tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8256060.post116568371860120715..comments2024-03-17T10:11:46.952-04:00Comments on Film Experience Blog: Clint Eastwood's Secret Plan Unveiled: Oscar to Become Emmy by 2008NATHANIEL Rhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11597109147678235399noreply@blogger.comBlogger65125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8256060.post-1166149634102626722006-12-14T21:27:00.000-05:002006-12-14T21:27:00.000-05:002006 seems to be set up for being one of the worst...2006 seems to be set up for being one of the worst Oscar races in the past 10 years. Since ROTK swept the Oscars, the lackluster quality of Best Picture winners has been appalling. With possibly the worst decision in Oscar History, Crash won Best Picture to a bunch of homophobic idiot savants in Hollywood. 2005 was not as bad, but Million Dollar Baby was NOT the best picture of the year. There were plenty of directorial flaws and narrative issues with the movie. <BR/><BR/>I am no Scorcesse worshipper, but I find it cruel that everyone sets his films to some impossible standard, while allowing praising mediocrity from other directors. The Aviator was an excellent film in terms of structure and directorial technique. The scene involving the crashing airplane was exquisite. Instead of allowing Marty to chose and direct films that he desires, people keep criticizing him for not living up to the quality of Taxi Driver or Raging Bull. Taxi Driver, for example, has become a classic over time. Upon release it only received lukewarm reviews. Yet, everybody expects Scorcesse to direct an instant classic. This is completely unfair and stupid.<BR/><BR/>With this trend in mind, I am expecting Oscar to vote like twelve year old girls. I would not be surprised if the winning tally played like this:<BR/><BR/>Best Pic: Bobby<BR/>Best Actor: Will Smith - Pursuit<BR/>Best Actress: Renee Zelweger - Total shit<BR/>Best Supporting Actor: Brad Pitt - some movie crying scene<BR/>Best Supporting Actress: Jennifer Hudson for singing so well<BR/>Best Director: Clint Eastwood - because of idol worship<BR/>Best Foreign Film: Apocalypto<BR/><BR/>The Oscars are heading down a downward spiral. If they continue their streak of blatant stupidity they will become as worthless as the daytime Emmys.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8256060.post-1165991720565901202006-12-13T01:35:00.000-05:002006-12-13T01:35:00.000-05:00The Oscars have become too much like professional ...The Oscars have become too much like professional sports and presidential elections.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8256060.post-1165835856169901292006-12-11T06:17:00.000-05:002006-12-11T06:17:00.000-05:00Grip gotten.Grip gotten.Krishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01451339200013522034noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8256060.post-1165830220065349672006-12-11T04:43:00.000-05:002006-12-11T04:43:00.000-05:00I don't get why there's an argument about this. I...I don't get why there's an argument about this. It's fairly obvious why they moved <EM>Letters</EM> to December. Awards, box office, and "saving the film" are all the same thing. No, Clint is not a needy oscar whore. Yes, Clint knows that his film needs awards attention for people to see it. No, <EM>Letters</EM> wouldn't have done as well in February. Yes, the studio obviously moved it to put both films in a stronger position for awards. The idea that the studio didn't know they could win more awards with a december release is BS. Anyone who's ever paid attention to the oscars knows that december releases fare better than february releases, and that a one-two punch works better than a flop. <BR/><BR/>The studio might not have realized that <EM>Letters</EM> could end up being THE ONE for this year if pushed up (though it's their own fault if they didn't), but they obviously knew that putting both films in this awards season would give them more attention. What exactly is Kris arguing? What exactly is Nathaniel arguing?<BR/><BR/>I think the problems here are that<BR/><BR/>A) people seem to prefer to argue, rather than find common ground, and<BR/><BR/>B) Kris doesn't get that part of Nat's Eastwood hating is in jest.<BR/><BR/>I mean PLEASE, no one thinks Clint is out there checking <EM>Letters'</EM> oscar odds every hour, but of course he'd like it to win some awards. Awards are how you get films like this to be noticed. December is where you put a film to help it win awards. Period. It's really quite simple.<BR/><BR/>Also, how is it "over" for Marty??? He has won 3 awards now for Best Director. Clint has won 0. And <EM>Letters</EM> didn't "sweep" the LAFCA, it won best picture and nothing else. Get a grip, people.<BR/><BR/>I say it goes down like this:<BR/><BR/>Best Picture: <EM>Dreamgirls</EM><BR/>Best Director: Marty<BR/>Best adapted screenplay: <EM>Letters</EM><BR/><BR/>But it is still very much up in the air. I personally like it that way.<BR/><BR/>But just, everyone... get. a. grip.adam k.https://www.blogger.com/profile/13485604493059621307noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8256060.post-1165826874297982682006-12-11T03:47:00.000-05:002006-12-11T03:47:00.000-05:00Okay. I get it now. We're wrong. You're right. Nic...Okay. I get it now. We're wrong. You're right. <BR/><BR/>Nice to know that's settled.<BR/><BR/>Now we're just left to wonder what would have happened in <I>Iwo Jima</I> had stayed in it's February release. Would it's critical favour have propelled it into the awards season at the end of the year or would all these groups think it was <I>old hat</I> by December and not bother. ???Glenn Dunkshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05424659636310160482noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8256060.post-1165825300111201252006-12-11T03:21:00.000-05:002006-12-11T03:21:00.000-05:00It's not a conversation anymore, though, Camel. I...It's not a conversation anymore, though, Camel. I've told you what is known, and you keep coming back with Eastwood-hating conjecture. Nothing much to be done at that point.Krishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01451339200013522034noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8256060.post-1165820680188047962006-12-11T02:04:00.000-05:002006-12-11T02:04:00.000-05:00Gosh Kris. You're so kind. Way to have a conversat...Gosh Kris. You're so kind. Way to have a conversation!Glenn Dunkshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05424659636310160482noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8256060.post-1165812099732086042006-12-10T23:41:00.000-05:002006-12-10T23:41:00.000-05:00- best actress lineups? I don't have many of them ...- best actress lineups? I don't have many of them memorized, but that year with Sarandon, Shue, Stone, Thompson and Streep is the best I can remember. 5/5 in excellence, and two of them are among the performances of the 90's: Streep and Shue. Best actor was also great, with marvelous Nicolas Cage getting the Oscar with one of the most heartbreaking performances I've ever seen. No fan of him, but I can't deny this, or Wild At Heart. Why isn't he good all the time?<BR/><BR/>- cal rothAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8256060.post-1165810511264475992006-12-10T23:15:00.000-05:002006-12-10T23:15:00.000-05:00adam --as far as I remember Sally Kirkland in Anna...adam --as far as I remember Sally Kirkland in <I>Anna</I> is no ewww. I mean I only saw it once that year but I was thrilled at the time when she made it to a nomination.<BR/><BR/>craig--88 really? I can take or leave Sigourney Weaver. Think it's Jodie's worst acclaimed performance. etc...<BR/><BR/>anyway. you're right about the one person's ewww is another's wow.<BR/><BR/>babloo --<I>dreamgirls</I> is also on AFI's top ten list and it's still the preemptive frontrunner, <I>letters</I> surge or not. I mean it is in a foreign language and they've still never awarded their top prize to a foreign language film.NATHANIEL Rhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11597109147678235399noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8256060.post-1165807984761698162006-12-10T22:33:00.000-05:002006-12-10T22:33:00.000-05:00Camel - You just don't know what you're talking ab...Camel - You just don't know what you're talking about. There's no other way to day it.<BR/><BR/>Yes, in two months, it would be too late to release Letters. Flags would have received NO Oscar attention, which was what Letters was banking on for an audience in the first place. I'll just say it one more time, it was pushed to 2006 to be closer to Flags, which would at least still be apparent.<BR/><BR/>WB didn't even believe in this thing, folks. They're only now awakening to it's awards potential.<BR/><BR/>Believe it or don't. Doesn't matter to me.Krishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01451339200013522034noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8256060.post-1165806760342826552006-12-10T22:12:00.000-05:002006-12-10T22:12:00.000-05:00And Cher won only because she was snubbed for Mask...And Cher won only because she was snubbed for <I>Mask</I><BR/><BR/>For me 1988 was the best year across the board.Craig Hickmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17336837289054015211noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8256060.post-1165806654253170612006-12-10T22:10:00.000-05:002006-12-10T22:10:00.000-05:00adam, I thought every single nominee from 1987 was...adam, I thought every single nominee from 1987 was overrated.<BR/><BR/>Every single one.Craig Hickmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17336837289054015211noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8256060.post-1165793168368475112006-12-10T18:26:00.000-05:002006-12-10T18:26:00.000-05:00But Kris - If you were to give most American filmg...But Kris - If you were to give most American filmgoers the option of a film starring a bunch of American actors in a war movie about one of the US' most triumphant victories... or a subtitled movie starring nobody that most have heard of, that (from appearances) shows the US as villains - which would make more sense to be a success? <I>Flags</I>. And so if <I>Iwo Jima</I> is a success then it'll be because of the awards it will receive. The awards will lead the box office. I mean, was 2 months that long to wait until it's original February release? I doubt it. The studio saw an awards opportunity and they took it.Glenn Dunkshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05424659636310160482noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8256060.post-1165792724112539982006-12-10T18:18:00.000-05:002006-12-10T18:18:00.000-05:00My apologies to Nat: Letters practically swept LA ...My apologies to Nat: Letters practically swept LA Film Critics not to mention The Departed snubs from NYFCO and AFI. <BR/><BR/>Oh well - what can you do? It's over for Marty...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8256060.post-1165790714402486152006-12-10T17:45:00.000-05:002006-12-10T17:45:00.000-05:00On the topic of actress lineups, why has no one me...On the topic of actress lineups, why has no one mentioned 1987???<BR/><BR/>Close, Kirkland, Hunter, Streep, and Cher? I thought this was regarded as one of the greatest ever. Unless Kirkland is an "ew"... I haven't seen <EM>Anna</EM>.<BR/><BR/>Or is this the one referred to as 1988 (the year of the ceremony)?adam k.https://www.blogger.com/profile/13485604493059621307noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8256060.post-1165789952963353612006-12-10T17:32:00.000-05:002006-12-10T17:32:00.000-05:00If awards is in the equation for Letters, it is so...If awards is in the equation for Letters, it is soley for the film's box office sake and for the sake of getting it some traction with audiences. Eastwood isn't an Oscar whore, which seems to be your point.<BR/><BR/>That is MY point.Krishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01451339200013522034noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8256060.post-1165789245556062872006-12-10T17:20:00.000-05:002006-12-10T17:20:00.000-05:00Just thought I would note:The Departed swept the B...Just thought I would note:<BR/><BR/>The Departed swept the Boston Film Critics (but that was pretty obvious). However, it was snubbed on the AFI Top Ten list in favor of The Devil Wears Prada, Borat, Happy Feet, and Inside Man. <BR/><BR/>The AFI Top Ten is particularly troubling for me, simply because, since 2000, the winner of the Oscar has been on the list. Guess what movie WAS on the list: Letters from Iwo Jima. <BR/><BR/>I'm just really, really tired of Clint Eastwood. Shouldn't he be eating applesauce and waiting for his grandchildren to call instead of consistently stealing Oscars from Marty? (The majority of this was a joke, FYI).Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8256060.post-1165787122295945412006-12-10T16:45:00.000-05:002006-12-10T16:45:00.000-05:00Nat, one cinephile's "ewww" is another's "wow."But...Nat, one cinephile's "ewww" is another's "wow."<BR/><BR/>But I feel you. <BR/><BR/>Just adding another perspective.Craig Hickmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17336837289054015211noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8256060.post-1165786936813304222006-12-10T16:42:00.000-05:002006-12-10T16:42:00.000-05:00And one last note on Swank. She does trailer park ...And one last note on Swank. She does trailer park better than anybody out there. Helps, I'm sure that she came from one. So she's just being herself, one might yelp. But, hey, Jack Nicholson has won multiple awards for being himself, so why not Hilary?<BR/><BR/>I've said it before: Kate Winslet, like Michelle Pfeiffer, is penalized for being too pretty. Unless she plays ugly or de-glams (see Theron, Kidman (grrr), or even Berry), she'll always be a bridesmaid. I haven't liked Bening since <I>Grifters</I>. Sandino Mareno and Staunton had to just be happy to be there. So Swank, to me anyway, was a lock to win.Craig Hickmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17336837289054015211noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8256060.post-1165786197189646482006-12-10T16:29:00.000-05:002006-12-10T16:29:00.000-05:00craig a lot of those were great lists yes but they...craig a lot of those were great lists yes but they usually had one ewww in them. i think 1974 is well regarded because all five performances are fine and a few of them would seem like a winner quality.NATHANIEL Rhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11597109147678235399noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8256060.post-1165785254064210282006-12-10T16:14:00.000-05:002006-12-10T16:14:00.000-05:00I don't like Eastwood films, generally--they seem ...I don't like Eastwood films, generally--they seem to lumber along at a snail's pace and I can't stay awake. <BR/><BR/>Not the shocking kind, I was, however, shocked by just how much my gut hurt after M$B. I had no problem, no problem at all, with that film, or Swank OR Freeman, winning.Craig Hickmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17336837289054015211noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8256060.post-1165784372185300222006-12-10T15:59:00.000-05:002006-12-10T15:59:00.000-05:00The best Best Actress race since 1974? Huh? I'd ta...The best Best Actress race since 1974? Huh? <BR/><BR/>I'd take 1980, <B>1982</B>, <B>1983</B>, 1985, <B><I>1988</B></I>, <B>1991</B>, 1993, and 1996 over 1974 anyday of the week.Craig Hickmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17336837289054015211noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8256060.post-1165778791931387332006-12-10T14:26:00.000-05:002006-12-10T14:26:00.000-05:00I do think LMS is the most likely to garner this n...I do think LMS is the most likely to garner this nod. Too fit - the light comedy, great cast (SAG ensemble win, I say), kind of indie, critics like it. It gives the BP line up some balance. <BR/>I say it can be beaten if critics rally after another #6 to #15 movie, just like a Brokeback juggernaut - or a Capote, assuming some #1 to #4 is the critic's choice. It sounds unreal, but I say United 93 really can get critic's traction and reach BP nom. Babel or Little Children are too divisive. Volver is too foreign, and Flags is shut out now that we have Letters. Maybe Notes on a Scandal?<BR/><BR/>- cal rothAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8256060.post-1165775683287631702006-12-10T13:34:00.000-05:002006-12-10T13:34:00.000-05:00cal --when it comes to 1992 Unforgiven does seem t...cal --when it comes to 1992 <I>Unforgiven</I> does seem to be the consensus. But the 2004 situation is another story altogether. There are plenty of dissenting voices that year though, to be fair, a good portion of them are in favor of the unnominated <I>Eternal Sunshine</I> as the future classic of that year, if they're not pro <I>Sideways</I> <BR/><BR/>but I'm tired too. Perhaps we should move on to another subject. <B>Can <I>Little Miss Sunshine</I> really do it or will <I>Babel</I> pull through in the end?</B> or am I wrong about who the top six are?NATHANIEL Rhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11597109147678235399noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8256060.post-1165773116886997362006-12-10T12:51:00.000-05:002006-12-10T12:51:00.000-05:00"the man has already been rewarded for underservin..."the man has already been rewarded for underserving work. You can't go back and say, "Oh, this is the ONE that Eastwood should have won for." <BR/><BR/>I really really disagree? And not only me, but I could use what you call "Film criticism and critical history" to confirm my point? I can say that, in both cases, according to film criticism and film history, Eastwood was rewarded with justice. Can't I?<BR/><BR/>I am getting tired. <BR/><BR/>- cal rothAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com