Questions/Thoughts for the Moment

[Reza]

The "stupid disaster movie" is actually great fun. Not unlike the slasher films of today where you root for all the stars as they die in gruesome fashion. Nothing can be more camp than seeing the great "Bernadette" die falling from that outdoor elevator as she quietly hands over a child to Faye Dunaway and slips off down into the darkness.

[danfrank]

I get that big studio films routinely got nominated in those days, but it still looks ridiculous in hindsight. I don’t know exactly which films were eligible that year, but what about Amarcord? Alice Doesn’t Live Here Anymore? A Woman Under the Influence? Young Frankenstein? Some of these may not have been the type of films to get nominated, but they’ve all stood the test of time compared to the stupid disaster movie.

[Mister Tee]

Just FYI: The Towering Inferno was there because it was the kind of crud the studio blocs were pushing through in those days (see: Airport in 1970), but also because it was a then-unheard-of dual studio project. Both Warner Brothers and Fox had purchased separate "novels" about a fire in a high-rise (called, I believe, The Tower and The Glass Inferno -- see how the marketing geniuses came up with their title?), and, rather than compete a la the comet movies of 1998, they pooled their resources to make one big shlock-a-thon. With the superstar headline cast, the movie was a can't-miss commercial smash, and no one was surprised to see it slip onto the best picture list.

The point is: it wasn't there because any Academy voters felt a need to commerce-up the list; it was a case of corporate enthusiasm. Besides, nothing else jumped out as candidate for the 5th slot. I guess Murder on the Orient Express was next in line -- and that was hardly Serious Cinema, either.

And, you know: how about a cheer for the days when four of the five were movies that good? -- and all, except The Conversation, significant box-office successes?

[danfrank]

The Towering Inferno may have appeared less glaringly abominable in a slate of 10, though abominable is still
abominable.

[Sabin]

Okri wrote
Owen Gleiberman: "I Hated ‘Spider-Man: No Way Home.’ But the Academy Should Absolutely Nominate It for Best Picture (Column)"

Major spoilers for Spider-Man in the second paragraph. At least, I think they're major.

I read this review and liked it quite a bit. I don't hate No Way Home but with every passing day I grow more and more indifferent. I wholeheartedly agree with his depiction of the multiverse. As for his argument in support of No Way Home being up for Best Picture, I don't know. I agree that to some degree (emphasis on some), the Academy Awards should reflect the public's perception of quality. On the other hand:

-Chinatown
-The Conversation
-The Godfather: Part II
-Lenny
-The Towering Inferno

Are we proud of this?

Also, I don't think I've mentioned this on this board but over the last week, I took it upon myself to rewatch every MCU film in a row. Don't ask why. I'm in the middle of Endgame right now. Not sure if I'll post anything about it on the board. It was both more and less interesting than I thought it would be.

[Okri]

Owen Gleiberman: "I Hated ‘Spider-Man: No Way Home.’ But the Academy Should Absolutely Nominate It for Best Picture (Column)"

Major spoilers for Spider-Man in the second paragraph. At least, I think they're major.

[anonymous1980]

I think it will get a PGA nomination. Nothing more.

[Big Magilla]

I think they might well make an exception for Spider-Man: No Way Home, a film that gives the industry hope for its future.

A win might be a bit of a stretch, but a nomination is definitely in the cards.

[Sabin]

Something to consider: Sony is doing a big push for Spider-Man: No Way Home for Best Picture. I don't think their goal is impossible. We've all agreed that 2021 was just about the worst year for a mandatory ten film slate since the roster expanded. There's about six films I feel comfortable projecting for a Best Picture roster and ten or so bubbling underneath the surface that might get in. We'll see which ones pick up traction when the guilds and groups with Academy overlap start weighing in. I know that nobody here particularly cares about the arrival of Spider-Man: No Way Home but some things to consider:

* It's so far grossed over $400 mil domestic and almost $900 mil worldwide. It's not slowing down. It is a massive blockbuster and pretty much the only one since COVID began. It's an industry success story.

* Marvel is the only thing making money these days. Top six: SP:NWH, Shang-Chi, Venom: Let There Be Carnage (also Sony/Marvel), Black Widow, F9: The Fast Saga, and Eternals. Marvel movies no longer represent a universally recognized threat. Do you like movie theaters? They're the only thing keeping them open.

* Academy voters are increasingly comfortable voting for comic book films. They're already likely seen Into the Spider-Verse so the notion of a multi-verse isn't so wild.

* It has a 94% on RT (a 98% Audience Score). It has a 71 on Metacritic but to contrast: Belfast 77, CODA 75, Dune 74, Tick, Tick... Boom! 74, Don't Look Up 50.

Anyway, I think it might be a little more in the conversation than we think.

[Okri]

Nightmare Alley's opening weekend is just brutal.

[Sabin]

Okri wrote
Here you go

Thank you. I deleted my request because I ended up looking for it and finding it on my own. It’s nice to think what we write here can serve as utility.

[Reza]

What is so great about the screenplay of West Side Story that it appears to be cast in stone on most prediction lists?

[Okri]

Here you go

[Okri]

Some musings in response.

a) I think Drive My Car will falter before the final five in foreign film. The Burning comparison is a good one, but I also think 2018 was a similar year. We had a lot of higher profile foreign language films that were all gunning for those spots (Cold War AND Shoplifters AND Roma AND Capernaum). It was the first foreign film line-up where all the nominees exceeded 1 million at the box office (I mean, Netflix didn't release Roma's numbers, but I'm assuming it did/would have). But I also don't think adapted is that wan either. Passing, The Lost Daughter, West Side Story and The Power of the Dog make a pretty solid quartet. While Hamaguchi has certainly been increasing his profile these past few years, I do think he's still mostly unknown - certainly compared to the foreign language directors who have made it.

b) I find it basically impossible to judge what box office should be now anyway, but I do find the image problem to be fascinating. What's a crowdpleaser for if it's ...not pleasing crowds? Obviously, the standards that we're used to applying are just out the window.

c) That said, if you asked me to articulate how most of the recent best picture winners won, I wouldn't be able to give a cogent response for most of them. The preferential ballot has wreaked havoc with my own understanding. Since the expanded field, I'm probably only able to give a solid argument for about half of them. Sabin made a superb argument in 2017 for The Shape of Water (and how to predict best picture in general) that I've reread a couple times, though.

d) You know, I actually wonder if Washington can win. It's weird. Post Training Day, it seemed like he was done (Tee, I'd be curious what your 2002 thoughts were) - he just kept making junk. But the perceive closeness of the race in 2016, the fact that came he back immediately for a nothing movie and the fact that he seems willing to challenge himself more (admittedly more on stage then screen) makes me wonder if there's a scenario where he takes the win in the end. Especially in this distended season.

e) You know, last year's acting categories (particularly the leading ones) stayed tense until the very end which was welcome (though only AMPAS can make wins that would be magnificent in a vacuum seem desultory in the end), so this year has the potential to be really exciting (now watch it go the way of 2004).

[Big Magilla]

Possible, bit Peter Dinklage is more likely.