LornaHansonForbes

Anyone else get the feeling that Oscars 2019 in particular is headed for a spectacular train wreck?

368 posts in this topic

4 hours ago, LornaHansonForbes said:

Forgiveness, another bitter, angry, acidic article on Oscars 2018. Nonetheless, I thought it was pretty well written (There are multiple contributors) and compelling and a lot of the comments are funny.

https://splinternews.com/the-bad-the-worse-and-the-ughhh-ly-the-lowest-moment-1832873903

So far, I've watched about a third of the show (on the dvr) and it's not bad. Maybe NOT having a host is a good thing. I haven't seen any superfluous production numbers yet (I missed the opening musical number as I didn't start recording until just before the supporting actress award. I stopped after Bette Midler's number (who at 73 looked great!)

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, LornaHansonForbes said:

a lot of people seem to have approved of the hostless format.

The only bad part (and it never seems to change) are the endless thank you speeches. I think there should be a rule that the award is taken away if you go over the time limit. There were 2 or 3 that went on and on. At least in a recording you can FF through them!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know, I switched over a few times when I was watching something else, and I swore I saw John Lewis standing there, but I said, NO, Can't be!!! LOL. Guess I wasn't seeing things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, LornaHansonForbes said:

[all apologies for the navel-gazing thinkpiecey quality of what is to follow, i am just in that kind of mood today.]

I understand what you're talking about. I believe you've mentioned manic-depression in the past (apologies if I'm remembering incorrectly). I don't have the manic part of that, only the clinical depression. Movies don't trigger it though. It's just always "on" for me. However, for some reason, listening to music, particularly from specific time frames, can make it worse. 

In fact, bad movies can lighten my mood more than good ones, sometimes, and they make a lot of bad movies these days. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lorna, even present day comedies get you down? (Sorry, I didnt read all of your post the first go round)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LornaHansonForbes said:

a lot of people seem to have approved of the hostless format.

I don't necessarily hate the idea of a host but I prefer this one to the ones with the last few hosts.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Gershwin fan said:

I don't necessarily hate the idea of a host but I prefer this one to the ones with the last few hosts.

For those who said, "But the ceremony will DIE if we don't have a Hip, Edgy Young Comic to attract the Young People who think the show is too long!", they have now just been proven WRONG.  And that bold is so that you'll hear Kevin Spacey's "Wroooong!!" from "Superman Returns".   

The tearful mutual hugginess in the speeches may have been a little harder to take without a chaser, but it reminds us that that was what the show is about:  People who work in a profession we take for granted realizing that they're not taken for granted among other people who work in their profession.  Or even by people who like the product that they make every day, and/or consider it sacred, like all classic movie buffs do.  

Oh, and did anyone notice, it came in under four hours??  That's for all those nervous ABC folk saying "But the viewers say it's TOO LONG if it's not Hip, Edgy and Funny!  Maybe if we just shot the awards out to the folks in the seats with a T-shirt cannon!"

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, it clocked in around 3 hrs and 15 mins. Not bad, considering the bloated overtime of the past several years...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, calvinnme said:

A question...maybe it is a stupid one. Why is it that Mahershala Ali was nominated for Best Supporting Actor instead of Best Actor in Green Book? It seems that Green Book has two male leads, and he is one of them. This is like James Stewart being nominated/winning Best Actor in 1940 for Philadelphia Story. It seems to me he was a supporting actor in that film, and Cary Grant was the lead actor, with Hepburn as the lead actress. 

 If they have a film with two (or three) leads of the same gender, typically anymore, one will be placed leading, and the other one (or two) will be shafted to supporting. The last time that two leads of the same gender were up in leading for the same film was Thelma and Louise back in 1991.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, CinemaInternational said:

 If they have a film with two (or three) leads of the same gender, typically anymore, one will be placed leading, and the other one (or two) will be shafted to supporting. The last time that two leads of the same gender were up in leading for the same film was Thelma and Louise back in 1991.

Has it REALLY been that long?!

Man I’m feeling old. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/24/2019 at 3:16 PM, calvinnme said:

My least favorite is probably "Around the World in 80 Days". It is just pure long-winded torture. Not even David Niven can save that one.

i thought it was kind of charming in a way (though it need a trim). My least favorite Best Picture wins would be Crash, American Beauty, and Birdman.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gee, the Oscars this year turned out pretty darned good without a host and with some Academy surprises.  I, for one, really enjoyed it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Spielberg Leads Oscar Charge Against Netflix?

 

While Netflix’s “Roma” may not have won the Best Picture Oscar last weekend, it got within such close spitting distance that it has rattled conservative elements of the film industry into action.

IndieWire reports that the Academy of Motion Pictures Arts and Sciences (AMPAS) is going to re-evaluate its stance on films from streaming services, and the person leading that charge would appear to be none other than filmmaker Steven Spielberg himself.

Spielberg recently suggested in a speech that Netflix films should only compete for Emmys, not Oscars, and the site indicates he will now voice his concerns at the upcoming Academy Board of Governors meeting scheduled for April.

A spokesperson for Amblin Entertainment tells them: “Steven feels strongly about the difference between the streaming and theatrical situation. He’ll be happy if the others will join [his campaign] when that comes up [at the Academy Board of Governors meeting]. He will see what happens.”

The Academy itself told the site: “Awards rules discussions are ongoing with the branches. And the Board will likely consider the topic at the April meeting.”

The topic of Netflix movies and what qualifies as a movie began in earnest nearly a year ago during a very public kerfuffle at the Cannes Film Festival in May and has been debated on and off ever since. A lot of it has to do with the so-called ‘theatrical experience’ and the three-month exclusivity window in place that exhibitors demand to protect their business.

“Roma” remains an interesting case study. Had it gone a regular theatrical route, a black-and-white Mexican language film with no stars and following a live-in nanny and house cleaner would certainly not have generated much box-office. Thanks to Netflix though, the film not only scored a 600 screen theatrical release for several weeks but has been available in nearly 200 countries worldwide.

How is it any less a movie than other nominees, especially those who did the bare minimum one-week release on a few screens in New York or LA? In fact, by imposing stricter rules to potentially disqualify streaming services, the site suggests AMPAS may end up making it incredibly difficult for smaller indie films to qualify.

Whatever the case, this AMPAS meeting is going to be closely watched.

 

http://www.darkhorizons.com/spielberg-leads-oscar-charge-against-netflix/

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i apologize for not letting this thread die (just yet) but this SCRUMPTIOUS SCANDAL over the SAT/college admissions deal that involves a former BEST ACTRESS nominee and broke yesterday really got me thinking...

I would not be the least bit surprised if some day a detailed report/book/expose comes out on the longrunning series of shenanigans and manipulations and- yeah- outright bribes that have gone down in the name of OSCAR GLORY over the years.

my only surprise would be if someone was able to actually get it published/verified (and if such a report were to come out and be verified, man it would change the face of entertainment forever)

i mean, if these sorts of people are willing to go to these $500,000 lengths over something as (no offense to you USC grads) as simple as four years at USC, you really think A LOT of awards (and good reviews) haven't been OUTRIGHT BOUGHT/bullied/cajoled and manipulated over the years?

Hmmmmmm, Gwyneth?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's been going on at the Globes for decades. Probably still is. LOL. (Wining and dining etc.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

New Members:

Register Here

Learn more about the new message boards:

FAQ

Having problems?

Contact Us