88th Annual Academy Awards

[flickchick85]

I get your point, and I think I agree with it for the most part, especially in theory. I just can't think of an example that works for me. I always felt it was telling that "Shakespeare in Love" and "Crash" being looked back upon shows it was a mistake, at least those years.

I also feel like how the Academy votes makes it hard to separate the two for me. It isn't like they award ridiculously well directed films that aren't usual Oscar fare.

Well yeah, the Academy's choices are wack, no denying that, lol.

Yeah I think so. I think they didn't plan on releasing it, at least not that early, but the Amazon deal came up and they jumped on it.

Well, that's bummer. Thanks for the report, though.

 

[Broseph44]

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Well yeah, the Academy's choices are wack, no denying that, lol.


Well, that's bummer. Thanks for the report, though.

So simple, yet so true.

Yeah, it is a barebones, quickie release. Good quality picture and sound, but that is it really. Which is enough for me, but still disappointing.

 

[kedrell]

Your Jaws example is my point. What they did with it is objectively effective.

Only if you like what the result was(which I happen to as it's my favorite movie of all time). None of these things are standing on their own saying 'Hey, look at me! Aren't I an objectively good component of this greater whole called a movie?'. It doesn't work that way. How you feel about the whole will color how you feel about the individual parts. Now I'm not saying excellence can't stand out amid an over-all bad movie. To use a Scorsese movie as an example: I don't like Gangs of New York. I think it's possibly Scorsese's weakest movie and maybe his only bad movie. There are lots of reasons I think it doesn't work. Yet DDL's performance in it IMO was awesome. Robbed of an Oscar he was, IMO. Like a nugget of gold covered in crap. Now there's an aspect I could separate from the whole but even then I wouldn't say it was an objectively good aspect to the movie.

Also, you seem to miss the point of this entire conversation. Lets use you and your love for MCU as a example. You are predisposed to like MCU films. You expect to like them and thus go in with a mentality to like them. That those films please your sensibilities makes them great films?

I have that expectation of EVERY movie I go to see. If I didn't expect to like them then I wouldn't go see them. This is why on end of the year lists my numbers of actual bad movies is relatively low compared to those I liked at least on some level. I saw 30 movies in 2015 and only 7 of them did I give a bad score to. If I did a top 10 worst movies of 2015 list I'd have to put 3 on there that I actually liked and by definition consider good movies. And I don't rank all MCU films as on the same level. Sure, some are great. Most are just good. And I have yet to see a bad one(and I've seen them all). Of course that kind of brand/franchise consistency is going to breed trust in me, the consumer/audience member. How could it not?

I personally dislike Sandra Bullock as an actress. Not as a person, but an actress. She grates me a bit. But I would never say she is a bad actress. I have seen bad actresses, she isn't one. She just isn't for me.

I wouldn't argue either way if someone said she was a bad actress or a good actress. To me she's an actress who can be either way. It just depends.

There are inherent truths that come with film. We know when we are seeing a good actress like Cate Blanchett or when a film looks cheap. Quality direction is easily identifiable.

Those two are not the same thing. Quality direction is sometimes identifiable, I'd say. Sometimes clearer than others. Blanchett has a string of successful quality performances under her belt so she is a brand that one is apt to trust(I know I do). But saying she's a good actress objectively(and for the sake of the argument I'll not contest this assertion) is not the same thing as saying her performance is good in this or that particular role. THAT is not objective even thought it is just a part of a movie and not the whole.

Now we can more easily tell when a budget is low and thus a movie doesn't look as expensively polished as some other high budget film. But even then that could be by design. Some people like a cheaper look to their films. It's still subjective. The value placed upon these things is still subjective even though we can objectively see that this cost more than that.

Using your method of judging films, isn't it all just a personal issue? So why point it out with Drizzle?

Because his comment seemed so bizarrely personal, it prompted my comment. He didn't just say 'I didn't like his performance in that movie'. I wouldn't have bothered commenting on that at all. But he was very specific that it was Clooney's smugness that turned him off. I as someone who also watched that movie saw no smugness in his performance. I saw confidence, affability, joviality and self-sacrifice. Perhaps a tad bit of immaturity in regards to his humor but that's it. I did not see some smug jerk on screen so I concluded that it must be something expressly unique as to why Drizzle didn't like that performance. I just worded it a lot more concisely.

 

[kedrell]

You don't like Mad Max? That's all I needed to hear.

Again, proving my point. There are no open minds so why bother arguing? People make up their own minds(me included) and that's it.

 

[kedrell]

I mean I like Marvel too, but is he one of these that praises every single MCU film?

Till they make a bad one, yeah. People like you simply can't accept that they haven't yet. And again, you are welcome to that opinion. But you try and tell me it's not just opinion and that's all I need to hear to ignore you because I know BS when I hear it.

 

[Broseph44]

Again, proving my point. There are no open minds so why bother arguing? People make up their own minds(me included) and that's it.

Till they make a bad one, yeah. People like you simply can't accept that they haven't yet. And again, you are welcome to that opinion. But you try and tell me it's not just opinion and that's all I need to hear to ignore you.

Cause Thor: The Dark World was as awesome as GOTG or Winter Soldier huh?

 

[Broseph44]

I seemed to have forgotten that the MCU could do no wrong, everything they throw out is gold Jerry gold! Forgot that they don't put out mediocre films. TDW was amazing

 

[flickchick85]

Alright, let's get off the MCU discussion. This won't lead anywhere good. While we're at it, let's get off the discussion of kedrell's opinions in general. They're his and he's entitled to them.

 

[jokesonm3]

Not one superhero film was nominated for best visuals this year.

And with 7 of em comin out this year the 89th Academy Awards are gonna be a riot.

 

[kedrell]

Cause Thor: The Dark World was as awesome as GOTG or Winter Soldier huh?

Why does it need to be 'awesome as' in order to be a good movie? I found Thor: The Dark World to be the weakest of the Phase 2 films and the 2nd weakest of the 12 MCU films made to date(only TIH is worse, IMO). But I still enjoyed it. I didn't love GotG either. It's good but not great(though slightly better than Thor2). TWS...yeah, that's one of the greats but even that has several either tied with it or ahead of it, IMO.

I'll never understand the mindset of comparing these movies and then deciding that those on the lesser end must be by definition bad movies because they aren't among the best of their franchise. I take each film individually as it comes and not one has failed to make me enjoy it so far. How much varies of course but I never had a MM:FR in the bunch where I was thoroughly annoyed by the time the movie was over. Maybe Marvel can hire George Miller and he can make their first crappy film. I dunno, I still wish I'd not spent good money on that car chase they called a movie. Or that extended, droning, monotonous snoozefest of an extended Twilight Zone episode they called a movie in Ex Machina. But hey, paying for crappy movies tends to piss me off and I feel I gotta right to smack talk them and get something for my hard earned $. Because they sure as ***t didn't give it to me.

Marvel never does that. They always give me value for my $. Call me crazy but I like that.

I seemed to have forgotten that the MCU could do no wrong, everything they throw out is gold Jerry gold! Forgot that they don't put out mediocre films. TDW was amazing

'Can do' and 'has done' are not the same thing. I thought that self evident but I guess I was mistaken.

 

[Sithborg]

Not one superhero film was nominated for best visuals this year.

And with 7 of em comin out this year the 89th Academy Awards are gonna be a riot.

Gods of Egypt is going to sweep them.

(Seriously, could be part of their faustian deal which seems to have attached their trailer to all 4 of my Star Wars showings)

 

[kedrell]

Alright, let's get off the MCU discussion. This won't lead anywhere good. While we're at it, let's get off the discussion of kedrell's opinions in general. They're his and he's entitled to them.

Thank you. It's odd how sensitive people are about holy cows like MM:FR(It's RT score renders it beyond criticism, you contrarians! Shut up and drink the damn koolaide! Ditto for Ex Machina!) Funny how the MCU's high scores don't offer it the same protection, isn't it. Oh well.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Not one superhero film was nominated for best visuals this year.

And with 7 of em comin out this year the 89th Academy Awards are gonna be a riot.

They might as well give up now. Rogue One and BFG are coming. Though maybe Strange can change that.

 

[Broseph44]

Alright, let's get off the MCU discussion. This won't lead anywhere good. While we're at it, let's get off the discussion of kedrell's opinions in general. They're his and he's entitled to them.

For you flickchick no problem

 

[kedrell]

Just noticed kedrell's dumb signature.

Then you're not thinking hard enough about what it means.

That movie(and I kinda, sorta liked it on the whole) is one giant collection of dangling plot threads...the likes and amount of which the Star Wars franchise has never seen OT or PT. It's basically JJ Abrams saying 'tune in next time, suckers!' as if this was a TV show. Well I've got some choice words for a film maker with that kind of bait and switch attitude...but they aren't allowed here, unfortunately.

 

[Broseph44]

Kedrell I posted that like a page or two back, I'm not getting into it anymore flickchick warned us both. Just leave it be.

But also one big giant to your comments on that haha.

 

[Broseph44]

Actually might just have to throw you on ignore all together to avoid me wanting to reply back.

 

[Broseph44]

I still also need to see Tha Martian, either gonna buy the blu release or check if it's on demand. That and Revenant are my must watches before the awards.

 

[flickchick85]

For you flickchick no problem

Thank you.

I still also need to see Tha Martian, either gonna buy the blu release or check if it's on demand. That and Revenant are my must watches before the awards.

The Revenant is a more impressive technical feat, but I MUCH preferred The Martian.

 

[Victarion]

@Flickchick, anyone who's seen it: I've read a couple of critiques that accuse The Revenant of being nothing more than an exhibition of pointless violence. Does it come across as such, or is there something deeper to the movie's themes that make it worth a watch?

 

[kedrell]

Kedrell I posted that like a page or two back, I'm not getting into it anymore flickchick warned us both. Just leave it be.

But also one big giant to your comments on that haha.

Well it had nothing to do with the MCU and Star Wars IS nominated for an Oscar or two...thus it's relevant to the thread.

Actually might just have to throw you on ignore all together to avoid me wanting to reply back.

Whatever suits you. I honestly don't give a rat's ass.

 

[dude stannis]

Not one superhero film was nominated for best visuals this year.

And with 7 of em comin out this year the 89th Academy Awards are gonna be a riot.

I don't think any where particularly good visually this year.

@Flickchick, anyone who's seen it: I've read a couple of critiques that accuse The Revenant of being nothing more than an exhibition of pointless violence. Does it come across as such, or is there something deeper to the movie's themes that make it worth a watch?

The violence being pointless is what makes the film poignant. Tom Hardy has a reason for the things he does and it's hard to blame why he has his worldview.

 

[kedrell]

@Flickchick, anyone who's seen it: I've read a couple of critiques that accuse The Revenant of being nothing more than an exhibition of pointless violence. Does it come across as such, or is there something deeper to the movie's themes that make it worth a watch?

There is I'd say though YMMV regarding how satisfied you'll be by the end. I was rather exhausted. Not to spoil anything but IMO the film peaked too early and then hadn't enough to it to keep the whole thing from feeling a bit lopsided. Di Caprio's performance and Hardy's are great in it but the movie as a whole I just liked. I didn't love it. Lots to admire here though and certainly not a bad movie.

 

[Broseph44]

Thank you.


The Revenant is a more impressive technical feat, but I MUCH preferred The Martian.

But you really enjoyed both?

Whatever suits you. I honestly don't give a rat's ass.

You obviously do cause you replied to me.