted prestige flicks. But if that were all I saw, I wouldn't be as interested in cinema.
The foreign movies and Sundance movies are actually doing fantastic on the On-Demand/Instant Watch scene. But looking at the landmark theatre website, and they still seem to be getting the playtimes that they usually do once the Oscars are past. The Housemaid, Poetry, and I Saw The Devil are all getting runs.

[baby doll]

The foreign movies and Sundance movies are actually doing fantastic on the On-Demand/Instant Watch scene. But looking at the landmark theatre website, and they still seem to be getting the playtimes that they usually do once the Oscars are past. The Housemaid, Poetry, and I Saw The Devil are all getting runs.Let's take Poetry, for instance. Right now it's playing on three screens in the US. And while it's gotten good reviews, the film's distributor (Kino, who also released Dogtooth) is a small company, so it's not going to have as wide a release as, say, Biutiful (which opened on 59 screens and at its peak was playing on 191). So most people in North America who see the film will do so at home rather than in a theatre, and that's what I mean by theatrical distribution being dead in this part of the world. There are good movies being made, but it's too expensive to release them theatrically in most cities. Yet it's only the films that open wide and are well promoted that anyone talks about. In other words, publicity drives the discourse.

[Ezee E]

Right. But it's a foreign movie, so a totally different topic.

[baby doll]

Right. But it's a foreign movie, so a totally different topic.Well, it's all cinema. My point is simply that a lot of the most interesting movies (whether they're being made in the US or elsewhere) don't play in most American cities, and there's much more variety on DVD and on-demand. Yet unless a film has a big theatrical roll-out like Black Swan or The Social Network, the culture at large doesn't consider them important (even a film as interesting as Dogtooth).

[Ezee E]

Well, it's all cinema. My point is simply that a lot of the most interesting movies (whether they're being made in the US or elsewhere) don't play in most American cities, and there's much more variety on DVD and on-demand. Yet unless a film has a big theatrical roll-out like Black Swan or The Social Network, the culture at large doesn't consider them important (even a film as interesting as Dogtooth).
Didn't I just say that foreign films are a different realm of distribution? It's cinema, but it's like comparing Godard to Bergman...

[baby doll]

Didn't I just say that foreign films are a different realm of distribution? It's cinema, but it's like comparing Godard to Bergman...And when Bergman and Godard were at their most "relevant," during the postwar boom in foreign film distribution, that whole golden age only came about because there were more independent theatres in the United States. (It was in 1948 that the US supreme court ruled that Paramount had to sell off its theatre chain.) After all, The Passion of the Christ is a subtitled independent movie without any big stars (unless you count the director), and it made like a bazillion dollars.

[Ezee E]

Anyone else have an opinion on this?

[NickGlass]

baby doll is saying that these "modestly" budgeted films are only seen and awarded because their marketing campaigns are not so modest. And it's hard to argue with that; Hollywood is a very obvious marketing system.