WGA Winners

User avatar
Hollywood Z
Temp
Posts: 431
Joined: Tue Jan 14, 2003 1:07 am
Location: Kentucky
Contact:

Postby Hollywood Z » Thu Feb 10, 2011 9:39 am

I think it's funny that we're looking at Inception as a linear storyline and criticizing it for being incoherent when dreams themselves are never linear or coherent, which is the intention I think the movie was going for.
"You are what you love, not what loves you." - Nicholas Cage; Adaptation

Big Magilla
Site Admin
Posts: 15618
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:22 pm
Location: Jersey Shore

Postby Big Magilla » Thu Feb 10, 2011 1:41 am

Damien wrote:Six months have passed since I suffered through Indulgence and I remember very little about it. But the problem with the film is not its being confusing as its being incoherent. The film follows no set of rules for its own particular universe and the events shown on screen unfold in an arbitrary maner, as if the editor just put sequences together at random..

Damien, I suggest you check it out on DVD. The extras, particularly the one hosted by Joseph Gordon-Levitt are fascinating.

It confirms what I thought as I watched the film which I originally thought was stupid myself.

There are certain things within dreams that are universal - we all go through the same things when we are dreaming. The film, which seems incoherent, actually makes perfect sense when looked at in that respect. The screenplay actually adheres quite strictly to the science of dreaming. Nolan really did his homework on this one.
“‎Life is a shipwreck, but we must not forget to sing in the lifeboats.” - Voltaire

User avatar
Damien
Laureate
Posts: 6331
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 8:43 pm
Location: New York, New York
Contact:

Postby Damien » Thu Feb 10, 2011 12:03 am

Six months have passed since I suffered through Indulgence and I remember very little about it. But the problem with the film is not its being confusing as its being incoherent. The film follows no set of rules for its own particular universe and the events shown on screen unfold in an arbitrary maner, as if the editor just put sequences together at random..
"Y'know, that's one of the things I like about Mitt Romney. He's been consistent since he changed his mind." -- Christine O'Donnell

User avatar
flipp525
Laureate
Posts: 5816
Joined: Thu Jan 09, 2003 7:44 am

Postby flipp525 » Wed Feb 09, 2011 11:28 pm

Just for the record, I wasn't extolling the virtues of the screenplay so much as I was trying to say the movie wasn't as "confusing" as everyone said it was.
"The mantle of spinsterhood was definitely in her shoulders. She was twenty five and looked it."

-Gone With the Wind by Margaret Mitchell

Okri
Tenured
Posts: 2587
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:28 pm
Location: Edmonton, AB

Postby Okri » Wed Feb 09, 2011 10:21 pm

flipp525 wrote:
criddic3 wrote:There seems to be two camps on this movie. One says that it's a confusing mess with good photography.

See, this is the criticism I just don't understand. What exactly is confusing about it? The characters even explain to the viewer what is happening as it's happening. My friend and I were discussing what the big deal was with all the people saying it was overly complex. It's not.

I don't mind the explanations at first. However, when they're still explaining the ideas two hours into the movie, they've failed. I enjoyed the movie inspite of that, but as a screenplay, yeah - it's crap.

dws1982
Tenured
Posts: 2963
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 9:28 pm
Location: AL
Contact:

Postby dws1982 » Wed Feb 09, 2011 4:51 pm

flipp525 wrote:See, this is the criticism I just don't understand. What exactly is confusing about it? The characters even explain to the viewer what is happening as it's happening. My friend and I were discussing what the big deal was with all the people saying it was overly complex. It's not.

You've just hit on my number one problem with the film.

User avatar
flipp525
Laureate
Posts: 5816
Joined: Thu Jan 09, 2003 7:44 am

Postby flipp525 » Wed Feb 09, 2011 11:39 am

criddic3 wrote:There seems to be two camps on this movie. One says that it's a confusing mess with good photography.

See, this is the criticism I just don't understand. What exactly is confusing about it? The characters even explain to the viewer what is happening as it's happening. My friend and I were discussing what the big deal was with all the people saying it was overly complex. It's not.
"The mantle of spinsterhood was definitely in her shoulders. She was twenty five and looked it."



-Gone With the Wind by Margaret Mitchell

User avatar
Hollywood Z
Temp
Posts: 431
Joined: Tue Jan 14, 2003 1:07 am
Location: Kentucky
Contact:

Postby Hollywood Z » Wed Feb 09, 2011 10:43 am

Damien wrote:Disagree.

As my late friend, film critic Stuart Byron, put it, "The distinction shouldn't be between 'art' films and 'entertainment' films. The distinction should be between good films and bad ones."

And while I didn't see The Last Airbender or Transformers 2, in 52 years of movie-going I have seen enough horrible large studio films to know what they are like.

But what is the criteria for good and bad? Are the same standards that we hold to avant garde movies be the exact same that we hold to mainstream films? No offense to your late friend, but that seems like an excuse to be an elitist.

I think the horribleness of Transformers 2 and The Last Airbender would shock you as to how bad a movie was allowed to be released by any large studio. I haven't seen anything this bad/insulting come out of a major studio in a long time. Well, Pearl Harbor, maybe...
"You are what you love, not what loves you." - Nicholas Cage; Adaptation

Okri
Tenured
Posts: 2587
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:28 pm
Location: Edmonton, AB

Postby Okri » Tue Feb 08, 2011 9:11 am

Sabin wrote:So, I'm going to backpedal: in the subjective, entirely relative world of Oscar prognostication, Christopher Nolan was robbed for The Dark Knight, insofar as the true enthusiasm the film was greeted with contrasted to the relative indifference that met The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, Frost/Nixon, and The Reader. Because the industry hates a man on the top of his game so quickly, and, although I don't think Nolan is destined for Oscar-dom like famously snubbed auteurs (his style is already becoming suffocating and limited by emotional detachment), his attempts if there ever are any to win an Oscar will be shameless.

I tend to agree.

Mister Tee
Laureate
Posts: 6396
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 2:57 pm
Location: NYC
Contact:

Postby Mister Tee » Mon Feb 07, 2011 9:11 pm

Sabin wrote:Oscar voters live to disappoint Oscar fans.

Tagline-worthy.

Sabin
Laureate
Posts: 7342
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 12:52 am
Contact:

Postby Sabin » Mon Feb 07, 2011 7:37 pm

(Bog @ Feb. 06 2011,5:48)
Well no, that was part of the point I was trying to make, and I wouldn't even come close to considering you one of these offenders (someone who said both "love" and "major, major filmmaker" in one paragraph- imagine what these people really think). But you do realize this is a common feeling among basically 1 out of every 2 "Oscar fans" that are not in the vein of a typical member on this particular board.

We know all about Oscar fans, don't we? They're a very impressive, well-balanced, worldly lot of people, aren't they?
:D

(Fucking nerds.)

Oscar fans and voters are so cosmically different, it's a wonder the former hasn't filed a restraining order yet. Oscar voters live to disappoint Oscar fans. They're wheeled out of bed in the morning, wiped, fed mush, and then vote for whatever sounds like a Holocaust film. To wake up in January of 2009 and see the calamity that was that year's nominations was painful. I maintain that Christopher Nolan is a major talent and a very good filmmaker, but he's no artist. I think his greatest strength lies as a collaborative writer and as a producer. Outside of some awesome images in The Dark Knight, it's not like he's a thoughtful visual stylist. Nolan has received some backlash on this board that I actually find preferable to the blind worship he sees elsewhere. The Dark Knight is not a masterpiece and I believe it was around no.7 or 8 on my list that year. The fact that one can make a case that the list of nominees expanding to ten in some form of response to the outcry of The Dark Knight's omission certainly boosts his visibility as an Oscar Casualty. I'm trying to think of the last time a film was so roundly embraced by critics and audiences to that degree and found its auteur entirely shut out. I really think the closest precedent would be if The Fellowship of the Ring failed to get nominations for Best Picture, Director, and Screenplay...

So, I'm going to backpedal: in the subjective, entirely relative world of Oscar prognostication, Christopher Nolan was robbed for The Dark Knight, insofar as the true enthusiasm the film was greeted with contrasted to the relative indifference that met The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, Frost/Nixon, and The Reader. Because the industry hates a man on the top of his game so quickly, and, although I don't think Nolan is destined for Oscar-dom like famously snubbed auteurs (his style is already becoming suffocating and limited by emotional detachment), his attempts if there ever are any to win an Oscar will be shameless.
"If you are marching with white nationalists, you are by definition not a very nice person. If Malala Yousafzai had taken part in that rally, you'd have to say 'Okay, I guess Malala sucks now.'" ~ John Oliver

Bog
Assistant
Posts: 809
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 12:39 am
Location: United States

Postby Bog » Sun Feb 06, 2011 6:48 pm

Sabin wrote:It's not criminal. Not at all. It's barely a misdemeanor. He's not in the same league as a slew of artists who anyone should rationally consider "robbed".

Well no, that was part of the point I was trying to make, and I wouldn't even come close to considering you one of these offenders (someone who said both "love" and "major, major filmmaker" in one paragraph- imagine what these people really think). But you do realize this is a common feeling among basically 1 out of every 2 "Oscar fans" that are not in the vein of a typical member on this particular board.

And that is based on (since 2002) Batman Begins, The Prestige, Dark Knight, and now Inception....yes, it's more like jaywalking.




Edited By Bog on 1297036357

Sabin
Laureate
Posts: 7342
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 12:52 am
Contact:

Postby Sabin » Sun Feb 06, 2011 6:18 pm

(Bog @ Feb. 06 2011,2:27)
(Sabin @ Feb. 06 2011,12:42)
I love Christopher Nolan. On the basis of Memento, The Prestige, The Dark Knight, and the first third of Batman Begins, major, major filmmaking talent, and I don't care what anyone else on this board says otherwise. I have no problem with every Christopher Nolan film getting talked up for Oscars, because his films are doubtlessly going to be more interesting than a Joe Wright, Stephen Daldry, or Tom Hoo/pper film.

Eh...that's all I got.

I'll concede to Memento, but the question is why does everything have to be so criminal with him not being recognized let alone winning? Because he made Memento now over 10 years ago, he's Scorsese even if he simply makes popcorn entertainment/comic book rehashes every couple summers?

It's not criminal. Not at all. It's barely a misdemeanor. He's not in the same league as a slew of artists who anyone should rationally consider "robbed". He made a mixed-bag art project that raked in almost a billion dollars, eight Oscar nominations, and two for writing and producing. He had an amazing year. I think it's worth noting that the reason he appears to be robbed is that Christopher Nolan began in the indie circuit and has absolutely flourished in the populist marketplace to the point where his name is an immediate grab in a way that not many have the past decade, especially considering that his blockbuster offerings like The Dark Knight often seem a whole lot more serious and mature than the middlebrow Oscar-fare of its respective year. Billion dollars, eight Oscar nominations, two for him alone...nah. He's fine.

(Bog @ Feb. 06 2011,2:27)
"Major, major filmmaking" is about 2 too many positive adjectives? But it begs the ultimate 2010 question to you Sabin, would you vote for King's Speech or Inception if you had a gun to your head?

The King's Speech is a less frustrating film but that's because it has nothing on its mind whatsoever. Inception has a ton on its mind and it makes it at times insufferably dull and unfocused. It's the difference between better filmmaking and a more solid film. I'll probably say Inception but both of them are C+ offerings in my opinion. I need to see Inception again, but after seeing The King's Speech a second time I'm convinced there's no need for anyone to see it again, and the once might be fairly irrelevant too. Like 127 Hours, it works best as a trailer.
"If you are marching with white nationalists, you are by definition not a very nice person. If Malala Yousafzai had taken part in that rally, you'd have to say 'Okay, I guess Malala sucks now.'" ~ John Oliver

Bog
Assistant
Posts: 809
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 12:39 am
Location: United States

Postby Bog » Sun Feb 06, 2011 3:27 pm

Sabin wrote:I love Christopher Nolan. On the basis of Memento, The Prestige, The Dark Knight, and the first third of Batman Begins, major, major filmmaking talent, and I don't care what anyone else on this board says otherwise. I have no problem with every Christopher Nolan film getting talked up for Oscars, because his films are doubtlessly going to be more interesting than a Joe Wright, Stephen Daldry, or Tom Hoo/pper film.

Eh...that's all I got.

I'll concede to Memento, but the question is why does everything have to be so criminal with him not being recognized let alone winning? Because he made Memento now over 10 years ago, he's Scorsese even if he simply makes popcorn entertainment/comic book rehashes every couple summers?

I honestly think in retrospect the film(s) would be looked on more favorably at least by me if I knew that after I viewed it I would not be bombarded with 6 months of he must win/be nominated for best director EVER (or at least an Oscar)!!

I cannot WAIT until next year when the Dark Knight Rises is irrationally pushed for a Return of the King type Oscar result...especially due to the "snub" the previous 2 installments.

"Major, major filmmaking" is about 2 too many positive adjectives? But it begs the ultimate 2010 question to you Sabin, would you vote for King's Speech or Inception if you had a gun to your head?

User avatar
Damien
Laureate
Posts: 6331
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 8:43 pm
Location: New York, New York
Contact:

Postby Damien » Sun Feb 06, 2011 3:17 pm

Hollywood Z wrote:Now, I'll be the first to admit, Inception isn't without it's flaws here and there, but they aren't so glaring as to consider it a bad movie, especially considering the dreck that came out this past summer. The problem with critiquing a movie like Inception the same way you would critique an Ingmar Bergman film is that the movies have two different goals. One is trying to be entertaining and an above average intelligent blockbuster while the other is a more artistic avant garde piece. You can't look at one and use the same criteria to judge the other.

And as far as Best Anything, I would have to argue a strong case for Best Cinematography, Best Art Direction, Best Film Editing (though it was grossly omitted from the nominations), Best Sound and Best Visual Effects.

Disagree.

As my late friend, film critic Stuart Byron, put it, "The distinction shouldn't be between 'art' films and 'entertainment' films. The distinction should be between good films and bad ones."

And while I didn't see The Last Airbender or Transformers 2, in 52 years of movie-going I have seen enough horrible large studio films to know what they are like.




Edited By Damien on 1297024147
"Y'know, that's one of the things I like about Mitt Romney. He's been consistent since he changed his mind." -- Christine O'Donnell


Return to “83rd Predictions and Precursors”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest