2018 Oscar Nominations Thread (post and whinge about them here)

[LYLS3637]

I loved THREE BILLBOARDS. Outside of DUNKIRK, it's my favorite of the crop. Wasn't all that impressed with LADY BIRD. Solid film, but nothing I haven't seen before. 

 

And Oscar balloting began only two days before the Franco scandal broke. It opened January 5 and closed January 12. 

[Mister Matt]

Surprised and sad Hammer didn't make the list.  And no nomination for In a Heartbeat for Animated Short?!??!  WTF?  Remember Me deserves the Oscar for Best Song.  Mystery of Love is the only other song I think comes close.  Happy Baby Driver got tossed a couple of bones for Sound and Editing.  I think it deserved more, but being a summer release "action" flick was already an uphill battle and the Spacey scandal only impeded it further, which is a shame.  

Has anyone seen Roman J. Israel, Esq?  Denzel kept popping up on the short lists, but I've never seen anyone even mention the film, much less his performance.

[RippedMan]

I think "Get Out" is a fine movie. I watched it on a plane and found myself mostly bored. It wasn't enough horror to be horror, nor enough thriller to be a thriller. It was just fine, and the ending was a bit obvious. But I think the lead was really terrific, so happy to see him nominated. 

"3 Billboards" is an absolute mess. How it got nominated for screenplay, I have no clue. The movie legit doesn't make sense. But glad he didn't get a best director nom because I thought the direction was weak. Lots of shots of trees and nature and terrible music. 

I'm surprised that "Molly's Game" was shut out. Did it open too late? I thought it would get some noms for screenplay/actress. 

[LYLS3637]

MOLLY'S GAME was nominated for Best Adapted Screenplay, but nothing else. Which is crap. I found it infinitely more enjoyable than DARKEST HOUR, GET OUT, LADY BIRD, and THE POST.

[Mister Matt]

The movie legit doesn't make sense.

What do you mean?  What confused you?  I had no trouble understanding or following it.  I thought it was brilliant and plan to see it again.

[RippedMan]

*SPOILERS for 3 Billboards* 

Mister Matt, there's a scene where the guy comes into the gift shop. He's angry, throws things at Frances. And then he ends up not being the suspect. So why did he come into the gift shop so angry? Why was he throwing **** at her? What motivated that? And why did Harrelson have a hot British wife in the middle of nowhere Missouri where everyone else had a thick accent? 

[LYLS3637]

RippedMan said: "*SPOILERS for 3 Billboards*

Mister Matt, there's a scene where the guy comes into the gift shop. He's angry, throws things at Frances. And then he ends up not being the suspect. So why did he come into the gift shop so angry? Why was he throwing **** at her? What motivated that? And why did Harrelson have a hot British wife in the middle of nowhere Missouri where everyone else had a thick accent?"

You don't know what motivated that. That's the point. You think you know why he was upset, and it turns out not to be what you think. You're convinced that's who did. Both the gift shop scene and the scene in the bar are supposed to convince you beyond doubt that they found the murderer. So when it turns out that the DNA isn't a match, is that an acceptable answer for you? Or are you convinced, as Frances and Sam were, that he deserves their form of justice?

[RippedMan]

I think it would have been a better written movie, if they had had some line in there about why he was so outraged in the gift shop. To me, looking back, that scene just seemed to put in there so we'd think it was him, because obviously why else would he be so pissed, but the fact that they never explain why he's so pissed to me just makes the movie messy. It was a bit too obvious of a decoy.

[ErikJ972]

I couldn't get past the nauseating redemption arc for Sam Rockwell's racist cop character.

The fact that this got nominated for anything baffles me. Let alone screenplay. It was obvioulsy written by someone with absolutely no clue about race in America. If this wins it will be a giant step back from Moonlight last year.

[Mister Matt]

The man in the gift shop is not just a red herring, but he also represents the degree of rampant misogyny she's facing.  He legitimizes her efforts and balances the story when the villain was being portrayed as an over-the-top psycho in a broader sense of being a white trash bigot, this other character comes along to more sharply focus on the topic that drives the character's primary motivations.

To me, looking back, that scene just seemed to put in there so we'd think it was him, because obviously why else would he be so pissed, but the fact that they never explain why he's so pissed to me just makes the movie messy.

He's pissed because like most people in the area, he knows who she is and what she's up to, which ruins his fun.  He was bragging to a friend in a bar about raping a girl!  In light of the past year, how is this messy or demand explanation?  Remember the white supremacist Preppy march with tiki torches, polo shirts and khakis?  That's the mindset this man represents.

I couldn't get past the nauseating redemption arc for Sam Rockwell's racist cop character.

I found it interesting because, in the end, isn't that one of the goals in achieving equality?  The ending of the film is asking for our opinion, not strictly feeding it to us.  It's about the subjectivity of justice, which can't be easily defined by means of legislation

[Call_me_jorge]

My major problem with Three Billboards is that I think Sam Rockwell’s character didn’t get in enough trouble after throwing a man out of a window. After doing something like that you wouldn’t go back into the police station and expect everyone to cheer you on. If I were that new chief, instead of firing him I would lock him up.

[RippedMan]

Mister Matt, the guy in the gift shop was from out of town. Hence them driving to another state. So how would he know who she is? There’s no mention that they are connected in anyway. He just walks in and starts throwing stuff and being very aggressive, but it’s not rooted in anything. I just don’t think it’s a good sceeenplay or movie. It’s has moments of brilliance - Frances’ speech - but most of the time felt odd and disjointed. The British wife.

[Mister Matt]

Why on earth would you be hung up on a man having a British wife in this town?  I knew a British wife (and mother) in Spring, Texas.  So what?  As for the stranger, we're not supposed to know the exact circumstances of his stop in Ebbing (he ends up at the bar as well).  The intrigue to the character is far more interesting than giving an explanation.  It's what I love about the film.  The fact that he enters her store and behaves in such a malevolent way towards her seems intentional, yet not for the reason we may have thought.  And in the end, the reason behind the scene in the gift shop isn't actually relevant to the story in the same way it isn't relevant to the characters in the final scene.  Whether the answer is realistic in a traditional sense or far-fetched or supernatural really has no bearing on the plot because it's a detail that doesn't matter.  I don't think it's messy at all.  The plot may not be as neatly tied up in a fancy bow as found in a Ron Howard or Spielberg film, but it's very deliberate, very efficient and actually, very realistic.

[BroadwayNYC2]

Man, Armie Hammer and Michael Stuhlbarg's snubs hurt. 

[henrikegerman]

more or less as expected, wish Luca and Michael Stuhlbarg would have been nominated for CMbYN, and would have liked a whole lot more Mudbound love, Dee Rees so deserved a nomination... but whatever.

Very surprised Darkest Hour was nominated for best picture.

[TheQuibbler]

RippedMan said: "Mister Matt, the guy in the gift shop was from out of town. Hence them driving to another state. So how would he know who she is? There’s no mention that they are connected in anyway. He just walks in and starts throwing stuff and being very aggressive, but it’s not rooted in anything. I just don’t think it’s a good sceeenplay or movie. It’s has moments of brilliance - Frances’ speech - but most of the time felt odd and disjointed. The British wife."

I'm with you. Also, what are the odds there's a different guy running around raping women and setting them on fire? The crime the man brags about is too specific in execution and location to simply be a believable red herring. 

 

Mister Matt said: "Has anyone seen Roman J. Israel, Esq?  Denzel kept popping up on the short lists, but I've never seen anyone even mention the film, much less his performance."

I saw it; its completely mediocre, botching an interesting enough premise with too many outlandish and implausible plot contrivances. The film ultimately can't decide what it wants to be about. Washington is good, but he's trapped in a bad film.

[Someone in a Tree2]

I'm expecting Oscar night's acting winners to match the same front runners that have consistently won at the Globes, Sags, Critics Choice, etc. GET OUT and CALL ME BY YOUR NAME will each take home a screenplay award and nothing else. I expect THE SHAPE OF WATER (my favorite movie of the year, but little-discussed in this thread) to take home the big prizes of best director and picture. The rest of the pack will all need to just be proud of reaping those nominations alone-- and that will be disappointing news to the fans of LADY BIRD, THREE BILLBOARDS, and (God help us) THE POST.

Listen, you could do worse-- look at WONDER WOMAN, a smash hit that was hailed by critics and audiences alike, and got not a single nomination.

[ArtMan]

Ripped Man and anybody else who is interested.  The dvd of Get Out has an alternate ending,  which in my opinion is more credible.  My redbox rental did not have special features.  So if you do a search,  do Get Out alternate ending and you can see it on youtube.  (sorry don't know how to provide the link)

[blaxx]

I may be alone here. The Shape of Water had an overall beautiful production, but the story at its core was as trite as it can get. When so many relevant films can use the spotlight, this aquatic Beauty and the Beast seemed shallow to me (no pun intended). Is that really the best picture of the year?

 

[RippedMan]

I def need to see some of the other films. I'm such a big Martin McDonagh fan, so was just so bummed with "3 Billboards." And thank, The Quibbler, you basically expressed what I couldn't say. It all just felt too neat and clean, and yet so messy with the storytelling. And in the end nothing was resolved. And I felt like the flashback to her and her daughter was laughable. Like, really, she says "Go and get raped" and then she does....a little on the nose, Martin. Dumb. 

 

[TheGingerBreadMan]

I don’t understand the argument that Three Billboards comes across as racist - featuring racist characters doesn’t mean that the piece itself has a racist message. Could somebody elaborate on this for me? I adored this movie and saw it twice - it is not a perfect film, but I think that’s the point - I don’t think that McDonagh intended for everything to be neatly tied up, because that’s not how life is. His characters and plot are not outlandish, and while the circumstances are clearly heightened, the events that unfold all could very well happen in a deeply conservative town, and the resolution of such events would likely not work out perfectly in the end. I think that his film is a very well-made piece with some spectacular writing and riveting performances.

[ErikJ972]

I agree the inclusion of a racist character does not mean a film is racist. My problem with 3 Billboards (one of many) is that the film takes the time to provide that character with a redemptive (and unbelievable) charachter arc, and doesn't spend one second exploring the pain and suffering that character has caused others. It was uncomfortable to watch. Especially considering the very real problem this country has with police brutatlity.

Your Guide to the Three Billboards Backlash

"On Twitter, NPR’s Gene Demby has been one of the leading voices against Three Billboards, calling the film’s rapturous reception at Toronto an indictment of the whiteness of the critical establishment: “I think festival audiences are so used to the centrality of white people’s inner lives treated as the Actual Emotional Stakes that they don’t get what’s janky about a movie set in a town where cops torture black [people] but the plot is about thwarted justice for a white lady,” he wrote in one thread. Other media outlets soon followed suit. The Washington Post’s Alyssa Rosenberg has written how the film’s handling of Dixon undermines its own moral convictions. At the Daily Beast, Ira Madison III, a McDonagh fan, called the film “unearned, manipulative and altogether offensive.” The HuffPost’s Zeba Blaycompared it to a white liberal’s racist uncle."

 http://www.vulture.com/2018/01/oscars-2018-your-guide-to-the-three-billboards-backlash.html

[Alex Kulak2]

James Franco was robbed

[Mister Matt]

The Shape of Water had an overall beautiful production, but the story at its core was as trite as it can get. 

I feel the same.  It was visually stunning and it was...cute.  A modern day fairy tale.  I love Del Toro's work, especially Devil's Backbone and Pan's Labyrinth, but this felt like it was lightened up to be the next Amelie or something.  I really enjoyed it, but didn't feel like it was a Best Picture winner.  I do think it will win for Score.

[RippedMan]

I can see both sides for sure. But to say that the film is "intentionally messy" because life is messy is a cop out for me.