Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Westside Steve

Oscars 18

Recommended Posts

I will have reviewed all of the best picture nominations and posted them by week's end.

Preliminarily

Oscar’s 2018
Hollywood has always reflected the attitude of America . From the patriotic films of the 40s through the sexual Revolution and the anti-heroes of the 60s and 70s and so forth. I can’t remember a more divided and bitter as than today and unfortunately that’s reflected in the Oscar nominations. I respect the rights of people to have opinions that differ from my own but because I’ve always seen the Oscars as the highest form of praise for outstanding acting and production I fear those standards have taken a backseat to political activism
Of the snubs involved this year I feel sorry for James Franco, he deserved  a best actor nomination in THE DISASTER ARTIST. He didn’t get one because of unproven allegations that he flatly denies. I’m also disappointed in Hollywood’s treatment of Woody Allen. The fact is that he began his relationship with Soon-Yi when she was 21 and the two have been married ever since. Also the accusation by daughter Dylan Farrow were fully investigated and the conclusion was that no abuse ever occurred. That sucks because WONDER WHEEL was snubbed this year and his upcoming film, RAINY DAY IN NEW YORK might never make it to the theaters. 
So because of our publishing schedule my predictions will be in next issue but because of deadlines I will write them before we go to press. That means there’s no way I can hedge my bets!


Just a recap of the best picture nominations.


1  THREE BILLBOARDS OUTSIDE EBBING MONTANA. Great acting, great character development and an offbeat story that allows all of the flawed people to find a measure of redemption. 


2 CALL ME BY YOUR NAME.
A disturbing study of a sexual relationship between a grown man and a teenage boy. The hypocrisy of the academy is staggering in this instance.


3 THE SHAPE OF WATER
It’s hard to accurately describe this wonderfully emotional and engaging story of a mute woman and a sea monster. 


4 DUNKIRK 
Rather slow moving story about the heroic rescue that took place in World War II.


5 DARKEST HOUR
Yet another World War II epic from the same time as Dunkirk but focusing on the irascible and iconic Winston Churchill. Absolutely great performance by Gary Oldman.


6 PHANTOM THREAD
Though exquisitely crafted this Daniel Day-Lewis and Paul Thomas Anderson film has almost no entertainment value whatsoever.


7 LADY BIRD
A pleasant but run of the mill Coming of Age film this time from a teenage girl’s point of view.


8 THE POST
Probably made to draw attention away from accusations of the modern-day Washington Post’s bias, but regardless how could Steven Spielberg Tom Hanks and Meryl Streep possibly make a bad film? We'll see it this week.

9 GET OUT 

A cheap B movie similar to Invasion of the Body Snatchers that only got nominated because they play the race card.


WSS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 CALL ME BY YOUR NAME.
A disturbing study of a sexual relationship between a grown man and a teenage boy. The hypocrisy of the academy is staggering in this instance.

You know I haven't seen this....and will not at your suggestion.   But please explain the hypocrisy angle.  (I am not disagreeing with you...only asking you to flesh it out)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, The Gipper said:

2 CALL ME BY YOUR NAME.
A disturbing study of a sexual relationship between a grown man and a teenage boy. The hypocrisy of the academy is staggering in this instance.

You know I haven't seen this....and will not at your suggestion.   But please explain the hypocrisy angle.  (I am not disagreeing with you...only asking you to flesh it out)

Well this is just a short recap the hypocrisy will be made more clear in the actual review but the entire plot of the film celebrates an adult grad student staying with a family for the summer and having a two-month sexual relationship with their virgin teenage son before going home to marry his fiancee.

Just imagine that story with an adult male and a teenage girl back in the 80s...

WSS

 

Share this post


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

Well this is just a short recap the hypocrisy will be made more clear in the actual review but the entire plot of the film celebrates an adult grad student staying with a family for the summer and having a two-month sexual relationship with their virgin teenage son before going home to marry his fiancee.

Just imagine that story with an adult male and a teenage girl back in the 80s...

WSS

 

Lolita?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Westside Steve said:

Firestorm of opposition. Banned in many places. Your point?

WSS

Would it have been considered the equivalent of this movie...story wise...except with a teenage girl?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Westside Steve said:

I suggest you either watch it or read my review on it comes out then you can bicker about it.

WSS

I am not bickering at all.  Just trying to put it in context with what you said...and trying to bring in a potential comparative story...except with a female.

Share this post


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

I am not bickering at all.  Just trying to put it in context with what you said...and trying to bring in a potential comparative story...except with a female.

It's different enough to make the bickering nonsense.

First of all Lolita was actually 12 then 14 when she was banged.

Second the critics and public threw a fit.

3rd for the film version came out Stanley Kubrick couldn't do hardly anything he wanted due to the Stranglehold of the censors.

 4th the book is French and in France they only recently started to ponder whether should be any age limit for sex. And the number they bandied about was 13.

Fifth if you are completely unaware of The Firestorm created by a 24 year old lawyer dating an 18 year old girl...

WSS

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Westside Steve said:

It's different enough to make the bickering nonsense.

First of all Lolita was actually 12 then 14 when she was banged.

Second the critics and public threw a fit.

3rd for the film version came out Stanley Kubrick couldn't do hardly anything he wanted due to the Stranglehold of the censors.

 4th the book is French and in France they only recently started to ponder whether should be any age limit for sex. And the number they bandied about was 13.

Fifth if you are completely unaware of The Firestorm created by a 24 year old lawyer dating an 18 year old girl...

WSS

 

You are just bickering with yourself over this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Once again the Oscars denies that nod to Tom Hanks. Must have some kind of hatred for him? Really very much showing favorites.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/6/2018 at 6:04 PM, JPPT1974 said:

Once again the Oscars denies that nod to Tom Hanks. Must have some kind of hatred for him? Really very much showing favorites.

JP not sure who you are referring to but in my opinion you can't nominate Tom Hanks for everything he does. I think he's very good in some things okay in others,  but you have to admit most of his characters are the same, and I really didn't think he did anything amazing in the post.

Giving a nomination to the kid from get out was an absolute  PC disgrace. And NOT giving one to James Franco was terrible 

WSS

Edited

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah as it is the same if you stop and think about it. And really a kid was indeed that! In the absolute PC disgrace.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, The Cysko Kid said:

I'm just glad 'get out' didn't win a bunch of awards

No kidding. That was a B movie at best.

The race card they played was unnecessary and the only reason it got any attention. And nominating that kid for best actor was a joke.

WSS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Racist! 

 

Rotten tomatoes has judged black panther the finest film in the history of cinema so that ought to tell you basically where we are. Any movie that's centered around black people is going to be graded on a curve. They actually put black panther as #1 and get out as #5 therefore invalidating the ability to take Rotten Tomatoes seriously for the rest of time. 

 

https://www.google.com/amp/comicbook.com/marvel/amp/2018/02/20/black-panther-ranked-best-movie-all-time-rotten-tomatoes/

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, The Cysko Kid said:

Racist! 

 

Rotten tomatoes has judged black panther the finest film in the history of cinema so that ought to tell you basically where we are. Any movie that's centered around black people is going to be graded on a curve. They actually put black panther as #1 and get out as #5 therefore invalidating the ability to take Rotten Tomatoes seriously for the rest of time. 

 

https://www.google.com/amp/comicbook.com/marvel/amp/2018/02/20/black-panther-ranked-best-movie-all-time-rotten-tomatoes/

 

 

Of course I think Rotten Tomatoes rating system is only the morons that go see the movies. Maybe critics are involved but I'm not sure. I don't know if you saw a black panther but it was ridiculous. The problem is they had cameras up at the Valley View Cinemark interviewing African Americans coming out who were thrilled that finally the truth was being told. 

Don't misunderstand me, it wasn't any worse than most of the superhero movies but it did have it's racial agenda to preach. Had that country bin in Eastern Europe and the natives are blonde folks would have rightly thought of it as a joke.

WSS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Westside Steve said:

Of course I think Rotten Tomatoes rating system is only the morons that go see the movies. Maybe critics are involved but I'm not sure. I don't know if you saw a black panther but it was ridiculous. The problem is they had cameras up at the Valley View Cinemark interviewing African Americans coming out who were thrilled that finally the truth was being told. 

Don't misunderstand me, it wasn't any worse than most of the superhero movies but it did have it's racial agenda to preach. Had that country bin in Eastern Europe and the natives are blonde folks would have rightly thought of it as a joke.

WSS

I've got a friend I went to school with who is all black panther all the time right now. I had to snooze him on Facebook because it's so obnoxious. 

 

18 minutes ago, Westside Steve said:

Of course I think Rotten Tomatoes rating system is only the morons that go see the movies. Maybe critics are involved but I'm not sure. I don't know if you saw a black panther but it was ridiculous. The problem is they had cameras up at the Valley View Cinemark interviewing African Americans coming out who were thrilled that finally the truth was being told. 

Don't misunderstand me, it wasn't any worse than most of the superhero movies but it did have it's racial agenda to preach. Had that country bin in Eastern Europe and the natives are blonde folks would have rightly thought of it as a joke.

WSS

It's all critics. There is a fan rating but only the critical ratings count toward it's final score. 

The real skinny of course is that it's only graded as highly as it is because no one wants to be the guy who says the black people movie was pretty ordinary and not spectacular. 

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.theroot.com/are-white-film-critics-grading-black-panther-on-a-curve-1823166866/amp

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree that it seems that some people are imputing a racial agenda to the movie that was not really there. 

Share this post


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

I agree that it seems that some people are imputing a racial agenda to the movie that was not really there. 

I think you are purposely being obtuse. No idea why that might be.

WSS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Westside Steve said:

I think you are purposely being obtuse. No idea why that might be.

WSS


What the Fuyuck are you talking about?  I am certainly NOT obtuse to the fact that were some racial overtones to this movie....nor to the fact that some people...both black and white... want to overemphasize those racial overtones....because of their own point of view on race.   They want to ignore the fact that 95% of this movie was just your basic  Superhero origin story meant for entertainment.    I was mildly entertained by it.  While noticing the racial element, I did NOT  think it overwhelmed the story or plot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tbh, who here today gives two shi.ts about the Oscars? It's not even about the best movies anymore, and it hasn't been in a long while. All it is is just a televised show about actor/actresses sucking each other off about how great they supposedly are and picking winning films based on whatever SJW flavor of the day issue that's currently going on. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, jbluhm86 said:

Tbh, who here today gives two shi.ts about the Oscars? It's not even about the best movies anymore, and it hasn't been in a long while. All it is is just a televised show about actor/actresses sucking each other off about how great they supposedly are and picking winning films based on whatever SJW flavor of the day issue that's currently going on. 

No, to me it is all about the movies, and the performances and which are the best.

The last two evenings I have sat down and watched first, on Monday,  The Darkest Hour, to see Gary Oldman's performance, and then last night to that of Frances McDormand in Three Billboards outside Ebbing, Missouri.  Sam Rockwell...winner of Best Supporting Actor. 

I would likely not have done that had they not won those awards.

Now, as far as the show goes....maybe it it just you who is overly concerned about those issues to the point that that is all you see and take from the program.  You lose focus on what the show is really about because you are personally consumed by the peripheral stuff.   Its like the Black Panther...people so overly concerned about the fact that some minor aspect offends their racial sensibilities that they lose track of the fact that it was a pretty darn good Super Hero story. 

By the way...what is SJW?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jbluhm86 said:

Tbh, who here today gives two shi.ts about the Oscars? It's not even about the best movies anymore, and it hasn't been in a long while. All it is is just a televised show about actor/actresses sucking each other off about how great they supposedly are and picking winning films based on whatever SJW flavor of the day issue that's currently going on. 

I think you are correct and it's been getting worse every year but still think back to the old sacheen littlefeather debacle with Marlon Brando.

But, maybe just for myself, I've always thought winning an Academy Award for best actor should be one of the greatest honors in the world. Like pitching a no hitter and the 7th game of the World Series or knocking out the heavyweight champion. 

I was a theater major and have been an Entertainer my whole life and oftentimes I will think of huge stars and think to myself oh, hell I could have done that. On the other hand there are really deserving musicians and actors and singers and songwriters Etc of whom I have the utmost respect and freely admit that what they do is in a class by itself. 

Unfortunately more and more the Academy Awards are nominating movies that don't even deserve attention let alone to be selected as the best work of an entire year of theatrical Productions. For instance Daniel Kaluva work is barely good enough for an insurance commercial but Gary Oldman and even the snubbed James Franco turned in stunning performances.

In a lot of cases it's just a matter of personal taste. I might not enjoy a film but think that it's extremely well done, case in point Phantom thread. Other times I firmly believe that a second-rate film gets love from the politically active Academy just because they want to prop up one minority or another. Get out was really a mediocre film.

And that's why people are turning off the Oscars because most of the films nominated never sold tickets at the box office and most moviegoers don't care about propping up whatever stupid social issues the academy wants to pimp.

WSS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree that the Oscars seem to NOT be  about "Entertainment"  per se.  

I understand that there are going to be movies about social justice, and there are going to be artsy crafty movies.....but why must some of them be excruciatingly void of entertainment value? 

12 Years a Slave....a document on slavery....-0- entertainment value...to me

Phantom Thread...artsy crafty movie....-0- entertainment value...to me.

Dunkirk....reiterates history....but about a 2-3 on a 10 scale of entertainment value.

The Darkest Hour....also a telling of history....but higher on entertainment value because of Oldman's depiction of Churchill.

And, of course, how many movies would never get a sniff at the Oscars....yet could get very high marks on Entertainment value? 

Like, say:  White Chicks.....funnier than it had a right to be.  Probably an 8 on entertainment value. But obviously not a social justice or artsy fartsy affair.

Some really super films combine both:   Social Justice, or Artsy Crafty.....combined with top notch entertainment value.

There you got your Godfathers, your Casablancas, Some others.

Some are pure entertainment with little or no social justice stuff, message stuff.  The Sting, Star Wars movies, etc. 

I know Steve gives grades to movies  A to F I suppose.

I think it may be good to also do a 0-10  system based on pure entertainment value.

And...to be honest....there could be some movies where to so called social justice aspect of it could actually detract from an otherwise very entertaining movie.  (maybe Black Panther fills that fare)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My system also includes a + b - C + etc etc. So they were actually 15 different ratings. Also I tend to grade on the curve especially considering other movies in the same genre. And those tend to be subjective a little bit day by day depending on how I movie strikes meet at a particular point.

As far as social justice I don't think that should be the main concern with whether I think it movie is well done. I think most of Michael Moore's movies do exactly what they are set out to do and are pretty entertaining on their own even though I think they are pure yellow journalism.

I thought Moonlight was a piece of crap but not because of any stupid message about homosexual black people in the hood.

It's hard to say the Texas Chainsaw Massacre doesn't deserve an A since it's one of the two scariest movies I've ever seen.

I didn't give black panther a D or an F I give it a C. 

If it has been set in a mythical land in Eastern Europe with all blonde haired actors speaking with ridiculous fake Scandinavian accents and evil Negroes  oppressing them  in the exact same plot it still wouldn't have been any good.

WSS

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

Sign in to follow this  

×