Call Me by Your Name | Sony Pictures Classics | 11/24/2017 in NY and LA

[TalismanRing]

1 minute ago, CoolioD1 said:

diary of a teenage girl does acknowledge the creepiness of the central relationship and skarsgard is pretty much a loser in it. very different vibe from this.

Again, he's 35 and she's 15 - old enough to be her father and he also sleeping with her mother.

[CoolioD1]

and armie hammer looks 35 and this kid looks about 15.

[The Panda]

Eh, I'll be honest and say I did pick up a creepy uncomfortable factor from the trailer.    

 

Then again, I've never been that into movies/books where the nature of the relationship feels like pedophilia, even if it's not.  They're just uncomfortable for me. Not sure how it's supposed to play but it did turn me off from wanting to see the movie.

 

If the reviews stay glowing and I get a chance to see it, I probably still will.  Im not convinced this is getting Oscar attention though, and I'm fairly positive this won't be any sort of hit in the DOM box office.

[NCsoft]

1 hour ago, El Panda Machos said:

Eh, I'll be honest and say I did pick up a creepy uncomfortable factor from the trailer.    

 

Then again, I've never been that into movies/books where the nature of the relationship feels like pedophilia, even if it's not.  They're just uncomfortable for me. Not sure how it's supposed to play but it did turn me off from wanting to see the movie.

 

If the reviews stay glowing and I get a chance to see it, I probably still will.  Im not convinced this is getting Oscar attention though, and I'm fairly positive this won't be any sort of hit in the DOM box office.

The best reviewed movie of the year on MTC usually have some Oscar attention (Moonlight, Boyhood, 12 years a Slave, Gravity), even Carol got 6 nominations (despite no BP nomination). We'll see how this one goes, but I think attention it definitely will have.

[The Panda]

57 minutes ago, NCsoft said:

The best reviewed movie of the year on MTC usually have some Oscar attention (Moonlight, Boyhood, 12 years a Slave, Gravity), even Carol got 6 nominations (despite no BP nomination). We'll see how this one goes, but I think attention it definitely will have.

Not all of the reviews are in yet.  I'm not saying it won't get any Oscar attention, I'm just not convinced it'll rack up major nominations yet.

[aabattery]

19 minutes ago, El Panda Machos said:

Not all of the reviews are in yet.  I'm not saying it won't get any Oscar attention, I'm just not convinced it'll rack up major nominations yet.

 

I think it'll be a good for a couple of acting noms at the very least. There's some really strong stuff in it.

[filmlover]

7 hours ago, PenguinHyphy said:

A few internet think pieces or Tweets about a movie not being "gay enough" is not a controversy. Social media gives everyone a voice, so there are obviously going to be dissenting opinions. Controversy is when criticism taps into something bigger and way more reviled. The U.S. is generally really against the sexual exploration of minors. Those sentiments are pretty much common amongst people from all backgrounds. At the beginning of the year, that Milo guy, who was exalted by the right, managed to bring both parties together in a rare instance to ostracize him for arguing in favor of pederasty. What he was arguing actually is extremely similar to the movie's premise. If people are vehemently against even the thought of it, what makes you think that they are not going to be against it being depicted on screen? The fact that you can go on any Youtube video with the trailer or any article speaking about it and the highest comment is one speaking about how the movie is a pedophile's dream or how it makes the viewer extremely uneasy really says a ton about what will happen with the movie when it begins to be pushed to the mainstream. People are already going to be against it because it is a gay movie, so they will use that to justify not having to see or support it. Birth of a Nation was not simply about his background. People were not trying to see a slavery movie, so they used his background to justify not having to see or support the movie. If his background were the only reason, Mel Gibson and Hacksaw Ridge would have been shunned too. One CNN or Fox News segment about Call Me By Your Name and the controversy, and the movie will be done.           

Are you seriously comparing the career status of Mel Gibson, one of the biggest stars in the world for decades before the world found out he was a monster, to Nate Parker, who was a nobody before his movie and controversy around him came along (save yourself the "America is racist/loves to take a successful black man down" post I'm sure you were ready to make cause nope)? lol. You clearly didn't follow awards season last year if you think Gibson didn't get plenty ostracized.

 

It's also funny that you think Fox News is gonna sink this movie. Fox News: the news station offended by pretty much everything (let's not forget they went after The Muppets just for having a villain who was a ruthless tycoon out to destroy their studio)? If Call Me by Your Name is sunk by anything, it won't be because the most snowflake-y news organization made a hit piece about it. It's not like their audience was gonna see this movie (or wouldn't have been similarly repulsed by it) in the first place even if it had similar age protagonists (or that most of said audience exists within the Academy, at least now).

 

I haven't really seen much backlash beyond comments of feeling uneasy about it, which is kinda understandable (considering the completely different body types of its two lead actors). And of course the bigots are just gonna spread their nastiness wherever they go. We'll just have to see how it all plays out when the movie comes out in a few months. I'm sure Sony Classics is expecting some heat incoming.

[BoxOfficeFangrl]

Yikes, SPC has disabled comments on the official Youtube trailer!

[debarr]

2 hours ago, aabattery said:

 

I think it'll be a good for a couple of acting noms at the very least. There's some really strong stuff in it.

Yeah. People on AwardWatch who have seen the movie are predicting Chamalet for Best Actor and Stuhlbarg for Best Supporting Actor. 

 

They say Armie Hammer don't have a showy scene, like Stuhlbarg. So, if he was to get a nomination will be a signal that the academy (at least the actors branch) are huge fans of the movie.

Edited August 4, 2017 by debarr

[filmlover]

2 minutes ago, BoxOfficeChica said:

Yikes, SPC has disabled comments on the official Youtube trailer!

Not sure they had much of a choice otherwise when over 90% of the comments were some variation of gay bashing.

[aabattery]

14 minutes ago, debarr said:

Yeah. People on AwardWatch who have seen the movie are predicting Chamalet for Best Actor and Stuhlbarg for Best Supporting Actor. 

 

They say Armie Hammer don't have a showy scene, like Stuhlbarg. So, if he was to get a nomination will be a signal that the academy (at least the actors branch) are huge fans of the movie.

 

Yeah. There's one scene in particular for Stuhlbarg that puts him over Hammer, at least in my opinion. Both were very good though.

 

However, I'm never particularly good at predicting these things so I could be way off.

[BoxOfficeFangrl]

9 minutes ago, debarr said:

Yeah. People on AwardWatch who have seen the movie are predicting Chamalet for Best Actor and Stuhlbarg for Best Supporting Actor. 

 

They say Armie Hammer don't have a showy scene, like Stuhlbarg. So, if he was to get a nomination will be a signal that the academy (at least the actors branch) are huge fans of the movie.

Chamalet is just 21 though, 22 when Oscar nominations are announced, it is SO hard for anyone that young to get nominated for Best Actor, they usually just fraud the performance into supporting if they can possibly get away with it.

 

[debarr]

He is by far the main character, regardless of the actor's age. This is one of the year's most aclaimed films. Plus, after Moonlight sucess and the continuous influx of new Academy members, we may need to reconsider past assumptions. 

 

Movies like Moonlight and La La Land in years past would not had as much sucess as they had this past ceremony. 

[Kalo]

8 hours ago, El Panda Machos said:

Eh, I'll be honest and say I did pick up a creepy uncomfortable factor from the trailer.    

 

Then again, I've never been that into movies/books where the nature of the relationship feels like pedophilia, even if it's not.  They're just uncomfortable for me. Not sure how it's supposed to play but it did turn me off from wanting to see the movie.

 

If the reviews stay glowing and I get a chance to see it, I probably still will.  Im not convinced this is getting Oscar attention though, and I'm fairly positive this won't be any sort of hit in the DOM box office.

 

I guess I could see why you might think that, but I really didn't get that from the trailer. When I was 16 I had an sort of infatuation with my sister's 26 year old marine boyfriend and would have been very glad if it had been a two-sided romance. 

 

loved the trailer. the last line was maybe one of the hottest lines I've ever seen. 

[The Panda]

49 minutes ago, Kalo said:

 

I guess I could see why you might think that, but I really didn't get that from the trailer. When I was 16 I had an sort of infatuation with my sister's 26 year old marine boyfriend and would have been very glad if it had been a two-sided romance. 

 

loved the trailer. the last line was maybe one of the hottest lines I've ever seen. 

Italy's age of consent is different than the US, so the movie's kind of in the clear.  But that sort of age gap when the younger party is still a young teenager just feels unsettling (and in the US, illegal).

[Kvikk Lunsj]

On 8/3/2017 at 10:11 PM, El Panda Machos said:

Italy's age of consent is different than the US, so the movie's kind of in the clear.  But that sort of age gap when the younger party is still a young teenager just feels unsettling (and in the US, illegal).

I thought the trailer had creepy vibes

[The Panda]

4 hours ago, Dexter of Suburbia said:

I thought the trailer had creepy vibes

Yeah, I know it's not the intent, but Hammer's character gave off a slightly predator like vibe to be.  I think they needed either an older main character or a younger supporting.

[Kvikk Lunsj]

5 hours ago, El Panda Machos said:

Yeah, I know it's not the intent, but Hammer's character gave off a slightly predator like vibe to be.  I think they needed either an older main character or a younger supporting.

He looks like he is 35 years old and the young actor looks like he is 16 years old. The story is still creepy that 17 year old and 24 year old would be falling in love with each other.  17 year can be a junior in high school.

[Premium George]

They could seriously could have gone with age 18 for protaganist and 20-21 for lover without affecting the story much.

[Kvikk Lunsj]

1 minute ago, damnitgeorge08 said:

They could seriously could have gone with age 18 for protaganist and 20-21 for lover without affecting the story much.

It would have played much better with audience and cast actors that do not look like such a age difference Hammer looks like he is at least 10 years older.