Into the Woods Official Movie Thread — Page 204

Oh Bucky, Bucky, Bucky....

....you miss the point.

Rare is it the majority of moviegoers recall a Best Picture winner and rarer still are those that care to.

These awards are so self iimportant it's amusing. They televise them and when their ratings suck are confused why people do not care. It's cause they nominate crap people do not watch. Why would they see an award show that has films they never wanted to see win anything?

Yes there are thosethat watch and write down movies to see. But they aren't the Average people the AAcademy is after with this televised self pat on the back.

Plus they enjoy boring overacted dramas than comedies or musicals. How many best pictures have been comedies? Not many.

You picked one word and used all caps to make what point? Oh, that you didn't read my post at all.

When I think forgotten Best Picture I think like

Crash, The Artist, Last Emperor, Gladiator even Chariots of Fire. What survives in our culture of Chariots of Fire is literally that theme when it's parodied.

Not putting down any of these fine films but it's just true

Updated On: 1/15/15 at 02:45 PM

liza's headband...most moronic?...really?...I think I deserve a MOST MORONIC award...teehee...in all the threads and all the post ever made here you crown me MOST MORONIC...for a point of view you disagree with wow...who knew my words would add up to so much!...

JE SUIS CHARLIE!

WHIPLASH was in no way "rejected" by the public. It hasn't even opened in most markets yet and it cost pennies to make compared to INTO THE WOODS. INTO THE WOODS always faced an uphill battle as an awards player (Besty had a very nice post about the reasons why who knows how many pages ago), and going into today's announcement it was only predicted to get in for a couple of nominations. The only surprise to me was that it didn't get in for Sound Mixing, a silly snub if you ask me, but whatever there were much worse snubs. The fact Meryl Streep got in for Supporting Actress is huge as the category was incredibly competitive and it's hard to think of the last fantasy performance that got nominated for an Oscar (was it Ian McKellen's nod for the first LORD OF THE RINGS?). It is a shame that Emily Blunt wasn't recognized but it's hard to complain about the list the Academy came up with, especially with the inclusion of genius Marion Cotillard.

---

Oh Plz. I'll bet good money you haven't even seen half of the films nominated for Best Picture. But of course Into the Woods is perfect and the Academy is shallow cause they didn't nominate your favorite film right? You are a joke.

I'm so proud of Into the Woods! It got nominated for what I thought it would (minus Sound Mixing). Though, I wish it would have made it to the BP lineup (especially considering they masterfully handled the second half--keeping it a beautiful and powerful story), I cannot complain! I think it will WIN Costume Design, and I hope it will win production design, but the Costume Design win belongs to Into the Woods and Colleen Atwood.

The Movie that will Best Picture is Boyhood and it has earned $24,132,400 in North America and $19,143,000 internationally, for a total of $43,275,400. So no, this won't be like that kind of year. And while I'm at it, Crash was certainly not a film no one had ever seen or heard of. Lord.

I'm just glad that INTO THE WOODS got nominated for Oscars at all. I disagree that BOYHOOD has the Best Picture in the bag just yet, for I think either SELMA, BIRDMAN, or THE GRAND BUDAPEST HOTEL will pull a CHICAGO type win that no one saw it coming.

"I'm just glad that INTO THE WOODS got nominated for Oscars at all. I disagree that BOYHOOD has the Best Picture in the bag just yet, for I think either SELMA, BIRDMAN, or THE GRAND BUDAPEST HOTEL will pull a CHICAGO type win that no one saw it coming."

Selma didn't get a director nomination and most are calling it snubbed (weirdly) so I highly doubt that will win. Budapest doesn't have the overall support. I would love to see Birdman win but Boyhood is the film of the year. It's gimmick is helping a lot. Actually, many people saw Chicago winning. It was one of the top 3 frontrunners.

Sometimes the movie with the gimmick wins. I remember seeing "The Artist" and being largely unimpressed with it. Yes, it was a silent black-and-white film with good actors and production values, but it didn't do anything new or different with the medium, just told a very conventional story in a very conventional way. It ended up winning Best Picture, almost solely on its gimmick (there was nothing remarkable about the movie except that it was silent and in black and white), but to me it played like a film major's senior class project. YMMV, obviously.

"Oh Plz. I'll bet good money you haven't even seen half of the films nominated for Best Picture. But of course Into the Woods is perfect and the Academy is shallow cause they didn't nominate your favorite film right? You are a joke."

*yawn*

You are so trite.

I never once said Into the Woods should win.

I don't think any of the films nominated are worthy of winning. NONE of them. It's as if they pick films so that they can get publicity so people will go and see them than actually pick films people actually care to see.

Oh, I mean real people. Not people that profess to love movies only to gush over films they see that are limited released and they feel OH so special for having seen them.

For three straight years I saw almost every single film possible on the weekends. Sometimes I'd see four in one day. That's because I wrote film reviews on them. Every single year I though the Academy was run by morons. They rarely ever pick films that last through the years and turn classic. They also rarely ever pick films for best picture that the mass audiences care about. It's a political hack of an award. If it were a really about awarding the best, then they wouldn't fret over someone winning twice in a row like they did for several actors who were nominated and only won on their worst of the two nominated films.

And so no I do not go see as many films as those three years because I have been burned by the crappy things Hollywood deems good. And so NO I don't believe they nominated the best of the best from last year. ANd therefore I don't really care which film wins, because I most likely will see it later and go OMG that won?

Oh, and you whining about me not seeing all the films on the oh so crappy nomination list means nothing to me. It certainly will not stop me from having an opinion. Because the good thing about seeing so many movies for three straight years is that I can predict, with great accuracy, how well I will like anything based on the trailer. I know which trailers showed everything. I know which trailers leave out the best parts to keep things secret.

I'm well aware of what films I'd like on that list just by watching their trailers.

Last year 12 Years a Slave was nominated. Didn't bother seeing it. Didn't want to. The more I heard about how the main character was abused through the film the less I wanted to see it. I've seen enough slave movies that I wasn't up to seeing another cliche mess of one. OH, but I'm sure there are people that will profess how it wasn't that much of a mess of cliches...

I don't see movies I have already deemed as I won't like them because it will not be a great viewing experience. I probably will never see it. That civil war time period is over done and I'm sick of it.