Return of the King being old enough to drink makes me feel super old.

swimmerbabe11 said:

---

Return of the King being old enough to drink makes me feel super old.

---

I was showing one of my kids a clip from Dodgeball last night and was horrified that both it and Anchorman are turning 20 this year.

The Academy is made up of over 10,500 members spread all over the world. They're not a monolith/hive-mind, those thousands of members don't share some ridiculous "woke" agenda, nor are they "out of touch." Because the point isn't to represent the will of the people, or what Average Joe Movie Goer thinks is the best movie of the year. Rather, the world's most acclaimed, accomplished, and successful cinematic experts gather to celebrate a field of movies, and then, at the very end of a three-hour ceremony, crown the one THEY think is the best, based on a 10,500-member voting system. Which, again, isn't meant to be tailored to Average Joe Movie Goer, nor is the decision meant to represent him, and it's completely up to him whether he wants to tune into the ceremony or not. Where this idea came from that the Best Picture winner is supposed to be for the movie most of America thinks is the best picture, I have no clue.

That said, it's not like the Academy didn't make an appeal to Average Joe Movie Goer in 2009, when they expanded the Best Picture field from five to ten nominees. And again, I would argue that the ceremony is less about who the actual Best Picture winner is, and more about the ten movies nominated in that category, the buzz those movies receive in the lead up to the ceremony, the play they receive during the ceremony, and how they benefit in the weeks/years after the ceremony. In that sense, I'd say those ten nominees are "in touch" and a pretty decent snapshot of the year. Could the Academy still stand to be more adventurous in that regard (for instance, nominating something like Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse for Best Picture)? Sure. But as late as last year, a movie like Top Gun: Maverick had a decent shot at actually winning Best Picture, and a woman from a Marvel movie was nominated for Best Supporting Actress. No one can argue that we're not seeing more and more bold/populist choices like that.

aggierogue said:

---

The Porkchop Express said:

---

aggierogue said:

---

ChipFTAC01 said:

---

bagger05 said:

---

Then we fall off a cliff. Since 2003 we've had a grand total of three top 20 box office movies win. Zero top 10 and about half outside of the top 50.

2004 - Million Dollar Baby - #24
2005 - Crash - #49
2006 - The Departed - #15
2007 - No Country for Old Men - #36
2008 - Slumdog Millionaire - #16
2009 - The Hurt Locker - #116
2010 - The King's Speech - #18
2011 - The Artist - #71
2012 - Argo - #22
2013 - 12 Years a Slave - #62
2014 - Birdman - #78
2015 - Spotlight - #62
2016 - Moonlight - #92
2017 - The Shape of Water - #46
2018 - Green Book - #36
2019 - Parasite - #54
2020 - Nomadland - #84 (Box Office Mojo shows it as a 2021 release)
2021 - CODA - ??? (not listed on Box Office Mojo -- $2.2MM gross which would've been around #100)
2022 - Everything Everywhere All at Once - #25

---

Wow, I can't believe that Hurt Locker and Braveheart were that far down the list. I would have thought Braveheart was a top 5 film

---

Hollywood and the Academy have lost touch on what the audience wants. They have their woke agendas and keep rewarding those taking their marching orders. Meanwhile, most people aren't impressed. That's what that list says to me. Taylor Sheridan touched on this in his recent JRE podcast.

---

The cliff seems to be since 2014. From 06-13, I saw all of the best picture winners in the theater, and I doubt I go doubt I go to more than 5-8 movies a year. Since 2014, I've seen 1 of those movies, Moonlight, and that was on demand, and I didn't think it was anything special. Most of the other ones I couldn't tell you anything about other than Aragorn is in Green Book and some lady ****s a fish man in Shape of Water.

---

Exactly. Take Barbie this year for example.

As a comedy, I'd describe Barbie as a goofy comedy similar to Anchorman or Zoolander directed more to a female audience. Why the Academy and critics are treating it like some masterful piece of cinema is comedy in itself. If this movie isn't about female empowerment it wouldn't be getting anywhere near the attention. My wife and daughter loved it. I was bored about 30 minutes in.

---

The entire discourse this week has been about how the Academy ISN'T treating Barbie "like some masterful piece of cinema." The movie's director and lead actress were left OUT of the conversation, i.e. weren't respected as "masterful."

And yet... Barbie was the highest grossing movie of the year. What's more populist than that? People complain that the Academy is "out of touch," then the Academy literally goes and nominates the highest grossing movie of the year for Best Picture, and people still find a reason to complain. Honestly, I don't understand what they're supposed to do. Just give John Wick all the awards? Will that make everyone happy?

John Wick does need an Oscar for the entire stunt team.

TCTTS said:

---

aggierogue said:

---

The Porkchop Express said:

---

aggierogue said:

---

ChipFTAC01 said:

---

bagger05 said:

---

Then we fall off a cliff. Since 2003 we've had a grand total of three top 20 box office movies win. Zero top 10 and about half outside of the top 50.

2004 - Million Dollar Baby - #24
2005 - Crash - #49
2006 - The Departed - #15
2007 - No Country for Old Men - #36
2008 - Slumdog Millionaire - #16
2009 - The Hurt Locker - #116
2010 - The King's Speech - #18
2011 - The Artist - #71
2012 - Argo - #22
2013 - 12 Years a Slave - #62
2014 - Birdman - #78
2015 - Spotlight - #62
2016 - Moonlight - #92
2017 - The Shape of Water - #46
2018 - Green Book - #36
2019 - Parasite - #54
2020 - Nomadland - #84 (Box Office Mojo shows it as a 2021 release)
2021 - CODA - ??? (not listed on Box Office Mojo -- $2.2MM gross which would've been around #100)
2022 - Everything Everywhere All at Once - #25

---

Wow, I can't believe that Hurt Locker and Braveheart were that far down the list. I would have thought Braveheart was a top 5 film

---

Hollywood and the Academy have lost touch on what the audience wants. They have their woke agendas and keep rewarding those taking their marching orders. Meanwhile, most people aren't impressed. That's what that list says to me. Taylor Sheridan touched on this in his recent JRE podcast.

---

The cliff seems to be since 2014. From 06-13, I saw all of the best picture winners in the theater, and I doubt I go doubt I go to more than 5-8 movies a year. Since 2014, I've seen 1 of those movies, Moonlight, and that was on demand, and I didn't think it was anything special. Most of the other ones I couldn't tell you anything about other than Aragorn is in Green Book and some lady ****s a fish man in Shape of Water.

---

Exactly. Take Barbie this year for example.

As a comedy, I'd describe Barbie as a goofy comedy similar to Anchorman or Zoolander directed more to a female audience. Why the Academy and critics are treating it like some masterful piece of cinema is comedy in itself. If this movie isn't about female empowerment it wouldn't be getting anywhere near the attention. My wife and daughter loved it. I was bored about 30 minutes in.

---

The entire discourse this week has been about how the Academy ISN'T treating Barbie "like some masterful piece of cinema." The movie's director and lead actress were left OUT of the conversation, i.e. weren't respected as "masterful."

And yet... Barbie was the highest grossing movie of the year. What's more populist than that? People complain that the Academy is "out of touch," then the Academy literally goes and nominates the highest grossing movie of the year for Best Picture, and people still find a reason to complain. Honestly, I don't understand what they're supposed to do. Just give John Wick all the awards? Will that make everyone happy?

---

Why do you want to make everyone happy? People are going to complain no matter what. You don't have to let it get you in a tizzy and you don't need to defend every position ever when it comes to the industry. Just saying, man. You can't make all the people happy all the time.

You think I want to make everyone happy? On this board? Ha, sorry, I thought my sarcasm was coming through loud and clear there.

As for me defending every position when it comes to the industry - again - I knock Hollywood all the time here. I'd say more than most people, in fact. The only time I defend it is when the eternally offended show up to complain about everything being woke, and peddle dumb conspiracy theories, when the reality is so much more simple.

ChipFTAC01 said:

---

bagger05 said:

---

If Oppenheimer wins best picture, it will be the first top ten box office movie to do so in 21 years (Return of the King).

We've been on a really long run of top box office movies not winning. Used to be the norm that the winner was a big box office hit.

1989 - Driving Miss Daisy - #8
1990 - Dances with Wolves - #3
1991 - Silence of the Lambs - #4
1992 - Unforgiven - #11
1993 - Schindler's List - #9
1994 - Forrest Gump - #1
1995 - Braveheart - #18
1996 - The English Patient - #19
1997 - Titanic - #1
1998 - Shakespeare in Love - #18 (Saving Private Ryan was #1 -- still irritated)
1999 - American Beauty - #13
2000 - Gladiator - #4
2001 - A Beautiful Mind - #11
2002 - Chicago - #10
2003 - Return of the King - #1

Then we fall off a cliff. Since 2003 we've had a grand total of three top 20 box office movies win. Zero top 10 and about half outside of the top 50.

2004 - Million Dollar Baby - #24
2005 - Crash - #49
2006 - The Departed - #15
2007 - No Country for Old Men - #36
2008 - Slumdog Millionaire - #16
2009 - The Hurt Locker - #116
2010 - The King's Speech - #18
2011 - The Artist - #71
2012 - Argo - #22
2013 - 12 Years a Slave - #62
2014 - Birdman - #78
2015 - Spotlight - #62
2016 - Moonlight - #92
2017 - The Shape of Water - #46
2018 - Green Book - #36
2019 - Parasite - #54
2020 - Nomadland - #84 (Box Office Mojo shows it as a 2021 release)
2021 - CODA - ??? (not listed on Box Office Mojo -- $2.2MM gross which would've been around #100)
2022 - Everything Everywhere All at Once - #25

---

Wow, I can't believe that Hurt Locker and Braveheart were that far down the list. I would have thought Braveheart was a top 5 film

---

Hurt Locker wasn't a wide release was it? I remember that Oscars and had never even heard of it until then. Same for Slumdog.

I think once Slumdog got a lot of award recognition it got pretty popular.

I think after 4 pages we can all just agree that the much more entertaining and accurate awards are the MTV Movie Awards.

10,500 members spread all over the world? Yet only a small percentage are from outside the US. As for agendas, how naive do you have to be to believe that there isn't pressure to influence? It's obvious I struck a nerve with you. I was also speaking to Hollywood in general and to the critics who rate movie and television. I mentioned Taylor Sheridan, b/c he would likely have some insight. He stated that several of his movies/tv series have gotten terrible ratings from critics and high audience scores. He referenced Mayor of Kingstown and said the critics apparently hated it, and the audience loved it. Said if you're not writing to fit their narratives, they penalize you for it. His words, not mine in that instance.

As for Barbie, it is up for Best Picture. That is what I'm referencing. It doesn't represent "Best Picture" material to me as I would have compared it to various other comedies that weren't respected by the Academy. Not talking about wardrobe or specific acting nominations.

Anyway, sorry to ruffle your feathers.

Who makes up the Academy?

aggierogue said:

---

The Porkchop Express said:

---

aggierogue said:

---

ChipFTAC01 said:

---

bagger05 said:

---

Then we fall off a cliff. Since 2003 we've had a grand total of three top 20 box office movies win. Zero top 10 and about half outside of the top 50.

2004 - Million Dollar Baby - #24
2005 - Crash - #49
2006 - The Departed - #15
2007 - No Country for Old Men - #36
2008 - Slumdog Millionaire - #16
2009 - The Hurt Locker - #116
2010 - The King's Speech - #18
2011 - The Artist - #71
2012 - Argo - #22
2013 - 12 Years a Slave - #62
2014 - Birdman - #78
2015 - Spotlight - #62
2016 - Moonlight - #92
2017 - The Shape of Water - #46
2018 - Green Book - #36
2019 - Parasite - #54
2020 - Nomadland - #84 (Box Office Mojo shows it as a 2021 release)
2021 - CODA - ??? (not listed on Box Office Mojo -- $2.2MM gross which would've been around #100)
2022 - Everything Everywhere All at Once - #25

---

Wow, I can't believe that Hurt Locker and Braveheart were that far down the list. I would have thought Braveheart was a top 5 film

---

Hollywood and the Academy have lost touch on what the audience wants. They have their woke agendas and keep rewarding those taking their marching orders. Meanwhile, most people aren't impressed. That's what that list says to me. Taylor Sheridan touched on this in his recent JRE podcast.

---

The cliff seems to be since 2014. From 06-13, I saw all of the best picture winners in the theater, and I doubt I go doubt I go to more than 5-8 movies a year. Since 2014, I've seen 1 of those movies, Moonlight, and that was on demand, and I didn't think it was anything special. Most of the other ones I couldn't tell you anything about other than Aragorn is in Green Book and some lady ****s a fish man in Shape of Water.

---

Exactly. Take Barbie this year for example.

As a comedy, I'd describe Barbie as a goofy comedy similar to Anchorman or Zoolander directed more to a female audience. Why the Academy and critics are treating it like some masterful piece of cinema is comedy in itself. If this movie isn't about female empowerment it wouldn't be getting anywhere near the attention. My wife and daughter loved it. I was bored about 30 minutes in.

---

To be fair, there's a legit argument to be made that Ken is actually the hero of Barbie and Barbie is the villain. It's going to be one of those "Johnny Lawrence was the good guy" arguments in 30 years.

I doubt Oppenheimer will win all 13, but I think it has a legit shot at 10.

BassCowboy33 said:

---

To be fair, there's a legit argument to be made that Ken is actually the hero of Barbie and Barbie is the villain. It's going to be one of those "Johnny Lawrence was the good guy" arguments in 30 years.

---

Johnny was the good guy. You've trained your whole life for something and then some sketchy kid transfers in via some rundown apartments that just happen to be in the district and has some non-sanctioned coach encourage him to use a move that could have gouged my man's eye out? The UIL would have sat his ass down permanently

aggierogue said:

---

10,500 members spread all over the world? Yet only a small percentage are from outside the US. As for agendas, how naive do you have to be to believe that there isn't pressure to influence? It's obvious I struck a nerve with you. I was also speaking to Hollywood in general and to the critics who rate movie and television. I mentioned Taylor Sheridan, b/c he would likely have some insight. He stated that several of his movies/tv series have gotten terrible ratings from critics and high audience scores. He referenced Mayor of Kingstown and said the critics apparently hated it, and the audience loved it. Said if you're not writing to fit their narratives, they penalize you for it. His words, not mine in that instance.

As for Barbie, it is up for Best Picture. That is what I'm referencing. It doesn't represent "Best Picture" material to me as I would have compared it to various other comedies that weren't respected by the Academy. Not talking about wardrobe or specific acting nominations.

Anyway, sorry to ruffle your feathers.

Who makes up the Academy?

---

His written movies have been generally well reviewed (4/6 are positive on metacritic, 5/6 fresh on RT), and the audience scores match pretty closely for each one. Seems to me it's less of an issue with the critics having a narrative and more an issue with his own narratives if he has to write beyond a 2 hour block.

The Porkchop Express said:

---

BassCowboy33 said:

---

To be fair, there's a legit argument to be made that Ken is actually the hero of Barbie and Barbie is the villain. It's going to be one of those "Johnny Lawrence was the good guy" arguments in 30 years.

---

Johnny was the good guy. You've trained your whole life for something and then some sketchy kid transfers in via some rundown apartments that just happen to be in the district and has some non-sanctioned coach encourage him to use a move that could have gouged my man's eye out? The UIL would have sat his ass down permanently

---

My point exactly.

TCTTS said:

---

aggierogue said:

---

10,500 members spread all over the world? Yet only a small percentage are from outside the US. As for agendas, how naive do you have to be to believe that there isn't pressure to influence? It's obvious I struck a nerve with you. I was also speaking to Hollywood in general and to the critics who rate movie and television. I mentioned Taylor Sheridan, b/c he would likely have some insight. He stated that several of his movies/tv series have gotten terrible ratings from critics and high audience scores. He referenced Mayor of Kingstown and said the critics apparently hated it, and the audience loved it. Said if you're not writing to fit their narratives, they penalize you for it. His words, not mine in that instance.

As for Barbie, it is up for Best Picture. That is what I'm referencing. It doesn't represent "Best Picture" material to me as I would have compared it to various other comedies that weren't respected by the Academy. Not talking about wardrobe or specific acting nominations.

Anyway, sorry to ruffle your feathers.

Who makes up the Academy?

---

I can't even keep track of what you're talking about anymore.

At first you were going on about the Academy having their "woke agendas" and rewarding... someone (it wasn't clear who)... for "taking their marching orders," whatever that means.

Then you suddenly switched to critics, who have nothing to do with the Academy, and how they don't like Taylor Sheridan's TV shows, which also of course have nothing to do with the Academy.

While my point was simply that 10,500 people can't possibly have a woke hive-mind agenda, no matter where they live. That, and they've clearly made an effort to include more popular movies overall, and that of those movies, they owe no one anything when it comes to selecting who THEY think is the Best Picture winner. Again, it's not like they're picking your elected officials or deciding what laws will govern you. They're picking THEIR favorite movie. Not yours. Not America's. You don't factor into the equation, nor are they trying to "influence" you or anyone else in any way.

---

I said Hollywood and the Academy. "Hollywood" meaning the whole lot including the critics who decide what they deem necessary, important, and praise-worthy. Not sure what is difficult to comprehend unless you're just easily confused or being purposely obtuse.

And lmao at the Academy not having a hive-mind agenda. Take a look at this list of individual thinkers. Of course all these people working in the same industry wouldn't think alike. What would ever give me that idea? No conformity at all here.

Quote:

---

The organization is an umbrella group for 17 branches that represent actors, casting directors, cinematographers, costume designers, directors, documentary filmmakers, executives, film editors, makeup artists and hairstylists, marketing and public relations, music, producers, production design, short films and feature animation, sound, visual effects and writers, as well as members at large.

---

As for the rest of your rant, any moron knows that they aren't picking my favorite movie or America's for that matter. Yet you go on to contradict your own argument by saying, "Look! They picked Barbie who the audience loves."

Well, this escalated quickly

Just watched 2 trailers for Zone of Interest and I will have to say it looks intriguing, especially the description of the movie in trailer two.

Quote:

---

The organization is an umbrella group for 17 branches that represent actors, casting directors, cinematographers, costume designers, directors, documentary filmmakers, executives, film editors, makeup artists and hairstylists, marketing and public relations, music, producers, production design, short films and feature animation, sound, visual effects and writers, as well as members at large.

---

Literally nothing in this text points to these 10,500 people all sharing the exact same thoughts or having the exact same agenda. I live here, among them, and if you think they're all liberal/woke, and only like/vote for artsy fartsy indies or whatever, I don't know what to tell you. That's just typical, fever dream nonsense.

Quote:

---

As for the rest of your rant, any moron knows that they aren't picking my favorite movie or America's for that matter. Yet you go on to contradict your own argument by saying, "Look! They picked Barbie who the audience loves."

---

I said they pick who they want for the WINNER, but are making an effort to appeal to "America" for the ten NOMINEES. It's a very simple concept. Oppenheimer, The Holdovers, Top Gun: Maverick, Avatar: The Way of Water, Dune, Joker, Ford v Ferrari, Black Panther, Get Out, Arrival, Hell or High Water, Mad Max: Fury Road, The Martian, American Sniper ... the list goes on and on when it comes to examples of the Academy making an effort the past decade+ to nominate big, popular, crowd-pleasing blockbusters/dramas/etc for Best Picture.

Regardless, for the umpteenth time, no one's forcing you to watch or care, nor are they insisting that you or anyone else share their opinion.

Sea Speed said:

---

Just watched 2 trailers for Zone of Interest and I will have to say it looks intriguing, especially the description of the movie in trailer two.

---

I was hoping it would be on digital soon, but A24 just announced that it's expanding this weekend and going wide next weekend, so likely no digital release until March or so. I may just have to be this guy and get a good snack/meal while I watch, to offset the sheer terror/depression on screen (though, apparently you don't see any of it - only hear it in the background, which might be even creepier)...

someone just brought in da big nachos and drink for zone of interest

— ellis (@sum1saiditinnit) January 22, 2024

TCTTS said:

---

Regardless, for the umpteenth time, no one's forcing you to watch or care, nor are they insisting that you or anyone else share their opinion.

---

Did I say otherwise? Take a breath dude.

You're being just as adamant on your end, peddling incoherent conspiracy theories to boot, while whining multiple times about how their choices aren't "for you."

I'm simply saying no one ever said they were.

Every shot had the camp as this hulking menacing thing almost peering over their fence to watch their normalcy and I imagine thatis what they were going for. It looked very interesting.

PWR85 said:

---

I'm not the expert and as cultured on these things as some, but I wonder if folks truly appreciate the genius and accomplishments of John Williams. 54 nominations and counting. Responsible for (arguably) the most recognizable and impactful music of the late 20th and early 21st century for Americans. And perhaps our greatest American Composer.

Has anyone been as dominant in their field for as long as he has in the entertainment industry?

---

He is 1000% the Mozart/Beethoven of our time

I didn't care for Zone of Interest. The setting of family life against the concentration camp was interesting, but it doesn't explore it very well. The last act of the movie doesn't even take place there.

A couple of artistic decisions that took me out of it as well.

Watched Maestro over the weekend. Not sure what I think of the movie overall but I thought Bradley Cooper was excellent. Many times I had to remind myself that was him. An amazing makeup job.

Question - were those actors smoking actual cigarettes during filming? I thought I was going to get lung cancer just watching them!

Just out of curiosity, I was looking at the odds on Draftkings. Unfortunately, it won't let me bet from Florida, but figured I'd share my findings.

If you do a parlay with the following six bets, it gets you -176 odds.

Best Picture - Oppenheimer
Best Director - Chris Nolan
Best Supporting Actor - Robert Downey Jr
Best Film Editing - Oppenheimer
Best Score - Oppenheimer
Best Sound - Oppenheimer

Considering those are all heavy favorites, that's a pretty damn solid bet. Were it available to me, I'd put down $1k for an easy $568.

DG-Ag said:

---

Watched Maestro over the weekend. Not sure what I think of the movie overall but I thought Bradley Cooper was excellent. Many times I had to remind myself that was him. An amazing makeup job.

Question - were those actors smoking actual cigarettes during filming? I thought I was going to get lung cancer just watching them!

---

I've always been intrigued by the cigarettes in movies thing. I believe most productions have moved away from actual cigarettes due to the obvious health implications. Someone once told me they smoke "sugar" cigarettes and that the smoke is added in post. I have no idea how true that is. I've always said that if I was a film actor, my big NO would be smoking. So much of Hollywood is addicted to the cancer sticks, and you've heard innumerable stories about actors getting hooked because of the movies they were in.