The Movie House - Part 11

There is no moral high ground he took it is just a form of comedy as just like the jester is the one allowed to roast the King, he took liberty to roast a ballroom of performers in a rather sinister and dying industry.

For him to remind celebrities of their actual place rather than the recent preachy behaviour and liberalism worn as a medal was correct and to show how out of touch they really are. The glowering faces of some of the ballroom along with how offended some parts of the media were is just embarrassing.

Truth is Golden Globe ratings just like the Oscars to which rightfully have been in decline for years, received the most attention and due to him at most. Otherwise it was another run of the mill award show.

https://twitter.com/StellaMcCartney/status/1214123180408918016


Case in point of what is by far the most Hollywood thing to say above, summed up in one tweet.

I enjoy watching films and good actors/actresses but nobody gives a fuck of who or what they are outside because in the end they are thespians NOT playing themselves.

El Gunner wrote:regarding the Ricky Gervais monologue, do you guys really think the Hollywood press executives and producers just hired Ricky and said go do whatever you want, or don't you think they asked him what he has planned and they looked over what he was going to say and gave him the green light?

when it comes to Hollywood, what interests me more is the people behind the scenes, the ones we never really see and don't know of who run the show and make large-scale decisions. The ones who are in charge of mass media and what we get to see on television screens - and the subliminal or even supraliminal images they sell to us/imprint into our mental streams since birth that aids in managing the masses and in turn power structures, and the Earth system as we know it.

The producers and the ones who actually pay for things to happen such as the industry runners are the real figures who run the show. Actors unless someone like Tom Cruise etc unironically have no power and are legit told what to do far more than what the image suggests. Hollywood has a dark history since the 30s from the obvious casting couch that applies to both sexes to what some performers are required to do to have and keep their platform.

Performing actors/actresses are treated like garbage by them as they see them simply as performers and cash cows. Do I care? No. But by now this is not a conspiracy but takes just a closer eye to reveal how it works.


GG awards were by NBC and up to them if anything and brought in ratings though I doubt such roasts will be allowed to be repeated beyond every now and then.

been a while since I saw a good horror, looks very Until Dawn like, promising

After watching 1917 and seeing it get so many nominations I'm happy to finally have my Oscar villain for this year. Would hate to see anything from that film win anything. Other than Roger Deakins. He basically made that film.

Parasite better sweep

Firenze wrote:Parasite better sweep

ugh

Firenze wrote:Parasite better sweep

As if they're not going to give all awards to the "one-take" film that will be forgotten in two years

Parasite will win a single award (best foreign) and nothing else... sadly

Bradley Cooper finally winning an Oscar for Joker would send me to hell

I'll be equally miffed if Phoenix wins Best Actor, when he had a much better and much more accurate portrayal of mental health in The Master.

My best actor pick would be Antonio Banderas
Hoping sincerely Tarantino somehow overcomes Bong Joon Ho in Best Directing
Knives Out (my film of the year) didn't even get a Best Picture nom, but of course not even miffed because we all know how the Oscars have no love for such wonderful original films, hoping Rian Johnson can slip away the Best Original screenplay from Tarantino then

El Gunner wrote:I'll be equally miffed if Phoenix wins Best Actor, when he had a much better and much more accurate portrayal of mental health in The Master.

My best actor pick would be Antonio Banderas
Hoping sincerely Tarantino somehow overcomes Bong Joon Ho in Best Directing
Knives Out (my film of the year) didn't even get a Best Picture nom, but of course not even miffed because we all know how the Oscars have no love for such wonderful original films, hoping Rian Johnson can slip away the Best Original screenplay from Tarantino then

Original? I would hardly call it original tbh. It was a incredibly well done genre film, written with wit and humour. But there's many films and books like it.

Also hate the term "original screenplay" they need just to fuse those categories together, since adapted screenplays are often based on less than the "originals".

My best actor pick would be Brad Pitt.

My biggest hope is that Sam Mendes and Renee Zelwegger doesn't win.

Imagine Sam Mendes with two academy awards for best directing without ever making a masterpiece. Would a tragedy. Hell, he only has one great film.

Brad Pitt is nominated in the Supporting category

El Gunner wrote:Brad Pitt is nominated in the Supporting category

Yeah I know. I’m happy he’s gonna win.

Disagree with the charegory though.

Pacino is my pick for Best Supporting tbh, but wouldnt mind Pitt to win it

Todd Phillips getting nominated for screenplay for adapting Scorcese's film ffs

what a time to be alive

Florence Pugh absolutely robbed for Midsommar.

Taron Egerton not getting nominated is another robbery.

Freeza wrote:After watching 1917 and seeing it get so many nominations I'm happy to finally have my Oscar villain for this year. Would hate to see anything from that film win anything. Other than Roger Deakins. He basically made that film.

Can you go into more detail here? I was (well, still am) looking forward to seeing it. My brother just got back from seeing it and was impressed, and he spent most of the lead up to watching it talking about how it didn't look particularly interesting to him

EDIT: just realized I've finally gone back to 100%. Thank you admin team multiple years at 75% had me reeling

I just think it’s the usual gimmick film that will be forgotten in a few years. Basically like Birdman, although everything about Birdman was better.

It’s hard to go into more detail without spoiling. I just thought characters actions didn’t make sense. There’s a thing that happens three times, where the main character just never learns his lesson. It’s bad writing to have a thing like that happen three times without the character learning.

The last 30 minutes were great from a visual sense. Think it looked unimpressive the first hour though as they made a compromise in order to stay with the one-shot gimmick. Didn’t really see the artistic need to do it. But then again. The academy loves that stuff.

I think a lot of people will love it on here though. I think it’s the reddit movie of the year basically.

imagine having a talent like de niro pacino and phoenix and people saying you only got nominated for awards because you are a white male.

De Niro didn't get nominated

the problem of diversity more lies for me in the studios and production companies who are more likely still to give scripts from established industry writers/producers/directors a chance, and not going out of their way to slowly fund and bring different races and female filmmakers more into the mainstream.

So i won't blame the Oscars on that front, as you can see they themselves go out of their way every now and then to give the Best Picture to films such as Green Book to save political face.

Freeza wrote:De Niro didn't get nominated

and theres me thinking he has won and been nominated in the past. my bad.

Unique wrote:

Freeza wrote:De Niro didn't get nominated

and theres me thinking he has won and been nominated in the past. my bad.

Then why include him? Even Al Pacino. Nobody has ever, ever complained about them getting anything undeserved. It's the opposite for them.

Freeza wrote:

Unique wrote:

Freeza wrote:De Niro didn't get nominated

and theres me thinking he has won and been nominated in the past. my bad.

Then why include him? Even Al Pacino. Nobody has ever, ever complained about them getting anything undeserved. It's the opposite for them.

so what are people moaning about. the best actors and directors are making the best films year after year and winning awards for them and people start saying shit like not enough black people or women are winning them. well if they want to win awards then make a good film ffs. its a fucking insult to the best actors and directors when people talk this kind of shit.

Freeza wrote:

Unique wrote:

Freeza wrote:De Niro didn't get nominated

and theres me thinking he has won and been nominated in the past. my bad.

Then why include him? Even Al Pacino. Nobody has ever, ever complained about them getting anything undeserved. It's the opposite for them.

can i assume you were part of the #OscarsSoWhite crap.

Unique wrote:

Freeza wrote:

Unique wrote: and theres me thinking he has won and been nominated in the past. my bad.

Then why include him? Even Al Pacino. Nobody has ever, ever complained about them getting anything undeserved. It's the opposite for them.

so what are people moaning about. the best actors and directors are making the best films year after year and winning awards for them and people start saying shit like not enough black people or women are winning them. well if they want to win awards then make a good film ffs. its a fucking insult to the best actors and directors when people talk this kind of shit.

The directing critique is mainly directed at not nominating Greta Gerwig. She made a great movie by almost any metric. The film got 6 nominations yesterday, and was universally loved by all critics.

And if you don't think there's a bit of racial bias in this, then you're just willfully ignorant. How can Parasite be universally discussed as the best picture of the year and not have a single acting nomination? There has to be prejudices against Korean names, or the fact they either can't name them or put faces to the names.

Mainly I think the biggest problem is industry wide. There's not enough projects being given to people who aren't white men.

And yeah, I agree with the best for the job should be hired, but the fact of matter is there isn't a difference between quality in movies depending on race, gender etc. so in that case the number of jobs given should reflect society and not be entirely made up of white men.

USC Annenberg's annual inclusion survey showed that there were no difference in metascore based on gender and race, except for black women being the best director. They were the outlier, and had a significant better metascore. I'll find it, when I can.

It's here: http://assets.uscannenberg.org/docs/aii-inclusion-directors-chair-20200102.pdf



There's a big problem with women getting directing jobs. And when they don't get hired as they directors. They can't be inducted into the academy branch, and then there won't be women nominated for the award.

And they're clearly just as good as the men at directing films. Suggesting otherwise is nothing but sexist.