Oscar nominations vs. Mine/Yours

Introduce yourself to the community or chat with other users about whatever is on your mind
VinegarBob
Posts: 775
4158 Ratings
Your TCI: na
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2010 7:54 am

Re: Oscar nominations vs. Mine/Yours

Post by VinegarBob »

I don't get all this PC stuff. I realise that some voters cast their vote to make a point, but people who do that aren't worth bothering about, and if that's why a particular film wins then it's probably not worth your time. I don't believe Moonlight falls into that category though, and if that's the case then why didn't Hidden Figures - which I believe does fall into that category - win instead?

Personally I don't find viewing films in terms of race/gender/politics very useful. Maybe overtly political films or films that are chronicling a specific racial/political/gender equality event in history, but more often than not those films aren't very good because they usually go about it in a ham-fisted way (I'm looking at you Hidden Figures).

In films set in the real world I primarily care about authenticity, dialogue/performances and the technical virtuosity of the various elements that go into the film, and I generally judge them on those merits. If a film feels authentic to me then I'll value that film more than if it feels contrived or fake. I don't care whether the main characters in films are black, white or green, male or female, transgender, hetero/homo or bisexual as long as those characters and the characters around them behave like authentic individuals with believable motives and goals and are interacting with each other and their surroundings in a realistic way. Moonlight ticks all those boxes. Hidden Figures does not. It's ironic that of the two films the one based on real events and people was more fake than the one based on fictional events.

Moonlight is a film with a fantastic script, solid direction and brilliant performances. It feels real. The issues it explores are interesting, and it explores them in an organic, subtle and believable way. That's why it's so good. It's not about race so much as about fitting in, finding your place in society and coping with the alienation that arises from being different from those around you. It's universal.

mattorama12
Posts: 887
3086 Ratings
Your TCI: na
Joined: Mon Feb 13, 2012 3:05 am

Re: Oscar nominations vs. Mine/Yours

Post by mattorama12 »

Stewball wrote:And no, I'm not thinking Ben Affleck should have been up there, because it's hard for me to distinguish between what's a not very demanding role, and what truly great actors do--make it look easy. Only on-scene insiders can answer that question.


There's probably nobody in Hollywood I've done a bigger 180 on (though McConaughey comes close). I used to hate him so much, but he's really proven me wrong. His performance, while not Oscar-y, was damn fine in The Accountant and one of the best things about the movie.

hellboy76
Posts: 446
6339 Ratings
Your TCI: na
Joined: Mon Sep 20, 2010 1:53 am

Re: Oscar nominations vs. Mine/Yours

Post by hellboy76 »

For some reason, I feel like I should see The Accountant.

Stewball
Posts: 3009
2188 Ratings
Your TCI: na
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2009 4:18 pm

Re: Oscar nominations vs. Mine/Yours

Post by Stewball »

HakkaMex wrote:I don't think thrillers get nominated very much to begin with traditionally though it's changed a bit in the past 5 years with the ones highlighted below from a list I found. It tends to be mostly dramas. Nightcrawler was the best one of the past few years imo and didn't get a nomination. Anyways, The Accountant didn't really have high enough reviews to get consideration. I thought Gone Baby Gone was Affleck's best film and even that didn't get a nomination.


Unfortunately thrillers equates to horror which are far too often horrorible. 8-) Yes, Nightcrawler was a most excellent thriller, and it didn't really fall in with the horror schulck. And yes, The Accountant didn't get good reviews because critics don't have or take the time to do the research and/or watch a movie 2 or 3 or 12 times when it's necessary. IOW, it when over their heads, mainly because they blew it off as an action movie before they even started watching it. I know this because I read minds, for those who were wondering. And the Academy SHOULD be above the milieu of pandering to crass commercial criticism--but of course it isn't. So given that and it's worshiping at the feet of the god of political correctness--and this years sub-par nominations, we should move on, which many appeared to have done this year. This was the first year I didn't watch it in since forever.

Thanks for mentioning Gone Baby Gone. That one slipped through the cracks here.

Stewball
Posts: 3009
2188 Ratings
Your TCI: na
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2009 4:18 pm

Re: Oscar nominations vs. Mine/Yours

Post by Stewball »

hellboy76 wrote:For some reason, I feel like I should see The Accountant.


Comes the dawn! 8-)

Stewball
Posts: 3009
2188 Ratings
Your TCI: na
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2009 4:18 pm

Re: Oscar nominations vs. Mine/Yours

Post by Stewball »

Mentaculus wrote:
mattorama12 wrote:Then shouldn't Moonlight be able to win Best Picture if it is the best picture, regardless of the race of the characters and filmmakers? What you said earlier is basically that because they are black, it shouldn't be able to win because it either is reverse discrimination or at least [/i]could be[/i] reverse discrimination, and therefore its win can never be legitimate. If we're striving for color-blind, then it should be able to win if it's the best movie plain and simple.


Hot damn. 8-)

I will chime in for a bit and say that regardless of where one falls on the spectrum of race and racial empathy at the moment, the acknowledgement of race as a component of a work's merit is currently a major shaper in our culture. Regardless of how you feel about it, people take this into consideration. It might be a good thing, it might be overkill, it might be negative in the long run - but it's prescient. Moonlight's win reflects our culture at the moment, (as well as being a well done character study) so IMO that has some merit.


What has race got to do with it? That wasn't the reason it got it's PC boost...at least not primarily. The only reason race keeps coming up in the US is 1) Democrat demagoguery, and 2) affirmative action and other such forms of reverse discrimination/hypocrisy.

Stewball
Posts: 3009
2188 Ratings
Your TCI: na
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2009 4:18 pm

Re: Oscar nominations vs. Mine/Yours

Post by Stewball »

Maaxwell wrote:
Stewball wrote:
Maaxwell wrote:Really though? I'm not American and certainly no historian, but even I've heard of the Southern Strategy. I know I shouldn't take the bait here...


What "Southern Strategy"? The Civil War south was Democrat. The pro-lynching, Jim Crow, segregated, anti-civil rights South was Demorat.

Indeed, but you're quite obtusely failing to mention the party switch of the 60s - the so-called "Southern Strategy". Look it up if you've (somehow) not heard of it.


I'm well aware of the switch, but I wouldn't call it a "strategy". MLK and his father were Republicans, and most blacks prior to the 60s knew the Democrats were KKK down on the plantation, Dixicrats, while Republicans were the party of Lincoln. But when Nixon was asked about MLK being in the Birmingham jail, he replied "No comment". That caused MLK Sr. to bolt to the Kennedy Democrats, with John being apolitical about race, but Robert was a genuine desegregationist. But LBJ, was about to be left off the ticket due to his corruption, so he worked to have JFK assassinated, and likely MLK and RFK as well. He upped the corruption in Washington a hundredfold. The US still generally fails to acknowledge the damage LBJ did to our political system. He didn't overturn racism, he just took it underground with his War on Poverty and Great Society. MLK wisely played both sides against the middle, but when he was killed, black race war lords took over and those sycophants have had 95% of blacks voting Democrat ever since--while the Democrats take them for granted.

Stewball
Posts: 3009
2188 Ratings
Your TCI: na
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2009 4:18 pm

Re: Oscar nominations vs. Mine/Yours

Post by Stewball »

VinegarBob wrote:I don't get all this PC stuff. I realise that some voters cast their vote to make a point, but people who do that aren't worth bothering about, and if that's why a particular film wins then it's probably not worth your time. I don't believe Moonlight falls into that category though, and if that's the case then why didn't Hidden Figures - which I believe does fall into that category - win instead?


Again, the issue for Moonlight isn't race, and Hidden Figures was just mathematically bad. And yeah, the PC crowd is 20% of Hollywood, but they intimidate another 70%.

Matorama12 wrote:There's probably nobody in Hollywood I've done a bigger 180 on (though McConaughey comes close). I used to hate him so much, but he's really proven me wrong. His performance, while not Oscar-y, was damn fine in The Accountant and one of the best things about the movie.

Thank You. And I'm in the near 180 category myself. But it's also hard not to like those who produced a movie you like a lot, or OCD on as in this case for me.

Mentaculus wrote:I will chime in for a bit and say that regardless of where one falls on the spectrum of race and racial empathy at the moment, the acknowledgement of race as a component of a work's merit is currently a major shaper in our culture. Regardless of how you feel about it, people take this into consideration. It might be a good thing, it might be overkill, it might be negative in the long run - but it's prescient. Moonlight's win reflects our culture at the moment, (as well as being a well done character study) so IMO that has some merit.


I'd certainly be the last one to rail against political commentary in movies. I think it's vital. But this is superficial overkill, as you put it. In this case, it, like global warming, is nothing but exploitation of an issue in the pursuit of power. That overrides any considerations of the quality of the film or even the righteousness of the cause--because they are both lost, or even countered, in the clamor for crisis.

mattorama12
Posts: 887
3086 Ratings
Your TCI: na
Joined: Mon Feb 13, 2012 3:05 am

Re: Oscar nominations vs. Mine/Yours

Post by mattorama12 »

Stewball wrote:
HakkaMex wrote:I don't think thrillers get nominated very much...


Is this from this thread? I'm not seeing HakkaMex's post and I've never ignored a user on this site.

paulofilmo
Posts: 2586
2428 Ratings
Your TCI: na
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 3:40 pm

Re: Oscar nominations vs. Mine/Yours

Post by paulofilmo »

mattorama12 wrote:
Stewball wrote:
HakkaMex wrote:I don't think thrillers get nominated very much...


Is this from this thread? I'm not seeing HakkaMex's post and I've never ignored a user on this site.


viewtopic.php?f=6&t=6359&start=20#p59921

doesn't have many posts. might've needed verification but was delayed.

Post Reply