tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8256060.post110615101425480493..comments2024-03-17T10:11:46.952-04:00Comments on Film Experience Blog: What is "Relevant"?NATHANIEL Rhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11597109147678235399noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8256060.post-1106214881091053642005-01-20T04:54:00.000-05:002005-01-20T04:54:00.000-05:00Right on.
The awards groups I respect most at thi...Right on.<br /><br />The awards groups I respect most at this point are from San Diego and DC (and Toronto, I think), as they seem to genuinely want to acknoweldge the best, most important works of the year rather than what may be considered "in" at the time, like the films you mentioned. I know someone in the San Diego critics group and it appears there was still much struggle in recognizing Vera Drake, which is a pity. Apparantly, Finding Neverland was quite a big thing among the group. Thank God THAT wasn't awarded anything it didn't deserve..<br /><br />-DavidAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8256060.post-1106196902042347932005-01-19T23:55:00.000-05:002005-01-19T23:55:00.000-05:00There seems to be a bit of a paradox happening if ...There seems to be a bit of a paradox happening if groups are trying to pick films in order to predict the oscars, when in fact the oscars look at those groups' picks in deciding what to nominate. You can't predict when your "predictions" influence the results. I think what all groups want is influence. I certainly don't think the critics were all "predicting" Sideways to be nominated, they wanted to get it nominated. But the talk of "relevance" is just stupid. One would hope every group would just pick what they love (or better yet, what they feel is worthy), or at least, every group but the academy would do that and the academy would then look at the others' picks. Anyway, I think the homogeny of the last two years is cause of the date change. No one has time to think.adam k.https://www.blogger.com/profile/13485604493059621307noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8256060.post-1106180149493558552005-01-19T19:15:00.000-05:002005-01-19T19:15:00.000-05:00This sort of thing annoys the hell out of me. I s...This sort of thing annoys the hell out of me. I seem to recall Tom O'Neil - or someone of his ilk - actually criticising one particular critics group because they were poor at predicting last year's Oscars. I think we might have the Golden Globes to blame for this, because they've never shied away when people keep calling them the best forecaster for the Academy Awards, even though this is a bit of nonsense if you look more closely at them.<br /><br />So, are the critics groups (and I still only count the top four - New York, LA, National Society and National Board) there to say who they think were the best of the year, or are they there to say who could pop up come Oscar time? One would hope the former, but the press and those in charge of Oscar campaigns increasingly make it the latter. That's quite sad, but the critics groups are to blame as well for making such bog standard choices year in, year out, with the occasional exception (Cameron Diaz, There's Something About Mary; Eddie Murphy, The Nutty Professor). And then when they're making an out-there choice, is it because they honestly think that's the best performance of the year, or are they just trying to create headlines? One wonders.<br /><br />But ARE they making bog standard choices each year, and if so, why are we expecting them to be different if that's their honest opinion? It's a vicious circle.Nigelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16659290334045792805noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8256060.post-1106165032812905392005-01-19T15:03:00.000-05:002005-01-19T15:03:00.000-05:00what I always would suggest is to look at a variet...what I always would suggest is to look at a variety of things. That's what I do for old movie years... and that's why the homogeny lately bothers me. Take some itty bitty Nathaniel of the year 2050 who is looking back at 2004 and trying to decide which films to seek out for viewing. He's only going to see the same 5 or 6 movies listed over and over again (as these groups keeps choosing the same) and my problem with the various groups this year is those 5 or 6 movies don't seem particularly relevant to the year we just had...which was quite varied and interesting.<br /><br />Is anybody going to think of Ray and Finding Neverland as true noteworthy marks of what was happening in the cinema in 2004 even as soon as 2008? Seems to me that the movies getting pushed to the side Eternal Sunshine, Vera Drake, and others are going to be better remembered very quickly.NATHANIEL Rhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11597109147678235399noreply@blogger.com