The Oscar nominations were just announced, I'm gonna try watching all of them this time. For every film I see, I'll update the thread with my thoughts on it, especially with respect to what it was nominated for.

---

Films nominated for a "big five" award (either best picture, director, actor, actress, and/or screenplay):

☐ Ford v Ferrari
☑ The Irishman
☐ Jojo Rabbit
☑ Joker
☑ Little Women
☑ Marriage Story
☑ 1917
☑ Once Upon a Time in Hollywood
☑ Parasite
☐ Pain and Glory
☑ The Two Popes
☐ Harriet
☐ Bombshell
☐ Judy
☑ Knives Out

Films nominated for other shit:

☐ A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood
☐ Richard Jewell
☐ How to Train Your Dragon: The Hidden World
☑ I Lost My Body
☑ Klaus
☐ Missing Link
☑ Toy Story 4
☐ Les Misérables
☐ Honeyland
☐ Corpus Christi
☑ American Factory
☐ The Cave
☑ The Edge of Democracy
☑ For Sama
☑ In the Absence
☐ Learning to Skateboard in a Warzone (If You're a Girl)
☑ Life Overtakes Me
☐ St. Louis Superman
☐ Walk Run Cha-Cha
☐ Brotherhood
☐ Nefta Football Club
☐ The Neighbor's Window
☐ Saria
☐ A Sister
☐ Dcera (Daughter)
☑ Hair Love
☐ Kitbull
☐ Memorable
☐ Sister
☑ Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker
☑ Rocketman
☐ Breakthrough
☐ Frozen II
☐ Ad Astra
☐ The Lighthouse
☐ Maleficent: Mistress of Evil
☑ Avengers: Endgame
☑ The Lion King

Looks like I have a lot of work to do.

---

Here, I'll just briefly go over the few films I've already seen:

The Irishman

Unsurprisingly, this was a great movie. Martin Scorsese is my 2nd favorite director, and I'm almost always pleased with his output. While it does tread around some familiar gangster movie territory, its deliberate pace and slow-burning approach to its storytelling helps it stand out—not to mention its epic 3h30m runtime. It's probably Scorsese's most grounded and mature film, too. Like, if you're under the age of 20, you'll probably find this movie boring as fuck. I think it requires a lot of perspective to fully appreciate, which is to say that I probably don't even fully appreciate it myself. I mean, we're essentially dealing with the affairs of a bunch of very old men from a bygone era, so there's layers to how disconnected I am from this kind of story, being a young person who doesn't know what it's like to feel overcome by my own waning mortality. I can only imagine what it's like, and for what it's worth, it's palpable and scary, and the film explores these emotions beautifully.

Even putting its themes aside, it's still such a treat to see legendary actors like De Niro, Pacino, and even Pesci come out of the woodwork to give it their all for (perhaps) the last time in their careers, if not their lives. As far as general entertainment value, I wouldn't necessarily put this film on the level of Goodfellas, Casino, or even The Wolf of Wall Street, but it's still a remarkable achievement, and I wouldn't complain if it won almost any of the awards it was nominated for... except for visual effects, I guess. They weren't the best. The de-aging effects are impressive, but you can still tell how old the actors really are by their movements, and Robert De Niro's contact lenses were so unnaturally bright-looking at times that it was honestly a little distracting.

Joe Pesci, though. Give that man an Oscar. We're never gonna see him again after this.

Overall, I'd give this an 8/10. For perspective, I'd probably give Casino a 9/10, and Goodfellas a 10/10.

Joker

This movie was cool, but I don't know if I'd consider it to be "best picture" material. Joaquin Phoenix could definitely walk away with an Oscar for his performance, and I'd be happy about that, but there's not much else about this movie that stood out to me as anything worth celebrating. It has a really cool tone and look to it, I suppose. The distinctly gritty aesthetic was more tasteful than Zack Snyder's idea of grit, and the quick outbursts of intense violence broken up between softer and quieter moments of introspection were pretty refreshing to see in a comic book movie.

Ultimately, my biggest problem with the film is that it's basically just Taxi Driver combined with The King of Comedy. That isn't a problem in and of itself—inspiration breeds creativity, and Scorsese is a wonderful director to take inspiration from—but instead of using these two films as a springboard for new ideas, I can't help but feel like they've been used a crutch to actively avoid needing any new ideas. Much of the film's entertainment value, as a result, is carried by Joaquin and his fantastic performance.

This movie is a 7/10 for me, which feels a bit generous, but 6/10 feels too harsh, so I'll just go for a 7/10. It's an impressive job and a likable effort coming from the guy who directed the Hangover movies, which I despise.

Marriage Story

If you have Netflix, and you're into some heavily emotional and dialogue-driven dramas, I highly recommend that you check this one out. The title is ironic; it's actually more of a divorce story, and it's a fairly captivating one at that. Adam Driver and Scarjo give two utterly fantastic performances—some would even say the best of the year, which I can't corroborate yet, because I haven't seen that many 2019 movies. What I will say is that they're the two best performances I've seen in years—at least, for this type of movie.

The screenplay is incredible. Both parties are equally sympathetic, with their respective sides of the story being given equal consideration and weight. You may find yourself siding with one of the two characters in the end, but you won't find yourself rooting against the other at any point. On top of this compelling narrative, we're provided with this remarkably poignant commentary on the state of marriage in the US, and how soul-crushing, bureaucratic, and Kafkaesque the divorce procedure can be—and, without spoiling anything, there does naturally come a point where it all explodes, and I have to say that it's probably my favorite singular scene from the few movies I've watched so far. You'll know it when you see it.

This is not the kind of film I normally watch, but here I am, giving it a strong review and recommendation. This is an 8/10, go watch it if you're interested.

Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker

Despite the fact that I'm the only person in the universe who truly understands Star Wars, I really honestly couldn't give a fuck less about it at this point. The thought of giving a Star Wars movie any kind of praise from an artistic standpoint is kind of laughable to me, because it's always been nothing more than a silly cartoon, but this movie is only nominated for its score and visual effects anyway, so whatever I guess.

This movie was pretty stupid, but entertainingly so. JJ Abrams played it safe as we all expected him to, which was boring, but every time there was a stupid twist (and there were like, five of them), I had a big smile on my face, like, "Sure! Let's go with that!" and that was my takeaway. I guess I would've preferred a more serious attempt at a movie, like The Last Jedi, but I have real movies for that.

That said, the visual effects were typical Star Wars fare, and John Williams kinda phoned it in, like he has been doing for this entire trilogy. I fucking love John Williams, but he has enough Oscars at this point, and I really don't think he put in the effort to deserve another one.

I give this movie a 6/10 for what it is, although it probably deserves a bit lower. I'll never see it again to find out. My feelings on the franchise as a whole are ultimately negative, no thanks to the fans who wouldn't let me enjoy my prequels in peace until Disney showed up, but I think the new trilogy is still my favorite of the three trilogies (which isn't really saying a lot).

Avengers: Endgame

This movie was fun... at times, but it wasn't nearly as fun as Infinity War. It was kind of a dizzying mess, in fact, which lost it a lot of points for me, but it's only nominated for visual effects, which is a category I couldn't really care less about. I like it when visual effects are used to make a movie look stylish and distinctive, and not necessarily photorealistic. I'm not impressed by photorealism anymore, and I don't think I ever really was.

In general, superhero movies are about in the same realm as Star Wars for me, unless they're going for a more adult approach, and there haven't really been any Marvel movies made for adults yet (Deadpool doesn't count, because Deadpool is for manchildren, and Logan is at the tail-end of a long-running series of films I don't give a fuck about).

I don't really know what to rate this movie. Probably a 6/10? It did the bare minimum for me, as far as I'm concerned, and that's to just keep me from being completely bored, but it was also kind of annoying at times, especially with how they turned Thor into a fat drunk, except they won't put any fat on Chris Hemsworth's beautiful face, because we can't allow people to think he's unattractive now or something. It was cool that they embraced the stupidity of their time travel system, I guess, but it also made Thanos as boring as he was in all of his previous cameos. It's just such a weird, weird mixed bag of a movie, and it's impossible to watch unless you've seen 500 other movies. The fact that I was able to myself makes me feel kinda gross. I guess by rating it a 6/10, I get to keep my personal bias in check.

All right, that's it for now I guess. I gotta see more shit. The Two Popes, I Lost My Body, Klaus, American Factory, The Edge of Democracy, Life Overtakes Me, and Brotherhood are all on Netflix, so I guess I'll start with those.

Wow Verby, I didn’t expect you to care about the oscars, the oscars mean absolutely nothing, it's just a big meaningless circlejerk, I thought you only watch meaningful things

"i don't care about the oscars, the oscars mean absolutely nothing, it's just a big meaningless circlejerk, i only watch meaningful things"

yes yes you're very cool and intelligent

i'm shitting myself over how cool and intelligent you are

you can fuck off now

Oh... Okay

=(

You have time for this outside school and work?

i have a pretty light schedule this semester, and even then, i think most people should be able to squeeze in at least one movie per night into their busy schedule

some of these will be hard to get a hold of legally, though

I was hoping Adam Sandler and Willem Dafoe to at least get some sort of nod this year.

But nope. Not a mention.

What the fuck even is Pain and Glory? I've literally never heard of it until these nominations came out.

Two Pope's can fuck off as well. Oscar worthy my arse.

Is the academy even aware of the Safdie brothers at this point? Two Oscar potential films of theirs completely ignored.

(rather than on your phone or something)

never ever


but yeah i'm interested in The Lighthouse, didn't actually know it was a horror movie though

Quote from: Mmmmm Napalm on January 14, 2020, 08:38:05 AM

(rather than on your phone or something)

never ever

YouTube

but yeah i'm interested in The Lighthouse, didn't actually know it was a horror movie though

I say horror, but that isn't a 100% accurate description, just the genre it fits into most neatly. The horror elements are in the form of the tension and anxiety that pervade the film's atmosphere. There's no jump scares or gore intended to shock.

What's wrong with viewing movies on your phone

What's wrong with viewing movies on your phone

you're seeing and hearing less of what the director intended for you to see and hear due to the suboptimal resolution and audio quality

it's also just really tacky and zoomerish

You don't need some super high-def television to watch films, but yeah watching a movie on your phone is just weird. There's no way you can see everything you need to. Even a laptop screen is better than a phone.

Sure but I don’t really sees how that takes away from the overall experience unless you’re some snob

obviously, it comes down to what you watch movies for

if you only care about the plot and the performances, these things probably won't bother you

for some, being able to see and hear the movie that you're watching kind of matters

I'm pissed Ad Astra left cinemas before I heard of it. Its the only 2019 film that looks like my kinda jam.

The Two Popes

Despite the fact that this movie's on Netflix, I've been putting this one off. It's rather difficult for me to give a rat's ass about anything to do with the Catholic Church, but I made an effort to put that prejudice aside for 2 hours and watch the movie for the sake of the movie. In the end, I came out of this one mildly entertained.

Anthony Hopkins is one of my favorite actors, and he played the part of Benedict XVI as well as you'd expect him to, netting himself a nomination for best supporting actor. I would've said that he carried the film for me, but Jonathan Pryce, the guy they got to play Pope Francis, did a pretty great job as well, and he's nominated for best leading actor.

Each of the conversations between these two are quite long, but still relatively engaging. While they can drag at points, there's an ample use of flashbacks to keep things from getting too dry. Particularly old flashbacks are filmed in black-and-white, and there's actually some really cool and interesting shots during these portions. The way these scenes were woven into the film's narrative in general was probably my favorite thing about it.

There was a surprising amount of humor and whimsy about the movie, as well—almost too much, I would say, in that there's an overly transparent effort being made to inflate the film's accessibility by bringing the characters a little too far down to earth. Like, did Pope Francis and Benedict really have pizza together and shit? I can't say I know for sure, I suppose, but if that happened, it wasn't really implemented in a way that felt real.

The movie was adapted from a play, and it kinda feels like it. It's very much a movie where very little happens onscreen—you're basically just sitting down, eavesdropping on a couple of old guys for the entire experience, which may not sound very riveting for some people, but apparently the Academy found it riveting enough to nominate it for best adapted screenplay. I don't know if this film really deserves to win any of the Oscars it was nominated for, but I don't regret watching it either. It was pretty okay.

6/10

1917

I saw this and forgot to post about it, so here I am. This was pretty cool—I think this wound up winning best picture at the Golden Globes, or something, which I don't necessarily agree with, but it was still a pretty solid picture. Although I feel that it ultimately boils down to a pretty basic war story, I do have to echo Napalm's sentiments about the trademark Roger Deakins cinematography. It looks beautiful, and several of its shots continue to stick out in my mind.

Of course, the whole one-take gimmick is inherently impressive, and even if it's made a bit too obvious where each of the cuts are, the fact that everything looks like one seamless shot gives us the opportunity to spend every waking moment with these characters, so knowing that anything can happen to them at literally any second adds a unique sense of tension that you just don't really get as much in more heavily-edited films.

I thought the movie did a fantastic job at capturing some of the most terrifying moments in war, like seeing a figure off in the distance walking towards you, unable to be sure whether they're friend or foe until it's almost too late to run away, or wanting to spare the life of a pinned down enemy, scared for his life, only to end up getting stabbed, because despite your good intentions, they still have no reason to assume you won't torture them. Fucked up shit like that. It's my favorite type of war film: No romanticizing, no glorification. It only shows you the horror, the pain, and the messiness of it all.

I wasn't expecting much from director Sam Mendes, given that he's made Jarhead, which I thought flat-out sucked, but I was pleasantly surprised with this one in the end. It's nominated for TEN goddamn awards, and I think it deserves at least one of them.

Maybe not best picture, because I still enjoyed Marriage Story and The Irishman more. Maybe not best director either, although I still think he outdid himself. The screenplay nomination is straight-up undeserved; I really don't think the script was anything special at all, but it's also not even really that kind of movie to begin with. The score was pretty typical Hollywood fare, to be honest, and didn't really stand out to me. The production design seemed pretty good; maybe it could win that one. The visual effects were fine, but it's going to get utterly stomped by the competition in that category. The makeup/hairstyling nomination feels... odd. It was as good as it needed it be, I suppose, but it's not a very cosmetically intensive movie by any means.

The remaining three (sound editing, sound mixing, and cinematography) are the ones it has the best shot at winning, I think. They're also the ones I feel it deserves the most.

7/10

Okay so I gave Marriage Story a viewing and I think it's hot garbo.

Everything sans maybe the performances (which I think are kind of overrated) is milquetoast.

The film's main selling point is that it presents how people realistically behave in the breakdown of a relationship, but I don't think it even executed that.

This couple do not interact like normal human beings. I don't think it helps that the characters are both hot shit professional artists with no inkling of relatibility or grit to them. Like, oh wow, he's energy conscious and she's extremely talkative, am I supposed to feel something here because you listed off a bunch of idiosyncrasies these characters have? Nah.

There are some okay segments but good god was this a struggle to get through. That argument scene was entertaining but for all the wrong reasons. I was legitimately pissing myself at Adam Driver yeeting himself into a wall only for him to ree like an incel. Not a convincing performance at all.

Scarjo probably carried the film, but I've never considered that much of a heavy hitting actress, so that's not really saying much.

Cringe/10 film.