|
|
Post by Vits on Jul 16, 2020 14:19:06 GMT
It's always been like this. The academy judges actors not only by the quality of their performances, but also by their public persona and off-screen behaviour. It's an open secret that Russell Crowe lost out to Denzel Washington in 2002, because of an incident when he threw a phone at a hotel employee. Oh, is that why so many other celebrities involved in controversies and even crimes have won? Is that why Russell lost out to such a bad performance? Yeah, no one remembers Alonzo Harris. No one quotes him or anything. |
|
|
|
Post by lowtacks86 on Jul 16, 2020 14:43:31 GMT
...because it's just a matter of opinion. Despite what some people my want to believe, there's no "objective" way to critique film (or art general), so people end up putting too much weight on Oscar wins (a lot of them tend to be forgotten over the years). I mean really, what are movie critics supposed to do, wear lab coats, run expirements and devise a bunch of formulas for "objective" movie analysis?
|
|
|
|
Post by SciFive on Jul 16, 2020 14:44:23 GMT
...because it's just a matter of opinion. Despite what some people my want to believe, there's no "objective" way to critique film (or art general), so people end up putting too much weight on Oscar wins (a lot of them tend to be forgotten over the years). I mean really, what are movie critics supposed to do, wear lab coats, run expirements and devise a bunch of formulas for "objective" movie analysis? This is so true!!!  |
|
|
|
Post by Prime etc. on Jul 16, 2020 14:53:37 GMT
Film is a less subjective art form. You can tell when there is/isn't effort and creativity in the final product. Either you follow certain rules or you break them in a way that creates new rules. If you break the rules and it's clear that you're not aware, then you're not talented. It's still subjective. And they do not hide the political nature of the awards anymore so that even makes it more subjective.
|
|
|
|
Post by SciFive on Jul 16, 2020 14:59:11 GMT
The Academy Awards do tend to be political. It’s hard not to get excited about movies that you like and actors you like when you hear about the Awards, but it’s a little depressing to realize that there are other things afloat in all this.  |
|
|
|
Post by SciFive on Jul 16, 2020 15:01:47 GMT
The movie business knows that people get excited about award shows, too.
Again, it’s hard not to find out who won, at the very least, even if you don’t watch the shows (which I don’t).
|
|
|
|
Post by mikef6 on Jul 16, 2020 20:40:51 GMT
It's always been like this. The academy judges actors not only by the quality of their performances, but also by their public persona and off-screen behaviour. It's an open secret that Russell Crowe lost out to Denzel Washington in 2002, because of an incident when he threw a phone at a hotel employee. No one ever let me in on the secret. I have always hated everything about "A Beautiful Mind" including Crowe's performance of fluttery hands and shuffling feet. What is no secret is that after two African-American actors won the top spots that year, Halle Berry was the other, there was an explosion of racially charged accusations that "politics" and "political correctness" were behind the wins. So many people think that people of color - or in some categories, women - could not possibly win legitimately (or get a job or a promotion) without "political" help. You know, if Russell Crowe had won that year over Denzel, I would have said, "He only won because he was white." |
|
|
|
Post by Dirty Santa PaulsLaugh on Jul 16, 2020 21:03:43 GMT
I agree they’re basically meaningless. It’s an insider award where industry people who have been recruited by the academy vote on the awards. And many of movies that won did so because the studio had the best campaign to convince voters. Harvey Weinstein was famous for this and is why guys like Matt Damon were slow to condemn him during #metoo.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dirty Santa PaulsLaugh on Jul 16, 2020 21:11:32 GMT
One reason I learned this is because of Sly Stallone not winning Best Supporting Actor for “Creed” (2015) He was winning at every major award show. But during his Golden Globe speech on national TV he didn’t thank Ryan Coogler the director or Michael B. Jordan his co-actor. So it was also during the #OscarsSoWhite trend. So the voters at the Academy didn’t give it to Stallone because of his controversy surrounding his speech. If he deserves it, then it’s about his acting not a damn speech. Sly should have won best actor for the original Rocky, but the late Peter Finch beat him out. |
|
|
|
Post by theravenking on Jul 17, 2020 9:44:26 GMT
It's always been like this. The academy judges actors not only by the quality of their performances, but also by their public persona and off-screen behaviour. It's an open secret that Russell Crowe lost out to Denzel Washington in 2002, because of an incident when he threw a phone at a hotel employee. No one ever let me in on the secret. I have always hated everything about "A Beautiful Mind" including Crowe's performance of fluttery hands and shuffling feet. What is no secret is that after two African-American actors won the top spots that year, Halle Berry was the other, there was an explosion of racially charged accusations that "politics" and "political correctness" were behind the wins. So many people think that people of color - or in some categories, women - could not possibly win legitimately (or get a job or a promotion) without "political" help. You know, if Russell Crowe had won that year over Denzel, I would have said, "He only won because he was white." I’m not saying it was the wrong decision. Personally I hated A Beautiful Mind, I thought it was a manipulative Oscar-bait movie with a borderline dumb plot.
But I recall that Crowe was the front runner for best lead actor that year, most people were expecting him to win, and afterwards it was assumed that he had ruined his own chances.
Denzel has always been well-liked and generally respected in Hollywood. He never had any scandals and is also regarded not only as a great actor but also as a decent human being.
How did Christoph Waltz win for Django Unchained? Was his performance really that great? Or is it just that he happened to be a really popular actor at that time?
We can pretend that an actor’s off-screen personality doesn’t matter. But let’s be real you have to be able to play the publicity game and lobby for awards or at least be generally popular and well-liked.
Mickey Rourke never really stood a chance to win best actor for The Wrestler, even if he hadn’t been going up against Sean Penn in Milk, simply because he is Mickey Rourke. People don’t like him, he’s too difficult, too weird, too rude, too intimidating. |
|
|
|
Post by Vits on Jul 17, 2020 9:53:18 GMT
But I recall that Crowe was the front runner for best lead actor that year, most people were expecting him to win, and afterwards it was assumed that he had ruined his own chances. Yes, Russell was the front runner, but he hadn't won in every single ceremony up to that point, so it wasn't that big of a shock. How did Christoph Waltz win for Django Unchained? Was his performance really that great? Yes. Same with INGLOURIOUS BASTERDS. I don't know what to tell you. Interesting that you chose D.U. because I remember that being a very unpredictable year for the Supporting Actor category, since no one had had a landslide in other televised awards like usual. Mickey Rourke never really stood a chance to win best actor for The Wrestler, even if he hadn’t been going up against Sean Penn in Milk, simply because he is Mickey Rourke. People don’t like him, he’s too difficult, too weird, too rude, too intimidating. Then why was he nominated in the first place? |
|
|
|
Post by Toasted Cheese on Jul 18, 2020 2:14:06 GMT
Because first and foremost it is a popularity contest with insider token nods and a desire to feel oh so distinguished and self-important. All shrouded in a phony virtuous political arena to boot, that can be considered biased and grandstanding hype as well. This makes them born out of egotistic self-congratulatory pats on the back as well.
As already stated, best is ALL subjective. Some films and performances that have won a strong following could have a case made for them, but these appear few and far between. Besides, the best quality of original cinema has long past now. The 70's are over.
|
|
|
|
Post by bd74 on Jul 18, 2020 3:13:08 GMT
It's always been like this. The academy judges actors not only by the quality of their performances, but also by their public persona and off-screen behaviour. It's an open secret that Russell Crowe lost out to Denzel Washington in 2002, because of an incident when he threw a phone at a hotel employee. I heard his loss had something to do with him having choked some man (a producer?) backstage at one of the award shows (the BAFTAs I think). Crowe had won all 4 precursors, but he didn't the win the Oscar, strangely. I find it very hard to believe that enough Academy members not only bothered to watch Training Day but felt that Washington's performance was worthy enough of the win. I don't really trust that the results are the true results. The late producer Julia Phillips wrote in one of her books that when she arrived at the theater and saw the seating arrangement of the 1974 Oscars, it gave her pause about Price Waterhouse. |
|
|
|
Post by Toasted Cheese on Jul 18, 2020 10:13:32 GMT
It's always been like this. The academy judges actors not only by the quality of their performances, but also by their public persona and off-screen behaviour. It's an open secret that Russell Crowe lost out to Denzel Washington in 2002, because of an incident when he threw a phone at a hotel employee. I heard his loss had something to do with him having choked some man (a producer?) backstage at one of the award shows (the BAFTAs I think). Crowe had won all 4 precursors, but he didn't the win the Oscar, strangely. I find it very hard to believe that enough Academy members not only bothered to watch Training Day but felt that Washington's performance was worthy enough of the win. I don't really trust that the results are the true results. The late producer Julia Phillips wrote in one of her books that when she arrived at the theater and saw the seating arrangement of the 1974 Oscars, it gave her pause about Price Waterhouse. I have not seen Training Day, but I do feel that it was a year of Academy virtue undermining itself with the black award winners. Heck, even Sidney Poitier won an honorary Oscar if I recall. He already had one. I also don’t believe that the films awarded are the genuine results. With all the political and questionable choices made, does that mean all Academy voters are operating from the same agenda? Do they call up each other to make sure they vote for whatever cause is relevant at the time? I don’t believe that either and it appears pretty obvious to me that the voters are voting for films and performances they haven’t even seen. |
|
|
|
Post by SciFive on Jul 18, 2020 10:20:21 GMT
Training Day was the one movie (I think) where Denzel Washington played a bad guy.
I think they might have given him the Oscar for this reason (just like they sometimes give out Oscars to actresses who are beautiful in real life but who play ugly or plain women in their movie).
Grace Kelly got an Oscar this way - also Nicole Kidman and Charlize Theron.
Denzel Washington is my favorite actor so I think he could have won the Oscar a number of times for other movies. I just think this one was so unusual (with him as a bad guy) that it really got people’s attention at how well he could pretend to be bad.
|
|
|
|
Post by Vits on Jul 18, 2020 10:25:21 GMT
I have not seen Training Day, but No no. It's OK. You can stop there. That's all we need to know. If you see that movie, by all means come back and tell us your analysis. even Sidney Poitier won an honorary Oscar if I recall. He already had one. Isn't that awarded to someone's entire career? Training Day was the one movie (I think) where Denzel Washington played a bad guy. I think they might have given him the Oscar for this reason (just like they sometimes give out Oscars to actresses who are beautiful in real life but who play ugly or plain women in their movie). Grace Kelly got an Oscar this way - also Nicole Kidman and Charlize Theron. No, those are all myths. Denzel had already won for GLORY. Henry Fonda and Tom Hanks didn't even get nominated for ONCE UPON A TIME IN THE WEST and THE LADYKILLERS respectively. Grace, Nicole and Charlize were also nominated for other kinds of roles. |
|
|
|
Post by Toasted Cheese on Jul 18, 2020 10:37:48 GMT
Vits I am not a fan of A Beautiful Mind and Crowe’s performance is the saving grace for me. I feel he was much better here than he was in Gladiator. Crowe had been a conceited bad boy and that may have influenced the voters choice, but Sean Penn was also up for I Am Sam. This was an Oscar bait role, a very good one too, and he had not yet won an Oscar either. He did win 2 years later. Denzel already had a previous Oscar win. He was either the alternate choice to Crowe, a back to back would have been sensational hype, or it came down to Academy grandstanding for two major black wins. Sensational also. Did all the voters in the acting branch feel this way that year? Best Actress was a weak year too. Poitier’s was an Oscar for his contribution to film, although he wasn’t on the screen much throughout the latter part of the century, and for his dignity in industry representation. Why Poitier?
|
|
|
|
Post by SciFive on Jul 18, 2020 10:50:11 GMT
I have not seen Training Day, but No no. It's OK. You can stop there. That's all we need to know. If you see that movie, by all means come back and tell us your analysis. even Sidney Poitier won an honorary Oscar if I recall. He already had one. Isn't that awarded to someone's entire career? Training Day was the one movie (I think) where Denzel Washington played a bad guy. I think they might have given him the Oscar for this reason (just like they sometimes give out Oscars to actresses who are beautiful in real life but who play ugly or plain women in their movie). Grace Kelly got an Oscar this way - also Nicole Kidman and Charlize Theron. No, those are all myths. Denzel had already won for GLORY. Henry Fonda and Tom Hanks didn't even get nominated for ONCE UPON A TIME IN THE WEST and THE LADYKILLERS respectively. Grace, Nicole and Charlize were also nominated for other kinds of roles. Whoa!! Hold on - I didn’t say that it was the only Oscar he’d ever won. I said he deserved Oscars for other movies (which I think he did) but I think he got attention from some of the viewers for playing a bad guy. You can’t prove he didn’t get attention this way. I don’t think it’s an accident when beautiful actresses get Oscars for appearing ugly in movies. My opinions are just as good (or not good) as your opinions. There is no way to objectively analyze something as subjective as the Oscars, but we’re all entitled to our opinions. Don’t call my opinions myths and expect to use the scientific method to prove this. |
|
|
|
Post by Catman 猫的主人 on Jul 18, 2020 10:50:37 GMT
Julia Roberts is the ultimate proof. The world would have been better served had she gone on to a career as a waitress in a greasy truck stop on Interstate 80 near the Iowa-Nebraska border.
|
|
|
|
Post by SciFive on Jul 18, 2020 10:53:45 GMT
Julia Roberts is the ultimate proof. The world would have been better served had she gone on to a career as a waitress in a greasy truck stop on Interstate 80 near the Iowa-Nebraska border. At least she mostly quit making movies to raise her children. |
|
