MovieChat Forums > LLOwens > Replies
LLOwens's Replies
I must admit Ron, that ever since becoming a fan of Kristen I would check out what films would be showing at HIFF and was checking their site to see what films they would feature. Carved, who frequently talks about attending film festivals has done a lot to whet my appetite to go watch one of Kristen's films at the HIFF. Perhaps Seberg was a late entry at the 2019 HIFF--the reason I didn't know it would be showing the exact day I went to watch the [i]Charlie's Angels[/i] reboot.
[quote]I wonder if they'll do some parts of it virtual, similar to how recent US awards shows were done. It'll depend on how things continue to go with Covid as we seem to be coming out of it but with variants popping up so who knows.[/quote]
I'm guessing the same thing, Ron. At last year's Hawaii International Film Festival, because Hawaii had very restrictive travel restrictions at the time, they went with a hybrid festival of in-person and virtual screenings. So perhaps TIFF will do the same.
This reminded me of the HIFF festival in 2019 where [b]Seberg[/b] was one of the featured films: https://mubi.com/awards-and-festivals/hawaii?page=5&year=2019
I'm still kicking myself because I was at the very theater multiplex where the 39th Annual HIFF was taking place when I went to watch Charlie's Angels. I recall seeing HIFF placards posted all over the theater but it never dawned on me of the possibility that Seberg might be one of films being shown at the festival--only in hindsight did I discover this.
I'll be sure to go see [i]Spencer[/i] if it's among the films at the 2022 HIFF.
Who would you suggest play Princess Diana instead of Kristen? IMO, Kristen is perfectly cast for the role, especially in the looks department--so perhaps this question will end up being a rhetorical one.
[quote]It still amazes me that lists like this can be made when the year is just a little past half over and most of the films have yet to be seen.
But nonetheless, there it is.
And I must add how nice it is to see Kristen's name placed so high on a list of 40 actresses.[/quote]
I guess Variety has a crystal ball when it comes to spotting an Oscar bait film before it is even released in theaters, Carved, you know the lavish type period drama set against the backdrop of a historical tragedy, as well as predicting how this film will pay strict attention to detail when it comes to makeup, hairstyle and costume design judging by the pictures of Kristen as the spitting image of Princess Diana.
That being said, since the pandemic has hit, it seems the quality of films and acing performances has dropped significantly. Case in point, 3-time Academy Award winning, 6-time Oscar nominated actress Frances McDormand won her third golden statuette for her lackluster performance in [b]Nomadland[/b]. I mean her character Fern had no character arc to speak of, in my opinion--she basically started and ended the film with virtually the exact same persona. Yet Kristen did similarly with her Bella Swan character in the Twilight Saga and has spent the past decade trying to live down the harsh criticism. At least Kristen exhibited chemistry with her costars in Twilight, unlike McDormand who didn't. Like Clayton Davis in the Variety article link you provided, mentioned how Kristen's role in Spencer may finally allow her to leave "that image behind for good." I sure hope so.
Don't get me wrong, I consider McDormand to be one of the best active actresses working in Hollywood today and was definitely deserving of her Oscar wins in her performances in Fargo and Three Billboards Outside of Ebbing, Missouri. But for Nomadland? And it's not as if the 2020 Best Actress Oscar field was devoid and bereft of talent as Viola Davis as Ma Rainey in Ma Rainey's Black Bottom and Carey Mulligan as Casandra Thomas in Promising Young Woman, were both mesmerizing and exhibited tremendous acting range in their respective roles. So I'll be peeved if Kristen knocks it out of the park in Spencer like she did in [i]Clouds of Sils Maria[/i], only to get snubbed by the Academy in favor of a veteran actress like McDormand who churns out another ho-hum performance.
In my opinion, last year's Best Picture winner [b]Parasite[/b] was quite memorable--especially the latter three-fourths of the film--as Act 1 played like a Korean drama and I don't mean that as a compliment. Acts 2 and 3 had something for everyone--well at least for those old enough to watch an R-rated movie: It was a heist film, a dark comedy, a horror film, a romantic film, an art house film, a thriller film, a mystery film, and perhaps most importantly a truly relevant social commentary film. It was character as well as story driven, while it was heavy on both style and substance. All of these combined elements which were seamlessly blended together with allegories, metaphors and tonal shifts made for a cohesive whole of a film that was oozing with suspense, conflict, tension, wit, drama and humor, which in the sum of its parts added up to one of the most entertaining films of the past decade.
Can't you cite a specific example as to why Nomadland will be one of the most memorable films released over the past decade?
If this film won primarily for virtual signaling purposes, then why didn't superior films such as [b]The Trial of the Chicago 7[/b] or [i]Judas and the Black Messiah[/i] win the Best Picture Oscar instead?
I rarely read books--least to say, read books which adapted screenplays and films are based on.
Zhao also made a film the critics would like as it currently has a 94% Certified Fresh rating on Rotten Tomatoes. What I don't understand about critics is they often move the goal posts so to speak when critiquing films. Take for example the following:
The Mauritanian 75% RT rating. RT Critics Consensus:
"The Mauritanian takes a frustratingly generic approach to a real-life story that might have been inspirational in other hands, but Tahar Rahim's performance elevates the uneven material."
Mixed reviews by film critics is a major reason why this film was snubbed by Academy Awards voters. Case in point: The critics showered Zero Dark Thirty, which went on to receive a Best Picture Oscar nomination, while bashing The Mauritanian, which was just as good, even more so if one factors in the stellar performances by Tahar Rahim, Jodie Foster, Benedict Cumberbatch and Shailene Woodley.
Speaking of "generic approach", there was nothing original and groundbreaking about Nomadland either. There is definitely a double standard going on here.
Land 70% RT rating. RT Critics Consensus:
"Land's lovely vistas can't compensate for a hollowness at its center."
So the critics collectively praise the cinematography of Land while forsaking Robin Wright's unforgettable and riveting performance dealing with unfathomable events while living in an unforgivable environment and harsh wilderness which makes Nomadland seem like a walk in the park. So Land is hollow while Nomadland isn't?
Our Friend 85% RT rating. RT Critics Consensus:
"Our Friend's occasionally frustrating approach to dramatizing its fact-based story is often offset by a trio of starring performances led by a never-better Jason Segel."
And Nomadland was able to dramatize it's fact-based story?
Ava 16% RT rating. RT Critics Consensus:
"Ava seems to have all the components of an entertaining spy thriller, but not even this spectacular cast is enough to salvage the dull, clichéd story they're given to work with."
Dull and cliched story? Huh? While Ava wasn't the greatest spy thriller in recent memory, it was vastly more exciting and entertaining than Nomadland. Heck, Jessica Chastain exhibited more character arc in this film than McDormand did as Fern. Not sure why the critics absolutely bashed this film.
Crisis 65% RT rating. RT Critics Consensus:
"With its serious-minded story, Crisis aims higher than many crime thrillers -- but uneven acting and a spotty script mean the end result falls short of its goals."
Uneven acting? While this wasn't Gary Oldman's best performance, it was still first rate if you ask me. And Evangeline Lilly showed more range in this compared to McDormand in Nomadland.
Spotty script? At least it was a screenplay worthy of basing a feature film on as it was full of conflict and tension thick enough to cut with a knife, to drive the storyline forward from the beginning of Act 1 to the end of Act 3. While Crisis received mixed reviews, it was still vastly more profound, compelling and entertaining than Nomadland, by a long shot.
Pieces of a Woman 75% RT rating. RT Critics Consensus:
"Pieces of a Woman struggles to maintain momentum after a stunning opening act, but Vanessa Kirby's performance makes the end result a poignant portrait of grief."
While this film was not exactly my cup of tea, Kirby did a much better job in portraying grief than McDormand did in Nomadland.
The Invisible Man 91% RT rating. RT Critics Consensus:
"Smart, well-acted, and above all scary, The Invisible Man proves that sometimes, the classic source material for a fresh reboot can be hiding in plain sight."
Makes on wonder why this film wasn't nominated for a Best Picture Oscar or any Oscar for that matter, as this was in my opinion, one of the best films released in 2020, predominantly because of it's Hitchcock-esque style suspense and well crafted script. Sure, this film was a reboot, but so was Little Women, which was nominated for 5 Academy Awards last year, including a Best Picture Oscar nom.
Promising Young Woman 90% RT rating. RT Critics Consensus:
"A boldly provocative, timely thriller, Promising Young Woman is an auspicious feature debut for writer-director Emerald Fennell -- and a career highlight for Carey Mulligan."
Carey Mulligan churned out the best performance by an actress in 2020, evidence by her extraordinary range and thus should have garnered her a Best Actress Oscar. This film was also highly entertaining in large part because of its clever script and well executed direction.
In conclusion, some make the argument that this wasn't a strong year for films. However, there were worthy candidates for Best Picture such as [i]Da 5 Bloods, Trial of the Chicago 7, Judas and the Black Messiah, The Father and Promising Young Woman[/i], all of which would have been more deserving of the Academy's top prize as they all fit the definition of a full-length feature film instead of a documentary like Nomadland appears to resemble.
I'm all too familiar with nomads, as my neck of the woods has several chronically unsheltered homeless individuals living in surrounding areas. I've also watched all the critically acclaimed films that deal with the topic of nomads and the homeless. So while I admit [b]Nomadland[/b] did ring true in portraying the lifestyle of a nomad, that's pretty much all it did. I did not see it as an artful expression of the life of a nomad.
I'd might as well pick up a camera and film a bunch of homeless people for a few hours, edit it a bit, and release it as a movie and it would be just as entertaining, perhaps even more so as [i]Nomadland[/i] didn't capture the nitty-gritty of what it's like to lose everything and the physical, emotional, psychological and spiritual toll it takes on a human.
Looking at your posting history over just the past few hours reveals other trollish comments you've left on 3 separate threads:
[quote]"Just look at your comment, it shows idiocy."
"You are like a vampire parasite using MovieChat this way."
"Hey stupid what part of "🔥 ATTENTION: Do NOT Post Political Discussions Here 🔥" are you not smart enough to understand?"
[/quote]
Should I go back further than a few hours in your posting history to demonstrate my point?
Perhaps the title for this thread should have been: [b]The worst Best Picture/Best Director Academy Award winning film of all time. [/b]
[quote]Way to be a jerk to attack someone who is trying to give you a frickin' compliment.[/quote]
In what way did I attack you? And in what way is the comment I responded to a compliment? There was zero positivity in your comment. ZERO. Your comment sure sounded sarcastic, negative and borderline trollish if you ask me.
By calling someone a jerk--now that's what I call an attack--having your true colors shine through.
[quote]If you have that much to say about this movie, why are you posting under this troll's stupid comment?[/quote]
Oops! I meant to reply to the OP.
That being said, are you going to add anything insightful to this topic or are you content with leaving a borderline trollish comment?
I understand how art is subjective and can mean different things to different people. However, I don't understand how the vast majority of professional film critics and members of the Academy agree that this was the best movie released last year.
Again for emphasis: Can you or anyone out there cite a specific example as to what made this film stand out from the rest?
So are you implying that if a film is full of flaws, in accordance to what screenwriting teachers generally consider filmmaking flaws, that one could give the excuse that it's an art house film? I mean, where is the art in this film?
And you are far from alone in your praise of this film as the critics consensus on Rotten Tomatoes states the following: [b]"A poetic character study on the forgotten and downtrodden, Nomadland beautifully captures the restlessness left in the wake of the Great Recession."[/b]
Perhaps you can help me understand in what way was this film "a poetic character study on the forgotten and downtrodden?" Can you cite any specific examples which set this film poetically apart from the rest of the films released in 2020?
Besides this film winning Best Picture, Best Director and Best Actress Oscars, it also received Academy Awards noms for Best Adapted Screenplay, Best Editing, and Best Cinematography. Had this film not been showered with some of the highest accolades in the industry, I would not be anywhere as harsh as I'm about to be. And don't get me wrong--this film's heart is in the right place--I'm all for bridging the inequality gap and solving the homeless crisis, but this film failed to make this film as compelling and provocative as it needs to be. Personally, I can't think of a single scene or instance in this film where I haven't seen it done better in a previous feature film or docudrama.
That being said, I'm baffled as to why the Academy is awarding filmmaking that isn't visionary, not revelatory, nor groundbreaking by any stretch but is instead nominating films which don't go out on a limb and appear to be playing it safe in order not to offend anyone (i.e., Amazon, proponents of corporate capitalism/income inequality), which translates to a boring film which stands for nothing while providing very little entertainment value for many moviegoers.
While McDormand is one of the best actresses working in Hollywood today, her past performances alone should not justify her winning a Best Actress Oscar for portraying a fictional character who exhibited no character arc--her character starts off and ends the movie as basically the same character--a one-note performance and not layered by any stretch. No heroes' journey here--about the only journey in this film involved driving around in her van from one dead end job to the next while meeting up with her support group comprised of other van dwellers. My idea of a role with a considerable character arc was Carey Mulligan's performance in Promising Young Woman, which was in my opinion the best actress performance of 2020 bar none in large part because of the tremendous range she exhibited in this film. Mulligan should have won the Best Actress Oscar.
I'm curious as to who taught Chole Zhao how to write a feature film screenplay as she appears to have broken every screenwriting rule in the book by not including several of the ingredients that great films have in common--thus the reason this film came off to me as more akin to a documentary than a full length feature film. Obviously, Academy Awards voters don't seem to care.
One of the first rules of screenwriting is to show not tell--and what this film predominantly seemed to do was tell not show--as in dialogue driven talking heads with little to show for. If this film was based on an original screenplay that would be one thing, but because it was adapted for the screen, one would expect the screenwriter to make an effort to let the characters reveal their emotions and thoughts through actions and images instead of via mostly dialogue, which is the lazy way of crafting an adapted script.
This story had almost no real tension and conflict to drive the storyline forward, no plot--thus it's not plot-driven, no formidable antagonist who challenged the mettle, resolve and intestinal fortitude of the protagonist (the only example I could think of was a concerned woman knocking on the side of McDormand's character's van and kindly questioning her reason for parking the van on her private property), it was very slow paced and did not build up to a satisfying climax, no believable chemistry between any of the characters, no real purpose for the main character other than to find seasonal employment (even here they could have shown how companies exploited low-paid essential workers during the pandemic) and form superficial relationships with other nomads, bland backstory, no emotional changes executed throughout the film, none of the major characters transformed their lives in a noticeable way--thus it's not character-driven either, no genuine moral premise, no witty dialogue, no do-or-die, all-is-lost point in the film where the stakes are raised forcing the main character to make extremely difficult choices, nothing I would constitute as visual art--okay I'll admit the cinematography was breathtaking when examined in it's entirely but nothing really stood out visually that would be forever burned in my cerebral cortex, nothing original which I haven't seen done better in previous films, and no true portrayal of human poverty and suffering, they could have at least capitalized on her vulnerability to make us care about her plight, a woman-against-the-world archetype to root for, which should have been the underlying theme of this film.
Can you explain why this film was even nominated for a Best Adapted Screenplay Oscar, least to say, winning Academy Awards for Best Picture and Best Director?
So can you explain what exactly IS this film supposed to be? Are you implying it's a great documentary?
It's almost as if the top active directors forgot how to make good movies this past year. For example, I had great expectations for [b]Tenet[/b] which turned out to be a disappointment. That being said, there were movies that exceeded my expectations such as [i]Promising Young Woman, Judas and the Black Messiah, Mauritanian, The Invisible Man and Mank[/i]. Heck, movies that were bashed by the critics such as Crisis and The Informer were better crafted and more entertaining than Nomadland.