|
Post by mattfincher on Mar 1, 2017 5:58:04 GMT
...
|
|
tonyz
New Member
Posts: 98
Likes: 43
|
Post by tonyz on Mar 1, 2017 6:04:43 GMT
I'd say Crash only because it's genuinely terrible movie. Both are huge upsets and neither deserved the win IMO.
Crash won SAG. SAG sometimes picks the dumbest movies to reward.
|
|
|
Post by mattfincher on Mar 1, 2017 6:08:49 GMT
I'd say Crash only because it's genuinely terrible movie. Both are huge upsets and neither deserved the win IMO. Crash won SAG. SAG sometimes picks the dumbest movies to reward. Cry some more.
|
|
Lubezki
Based
the social distancing
Posts: 4,332
Likes: 6,554
|
Post by Lubezki on Mar 1, 2017 6:11:09 GMT
Moonlight. LLL just seemed undeniable.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 1, 2017 6:29:41 GMT
Moonlight's win is unprecedented-- SAG supporting actor and WGA were only guild wins, it bombed BAFTA, and only won Drama Globe
La La Land lead the nominations, won PGA, DGA, Globe, BAFTA, SAG Actress and made over $100m more than Moonlight
Crash also had WGA but at least won SAG ensemble and ACE
There was also talk of Brokeback backlash and homophobia within the Academy
|
|
|
Post by moviebuffbrad on Mar 1, 2017 9:31:15 GMT
There was also talk of Brokeback backlash and homophobia within the Academy Yeah, and there were also people predicting Crash as a possible upset. Not so with Moonlight. LLL seemed like the biggest lock since Slumdog. The critical and financial success, the 14 nominations club, sweeping everything, the "movies about Hollywood" trend that's been going on since The Artist, etc. Speaking of the movie they were too homophobic to award 11 years ago, Moonlight also had that going against it.
|
|
flasuss
Badass
Posts: 1,828
Likes: 1,615
|
Post by flasuss on Mar 1, 2017 12:30:50 GMT
Moonlight. If you were following the race closely in 2006, you'd see that Crash was rising and was a true contender, plus it faced a movie that had homophobic backlash.
Meanwhile, Moonlight didn't seem to have a chance, doing poorly at BAFTA, with La La Land a very beloved movie that had tied the nominations record.
|
|
|
Post by Johnny_Hellzapoppin on Mar 1, 2017 13:24:29 GMT
Definitely Moonlight.
|
|
tonyz
New Member
Posts: 98
Likes: 43
|
Post by tonyz on Mar 1, 2017 16:11:27 GMT
I'd say Crash only because it's genuinely terrible movie. Both are huge upsets and neither deserved the win IMO. Crash won SAG. SAG sometimes picks the dumbest movies to reward. Cry some more. Yeah I'm oh so crushed...
|
|
filmnoir
Full Member
Posts: 820
Likes: 408
|
Post by filmnoir on Mar 1, 2017 17:11:29 GMT
Moonlight. If you were following the race closely in 2006, you'd see that Crash was rising and was a true contender, plus it faced a movie that had homophobic backlash. Meanwhile, Moonlight didn't seem to have a chance, doing poorly at BAFTA, with La La Land a very beloved movie that had tied the nominations record. Moonlight was much more highly regarded than Crash. It won GG, LAFC, NSFC, CFCA, SFCA, ISA, Gotham, NYFC-On-line, WGA, USC Scripter - among others. And Barry Jenkins slayed when it came to LAFC, NYFC, NSFC, NBR.
And LLL did fail to get a SAG ensemble nod. I don't think the film as a whole was as highly regarded by AMPAS - since it won only 6 out of 14 nods.
|
|
|
Post by SergeantTibbs on Mar 1, 2017 17:24:17 GMT
So Matt, what was your initial reaction to the BP announcement? I always remember you championing it (and Ali) since you saw it.
I chose Moonlight not because of the quality but because it lost some key precursors we thought constituted locks and La La Land seemed like the lockiest lock since 2008.
|
|
morton
Based
Posts: 2,811
Likes: 2,954
|
Post by morton on Mar 1, 2017 18:33:38 GMT
Moonlight. If you were following the race closely in 2006, you'd see that Crash was rising and was a true contender, plus it faced a movie that had homophobic backlash. Meanwhile, Moonlight didn't seem to have a chance, doing poorly at BAFTA, with La La Land a very beloved movie that had tied the nominations record. Yes, I actually thought Dev Patel had a chance because Lion seemed to be peaking at the right time whereas Moonlight seemed to be fading. After the Globe win where even Ali lost, it didn't manage many nominations at BAFTA. It lost SAG Ensemble which I thought was a really bad sign. On the other hand, La La Land kept setting all kinds of records and continued to do well at the box office. in hindsight, I can see why Moonlight was able to pull off the upset. There was a lot of backlash against La La Land, and I think that with Best Picture being the only category using preference voting that Moonlight was ranked ahead of it on several ballots even if Moonlight wasn't the voter's first choice. It seems odd because I thought La La Land wouldn't be divisive and would win on preferential ballot, but I could see how the backlash and people thinking that it was too slight to be winning everything would cause people to rank it at the bottom of their ballots or near last. I think politics also played a factor. It's certainly not the only reason it won, but I guess some voters did the opposite of what I thought they would do. I thought that the escapist film would win in such a dark year, but in fact, I think that ended up hurting La La Land in the end that it wasn't "important" since the last few Best Picture winners have had that. (Maybe not Birdman; although, I guess there could be an argument made that up against Boyhood, Birdman criticizing superhero films and celebrating "art" was the more "important" message.) There's also been a trend over the last few years where the film with a large ensemble has won, and while Moonlight wasn't populist and middlebrow enough for SAG to win Ensemble, it was nominated. So La La Land missing SAG Ensemble did turn out to be somewhat significant after all as well.
|
|
|
Post by phenix714 on Mar 1, 2017 18:55:11 GMT
Moonlight. If you were following the race closely in 2006, you'd see that Crash was rising and was a true contender, plus it faced a movie that had homophobic backlash. Meanwhile, Moonlight didn't seem to have a chance, doing poorly at BAFTA, with La La Land a very beloved movie that had tied the nominations record. La La Land received violent, irrational backlash as well. I wouldn't say Moonlight didn't seem to have a chance. It was the obvious runner up and people were starting to feel it could upset. Its WGA win was a sign that it had a lot of love, because how else could it have taken down Lonerghan and the Best Picture juggernaut ?
|
|
|
Post by phenix714 on Mar 1, 2017 19:05:53 GMT
Moonlight. If you were following the race closely in 2006, you'd see that Crash was rising and was a true contender, plus it faced a movie that had homophobic backlash. Meanwhile, Moonlight didn't seem to have a chance, doing poorly at BAFTA, with La La Land a very beloved movie that had tied the nominations record. Yes, I actually thought Dev Patel had a chance because Lion seemed to be peaking at the right time whereas Moonlight seemed to be fading. After the Globe win where even Ali lost, it didn't manage many nominations at BAFTA. It lost SAG Ensemble which I thought was a really bad sign. On the other hand, La La Land kept setting all kinds of records and continued to do well at the box office. in hindsight, I can see why Moonlight was able to pull off the upset. There was a lot of backlash against La La Land, and I think that with Best Picture being the only category using preference voting that Moonlight was ranked ahead of it on several ballots even if Moonlight wasn't the voter's first choice. It seems odd because I thought La La Land wouldn't be divisive and would win on preferential ballot, but I could see how the backlash and people thinking that it was too slight to be winning everything would cause people to rank it at the bottom of their ballots or near last. I think politics also played a factor. It's certainly not the only reason it won, but I guess some voters did the opposite of what I thought they would do. I thought that the escapist film would win in such a dark year, but in fact, I think that ended up hurting La La Land in the end that it wasn't "important" since the last few Best Picture winners have had that. (Maybe not Birdman; although, I guess there could be an argument made that up against Boyhood, Birdman criticizing superhero films and celebrating "art" was the more "important" message.) There's also been a trend over the last few years where the film with a large ensemble has won, and while Moonlight wasn't populist and middlebrow enough for SAG to win Ensemble, it was nominated. So La La Land missing SAG Ensemble did turn out to be somewhat significant after all as well. Regarding the divisive factor, I think Moonlight quite simply was an easier movie to like than La La Land, weird as it may sound. The modern world we live in has become very political and obsessed with matters of societal importance, so a movie like Moonlight is very "hip" these days. La La Land on the other hand is a movie that is very out of touch with reality. It is made for dreamers, artists and people who look at the past with nostalgia. This mindset is not all that popular in a modern world that is all about materialism and progress. People may feel that persons like Seb and Mia are actually harmful to society, due to their passivity and their refusal to deal with reality.
|
|
|
Post by Billy_Costigan on Mar 1, 2017 19:57:14 GMT
Moonlight. LLL just seemed undeniable. Greatest avatar of all-time!
|
|
|
Post by phenix714 on Mar 1, 2017 20:13:23 GMT
Moonlight. LLL just seemed undeniable. Greatest avatar of all-time! Yeah I couldn't stop watching it. Such a great scene. How can some people say the actors weren't a crucial part to the movie's greatness ?
|
|
|
Post by JangoB on Mar 1, 2017 20:17:28 GMT
A tough question, but I lean towards Crash. If only because Moonlight was the most critically acclaimed film of 2016 and was so beloved, while Crash didn't quite seem to me to be that kind of film. Moonlight winning was obviously shocking, but for me most of the shock comes from the messiness of the announcement itself. While Crash was just a piece of pure whatthefuckery. At least Moonlight had taken quite a few awards of its own up to that point, while Crash failed to even get a Globe Drama nomination
|
|
|
Post by mikediastavrone96 on Mar 1, 2017 20:27:52 GMT
La La Land was definitely a bigger frontrunner than Brokeback Mountain, which despite its critical acclaim and popularity had considerable controversy given the national opinion of homosexuality at that time. So although Crash was not at the level of respect as Moonlight, it made sense as the alternative given its SAG Ensemble win and the themes of racial prejudice being seen as "safer" than themes of homosexuality and masculine repression (ironically the same themes that resonate greatly in today's political climate and helped push Moonlight to the win) among the predominately old, white, male Academy.
|
|
|
Post by ibbi on Mar 1, 2017 20:50:52 GMT
They're both huge shocks, but looking back with the great gift of hindsight there were a number of reasons why Crash winning/Brokeback losing made sense. Not the case this time.
-Moonlight didn't have some absurd, unheard of flooding of Hollywood with screeners. -Moonlight. didn't win the SAG ensemble award. -La La Land didn't have prominent figures in the community speaking out against it/refusing to watch it, there was no reason to believe the 'backlash' was any bigger a deal than the crap the front runner catches every year.
It was the safer, more palatable choice, and way out in front when it comes to precursors. That shouldn't be a position which you lose from. This win literally makes next to no sense.
|
|