criterionforum.org

Maybe there was no one left to vote for Michael Shannon after he murdered them all.

Does anyone think the Globes voters are misogynist? The drama list was full of male-led films, one starting an sexual abuser and another directed by sexual abuser. The critically-accaimed female-led films of this awards season(Arrival, Jackie) were shut out. It wouldn't surprise me if someone on Twitter start to have this discussion after last season #oscarsowhite debate.

Counterpoint: No one actually cares about the Golden Globes

Film Comment's annual critics poll is now up.

1. Toni Erdmann
2. Moonlight
3. Elle
4. Cemetery of Splendor
5. Certain Women
6. Paterson
7. Manchester by the Sea
8. Aquarius
9. Things to Come
10. No Home Movie

I had a bad reaction to Elle - Huppert is superb and deserves an Oscar for such a difficult part, she very nearly saved it for me and almost made it work.

Ribs wrote:Counterpoint: No one actually cares about the Golden Globes

Dylan went to the Golden Globes. Take that, Nobel Committee!

Some huge surprises there but the continued shock at Loving underperforming is hilarious-- can these pundits really not read the writing on the wall for this movie?

Is Huppert a SAG member? I feel like I recall this kind of scenario with international actors in the past, but I don't recall who it was for.

mfunk9786 wrote:SAG opts for Emily Blunt over Isabelle Huppert; totally ignores Nocturnal Animals and 20th Century Women; was really into Captain Fantastic of all things

I have to say Emily Blunt was fantastic and I'm happy she was nominated for a somewhat underrated film. Huppert however, should have been nominated. Unfortunately, Meryl is the erstwhile darling who is primed to hand off that baton to Emma Stone and that's that.

Seems mildly suspicious that, of Sony Pictures Classics' three major foreign language contenders this year (Verhoeven, Ade, Almodovar) only one made it through, which saves them the trouble of splitting the vote.

Too bad the Egyptian choice didn't make it.

I always suspected the "big name" films won't get nominated, I'm even surprised Toni Erdmann made it considering how the academy usually subs most Cannes highlighted films. But fully expected Neruda to get in. I think Elle will be like Two Days, One Night and get Huppert a nomination. The problem is usually the academy picks surprising but actually interesting titles, this year just looks bland. How can Mommy not get a nominal and It's Only the End get in is beyond me

dda1996a wrote:I always suspected the "big name" films won't get nominated, I'm even surprised Toni Erdmann made it considering how the academy usually subs most Cannes highlighted films. But fully expected Neruda to get in. I think Elle will be like Two Days, One Night and get Huppert a nomination. The problem is usually the academy picks surprising but actually interesting titles, this year just looks bland. How can Mommy not get a nominal and It's Only the End get in is beyond me

consternation over the foreign films nominees is eternal.

1. Submissions often have nothing to do with the consensus of recent festivals. In various countries the people doing the selecting have probably never been to a festival, thus the films are often more representative of localized cinema rather than festival cinema and remember that festival cinema is designed from story idea to completed product to be targeted at the wealthy western international elites who attend festivals and buy films for distribution. It's still a commodity, even when there are subtitles.

2. Most film writers only see international film in the context of festivals, thus they're always outraged when the flavor of the festival (their only exposure to international film that year) is not selected. Repeat ad infinitum

3. This used to exacerbated by the immense difficulty of seeing the submitted film if that film did not participate in the festival game, before our current age of super piracy (or private Vimeo links from distributor to curious journalist) it was nearly impossible to see the films usurping the flavor of the festival (and the only thing they saw)

4. Almost by default, the academy committees are made up of retired film professionals who adore film, but have rarely participated in the international festival fuckery, certainly not annually, and definitely not more than one festival in a year, they've read variety blurbs perhaps, but they have utterly no investment nor connection to the critical consensus as they watch the films (the recent addition of the executive committee exists only to put in films that have successfully promoted themselves incessantly as the important can't miss thinger of the year)

Ironically this has led to decades of castigating the foreign film nominees when they are one of the only informed decisions in the oscars as the committees actually watch all the eligible films.

It still doesn't excuse some glaring omissions. The documentary branch is similar. I stopped caring about the oscars but the few I still care about are the animated, documentary and foreign because they almost always nominate one unheard of film. I was just saying they have their own agendas and tastes, but they still miss some great films, festivals or not.
Hoop Dreams and 4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days are two brilliant films that were omitted, unjustly. Sometimes the films that are lauded during the festivals happen to actually be worthy of such praise

movielocke wrote:1. Submissions often have nothing to do with the consensus of recent festivals. In various countries the people doing the selecting have probably never been to a festival, thus the films are often more representative of localized cinema rather than festival cinema and remember that festival cinema is designed from story idea to completed product to be targeted at the wealthy western international elites who attend festivals and buy films for distribution. It's still a commodity, even when there are subtitles.

A case in point: the official Polish selection of Andrzej Wajda's swansong Afterimage. Now this is a perfectly decent film, but light years from Wajda's best, and while it might scrape a top ten Polish films of 2016 list there's no way that it's the best, or anywhere close. I suspect it was picked for sentimental reasons, coupled with the fact that it's Wajda's last film so was his last shot at a real Oscar (as opposed to an honorary one), but I'm not surprised that it didn't make the final nine. (NB: it was picked as Poland's official selection before his death.)

2. Most film writers only see international film in the context of festivals, thus they're always outraged when the flavor of the festival (their only exposure to international film that year) is not selected. Repeat ad infinitum

This is one of the reasons why, whenever I start delving into a particular national cinema, my first priority is to get hold of a domestic poll of what's considered good, since it will most likely be strikingly and fascinatingly different from what a Western critic would come up with.

MichaelB wrote: 2. Most film writers only see international film in the context of festivals, thus they're always outraged when the flavor of the festival (their only exposure to international film that year) is not selected. Repeat ad infinitum

This is one of the reasons why, whenever I start delving into a particular national cinema, my first priority is to get hold of a domestic poll of what's considered good, since it will most likely be strikingly and fascinatingly different from what a Western critic would come up with.[/quote]
When you start such an endeavor, how do you then track down the films themselves? I'm guessing you can't be fluent in all these different languages, so how do you find English friendly ways to watch said films?

This varies from territory to territory, but I often find that the biggest local titles are usually available on DVD with English subtitles. There are a few exceptions - the big Polish blockbusters of the 1990s like Dogs and Killer seem to be resolutely monoglot - but they're the exceptions.

For instance, when I discovered that Hungarians rank Zoltán Fábri at least as highly as Miklós Jancsó or István Szabó (they don't seem to rank Béla Tarr at all), I was able to get four or five Fábri films on English-friendly Hungarian DVDs.

Directors share thoughts on some of their favorite films of the year. Some interesting pairings here, including takes from several forum favs

"I’ve seen the future of American Cinema and his name is Damien Chazelle." - William Friedkin

That ought to be a treat for Chazelle to read. How cool.

Jackie failed to make the shortlist for Makeup/Hairstyling. Pundits were predicting it to win, so may be indicative of the film being less of a sure thing elsewhere than anticipated

EDIT Hacksaw Ridge also snubbed here, same conclusions as above

If there's one thing Suicide Squad is accomplished at, it's the Makeup/Hairstyling with all the characters with prominent tattoos, Killer Croc, etc., so I can't really criticize it making the short list.

Glenn Kenny's year end list is always without equal. Among other notes is that he seems to have some very harsh feelings toward Manchester by the Sea upon revisiting it/sitting with it for a while.

People making fun of that 37 film list before really should be laughing with that.

I think there's a hell of a lot of difference between a film critic doing it on his own blog and someone doing it on our forum's Top 10 thread