I know right about now I’m supposed to hop aboard the outrage train that Sam Elliot criticized Jane Campion for making a movie about the American West. But it’s like the film Don’t Look Up – when you have babies dying in hospitals in Afghanistan and Ukrainians running for their lives, not to mention Americans struggling just to put food on the table and get their kids a decent education in this country, how can what someone says on a podcast matter that much?
Why it matters is that it will finally give people a reason to fight and vote for The Power of the Dog. It was a gift by Sam Elliott. He just doesn’t know it.
The Power of the Dog is one of the best films of the year, and an absolute masterpiece by one of the most talented directors the film industry. It stands on its own merits. It doesn’t need a pity vote. Campion is one of the rare female directors who is every bit as good as her male counterparts and isn’t treated like she is at a disadvantage because she was born female. She has never accepted that narrative and has never needed to. If her films win Best Picture it will absolutely be because it deserved to win and not for any other reason.
Campion is also the first woman to be nominated for Best Director twice. In a town and an industry where the only thing that seems to matter is “firsts” and pushing identity as the most important aspect that drives a winner, she has that walking away. Do you know how many male directors have two or more nominations? A lot. But women never do. Campion is the first.
It is a testament to her talent and her film that people aren’t even talking about this aspect of it. They don’t have to. The movie stands on its own. So if I was going to say anything about Sam Elliot’s comments it would simply be that: she has earned enough respect to be criticized. If they don’t respect you they don’t criticize you.
The Power of the Dog was an awards monster heading into the race. The awards coverage machine had decided that it was down to two Telluride gets, with Belfast being the other. They were so good that no film really came along to knock them from their perch. At least, that is how we all saw it going down. So why then has the conversation shifted to CODA? And does the conversation even matter?
Well, the tl;dr is that we have to wait for the Producers Guild to tell us which way the race is headed. They got their ballots in hand on January 27th and their deadline is in five days. It’s possible they will catch the CODA wave or it’s possible they won’t. The other thing I know for sure about this year, because it’s true every year, the Best Picture winner tells us about ourselves. It is about capturing a moment in time. This was true all through Academy history and it is true today.
If the credo is to disallow any films by or about white men, then that will be reflected when we look back in time at things that don’t make sense. Belfast is a film that would win hearts in any other time, except this one. What people vote for now defines who they are. Who they are matters right now more than it ever has. This was especially true during the last four years, when whatever people voted for has been scrutinized and judged like never before. Hollywood is, right now, living through a new kind of Red Scare or Black List, where just being white and male is seen by many as a liability. And if being white and male is a liability, voting for anyone white and male is a liability by association.
True of Nomadland, true of Parasite, true ever since the Green Book win sent shockwaves through the industry in a way we’ve never really seen before. As Clarence Moye has said, the Academy was changed after Green Book and so far they haven’t gone back to just picking the film they like best. They often now seem to be choosing movies based on what it says about their purpose.
The Green Book debacle has put voters in a place of constant self-judgment. Are they making the right choice? What choice will be rewarded? What choice will be condemned? The Academy has always taken incoming when it comes to their choices. They have always been condemned by critics especially. But what we’re living through now is different.
It’s a little like this:
So they are always looking for a way out of the conundrum of having to satisfy the needs of the social justice police on Twitter and picking a movie they actually just really like and think is worthy of being named Best Picture of the Year.
The Oscar coverage hive mind on Twitter has somehow now decided that CODA will win now that it has won the SAG for ensemble, along with Supporting Actor for Troy Kotsur. It is an incredibly moving film with a strong message and it is definitely one that Film Twitter approves of because it is directed by a woman. It is a big deal that a film with a predominantly deaf cast is doing this well in the Oscar race. It’s great for people who have disabilities to see themselves on screen, just as it would be for any other marginalized group.
But if CODA wins, it will be the first film to win since the 1930s with just three Oscar nominations. It has no editing or ACE Eddie nomination. It has no DGA or directing nomination. And if it wins all three of its Oscar nominations, which it would probably have to win, it would be the first film since the expanded ballot to clean sweep its awards. CODA is very much like Hidden Figures, which also won the SAG ensemble and came into the race with the same three nominations, only Supporting Actress instead of Supporting Actor and didn’t win any of them.
If you’re asking me if it deserves to win Best Picture of the Year up against Belfast or The Power of the Dog or even Dune or Licorice Pizza I’m going to say that no, it doesn’t. That isn’t to say it’s a bad movie. It isn’t. It’s a good movie. But its win would tell me more about what people are afraid of than what they actually love.
So why is CODA suddenly taking the place of The Power of the Dog or Belfast? Well, because Belfast did not win the SAG ensemble award and The Power of the Dog did not win the Scripter. That has signaled to the hive mind that there is something wrong with these movies even though the Academy has not yet voted for them and won’t until March 17th, which is a long way away.
For a long time there was an ongoing narrative that the Academy might not be ready to give Best Picture to Netflix. That it would be admitting defeat in the war between theatrical and streaming. But what’s funny about that is no one ever thought the same thing about CODA and Apple. CODA is still thought as the “little movie that could” even though Apple is richer than any movie studio, even Disney. They sit atop the pile when it comes to money and power and reach.
But it is kind of ironic that CODA, which has only earned about $1 million in theaters, is seen as the “little movie that could.” The only thing that has held Apple back all of this time was the prestige factor. Well, that seal has been broken.
You think Disney is big? Look at where it sits compared to Apple. Yet Apple is so good at controlling their own image it never comes up. People don’t think of them as what they actually are.
Where Netflix stood by Dave Chappelle Apple fired Anthony Garcia Martinez after employees found a memoir he’d written was “misogynistic.” They wanted him out because of a book he once wrote. Apple complied. Netflix didn’t. Is that how you play the game of appealing to this crowd? Probably.
Leaving themselves out of it, not making it about Apple winning, has been an effective strategy. It definitely flew under the radar, so much so that awards voters barely noticed it until SAG put it on the map.
Everything is changing really fast and people are barely noticing. They are too busy chasing the latest outrage on Twitter to notice what will be written about in the decades to come if there is anything left. You have bigger studios like the WB (Dune, King Richard) and Focus Features (Belfast), United Artists (Licorice Pizza), Searchlight (Nightmare Alley), Disney (West Side Story), and an independent like Janus Films, competing alongside Netflix and the biggest and most powerful brand in the world, Apple. And theirs is the “little movie that could.”
But that’s because the two frontrunners were somehow thought of as not finishers. People are starting to notice CODA, and what it feels like to watch CODA win. That feels good to many of them. They are doing something useful with their futile selves, finding purpose in a world gone wrong. If they can do this one thing they can wake up in the morning with pride. They don’t have to wake up feeling like they did something wrong because Twitter and Vanity Fair and the New York Times and the Los Angeles Times are scolding them.
But is that any way to pick Best Picture of the Year? No, it isn’t. When people look back at a win like that they wonder how that movie with three nominations beat, say, The Power of the Dog with 12? It will seem like the strangest thing ever unless you know this year, you know the voters, and you know the tastemakers. Then it makes sense. When we look at everything that’s going wrong in the world and in this country then it makes sense because it reminds these voters of who they want to be.
The truth is that, with a preferential ballot, any of them CAN win. Right now it’s just a matter of getting voters to position them to the top of their ballot. Granted, right now CODA will have no problem getting there. It will have lots of numbers 1, 2, and 3 votes which could put it over the top. But if it’s going to win it has to win Screenplay. And that would mean CODA becomes the first film in the era of the expanded ballot to “clean sweep” at the Oscars.
I can’t let go of Belfast because, quite frankly, it filled me with hope. It was the only time in this entire year I felt hope. Such is the power of art, I suppose. But it depends on who you are, how that movie touches you. While it’s true that The Power of the Dog winning would be unusual on a preferential ballot, its win would make history too, not just because a woman brought in a record 12 nominations but because Netflix would get there first. They’d kick down the door and suddenly a wider world of opportunity waits for everyone. That’s true of Apple too in a sense but with Apple you’re really looking at a much different level of money and power.
But we’re circling three movies when it’s possible another movie might win the Producers Guild and thrust the race in an entirely different direction. Every movie in this era needs a reason for people to vote FOR it. They can’t just lazily cast a vote. They have to work hard to order their preferences. That tells them what they really think when they sit down to fill them out.
So the people who think Dog is great and CODA terrible I ask the following…
If the deaf people in CODA were homicidal sociopaths and/or maniacal control freaks unable to accept their deafness would you have liked the movie more? Does a movie have to belittle and demean a minority in order to be great? Can’t a movie be great if it depicts The Other with compassion and respect?
I think Coda is adorable, very cute movie. But it’s not great filmmaking. It is sympathetic, but it’s not about the characters so much as it is about the craft that goes into the art of cinema; which is the thing CODA lacks, Coda could have been an emmy winning tv movie, or something else, a great tv series, but it never elevates itself to artistic filmmaking. I did cry and I loved the performances. But you have to judge it based on artistic achievement. It is just commonplace filmmaking on the other aspects.
This. I don’t like either much, but I prefer CODA, for sure. And I agree with the comment as a general observation even more…
This argumentation makes no sense to me. You’re assuming that people like The Power of the Dog specifically because they think the movie portrays homosexuality as something bad, which is obviously not correct (if that was a reason, a lot more aggressively and openly homophobic content exists and thus they would be awarded). I understand having issues with another LGBTQIA+ story being about someone’s sexuality being repressed or a character who is violent (emotionally or physically) but phrasing the issue like this really hurts your point.
To answer your question (as someone who thinks The Power of the Dog is a phenomenal movie and thinks CODA is middle of the road), CODA wouldn’t be improved by the changes you mention because the story it’s telling wouldn’t make sense with these changes. What would help CODA in my opinion is a less rudimentary script and more meaningful aesthetic choices. But at the same time, having Cumberbatch’s character (since the sexuality of Smit-McPhee’s character isn’t at least in my opinion particularly defined in any direction) be openly gay and have the other characters as you describe treat that with compassion and respect would make the central idea of The Power of the Dog collapse as alternatives to traditional heteromasculinity being embraced would imply that open emotionality would be fine as well, and isn’t that what the movie is about eventually, men (of any sexuality) feeling stuck within the idea of who they are supposed to be and afraid of being open with their emotions.
^ all of that
I just finished watching Drive My Car on HBO Max. What a mature, grown up work of art. On a level that American movies fail to grasp. I am so moved. It is vastly human and speaks to the way in which stories ultimately connect us all. wow.
Anyone else think Drive My Car is overrated? There’s that great scene near the end with the sign language on stage, but I didn’t care enough about the character for it to be really impactful. It had a stagey feel even when not on stage. That may have been by design but I was expecting more.
Yes, I found this one hard to connect with and just ok. I quite enjoyed the prologue and then didn’t like much where it went then. There were a couple of conversations in the car that intrigued me – and it managed to keep my interest for a 3 hour film.
This aged extemely well:
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/edb4f5aee6ca6ff1c0e5af9499349052e19c45aa6606c1321f0a0ab4f5f0eb67.png
AQP2 >>>> Oscar nominees save Dune (which is the best movie of the year)
BTW, we need The Batman Enters Oscar 2023 race thread. 85% RT, 72% Meta, 96% Audience on RT, 8.9 IMDB.
It’s not gonna… But it’s still a pretty good call.
Gold Derby
Oscar Experts predictions slugfest: “Did ‘The Power of the Dog’ and ‘West Side Story’ just get Best Picture boosts?”
https://www.goldderby.com/article/2022/2022-oscar-predictions-west-side-story-the-power-of-the-dog-experts/
In an age of indecision, wouldn’t it be weird if West Side Story won. It just premiered on HBO Max and Disney Plus and everyone was texting me just how brilliant it was all of the sudden, like they have made some major discovery.
Or it missed the editing and Eddie nominations and won’t.
Hopefully “The Power of the Dog” – the most homophobic movie of the year – looses.
“West Side Story” is far better and it would be a great winner. 🙂
I liked Power of the Dog but West Side Story was better. I must admit those are the only two best picture nominees I’ve seen.
May this process continue.
I can see a scenario where West Side Story loses and people claims the irrelevancy of The Oscars because this, the film that showed literally everywhere around Christmas and nobody went to see, didn’t won.
And then the academy having to adapt to that passive, lazy viewing.
I can actually see this as well. If feels like the movie is just now being discovered and talked about.
Same. Many friends just discovering it. Reading Twitter comments and majority are say they love it but didn’t see it in the theater.
It was good I’m curious why it’s on both HBO max and Disney+ since it’s a Disney movie.
It only became Disney’s after they bought 20th Century Fox , but West Side Story had a contract to be on HBO prior to the Disney sale, and so they are honoring that contract.
Good to know glad I got to see it. It was actually the best Hollywood music i’ve seen in a very long time. Great music performed by professional theater actors. They also have Drive My Car which I started. I’m treating it like how I watch a miniseries since it’s almost three hours long.
I thought the non-song scenes were atrocious, especially since Tony Kushner wrote them!
All the characters became even more one-dimensional than they were in the first movie.
And if I hear someone say “Speak English” one more time, I might vomit.
So, here’s why I very likely won’t be predicting Belfast for the PGA win, even if it wins the Critics Choice for screenplay: no PGA winner in the SAG era has won neither the DGA, ACE or any SAG award. Belfast is very unlikely to win the DGA (I guess that could be a path) or ACE (no Oscar nomination) and hasn’t won any SAG awards. Neither did The Power of the Dog,
but that one presumably will win the DGA. There is one pre-SAG exception, in The Crying Game, which was snubbed by ACE, didn’t win the DGA and didn’t win any Oscars or major precursors for acting, nor do I think it would have been a likely ensemble winner. But that’s all debatable, clearly. (The PGA winners that didn’t win DGA or a SAG award, but only ACE, are The Big Short, Moulin Rouge! and Gladiator.)
For this reason (having figured out that this stat exists – I knew there was a reason for my growing sensation that Belfast by now just felt too unlikely to win the PGA, so I was looking for one), I’m also switching my unofficial prediction for Best Picture to The Power of the Dog. (Which was already my official prediction, after Oscar nominations day.) This is probably a bad sign for anything else in the race. When even I have decided to switch to a movie so late in the race, despite having had my doubts about its chances all the way until then – which I still do, but the objective reasons/evidence just aren’t strong enough anymore -, I don’t think I’ve ever been wrong. (Since I don’t overreact to stuff – if anything, I underreact – I just never ever change my BP prediction until I feel it’s close enough to 100% warranted and the evidence is getting overwhelming.) In other years, I either never switched to the winner at all or never switched away from it (whenever I was on the right track), respectively. Like with 12 Years a Slave, Birdman, Spotlight. It’s been a while – I switched to both Nomadland and Parasite late, so this seems to be a trend. The Academy membership changes at work, most probably. (Again, I’m talking about my unofficial prediction. The stats prediction bears no personal input, unless I decide to make changes to the system “on the fly”, which I don’t know if I’ve ever done, anyway. I’ve always just waited for the result to see if it was necessary to make any tweaks or not.)
But there’s still hope that I am wrong, of course. For one, Campion hasn’t won the DGA yet. Also, there’s the potential precedent mentioned above – The Crying Game. (Driving Miss Daisy isn’t one – Jessica Tandy swept the season, at least in the TV portion.) As for something other than Belfast beating The Power of the Dog at PGA… That’s also hard to envision. Only Driving Miss Daisy has ever won the PGA without a DGA nomination, and that was in a weird first year, with the PGA naming a winner on almost the same day as AMPAS. (And after, in fact.) So, this would leave, besides Belfast, only:
– Dune (could win ACE, plus the DGA has been won without an Oscar directing nomination before, although not often, and only twice in the PGA era);
– Licorice Pizza (but the lowest Oscar nomination count ever for a PGA winner was 4 – Little Miss Sunshine -, then 5 – Green Book -, the rest all being on 6 or higher, and LP has got just 3, plus only 1917 ever won the PGA without both editing and acting Oscar nominations);
– and West Side Story (which can’t win ACE, so it would have to win the DGA – but this one is also very unlikely, due to the stat that only Apollo 13 has won the PGA without a BAFTA Best Film nomination, and this was back when BAFTAs were awarded after the Oscars, plus they only had 4 nomination slots, and so on).
So, I guess one could predict Dune to win the PGA, but that feels much too optimistic and, as far as stats go, The Power of the Dog just seems a far more logical pick.
Claudio in terms your personal preference you actually love Dune yourself more rhan other contenders? This awards season should included NO TIME TO DIE …and THE LAST DUEL spice things up bit ey? Coincidence my choice of words? ‘Spice’ lol mate but in seriousness u think as unlikely it be thst DUNE ptI could win best picture? Doesn’t make sense when duology is conc luded qt pt II release? It like awarding film best pix half way through it overall story ey? Could DUNE WHEN PT II COMES OUT BE THE SCIENCE FICTION GENRES SALVATION BREAKTHRIUGH DUNALLY WIN VMBEST PICTURE aT OSCARSis? That be fitting as Dune is fusion cinematically of elements of some of visual thematic style of some most iconic science fiction films of all time.. has bit of 2001 q space odyssey absolutely, a bit of bladerunner to limited degree ( assassins scenes/ chase), certain some more serious elements of starwars and believe it or not genius of director Dennis Villenue vision courtesy of visionary source author in Frank Herbert’s books, is costumes and design and stage being set for epic battle between dictatorial type Harkonnen ( akin to the Roman Dictatorship of Caesar) qnd the house Atreides democratic valued house sort of… bears resemblance to that of some great Roman epics ..oh is any coincidence too whole premise battle for control strategically in terms of resources on planet Arrakis is neutral territory ..bit like what happening now bit with Russia invading Ukraine u do wonder ey? Could DUNE be good enough big emiugh achievement win best pic for BOTH parts of movie? THAT B HISTORIC FIRST we talk bout films with relevance to world we live today why not Dune?
Yes, Dune and Belfast. 🙂 Dune is my #1 so far. It’s virtually dead, without both directing and acting nominations, though… Sadly, I’m also a lot more skeptical about Part II, even if it, too, is fantastic, having any BP-winning chances – this is still sci-fi, a genre the Academy has shown its disdain for over and over, since forever…
Just cos they show disdain doesn’t mean u just need accept that surely u don’t think their genre discrimination is viable much longer big ibowecyou coming to sci fi genre soon ey?
Sadly, I kinda’ do have to accept it, if I don’t want to just be disappointed over and over… Their biases just have not changed, for decades upon decades. (Or, at least, this particular one hasn’t.) If they ever do, great! But I’m not holding my breath. 🙂
All I getting qt what u prefer ..regardless what they do… PUT this way we very reluctantly accept it ..but I doubtful even next 5 years qre sustainable for academy do genre discrimination . Despite me saying that one movie that be biggest biographical drama in decades surely be red hot favourite ” Elvis” Hollywood first ever comprehensive biographical drama of the greatest music artist of all time ey?
In fact for 2023 we have 4 big epics:
I think of competing best picture . Could be year thst breaks the obscure lesser known films winning mould return to tru big screen films ey?
1. Elvis
2. Nolan’s film on Manhattan project ( forgotten film title shamefully )
3. Death on the Nile
4. The Northman
5. The Batman
On the last one.. as you encouraged by while being understsndsbly sceptical wonder if Oscar ever drop their increasingly vain disgraceful genre discrimination ..the Batman is yet ANOTHER comic book adaptation transcends it stereotypical genre to be more robust. Darker film noir mystery / serial killer thriller epic rather than comic book adaptation filmmak err s of science fiction and comic book genre are getting smarter Crossing over from singular genre to multitude of them.. more layered sophisticated these base genre films become evolve into mote pressure will be academy keep ignoring.
Qfter all Claudio AMPAS is ” motion picture ARTS and SCIENCES soooo..where logic or credibility on continuing discriminate against increasingly layered mixed genre often far more inspired films thsn just usual suspects half the time?
It unviable position ampas take in long term mate trust me on thst history says it take 30 years for Oscar break down barrier well accept role of women as filmmakers took like 50 yrs sooo? Same Principe applies don’t u think I make some compelling points?
Those are more AMPAS-friendly projects… But, yeah, let’s hope they do eventually embrace the epic again, as well as sci-fi!…
i know that mate update your family and friends they well and safe? suddenly pendulum focus shifted from covid to threat of wwIII world cant catch a break ey? as for outlook yes let hope but… consider this years contenders a warm up to academy coming back in form..to common sense.. first..
I don’t know if we’re safe… 🙂 We can only hope.
Indeed, very interesting analogy between the Ukraine conflict and the events in Dune! Situations seem rather similar…
Dune (could win ACE, plus the DGA has been won without an Oscar directing nomination before, although not often, and only twice in the PGA era)
There is a possible (however slight) narrative for a DGA upset. Denis being snubbed at the Oscars were so outrageous in the eyes of many that they might award him here as a “revenge”. I mean, isn’t that what drove Spielberg, Howard and Affleck win at the DGA despite missing at the Oscars? I know this is a bit straws grasping.
The difference here is that The Color Purple, Apollo 13, and Argo were legitimate threats to win Oscars BP (even if two of them failed at the end), whereas Dune is nowhere near the conversation.
“The difference here is that The Color Purple, Apollo 13, and Argo were legitimate threats to win Oscars BP (even if two of them failed at the end), whereas Dune is nowhere near the conversation.”
Yup, seems very unlikely. Although, actually, The Color Purple had no directing or editing nominations, plus, apart from the DGA, it won nothing else major, so I’m not sure that particular one was a real threat, at least not pre-DGA win. (Stats-wise, also not after, but at least logically…) Apollo 13 also did quite poorly at the Globes and Critics Choice (1 tied win for acting, in total) and wasn’t BAFTA-nominated. It won SAG Ensemble and an acting award, but that’s the only real difference to Dune at the moment. (Even if it’s a stark one, given that Dune has no acting nominations anywhere.) So, given that Dune can still theoretically win both PGA and DGA (and could win ACE and maybe even WGA, given the ineligibilities, both of which Apollo 13 lost), maybe it’s not in that much worse a shape, really – although, of course, it’s the strength of the front-runner, Dog, that should make the difference. (As for the conversation, you’re probably right, The Color Purple and Apollo 13 I’m sure were more in it than Dune, at least.) But, yeah, there’s a small chance there. Fully unexpected things can sometimes happen. Almost for sure won’t, but there’s some doubt yet…
Maybe threats is overstating, but TCP and A13 were at least #2. Dune far from that.
Stats-wise, The Color Purple wasn’t even top 3 (and it’s not close). Witness and Prizzi’s Honor were both WGA winners with no relevant snubs. The latter was a GG BP winner, the former, the ACE winner. And the Oscar results confirmed it: Witness won editing and screenplay, Prizzi’s Honor won supporting actress. The Color Purple went 0/11. Apollo 13 very likely was second, indeed. Sense and Sensibility was close, with WGA and SAG acting wins, the Globe drama win plus later the BAFTA Best Film win, but without directing and editing nominations, plus only one other win, screenplay (Apollo 13 won two, including editing), it’s probably not quite got a good-enough case. Just such a weird year!… About the weirdest ever, still.
True, it’s pretty unclear whether Dune is even top 4…
And when (okay, if) Hamaguchi wins
DGA?Write-in? 🙂
Wrong awards body lol – I must have been sleep-typing again.
🙂 I feel ya’…
🙁 Sigh.
Can still happen – I know, I know, I said the same thing about Once… I’m not ruling out a Belfast comeback by any means! It’s just not really reasonable to predict it as one of the likely scenarios anymore, though…
I don’t see it happening. There are signals that it won’t. When are PGA and DGA? Sorry, I always have trouble locating calendars with all the other school-related events going on. Right now I am down to grading the last 15 poetry books, so I am doing well. Hope you are having a great weekend. We should schedule a talk after the Oscars. I am off the week after them, which is so lucky.
“There are signals that it won’t.”
Can’t disagree… 🙁 DGA is 12th – then BAFTA & Critics Choice 13th – and PGA is 19th.
“We should schedule a talk after the Oscars. I am off the week after them, which is so lucky.”
Totally! 🙂 I hope we’ll have some positive outcomes to discuss…
He’s right that Benedict Cumbersnatch gave an absolutely ludicrous performance. Not sure what that was, but some odd fantasy I suppose.
he doesn’t cut it as an American. He passes as Strange where Americanness isn’t a big part of the character but here he’s supposed to be a quintessential cowboy and he’s such a quintessential English fop.
If the Academy couldn’t award Brokeback Mountain, a film about a GAY COWBOY ROMANCE, Best Picture, I can’t see Power of the Dog doing so. Not that Power of the Dog is a gay romance, it’s much darker and brings back the boring tale of hiding one’s sexuality(Yes i know there was more to it than that, but it’s there). I know the timeline would indicate it as honorable, I’m just tired of seeing people hide their sexuality in film, and I’m a GAY MAN saying this. It’s tiring.
I also found Power to just be MEH. Great acting and cinematography, yes, but overall it was just OK. The pacing was slow and tiring.
As a gay man, I second what you say. I dislike the Dog more than you do, but that’s neither here nor there when it comes to your major point. In movies, TV, and theater I’d like to see gay men portrayed living out their sexuality — problems and all — rather than hiding it. Partnered life of any gender combination is bound to have problems.
Everyone would benefit if we saw gay lives explored in dramas and comedies where sexuality is open but not defining. By all means don’t idealize gay life, and what’s more, go ahead, make the gay guy a spy, a hero, an adventurer or a real baddie. Drama is wide open. Being gay doesn’t exclude anyone from any of life’s troubles or opportunities.
Also, and you may not agree with me on this one, I’ve had to acknowledge lately that I’m getting tired of straight actors playing gay characters. I don’t want any actor limited and of course I want to see gays play straight roles, which, of course they already do, usually without acknowledgement to the public. But if you find truly talented, gifted gay actors, and give them gay roles with good scripts helmed by smart directors, once audiences see them doing exciting work, those gay actors will become bankable.
But they’ll never become bankable until you give them interesting, openly gay roles. I’m very appreciative of straight actors who’ve played gay roles movingly and with dimension. But it’s time for gay actors to play those roles. Let the gay actor dig down into his unique psyche and range of acting skills to come up with powerful emotions to portray.
One thing I want to see are the stereotypes gone. I want to see them tattooed, musicians, into sports, not doing all the drugs, hookups, HIV etc.
See The Man With the Answers. From last year.
spooky a friend of mine emailed me last night, suggesting I watch it, and you’ve put it out there today too. I have just found it and started watching it. Ta muchly.
Straight people aren’t interested in seeing movies about gay people. Otherwise we’d have some popular gay movies out there, at least more than the one per decade the Academy decides to recognize.
I think you’re right. I’m fighting an uphill battle. And I’m being stupidly optimistic. I would say to straights: Gays are your neighbors and co-workers. Why wouldn’t you want to see how their lives work, and locate what you could within them to identify with? We’ve been adjusting our feelings and experience to identify with straight people struggling since forever. Why won’t they do the same?
Bohemian Rhapsody was pretty popular. I’m guessing a lot of straight people saw it. Rocketman also did quite well.
Brokeback Mountain grossed $175 million in 2005 dollars.
they were about celebrated people with lots of popular music
Didn’t see Rocketman, but to suggest Bohemian Rhapsody to be anything other than trash. Most gay men I know found it to be repulsive (well, at least those old enough to have lived through the events shown)
Rocketman is the better of the two atleast it wasn’t afraid to be a musical. Also the music is better. Let’s face it if it wasn’t for Freddie Mercury’s voice Queen wouldn’t have gotten anywhere.
I discount the two biopics because they are biopics. Pretty much every biopic about a legendary singer does well.
As for Brokeback, it got lots of press as a breakthrough gay movie. Yes, it was well-made and it was nice to see Hollywood tell the story. But it wasn’t groundbreaking. I was bored watching it. Dozens of independent and foreign films have covered the same material before and many of them better. And straight audiences ignored them.
Hello my friend. I’ll share this with you, although in part I am responding to Chris as well.
Drown, Last Weekend, Nasty Baby, The Normal Heart, Sal, The Elephant Story, Jenny’s Wedding, Match, Teenage Kicks, Boys In The Trees, Take Me To The River, Moonlight, Keep the lights on, 4 Moons, Paris: 05.59, Jonathan, Tamara, Tomcat, It’s Only The End Of The World, From Afar, I Am Michael, Being 17, Other People, Departure, Lovesong, Beats Per Minute (bpm), Call Me By Your Name, Battle of the sexes, God’s Own Country, Riot, Golden Years, A Date For Mad Mary, Handsome Devil, Heartstone, Don’t Call Me Son, Me Myself & Her, Beach Rats, Love Simon, Pulse, Sorry Angel, Boy Erased, Can You Ever Forgive Me, Disobedience, Sequin In A Blue Room, To Each Her Own, Pain & Glory, Portrait of a Lady, I am Jonas, Nothing To Hide, My Big Gay Italian Wedding, Evening Shadows, Dear Ex, Your Name Engraved herein, Dear Tenant, Funny Boy, Stage Mother, Uncle Frank, Summer of ’85, Matthias and Maxim….
These are just some of the LGBTQIA+ movies I have put my hands on the last few years. Granted they are not all about gay men, but queer stories are plentiful, and some of these were recognised by the Academy and Indie Spirits and British Independent Film etc etc.
I did not view Power Of The Dog as a queer film per se – for me, the sexuality of either of the protagonists remains somewhat cryptic or at least open to discussion; but the film is about so much more than just sexuality.
Okay. There’s much more I need to see. May I ask how many of these have relatively happy, or at least realistically positive, endings?
Sorry I overlooked this comment. From memory, the following had realistically or positive endings but don’t hold me to it! 🙂 Other People, God’s Own Country, Riot, Love Simon, Disobedience, Sequin in a Blue Room, To Each Her Own, Nothing to hide, My big gay Italian Wedding, Your Name Engraved Herein, Funny Boy, Stage Mother, Matthias & Maxim – and i forgot one from this year i saw ‘Dancing Queens’ – Swedish movie on Netflix.
Excellent! And, yes, I remember the positive endings of the ones I’ve seen: God’s Own Country, Love Simon and Your Name Engraved Herein (thanks to a reminder from you). The rest of the list is noteworthy. Okay, I’ll acknowledge that gay lives are being celebrated in movies.
On television, btw, I rather enjoyed Uncle Frank and it had a happy but slightly ambiguous ending. Not everyone in the family was on board with a gay couple, which is true to life. Also, though it’s largely aimed at a teenage audience, I’ve enjoyed the first two seasons of Love, Victor (a spinoff of the movie Love, Simon). It’s sweet but still often enough it’s down to earth and lifelike. It’s going to get a 3rd, and final, season later this year.
Gosh, you really do keep up. Your original list was very impressive. Do you ever write about this stuff? It would seem you have the makings of a fascinating magazine piece or newspaper feature in your head.
thank you. I even whittled that list down from a longer one when i trawled my annual lists of movies i’d seen. I’ve been more conscientious these last few years to find narratives that hopefully speak to me. I too have been critical of cinema that doesn’t represent well or positively our community. I am probably more critical of queer cinema than others (I am certainly very critical of Australian cinema – and as a member of that Academy, I am often disaffected by its choices). But any guild can only illuminate the stories and storytellers actually making the movies. I’ve seen some stinkers! I find foreign films largely more satisfying for storytelling. I can see that in my viewing habits and end of year lists – more and more.
You clearly keep up too with a lot of content. I must chase down Love, Victor. I had not come across it.
It’s not for mature audiences but we mature folks can have wished for something like it when we were teenagers. You’ll need to stick with it. Season 2 is MUCH better than Season 1, which is the reason I’m looking forward to Season 3. Season 1 may try your patience, but the characters get richer the following season. It’s essential watching, btw, didn’t mean to suggest that, so don’t let it eat up your time if you’re just not digging it.
(copy of my comment to ‘No Thanks) Two other titles that mean a lot to me ‘Holding The Man’ and ‘Lilting’ – two queer stories but not happy endings, but brilliantly told love stories. highly recommended – but not upbeat!
I only recently discovered Other People. I thought it was phenomenal. How was this film completely snubbed? I watched it again the next day
I think it was my intro to Jesse Plemons. Love Molly Shannon in anything, but she was just amazing in this.
and how many of them have found a straight audience…
A film like Boy Erased, you think, would have found an audience. Now it’s forgotten.
God’s Own Country is a must-see. It’s not like anything else I’ve seen.
that’s a little incalculable – but many of those titles and others have been seen by people from all walks – as they were in Cannes or Venice or any number of non queer specific festivals. Yep, God’s Own Country is one the very best in recent years.
3 months, on Paramount+, is surprisingly good. It has a slice-of-life approach and I think a more structured narrative would have served it better, but overall I thought it was a fresh take even though all of the subjects it dealt with are overdone.
I also really loved ‘Your Name Engraved Herein’ (2020) on Netflix. Beautiful film. And the Cesar winning ‘Beats Per Minute’.
I liked it, too. But I’m frankly not remembering a whether the ending was relatively positive or not. Obviously, I need to re-look.
beats was not upbeat, but so much beauty and such passion and rich fabric of my generation (not sure if yours too) in facing HIV head on, Act Up etc
Your Name Engraved herein had a sweet ending; but lots of high drama through it – but again so much truthful passion and lust.
Need to see beats. Yeah, the two guys do get together at the end of Name Engraved, don’t they? I should have remembered that. It was very well acted.
Beats Per Minute was my favourite movie of 2018 – it was such a gut punch of a movie in so many ways; but it moved me incredibly. Awesome, brave filmmaking.
One of my favorites of 2018 as well…
And check out Handsome Devil – if you haven’t so far. Sweet Irish dramedy. Lovely movie.
Yes, and very upbeat. Terrific movie. Straight lead actors giving wonderful performances.
Edit: I shouldn’t have overlooked your larger point, a great question: How many of those movies have found a straight audience?
Dave, you’ve also seen Weekend and A Fantastic Woman, yes?
Yes, I was slightly underwhelmed by Weekend and really didn’t like A Fantastic Woman, but the latter in part for me was influenced by some trans colleagues of mine who found it offensive. It was an ok movie, but it didn’t impress me, as it did so many others. Weekend – that was some time back – yes it wasn’t as good a movie as 45 Years (his next movie i think), but as a concept and nice to see a contemporary take on gay hook ups and the search for connection, it was important. What did you think of both?
I am a big fan of Weekend (more than 45 Years) and an admirer of Fantastic Woman (the lead performance in particular). What about it did your friends find offensive?
The narrative that trans folk are always seen as victims of violence and hate crimes. Perpetuating that narrative has angered many in the trans community, as it did for me in the 1990’s with gay films. I stopped supporting the Mardi Gras film festival as so many of the movies depicted our community being abused or murdered. Sure we have been vilified, but art does also need to uplift and be progressive.
I’m sure if I revisited Weekend, I would get more out of it now, but at the time, it felt a little too small in scope or ambition. I really liked Haigh’s writing and directing of 45 Years.
Which brings us to Tangerine and Stranger by the Lake…
Ah yes – i nearly included Tangerine in my list, but chose not to. I thought it a very impressive achievement, but it didn’t blow me away. Stranger By The Lake was a deeply unsettling but significant piece of queer cinema. Glad you mentioned it. Very evocative.
what are your thoughts on those two gems?
I loved both of them but my favorite piece of fairly recent queer content is not a film but a TV series: Sense8, warts and all.
you know i get a kick out saying this everytime: ‘thanks, No thanks’
I will check that one out too. 🙂 Have just added it to my netflix queue!
Dave, stop.
Stop, will you?
Stop, Dave.
Will you stop, Dave?
Stop, Dave.
😉
okey dokey 🙂
J/k but I couldn’t resist that quote.
it was funny.
Two other titles that mean a lot to me ‘Holding The Man’ and ‘Lilting’ – two queer stories but not happy endings, but brilliantly told love stories.
Need to check them both out, love Ben W.
Me too. I go a little weak at the knees and mushy around the eyes when i see him. You will too if you can find Lilting, He is Sooooooooo beautiful in that movie.
And then there’s that interesting queer-themed miniseries he did, London Spy. I found it ultimately unsatisfying, but the cast is great.
Yes, i had to get that one too – it was a bit of a tease all the way through from memory, but a great cast. Jim Broadbent always lends some weight to a project. You’ve just jogged my memory that there is a new series with Ben – This is Going To Hurt – he plays a doctor – 7 part series. I think it is not available for streaming or broadcast. Anything with him in it……
It’s available, just not…umm…never mind…
sorry i meant to say it is now available. I’ve just downloaded the first ep.
Thanks. I’ll look for this.
Same. But I was hooked by the twists right up until that unsatisfying conclusion. Such good acting from Wishaw! The rest of the cast very good, too. And I loved the way it was shot. Very murky and mysterious without a lot of tricks. More a matter of scarily arranged images. Gorgeous, I thought.
I drank it all up.
Lilting was brilliant, how underrated is it
Um, a gay person in 1920s Montana couldn’t live out their sexuality, that’s the whole point of the story
Absolutely, the movie was about so many other things too. And there is a bounty of lgbtqia movies especially about gay men; made by gay men with gay men. I have never read The Power Of The Dog as wanting to be, nor being gay cinema.
You’re right. I was clumsy. The notion of the movie being gay cinema or forming some sort of marker in the struggle for gay recognition is misplaced. The novel’s subject is panicked masculinity that becomes toxic in trying to bury same-sex impulses. No tenderness between men allowed. It’s hard to see any gay embracing that as an affirmation.
But the novel didn’t attempt any sort of affirmation, only a plea for honesty and acceptance. It was written in sorrow and rage that a macho man would conceal his gay identity by exercising cruelty. The source of that meanness is what Savage, the novelist, was trying to expose. Campion and Cumberbatch melodramatize the novel’s very sober point.
And i absolutely defer to your eloquence on those beautiful takeaways; albeit from such a dark, twisted tale. I wanted to respond to what felt like Chris’ cherrypicking Power Of The Dog as the only gay cinema of the moment and that it was the only representation that we gay men and other LGBTQI+ folk have in 2022, which it is not, and as Andrew succinctly points out – that was America in the 1920’s.
The comparisons to Brokeback – either as a movie, or as an awards narrative doesn’t feel right to this movie lover or Oscar watcher.
Indeed, I don’t see a Brokeback comparison, but one should note that Annie Proulx is a fervid supporter of Thomas Savage’s novel. I haven’t seen her reaction to the movie reported anywhere.
She wrote the foreword to the film tie-in version of the novel & I’ve heard Campion refer to discussions about the film with her, I think.
Thanks very much. I guess Campion’s adaptation pleases Proulx.
Absolutely, if anything the campaign has avoided the “gay” tag.
Point taken. I was looking forward. I should have made that clearer.
This is a film set in 1920, I don’t get why it has to do anything more than portray what things were like then.
As I said earlier, your point about what’s portrayed during the story’s 1920 time period is well taken. In what ways the movie’s portrayal is illuminating for us today is a separate question, and worth asking.
sibling rivalry, need to belong, for connection, for affection. How to present in mixed circles – socially, economically and sexually to a lesser extent. Depictions of different forms of masculinity. Familial ties, the isolation of rural communities or rural living in general. The beauty and the harshness of the landscape and the life to survive in that terrain. Just a few thoughts that spring to mind for me, what Campion offers via her script and direction.
And for all the acclaim and brilliance of the male cast members, it is the performance by Kirsten Dunst that has stayed with me. I’m somewhat haunted by her. She is the key character and has the most links with the rest of the ensemble. Her eyes do a lot of the heavy lifting acting for me in this.
Sorry daveinprogress, it’s most uncomfortable for me to report that you and I part company here. None of what you listed landed with me. I feel terrible. I never want to disagree with you, you’re such a nice fellow.
that’s ok, we don’t have to always agree on things. what do you take from the movie for us in 2021/22? And i always enjoy reading your thoughts on movies.
Indeed, you and I don’t always have to agree. I was being overdramatic.
I don’t take anything from the movie into today. From Savage’s novel I take a lot, about the desperation of men who can’t be who they are, who not only conceal it but bury it deep. Campion’s script and direction, as well as Cumberbatch’s performance, capture hardly any of that, so they don’t get anywhere near any actual feelings I have.
All their work starts on the outside, with appearances, and tries to burrow in from there. I don’t think they get very far. They needed to start inside Phil and work outward to let his behavior slowly reveal the poison inside, to the point where we finally see it in its ugliness. But they just replicate events in the novel, in order, dutifully portraying outrage after outrage, which means there’s no pace, no build, no clear points of revelation. Cumberbatch snarls at the beginning and by the end his snarls have turned to whimpers. And that’s about it. I couldn’t tell what he imagined he was doing, how he thought the performance was developing, deepening. So, I was detached from Phil throughout the movie. Cumberbatch never got deep, as far as I could tell.
I reviewed the movie, so you could have a look at that.
I appreciate what you have written. I thought you were earlier opening a discussion on perhaps what the movie might be offering as insight into life and society today. I do agree that there is certainly an elusive quality to Phil, so too with Peter, but (and, I am not someone who thinks this movie is the best thing since sliced bread), I actually prefer to have the layers be less transparent and consider who he is, or who they all are; through my own prism – as of course you have done, and done with great consideration.
The movie is far from perfect, but there is a prosaic quality to Campion’s storytelling (always has been) which is what makes her work so distinct and offers more in subtext than the text itself. There is a murky and dark underbelly to the entire narrative, which personally is not my desired style or form of storytelling, but each to his, her or their own.
I will revisit your review as I know I will continue to get another well thought take on this movie.
Gosh, you are so kind. And, yes, we all have our own takes. The only other Campion I’ve seen is Portrait of a Lady, where I had similar problems. So, I can’t claim to have a grasp on her work overall. More to see.
So eloquently put.
thanks 🙂
Is toxic masculinity not relevant today? I’m sorry but I get the feeling you are disappointed The Power of The Dog isn’t the film you want it to be. I can understand that frustration because I felt that to before. However, I feel it’s very unfair to criticise a film for what it isn’t.
It’s adapted from an excellent novel that does treat toxic masculinity in a way that’s relevant today. It could have been a better movie had it adopted the novel’s tone and approach. Campion didn’t invent a story on her own. She hollowed out and coarsened the fine story she chose to adapt. Thus, my disappointment.
People are making complaints about how it wasn’t groundbreaking or darker or whatever about its gay story are really missing. The gay bits are merely the icing on the cake really. Most people would watched and not think too much about that because it is so subtle. Perhaps too subtle for some. However, you can take all the gay bits and the story wiuld really change much. It felt unnecessary the first time I watched. But on second view I realised it adds new dimension to story. From what I read from your comments the book is very different from the film. Gay story is on the edges in the film while it seems to be central in the book. It’s not so important in the film and it stand without it. This is an artistic choice and Campion has more than achieved what she was going for. The Dog is a film about toxic masculinity and the deadly power it can unleash. The gay stuff is really in the background.
Many films or books look forward by looking back. If you think the themes in the filmare no longer relevant, I think you are mistaken.
I didn’t mean to suggest that the themes are irrelevant today. The movie didn’t tell me anything new about them.
I know you don’t like this adaptation, but the film is different and stands on its own. Try to enjoy on its own or else forget about. But trying to compare the two isn’t really that important.
Yup, I found this aspect of it cliched (and thus boring) too. Forget whether I mentioned this (specifically) the last time we discussed the movie.
Like: WOW I guilty try not to be assuming my fellow long serving insightful intelligent member on AD on thst how you? Truly hope u family well and safe. But if may say so with utmost respect for I all for a Gay and Lesbian film winning best pic one day if it RIGHT type of film intact truthfully one my best friends more than that a mentor in critical part my life …is trans, bisexual qnd Lesbian..I don’t care bout thst I care bout how much they dedicated in their life helping others in process doing very well for themselves… but this in mind my fear fellow, you made emphatic statement that JUST COS A FILM HAS THEME OF GAY AND LESBIAN DOES NOT MEAN IT aLWAYS ENGAGING or memorable if it a story as screenplay that waffles drags on has certain ” spin” with a misogynistic gender wars type agenda it becomes woke trash masquerading as a western it damning someone like uslf on filmmaker and film credentials as q frontrunner is not a fan of pod..not damning on you damning on films credibility as genuine engaging motion picture ..heck not even my trans friend would be able sit through something like this
I’m not sure Campion and Cumberbatch are trying to be “woke” as much as they’re trying to prove to the audience that they’re “sensitive”. They don’t like people’s feelings being hurt. They seem to think that vividly showing people being hurt is enough to make the audience (1) identify with the wounded characters and (2) admire the filmmakers for deploring Phil’s meanness.
They do too much showing, not enough telling. They should have let the characters themselves tell us how and why they feel hurt. Campion and Cumberbatch think that showing pain is the same as explaining pain. It’s not. That’s why Cumberbatch’s breakdown towards the end is so unmoving. Phil hasn’t told anyone what he’s afraid of. He never does.
That reliance on detailed, fussy, pretty pictures is one reason that scene after scene just hangs there on the screen, looking “mysterious” but puzzling us more than disturbing us. The effects are hard to pin down because the writing and acting aren’t doing the emotional and psychological digging. Campion expects that if she’s explicit enough we in the audience will do the digging for her.
Film is mainly a visual medium. Dialogue is not really necessary, I believe, in a film. It’s the visual, performance, the music and sounds that tells you what’s happening more than the dialogue. I fell into the trap of wanting to know how or why a character took the path they did. I thought it was essential, but it’s a trap. Because it’s not necessary to explain why a character does something, especially when there are clues about the characters and their past. It’s an unnecessary exposition, especially when the whole film is premised in giving as little details as possible and only giving little hints throughout. It’s a film by small revelations. The mystery of the characters is the whole point of the film and this is the way it’s played by Campion and actors it’s a small revelation after small revelation. Those revelations are left unexplained and you have to connect the dots, as it were. It might lead you to somewhere or it might not. We can only guess what the characters are feeling and what their motivations are through their actions. There is an internal monologue at the beginning of the film and that’s the only moment in the whole film where we know what they’re thinking. In the rest of the film, Campion keeps their true motivations hidden or very subtle. This is one of the reasons we never see the ending coming because the character (Peter) never seems like he’s going to do that. We can only get that through the revelations set out in the film and hints about him. It’s that kind of film, not a film where a person’s internal thoughts are laid out. That might be the kind of film you wanted but it’s not that kind of film. The beginning is linked to the ending. And she uses a popular trope: the unreliable narrator. Many think it’s a revenge story and that’s a big part of the story, but it hides a lot of what’s going on. There is a lot of clues in there that, even though Phil’s actions may have pushed Peter to the edge, which I think were not enough to push him to murder, especially after he and Phil’s relationship blossomed somewhat, it’s obvious that there’s something wrong with Peter, there’s something dark beneath the surface. There are clues in those horror scenes involving Peter, like when he lovingly strokes Mr Cottontail before killing him or the scene where he disembowelled the rabbit he gave to his mum as a present and she took as a pet. And he does pretty much the same to Phil, with whom he shared a tender moment, knowing he would die soon afterwards from the anthrax from dead cow hide Peter gave to him. And it’s safe to say he wasn’t upset at Phil’s death in the ending scene, as he got what he wanted.
“I’m just tired of seeing people hide their sexuality in film”
Me too. 🙂 That’s exactly what I was thinking as I was watching. This is now a full-on cliche. It’s just not interesting anymore and has begun to feel contrived. (I’m not gay, but I do watch a lot of movies.) I get that the novel was written long ago, but still…
Exactly. And I love Brokeback Mountain, and I understand at the time that’s how it was. But it’s tiring that THAT’S all we get in mainstream. Or stereotypes or coming of age as they are exploring their sexuality. Let’s have their sexuality be there but it doesn’t MAKE who they are. Which is what I’m doing with a script I’m working on.
I don’t think it’s valid criticism to criticise a film for what it’s not. I understand what you’re saying but it’s un entirely a different conversation. You can only judge it by what its trying to do and the story it’s telling. I think it’s unfair to judge a film in any other way.
I’m not judging the film. I’m simply voicing my problem with the age old story telling of someone hiding their sexuality. It’s not groundbreaking storytelling at all.
Well, you can say that pretty much about evety film. Does it have to be groundbreaking to be great? Also, some old age stories never die or get old. And the The Dog is much more than that. I mean, that’s do obvious. And that’s why it’s highly Acclaimed and won many awards and topped critics top ten list of best films in 2021.
To each their own on this one. If I’m watching a western that’s going to have a character be gay, I want it to be groundbreaking and changing the rules.
True, to each their own . However, you are proving my point. You’re still insisting a film has to be groundbreaking to be great? Which filns are groundbreaking in the Oscar race? Are we talking about that or just what you prefer to see? If it’s the latter, it’s a fair point. But that’s a different conversation and I don’t think it should be used as a criticism of The Dog. That’s very unfair to single put for not doing what you want to see done.
I didn’t say groundbreaking is the only way to make it great. I’m saying it would’ve made THIS particular film great.
Well, that’s really interesting. It would’ve been great great it done something differently? Something something makes great! Thanks, for your input, Chris, but we’re going to go with Jane Campion on this one.
Go on ahead. I’m pulling for Belfast or LP(long shot) or CODA.
“Let’s have their sexuality be there but it doesn’t MAKE who they are. Which is what I’m doing with a script I’m working on.”
Spot-on! Good luck with the script!
I mean, many things are clichéd, as in any that happens a lot becomes a cliche. It’s true and it happens a lot, so it’s a cliche? It’s a big part of the game experience or was and this is particularly true in other parts where they are not so welcoming of gay people. That’s what it was like in 1920s America and it still is in some communities. In ultra conservative communities, people are not allowed to be themselves and this leads not only to them hiding their sexuality but playing the role that their society wants to them adopt. The film goes beyond that and throws together two different kinds of masculinity and makes them face off. It’s about survival in the most extreme circumstances and it’s kill or be killed. It’s not about gay affirmative, but a gay survival. And let’s remember this is based on a book written long time ago and partly an actual experience of the writer. Was Campion supposed to leave that part out when it’s a central point of the original story? It’s very important, especially in this genre. So, the criticism of cliche is not valid one for me, at all. The issue is not so much the hiding but why is it hidden? And the beauty of the film is not only that they’re hiding, but it’s also hidden from the audience as well. We only know there’s something going on because of small bits of revelations. We never get a real declaration of it as such or anything like that. But based on the clues we’ve seen we can come to pretty clear conclusions. And even if a story or theme is a cliche, it’s more about how you do it. If the way you tell it isn’t clichéd, then it’s not clichéd. This is why there are multiple adaptations of the same stories, because each one can give a unique point of view. At least that’s the theory and the best ones certainly can. I don’t think it’s a cliche that the young timid guy who’s a victim of toxic masculinity not only wins over the brute who tormented him and his mother, but actually proved to be much stronger and deadlier than his tormentor.
The thing is, cliches (such as this one) take one out of the movie – well, me, anyway. They make it feel written, instead of authentic. And, because of that, they make me empathize with the characters less. As well as be less interested in them, because they feel like devices. (Although Cumberbatch did a pretty good job making up for it, probably about as much as could be done.)
I don’t know what Campion could have done. 🙂 I’m just talking about what the movie is. I can’t comment on the reasons. Maybe it’s just bad timing, now that this has become a cliche. I probably would have found this movie a lot more interesting back when Brokeback Mountain came out. I don’t know if it’s anybody’s fault. It’s just what it is. I guess the movie just isn’t for me – but maybe I’ll feel differently upon rewatch. Always possible.
I also don’t really care if the cliche criticism is valid or not. 🙂 I’m not expressing an opinion about the objective value of the movie, if such a thing exists. I’m just explaining why it didn’t work for me. Sometimes, that can be a personal thing, not an objective, obvious flaw. (In other words, I know the criticism is valid from my perspective and makes sense in that respect, and that’s all that matters to me.) I don’t like such cliches, they don’t work for me and are detrimental to my experience watching a movie, as explained above. But if others don’t have a problem with them, at least in this movie, then I don’t have a problem with that, either. 🙂 (Same as my not having a problem with people loving CODA, which I personally think is a lot more cliched than Dog. But both also clearly have qualities, too, and I understand why people love them, even if I don’t.) Just different tastes.
“And even if a story or theme is a cliche, it’s more about how you do it. If the way you tell it isn’t clichéd, then it’s not clichéd.”
I very much agree with this. I just didn’t think the execution (or narrative structure) here was all that interesting or original, either. But, of course, this is subjective. Nothing to be done about it.
“I don’t think it’s a cliche that the young timid guy who’s a victim of
toxic masculinity not only wins over the brute who tormented him and his
mother, but actually proved to be much stronger and deadlier than his
tormentor.”
Actually, in a way, it’s one of the oldest cliches, no? David vs. Goliath. But I suppose in the details it’s not cliched… It also happens to be morally reprehensible to me how that story concludes (straight-up premeditated murder, and very much unjustified – I’m not a fan of the death penalty even when it’s warranted, when the perpetrator has actually done something, which was not the case here, he was just being mean and weird, I even think “tormentor” is very strong for what he was doing) and it’s very hard for me to get on board in the slightest. Which is one of the other major issues I have with the movie. (The most annoying thing about it being that this outcome is presented in a very positive light – or at least in one that’s in no way negative – and we’re clearly meant to be on board with it.)
The oppressive and extreme culture makes people do horrible things. This and the pushing to be stronger by Phil and his dad made Peter strong and then he became too strong. As I understand it, this made him into the monster that he is and it kind of ignites something dark deep inside Peter. It’s like a pressure cooker waiting to explode. For me, the biggest point the film is making is about how toxic masculinity creates violent men and even turns a delicate flower into a monster (that’s an actual metaphor in the film). There’s no rationality for the killing and, as you pointed out, the motivations the film gives him are not enough to drive him to that level. Even the way he does the killing is sinister. This is what I’m saying. These are the things people are missing, this darkness around Peter. The killing only makes sense if you pay attention to those horror scenes involving Peter. There’s also a great foreshadowing in death of Mr Cottontail. The killing of Phil is unjustified and Campion makes it clear by how its played that Peter is the monster. The film sets up the (false) premise that people believe the film is about right from beginning: that his sole motivation is to protect his mother.
Hmmm… I hadn’t considered his motivation wasn’t only to protect his mother… Interesting take! Yeah, that’s kinda’ the only way it makes sense. If Peter is just a bit off kilter to begin with. (Just enough so his reaction to these circumstances be this, instead of something more appropriate to the level of the “crimes”.) I still don’t find this all as fascinating as you do. 🙂 (Or at all.) But, if it at least makes sense, somewhat, that’s a start, I suppose…
But, as I said before, this is a lie. I’ve talked about it but nobody seems to get it. You’re the first to actually get this. The only thing you misunderstood is the intention of Campion. She twists the story and swaps both leads around, as Peter gets control of the narrative and their relationship. Phil is not really the brute we think he is and can be gentle and loving and Peter is not timid/weak and can be strong and even a monster.
Sorry, I have to reply like this because it won’t accept a long comment. Also, David versus Goliath might be the biggest cliche there is pretty much a stable in Hollywood and all cultures really. It wouldn’t be as fun if there’s no real challenge. People everywhere love an underdog.
The thing is, this kid (Peter) hardly ever comes off as an underdog. There’s the opening voice-over, then he pretty early on displays some sinister qualities that make it harder to root for him, even if that wasn’t there… I don’t know, I just feel like the movie is trying to be a number of different things at once and doesn’t quite manage to be a satisfying version of any of them. (Which is maybe more “realistic”, because things in the world are usually messy, like that, but realism is easily accessible to us… in real life. Every day. It’s nothing special. Stories, however, need to be satisfying, too, on some level, not just realistic, at least in my opinion.) But, yeah, that’s all very unclear and subjective and all that, of course… 🙂
Well, the thing about The Power of The Dog is that you can take out the gay bits and it still works because nothing really changes from its narrative. The first time I watched it I didn’t love it and thought the gay bits were unnecessary. However, on second viewing I realised it’s not necessary but it adds new dimensions to the story. I’m laughing! At last an analysis I can get on board with! Because I’ve been dying for someone to see the same things or the same understanding of it that I have. This is how it is actually presented and that’s why you have difficulty with it. For example, I, too, had difficulty accepting Phil was really a monster. So, for us to accept he had to die he had to be a real monster. But in the film he’s not really a monster. He was acting up to be this brutal guy, but that’s one of the beauties of the film, because it turns the tables. You see, the guy who was the tormentor or bully, however you want to describe him, is actually a soft guy, changes his behaviour, mellows out and even hangs out with Peter and they even bond. And it turns out the guy who was bullied is not just bad but a monster.
“And it turns out the guy who was bullied is not just bad but a monster.”
Yeah, I get that, but I just don’t like that twist… 🙂 For some reason, I didn’t find these reversals to be interesting. I just found them to be forced.
“you can take out the gay bits and it still works because nothing really changes from its narrative.”
Exactly, they are unnecessary. (They may add new dimensions, but none that change things dramatically.) And that, for me, makes the cliches attached to them even worse. Makes it all feel shoehorned in…
It twists and turns everything up side down. This guy who was the victim at the beginning turns up in second half of the film and takes over. Peter takes over and kills Phil. They may both be victims of their culture but there’s something fundamentally wrong with Peter. This is why I say there’s a horror element to Peter’s actions. I have to keep repeating this because how do people miss this? Calling it a horror film might be pushing a bit too far but there’s definitely a horror element in Peter’s actions. There isn’t really a good guy and the film twists it and it’s Phil you feel sorry for because he’s not as bad as it first seems. People keep saying he’s a brute and everything but he’s not actually a monster like Peter is and certainly didn’t deserve to die. The sequence of their tender moment followed straight away by his sudden death clearly illustrates that we are meant to sympathise with Phil. It was so jarring as to indicate something was off. For me, the film makes clear Phil is a victim of Peter’s actions and we are supposed to sympathise with him. It also makes clear Peter is a victim of bullying by Phil and his dad (I’ve been wondering whether Peter might also be responsible for his dad’s death) and both are victims of the times they lived in.
The problem is, to me, seeing this reversal of roles is in no way satisfying. Especially when it ends the way it ends. No matter what the intention by the filmmaker was. 🙂
Yup – I like this interpretation a lot. I still doubt looking at it through this lens will make me like the movie more. I guess if I indeed end up getting that sense that we’re supposed to sympathize with Phil (I did anyway, to an extent, but I didn’t think it was because of anything Campion did, maybe the guy who wrote the book, at most), which I didn’t the first time around (get that sense), then it might.
Genuine question: do pundits really think CODA could win BP after CODA missed all over the place & only scored 3 Oscar noms, or are they just trying to generate drama & content?
I expected them to over-interpret Belfast’s ensemble win, but now we have the crazy spectacle of over-interpreting CODA’s.
We do know how AMPAS voted right? As in the nominations from the body that awards the Oscars, right?
The strange thing that happened this week was TPOTD being in the Fan Favourite top 10 against all expectations. Not sure if it means anything, it’s just weird it’s been mostly ignored.
NBR have gotten off the Belfast train post-SAG & are all in for TPOTD now for BP. And yes, CODA has moved up in their predictions.
I wrote a long post about all the positives CODA brings to the competition, but it keeps getting deleted as SPAM.
I think POwer of the DOg will win, people will vote for it simply through the power of suggestion. I bet a lot of people who vote barely see any of the movies, especially now that there are ten of them.
But CODA will earn it’s second place (it’s a shame we will never see the final tallies)
I don’t think CODA is second, way too many snubs & way too few noms. The SAG ensemble win is being blown out of proportion, which is what their campaign wants.
No one seems to be pointing out that CODA could get the conservative vote. It involves a small town of working people struggling to make ends meet when government regulations (environmentally based ones at that!) are inhibiting them,
It’s a film both progressives and conservatives can embrace.
… because conservatives love coming-of-age films featuring musicians and families of hearing impaired people? I thought they’d think it’s a “woke” film about “good people doing good things”. If you believe in the theories concocted by Sasha Stone.
Sasha and Co. – it’d be interesting to see a column on Marvel’s upcoming slate of films, most especially the X-Men. The next crop of movie stars will probably come from that franchise, and it’s a very diverse group of heroes. I’m particularly interested to see how Marvel casts Storm, one of Marvel’s most powerful heroes who lead the most popular team for decades. I’m interested to see how well they treat that character, or if they sideline her for their trio of white guys (Wolverine, Professor X, and Magneto). As a matter of fact, the X-Men is stocked with a lot of powerful female superheroes, way more than the Avengers, and I’ll be interested if Disney decides to downplay them as much as Fox did, or ties them up in love triangles (Jean Grey) or damsel in distress tropes (Rogue).
Anyways, it’s a bit odd to bring this up in this thread, but I do think it’s an interesting question – who will play STORM?
I think Storm is already cast, and bound to appear in Black Panther 2…
by the way, Judd Apatow’s “The Bubble” has a trailer already – a fake one! – and opens on Netflix on April 1st. Fascinanting ensemble, including Karen Gillian, David Duchovny, Maria Bakalova and more… a bit all over the place, which I find intriguing (as the premise)
That’s a cool lineup! Maria Bakalova deserves employment after Borat 2 and I hope she gets a nice juicy part. I’ll have to check it out!
The SAG Awards are voted on by a huge group of actors, so I’m not convinced the Academy will follow suit and award CODA as Best Picture. The acting races are the ones that I think are most affected by the SAG wins. Best Actor and Best Actress are dime-a-dozen biopic fare, unfortunately, but the supporting categories offer up several fictional characters.
The acting branch of the Academy gave CODA 1 nomination & TPOTD 4. People like Feinberg conflating AMPAS with SAG-AFTRA when they diverged so much this year is disingenuous.
The diverged so much this at THAT time. The SAG wins happened after the Academy voted, but it may be an indicator of who actually wins. Any of the four would not surprise. I’m having a hard time seeing CODA winning Picture. But it is that safe(er) choice the Academy defaults to every 5-7 years, like with Spotlight.
So is Belfast…
Although I think Power of the Dog is a good film- I don’t think it will win the Oscar for BP. It is a film that is hailed by critics and film Twitter as a masterpiece But many of my cinephile friends are not passionate about this film.The other issue is that many people find it boring.
People have some sort of issues with every film nominated in the BP category except for Coda. This film may not be a masterpiece, but it is well liked across the board. Out of the 10 films nominated- Coda and Dune have the highest IMDB score while TPOTD has the lowest. It is certainly not a factor in determining who is going to win BP, but it is interesting that is number 10 on the list.
Westerns ironically can be made somewhere else besides the American West. New Zealand put Willow and the lord of the rings, two fantasy films graved into it’s landscape. They could put Jane’s interpretation of power of the dog there as well
Most of Leone’s were made in Spain. Don’t tell him.
If Sam Elliot knew jack shit about Westerns he’d know that they have long and well established history of being filmed by foreigners in foreign countries. Such a weird comment.
Netflix with the perfect response to Elliot. https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/a097b37cdcb0949133e26f36a91a520b65f329550f36bf25a70fe18135508482.jpg
Can someone tell me why Little Miss Sunshine or The Help or Black Panther or Trial winning Ensemble didn’t mean they were winning BP but CODA winning is different?
It’s because other Oscar bloggers and Film Twitter are desperate for drama in this race. Because the season is longer this year and awards have been spread out, it’s been too quiet. They need something to write about, grist for the mill.
Every year is unique, and nobody should be saying CODA is winning before we get the PGA winner.
I wonder if Little Miss Sunshine, which won the SAG and the PGA, could have beaten The Departed on an expanded, weighted ballot. More than anything that was Marty’s year, and the whisper campaign that if you were voting for him, you should also vote for his movie was somewhat effective. But in a close race on a different type of ballot where dominating the top 3 is preferable to ending up #1 after one round of voting…it could have gone another way.
Not *that* unique, really. And we can’t ever know if LMS could have beaten Departed on pref. ballot. Film A could beat Film B on pref. ballots is just fantasy talks with no evidence whatsoever repeated ad nauseum, it almost becomes a fact.
As for Scorsese being due narrative. The same could be said for Campion.
Each year is most certainly unique because the competition is different every year (this is why over-reliance on ‘stats’ is a little precarious). I never said it would have won, only that it could have had a better chance because I believe the preferential ballot favors movies like LMS – movies that pretty much everyone likes, nobody hates – over movies that have an ardent core of supporters but also significant detractors.
Talented as Campion is, she’s nowhere near as overdue as Scorsese was when he won – and I doubt that will have the same impact on BP this year, under this system, anyway.
It would have had a better chance, for sure – but still lost.
Not *that* unique, really. And we can’t ever know if LMS could have beaten Departed on pref. ballot. Film A could beat Film B on pref. ballots is just fantasy talks with no evidence whatsoever repeated ad nauseum, it almost becomes a fact.
As for Scorsese being due narrative. The same could be said for Campion.
I mean, with no directing or editing nominations… we can be pretty sure it wouldn’t have.
Nobody should be saying it even after we get the PGA winner, no matter what that is… 🙂 (Unless they want to be wrong.)
“I wonder if Little Miss Sunshine, which won the SAG and the PGA, could have beaten The Departed on an expanded, weighted ballot.”
Sadly, no. It had no directing or editing nominations. A stat never beaten, not in the 23-24 years of preferential BP voting and not in the other 65 or so years (with an editing category).
Especially since PGA will tell us nothing about Drive My Car‘s place in the race…unless tick, tick…BOOM! or Being the Ricardos wins. 😉
Well, Drive My Car is a bit too stats-dead to be a factor, anyway… Sammy made an interesting argument about why it maybe wouldn’t be, but still, it didn’t even get in for acting or editing at the Oscars, even though it did so well. Story just doesn’t add up…
You know I don’t believe in “stats-dead.”
Many people don’t. Yet no movie I’ve ever pronounced stats-dead (of which there are at least 3-7 per year) has ever won BP, so far… These are stats that just don’t fail. Of course it’s not impossible for it to happen eventually, but there’s a reason it has never happened in 90 years of Oscar history… Very tricky to bet against these. Mendes, as strong as he seemed, fell to such a stat (which I unfortunately only caught post-ceremony, something I will forever be pissed about) when he lost to Bong (who I still had a bet on, even so). And that one wasn’t even quite 100%. The Drive My Car ones are, and there are several of them.
Netflix had the absolutely perfect response to Elliot.
https://twitter.com/netflixfilm/status/1498730265664966656?s=21
The thing I missed in the Spotlight & Parasite years, reinforced with Nomadland, is AMPAS likes it’s Best Pictures to be socially relevant. Thanks to Elliot for reminding voters that TPOTD fits that bill.
If voters were truly driven by identity politics and using their votes to make a statement, last year’s ceremony would have ended with historic wins for Viola Davis and Chadwick Boseman — and not a THIRD Best Actress Oscar for Fran McDormand and a second Best Actor Oscar for Anthony Hopkins.
Does that look like a group overly concerned with doing something with their “futile selves” or a group that voted for what they liked best? And still, this page plays accomplice to the Twitter mob it has such disdain for by suggesting, all evidence to the contrary, that the Academy has fallen prey to it when choosing winners. PR posturing aside, when voters get their ballots in the privacy of their own home, little seems to matter beyond what they think is most deserving.
Let’s be reasonable before fanning the flames. Just because films by white men have not won Best Picture the past two years does not mean the Oscars have Green Book PTSD and are suddenly terrified of voting for white men. Maybe they found Parasite more original, more entertaining, more relevant than 1917. Maybe they found Nomadland more moving, more cohesive, and more illuminating than Mank. In fact, if you look at the five years preceding Green Book’s win, only one Best Picture winner was directed by a white man. Nobody was making this argument back then – we were still, you know, talking about the films themselves and something far more relevant (and interesting) to their chances of winning: how they compete against each other on a weighted ballot that favors consensus.
Hollywood Critics Association Awards
Picture – “CODA”
Actor – Andrew Garfield, “Tick, Tick … Boom!”
Actress – Kristen Stewart, “Spencer”
Supporting Actor – Troy Kotsur, “CODA”
Supporting Actress – Ariana DeBose, “West Side Story”
Cast Ensemble – “Belfast”
Director *Tie* – Denis Villeneuve, “Dune” and Jane Campion, “The Power of The Dog”
Original Screenplay – Fran Kranz, “Mass”
Adapted Screenplay – Siân Heder, “CODA”
Animated or VFX Performance – Stephanie Beatriz, “Encanto”
Action Film – “The Harder They Fall”
Animated – “The Mitchells vs. The Machines”
Comedy/Musical – “Tick, Tick … Boom!”
Documentary – “Summer of Soul”
Horror – “Last Night in Soho”
Indie – “Pig”
International – “Drive My Car”
First Feature – Lin-Manuel Miranda, “Tick, Tick … Boom!”
Short – “Us Again”
Score – Hans Zimmer, “Dune”
Original Song – “Be Alive,” “King Richard”
Cinematography – “Dune”
Production Design – “Nightmare Alley”
Editing – “Last Night in Soho”
Stunts – “Shang-Chi and The Legend of the Ten Rings”
Costume Design – “Cruella”
Hair/Makeup – “The Eyes of Tammy Faye”
Visual Effects – “Dune”
Honorary Awards
Acting Achievement – Nicolas Cage
Artisan Achievement – Greig Fraser
Artisan on the Rise – Alice Brooks
Excellence in Artistry – Kenneth Branagh
Filmmaker on the Rise – Natalie Morales
Filmmaking Achievement – Guillermo del Toro
Game Changer – Simu Liu
Inspire – Aunjanue Ellis
International Icon – Javier Bardem
Newcomer – Jude Hill
Spotlight – The Cast of “CODA”
Star on the Rise – Saniyya Sidney
As good as HCA got it, Dune hosed out of ensemble (you’ve heard the phrase super team, as in NBA franchises? Dune was such a super-team of actors). Hard to argue that there were better choices in PD and Editing. 🙁
Any awards show with 12 vanity honorary awards can’t expect itself to be taken seriously.
The Everyone Gets A Trophy Awards
The Oprah awards
Final Oscar predictions:
Best picture: CODA
Best Director: Jane campion for the power of the dog
Lead actor: will smith for king richard
Lead actress: Nicole Kidman for being the ricardos
Supporting actor: Troy Kotsur for Coda
Supporting actress: Ariana DeBose for West side story
Adapted screenplay: the lost daughter
Original screenplay: belfast
Original song: Dos orguitas: encanto
Original score: Hans Zimmer for dune
Animated feature: Encanto
VFX: Spider-Man: No way home
Cinematography: the power of the dog
Sound: dune
Costume design: cyrano
Production design: dune
Makeup and hairstyling: the eyes of tammy Faye
International Feature: drive my car
documentary feature: summer of soul or the revolution will not be televised
Film Editing: Dune
Animated short film: Robin robin
Live action short film: alkachu: take and run
Documentary short subject: the queen of basketball
VFX Spidey over Dune????
In a word….
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/151ad916c7c998edf863f57d5f8b34fe9ae39913f40386ad8f5062c9218198a9.gif
Why cant it be a tie in special effects this year.
Dune was amazing while Spidey’s outing was darker than ever.
Because Dune has 10 nominations and voters will want to throw as many below the line awards at it as possible, just like Gravity and Mad Max: Fury Road.
True-Dune has the edge, spider-man is a close second
Music is going to Power of the Dog. It was worlds better than DUNE. Plus Jonny is overdue having missed out on Phantom Thread and stupid rules kept him from getting it for There Will Be Blood.
Final? Even if Dog wins PGA?
If PGA goes to CODA it would be the most laughable win of the year. Producers awarding the laziest production (just a english version remake of an already successful french crowdpleaser) rather than to go to actually original and risky material like The Power of the Dog or Don’t Look Up.
The French version isn’t that love BECAUSE THEY DIDN’T USE DEAF ACTORS!
Serious question for the mathematicians out there: Assuming all voters cast a ballot, if Drive My Car were the #1 film on one-quarter of the Oscar ballots (2500 give or take) and #2 on the rest (ca. 7500), does that mean it would win Best Picture? In other words, how likely is it that CODA, Belfast and TPotD will each get less than a third of the votes (ca. 3300) in Round 1?
If none of the other films got more than 50% (5001+) #1 votes, then yes. DMC would win
on the 2nd round.eventually.EDITED, per Aroncido’s example:
Provided if the % tally of the films below DMC when added place DMC in the top 2.
Or even just 15% in Round 1…
1. The Power of the Dog 2. Drive My Car
25%
1. CODA 2. Drive My Car
15%
1. Belfast 2. Drive My Car
15%
1. Drive My Car 2. [anything else]
15%
1. West Side Story 2. Drive My Car
5%
1. Licorice Pizza 2. Drive My Car
5%
1. King Richard 2. Drive My Car
5%
1. Don’t Look Up 2. Drive My Car
5%
1. Dune 2. Drive My Car
5%
1. Nightmare Alley 2. Drive My Car
5%
Crazy talk?
Your scenario if not crazy then fantasy. 🙂 Not everyone would have seen DMC and everyone having it either at 1 or 2 is just a next to impossible reality.
Call me crazy. I don’t see it happening, but it’s nice to know it’s possible if implausible. Although…
It could do it with even less. A very simple example would be one where Drive My Car was 9th and the first round is strucuted as having five complimentary structures where one film get 10%+x_i votes while another gets 10%-x_i votes with somewhat limited x_i (basically to the point where the amount of votes gotten by the 10th place film would raise Drive My Car out of 9th place). For example, if you have x_i=1,2,3,4 and 5, Drive My Car would win if it were to start in 9th place with 10%-4 votes (by round 2, it would have 20%-9 votes, in round 4 it would have 30%-11 votes, in round 5 it would have 40%-12 votes, in round 5 it would have 50%-12 votes and round 6 it would win with 60%-11 votes).
In that scenario (which is outside the realm of plausibility), the only way Drive My Car would lose is if either it loses in the top 2, meaning one film got at least 50% of the total vote in round 1, or it loses in the top 3, meaning two films got at least 33% each. For this latter to happen, the top 3 would need to get 91% of the total vote – sounds extraordinarily unlikely.
But if all ballots have DMC at 1 or 2, then it is impossible for any film to gain votes. Only DMC can so it will inevitably win.
The only chance it can lose is to lose in round 1, when another film got more than 50%.
Of course this scenario is implausible for ANY film to achieve.
Let’s say two films get 35-35% of the votes in round one, and DMC gets 25%. DMC gains all the votes from films 4-10, but that is a total of 5%, so in the round of three, the standing is 35, 35, 30 and DMC gets eliminated.
I stand corrected.
I am not a movie buff. I am huge movie fan. I’m an Oscar enthusiast. I love movies. 12 Angry Men (original by Lumet) is my all time favorite film. Running On Empty, Gosford Park, The Godfathers 1/2, To Kill a Mockingbird, The Sting, Millers Crossing, Network, and Shawshank are among my tops as well. More recently I loved Ladybird, Vice, and Minari.
All this to say….I’ve seen all the 2022 best picture nominees and CODA was my runaway favorite. To me, it IS the best movie of the year. Maybe if it wins Best Picture, it’ll be because many others felt the same way.
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/b446951a1bde9e2de4d9f227b8087d84a4fddc8aa646740bc3bbc2d8410a41be.gif
Wow, somebody else who loved Vice! This is like a UFO sighting around here… 🙂 High-five!
I’ve been waiting for this obnoxious New Zealand argument to crop up all season with trepidation. Many Americans don’t really understand the ‘western’, Sam included.
I’ve said it before and i’ll say nit again Dog is overrated ! It’s a combination of There Will Be Blood and Brokeback Mountain with Cumberbatch channeling Daniel Day Lewis with a score by Jonny Greenwood and McPhee doing a Norman Bates impression And it’s portrayal of two gay men is somewhat offensive ,one a brute the other a potential serial killer ! As for CODA not only is it a remake of a 2014 French film it’s also very similar to a 1999 German film called Beyond Silence which was nominated for Best Foreign Film ! If the Academy is going to give a film with only three nominations Best Picture i’d vote for Licorice Pizza for Picture , Director and Screenplay !
“The Power of the Dog” is homophobic – and this is its real problem.
I’m gay and I was offended by its depiction of gay men.
I hope it looses.
“Brokeback Mountain” was similar in its topics but it handled homosexuality tremendously (it’s still my favourite American movie of the XXI century). So it’s rather ridiculous that it lost 16 years ago and now it’s copycat, far worse than the original, might win.
Only Phil is “gay” (though I wouldn’t use that word to describe him). Peter’s sexuality is at best ambiguous if not fully undefined.
“ambigous”, true, but it’s not impossible that he’s gay (and movie even does not try to convince viewers that he is not)
I am gay and I wasn’t offended by its depiction of gay men. But then, I am not US American.
“Where Netflix stood by Dave Chappelle Apple fired Anthony Garcia Martinez after employees found a memoir he’d written was “misogynistic.” They wanted him out because of a book he once wrote. Apple complied. Netflix didn’t. Is that how you play the game of appealing to this crowd? Probably. ”
That or Dave Chappelle is a wildly popular comedian whose specials are watched by millions while Anthony Garcia Martinez was some dude Apple hired to be in middle management.
It’s not a moral stance by but business interests which dictate their actions. One could without the hassle and the other couldn’t. It’s always about the big bucks.
I LOVE Belfast, and I don’t care who knows it!
A brief rundown of my ballot (if I had one)…
1. Belfast (an endearing, hopeful, moving, and beautiful story with exceptional performances; saw it twice in theaters and was moved to tears both times, just a lovely cinematic experience)
2. Drive My Car (richly layered visual storytelling, thought provoking script, and heartfelt filmmaking that captures the complexity, mystery, and beauty of the human condition)
3. Nightmare Alley (phenomenal performances, and a movie that captures the insanity of our society right now: deception, greed, addiction, desperation, and darkness; it was like looking at a mirror of life in 2021)
4. Dune (probably my favorite movie theater experience of the year; exquisite craftsmanship)
5. The Power of the Dog (a movie I admire and respect immensely for its craft and performances, but it felt distant; pretty much the same way I feel about Roma)
6. CODA (very schmaltzy, but the performances and big heart won me over)
7. Licorice Pizza (exceptional filmmaking, but it just felt kinda hollow and didn’t stick with me)
8. West Side Story (lovely to look at, but this is so much better as a stage production; I think my main problems with the film are with the source material)
9. King Richard (very basic, predictable, but well made sports movie)
10. Don’t Look Up (the only film I would consider to be “bad”)
The way you feel about Belfast, I feel about Drive My Car. West Side Story is a close second. Both are masterpieces. Everything else is very good.
The way you feel about Belfast is how I feel about West Side Story and Dune. The 2 real director movies of the year.
Love who or what you want to love. Love is good, hate is bad. Love can be strange sometimes but who cares? It’s yours. I don’t love The Dog because there’s no personal connection for me. But it’s pretty close and it’s the kind of film I regard what great films to be. I may love a film but would not necessarily regard it as the best. And vice versa. For example, I wouldn’t say I love Apocalypse Now but for me it will always rank as one of the greatest films ever (I go back and forth between The Godfather and it on which film I put in my all time top ten and now it’s the former because Part 2 enhances the saga). It’s not a film one love really because it is very nihilistic and shows the horrors of war. It’s also not an anti-war film and could even be said to be reveling in it (I love the smell of napalm in the morning). I think it’s neither. Although I don’t love the film, per say, I do love the sheer genius of filmmaking craftsmanship. Its visual is hypnotic. It’s not as intoxicating as Vertigo or as beautiful as Lawrence of Arabia but still astounding. No scene has stuck with memore or blew me away as much like that epic scene in Apocalypse Now where the helicopters are attacking a village and Ride of Valkyries is playing loudly. It is both shocking and awesome at the same time. It both disgusts me and also delights me at the sane time. For me, no film is bigger and certainly no scene is bigger than that scene. When I think cinema, Apocalypse Now is what comes to mind.
I have been trying to get my head around that scene since I first saw it as a young child, and I couldn’t really explain how I feel about it. But how I feel is explained much better and beautifully by the late great Roger Ebert: “What’s great in the film, and what will make it live for many years
and speak to many audiences, is what Coppola achieves on the levels Truffaut was discussing: the moments of agony and joy in making cinema. Some of those moments come at the same time; remember again the helicopter assault and its unsettling juxtaposition of horror and exhilaration. Remember the weird beauty of the massed helicopters lifting over the trees in the long shot, and the insane power of Wagner’s music, played loudly during the attack, and you feel what Coppola was getting at: Those moments as common in life as art, when the whole huge grand mystery of the world, so terrible, so beautiful, seems to hang in the balance.”
Apocalypse Now is amazing. Hard to have a personal connection to, indeed (unless you were in the war or something, I guess), but also hard to not be wowed by and impossible to forget…
Ranking the 2022 bp nominees
1. CODA
2. Belfast
3. King Richard
4. Nightmare alley
5. Licroice Pizza
6. Dune
7. West Side Story
8. Drive my Car
9; The power of the dog
50. Don’t look up
Spider-Man no way home, no time to die, being the ricardos and eyes of tammy Faye should’ve taken that 10th spot away from don’t look up
Hey, do you know they filmed The Martian in Mars? They needed to be accurate location. Anyway, The Dog was restricted because of Covid and many films are not filmed on the places they’re supposed to be based at.
Are you serious about The Martian? I never knew that.
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/e322891b3c0a83cc7d1afdb43e14281c93a25c4b5195f2539a8c2a612006aed0.gif
Of course. How else do you think they could have depicted Nats so accurately? They thought of leaving Damon there, but was brought back because Affleck missed him too much.
Let’s hope Sam Elliot’s homophobic, misogynistic and xenophobic rant has little or no support in the Academy. It is also pretty damn stupid. How has he managed to show himself up that badly? I think he has missed the point of the film. It is guys like him the film is talking about.
Also, the best Western films are made by non-Americans. I hated the usual Western films, especially those with racist John Wayne (always thought he was a racist and have been proved right) but loved Sergio Leone’s Spaghetti Western.
Not just non-American but a WOMAN non-American. The nerve of her!
Something within him has been disturbed by this film. It’s weird I have not any criticism of this any close to that. Well, it’s not criticism, just hateful insults.
The best western films are made by non -Americans ? I guess you should tell that to John Ford , Sam Peckinpah , Howard Hawks Budd Boeticher Anthony Mann and Clint Eastwood ! As for John Wayne being a racist , that’s what made The Searchers the great film that it is .. He is a racist !
“If the credo is to disallow any films by or about white men, then that will be reflected when we look back in time at things that don’t make sense…….And if being white and male is a liability, voting for anyone white and male is a liability by association.”
THE POWER OF THE DOG is about white men! THE POWER OF THE DOG is about white men!
I feel like I’m taking crazy pills. Sasha, I can’t tell if you’re intending to troll people, or just too inept to notice, but my god, this is getting out of hand.
You’re expecting logical consistency? Where have you been?
Sasha: “Hollywood needs to get out of its bubble and make movies about regular working class Americans who don’t live on the coasts!”
Hollywood: Makes Nomadland and gives it the Best Picture Oscar
Sasha: “The director isn’t a white man so it doesn’t count.”
But the white men are not Americans. Why are non-Americans making film about America? And why aren’t American director winning BD? And so on and so forth.
Well, the director-writer-producer is not a white male. That’s probably who she means they would be voting for. Makes sense. Obviously, almost every American movie ever will have at least some white males in it…
I guess she formulated it poorly, with the “by or about” bit, but this seems like nitpicking.
HIDDEN FIGURES isn’t an apt example. NOBODY ever talked about it winning Best Picture at any point in the race. And, it wasn’t ever even in the discussion as a Dark Horse possibility (which is all the CODA is now – it is not a front runner).
And BELFAST isn’t much of a counter, as well. What awards has it actually won this Awards season? It’s piled up nominations, but, how many from significant organizations has it actually WON outside of Screenplay from the discredited Golden Globes? CODA has this big one, plus Kotsur has won a couple.
Not saying CODA is a favorite or a frontrunner. But, it’s a legit Dark Horse, something that HIDDEN FIGURES never was, nor is BELFAST right now
The usual logic around here is “I liked something, therefore everyone else must also like it as much as me, and if they say they don’t they must be lying because they’re part of the woke mob hive mind or something.”
While I agree that Belfast has underperformed (it would need the PGA at this point to be the dark horse ppl say it is), you are incorrect on the discussion around Hidden Figures. People ABSOLUTELY talked about it winning Best Picture. Most notably Pete Hammond and Tom O’Neil. Both of those pundits switched it into the winners spot on their Gold derby predictions at one point, though they eventually dropped it, and both talked about it considerably in video discussions after its SAG win.
CODA is capturing a similar burst of love which Hidden Figures did. Is it enough to win Best Picture? Probably not. But it’s clear that the movie’s heart is capturing people, which means its in play.
Wow, they really did that?! I guess because of Spotlight…
Had Parasite happened less than 2 years before Hidden Figures also won SAG, I bet people would have discussed the possibility of its winning BP!… (Even if with not as much conviction as for CODA, given that the latter also seems to be winning an acting award.) I’m not saying it’s right – I’m just saying they would have…
CODA is stats-dead without directing or editing nominations. Zero exceptions, all-time. (Not to mention DGA, ACE and BAFTA Best Film.) Calling it a “dark horse” is being quite a bit too kind to its chances. Belfast, on the other hand, only missed editing (as far as stats-relevant categories go) and has won as many industry awards as Dog, so far. And it has the screenplay Globe. It is far more of a dark horse than CODA.
I enjoyed CODA but it is not best picture material.
Well, I haven’t seen any of those movies (I did see House of Gucci), but I read Sam’s interview about the DOG. And boy, he makes a lot of sense to me. It’s not a movie I want to see.
Which part of his interview made sense to you?
You refuse to watch a film because a single old fart doesn’t like? And how can he be right when you haven’t seen it? And how can he be right and all those who loved the film be wrong? You have warped view of things. Can’t you watch it and make up your own opinion afterwards?
If Goombah Driving Miss Daisy and Grinding Nemo can win then why not? And, I’m convinced Bohemian Rhapsody would have won if it weren’t for Bryan Singer (it still won the most awards that night)
“Grinding Nemo” :)) – love it!
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/7e6fcd5568f15720cb68039526b84849cf63e74e3cb1d823ab8bff1c778faf66.jpg
“Seriously, CODA?”
Such a great performance. How did all the wonderful actors of DRIVE MY CAR get overlooked? Hopefully people will discover what an amazing movie this is, once it begins streaming on HBOMax tomorrow.
What in hell is Sam Elliot talking about tho? Running around in chaps and no shirts? Were they??? There’s the ONE sequence where the guys are naked in and around the pond (or was it a river? Some body of water). But I really don’t remember anyone running around without a shirt on outside of that (quite purposeful) scene. If they did it was a very small moment because I walked away with much different memories.
In any case, always amusing when old folks yammer on about nonsense. Elliot here is the equivalent of some dude shaking his fist at a cloud.
Not to mention that Elliot seems completely oblivious to what part of the whole “dude ranch” culture was.
I haven’t seen Belfast yet but Power of the Dog was def feelgood for me. Hands down happy ending. I loved the complexity of dealing with two gay characters with the seemingly persecuted one annihilating the other for being beyond asshole. Perhaps I am a niche market…
Spoilers, bruh
It’s been months already…
Trying to re-characterize Sasha’s interpretation of a film that I reckon most film fans have seen. It’s no tearjerker like Brokeback. It’s a happy ending…
Yeah, very satisfying to be presented with premeditated murder, no real justification (unless you think anybody who’s an asshole to people – but doesn’t actually do anything to them or even so much as threaten to do anything – should just be preemptively executed, just in case), and clearly expected to approve of it… Very inspiring stuff! I wonder what you’d say if I decided to just randomly kill whichever person had annoyed/offended me the most, recently, then came here and proudly announced it to the community. I bet you’d be all high-fives and such…
I just can’t agree that “Power of the Dog” is a masterpiece. It’s well done, but I just thought Cumberbatch was okay at best in it. His scenes toward the end where he’s going off on Peter and George about their mom’s drunkeness rang super false and forced to me. Particularly the lines “your ma’s got… . uhhh what chamacallit alcoholic personality? It comes under the letter A!’, and “It is high time that bozo and you got next to a few… whatever you call them? Facts!” They just seemed super unnatural coming from Phil. He’s supposedly a Yale grad, now living life as a cowboy? He seems pretty fluent and well-spoken throughout the show, and then he suddenly struggles to remember simple words seemed really odd. I don’t recall him being drunk, either.
Cumberbatch was my least favorite part of the show, which is a shame, because everyone else played their part well. It just didn’t work for me.
Poor Sam! Got so triggered!
Don’t forget that cranky ol’ Sam Elliott is more representative of the AVERAGE Academy voter (62 white and male) that no amount of new voting influx is going to change.
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/caf01deef9697fa586ef60b7c58633bb133ef2992d015663f622126fb4299ca2.gif
62 behaves very differently from 77 (Sam’s age) though.
Very!
Is that a good thing? Now all people will think is if it doesn’t win it will be because of guys like him in the Academy. They don’t want to be associated with guys like him and that might help The Dog.
I think it’s a neither here nor there thing. It will certainly mobilize the new influx, but it will also wake up the old gang who might not have gotten around to seeing it, and they’ll invoke the Ernie Borgnine rule.
This is not 2006. We had Moonlight and Parasite winning. It’s not the same Academy even though we still get fikns like Green Book as winner. As long as it’s not up against a baity a retread race film, it’s fine.
I tried to watch Dog twice and fell asleep each time. Perhaps it’s a more interesting film if you’re gay.
Whata f*** up comment is this. I already watched it a second time and it is always getting better!
I haven’t seen it and after reading Sam’s interview, won’t see it.
That should give you more reasons to watch it
You just dont deserve the film. Its simple. You are not a cinephile. Because you are not even bother try seeing it!
I can’t even get my head around the idiocy of this comment. I really can’t.
Unless he’s edited his comment and it was originally worse. This I can’t know. But you can tell me.
Interesting… What bothers you about it so much? The falling asleep? (The fellow is just being honest. I don’t think he deserves to be insulted for it. He didn’t insult the movie or its fans either. He, at worst, suggested it bored him, which is simply not insulting, it’s just his opinion/reaction. But the movie’s fans insulted him, because they disliked his comment, or read more into it than was there. I don’t see how that’s fair.) Or the use of the word “gay”? (In, I thought, a not at all malicious manner, unless one is paranoid about it and decides to read into it what they want to read into it.) I mean, would it not be more likely for somebody who was gay to find this more interesting than somebody who wasn’t? (Which isn’t to say only a gay person would – nor did the OP suggest this in any way.) Seems like a reasonable assumption to me, given its themes – but maybe I’m wrong.
I think Sammy’s response was far more level-headed and reasonable. I don’t get why we should ever react so acidly to people just expressing their dislike for or disappointment with the movies we love. After all, we surely dislike some of the movies they love just as much, and I don’t think we feel like we’re not entitled to express that opinion about them. (Nor do I think any of us abstain from doing so – or should.) So why wouldn’t they have this right too?
Disliking a film, any film, never brothers me, but the reason for disliking it might. I don’t understand the idea that you have to be a particular sexuality to enjoy a film. Such a thing can’t exist, surely? And is The Power of The Dog an example of a film that only gay people can enjoy?Well, not only is the evidence there to prove that total bull, but it’s not even a gay film such. It’s alludes to gayness in the two main characters, but that’s it. It’s a stupid thing to say and maybe even homophobic.
He’s entitled to not like any film, but there’s no film test for race, gender, sexuality or creed. Taste in film (or any tsste) is not linked to any groups. It’s totally personal.
I completely agree, but the point I was trying to make was that I don’t think that’s what he said. 🙂 “that you have to be a particular sexuality to enjoy a film.” He just said it might make you more likely to enjoy/appreciate it if you were, which I think is a perfectly fair assumption. It’s the same as saying people who like boxing will probably get more out of The Figher than people who don’t. It’s normal and probably statistically right. On average, they probably do. He never claimed you had to be gay to like The Power of the Dog. That’s why I don’t think he did anything wrong and I think reading that into it is unfair. Maybe he did mean that (that’s between him and his conscience, we’ll probably never know), but there’s no evidence in the actual text (what he wrote) that he did…
That’s how I read it, anyway… 🙂 Maybe it’s not the only objectively valid reading of his phrasing.