Usually the Oscar race feels a bend in the road right about now, with Toronto making or breaking several titles. There is always the hope that a film will break out there. But Telluride and Venice have already spit out one or two sure bets, and one wonders if there’s anything left in the festival circuit to move the race significantly. The Best Picture category has had only one minor shift since festival season started, and that is the potential ousting of George Clooney’s The Ides of March. While it hasn’t really been definitively ousted, its reception has been lukewarm so far, with what appears to be a solid “B” from festival attendees and others who’ve seen it. The Descendants, on the other hand, is soaring at the moment and seems to have everything a Best Pic contender needs: bravura, unrecognized director, bravura leading role by a white male, and a great story. It is easily one of the best films I’ve seen this year and the only thing that can hurt it now is overhype.
Likewise, Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy, propelled by what is said to be a brilliant turn by Gary Oldman, seems to have secured a place in the Big Ten. At least for now. When films are elevated above the rest at festivals it gives them a big head start heading into Oscar season. Conversely, a tepid response can sometimes stall an engine that’s impossible to restart. It has to be crazy making for publicists: how to now strategize with so many bloggers and critics seeing and writing about films that have yet to open. Sometimes it feels like an echo chamber, with people talking to each other about a race that exists only in their minds. The public at large isn’t really clued into what’s going on yet. They simply see a movie and decide for themselves whether they like it. That said, the buzz for The Descendants and Tinker, Tailor seems to be strong enough to perhaps trickle down.
As of now, it looks like there are five solid Best Picture contenders:
- Midnight in Paris (broke box-office records for Woody Allen, director’s notoriety, great word of mouth)
- The Help (insane box office, all female cast, sure to land at number 1 for many voters)
- The Artist (beloved by nearly everyone, backed by the Weinsteins, one of the best pics of the year)
- The Descendants (entertaining, relevant, a leap in maturity for its director and star)
- Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy (led by Oldman’s brilliant performance, distinguished literary pedigree, British – which never hurts)
Tree of Life still feels like it’s in play, even though it didn’t quite get the kind of acclaim it needed. With number votes happening, it could sneak in there.
Definitely out: W.E., Butter
On the fence: The Ides of March
Potential but nothing yet set: Beginners,Wuthering Heights, Super 8
Yet to be determined: Moneyball, 360 (playing in Toronto), Carnage, Contagion
Still to come? Essentially all of the Big Oscar Movies. And if they ALL come on strong, some of the first solid five could wobble.
- War Horse
- J Edgar (AFI Fest rolls it out)
- Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close
- The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo
- The Adventures of Tintin: Secret of the Unicorn
- Hugo
- The Iron Lady
- Young Adult
- We Bought a Zoo
Unless there’s an unknown rabbit waiting to be pulled from the hat, that’s mostly it for 2011. This is always the time of year where the lull and predictability makes me nervous. Is there a Million Dollar Baby lurking in the woodpile? Will The Descendants be that Best Picture winner that gets its start in Telluride and just keeps on hitting every mark until year’s end?
Last year, the two most popular films early on were The King’s Speech and The Social Network, with Black Swan and True Grit coming up on the outside in the final stretch pulling votes from those two. Usually by Toronto we have, at the very least, a presumed frontrunner. I guess that would be War Horse, even though no one has seen it. Spielberg, war, British people, Tony award-winning play – who knows what will happen with it. Has there ever been a film everyone thought would win before anyone saw it that actually DID win?
One thing I like about the TBA Oscar movies is that many of them feature women in the lead roles: Young Adult, The Iron Lady, and Dragon Tattoo. That makes it quite an unusual Oscar year for sure, though it’s a niche appeal that might have benefited better from last year’s balloting method rather than this year’s.
We also have at least two serious tearjerkers, with Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close, and War Horse. They could each join The Descendants as the films most likely to make AMPAS members cry real tears. Extremely Loud has 9/11’s anniversary to pair with it this year, and Tom Hanks. Hopefully it will play out as good as the screenplay is. Adapted screenplay could be the most competitive category running, as is usually the case. How many of the potential Best Pic nominees are original scripts? Young Adult is one, Midnight in Paris, The Artist, Contagion, The Iron Lady, and J. Edgar.
The trick this year will be finding a reason to care. While one could almost make the argument that The King’s Speech really did deserve to win the title, Best Picture of the Year for 2010, there is no one who would have argued that Tom Hooper was destined to win Best Director of the Year — and then he did, from both the DGA and the AMPAS. When something that bizarre occurs, one can only throw up one’s hands and attempt to accept these people for what they really are: they want you to be good, just not better than they are. They want a conventional film with an uplifting ending and characters you care about. The rest is left to the studios and the publicists. For a while there, though, there was no longer an Academy type of film. They were simply awarding great films. For a short while. A brief shining peak. From which there was only one way to go. Back down the mountain.
It’s not even that The King’s Speech isn’t a great film. It’s just that there were much better films in the race last year, specifically The Social Network. My aim here is not to beat a dead horse or continue this ongoing argument but just to say that my expectations for what the Academy can do with this great honor they have built up over the many decades have been significantly lowered. We don’t really have a choice anymore but to accept the generally accepted theory about who and what they are.
That means that this year’s Oscar race will be less interesting because there isn’t the notion that anything can happen. Our anticipation of what happens will necessarily be narrowed to fit the Academy’s limitations. Hopefully, those expectations will then be ripped wide open as the voting evolves. The truth is that it has never really been the best place to look for great films. They award some great films but mostly “pretty good” movies. So let’s keep our eye on the “pretty goods” and reserve the best for our own pleasure. This is perhaps the best reason why one should never let one’s emotions get involved when Oscar watching. A realistic attitude about the love affair is the best protection against heartbreak.
It seems you “critics” who think you should determine the Best Picture winner will never forgive them for not agreeing with you. You still complain that the standard was lowered because The Social Network didn’t win. Maybe, just maybe, you were wrong! {Personally I hated The Social Network, I found it misogynistic, racist and generally unpleasant viewing – but who cares what I think, or what critics think] The Oscars have always been this strange award which sometimes pleases, often doesn’t, but always keeps us fascinated (The Greatest Story Ever Told anyone). The main difference now is that there are all these prognosticators who believe they have a right to tell the Academy how to vote, if it doesn’t do as they say, then standards must be slipping. Mmmm it’s like a continuing temper tantrum
It seems you “critics” who think you should determine the Best Picture winner will never forgive them for not agreeing with you. You still complain that the standard was lowered because The Social Network didn’t win. Maybe, just maybe, you were wrong! {Personally I hated The Social Network, I found it misogynistic, racist and generally unpleasant viewing – but who cares what I think, or what critics think] The Oscars have always been this strange award which sometimes pleases, often doesn’t, but always keeps us fascinated (The Greatest Story Ever Told anyone). The main difference now is that there are all these prognosticators who believe they have a right to tell the Academy how to vote, if it doesn’t do as they say, then standards must be slipping. Mmmm it’s like a continuing temper tantrum
Tero, Avatar is such a case
Tero, Avatar is such a case
Is it possible to be nominated for Picture AND Director without a Screenplay nod?
Is it possible to be nominated for Picture AND Director without a Screenplay nod?
I’m starting to think that Drive will be a bigger player after all. Gathering 4-5 nominations in major categories (a bit like Black Swan). They could be Picture, Director, Supporting Actor and Editing at least. Let’s see how well it does when it opens in America this week.
I’m starting to think that Drive will be a bigger player after all. Gathering 4-5 nominations in major categories (a bit like Black Swan). They could be Picture, Director, Supporting Actor and Editing at least. Let’s see how well it does when it opens in America this week.
i have to say this – I’m kinda sick of going through hundreds of comments discussing petty arguments about movies from the past. Clearly people’s views are subjective, and clearly people get emotional about their personal choices, but personally i log on to gain insight for predictions and hear people’s opinions about that. And many people do offer very valuable information, and comments which someone who is not in the industry appreciates. So I gotta tell you, when I see a comment about The Social Network VS. The King’s Speech, I skip it and move forward, looking for something more interesting that focuses on predicting THIS year’s race. I guess I’m a practical guy.
Alright enough rambling, here is my current prediction for best picture nominees.
This prediction will clearly change in the upcoming months.
The order is by who is likely going to get nominated, not by who I think will win.
1. J. Edgar
2. War Horse
3. The Iron Lady
4. Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close
5. Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy
6. The Descendants
7. Moneyball OR The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo (but not both)
8. The Help
9. A Dangerous Method
Missing out: Harry Potter, Drive, Warrior, Midnight in Paris, The Artist, Young Adult, My Week with Marilyn, Carnage, The Ides of March, Shame, The Tree of Life, Albert Nobbs, We Bought a Zoo
i have to say this – I’m kinda sick of going through hundreds of comments discussing petty arguments about movies from the past. Clearly people’s views are subjective, and clearly people get emotional about their personal choices, but personally i log on to gain insight for predictions and hear people’s opinions about that. And many people do offer very valuable information, and comments which someone who is not in the industry appreciates. So I gotta tell you, when I see a comment about The Social Network VS. The King’s Speech, I skip it and move forward, looking for something more interesting that focuses on predicting THIS year’s race. I guess I’m a practical guy.
Alright enough rambling, here is my current prediction for best picture nominees.
This prediction will clearly change in the upcoming months.
The order is by who is likely going to get nominated, not by who I think will win.
1. J. Edgar
2. War Horse
3. The Iron Lady
4. Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close
5. Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy
6. The Descendants
7. Moneyball OR The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo (but not both)
8. The Help
9. A Dangerous Method
Missing out: Harry Potter, Drive, Warrior, Midnight in Paris, The Artist, Young Adult, My Week with Marilyn, Carnage, The Ides of March, Shame, The Tree of Life, Albert Nobbs, We Bought a Zoo
but i just think its a lot closer to that than “everyone has an opinion” and throwing our hands up at that and leaving it there.i think we can do better than that.
I think it’s actually “anyone who has spent a significant amount of time watching enough different movies, thought about them, read about them, discussed them… can have an opinion and can’t be told “this is better than this” “
but i just think its a lot closer to that than “everyone has an opinion” and throwing our hands up at that and leaving it there.i think we can do better than that.
I think it’s actually “anyone who has spent a significant amount of time watching enough different movies, thought about them, read about them, discussed them… can have an opinion and can’t be told “this is better than this” “
Interesting analysis, I have been (and am continued to be) however completely dismayed as to why people are comfortable overlooking the complete and utter misogynistic nature of The Social Network as well as the pompous, ungrateful attitude of its writer, Aaron Sorkin. I will add that this especially applies to women, who should have jeered at this film and not cheered. I’m very happy The King’s Speech won last year and put an end to what would’ve been certainly a disgraceful moment for US citizens and how the international community views us.
Interesting analysis, I have been (and am continued to be) however completely dismayed as to why people are comfortable overlooking the complete and utter misogynistic nature of The Social Network as well as the pompous, ungrateful attitude of its writer, Aaron Sorkin. I will add that this especially applies to women, who should have jeered at this film and not cheered. I’m very happy The King’s Speech won last year and put an end to what would’ve been certainly a disgraceful moment for US citizens and how the international community views us.
Tero, are you kidding? Super 8 is a mix of Goonies, Gremlins with a touch of Alien. By audience darlings Abrams and Spielberg. Appealing not only to the newer generations but to the whole generation that enjoyed summer movies in the 80s. It’s a b.o. slut, if you ask me, that was heavily pushed by viral campaigning. 200 million was the expectations, if not even more, in a realistic world… another issue is the fact that they produced it “only” with 50 million, which I’m pretty sure doesn’t include marketing costs.
Plus, I don’t find a single person who loved the film, just liked it or thought it was mediocre. Even some that thought it was pretty bad. I liked it, but all these “Best Picture” nom contender is ridiculous, just by looking at the competition: if it gets nom’d in front of Harry Potter AND Planet of the Apes, THAT would be a travesty.
Tero, are you kidding? Super 8 is a mix of Goonies, Gremlins with a touch of Alien. By audience darlings Abrams and Spielberg. Appealing not only to the newer generations but to the whole generation that enjoyed summer movies in the 80s. It’s a b.o. slut, if you ask me, that was heavily pushed by viral campaigning. 200 million was the expectations, if not even more, in a realistic world… another issue is the fact that they produced it “only” with 50 million, which I’m pretty sure doesn’t include marketing costs.
Plus, I don’t find a single person who loved the film, just liked it or thought it was mediocre. Even some that thought it was pretty bad. I liked it, but all these “Best Picture” nom contender is ridiculous, just by looking at the competition: if it gets nom’d in front of Harry Potter AND Planet of the Apes, THAT would be a travesty.
@ andrew
very well said. i think we agree on this about 95% and just are going to have to agree to disagree on the little intricacies. Your points are well taken– i just think we are way closer to being able to definitively have a “best” than an “anything goes and all opinions are equal” (not your direct quote just making a point). It kind of like when me and my best pal compare our year end top 10’s. We usually agree on 8 out of the 10 and naturally we spend all of our time arguing about the 2 films we differ on! This garners the bulk of the discussion. But if you step back and look at its remarkable how similar it is (same goes for the top 10 of all time or the year end top 10 lists compiled by critics). I’m not saying its exact or a science (nor should it be) but i just think its a lot closer to that than “everyone has an opinion” and throwing our hands up at that and leaving it there.i think we can do better than that.
@ andrew
very well said. i think we agree on this about 95% and just are going to have to agree to disagree on the little intricacies. Your points are well taken– i just think we are way closer to being able to definitively have a “best” than an “anything goes and all opinions are equal” (not your direct quote just making a point). It kind of like when me and my best pal compare our year end top 10’s. We usually agree on 8 out of the 10 and naturally we spend all of our time arguing about the 2 films we differ on! This garners the bulk of the discussion. But if you step back and look at its remarkable how similar it is (same goes for the top 10 of all time or the year end top 10 lists compiled by critics). I’m not saying its exact or a science (nor should it be) but i just think its a lot closer to that than “everyone has an opinion” and throwing our hands up at that and leaving it there.i think we can do better than that.
Jesus, I’m pretty sure Paramount expected 200 worldwide (not domestic) from Super 8. No more.
I have had The King’s Speech and The Social Network on blu-ray for months. The latter I’ve seen 5 times at home (on this format) alone. TKS is still in its plastic covers.
Jesus, I’m pretty sure Paramount expected 200 worldwide (not domestic) from Super 8. No more.
I have had The King’s Speech and The Social Network on blu-ray for months. The latter I’ve seen 5 times at home (on this format) alone. TKS is still in its plastic covers.
Super 8 is a movie that wasn’t expecting “only” 125 million domestic. It was expected to be a huge blockbuster. To be frank, both viral campaignings for Cloverfield and Super 8 didn’t work that well. The movies have done money, yes, and specially thanks to limited budget they become profitable. But I think it is out of question that most people expected way more of a Abrams/Spielberg monster/scifi/FX-heavy summer combo. 200 domestic, at least. When it comes to the Oscar chances, it hurts to be considered a blockbuster and well, NOT being the blockbuster everyone expected. Underperformed ain’t “bomb”, you know.
Super 8 is a movie that wasn’t expecting “only” 125 million domestic. It was expected to be a huge blockbuster. To be frank, both viral campaignings for Cloverfield and Super 8 didn’t work that well. The movies have done money, yes, and specially thanks to limited budget they become profitable. But I think it is out of question that most people expected way more of a Abrams/Spielberg monster/scifi/FX-heavy summer combo. 200 domestic, at least. When it comes to the Oscar chances, it hurts to be considered a blockbuster and well, NOT being the blockbuster everyone expected. Underperformed ain’t “bomb”, you know.
By the way, do any of you, perchance visit the imdb boards? The Oscar Buzz board?
By the way, do any of you, perchance visit the imdb boards? The Oscar Buzz board?
@julian
as a professor in arts, you are conceptually equipped to speak and write about works of art with more eloquence, more depth and scope. You will be able to discern a lot of stuff about works of art that “the common man” just don’t see (and probably doesn’t appreciate). But it is still a matter of perception.
Very well said. Bravo. Among art professors, it remains a matter of perception.
@ drake
I don’t mean to keep hammering you with my point or anything and I understand where you’re coming from, but I just actively disagree with your view so forgive my need to keep on replying to your posts.
It [Citizen Kane] at least “could” be voted the best because it is the best.
Two things: One: It is the best according to the majority. Two: The fact that it could be voted as the best doesn’t say much because technically speaking, there will always be a film that is the most agreed upon by numbers, so there has to be a film that “can” be voted the best. But take a look at the Rottentomatoes Tomatometer numbers for a random (large enough) sample of movies. If consensus was a strong candidate for objective labelling, you would expect more movies to have Tomatometer scores near 0% and near 100% than those with scores around 50%. That would indicate that film critics (people who have studied film) have at some generally agreed upon (even if not absolute) list of criteria that they look for in movies, and that there is a sufficiently strong tendency to agree about what makes a good film and what makes a bad one. But no. You’ll find the scores to be uniformally distributed from 0% to 100%. As many movies divide critics as those who find them in agreement. Looking at MCN’s compilation of Top Ten 2010 lists, there are 75 film that have at least five critics agree are Top 10 worthy. 75! Why? Because experiencing art is personal, and I think that’s just a wonderful thing. Films are made up of so many coulours and beats and people have so much different responses to the same things that there has to be a personal filter through which every critic reviews movies, whether they recognize it or not.
@julian
as a professor in arts, you are conceptually equipped to speak and write about works of art with more eloquence, more depth and scope. You will be able to discern a lot of stuff about works of art that “the common man” just don’t see (and probably doesn’t appreciate). But it is still a matter of perception.
Very well said. Bravo. Among art professors, it remains a matter of perception.
@ drake
I don’t mean to keep hammering you with my point or anything and I understand where you’re coming from, but I just actively disagree with your view so forgive my need to keep on replying to your posts.
It [Citizen Kane] at least “could” be voted the best because it is the best.
Two things: One: It is the best according to the majority. Two: The fact that it could be voted as the best doesn’t say much because technically speaking, there will always be a film that is the most agreed upon by numbers, so there has to be a film that “can” be voted the best. But take a look at the Rottentomatoes Tomatometer numbers for a random (large enough) sample of movies. If consensus was a strong candidate for objective labelling, you would expect more movies to have Tomatometer scores near 0% and near 100% than those with scores around 50%. That would indicate that film critics (people who have studied film) have at some generally agreed upon (even if not absolute) list of criteria that they look for in movies, and that there is a sufficiently strong tendency to agree about what makes a good film and what makes a bad one. But no. You’ll find the scores to be uniformally distributed from 0% to 100%. As many movies divide critics as those who find them in agreement. Looking at MCN’s compilation of Top Ten 2010 lists, there are 75 film that have at least five critics agree are Top 10 worthy. 75! Why? Because experiencing art is personal, and I think that’s just a wonderful thing. Films are made up of so many coulours and beats and people have so much different responses to the same things that there has to be a personal filter through which every critic reviews movies, whether they recognize it or not.
@ julan
You make some fantastic points as well Julian. You say:
“You cannot make any clear-cut criteria for judging one movie better than the other”
i don’t agree here. again, its not an exact science, and i’m not trying to create some point system or grading that drains all of the fun/enjoyment out of this (i can’t but think of the scene in dead poet’s society where where williams makes his students tear out the page in the book that is about rating poetry– haha… i’m not that evil). I consider myself a film formalist and a believer in the “auteur” theory. I kind of combine David Bordwell and Andrew Sarris. I studied, learned, and believe in this school of criticism and evaluation. I don’t cover documentary films and i don’t cover experimental films. Anyways, i just think i can use those criteria i can judge pretty objectively. I understand 95% of moviegoers (at least) aren’t going to use that same criteria but that’s ok. I have to stick up for what i believe in.
@ julan
You make some fantastic points as well Julian. You say:
“You cannot make any clear-cut criteria for judging one movie better than the other”
i don’t agree here. again, its not an exact science, and i’m not trying to create some point system or grading that drains all of the fun/enjoyment out of this (i can’t but think of the scene in dead poet’s society where where williams makes his students tear out the page in the book that is about rating poetry– haha… i’m not that evil). I consider myself a film formalist and a believer in the “auteur” theory. I kind of combine David Bordwell and Andrew Sarris. I studied, learned, and believe in this school of criticism and evaluation. I don’t cover documentary films and i don’t cover experimental films. Anyways, i just think i can use those criteria i can judge pretty objectively. I understand 95% of moviegoers (at least) aren’t going to use that same criteria but that’s ok. I have to stick up for what i believe in.
@andrew
that’s very well written and i think you make a point between objectivity/subjectivity and consensus. Very good point. I agree citizen kane is voted as the best by consensus but you can’t completely separate it from the piece of art it is. It at least “could” be voted the best because it is the best. Consensuses are good (albeit not perfect) because they throw out the outliers. I just look at that critics compiled top 10 list and can’t help but notice the huge discrepancy between #1 Social Network and #6 King’s speech and feel they got it right based on the quality of the film- plain and simple. It’s like 1972 with “the godfather” and “cabaret” (i’m not directly comparing these films to the 2010 films). Both great films, but i think one is the best film of 1972 (the godfather) and one is the 3-5th best (cabaret) of 1972. I actually have king’s speech like 10-12 of 2010 but whatever. I’m just saying like with 1972’s top films and 2010 best films i can tell the difference even at a microscopic level at the top. I won’t go blind or get angry with someone trying to argue with someone that prefers “king’s speech” or “cabaret”… I just think they are wrong. It’s not like i stop people and correct them or argue with them when they say they love “caberet” or “king’s speech”. i wouldn’t be that arrogant nor is it worth it cause i really like those those films, too. To use ryan’s analogy these films are both in the museum. It just may take the curator of the museum instead of a 2nd year art student to tell the difference. (please don’t take that personally, i’m not in any way shape form take that to mean i’m talking about you, i’m not, its obvious from your writing they you know your stuff.).
@andrew
that’s very well written and i think you make a point between objectivity/subjectivity and consensus. Very good point. I agree citizen kane is voted as the best by consensus but you can’t completely separate it from the piece of art it is. It at least “could” be voted the best because it is the best. Consensuses are good (albeit not perfect) because they throw out the outliers. I just look at that critics compiled top 10 list and can’t help but notice the huge discrepancy between #1 Social Network and #6 King’s speech and feel they got it right based on the quality of the film- plain and simple. It’s like 1972 with “the godfather” and “cabaret” (i’m not directly comparing these films to the 2010 films). Both great films, but i think one is the best film of 1972 (the godfather) and one is the 3-5th best (cabaret) of 1972. I actually have king’s speech like 10-12 of 2010 but whatever. I’m just saying like with 1972’s top films and 2010 best films i can tell the difference even at a microscopic level at the top. I won’t go blind or get angry with someone trying to argue with someone that prefers “king’s speech” or “cabaret”… I just think they are wrong. It’s not like i stop people and correct them or argue with them when they say they love “caberet” or “king’s speech”. i wouldn’t be that arrogant nor is it worth it cause i really like those those films, too. To use ryan’s analogy these films are both in the museum. It just may take the curator of the museum instead of a 2nd year art student to tell the difference. (please don’t take that personally, i’m not in any way shape form take that to mean i’m talking about you, i’m not, its obvious from your writing they you know your stuff.).
Andrew: exactly my point (but spoken with more acuity): This discussion is about consensus, not objectivity. And it is important to know the difference between the two and to acknowledge it.
It is the same thing with education; of course, as a professor in arts, you are conceptually equipped to speak and write about works of art with more eloquence, more depth and scope. You will be able to discern a lot of stuff about works of art that “the common man” just don’t see (and probably doesn’t appreciate). But it is still a matter of perception. And within for example the community of movie critics, you will always see a tendency approaching a consensus. My claim is that that need for consensus tells us more about the social functioning of our species than about the actual objects of art.
But id we focus on the individual side of things, it is obvious that we are equipped with the same sensory apparatus. And we somehow (more or less deliberately) arrive at a value judgment.
I guess I’m a pragmatist (philosophically speaking) when it comes to making judgments on art. “The best movie ever” is a meaningless phrase for me. It implies Best Movie Ever (with capital letters indicating the absoluteness of the statement), whereas I can only say what works for me and, if I care for it, come up with any given argument. What is best? What it truth? I can only tell you how I feel about it and I might be wrong (in the sense, that I might change my mind because my perspective is altered).
Citizen Kane, in my opinion, gains nada for me by being put on a pedestal time and time again. I think it actually diminishes my perception of the movie. I’m thinking: “It’s not THAT great, is it?” Ultimately, though, yes, it probably is. But the point is, why do we have to categorize everything, put everything in boxes. Labeling art is problematic if it diminishes the experience of it.
Andrew: exactly my point (but spoken with more acuity): This discussion is about consensus, not objectivity. And it is important to know the difference between the two and to acknowledge it.
It is the same thing with education; of course, as a professor in arts, you are conceptually equipped to speak and write about works of art with more eloquence, more depth and scope. You will be able to discern a lot of stuff about works of art that “the common man” just don’t see (and probably doesn’t appreciate). But it is still a matter of perception. And within for example the community of movie critics, you will always see a tendency approaching a consensus. My claim is that that need for consensus tells us more about the social functioning of our species than about the actual objects of art.
But id we focus on the individual side of things, it is obvious that we are equipped with the same sensory apparatus. And we somehow (more or less deliberately) arrive at a value judgment.
I guess I’m a pragmatist (philosophically speaking) when it comes to making judgments on art. “The best movie ever” is a meaningless phrase for me. It implies Best Movie Ever (with capital letters indicating the absoluteness of the statement), whereas I can only say what works for me and, if I care for it, come up with any given argument. What is best? What it truth? I can only tell you how I feel about it and I might be wrong (in the sense, that I might change my mind because my perspective is altered).
Citizen Kane, in my opinion, gains nada for me by being put on a pedestal time and time again. I think it actually diminishes my perception of the movie. I’m thinking: “It’s not THAT great, is it?” Ultimately, though, yes, it probably is. But the point is, why do we have to categorize everything, put everything in boxes. Labeling art is problematic if it diminishes the experience of it.
@ drake and Ryan
”[Not all opinions are] created equal.”
No, some opinions will be more “educated” than others. By educated, I mean the opinion would be coming from a person who has spent a long time (many years) experiencing , thinking, reading and writing about different schools and forms of cinema. We can agree that that person would have a more sophisticated taste than someone who has only watched blockbusters and romantic comedies on Friday nights at the theater. But it’s safe to assume that film critics (and probably the majority of AMPAS) don’t fall into the latter category. And yet they disagree. Why? Who’s more right? Should we automatically consider the majority opinion/taste to be the most “right” one? Just because it’s the most common one?
”How do like 60% of film critics last year agree that “social network” is the #1 film of 2010 when there are like 10,000 plus films released last year alone?”
See, you’re saying 60%. But the remaining 40% are still a huge number. All of them film critics. So why, in the drastic examples of Twilight or Transformers vs. TSN, it’s so easy to make a discernment? Because the former kind of films really don’t try that hard to appeal to those who have a more “educated” taste in film (RT critics, AD users, film fans…) (I’m using “educated” as I defined above, not in any snobbish way). The Social Network, in comparison, was made by filmmakers who were interested in the same things that most of us like to see in a film. Most of us. 60%. You will still find plenty of “educated” film critics, who are usually in agreement with what are widely considered to be the better films, who will not find that much to like in TSN. They can present valid criticism of some aspects of the film. Are they wrong, or “less right” than others? You might also find one or two who will have Twilight as one of their favourite movies of the year. It could very well be Roger Ebert or any other non-trivial critic. This happens all the time. 5/5s and 4/5s from respectable sources for movies that have very rotten RT ratings. Clearly, these critics see something meaningful/artful in these films that most of the others don’t, and you have to respect that.
There is always a consensus. Citizen Kane is consistently voted as the best by consensus, not by objectivity. There will always be disagreements and that’s the richness and the beauty of art.
@ drake and Ryan
”[Not all opinions are] created equal.”
No, some opinions will be more “educated” than others. By educated, I mean the opinion would be coming from a person who has spent a long time (many years) experiencing , thinking, reading and writing about different schools and forms of cinema. We can agree that that person would have a more sophisticated taste than someone who has only watched blockbusters and romantic comedies on Friday nights at the theater. But it’s safe to assume that film critics (and probably the majority of AMPAS) don’t fall into the latter category. And yet they disagree. Why? Who’s more right? Should we automatically consider the majority opinion/taste to be the most “right” one? Just because it’s the most common one?
”How do like 60% of film critics last year agree that “social network” is the #1 film of 2010 when there are like 10,000 plus films released last year alone?”
See, you’re saying 60%. But the remaining 40% are still a huge number. All of them film critics. So why, in the drastic examples of Twilight or Transformers vs. TSN, it’s so easy to make a discernment? Because the former kind of films really don’t try that hard to appeal to those who have a more “educated” taste in film (RT critics, AD users, film fans…) (I’m using “educated” as I defined above, not in any snobbish way). The Social Network, in comparison, was made by filmmakers who were interested in the same things that most of us like to see in a film. Most of us. 60%. You will still find plenty of “educated” film critics, who are usually in agreement with what are widely considered to be the better films, who will not find that much to like in TSN. They can present valid criticism of some aspects of the film. Are they wrong, or “less right” than others? You might also find one or two who will have Twilight as one of their favourite movies of the year. It could very well be Roger Ebert or any other non-trivial critic. This happens all the time. 5/5s and 4/5s from respectable sources for movies that have very rotten RT ratings. Clearly, these critics see something meaningful/artful in these films that most of the others don’t, and you have to respect that.
There is always a consensus. Citizen Kane is consistently voted as the best by consensus, not by objectivity. There will always be disagreements and that’s the richness and the beauty of art.