August1991 Posted February 20, 2011 Report Posted February 20, 2011 127 Hours (2010): Christian Colson, Danny Boyle, John SmithsonBlack Swan (2010): Mike Medavoy, Brian Oliver, Scott Franklin The Fighter (2010): David Hoberman, Todd Lieberman, Mark Wahlberg Inception (2010): Christopher Nolan, Emma Thomas The Kids Are All Right (2010): Gary Gilbert, Jeffrey Levy-Hinte, Celine Rattray The King's Speech (2010): Iain Canning, Emile Sherman, Gareth Unwin The Social Network (2010): Scott Rudin, Dana Brunetti, Michael De Luca, Ceán Chaffin Toy Story 3 (2010): Darla K. Anderson True Grit (2010): Ethan Coen, Joel Coen, Scott Rudin Winter's Bone (2010): Anne Rosellini, Alix Madigan IMDbI would set up a poll but I'm too lazy/tired. I've seen Inception, The Kids Are Alright, The Social Network, The King's Speech. Frankly, I think most of them are crappy movies. IMHO, the "message" of Avatar was hypocritical: rich corporation/billionaire makes movie to make money by criticizing corporations/greed. IOW, I think the Academy/Hollywood are going the way of the New York Times. They don't get "new media". The mere fact that "The Social Network" was nominated is a sign of the times. It's like the CBC telling listeners to go to their web page for further details, or Al Jolson telling people to buy the album. ----- I hated Inception and if it wins, I will declare that Hollywood has fundamentally cut itself off from the Western world. The Kids Are Alright? They gave it to American Beauty. (My own feeling is that since Midnight Cowboy, it's been downhill. Same basic story: "America is bad.") Possible. True Grit? They gave Woody Allen one award and I suspect they'll do the same for the Coen brothers. One is enough. The Fighter? I haven't seen it. I want to. Mark Wahlberg is no fool. Black Swan. Haven't seen it. A possible. The King's Speech. Very good but British/Weinstein and not as good as "Shakespeare in Love". Then again, it has the 21st century slant of victim defending Western values. Maybe. Is "127 Hours" a Best Picture? Comparable to "Lawrence of Arabia" or "Gone With The Wind"? How we in the West have fallen... Quote
bloodyminded Posted February 20, 2011 Report Posted February 20, 2011 IMDb Frankly, I think most of them are crappy movies. IMHO, the "message" of Avatar was hypocritical: rich corporation/billionaire makes movie to make money by criticizing corporations/greed. I sympathize with this view, but we have to allow for contradictions. Does one have to choose to live poor before criticizing the rich? It's not tenable. None of us are totally free from contradictions, even hypocrisies from time to time. Impossible to avoid. IOW, I think the Academy/Hollywood are going the way of the New York Times. They don't get "new media". Possible. time will tell. But so far, to my knowledge, the Hollywood film industry is doing vey well. The mere fact that "The Social Network" was nominated is a sign of the times. It's like the CBC telling listeners to go to their web page for further details, or Al Jolson telling people to buy the album. No it isn't. The Social Network is a character study, first and foremost, of a troubled and rather unlikeable gadfly who is both a beneficiary and a victim of circumstance and of his own "genius" (though the term is questionable). It is also, as far as i know, the only serious big film that makes a genuine effort to explore social media and its relationship to the corporate world...as the "rebel" Zuckerberg is completely co-opted. While I didn't find the movie as astonishing and groundbreaking as many critics obviously have done, I thought it was very good. I hated Inception and if it wins, I will declare that Hollywood has fundamentally cut itself off from the Western world. So you finally watched it? Personally, although I enjoyed the movie, on my second viewing I found it hugely problematic. Not least because the convoluted plot devices demanded a terrible amount of talky-ness, with characters constantly explaining to one another what the hell was going on. But as for Hollywood and "the Western world"...has the Academy not always been voting for any number of sub-par, or at least ordinary and unremrkable movies? Why is this different? Like I said before, Rocky won in 1976; the same year that the infinitely superior, more artful, and yes, more exciting and brilliant Taxi Driver was released. TD is a true gem, flat-out brilliant. I suspect one could discover similar questionable votes for dozens of "Best Film" wins at the Oscars, to say nothing of the other categories. The Kids Are Alright? They gave it to American Beauty. (My own feeling is that since Midnight Cowboy, it's been downhill. Same basic story: "America is bad.") Possible. It's not about "America is bad." Many movies are explorations of the darkness and complexities of contemporary society. that's a good thing. If every movie was a paen to glorious nationhood...well, are you supporting feel-good propaganda? True Grit? They gave Woody Allen one award and I suspect they'll do the same for the Coen brothers. One is enough. But your suspicion (which is a good thing, btw) of the Academy and their choices would render such a happenstance totally meaningless, wouldn't it? The King's Speech. Very good but British/Weinstein and not as good as "Shakespeare in Love". Yecccch! Shakespeare in Love is a wretched movie, unbearable, really. Is "127 Hours" a Best Picture? Comparable to "Lawrence of Arabia" or "Gone With The Wind"? How we in the West have fallen... What about Rocky? Or Gladiator? Braveheart? Crash? Forrest Gump? In the Heat of the Night? How Green Was My Valley? Terms of Endearment? Amadeus? Please. Quote As scarce as truth is, the supply has always been in excess of the demand. --Josh Billings
Michael Hardner Posted February 20, 2011 Report Posted February 20, 2011 Forrest Gump beat Pulp Fiction Kramer Vs Kramer beat Apocalypse Now Quote Click to learn why Climate Change is caused by HUMANS Michael Hardner
bloodyminded Posted February 20, 2011 Report Posted February 20, 2011 Forrest Gump beat Pulp Fiction Kramer Vs Kramer beat Apocalypse Now And there we are. We can call it bad, good, or neutral. I simply don't understand the implied contention (strongly implied) that things have somehow changed, starting around this year or last. Quote As scarce as truth is, the supply has always been in excess of the demand. --Josh Billings
wyly Posted February 20, 2011 Report Posted February 20, 2011 And there we are. We can call it bad, good, or neutral. I simply don't understand the implied contention (strongly implied) that things have somehow changed, starting around this year or last. the best picture doesn't always win due to lobbying within the industry...and it's all still subjective, I've watched forrest gump many times and pulp fiction once...Kramer Vs Kramer I've never been able to sit through even once Apocalypse Now 2-3 times... Quote “Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives.”- John Stuart Mill
Moonlight Graham Posted February 20, 2011 Report Posted February 20, 2011 Seen Inception, The Social Network, and Toy Story 3. Inception was meh, not even worthy of a nomination. I dont see what the fuss is about. The Social Network was very good, i'd give it 4/5 stars. Toy Story 3 was also very good, my fav of the series, but How To Train Your Dragon was even better, the best CG family film ever made IMO and the best movie i saw last year. How that didn't get nominated but Inception did is BS. It really doesn't matter who wins. Last year Inglorious Basterds was better than Hurt Locker (which was still quiet good, but c'mon). Its all subjective blah blah of course. The best film usually wins i think though, so we'll see. It always kind of sucks watching the Oscars since half the films usually haven't been released on home video yet so its kinda hard to have any reaction to any of the winners. Quote "All generalizations are false, including this one." - Mark Twain Partisanship is a disease of the intellect.
Moonlight Graham Posted February 20, 2011 Report Posted February 20, 2011 "August 1991: Is "127 Hours" a Best Picture? Comparable to "Lawrence of Arabia" or "Gone With The Wind"? How we in the West have fallen..." What about Rocky? Or Gladiator? Braveheart? Crash? Forrest Gump? In the Heat of the Night? How Green Was My Valley? Terms of Endearment? Amadeus? Please. August, there aren't going to be 10 films like "Lawrence of Arabia" or "Gone With The Wind" every year. Kinda setting you expectations a little high. Braveheart, Crash, Forrest Gump are 3 of my fav movies of all-time. Thought Rocky dragged a ton, and Gladiator was good certainly not great. Quote "All generalizations are false, including this one." - Mark Twain Partisanship is a disease of the intellect.
wyly Posted February 20, 2011 Report Posted February 20, 2011 Seen Inception, The Social Network, and Toy Story 3. Inception was meh, not even worthy of a nomination. I dont see what the fuss is about. The Social Network was very good, i'd give it 4/5 stars. Toy Story 3 was also very good, my fav of the series, but How To Train Your Dragon was even better, the best CG family film ever made IMO and the best movie i saw last year. How that didn't get nominated but Inception did is BS. It really doesn't matter who wins. Last year Inglorious Basterds was better than Hurt Locker (which was still quiet good, but c'mon). Its all subjective blah blah of course. The best film usually wins i think though, so we'll see. It always kind of sucks watching the Oscars since half the films usually haven't been released on home video yet so its kinda hard to have any reaction to any of the winners. Inception-different but no biggie... The Social Network and Toy Story 3-not interested enough to be botheredInglorious Basterds was better than I thought it would be so was entertaining...but I liked Hurt Locker much more...I think personal expectation plays a part, if you believe the hype you go into the theatre expecting great things only to be set up for a huge let down when it doesn't meet your expectations...go into the theatre expecting very little you're pleased when it delivers, that was me with Hurt Locker... Quote “Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives.”- John Stuart Mill
Moonlight Graham Posted February 20, 2011 Report Posted February 20, 2011 Inglorious Basterds was better than I thought it would be so was entertaining...but I liked Hurt Locker much more...I think personal expectation plays a part, if you believe the hype you go into the theatre expecting great things only to be set up for a huge let down when it doesn't meet your expectations...go into the theatre expecting very little you're pleased when it delivers, that was me with Hurt Locker... Hype-factor is definitely huge with movies. Like you said it will completely change your impressions of a movie. That's why i usually try to watch a hyped movie twice before i judge it if i didn't like it much the first time. I can count dozens of hyped films i wasn't too impressed with the first time and now consider them some of my fav movies ever (ie: The Matrix, LOTR pt.1, Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon etc.) Quote "All generalizations are false, including this one." - Mark Twain Partisanship is a disease of the intellect.
wyly Posted February 20, 2011 Report Posted February 20, 2011 Hype-factor is definitely huge with movies. Like you said it will completely change your impressions of a movie. That's why i usually try to watch a hyped movie twice before i judge it if i didn't like it much the first time. I can count dozens of hyped films i wasn't too impressed with the first time and now consider them some of my fav movies ever (ie: The Matrix, LOTR pt.1, Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon etc.) ya that as well...some movies do get better the more you watch them as you pick up nuances you missed in earlier viewings Quote “Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives.”- John Stuart Mill
bloodyminded Posted February 20, 2011 Report Posted February 20, 2011 (edited) Braveheart, Crash, Forrest Gump are 3 of my fav movies of all-time. Thought Rocky dragged a ton, and Gladiator was good certainly not great. Well, you hit the nail on the head about subjectivity...I don't like any of those movies. Especially Forrest Gump. I can count dozens of hyped films i wasn't too impressed with the first time and now consider them some of my fav movies ever (ie: The Matrix, LOTR pt.1, Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon etc.) Yeah...I really didn't like Fellowship of the Ring when I saw it. Didn't care for it all. Then my daughter insisted I watch it again...lo and behold, I enjoyed it very much. Edited February 20, 2011 by bloodyminded Quote As scarce as truth is, the supply has always been in excess of the demand. --Josh Billings
wyly Posted February 20, 2011 Report Posted February 20, 2011 Well, you hit the nail on the head about subjectivity...I don't like any of those movies. Especially Forrest Gump. Yeah...I really didn't like Fellowship of the Ring when I saw it. Didn't care for it all. Then my daughter insisted I watch it again...lo and behold, I enjoyed it very much. then there those movies we loved decades ago and when we watch them again today we find they suck...our taste in entertainment grows/refines with experience... Quote “Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives.”- John Stuart Mill
bloodyminded Posted February 20, 2011 Report Posted February 20, 2011 then there those movies we loved decades ago and when we watch them again today we find they suck...our taste in entertainment grows/refines with experience... Yeah. For instance, I loved--loved--Rambo when it came out. Well, I still am sort of fond of Rambo...but in a different way. I no longer think it is "brilliant filmmaking," as I did in '83 or whatever year it was. I don't think it's a bad movie, per se....I simply don't think it's good in the same way I used to. Quote As scarce as truth is, the supply has always been in excess of the demand. --Josh Billings
wyly Posted February 20, 2011 Report Posted February 20, 2011 (edited) Yeah. For instance, I loved--loved--Rambo when it came out. Well, I still am sort of fond of Rambo...but in a different way. I no longer think it is "brilliant filmmaking," as I did in '83 or whatever year it was. I don't think it's a bad movie, per se....I simply don't think it's good in the same way I used to. I think it succeeded because Stallone didn't have too many lines to deliver and it was aimed at a particular audience(young males)...I enjoyed it too at the time but seeing it again the acting/dialogue is quite weak IMO...another war/action flic Bridge Over the River Kwai or Lawrence of Arabia the acting even today would be top rate... maybe this verifies the cliche "standing the test of time" is the movie still as good 40, 50, 60, years after it was released Edited February 20, 2011 by wyly Quote “Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives.”- John Stuart Mill
bloodyminded Posted February 20, 2011 Report Posted February 20, 2011 I think it succeeded because Stallone didn't have too many lines to deliver and it was aimed at a particular audience(young males)...I enjoyed it too at the time but seeing it again the acting/dialogue is quite weak IMO... another war/action flic Bridge Over the River Kwai or Lawrence of Arabia the acting even today would be top rate... maybe this verifies the cliche "standing the test of time" is the movie still as good 40, 50, 60, years after it was released Yeah, I think that's a good point. I watched--yet again--The Godfather a couple of weeks ago. It's almost forty years old, but it's aged really well. It's awesome! Quote As scarce as truth is, the supply has always been in excess of the demand. --Josh Billings
a.gee Posted February 20, 2011 Report Posted February 20, 2011 I root for Inception, but it probably will not win based on the fact that it was a summer movie, and they're usually forgotten by the time of the film festivals and the rest of the worthy contenders start to make an appearance. My next choice would be The King's Speech; plot, costumes, acting, sets... very worthy indeed Quote
fellowtraveller Posted February 20, 2011 Report Posted February 20, 2011 (edited) I go to a lot of movies, going to Incendie tonight. As it happens, I have seen all of the nominees. The best movie, easily, is Winters Bone where a young actress named Jennifer Lawrence does a superb job. I also liked Inception, which had a decent crack at presenting a plot in a very different way and almost succeeded. They get points for trying. The worst of that bunch is The Kids Are All Right, which was so trendy and forced it made my skin crawl. Benning and Moore and Ruffalo are all fine actors, but the script was embarassing. A very good movie (in theaters now)and not on the list is Another Year directed by the quiet genius Mike Leigh. If you like his style and I really do, this is another gem. Some of you may remember his Vera Drake, another quiet and superbly written/acted that is one of my favorite movies. Leigh has a certain rhythym and flow in all his stuff: he chooses a superb ensemble cast of mostly Brit actors, gives them a story about ordinary lives of ordinary people, and tells a strong story that allows you to think a bit for yourself. Somebody mentioned Crash, a movie I hate with a passion. Leigh si the opposite of Paul Haggis, who revels in manipulation and heavy handed 'drama'. Blech. Other than The Kids, the rest are not bad and certainly watchable, though none are classics. Edited February 20, 2011 by fellowtraveller Quote The government should do something.
bloodyminded Posted February 20, 2011 Report Posted February 20, 2011 I go to a lot of movies, going to Incendie tonight. As it happens, I have seen all of the nominees. The best movie, easily, is Winters Bone where a young actress named Jennifer Lawrence does a superb job. I agree with most of your post, but I'm just not feeling this movie. I thought the performances were great; the movie banal. I get the feeling that it's a somewhat ambitious attempt to transcend genre (by marrying two or three), but that the ambition fails. But not many people agree with me, so I humbly plan to defer to y'all enough to give it a second viewing. Sometimes that does help. A very good movie (in theaters now)and not on the list is Another Year directed by the quiet genius Mike Leigh. If you like his style and I really do, this is another gem. Some of you may remember his Vera Drake, another quiet and superbly written/acted that is one of my favorite movies. Leigh has a certain rhythym and flow in all his stuff: he chooses a superb ensemble cast of mostly Brit actors, gives them a story about ordinary lives of ordinary people, and tells a strong story that allows you to think a bit for yourself. Mike Leigh is famous for both working the actors hard, but letting them develop characters in their own way. The result tends to be very organic, very quietly fascinating movies. He's awesome, I agree. Somebody mentioned Crash, a movie I hate with a passion. Leigh si the opposite of Paul Haggis, who revels in manipulation and heavy handed 'drama'. Blech. Again, I'm with you. I detested this movie, and thought it a giant fraud from beginning to end. I didn't believe a goddamn word of it. Paul Haggis's only really good move was to extricate himself from the Scientologists. Bravo to that, anyway. Quote As scarce as truth is, the supply has always been in excess of the demand. --Josh Billings
fellowtraveller Posted February 20, 2011 Report Posted February 20, 2011 A bit off topic, but Innaritu has a new movie. released here next week called Biutiful with Javier Bardem starring. I'll go to it a) to give Inarritu a last chance at my automatic attendance at his movies and because I really like Bardem. Inarritu did an unoffical and 'stylistically linked' trilogy of movies in the last decade, starting with Amores Perros followed by 21 Grams followed by Babel. Amores Perros was a wonderful, gritty movie that featured an innovative, scenes-out- of -sequence style and handheld cameras. Paul Haggis stole the whole idea whole for Crash, and infused it with hamhanded pontification. But I digress. 21 Grams had some wonderful acting, particularly with the stellar Benicio del Toro(sean Penn and Naomi Watts also good)and a very ordinary plot that was again told out of sequence- yet still managed to be entirely predictable, I'd say the movie was severely damaged by the direction and nearly salvaged by the acting. Finally, Babel was more of the same but with Brad Pitt. Blah. I have high hopes for Biutiful, but it is his last chance. if he comes up with shaky handheld cameras and a plot shot out of time sequnce for no reason again: I give up. Quote The government should do something.
Moonlight Graham Posted February 21, 2011 Report Posted February 21, 2011 Again, I'm with you. I detested this movie, and thought it a giant fraud from beginning to end. I didn't believe a goddamn word of it. Thought Crash was brilliant. There we go again! Quote "All generalizations are false, including this one." - Mark Twain Partisanship is a disease of the intellect.
Jack Weber Posted February 21, 2011 Report Posted February 21, 2011 (edited) I sympathize with this view, but we have to allow for contradictions. Does one have to choose to live poor before criticizing the rich? It's not tenable. None of us are totally free from contradictions, even hypocrisies from time to time. Impossible to avoid. Possible. time will tell. But so far, to my knowledge, the Hollywood film industry is doing vey well. No it isn't. The Social Network is a character study, first and foremost, of a troubled and rather unlikeable gadfly who is both a beneficiary and a victim of circumstance and of his own "genius" (though the term is questionable). It is also, as far as i know, the only serious big film that makes a genuine effort to explore social media and its relationship to the corporate world...as the "rebel" Zuckerberg is completely co-opted. While I didn't find the movie as astonishing and groundbreaking as many critics obviously have done, I thought it was very good. So you finally watched it? Personally, although I enjoyed the movie, on my second viewing I found it hugely problematic. Not least because the convoluted plot devices demanded a terrible amount of talky-ness, with characters constantly explaining to one another what the hell was going on. But as for Hollywood and "the Western world"...has the Academy not always been voting for any number of sub-par, or at least ordinary and unremrkable movies? Why is this different? Like I said before, Rocky won in 1976; the same year that the infinitely superior, more artful, and yes, more exciting and brilliant Taxi Driver was released. TD is a true gem, flat-out brilliant. I suspect one could discover similar questionable votes for dozens of "Best Film" wins at the Oscars, to say nothing of the other categories. It's not about "America is bad." Many movies are explorations of the darkness and complexities of contemporary society. that's a good thing. If every movie was a paen to glorious nationhood...well, are you supporting feel-good propaganda? But your suspicion (which is a good thing, btw) of the Academy and their choices would render such a happenstance totally meaningless, wouldn't it? Yecccch! Shakespeare in Love is a wretched movie, unbearable, really. What about Rocky? Or Gladiator? Braveheart? Crash? Forrest Gump? In the Heat of the Night? How Green Was My Valley? Terms of Endearment? Amadeus? Please. Two examples to think about... '73 (if I recall correctly) The Excorcist won Best Picture...The Excorcist is a very good film.It's one of the very few horror films that has actually creeped me out!Being a Christian,it also is very graphic and disturbing...That does'nt mean it's not a very good film and probably in any other year,would have deserved the nod... That year,it beat out what I think is a superior film...Namely,Deliverance...Deliverance is so deep and full moral issues,psychological issues,legality issues that it stands up now as an all time classic...The hillbilly rape scene is truly frightening because it's entirely plausable!!! '94 (if i recall correctly) Forrest Gump won best picture...Gump's a good film.It's a feel good story,if not a little goofy.It's kinda like a reprise of the Peter Sellers film Being There,kinda cool,but not really plausable unless one suspends reality... Gump beat out The Shawshank Redemption,which is a far superior film with a far more interesting story. Edited February 21, 2011 by Jack Weber Quote The beatings will continue until morale improves!!!
Michael Hardner Posted February 21, 2011 Report Posted February 21, 2011 Gump beat out The Shawshank Redemption,which is a far superior film with a far more interesting story. ...and both of which are inferior to Pulp Fiction which hasn't dated at all. Shawshank and Gump continue to age, like the sappy feel-good/Touchstone movies of that era. Quote Click to learn why Climate Change is caused by HUMANS Michael Hardner
Moonlight Graham Posted February 21, 2011 Report Posted February 21, 2011 All 3 are awesome movies. Quote "All generalizations are false, including this one." - Mark Twain Partisanship is a disease of the intellect.
Michael Hardner Posted February 21, 2011 Report Posted February 21, 2011 All 3 are awesome movies. Gump ? I thought it was a feel-good mishmash that wasn't believable, and therefore missed the mark on its purportedly inspirational message. I did like seeing Sally Field again - this time playing Hanks' mother ( oddly, I think that she played his love interest in Punchline ). Quote Click to learn why Climate Change is caused by HUMANS Michael Hardner
Jack Weber Posted February 21, 2011 Report Posted February 21, 2011 ...and both of which are inferior to Pulp Fiction which hasn't dated at all. Shawshank and Gump continue to age, like the sappy feel-good/Touchstone movies of that era. I've seen all 3... All are good.. I believe the Shawshank Redemption is far superior to Pulp Fiction,but,that's just me.... Quote The beatings will continue until morale improves!!!
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.