Best Foreign Film

[Eric]

Having now seen both, I think they're equally mediocre. My loss.

[Big Magilla]

I'm coming late to this discussion having just seen The Lives of Others, which I watched twice on DVD, the second time with the director's commnetary.

It may be a little like having my cake and eating it, too, but while I ultimately came to consider Pan's Labyrinth the best film released in the U.S. in 2006, I easily consider The Lives of Others the best film released in the U.S. in 2007. Had I been voting, I may have wished to split my vote along the lines of the Academy, giving Pan the awards it did and Lives the foregin film award.

Lives may not be as accomplished overall as Pan, but 6'9'' Florian Henckel von Donnersmarck is a creative force to be reckoned with. The Oxford graduate took three years to write Lives, painstakingly researching its accuracy, two years to film it and another to market it. His favorite novel is Doctor Zhivago, which he read in the original Russian that he once taught. His first of three children is named Lara.

Any plans of remaking Lives, which was filmed in the locations of the actual events depicted, needs to be abandonded forthwith. No one could ever match Ulrich Muhe's haunting performance.

[Hustler]

It's like we're all coming down from a drug and taking the withdrawls out on each other.

Maybe this is the post -traumatic effect of the oscar ceremony.

[ITALIANO]

Maybe Italiano is the sort of person who will never admit liking a film after he's seen it. I don't know how one can prove such a thing, but I suppose it's possible.

Wrong. I'm very objective when it comes to movies, and if Dreamgirls had turned out to be a great one I would have admitted it without any problem. But considering the director and his past work, I had a strong suspicion that it would have been a very disappointing film. And when I saw it it just confirmed my worst fears.

I wasn't insulted for this reason - most people here did the same about other movies in the past - some even refuse to watch movies by directors they've come to hate, and I don't find anything wrong in this. But with typical American hypocrisy, they used this as an excuse. The sad truth is that I was insulted - heavily insulted - for the simple reason that I dared to question the value of a movie that everyone here HAD to like, or at least to be polite about. I didn't, and deep inside they knew I was right. They couldn't forgive me for this. It's so obvious.

[Sonic Youth]

You may be right about the legacy issue, OscarGuy. But another analogy might the Best Documentary race from a couple of years ago, in which a popular film that had been widely seen (Super Size Me) was beat by one nearly nobody had seen, and that had been under-predicted to win: Born into Brothels. Nobody (except maybe Morgan Spurlock) thinks of the latter as "the film that beat Super Size Me" anymore; now that it's been fairly widely seen (apparantly at one point it held some kind of record for most netflix rentals) it's thought of under its own terms.

I can think of other examples that have stood the test of time.

It's A Wonderful Life is one of the most beloved films ever. But The Best Years of Our Lives isn't thought of as "The film that beat It's a Wonderful Life." And Rebecca isn't thought of as "The film that beat The Grapes of Wrath." Those films are considered on their own merits, and not in the looming shadow of another - possibly better - film.

[criddic3]

I did not mean to imply Lives of Others wasn't a good movie. It does have plenty of positive critical support. And I might even like it if I ever get to see it.

Now, taking the comment "forever will be known as the film that robbed Pan's Labyrinth" isn't necessarily an opinion of mine that the film is better, but historically, it's the kind of perspective that can and likely will be taken. Do you remember a little film called Citizen Kane? When it lost to How Green Was My Valley, it became a cause celebre to declare that loss a crime. How Green Was My Valley's still a good film, but no matter how good a film it is, people will still see it as the film that beat Citizen Kane...that's its only major claim to fame. I think my statement is still apropos even without having seen it.

I have heard people say that How Green Was My Valley is among their favorite films of all-time. There are people out there who also view Citizen Kane as more of a lesson in great film making than as a film they could love. I'm not sure where I stand on that, since I've seen both films a couple of times and find them both to be fine films. Kane has some remarkable technical achievements, and its story is engrossing, but many people will more fondly remember the characters of How Green Was My Valley, so maybe they have a point. It is possible that this is one of the reasons the film was victorious to begin with.

[Penelope]

Dear God in Heaven, please, NO, I beg of You!!!

[rain Bard]

Yeah, but don't you want this to make money, Sonic? Put Robin Williams in the Mühe role, and you're set. Finally, a role for him that can combine the "creepy evil guy" thing he was trying out a couple years back, and the "serious, inspirational" thing he practically trademarked in the late 80s and 90s. Maybe Tom Shadyac can be convinced to direct the thing. And forget the Gabriel Yared score- too subtle. Is James Horner available?

[Sonic Youth]

It's now a moot point, because a deal was just signed with the Weinstein Co. to make an English language remake of The Lives of Others. Crap.

Just going by physical similarities, I can picture them casting Ed Harris in the Ulrich Mühe role, Colin Firth as Georg Dreyman, Jim Broadbent as Grubitz, and Jack Black as Weisler's wacky eavesdropping partner. Sidney Pollack can be hired to provide that ideal patina of literary blandness. Can't we make our own movies anymore??

[rain Bard]

You may be right about the legacy issue, OscarGuy. But another analogy might the Best Documentary race from a couple of years ago, in which a popular film that had been widely seen (Super Size Me) was beat by one nearly nobody had seen, and that had been under-predicted to win: Born into Brothels. Nobody (except maybe Morgan Spurlock) thinks of the latter as "the film that beat Super Size Me" anymore; now that it's been fairly widely seen (apparantly at one point it held some kind of record for most netflix rentals) it's thought of under its own terms.

And before someone says something like, "but Pan's Labyrinth had six nominations which proves it was much more beloved than Super Size Me" I'll just add that the multiple nominations and wins for Del Toro's film only help ensure its legacy. The lack of an extra Oscar won't seriously threaten that.

Also, the Citizen Kane case is remembered so well in part because of the concerted campaign waged by Hearst and his allies to prevent it from winning any more than it did. When people who have a limited appreciation of John Ford start screaming that Kane was robbed blind, they actually have a case, not so much on the grounds that an inferior film won but that there were forces actively trying to rob it. Not so with Pan's Labyrinth.

I imagine when people look at the record books in sixty-some years and notice that the still-remembered Pan's Labyrinth won some Oscars and lost some, including the Foreign Language Oscar (which by that point won't exist any longer due to the technology of the universal translator) they won't think of it as a great travesty of cinema history. Who knows, perhaps the Lives of Others, once it gets more widely seen by folks not bitter about the Pan's Labyrinth loss, will become a long-remembered film too (I know Damien believes otherwise, but I'm not so sure)?

[FilmFan720]

Funny, I thought it's claim to fame was as One of the Master's Greatest Films. Maybe that is just on this board, though.

[OscarGuy]

I did not mean to imply Lives of Others wasn't a good movie. It does have plenty of positive critical support. And I might even like it if I ever get to see it.

Now, taking the comment "forever will be known as the film that robbed Pan's Labyrinth" isn't necessarily an opinion of mine that the film is better, but historically, it's the kind of perspective that can and likely will be taken. Do you remember a little film called Citizen Kane? When it lost to How Green Was My Valley, it became a cause celebre to declare that loss a crime. How Green Was My Valley's still a good film, but no matter how good a film it is, people will still see it as the film that beat Citizen Kane...that's its only major claim to fame. I think my statement is still apropos even without having seen it.

[Penelope]

There are the occassional flare-ups but I don't think they happen more than once a year.

And it seems to happen RIGHT AFTER the Oscar ceremony. Look at the fights that have broken out just in the past few days. It's like we're all coming down from a drug and taking the withdrawls out on each other.

(And, of course, I should know better than to stick my nose into another argument!)

[Sonic Youth]

Haven't seen Lives of Others but I can't think of much being able to top the poignancy, beauty and depth of Pan's Labyrinth.

Then how about you practice what you preached a month ago to Italiano for casting judgement upon a film he hadn't seen, and go see The Lives of Others before making all this belittling commentary?

I saw TLOO over the weekend and it is TERRIFIC. No, maybe not as much as Pan's Labyrinth is, but it's only marginally less terrific. Or, not even marginally, but slightly. A very worthy winner. It's not as though the Academy decided to honor a piece of crap in this category.

Hold on there. First of all, I'm not belittling ANYTHING except the foreign film committee and the way it runs its business.

I admit I haven't seen Lives of Others, but I'm not dismissing it out of hand and I'm not calling it trash without seeing it. I'm being honest.

Aw, come on, OG.

When you belittle the Academy for voting for a film you haven't even seen, you're belittling the film itself. It doesn't matter if you put it down directly or not. "Further proof why they shouldn't just let the people who aren't working vote on this award" is, BY IMPLICATION, a declaration that The Lives of Others is not a worthy winner, a statement made sight unseen. I understand you're disappointed. I'd have voted for Pan's Labyrinth, too. It's one of my two favorite movies of the year. But Lives of Others is very, very good, and it's in my top five. I'm not begrudging its win. And had I not seen it? Well, I'd be very let down, also. But I'd hold off on snap judgements about the winning film.

I have not seen Dreamgirls. What if I continually belittled AMPAS for giving Jennifer Hudson the Supporting Actress award, even as I carefully made sure not to criticize her performance directly? It would pretty much amount to the same thing.

And anyway, "Lives will forever be known as the film that robbed Labyrinth of an Oscar for Foreign Language Film" IS dismissing it out of hand. As if it won't be remembered for anything else.

And I'm NOT the one who got up in Italiano's face about not having seen the film to make a judgment. I may have suggested he shouldn't dismiss it without having seen it, but I would hardly say that I was the instigator nor primary driving force behind the Italiano-bashing regarding that incident.

However, I resent being called out for things that I haven't said and haven't done. Sonic, check yourself and your facts before posting,

Don't take me up on that challenge. I know exactly when you got in his face, and what you said. I'm not posting any quotes because I don't care to get into a "but-you-said, but-I-said" discussion. But I could.

No, you weren't the instigator to the Italiano-bashing. That's irrelevant. I never said you were. No, you weren't the primary driving force. That's irrelevant. I never said you were. But you were someone who took umbrage to Italiano's belittling a film before seeing it. And understandably so. Which is why the continuous commentary you've made regarding this category is irksome to me.

Maybe Italiano is the sort of person who will never admit liking a film after he's seen it. I don't know how one can prove such a thing, but I suppose it's possible. If it's true, your willingness to admit you've made incorrect pre-judgements in the past makes you a better man. But that doesn't do The Lives of Others much good as of now. Until you do see the movie and change your mind, your belittling comments stand. And what if you never see it? There's an entire genre of Westerns that you've put down en masse, and you haven't seen most of them and have no plans to.

I know you dislike me and can't stand me as a person or a poster, but really, this has to stop.

Really? I think we have a pretty good thing going here. There are the occassional flare-ups but I don't think they happen more than once a year. I'm very appreciative for what you've provided for the rest of us, Wes. And I try not to step on your toes. But every once in a while, I feel something you say has to be addressed. And I did.

[OscarGuy]

Haven't seen Lives of Others but I can't think of much being able to top the poignancy, beauty and depth of Pan's Labyrinth.

The thing though is that it does. It really does. I have 'The Lives of Others' at no. 3 on my list for last year and 'Pan's' at no. 5 but between those two and 'Letters from Iwo Jima', I switch depending on the time of the day.

Seriously, Wes. I understand you love 'Pan's Labyrinth' as much as you do and that's great, but don't assume that something isn't as good as your baby or you're closing yourself off to what could be (and in the case of 'The Lives of Others', most certainly is) an outstanding moviegoing experience.

That's why I said "I can't think of anything..." It means that while I can't think of anything, it can happen.

I'm NOT closing myself off to it...which is contrary to what you're implying. That's why I used that expression. Otherwise, I would have said "Nothing could top it". Huge difference in phrasing.