The Kids are All Right

I haven't seen that yet, but I felt the same way about The Social Network and The Fighter. Good movies, but not great. Another year of turds from Hollywood. Now that they have expanded the field to 10 movies, I think there are going to be a lot of mediocre nominees.

Well, the Social Network had some good acting. Also, the screenwriting was perfect for a film about a website. There was cheese (Jesse Eisenburg being... himself, not Zuck), but overall it was a good movie. Not Oscar caliber though.

I think the OP is being too nice on The Kids... It was barely mediocre. I think it is one of those "Hollywood takes on the American Family" deals where they think everyone deals with stuff that only happens in Hollywood.

"Oh, it is so real. They are dealing with such everyday situations!"

The whole thing was just stupid.

I have not seen the Fighter.

127 Hours and King's Speech were amazing.

Ok, so what was the issue with Lesbians watching gay male porn?

Did any of you see Winter's Bone? That was pretty good. I thought it was only okay when I saw it, but I've been thinking about it ever since. It would be cool if that got Best Picture. That or Toy Story 3 (which I didn't see, so I can't speak to its merits, but it would definitely be against expectations for an animated comedy to get the Oscar).

Toy Story 3 was a stunning surprise and very much for adults with a script that really resonated. It won't happen, but it would be great if it got Best Picture as a reminder that story is really what matters.

I am out of touch with the world.

I thought this was going to be a thread about The Who and the concert film of 1979.

The Who rocks!

Only reason it is nominated is 'cause it has Annette Benning and Julianne Moore and that other guy that the Academy loves and the gay theme.

Social Network and Jesse Eisenberg's accolades are a mystery to me as well. Almost seems like The Academy wants to increase younger viewership.

I think it is getting the acclaim for being one of the first semi-mainstream films to try to provide a realistic look at a lesbian family much more than for being a good movie. The focus of the film was the relationship between the moms and the affect of finding the birth father on the kids and moms instead of being about the problems of lesbian families (acceptance in society was presumed in the movie). So, the film gets acclaim because it accepts a lesbian relationship as being normal and focuses on universal issues of long term relationships and adoption instead of some contrived story about lesbians fighting for acceptance in society of their family against a crusading religious right bad guy.

King's Speech was a way better film.

Filmy Mc Film wrote:

Anyone disagree? Can you shed some light on what I am missing?

Thanks.

I'll admit that I haven't seen the movie in question. However, what you may be puzzling over is the academy's desire to make the oscars "more accessible". This started last year with the nomination of Avatar and District 9 for best picture. While both were ok movies, they really weren't best-picture quality, however both did well at the box office.

Over the last few years, ratings for the oscars have begun to drop off (I think this may be true for many award ceremonies). The academy identified one possible cause for this being the fact that generally, best picture nominees are more "film" type movies and less "action and explosions". Fewer people watch film-type movies and people are less likely to watch an award ceremony when they haven't seen (and often have never heard of) most, if not all, of the nominees. Thus, the decision was made to expand the field from 5 to 10 nominees and include movies that may not be great films, but that did well enough at the box office that more potential viewers have actually seen. So long story short, you don't have to be a great movie to be nominated for best picture. I imagine that in 10 years or so, you won't need to be a great movie to win best picture, but that's another matter entirely.

Like I said, I don't know about "The Kids are All Right", but it is possible that the movie falls into the category of "movie a lot of people saw" rather than "great movie".

Is this the same academy that didn't even nominate Christopher Nolan for "Inception"? Buncha idiots I tell ya.

Personally, I think the Oscars tend to favor pretentious, self-consciously serious movies (i.e., if they were a TV show, 15 years ago they would have been advertised the week before as "A very special episode of Blossom"), the sort of artistic product that the term "middlebrow" was invented to describe. Their tendency to give Best Actress to any A-list starlet who makes herself fugly through makeup/costume is a similar tendency.

That being said, sometimes they get it right. And I didn't see The Kids are Alright, so I am not passing judgment on it with my statement.

Mtn Dew wrote:

Is this the same academy that didn't even nominate Christopher Nolan for "Inception"? Buncha idiots I tell ya.

I'm also kind of surprised by the accolades The Social Network has been getting compared to Christopher Nolan and Inception.

I personally think The King's Speech should win.

I don't know what movie you were watching. It was great. Especially watching Keith Moon smash his drums on the Smother Brothers show.

But seriously,

Its the same old hollywood. It goes beyond homosexuality. There are certain subjects that Hollywood seems to love. The holocaust, "wicked smart" Southies, Elizabethan England, movies that use panoramic nature shots. Make just a good movie on those subjects but nothing great and you are automatically nominated for an Oscar. They generally will beat any movie by Martin Scorsese even though his movies are vastly superior in artistry.

Daddy-O wrote:

I am out of touch with the world.

I thought this was going to be a thread about The Who and the concert film of 1979.

I thought this was going to be about The Offspring.

Didn't "Up in the Air" win for best picture last year? Nobody's going to watch that 10 years from now. Why do you care what gets an Oscar? There's no relation between winning one and being a good, bad or indifferent movie.