Entertainment
Sponsored by

*** Awards Season 2023 ***

32,313 Views | 512 Replies | Last: 2 yr ago by Brian Earl Spilner
TCTTS
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to [removed post] • 2:26a, 3/14/23
AG
C@LAg said:
that may be the case, but why show up if you feel you might get Seth McFarlaned in front of a worldwide audience?

It was Kimmel, though. Not McFarlane or Apatow. Like the article says, Cruise was on Kimmel just a couple weeks prior, where they talked about seeing each other again at the Oscars. They're friends. Kimmel was never going to go off on Cruise and had a whole, three-minute tribute planned for him instead. But Cruise got paranoid, can't take even the slightest potential joke, and bailed not only on Kimmel, but the broadcast, his co-producers, co-stars, and director, who all attended. It was just a lame, thin-skinned gesture, considering how vocal Cruise has been about saving/celebrating Hollywood until now.
Reply Quote
2
3 edits
YouBet
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
8:35a, 3/14/23
AG
The primary reason I watched was to see if Top Gun might actually win something so I was admittedly a little bummed he wasn't there. I was also expecting some vainglorious stunt by him to kick it off.

Bummer he wasn't there but what ya gonna do.
Reply Quote
3
Lathspell
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
9:51a, 3/14/23
AG
I couldn't care less whether Cruise was there or not. If the Academy had wanted that level of star power at the Oscars, they should have given Top Gun: Maverick more Oscars, or actually given the best movie of the year the Best Picture Oscar. At least film editing or something else.

Top Gun Maverick was obviously too patriotic and pro-American to win that Oscar, especially when they need to check all those boxes. The Academy obviously doesn't value what Cruise's movie gave to audiences and the industry over their agenda.

In 10 years, we'll see how many people are still watching EEAAO vs how many people are rewatching Top Gun Maverick.
Reply Quote
6
1 edit
Rudyjax
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Lathspell • 10:08a, 3/14/23
AG
DallasTeleAg said:
I couldn't care less whether Cruise was there or not. If the Academy had wanted that level of star power at the Oscars, they should have given Top Gun: Maverick more Oscars, or actually given the best movie of the year the Best Picture Oscar. At least film editing or something else.

Top Gun Maverick was obviously too patriotic and pro-American to win that Oscar, especially when they need to check all those boxes. The Academy obviously doesn't value what Cruise's movie gave to audiences and the industry over their agenda.

In 10 years, we'll see how many people are still watching EEAAO vs how many people are rewatching Top Gun Maverick.


When has the Academy ever cared about the most popular movie?

Top Gun was a great action flick. But the plot was recycled. The acting was decent. It sure did touch the right nostalgia.

It definitely should've won for something, like stunts and visual effects.
Reply Quote
4
Lathspell
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Rudyjax • 10:09a, 3/14/23
AG
And EEAAO was far superior? Nope.
Reply Quote
1
Brian Earl Spilner
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Rudyjax • 10:12a, 3/14/23
AG
It should have won VFX instead of Avatar?
Reply Quote
Rudyjax
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Lathspell • 10:39a, 3/14/23
AG
DallasTeleAg said:
And EEAAO was far superior? Nope.

I have no idea. It doesn't seem like something I'd like. But who knows.
Reply Quote
Rudyjax
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Brian Earl Spilner • 10:40a, 3/14/23
AG
Brian Earl Spilner said:
It should have won VFX instead of Avatar?


Yeah.

I don't know. If they had an Oscar fof stunts they'd win I guess.

Reply Quote
oragator
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
10:45a, 3/14/23
It did wi. For sound right?
Reply Quote
CondensedFogAggie
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Rudyjax • 11:15a, 3/14/23
Chuck Cunningham said:
DallasTeleAg said:
I couldn't care less whether Cruise was there or not. If the Academy had wanted that level of star power at the Oscars, they should have given Top Gun: Maverick more Oscars, or actually given the best movie of the year the Best Picture Oscar. At least film editing or something else.

Top Gun Maverick was obviously too patriotic and pro-American to win that Oscar, especially when they need to check all those boxes. The Academy obviously doesn't value what Cruise's movie gave to audiences and the industry over their agenda.

In 10 years, we'll see how many people are still watching EEAAO vs how many people are rewatching Top Gun Maverick.


When has the Academy ever cared about the most popular movie?

Top Gun was a great action flick. But the plot was recycled. The acting was decent. It sure did touch the right nostalgia.

It definitely should've won for something, like stunts and visual effects.

Exactly this.

A quick glance at past Best Picture winners shows Maverick wasn't even close to winning. Coda, Nomadland, Green Book, Moonlight, Birdman etc ain't Maverick. Same reason why none of the Marvel movies won either, why Dune didn't win last year.

To blame this on 'too patriotic' or 'pro-American' is a complete misunderstanding of what the Oscars are looking for. And this is coming from someone who immensely enjoyed Maverick like most everyone.
Reply Quote
4
3 edits
Lathspell
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to CondensedFogAggie • 11:42a, 3/14/23
AG
This is a different time. Top Gun Maverick literally revitalized the theater experience.

Also, Green Book was far superior to EEAAO. Yall keep pointing to past movies, but I'm referring to this year. EEAAO was an acid trip sci-fi movie. This was not even similar to Green Book or Coda, or any of those other movies.
Reply Quote
tk for tu juan
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
11:44a, 3/14/23
Times watched:
Christmas Vacation - too many to count
1990 Best Pic winner Driving Miss Daisy - Zero

Die Hard - too many to count
1989 Best Pic winner Rain Man - once
Reply Quote
5
1 edit
Lathspell
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to tk for tu juan • 11:47a, 3/14/23
AG
And if one of those other standard Best Picture noms were to have won, I would have chalked it up to the Academy just rewarding the standard Best Picture-type movie. A more outrageous action movie that was fairly messy ended up winning over a movie I actually thought has more emotional scenes.
Reply Quote
The Porkchop Express
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Lathspell • 11:50a, 3/14/23
AG
DallasTeleAg said:
This is a different time. Top Gun Maverick literally revitalized the theater experience.

By that definition, would you have wanted Spiderman: No Way Home nominated as well? No sarcastic, just wondering.
Reply Quote
2
double aught
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Brian Earl Spilner • 12:08p, 3/14/23
AG
Brian Earl Spilner said:
It should have won VFX instead of Avatar?
That would've been fine with me. Sign me up for practical effects when possible.
Reply Quote
2
Lathspell
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to The Porkchop Express • 12:12p, 3/14/23
AG
The Porkchop Express said:
DallasTeleAg said:
This is a different time. Top Gun Maverick literally revitalized the theater experience.

By that definition, would you have wanted Spiderman: No Way Home nominated as well? No sarcastic, just wondering.
I didn't think No Way Home was of the same quality as Maverick. I also did not say the only reason Maverick should have won was for that one reason, but simply gave it as a differentiating factor for a movie like this released in 2022.

I didn't watch all the Best Picture nominees, but I did watch EEAAO and Maverick... the two aren't even close, imo.
Reply Quote
tk for tu juan
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
12:26p, 3/14/23
The public gets to vote with dollars on the movies they want to be made, and the Academy votes on the movies they like making or the cause they are currently infatuated with.

They need the money from the blockbusters to make the movies they want, and we need them to make the movies we want to watch (press play on Circle of Life). Which is why I try not to get bent out of shape on the Best Pic winner choice
Reply Quote
2
Lathspell
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to tk for tu juan • 12:41p, 3/14/23
AG
Oh, I actually really don't care who wins Best Picture. Or, I should say, it doesn't really bother me that EEAAO won. If Maverick had won, I would have been pleasantly surprised and happy about it. I was simply making a point as to why it didn't bother me that Cruise wasn't at the Oscars. I also will always make snide comments about the DEI stuff in Hollywood because the Academy literally announced a few years ago that there were now DEI standards to their awards. The following posts then focused on one of my points, thereby making it seem like I was making some grand statement about Best Picture winners.

As I've already said, the only award, or lack thereof, that actually kind of irked me was the omission of The Batman for Cinematography.
Reply Quote
2
tk for tu juan
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
12:54p, 3/14/23
Looking at IMDB, crazy to find out the directors for the "Turn Down for What" music video just won a bunch of Oscars for EEAAO.
Reply Quote
2
The Porkchop Express
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to double aught • 1:00p, 3/14/23
AG
double aught said:
Brian Earl Spilner said:
It should have won VFX instead of Avatar?
That would've been fine with me. Sign me up for practical effects when possible.
That actually is a pretty compelling case. I never saw Avatar 2 so I can't speak directly to the impact of the CGI but certainly have read about it over and over, but Maverick's commitment to as little CGI as possible in making an incredible set of action sequences using real people, real planes, and real aerial stunts certainly makes the case of being more difficult and more impressive from a technical standpoint.
Reply Quote
3
Brian Earl Spilner
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to The Porkchop Express • 1:53p, 3/14/23
AG
You should probably watch Avatar 2 first.
Reply Quote
The Porkchop Express
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Brian Earl Spilner • 2:00p, 3/14/23
AG
Brian Earl Spilner said:
You should probably watch Avatar 2 first.
Unfortunately, I'm probably not going to. Just spitballing one type of special effects vs. another.
Reply Quote
Brian Earl Spilner
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to The Porkchop Express • 2:03p, 3/14/23
AG
For basically any other major blockbuster not named Avatar, it's definitely a valid case.
Reply Quote
Lathspell
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to The Porkchop Express • 2:08p, 3/14/23
AG
The Porkchop Express said:
Brian Earl Spilner said:
You should probably watch Avatar 2 first.
Unfortunately, I'm probably not going to. Just spitballing one type of special effects vs. another.
If you aren't familiar with the YouTube channel Corridor Crew, you should check out their episodes for Avatar 2's CGI. The Weta graphics people were doing things that were blowing their minds, and they are visual effects people.

I thought Avatar 2 was extremely mediocre, but the VFX were astonishing because of everything they had to do with water, which has historically been extremely difficult for VFX.
Reply Quote
The Porkchop Express
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Lathspell • 2:09p, 3/14/23
AG
DallasTeleAg said:
The Porkchop Express said:
Brian Earl Spilner said:
You should probably watch Avatar 2 first.
Unfortunately, I'm probably not going to. Just spitballing one type of special effects vs. another.
If you aren't familiar with the YouTube channel Corridor Crew, you should check out their episodes for Avatar 2's CGI. The Weta graphics people were doing things that were blowing their minds, and they are visual effects people.

I thought Avatar 2 was extremely mediocre, but the VFX were astonishing because of everything they had to do with water, which has historically been extremely difficult for VFX.
Thanks, I will have to check it out some time.
Reply Quote
CondensedFogAggie
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Lathspell • 2:11p, 3/14/23
DallasTeleAg said:
Also, Green Book was far superior to EEAAO. Yall keep pointing to past movies, but I'm referring to this year. EEAAO was an acid trip sci-fi movie. This was not even similar to Green Book or Coda, or any of those other movies.

Hollywood has forever awarded movies that push the cinematic envelope in relatively unique directions. And this year EEAAO was unique in a different way from Green Book or Coda.

You may think it's just an acid trip which to be fair the writers were probably on copious amounts of it plus cocaine, but plenty disagree, seeing how EEAAO broke numerous records in terms of sheer number and variety of awards won the past year. Not just the Oscars.

Anyway, I would have been fine and happy if Maverick won. Amazing movie.
Reply Quote
3 edits
fig96
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Lathspell • 2:14p, 3/14/23
AG
DallasTeleAg said:
I couldn't care less whether Cruise was there or not. If the Academy had wanted that level of star power at the Oscars, they should have given Top Gun: Maverick more Oscars, or actually given the best movie of the year the Best Picture Oscar. At least film editing or something else.

Top Gun Maverick was obviously too patriotic and pro-American to win that Oscar, especially when they need to check all those boxes. The Academy obviously doesn't value what Cruise's movie gave to audiences and the industry over their agenda.

In 10 years, we'll see how many people are still watching EEAAO vs how many people are rewatching Top Gun Maverick.
Maverick was an absolute blast but I was very surprised it was nominated for Best Picture. It's a really fun action movie, but if that's the criteria better action films like the last Mission Impossible should've been nominated (and TBH maybe should have been). But the "too patriotic" thing is humorous, it just wasn't a Best Picture kind of movie.

EEAAO was a remarkable film whether it was your cup of tea or not, and the number of people that can make a film like that that's cohesive and actually works can probably be counted on two hands.
Reply Quote
4
Lathspell
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to The Porkchop Express • 2:14p, 3/14/23
AG
Figured I'd just link it. I think i linked it on the Avatar 2 thread, but it's worth a rewatch. Very interesting:

Reply Quote
Lathspell
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to fig96 • 2:15p, 3/14/23
AG
fig96 said:
DallasTeleAg said:
I couldn't care less whether Cruise was there or not. If the Academy had wanted that level of star power at the Oscars, they should have given Top Gun: Maverick more Oscars, or actually given the best movie of the year the Best Picture Oscar. At least film editing or something else.

Top Gun Maverick was obviously too patriotic and pro-American to win that Oscar, especially when they need to check all those boxes. The Academy obviously doesn't value what Cruise's movie gave to audiences and the industry over their agenda.

In 10 years, we'll see how many people are still watching EEAAO vs how many people are rewatching Top Gun Maverick.
Maverick was an absolute blast but I was very surprised it was nominated for Best Picture. It's a really fun action movie, but if that's the criteria better action films like the last Mission Impossible should've been nominated (and TBH maybe should have been). But the "too patriotic" thing is humorous, it just wasn't a Best Picture kind of movie.

EEAAO was a remarkable film whether it was your cup of tea or not, and the number of people that can make a film like that that's cohesive and actually works can probably be counted on two hands.
Agree to disagree.
Reply Quote
1
fig96
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Lathspell • 2:33p, 3/14/23
AG
DallasTeleAg said:
The Porkchop Express said:
Brian Earl Spilner said:
You should probably watch Avatar 2 first.
Unfortunately, I'm probably not going to. Just spitballing one type of special effects vs. another.
If you aren't familiar with the YouTube channel Corridor Crew, you should check out their episodes for Avatar 2's CGI. The Weta graphics people were doing things that were blowing their minds, and they are visual effects people.

I thought Avatar 2 was extremely mediocre, but the VFX were astonishing because of everything they had to do with water, which has historically been extremely difficult for VFX.
Agreed with you on this one, I have a lot of friends in the VFX industry and there was zero question what film was going to win this year. The scale of what they're doing at that quality is insane and there was tons of new tech developed during the making of it.

And I actually liked Avatar 2 far more than I expected to, really well paced and no one directs action like James Cameron.
Reply Quote
1
Brian Earl Spilner
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Lathspell • 2:36p, 3/14/23
AG
I enjoy that channel and those videos.
Reply Quote
TCTTS
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Lathspell • 2:48p, 3/14/23
AG
DallasTeleAg said:
I couldn't care less whether Cruise was there or not. If the Academy had wanted that level of star power at the Oscars, they should have given Top Gun: Maverick more Oscars, or actually given the best movie of the year the Best Picture Oscar. At least film editing or something else.

Top Gun Maverick was obviously too patriotic and pro-American to win that Oscar, especially when they need to check all those boxes. The Academy obviously doesn't value what Cruise's movie gave to audiences and the industry over their agenda.

In 10 years, we'll see how many people are still watching EEAAO vs how many people are rewatching Top Gun Maverick.


I've lived and worked in Hollywood going on 18 years now and have never met a single person who thinks like this. Hell, two of those years I literally worked for the Academy president, and this "agenda" nonsense is so stupidly overblown I can't help but laugh. It's nothing more than Tucker-Carlson-fueled, fever dream bullsh*t.

Everyone and their dog out here LOVED Maverick. No one, save for a few idiot blue check marks and and some Karens with megaphones, thought it was "too patriotic." The reason so many Academy members are pissed that Cruise didn't show is BECAUSE they value what his "movie gave to audiences and the industry." Everyone knows that he saved the theatrical business, and could not be more grateful. That's *why* Kimmel and the Academy wanted to honor him, in person, and why they felt snubbed.

The reason TG:M didn't win Best Picture is because it's a blockbuster, and in the 95-year history of the Academy blockbusters have only won Best Picture once that I can recall (Return of the King). Sure, that's a different kind of snobbery/"agenda," but it has nothing to do with the paranoid crap your spewing.
Reply Quote
5
3 edits
Brian Earl Spilner
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to TCTTS • 2:50p, 3/14/23
AG
Just curious, outside of Jimmy Kimmel saying he was disappointed, is there any actual indication that there's widespread anger among the Academy that Tom Cruise didn't show?
Reply Quote
1
TCTTS
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Brian Earl Spilner • 2:55p, 3/14/23
AG
Matt Belloni is one of the most plugged in guys in Hollywood, and he was at the Oscars. If he says Academy members were pissed, they were pissed. I also know for a fact, first-hand, that the TG:M crew who did attend were expecting Cruise to show and were disappointed when he didn't.
Reply Quote
1 edit
double aught
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
2:57p, 3/14/23
AG
Kind of funny that he saved the industry and they still want more from him.
Reply Quote
3
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.