The Annual Academy Awards - General Discussion

[Robert Lynch]

Does anybody know why Joaquin Phoenix doesn't do SNL? I seen Adam Driver, Margot Robbie, and other award nominees/Academy Award winners do SNL, too, so I wonder why he hasn't done it yet?

[TattleTeeny]

Quote

It was just very stream of consciousness, like he didn’t think of anything in advance, just opened his mouth, and garbage started flowing out.  

Just watched it--still makes sense to me. Maybe that's how I operate, I guess (and I hate this treatment of animals already, so there's that).

[slowpoked]

18 minutes ago, Neurochick said:

How would British people feel if an American actor played someone like James Bond?

That already happened and the Brits were NOT happy with it! This Texan named Renee Zellweger played every 2000s Brit women's hero - Bridget Jones. 

Personally, I think it came out great, and Renee was so excellent in it, it's one of my all-time favorite performances from any movie. Comedies just get an unfair rap at the Oscars, and I'm glad Renee was able to overcome that to get a Best Actress nom (even if she didn't' win).

But as we all know, Bridget Jones (and James Bond) are fictional characters. Harriett was not, so I can see the valid argument that it should have been played by an African American actress instead.

Edited February 11, 2020 by slowpoked

[Nordly Beaumont]

18 minutes ago, TattleTeeny said:

Just watched it--still makes sense to me. Maybe that's how I operate, I guess (and I hate this treatment of animals already, so there's that).

Made sense to me, too. It didn't seem off the cuff to me, I think he said what he wanted to and planned to say.

[formerlyfreedom]

A reminder that this is the topic to discuss the Academy Awards; here are the topics that further discussion of race and ethnicity and #MeToo & sexual harrassment in Hollywood can continue. Thank you.

[Toodleoo]

Heard on the radio on the drive home that the Oscars broke a new record—lowest viewership ever! Woohoo! 23M or so.

(I did prefer the pacing and the no-host thing though)

Twitter has lost its mind over Jane Fonda’s artful pause when announcing Parasite as the winner and I agree, she recognized the importance of the win and gave it a respectful gravity.

Many mentioned her carrying a red coat and I completely forgot that she wore it for her Fire Drill Fridays while protesting climate change. In addition, she made a point to wear a dress she’d worn to Cannes in 2014 as a nod to sustainability/reuse.

One production thing I did not like was how they’d show some clips of nominated films in a box perhaps 1/6th the size of the TV with a teeny tiny title, in front of an ocean of stage backdrop. Cut that shit out, I’m old and can’t see and have a big TV for a reason, yo.

Edited February 11, 2020 by Toodleoo

[Cotypubby]

1 hour ago, dmeets said:

Unless the theaters have been showing Irishman and Marriage Story and I've just been oblivious? I know AMC refused to include them in the Best Picture Showcase, just as they did with Roma last year.

Both The Irishman and Marriage Story have played in several independent theaters here in NYC and around the country. It's only the large chains like AMC and Regal that refused to play them. Same with Roma last year.

[paramitch]

One of the common latest reviews/critiques of this ceremony was that, despite in-ceremony attempts, was, it still remains a really white-centric nomination panel (undeniably true), which is also why I think any people of color were so applauded in the ceremony (which was awesome, I just wish they'd had more nominees).

Again, which I found really upsetting that the camera people couldn't find native American actor Wes Studi for his moment after his fucking honorary Oscar (or fellow honoree Geena Davis).

The subtext actually became text!

4 hours ago, Minneapple said:

Ricky Gervais at the Golden Globes said it best. Hollywood actors work in an industry that features companies like Amazon and Disney. They have no moral ground on which to lecture anybody. 

I can't stand Gervais but I get his POV to a degree -- sort off. I also think he's glib and not really addressing the issue of opportunity. So I don't quite agree -- yes, I feel that you are totally okay with making a movie without espousing every single idea the production company 3 tiers above you espouses. You're paid to do a job. Not to be judged morally for doing so.

1 hour ago, Neurochick said:

I don't think Erivo should have played Harriet either.  I always thought that part should have been played by an African American actress.  How would British people feel if an American actor played someone like James Bond?  It just seems to me that directors feel any black person will do, no one will know the difference. 

I'm all in favor of am American or female Bond, dammit, and I'm fine with Erivo as Tubman, considering Streep as Sophie (and who were both lovely and superb in the roles). But I agree that casting directors still need to think bigger -- and too often, don't.

53 minutes ago, Robert Lynch said:

Does anybody know why Joaquin Phoenix doesn't do SNL? I seen Adam Driver, Margot Robbie, and other award nominees/Academy Award winners do SNL, too, so I wonder why he hasn't done it yet?

I don't love him (see also harassment and on-set behavior) but I suspect it's due to anxiety, insecurity, and other issues. He has talked openly about many of them, and you can see even here that he was openly terrified and shaking (which I totally understand and empathize with). He isn't always a nice guy according to industry gossip, but I believe he tries, and that he's this kind of shy, broken guy trying to navigate a tough world.

43 minutes ago, slowpoked said:

That already happened and the Brits were NOT happy with it! This Texan named Renee Zellweger played every 2000s Brit women's hero - Bridget Jones. 

Personally, I think it came out great, and Renee was so excellent in it, it's one of my all-time favorite performances from any movie. Comedies just get an unfair rap at the Oscars, and I'm glad Renee was able to overcome that to get a Best Actress nom (even if she didn't' win).

I love that you brought these up. I adore Renee as Bridget (she's absolutely wonderful). I'm fine with performers anywhere playing characters from anywhere, I just want them to do so with real respect and preparation.

Edited February 11, 2020 by paramitch
typo

[mtlchick]

1 hour ago, Robert Lynch said:

Does anybody know why Joaquin Phoenix doesn't do SNL? I seen Adam Driver, Margot Robbie, and other award nominees/Academy Award winners do SNL, too, so I wonder why he hasn't done it yet?

I think it's a mix of "is this really a good idea" on both sides.  By his own admission, he's not the easiest person to work with.  By the show's admission, they will make it known if there was a host that the cast disliked so much because they were so difficult to work with.  (exhibit A: Adrien Brody.) 

Edited February 11, 2020 by mtlchick

[slowpoked]

19 minutes ago, paramitch said:

I adore Renee as Bridget (she's absolutely wonderful).

That scene in the book launch party where she was tapping the mic and ends up saying "OY!" to get the attention of the crowd is one of the most glorious and funniest scenes I've seen in a movie. I watch the movie every time it's on cable and even though I know what's coming in that scene, it never fails to make me laugh out loud.

[Quickbeam]

I had to go to sleep before the last 4 awards. Went back and watched them. I thought Phoenix was coherent and passionate. I liked it, Renee too. I guess I’m an easy room. 

Edited February 11, 2020 by Quickbeam

[Robert Lynch]

44 minutes ago, mtlchick said:

I think it's a mix of "is this really a good idea" on both sides.  By his own admission, he's not the easiest person to work with.  By the show's admission, they will make it known if there was a host that the cast disliked so much because they were so difficult to work with.  (exhibit A: Adrien Brody.) 

I see. You know, that would make sense. I was just shocked that he never did one.

[UsernameFatigue]

2 hours ago, TattleTeeny said:

Just watched it--still makes sense to me. Maybe that's how I operate, I guess (and I hate this treatment of animals already, so there's that).

Ditto. I personally don't know anyone who had a problem with it. The speech was also the topic this morning on a local radio talk show, specifically the part to do with how animals as sentient beings are often treated. The entire call in show was devoted to the topic, and for that I give Joaquin a standing O. 

I didn't mind Renee's speech either, but did find hers to be a bit rambling. Joaquin's? Not at all. 

[rmontro]

2 hours ago, Robert Lynch said:

Does anybody know why Joaquin Phoenix doesn't do SNL?

He's a brilliant actor in the movies.  But he has a tendency to be kind of incoherent in a live situation.

[greyhorse]

Late to the party here, and from the looks of it, Joaquin and Squinty's speeches seem to have drawn the most criticism.

I agree that Joaquin's was rambling and stream of consciousness verbal diarrhea.  But who knows?  Maybe he rehearsed this and this was exactly what and how he intended to say it. He's won every award this season, I wonder what his other speeches were like?  Were they soap boxy?  Or the standard "Thank you to everyone including the woman who clips my toenails"?  You can be a vegan, nothing wrong with that.  In 2015, it was estimated that 1 million Americans were vegan, or 0.4% of the population.  So he's wanting to express his views on animal cruelty and hopes that some of the 99% of America will change their daily food habits.  Sure.  I doubt that Joaquin Phoenix is so adored by the general population that people are hanging on his every word and will rush to emulate him.  If Brad Pitt had talked about inseminating cows and stealing their milk, I don't think people would care that much.  Because Brad Pitt is loved and can do no wrong.  Just like Leo when he talked about climate change.  Actors can talk about important social and world issues.  But you have to have an audience and a following in order for it to be received the way you intend.  Joaquin doesn't have that and never will.

Squinty is just always like that.  She seems to be the same giddy "I can't believe I'm here" woman that she was 20 years ago.  Only her face is all transformed now from her plastic surgery that it's hard to recognize her.

[Silver Raven]

5 hours ago, meep.meep said:

In transcription they leave out all the ums and long pauses and weird timing of phrases.  He came across as insincere, like someone seizing his one chance to get his big cause out in front of a captive audience.   And, as I said before, like he didn't prepare for it very well.

His speech at the BAFTA awards was equally as incoherent and rambling.

[LennieBriscoe]

11 hours ago, Blergh said:

I know one must consider the source and the fact that it's no secret that, for all his talents and good works notwithstanding, Elton John is a camera-hogging showboat,  All that said,    would it have killed Mr. John have let his collaborator of more than half a century Bernie Taupin (who co-wrote the Oscar winning tune) to actually get to utter 'thank you' or even get a single word in edgewise?! IMO, Mr. Taupin is FAR more tolerant and accepting of Mr. John's hogging than he deserves to say nothing of how I'd have treated it! 

I don't understand. The ceremony I thought I saw had Bernie speaking first, mentioning the long-time collaboration of him and Elton.

I admit to not listening to all of Joaquin. Got the beginning and his River quote at the end, mostly. But truth to tell, he has always been a bit odd. A good choice for "Joker."

Edited February 11, 2020 by LennieBriscoe

[Crs97]

I didn’t find his BAFTA speech rambling at all.  He said he was honored, but conflicted to receive the award because the lack of diversity in nominees made it clear to POC that they aren’t welcome.  He said he is part of the problem for not requiring inclusion clauses in his contracts, and it is the responsibility of the people benefiting from systemic racism to bring it down.  It was a beautiful speech IMO.

Here it is

[Robert Lynch]

1 hour ago, greyhorse said:

Late to the party here, and from the looks of it, Joaquin and Squinty's speeches seem to have drawn the most criticism.

I agree that Joaquin's was rambling and stream of consciousness verbal diarrhea.  But who knows?  Maybe he rehearsed this and this was exactly what and how he intended to say it. He's won every award this season, I wonder what his other speeches were like?  Were they soap boxy?  Or the standard "Thank you to everyone including the woman who clips my toenails"?  You can be a vegan, nothing wrong with that.  In 2015, it was estimated that 1 million Americans were vegan, or 0.4% of the population.  So he's wanting to express his views on animal cruelty and hopes that some of the 99% of America will change their daily food habits.  Sure.  I doubt that Joaquin Phoenix is so adored by the general population that people are hanging on his every word and will rush to emulate him.  If Brad Pitt had talked about inseminating cows and stealing their milk, I don't think people would care that much.  Because Brad Pitt is loved and can do no wrong.  Just like Leo when he talked about climate change.  Actors can talk about important social and world issues.  But you have to have an audience and a following in order for it to be received the way you intend.  Joaquin doesn't have that and never will.

Squinty is just always like that.  She seems to be the same giddy "I can't believe I'm here" woman that she was 20 years ago.  Only her face is all transformed now from her plastic surgery that it's hard to recognize her.

Betty White and Doris Day were the only ones who did much more than Joaquin. They are strong on their stance against animal cruelty and supporting animal rights. I am not against his stance and I think he is doing a great job of it, but he would have to do much more like these two in order to gain recognition.

[Lonesome Rhodes]

The least mooooving and watched Oscars in my memory.  More than 10% fewer total viewers than ever before?  Wow.

The most important thing to me was that Robert Forster be a part of In Memoriam.  He was.

When did the "orchestra" get moved back to the stage pit from the Capitol Records building?  

Several trophies given for career achievement.  It happens.  

When did Bob Iger become Jack?  How many times was he on my TV screen?  In an unrelated development, the announcer, Disney, did a fine job.

The best package, or at least the one which most stirred me, was the one relating certain songs to movies/moments.  There were a few misses and boy, did they blow it by not including certain songs (maybe next year?) but credit to AMPAS for the concept.  The one which thrilled me was Slumdog Millionaire (dance sequence at the train station).   

Thank you to the many contributors to this thread.  

 

   

 

[paramitch]

12 hours ago, slowpoked said:

For me, since there can never be a consensus about the Best Picture winner, my personal test for it is if it ages well. I think as long as it does, it's a good Best Picture winner. IMO, those that didn't age well in recent times were Titanic, American Beauty and OMG, Green Book. If La La Land had held up its win, it would be on my list too - I didn't already like it the first time I saw it. 

It's all so subjective. I loved all of the above (although American Beauty decidedly does not age well, and no, I wouldn't feel the same way today). And I still love Green Book (I know, feel free to throw things at me), and La La Land, FWIW.

12 hours ago, Scout Finch said:

I couldn't finish watching Roma because I got grossed out by all the scenes of dog feces, especially the up close ones with the tire rolling over it. I could almost smell it! What the hell??! I could excuse one scene but there were multiple ones. I think I made it about halfway through the movie but never found it interesting.

I love this so much because this is me. I loved ROMA but had the same issues. Aghggh!

10 hours ago, blackwing said:

I guess I never understand the mentality of the soapbox speech.  Yes, he won the Oscar and it’s clear that whatever the hell he was talking about has a very deep meaning to him.  But I don’t understand the thinking... “I won the Oscar, hundreds of millions of people are watching me, now is my chance to tell people about a meaningful issue to me and hope that I can convert many people’s way of thinking?”  Honestly at post 11 pm my thinking is, I’m tired please just STFU and move it along so I can go to bed.   Now I’m hearing here that it was about cows and I’m laughing.  You’d think that he would have talked about River before the cows.  He was more concerned with getting  his soapbox issue across than with rememberIng his late brother?

My take is that he wanted to make a point about empathy and universal kindness, had trouble saying all he wanted to live, and then closed with his brother's manifesto. I was incredibly moved despite the rambling.

10 hours ago, Inquisitionist said:

Apparently it's more about Lloyd Vogel (Matthew Rhys), the journalist who wrote about Mr. Rogers.  But Meryl Streep was nominated for Best Actress for The Devil Wears Prada, when I would have called her supporting in that movie (Anne Hathaway was the lead).

This has been a thing forever and I agree that it's ridiculous and totally based on ego. In some cases, the studios will wrangle who to nominate where, and in others even set actors against each other so that one will give up a major category for a supporting one, etc. It's frustrating but we can see it for decades now, honestly.  But in terms of the Rogers film, I actually give credit to Hanks for allowing them to nominate him as supporting -- I'm sure they were panting to get him in the chase under Best Actor for marketing reasons, if nothing else.

9 hours ago, TattleTeeny said:

I think that if one is going to bring up animal cruelty in a setting like this, he may as well bring attention to an example that often flies right under people's radar. Surprisingly (but sort of not surprisingly too, in a way), many people seem to believe that no harm comes to dairy cows, that they just walk around eating grass until it's time for the kindly old farmhand to express their udders (and once, I saw someone say on another thread here that cows produce milk nonstop, with or without pregnancies and births, and need us to help them get it out). Making a statement about meat itself wouldn't be the same; people know all of that already. In fact, maybe he should have included what happens to male baby chicks.
 

I'm so glad you brought this up. I hated being the token liberal on animal cruelty, but Joaquin brought up a bona fide issue, and I'm glad he did (and don't get me started on pigs or chickens when it comes to factory farming). It wasn't a joke and it wasn't funny. He said something he has protested and spoken about for years now, so more power to him.

9 hours ago, FilmTVGeek80 said:

He's won about a thousand awards this season. He's thanked other people before but doesn't need to in every single speech. “I won the Oscar, hundreds of millions of people are watching me, now is my chance to tell people about a meaningful issue to me and hope that I can convert many people’s way of thinking?” Partially, yeah. It's his moment to talk about what matters and for someone like him, who actually walks the walk when comes to caring about these things, if he can reach one person it's worth it. Sure, there are people like you who won't care and just want to be entertained and that's fine. But, you're not the person he's trying to reach. He doesn't have to calibrate his speech, his moment, to entertain.

The speech wasn't all about cows. Not that caring about animal cruelty is something to be ashamed of. He wanted to close out with a reference to his brother. It wasn't about cows being more important to him than his brother. He was able to do both - say two things at once that meant something to him. 

I agree, and love this take. Joaquin took a moment and tried to change people's minds. Sometimes this actually works. And hey, how many thousands of people today do you think googled "dairy cruelty" as a phase? This makes a difference, however small.

8 hours ago, Minneapple said:

Ricky Gervais at the Golden Globes said it best. Hollywood actors work in an industry that features companies like Amazon and Disney. They have no moral ground on which to lecture anybody. 

I feel this is deeply unfair. I have friends who work for Disney and Amazon. I do not automatically assume this means they have no souls. Just that they need paychecks. 

7 hours ago, blackwing said:

I believe people did upthread.  She’s always like that.  I wonder if that’s her schtick, to play the overly excited ingenue who can’t think straight (even though she’s 50 years old, it doesn’t really work anymore).  Either that or she’s just always drunk.

I’m curious about when the decision to have these young, mostly minority, actors introduce themselves and the presenters was made.  The cynic in me says it was after the nominations were announced and there was backlash about the almost entirely white acting nominees.  “See we do care about young minority actors!”   Eh.  I thought it seemed a bit too obvious.  Like they were checking off boxes.  “We need an Asian... Kelly Marie Tran!  We need a Hispanic... Anthony Ramos!  We need a black person... Zazie Beetz! 

If you ever catch the Hollywood Reporter Roundtables on YT or other interviews, Zellwegger is a lovely, quiet and thoughtful particpant. She comes across as sympathetic and empathetic, and willing to move forward and to own her past. I don't love her work in "Judy" but I adore her as a person, even knowing she was at many times a Miramax love child. I still question how much she knew about Weinstein, but maybe she truly did just get lucky and never have to deal with that stuff.

As far as the 2020 ceremony and its variety of multi-ethnic acts, presenters and genders? Of course this was calculated. There was one non-white nominee in major acting categories, which was disgraceful. Speaking as a publicist, they tried to cover their asses to show, "Hey! we love everyone, all genders and races, even if it doesn't look like we do!" 

6 hours ago, KaveDweller said:

Similarly, I wouldn't have called Brad Pitt supporting in Once Upon a Time in Hollywood. I thought he and Leo were co leads.

They could have submitted (and won) as lead nominees. But -- given history and numbers -- this is an instant "both lose" scenario (see also "Thelma and Louise" etc). The smart move is when one of the actors agrees to submit as a supporting even if the script doesn't line up in terms of actual content.

Like, another weird example (among many) is Hopkins winning as Best Actor for "Silence" when he had fewer lines and screentime than most supporting nominees. It's really all about clout and the competition for that year.

1 hour ago, Crs97 said:

I didn’t find his BAFTA speech rambling at all.  He said he was honored, but conflicted to receive the award because the lack of diversity in nominees made it clear to POC that they aren’t welcome.  He said he is part of the problem for not requiring inclusion clauses in his contracts, and it is the responsibility of the people benefiting from systemic racism to bring it down.  It was a beautiful speech IMO.

Here it is

Thanks for this -- I hadn't seen it. I'm not a huge Joaquin fan (although I think he's a talented actor) because of his off-set behavior, but I appreciated the humility and appreciation in his speech for his less than good times, so... sigh.

49 minutes ago, Robert Lynch said:

Betty White and Doris Day were the only ones who did much more than Joaquin. They are strong on their stance against animal cruelty and supporting animal rights. I am not against his stance and I think he is doing a great job of it, but he would have to do much more like these two in order to gain recognition.

It's a tough area because there is an instant stigma these days against anyone who speaks out against animal cruelty -- you're either a militant vegan or a hunter, when actually it's so much more complicated. (And FWIW I can't stand PETA for how far it goes on domestic pets -- they have a truly awful history where euthanasia is preferred to rehoming/adoption, etc.)

[Vermicious Knid]

Why Jane Fonda had a coat on stage.

Saw Olivia Coleman and thought "The dress has eyes".

[Inquisitionist]

11 hours ago, KaveDweller said:

I think the actors can decide which category based on which they think they have a better shot of winning. That's probably not what they are supposed to do, but the rules seem flexible enough that they can when they want to. Meryl was definitely supporting in The Devil Wears Prada, but I kind of feel like Meryl doesn't do supporting.

 

11 hours ago, slowpoked said:

I think category fraud is a real thing and it's been going on for awhile. Yes, I believe the actors AND studios decide what category to submit nominations for, but on some of them it was just egregious. Like the Devil Wear Prada for Meryl. Although Meryl does do Supporting category - she was nominated in that for Into The Woods. 

She was nominated for Supporting Actress for Adaptation as well.  I think that and Into the Woods were much clearer cases than TDwP, but I'd argue she was secondary there as well.

[Robert Lynch]

I think I could understand where Joaquin Phoenix is coming. I remember buying Gladiator on DVD(before Blue-Ray) and Ridley Scott told a story about Joaquin being weight sensitive about looking like a fat hamster on camera. I felt pity for him because he really seemed sensitive about his weight stemming from his childhood all the way to adulthood. That stuff could take a toll on a certain person, based on appearances in Hollywood. I think he knew he could never replace his brother in terms of good looks and charisma, judging that he was the odd duckling in the family. I believe Joaquin knew his difficulties about growing up in the spotlight, but he seemed to grow up as an artist.

You cannot love the actor itself, but his dedication for craft is there for all the world to see. 

[Quickbeam]

My last Oscar thought...do yourself a favor and watch the 7 minutes of "Hair Love" on YouTube or wherever. It's really very sweet and touching. I'm glad it won. 

[Ohwell]

I think Jane Fonda should be the one to present the Best Picture award from now on. 

[Pickles Aplenty]

I didn't have a problem with anyone's speech.  I expect a little rambling, at a big moment like that.  I don't know much about dairy farms, but if it was an example that Joaquin gave about cruelty, whatever.  It was a bit weird, but it was fine.

I really liked Brad Pitt thanking the stunt men and women, with his speech, and I liked Laura Dern, thanking her parents.  And I like the way Bong Joon-ho looked at his Oscar, like he couldn't believe it had actually happened.  Those were probably my favorite moments of the night.

[Quickbeam]

5 minutes ago, Billina said:

I didn't have a problem with anyone's speech.  I expect a little rambling, at a big moment like that.  I don't know much about dairy farms, but if it was an example that Joaquin gave about cruelty, whatever.  It was a bit weird, but it was fine.

I really liked Brad Pitt thanking the stunt men and women, with his speech, and I liked Laura Dern, thanking her parents.  And I like the way Bong Joon-ho looked at his Oscar, like he couldn't believe it had actually happened.  Those were probably my favorite moments of the night.

The stunt organizations have been trying to get Academy recognition for many years. It was a nice nod to them. 

[TattleTeeny]

Quote

Betty White and Doris Day were the only ones who did much more than Joaquin. They are strong on their stance against animal cruelty and supporting animal rights. I am not against his stance and I think he is doing a great job of it, but he would have to do much more like these two in order to gain recognition.

maybe that's his plan and this is how he's starting out -- though "starting out" is the wrong term, probably, as his stance on animal rights is not new. He also worked on the documentary Earthlings (which I am terrified to watch, even though I would like to) in some capacity. 

[ShadowHunter]

Oscar ratings fall to an all time low. 23.6 million total viewers and a 5.3 rating in the adults 18-49 demo, according to Nielsen's fast national ratings. 

[KatWay]

32 minutes ago, ShadowHunter said:

Oscar ratings fall to an all time low. 23.6 million total viewers and a 5.3 rating in the adults 18-49 demo, according to Nielsen's fast national ratings. 

I feel like people just "watch" online now. Everybody was definitely talking about it on social media.

[slowpoked]

1 hour ago, KatWay said:

I feel like people just "watch" online now. Everybody was definitely talking about it on social media.

True. I know a lot of friends who say they have a "live stream" of it. Whether it's legal or not, who knows. But I think live streams don't count for Nielsen ratings.

I think that system should also be updated to reflect the fact that there's so many options to view the Oscars aside from regular broadcast TV - Hulu, Sling, YT, etc. I think it's unfair to present it that way (that it's losing viewership) when people are just finding different ways to watch it.

My personal faves though are those who proclaim how irrelevant the Oscars have become because Hollywood has become full of liberal elitists, etc., but actually live-tweeted about it, fought with other people who should have won, and posted news articles the next day about how irrelevant it is.

[Ms Blue Jay]

On 2/10/2020 at 1:41 PM, mojoween said:

The caption under his picture in my local paper says “Bong Joon-Ho” and the first words in the first paragraph of the article accompanying it are “Bong Joon Ho.”

I wasn't referring to the punctuation, I was referring to a completely different name being used.

[Athena]

Keep the conversation polite and civil. Do not snark your fellow posters. Posts have been removed. Thank you. 

[Bruinsfan]

2 hours ago, slowpoked said:

My personal faves though are those who proclaim how irrelevant the Oscars have become because Hollywood has become full of liberal elitists, etc., but actually live-tweeted about it, fought with other people who should have won, and posted news articles the next day about how irrelevant it is.

I work about 10 feet from such a person. In the interest of a harmonious work environment I won't be saying "pray tell, exactly when were you enjoying movies and televised entertainment that weren't being produced by a Hollywood full of liberal elitists? I must have missed the Oscars that went to Kirk Cameron and those God's Not Dead movies."

[Inquisitionist]

8 hours ago, Billina said:

I really liked Brad Pitt thanking the stunt men and women, with his speech, 

I also loved his shout-out to Ridley and Geena.  I'm sure that if Thelma & Louise hadn't come along, Brad would have made his mark in some other role, but damn, that was one HELL of an introduction to a wide audience.

[Milburn Stone]

On 2/10/2020 at 6:08 PM, Juneau Gal said:

Thank you! I was going to write the same exact thing. Did not watch but read the transcript. It made sense. 

My own view--if the transcript makes sense, the speech makes sense. So it did. Any pauses and body language and ums and ahhs uttered were mere distractions. You can take away points for delivery, but the ideas were cogent.

Edited February 12, 2020 by Milburn Stone

[BW Manilowe]

From USA Today: Eminem Explains How He Pulled Off His Surprise ‘Lose Yourself’ Performance at the Oscars

[Minneapple]

On 2/11/2020 at 1:35 AM, paramitch said:

I feel this is deeply unfair. I have friends who work for Disney and Amazon. I do not automatically assume this means they have no souls. Just that they need paychecks. 

Sure, I have friends who work for Amazon too. Do they get up on a soapbox and lecture me about cows being inseminated and God only knows what else? No, they don't lecture me about anything and that's why we're friends.

[aradia22]

More random fashion thoughts... 

I loved Sandra Oh's gown. It's doing a lot but it's doing it successfully. It's polished and it commits. 

Gal Gadot's look was interesting. I think I need to stare at it longer. It's a different vibe for her. 

So much boring fashion this year. Lots of minimalism. Lots of weird architectural shapes. Project Runway has really ruined me for a certain style of gown because I know how quickly a mediocre designer can whip up a basic dress with a big flounce. 

[BuckeyeLou]

1 hour ago, aradia22 said:

More random fashion thoughts... 

I loved Sandra Oh's gown. It's doing a lot but it's doing it successfully. It's polished and it commits. 

Gal Gadot's look was interesting. I think I need to stare at it longer. It's a different vibe for her. 

So much boring fashion this year. Lots of minimalism. Lots of weird architectural shapes. Project Runway has really ruined me for a certain style of gown because I know how quickly a mediocre designer can whip up a basic dress with a big flounce. 

I agree, there were no dresses that really stood out & were unique & different. (I remember the year Halle Berry wore that maroon dress with embroidery, it was beautiful) I liked the marigold color on Mindy Kaling,  I thought Penelope Cruz looked adorable, Charlize Theron always looks gorgeous & classic,  there was a lot of gorgeous statement jewelry, including the beautiful floral wreath in Salma Hayak's hair. 

[Bruinsfan]

I thought Billy Porter and Waad al-Khateab wore dresses that fit the unique and different descriptor.

 

So did Kristen Wiig's, but not in a good way.

Edited February 13, 2020 by Bruinsfan

[Milburn Stone]

3 hours ago, Bruinsfan said:

I thought Billy Porter and Waad al-Khateab wore dresses that fit the unique and different descriptor.

So did Kristen Wiig's, but not in a good way.

I'm surprised by all the negative commentary on Maya and Kristen's dresses. I thought they were going for a look that was deliberately parodic of "old Hollywood glamour" and succeeded marvelously. And the reason they succeeded marvelously--the reason those dresses enhanced the bit--was that those dresses were accurate, i.e. truly elegant in that style. 

 

[Inquisitionist]

2 hours ago, Milburn Stone said:

I'm surprised by all the negative commentary on Maya and Kristen's dresses. I thought they were going for a look that was deliberately parodic of "old Hollywood glamour" and succeeded marvelously. And the reason they succeeded marvelously--the reason those dresses enhanced the bit--was that those dresses were accurate, i.e. truly elegant in that style. 

 

I think I was with you up until your last 5 words.  These dresses were truly elegant?  I may need some more context.  🙂 

[DollEyes]

On 2/9/2020 at 10:18 PM, tennisgurl said:

I know what my cats will be dressed as next Halloween...

With or without human hands?

[Bruinsfan]

Maya's dress could have been nice if it were fitted right, and belted. The only thing that could have saved Kristen's would have been whatever preys on that type of sea cucumber in the ocean swimming onto the stage and eating it.

[paramitch]

More post-Oscars discussion!

On 2/11/2020 at 4:07 AM, Robert Lynch said:

I think I could understand where Joaquin Phoenix is coming. I remember buying Gladiator on DVD(before Blue-Ray) and Ridley Scott told a story about Joaquin being weight sensitive about looking like a fat hamster on camera. I felt pity for him because he really seemed sensitive about his weight stemming from his childhood all the way to adulthood. That stuff could take a toll on a certain person, based on appearances in Hollywood. I think he knew he could never replace his brother in terms of good looks and charisma, judging that he was the odd duckling in the family. I believe Joaquin knew his difficulties about growing up in the spotlight, but he seemed to grow up as an artist.

Oh, thanks for this reminder! I actually remember this from the Director's Commentary way back when on Gladiator and had forgotten it. Poor Joaquin. The irony is that while River was ridiculously handsome, Joaquin grew up to be a genuinely handsome guy too (more in that dark and brooding way, but still). I thought he was both magnetic and superb in Walk the Line, for instance, and had real chemistry with Reese, too.

As far as Gladiator, I also do remember that some other costars (I think Richard Harris and Oliver Reed both) talked with exasperation and affection about how insecure Joaquin was on the film, and that he was constantly asking for opinions after takes, and whether he was okay. He seems sort of gentle and broken, so I hope he's attained more confidence the past decade.

I was also appreciative that he broke ties permanently with Casey Affleck after Affleck's behavior on-set in I'm Still Here (Affleck was married to Phoenix's sister at the time). And this is something I just found out after checking out a few of the latest articles -- I was really angry at Affleck (and his brother AND Damon, who went out of their way to mock and deny the women who sued him), so this made me feel much better about Phoenix's journey.

On 2/11/2020 at 5:37 AM, Quickbeam said:

My last Oscar thought...do yourself a favor and watch the 7 minutes of "Hair Love" on YouTube or wherever. It's really very sweet and touching. I'm glad it won. 

It's so lovely! I loved that they made it available in full on YouTube. It was absolutely perfect (yes, I cried). Seriously, go watch it.

On 2/11/2020 at 9:42 AM, Billina said:

I didn't have a problem with anyone's speech.  I expect a little rambling, at a big moment like that.  I don't know much about dairy farms, but if it was an example that Joaquin gave about cruelty, whatever.  It was a bit weird, but it was fine.

I really liked Brad Pitt thanking the stunt men and women, with his speech, and I liked Laura Dern, thanking her parents.  And I like the way Bong Joon-ho looked at his Oscar, like he couldn't believe it had actually happened.  Those were probably my favorite moments of the night.

I was so thrilled Brad thanked the stuntpeople -- I'm a huge supporter of the Academy adding stunt categories, and it's way way past overdue. Stunt persons make the impossible look possible. They do things that could get them killed to make the stars look good (and plenty have died doing so). So many great stunts through the decades are legendary. It needs an Oscar category.

On 2/11/2020 at 6:43 PM, Inquisitionist said:

I also loved his shout-out to Ridley and Geena.  I'm sure that if Thelma & Louise hadn't come along, Brad would have made his mark in some other role, but damn, that was one HELL of an introduction to a wide audience.

I loved Brad's shout-out to Geena, and it was really graceful and humble of him. And she really was a huge fan of his for the part, and she definitely had a voice in his getting the role. I agree that he would have broken through eventually but yeah, it's a pretty amazing intro! I don't think he gets enough credit for going from absolutely lovable and likable, to being an incredible scuzzball. 

Side Note: Even if that plot twist will always bother me, because (THELMA & LOUISE SPOILERS)... 

Spoiler

There is, for me, no way -- no way on God's green earth -- that Louise would ever hand Thelma ALL HER MONEY and say "guard it." Louise's boyfriend JUST BROUGHT IT TO HER, so WTF? Louise already knows keeping it in her own room is safe. The only reason she gives it to poor befuddled, gullible Thelma is because the script needs her to do so. I love the movie -- it's brilliant and a genuine classic, but this is my one freaking criticism...

 

On 2/12/2020 at 11:10 AM, Minneapple said:

Sure, I have friends who work for Amazon too. Do they get up on a soapbox and lecture me about cows being inseminated and God only knows what else? No, they don't lecture me about anything and that's why we're friends.

That's totally fair, but I was responding to this quote from you, specifically:

Quote

 @Minneapple: Hollywood actors work in an industry that features companies like Amazon and Disney. They have no moral ground on which to lecture anybody. 

That was what I felt was perhaps not fair. I know people who work for Disney and Amazon and they have plenty of moral ground as good people in real life. They just needed a job that allowed them to be creative, have benefits, etc. And I admit that as a freelancer who's often just a few months from homelessness if clients are late or nonpaying, etc., I don't know what I would do if a truly heinous company (say, a notorious pharma or insecticide company) offered to hire me for some work. It would be gut-wrenching because I need the work, but at the same time... I'd wave goodbye to my soul. So it's an interesting situation -- now more than ever, certainly.

Meanwhile, do I think it's cool for anyone to get on a soapbox and suddenly lecture or judge me -- for instance, my friends or family daily? No. But I don't mind having those conversations on occasion either. Some of the best conversations I've had with loved ones have been about trying to live a more moral life when it comes to humane treatment of animals raised for food (both the pros and the cons). I try not to be too intrusive -- I let people know I don't eat pork -- but that's basically it. I mostly live on fish nowadays as my main protein, but I am always grateful for whatever someone else cooks for me, for instance.

On 2/12/2020 at 2:15 PM, BuckeyeLou said:

Charlize Theron always looks gorgeous & classic,  there was a lot of gorgeous statement jewelry, including the beautiful floral wreath in Salma Hayak's hair. 

Charlize Theron is basically bathing in the magical sacrificial blood of a thousands virgins at this point (along with Keanu Reeves), because she just continues to look so fresh and amazing. And I love that when awards season comes out, she just crops her hair down to a few inches and still manages to look like this is not the most difficult look in creation to carry off as flawlessly as she does.

Speaking of which, one of my favorite Charlize Oscar moments will always be this surprisingly elegant one with Channing Tatum (you can really see all Theron's and Tatum's past dance training here, and it's so lovely). I basically instantly cast both of them in a mental movie musical (and am still waiting). 

Edited February 15, 2020 by paramitch
Forgot Walk the Line!

[FoundTime]

On 2/10/2020 at 4:45 PM, slowpoked said:

I find the Academy's love and hate affair with Netflix interesting. I think the Academy should like it that Netflix is participating, because they're so willing to drop the BIG bucks during awards campaigning. And having huge money spent can only eventually benefit the Academy itself. 

I read a secret ballot, and I would think this is a popular sentiment across the voters, that The Irishman loses its power when a viewer know they can re-watch/watch it later, because it's on Netflix. When you watch it one seating, like in a theater, he claims it's a powerful movie (maybe I have to take him up on his claim - it took me three viewings at home to finish it). 

But is that really all there is to it though? I highly doubt these voters watch the movies nominated in theaters when they come out. I would venture a great portion of them only watch the screeners that they get from the studios, and you can also hit pause, replay, rewind, FF on those screeners, very much just like watching it on Netflix. 

I think until the Academy eventually turns over its membership and have voting members who think of streaming devices as a non-issue, there will still be a huge bias against Netflix in the years to come.

After the Oscars last year Steven Spielberg got all up in arms about streaming films being eligible for Academy Awards. I thought Netflix's response made some good points:

“We love cinema. Here are some things we also love:

-Access for people who can’t always afford, or live in towns without, theaters

-Letting everyone, everywhere enjoy releases at the same time

-Giving filmmakers more ways to share art

These things are not mutually exclusive.”

The other thing I think makes the Academy nervous about Netflix is that its model raises a pretty existential question - What is film? Does it have to be something shown in a theater? (and believe me, I am really glad to have seen 1917, for example, in a theater). I agree this is partly a generational issue that will evolve over time.

[Browncoat]

If I can't afford a theater, I might have trouble affording Netflix, Amazon, and the 47 other subscription services I need to be able to see their movies. (Yes, I know there aren't really 47 others.)

[Crs97]

I like having the academy consider movies shown in the streaming services because the theatre that shows some of the independent movies is farther away than I’d like.  Give these films more platforms to be seen.