Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Oscars 2019 thread.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • WOM
    replied
    There was no book. The script was co-written by the son of the driver character, along with director Farrelly. And any story is seen through the lens of the teller. That's not necessarily a drawback...it's just their perspective.

    Leave a comment:


  • San Bernardhinault
    replied
    Arguably that's part of the problem - the book was written by the bloke Mortensen plays so it inevitably means that the Mortensen character is the lead and the focus of the story. But that means that it's racism looked at through the prism of a white observer

    Leave a comment:


  • ad hoc
    replied
    Yes.

    It's not like Philadelphia when Hanks won the leading actor award for a film in which Denzel Washington was the lead

    Leave a comment:


  • Bordeaux Education
    replied
    Having not seen it, is Mortenson genuinely the leading actor and Ali the supporting actor?

    Leave a comment:


  • G-Man
    replied
    I enjoyed Blackkklansman, but for a movie that ends with a sermon over reality footage, it seems a strange decision to alter something as basic as the timeline of the story it's based on. I can see why Lee might have liked to create a mood of Naturals, Black Panthers and early '70s soul, but doing so at the expense of reflecting the authenticity of the story you are telling? You don't get movies about Hitler set in the 1950s because you want the SS goosestep to "See You Later, Alligator".

    Leave a comment:


  • Felicity, I guess so
    replied
    Admittedly my positive response to Green Book came after a number of “warnings” against it. I often find that- no-one else likes it, you find the value in it; the world loves it... meh
    but I defend the pretty mediocre Bohemian Rhapsody because if you’re old enough to remember/vaguely like Queen, Mesut Ozil’s (sorry...) performance is great and it does a competent job;

    I will defend GB because BOTH performances are extraordinarily good and the costumes are great and the script really gets the job done...and, yes, it’s a bit “liberal movie that Hollywood likes” but it’s also a true fucking story, one that doesn’t hide the white character’s racism whereas, much as I enjoyed Black KKK, ITS deception/artifice is far worse, presenting a black cop who infiltrated the black movement as an unambiguous hero (who gets the cool black chick) and for all Spike throws Trump’s USA at us to make it powerful and relevant, that really sticks in the throat

    Leave a comment:


  • WOM
    replied
    Spike Lee is a Grade A shit.

    Leave a comment:


  • The Awesome Berbaslug!!!
    replied
    Spike Lee turned his back when Green book won. I don't think he was impressed. (and I don't think it was because he didn't win)

    I haven't seen any of these movies, but I'm delighted that Olivia Colman won an oscar. I don't care if she deserved it or not. They should give more oscars to people involved in peep show.

    Leave a comment:


  • G-Man
    replied
    Best moment of the show: Trevor Noah speaking Xhosa, translating it to mean some guff when what he said was: "The white people don't know I'm lying to them."

    Leave a comment:


  • WOM
    replied
    Okay, I see what you're saying in that regard. Kinda like a 'Hallmark' movie of the week about love being a poor representation of a real-life marriage.

    Leave a comment:


  • San Bernardhinault
    replied
    It's not the accuracy that's the problem with Green Book. It's that it's the black experience of racism in America all seen through the lens of white men. It's that the black man's problems are redeemed and solved by a white man. It's that it paints black identity in America as being basically about eating fried chicken. And it's that while it talks about racism in America (in a very heavy handed way), it does so in a way that makes sure that it's completely separate and unrelated to modern America with a nice safe distance of time, and we're comfortable that the racism is all in the past - Nobody needs a Green Book now.

    None of this would matter very much if it was the kind of film you watched on a Thursday evening on Netflix, and were entertained by. It does matter when it's being voted as the very best film of the year.

    Leave a comment:


  • WOM
    replied
    I don't think it's Oscar-worthiness depends on its historical / cultural accuracy. I think that's an odd measure.

    Leave a comment:


  • ursus arctos
    replied
    I don't get that at all.

    If Akiro Kurosawa came back from the dead and directed a typically brilliant film apologia for the Tokyo Sarin attacks inspired by Aum Shinrikyo propaganda, I would not support it for Best Picture or any other award.

    Leave a comment:


  • WOM
    replied
    I have real issues with Green Book being discounted or minimized because it isn't an accurate portrayal of the black experience, or its being inaccurate to its setting or its historical time or its source material or purported message, etc. The film is what the film is. That's not why it shouldn't have won.

    By all accounts, it simply couldn't hold a candle to some of the other nominees. That's what people should be talking about.

    Leave a comment:


  • ursus arctos
    replied
    It's the film version of Roberts' opinion in the Voting Rights Act case.

    Directed and produced by a guy who promoted the "Jersey City Muslims Celebrated 9/11" crap

    Leave a comment:


  • San Bernardhinault
    replied
    Green Book's perfectly fine to watch. But the content is basically "We used to have racism in America, and that could be overcome with the help of a white dude." I'm not sure it should have been winning any Oscars.

    Leave a comment:


  • ad hoc
    replied
    I ought to make it clear that saying Green Book is one tenth the film that Roma is, is actually a compliment I'd put Roma up with Citizen Kane as one of the most impressive "uses of film as an artistic medium" in the history of cinema

    Leave a comment:


  • Aitch
    replied
    I thought the trouble with Green Book was that it was a feel good film you shouldn't want to feel good about. So all the emotions and sensitivities are watered down to make them acceptable to a comfortable audience and the clichés are played up. The resultant hackneyed bromance has two men acting as noble savages in a world that doesn't understand them. Yawn.

    Leave a comment:


  • ursus arctos
    replied
    Useful précis of Green Book's issues

    "Green Book" is the worst best picture Oscar winner since “Crash,” and I don’t make the comparison lightly.

    Like that 2005 movie, Peter Farrelly’s interracial buddy dramedy is insultingly glib and hucksterish, a self-satisfied crock masquerading as an olive branch. It reduces the long, barbaric and ongoing history of American racism to a problem, a formula, a dramatic equation that can be balanced and solved. “Green Book” is an embarrassment; the film industry’s unquestioning embrace of it is another.

    Leave a comment:


  • Bordeaux Education
    replied
    Originally posted by Walt Flanagans Dog View Post
    Seems like a weak year?
    Funnily enough, it's the first year that I have really wanted to catch up on all of the Best Picture nominations.

    Leave a comment:


  • Duncan Gardner
    replied
    Good movie. Tom Conti as the manager steals it for me

    Leave a comment:


  • Benjm
    replied
    Originally posted by Duncan Gardner View Post
    A woman in Walsall phoned Dotun Adebayo's BBC show claiming to have seen it 83 times.
    I saw that in the Brexpress & Star. In a reciprocal gesture, March's showing of Slade in Flame at the Regent Street Cinema has sold out a month in advance.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sporting
    replied
    Originally posted by Walt Flanagans Dog View Post
    I've seen a grand total of two films at the cinema in the last 12 months

    Two more than me!

    Leave a comment:


  • Ray de Galles
    replied
    Originally posted by ad hoc View Post
    I'd say Mortenson was a significantly better acting performance than Malik. Malik does a great imitation of Mercury, but imitation is not the same as acting.

    Roma is ten times the film that Green Book is.
    I don't know about that, it's the kind of statement that show up the inherent silliness of awards season (and I'll admit to being prone to making them myself).

    They're both films that are incredibly well put together, perfectly showcase the talents of their makers and achieve their aims. It's very tempting to see 'Roma' as "more important" and admire it's visual breadth but the acting, script and overall personality of 'Green Book' are impressive. I quite like the fact that both movies are about warmth, love and humanity and the contrasting ways they illustrate those traits. I want to see 'Roma' again (ideally in the cinema) but I can also see me settling down to watch 'Green Book' as an annual Xmas staple.

    I do agree with you on Malek though, Peter Bradshaw of the Guardian said in his initial response to the awards that Malek's was the least impressive of all the nominees and while I haven't seen Willem Dafoe's performance I would tend to agree it is far lesser than Mortenson, Bale and Cooper's. It's a proficient, feature length 'Stars In Their Eyes' performance that feels like something from an SNL sketch. The film itself is clunky and messily incoherent which is mainly propelled along by the live show scenes which keep it watchable so the sound awards are the only ones that are really justified in my opinion.
    Last edited by Ray de Galles; 25-02-2019, 10:47.

    Leave a comment:


  • Walt Flanagans Dog
    replied
    I've seen a grand total of two films at the cinema in the last 12 months - Bohemian Rhapsody and Green Book - and while they each did the advertised job, I didn't come out of either of them thinking they were going to win multiple Oscars. Seems like a weak year?

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X