Outside the bubble, Hollywood and the Oscars have become the hated. They don’t realize this because they don’t have to. They have a magic mirror to tell them who’s the fairest of them all. It is a flattering echo chamber full of people who are either true believers or are too afraid to speak out.
Very few inside the bubble can name the problem because they can’t see it. And it might not even be a problem if the Oscars will do what the Globes and the SAG have done: expand their reach onto the world of a streaming platform. The Golden Globes will take place January 5th, broadcast simultaneously on CBS and on Paramount+. The SAG Awards are now available to a global audience on Netflix. And here might lie the best future for the once all-mighty Academy Awards tumbling headlong into their 100th year. They may very well exist as nothing more than a niche curiosity and a delivery device for hungry egos looking to have that honor next to their name to negotiate better deals so that people will say “Oscar nominee” or “Oscar winner” every time their name is mentioned.
Millions of people outside the bubble are rooting for the demise of both Hollywood and the Oscars because they hate what they have become. The Oscars probably can’t ever return to what they once were, but it does seem strange that they now seem content to appeal to such a small minority of people who share what one might call “elitist” tastes. In other words, in shaping the Oscars to the taste of the film critic hivemind, they have entirely defeated their original and longtime purpose.
I should say that few people reading this will probably agree, neither will those who cover the Oscars here or anywhere else. They’re in survival mode. How can they keep the plates spinning one more year? It’s harder for me to do that because I can see the problem and because I can’t keep my big mouth shut.
So bear with me as I outline some ideas about how I think the industry and the Oscars can fix themselves, even if they will never be what they once were.
First, let’s start with a little bit of history. Back in the 1950s, the box office was having another moment of crisis. The reason for this was that the films of the 1950s, like the culture, were caught up in a utopian vision for America, a Leave it to Beaver kind of ideal life.
As mid-century Hollywood scrambled to stem faltering ticket sales to compete with TV, studios in the 1950s tried several solutions that were ultimately as ineffective as band-aids on an arterial stab wound. Their temporary remedies — Cinemascope, 3D, even Smell-o-Vision — failed to work in the long run because it takes more than gimmicks to prop up the box-office in a meaningful way. The hard lessons Hollywood got taught years ago need to be re-learned today, as studios now chase the international box office rather than focus on the domestic audience. To explain why I think this is a mistake, we’ll compare the similarities between the two eras.
A major mistake studios made after the horrors of World War II and the Great Depression, was to think America wanted to see a sanitized, fantasy version of reality. The problem with this attitude was that there was a simmering counterculture on the rise — one that would be more interested in hard, gritty truth than what most Hollywood movies were willing or able to provide. As for the few films that did explore darker themes in the fifties, they were not all that different from what people could see during the Golden Age of television — partly because the New York filmmakers were ahead of the game.
A turning point came when studios began to subvert the Hays Code that had been enforced since the mid-1930s. Hollywood realized they needed more provocative leeway to compete with the newfound freedom of international cinema, as astonishing “New Wave” cinema movements were blooming in numerous countries around the world. The Hays Code was finally abandoned altogether in 1968, instantly allowing American films to be more shocking and more daring. more sexual and more violent. Hollywood at last could explode outward in ways that nobody back then could have predicted. That’s why films of the 1970s were so damned good.
Well, here we are again. The same sort of dynamic is underway. Hollywood seems to be once again aligned with the government, as it was in the 1950s. We have the same kind of paranoid witch hunts and a “woke scare” that separates the “good” people from the “bad” people. The way I see it, we have an industry that is 100% married to the doctrine of the government, with tentacles that have even spread to public schools and universities.
Funnily enough, we’re now all the way on the other end of the spectrum. It is the very thing people in 1950s America feared the most: a Communist-like ideology that is now indoctrinating the young via culture. It’s hard to argue with this interpretation, what with Barack and Michelle Obama signing a Netflix deal, Rob Reiner making a documentary about Christian Nationalists. And films like Sound of Freedom being demonized and shut out of the mainstream culture.
So, changing all of this is going to take a lot of work. But the signs are there that people in charge can see the current strategy isn’t working. The industry is collapsing. Storytelling has bottlenecked and the majority of the public sees the Oscars and the film industry as not worth their time (at best) and obnoxious and toxic at worst.
Abolishing the Hays Code in 1968 solved some of Hollywood’s problems, but not all. Television would always compete with movies for attention, just like streaming and social media compete now. As I’ve said many times, Hollywood can’t fix itself, but a counterculture revolution, already underway, will force change anyway, and for the better.
I do think there are some things the Academy can do to “fix” the Oscars that might help boost ratings but more importantly, make the Oscars useful beyond being yet another sanctimonious lecture by people who see themselves as morally superior to the rest of America.
The Problem
There’s a stark disconnect between the industry, the Oscars, and the general public. As I said, people “inside” don’t see this as a problem. But let’s say for the sake of argument that the people in Oceana did care about the Proles. What could they do to fix it?
- Reduce the Best Picture nominees back down to five. After WWII, that is exactly what the Academy did because the war had necessitated a decrease in film production output. Five Best Picture nominees with five Best Director, Acting, and Writing categories is the way to go. No one cares about ten because they don’t care about the movies nominated, with very few exceptions. Why is there nothing nominated other than more of the same movies no one, except those inside the bubble, care about? I argued once, a long time ago, that increasing the Best Picture slate to ten could help the Academy highlight more films directed by women and non-white directors, and I really did think that would solve the problem—but it hasn’t. If anything, it’s made it much worse. They have diluted their power in the Best Picture prize. Except for last year, Best Picture has felt almost meaningless. I will explain why this hasn’t worked further on down the piece.Going back to five Best Picture nominees will celebrate big movies, or even smaller movies, that have risen to the top because they of their excellence by a majority vote. That will mean they hold their place in history more, are remembered more, and make more money at the box office. Having ten is just a way of satisfying film critics and the people who cover the Oscars, but that is such a small minority of people it doesn’t make sense to focus on only their needs.
People have said to me, doesn’t this mean you will make less money? Well, not really. For one thing, Disney has a monopoly on big Fox, Searchlight, Disney, etc. The studios are consolidating, and the films lined up for awards usually fall under one or the other of the monopolies. So why not make it a competition between studios rather than casting a wider net for all of their movies to get in?
Get rid of the preferential ballot, go back to five.
- The five Best Picture nominees should be theatrical films, not streaming. And that could mean there is another category for Best Picture, streaming. If Netflix is going to compete, their films should be theatrical movies too, like Apple is doing. That is, if they want to be in the Oscar race. This is a little more controversial, I know, because that ship has mostly sailed. But Apple showed us that you can do both, have a big movie like Killers of the Flower Moon and also have it be a theatrical experience.
- Expand the International Feature category and remove the regulations that say countries have to submit an official entry. Talk about something that has gone way out of date. Open up the International Feature category to include 10 nominees – and think about having an entirely separate competition for international with its own categories for international acting, directing, writing, etc. Call them the International Academy Awards and air them on Netflix. International features are kicking Hollywood’s ass. Writers and filmmakers in other countries don’t have their balls in a vice and can still tell great stories — but the Oscars are designed to prop up the American film industry because the entire economy depends on it. Local crews depend on it. Movie theaters depend on it. Why have the Oscars at all if it’s just going to be a naval-gazing exercise in futility to have Film Twitter applaud the efforts? With ten slots for International Feature, you have a way to invite people to view the broad array of brilliant films from all over the world — and five just isn’t enough. I also think the Documentary Feature category should expand to ten as well, for the same reason. These categories are exploding with creative talent, while it’s now proving harder and harder each year to fill ten Best Picture slots with American movies.
- It’s time to drop the “Woke” act. Hollywood isn’t fooling anyone. When they did not award Lily Gladstone the prize and have awarded Best Actress to only two women of color in 96 years, it’s time to say the “woke” thing is a virtue-signaling failure that killed the Oscar brand. They should eliminate the DEI mandate and make a public announcement about it. They should stop pretending to be something other than what they are. They are who they are. They are 70% male and 80% white. The male part means Emma Stone was always going to win because she is having sex six ways from Sunday. By contrast, Cate Blanchett, last. year, played a gay woman, and there was no transactional relationship with the mostly hetero “steak eaters.” Listen, I’m not shaming. I’m only saying stop pretending. It’s like watching sharks try to be vegetarians. You are who you are, and America is what it is — 70% white, mostly heterosexual, mostly Christian.
- Trust the Free Market. Stop listening to activists. Start listening to audiences. What made money? Top Gun Maverick, Barbie, Oppenheimer. Big movies with big stars. Of these, only Barbie is “woke,” but really, when you think about it, she’s still at the top as the white blonde. This doesn’t mean that Hollywood should only cast white people, but it does mean that the people you hire have to be box-office draws, no matter their skin color. Stop trying to fix people. Just give them what they want.The Woke injections ring false anyway. You are fooling no one. We all just patiently tolerate it and hope it goes away. It serves the people at the top to avoid bad pubilcity. That’s all it does. It doesn’t change society. It doesn’t make things better for non-white people. They are always going to only represent absolution for the white people.
Wokeness wrecks movies. Take the movie Anyone But You. A movie with two good-looking white people, heterosexual, at the top. But because they had to meet the requirements of the activists that have infiltrated Hollywood far more seriously than the Catholics did during the Hays Code, the film is cast in a peculiar way. A lesbian couple is getting married, but they have no distinguishing characteristics other than the fact that they’re checking off the box so GLAAD doesn’t scream at them. Had one been a butch lesbian and the other a lipstick lesbian, that might have been funny. Had a parent been homophobic and weirded out, and that was a conflict that had to be worked through, at least it is acknowledging what is actually happening. But instead, as usual, you get fake euphoria that doesn’t seem real.
- Bring back the best of everything: the best writers, directors, and editors. Is it going to be dominated by white men? I don’t know, but I do know that you can’t sacrifice excellence to make everyone feel better for five seconds by pretending a reality that doesn’t exist. Enough. End it. We all want to see movies with the best people making them. A small portion want to see a utopian diorama that makes everyone feel good about their world. Forget it. That isn’t the job of Hollywood.
- Dump Jimmy Kimmel – Sorry, Jimmy, you’re too political for the Oscars. I continue to recommend someone offensive and brave. Ricky Gervais would be an overnight sensation that would get the right people angry and bring the numbers way, way up for the telecast. That’s the way to go. That has always been the way to go, and it remains so today. The more you reflect outward that Hollywood is an insulated little club full of people who hate the American majority, like Jimmy Kimmel does, the less people are going to be interested in any of it.
- Divorce the Democratic Party. We have to get over the idea that the Oscars are our politics — or our parents, or our counselors, or our Church. They aren’t. They exist to honor high achievements in film; once they return to that, they will return to having relevance again. It’s bad enough that all of the documentaries now are, in some way, in keeping with the Democratic Party platform. Why would even want to do that? Try to remember that it’s a country full of 330 million people.
- Keep the producers from last year and the uplifting mood of the ceremony. All of that worked. The more people know the Oscars are going to be fun, the more they might consider watching. Change isn’t all about the telecast, but the telecast is the face of the industry. It is who and what they represent and right now, they represent insulated and isolated Woketopians — or as Laurie Anderson once called Heaven, “a perfect little world that doesn’t really need you.”
- Bring Back Men – yes, you heard me. I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again. Eliminating men is the biggest single mistake Hollywood has made. Not just men but macho, masculine men. They are the caffeine in the coffee. Bring them back. Beautiful women and hot men will bring people back. Celebrities and the Oscars are our showcase for the gods. If they aren’t gods, why would anyone bother? They can look out the window. They can walk to the park. This is the only time in Oscar history where we did not have strong leading men. We have these kind of muted, feminine men and for a lot of us, that won’t do.
So there you have it. My ten point plan to bring back Hollywood and the Oscars.
I do have one more suggestion, and that is this: Movies will get better when the entire industry gets over itself and stops acting like it’s the end of the world because Donald Trump exists. I promise you that the majority of what you know about him and his supporters is propaganda designed to keep you outraged and politically compliant. But whatever that is, that need to separate this country into an “us vs. them” mentality isn’t serving anyone, least of all, Hollywood.
![2025 Oscars: Can a Late-Breaker Still Win Best Picture? [POLL]](https://www.awardsdaily.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/gladiator-350x250.jpg)
(( Followed! ))
Thank you, on behalf of Ricky too <3
Bad News – OJ Simpson has died. The first major celebrity to be unfairly cancelled – he was found NOT GUILTY – and yet he could never find work. This set the tone for a Hollywood that is more concerned about vengeance than maintaining a proper meritocracy,
So much to say, I don’t know where to begin. It knocked me flat. One of the most skillfully-constructed stage crescendos I’ve ever seen.
All those flashbacks to warm, tender fatherly advice hit so hard. Now I understand why.
yeah, I was surprised at how good it was. I knew it was on Broadway so I know it had a ton of merit, but I was still taken aback. So much going on. Watched it a second time last night and, it’s so well-written. Hopefully this picks up some Emmys and that new Stupid Golden Globe for stand-up. I guess it could be considered stand-up rather than a one-person show.
One thing I do know, though, is that it will be better than at least 5 BP Oscar nominated movies. Probably more than that. This year it would have ranked maybe third or fourth. I find it to be as good as American Fiction. (of course, as a theater person, I admire how well it was directed. Foremost, if you think about where he was standing at any given moment and then followed him to a new place on stage, it actually kept the story moving forward. And at the very least imagine a stage full of co-stars.
The story went all downhill when he died. The series, if anyone had any sense, should have been about him.
I just now found out that he’s Batman’s dad!
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/c9e408939dc90ad15831324a3c2abc57438612b901ca2b73e29609041f0e33b6.jpg
Your sister and mine would get along great. Which makes me start to smile before I wince.
If it’s any consolation, you’ll still still be catching up on all the movies I mention, long after I’m dead and gone.
Reason I was not sure if I have HBO is because apparently I get it as a free perk with my phone carrier or internet provider or something, so the “bill” is hidden inside another bill.
Don’t be mean. You only end up encouraging disreputable Americans like me and Tom Ripley to visit your country and get up to all sorts of mischief.
Thank you so much for recommending Alex Edelman. I’ve never seen anything like it. Masterful.
Rarely have an opportunity to call something a tour de force, but wow, this is certainly that.
I need more comedy in my life. Thank you for this title.
Somebody here is reading this movie site for the wrong reasons. I will research this Ricky Gervais to find out why he has got this much power over some people. imo his appearance is too ugly to watch for 3 hours.
* lead character is too hot to be straight.*
Truth, in both movies and in real life. LOL
I know too much about religions. My grandparents have 3 versions — Catholic, Jewish, Lutheran, and even a 4th if Agnostic is counted. My sister has said she follows Buddhist. Primarily she says it to anger everyone. LOL. I like movies that cause people to cry.
Full article of looming mini tragedy here if Megalopolis doesn’t find a distributor fast
https://screenrant.com/megalopolis-movie-distribution-issues-challenges-coppola-report/
This quote on the Achilles heel looks like very unfortunate of uncertainty around Megalopolis ability to find a distributor frankly I shocked and appalled in ALL the studios who saw screening to determine who put their money forward for distributing ….
As per this quote that sums up where justified SHOULD be given green light for distribution. Where risk can pay off …I wonder wherher film studioshave learnt NOTHING from the risk attached to Oppenheimer and Barbie astonishing success and enormous pay-off on too vastly different scope ambitious never before told stories before..what u think this ?
As per Hollywood reporter ( I can’t believe Megalopolis could be sunk cos of one dimensional attitude film studios of whqt constitutes a in. Their eyes ‘ acceptable ‘ level risk…who else feels Megalopolis could be enormously popular ? Upside bigger than downside and suddenly it only fsil cos of blinkered vision of studios refusal to distribute it ? Let hope there change of heart soon by studios ey?
As per Hollywood reporter who agree with this?
” There needs to be room in Hollywood for more than “commercial” blockbusters and small independent films. There also needs to be a space for big-budget projects that are original and not part of an established franchise or intellectual property. With names like Coppola and Driver attached to the film, it’s far from an unknown quantity. Hopefully, a studio will ultimately pick up Megalopolis, finally bringing Coppola’s compelling vision into theaters.”
Ain’t that the truth right ?
Sure studios are wary post covid but unique original never done before stories is EXACTLY what success story was of Barbenheimer right ? So really is this that big gamble in studios eyes ? Bit of a tragedy gonna unfold here I stunned Francis Ford Coppola oen financed project would be rejected for distribution why won’t studios help him out here we csn be very confident film make it returns what u think little doubt audiences go for this type of film no ? Why not ? !
American not even sure of what expensive streamer he has or does not have. LOL. Do you not ever look at your bills??
I am here to PLEAD with everybody to stop watching so many movies until I can catch up.
How does everybody on this movie site have time to watch every movie made in history???
honestly, I wouldn’t do it to earn a living
1 minute into Alex Edelman and my first surface-level superficial impression is that I like how he prances about the stage with nouveau Peewee Herman body language.
That’s all I have at this point.
Dammit. I woke up way before my alarm was set.
So I wasn’t even sure if I have MAX but turns out I do. So I watch ep 1 of Jerrod Carmichael, which is great.
But… Dammit, I have my own story in which Leviticus figures so now it’s gonna seem like I copied him.
But my story happened in a previous century.
Now here I am scrolling this dumb randomized layout of the MAX offerings to see if I can find this other amazing thing you want me to be amazed by.
And Dammit. Here it is. So I guess I’ll watch part of it before work. Instead of doing 20 other things I need to be doing.
Crossing fingers that…
1) You understand all of the religious dogma
2) You cry at the end as much as I did. Man, i think it’s the fastest I’ve ever burst into an ugly cry.
Linus Roache is a marvel. He never really could move away from those staid English dramas. It’s a shame.
Of course. I called it an essential addition to the gay canon at the time. This wasn’t a tough call.
Normally I don’t say such things. I try to limit myself to such comments once, maybe twice a year. For example, only All of US Strangers would get a similar proclamation.
Rothaniel, it should be noted, gets a boost because it’s from a Black man and a stand-up special. In other words, it blazed some trails.
So, of course, you should be aware of his new show on HBO. I’ve only seen the first episode and I’m very skeptical he can pull off whatever he’s trying to pull off. We shall see.
Adding to queue.
Did you see Rothaniel (2022)?
Funnily enough, this is how I feel about Andrew Scott as Tom Ripley: https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/1a9d6bc2ba3cb9ef83ac6ee51b9b9fb849f03bc364c28b4ef67d2607a7cfa2b9.gif
Okay but I’m watching Priest tonight. Happy to see that it has a wry sense of humor.
The writer won 4 TV BAFTAs. He created the great Cracker series!
I always enjoy movies like this where the lead character is too hot to be straight.
Off-topic (thankfully)
You need to see the new comedy special on HBO with Alex Edelman. Adapted from his one-man Broadway show.
It’s spectacular, it really is.
I hate to say it’s “redefining” stand up but it’s not, but it’s definitely the best example of the latest paradigm of stand-up. It’s storytelling, it’s hilarious and there’s a point that needs to be made and heard.
you want a movie with over-the-top happiness that’s also somewhat obscure and a critical darling? Hmm. Go with early Coen Brothers, I guess. You can’t go wrong with Raising Arizona.
c’mon. Would we be this fixated on Dirk Bogard for the past few days if he were not gay?
Your qualms about any impending threesome may dissipate after you see episode 3.
What was the cost to Netflix to build time machine to return to Italy 1955? My grandmother has photo alboms from that time that look the same. I have only watched first two hours. Thus far. I am worried they are heading toward a threesome. Please don’t. SPOILER: Il sesso a tre si trasforma sempre in dramma.
Well, is he gay or not? Ciao babbo!
Birdman was a gimmick movie. Then 10 more movies did the LONG TAKE gimmick even better but they all got ignored.
You all make it impossible to keep up with you. Can some one tell me a movie that will not be the most depressing stuff ever watched? LOL.
The article has the success it intended. It got 268 replies. LOL.
The scene in the theater with a young Bob Balaban would DEFINITELY raise the hackles of some people in this community.
It’s been forever since I’ve seen it, so I can’t really remember much. I suspect, though, if it did come out, it wouldn’t have nearly the impact it did back then. In fact, I bet award committees wouldn’t even notice it.
But then, like I said, I haven’t seen it lately. But after seeing Darling this week, it’s one of those movies I plan on “updating” my knowledge.
Not sure of your religious beliefs
That makes two of us!
Ripley is on for this week. I just needed to finish up a couple of other shows so I wasn’t juggling too many.
I am watching Coronation Street from march of 2023. it’s what’s available on Hulu. For years I would see this show mentioned on British Entertainment programs, usually in a derogatory manner because it’s a show about common people. Upper class need not apply.
I find it so captivating because it moves with the speed of a bullet train, the cast is huge and we are constantly starting and ending stories. But what makes it work is you get a real sense of community amongst these characters. We see them all interact in all sorts of situations as they influence each other’s stories. It’s kind of a marvel.
But the story that sealed the deal for me, was the stalking of Daisy by this guy Justin. I thought it was over, but then suddenly Justin appears from nowhere and lunges toward and throws something at Daisy. Her friend Ryan manages to get inbetween the two, with most of the substance landing on him. Turns out it was acid. What followed was ten minutes of him screaming in agony with Daisy struggling, not know what to do. It’s a harrowing sequence.
And now, I am watching Ryan trying to accept his body is forever damaged, the left side of his face dominated by the burns (he’s still bandaged and can’t find the strength to look at himself with them)
Meanwhile the town continues and we get this older character Brian that I was completely unfamiliar with had taken one of those DNA tests and learned he was 8% Italian, so he spends the next episodes suddenly demanding to eat pasta instead of fish and chips. It’s a completely stupid story.
But that’s how life is, tragedy juxtaposed with nonsense.
I think you should see Priest. Not sure of your religious beliefs, I think you need to understand what it means to have faith to truly grasp this film so I can’t promise you will find it meaningful as much of it involves the nature of sin, how we as humans navigate it, and whether we can find redemption in an organized religion that’s unwilling to forgive even though forgiveness is a cornerstone of their theology. It’s a spellbinding experience.
Oscars started been hated because of what they really were ”before” and then because of the ”washing” they started to act with no one believing them. Oscars are hated because they belong to a class, because it is part of the system of power, not because of what this class appears to believe (or not) to. No return to the past, no Trump, no antiwokeness or ”American honesty” is going to change that shift. The only thing of what Sasha is suggesting that this assumption can agree with, it’s Ricky Gervais, to make Oscars and Hollywood, not change, but come closer to it’s end.
With a couple of days left on my BFI membership, I decided to search for something interesting.
FIrst up, I found Ridley Scott’s first film “Boy and Bicycle.” It was as advertised! A 16 year old old boy riding his bike around town after deciding to skip the day in school. What a charming visual stream-of-consciousness poem this was. Perhaps if it were a lesser or unknown director I would have decided to turn it off. But knowing this was the director of Alien, Thelma and Louise and The Martian, I found it quite compelling. I mean, here was this lyrical work from one of the great action/sci-fi/thriller directors of our day. A must-see for anyone interested in mapping out someone’s creative journey.
And then I found Terrence Davies’ trilogy of Chilren, Madonna and Child, and Death and Transfiguration. Altogether it’s about 100 minutes, but it seemed much much longer. Not because it was bad or it was boring, it was just some of the most depressing stuff I’ve ever watched. By the end, it was virtually unwatchable, it put me in a state of unvanquishable despair. And yet I kept watching as this old man was slowly dying, each successive scene closer to death. The final image is incredible, it is one of the most overwhelming and memorable images in all of cinema. I feel like this is a must-see, but not for everyone. It’s a tough, very tough film to watch.
Is this a good place to scream and bang my head against the wall?
All the worldwide travel books name AD as one of the best destinations to scream and bang our heads against the wall.
I have not seen Priest! 1994 was one of those years that I can’t speak about without advice of counsel.
Coronation Street must surely be amazing, since it’s been around for 62 years!
Try to schedule time to do Ripley. Strap yourself in and be patient. When it kicks into full-blown Hitchcock or Clouzot mode in episodes 3 thru 5, you’ll be ready to forgive Netflix for anything it ever did wrong.
should get to those, it’s a boring sunday around these parts. Although I am becoming increasingly addicted to Coronation Street and Hollyoaks, two British continuing dramas.
Well, the one thing theater never gets praised for is how it can produce a suitable wife for all occasions. Of course now that’s been surpassed by “models” – whenever I see a male movie star with a “model” my skepti-meter pings. Every model wants to become an actress and what better way for them to get good at acting than to marry a “straight” man with a “secret.”
aww! ty.
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/c6eccffb601d7fba6be07ec2f7b3ec925521f05df4ec995c8337d7f336c7c340.gif
In fact, in your previous reply, you already answered the questions I haven’t asked yet ! It always amazes me how much of this stuff you know just off the cuff.
And, of course, great point on word of mouth.
Welp. I see I already completely misunderstood what you were saying, so I answered some questions that you were not even asking!
So I hesitate to offer any more of my half-assed remarks.
But…
“And that got me wondering, how did a film that’s seemingly quite far from mainstream Hollywood fare become such a hit with audiences?”
I might carefully suggest that just because a lot of people bought a ticket to see the movie that was making news, that doesn’t mean they all loved it after they saw it.
I would wager that a lot of them left the theater saying the 1993 equivalent of “WTF did we just see?”
Yes, I know, “word of mouth” is a vague thing that people always claim is infallibly influential.
But I go back to my observation that this was 25 years before social media was able to caution people about what they were about to go see on Date Night.
Nowadays trailers are more explicit and there are 100 different ways for people to find out how weird a movie will be before they see it. In 1993, not so much.
But even today: millions of people still watched Saltburn and by the end of it millions of them were throwing millions of TikTok fits about what they had been “lured” into watching.
Anyone in 1993 who had enjoyed a grand fun time watching Holly Hunter in Broadcast News and Raising Arizona were in for quite a shock.
====
Also, after enough people are curious about buzzed-about movies and then being aghast at what it is after they see it, a not insignificant number of moviegoers will eventually begin to distrust the hype.
I remember my mom telling me that my dad talked her into going to see Last Tango in Paris.
After that she never again believed anything that the quotes on a movie poster told her.
The modern-day equivalent is giving the Best Picture Oscar to something like Birdman — fewer and fewer people will fall for that bullshit.
These are all great and valid points (thanks for the thoughtful reply!), but a lot of it addresses the general decline of the box office, and in particular movies made “for adults”.
What really inspired my original post is that I was considering whether this film would be a good pick for a Christmastime movie night with my parents. And looking at it from that angle, I noticed its strangeness, unconventionality, perhaps even slight inaccessibility much more than on my previous watch. (In fact, I’m slightly leaning towards a ‘no’ for Christmastime movie night.) And that got me wondering, how did a film that’s seemingly quite far from mainstream Hollywood fare become such a hit with audiences?
I think, on top of all the reasons you mention, there seems to be less openness from audiences (with the exception of ‘Film Twitter’ types who are actively seeking this stuff out, e.g. Poor Things) to watch slightly challenging stuff? I’m not sure, I wasn’t particularly alive in 1993, but there had to be something that made it so that these kinds of films aren’t even seeked out on Netflix, even though a lot of them are on there.
Anyway, turned out he was briefly married to Glynis Johns! Send in the Clowns indeed!
Let’s see if I can mimic some posh 1960s London cadence:
Naturally, a woman like Glynis Johns would have been seen as the ideal type of woman , were one to be gay and finding oneself in need of the ideal type of woman to marry.
(we have to make “been” rhyme with “seen” when we say it with droll intonations.)
I am beyond thrilled that you saw and enjoyed The Servant!
Isn’t is wildly fabulous in so many ways?
I adore you for connecting it to Saltburn.
I’m having my usual jam-packed busy day with family obligations, like I do every Sunday, so I can’t write a whole big thing in reply right now.
But if you don’t mind me tipping you off to some “further reading,” as the kids say. (Do kids say that?)
Here’s wonderfully gay Colm Toibin writing for Criterion about the “defiantly gay” author of the novelette source material, and the downlow gay Dirk Bogard, and the certifiably bisexual Joseph Losey.
https://www.criterion.com/current/posts/8180-the-servant-a-cruel-servility
Here’s a clever unpacking of The Servant by a witty gay writer on his own movie blog called LiscenseToQueer
https://www.licencetoqueer.com/blog/no-time-to-dirk-bond-and-bogarde
If those don’t wear you out too much, here’s a really comprehensive appraisal of the life and films of Joseph Losey in the supremely elitist film journal, Senses of Cinema:
https://www.sensesofcinema.com/2003/great-directors/losey/
So many reasons.
You know me. I’m always the guy that never buys into simple one-facet single-factor explanations.
1) Budget. The Piano only cost $7 mil in 1993 — so that’s $31 million today just with regular inflation — but Hollywood inflation is much steeper, so The Piano could easily cost $70 million today. Heck, cast DiCaprio and his salary alone is $30 million.
2) 1993 was peak Blockbuster Video era. The beginning of “We can wait 10 weeks to see this at home.” Soon to be replaced 50 million red Netflix envelopes delivered discreetly to our mailboxes, virtually instantly.
3) No family in 1993 was going take the kids to see Harvey Keitel dangle his flaccid dick around. So this was the tail end of the days when “we have to get a babysitter if we want to see any nekkid tiddies and a glimpse of weenies onscreen.”
3a) The era of spending 30 bucks for a night out to see 10 seconds of nudity was ending for elitist pervs , as well. Windows 95 was about to make 100,000 dicks and nipples available for viewing at home, with a screeching 54k modem.
4) The Piano today would instantly cause half a million men online to cry about “feminist agenda” and “oh look, another movie where the white dude is the abusive toxic male” — so right away, 50 million republicans are mad about it and won’t pay to see it.
5) As Sasha has told us truthfully many times: The Oscars used to be a Hollywood promotional machine. Winning Oscars made people want to go see the Oscar-winning movies to find out what all the hoopla was about. Because back then, an Oscar movie could double, triple, quadruple its box-office based on winning an Oscar. Those days are long gone, because shifts in release dates, and Oscar Night dates, and tighter theatrical windows have all wrecked that lucrative Oscar money-grab that helped make mature movies financially feasible.
6) Family budgets. Between 1993 and 2013, in just 20 years, the price of movies tickets shot up from $4 to $9. Also, back to the VHS and DVD factor… families had to have these home video players. Kids demanded it. So that’s an investment of 200 or 300 bucks, just for the VHS and DVD players. That’s a big bite out of the family movie budget. Dads would say: I bought this goddamn Magnavox top-loading VCR, so we’re gonna fkn use it.
7) Let’s not be so quick to dismiss the influence of cable TV on the entertainment habits of mature and more sophisticated movie-lovers. Pre-1990, broadcast TV had strict standards for TV content. 30 Cable TV channels that all became available in the 1990s did not have to abide by FCC rules about sex, profanity, violence. People interested in movies and TV for grown-ups could get that piped directly into their living rooms.
7a) But “premium cable channels” came at a price — which takes us back to point 5) — budgets. Families spending 40 bucks a month on premium cable channels had 40 bucks less in disposable income to spend on increasingly pricey nights out at the movies.
None of these things happened overnight. But gradually they all chipped away at the need to get in the car and drive to see any sort of mature movie.
Is that a sad regrettable shame? Yes.
Was it pretty much inevitable? I think so, yes.
I think it can be the answer. TV has gotten much better since the early 90’s. There wasn’t much on TV back then that would satisfy people with elevated needs. HBO and Showtime offered nothing back then except unnecessary nudity. CBS could put out an occasional TV movie like the sensational Guilty Conscience (with Anthony Hopkins and Blythe Danner) but their Emmy Winners were Northern Exposure, NBC had LA Law (and a sadly overlooked I’ll Fly Away, easily the best networkTV show to address race of all time) and ABC had yet to give us anything to replace the forgotten “thirtysomething” which was easily the class of TV at that time, by the third and forth season it just churned out classic episode after classic episode.
So, yeah, people in search of smart intelligent fare had no choice to go to the movies. It may seem like a ton of people, but it was only 39 million dollars domestically, which works out to like maybe 5,000,000 million people. Meanwhile Northern Exposure got 15,000,000 Households. So it’s not like it was that huge. And you have to realize, The Piano was still one of the few cinematic options of that time. Most foreign and truly independent stuff was out of reach for most Americans, only if such a movie was Oscar nominated it would play in more than a couple of fashnionable city theaters, and never reach the suburbs.
https://tvline.com/news/jett-cancelled-renewed-season-2-cinemax-original-series-ending-1146526/
I highlighting this as broad based example of why and I boldly predict this contrary ro number of entertsinment pundits who fall in the trap whenever a new superficial trend emerges , that rise of streaming as being prominent in winning MAJOR Oscars is further away than what some would like to think.
Just consider and extrapolate in principle, sure I know “Jett” is a TV series …but not fact it a TV series or not albeit absolute ripper of truly original series that doesn’t try be too cute as some do building a focus on ” woke” or ” anti woke ” based insured stories NO..it is original , delightfully compelling rippingly written , superbly acted just excels in basic things a potentially great TV series SHOULD DO to ENTERTAIN not to gesture or rationalise or intellectualise ‘ woke’ or ‘ anti woke ‘ it inspiration driven by strong sense of vision. Where tables turned on it head to subvert actual espionage genre with a twist… plays with ot story character elements of well worn genre and MAXIMISES it potential sumptuously shot , with absolutely stunning magnetic lead in Carla Gugino…THAT is type of series that companies regarding streaming online SHOULD invest in ..
Rather than number of series that try to subvert Hollywood’s direction one way or the other by driving their themes through the ‘ woke/ anti woke’ spectrum …
And herein lies my concern : number of true best potential streaming series like ” JETT” these originsl inventive appealing very very popular series with serious upside are fhwed up and spat out the WRONG type of TV series is executed by the streaming service or subsidiaries .
This has been aflow on effect where frankly I have observed that the ‘ popular based’ decisions by execs of number of subsidiaries of streaming companies in boardrooms is based on what they arrogantly ASSUME is popular , not what in reality has serious potential be really popular that left strong first impression. ..not just Netflix people take issue wirh but atrocious judgement of discontinuity of some most impressive original series going round.. issue is lack of judgement combined with streaming services inability to discipline build structure and RESIST trying to nrrwk world record to cram in diff constant flow new series or movies too for everyone in doing so … unless streaming companies break their previous records for more members .. they have to discontinue or thrn as consequence OVERSATURATING the marketplace pull pin on second seasons or new season of recently started series AND sometimes pull resources off MORE WORTHWHILE film projects cos their pipeline is too big their are too many multiple projects at once in both film releases and streaming projects..
While I accept to limited degree cancellations and pulling the pin on projects both movie online and TV. Series for streaming do have limutrd shelf life whwt does ot conv3y to us the consumer that their a perception of unhealthy inherent bias against TRUE visionary original compelling creative shows? Or movies? Specifically to discontinue these projects so soon after only one season ?
The other credibility question that OSCAR in future esp now at a time disilusionm4nt with role of streaming and Oscars resistance – to their great credit to RESIST bar one year legitimising this culture as happens in streaming format more than traditional TV format of discontinuity and streaming companies who jeopardise integrity of some film releases potential moat obvious being hbo Max impact on Tenet that lead to Nolan’s divorce ( I prefer he stays wi5h Universal give Warner bros time to earn his trust back they owe him not other way round – regardless that it new management atvwarner bros nolan should i believe stock with Universal )… but just as case in point film releases that cost film studios hundreds of millions to enter into these I believe utterly compromised dealings with streaming companies ..lead to diminished returns …in short …
Streaming companies as a collective business model with some like Netflix and some others like HBO MAX have become equivalent to ‘ junk mass consumerist tv’ that has lost its way..
I believe the oscarsrecognized this ..comvin3d with era post pandemic , and combined with negative publicity and lure and trap of ‘budget solution ‘ for film studio do movies on streaming …that as we seen esp over last fewcyears I evrn go far to say overreliance of streaming by film studios dragged out ability of recovery happen post pandemic ..
Combined with not just Tenet failure by Warner bros fuking up it release not informing Nolan of it but so many examples pf studio releases with streaming services like Napoleon and number others that did not make potential that brilliant film and number other desrrved.
The Academy made a call in light this year’s Oscars that they not gonna gamble on indulging in risky streaming- studio ventures as serious oscar contenders…as in bar the one year in last nearly decads of streaming…release films..
The pattern of disruption and compromise that hurt the profile of several release films …and thrn there some that deerrved far better broader recognition like ‘ killers of the flower moon’ or ‘ killer’ ( disgracefully the latter only in cinemas for 1 week 1 week ! – worth noting critics praised that film and evrn on this site desrrved high praise for Fincher one of most overdue to win oscar film makers around. … but if co-studuos thst collaborated with streaming companies had confidence and financial confidence faith in the strength of Pur film studio itself capability to release these 2 as cinema releases .
Would it thrn been possible that:
Killers of Flower Moon would been truly Scorsese’s best film to date hence Bern stronger chsnce least win adapted Screenplay and few other Oscars
And Killer if it were not streaming release but cinematic made killing in box office hence elevated it chsnve be least best pic contender ?
Streaming model is broken it too heavily diluted..there way too much discontinuity and total lack of patience for sub studios have contract with streaming companies to make case for season renewal for tv series …and least several cases in 2 YRS ALONE … movies of tremendous potential cinematically and as oscar contenders have failed to gain traction.
Notion that the theory that been totally disproven now that streaming driven movies could ‘ redefine ‘ new era ‘ of Oscars is absolute myth that do far remains be seen I doubt on evidence above ..
Even if near future films get oscar nominated they win multiple major awards tryst need be earned and streaming services need yo earn trust of the Oscars who seen through the broken streaming model mentality as far as pitching for Oscars.
I love see things on streaming I grateful for that don’t get me wrong… but whrn it comes to awards season and whrn it comes ro countless questionable decisions streaming companies have made don’t you believe trust need to be earned ?
They could start these streaming companies by NOT canning brilliant ” Jett” and not trying to twist arms of film studios to deny non subscribers chsnce see true cinematic film visions at their real potential rather thsn diminished streaming way.
Streaming may be popular sure but we farther away at time revival of cinema ushered in by ‘Barbenheimer ” generating more predictability and stability thsn erratic ‘ cut and run ‘ attitudebif streaming companies currently model ..
I sure plenty you have views for or against what I saying but think bout it would oscar really rush to validate streaming driven film so soon after exceptional one off with coda ? In last decade streaming driven films only had one oscar winner for best picture.. and they had lit more losses than wins is any coincidence this is happening whrn above stuff I outlined also happens ?
I wonder what happened, culturally, to make audiences less interested in this kind of filmmaking. Netflix (and home video) can’t be the answer – there’s always some artsy fare on there but it’s never particularly popular.
It would have swept the Oscars if not for Schindler’s List. I remember when it came out it was quite a sensation. Independent fare like The Piano was all the rage back then, unique stories were desired. This was still before the huge increases in home video technology took place. Tube TV’s were still the norm and at that time Laser Disks were the “next big thing” that never really happened. We were promised changes were coming soon, but the DVD was still about 5 years away and big screen High Def TVs were still a decade away and 15 years away from becoming affordable for many.
So, yeah, adult fare was still quite the box-office draw. Other big bits that year included the aforemention Schindler, Four Weddings and a Funeral and The Fugitive. All the BP nominees were box office successes crowding out films that didn’t quite hit the box office well, movies like The Joy Luck Club that was considered a surefire BP nominee upon release. Until it’s disappointing box office (that would probably be equivalent to 100 million or so in todays’ domestic box office – this is more a guess than fact).
Just rewatched The Piano. Fantastic stuff, I liked it even more than first time around, but I felt very strongly throughout how strange it is. How did this get not only Oscar love, but grossed something like 300million (inflation-adjusted) at the box office? I feel like if it was released today, it would be considered “arthouse fare” and gross like 20mil max. Movie industry must have been wild in the 90s.
All that’s missing in The Servant is the Hedge Maze with the Minotaur statue at its center! What fun! I sure wouldn’t mind having Dirk Bogarde as my servant daddy.
And, as always, Sondheim has a good and proper lyric “There’s a city in Brazil no one wants to fill.”
Thanks to Ryan for mentioning this movie to me!
So, of course, there’s much to discuss! Googled Dirk Bogarde to see if he was gay. After this, Darling and The Spanish Gardner which I caught a couple months ago, I was sure he was! Well, I was sure after The Spanish Gardner, but oh well. Anyway, turned out he was briefly married to Glynis Johns! Send in the Clowns indeed!
https://preview.redd.it/qw2z6anh1e481.jpg?width=640&crop=smart&auto=webp&s=0a1afdd7db04b655a251217eaff766177b50f968
I looked at this one again. We see where all the group of Other is yellow? Yellow was big group before. Then did they start asking better questions on their polls? Designate more of the variety?
Then we see the yellow which is Other goes down to almost nobody in past two years. Why is because we have other ways to describe ourselves now. Better ways to describe.
Straight group will see this as trendy. Here in my country we have the Fratelli d’Italia that say we LGBTQ are Sesso Alla Moda. They are Italy’s conservative party. They think not-binary is a TREND. LOL. I pity them and their boring idea of sex.
It is the same as I read some say Poor Things is all kinds of sex. What is all kinds? I see only two kinds. She sometimes is on top. She sometimes receives doggy style. That is only 2 kinds of position. Never anything else. It is not crazy sex at all. I pity some who say Poor Things is crazy sex. Really Poor Things is boring sex to me. Who else wants to talk about sex with me today? LOL
https://www.skynews.com.au/lifestyle/celebrity-life/australian-actor-isla-fisher-announces-shock-split-from-husband-sacha-baron-cohen-in-joint-message-following-13-years-of-marriage/news-story/b5731d2f56865c793d1c389bdba2916a
I not trying turn this fabulous site into tabloid style fodder… but I must admit I absolutely stunned by this development …
And err memo to Rebel Wilson .. and some ( not all) others who jump to the media to scream and accuse on sexual harassment before the proof in hard evidence is revealed…as wherher untested claim is true or not…Rebel just sounds like attention seeking playing to social media crowd … if anyone is unacceptably harassed don’t leak to the online media if your fair dingkom concerned how u were mistreated deal wirh it to take person u accuse in court!!
Don’t we all miss the days where social media digital media DIDNT exist as means to (sound like ) smear other people by instigating ‘ trial by media ‘.. it does jeopardise ability of courts carry due process without external rumor generated innuendo… sometimes..
Why can’t people just learn to NOT leak to media or talk to media till AFTER they least presented a case in court?
I don’t know whether Baron Cohen is guilty or not bur what I do know is making accusations through the media before letting court process play out is utterly unethical …
Rebel Wilson should follow due process not snipe to the media .. people only lose respect for celebrities who snipe against others .. unless there a PROVEN reason do so..feelings are only PART of hard proof, nor is payback, retaliatory gestures, attention seeking … using unfettered access to digital media and social media to fuel resentments some not all do that.. it fair question. To ask not just Rebel Wilson but some others shouldn’t they just respect court of law rather than credibility hitting and backgrounding against others here ?
It not question of whether or not Rebel Wilson was actually harassed or not it question of need for self responsibility of how celebrities MANAGE these issues.. that hardly suggests such behaviour make thrm role models for their fans to look up to no sets a bad example..
Ease wirh which slander and vindictiveness pervades process of proper justice that festers through digital and social entertainment media … if anything has potential to jeopardise a fair reasonable outcome for accuser pr the accused ..
But it also beyond Rebel’s misjudgement in her approach here raises question if the ONLIME MEDIA ROLE and duty of care namely esp where something is speculated accusation, online media should impose much higher editorial standards of themselves so not do possible harm to others like split if true between Baron Cohen and Isla Fisher..namely not report rill AFTER court case is properly in session not before not even at start of a trial or court case…
Digital online media truly showing contempt for trustworthy credible reporting when they ‘ jump’ on rumor slander bandwagon .
IF Rebel Wilson truly believes wants us to believe what Baron Cohrn allegedly did realky did happen then present all issues in court not to media.
What you think ? Cos atm Rebel Wilson who I never regarded as not even above average compared to other Aussie actresses .. has lost my respect UNLESS her claims proven true. Just cos person claim written in a memoir it their point of view but sometimes occasionally MOST time is not case memoirs can have ill intentioned implications … to be clear only in absolute minority of cases.
I be disgusted IF court proves NOT trial by damn media ! Baron Cohen did sexually harass REBEL WILSON but I sorry I just had to expose dangers or anyone channeling accusations primarily through the media esp whrn court process is happening on sane matter …
Relying on social media or online digital m3dia make accusations set very dangerous precedents that what courts are for right ?? Aren’t they ??
Laurence Olivier won both Best Actor and Best Picture for Hamlet in 1948.
Stone’s next Oscar win could be as Producer.
The only people to win Oscars for acting and non-acting:
Barbra Streisand – ‘Best Actor’ (Funny Girl) and ‘Best Original Song’ (A Star Is Born)
Michael Douglas – ‘Best Picture’ (One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest) and ‘Best Actor’ (Wall Street)
Emma Thompson – ‘Best Actress’ (Howard’s End) and ‘Best Adapted Screenplay’ (Sense and Sensibility)
George Clooney – ‘Best Supporting Actor’ (Syriana) and ‘Best Picture’ (Argo)
Brad Pitt – ‘Best Supporting Actor’ (Once Upon A Time… in Hollywood) and ‘Best Picture’ (12 Years A Slave)
Frances McDormand – ‘Best Actress’ (Fargo, Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri, Nomadland) and ‘Best Picture’ (Nomadland)
People who make it their narrative that something needs to be “fixed” are never satisfied, because once they lose that narrative, they have nothing left to contribute. I fear this may be what has happened to Sasha.
Well, books are relatively high risk, and you might want to consider simply publishing articles. Articles can also a) attract a fan base that could eventually read your completed book or b) be a way to show a literary agent you have successfully worked through publishing channels
After working since 2010 in the article-writing sphere and publishing in over 3 dozen outlets professionally, I’m teaching a course and since we have at least some similar spheres in which we write about (movies), perhaps you’d be interested in my course. I have one Sunday 3 pm EST
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1-DNR1wy4liHExCbBeS02DU9qGGlqI1flb6cvRFBaA1M/edit?usp=forms_home&ths=true
Part of me thinks that theaters will push back on this because of lost concession sales
Critics Choice Super Awards winners announced yesterday:
FILM:
Acrion: John Wick 4
Actor: Tom Cruise, Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning
Actress: Rebecca Ferguson, Mission: Impossible, Dead Reckoning
Superhero Movie: Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse
Actor: Michael Fassbender, The Killer
Actress: Iman Vellani, The Marvels
Horror Movie:Talk to Me
Actor: Nicolas Cage, Dream Scenario
Actress: Sophie Wilde, Talk to Me
Sci-fi /Fantasy Movie; Godzilla Minus One
Actor: Mark Ruffalo, Poor Things
Actress: Emma Stone, Poor Things
Villain: Godzilla, Godzilla Minus One
TELEVISION
Action/Limited Series/Made for TV Movie: Reacher
Actor: Idris Elba, Hijack
Actress: Zoe Saldaña, Special Ops: Lioness
Superhero/Limited Series/Made for TV Movie (also Horror/Limited Series/Made for TV Movie): The Last of Us
Actor: Pedro Pascal, The Last of Us
Actress: Bella Ramsey, The Last of Us
Sci-fi/Limited Series/Made for TV Movie: Black Mirror: Joan Is Awful
Actor (tie): Jharrel Jerome, I’m a Virgo. and Kurt Russell, Monarch: Legacy of Monsters
Actress: Annie Murphy, Black Mirror: Joan Is Awful
Villain: Melanie Lynskey, The Last of Us
It’s a solid footnote.
Like the guy in Demolition Man is named Scott Peterson. Or something. It used to be a well known murder, but time passes and it turns out I can’t recall much about either.
Wikipedia has it listed as 1994.
Most movies I have to look up. Only thing I can remember about 1994 is that Penn State Football went undefeated and still didn’t get national championship.
Oh, and the whole Nancy Harding and Tonya Kerrigan brouhaha.
It’s possible they didn’t mention it because it isn’t a 1994 film. Although it showed at festivals that year, it was released commercially in 1995.
While I have seen it and liked it, I doubt it would make any top movies list of mine. Different tastes, I guess.
Is this a good place to scream and bang my head against the wall?
I was over on some other site and they were discussing the top films of 1994, Good year, lots of competition. But not one person mentioned Priest which I am pretty confident is the best film of the year. The mix of social commentary, theme and emotional intensity is perfect and the payoff at the end is one of the best in movie history.
But the scene that makes it one of the truly great movies comes midway, with Linus Roache as the original Hot Priest praying and yelling at the crucifix helpless and questioning if God exists. This is, meanwhile, but the problem being addressed as if by divine intervention.
I certainly am not a believer in God or a follower of Christianity, but this scene blows me away every time.
Of, of course they hate the film over there. There is gay sex in it. Hot gay sex at that.
Nice try, Agatha. We’re on to your slick little tricks.
When I was in 5th or 6th grade I’d stay with my grandmother when my parents were “having trouble.”
I was reading a lot of Ellery Queen and Agatha Christie at that age, and my grandmother asked me about The Murder of Roger Ackroyd when she saw I had it.
Telling her the story thus far, I mentioned the name of the narrator, Dr Sheppard.
My grandmother had a strange reaction — a recoil or wide-eyed gasp or something.
So I was like, “What?”
She goes, “Nothing. I’ll tell you when you finish your book.”
She told me later.
Turned out that my grandmother knew all about a real life famous murder case, decades earlier, in the 1950s. Scandalous court case. Like OJ level of sensationalism, apparently.
A doctor had murdered his wife. His name was Dr Sheppard.
My grandmother said she didn’t want to tell me until after I got to the end of the Christie novel, but that she would have instantly known that any character named Dr Sheppard was a murderer.
Not sure this anecdote will make it into my fascinating memoirs.
Sasha is never satisfied.
https://deadline.com/2024/04/nuclear-war-movie-denis-villeneuve-legendary-dune-part-two-bestselling-book-1235876114/
Wow it appears Oppenheimer’s success may have ‘ unintended’?? Ramifications for type of stories that Hollywood looking at wirh increasing focus on ‘ aftermath’ of inventions of weapons or politics of war …
First we had Oppenheimer , then ‘ Civil war’ and now, soon Villenue who determined to jump up my top filmmaker lists go evrn bleaker with this adaptation of how world be like in AFTERMATH nuclear war …chilling yet essential stuff..is this new era ushered via Oppenheimers success through how it showcased it themes of new era of geopolitical/ tension filled / conflict based dramas? Transposed in a contemporary sense?
Compelling and course touch disturbing but important be aware without filmmakers sacrificing cinematic value and appeal of course so ensure after all it film not docudrama ey?
I’m so glad that I can enjoy reading Awards Daily again. I even feel I can comment freely again.
Smells criminal. They have found the way for movies to be made for Trump’s people. Spend €20M to make it, and one anon rich man to buy €100M tickets. This too is how a money laundry works.
https://media1.giphy.com/media/juUiJTTlOKzQ88xzFN/giphy-downsized-small.mp4
As manipulation scams go, it was pretty clever. Spend money to bulk purchase tickets knowing that your distribution deal gives you most of that money back on the other side. It’s the theaters who get ripped off when concessions aren’t sold. Pretty sleazy but it was a very sleazy organization that made the thing.
Planet Earth Is Healing. LOL.
People on twitter said the protagonist of Sound of Freedom is arrested for multiple assaults on many women. News like that it would make voters think twice before marking the movie on a ballot for the Oscars. That is why movie awards for people in favor of Trump is a good place for movies like Sound of Freedom. I read they approve of his sexual assault against women?
I did not know about that. When the movie was in the news I looked where to see it from curiosity. On streaming it was €20, twice the already too much cost of a regular movie. Pazzo! Now the cost is much lower but my curiosity is much lower too. LOL.
I want to point out that the thing that killed Sound of Freedom was…Barbenheimer. Sound of Freedom’s team came up with a cynically clever way to manipulate ticket sales, but it became quite apparent that not every ticket “sold” in this fashion resulted in butts in the seats. I can’t imagine the hit the theaters took from lost concession sales because of this. Barbenheimer put butts in the seats. And a LOT of snacks and drinks got sold.
Even the People’s Choice Awards shunned Sound of Freedom.
After I thought about it, I have had this idea. The author states in many articles that Trump people hate the Oscars as they are filled to overflow with liberals. I have a serious idea. Why don’t the Trump people have their own movie awards for only the movies they like? For example Sound of Freedom that is mentioned many times by the author?
I am not being a “smart alex” I am asking why not, if that could be a real solution. If the author’s idea is to have all the not-English movies get their own awards, why would it not be a good idea for the not-liberal movies to get their own awards show too There are many different movie awards for the different groups. The gay movies have Galeca I saw from the writers here. The black movies get their own awards, is that not true? I am not making a joke. I am serious as I wonder why the Trump people just don’t make their own movies and give them their own awards? Why does everybody want the liberals to bend their own ways of thinking? I don’t see where the Trump people are bending their thinking to make liberals happy. Am I wrong to ask?
Invite me over to Hollywood for a year and I will fix the city with my ideas. LOL
This is why people need to elaborate, with examples!
yeah, agatha christie did it too
It’s like the take certain people have on “The backlash against Sound of Freedom was because it was conservative” not because just maybe it’s not a good movie.
The reason Preacher’s kids are the coolest, is because we see things no one else sees. We have to learn differently than everyone else gets to, which is why so many of us rebel and have to figure out truth from all the hypocrisy. People don’t understand the pressures we are forced to live under, and how defeating that life can be—especially if your parents aren’t protective of you or if they are OVER protective of you. My parents found the right balance for the most part, and shielded my brother and I from so much, but that didn’t stop us from living a double life behind the scenes. We had to discoverer in secret, what everyone else already knew.
So that’s where everyone knows the wild stories of us PK’s.
Okay, I can take a minute to tell you about a wild coincidence.
The guy in Darling who doesn’t realize he’s confessing that gay men mistake him for being gay…
LONDONER:
Talking as a Londoner, I think…
how rife homosexuality has become,
in London itself.
I would say again, in retrospect,
that a few years back…
Again, two or three years ago…
that you were very blatantly approached
by different people in different places.
INTERVIEWER:
Really?
LONDONER:
It does, sort of, still…
INTERVIEWER
You say it’s worse?
LONDONER:
It has become worse over a period of time…
INTERVIEWER:
…but you have to live with it.
LONDONER:
I suppose so.
====
Um-hmm.
So, speaking of “straight” guys who seem bewildered when gay men pick up on gay vibes emanating from the “straights”
Look at this thing Jeff Wells decides to reveal on his site yesterday morning:
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/91313bb24d7e16baf5ab1872fda7f36cadaddb32644db66221e42f8bdbe2100d.jpg
Over the weekend when the Trump campaign let fly with “Christians and Catholics” messaging about Easter I kept shaking my head wondering if Catholic voters are ever going to piece things together.
I was taking a quick glance at comments on this rather insulting piece and then THIS thread.. Kind Hearts and Coronets and Separate Tables?
More of this please. What an utter surprise.
Can’t always trust those voiceovers, though, can we?
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/8e8c433261cc8a2254a3cae82b87c3680ac1709db8c6b4c205fe1a300287e4bb.gif
“the hardest part of being gay”
I’ve spent most of my life identifying with actresses, so that’s how I’m able to imagine that I can see myself onscreen in 2500 straight romance movies.
Kind Hearts is hilarious. The other Brit film from that time that I love is Separate Tables.
I have a feeling our new Evangelical Overlords will not be sharing much of their authority with Catholics.
I have a family story about that. I keep promising to write these replies, so I better get busy.
Fellini’s Satyricon must have brought out a lot confusing and contradictory feelings in Aaron
We can thank Aaron.
I come running whenever I hear that “a not very healthy mentality about human sexual situations takes precedence in pivotal Oscar races.”
Because I want to be sure I’ve not missed any of those movies.
Not sure.
But look what happened to the sexual orientation of students after Trump first squatted in the Oval Office in 2016.
(100% legit graph)
Thanks to MAGA, nobody wants to be straight anymore.
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/8d0d09f5a930909fc4f72738f26b77b39d3361cfb99178ac103af29e393e00f8.jpg
Another thing I wondered, how much of the third act was influenced by Grace Kelly?
Also, while watching the third act, if it weren’t for the voiceover I would have been frightened for poor Diana Scott, thinking that the gays might have wanted to murder her on that yacht.
I know it’s not your site, but what do you think of the idea of a movie club. Each week you pick out a film that’s been largely overlooked or forgotten and you introduce it to a new audience. I think people will enjoy that.
will definitely give it a shot, (the Pinter) I have it for a week. I’ve already decided to hold off on Ripley, I got about 4 shows I am working on already.
I worked at a video store in the mid 80’s and recall the celebrated release of Belle de Jour on video (by then most of the classics had long been in print, but occasionally there was one that wasn’t) so I took it home. I was shocked by that 1967 film! Since then I’ve learned a bit, Grand Guignol theater, the Theater of Cruelty (think Marat/Sade) but wasn’t aware of it’s translation to film – never heard of Salo at this point.
It’s funny because here in the US we think of the 60’s as some sort of widespread Camelot, at least among the wealthy, there’s an upper crust conservatism that’s suffocating in many of the movies of that time.
I’ll just say this, Oh to be a film fan at a time of such transition. It must have been thrilling. Clearly the 60’s, at least internationally, were an amazing time. Somehow “Darling” was the missing piece that helped me see the fuller picture.
I just like to point out, this all began in theater. People overlook the importance of theater. It would be a shame if we let it die. I am sure there are tons of works out there that will help shape the movies decades to come (the obvious example being Slave Play)
It all kind of puts to shame the 90’s, the other great societal upheaval captured in cinema, with independent film, the diversity of stories available to us was amazing, at least compared to the 80’s. Those two decades make cinema of 2000 to today come off as bland. The great directors of the last 25 years perfected the marriage of style and technique, but most forgot to tell stories that were vibrant and essential.
Maybe 2023 was a turning point. It sure looks like it might be.
Wonder what those percentages will be in 2040?
Or is Trump gonna change that?
leave Jim Rockford alone. https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/7f4cd71a9eedcf41bc94f435cb15f09fdfd938b09506efc7933bb63f21527cec.jpg
Of the nine cast members originally hired, the one he probably gave the shortest shrift to was Michael Coe (Kramer vs Kramer), who was written out of the credits a few episodes in. I believe Morris was hired as a writer and saved, and he was given 5 seasons which is a pretty generous tenure.
He also heard the complaints loud and clear that they needed a black woman in 2013 and didn’t even wait a full season to hire one (which usually disrupts the flow) , and then fired four of the white people that season while keeping the unproven Sasheer Zamata on, because you have to admit the backlash would have been strong. It took him until 2022 to cut a POC short after one season (Aristotle Athari) while Jon Rudnitsky, Luke Null (perhaps the most underutilized cast member ever; he was hired as a musical comedian but never got to play his guitar once), and Lauren Holt got fired.
My reaction is that if a Black person says I was discriminated against, I listen to them but I also put it in context. I think the guy on Heroes was convincing of Ali Larter A difficult coworker or mean person is a mean person. That doesn’t mean they’re racist because one of the targets of meanness happens to be a black. That’s kid gloves to me because it implies we can never be critical of our black coworkers, and it sets a dangerous precedent.
In reality, I do think it’s somewhat of a red scare atmosphere because the number of people we believe are racists is far lower than those who we accuse of it. That’s my opinion.
I think their books exist mostly in my dreams, for now.
do you wish to email me about an opportunity or be told about it here, im at okonh0wp@gmail.com
a friend of mine, successful Spanish author, has been pressuring me, for years, to write two books, one fiction (which I pitched to him and showed him the prologue) and my memories. Given I am being fired in less than one month, I’ll have – it seems – plenty of time to dedicate to them and finally do it.
(a couple of his books have been translated to English and some other languages, by the way, and one of them has been quite the object of the fight between some film and tv studios, with the idea of creating either a franchise, or a TV series for several seasons)
To be fair, the accusations that Lorne gives black SNL cast members short shrift have been around since the Garrett Morris days. And it’s not exactly a deeply held secret that Lorne himself isn’t particularly that liberal (90’s SNL was notoriously right wing in fact).
I’m not comfortable with the suggestion that black people in the industry who are complaining about mistreatment are fabricating their experiences for career advancement. Lea Michelle always had a bad on set reputation, but your immediate reaction is to imply the black cast members are lying?
^^^^^
True.
I misread a statement he made that was intentionally vague, so it was widely misunderstood.
It’s really easy for people to go guns up on some of these topics, isn’t it?
wow, do they have websites for it or a page or something?
wow, thanks. seriously.
good debate is healthy. Seriously, I have campaigned quite a bit for democrats
I’m gonna delete some dumb things I wrote in my previous reply.
Thank you for your gentle reprimands.
I thought people were defending the marketplace and film makers doing what they want.
I also don’t believe she would have a problem ineracting with gay people in real life or professionally. She’s just working on a specific kind of project. I would probably draw a stronger line if someone was hostile on set or said they wouldn’t work with gay people. Even then, I do feel like accusations of hostility to “margianalized people” can be spun by the press in horrible ways:
1) If Lea Michelle is a little aloof or mean to her costars on set, it’s no big deal, but if one of those costars complains who’s of color, suddenly the press has their headline: “Lea Michelle’s a bigot!”…
2) Additionally, Joss Weedon once says to one of his actors “I don’t even let Rob Downey Jr give me notes” and Weedon was accused of being bigoted. Weedon than said that not all of his actors (including the Black actor who accused him of racists) were strong actors and needed guidance. The amount of twitter hate he got for racism indicates that people will sound that bell at a moment’s notice….
3) Ellen DeGeneres’s headlines as toxic also become much stronger when it was noted that people of color who were among the complainers
4) The head of WeWork also got gobbled up by liberal media despite constantly holding town hall meetings and giving raises to her workers. The articles that seemed to attack her focused on disenfranchized women of color
5) Look at Mo Ryan’s hit piece on Lorne Michaels at SNL. Mo Ryan is well-known for having an SJW mentality. She’s closely policed franchise for the exact number of female or Black directors they’ve hired.
Her story tries to suggest that Michaels is harder on POC who work there when there have been reports of white employees having panic attacks and being miserable. (I wrote more about it here: https://orrinkonheim.medium.com/1bd39188f8d)
https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/lifestyle/arts/burn-it-down-book-excerpt-snl-lorne-michaels-1235507730/
one of the actors from Star Trek Voyager, Garrett Wang, said the set was racist because
My sister didn’t want to tell her kids about gay people when they were about 5 or 6. She said, well I’m not having the sexuality talk yet, so that applies for either sexual orientation I’m not prepared to demonz.
A less mature Colin Farrell seeemed pretty homophobic in the early 2000s when he worked with Joel Schumacher.
(Somewhere in this episode of Dinner with Five, Colin Farrell outright calls him a gay slur….https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OOWQhm7Ms6k)
I’m not sure where Eddie Murphy’s movement away from gay jokes came when he worked with Bill Condon.
I’ve pre-ordered books by Ferdinand and Claudiu that they haven’t even written yet.
I’m gonna lay off butting heads with you, because I hope you know that you’ve been one of my favorite regulars in the AD community for years.
I apologize for bristling up so easily.
I’m just now rereading this:
Who’s Afraid of Virginia Wolfe was 1966, I think, but the play was a couple of years earlier. Did the Albee play influence this film? All of that matters.
I thought about Albee last night too!
Wish I could give a more clever reply but: Yes Yes.
In general, I think that the 1960s represent a distinct and visceral pivot in movies, plays, and even TV — alongside the French and Italian New Wave movements that began almost a decade earlier and probably provided inspiration and creative provocation. Movies began to adopt an almost documentary style of raw reality, yeah?
And the Brits may not even have needed to mimic Albee — because they had Joe Orton, John Osborne, Harold Pinter. The whole 1960s Brit aesthetic of “kitchen sink realism” is to me so thick with authenticity. So, for me, one of the things that makes Darling so fascinating is how it took that gritty working class lens and turned it to focus on the debonair class.
True, at times it feels today a tad heavy-handed and too on-the-nose, but it’s no wonder that mid-60s American audiences found it thrilling.
Talk about flipping a switch
1964: Mary Poppins, My Fair Lady,
1965: Darling, Alfie, Georgy Girl
Oh… and speaking of Harold Pinter…
I’m sure you’ve seen it, but as long as we’re getting BFI classics for free, The Servant is right their on the homepage of the channel.
My memory of the Moonlight campaign was that people respected the hell out of Jenkins’ technical chops and Ali’s absolutely masterful performance but that people wondered if the film was a bit too arty to actually pull the upset. And since 12 Years a Slave had won a few years prior, I have doubts that a “it’s TIME to give the award to a black film” campaign was on anyone’s mind.
Randolph should have been nominated for her incandescent performance in Dolemite if one wants to be picky. I did find it more than a little insulting that some people took great pains to say “don’t worry, her nomination isn’t woke, she’s actually good”. More than a little condescending.
To your point about Asians in films, the last two films that won BP with prominent Asian themes/casting are STILL ripped in movie blogs. And poor Chloe Zhao who wasn’t even on screen gets that crap as well.
Hypothetical
If Cameron had said that she didn’t want to make movies with black people and invoked her religious beliefs as the rationale, would that be ok? Would we be making excuses for that? Of course not. So why is it different when it comes to gay people?
That’s why I’m torn. I don’t think the inclusion standards are necessarily bad, but if they become strong enough to compromise what kind of film you want to make, then I’d be against it.
I respect you a lot, but I think it would be naive to think that Moonlight’s campaign didn’t center around “time to give the award to a black narrative.” Part of me also wonders if Divine Joy Randolph’s win isn’t an award for Alexander Payne having a major role be played by a Black actress for the first time.
I think we also need to keep in mind that representation isn’t as much POC vs white people. There are a lot of groups like NAtive Americans, South Asians and East Asians that are underrepresented while African Americans are at this point overrepresented.
Your sister is an awful person, Ryan. I’m sorry you have that dynamic, and that is really awful.
I equally feel confident that Candace Cameron has bigoted friends. I personally am Jewish and went to college in the South where people would call me dirty jew or say I killed Jesus. I’m not a fan of Christians either, and I dislike other Jews who think that this is a Judeo-christian nation, because I don’t think Christianity has Jewish interests at heart.
However, I think there’s freedom of religion, and we have to find some line for not punishing people just for being Christian. But I think we can all agree that Hollywood is a very, very liberal place.
Candice Cameron herself didn’t say gays are evil or anything like that. She might be associated with that, and she has a right to make stories that don’t include gay people. I don’t believe in the doctrine that all stories MUST include gay people. I was responding to a point that there’s room in Hollywood to write stories that don’t have gay people as well. I think even if Cameron is rich, her ability to get whatever she wants greenlit, might suffer.
All that poor detective had to do in Wicker Man was take up Britt Eckland’s invitation for a booty call…
It’s not whether critics succeeded in ostracizing Chris Pratt. It’s that they didn’t take his statements at will.
Pratt didn’t even belong to that church. He was falsely associated with going to that church, but didn’t want to throw them under the bus
You’re the editor for a site where Sasha Stone is explicitly endorsing Trump on Twitter! I, on the other hand, live in Washington DC and joined in protests outside the offices of Lindsay Graham and JD Vance for ruining the foundations of democracy with their statements, and I have spent 8 weeks over the past 3 years working for the Democratic party. It’s just not true that I’m a Republican.
I think it’s extremely important to throw out there that one can be on board with FAIR for All, Quillette, and Bari Weiss and against wokeness, WITHOUT being Republican or bigoted.
I’m ok if we disagree. and I’m sorry if you take that as a threat to LGBT rights, but I think that Republicans are the ones you should be going after, not centrists like Fair for All, Quillette, or Bari Weiss
There’s an incredible song by the god-tier guitarist Richard Thompson called “Outside of the Inside”. Thompson, a Sufi Muslim, said that it was a song about the Taliban’s view of the world, but added that it could be seen as a condemnation against any religious fundamentalism. This site is goofy about links, or I would post one, but look up the song, it’s brilliant. As are all his records.
The verses that still jump at me are below,
I’m familiar with the cover
I don’t need to read the book
I police the world of action
Inside’s where I can never look
Got no time to help the worthless
Lotus-eaters, Mandarins, crooks
there’s a message on the wind
Calling me to glory somewhere
There are signs too deep for the dumb
Like perfume in the air
And when I get to Heaven
I won’t realize that I’m there
Thanks Ryan, that makes sense. I have very little experience with html coding and often feel intimidated by it. If WordPress insists on having two #1s, then so be it.
As always, I appreciate the effort you put into fine-tuning articles.
Darling,
Please don’t think I’m targeting your comments in an attempt to dismantle your claims, okay?
But you do seem willing to welcome a tolerance for stances on both ends of the spectrum.
So all I’m doing here is letting you know that the “fairforall” site you quote is rightwing, anti-woke, and specifically anti-CRT.
They call themselves “Foundation Against Intolerance and Racism” — which sure sounds cool. But it’s actually the same Orwellian word-play that GW Bush tried to use when he called his devastating give-away to the logging industry “The Healthy Forest Initiative”
So — since you are obviously interested in hearing both sides of an issue, here’s another statement from the American Library Association.
(The American Library Association was founded in 1876)
(Foundation Against Intolerance and Racism sprung up in 2021)
The ALA says:
Ironic that this LONG thread about Darling broke out in a comments section for an article that said Oscar needs to be more AMERICAN
Pratt has the acting range of a potato. He’s going to need to substantially improve his skills or he will end up in streaming purgatory.
Chris Pratt got crap because he preemptively declared that his show got bad reviews because of his religious beliefs. Never dawned on him that his show got bad reviews because it was a bad show. He likely didn’t do himself any favors when he kept bragging about how healthy his kid he had with his second wife was when it’s well known that the kid he had with Anna Faris had substantial developmental issues. He came off like an A-hole about that.
And Candace Cameron? What Ryan said below.
Since it’s been pointed out that you can pass the inclusion standards with extreme ease without changing an actual thing ON SCREEN, the notion that “artistic integrity” has been compromised is simply not true. And there are some people who are deliberately distorting what the inclusion standards are saying in order to grind their own axes.
Oppenheimer was literally an all white film on screen. But if you saw the Oscars you saw a female editor and a female producer hoisting statues. If you looked at the tech credits on IMDB, you saw women as department heads in nearly half of the departments. You saw lots of women, Asians, Latinos, African-Americans as techs on the film. The idea or belief that Rustin or Moonlight had an “edge” over their competitors because there were black faces on screen a) isn’t true and b) kind of shows why the inclusion standards were needed to begin with.
I tried to fix that glitch, Cameron, but the automatic HTML code in WordPress that adds numbers to paragraphs choked when jpg illustrations were inserted after point #4.
It looked a lot worse before I tinkered with it, (the margins were all over the place) — but I gave up on my clinical perfectionism after spending more time on it than it was worth.
Believe me, nobody is bothered more by formatting hiccups than an OCD misfit like me. It distresses the fuck out of me.
I had not the slightest clue who Candace Cameron even was.
a 10-second google threw this in my face:
No doubt a certain type of straight person thinks a statement like that is just grand.
But any straight person who’s not deepdown a hateful bigot can easily see why it’s offensive.
Because here’s what she’s saying: “LOL, can’t you understand that LGBTQ characters can’t appear in movies about good families and faith in the Lord!”
She’s saying LGBTQ characters don’t exist in “good families.”
She’s saying there’s no such thing as an LGBTQ person that has faith in the Lord.
She’s saying LBGTQ people can’t even be Christians.
Hope this clears things up for you, Darling.
Also: Candace Cameron is wealthy beyond the wildest of dreams of 99.9% of mere mortals. She’s gonna be just fine.
So what if she lost a few friends who are disgusted by her nasty attitude. I feel quite confident that she’s got plenty of friends who are crude stupid bigots.
Wonder how come I’m sneering?
I have a sister who thinks me being gay disrupts her hardcore MAGA vision of what constitutes a “good family.”
So, for the past 11 years, I have not been invited to be a character in her lavish family holiday celebrations in her multi-million-dollar mansion.
Darling,
(gonna preface some comments with 1965-style Darling today, to add a veneer of sophistication.)
You can make good points without being disingenuous.
Chris Pratt was not “ostracized for going to church.”
He just raised a lot of eyebrows by pledging his allegiance to a specific billion-dollar megachurch that has a messy and well-documented history of racist and anti-LGBTQ discrimination.
Also, let’s have a look at the founder of that church:
Also, Darling,
Chris Pratt is so “ostracized” that he starred in the #2 and #4 box-office juggernauts of 2023.
Both his movies kicked the shit out of Oppenheimer’s domestic box-office haul.
It would probably help to cool down online discourse if every mean tweet didn’t set butthurt MAGA hair on fire, so that they would quit screeching about being victimized all the fucking time, darling.
Has the liberal media attacked conservative celebrities? Sure. But look at what they have done to Mariah Carey, Britney Spears, Whitney Houston, Michael Jackson, George Michael, Madonna, Princes Diana, Janet Jackson, Robert Downey Jr., Kim Kardashian, Lindsay Lohan, Anne Hathaway, Jennifer Lopez, Will Smith, James Franco, Justin Timberlake and I can go on and on.
I think Candace Cameron and Chris Pratt are not doing so badly. If that’s McCarthyism what would you call how the media have treated Mariah and Britney? A holocaust?
Amazingly insightful post and I totally agree with you. With the DEI initiatives in place, I mostly see artistic integrity compromised, and I just wonder if they’re changing historic details and adding black or lesbian couples to meet the DEI requirements. I think adding Black people into period pieces ruins historic accuracy in many cases (I’m kind of borderline on Jerrod Carmichael’s placement in Poor Things, for example), and I kind of wonder if Hamilton did a good thing there, or if people misinterpreted Hamilton to realize what worked on stage might work on film. I think it’s also the principle of the thing. Film makers need to be free to make what they want to make. I’m not sure of whether I’m opposed to it, because they can do behind-the-camera scenes.
I think what’s worse is if DEI existed and we still discriminated and voted for stuff that was more woke. For instance, if Napoleon and Rustin both meet the DEI standards, then is there really a need to vote for Rusin over Napoleon because it’s a more inclusive/woke film? Even if Napoleon doesn’t have black actors front and center, that doesn’t mean that they don’t have representation behind the camera.
Again, DEI has positives and minuses, but if it levels the playing field so that Rustin doesn’t have an edge over Napoleon, or say Moonlight doesn’t have an edge over La La Land and people are voting for quality alone, then I’m for it.
I think the 10-best-picture field was the smartest thing the Academy has ever done.
https://fanfare.pub/why-the-expanded-best-picture-field-is-the-best-thing-the-oscars-have-ever-done-0782fc80c33d
I do think that an artist who makes a film that goes against woke trends does carry risk of being ostracized/demonized by the press. Look at Candice Cameron who just wanted to make films with heterosexual couples. She wasn’t against her castmates making gay TV shows. Then her cast mates broke with her and demonized her.
Chris Pratt got crap just for going to church and being slightly conservative.
Look at the way liberal reviewer rips him apart for his “blue collar views”
https://www.polygon.com/22559679/the-tomorrow-war-review-chris-pratt
Sasha is maybe going off the deep end that any of this affects the Oscars, but there is a certain McCarthyism in the arts for sure. Look at how libraries are not equally collecting books of both sides on the cultural divide anymore:
https://news.fairforall.org/p/the-freedom-to-read-isnt-just-about
I don’t think the Oscars are or were ever broken. It’s always been only for movie fans.
aww, you made my day, Jerm. The admiration society we have is mutual. I still plan to come back to this, to offer a couple of tales of my own young adventures with a Baptist upbringing.
(And something I found out even as a preteen church urchin: Preacher’s Kids are the coolest.)
I accidentally signed up for two different varieties of BFI. 7-day and 14-day free rides. Now I have to be careful which one to cancel.
I’ll come back with a better reply later.
I first saw Darling in a campus film society screening. Way back then, I was still formulating the attitudes of my own social façade — and “chic but also casually awful” really appealed to me. (Still does!)
Yes I agree we can see Schlesinger trying to be a “bad boy” by touching on things that I assume nobody was supposed to be touching in 1965. But I get off on that. I try to dial back my brain to various past eras to put myself in the mindset of the times.
I like how, at times, he seems to be doing a Fellini homage, showing us La Dolce Vita in London. And that shabby-glam Paris debauchery.
Julie Christie is just so exquisite though. Cheeky and spoiled one moment, anxious and vulnerable the next.
This might sound weird or a stretch, but something about her demeanor is similar to Zendaya, to me. That surface sheen of unearthly beauty makes them fearless enough to pull goofy expressions. Nothing they can do screw up their faces can make them any less gorgeous. Also the way they can both pout like rotten brats and make it look hot.
Yes I way overestimated my ability to stay up to do any Ripley. Passed out with headphones on.
But I checked the first 15 minutes which is plenty enough to know I’m gonna bask in the inky noir visuals.
Robert Elswit and the production designers going hard for those Emmys.
Something about the interview with stiff Brit in Darling who is unaware that he’s confessing that he’s gay-bait. Reminds of something else I saw on Twitter just yesterday where a dubious “str8” dude is saying and revealing the exact same thing. Some things like that are so comically timeless across the decades. I hope I can remember the tweet to find so I can show you.
Oh I know! Just remembered. Will be easy to find. I’m gonna love sharing this.
Later, darlings!
“I’m not shaming. I’m only saying stop pretending. It’s like watching sharks try to be vegetarians. You are who you are, and America is what it is — 70% white, mostly heterosexual, mostly Christian.”
These sentences rather seem to emphasize the undeniable importance of “Pretending to be Woke”.
Oh for sure. I can see I might spring for the bargain annual deal when my 2-week freebie runs out.
The BFI restorations are so richly detailed. Velvety.
I need to study your comment style so I learn to be more even-tempered, Christophe.
Just that some people write things so recklessly abrasive, I get all scuffed up and defensive.
I agree with everything you’ve said here.
Today we’ll post our long-gestating thing! But I have to work a half-day first. It’ll be around noon here, so 7ish your time.
Yeah, I love both films and their lead female performances and don’t understand the need to pit them against each other as though one had robbed the other. The Sound of Music is one of the most successful films in history (and rightly so) and already won Best Picture as well as a slew of other Oscars (and rightly so), Julie Andrews had already won an Oscar the year before, so yeah the Academy was right to make a little room where it could for that darling performance of Julie Christie, it took nothing away from the cult status of TSoM or Andrews but allowed us to remember that darling film which I’d probably have never had the idea to watch if not for Christie’s Oscar.
Just on the home page I can see three films I would recommend: Kind Hearts and Coronets (personal favorite), Contempt (it’s French but has lovely views of Italy (and Brigitte Bardot’s butt)) and The Wicker Man.
A lot to unpack here. Some good stuff, and some … not so good stuff.
I agree that reducing the best picture lineup would be a good idea. Five might be too few, but ten is definitely too many. This year was an exception; most of the time there are multiple clunkers in the BP race. And while the Oscars have never really matched up with box office, most nominees were at least reasonably popular. No longer. Only three BP nominees this year were in the top 50 box office for the year (Barbenheimer and KOTFM). That’s not real good if you want people interested in the awards. Also, like the post war years, the number of releases is lower than it was; the number of popular releases way lower. You can thank COVID, streaming, and strikes for that.
I disagree on international being separated out. Keep it the way it is now, but eliminate the requirement for submission by country. Have it like animated. Eligible like everyone else, but an additional category for foreign language films released that year.
Get rid of the DEI requirements. They are performative virtue-signaling and don’t really accomplish anything. Any film released by a studio or established indie can meet the requirements with laughable ease just with the back office staffing. But most publicity has focused on the storytelling, casting, and crew requirements, which only provides a cudgel for conservatives to bash Hollywood with. It also can make even someone like myself (politically I am center left), wonder if a particular story line or non-white character is there for DEI or virtue-signaling reasons or because it is integral to the story or they were best for the part. I tend to assume honest motives, but I would rather not even have cause to think of ulterior ones.
The Democratic Party and Hollywood have been joined at the hip since forever. That won’t change. And I don’t worry about Obama getting a Netflix deal or Reiner making a movie about Christian nationalists. As Dems go, Obama is pretty sensible, and Rustin is considered a pretty good film. And some Democrat filmmakers are popular even with conservatives. Ron Howard and Steven Spielberg come to mind.
Sound of Freedom is responsible for its own demonization. Its marketing was aimed largely at evangelicals. Such movies tend to be regarded with disdain by reviewers and the establishment, usually with good reason. Having its subject and its lead actor advocating wild conspiracy theories didn’t help. It also wasn’t especially good. Not terrible, but hardly distinguished. In a weak year, and without its political/cultural baggage, I could see supporting actor for Bill Camp as a possibility. Even some of the bad reviews praised his performance.
Not sure about hosting. I remember one year there was no host. The presenters did their own stuff. As I recall, it worked reasonably well.
As to what is wrong with Hollywood today, I think it has to do with being excessively risk-averse and lacking imagination. And budgets are going to have to come down. No more 10 figure paydays – for anybody. And stop running franchises into the ground. It wastes money and talent, and alienates movie-goers.
I only got one week free. I don’t even need that. I can’t think of one British film that’s worth watching.
I want to stay up to watch Ripley, but I will struggle to stay awake and fall asleep only to wake an hour later with extreme insomnia which I try to eliminate by watch Morning Joe. Oh what a world.
As with all “old” movies, it takes me some time to get in the proper state of mind. Well, at least ones that are forward thinking as this one is. I always have to wonder where in the timeline does it fit. I want to consider Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf here. Well that movie was 1966 I think, but the play was a couple of years earlier. Did the Albee play influence this film? All of that matters.
Because parts do seem kinda cliche now, even though they must have seemed groundbreaking at the time.
But, yeah, Schlesinger’s vision is pretty incredible for that time, I am actually surprised at some of the elements included. Hollywood was more open minded than I had ever guessed.
Moments really struck me – like the opening sequence with the “My Story” billboard covering the world hunger billboard. Combined with the Black servants at that auction and the woman eating a finger food when discussing stopping hunger.
And what was the guy early on being interviewed complaining about how some homosexuals see the light of day. And then homosexuals are sprinkled throughout. The inclusions were obviously political and meant to stick out, but today, it just seems odd for it all to be so obvious.
One thing is clear now. Any time I want I can toss aside an entire shelf of books yelling “I hate books” and get away with it. “I was just re-enacting a famous scene from Darling, darling.”
Thanks for pointing this out. Julie Christie is definitely better than that Andrews chick. Maybe she and that nun should have sung Climb Every Mountain poolside in bikinis. That would have won her something special.
you should teach a class called White Studies 101! You can teach it ironically!
Like at Harvard, or one of those other leftist universities that are more interested in raising the profile of minorities than passing traditions from alumnus to son.
Are you an American or one of them furriners???
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/ab8c420dd7da0919cab8b78a4e9d65656b9482709928ce220fdb4d4738155bbb.gif
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/f06b6934af0677700a136bab821dd560932689ba00eabb1c44e76bb43e7630e7.gif
I talked myself into rewatching Darling tonight too! It’s so suave.
With fun gay nods thrown in by that rascal Schlesinger.
BFI Classics.
14-day free trial.
(This is how I’m staying awake to watch Andrew as Ripley, a couple of hours from now.)
My living room TV is busy binging 3 Body Problem all evening. Again.
3BP is back in the Netflix #1 most popular position today. Kicked Moses down to #2.
35 minutes into Darling and Julie has yet to show us her nekkid butt. (She will)
Neither has Dirk. (He won’t)
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/c67b91b8b62d0b3683bbf8b43ec4b961560ca0a38eabbb4a1d6a8201278d4edf.jpg
Let’s just enjoy the films because there is no arguing with Sasha on her points. Her views can basically be reduced to the following:
1. Marginalised people for a long time were marginalised (blacks, Asians, LGBT community)
2. But now the minorities and their allies are the real powerful caste in the US (and by extension the world), and now non-minority groups are not getting a fair shake in representation. In fact, they are demonized.
3. Even more, minority groups and their allies look down on Americans who don’t accept this new status quo. Minority groups are thus now the new elite, but annoyingly they don’t recognise that they are the elite.
4. Just because you don’t follow the ideologies of the minorities and their allies, that does not make you evil. Trump voters are just like everyone else. They just think different and should be respected.
5. If you don’t respect these people who think differently to you then you are promoting a new McCarthyism, even worse than the 1950s!
6. True diversity means representing ALL ideologies and classes of people. So that means also telling the stories of non-minority groups, warts and all. If you don’t go out of your way to represent these people, then you are silencing the silent majority. This means that both Hollywood and Western civilization is destroying itself.
So what should we do to fix this absolutely awful situation?
1. Let’s go back to how things were before. Before, minorities were not represented, but so what? They are minorities. We need to reflect what most people are like.
2. Recognise that we need to respect ALL Americans. Most Americans are white and heterosexual. And most of those probably are a bit homophobic and racist. But still, that’s America dude! So Hollywood should include representations of racists (because they exist). If they say something that some minorities think is offensive (then so be it). If the mainstream populaton i.e. the real Americans and not the corrupt lefty elites accept it, then that is all that matters.
3. Why do ALL films now have LGBT characters? They are only 8% of the population. How can you expect 92% of the population to be inundated by the 8%? It is communist to expect absolutely everyone to accept this. This is actually the opposite of TRUE diversity.
4. “Trans women ARE women” is ideology. Most Americans recognise the physical differences between a man and a woman. It has always been thus. In fact, it is rather insulting that most Americans now need to watch non-binary and emasculated actors absolutely destroy masculinity and femininity. Of course they vote for Trump, I mean what do you expect when you are forcing gender ideology on them?
5. To completely represent America and not pander to Democrat pinkos, we need to bring back films: a) in English. b) that have real men and real women c) are mostly made up of white and heterosexual characters to reflect the demographics of America d) make sure that films return to being offensive to minority groups otherwise they are killing art and e) if they are a bit sexist, or racist, or homophobic, then deal with it, because that is America, and we are all equal in the land of the free, and if the pinko commies, evil “do gooders” who always want to feel good about themselves, don’t like it, well, good. That is REAL diversity. That is appealing to EVERYONE. Not just the pinko commies who live in a bubble.
The issues are:
1. In moral philosophy it is not all relative. People feel strongly that certain ideologies are better than others. There are good arguments to be made that non-racism etc. is a better moral position than a racist one. It is true that ideologies shift and evolve over time, but you can’t stop people feeling strongly about it, even if it is to assuage their white guilt and feel good about themselves.
2. Hollywood execs are not stupid. They make calculations. No studio put money into Origin (one of the best films of the year by the way). At best, they will seek “neutral” content, like superhero movies. But they would be shooting themselves in the head if they went back to misogynist, racist and homophobic stereotypes in their product. Sure about 30% of Americans would like that. But the 50% of liberals wouldn’t. And it will probably make about 20% of Republic voters uncomfortable. So there is no financial incentive to appease the MAGA crowd.
3. Sure, the ultra woke and their cancel culture campaigns can be annoying. But so can the counter culture anti-woke campaigns. They are both annoying.
4. There is a cultural evolution sure. This means that many people do not feel comfortable when content offends their gay brother, black best friend, Asian neighbor. Does that mean they are killing art? We are spoilt for content now. So we all have a million options that align with our worldview to watch. There are consequences to this, sure. But blame the technology.
5. The cult of the individual has been amplified with the technologies of algorithms. We are never going back to watching the same films and tv shows or listening to the same songs. For every Barbie and Oppenheimer, we all enter our own dark cave of dank content and find people online who share our interests. This stems from the technology and not from French philosophers corrupting college campuses.
6. I personally welcome all films being made. Bring on another 100 Sound of Freedoms (which I haven’t watched). If there is an audience for it, then it should be made. But this does not mean that someone personally should have to make a Sound of Freedom if they don’t want to. Making a film or a piece of art requires millions of dollars and years of work. Why should someone be forced to make a film about something they don’t care for? Minorities had to fight for decades to get their stories told. As the Sound fo Freedom shows, it can be done. But if a particular studio chooses that it is not for them, it is not exactly the end of the West. It is capitalism.
7. Just because a piece of art is made it doesn’t mean that anyone is forced to watch it. A so-called “real American” has literally millions of hours of content available on streaming that does not promote any “woke” message. And noone has to watch the Sound of Freedom if it isn’t for them. I do plan on watching it though …
I wouldn’t mind these culture war posts if they also
1. linked current trends to changes in technologies
2. linked current trends to global economic changes i.e. the changing nature of the industry and the value of the international box office.
I completely get the argument that Hollywood should be America first but there is no point making that argument if there is no recognition that American industry has always been expansionary, seeking external markets. And Hollywood is no different.
Making it ALL about wokeness and culture wars seems limiting when there is so much one can say …
Off to watch Darling.
I’ve been hearing a lot about this Julia Crispy lately, some young ingenue I guess who I fear can’t act and just relies on her beauty.
This is the hardest part about being gay.
Please do not worry Sasha about the evil gays or trans or for that matter the truly crazy far right maga types. Hollywood may disappear or is in decline as your foreshadow (certainly not currently, but others, not yourself because of your particular narrative, have covered off reasons for this) but that’s not because there were too many blacks or muslims or gays or scary sexually mutliated children cast in “certain films”. But rather AI. That’s what is going to change the entire altered reality viewing experience. And re altered reality, I’m not talking about your beloved trump cult.
What changed? “The Great Awokening!” (wink wink)
You are a bad boy. Don’t dismiss a musical’s responsibility to be honest about history. The best musical of all time is fundamentally a bio-pic after all.
And I’d argue that today’s political and social climate is best captured in a musical from the early 90’s Just shows you that history does repeat itself. I know you have a ton on your plate and I ask too much of your time, but…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UP4VwmwkI1c
Joel Osteen is sooo hot. I believe whatever he says.
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/dc0f34e680bf0c1cb57196dedfffff5275c580f10c7606b8235e5721c2f2d07c.png .
she likes to write articles in which right-wing sites will feature. That way she gets more clicks.
LOL. Better than me, I remember almost none of mine.
Thanks to everyone here on this site that I found about All Of Us Strangers. When are we doing that poll? I put about 10 Italian gay movies of 2024 in my suggestions.
Ryan’s a swell guy. No need to be afraid of him.
Kind’ve tired of the #OscarSoWhite deal. Nominees shouldn’t have to apologize for getting nominated or receiving an award over a quota pick.
I thought of how to say it safely.
There is a contributor here who writes long contributions. He wrote a comment once. What he wrote, I can’t find it but I will try to remember. He wrote about how he does not mind when Asian or LGBTQ or Black get nominated for the movies about themselves.
He said he is alright with them getting attention at the Oscars but he wishes they would not win so many Oscars now. He thinks when they win all the time it must be for woke reasons.
If I may, I am not willing to understand anybody thinking this way—> “I was in favor of women, gays, non-whites being noticed at the Oscars. The problem is when they started winning.”
Yesterday I was nervous to say anything on this article. I was reading what everybody wrote. I got scared for everybody that spoke openly their feelings. I was scared the same I would be if watching friends dance on rim edge of a volcano. LOL. That might explode and erupt. For along time last year I did not comment, I was scared to. I did not want myself to get banned.
Sasha Stone is a nice person that I used to follow on both of her twitters. I asked her a question one time last year and got blocked on her secondary twitter. It was not a bad question so I don’t know why she blocked me. Now I don’t bother her and I don’t bother Ryan Adams in his DMs. I wanted to have respect and for me not be a nuisance to anybody. What I wanted to say now today is this only— I appreciate this is a website where people can say what they want this way. Sashe Stone is a good person for allowing it. Writing this gives me ban immunity is what I hope. LOL.
Lack of evidence of the conspiracy is proof of the conspiracy
Alex Jones 101
I loved Dune, but my point about WB still stands. I think WB knows this after their mad dash to sign Cruise to make an Oscar bait film.
Barbie lost because it was a WB film. Top Gun lost because a) it was a Paramount film (when’s the last time they won BP) and b) Cruise’s prominent role in a nasty cult sits badly with many voters and it’s easy to express that anger at his cult via the anonymous Oscar ballot
Every year has a completely different dynamic than the year before. Different field, different narratives, different campaign ebbs and flows. The same “wokesters” who gave EEAAO 7 Oscars gave a three hour all-white movie about nuclear physics 7 Oscars the next year. Different year, different field.
And no, I don’t understand the argument about international films. I’m not going to repeat this in detail like I have before, but international films starting in the 60’s REPEATEDLY landed topline Oscar nominations and the sky didn’t fall, the earth kept turning. Those nominations were seen as earned and no one objected. Z damn near won in 1969 because it had the New York Film Critics’ prize which was usually a good precursor. So what exactly changed where we now are actually discussing the merits of throwing international films out of the main categories.
Of course, Barbie wasn’t going to be the new Lawrence of Arabia. How silly.
It was the new 2001.
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/1ddca74667029c5f93b48852262a25ef6c63f4113b605b1690b12b5e7ef9646e.jpg
Those without facts rely on conspiracy. It’s easier.
If we accept Sasha’s argument then it is a Hollywood problem, not an Oscars problem. This year shows that if you give the Academy a high brow blockbuster like Oppenheimer then they will shower it with awards. As noted below, films like Barbie and Top Gun have never won, so nothing has changed. The problem is that Hollywood is making fewer Oppenheimers than it used to. Give the academy a non-woke serious blockbuster like Oppenheimer then it will win every year.
And the acting awards just go to show that it is very rare for a narrative to emerge to sweep up the wins for woke reasons. EOTAAO is probably an exception but as I keep saying, people just loved that movie. It is one of the few films in recent years, where woke and non-woke people I know just absolutely adored it and raved about it. But otherwise the winners are business as usual pretty much. And outside of an elite few, nobody even knows about the diversity rules for nominations, which of course have not made any film ineligible that we know of.
So where Sasha is right is in saying that over time the Academy is aligning more with critics. But that is simply because the rest of Hollywood fare is so absolutely awful and genre films will always be the exception than the rule for awards bodies. As they have always been.
But the main issue I have with this piece is the definition of woke. What is woke about Anatomy of a Fall? And The Holdovers? And The Zone of Interest? Etc. Absolutely nothing unless having a black character or non-English dialogue is now all of a sudden left wing propaganda. You know there are right wing black people all over the place and outside of the US people who speak different languages sit on all sides of the political spectrum.
Although I don’t agree with Sasha on excluding international films, I understand the argument. But please do not conflate the international with wokeness and left wing propaganda. I mean this year the only woke film was Barbie and that was American ….
Looking forward to Almodovar’s new film, but I found Dune 2 a real bore and very tedious. Also very awful acting from what are usually excellent actors. I was surprised by the strong reviews. Personally I would only give it tech nominations, but for me it has no business being nominated for best film, director, or screenplay. But what do I know?
Not again please. Stop this shit with “Top Gun and Barbie should’ve won BP”. Those kind of movies never won, just never. Top Gun is not a new From Here to Eternity and Barbie is not a new Lawrence of Arabia. And please spare comparison to Titanic too just on box office reasons. They just aren’t that kind of cinematic achievement. Why should Oscars be a another Popcorn Awards? Just to improve ratings for like 0.7%?
I never was a fan of 10 nominees in Best Picture so I would be happy to see a comeback to five. But I also must admit that I really like most of winners of the preferential ballot era.
I had a hellish day at work, too, and hope yours improved.
Absolutely, Jerm. You see it so clearly, my friend.
And then the truly diabolical thing about rightwing grifters like Osteen — when he tells rich people that God has personally blessed them with wealth, the flipside of that is that Osteen is telling the sick and the poor that they have not earned God’s generosity.
If we’re not rich, then it means God has abandoned us?
It’s so screwed up, right?
But gullible MAGA who are lucky in life swallow that shit like it’s fudge candy.
Most awesome and spiritual thing about Joel Osteen is that he’s just a humble rightwing man of the cloth.
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/d742bc02e43fcc1eb03ee83e5aaf96d80f15d3a4a0cd295efd5daecb264543f7.jpg
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/9517ebe4ef32b14dfe1456e0f20bd1aea97f361693d6d8ee6ff071909174df3c.jpg
*****Audibly laughing*****
Of course it is. And it will have the same result for religion that the Gilded Age churches had
The horrible thing that is anger-some about Prosperity Gospel, is “give to me, tithe to me and my ministry, and God will give you prosperity, God will multiply your wealth”….same group of people also tell people that God can heal your ailments if you have enough faith….and if you don’t have enough faith then it’s because you are sinning.
It’s all a distortion of scripture.
well, I’d say that key factor this year, is the long foreign language master finally making a Hollywood film… Bertolucci swept with The Last Emperor, Forman won twice (One Flew over Cuckoo’s Nest and Amadeus), some could argue to add Ang Lee as well (however he’s considered half-American, isn’t him?). That can really distort the race, if The Room Next Door is raved.
Other than that, Dune II is literally, the unquestionable frontrunner, with stronger reviews than the already raved original. It just needs to be careful in its campaigning, and also hope that nothing “distracts” Hollywood from its success.
From the 3 films I mentioned…
Dune II is almost warranted Best Director, Adapted Screenplay and Film Editing nominations, plus sweeping technicals, in nominations at least. Best Picture is a given, in a field of 10, for a nomination.
The Apprentice? Likely an acting showcase. Actual events. Recognizable main characters with actors transforming into then, and probably high tension. This could be Ferrari, though. But so far, it’s one of the films that is warranted most anticipation.
Almodóvar’s? 3 acting noms at least if JUST any good. Screenplay nom. Score, Cinematography, quite likely. Director as well, golden chance for another hilariously iconic moment with him accepting an Oscar for a 3rd time. Bonus points: he really knows how to throw parties and to promote his films, he’s a studio on his own.
Those are the 3 films I will put at the top 3 in GoldDerby, when predicting starts.
I have little confidence that WB is winning topline Oscars as long as Zaslav is there.
So far, I have faith in 3 contenders
1. Dune II, likely to do a Mad Max: Fury Road and go up to a Return of the King, if it is a weak year. De facto frontrunner, until anything impresses more.
2. The Apprentice. It really can capture lightning in a bottle. Pro-Trump? Happy to see his beginnings (despite probably harsh commentary on it). Anti-Trump? Totally happy to see a film that looks back at how the nightmare started to build. Stan and Bakalova are automatic contenders hitting all the right notes to be (at least) finalists. I have more faith in Bakalova than Stan, though.
3. The Room Next Door. It’s the film that half Hollywood (or more) have been decades waiting to see… for Pedro Almodóvar to surrender and do an Almodóvar film but with Hollywood stars. That Moore, Swinton and Turturro would be hugely buzzed is out of question. Without the subtitles barrier, it’s the indie / auteur film of the year, before it’s over with filming. With the precedent of “Parallel Mothers”, breaking through for Actress and Score, without much time to build up, and being Spanish spoken, and after two masterpieces in a row, it’s really likely to compete for the critical darling spot.
Anything else? Maybe Blitz or Lanthimos’ next. But your guess is as good as mine.
EDIT: Sing Sing looks like a huge contender as well… and I’d say Domingo may even win.
I found the statement odd and bizarre also, since most of what we know about Trump is courtesy of the great man himself talking while filmed or typed, presumably by him given his inimitable style, on social media or repeated by cabinet members he personally approved and his ever more morphing and strange team of rag tag lawyers.
It seems Sasha remains blissfully unaware that Trump is a con man, a more crass buffoonish Joel Osteen if you please.
This article is baffling. Maybe it’s click bait? Maybe it’s a call for attention? Our lady has always been provacative, but it makes me wonder – what is her next party trick?
She writes: “Back in the 1950s, the box office was having another moment of crisis.” Another, like now? Obviously with movie theatres shut because of covid, box office would plummet. Since then, box office both domestically and globally has been steadily rising to near pre pandemic heights.
https://www.boxofficemojo.com/year/
https://www.boxofficemojo.com/year/?area=XWW&grossesOption=totalGrosses
Depending on how much we are able and willing to spend on various in-home viewed streaming services, there is a plethora of stunning filmed entertainment to be had. In addition to giving filmmakers an additional revenue after theatrical release, some large streaming services (e.g. Netflix, Amazon Prime Video, Apple TV Plus) have actually bought or produced films for exclusive streaming distribution. This has resulted in a boom for movie production.
Just this year, one actor in particular is 1st billed in 2 films that are now both at the $630 million mark globablly and rising given both are still in theatres.
If anything, there is more choice and I’d bet more viewing of filmed entertainment than at any other point in our past 100+ years.
Sasha may well wish for the demise of “Hollywood” in order for those nasty libs to be owned, but if anything, the opposite is our current reality.
That bit here a couple months back had her claiming it was FBI plants who “instigated” this.
I’m having a hellish day at work, which prevents me from explaining how much The Sound of Music veered from the actual historical fact.
And that’s fine! It’s a Broadway musical! It’s not a PhD History Seminar. Poetic license made a lovely charming movie.
I would never want to ding or taint your obvious heartfelt fondness for The Sound of Music. But the actual chain of events the led the Von Trapp’s to safety was nothing like the cozy story the movie told.
It’s ok, Aaron. I’m not mad. I just get frustrated when you — or anyone — feels the need to drag another actress down or sneer at another movie in order to justify how they feel about their own personal favorites.
Darling is gem of a film. It’s an iconic, complex, layered performance by Julie Christie, who was about to embark on an astonishing string of ’70s Golden Age masterpieces for the next 15 years.
(btw, Julie Andrews famously went topless 15 years later, in a movie directed by her hubby Blake Edwards called S.O.B., but it failed to win her this imaginary Best Nipples Oscar.)
So I wasn’t going to cower down and let Julie Christie or the Darling be smeared with accusations that the only reason she won was for being sexy. The movie is bold in its depiction of a free-spirited women, but it’s not even explicitly sexual.
I did omit the fact that Julie Andrews won her only Oscar barely 2 yrs before sound of music was released …”
Factually inaccurate.
Julie Andrews won her Oscar for Mary Poppins on April 5, 1965.
The Sound of Music premiered on March 2, 1965.
The Sound of Music premiered a full month before Julie Andrews won the Sexless Mary Poppins Oscar.
Every generation needs a leader.
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/9c362fb2cb7cf2c2d763737599bd155505ab281daad71b52713b65ef46e65c6d.jpg
Prosperity Gospel dogma isn’t really THAT different from Gilded Age churches that tried to wave off shocking levels of American poverty by openly declaring that you were poor because you were morally inferior (and flipside the same churches waved away the venality of the Robber Barons by equating wealth and opulance with piety)
It only took the rise of actual Marxism in Europe to knock some sense into the power brokers of the day, thus the “Progressive Era”
It’s as old as time that Hollywood gets obsessed with the shiny object and drives it completely into the ground failing to have a pipeline of different films. For all the talk that “wokeness” killed Marvel films, the reality is that 33 films and 25 TV shows became such overkill that diminishing returns set in pretty hard.
I don’t know which is worse. The hyperidealization of Trump supporters, or the infantilization of them (where we are expected to permanently walk on eggshells around them because they’re so emotionally fragile and anything violent they might do is because we pushed them to it). But to say that MAGA extremism is all made up just simply isn’t true. I can go on Twitter right now and search for the phrase “Big Mike” and find literally THOUSANDS of tweets from MAGAs insisting that Michelle Obama is a man. And not just from MAGA trolls, but from bluecheck conservative influencers. Donald Trump Jr. literally shared a “Big Mike” meme on easter weekend.
Personally, I don’t understand why Trump is brought up here so much because it’s more than a little obvious, or should be more than a little obvious that the man doesn’t have a single solitary cultural interest, which is ironic because some of his supporters loudly insist that he’s the savior of “Western culture”
I actually truly appreciate your clarity no I didn’t know that I absolutely did not mean at all make u get up on wrong wide bed in morning I did omit the fact that Julie Andrews won her only oscar barely 2 yrs before sound of music was released …
I admit I didn’t know much bout darling buy I hope like think I careful in casting ( clearly ) as I admitted b3fore whrn I grateful u she’d light on sonething esp really old stuff u understsnd better than me I only querying Julie Christie role not questioning calibre or quality ot Actress at all.. Def not legendary Julie Christie but I point out and herein I learn valuable lesson… in end a Actress or actor can have one career oscar win ( like Julie Andrews) but be MORE REMEMBERED than a 2 time oscar winner ..( like Emma stone ) and STIL actress’s impact on culture and lasting true truth of time as reference point ( true test of time will shape how tremendous 2 time oscar winner emnq Stone really is so I admit we can’t judge yet) but Julie Andrews and Julie Christie in their oen ways are in my view far more accomplished lasting impression actresses than Francis McDormands, or Emma Stones of today .. both Julie Chrietie and Julie Andrews reshaped the era of cinema through their performances so make no mistake Ryan , I acknowledge not bout number owcar wins it bout lasting LEGACY lasting impression of actor or actresses mul6iple roles .
Like you say thsnx reminding me mate Julie Christie was in Dr. Zhivago a film my dad reminds me of almost every oscar year ..
So thsnk you for reminding me value of actor or actresses lasting impact with only one oscar win .. for clearly Julie Andrews and Julie Christie are truly genuinely rare phenomenal acting talent sin e their time for all time ..
N like you say it very reasonable that oscar hardly ever embrace actresses once they won oscar on debut …
I more at ease in few more ww6s thsn I was I guess with Emma Stone winning 2 Oscars in light this ( what u saying biut fractured truce ? Noooo mate hopefully u see by my tone i make effort happily to you keep o7r truce going for long tim3 5o com3 see? Don’t worry ) 🙂
Thsnk you for u sense of perspective … but it tin4l6 debate too is 2 time winner Emma Stone ij test of time does she stack up to true cultural cin4matic legends in Julie Andrews and Julie Christie ? It fair question ey? Atm I say no way.. I sure plenty pple would agree ..yet in principle this is why can be more beneficial in my view for oscar NOT to rush give an6 actor or Actress 2 oscar wins so close together ( with some exceptions like Tom Hanks) let their first oscar win settle in public conciousness for period of time then give second oscwr if warranted bit ltr in their career ( imo a 10-15 yr gap is fair )
FYI my dad reminds me of Dr.Zhivago legacy once a ur each oscar time u reminded me whwt I forgot Julie Christir was key role in that movie ey ?
Soo perhaps no i admit I was wrong but i didn’t understand in fact fair to say unless one close to 50 yrs old u less likely to understsnd whrn recalling 1960’s era Oscars moments thsn not … but taking into qccountbwhwtbu saying excluding in light wha5 u said Christies role in ‘Darling ‘ I do believe sometimes not always Oscars best Actress choice puts too much stock as Sasha alludes yo in more retail literally ideology that ‘ sex sells ‘ only should be part of equation regarding performance wins oscar not be all end all in some years outcomes …
I note u critique of sound of music u dont regard it as one Hollywood’s most accomplished great musicals? It to msny pple by far not just me is as powerful as it is magical in way it brings real foreboding- no less set at pivotal moment of rise of Hitler spreading his influence into Austria … how it impacts the Von trap family right at time captain Von trapp love for music and sense of fun with the kids and through that embracing through that discover true love with Maria … right as their world threatens be split apart as Nazi political ( eventually) military machine marches across Europe… threatening hijack Von trapped family newly discovered lease of life… it is most landmark powerful instance where real historic events impact on families lives in a changing world… that it goes even further than that to demonstrate risks and stakes to leave their homeland b3hind so nazis cannot capture the vontrapp family… it one most rousing powerful endings of ANY musical ..Hollywood ever made…
So I baffled why u dismiss it as ‘ ditzy’ cos it themes and merging of family rediscovering what one thought they lost trying to survive and thrive take what most precious to sacrifice their hon4lwnd to find life away from impending war this is transcendent landmark musical cinema drama which is why to many SOUND OF MUSIC is a classic a masterpiece and has NOT been matched in it ambition and epic scope ever since it release … in fsct it themes more relevant today than rhey ever been u thoughts? Eso for fate of Europe with Russia creeping closer to banging down Europe’s door and whqt rhey forced on Ukrainian families with no doubt some like that of Von Trapp in sound of music who desperately try to flea Ukraine at time at start of war b3fore it rolls into 5heir town. See?
I have the “privilege” of having grown up in a multicultural society.
It was a society full of Jews, Muslims, Christians, atheists,…
Churches, mosques, synagogues – all next to each other…
Now looking back I can comfortably say that it is the most valuable asset I have ever had. That experience is 10x more valuable than a college degree.
I welcome you to my lawn. Feel the exotic grasses between your fingers. You will be amazed.
“I promise you that the majority of what you know about him and his supporters is propaganda designed to keep you outraged and politically compliant.”
Yup.
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/b0d884834ed2e8d8a0423d788e68cd21445e1d3600c27c49f1db3feda7f39c1f.jpg
Well how timely to discuss Jesus considering this past weekend, killed by the people who hated him for all doing and saying all of these things.
I imagine Jesus to be no particular party in politics. I see him as just speaking truth, telling people how they should live, and just sort of a carefree attitude of living. However, he did respect authority and he told people to follow laws and do what’s right. So many people take these things and twist them to fight a narrative, which is why there are so many almost “definitions” of who Jesus is and what he was.
It is refreshing to have this conversation, I was never planing it. I was always afraid to, and maybe that’s a shame on me. Thank you for your words and expressing your thoughts. We would probably agree more than we disagree about such topics. I do am looked at as a radical in my own family for my beliefs. I welcome it.
NOT JOEL OSTEEN!!!! He’s a con artist through and through.
Thank you for your words in both of your posts. I appreciate your responses more than you know. It did weigh on me and wasn’t sure of how this would be received, which is why I privately messaged you in my worriness.
Christianity has such a rich fabric of people who all believe in the same God and the same Jesus, and it’s beautiful in so many ways. It’s so painful to hear stories of people who were hurt by people who claimed to be a Christian, and so many people choose to walk away from faith because of those instances. Those types of people infuriate me to my core. Nothing makes me madder than people who claim Christianity and just spew anything but Christianity.
Sadly the stories of your mom are common. In my 32 years of life being a pastors kid and working in ministry, I’ve heard countless stories, witnessed countless offenses, and the fact that it is so common breaks my heart.
This Christian Nationalism/fascism needs to be burned down, exposed, and destroyed. I didn’t know Reiner was even doing this documentary, but I truly am looking forward to it. I hope people watch it and see the truth. THIS IS WHAT DOCUMENTARY FILMS ARE FOR!!!
So relieved that the response to my post has been positive and not being hated on, I still would like clarification from Sasha though—I still respect her and admire her.
That’s true.
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/a8960017328c36db3416dad64ef1964f4858b9f8dca40a1b130fe87a9c25cdd4.gif
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/b5914f8a170646e47e9d98b2567ff692e40641c94d1da7141ca55a6d78c98f94.gif
Biden being Catholic is what’s fueling the batcrap crazy evangelical anger. A lot of people truly don’t understand how much evangelicals/pentacostals DESPISE Catholics
Obviously we’ve collectively forgotten that America’s first Catholic President literally had to give a campaign speech insisting that he wouldn’t be taking orders from the Pope.
I loved that Cheech and Chong movie they made about them.
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/9d8fff475046bf44c833bc28e5ae7ef859fc976a50820493b05094744aec9191.jpg
Something I like to ask the people cheering on Christian Nationalism is “which specific Christian denomination gets to be the one in charge and why”. The Founding Fathers damn well knew why this was a problem, and understood the history of centuries of RUINOUS religious warfare in Europe. They sought to prevent that by explicitly designing a SECULAR Republic. And apart from the Mormon business in the 1870’s, we’ve managed to avoid religious warfare. Pulling this thread, which the Christian Nationalists fully intend to do, will get many people killed. The Trump campaign is already using the “Christians and Catholics” rhetoric. Will Catholics clue in? Will anyone else?
Not sure what he’s saying about Sound of Music was maybe the only musical that blended history with characters (unforgettable ones!)
I am just going to cry.
Someone just needs to welcome him to the real world.
“Willkommen, bienvenue, welcome!
Fremde, etranger, stranger.
Gluklich zu sehen, je suis enchante,
Happy to see you, bleibe, reste, stay.”
As for everything else, someone just needs to remember the basic truth…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ajDpk8PH8hg
Maybe. But I think Zone of Interest reallly picked up steam in the end while Killers was slowly dying.
Good to know Sammy!
Just made it public, hadn’t realised.
I am not denying her talent, it’s just that there isn’t very much differentiating her from all of the other pop artists out there. They’ve all been shoved into such a tiny compartment and aren’t allowed to deviate from that tried and true. Some songs, sure, do manage to sound a bit different, but they are still plagued with the same problems. The songs generally have a very simple structure and don’t build to anything. Everything is pretty much there in the first minute, both lyrically and musically. Sure, they may build in intensity and the bridge may offer a surprise but they all go on repeat way too quickly.
These artists also have a tendency to not trust their songs. There are two many vocal acrobatics, runs, and vibrattos and other adornments. Sometimes it’s nice to just let the quality of the song speak for itself. Flourishes are great in moderation. But what’s even better is a melody and lyric combination that attach to your soul. My best advice to pop music these days is “One syllable, one note” Sing the entire song that way, and if it’s boring, throw away the song, it’s no good. And then you can add other aspects of music people love to create a bit more tension leading to a satisfying climax.
So many of these songs are ridiculous collaborations of multiple people, there’s rarely a singular vision allowed to shine through.
Now I know that the following song isn’t aimed at a youthful audience, but what I love about it is the simplicity and purity of the vocal that increases in intensity as more and more layers are added to the music. This song is not disposable. This is a song that just continues to grow on me over time. As the best songs should.
And then notice how the lyrics are actually a metaphor for something deeper and more meaningful.
Taking time out from Sacha’s latest rant I’d like to remind people that today is the 100th anniversary of Marlon Brando ‘s birth and that the Los Angeles City Council has declared April 3 , 2024 as Marlon Brando Day in the city of Los Angeles .
One of the more idiotic charges against Biden is claiming a man who’s a devout Catholic attending mass every Sunday is anti-Christian.
I think the Top-5 would be:
Oppenheimer: BAFTA + DGA
The Holdovers: BAFTA + DGA
Poor Things: BAFTA + DGA
Killers of The Flower Moon: BAFTA + DGA
Anatomy of a Fall: BAFTA (sole non-DGA nominee foreign film)
1. Zone of Interest failed to make the cut for BAFTA Best Film – unlike Flower Moon.
2. Flower Moon got 10 noms. Movies with double digit noms almost always get the top-5 placement at the Oscars.
BAFTA Best Film + DGA has historically been good enough of a combo for a Top-5 placement at the Oscars.
I agree that the field should not have been expanded in a feeble attempt to placate Batman fans.
While I was puzzling over the whole “manly man” thing I wondered if this was a suggestion that the Oscars become more like the AVN awards
Apparently I didn’t
I had to wake up and fuss with Aaron about Julie Christie so now I’m late for work. I’ll still come back to this later, Jerm.
Just quickly though:
Millions and millions of Democrats are genuine Christians.
Millions and millions of LGBTQ+ folks are genuine Christians.
Genuine Christians know and understand this. Millions of genuine conservative Christians understand it too.
What no Democratic Christian or LGBTQ+ Christian will ever be is a christofascist. — which is a thing that sadly and dangerously does exist — and that’s why there’s a word for it.
The term has existed for 54 years. So anyone who wants to trace the origin, can count back to see what was happening in American society circa 1970.
My own mother was run out of her rural Southern Baptist church 15 years ago — a church she had attended for decades — because it became overrun with hateful raging proto-MAGA politics.
It broke her heart. It shattered her. It was the saddest thing to witness.
My own hardcore-MAGA sister suggested to my mom an alternative way to attend Sunday services — on TV. Tele-evangelist.
The sickening charlatan “preacher” my sister recommended to my mom?
Joel Osteen. Look him up if you want to learn about a grifter rightwing fake-“christian” who’s going to hell.
My mom tried to watch that garbage, and it shattered her devout heart all over again.
I’d follow you if your Disqus profile wasn’t private!
Aaron. Good lord. This is the very last thing I wanted to wake up and need to address this morning.
I do wish you wouldn’t, but fuck, here we are again.
I know to you it must seem that I target you for a spanking, but yeesh, can’t you ever ask a simple question instead of always going off on a weird wrong-headed speech.
First let’s distill your thing today down to basics.
So buried in all that is an interesting question: “I always wondered how Julie Andrews lost to Julie Christie in 1965.”
That’s a question that 50 readers here could instantly answer for you, but it seems I’m the only one who ever takes time to school you.
Two major reasons:
1) Julie Andrews had won the Oscar for Mary Poppins in 1964. Do you have any idea how exceedingly rare it is for any actress/actor to win back-to-back Oscars? In 1965 it had only happened twice in Oscar History.
Oddly enough both times occurred in 1937 and 1938 — Spencer Tracy and Luise Rainer both won two Oscars each in those two consecutive years.
The Academy was not going to hand Andrews 2 Oscars in a row for the first two movies she ever made. For two fizzy musicals in a row? In the middle of the swinging sixties? No fucking way.
2) Julie Christie was a vivacious stick of svelte dynamite in the ’60s and ’70s. Aside from her miraculous talent and beauty, she had exquisite good taste in choosing all the movies she signed onto. She was so much in demand that she often made two masterpieces in the same year. (more about that in a minute.)
In 1965, she not only became an international sensation with Darling, Julie Christie also starred in a David Lean epic you may have heard of: Dr Zhivago [which, not that this matters, but Zhivago is the 8th highest grossing movie of all time (adjusted for inflation).]
AMPAS rules prevent any actress from being nominated for two movies in the same category, and it’s a stunning testament to how much Darling was respected that the voters chose it (over Lara in Zhivago) to be her Oscar ticket.
So do you see things more clearly now? Dr Zhivago and Sound of Music each had 10 Oscar Nominations and each of them won 5. This is a perfect example for why “sweeps” are sometimes such a weirdly disgusting letdown: Because when there are more than one outstanding movie nominated for a boatload of Oscars, it’s depressing as hell for true movie-lovers when one of them goes home empty handed (see Tar, for example).
But back to your clumsy question: Julie Christie almost certainly won in 1965 because in the minds of voters she had blown them away in Darling and Dr Zhivago both.
===
Now here’s where I’m gonna get pissed.
On what fucking planet does Sound of Music have more “substance” than Dr. Zhivago or Darling? Sound of Music has many aspects to be praised, but substance is not one of them.
Meanwhile, Darling was directed by (gay) John Schlesinger whose own astonishing career was beginning to peak. 3 more years and he would win the Oscar for Midnight Cowboy — the least sexy X-rated movie ever made.
Darling was written by Frederick Raphael who was one of the classiest most and most erudite authors in the world. Brilliant dude wrote 20 novels and two other genius screenplays that represent the epitome of sophisticated depictions of unravelling relationships: the ultra-charming Two for the Road and the ultra-disturbing Eyes Wide Shut.
Raphael’s screenplay for Darling was an intensely astute character study unlike anything ever written for an actress. He won the Oscar for it.
You say “critics were lukewarm” about Darling? wtf, Aaron.
Darling won 4 BAFTAs (including screenplay, actress & actor)
Darling won Best Picture, Best Director, Best Actress from the NY Film Critics
Darling won Best Actress & Best Director from the National Board of Review
Darling won two screenplay awards from the British writer’s guild
Darling won Best Foreign Film at the Golden Globes
Julie Christie was on fire in 1965, and she was barely even getting started.
In 1971 Julie Christie starred in (gay) Joseph Losey’s The Go-Between (one of Sasha’s all-time favorite kinky love stories) — and the same year she made McCabe & Mrs Miller while bonking Warren Beatty’s brains out, onscreen and off.
In 1975, Julie Christie made Lumet’s Shampoo and Altman’s Nashville.
In between those 4 fantastic films, in 1973 she made Don’t Look Now — voted by critics in 2017 as the best British film ever made.
Julie Christie should have 4 Oscars, not just one.
Anyone who says she won for Darling only because she was sexy needs their dense head examined.
Anyone who claims Darling “lacked substance” apparently never fucking saw it.
(Julie Christie was up for the role of Honey Ryder in Dr No in 1962, but perv-meister Albert R. Broccoli said her tiddies weren’t big enough)
“Oscar always goes for the sex” is the crudest and most reductionist shit-take of all shit-takes.
If that were the case, then why didn’t voluptuous Sophia Loren win the Oscar for Marriage Italian Style in 1964?
Because prim Disney nanny Mary Poppins won, that’s why.
Class dismissed.
No worries, pedantic contrarian is my favourite vintage!
Thank you for that. I consider myself a Christian, although many Christian traditionalists would consider my personal beliefs to be heretic, and I’m always aghast how unchristian so many so-called Christians sound like.
I hate to mix religion with politics, because I think religion should be beyond politics and inspire people of all parties to work together for the common good, yet I can’t shake the feeling that Jesus’s teachings are closer to the purported values of the left (and I don’t mean a party in particular because there’s a lot of hypocrisy and scheming in political parties of any stripe) than those of the conservative right: “feed the poor”, “heal the sick”, “pay your taxes” (what belongs to Caesar), “love thy neighbor”, “pray for thy enemies”, “welcome the stranger”, “blessed are the peacemakers”, “do not judge lest ye be judged” and so on.
Jesus himself was a bit of a hippie character (as caricatural as it may sound), walking around the land preaching peace and love, living out of people’s generosity… and then there are quotes from the Book of Acts about how Christian communities should organize themselves and manage resources that sound straight out of the communist manifesto: “ No one claimed that any of their possessions was their own, but they shared everything they had. […] For from time to time those who owned land or houses sold them, brought the money from the sales and put it at the apostles’ feet, and it was distributed to anyone who had need.” This is as close as it gets to Karl Marx’s “from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs”.
It’s ironic that conservative christians are quick to mention Paul for that one nasty thing he said in passing about homosexuals and fornicators, but somehow omit the lengthy exposés about how being kind and generous, sharing and caring form the basis of Christian values and behavior, as if these crucial ideas (it was already Jesus’s piece of advice to the rich young man who wondered how to find the kingdom of heaven to “sell [his] possessions, and give the proceeds to the poor”) were mere afterthoughts as opposed to the bulk of the law.
Trust the free market!!
Oppenheimer and Barbie were risky projects. One yaer before their release many people thought they would flop.
Big companies have put most of their money on franchises trying to minimize evpmonic risks and that has brought lots of boring, and overpriced movies.
Even your loved Top gun was seen a bit risky as nobody foresaw whar a succés would be.
The problem is not wokeness is companies no taking hardly any creative risk.
I don’t get it either. There’s a major difference between being at one’s peak, being successful, and being on your deathbed. There’s nothing wrong with just being successful.
The two biggest wounds the industry has been dealt with in the past five years was out of their control (COVID) and self-inflicted (studio greed leading to dual strikes). Yet despite both of those things are still looking good.
All you have to do is look at the box office from this past weekend. You’d think it was pre-2020 as films of all shapes and sizes (other than Ghostbusters) over-performed.
Olivia is a brilliant distillation of Avril and Billie Eilish. Go on YouTube and watch her in talent contests when she was only 8 and 11. She’s actually ahead of where Taylor was at 21 in terms of popularity and delivered two smash albums right out of the gate. You also might want to check out The Marias second album called Submarine that comes out next month.
Thanks, rufussondheim.
This, for me, is the takeaway of 2023’s movies, the reason the year needs to — modestly — go down in history. There wasn’t universal greatness by any means. But this year came closer to saying what I think the industry without chagrin or embarrassment should say on air right before presenting Best Picture:
Here are our 10 nominees for Best Motion Picture of the Year. This is our moment — as an industry — to say to the world: Here’s what we can do. This is our best.
Then read the 10 nominees and announce the winner.
I’d like to have seen “All of Us Strangers” on the BP list, but overall, this year’s list was not at all shabby. I suggest we not take that less than transformative but totally decent achievement for granted.
I always wondered how on Earth Hollywood’s greatest EVER I unapologetic in saying it penultimate musical – DRAMA GAMECHANGER “THE SOUND OF MUSIC” one of very very few if any that successfully blended TRUE HISTORIC events as it backdrop setting with most unforgettable characters , humor and drama in it cross generationsl transcendent musical numbers… but i always wondered thinking reflecting as Sasha says Oscars obsession with ” sex over substance ” ( is how I read it ) taking precedence in oscar voters minds… but I wondered on reflection in my research how on EARTH Dame Julie Andrews lost Actress oscar … then I looked at concept of far less memorable frankly inferior film that crirics were lukewarm about by another iconic Actress in Julie Christie which granted she was strongest award worthy drawcard in that oscar year , BUT how MEMORABLE TRULY IMPACTFUL CULTURALLY was her performance? Her performance by it very concelt in ‘ Darling’ possibly ? Set the precedent in the evolution of sex dominated role getting benefit of the doubt over much more profound, conviction filled , inspired performance by Julie Andrews …but cos as per what Sasha implies in context thatrole where I absolutely DONT have a dig at great Julie Christie at all but more Oscars choice of TYPE OF ROLE..as saying goes : ” sex sells” and yet when we look bavk it is JULIE ANDREWS ICONIC PERFORMANCE FROM THE SOUND OF MUSIC TO THOS VERY DAY EVER SINCE THAT BERN WAY MORE TALKED ABOUT THAN Julie Christies character in ‘Darling ‘ the ONLY reason Julie Andrews lost is as per Sasha’s principle ” sex takes precedent amongst oscar voters ” but fact is that does NOT make it most memorable pr resonant performance to film goers or most treasured and celebrated ..
In case of Gladstone very much was more profound more realistic more powerful and MORE IMPORTANT performance be MORE TALKED about beyond this awards season than oversexed character Bella Baxter thwt gave emnq stone her second oscar …
Yup rightly ir wrongly sex sells and oscar had varying degrees missed opportunities evrn in sound of music year way back then ( yes I know the ‘ sex sells’ stuff was founded introduced by Marilyn Monroe etc … but ij terms context introduction of first early modern post war cinema Julie Andrews Loss to Julie Christie who character was largely way more sex themed oriented than Julie Andrews character in sound of music it was a DECISIVE pivot that since continued to set the precedent…if u ask me it not very healthy mentality for any type of human to human sexual situations take precedent in sense of number of pivotal oscar races going way of performance more bout sex.. I always regarded genuine authentic performance and film audience tastes much better rounded than that …so in truth is Oscars really on right track not able break prior precedents whrn it matters moat of ‘ sex sells’? It fact isn’t it ? Number of past oscar nominated rolls outside this year by women who not won oscar in some cases not been oscar nominated , indeed film audiences love contrary to Oscars interpretation it definitely NOT bout most asexually oriented type roles of actresses namely specifically I talking bout roles that require actresses showcase themselves eith lots of nudity snd sex scenes … so it actually very misleading in pivotal oscar races evrn back with Julie Andrews cs Julie Christie showdown that Oscars make out that in those type of pivotal races it misleadingto reality that role with more sex scenes and / or nudity/ close to forms of nudity few times in a film , that this is what film audiences want .
Well it was NOT in year sound of music was in cinemas and it was not whrn u look at oacar nominated films I’d Oppenheimer and yes Barbie too ( SOME attractive women yes ) but while sex was theme in Barbie other than nature of dialogue and themes to gerwigs tremendous credit no actual sex scenes or nudity for film like that was truly refreshing and Oppenheimer ok ok so 2 pretty expressive sex scenes and nudity BUT that was NOT core reason or even secondary reason Oppie was huge hit no damn way .
So fact of matter is the Oscars like to state thing more important to thrm thsn how they truly reflect in reality.. but truth is it could not be further than truth constant point if separation between what oscar thinks should take precedent as more sex scene / nudity semi nudity oriented roles winning Oscars over true masterpiece e performances like Julie Andrews and Gladstone this year . Yet.. in year or 2 time give or take evrn in decade plus from now it is Gladstone’s performance be arguably well remembered as Julie Andrews roke in sound of music was rather thsn actual oscar winners… u really gotta wonder sometimes where Oscars head is at…I never believed in a ‘ sex sells’ mentality…I admire performances where more not just and beyond bout sex .. oscar not like a ‘ bras and things ‘ or ‘ sexyland ‘ adult shop store.. but it does speak extent the Oscars sometime devalue their underatsnd8ng what ought constitute worthy best acting Oscar win. It lot more thsn just bout sex..
Dude. No. Trust me.
You do not want to mess with the Two Corinthians. https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/6450476000873ca587c71af8c2715dc68c257dd64838f9f6a6202b280c0d1d6f.png
I really want to emphasize that people need to know the term “Christian Nationalist” and anyone that gives that term a favorable context.
It’s bad form to compare anyone to Nazis, I know. But we’re getting dangerously close to fooling ourselves that such horrors can never be repeated.
wow, you and I are like the most opposite of people ever – I tried to like her. I gave her one song a few listens but quickly tired of it.
As expected, the new Beyonce album is very good. As is Waxahachie and Hooray for the Riff Raff. And Elbow has their best album in years.
But the best of the year is Yard Act. Totally awesome.
I bought the Trump Bible just because I knew he needed the 60 bucks more than I did. How else will I spend my welfare checks? I’m tired of lobster, folks.
I was going to read Two Corinthians first, but then I decided to go to Matthew 5, because that’s where I get to read about how great Trump is. Totally great. I am so happy I can dig through the mainstream media propaganda and get to know the real Him.
Blessed are the poor in spirit,
for theirs is the U S Capital.
Blessed are those who are born,
to a rich father
Blessed are the white men,
for they will inherit the rich father’s wealth.
Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for unlimited power,
for they will be satisfied.
Blessed are the famous,
for they will be allowed to violate women.
Blessed are the evil at heart,
for they will exploit God for profit.
Blessed are the dictators,
for they will be called the source of truth.
Blessed are those who are persecuted because of jealousy,
for their legal bills shall be the price of victory.
Blessed are you when people insult you, indict you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of wokeness.
Rejoice and be glad, because great is the reward in the White House, because no one has ever been persecuted as much as Him.
I then turned to my favorite verse.
John 11:35 —Trump won.
Finally, a Bible that gets it right.
Jerm, good buddy, thank you for sharing, and don’t please fret about saying too much.
It’s past 1 a.m. in my middle-America time zone, and my alarm for blue-collar work goes off before sunrise, less than 6 hours from now. So I’ll need to be brief.
I just don’t want you lay awake with any tension or anxiety, so I want you to hear that I know where you’re coming from. Maybe it will help ease your hurt heart to know that someone here understands you.
I’ll want to say more tomorrow as soon as I get a free moment — in fact, I think I’ll share a bit about my own personal trip through organized religion (my parents made an effort to raise me Southern Baptist, which didn’t stick, but that doesn’t mean I’m not spiritual).
I get it. I fully sympathize with the bewilderment — when emotional matters can feel so clear cut, to any of us, but then we run up against opinions that seem to twist the things we know into something else entirely.
So please don’t worry that you’ve written anything wrong, Jerm. Because we know you always express yourself like a gentleman, and nobody would ever be offended by hearing you speak straight from your heart this way.
I will say that I believe Sasha meant no harm with the way she may have worded things, so let’s all try to find the deeper meaning and grasp the passionate intentions that informal words don’t always capture accurately.
That’s all I’ll say for now — which isn’t much, but I hope it’s enough to help you not dwell on any qualms you have about saying what you’ve said, okay? Looking forward to talking things out tomorrow! For now, let’s get some rest.
….This is the edited version? I shudder what the original looked like.
I remember now the piece a bit back claiming that since 2000 Oscars ignored “masculine male characters” and then folks listing the number of movies before that that hardly showed those.
Among so many baffling changes in Sasha is this belief from her that the entire industry is on its deathbed.
This is….wow. Just wow.
A rant on “people stuck in the bubble” from someone who clearly is stuck in a bubble thinking Tucker Carlson is a smart reporter amid other issues.
The take on Hollywood allied with the government misses so many realities it’s impossible to count, not to mention acting like its Red Scare era when so many “canceled” folks still working.
Once again, a Ricky Gervais Oscars would be him with that annoying smirk making snide remarks that are met by dead silence or booing because the guy has no standing with mainstream crowds and no one wants to see an Oscars turned into a third rate Dean Martin roast.
Eliminating men is the biggest single mistake Hollywood has made. I really must have missed that….
As for your last line on Trump, we don’t need propaganda when his every news appearance and rally showcases the petty, vindictive, horrible man he is and supporting someone like that doesn’t say a lot about you.
I love this site, I love the folks here but these pieces about “the left is evil/the right isn’t so bad” are taking away a lot of joy.
Hey, don’t be knocking HSM. Olivia Rodrigo came out of it.
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/62c829027f50d1d90f8cd17857379710b2fe57df6c9c4578c154b2655419191f.gif
I don’t think I’ve been this triggered by a post from Sasha since I first came to this website as a closed minded strong Christian Conservative Republican fighting against left leaning things Sasha used to say.
I’m sure Ryan has some idiotic receipts that I posted here, DON’T EVER SHARE THEM RYAN! (Not out of fear, but just because it’s cringy to think of how uninformed and programmed I was back then.)
Let me give you a quick background. I am a PK, that’s cool kid speak for Pastors Kid. My dad is a pastor, from a long lineage of pastors—teaching if you sinned before you repented, after salvation, you still could go to hell. My wife grew up in fundamentalist baptist—if you don’t know what that means, watch Shiny Happy People on Prime. We both grew up in strong conservative evangelical families, but differing beliefs.
Here’s the thing, my wife and I have since “deconstructed our faith” in terms of finding the flaws in what we were raised in, and built it up with what we firmly believe. My wife and I are both on staff at a church, and faith is an integral part of our life. I’ve never shared this here in any detail out of fear of any hate.
I have expressed the idea that I applaud Sasha for questioning and challenging beliefs and ideas she learned from the left, and starting to study the right and find a better understanding of the other side. I think that’s important to have a well rounded opinion, no matter what the topic, always study the opposition—that’s wisdom to me. I did this very thing, but opposite.
But this comment is something that I can’t ignore, and the very reason I share my faith and story, specifically the Reiner bit:
“It is the very thing people in 1950s America feared the most: a Communist-like ideology that is now indoctrinating the young via culture. It’s hard to argue with this interpretation, what with Barack and Michelle Obama signing a Netflix deal, Rob Reiner making a documentary about Christian Nationalists. And films like Sound of Freedom being demonized and shut out of the mainstream culture.”
I HOPE with all that is within me, that Sasha is not saying that Rob Reiner’s doc about Christian Nationalism would be communist-like ideology. Is she? Are you, Sasha? Not looking to start a fight, looking for clarification.
If you are saying that, does that mean you feel the opposite, which would be that you are condoning or saying Christian Nationalism is okay?
Where I stand is this. I am no longer a Conservative Republican, because of Christian Nationalism. I have seen so much hatred, closed minded, abusive, vile things done and said in the name of Christian Nationalism. I have promoted myself here for years as someone who finds themselves somewhere in the middle. I listen to both sides, form an opinion that makes sense to me and what I feel is truth. I hate both far left and far right politics with all that is within me, there can be no change or progress within these groups. Find people in the middle and have conversations! I’ve learned so much!
My church preaches against Christian Nationalism, because there is nothing Christian about it. It is a mask of Christianity covering the most hateful and evil things. As a Christian, it is utterly unacceptable, embarrassing, and extremely disheartening that so many people don’t know what real Christianity looks like because Christian Nationalism is all anyone sees right now from the current state of republicans, and Christian circles take it as gospel. I’ve seen people leave churches for taking down American flags in church, and people leaving for questioning if anyone has prayed for Biden the same way they all were saying to pray for Trump. Where I come from it’s “Guns, God, and Trump” EVERYWHERE. The amount of churches in my area that took congregations to see The Sound of Freedom was astounding. You say these things aren’t main stream but they are where I come from, and take it from someone who regularly fights these yahoos on a daily basis, it ain’t the way you think it is. Christian Nationalism is growing and something that should never exist. Sasha, I know you’ve recently traveled through middle America, and you are discovering new thoughts and ideas from the right, but I don’t think you truly know what middle America really looks like. Until you live it, you can’t understand what it is.
I’ll stop here, because I feel in my being triggered, that I’ve said too much. Sasha, I know we’ve messaged on Insta, I am more than willing to share my experiences with you via any of our connected socials or email. I have so much more to say, if you are willing to talk about it. Again, I applaud your open mindedness, but any condoning of something that is so wrong to me gives me strong pause, and I truly hope that isn’t the case with your thought. I hope for a clarification, because I don’t want to misunderstand you.
I also hope I don’t offend anyone here by sharing my faith, I promise I’m loving and understanding! Not all Christians are Republicans, and NO real Christians are Nationalists—I said what I said. I welcome anything that wants to dismantle and destroy Christian Nationalism, I’m looking forward to Reiners doc, it may be very helpful and enlightening to many.
1. Reduce the Best Picture nominees back down to five – Do you want movies like Top Gun: Maverick and Barbie nominated or not? Also, the Oscar bump for nominees is more than just theatrical. We may not be seeing the theatrical bumps of the past when Oscar ratings were significantly higher because there were significantly less ways to occupy one’s time, but you also have way more options for people to watch the nominated films of all sizes that largely go underreported or unreported compared to movie ticket sales (PVOD, VOD, streaming, etc.). Just because one revenue stream is down doesn’t mean the industry isn’t making money in other ways.
2. Bring back the best of everything: the best writers, directors, and editors – Best is subjective and you can look at many years in any decade where different people with different taste will say the “best” did not win.
3. Dump Jimmy Kimmel – The problem is nobody really wants to host these shows. Ultimately, Kimmel isn’t great, but he’s better than many award show hosts we’ve had in the recent past. If we’re really talking about Kimmel or Gervais, it’s Kimmel all day. Gervais is pissed his Hollywood career was a bust and it shows at every award show he hosts. He peaked in Hollywood in 2001-2003 with a BBC TV show that was ultimately far more successful when the US remade it. Not saying his version wasn’t superior, he’s not a successful standup, or that he doesn’t have a niche audience with his various TV shows, but I am saying he’s ultimately a bitter elitist. Bring in Mulaney.
4. Divorce the Democratic Party – And marry the party of Marjorie Taylor Greene and QAnon? Ultimately, votes are anonymous and the Academy votes for what they like and/or are passionate about. You can’t force them to believe in something they don’t or tell them not use their voice any more than they can force us to believe in something we don’t or have them try to stifle our voice on whatever platform we have.
5. Keep the producers from last year and the uplifting mood – Agreed. I would think that’s a goal despite it meaning nothing for ratings.
6. Bring Back Men – Where did the men go exactly? I saw many men at the Oscars. Best Picture was about the man who created the the most powerful weapon the world has ever used and he laid pipe to characters played by Emily Blunt AND Florence Pugh. Creating weapons and fucking beautiful women. Doesn’t get more traditionally manly than that. Murphy even won an Oscar for doing so.
In your words which I love your adjectives choice e of words even if this year I totally ridiculously disagree but I still admire your cheek neverh3k3ss dear chase as reflected by this year’s oacar winner in acting by very namesake of film dominated sensationally pacars past this year in u words : ” this year marked at Oscars the rise and redemption of the ” CATATONIC ” PERFORMANCE…but ey Chase you should be happy bout that in a screwed way: after all the expression og Murohy as Oppie would refer to YOUR underwhelming expression as similar down beat and a “Nyah whatever next season pls” mentality so in that way you yourself have quite bit in common in terms of Oppies ‘meme’d’ reactions as u reaction yo Oscars hence in my comprehensive insightful conclusion u have much in common with expressive reaction of thos year catatonic performance oscar winner ( reaction only ) see? So u should celebrate ey ?
Yes, the Academy has a problem. It just gave the elitist film that no one watched best picture. God give me strength.
Probably the most beautiful shot ever from a documentary.
Just watched the saddest thing. An elderly reserved Englishwoman on Coronation Street’s dog underwent kidney failure and had to be put down. Watching it all play out was devastating.
Oh, Cooper. Why’d you ever get cancer?
https://image.petmd.com/files/styles/863×625/public/2023-09/keeshond-dog-breed.jpg
Okay, you convinced me.
I let too many movies teach me how to be a pedantic contrarian whose crusty demeanor masks my bitter loneliness — until my tender heart inevitably dissolves to reveal that I’m deepdown a thoughtful and loveable fellow.
(recipe for about 55 honorable Best Picture nominees over the years)
Three years later we still don’t know CODA’s domestic boxoffice haul. It earned < $2m overseas which suggests its boxoffice makes the Hurt Locker seem like Avengers Endgame.
Good point. But traditionally the best film nominees have never aligned 100% with best director even with five nominees, so I see some slippage. Usually a film that is broadly liked, like I think The Holdovers was, can nab the nomination, even if it misses key nominations like director. Also, it got the BAFTA nomination. The only difference to BAFTA I think would be the Oscars substituting Zone of Interest for Killers of the Flowers Moon. Zone of interest was really strong with the Academy compared to Scorsese’s epic.
So I am pretty certain these would have been the five nominees, meaning that the critics fave (Killers) and the box office champ (Barbie) would have missed the cut.
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/319fd3586fdcd687217a0aefea4c17f918676263e03e01baa7af73e74aeaebb3.gif
Don’t you realize the Perpetual Outrage Machine is a year-round thing?
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/21538e72ad6ccb75503584d7eea6ab31dc66a41bec26b3fcb69e5a2fa9239d9b.gif
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/1381dd104b8be9407f40e501a66700b56641b87e17def1a839b969febc71c308.gif
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/76786d5a4725d658da047b0d411fb0e078ab80c78b3b630edabdd7eec4204a5d.gif
At the risk of being called a “troglodyte,” how is The Holdovers making the cut without a director’s nomination?
Absolutely. You and I are living proof.
“Not just men but macho, masculine men.” ……..the rest of you can field this one.
Exhaustive field research ongoing. Not yet ready to publish my findings.
which movies at the Oscars were the sanctimonious lecture movies?
This one scene springs to mind.
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/2042404b6fc1e815f0e21b093c585fdb723b16aa8df2de6d4b49187d691fe5aa.png
With all due respect, this reads like a letter of resignation (no pun intended).
snap!
This is one of our lesser hyper masculine /macho men from downunder. https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/4c0fe6c8a23d65cc4630a791e04bdd300102abf5cccfd783b4e1553ba120c072.jpg
Shirtless humor is allowed and encouraged.
“If everyone outside of Hollywood wants Hollywood dead”
A conscientious editor lightly tweaked that line to say “millions of people,” and he (or I) wisely didn’t specify how many millions. Could be just 2 or 3 million. Mostly in Moscow.
Memory lane!
Though I only remember about half of those hookups.
“10 BP and 5 director? You eliminate half the BP field in a nanosecond.”
How dare you!
Don’t come running to me when Chase sees you spew this obsolete nonsense.
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/76786d5a4725d658da047b0d411fb0e078ab80c78b3b630edabdd7eec4204a5d.gif
Playing with fire, I see.
In future, please choose less controversial macho masculine illustrations.
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/77c9773e46cd733f4a8a37dd720d34b6f67d61f9ffb62126e9926033a8811a70.jpg
Can one be a member of the proletariat while also loving All of Us Strangers? Discuss.
All humor is welcome, no matter how crude or cruel or offensive it is to others.
At least that’s my best guess considering the site’s owner wants Ricky Gervais to host.
If there were ten directors nominated, it wouldn’t mean that all ten films were suddenly in the running. That would be as bad an assumption as assuming there are five films in the running for BP, each matching a nominated director.
It’s plainly obvious to anyone who has been watching the Oscars for as long as Sasha or myself or Ryan Adams have, only three films max have any shot at winning BP once the nominees are revealed. Most years it’s actually two.
It was a little difficult determining the also-rans this year, even now we could argue which were films 2 and three (although it’s obvious that Poor Things and The Holdovers were probably the two) but this year was exceptional in that most of the best films of the year were actually nominated.
I am guessing that Ryan is tired of trying to save Hollywood. Otherwise he’d never have made this video of himself driving various Academy members to the latest Christopher Nolan screening.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FlWFfgK3ph8
Is this humor allowed? If it is not then I can say the same thing and be serious. LOL. I don’t want to get in trouble.
In may take ten years, but all the other conferences are going to drift away into meaninglessness. No top recruit would turn down an offer from those two conferences. They may as well make it official now, the are the minor leagues of the NFL
That’s just a template. The total nominees would be 6, but there can be adjustments along the lines of 4-2 or even 5-1 either way.
10 is too many. There’s a reason why the Academy abandoned 10 nominees, because you run the risk of filler as theres been since they went to 10. 10 BP and 5 director? You eliminate half the BP field in a nanosecond.
6 BP and 6 director is the way to go.
I will see if I can safely say this, in these careful words.
I agree with the author that Hollywood must stop making movies that star any man who is not macho masculine. Oscar awards must only go to macho masculine men. Did I break any rules?
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/6521ee04dc603f12eb5dddaa330be2ca0c24bb400c01e98fa5bd12b540f73ada.jpg
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/2fa3a1760740b1ef3c99a2e752c633c43370c687bf59b552c0858ad01ae1eb9f.jpg
6. “Not just men but macho, masculine men.” ……..the rest of you can field this one.
Only the ones of us that want to accept the suicide mission. I want to volunteer but am afraid.
” I argued once, a long time ago,
that increasing the Best Picture slate
to ten could help the Academy highlight
more films directed by women and non-white directors,
and I really did think that would solve the problem
—but it hasn’t. If anything, it’s made it much worse. ”
These sentences made me want to respond by saying something that would be assured to get me into trouble. LOL. After I sleep I will consider the best way to say it.
“… beyond being yet another sanctimonious lecture by people ”
As for this opinion, who can explain to me which movies at the Oscars were the sanctimonious lecture movies? Please show me the list of some of them.
From google, I have found this to be diagram of the novel 1984. iow, it is all a fiction. A fiction from 75 years ago.
I have read all of it to the end. It was a journey. I must lay down my head to rest now, to sleep my worries away. LOL.
“… beyond being yet another sanctimonious lecture by people who see themselves as morally superior to the rest of America.”
People who do not condone political violence or nefarious means of winning elections/staying in power ARE morally superior. ☑️
Also, I’m curious to hear exactly who you think F’guy is? You insult our intelligence by suggesting he is anything other than what we all know: a twice impeached, failed business man, rapist, insurrectionist who cozies up to dictators, condones violence, and whose main desire is to rule the U.S. with an iron fist and in so doing take us way back in time.
This is as offensive and wrong-headed a piece as any I have seen on this website, and I have been reading you for the better part of a decade. People like Glen can explain it better than I can, as the arguments presented here, and in all of your essays (seriously are these things being written by AI? They all sound exactly the same) feel more like the ramblings of someone who fell down a far right YouTube rabbit hole than they do a once-respected journalist.
I’m personally uncomfortable with the argument that a person’s place in the grand scheme of things should be determined by demographic share. I know that’s not what the author meant, and as I said below, it’s very easy for people to misinterpret what’s being said when those charts are being invoked.
Oh, and go UConn.
Crazy that UConn and NC State made the final four in both men’s and women’s basketball. That’s never happened before.
That’s what I meant. If the Big 10 and SEC (who have wildly overexpanded) were to be given 10 automatic spots each because of their hugeness that would be akin to saying that THREE studios must have guaranteed Oscar spots.
The little schools making runs is what makes March Madness so fun. Kind of crazy that two time winner NC State is considered the Cinderella team this year.
well, technically they do have spots. All conference champions do. But maybe if you said “8 Spots” each you’d be more correct since basically any team from either conference with a winning conference record is likely to be a participant.
Man, I had to stop reading. Not sure how anyone could finish. It’s like watching an 8 hour costume designer’s cut of High School Musical 4: Prison Life.
Where does the Class Hierarchy graph come from? And how is it relevant to anything in the world anywhere? It’s just made-up.
Barbie was a dead film walking the minute David Zaslav openly bragged how much money WB was saving because of the strikes. Still not sure how people can ignore strike anger when looking at WB and Netflix’s haul of exactly ONE Oscar.
“Millions of people outside the bubble are rooting for the demise of both Hollywood and the Oscars because they hate what they have become.”
Truer words were never spoken. Remember when they all got together on the January 6th and took over the Hollywood sign screaming “Hang Meryl Streep”
Why? Then it’s not really an award for artistic merit if you have guaranteed spots for the big boys. This would be like having the SEC and Big 10 having guaranteed spots for the March Madness tourney instead of EARNING a spot. Want to win an Oscar, make good movies. And maybe don’t have David Zaslav runinng your studio.
Sarcasm aside, it’s pretty apparent AMPAS was giving John Mulaney an audition for the gig.
I do not understand why she thinks Gervais from the first season of Survivor would be a good host.
https://ew.com/thmb/jaT2CHT-Ypu6NwTPFIJl4wsY3Ds=/1500×0/filters:no_upscale():max_bytes(150000):strip_icc()/survivor-4-2000-6687f713e44e4037a06329a5e256f6fb.jpg
I can imagine the meltdowns if the Oscars went down to five nominees on this website. After all the five nominations would have been:
Oppenheimer
The Holdovers
Poor Things
Anatomy of a Fall
The Zone of Interest
killers and Barbie would have been snubbed and Hollywood as the insular bubble narrative would go into overdrive. At least this way Barbie was nominated.
1. A three hour biopic with an all white cast made a billion dollars at the box office (free market) and won 7 Oscars, including a rare Actor/Supporting Actor combo. Yet the sky is still falling?
2. “Bring back the best” is such a subjective metric it’s literally impossible to determine what that actually would entail.
3. What was the “woke” component of who won this year? Three white acting winners (and the black acting winner got a “get out of woke free” card” by multiple pundits who seem to care about this topic). And with all due respect, I don’t think the census charts are making the arguments the author thinks are being made.
4. With all respect in the world, I am puzzled about what the issue is with international films and filmmakers. International films have landed in topline nominations for nearly seven decades and the earth has kept turning. And if the Oscars were meant to “prop up the American film industry” there are so so so so many BRITISH films that ran the boards over the years. Are Brits just Americans who talk funny?
Suggesting that non-American films should be removed from Oscar consideration is not a rational solution, especially since it’s a “solution” to a non-existent problem.
5. Gervais ain’t happening. And frankly having a host whose sole purpose is to viciously insult the nominees is not good television. And MANY of the nominees are in the techs and they deserve a rare moment in the sun without having someone like Gervais crapping all over them.
6. “Not just men but macho, masculine men.” ……..the rest of you can field this one.
7. ” that need to separate this country into an “us vs. them” mentality isn’t serving anyone, least of all, Hollywood.” – in an article where complaints are made about Democrats, international films, “muted, feminine men”, and “elites”. Please square this circle because I’m not sure how that be done with what has been presented.
We had a really nice Oscar season this year, can’t we be happy with that?
In Sasha’s world, there are apparently two bubbles. One percent of the population lives in one bubble whereas a different one percent lives in the other bubble. 98% of us, on the other hand, live in reality.
You see, the soapy membrane of these bubbles distorts the view of the real world. While it’s very easy for us to see inside bubbles. Turns out there’s nothing of consequence inside of them.
Oppenheimer swept the Oscars. Doesn’t seem very woke to me.
If everyone outside of Hollywood wants Hollywood dead then why do they see movies. They seem to really like its product.
Also it feels like you hate movies. I’m not sure why you are still interested in writing about them
Six nominees. 3 mainstream, 3 indies. This is the solution.