Not just this but "Being John Malcovich" too. My goodness! Out of the entire pack from the 2000 Oscars... American Beauty was the ONLY one, from the list, good enough to win it.
Looking back at those who got nominated...
The Green Mile would have seemed more like a desperation move by the Academy to award Frank Darabont with an Oscar after rightfully screwing him out of one with The Shawshank Redemption. This is not to say that The Green Mile wasn't a well done picture but "American Beauty" was much more orginal then it was.
The Sixth Sense's had a surprise ending, maybe too odd for Hollywood. It was probably the same thing that kept Paul Thomas Anderson and his frogs out of the competition. The Cider House was a film that tired to hard to suck in all the classic elements of your everyday drama. And The Insider, like The Hurricane, took too many liberties with fact over fiction.
I have always been one whose believed that being creative, with anything artistic, is a HUGE element to a project and so rewarding, an Oscar to a "true story" sort of takes away from that magic. This is ONE of the few reasons why I nail films like "Apollo 13" and "Brave heart". The story's been written. Where is the originality?
I really think "Magnolia" and "Being John Malcovich" (for that matter) really deserved more credit. Maybe they are odd... but why does that ALWAYS have to be a bad thing.
Quote from: ckad79I have always been one whose believed that being creative, with anything artistic, is a HUGE element to a project and so rewarding, an Oscar to a "true story" sort of takes away from that magic. This is ONE of the few reasons why I nail films like "Apollo 13" and "Brave heart". The story's been written. Where is the originality?
There's originality in the way it's told by the script and the way it's presented in visuals.
Quote from: ckad79I have always been one whose believed that being creative, with anything artistic, is a HUGE element to a project and so rewarding
You may be confusing creativity with puritanical originality. Adaptations have huge potential for originality (though I'm also annoyed by the gimmick of "true stories"), and I guarantee Magnolia was influenced to a similar degree... that doesn't make it a less great or even a less original film.
Context can be originality.
Quote from: The Gold BlackmanQuote from: ckad79I have always been one whose believed that being creative, with anything artistic, is a HUGE element to a project and so rewarding
You may be confusing creativity with puritanical originality. Adaptations have huge potential for originality (though I'm also annoyed by the gimmick of "true stories"), and I guarantee Magnolia was influenced to a similar degree... that doesn't make it a less great or even a less original film.
Context can be originality.
Amen...
the bulk of oscar voters are old people or indifferent hollywood folk like dennis leary who said he just votes for whoever he's friends with and keeps all the screeners. its not made up of film geeks like us, thats why.
Quote from: themodernage02the bulk of oscar voters are old people or indifferent hollywood folk like dennis leary who said he just votes for whoever he's friends with and keeps all the screeners. its not made up of film geeks like us, thats why.
How did Dennis Leary become an Oscar voter? What two members sponsored his membership?
i have no idea, but i remember last year watching him on leno (i believe) talking about how he loves having all his friends over to watch screeners of movies still in theatres and he doesnt care about voting. he votes for if anyone is his friend.
What's wrong with Leary being a voter?
Quote from: CinephileWhat's wrong with Leary being a voter?
Did you read mod-age's posts?
Yeah, but I don't know. It's probably because I like Leary, but I don't think it's too big of a deal for him to vote for his friends. I mean a least he's watching a lot of those screeners, right? Chances are, he's watching the stuff the art-house people want the voters to watch anyway.
Quote from: CinephileYeah, but I don't know. It's probably because I like Leary, but I don't think it's too big of a deal for him to vote for his friends. I mean a least he's watching a lot of those screeners, right? Chances are, he's watching the stuff the art-house people want the voters to watch anyway.
But then a lot of people gripe about deserving films NOT getting nominated. Well, this is why. It's one thing for him to watch the art-house films, but if he's not friends with those involved, then it really doesn't matter.
True, but maybe he IS friends with those involved.
Ah, but who the hell knows. Sometimes I'm really optimistic. Whatever.
f*** the Oscars anyway man, it's politics and popularity that only serve to add to the cash collected at box offices. the oscars are good for one thing only, if a smaller film gets nominated then it tends to get a re-release and more people see it, and thereby advancing the career of a possibly talented director/writer whatever. same thing for lesser known actors/actresses
and if the dvd screener ban had stuck as it first was then smaller films would get more of a shafting so who gives a rat's ass
i just watch for the clothes and the odd celebrity fall-down
so if dennis leary wants to vote for his buddies i don't give a damm, it's just another example of why the oscars are bogus
zombie's on point.
there's nothing surprising about leary's voting methods.
Quote from: analogzombiei just watch for the clothes and the odd celebrity fall-down
:shock:
Speaking of overlooked films in 1999, Fight Club deserved more recognition.
And as much as we all say we hate the Oscars we're all gonna watch it anyway. Besides, it's Billy Crystal hosting this year - thank God - and hopefully Lost In Translations will score big on behalf of all us movie geeks everywhere. ...?
I hope LIT does win a couple (especially for Bill Murray), but my prediction is that it'll be the little indie film that gets nominated for almost everything, and wins nothing.
i think rotk will get alot this year
Either way, lots of upset people.
If Magnolia had been a Miramax film, it would have been up for more Oscars. Cider House Rules was the beneficiary of the Miramax Publicity Machine, as was Shakespeare in Love and Life is Beautiful. I generally like Miramax films, but sometimes les freres Weinstein deprive worthy, smaller films of due recognition. Example: all the campaigning for Life is Beautiful won a Best Actor Oscar for Roberto Benigni, while Nick Nolte in Affliction got screwed. If only Affliction were backed by Miramax.
Also, Michael Caine screwed Cruise out of an Oscar for Best Supporting Actor, because Miramax is better at Oscar campaigning than New Line.
Certainly, as time goes on, Magnolia, Fight Club, Being John Malkovich and even The Matrix would have been better Best Picture nominees than Green Mile or Cider House Rules.
Also, it's insane that PTA has only been nominated for Best Screenplay and not Best Director.
I think Cider House Rules was an overrated piece of crap, and Green Mile was an overlong bore, and Sixth Sense was a retread of Jacob's Ladder.
Magnolia wasn't up for Best Picture for the same reason Jimi Hendrix has never won a Grammy.
all of the movies nominated were good, but not worthy of the nomination. magnolia and BJM were worthy, but certainly not fight club and matrix....i think eyes wide shut, bringing out the dead and the straight story should have rounded it out.
Didn't Hendrix's Star Spangled Banner get a Grammy nomination? Look, Magnolia didn't get nominated because it shouldn't have. It's a giant blob of poorly connected ideas all done up with great visuals. Never had a chance. If you like Magnolia or Fight Club or Malkovich or whatever that's fine ( I only like Fight Club). Just don't use the Academy as a barometer of what's good. Cannes or other international festivals are more interested in quality and creativity. Magnolia won in Berlin. That was its pinacle.
Ouch. Regarding Berlin, how highly is it regarded among the various festivals?
Berlin is well regarded. Aside from Cannes, Berlin and Venice are probably the biggest European festivals.
I don't think Magnolia was just a blob of incoherent ideas -- in fact, one of its few Oscar noms was for Best Original Screenplay. It's actually a well-thought out, well-structured script. There are more connections and parallels in the episodes than there are in a lot of other ensemble movies like Short Cuts.
I don't take the Oscars too seriously, althought it's nice when a worthy film wins an award and then reaches a broader audience, which means there will be a higher likelihood that the suits will greenlight more artistic fare (I can dream can't I?). If nothing else, Oscar gives an incentive to make movies that aren't aimed at teenagers.
As for the Grammys, they are the biggest joke of all the major awards. The Rolling Stones never won for stuff like Some Girls, Exile on Main Street or Beggar's Banquet, but they did win in the 90's, a period of creative bankruptcy for them. Clapton and Santana won big in the 90's for their most mediocre work. Christopher Cross won Best Album of 1980, over such classics as The Pretenders 1st album, London Calling by the Clash and The Wall by Pink Floyd. Hendrix may have been nominated for something, but he never won any major awards. His stuff was too far ahead of its time.
"How did "Magnolia" not get a Best Picture nomination?"
because it fuckin stinks. ask any person in xixax.
yes. we all hate that fucking movie!!!
soixante....you are spot on.... :yabbse-thumbup: .....
i still say the worst best pic..(in recent tims0..has been Shakespeare in love..over thin red line....when you watch the two.. .its almost ridiculous that Shakespeare in love........was even mentioned in the same category.....way overrated film....and yes i did see it....it sucked ..bad......
annd my last rambling .is the fact. that lynch(yes i'm baised).. lost that oscar to howard for a beautiful mind for direction...???....i agree that ABM..is a good ffilm....but when it came down to a director helming a project and makinnng it work.....lynch deserves more for doing an equally acclaimed film that was more ambitious.......
but he did look like a pimp in his suit that night.....
yeah that oscar woulda been so much more exciting if these five were nominated:
being john malkovich
three kings
bring out the dead
wonder boys
magnolia
Wonder Boys came out in 2000, hence was ineligible for the 1999 Oscars.
My five best pics for 1999 woulda been: Go, Magnolia, Fight Club, Topsy Turvy, American Beauty. Nicole Kidman shoulda been up for Best Actress for Eyes Wide Shut. Brad Pitt should have been nominated for Best Actor for Fight Club, alongside Jim Carrey in Man on the Moon.
I agree with the previous poster, that Shakespeare in Love didn't deserve Best Picture, especially over Thin Red Line or Saving Private Ryan. In fact, Shakespeare in Love didn't even make my top 30 of the year.
Quote from: soixanteGo
uh....... :o
Quote from: ewardQuote from: soixanteGo
uh....... :o
Go is not a good movie.
Quote from: chuckhimselfoQuote from: ewardQuote from: soixanteGo
uh....... :o
Go is not a good movie.
Yeah, it's just Pulp Fiction: The College Years
Quote from: Gambloren das ManhörenQuote from: chuckhimselfoQuote from: ewardQuote from: soixanteGo
uh....... :o
Go is not a good movie.
Yeah, it's just Pulp Fiction: The College Years
don't be so hard on Quentin.
I'm sure he's only hard on Quentin: The College Years.
You're right. Go isn't a good movie. It's a great one. *ducks*
never said it was bad, i kinda enjoy it when im bored. but he put it in the best picture category and so i was at a loss for words.
yeah if I were to choose a 90's teen flick to watch, I'd pick Go. It's got some edge, but it just wasn't very original.
i liked "Ten things I hate about you" and "Bring it On" , but not "Go".
I didn't like Go the first time I saw it. But then I couldn't get it out of my brain for a few days, so I went to see it again, and liked it. Subsequent viewings on DVD made it even better. I had a similar experience with Something Wild when it first came out, didn't like it the first time, but liked it a lot the 2nd time.
Go is simply a great joy ride of a film. Stylistically and narratively, it is rather daring. Even though it's derivative, so is Pulp Fiction. Pulp Fiction is clearly better, but Go has its own energy.
It is also features lots of memorable dialoge written by John August, and every performance is excellent. Even Katie Holmes, who is merely an average actress, gives a great performance. William Fichtner and Sarah Polley are especially good. The only problem is the ending, in which the film merely runs out of gas. However, I do like movies in which folks do drugs and get away with it (as in Dazed and Confused).
the thing i really don't like about Go is the fact that director Doug Liman and screenwriter John August are mis-matched... it looks like John August knew what he was writing about but Liman got it in a different way. I like John August. I like the fact that he actually takes the time to answer questions at the IMDB but Go lacks cohesion. And there are characters that have the charisma of a carton of milk.
Go also isn't a great movie because it dates incredibly fast, not just with the times but with even the same audience as well. as soon as you grow out of a certain age or a certain scene the film loses its charm.
Quote from: peteGo also isn't a great movie because it dates incredibly fast, not just with the times but with even the same audience as well. as soon as you grow out of a certain age or a certain scene the film loses its charm.
yeah, "E" is soooo last decade.
Besides the structure, how is "Go" like "Pulp Fiction"? I wouldn't call "Velvet Goldmine" "Citizen Kane: The Glam Years" because they share the same story structure.
Quote from: MacGuffinBesides the structure, how is "Go" like "Pulp Fiction"? I wouldn't call "Velvet Goldmine" "Citizen Kane: The Glam Years" because they share the same story structure.
they both deal with drugs. none of them is concerned in telling a story : both of them show Situations. Both ooze Pop Culture references . And Pulp Fiction is a Crime/Comedy, while Go tries to be one.
you don't find that whole drawing a dot on the arm for gun sequence in anyway similar to drawing a dot on uma thurman for the big needle? Or those "casual" conversations filled with pop references--and how it opens and close in the diner, much like pulp fiction?
I don't think it's just stealing the structure when the entire chronological order of Go--including the time frame in both dates and story terms, are nearly identical. I don't think Go would've been made if it weren't for Pulp Fiction.
or, hey, check out this review:
http://www.suntimes.com/ebert/ebert_reviews/1999/04/040904.html
awww, somewhere in this archive there's John August talking about how Go couldn't exist if it wasn't for Pulp Fiction.
http://www.imdb.com/Indie/Ask/archive.html
Thanks for that link pete. Roger Ebert sums it up nicely:
"When his characters deliberately create a flesh wound with a gunshot, for example, the setup and payoff remind us of the needle plunging into the heart in ``Pulp Fiction'' (and of the deliberate blade wound in ``GRIDlock'd''). And when two of his characters sit in a diner and have a conversation about the comic strip ``Family Circus,'' we think of the Uma Thurman and John Travolta sharing pop lore over their milkshakes in ``P.F.'' We're also reminded of ``Pulp'' in scenes involving a laconic drug dealer, a crisis involving body disposal, an unintended drug overdose, in the way its story lines branch off and then join up again, and even in an unusual character name, Zack."
I have a better question.
How did Forrest Gump beat out Pulp Fiction AND The Shawshank Redemption for Best Film of the Year in 1994.
Of the three films, Gump would be my third choice.
Quote from: halo_onHow did Forrest Gump beat out Pulp Fiction AND The Shawshank Redemption for Best Film of the Year in 1994.
it had a wider appeal, and was a pretty damn good movie too.
Quote from: themodernage02Quote from: halo_onHow did Forrest Gump beat out Pulp Fiction AND The Shawshank Redemption for Best Film of the Year in 1994.
it had a wider appeal, and was a pretty damn good movie too.
and let's not forget the fact that the Academy it nuts about roles that involve a disability. good night.
Everyone always gets onto them about that, but it makes sense. A respected actor dropping the ego and doing something different. Good for them
Quote from: soixanteIf nothing else, Oscar gives an incentive to make movies that aren't aimed at teenagers.
Here, here.
By the way, would I get lynched for saying my favourite 'teen' film of the 90s was Cruel Intentions.
What the xixax top five of 1999 *might* have been:
Magnolia
American Beauty
Fight Club
Eyes Wide Shut
Three Kings
Does that satisfy everybody? Anybody...?
Oh, and I know it was released 2000, but Wonder Boys was an awesome film. Insidently my 2 all time greatest films to watch very late at night when I'm suffering from Insomnia are Fight Club and Wonder Boys. They're both great. Even if you don't like them.
Quote from: SleeplessBy the way, would I get lynched for saying my favourite 'teen' film of the 90s was Cruel Intentions.
I doubt it. There's a good number of people around here that really liked that film. And as a sidenote, maybe P would heighten your status closer to 'credibility'...
Quote from: soixanteWhat the xixax top five of 1999 *might* have been:
Magnolia
American Beauty
Fight Club
Eyes Wide Shut
Three Kings
Magnolia
Eyes Wide Shut
Fight Club
The Matrix
American Beauty
Run Lola Run
Arlington Road
The Sixth Sense
Quote from: halo_onQuote from: soixanteWhat the xixax top five of 1999 *might* have been:
Magnolia
American Beauty
Fight Club
Eyes Wide Shut
Three Kings
Magnolia
Eyes Wide Shut
Fight Club
The Matrix
American Beauty
Run Lola Run
Arlington Road
The Sixth Sense
Top 5?
soixante got it right.
Uh, no, you can replace either Three Kings or American Beauty with Being John Malkovich. That would have been the top five.
It was me, I only quoted soixante. I really wasn't that fussed on Being John Malkovich, but I guess you can swap it for Three Kings, this being a democracy and all.
keep three kings but get rid of fight club
how bout we get the fuck over lists.
Quote from: ewardkeep three kings but get rid of fight club
I raise you a dollar.
Quote from: Phow bout we get the fuck over lists.
fair enough.
Quote from: Gambloren das ManhorenI raise you a dollar.
:wink:
Someone misquoted me earlier. My top 5 for 1999 is:
Go
Magnolia
Fight Club
American Beauty
Being John Malkovich
My best actress is Nicole Kidman in Eyes Wide Shut and my best actor is Brad Pitt in Fight Club, neither of whom was nominated.
South Park: Bigger, Longer and Uncut, Topsy Turvy, Eyes Wide Shut, Election and Boys Don't Cry round out my top 10. I enjoyed The Limey and The Matrix quite a bit, but they just missed the cut.
I think it's useful to make lists -- it forces you to think, it helps sort out a chaotic universe. It is useful to the honing of one's aesthetic perceptions to figure out why Fight Club is better than American Beauty, and why American Beauty is better than Being John Malkovich, etc.
Quote from: soixanteI think it's useful to make lists -- it forces you to think, it helps sort out a chaotic universe. It is useful to the honing of one's aesthetic perceptions to figure out why Fight Club is better than American Beauty, and why American Beauty is better than Being John Malkovich, etc.
I'm not seeing list making translate into any real discussions, though. The usual is a thread will be made and everyone will make lists and if any arguments sip through the cracks, it goes to a maximum of 3 sentences of explanation at best for someone posting. Most people make lists here, but also understand its detriment to starting actual discussion.
Quote from: soixanteI think it's useful to make lists -- it forces you to think, it helps sort out a chaotic universe. It is useful to the honing of one's aesthetic perceptions to figure out why Fight Club is better than American Beauty, and why American Beauty is better than Being John Malkovich, etc.
actually no, it whittles everything down to an insignificant number. i'm talking about when ppl list title after title, with no further explanation or attempt at insightful analysis.
there is no way to tell why sumone chose one film over another, i might choose Bring It On over Almost Famous because i think kirsten dunst is really hot. it's meaningless and perpetuates lack of insight. it implies it is enuff to merely rank a film, or to assign a value to it, to qualify as an acceptable form of review. it isn't acceptable, at best it is a curious novelty that reveals more about someones obssessive compulsions, and at worst it is completely, utterly, sickeningly irrelevant.
lists, no matter how well-written and crafted (or poorly), are still just rental suggestions. so obviously they're insignificant numbers. all discussions here on this site pertaining to movies are just that--rental/ theater recommendations. so stop being angry over lists.
Quote from: Phow bout we get the fuck over lists.
:cry:
Quote from: Pthere is no way to tell why sumone chose one film over another, i might choose Bring It On over Almost Famous because i think kirsten dunst is really hot. it's meaningless and perpetuates lack of insight.
Actually, I don't think that's all that bad. When Godard was a critic, he used to rank movies based on how good the lead actress looked. For a young man, that might be the most honest and sensible way of approaching these things...
Quote from: peteso stop being angry over lists.
i can be angry over whatever the fuck i want, like ur obnoxious signature banner.
Quote from: SoNowThenActually, I don't think that's all that bad. When Godard was a critic, he used to rank movies based on how good the lead actress looked. For a young man, that might be the most honest and sensible way of approaching these things...
yeah but u wouldn't know that just form looking at my list would u. i think i made a clear argument, if u make lists don't assume ur doing anything that is even slightly relevant EVEN AS A RENTAL LIST. they don't really mean anything to anyone but urself. and anyone who is still into them after 6 months on the interweb, is seriously lacking in mental development.
right right
I just wanted to use this obscure piece of knowledge I had to make a cute remark...
I'm a list fan, but only to a point. What I like about lists is looking at somebody else's and going "love that one too, and that one, and that one, and... hmmm, never heard of that one", and you check it out because of the good company it keeps. Y'know what I mean?
i know what you mean.
Quote from: SoNowThenI'm a list fan, but only to a point. What I like about lists is looking at somebody else's and going "love that one too, and that one, and that one, and... hmmm, never heard of that one", and you check it out because of the good company it keeps. Y'know what I mean?
sure i can agree with that. especially top ten lists of the year. those are fine,. but don't u think it's ridiculous when ppl start making lists in every thread just cos they hav no real insight to offer other than.. hmm, LIST!
i just wish ppl would get over that. it's chronically overused here.
I agree. Even I've been guilty of this in the past (and present). They're tempting little sluts, those lists...
hahahaha.
Quote from: PQuote from: peteso stop being angry over lists.
i can be angry over whatever the fuck i want, like ur obnoxious signature banner.
Quote from: petehahahaha.
Quote from: PQuote from: peteso stop being angry over lists.
i can be angry over whatever the fuck i want, like ur obnoxious signature banner.
"Maybe you've thought about calling before. You can help a child for only 26 cents a day. Think of the difference you could make! You know what I think it is? You just forgot the number. So, here it is again."
cool is that from Magnolia too?
thats like saying why didnt david lynch win for best director for mulholland drive
or naomi watts?!?
Seriously, yo. Well, at least the Golden Globes gave Mulholland Dr. some credit. Though I can't wait for the day when Naomi Watts wins Best Actress. That'll be a good day, indeed.