NBR Winners

[Big Magilla]

I may open up a can of worms with this but: ITALIANO and Big Magilla, don't you think this is borderline genre snobbery?

No, it's revulsion teetering on borderline stomach sickness.

This is what you're revolted by and sick to your stomach about in this world? In this moment in time? A movie you didn't like getting a meaningless award? Hyperbolic much?

Compared to the shootings this afternoon in San Bernardino, the Paris attacks, the continuing Trump madness and a myriad of injustices going on in the world, the NBR vote matters little, but in terms of the quasi-official start of awards season, it's a definite downer. I'll leave it at that.

Can (of worms) closed.

[OscarGuy]

I find Mad Max to be an incredibly artistic, sentient and thought-provoking film that relies on visual details to tell its stories. If you are a fan of having everything crammed down your throat and over-explained, then this movie isn't for you. I'm not saying anyone is wrong for hating it, but to claim that it lacks artistry or thought-provoking commentary means that you just don't get what it's saying or you disagree with it. That doesn't mean that it's not artistic.

Not everyone would consider the Campbell's Soup can a work of art, but it is. Just because something is commercial (and based on the history of Mad Max at the cinema, it's hardly a guaranteed commercial success), doesn't mean that it's bad. Loving, hating or being indifferent to ANY film doesn't make it lacking in art, it just means that it's not your kind of art.

[CalWilliam]

though I do enjoy and like a lot of them.

Yes, but then I "enjoy and like" sex, or spaghetti al pesto, or - why not - sometimes a good action movie, even. But "enjoying and liking" doesn't make anything necessarily great or artistic.

Like Ella Fitzgerald would have sung, I'm Bewitched, Bothered & Bewildered. The Martian best director, actor and screenplay. What a world. It's a sad and disturbing outcome. I'm a young mind, and my desire is to improve my judgment every day. If there's no bribery involved, it's even more deplorable, for they may truly believe in it, so like Marco pointed out, it's criticism what's in danger, not American films.

[flipp525]

I may open up a can of worms with this but: ITALIANO and Big Magilla, don't you think this is borderline genre snobbery?

No, it's revulsion teetering on borderline stomach sickness.

This is what you're revolted by and sick to your stomach about in this world? In this moment in time? A movie you didn't like getting a meaningless award? Hyperbolic much?

[Okri]

I will just say that Mad Max did well with Sight and Sound, Cahiers du Cinema, the NBR and John Waters. Now, taking NBR seriously is stupid - they are an odd organization that awards studios in order to get them to buy tables and has poor organizing principles, so I'm floored that it could cause revulsion in Big Magilla, though I'm a little delighted that there was an epic swerve right off the bat. I'm a little disappointed in New York in context.

[Big Magilla]

I may open up a can of worms with this but: ITALIANO and Big Magilla, don't you think this is borderline genre snobbery?

No, it's revulsion teetering on borderline stomach sickness.

I can't really complain about Sylvester Stallone's win since I haven't seen Creed, but it strikes me, sight unseen, as this year's The Judge with Stallone the clear favorite for Duvall's token old dude nomination.

Probably the closest thing in terms of genre that comes close to this Mad Max reboot was District 9 which I liked and championed for a Best Picture nod thanks to its inventiveness. There was nothing inventive about Mad Max which was just one long chase in the desert. In my opinion it should be competing for a Razzie for Worst Picture along with the Jurassic Park reboot which was almost as bad albeit for different reasons. That one was just plain silly.

[The Original BJ]

So when I say that I don't think Mad Max is the kind of movie that should be winning major film awards, it doesn't have to do with the fact that it's a sci-fi/action movie, but that I didn't think the storyline or themes reached the level of invention of the film's technical qualities, and for me, that's kind of a big issue.

Well, that's the thing. I do.

But isn't that just a difference of opinion rather than genre snobbery?

[ITALIANO]

though I do enjoy and like a lot of them.

Yes, but then I "enjoy and like" sex, or spaghetti al pesto, or - why not - sometimes a good action movie, even. But "enjoying and liking" doesn't make anything necessarily great or artistic.

[anonymous1980]

So when I say that I don't think Mad Max is the kind of movie that should be winning major film awards, it doesn't have to do with the fact that it's a sci-fi/action movie, but that I didn't think the storyline or themes reached the level of invention of the film's technical qualities, and for me, that's kind of a big issue.

Well, that's the thing. I do. I'm not the type who would champion a superhero franchise movie for awards every year though I do enjoy and like a lot of them. I believe this is one that absolutely merits it.

[ITALIANO]

I may open up a can of worms with this but: ITALIANO and Big Magilla, don't you think this is borderline genre snobbery?

Not really, they belong to different genres after all... Or maybe yes - after all, I wouldn't consider a pornographic movie (and that's a genre, too) for a serious prize, either. Oh, I know, there may be "artistic" porn movies, and for example 2001: A Space Odyssey was a great sci-fi movie - exceptions do exist.

But they are rare. Very rare. And since commerce already gets money and box-office (while art often doesn't), I don't see why it should also get great reviews and awards...

[The Original BJ]

I may open up a can of worms with this but: ITALIANO and Big Magilla, don't you think this is borderline genre snobbery?

I don't, unless the argument is that big studio summer blockbusters are a genre. But that's more a business model that produces certain kinds of movies, not a genre in the classic sense.

If you were to ask most people what the genre of Mad Max: Fury Road is, you'd probably get something along the lines of post-apocalyptic/science fiction/action. That seems like pretty much the same genre as a number of movies I love -- Children of Men, Brazil, WALL-E, albeit in a gentler key. And there are other films in that genre that I don't rate as highly -- The Dark Knight, Snowpiercer, Looper, to cite several recent examples -- that I still thought were significantly more compelling in terms of conception and narrative than Fury Road.

So when I say that I don't think Mad Max is the kind of movie that should be winning major film awards, it doesn't have to do with the fact that it's a sci-fi/action movie, but that I didn't think the storyline or themes reached the level of invention of the film's technical qualities, and for me, that's kind of a big issue.

[anonymous1980]

I may open up a can of worms with this but: ITALIANO and Big Magilla, don't you think this is borderline genre snobbery?

[ITALIANO]

This year it's going to make me angry. I feel it.

Because how can a supposedly serious film organization give four of its six major prizes to movies like Mad Max, The Martian, and Creed? I've seen only one of these, and I found it even enjoyable - but NOT award-worthy! And I'm not exactly talking about the quality itself - I can't believe that American cinema at its best today is THIS kind of movies, expensive blockbusters. It would mean that it's dead (which is a possibility, of course). In Europe it would be unthinkable. Nobody would take movies like these seriously here, come on.

The fact that some on this board applauded the choice is frankly scary - the anxiousness of following fashions (and money, and success) is stronger than intelligence I'm afraid. Which of course makes me think that maybe it's not American cinema which is dead, but American criticism. When I was little more than a teenager I remember Pauline Kael being desperate for the critics' ecstatic reaction to Dances with Wolves. I wonder what she would say now. I know that THIS group isn't composed of exactly film critics, but they mirror a certain trend which is quite obvious. I usually try not to read reviews from American critics on the net, but when I do, I am shocked by the lack of depth, the infantile enthusiasm, the painfully obvious absence of culture and EVEN of film culture (and if there's an art where the US by now have a rich history of, it's cinema). Maybe in the newspapers and magazine it's different, but I doubt. And American film criticism used to be great - I'm old enough to remember this.

I could write a book on the subject, but it would fall on deaf ears, or perhaps I should say blind eyes.

[FilmFan720]

http://www.rogerebert.com/mzs/its-time- ... -excellent

[Big Magilla]

This year it's going to make me angry. I feel it.

Because how can a supposedly serious film organization give four of its six major prizes to movies like Mad Max, The Martian, and Creed? I've seen only one of these, and I found it even enjoyable - but NOT award-worthy! And I'm not exactly talking about the quality itself - I can't believe that American cinema at its best today is THIS kind of movies, expensive blockbusters. It would mean that it's dead (which is a possibility, of course). In Europe it would be unthinkable. Nobody would take movies like these seriously here, come on.

The fact that some on this board applauded the choice is frankly scary - the anxiousness of following fashions (and money, and success) is stronger than intelligence I'm afraid. Which of course makes me think that maybe it's not American cinema which is dead, but American criticism. When I was little more than a teenager I remember Pauline Kael being desperate for the critics' ecstatic reaction to Dances with Wolves. I wonder what she would say now. I know that THIS group isn't composed of exactly film critics, but they mirror a certain trend which is quite obvious. I usually try not to read reviews from American critics on the net, but when I do, I am shocked by the lack of depth, the infantile enthusiasm, the painfully obvious absence of culture and EVEN of film culture (and if there's an art where the US by now have a rich history of, it's cinema). Maybe in the newspapers and magazine it's different, but I doubt. And American film criticism used to be great - I'm old enough to remember this.

I could write a book on the subject, but it would fall on deaf ears, or perhaps I should say blind eyes.