Oscars 2024: The Zone of BARBENHEIMER (LIVE)

[dbunting]

I watched most of the show, it's the one awards show I still watch.  My wife got home right after it ended and her first question was, did Billie Eilish sing yet, I wanna see her.  So there is something to her for my wife to want to see her perform, we are 50+ years old.  We both watched Oppenheimer, Holdovers and Flowers Moon and agreed Opp was the better movie and felt shorter then Flowers. We also both have no intention on rewatching any of them, whatever that says about them / us.

When Pacino came on and did whatever he did I felt a little sorry for him and more so for the nominees, has anything been said if he was ill or just age? I didn't read this whole thread so apologies if it was mentioned up thread.

p.s. It was nice to see the show not take itself so seriously for once. Cena coming out like he did was refreshing since the Oscars usually seem really uptight and full of themselves as a show.

p.s.s. Did anyone catch Emma Stones reaction when Jimmy made the comment about the Poor Things clip, "that was all of the movie we could show without blurring it"... the camera went to her and it seemed to me she was pissed, probably tired of all the attention the nude scenes have gotten.

[Spockydog]

20 hours ago, Ser Rodrigo Belmonte II said:

Glad Nolan won but Oppenheimer is far from his best film….

Not sure this was quite the Pity Oscar they gave to Scorsese.

 

Edited March 12 by Spockydog

[Mladen]

8 hours ago, Cashless Society said:

I get the feeling that the new batch of members aren't at all concerned with the whole spread the wealth outlook. Also, where any of this year's nominees as hyped as EEAAO? Because hype can get you additional awards, deserved or otherwise. 

I've been waiting to write of the BAFTAs as a precursor ever since they announced that the winners are determined by a small select jury. Last year seemed like the start of it and yet somehow they bounced back.

True. Voting body is significantly different from 10 years ago. They added circa 4-5 thousand members and significantly changed the demographics (IIRC, in 2014. 97% of Academy was white, aged 65+). There is a reason why we call them dinosaurs. 

Yeah, it seems the old "spread the wealth" doesn't work. That said. it should be noted that 8 out of 10 Best Picture nominees got at least one Oscar. Five movies divided 8 above-the-line categories. We have three foreign-language movies, three movies directed by women in Best Picture ten. Another thing - it's a generational thing. "Oscar movie" as we define it these days was coined during 2000s and 2010s, as well as "Oscar bait". However, we see Oscar bait failing - best example: Maestro. Simply, the new generation, the new Academy and by default - the new Oscar movie. 

Yeah, OPPENHEIMER didn't win anything they weren't 100% predicted to win. Which means that even love for Oppy had its limits. Oppy wasn't as big as EEAAO in terms of award hype, despite two movies accumulating rather similar tally of awards. 

As for BAFTA, no precursor, despite its name, serves to tell us who will win the Oscar. That's not their mission, despite public, peers and critics looking at them that way. I would argue that every award-giving body wants to have great overlap with the Oscars as it makes it "the most important". BAFTA was a separate universe last year, but this year it's like they made a point to prove their relevance. That said, it should be noted that Nolan is British, Murphy is Irish, POOR THINGS and THE ZONE OF INTEREST are British movies and ANATOMY OF A FALL is French movie, and those always bode well at BAFTA. So, this year may be that BAFTA members were more connected with movies in contention. We'll see the next one. But BAFTA is known to do its own thing from time to time. 

[Deadlines? What Deadlines?]

6 hours ago, Spockydog said:

Not sure this was quite the Pity Oscar they gave to Scorsese.

 

[3CityApache]

11 hours ago, Mr. Chatywin et al. said:

I've listened to a handful of her songs and they're all bland imo. That's why I used Cold Play as a comp.

First two albums of Coldplay were very good actually. That's the later albums that didn't do them any favours.

[Veltigar]

13 hours ago, Mr. Chatywin et al. said:

I've listened to a handful of her songs and they're all bland imo. That's why I used Cold Play as a comp.

 

Ah well, de gustibus et coloribus non est disputandum! I'll leave it here before your user name inspires you to Castamere me 

 

Spoiler

And who are you, the proud lord said
That I must bow so low?
Only a cat of a different coat
That's all the truth I know

In a coat of gold or a coat of red
A lion still has ears

And mine are long and sharp, my lord
As long and sharp as yours

And so he spoke, and so he spoke
That lord of Castamere

But now Billie Eilish's music sweeps o'er his hall
With no one there to hear

Yes now Billie Eilish's music sweeps o'er his hall
And not a soul to hear

 

And so he spoke, and so he spoke
That lord of Castamere
But now now Billie Eilish's music sweeps o'er his hall
With no one there to hear

Yes now now Billie Eilish's music sweeps o'er his hall
And not a soul to hear

 

13 hours ago, Mr. Chatywin et al. said:

I'm happy for Murphy, but I think when we look back it won't be seen as a great performance or film in general. I still have a lot to see (also annoying that a lot of these movies aren't out yet to stream or rent at a decent price), but I think 2023 will be remembered as a year with a lot of B+ films. 

I enjoyed Oppenheimer when I watched it, but I think it's quite similar to something like Silence. Great, but you watch it once and forget about most of it afterwards.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

2 hours ago, 3CityApache said:

First two albums of Coldplay were very good actually. That's the later albums that didn't do them any favours.

I will die on the hill that is arguing they're not good. Music should never feel boring, but I guess some people like that.

24 minutes ago, Veltigar said:

 

I enjoyed Oppenheimer when I watched it, but I think it's quite similar to something like Silence. Great, but you watch it once and forget about most of it afterwards.

Basically this. It wasn't something like Crash, but it also isn't the kind of film you'll hear people say they've watched it several times. And TBH that was kind of my point, a lot of the top movies this year were one and done and a lot of BPs have been like that lately. Who wants to go revisit Nomadland? How about The Artist? Is Driving Miss Daisy your jam? Scrolling back a few decades most BP winners are rather forgettable.

Edited March 12 by Mr. Chatywin et al.

[Darryk]

12 hours ago, dbunting said:

p.s.s. Did anyone catch Emma Stones reaction when Jimmy made the comment about the Poor Things clip, "that was all of the movie we could show without blurring it"... the camera went to her and it seemed to me she was pissed, probably tired of all the attention the nude scenes have gotten.

I noticed that too! She looks so cute when annoyed.

[Darryk]

I watched a rerun of the Oscar ceremony last night and I have to say I really enjoyed it this year.

There were a lot of fun jokes. I liked what they did with the best supporting actor / actress and best lead presentations. The song performances were great (including Billy Eilish although she seems unpopular around here) and I agreed with all the award choices.

And there was a cute dog. What more could you want?

I still find Kimmel to be quite a boring host though; too safe and generic. I wish they'd get someone with a bit more edge, like maybe Chris Rock.

[Ran]

2 minutes ago, Darryk said:

like maybe Chris Rock.

I don't think he's volunteering for that job again any time soon.

[IheartIheartTesla]

Oscars doesnt like 'edgy', otherwise they'd ask someone like Gervais who has made his name skewering the celebrities at the Golden Globes. I think the vibe is different, and they expect a bit more reverence for the entire process. 

Golden Globes are where fillum people hobnob with the tv hoi polloi. and alcohol flows, so there is a bit more leeway to be irreverent.

[Kalbear]

Requiem for a Dream is a movie that I will never willingly watch again and I wouldn't say it's bad because of that. The notion that you have to see it many times seems like a very weird criteria for best picture. 

[Relic]

I'm not a Nolan fan but I really enjoyed Oppenheimer. Have seen it twice and I'll watch it again at some point down the line, provided I don't get hit by a bus.

[IFR]

I think Oppenheimer deserves credit for managing to be very accurate to historical events (with some minor liberties) while still managing to be extremely engaging. Even the miniseries Chernobyl didn't have this amount of fidelity to historical records.

This is a sadly uncommon thing, even among highly acclaimed biographical movies.

That said, it was a strong year. I still need to watch Zone of Interest, Anatomy of a Fall, and The Holdovers. I probably won't watch Maestro.

[dbunting]

6 hours ago, Kalbear said:

Requiem for a Dream is a movie that I will never willingly watch again and I wouldn't say it's bad because of that. The notion that you have to see it many times seems like a very weird criteria for best picture. 

When I think of a movie as being the best, it is something I want to see again. I want to see things that I may have missed, or appreciate subtle things or just to enjoy the ride again. Not wanting to watch something again doesn't make it bad either.

Clearly it's just an opinion of mine.

[Deadlines? What Deadlines?]

2 hours ago, dbunting said:

When I think of a movie as being the best, it is something I want to see again. I want to see things that I may have missed, or appreciate subtle things or just to enjoy the ride again. Not wanting to watch something again doesn't make it bad either.

Clearly it's just an opinion of mine.

Same.

Would I to want to watch it again, would I to want to own a copy (back when physical media was a thing), and would I recommend it to others? Those are the tests of a good movie for me. 

Requiem for Dream is a special case though. That ending is pretty devastating. It sticks with you. Speaking for myself, my brain continued to grind on the fate of its characters long after the movie was over. Days. I'm talking days. 

 

[Argonath Diver]

Regarding Requiem, it literally made me lose complete interest in ever trying out potentially lethal drugs (ie, more than weed and shrooms). Worked far better than the DARE program I was subjected to my entire youth, which only made me think I'd eventually love weed (I do) and was generally mocked by every kid in the classroom.

Instead, save time and just play Requiem to a bunch of 13 year olds who would love the music and beautiful young people, then have their psyche traumatized into avoiding dangerous drugs forever. I was already a college kid and young fanboy of Pi, and definitely still a bit naive about drug and club culture. I very well may have taken a pill or two and who knows what else, but I chose to walk into to a theater almost completely unknowing of what was in store for me. 

Nope, none of that for me. Pass that dutch, thank you.

[dbunting]

1 hour ago, Argonath Diver said:

Regarding Requiem, it literally made me lose complete interest in ever trying out potentially lethal drugs (ie, more than weed and shrooms). Worked far better than the DARE program I was subjected to my entire youth, which only made me think I'd eventually love weed (I do) and was generally mocked by every kid in the classroom.

Instead, save time and just play Requiem to a bunch of 13 year olds who would love the music and beautiful young people, then have their psyche traumatized into avoiding dangerous drugs forever. I was already a college kid and young fanboy of Pi, and definitely still a bit naive about drug and club culture. I very well may have taken a pill or two and who knows what else, but I chose to walk into to a theater almost completely unknowing of what was in store for me. 

Nope, none of that for me. Pass that dutch, thank you.

That movie and Faces of Meth online. The transformations are things of nightmares and when you see their ages it's crazy.

[DMC]

4 hours ago, Argonath Diver said:

Regarding Requiem, it literally made me lose complete interest in ever trying out potentially lethal drugs (ie, more than weed and shrooms). Worked far better than the DARE program I was subjected to my entire youth, which only made me think I'd eventually love weed (I do) and was generally mocked by every kid in the classroom.

Instead, save time and just play Requiem to a bunch of 13 year olds who would love the music and beautiful young people, then have their psyche traumatized into avoiding dangerous drugs forever.

I dunno.  I have a lot of criticisms about DARE, but that's cuz it started as early as 3rd and 4th grade, when most kids were 9 and 10.  Like, almost literally that South Park episode where Mackey passes around weed and then it's gone.  

I agree that I haven't seen Requiem for well over a decade at least cuz it's fucking depressing, but that's cuz by the time I saw it I knew what they were talking about and..I don't think that's the best cautionary tale for preteens.  More like, k, so I'll just get high on weed and shrooms instead!

[Heartofice]

By the time Requiem for a Dream had come out I had probably seen Danny Boyle's Trainspotting about 10 times. So my reaction to it was that it just felt like an overblown Americanised version of that. Similar subject, but higher production values, bigger stars, less subtlety. Dunno if I would feel the same now, I certainly have never wanted to watch it twice, but in my head it's like the difference between the UK and US The Office.