criterionforum.org

Fletch F. Fletch wrote:

Andre Jurieu wrote:Most of the audience did understand what Tomlin and Streep were doing, including (somewhat surprisingly to me) Jennifer Aniston.

Yeah, that caught my attention too. Maybe there's hope for her yet.

tryavna wrote:And did you notice that the Academy included a brief shot from John Wayne's Green Berets? Hardly one of the more progressive films ever made....

I noticed both of those things. No picking on Aniston from me for a month.

I would dearly love to have a live audio feed of the booth during Bacall's stumbling and bumbling. Directors absolutely despise that.

As much as I despise the Crash win, it did make for an interesting little trivia snippet.

This was only the third time since the supporting catagories were introduced that the six major awards have gone to six different films. It hasn't happened since 1957, when Around the World in 80 Days took home gold.

'Course, Good Night and Good Luck or Munich could've won and still kept that stat while making me much happier...

-Toilet Dcuk

Michael wrote:

Citizen Kane - Denied, Raging Bull - Denied, Brokeback Mounatin - Denied. Fucking idiots!

You better be kidding! Citizen Kane, Raging Bull.. yeah! BBM.. oh come on. Do you really think that Ang Lee will ever become legendary like Welles and Scorsese?

"Citizen Kane", "Sunset Blvd", "Raging Bull", "Goodfellas", to name a few, were obviously the best film among those nominated for BPs in respective years. However, neither one of the bunch was the favorite, let alone heavy favorite going into the Oscar night.

The reason that people are calling this one of the biggest upset, if not the biggest one ever in Oscar history is that by giving the BP award to "Crash", all the rules about Oscars are thrown out of the window. This is the first time in Oscar history that a film that swept every award in sight lost to a vastly inferior film that won nearly none precursor awards, and did not even mange to get a BP nomination from the GG.

What's really so sad about this is that the reason that "brokeback mountain" lost was mainly because of homophobia, that the AMPAS are in fear of gays as a group. Cannot believe that it still happens in the US in 21st century, and with a supposedly liberal group like AMPAS.

Finally, this upset reminds of of "Rocky" winning over 3 undisputed classics in 1976 - 'taxi driver', 'network', and 'all the president's men'. Of the 5 BP nominees this year, "brokeback" and "Munich" might have a good chance of standing the test of time. "Capote" might become a cult classic in the future. "Crash" is a concept movie with laughable plot, scenes and dialogue at the mercy of an amaterish director. It will be perfect case study to film school students for how not to make a bad movie. The movie is supposedly to deal with racial discrimination. However, the Asians are so stereotyped in the movie it's not even funny. Is that racial discrimination in the eyes of AMPAS?

What's really so sad about this is that the reason that "brokeback mountain" lost was mainly because of homophobia, that the AMPAS are in fear of guys as a group. Cannot believe that it still happens in the US in 21st century, and with a supposedly liberal group like AMPAS.

Mainly of homophobia? It's possible but we will never know. I admit that it did come to my mind.

Finally, this upset reminds of of "Rocky" winning over 3 undisputed classics in 1976 - 'taxi driver', 'network', and 'all the president's men'. Of the 5 BP nominees this year, "brokeback" and "Munich" might have a good chance of standing the test of time. "Capote" might become a cult classic in the future. "Crash" is a concept movie with laughable plot, scenes and dialogue at the mercy of an amaterish director. It will be perfect case study to film school students for how not to make a bad movie. The movie is supposedly to deal with racial discrimination. However, the Asians are so stereotyped in the movie it's not even funny. Is that racial discrimination in the eyes of AMPAS?

Yes, Crash is terrible. It borrowed way too much from Short Cuts and Magnolia (the LA setting, damaged people from every corner, music/songs connecting everyone). And the fact that Hollywood recognizes, praises Crash more than those two much superior films disturbs me so tremendously (but that shouldn't be surprising anyway).

Out of the five nominated pictures, I would pick Brokeback Mountain despite my personal feelings about it. BBM just seems to be the most appropriate film to win because it's pretty much a grand/epic romance that Hollywood had been starving for. There are some 2005 films that I think are so much better than all of the five films put together: The Hand, Mysterious Skin, Tropical Malady, Nobody Knows, Grizzly Man, Cache.. even Domino and Diary of a Mad Black Woman (ok, guilty pleasure).

kieslowski_67 wrote:The reason that people are calling this one of the biggest upset, if not the biggest one ever in Oscar history is that by giving the BP award to "Crash", all the rules about Oscars are thrown out of the window. This is the first time in Oscar history that a film that swept every award in sight lost to a vastly inferior film that won nearly none precursor awards, and did not even mange to get a BP nomination from the GG.

However, the one precursor award that Crash did win was the Ensemble Cast award at the SAGs. I believe this signal was a pretty good indication of the momentum the film had been building ever since Ebert gave it his seal of approval. Since (I believe) actors are the biggest chunk of voters in the Academy, and the awards were delayed by a couple of weeks due to the Olympics, it was a bit easier to sway voters towards an underdog "issue" movie that allowed actors to take center stage. I'm sure Oscar voters became just as tired as the rest of us by the hype surrounding Brokeback (it just took them a few extra months). Also, we shouldn't underestimate the power Ebert holds over Oscar voters. I'm fairly certain his campaigns for his own favorites have been very successful in the past 5 years or so.

Also, even though I think Crash is a piece of crap, I'm pretty sure that it's not a general consensus among Oscar voters that Crash is "vastly inferior" to Brokeback, and that their vote was instead done with a specific purpose or ulterior motive that had absolutely nothing to do with the quality of the film. I also think Crash stinks, but we're not talking about an obvious difference in quality that is apparent when we compare Bresson to Paulie Shore.

kieslowski_67 wrote:What's really so sad about this is that the reason that "brokeback mountain" lost was mainly because of homophobia, that the AMPAS are in fear of guys as a group. Cannot believe that it still happens in the US in 21st century, and with a supposedly liberal group like AMPAS.

Just because the movie lost doesn't mean it is due to homophobia. It might be on some level or for some fraction of the voting population, but it also may have to do with voters thinking Crash deserved some more recognition than it had received so far. I think this might have been more anti-hype than anti-homo. Sometimes people just go with the easily-likeable underdog, and Crash is fairly easy to swallow. It might just be that they believed Crash was the better film. Is that so hard to believe? We're talking about a voting body with a well established history of questionable taste.

Andre Jurieu wrote: However, the one precursor award that Crash did win was the Ensemble Cast award at the SAGs. I believe this signal was a pretty good indication of the momentum the film had been building ever since Ebert gave it his seal of approval.

Prior to the crash on Sunday night, the SAG ensemble predicts the Oscar BP winner 50% of the times, DGA+PGA+WGA+GG predicted the final BP winner 100%, DGA alone predicted the BP winner 90% of the times. You do the math and tell me which is(are) a more reliable precursor.

Ebert's wife is black and they might have been at the receiving end of this so called racial discriminating thing. I am sorry but that won't be enough reason for you to shamelessly advocate a minor movie (if the AMPAS really wants to honor a truly remarkable film that tackles the racial issue, they could have done it with the brilliant and vastly superior "do the right thing").

This is not the first time Ebert totally lost his touch. He did the same thing for proclaiming that Frances Mcdormand should win the best actress Oscar for "Fargo" in 97, while leaving out a richly deserved winner Emily Watson ("breaking the waves", the best performance of the 90s) going home empty handed. Is there any doubt to sane cinephines which performance is vastly superior? It's like asking whether Michael Jordan is a better basketball player than Steve Kerr and Mr. Ebert feverishly claimed he believe Mr. Kerr is and should be the better player. Sorry, Ebert, you suck and I will never listen to your shit any more.

Andre Jurieu wrote:Just because the movie lost doesn't mean it is due to homophobia.

That was exactly the question raised by LA Times and NY Times yesterday, very unfortunately. And there were lots of stories published weeks ago on how the male members of the AMPAS were uncomfortable at going to screens of "brokeback mountain" and see two guys getting intimate. I am not gay myself but I can tell that is homophobia.

This is not the first time Ebert totally lost his touch. He did the same thing for proclaiming that Frances Mcdormand should win the best actress Oscar for "Fargo" in 97, while leaving out a richly deserved winner Emily Watson ("breaking the waves", the best performance of the 90s) going home empthy handed. Is there any doubt to sane cinephines which performance is better

You can call me insane if you want to. It's of my opinion that McDormand and Watson deserve the prize equally. Just two very different types of acting. McDormand's performance still stays with me as much as Watson's over the years.

at was exactly the question raised by LA Times and NY Times yesterday, very unfortunately. And there were lots of stories published weeks ago on how the male members of the AMPAS were uncomfortable at going to screens of "brokeback mountain" and see two guys getting intimate. I am not gay myself but I can tell that is homophobia.

My partner brought up a concern yesterday: How is that homophobia if the Academy gave BBM the highest number of nominations of all the films, including Crash?

kieslowski_67 wrote: And there were lots of stories published weeks ago on how the male members of the AMPAS were uncomfortable at going to screens of "brokeback mountain" and see two guys getting intimate. I am not gay myself but I can tell that is homophobia.

I REALLY don't want to turn this into another BBM thread, but this has to be addressed. I haven't read these stories (link?) but this could partly be journalism searching for a story. Which members? Uncomfortable how so?

Even more importantly, even if male members (heh, heh) were uncomfortable at screenings, it doesn't necessarily denote prejudice. Being uncomfortable with something is an entirely different issue than being intolerant of it. I am extremely uncomfortable with the idea of abortion and am whole-heartedly pro-choice, for example.

But really, my two cents only, I don't want this to end up in Infighting...

-Toilet Dcuk

kieslowski_67 wrote:

Andre Jurieu wrote: However, the one precursor award that Crash did win was the Ensemble Cast award at the SAGs. I believe this signal was a pretty good indication of the momentum the film had been building ever since Ebert gave it his seal of approval.

Prior to the crash on Sunday night, the SAG ensemble predicts the Oscar BP winner 50% of the times, DGA+PGA+WGA+GG predicted the final BP winner 100%, DGA alone predicted the BP winner 90% of the times. You do the math and tell me which is(are) a more reliable precursor.

Well, I guess I've crunched the numbers and found that when we are talking about separate votes and different voting bodies, different results may occur. Yes, some of these precursor awards are better indicators than others when we look at past history, but considering each vote is a separate action and the circumstances of the voting change from year to year, these precursor awards are not totally accurate at predicting results within a given year. The SAG awards haven't been around that long and my point isn't even about the correlation between the results of the various award shows. I just mentioned that the win at the SAGs was an indication of Crash gaining momentum. My point is that the support of the actors is an indication of support from a fairly large body of voters. Since it was the last major awards show before the Olympic-downtime, it was the last chance to make a big splash. Crash received such a significant push that it was thought to be the only film that could upset Brokeback. I'm not arguing with your contention that Crash's Best Picture win was a surprise based upon how the Hollywood awards are supposed to play out. I'm just saying this wasn't completely unexpected and that the film was receiving significant support beforehand.

kieslowski_67 wrote:Ebert's wife is black and they might have been at the receiving end of this so called racial discriminating thing. I am sorry but that won't be enough reason for you to shamelessly advocate a minor movie (if the AMPAS really wants to honor a truly remarkable film that tackles the racial issue, they could have done it with the brilliant and vastly superior "do the right thing").

Or Ebert may have actually thought that Crash was a great film and he might have thought it better than Brokeback. I don't particularly think all that much of Ebert or Crash, but why is it that his appreciation of Crash has to have an excuse? Why is it so unthinkable that his support of Crash is related to his belief that the film is of high quality rather than due to the ethnic background of his wife? I somewhat agree with you that personal experience with racial discrimination is not the greatest reason to advocate a "minor" movie, but maybe Ebert doesn't believe Crash to be a minor movie. Perhaps he believes it to be a very significant film, perhaps just as good or better than Do the Right Thing.

Yes, the academy could have rewarded Do the Right Thing back in the day, but they didn't. Maybe rewarding a less superior, bland, safe film such as Crash is their way of making amends - which is an action they have done in the past. It's not the greatest method of apology, and I don't agree with it (considering all the praise goes to an old white-guy with questionable talent), but it's the way (Hollywood) politics work.

kieslowski_67 wrote:This is not the first time Ebert totally lost his touch. He did the same thing for proclaiming that Frances Mcdormand should win the best actress Oscar for "Fargo" in 97, while leaving out a richly deserved winner Emily Watson ("breaking the waves", the best performance of the 90s) going home empty handed. Is there any doubt to sane cinephines which performance is vastly superior? It's like asking whether Michael Jordan is a better basketball player than Steve Kerr and Mr. Ebert feverishly said he believe Mr. Kerr is and should be the better player.

I don't think that analogy works all that well. I would say that comparing McDormand in Fargo to Watson in Breaking the Waves and determining who is the best actress, would be more akin to comparing Kobe Bryant scoring 68 one night versus Portland and Vince Carter scoring 55 versus the Suns. Both are impressive and both have their own context which makes them difficult to compare with any great degree of certainty, but people form their own passionate opinions and try to diminish the accomplishment of the opposing side. Realistically, how can one come to a definitive conclusion?

I've yet to see either BBM or Crash, so I'm neutral on that score.

But I'm hopping mad that the bloody penguins won best documentary, while Grizzly Man - which shows nature as it actually is, not some scenic Disneyfied version - wasn't even nominated.

kieslowski_67 wrote:That was exactly the question raised by LA Times and NY Times yesterday, very unfortunately. And there were lots of stories published weeks ago on how the male members of the AMPAS were uncomfortable at going to screens of "brokeback mountain" and see two guys getting intimate. I am not gay myself but I can tell that is homophobia.

Maybe, but I'm not exactly sure why these same people who were uncomfortable going to screens of Brokeback and see two guys get intimate - presumably due to social embarassment by the sounds of what you wrote - couldn't just get a screener DVD of the film.

Just because the movie lost doesn't mean it is due to homophobia. It might be on some level or for some fraction of the voting population, but it also may have to do with voters thinking Crash deserved some more recognition than it had received so far. I think this might have been more anti-hype than anti-homo. Sometimes people just go with the easily-likeable underdog, and Crash is fairly easy to swallow. It might just be that they believed Crash was the better film. Is that so hard to believe? We're talking about a voting body with a well established history of questionable taste.

I'm willing to believe that. I haven't seen any of the 5 movies that were nominated, and frankly not interested in a one with the exception of Munich, so I'm pretty much indifferent about it as well. And I think it's not homophobia if men are a little put off by men making out. There are some men who are put off by women making out (amazingly).

nyasa wrote:I've yet to see either BBM or Crash, so I'm neutral on that score.

But I'm hopping mad that the bloody penguins won best documentary, while Grizzly Man - which shows nature as it actually is, not some scenic Disneyfied version - wasn't even nominated.

That that decision was preposterous is certain. I am most disturbed though too that a movie like "Darwin's Nightmare" which was nominated did not win over "March of the Penquins". Though "Grizzly Man" I might admit is a better film than "Darwin's Nightmare", there were few films this year which I felt were as relevant and transcendent as was DN.

Also, I would like to add a response to the whole movie-that-inspires-me and "___ is cinema" subject. This year there were two movies that inspired me such: "Cache" and "The Beat That My Heart Skipped". Of the movies nominated for best picture I believe all but "Crash" will stand the test of time, and all for quite different reasons. "Capote" I think may achieve a kind of "Raging Bull" status in years to come, as one of the great biopics about a unique American personality. "Good Night, and Good Luck" is in my estimation one of the most effective political films to hit screens since the sixties, and I think it will be remembered as such a shot in the dark. "Munich" is one of Spielberg's best, and will be remembered for similar reasons, if not also for the fact that it is simply another masterful piece of revisionism from Spielberg that pays homage to many of the great thrillers, most obviously "Day of the Jackal". Finally, "Brokeback Mountain"... well, that's just a quintessential Hollywood film isn't it? If during the Golden Age there hadn't been even more homophobia as there is now, that film would've fit right in. It is a romance up there with all the other great romances. And it's far better than schlock like "Titanic" and "Pearl Harbor" at least.

nyasa wrote:I've yet to see either BBM or Crash, so I'm neutral on that score.

But I'm hopping mad that the bloody penguins won best documentary, while Grizzly Man - which shows nature as it actually is, not some scenic Disneyfied version - wasn't even nominated.

Yeah, enough of the Penguins hoopla already. And to see those guys come out with their stuffed penguins. Please.

Personally, I was rooting for the Enron doc. but, hey, at least they won the Indie Spirit Award...

How about for Herzog's follow-up: Grizzlies Meet Penguins? I'd pay to see that.

Andre Jurieu wrote:

kieslowski_67 wrote:

Andre Jurieu wrote: However, the one precursor award that Crash did win was the Ensemble Cast award at the SAGs. I believe this signal was a pretty good indication of the momentum the film had been building ever since Ebert gave it his seal of approval.

Prior to the crash on Sunday night, the SAG ensemble predicts the Oscar BP winner 50% of the times, DGA+PGA+WGA+GG predicted the final BP winner 100%, DGA alone predicted the BP winner 90% of the times. You do the math and tell me which is(are) a more reliable precursor.

Well, I guess I've crunched the numbers and found that when we are talking about separate votes and different voting bodies, different results may occur. Yes, some of these precursor awards are better indicators than others when we look at past history, but considering each vote is a separate action and the circumstances of the voting change from year to year, these precursor awards are not totally accurate at predicting results within a given year. The SAG awards haven't been around that long and my point isn't even about the correlation between the results of the various award shows. I just mentioned that the win at the SAGs was an indication of Crash gaining momentum. My point is that the support of the actors is an indication of support from a fairly large body of voters. Since it was the last major awards show before the Olympic-downtime, it was the last chance to make a big splash. Crash received such a significant push that it was thought to be the only film that could upset Brokeback. I'm not arguing with your contention that Crash's Best Picture win was a surprise based upon how the Hollywood awards are supposed to play out. I'm just saying this wasn't completely unexpected and that the film was receiving significant support beforehand.

The last major awards show before the Oscars were the BAFTA and to a lesser degree, the ISA.

The SAG ensemble win for "Crash" was predicted by many well in advance simply because it is the only ensemble piece among the 5 nominees. I am not sure that It indicated that it was gaining momentum. Who knows? Last year, "Sideway" took the SAG ensemble but everyone knew that the BP race was between M$B and "Aviator". "Gosford Park" rightfully took home the ensemble award in 02 but no one was gonna bet against "ABM". Similarly, "Traffic" won the ensemble in 2001 but the race was really between "Gladiator" and Ang's "CTHD". "Traffic" never really had a chance.

Speaking of political hot-button ensemble dramas, where the hell is Syriana in all of this?

-Toilet Dcuk

toiletduck! wrote:Speaking of political hot-button ensemble dramas, where the hell is Syriana in all of this?

Crash stole most of its thunder. Plus, many critics (and audiences) found Syriana harder to follow (which was kinda the point). But hey, at least they threw it a bone in the form of Clooney's Oscar...

Fletch F. Fletch wrote:Crash stole most of its thunder. Plus, many critics (and audiences) found Syriana harder to follow (which was kinda the point). But hey, at least they threw it a bone in the form of Clooney's Oscar...

Yeah, if anything that was more me bitching in rhetorical form... I found Syriana to be exactly what I was hoping for from Crash. And personally, I don't think it was any harder to follow than Gosford Park (which a second viewing easily solved), and GP at least got the nod. Then again, it didn't have to compete against Altman-Lite.

Although not getting nominated as a cast for the SAG awards still throws me a little. Sure, Crash got all the designated ensemble press, but c'mon, there's not room for two?

-Toilet Dcuk

flyonthewall2983 wrote: And I think it's not homophobia if men are a little put off by men making out. There are some men who are put off by women making out (amazingly).

Uh... if the gender doesn't matter, then isn't that just being put off by homosexuality in general?

kieslowski_67 wrote: The last major awards show before the Oscars were the BAFTA and to a lesser degree, the ISA.

Yeah, but I was just thinking about the American awards. The BAFTAs have some influence on the Oscars but I don't think anyone knows the with any certainty how much since they have only recently started to be televised in the US. Meanwhile, the Independent Spirit Awards have very little influence on the Oscars (which is probably how they like it considering when they are scheduled).

toiletduck! wrote:

Fletch F. Fletch wrote:

toiletduck! wrote:Speaking of political hot-button ensemble dramas, where the hell is Syriana in all of this?

Crash stole most of its thunder. Plus, many critics (and audiences) found Syriana harder to follow (which was kinda the point). But hey, at least they threw it a bone in the form of Clooney's Oscar...

Yeah, if anything that was more me bitching in rhetorical form... I found Syriana to be exactly what I was hoping for from Crash. And personally, I don't think it was any harder to follow than Gosford Park (which a second viewing easily solved), and GP at least got the nod. Then again, it didn't have to compete against Altman-Lite.

Although not getting nominated as a cast for the SAG awards still throws me a little. Sure, Crash got all the designated ensemble press, but c'mon, there's not room for two?

I didn't think Syriana was hard to follow either, but my main problem with the film is that it simply offered information that was already pretty obvious. Everyone associated to this film kept talking about how they were going to provide the awful truth about the Oil Industry, and all I got was the same stuff that has been known for the last 10-20 years. I also didn't enjoy the fact that it was essentially Gagan recycling Soderbergh's efforts in Traffic. It was decent, but not as daring as it seemed to think it was.

I liked Penguins so I wasn't concerned that it won. I also liked Enron and Murderball, so really, if any of them won I would have been happy. But if Grizzly Man was nominated it would have been no contest. I'm pissed it didn't get nominated, but of the nominees I'm fine with what won (but the stuffed penguin thing made my eyes role. )

Crash pisses me off, though. I was shocked to see it was nominated and was just floored to see it win. I didn't hate the film, but it was really just not that impressive. I would have been happier if any other film won over it.

I didn't see any of the Foreign Film nominees. Did anybody here? Did the right one win?

Andre Jurieu wrote:

flyonthewall2983 wrote: And I think it's not homophobia if men are a little put off by men making out. There are some men who are put off by women making out (amazingly).

Uh... if the gender doesn't matter, then isn't that just being put off by homosexuality in general?

My bad, you're right. Bill Maher said something funny along the lines of "when homophobia trumps terrorism in an election, this country needs to get laid". That's precisely how I feel about the matter.

Andre Jurieu wrote:...It was decent, but not as daring as it seemed to think it was.

No, it wasn't anything that made me shit my pants, but I would've gladly subbed it in for Crash as ensemble piece du jour. And, different catagories, I know, but when Crash can get a writing win before Syriana, something's seriously up. Although, I just saw Syriana last night, so it's also probably getting a couple of undeserved bonus points as I fume about Senor Haggis.

cdnchris wrote:I didn't see any of the Foreign Film nominees. Did anybody here? Did the right one win?

Tsotsi, Joyeux Noel, and Sophie Scholl will all be playing here next week, so if I feel like dishing out thirty bucks, I'll give you the scoop on those three. (Odds are: no.) However, from the Tsotsi trailer and the reviews I've heard, it sounds like a worthy contender. No Wayward Cloud, of course, but beggers can't be choosers, I s'pose.

-Toilet Dcuk

toiletdcuk! wrote:

Andre Jurieu wrote:...It was decent, but not as daring as it seemed to think it was.

No, it wasn't anything that made me shit my pants, but I would've gladly subbed it in for Crash as ensemble piece du jour. And, different catagories, I know, but when Crash can get a writing win before Syriana, something's seriously up. Although, I just saw Syriana last night, so it's also probably getting a couple of undeserved bonus points as I fume about Senor Haggis.

Yeah, I agree (though not about shitting my pants over any movie... maybe Goodfellas if I've had some bad take-out) that it's much better than Crash and I would have been glad if Syriana had taken Crash's nomination. Also, I think that's Hoser Haggis, not Senor... though I'm sure Canada will someday wind up simultaneously apologizing to the global community for him, Bryan Adams, and Celine Dion. Just remember we gave you guys Cronenberg.

Andre Jurieu wrote:

toiletdcuk! wrote:

Andre Jurieu wrote:...It was decent, but not as daring as it seemed to think it was.

No, it wasn't anything that made me shit my pants, but I would've gladly subbed it in for Crash as ensemble piece du jour. And, different catagories, I know, but when Crash can get a writing win before Syriana, something's seriously up. Although, I just saw Syriana last night, so it's also probably getting a couple of undeserved bonus points as I fume about Senor Haggis.

Yeah, I agree (though not about shitting my pants over any movie... maybe Goodfellas if I've had some bad take-out) that it's much better than Crash and I would have been glad if Syriana had taken Crash's nomination. Also, I think that's Hoser Haggis, not Senor... though I'm sure Canada will someday wind up simultaneously apologizing to the global community for him, Bryan Adams, and Celine Dion. Just remember we gave you guys Cronenberg.

I just found out the hoser came from London, too, where I lived. Ugh!