THE DANISH GIRL | 11.27.15 | Focus | final domestic gross: $11,114,018

[TStechnij]

I was a Les Mis defender (I still like a lot of that movie) but I was bored stiff by King's Speech and this seems twice as cloying.

You say cloying, I say poignant, beautiful and sensitive.

[DAR]

TKS has grown on me.

As for this yep looks good but awardsy

Edited September 2, 2015 by DAR

[riczhang]

I CAN'T EVEN WITH THIS TRAILER. EDDIE  

 

Also, does anyone else think that Matthias Schoenhaerts looks like Putin in this film? 

[TStechnij]

I CAN'T EVEN WITH THIS TRAILER. EDDIE

Also, does anyone else think that Matthias Schoenhaerts looks like Putin in this film?

100% he does.

[BK007]

The Martian doesn't look like Oscar bait at all. Which is probably why the reaction to the trailers has been overwhelmingly positive.

 

What even is this definition? 

 

Great performances? 

 

I may not have liked the Theory of Everything much but Redmayne was phenomenal. For me it was the direction of the story that was lacking.

 

Anyway, two kinds of posters call things Oscar bait.

 

The first are the populists who only see blockbusters. These posters only post or comment mostly during summer and winter seasons and disregard everything else whose budget is not blockbuster worthy. Furthermore, focus is on action movies, preferably superhero movies or big CGI spectacles. Dramas are considered part of the "nothing interests me" heading. To add some kind of weight to their opinions, these posters/people get excited by "fanboy directors" or rather whichever directors the Internet movie websites they frequent tout up as auteurs. They follow the Oscars expecting TDKR and Jurassic World to get nominated and once they don't talk a lot of shit about how irrelevant the Oscars are.

 

The second are those whom are at the other end of the spectrum. They don't particularly enjoy blockbusters, but seek out indie movies. Anything that is produced by the Hollywood traditionally big studios or mini majors are written off as bait. They still follow the Oscars and are underwhelmed by overrated movies that are critically adored.

 

 

edit: For myself, if I were to use such a crude term, the movies that would fall under it would be those that are clearly playing to a certain beat and whose performances are not about the characters but about the actor. This is not one of them. Neither was the King's Speech. I fail to see why we can't turn the tables and subject the same kind of terminology to the populist loved films on this site. We can't because Marvel and Nolan are Gods for no reason at all. This is why forums are so ill-representative of actual people. 

Edited September 2, 2015 by BK007

[tonytr87]

Hooper's problem is every film of his seems to be begging for Oscars. King's Speech was pretty good, but received a lot of hate cause it didn't deserve Best Picture. Les Miserable was uneven as fuck. This looks good enough. 

[kayumanggi]

Hooper made this movie with the Oscars in mind. He has been like that for quite some time. No denial, no begging. He wants those Oscars lol.

[kayumanggi]

Of course it is, and its not like this is gonna be a weak year too.

 

That's kinda unfair isn't it? Completely defeats the essence of the awards.

[MinaTakla]

But since he's ALREADY an Oscar winner, I mean Hooper, why do people not give him credit for trying to do a good movie and always see it as Oscar hunting?

I just don't buy it.

[kayumanggi]

Plus what is wrong with Oscar hunting?

[La Binoche]

The whole thing looks a little too eager to sweep the Oscars. 

 

Also, there's no trend Hollywood won't jump on, is there? I mean 'transg' was the IT trend of 2015, wasn't it? 

[TStechnij]

What's wrong with Oscar hunting is that people think it is bad and pandering. So what is wrong with it is that there is a perception that there is something wrong with it lol.

That being said, I hate to think people actually pander for awards. Instead, I want to think Hooper picks projects he finds compelling and just tries to make a damn good movie.

My bigger problem with Hooper is his camera technique, but this trailer seems free of any of those weird shots he is known for.

[ShouldIBeHere]

Interesting premise, great talent in front of the camera, a director who made one of my all-time-favourites (King's Speech). 

 

Not sure how interestinly they manage to tell that story. But everyone should be able to see that the ingredients are there to actually make this a good movie... but all that "Ugh Oscar-bait" comments? Come on, guys... don't be so ignorant just because these kinds of dramas are not for you.

Edited September 2, 2015 by ShouldIBeHere

[Hatebox]

edit: For myself, if I were to use such a crude term, the movies that would fall under it would be those that are clearly playing to a certain beat and whose performances are not about the characters but about the actor. This is not one of them. Neither was the King's Speech. I fail to see why we can't turn the tables and subject the same kind of terminology to the populist loved films on this site. We can't because Marvel and Nolan are Gods for no reason at all. This is why forums are so ill-representative of actual people. 

 

You say that as if Marvel and Nolan are infallible round here, but they both have a ton of critics on this forum. As well they should, in many instances.

[misafeco]

If you like the movie: A great piece of filmmaking with outstanding performances, etc.

If you don't like the movie: Oscar bait

[kayumanggi]

Again, I don't see anything wrong with this or any other film being an Oscar bait.

[Avatree]

I too fail to understand the issue with movies being "oscar bait".

[BoxOfficeFangrl]

The whole thing looks a little too eager to sweep the Oscars. 

 

Also, there's no trend Hollywood won't jump on, is there? I mean 'transg' was the IT trend of 2015, wasn't it? 

 

The Danish Girl has been in the works for years, at least since 2008 when Nicole Kidman (as the title character) and Charlize Theron were in talks.

[Avatree]

I would have preferred Kidman over Redmayne.

[BoxOfficeFangrl]

I don't have a problem with movies being made for Oscars (movies are made for all sorts of reasons), but I guess when movies are just made for money, it's pretty straightforward and there's no pretense that there's anything "noble" about them. But "art" is supposed to have loftier goals, I guess, and be made for its own sake, so to make it with prizes in mind can strike some people as a bit desperate. Also, a lot of the movies that awards bodies tend to like aren't necessarily remembered in the long run, or even a year later. You could say that about a lot of cash-grab movies, but again, they're not held up as anything especially lofty or worthwhile in the first place. There's also probably a fair amount of resentment that whole genres are pretty much stricken from winning Best Picture, regardless of quality, while very middling movies set in the right time period and filmed with a certain tone get to be major Oscar contenders.