87TH ACADEMY AWARDS CEREMONY DISCUSSION THREAD AAAHHH! | Discuss It Live Here

[Empire]

But that doesn't make it right.  The academy is supposed to award the best of the best, not just what they prefer.

Best is subjective though.

[Kalo]

Well the Oscar's really sucked this year

 

Boyhood snubbed - seriously, this movie was twelve years in the making and captured the essence of life.  (also I think I liked it better than Birdman actually).

 

Lego Movie Snubbed maybe not my favorite animated film of the year but come on!

 

Jake Gyllenhaal majorly snubbed best performance of the year

 

Nightcrawler Snubbed - best film of the year (well I still need to see whiplash)

 

The Way He Looks Snubbed - best foreign film of the year.

 

Gone Girl Snubbed - should have got an BP nom. I mean come on they had room. and so much better than Imitation game and American Sniper. 

 

I kind of think Dawn should have won best Visuals too. (even though I loved Interstellar) 

Edited February 24, 2015 by Visor shades Kalo

[Kalo]

 

 

After a day, yeah, I kinda have to admit I went overboard. In fact, now I feel kinda bad for Birdman because I know it's gonna go through a lot of unnecessary hate (some of which I threw at it already, but even more) just because it beat Boyhood. My real issue is that Innaritu walked away with three Oscars... I mean, why? Why can't they spread the love?

But I digress. I have a movie I'll watch later tonight to cheer me up, and who knows? Maybe Boyhood 2 will sweep in a few years.

 

I think it would be called Manhood    

Edited February 24, 2015 by Visor shades Kalo

[Blankments]

In my honest opinion, Birdman is head and shoulders better than Boyhood.

And in my honest opinion, Boyhood is head and shoulders better than Birdman and every Best Picture winner since The Hurt Locker. But I guarantee you no one here wants me to go on about this so I'll be quiet and get over it.

 

 

(And honestly, my issue isn't with Boyhood losing Picture; it's more that it didn't take at least Director.)

[Lordmandeep]

Oscar Tv Ratings fall 17% from last year..

 

http://deadline.com/2015/02/oscar-ratings-2015-academy-awards-show-abc-1201379351/

 

The films may be good but in reality only film anyone will remember from this crop is American Sniper. 

Edited February 24, 2015 by Lordmandeep

[filmlover]

Oscar Tv Ratings fall 17% from last year..

 

http://deadline.com/2015/02/oscar-ratings-2015-academy-awards-show-abc-1201379351/

Yep, they are starting clean next year. These two producers need to GO!

[Leyla]

lol the 2nd year in a raw I havent watched the ceremony live 7 i dont even regreat it 

 

Eddie & Jules  wins are   

Sad that actual best animated pics missed 

Lost stars perf was OKish but would have been better with Keira obvs

predictably lost to Glory though 

Interstellar win for FX is BS as well

poor Weta & Dawn

 

but good thing Leviathan lost yay!

Edited February 24, 2015 by Lady of Lorien

[terrestrial]

Poor Bradley, 3 noms in a row, that s gotta sting a little bit.

 

Compare Julianne Moore's GG, BAFTA,... film list with her Oscar noms. And how many non-Oscar wins she has, how many Oscar nominations without a win....

 

 

Lady Gaga singing was pointless and wasted so much TIME! There should be a new rule that the only songs that can be preformed on stage are those songs nominated for the year that it is given out.

 

Or songs out of the - in this case - all in 2014 released movies

 

 

Yep, they are starting clean next year. These two producers need to GO!

 

The main writer is seemingky known for drama... (I haven't look him up, impression via reactions)

 

I think also not every writer's style is a match for every comedian able actor

 

 

What annoys me about the award shows in general:

they say they nominate... the best.

In some years the best make-up, special effect,.... happened in a medicore to bad genre movie. You'll never see them even get nominated. If they nominate a genre-movie it is usually a blockbuster - and rather seldom winning then.

 

Sometimes there is a very good performance in a bad movie. Not a chance to get even suggested to get nominated. And so on

Edited February 24, 2015 by terrestrial

[Talkie]

Oscars Show Growing Gap Between Moviegoers and Academy

 

In the end, it was the audience that got snubbed.

 

Following the best picture win on Sunday night by “Birdman” — a brainy film seen by fewer than five million ticket buyers in North America — the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences woke on Monday to soft television ratings for its Oscar telecast and fresh signs that its movie awards have become hopelessly detached from movie viewers.

 

According to Nielsen data, the Oscar broadcast on ABC drew about 36.6 million viewers, down 14.9 percent from roughly 43 million last year. It was the lowest-rated show since 2009, which had about 36.3 million viewers for a ceremony hosted by Hugh Jackman, with “Slumdog Millionaire” in the winner’s circle.

 

The bigger problem, as the results came in, were indications — visible amid a confusing tangle of awards that went in many different directions — that both the Academy and the echo chamber of Hollywood’s awards-system machinery have nearly broken their connection with the movies that many millions of people buy tickets to watch.

 

“It’s sad, but most people have to finally accept that the Oscars have become, well, elitist and not in step with anything that is actually popular,” said Philip Hallman, a film studies librarian at the University of Michigan. “No one really believes anymore that the films they chose are the ones that are going to last over time.”

 

The audience clearly cast its vote for Clint Eastwood’s “American Sniper,” a reality-based Iraq war story that has taken in about $320 million at the domestic box office from nearly 40 million viewers. Box-office analysts predict that “American Sniper” will easily take in $340 million before its run is finished, making it the No. 1 film released last year, as measured in domestic ticket sales.

 

Another telling statistic: “Birdman” collected about $11 million in ticket sales between the time it was nominated and Sunday; “American Sniper” took in $317 million over the same period.

 

But “American Sniper,” one of eight best picture nominees and with six nominations over all, went home with nothing but a sound-editing statuette.

 

“The Imitation Game,” the second-ranked ticket seller among the best picture nominees, with about $84 million in domestic sales from about 10 million viewers, did no better. After months of intense prize campaigning by the Oscar-savvy Weinstein Company, it lost in seven of its eight nominated categories, winning only for best adapted screenplay.

 

[DAR]

Here's my wish list of future hosts I'd like to see.

Jimmy Fallon/Justin Timberlake

Tina Fey/Amy Poehler

Jimmy Kimmel

The Muppets

Edited February 24, 2015 by DAR

[Jessie]

Minorities are still at a disadvantage towards leading roles as long as producers/directors are still 90%+ white males, whether that is intentional or not. Takes a lot of time I understand but still needs to be discussed, women & non white males always deserve better.

 

But its Hollywood, and American film company. It would be like us going to india and complaining about the lack of diversity in Bollywood movies. Its as if people want a fully diverse cast in every fucking movie lol, be realistic.  As for the lack of female roles argument, well, action films have proven to be very popular in cinemas as well as CBM's and as harsh as it is to say this, men just fit the roles better than women do.

 

Women do have great roles given to them and JLaw and Bullock are arguable the most bankable stars in the world right now so I don't see the problem, its simply people moaning for the sake of moaning whilst the rest of the world carry on living their lives. The only thing I will agree with is its wrong for women to be paid less than men simply because of their gender, however im not going to feel too sorry for them simply because taking 10% backend profit of a multi million dollar earning instead of 12% is still a healthy fucking living compared to 99% of the worlds population. There are far bigger problems in the world than diversity in movies and a 'supposedly' lack of strong female characters in movies.

Edited February 24, 2015 by jessie

[terrestrial]

But it is even worse in some ways than this article states it:

 

what movies get even nominated? Before they get nominated those nominated made a lot less / was seen by way less people.

 

A lot of tickets seem to get sold only because people are curious about the nominess or winners (see Birdman now expanding to 1000 theaters) or bcs of tactifully great done release dates - widen of theator count dates in combination of arad buzz and advertising and so on. Not for their WOM or for if the GA did it even like in the 'normal' way. And how many of those viewers after the nomination are self-declared movie knowers / specialists / elitists... and as such not the same as the GA?

 

I am not for giving BP only to blockbusters or only nominating blockbusters,.... but for giving nominations to at least part of the production if they were great (cinematography, writer, effects, actors/actresses,...). Or to give noms to comedies, .... whatever genres too, not so overly to made-for-Oscar / drama / bio-pics....

And to look into why bio-pics get IMHO too often the awards, if the creation out of nothing is IMHO so far more difficult than to have something to ~ copy for. Or the award going rather to the historical to todays 'real' earth cultures, than Sci-Fi or horror or fantasy.

And if the nominations do include all, the tendency to give it to the movie with the most roots in the 'real' cultures here on earth.

And never give an award to a digitally / human mix created charater's team, see Apes or... not even a newly created or a special award (why not? Say you do not know how to judge that yet, but give it for the impact/quality mix it has to the movie industry) or whatever, but do not close the eyes / put the head in sand and ignore it.

 

And to give the awards to the best whatever team, no matter if it was working out of the US, UK AUS, or all over the world... for all the US produced movies (assuming that is the condition for the Oscars, didn't look into that too), as in having a lot or only a few strong connections to the co-artists who later vote about their work. There are exceptions, but way too few.

 

Too often it seems those kind of prizes get used either as a consolation prize for movies that didn't got nominated / won a more 'important' prize or to movies the voters liked in general best, but not to the ones who were the most creative in general and had to held that quality up for the whole movie and not only for small parts of the movie....

 

I think also it was not a good idea to try to take away from other award shows... via the moved up schedule, especially the Oscar voters might be in need for more distance to freshly seen movies.

As in my imperssion is also they seem to be a bit 'short-memoried' (?term?). Way too much possibilities for influencing them via studios schedules and other details

 

There are so many details that look to me to be wrong with a lot of the awards, most obvious with the Oscars.

[Jessie]

I'd love for Ricky Gervais to host the Oscars. He was awesome hosting the Golden Globes.

[terrestrial]

But its Hollywood, and American film company. It would be like us going to india and complaining about the lack of diversity in Bollywood movies. Its as if people want a fully diverse cast in every fucking movie lol, be realistic.  As for the lack of female roles argument, well, action films have proven to be very popular in cinemas as well as CBM's and as harsh as it is to say this, men just fit the roles better than women do.

 

Women do have great roles given to them and JLaw and Bullock are arguable the most bankable stars in the world right now so I don't see the problem, its simply people moaning for the sake of moaning whilst the rest of the world carry on living their lives. The only thing I will agree with is its wrong for women to be paid less than men simply because of their gender, however im not going to feel too sorry for them simply because taking 10% backend profit of a multi million dollar earning instead of 12% is still a healthy fucking living compared to 99% of the worlds population. There are far bigger problems in the world than diversity in movies and a 'supposedly' lack of strong female characters in movies.

 

O mei o mei...

 

Read up on percentages of female speaking roles in US movies (I posted the numbers a while back), and so on.

 

A very few female roles don't balance out the extreme unbalanced situation. Especially as the most females roles are still shown in a cliche way...

Same counts for non-whites characters, way too often still cliches.

 

Your way to argue would mean only 10% of the US are non-white and females together. Or the paying for tickest ones.

 

About males fitting the roles better, let's say it this way:

- nealry all females in a hero movie wern't shown without cliches still included or in rather bad movies.....

 

- Only a very few film makers are even able to do 'something' with a female fighter or a strong female person.

 

- Did you even read up into how many complain there are e.g. missing female hero toys, T-Shirts,... and if they are on the market why females young and old do not want THAT version? see #itsnotjusttheboysthatsavetheday

 

sjoes ‏@sjoes Feb 21

RT @kesselrunn: #itsnotjusttheboysthatsavetheday @hasbro @amy_geek @starwars < P.S. It's not FAIR!

 

 

- How many are extrmely fed up with getting ignored in such movies?

- Why certain CBMs got a far higher female viewershp percentage than others?

And so on...

 

The people moaning for the sake of moaning... wow, you are an ignoarant it seems. I wasn't aware about how big a one.

[Hatebox]

The films may be good but in reality only film anyone will remember from this crop is American Sniper. 

 

People keep saying this but I don't see why Birdman will be forgotten any more quickly than other well-remembered indie hits.

 

Whiplash is also great so I guess it depends on what the director does next.

[Jessie]

O mei o mei...

 

Read up on percentages of female speaking roles in US movies (I posted the numbers a while back), and so on.

 

A very few female roles don't balance out the extreme unbalanced situation. Especially as the most females roles are still shown in a cliche way...

Same counts for non-whites characters, way too often still cliches.

 

Your way to argue would mean only 10% of the US are non-white and females together. Or the paying for tickest ones.

 

About males fitting the roles better, let's say it this way:

- nealry all females in a hero movie wern't shown without cliches still included or in rather bad movies.....

 

- Only a very few film makers are even able to do 'something' with a female fighter or a strong female person.

 

- Did you even read up into how many complain there are e.g. missing female hero toys, T-Shirts,... and if they are on the market why females young and old do not want THAT version? see #itsnotjusttheboysthatsavetheday

 

sjoes ‏@sjoes Feb 21

RT @kesselrunn: #itsnotjusttheboysthatsavetheday @hasbro @amy_geek @starwars < P.S. It's not FAIR!

 

 

- How many are extrmely fed up with getting ignored in such movies?

- Why certain CBMs got a far higher female viewershp percentage than others?

And so on...

 

The people moaning for the sake of moaning... wow, you are an ignoarant it seems. I wasn't aware about how big a one.

 

If its such a problem, why don't women write their own scripts? with their own characters? Lets face it, there are far more male writers out there than female writers yet women expect the males to start focusing on stronger female characters. Guess what, men know more about men than women, they probably aren't all the great in creating great female roles so instead of all the whining, why don't women actually do something about it and create these roles for themselves instead of expecting the nasty men to do it all for them lol.

 

And yes, males are more believable in superhero roles than females. Males are known to be the more physical side of the gender so its not sexist to assume that most viewers (yes, women included) will find male action stars more believable than women action stars. Sure there are the exceptions, but it takes a good writer to make it work and there are far more average writers in Hollywood than good writers. If you want to blame someone, blame Stan Lee, he created these heroes and now Hollywood are just re-telling the stories.

 

Its click bait articles or internet posters that have a problem, its funny how ive never come across any female in the real world who's had a problem with the lack of 'female superheroes, female action roles etc etc' Literally this complaint is practically non-existent in the real world. If there is a 'problem' its the fact there are too many superhero movies being released, or sequels which are all based on already established male characters.  Not really much that can be done about that so don't call me ignorant for simply saying it how it is.

Edited February 24, 2015 by jessie

[The Stingray]

lol @ all the people that bring up box office figures and want the Oscars to become a popularity contest. Go watch the MTV awards.

[TalismanRing]

Well Travolta is a bit less creepy than advertised.  Backstage, after the "infamous" photo call, Scarlett seems quite happy to see him (they did once co-star in A Love Song For Bobby Long).

 

[terrestrial]

If its such a problem, why don't women write their own scripts? with their own characters? Lets face it, there are far more male writers out there than female writers yet women expect the males to start focusing on stronger female characters. Guess what, men know more about men than women, they probably aren't all the great in creating great female roles so instead of all the whining, why don't women actually do something about it and create these roles for themselves instead of expecting the nasty men to do it all for them lol.

 

And yes, males are more believable in superhero roles than females. Males are known to be the more physical side of the gender so its not sexist to assume that most viewers (yes, women included) will find male action stars more believable than women action stars. Sure there are the exceptions, but it takes a good writer to make it work and there are far more average writers in Hollywood than good writers. If you want to blame someone, blame Stan Lee, he created these heroes and now Hollywood are just re-telling the stories.

 

Its click bait articles or internet posters that have a problem, its funny how ive never come across any female in the real world who's had a problem with the lack of 'female superheroes, female action roles etc etc' Literally this complaint is practically non-existent in the real world. If there is a 'problem' its the fact there are too many superhero movies being released, or sequels which are all based on already established male characters.  Not really much that can be done about that so don't call me ignorant for simply saying it how it is.

 

They  do write scripts, take a look into who writes what and who gets their script bought and who not for what reasons. You see only the ones who sold their scripts. A huge difference

 

Why do woman nothing? Really? What do you think they do? You call it moan/whine or similar. They started a llong time ago to write articles. That too often got not published (I speak about professional journalists,...)

 

All the nasty men? How old are you? I know you have a fiance, so you seem to be an adult. But who even speaks so beside pupils or younger? I seldom use this kind of questioning (not even sure if I ever asked in this way), but I can not comprehend an adult argueing in this way.

Too many people in money-related decision positions are ignorant, lazy for the real effort to try to not being biased and tons of other reasons like having nothing to do with the art parts of movie making. Nowadays even people who speak on the radio, are part of the production in movies,... have to look ... nice.

It's appearances over quality. Bully too often over reason. But that is nothing new, it only got worse.

Guess why so many biased and too lazy to really learn about changes, details, .... people sit in positions others would do better work

There are females directors, they do make movies. Usually with a lot less budgets, support,... by the studios.

 

Stan Lee: now you are kidding me, aren't you? He created all those cliches? Advice; take a lot of history books into your hands... including what happened in UK, Europe,... after the return of the soldiers of WW II (as you are seemingly out of UK, there are some really good books about that, including the 'Access to History' book series, and 'Women in History', and so on)

 

Good writers, only if that would be enough. Producers and the people around of the money side of the movie business are, who nowadays mostly have 'an idea' how to make money, develop the barest story-points, often enough out of the BOs of other movies,.... and contract writers,... to create then the story.

 

Again: it is not only about fighters,.. strong women in general, not shown in a cliche way and so on.

 

You either seem to have a rather ... presorted access to females, or you have not realised one little tenndency of females: too many tend to not say open about something like that, if they already are aware about the male in the discussion being... biased. They are usually less loud in average, but I personally do not know even one women who is happy with the presentaion of females in genral, even if they run to watch (arrghhh) romance movies. Certain parts of them love those, but not all details about them.

The ones who do not love them and also not the presented cliches in other movies... go either not longer to the cinemas or far more seldom than they would like to.

 

Again: why are certain movies with better female fighters like GotG,... so extremely successful? They manage to get also the females into the cinemas. To see also via the ages of females going into the cinemas at 'girsl day out' = I saw groups of way over 40 years old in GotG,....

The most of the over ~ 35y old people I know are not part of the blogger/forums writers/... scene, a lot of the female pupils I teach do not visit especially movie and games forums,... bcs of the writing style / reactions of the posteres there, especially if they dare to say something against female cliches.

 

 

Too many superhero movies?

We had - including Big Hero 6 - in 2014 according to BOM 6 Superhero movies. Out of 692 movies that got released in US cinemas last year. In 2013 and 2012 each 5 superhero movies

 

Who thinks we get too many superhero movies.... doesn't watch enough movies IMHO. And why those should be responsible for not enough female stron roles,... I have really no idea

[lab276]

Oscars Show Growing Gap Between Moviegoers and Academy

 

In the end, it was the audience that got snubbed.

 

Following the best picture win on Sunday night by “Birdman” — a brainy film seen by fewer than five million ticket buyers in North America — the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences woke on Monday to soft television ratings for its Oscar telecast and fresh signs that its movie awards have become hopelessly detached from movie viewers.

 

According to Nielsen data, the Oscar broadcast on ABC drew about 36.6 million viewers, down 14.9 percent from roughly 43 million last year. It was the lowest-rated show since 2009, which had about 36.3 million viewers for a ceremony hosted by Hugh Jackman, with “Slumdog Millionaire” in the winner’s circle.

 

The bigger problem, as the results came in, were indications — visible amid a confusing tangle of awards that went in many different directions — that both the Academy and the echo chamber of Hollywood’s awards-system machinery have nearly broken their connection with the movies that many millions of people buy tickets to watch.

 

“It’s sad, but most people have to finally accept that the Oscars have become, well, elitist and not in step with anything that is actually popular,” said Philip Hallman, a film studies librarian at the University of Michigan. “No one really believes anymore that the films they chose are the ones that are going to last over time.”

 

The audience clearly cast its vote for Clint Eastwood’s “American Sniper,” a reality-based Iraq war story that has taken in about $320 million at the domestic box office from nearly 40 million viewers. Box-office analysts predict that “American Sniper” will easily take in $340 million before its run is finished, making it the No. 1 film released last year, as measured in domestic ticket sales.

 

Another telling statistic: “Birdman” collected about $11 million in ticket sales between the time it was nominated and Sunday; “American Sniper” took in $317 million over the same period.

 

But “American Sniper,” one of eight best picture nominees and with six nominations over all, went home with nothing but a sound-editing statuette.

 

“The Imitation Game,” the second-ranked ticket seller among the best picture nominees, with about $84 million in domestic sales from about 10 million viewers, did no better. After months of intense prize campaigning by the Oscar-savvy Weinstein Company, it lost in seven of its eight nominated categories, winning only for best adapted screenplay.

I don't know, maybe moviegoers should change their rubbish taste instead? Or maybe studios should stop making rubbish blockbusters that couldn't possibly be nominated. There are other ways around this!