Jump to content

95th Academy Awards (OSCAR NIGHT): You're all feckin' boring!


Mladen
 Share

Recommended Posts

49 minutes ago, dbunting said:

I am a fan of the franchise and Rocky is IMO the best by far. It introduces us to the characters, shows us their flaws and builds them up. The fact that (spoiler alert) Rocky loses the fight IMO is what makes it a great movie. The hero lost and succeeded.

Guess that scene in the pet store really did it for you. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have not seen the film, but on JLC, I have seen several directors say that she has for years now been an absolute treasure for them during filming, like going several extra miles to keep the set loose but professional, mentoring younger actors, and routinely described as ‘making everyone else’s performance better’. FWIW. I have no particular opinion of her as an actress either way, haven’t see all that many of her films. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah of all the awards the movie got the JLC one is a bit of a head-scratcher. She is basically doing a comedy sketch bit during her scenes, a bit of fun, hardly acting at all. It's more like getting an award for being on SNL. 

It didn't seem like a particularly strong category this year anyway. Possibly I would have given it to Kerry Condon but that just felt like a pretty solid performance more than anything. I don't think Bassett can expect to be winning Oscars for chewing the scenery in an MCU movie either. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, James Arryn said:

I have not seen the film, but on JLC, I have seen several directors say that she has for years now been an absolute treasure for them during filming, like going several extra miles to keep the set loose but professional, mentoring younger actors, and routinely described as ‘making everyone else’s performance better’. FWIW. I have no particular opinion of her as an actress either way, haven’t see all that many of her films. 

Yes, she's not someone who has any kind of negative reputation or accusations of being a diva, and in fact there's a lot of stories from Everything Everywhere All at Once about how effusive and positive she was about the film, how supportive of her fellow actors, etc. In fact, she spent a lot of time talking up Stephanie Hsu in the interviews I'd seen.

There's something to be said about being likable and well-liked in that nest of vipers called Hollywood.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Ran said:

Yes, she's not someone who has any kind of negative reputation or accusations of being a diva, and in fact there's a lot of stories from Everything Everywhere All at Once about how effusive and positive she was about the film, how supportive of her fellow actors, etc. In fact, she spent a lot of time talking up Stephanie Hsu in the interviews I'd seen.

There's something to be said about being likable and well-liked in that nest of vipers called Hollywood.

And in addition being good for the final product/art in ways not limited to her on-screen contributions. Rian Johnson credits her in the extreme for getting the cast to buy in and enjoy the slightly new/odd filming experience of Knives Out. That’s not fluff, it can make all the difference on set. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, James Arryn said:

I have not seen the film, but on JLC, I have seen several directors say that she has for years now been an absolute treasure for them during filming, like going several extra miles to keep the set loose but professional, mentoring younger actors, and routinely described as ‘making everyone else’s performance better’. FWIW. I have no particular opinion of her as an actress either way, haven’t see all that many of her films. 

She is talented and she is well-liked. I know some of my friends from LA who work as critics and journalists are all enamored with her. She is kind, generous, a true sport. No one denies that. The problem is... You are not supposed ti get the Oscar for being kindest person. That's where this entire debate started. She was solid in EEAAO, but she is far from something that would usually garner awards. 

33 minutes ago, Heartofice said:

Yeah of all the awards the movie got the JLC one is a bit of a head-scratcher. She is basically doing a comedy sketch bit during her scenes, a bit of fun, hardly acting at all. It's more like getting an award for being on SNL. 

It didn't seem like a particularly strong category this year anyway. Possibly I would have given it to Kerry Condon but that just felt like a pretty solid performance more than anything. I don't think Bassett can expect to be winning Oscars for chewing the scenery in an MCU movie either. 

The moment Michelle Williams decided to campaign in Lead Actress, this category became a chaos. The sad thing is this could truly have been an amazing category. We had Claire Foy and Jessie Buckley from "Women Talking", Nina Hoss from "TAR", Thuso Mbedu and Lashana Lynch from "The Woman King", Dolly De Leon from "Triangle of Sadness", Janelle Monae from "Glass Onion". Keke Palmer was campaigning in Supporting for "Nope", Zoe Kazan in "She Said"... Not to mention Angela, Kerry, Stephanie Hsu and Hong Chau. So, we had an amazing pool of supporting performances and somehow we ended up with somewhat uninspiring lineup and consequently winner.

To be honest, Bassett was not much better in "Wakanda Forever". But she had two powerful scenes, which, Supporting performance is supposed to be - couple of strong powerful moments during the movie. People toyed with the idea of AB at Oscars since trailer for "Wakanda Forever" came out. Plus, when we got the script, you could see how Angela owned that scene with Okoye. Changing the rhythm and emphasizing certain parts... She did amazing job there. Is it her best performance? Of course not. 

Simply, we had two legacy Oscar narratives clashing, with three deserving women being newcomers no one heard about. And per usual recipe, when Academy can't decide, they choose what they already know and like.

27 minutes ago, Ran said:

Yes, she's not someone who has any kind of negative reputation or accusations of being a diva, and in fact there's a lot of stories from Everything Everywhere All at Once about how effusive and positive she was about the film, how supportive of her fellow actors, etc. In fact, she spent a lot of time talking up Stephanie Hsu in the interviews I'd seen.

There's something to be said about being likable and well-liked in that nest of vipers called Hollywood.

I spoke about this already... She talked up both Hsu and Yeoh this entire season. People from Oscar sites talked how Academy members told them they watched EEAAO because of JLC. Remember, the movie came out last March, and we all sort of expected to die out when fall season begins with Venice and new movies coming out of Venice, Toronto and New York festivals. So, JLC worked around the clock to promote the movie basically creating snowball effect. We also had her propping up Michelle Yeoh during SAG. Cate was already steamrolling the season, beating Yeoh at CCA (where EEAAO won everything) and at BAFTA. So, it wasn't a small deal when JLC went on stage and said "I say Michelle, you say YEOH" People adored her, and we got it. SAG changed both Lead and Supporting Actress races. 

And yes, we can all be cynical about Hollywood, but JLC is a decent person. I am angry she won, I hate that sort of things at Oscars, but that is just me. But I can't deny JLC is profoundly decent and humble person. Not to mention funny and adorable. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Mladen said:

And yes, we can all be cynical about Hollywood, but JLC is a decent person. I am angry she won, I hate that sort of things at Oscars, but that is just me. But I can't deny JLC is profoundly decent and humble person. Not to mention funny and adorable. 

I’m convinced that Mark Rylance won his Oscar not for Bridge of Spies but for Wolf Hall.  The Academy is like a jury they do what they want regardless of the rules or principles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

I’m convinced that Mark Rylance won his Oscar not for Bridge of Spies but for Wolf Hall.  The Academy is like a jury they do what they want regardless of the rules or principles.

It was combination of people liking Mark Rylance, snobbery directed towards Stallone and "Bridge of Spies" being Best Picture nominee. But, yeah...

What these Oscars brought and what is really important in some ways is the new generation, the end of AMPAS snobbery, racial bias, their accounting for taste. If you compare which movies went empty-handed and which got awards, a conclusion can not be more clear. Whether we speak about Yeoh or Ke Huy Quan, Fraser or JLC, awarding any of them would be impossible 10 years ago. But AMPAS has been slowly changing the membership and it is a generational thing. Can anyone imagine Spielberg losing with "The Fabelmans" 10 years ago? Or Blanchett and Farrell being challenged by unorthodox roles and win?

That doesn't mean AMPAS has not its own issues. People celebrate Yeoh's victory because it is the end of racial bias in Best Actress category, but they forgot that at least three POC actresses have been denied nomination this year, and 2 of them have been more than worthy. On the other hand, we also need to understand the sexism working in Academy. The role Blanchett had was meant for a man, not a woman. And even though it is brilliant and undeniably great. Blanchett suffered for not playing warmer, more caring female character. Something the likes of Robert De Niro or Daniel Day-Lewis would never be bothered with. So, while we can celebrate some small/not-so-small victories, we should understand there's much more to achieve.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm perfectly content to say JLC's Oscar is a make up win for "A Fish Called Wanda" (and, really, "Freaky Friday") and call it a day. But I'm more interested in recognizing careers than individual performances anyway. I think its just too hard to accurately make comparisons across something as subjective as specific roles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Mladen said:

The role Blanchett had was meant for a man, not a woman.

The first draft of Everything was written with an eye towards starring Jackie Chan instead of Michelle Yeoh. 

Quote

Blanchett suffered for not playing warmer, more caring female character. 

She won the Volpi, the Golden Globe, the BAFTA, and a bunch of other awards. If that's suffering, there's a thousand actresses who'd like to suffer that same way. You might as well say she suffered by being in an arthouse movie with a poor box office (had Tár won best picture, it'd be the lowest-grossing theatrically released film to ever win, if my research is correct.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Ran said:

The first draft of Everything was written with an eye towards starring Jackie Chan instead of Michelle Yeoh. 

Yeah, I know that. And I think the change added a lot more substance to the material.

21 minutes ago, Ran said:

She won the Volpi, the Golden Globe, the BAFTA, and a bunch of other awards. If that's suffering, there's a thousand actresses who'd like to suffer that same way. You might as well say she suffered by being in an arthouse movie with a poor box office (had Tár won best picture, it'd be the lowest-grossing theatrically released film to ever win, if my research is correct.)

Perhaps "suffer" is the wrong choice of word. But, unlikeable roles rarely win at Best Actress category. That was one of several other reasons why Blanchett didn't win - she had two Oscars (which everyone was repeating ad nauseum as if that is the argument about her performance), she didn't have the narrative in comparison to almost every woman that was in contention - Yeoh, Davis and Deadwyler vying for historic win, Davis and Williams being overdue for Best Actress Oscar, Ana de Armas being ingenue Hollywood likes to award. It was also arthouse film with a poor box office (interestingly, so far it has earned $15M outside US, which is 2/3 of its box office, signaling that Europeans liked it more than Americans).

TAR was never winning Best Picture, we knew that since it was released in Venice. Its only win was always Blanchett. Since she got Volpi cup at Venice, that has been the movie's narrative. And Field, Hoss, Hoffmeister, Willi, Hildur... They all tried their best in supporting Cate to become that one win for the movie. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Blanchett already won for an unlikeable character in Blue Jasmine.  Looking at the list of best actress winners over the years, I don't really see much evidence that best actress wins have been for primarily for 'warm' 'caring' roles.  If anything there is a preference for showy characters, warm or not.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Cas Stark said:

Blanchett already won for an unlikeable character in Blue Jasmine.  Looking at the list of best actress winners over the years, I don't really see much evidence that best actress wins have been for primarily for 'warm' 'caring' roles.  If anything there is a preference for showy characters, warm or not.  

 

Yeah, I was going to mention Jasmine. That character is basically the anti-heroine of the story, a mess of a woman who's going from self-created crisis to self-created crisis. Amazing performance, Allen's take on Blanche DuBois in a way, not a warm and sweet character.

I think there's a lot of over-thinking about who won and why and who got slighted. Mostly it' a popularity contest mixed with a box office contest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just took a look at the best Actresses winner.

Quite a few were for roles in Bio-pics.

Not all of them were likable characters. Be it Aileen Wuornos or Maggie Thatcher. Then we had Natalie Portman in Black Swan. Kathy Bates in Misery, and Jodie Foster in Silence of the Lambs.

Not exactly warm female characters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Cas Stark said:

Blanchett already won for an unlikeable character in Blue Jasmine.  Looking at the list of best actress winners over the years, I don't really see much evidence that best actress wins have been for primarily for 'warm' 'caring' roles.  If anything there is a preference for showy characters, warm or not.  

 

Jasmine is a take on Blanche DuBois, one of the most known female protagonists in American literature. It is the role to prove your Oscar chops. She may not be the likeable in terms of personality, but it is very relatable role with a long history. Lydia is much colder, intellectual type of role in comparison to Jasmine. And yes, Lydia is far less showier than Jasmine.

4 minutes ago, Deadlines? What Deadlines? said:

Kathy Bates won for Misery. Charlize Theron won for Monster. If there's a trend regarding "warm female characters" and Oscar wins, there are definitely exceptions. 

Yes, but it is also about certain type of unlikeable characters. Not every villain is hated, as audience we tend to love to hate some characters. Think of, for example Lena Headey and Charles Dance in "Game of Thrones". Lydia doesn't fall into that category either. She is difficult to warm up to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/13/2023 at 5:30 AM, The Anti-Targ said:

Given there have traditionally been 4 nominations, and in more recent years 10, a 50% connection between best director and best picture is a trend. I imagine the only comparable predictor would be screenplay, but since there are two of those awards it's a bit trickier to make the link.

Never mind, I'm stupid. There's actually a 70% correlation between Picture and Director. 

On 3/13/2023 at 7:03 PM, Deadlines? What Deadlines? said:

The utter lack of nominations for The Shining

Th Oscars capture a mood and a moment (most of the time), but are very hit-and-miss when it comes to films that really endure. 

To be fair, outside of a niche group of film lovers, most people thought this was a bad movie upon release. 

On 3/13/2023 at 7:27 PM, Ran said:

But I do think there's something about the film that does trigger people, and it's the fact that it's basically an indie superhero film that's just another example of the Marvelization of Hollywood. You've got people decrying superhero films as an example of the infantilization of the art, and here people plunge head over heels into a love affair with this superhero film. It even has a supervillain in Jobu Tupaki.

I'm rewatching it now and had to pause a little under half way in because it's just a bit exhausting. There's some things I really like about it up to this point (Quan, Yeoh, the thematic heart of it), but the frantic tossing out of "quirky" nonsense like the Everything Bagel Blackhole and the world of cheese-filled sausage fingers is jut tiresome. I still think the film is too long and too undisciplined.

But the argument against Marvel isn't that it's about superheroes, but rather that instead of being an artistic expression, it's an assembly line product. That's the difference between them. People still go crazy over The Dark Knight right?

I think the exhaustion is part of the reason it resonated so much with certain audiences, particularly with Gen-Z.

23 hours ago, Mladen said:

EEAAO is certainly an original movie, but I think some people may be exaggerating this. You have Guillermo del Toro's "The Shape of Water" introducing quirky fantasy to Academy members, you have "Parasite" starting what seems to be an Asian wave of influence (just to be clear, nothing bad with that, Asian cinema is glorious and original and we need more of it) plus multiverse is sort of MCU thing these days. 

Will EEAAO stand the test of time? IDK... People try to convince me that it is the best thing since sliced bread. On the other hand I know the memory of modern consumer and I have seen these obsessions going as fast as they were created. We'll see in a year or two. And we'll also see whether this will bring any change to Hollywood or are we destined for another 2015. in 2024? 

Depends on how one defines "Original". Throughout the previous year, a lot of people where talking about Top Gun: Maverick as if it was somehow an "original" movie.

I'm pretty sure it will. Any movie that comes out early in the year, gets constantly talked about throughout the year and receives a best picture nomination pretty much stands the test of time. Taxi Driver, Get Out, Silence of the Lambs.

16 hours ago, Mladen said:

I never said EEAAO is fading. I have my doubts, but I think that the effect it will have on industry is significant. When a movie like this wins 7 Oscars, people start thinking outside the box what they consider is "Oscar-winning movie". I was talking particularly about this win, but EEAAO as a whole does have a potential to change what is being awarded at the Oscar. We have two "by the book" movies - The Fabelmans and Elvis going empty-handed, so I think that is also telling.

I'm not sure it will change what gets awards anytime soon. Look at the other big win of the night, a movie that fits many characteristics of Oscar Bait. There's a high probability that it could have won more awards if Netflix had been campaigning for it from the beginning. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Cashless Society said:

To be fair, outside of a niche group of film lovers, most people thought this was a bad movie upon release. 

That's my point. No one got it at the time. Even people who are supposed to be more sophisticated in their appreciation of the art than us proles. 

2 hours ago, Cashless Society said:

But the argument against Marvel isn't that it's about superheroes, but rather that instead of being an artistic expression, it's an assembly line product. That's the difference between them. People still go crazy over The Dark Knight right?

I think this is what Coppola was getting at when he said he thought they were, "despicable". Pure studio driven films. For a guy like him, the real innovation of the MCU isn't the shared universe; it's reducing the Director to the role of hired hand. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...