Oscars 2018

_Dara_

Zeek12 wrote: »

The 70s was a real golden era of American film IMO. But even then there were some questionable Best Picture decisions on Oscar night....
Rocky beating out Taxi Driver, Network and All the President's Men comes to mind. Rocky is entertaining stuff, but hardly that great...

Taxi Driver should win best film every year. Every single goddamn year.

And you're right. The Oscars has for a long time been about who canvassed the best. The bould Harvey was adept at it apparently.

Arghus

The Oscars are the culmination of a many months death march. The dizzying, endless, array of other awards whose main purpose seems to be furthering the Oscar campaigns of all involved. If you come out on top after all that you probably do deserve the award - just for sheer effort.

gmisk

Ohmeha wrote: »

The Florida Project should have got a best picture nomination that's another snub I don't understand when Darkest Hour and Lady Bird are receiving questionable reviews

I think get out is really overrated tbh and shocked it is in the conversation at all. I would be far more inclined to give a nom to the Florida project (even though I wasn't a huge fan of it but I did admire the cinematography and the acting)
However Lady bird questionable reviews?!? It has had pretty much universally positive reviews (99% on rotten tomatoes, 94 on metacritic)

_Dara_

I think I thought ‘Get Out’ would be really clever based on the rave reviews but it just seemed like a pretty bogstandard horror to me. It truly is a critical darling though.

Zeek12

Zeek12 wrote: »

The 70s was a real golden era of American film IMO. But even then there were some questionable Best Picture decisions on Oscar night....
Rocky beating out Taxi Driver, Network and All the President's Men comes to mind. Rocky is entertaining stuff, but hardly that great....

Kramer v Kramer chosen ahead of Apocalypse Now and All that Jazz was another odd one.

To me the Oscars are more about momentum and how well you're liked within the business - rather than a true selection of the best films in a given year

I'd argue that Rocky is a pretty exceptional film at that time. The same thing has been done to death since, but Rocky is the Dirty Harry of Boxing films, and had so many things going for it that have been copied ad nauseam. Its not like Stallone was considered a genius in the industry ever, always thought of as a guy who couldn't act and a meathead. But he managed to come up with a brilliant screenplay, amazing characters. The direction, score, everything about that film was really good - and it was one that can be loved by everyone. I know people (foolish people) who don't like network, or All the presidents men. I can see how Rocky can get the nod with its mass appeal.
Kramer Vs Kramer, now you definitely have a point with that one. Probably something political with Coppola with the studios having a bunch of issues with him. Or maybe Meryl Streep has secretly been the overlord deity of hollywood forever....

yerwanthere123

Couple of thoughts..

The acclaim of Get Out continues to baffle me, and I do believe that it's mostly in response to the American political climate inside the last year. I thought it was very average, but who knows, I may rewatch some time and see what everyone else saw?

Octavia Spencer getting a nomination is surprising to me too. I mean there was nothing bad about her performance, but I didn't think it was particularly memorable either.

Sad The Big Sick didn't get the nomination for best picture, even if it never stood a hope of winning anyway. It's one of the best movies I've seen inside the last year or so. Certainly better than fúcking Get Out anyway.

It's quite impressive how far the Skins alumni have come, Daniel Kaluuya and Dev Patel both now Oscar nominees. Even Jack O' Connell has had a pretty impressive career too.

Hope Three Billboards wins best picture!

JP Liz V1

Casey Affleck has withdrawn from presenting the best actress award

gmisk

JP Liz V1 wrote: »

Casey Affleck has withdrawn from presenting the best actress award

Good...sleazebag!

p to the e

gmisk wrote: »

Good...sleazebag!

Don't call "JP Liz V1" a sleazebag

MfMan

MfMan wrote: »

To reiterate, bit disappointed for Jeremy Renner (Wind River), and the film in general. Very skillful. Denzel Washington, who tends to auto-pilot through every movie, seems to be the male Streep.

The estimable Clarke agrees with me

https://www.irishtimes.com/culture/film/roman-j-israel-esq-colin-farrell-is-fine-the-film-is-a-total-mess-1.3375256

gmisk

MfMan wrote: »

The estimable Clarke agrees with me

https://www.irishtimes.com/culture/film/roman-j-israel-esq-colin-farrell-is-fine-the-film-is-a-total-mess-1.3375256

Totally agree Wind River was excellent I thought.
I find Denzel a tad mannered in some films (Link Streep was in the post...for good sake stop fiddling with your glasses!)

JP Liz V1

Directors Guild of America Awards (DGA) winners

Outstanding Directorial Achievement in Feature Film:
Guillermo del Toro, "The Shape of Water" - WINNER

Outstanding Directorial Achievement in Documentaries
Matthew Heineman, "City of Ghosts" - WINNER

Outstanding Directorial Achievement in First-Time Feature Film:
Jordan Peele, "Get Out" - WINNER

JP Liz V1

JP Liz V1 wrote: »

Directors Guild of America Awards (DGA) winners

Outstanding Directorial Achievement in Feature Film:
Guillermo del Toro, "The Shape of Water" - WINNER

Outstanding Directorial Achievement in Documentaries
Matthew Heineman, "City of Ghosts" - WINNER

Outstanding Directorial Achievement in First-Time Feature Film:
Jordan Peele, "Get Out" - WINNER

I must be getting very old and cynical. I sat down to watch The Shape of Water seeing it up for best film, and knowing next to nothing about it, and then I see its about the thing Hannibal from the A-Team used to dress up as in his day job, and Amelie courting it with eggs, and I thought to myself I just can't take this seriously....

Tony EH

Deleted User wrote: »

I'd argue that Rocky is a pretty exceptional film at that time. The same thing has been done to death since, but Rocky is the Dirty Harry of Boxing films, and had so many things going for it that have been copied ad nauseam. Its not like Stallone was considered a genius in the industry ever, always thought of as a guy who couldn't act and a meathead. But he managed to come up with a brilliant screenplay, amazing characters. The direction, score, everything about that film was really good - and it was one that can be loved by everyone. I know people (foolish people) who don't like network, or All the presidents men. I can see how Rocky can get the nod with its mass appeal.
Kramer Vs Kramer, now you definitely have a point with that one. Probably something political with Coppola with the studios having a bunch of issues with him. Or maybe Meryl Streep has secretly been the overlord deity of hollywood forever....

In the 70's, 'Rocky' was always going to beat 'Taxi Diver' all day long. No best picture award was going to go to a film that featured 12 year old pros and mass murder, all shot in a gritty, no nonsense, uncompromising, way. 'Rocky' winning contains no surprises. Now, 'Kramer vs Kramer', while being a very good film, beating 'Apocalypse Now' will always be a head scratcher. Also, let's not forget, 'Ordinary People' (another good film) beat 'Raging Bull' (a great film) three years later and Redford also got best director! That's even more bizarre than the 'Rocky'/'Taxi Driver' thing. It's like hollywood were afraid of Scorsese for best part of his career.

I think both pictures ('Rocky' and 'Taxi Driver') are great and agree with the poster who said the 70's was a golden era. For me it's THE golden era and not before or since have films been as good, interesting or entertaining. But then, as a kid of the 80's, I grew up on 70's films. So, bias may play a part. But, equally playing its part is the fact that hollywood was willing to allow talent to make films that wouldn't have seen the light of day in the decades preceding, because BO sales were down and codes were relaxed.

Tony EH

Tony EH wrote: »

In the 70's, 'Rocky' was always going to beat 'Taxi Diver' all day long. No best picture award was going to go to a film that featured 12 year old pros and mass murder, all shot in a gritty, no nonsense, uncompromising, way. 'Rocky' winning contains no surprises. Now, 'Kramer vs Kramer', while being a very good film, beating 'Apocalypse Now' will always be a head scratcher. Also, let's not forget, 'Ordinary People' (another good film) beat 'Raging Bull' (a great film) three years later and Redford also got best director! That's even more bizarre than the 'Rocky'/'Taxi Driver' thing. It's like hollywood were afraid of Scorsese for best part of his career.

I think both pictures ('Rocky' and 'Taxi Driver') are great and agree with the poster who said the 70's was a golden era. For me it's THE golden era and not before or since have films been as good, interesting or entertaining. But then, as a kid of the 80's, I grew up on 70's films. So, bias may play a part. But, equally playing its part is the fact that hollywood was willing to allow talent to make films that wouldn't have seen the light of day in the decades preceding, because BO sales were down and codes were relaxed.

Yeah I forgot to mention the 12 year old pro is never gonna get the nod. I think maybe Ordinary people is getting a bit underrated. I'll be honest, at the risk of a public crucifixion, I enjoyed it more then Raging Bull. Not saying it was better but it certainly marked me more then Raging Bull.

As for the golden era, I would have to put the 80's in there as well. The likes of Michael Mann, Oliver Stone, David Lynch and Cronenberg all coming into their prime and making amazing ballsy films. And it was also a fantastic decade for kids films too.
I think the 80's was the last decade before marketing took over popular culture from artists.

Tony EH

Deleted User wrote: »

I think maybe Ordinary people is getting a bit underrated. I'll be honest, at the risk of a public crucifixion, I enjoyed it more then Raging Bull.

:eek:

Line on the left, one cross each...

Deleted User wrote: »

As for the golden era, I would have to put the 80's in there as well. The likes of Michael Mann, Oliver Stone, David Lynch and Cronenberg all coming into their prime and making amazing ballsy films. And it was also a fantastic decade for kids films too.
I think the 80's was the last decade before marketing took over popular culture from artists.

Cronenberg and Lynch would have been "anti-hollywood", no matter what era they made films and they come from the 70's "enlightened" period too, without which I doubt they would got a break at all. Lynch got 'The Elephant Man' on the back of 'Eraserhead', which simply wouldn't have got a distributor if it was made a decade earlier. Cronenberg had been working independently throughout the decade, before Dino De Laurentiis financed 'The Dead Zone'.

Stone and Mann were always pretty mainstream Hollywood directors though. I wouldn't put them in the same box as Cronenberg or Lynch. I can't see Mann or Stone making something like 'Rabid' or 'Blue Velvet'. Also Stone did make 'The Hand', which was a pretty mad concept.

The 80's have some great classics, no doubt, as all the decades do. But when I think of the 80's, I feel that that decade is overshadowed by action flicks, tame horror films and teen romps, which were specific marketing angles. When I think of the 70's, I think anything goes.

Tony EH

Tony EH wrote: »

:eek:

Line on the left, one cross each...



Cronenberg and Lynch would have been "anti-hollywood", no matter what era they made films and they come from the 70's "enlightened" period too, without which I doubt they would got a break at all. Lynch got 'The Elephant Man' on the back of 'Eraserhead', which simply wouldn't have got a distributor if it was made a decade earlier. Cronenberg had been working independently throughout the decade, before Dino De Laurentiis financed 'The Dead Zone'.

Stone and Mann were always pretty mainstream Hollywood directors though. I wouldn't put them in the same box as Cronenberg or Lynch. I can't see Mann or Stone making something like 'Rabid' or 'Blue Velvet'. Also Stone did make 'The Hand', which was a pretty mad concept.

The 80's have some great classics, no doubt, as all the decades do. But when I think of the 80's, I feel that that decade is overshadowed by action flicks, tame horror films and teen romps, which were specific marketing angles. When I think of the 70's, I think anything goes.

I kind of agree with you. I think Stone and Mann more 'became' mainstream Hollywood because for example in Stones case he had so much success with the likes of Salvador and his scripts the studios knew they were on to a good thing with him and had no choice but to bankroll him. And i love the way he made big budget flicks when he had the creative control to make them about very controversial things. It cost him in the long run, but he made his mark at his peak.

Lynch and Cronenberg are indeed products of then 70's but the films they made right at their best I think were in the 80's.

And probably I have much more love for those 80's action films like Predator and Die Hard and as a kid it was impossible not to love the likes of Bloodsport, then you have all those great flicks like Gremlins, Goonies, Back to the Future brilliant original work. And the Sci Fi was really golden in the 80's - Aliens, Blade Runner. There is just so much to love about that decade in film.
There probably was a lot more toot as Alan Sugar would say also, but I don't think it takes away from the long line of brilliant filmmaking

MfMan

Deleted User wrote: »

Yeah I forgot to mention the 12 year old pro is never gonna get the nod. I think maybe Ordinary people is getting a bit underrated. I'll be honest, at the risk of a public crucifixion, I enjoyed it more then Raging Bull. Not saying it was better but it certainly marked me more then Raging Bull.

As for the golden era, I would have to put the 80's in there as well. The likes of Michael Mann, Oliver Stone, David Lynch and Cronenberg all coming into their prime and making amazing ballsy films. And it was also a fantastic decade for kids films too.
I think the 80's was the last decade before marketing took over popular culture from artists.

Don't blame you. Raging Bull should have been rechristened Raging Dull instead. An overlong montage of La Motta (causing) suffering interminably, coming during a period of his career when De Niro was going through an intense phase of repeating all his dialogue three times.

Looper007

So after the Bafta's last night, it must be safe to call the acting awards, Gary Oldman and Francis McDormand must be a lock in now of the Best Actor and Actress awards, also Sam Rockwell and Allison Janney also must be across the line. Unless The Oscar voters pull a shock in the last minute, I think these will be the safe bets on Oscar Night.

I won't call Best Film, Best Director or Best Original Screenplay just yet cause I wouldn't be surprised if the Oscar voter's cause of this whole Time's Up movement, throw them the way of Greta Gerwig's Ladybird. Maybe I'm a bit cynical but the Oscar's do love to please whatever movement is "So hot" right now. I'm hoping Three Billboards win for Best Film and Screenplay and Paul Thomas Anderson for Best Director, definitely have more chance of the first two then the last sadly.

Nothing against Ladybird, but I really don't get the love the film's got with the critics. By no mean's is it a bad film, it's a perfectly fine one but nowhere the masterpiece the critic's painted it as. Although I think she's a fine actress I don't think Saoirse Ronan performance was Oscar worthy, she was far better in Brooklyn, still her greatest performance to date.

Looper007

Looper007 wrote: »

So after the Bafta's last night, it must be safe to call the acting awards, Gary Oldman and Francis McDormand must be a lock in now of the Best Actor and Actress awards, also Sam Rockwell and Allison Janney also must be across the line. Unless The Oscar voters pull a shock in the last minute, I think these will be the safe bets on Oscar Night.

I won't call Best Film, Best Director or Best Original Screenplay just yet cause I wouldn't be surprised if the Oscar voter's cause of this whole Time's Up movement, throw them the way of Greta Gerwig's Ladybird. Maybe I'm a bit cynical but the Oscar's do love to please whatever movement is "So hot" right now. I'm hoping Three Billboards win for Best Film and Screenplay and Paul Thomas Anderson for Best Director, definitely have more chance of the first two then the last sadly.

Nothing against Ladybird, but I really don't get the love the film's got with the critics. By no mean's is it a bad film, it's a perfectly fine one but nowhere the masterpiece the critic's painted it as. Although I think she's a fine actress I don't think Saoirse Ronan performance was Oscar worthy, she was far better in Brooklyn, still her greatest performance to date.

I'm a huge Oldman fan, but DDL's performance is on another level and he should win it hands down. But then Oldman will probably get it for posterities sake and that he deserved it for previous roles and because DDL's has had enough already. But my faith in the Oscars might return if DDL gets it. I'm not sure how anyone could watch phantom thread and not give it to him.

jam83

Looper007 wrote: »

So after the Bafta's last night, it must be safe to call the acting awards, Gary Oldman and Francis McDormand must be a lock in now of the Best Actor and Actress awards, also Sam Rockwell and Allison Janney also must be across the line. Unless The Oscar voters pull a shock in the last minute, I think these will be the safe bets on Oscar Night.

I won't call Best Film, Best Director or Best Original Screenplay just yet cause I wouldn't be surprised if the Oscar voter's cause of this whole Time's Up movement, throw them the way of Greta Gerwig's Ladybird. Maybe I'm a bit cynical but the Oscar's do love to please whatever movement is "So hot" right now. I'm hoping Three Billboards win for Best Film and Screenplay and Paul Thomas Anderson for Best Director, definitely have more chance of the first two then the last sadly.

Nothing against Ladybird, but I really don't get the love the film's got with the critics. By no mean's is it a bad film, it's a perfectly fine one but nowhere the masterpiece the critic's painted it as. Although I think she's a fine actress I don't think Saoirse Ronan performance was Oscar worthy, she was far better in Brooklyn, still her greatest performance to date.

After her pandering to the American audience by taking the piss with that aer Lingus sketch I hope saoirse Ronan doesnt get the Oscar.

Hoboo

Watched 3 Billboards last night and wasn't sold......for best film or best actress. Ok it was good, touched on many subjects such as racial hate, cancer, rape, domestic violence, police brutality, the list goes on........the characters were all in their own right well acted.....but only one was Oscar worthy imho. Sam Rockwell for me was outstanding and certainly worthy of supporting. McDormand although good, I don't think it was Oscar winning, but who instead? Which says a lot. The film itself had a Coen Brothers feel, but didn't live up to expectations. Haven't seen Ladybird yet so can't comment on Saoirse, Gary Oldman I thought was fantastic and well worthy of a win........although need to see DDL. Ill watch them this week.

Looper007

jam83 wrote: »

After her pandering to the American audience by taking the piss with that aer Lingus sketch I hope saoirse Ronan doesnt get the Oscar.

She won't be getting it, and doesn't deserve it either. I thought Margot Robbie was better, and I would give the nod also to Sally Hawkins. Francis McDormand is by far the deserving winner. I think Ronan's performances in Brooklyn and Atonement were way above of that one in Ladybird.

Looper007

Deleted User wrote: »

I'm a huge Oldman fan, but DDL's performance is on another level and he should win it hands down. But then Oldman will probably get it for posterities sake and that he deserved it for previous roles and because DDL's has had enough already. But my faith in the Oscars might return if DDL gets it. I'm not sure how anyone could watch phantom thread and not give it to him.

I think it's an overall career nod for Oldman really, one of those like Henry Fonda, Al Pacino and Jeff Bridges, give him one before his career ends type Oscars. I think the case of DDL not winning it is he's won 3 already and they want to pass it around. I agree with you DDL performance is far above Oldman is not funny, and I think Oldman is awesome.

JP Liz V1

I wonder will Ryan Seacrest be doing the red carpet for E

Rjd2

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-oscar-for-best-picture-goes-to-something-you-probably-didnt-see-1519913515?mod=e2tw

Not the most ground breaking of articles, but its interesting the oscars have got slightly more niche over the years. It probably also explains why ratings continue to plunge.

JP Liz V1

Warren Beatty and Faye Dunaway will once again present the award for Best Picture during Sunday’s Oscars

corcaigh07

Any dark horse tips for the Oscars tonight?

I feel something unexpected will happen tonight, more because of #metoo, trump, Weinstein etc that the actual movies themselves.

Tipsy McSwagger

Not one outstanding film up for best picture.

NinetyTwoTeam

I loved Ladybird but Saoirse hasn't got a prayer, McDormand is an absolute lock for Best actress, as is Oldman for best actor, and Del Toro for best director.

Ladybird will go home totally empty-handed.

Can't believe A Ghost Story wasn't nominated for best cinematography and best score, and Good Time for best score and best screenplay.

A Ghost Story had the most beautiful photography, every shot was like a painting and dripping with atmosphere, and was such an original piece of art. I didn't think the cinematography in Bladerunner was much better than the typical blockbuster film and it's a heavy favorite to win.