Jump to content
Risto

Awards Season 2019 - Movie Edition: Show Must Go On! (UPDATE: Oscar Noms, SAG Winners)

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, BigFatCoward said:

I have to confess I haven't seen a huge number of good movies this year due to personal circumstances. But if there aren't enough good ones, just have a shorter list. 

I'd actually suggest it would be more difficult to make a longer list than this. It pretty much covers all of the best movies of the year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eh, can’t say the list is outstanding for having a bunch of bad films, especially when you look at the list of nominees in previous years. I mean this is the award show which gave Shakespeare in Love 7 awards including best picture so :dunno: let’s not pretend there’s have always been an outstanding crop of nominees for these awards

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, BigFatCoward said:

I have to confess I haven't seen a huge number of good movies this year due to personal circumstances. But if there aren't enough good ones, just have a shorter list. 

The best picture nominees are all the films that meet a minimum threshold of support. All the films listed earned at least 5% of the 1st place nominations or at least 5% after an abbreviated version of the single transferable vote process. The only hard rule is that there are always at least 5 films and no more than 10 films nominated.

Edited by Ran

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was definitely a weaker year for movies, but If they're going to give one nod to a blockbuster (which the Oscars usually do at this point), Black Panther was the best blockbuster I saw this year by a mile. I don't think it deserves to win, but it deserves to be nominated just as much as The Favourite or Bohemian Rhapsody.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually thinking about it, I think there are a few movies missing from the list. Leave no trace, You were never really here, Hereditary could and should be mentioned I think. Maybe not quite the movies you'd expect to see for Oscars, but certainly better than many actually nominated. 

And if you want to put in a Blockbuster movie, Infinity War is miles ahead of Black Panther on every single level ( I mean it even features the same character and location.. and does it better! )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, considering the overall list of nominees, I don't mind Black Panther being there. Objectively speaking, it was the most solid blockbuster film this year, even though my preference is Infinity War. It's another nomination in a recent line of SFF movies that received a bit of a token nomination, like District 9, and even Blade Runner 2049, and in the process avoided fan backlash. It doesn't have many other nominations, none in the categories that should enforce a win (writing, directing, and acting). I am in full agreement with Black Panther's nominations in the music and costumes categories, and I'm glad it didn't get nominated for visual effects, which weren't that great. (Not sure what the Critics Choice Awards were thinking giving it the win there)

I haven't seen many award-worthy movies this year. I'd say Ryan Gosling could have been there for First Man, but I've only seen Rami Malek out of all the contenders, so not sure if I can call it a snub. But First Man probably should have gotten a spot in the Best Picture category, and its music (Justin Hurwitz) is definitely a snub. It seems the Academy loves Alexandre Desplat.

A small snub is Aquaman not getting in the visual effects category. Not sure why the ADHD inducing effects of Ready Player One are better, First Man's visuals were fine, but sub-par other space stories, imo, and... Cristopher Robin? ok...

Edited by Corvinus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly, the entire year was such a dud, that it undoubtedly reflected on the nominations. With the entire host fiasco, one can say that no one is really looking forward that particular night. 

I am sorry, I am a huge Queen fan, but "Bohemian Rhapsody" is hardly worthy of being nominated for Best Picture. But, given no director, screenplay and cinematography nominations, with only editing and best actor nominations, it does speak that it is not something we can expect to win. Same with "Black Panther". We have movies that somehow are best but ultimately fail to bring more nominations among the major categories (Black Panther, interestingly, didn't get Visual Effects nom, but got Score, Song and Sound Editing, along with the Costumes.)

I really hope Glenn Close can finally get that Oscar. I would really, really HATE to see Lady Gaga winning. I would expect Bradley Cooper to finally getting his Oscar. I will see SAG awards, but it seems Mahershala Ali has this in his bag. That said, to achieve second Oscar that quickly speaks a lot. Regina King also looks like a safe bet. 

2 minutes ago, Corvinus said:

It seems the Academy loves Alexandre Desplat.

That is even understatement... I don't know what was the last thing he did without getting a nomination for Oscars. Probably, Deathly hallows part 2 :D He had almost 10 nominations in 10 years. 

4 minutes ago, Corvinus said:

and... Cristopher Robin? ok...

It was a fun moment seeing it on that list. I really don't know much about visual effects, but I do know that it wasn't THAT good :D

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just looking at the weirdly inconsistent list of nominees, even accounting for how the 10 best picture list has become unmoored from director/cinematography and acting awards, it does look like a dud of a year.  And, at this point, it's almost like committing career suicide to agree to host the Oscars, no one in their right mind would do it if they're an established star because it always crashes and burns one way or the other.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, HelenaExMachina said:

Eh, can’t say the list is outstanding for having a bunch of bad films, especially when you look at the list of nominees in previous years. I mean this is the award show which gave Shakespeare in Love 7 awards including best picture so :dunno: let’s not pretend there’s have always been an outstanding crop of nominees for these awards

Crash winning was more offensive, but nothing will eclipse Dances with Wolves beating Goodfellas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Crash winning was more offensive, but nothing will eclipse Dances with Wolves beating Goodfellas.

Forest Gump v Shawshank?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, BigFatCoward said:

Forest Gump v Shawshank? 

Forrest Gump hasn't aged particularly well, but it was very popular and highly regarded the year it came out.  It's also very much the kind of film the academy loves (schmaltzy, middlebrow, unchallenging, with a popular leading man).  IMO Crash, Ordinary People and Dances with Wolves are all much weaker choices. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, BigFatCoward said:

Forest Gump v Shawshank?

That was the same year as Pulp Fiction too. I think you can argue that at the time FG was seen as the best of the three, but now is the least. It’s also worth noting that Shawshank wasn’t an instant success. It’s popularity grew over time and the Oscars is still a popularity contest, though not as blatant as other award shows.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Tywin et al. said:

Crash winning was more offensive, but nothing will eclipse Dances with Wolves beating Goodfellas.

1999!!! Shakespeare in Love over Saving Private Ryan and Paltrow over Blanchett.

The latter one still hurts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah Forrest Gump winning is particularly egregious in hindsight because it beat both Shawshank and Pulp Fiction.  Shakespeare in Love beating out three excellent WWII films (Saving Private Ryan, Thin Red Line, and Life is Beautiful) also sticks out - although I guess Ryan and Line split some votes.  I don't think Crash was that bad considering it was just a meh year.  Looking at the other nominees, Capote and Brokeback were both pretty meh as well (and iirc Brokeback came in as the favorite).  I love Munich (definitely Spielberg's most underrated), and Good Night and Good Luck is clearly the superior film, but I don't think either had much momentum at the time.

A couple that haven't been mentioned:  Chicago and The English Patient.  Chicago beat out a very impressive group, and I think all four were clearly better movies - Gangs of NY, The Hours, The Pianist, and LotR II.  English Patient was another pretty meh year, but the Academy could have voted for Fargo.  And for a throwback, Rocky beat out Taxi Driver, Network, and All the President's Men.  I think that's worse than Ordinary People (which I actually like) beating out Raging Bull (which I've always thought was overrated).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm kind of mad at Black Panther being nominated, because it's clearly just a token gesture. Moves don't win best picture unless they are at least nominated for director, screen play and if not those then at least 2 acting awards. IMO it's nominated mostly because of the failed attempt to introduce a popular film award, and to placate lovers of popular film they nominate the second film that got the pop film pundits chattering about awards snubs for popular films. The first being Wonder Woman. Interesting that the two films that had people talking about the lack of representation of popular films are films lead by demographics that have historically been underrepresented at the highest levels in film.

They could at least have given some semblance of credibility to the nomination by nominating Michael B. Jordan for best supporting actor.

Edited by The Anti-Targ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Darth Richard II said:

Oh is it time for Braveheart is one of the worst films of all time speech?

Taken as a work of fictions I don't think it's wrong to say it was a good film. In terms of its faithfulness to Scottish history however, it appears Gibson and co took some rather egregious liberties. I guess it all depends on how one emphasises the importance of faithfulness to history. I for one won't ever watch the movie again, even though in my days of ignorance I watched the move a couple of times and enjoyed it a lot.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

Crash winning was more offensive, but nothing will eclipse Dances with Wolves beating Goodfellas.

Meh, Dances with Wolves at least has a good enough story that it was copied 2 times later and both were also nominated for best picture with one being the highest grossing movie of all time.  Shakespeare in Love over Saving Private Ryan is abject stupidity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, The Anti-Targ said:

I'm kind of mad at Black Panther being nominated, because it's clearly just a token gesture.

I wouldn't call it "token". Black Panther was a major moment in American cinematic culture and this is what's being acknowledged by those who voted for it. It's at least as well-made as "A Star is Born", "Vice", or "Bohemian Rhapsody", IMO, and no less deserving of a presence on the list than those films.

I recently rewatched Goodfellas and I have to say that I'm more convinced than ever that Dances with Wolves was the right winner that year. Ray Liotta's narration becomes increasingly unwelcome as the movie progresses, and there's very little emotional engagement with the cast (which is not necessarily the norm with Scorsese; Mean Streets and even Casino feel more emotionally grounded). The film's direction is top-notch, and I would have given it to Scorsese over Costner (but only just), but Dances with Wolves has a lot on its side -- gorgeous cinematography, a beautiful John Barry score, great writing -- which is why it racked up so many wins in 1991.

Edited by Ran

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, The Anti-Targ said:

Taken as a work of fictions I don't think it's wrong to say it was a good film. In terms of its faithfulness to Scottish history however, it appears Gibson and co took some rather egregious liberties. I guess it all depends on how one emphasises the importance of faithfulness to history.

Yeah I don't think historical accuracy has any relevance to a film's quality.  If that's the standard, then Shakespeare sucks too.  I think a lot of the Braveheart hate has to do with the farcically egregious historical inaccuracies and (rightly) having a distaste for Gibson personally.  To each his own, but I don't care about either when watching a movie.  And in my book Gibson has a pretty damn good track record as a director between Braveheart, Man Without a Face, and Apocalypto (haven't seen Hacksaw Ridge and Passion is an abomination in every way - including barely being an actual movie).  Generally, I agree with the wisdom of Trey Parker - say what you want about Mel Gibson, but the son of a bitch knows story structure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×