The Oscars 2017 on ABC | 89th Academy Awards | Discuss It Live Here | Super Sale to Honor the Steve Harvey moment! (p124)

[Valonqar]

14 minutes ago, The Panda said:

 

So you're going to trash Moonlight, without seeing it, making assumptions of what it's about and why people liked it?

 

The movie wasn't made to win Oscars, man.  It's a small indie film with mostly smaller named actors, that broke out and resonated with audiences.

 

It wasn't because of politics that it got in, it's because it was a well made film.  If they wanted an easy political choice they would have gone with Hidden Figures over Moonlight.

 

Moonlight isn't a white guilt movie at all, if you saw it, maybe it'd click with you.

 

Nobody was guilted into voting Moonlight.  And it's incredibly offensive to any minority filmmaker to say their movie only got acclaim because of white guilt, instead of recognizing that maybe they're talented people who made a good movie about human struggle and self-identity.

 

 Not white guilt. BBM guilt! you think all those white closet gays that make 80% of AMPAS were ever going to vote for a white gay movie? Too close to their closet, er, home. This was their chance to redeem for that snub and they took it. 

Edited February 27, 2017 by Valonqar

[The Panda]

Just now, Valonqar said:

 

 Not white guilt. BBM guilt! you think all those white closet gays that make 80% of AMPAS were ever going to vote for a white gay movie? This was their chance and they took it. 

 

Lolololol, if it was BBM guilt they had plenty of other chances to make up for it since then.  That has nothing to do with it at all.

[NCsoft]

43 minutes ago, filmlover said:

Another fact: Moonlight is the first movie to win Best Picture without any of SAG, PGA, or DGA since Braveheart.

Did braveheart at least have Editors Guild? 

Moonlight is such a huge upset in that its WGA + GG Drama vs PGA, DGA, ACE, GG Sweep, Critics Choice BP/BD, and BAFTA BP/BD

one of the biggest upset I can remember, even without the debacle.

[Valonqar]

Just now, The Panda said:

 

Lolololol, if it was BBM guilt they had plenty of other chances to make up for it since then.  That has nothing to do with it at all.

 

No they didn't. Those movies were about white gays like them. They don't like to be reminded. It's easy to reward a movie where things happen to someone else. 

 

 

[cannastop]

4 minutes ago, Valonqar said:

 

 Not white guilt. BBM guilt! you think all those white closet gays that make 80% of AMPAS were ever going to vote for a white gay movie? Too close to their closet, er, home. This was their chance to redeem for that snub and they took it. 

Isn't it kind of sad that you're always looking for a way to downplay black people's successes?

[filmlover]

Even if it didn't win Best Picture, La La Land still made a very impressive showing last night. Youngest Best Director winner ever is definitely of significance.

[RandomCat]

Hm...so casual Sexism, Racism, and Homophobia. Gotcha.

[filmlover]

1 minute ago, Valonqar said:

 

No they didn't. Those movies were about white gays like them. They don't like to be reminded. It's easy to reward a movie where things happen to someone else. 

 

 

You are a sad, strange little man, and you have my pity.

[BirdMan]

3 minutes ago, Telemachos said:

 

Your opinion is your opinion, but it's not some objective fact. 

 

@filmlover is right to bring up preferential balloting -- over the last several years, it's shown that many of the older statistics (and even the guild awards) don't necessarily matter when it comes to Best Pic. Indeed, only the PGAs are a decent harbinger for that, since they're also preferential, and in retrospect I'd guess that LA LA LAND's win there was closer than we expected. When you combine that with HIDDEN FIGURES winning the SAG Best Ensemble, clearly LA LA LAND's front runner position was shakier than we all thought. 

My friend no movie in recent years has had such strong precursors , and the SAG ensemble thing was because it literally had an actor and an actress for the entire duration of the movie 

now there has been some movies with very strong award buzz before the oscars  and were considered the frontrunners such as The Social Network and Boyhood but when they lost best picture they lost a whole bunch of academy awards with them including best director , LLL won everything it was predicted to win except for sound mixing and film editing but lost BP , which means Moonlight did not in fact pull off a King's Speech , not even the same case with last year's Spotlight because it was still considered the frontrunner heading into the oscars despite losing in many categories 

 

[The Panda]

3 minutes ago, Valonqar said:

 

No they didn't. Those movies were about white gays like them. They don't like to be reminded. It's easy to reward a movie where things happen to someone else. 

 

 

 

So you're saying films with white casts are awarded based on merit and films with minority casts are based on politics.  That sums up your viewpoint, and it's pretty insulting.

[Valonqar]

Just now, cannastop said:

Isn't it kind of sad that you're always looking for a way to downplay black people's successes?

 

I don't have to look for a way because black (movie) people's successes tend to come with pre-arranged political hype. In fact, it seems like everyone who campaigns for those movies and people revel in political hype. There are exceptions too. Like Obama, though that's not a movie example. Credit where credit is due, he was such a strong candidate, he didn't need "it is time" race baiting to win. That his win was historical in that regard went without saying but he didn't resort to it because he didn't need it. That's how you know win's deserved. Cuaron also didn't need "it is time" shit to become the first Mexican director winner. His incredible work spoke for itself. OTOH, McQueen was crawling on the floor begging to become a historical winner. Why? cause he was weak. You need politics only if your work alone isn't stronger than the competition. No wonder he didn't win but his movie won as a consolation or whatever. 

 

 

[Valonqar]

10 minutes ago, filmlover said:

You are a sad, strange little man, and you have my pity.

 

I feel super good about myself now. If that was by someone I respect, I'd be upset,. But from you, it's a compliment. 

 

@The Panda

 

Quote

So you're saying films with white casts are awarded based on merit and films with minority casts are based on politics.  That sums up your viewpoint, and it's pretty insulting.

 

Nope, that's what you said. 

 

Slumdog had minority cast and didn't win because of politics. I don't recall either OscarsSoNotIndian oe ILM or DefyPresidentByVotingIndian. 

 

 

Edited February 27, 2017 by Valonqar

[RandomCat]

5 minutes ago, filmlover said:

You are a sad, strange little man, and you have my pity.

 

Strike the Pity. I don't have the pity.

[filmlover]

Are we sure this person isn't the Bryce Dallas Howard character from The Help?

 

Or the Kirsten Dunst one from Hidden Figures, for that matter.

Edited February 27, 2017 by filmlover

[Dementeleus]

Just now, BirdMan said:

My friend no movie in recent years has had such strong precursors , and the SAG ensemble thing was because it literally had an actor and an actress for the entire duration of the movie 

now there has been some movies with very strong award buzz before the oscars  and were considered the frontrunners such as The Social Network and Boyhood but when they lost best picture they lost a whole bunch of academy awards with them including best director , LLL won everything it was predicted to win except for sound mixing and film editing but lost BP , which means Moonlight did not in fact pull off a King's Speech , not even the same case with last year's Spotlight because it was still considered the frontrunner heading into the oscars despite losing in many categories 

 

 

There's no way you (or I) know exactly why SAG members chose to vote the way they did, but they've certainly gone for the eventual winner a fair amount of time and it's worth noting that they didn't this time. And perhaps that was an unexpected weak link in LA LA LAND's Oscar chances: if you were an actor and you weren't over the moon for Stone or Gosling, there's a good chance you voted for something else.

 

The experts I saw on the various Oscar blogs more or less picked LLL to win 9. Several thought it would win more. This story that "it basically won what it was expected to win" isn't true. Even if you grant that it missed out on some of its fringe categories, the Best Editing loss is a huge red flag -- that's an Oscar most BPs win, especially if they're a heavy front-runner in general. 

[Arlborn]

11 minutes ago, Valonqar said:

 

No they didn't. Those movies were about white gays like them. They don't like to be reminded. It's easy to reward a movie where things happen to someone else. 

 

 

Wait a second here! Did you just call all of the Oscar people gay...? And in the closet about it?

 

Edited February 27, 2017 by Arlborn

[RandomCat]

Just now, Arlborn said:

Wait a second here! Did you just call the Oscar people gay...?

 only 80% of the white men.

[Dementeleus]

3 minutes ago, Valonqar said:

 

I don't have to look for a way because black (movie) people's successes tend to come with pre-arranged political hype. In fact, it seems like everyone who campaigns for those movies and people revel in political hype. There are exceptions too. Like Obama, though that's not a movie example. Credit where credit is due, he was such a strong candidate, he didn't need "it is time" race baiting to win. That his win was historical in that regard went without saying but he didn't resort to it because he didn't need it. That's how you know win's deserved. Cuaron also didn't need "it is time" shit to become the first Mexican director winner. His incredible work spoke for itself. OTOH, McQueen was crawling on the floor begging to become a historical winner. Why? cause he was weak. You need politics only if your work alone isn't stronger than the competition. No wonder he didn't win but his movie won as a consolation or whatever. 

 

Your opinion is your opinion, but that's where it ends. Your continual refusal to grant all these various minorities any sort of worthwhile achievement is also sadly telling. 

[filmlover]

Just now, Telemachos said:

 

There's no way you (or I) know exactly why SAG members chose to vote the way they did, but they've certainly gone for the eventual winner a fair amount of time and it's worth noting that they didn't this time. And perhaps that was an unexpected weak link in LA LA LAND's Oscar chances: if you were an actor and you weren't over the moon for Stone or Gosling, there's a good chance you voted for something else.

 

The experts I saw on the various Oscar blogs more or less picked LLL to win 9. Several thought it would win more. This story that "it basically won what it was expected to win" isn't true. Even if you grant that it missed out on some of its fringe categories, the Best Editing loss is a huge red flag -- that's an Oscar most BPs win, especially if they're a heavy front-runner in general. 

To be fair, La La Land wasn't even nominated in Ensemble at SAG which made sense because Stone and Gosling are the only people who do anything at all in the movie. Expecting it to make a strong showing there was always expecting too much. They did award Stone and probably solidified her Oscar glory in the process, though.

[BirdMan]

3 minutes ago, Valonqar said:

I don't have to look for a way because black (movie) people's successes tend to come with pre-arranged political hype. In fact, it seems like everyone who campaigns for those movies and people revel in political hype. There are exceptions too. Like Obama, though that's not a movie example. Credit where credit is due, he was such a strong candidate, he didn't need "it is time" race baiting to win. That his win was historical in that regard went without saying but he didn't resort to it because he didn't need it. That's how you know win's deserved. Cuaron also didn't need "it is time" shit to become the first Mexican director winner. His incredible work spoke for itself. OTOH, McQueen was crawling on the floor begging to become a historical winner. Why? cause he was weak. You need politics only if your work alone isn't stronger than the competition. No wonder he didn't win but his movie won as a consolation or whatever. 

12 years a slave was a damn masterpiece man , movies like that should win naturally 

don't dismiss movie qualities based on race please