Audio Asylum Thread Printer
Get a view of an entire thread on one page
|For Sale Ads|
Yes the Oscars - the vanity project for Hollywood but hey it's something to do.
"Ford v Ferrari"
"Once Upon a Time in Hollywood"
Have you seen them all - and which one(s), if any, did you like?
I have seen 3 to this point. Joker, 1917, and Once Upon a Time in Hollywood and I liked all three.
The Tarantino film is curious as it seems to me that it will be liked more by non Tarantino fans and Tarantino fans will probably not enjoy it. 1917 has a tough road as there are so many good war films. Still, the two long seeming single takes were impressive so from a visual and intensity level I rank it pretty high. It's well acted and reminds me a little bit of Gravity - a film deserving of the big screen. But is there enough "meat" in terms of plot and story. Hollywood tends to like more melodrama and this decidedly doesn't have that.
And the Joker for what it is is pretty great. The downward spiral of a man who is not quite right who is no longer getting his subsidized medication from a government not helping the weakest in society. It's also nice to see a film with an unreliable narrator. Still, like 1917, will the voters feel there is enough here that rises above plenty of past films like Taxi Driver or Fight Club where there is enough "meat" to warrant best picture. I doubt it. Joker seemed to polarize critics quite a lot which usually hurts its chances - they usually like the safe amiable pick.
...although great production values and such and technically a good performance by Phoenix it was overdone and overall just too negative. The term allegory continually came to mind throughout. I thought "Birdman" was a much better study of a person going mad.
"Parasite" was clever and entertaining but very dark as a comedy. Loaded with allegory too. Surprisingly, subtitles weren't a problem.
Both "Ford v Ferrari" and "Once Upon a Time" were boomer oriented nostalgia pieces. Both were well done overall but I thought Bales's performance in FvF was uninspired whereas Pitt and DiCaprio were great in their roles.
So...of the four I've seen, I vote for OUaTiH mostly because it was kinda like a big glorious selfie just like the academy and it's awards.
and I'd have to say Phoenix is a (clown) shoe-in for BA.
So that will be THREE great Joker portrayals and a golden guy for each.
He was absolutely mesmerizing and brilliantly realistic and the director was smart enough to just follow that.
It was a much better film than I thought it might be too - smart, tight, and a very serious social commentary.
Of the others, I've seen "The Irishman", "Marriage Story" and "Once Upon a Time in Hollywood".
They were all very good (with a LOT of great acting) but "The Irishman" is the only one I would enjoy seeing again any time soon.
So, that would be my favorite so far.
"Once this was all Black Plasma and Imagination" -Michael McClure
I'll have to give Irishman another try, as it started out too much like every other Sorcese Mafia film. They're nice, but more of the same after a while IMO.
I liked the Joker a lot, too. I thought it was brilliant. Hey, it's not going to be realistic, give me a break, it's a completely over-the-top fictional character to begin with!
1. It's TOO long!
2. I am sick of Scorsese's fascination with the Mafia...I almost wish someone would make HIM disappear so I don't have to bear yet another mob movie from him AND as other's have pointed out he has made this genre of movie before and MUCH better!
3. The old to young makeup NEVER works! Whereas the young to old is ALWAY more believable think Gary Oldman in Dracula or Kate Nelligan in The Prince Of Tides....
4. I feel like I have seen this performance by Pacino before, only he was in a uniform....boring!
I did stick through it to the end, but when the credits rolled I felt like I had just wasted my time! IF it wins ANY awards it should be for tedious and LONG!
I much prefer Scorsese when he steps away from his comfort zone... New York, New York, The Aviator and The Age Of Innocence....
Wolf of Wallstreet was a hoot.
I liked them both, a lot, but Parasite gets my vote. May try for 1917 on the big screen and Once Upon A Time... on Red Box rental this week.
\\Edit - Also saw Marriage Story, also a good one but a notch or two below the other 2. The scenes showed off some S_E_R_I_O_U_S acting. So much so that the two big scenes, Scarlett's first meeting with Dern and the BIG FIGHT, turned me off. I could hear the director, in my mind telling the actors, you nail these scenes, guaranteed Oscar nom'n.
"E Burres Stigano?"
I've seen 7 of the nominees.
I avoided Joker because I avoid comic book movies, but when I saw it, it was only very tangentially a comic book movie, much more an homage to Taxi Driver and King of Comedy. Phoenix does a remarkable unique psychopath and deserves all awards. And I kind of loved this. But no chance for best picture. Too dark.
Once Upon a Time is long and digressive, filled with Tarantino dialogue, and would make a fine best picture. Although IMO it is far from his best work.
The Irishman was a good return to Scorcese mob world, but again, he's done it far better in the past. Doubt it will win.
Little Women was great, but it won't win.
My own choice would be Parasite, a movie that surprises at every turn. It is rare to see such an original bizarre story that is also completely entertaining. It just might win, but again, it goes pretty dark, and it is in Korean, which means many people won't even watch it.
Have not yet seen 1917, it seems to have a lot of momentum now.
I don't see too many movies, but my wife tries to drag me to see them.
Irishman: Couldn't watch for very long - already saw enough of that genre, really no different that past versions to me, quarter way through
Joker: I liked it.
Green Book: Was that last year? I really liked it!
I really didn't like 'Joker'. Nothing about it.
Don't understand 'Ford vs. Ferrari'. I thought Bale "aped" his way through his role and only baby boomers were around long enough to remember that Le Mans and Carrol Shelby. (The stats seem to bear that out.) I thought Tracy Lett was the best as Henry Ford.
After 'Roma', I thought the "old guard" was going to put an end to Netflix grabbing Oskies? What happened? What's 'Marriage Story" doing up there?
I've seen seven out of nine. 'Jojo Rabbit' will have to go to disk before I stand a chance of seeing it. Life is hard.
Oh yeah, I think Rockwell deserved a nod for Jewell along with Bates.
I don't think the Joker has any chance of winning best picture regardless of my view of it. I liked it a lot. But it's a polarizing film.
It's the same reason Pulp Fiction had no chance of winning. Film critics were doling out 5 stars best of the year praise - but subject matter, violence, non linear story telling, dark comedy - zero shot. it was too "out there" for its time.
The Oscars has always been a bit of a silly thing to me because the films are often so different that it can be very difficult to choose between them. Plus it's a voting process. Some people prefer character studies while others prefer filmmaking technique while others want a movie that has some important significant message of some sort.
And then what about originality - Some prefer a film that comes from a great piece of literature while others prefer something from an original screenplay. I give a little less weight to movies like Little Women and last year's Star is Born simply because they've covered the same ground and sometimes it's the 4th or 5th adaptation.
And in today's world if a film has even the slightest hint of a political message of any type it will be ripped by some segment real or imagined.
What bothers me most is not the oscars it's all the articles that come out about diversity and so and so being snubbed. Stephen King took flack for saying he votes for screenplay adapted and original and best picture and he solely rates it on quality not diversity.
People are screaming that he should have basically NOT made a decision based on quality of writing but instead voted for a minority or a woman instead. I'm a lefty - Mr. King is a lefty - the far left are loons.
I say the same thing to Baseball fans. If you get voted in just because you're black or a woman and you win - it's not a real win.
The Astros win of the WS will now always be tainted - it sucks for their fans because they were so happy their team won but not because of the tech cheating and the further notes that players were wearing wires that buzzed them so they knew which pitch was coming - it basically renders their win worthless. The old saying that cheaters never win applies.
This applies to the academy - and to the farther than me left. They need to take a page from John Cleese on political correctness.
and it was Marriage Story... I thought Adam Driver did an amazing job in that film! His performance was spot on IMHO... I am not much of a Scarlett fan, so I was not moved by her performance as much as Driver... The Best Supporting Actor category is anyones guess... I saw The Two Popes and both Pryce (he's nominated for BA, but not better than Driver IMO) and Hopkins gave his usual solid performance. I may try to watch The Irishman today so I can have a truer sense of who might win in that category... As for Best Actress, I've only seen SJ in Marriage Story but I do have to say that when I watched clips of Bombshell, I actually thought Theron WAS Megyn Kelly! It will probably be between Ronan, Zellweger and Theron and who can turn out the vote....
Post a Message!
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: