The Oscar race feels as disconnected from American culture than it has ever been. The discussion of film awards has turned into a discussion of art and politics. Women disappearing from the Oscar movies, a voting body made up mostly of elderly white males, Martin Luther King’s relationship to LBJ, LBJ’s image among Americans, the Civil Rights movement and what it means to today. Now that Selma’s highest awards hopes fell victim to the same types of sentiments that downed Kathryn Bigelow’s Zero Dark Thirty (interpretations of the official story) focus has shifted to American Sniper, its accusers and its apologists, its message and its intent. How much money it will make and why. What damage its popularity might cause, and to whom. What good might come of it. The American hero everyone was talking about on Martin Luther King, Jr. day was not Martin Luther King, Jr. but Chris Kyle.
Theories are now being formulated as to why he’s the hero Americans really want and need, to the tune of a potential $350 million box office take. Critics rally in support of the film. Both it and Selma received the rare A+ from Cinemascore. The two films could not be more starkly divided up to and including King’s assassination coming at the hands of an American sniper.
At the beginning of President Obama’s first term, liberals were hopped up on the notion that Obama would end both wars (he did not promise to end the war in Afghanistan). This 15 year debacle has created its own divide among Americans and rages on to this day. A mess and a quagmire started by the Bush administration after the terrorist attacks on 9/11 by Al Qaeda, which had nothing whatsoever to do with Saddam Hussein. But the Bush administration took the shock of the moment and seized the opportunity to take out a dictator and free up the oil reserves for easy milk-shake drinking in the Middle East. We were lied to about the war, misled about weapons of mass destruction and to date the death count stands at:
The Iraqi civilian death toll seems impossible to accurately measure but is presumed to be over one million dead since the invasion. While deaths of American soldiers have slowed since Obama took over, they are still in harm’s way each and every day we all walk around free. The toll taken on American soldiers and Iraqi and Afghani citizens is immeasurable. What American Sniper does is give many Americans the chance to grieve the fallen soldiers, and perhaps to feel as though it was not fought in vain, this useless and hopeless war.
In 2009, Kathryn Bigelow’s Iraq film’s $17 million box-office take sprung from the notion that it was a liberal, anti-war film, one that did not put enough blame on the enemy. It did not give us an enemy, in fact, because in that film Americans are defending themselves against citizens with IEDs who are fighting against the American invasion. They are undefinable, hard to locate and they are everywhere.
But we are a war-prone nation. We spend more money on defense than we do anything else. Our military is, in many ways, the backbone of our country’s economy. There are whole populations out there in the “flyover states” that are under-served by Hollywood. It took Clint Eastwood’s sensibilities to earn the prestige to get into the Oscar race, and his war sensibilities to woo the conservatives who see Eastwood as one of their own after her performance at the Republican National Convention four years ago.
The teeny tiny insular world of Oscar has now crossed over with the “silent majority” of conservative Americans who are arguing the film alongside the film people. Usually film people are written off by the majority of conservatives. Now, with Sniper in the mix, it’s brought the two worlds together. Michael Moore and Seth Rogan are getting hit with violent fury. Some critics are receiving death threats. Meanwhile, on Oscar Island, voters are simply enjoying the nice, safe films they’ve picked for Best Picture outside the two controversial ones.
The irony of the debate, though, was that when Selma’s turn came up, the conversation somehow found a way to be about anything but this American hero, someone who led the civil rights movement and drove the Voting Rights Act, along with many other brave Americans. They have been marginalized and deemed less important than maintaining the pristine image of Lyndon B. Johnson. Chris Kyle, however, doesn’t need to be deemed a hero by the mainstream press or film critics — the people are doing that for him. A badass sniper, a brave man who had 160 confirmed kills which included women and children. Some film critics are defending the movie, saying it is decidedly anti-war. Other critics disagree. It is turning out to be the kind of film that really tells you more about your own beliefs than it does make any kind of broad statements either about the war in Iraq or about who Kyle was. The overriding message of it seems to be: you can’t escape what that kind of killing does to a person.
The sentiment towards the Iraq war is changing the way the sentiments about Vietnam happened after Oliver Stone’s Platoon came out. American Sniper offer Americans the chance to redeem their forgotten and dead soldiers who are fighting a war no Americans wanted to fight in the first place (well, a lot of them surely did and still do). The scary part comes in when Obama is brought into it. Or Hilary Clinton. Here are few tweets to Michael Moore from the various tweets of his on the subject of American Sniper:
@MMFlint Hey stupid, if it were not for American Snipers there would be more dead Americans!
— MB (@harleysurferMb) January 19, 2015
@MMFlint you need to be the spokesfatty for the whale Hitlary clinton!
— Big Kahuna (@BigKahuna919191) January 19, 2015
@TherapyDogsRock @MMFlint Exactly, Laurie. This fat ass Jabba wannabe needs to be sent overseas to learn the Soldier experience or #STFU.
— A-Kross كافر (@TheKrossSays) January 19, 2015
@Thomasismyuncle @AdamBaldwin @MMFlint Classic liberal tactic. Try to change the facts in a futile attempt to evade. He's too fat for that.
— Jeff257 (@Jeff257) January 19, 2015
@MMFlint YOU and your COMMIE SCUM have NO WAY of understanding what REAL #AMERICANS feel — you FAT ASS COMMIE MOTHERF**KER- EAT SHIT & DIE!
— KAFFIR_GEORGE (@ParalegalGeorge) January 19, 2015
But this tweet is my favorite — in reference to Michael Moore bringing up our unjust invasion of Iraq:
@MMFlint America invaded Nazi Germany even though they didn't attack us. Historians lick our butt for it.
— Comrade Commissar (@CommissarOfGG) January 19, 2015
What is most sadly ironic is the fear in the minds of so many who covered the media storm around Selma, the Maureen Dowds who were so insulted at the liberties were taken and what that might mean to people “not sophisticated enough” to understand that it was just a movie. IT’S NOT JUST A MOVIE, they shouted from the rooftops. History is at stake! A few of them even huffed and puffed about it being shown to schoolchildren, as though any black kid or white kid growing up in America would not benefit from seeing the story of Martin Luther King — just because of the way LBJ was portrayed.
And then those same people just brushed off what kinds of stories Sniper viewers might take home from that film. The people who will see Sniper will far outnumber those who will see Selma. No one is worried in the least bit about what that says about our American involvement in Iraq. I agree that, with both films, a sophisticated audience is required, but I’m watching how the most unsophisticated are taking the film American Sniper absolutely the wrong way.
Tonight, President Obama will give his State of the Union address to the people of America. He will have to face down an all Republican Congress, a disconnected public, continuing racial divide and the white majority’s frustration with that tension. Sounds a like the Oscar race, doesn’t it?
Has this country changed at all for the good? Hard to say. Have the Oscars changed at all for the good? Hard to say. After 16 years watching their voting I’ve seen them shift to actually pay attention to critical acclaim over box office success. Part of this was necessary because the box office has given itself over to fast food. Part of it was simply due to the Oscars changing their date by pushing it back a month. That meant that the race is no longer very interested in factoring in public opinion along with critical acclaim, but rather, it’s reverted to something decided on by studios, bloggers and critics.
The Oscar voters have such a small window to vote and many of them, by their own admission, don’t see all of the movies. They certainly did not seem to want to even things out among the sexes this year, nor among the minority contenders. Division has never been more dramatic at the Oscars and it will have never been more dramatic than it will be at tonight’s State of the Union.
One thing does seem clear, though, Americans — be they sophisticated 1%-ers, Oscar voters, or dudes who stockpile weapons and live in caves in the Pacific Northwest — they like to be on the right side of white history.
The thing no one really talks about is that Rory Kennedy’s Last Day’s in Vietnam is also up for Best Documentary. It’s about how we cut and run and left Vietnam mostly devastated. It’s an opportunity to remember the harm we cause when our wars are fought for the wrong reasons, either to secure power, grab wealth, or pursue faulty ideology.
I suspect that with all of this heat surrounding American Sniper, the Oscar voters will want to avoid all of that and will continue to do what they always have done in times of strife: put their head in the sand and wait for it to go away. That will make it easy for them to vote for the frontrunner, Boyhood. I suspect that Sniper is still a threat to win in some categories, like Best Actor or Screenplay. This was a tale of two movies both playing at the AFI fest, two very different directors, two different heroes, two different Americas. I am left with the irony of the actor playing Chris Kyle being the one who knocked out the actor playing Martin Luther King, Jr.
Predictions
Best Picture
Boyhood
American Sniper
Birdman
The Imitation Game
The Grand Budapest Hotel
Selma
Whiplash
The Theory of Everything
Best Actor
Michael Keaton, Birdman
Bradley Cooper, American Sniper
Eddie Redmayne, The Theory of Everything
Benedict Cumberbatch, The Imitation Game
Steve Carell, Foxcatcher
Best Actress
Julianne Moore, Still Alice
Marion Cotillard, 2 Days, 1 Night
Rosamund Pike, Gone Girl
Reese Witherspoon, Wild
Felicity Jones, The Theory of Everything
Supporting Actor
JK Simmons, Whiplash
Edward Norton, Birdman
Mark Ruffalo, Foxcatcher
Robert Duvall, The Judge
Ethan Hawke, Boyhood
Supporting Actress
Patricia Arquette, Boyhood
Laura Dern Wild
Emma Stone, Birdman
Keira Knightley, The Imitation Game
Meryl Streep, Into the Woods
Director
Richard Linklater, Boyhood
Alejandro G. Inarritu, Birdman
Wes Anderson, Grand Budapest Hotel
Morten Tyldum, The Imitation Game
Bennett Miller, Foxcatcher
Original Screenplay
Alejandro Inarritu et al, Birdman
Wes Anderson, Grand Budapest Hotel
Richard Linklater, Boyhood
Dan Gilroy, Nightcrawler
E. Max Frye, Dan Futterman, Foxcatcher
Adapted Screenplay
Damien Chazelle, Whiplash
Graham Moore, The Imitation Game
Jason Hall, American Sniper
Anthony McCarten, The Thoery of Everything
Paul Thoman Anderson, Inherent Vice
Editing
American Sniper
Boyhood
The Grand Budapest Hotel
Whiplash
The Imitation Game
Cinematography
Grand Budapest Hotel
Birdman
Mr. Turner
Unbroken
Ida
Production Design
Grand Budapest Hotel
The Imitation Game
Mr. Turner
Into the Woods
Interstellar
Sound Mixing
American Sniper
Interstellar
Whiplash
Unbroken
Whiplash
Sound Editing
American Sniper
Interstellar
Birdman
Unbroken
The Hobbit
Costume Design
Into the Woods
Grand Budapest Hotel
Maleficent
The Imitation Game
Mr. Turner
Original Score
Theory of Everything
Grand Budapest Hotel
Interstellar
The Imitation Game
Mr. Turner
Foreign Language Feature
Wild Tales (Argentina)
Ida (Poland)
Leviathan (Russia)
Tangerines (Estonia)
Timbuktu (Mauritania)
Documentary Feature
CitizenFour
Last Days in Vietnam
Virunga
Finding Vivien Maier
The Salt of the Earth
Animated Feature
How to Train Your Dragon 2
Princess Kaguya
Big Hero 6
The Box Trolls
Song of the Sea
Visual Effects
Interstellar
Dawn of the Planet of the Apes
Guardians of the Galaxy
Captain America
X-Men
Makeup
The Grand Budapest Hotel
Guardians of the Galaxy
Foxcatcher
Song
“Glory” (Selma)
I’m Not Gonna Miss You “Glen Campbell…I’ll Be Me”
Everything is Awesome (Lego Movie)
“Grateful” from “Beyond the Lights”
Lost Stars, Begin Again
I agree with most everything you said above, Sasha, especially about going into Iraq for no reason other than the oil. I agree that American Sniper has the potential to steal Best Picture away.
I love seeing the death tolls before and after Obama took office.
I love it and agree with it. I just don’t know if this is the proper place for it.
Then again, it’s your site, so you get to do with it what you want.
Walt D in LV
(The Master, to me, was far and away the best of the year…see? PTA bias 😉 )
This is why I want to do top tens. I have a funny feeling most of us are going to have INHERENT VICE on ours.
Only Ryan would watch POINT BREAK with a Dutch kingpin in Thailand. smh
I’ve actually not seen Point Break yet
What’s wrong with you?!?!?!?!
lol j/k It’s not that great. They were just really hot in it.
I’ve actually not seen Point Break yet – will have to check that out, sounds pretty interesting. Just added it to my list of priorities… 🙂 Thanks for the tip!
Ryan, I’m glad you recognize the intent, at least the tone, behind my questioning. I know your political beliefs as well as Sasha’s, well, as much as I can know just by following you both on here. So I know there will be a bias already when watching a movie like American Sniper (not a jab, I promise). I have a bias towards Paul Thomas Anderson and Darren Aronofsky. I do, however, feel that you leave your bias at the door a bit better than others. The line of questioning was for those who have defended Bigelow but have blasted Eastwood. You and I both agree Bigelow would have made a different movie than Eastwood and, sight unseen on both accounts, I believe Bigelow’s version would trump Eastwood’s because she doesn’t dwell in melodrama. But my main point was three American made movies about the US military involved in the Middle East, all three are controversial (some more than others) but only one of them got the raw end of the deal on here. Like Sasha says, she started blogging like this because she wanted to find out which movies or performances were headed to Oscar glory and why. I am, or was, trying to figure out why a movie about a sniper killing possible terrorist children gets crap but a movie with torturing possible adult terrorists gets praise and defense from the big bad politicians. I’m not bashing ZD30, out of the movies nominated it should’ve won best picture (The Master, to me, was far and away the best of the year…see? PTA bias 😉 ). But I do know that if Bigelow somehow, someway made the exact same movie we wouldn’t be seeing the headlines we’re seeing now, unless it was more like, “Where did Bigelow go wrong?” I’m not finger wagging or making blind assumptions, I’m basing so much of my thoughts off of a decade+ of following this site and many of the readers. I’m glad we can have these discussions without it turning ugly. I learn more about my friends from conversations like this than I do with co-workers in real life who just go, “Yeah the movie sucked. The end.” I knew you were in Thailand for years but now I know you watched Point Break with an Amsterdam drug kingpin and the slow evolution you came to know a great film director. But you know me, I ask these questions not to stir up shit but to try to help settle it. I enjoy answers like these!
And by the by, I came to a few “aha” moments when Claudiu pointed out that Bigelow’s last two movies show “genuine humanity, whereas American Sniper does not.”
“my main problem is that Bigelow’s films have lots of moments of genuine humanity in them, whereas Sniper does not,”
If that’s truly the case then it’s something I will pick up on as well and that’s a decent enough reason to give it some crap. I would understand that.
“my point, that you touched upon, is there definitely wouldn’t have been this sort of talk if she had made it.”
I don’t disagree with that, like I said. But it’s a natural reaction, nothing wrong with it.
As for the rest, yeah, like I said, my main problem is that Bigelow’s films have lots of moments of genuine humanity in them, whereas Sniper does not, though it makes some lame attempts at it.
Nice, quick discussion on American Sniper – http://ia902603.us.archive.org/1/items/FThisMovie-NaturalBornKillers/FThisMovie-NaturalBornKillers.mp3
It starts around the 8′ mark and lasts about 5-6 minutes. Quite good points made, as expected from these guys. And NOT from a political perspective (they didn’t think the movie had an agenda at all – they even quote the filmmakers, don’t remember who exactly, saying they wanted it to be more of a character piece, not pro or anti-war).
By the way, of all the podcasts I’ve listened to so far, I’ve not found one that defends American Sniper even a little bit (apart from the technical aspects). And I’m not choosing them, I’m just listening to the same podcasts I usually listen to…
Claudiu, very good set of points. I have no doubt Bigelow would’ve made an entirely different movie than Clint did but again, I haven’t seen American Sniper. I do believe there would still be some sort of flack heading her way if she had directed it but my point, that you touched upon, is there definitely wouldn’t have been this sort of talk if she had made it. All three films about the US involvement in the Middle East shows some pretty controversial stuff but in the end it’s just those main characters doing what they have to do to get home or complete the job. William James put his squad in danger so he could be more comfy and do his job right, Maya and Dan subjected suspects to torture, Chris Kyle killed women and children suspected of being terrorists, or at the very least put the lives of American soldiers at risk. To the naked eye one character can be seen as reckless, two can be seen as cold and calculating and the third can be seen as a macho steak eater ‘Murica boy. There does seem to be a double standard when every film should be held to one standard. That all said I really should go see American Sniper so I can make my own assessment. I won’t read the book, I’d rather take the film for what it is.
Awesome, Roberto – at least there’s two of us now on team Birdman! 🙂
“What if American Sniper had been directed by Bigelow?”
I can assure you it would not have been well received here, regardless. Maybe the criticism would not have been as violent (given that it was a woman director), but there would have been criticism, and from the same people. ALSO – it would not have been talked about as much, because it likely would not have made as much money and would not have been nominated for Best Picture – the Academy don’t love Bigelow nearly as much as they do Eastwood, or at least there’s no real evidence that they might.
However… the more important point: Bigelow has proven through her approach to the other two movies in question that she would NEVER have made American Sniper the way Eastwood made it (probably wouldn’t have agreed to make it in the first place, given the nature of the source material). And she’s not old enough to have lost it yet. 🙂 Although I do hope Clint proves me wrong and comes up with a truly great picture once more in the next few years…
Sasha I know you try, but this blog design is crazy. If I want to reply to someone’s post, I have to enter comments all the way down to the last slot. That’s no way to design a blog. I assume this is a WordPress platform, but really — can you improve on it?
Anyhow, here’s my comment if it matters. One of the best movies is showing in my area, A most violent year, and I went to see show times. To my surprise it’s only playing in 3 theaters in Chicago!!!! I can’t believe it. Chastain is supposed to have given a great performance. I just wonder about the timing of the releases of these movies. Who schedules them? Maybe Violent Year should have been released in 2015 instead of 2014? And maybe the same with Selma? Even though they wanted it to coincide with the march anniversay, seems that movie would have had a better chance being released in early 2015, and Ava wouldn’t have had to rush it through.
If you think your movie is worthy of an award, then the studio should start sending screeners early in the year, around March! Is there a law that says academy members can’t get movies before December?
I was listening to a radio host in Chicago and he’s a SAG and Oscar member. He said that he had gotten to many screeners he couldn’t watch all the movies, so he only voted on the ones he saw.
Then he said about the TV shows, there were just too many, so he voted for the names he recognized. That’s no way to run a contest!
Ryan, in fairness Clint did make Jersey Boys earlier this year. After that was released I never thought we’d be seeing a best picture nominee of his this year! I agree that these talks are okay when talking about the movie. But to echo Robin’s point, but I’ll just reword it, it’s more like 10-20% or more talk these days is Selma vs American Sniper and when placing them side by side it’s not quite fair to a movie like American Sniper. People act like Cooper knocked Oyelowo from best actor…false. He knocked Gyllenhaal out. Oyelowo was probably next in line. Then Sniper gains massive box office and people have to point out that it happened over MLK day, “A Sniper took out King (in the box office).” The irony hasn’t bypassed me but this is exactly the sort of smear talk we’re usually against. The Hurt Locker got flack but here it was (rightly) defended. Zero Dark Thirty got an extreme amount of flack but here it was (rightly) defended. American Sniper enters the Oscar race and makes more money than Selma but here it’s (unjustly) scathed. Is it because the first two were directed by Bigelow and this was directed by Eastwood? Are we bring a director’s political views into it? What if American Sniper had been directed by Bigelow? I haven’t seen American Sniper and I want to just so I can say I saw all best picture nominees.
Is it because the first two were directed by Bigelow and this was directed by Eastwood? Are we bring a director’s political views into it? What if American Sniper had been directed by Bigelow?
Steve Kane, *sigh* … I wish you knew how I felt to be gently led by the hand and politely asked to please hush up about this political stuff, and then in the same breath I get asked 3 loaded questions like yours…
“Is it because..?” “Are we being asked…?” “What if…?”
…”but hey, don’t answer those questions, because we’re all very tired of hearing your political answers, Ryan”
Claudiu already did a rather fine job pointing out that Kathryn Bigelow would never have told the story of Chris Kyle in American Sniper the same way Clint Eastwood has chosen to tell it. I have more to say about that, but not now. I’ll wait a little while to give everybody a breather.
I will say this… (I’m trying hard to think of a way to address the implication without making this specifically about the politics of American Sniper)…
“Is it because the first two were directed by Bigelow?”
I know you haven’t asked this question trying to imply that I (or “we”) have somehow given Kathryn Bigelow a free ride or an Easy Pass ticket to let her escape from the same close scrutiny that Eastwood is getting.
But, Steve Kane, the implication to me feels clear and I need to address it, just for my own touchy sense of defensiveness, ok?
You didn’t ask that question with any malice or jab of accusation, I do know that. And I can’t speak for anyone but myself, but maybe by speaking up for myself I will speak for some others who might think, “Hey, hold on, What are we being accused of here?”
These are the facts of my first encounters with Kathryn Bigelow and The Hurt Locker:
The first Bigelow movie I ever saw was Near Dark. I saw it and I loved for years without having the SLIGHTEST clue that Bigelow directed it. I just wasn’t paying attention back then. OK. Flash forward a few years. One weekend in Thailand, an Amsterdam drug kingpin and his wealthy Thai girlfriend invited me and my best friend to see a videotape of movie at their posh condo on Jomtien Beach south of Pattaya. That movie was Point Break. It knocked my socks off, for all kinds of reasons, but — again — just like with Near Dark — I didn’t catch who directed it. Wasn’t paying any attention. I loved it without having the SLIGHTEST clue that Bigelow directed it.
For those keeping score, that’s two Bigelow movies I fell in love with without even knowing the name Kathryn Bigelow. Me = Clueless.
A little later I ran across Strange Days in a Blockbuster Video on Sukhumvit in Bangkok; we rented it, I liked it a lot, this time I did notice the name Bigelow, and I was vaguely aware that she used to be Jim Cameron’s girlfriend or something. Cameron’s name is on the credits on Strange Days, so I thought, “hmm, interesting” but that was the end of the connection because this was 1995, I didn’t have a PC, I’d never heard of the internet.
I don’t think the name Kathryn Bigelow entered my mind for the next 13 years. Truly. I didn’t know nuthin about her, I didn’t care about her. I still had NO CLUE that she directed Near Dark or Point Break.
ok, January 24, 2009. I got hold of a random screener, spun it up on the laptop, started watching. 45 minutes later I put it on pause. I emailed Sasha, Craig Kennedy, and a couple of AD readers (Pierre de Plume and “sartre”) (I had only known Sasha and Craig for about 1 year at that time).
Jan 24, 2009, I wrote to them and said:
(I still have that email because I never delete anything)
I still wasn’t paying any attention that it was Kathryn Bigelow. Still had NO CLUE about her. After I finished The Hurt Locker, was blown away by it, for the first time in my life I googled her and for the very first time in my life I made the connection to Near Dark, Point Break, The Hurt Locker — and then learned about her relationship James Cameron.
It was fully 13 months after I saw that January 2009 screener of The Hurt Locker before it would win Best Picture.
So no, Short Answer: I did not get give The Hurt Locker any special treatment just because it was Kathryn Bigelow. I had no idea who she was, NO CLUE, and I had no idea what a force of nature she was about to become.
Sorry for the probably very boring retracing of my steps in my very embarrassingly slow dawning of awareness about “who the hell is Kathryn Bigelow?”
But just want to make crystal clear that I didn’t give The Hurt Locker a free pass because of Bigelow, because her name meant nothing to me.
Millions of other people will have surely glommed onto Bigelow decades ago, but I think NONE of us in 2009 were giving The Hurt Locker any velvet glove treatment just because it was Bigelow. Why would we?
For the record, I don’t particular dig the movie were the beefy dude sits on rooftops and sits happily clipping the edges of tin cans with scissors. Don’t go see A Merry Can Snipper.
But seriously, my God, when are we going to talk about the movies again? 10% of what we now read and hear about American Sniper is political war talk – I know movies stir this – what of the film itself? Great debate though.
10% of what we now read and hear about American Sniper is political war talk
Nightcrawler sparked debate about the voracious appetite of the media for sensationalist stories. Imitation Game sparked debate about the shameful way society is allowed to wreck the lives of people who are not heteronormative.
Every serious movie is about something bigger and more important than the framework of story that supports its larger more thought-provoking message.
If movies were not ABOUT something more than their plotty plot plots, then movies would be worthless for any purpose except a 2-hour distraction.
When I hear somebody tell me that they don’t go to the movies to think about the issues the movie raises, I wonder what they think serious movies are for?
When somebody on this page directly mocks me by saying “Maybe the military should do peace marches, yes that would work.” then I’m going to explain in strongly-worded terms what the real purpose of the US military is: it’s primarily to make American war profiteers rich. So please stop it with this gullible “America brings order to the chaos of the world” because that hasn’t happened since 1945.
Want to talk about the movie’s style and technique and other aspects of filmmaking. Please do talk about that. Write about that, discuss that. Easy, right?
Don’t want to read any talk of the politics behind a movie that wraps itself in global conflict? Skip those comments, scroll past them, find the 95% of content on the site that’s not political. Easy, right?
10% of what we now read and hear about American Sniper is political war talk
If Clint Eastwood didn’t want to spark political war talk then he shouldn’t have made a political war movie. He should’ve made the 5th remake of A Star Is Born. He should make another movie about baseball or orangutans some other uncontroversial shit.
Good grief Ryan,Americans roaming the world killing people? Pretty shrill,over the top and inaccurate. What I see and have seen is a United States military ordered to bring order out of chaos .Maybe the military should do peace marches, yes that would work. Humans are many things, loving, sensible, intelligent, prudent,also stubborn, violent, murderous, volatile. When you speak of us as murderous invaders I have to wonder about your common sense. These are just movies.Most people do not eat, drink and crap movies as many posters here do. This isn’t Selma vs. American Sniper ,well maybe in your mind.
What I see and have seen is a United States military ordered to bring order out of chaos .
The US miliatry rained down chaos on Iraq the same way the US military rained down chaos in Vietnam and Cambodia.
I’m saying I don’t think everybody else in the world is as thrilled to watch movies about that as some people in America are. Global box-office numbers for Patriotic American Hero movies usually bear this out.
These are just movies.
Thanks for making clear that movies are nothing but movies to you. Enjoy your popcorn at American Sniper. Don’t worry your little head about the 1.5 million human beings who died so you can escape into movieworld for 2 hours — to have your beliefs confirmed that America bombs people to smithereens to bring them “order.”
What I see and have seen is a United States military ordered to bring order out of chaos.
yeah, I wonder where you saw that? On CNN? On Fox? At the movies? It’s a lie, darling, it’s a lie. Eat it up though, if that’s what makes you feel comfortable. Eat it up with hot buttered popcorn.
There was NO FUCKING CHOAS in Iraq until the US military invaded Iraq for NO REASON and pounded that country to rubble with SHOCK AND AWE for 15 solid years.
2 Trillion dollars pays for a helluva lot of chaos. (that’s the whole point, really: to siphon 2 trillion dollars in the pockets of war profiteers.)
Try to ask the 1,500,000 Iraqis who died from the chaos Cheney delivered to Iraq. Of course, you can’t ask them so I’m telling you.
But naturally I understand that it might make you feel better if you let Fox News and Chris Kyle tell you that we were there to bring “order” to Iraq. Let Chris Kyle tell you that Iraqis are savages. How do you bring “order” to country of “savages”? gee, I guess slaughter as many of the savages as you can, right?
American Sniper reaffirms your belief that America was there to bring “order” to Iraq? Jesus Christ, fine, think what you want, have some more popcorn.
==
People talk about movies passing the Bechdel test. (do any girls talk to any girls?)
American Sniper passes the Bechtel test. Do you know who Riley Bechtel is, zazou? You seem to know a lot about the military and the purpose of the military. In all the news stories you have ever heard about Iraq, did you learn a lot about Riley Bechtel?
He runs Bechtel Corp., the largest construction and civil engineering company in America, and the biggest recipient of billions and billions of engineering contracts in Iraq.
(blow that shit up, so Riley Bechtel can get filthy rich rebuilding it, and then blow it all up again. Nice little trick. It’s criminal. It’s mass murder for money. People get shot on the streets of cities around the world for 20 bucks. You think people like Riley Bechtel care about seeing 100,000 nameless faceless people die if it puts $50 billion in his pocket? He doesn’t care any more about those Iraqis than American Sniper does, and neither do millions of people who pay to see it.)
Never heard of Riley Bechtel? I guess CNN and the movies forgot to tell you about him. The movies never taught you that Riley Bechtel is the 104th richest man on planet earth? Nope. the movies just want you think about how America brought “order” from “chaos” —
– the “chaos” of 1.5 Iraqis living their everyday ordinary lives, not bothering America at all. And now they’re all dead. Nice peaceful orderly corpses.
1,500,000 peaceful orderly corpses amid the rubble of useless shit Riley Bechtel charged taxpayers $50 billion to build and then watch us blow up again.
That part of the story isn’t very cinematic though, is it?
But that’s the reason Chris Kyle was on the Baghdad rooftop shooting children: To make Riley Bechtel and 100 other billionaires richer than they already were.
Claudiu, I’m with you on Birdman. I LOVED the script and the performances, and after seeing it for the fourth time yesterday, I still think it’s my favorite film of the year.
“Claudiu- are you a marketing executive for Birdman? Just wondering because your enthusiasm for the film is bigger then anyone else I’ve spoken to, and that includes most of my psychic friends (I’m a professional psychic, in case you’re new to these boards).”
:)) I wish! I’d be making a lot more money than I am now… 🙂 No, just loving the movie – I might actually be its biggest fan, who knows?!… And I know it won’t win much on Oscar night, but it’s OK. It’s hardly the kind of movie I’d expect them to reward. It’s fine, I like Boyhood too.
And no, I’m not new. I know who Gail Withers is. 🙂 Well, as much as most people here, at least, I reckon…
If nothing else, American Sniper and all the lib/con peace/war discussions and controversy, provides some variety from the approved script of this year Oscars as “The White Oscars” ™. 😉
Claudiu- are you a marketing executive for Birdman? Just wondering because your enthusiasm for the film is bigger then anyone else I’ve spoken to, and that includes most of my psychic friends (I’m a professional psychic, in case you’re new to these boards).
I found Birdman okay- but didn’t understand why it was called Birdman. There weren’t any birds. Not one. Only Michael Keaton in a superhero costume, that looked more like a bad thrift store outfit then superhero attire.
Anyways, I also am close friends to many of the “steak eaters” in the academy- that’s what they liked to be called, anyways (usually many avoid steak and go right for the wine). I’ve spoken to a few this week and asked if they were voting for Birdman. One woman, who shall remain anonymous, says “It will lose most categories. Michael might win, but I’m not voting for him. He’s a Virgo- they’re always egotistical and critical.” Interesting.
“it’s all about the characters, who profoundly fascinate me, the dialogue, the themes, the tone…”
And, of course, the performances. 🙂 I forgot to mention those, for some reason… All great, no exceptions.
“Claudiu, I don’t mind saying that you make a better case for Birdman than most ‘professional’ critics ( some of whom enthuse about Birdman in the very same terms and tone as a marvel geek would swoon about Ironman *cough* Wells *cough*). You make me want to watch Birdman again, Claudiu — something I thought I wouldn’t say for months.”
Thanks for the compliment! Although you’re probably being too kind… 🙂
Yeah, I definitely am not a fan of Birdman because of the technical stuff (which serves the story well, though, I would say) – and, again, the copy I saw wasn’t even good enough to get the most out of that side of it. And I’m not even as big a fan of the drum score (although – I think – I get why it’s done this way, and it’s not like it bothers me, either), necessarily – my mom loved it. No, it’s all about the characters, who profoundly fascinate me, the dialogue, the themes, the tone… I know many didn’t like the ending, and I agree there might be a better ending out there, but I don’t have a big problem with the one they went with, I think it fits in nicely with the direction in which Riggan’s character was heading (totally O.T.: preposition last just sounds so much better to me, I’ll never be a fan of that rule).
“You’re the first person to begin to convince that the single take trick had any real purpose (it mostly did nothing but annoy and distract me, first time around)”
Actually, I think it takes a bit of getting used to… I didn’t like it at first either, as I wasn’t ready for it, but after 10 minutes or so I got used to it and found that it fit the pace and tone of the movie more and more. So, if you didn’t have the same experience with it the first time, maybe it just doesn’t work for you like it does for me, and a rewatch might not change that. Don’t know. I won’t say “don’t see it again”, though, because I definitely think Birdman deserves a second chance from anybody. 🙂
“(But an Oscar won’t prove you ‘right’ either ) :)”
Of course not! 🙂 I mean, I know I’m the guy who believes in the Oscars still picking the actual best a lot more than most people (which is why I was so passionate about 12 Years getting it last year, even for the wrong reasons, if it couldn’t for the right reasons, because I sincerely thought, and still do, that it was THE best of the year), but that doesn’t mean I don’t understand that it’s very much hit-or-miss. Sometimes (at least for my tastes) they get it right, sometimes they get it wrong (Argo, The Artist). But I definitely think their roster of winners since 1929 is a pretty superior list of mostly classic (for better or worse) films, and they probably get it right (or close to right, by at least picking one of the best movies of the year, if not quite THE best) more often than they get it (completely) wrong. Which is why I care about Best Picture so much more than the other categories – well, that and the stats…
So, yeah, clearly, if Birdman (or anything, at any point) wins BP, it doesn’t in any way MEAN it’s the best of the year, or even necessarily all that good. 🙂 Just like the fact that 12 Years a Slave won last year doesn’t mean that. But it’s definitely better than something like American Sniper, which I just can’t make any kind of a case for, winning. Any of the nominees this year (because it’s not as strong as last year) apart from The Imitation Game, which I feel is just too cliched and – here it comes – flawed 🙂 to be a reasonable choice, or American Sniper, would be a good pick.
My mom’s favorites are The Grand Budapest Hotel and The Theory of Everything, by the way. I have The Grand Budapest Hotel (which I know you love) 6th/8, but not because I didn’t like it, but simply because I liked the five that I put in front of it even more (and, apart from Birdman and maybe Selma, none of them THAT MUCH more). I actually enjoyed TGBH quite a bit, had a lot of fun watching it, and thought it was very good. I’m sure I’ll be watching it again many times in the future, and NOT because of the awards attention. It’s genuinely a pretty great movie. Probably my favorite Wes Anderson picture (as ever, I’m with the Academy on this one as well – go figure), although Moonrise Kingdom is close.
“Tom O’Neill was raving about “American Sniper” on Entertainment Tonight for “livening up the Oscar race.””
Yeah, the same guy who was insisting Leo might win Best Actor last year… I guess that’s his thing.
“And watch out for “Grand Budapest”! It could win the SAG Ensemble and then everything will be up for grabs.”
Definitely a possibility, but I’m going to bet on Birdman there.
“Please stop sticking this ridiculous “villain” label on LBJ, because Selma is primarily very fair to him. In real life, he was wisely politically cautious and hesitant to jeopardize other important pieces of legislation. In the movie, we see the shift in his priorities rather elegantly condensed and respcectfully expressed.”
That’s exactly how I saw it. And, while watching, I was looking specifically for signs of him being an all-out bad guy, having read about the controversy beforehand – not there…
***
Now, to the Birdman issue:
“there’s no story to follow”
That doesn’t seem to bother people in stuff like Inside Llewyn Davis, Lost in Translation, The Tree of Life… so, not valid criticism, as the movie is interesting enough without the need for a “traditional” plot.
“the dialogue is horrifically hard to follow.”
That’s on you, bro. I understood pretty much everything, and I did NOT have the best copy (audio-wise) to work with, and no subtitles either.
“Just a bunch of actors rambling about nothing.”
Says who? My mom is a retired (medically) literature teacher (so she has some idea about what makes good dialogue) who has little interest in the acting world, even less so in the theater, and, when I showed it to her, she never once complained they were talking about nothing. And SHE WOULD. Believe me, I know, from other movies which I love and she doesn’t. In fact, she thought it was very interesting and among the best movies I’ve shown her this year. Which, believe me, I had NOT expected. She didn’t like the characters much (which I knew would be the case), but she didn’t have any kind of problem with the theme/ideas. Feel free to argue that she was wrong not to, but do it with real arguments, not personal impressions!
“Michael Keaton is playing a version of himself- nothing more. It’s ah adequate performance at best. Edward Norton’s weakest nominated role- why is he even nominated is more the question.”
Opinions, opinions…
“Antoinette (and others)… I saw Birdman, and inmediately thought it was the pretentious and coward american remake of Mabrouk El Mechri’s masterpiece, “JCVD”. They just changed van Damme playing himself, for Michael Keaton. B-Movie action films for Superhero blockbusters. The Post Office set, for a theater. While “JCVD” only made a couple of little concesions to “fantasy”, and featured a purely art-house monologue in which van Damme bares his soul in front of the camera, in “Birdman” it’s all about production values, an excellent cast provided of an Oscar-clip per scene, but Iñarritu does not go the extra mile El Mechri did, and renames Keaton and Batman, while Birdman is intended to be an allegory of Batman, but reminds of “Condorman” way too much for its own good.
For me, beyond doubt, “Birdman” is basically another Iñarritu gimmick to get an Oscar nomination (the man is obsessed with that, just look at his biography), and there’s nothing truly original in “Birdman”, nor really poignant, to me, it felt forced, coward and unimaginative, and the only scene that really woke me up of the snore fest, was the Times Square walk. That was more than OK. To see “Birdman” so highly rewarded, it’s painful, specially since the long shots gimmick has no real sense in the movie Iñarritu is shooting. It doesn’t add realism, on the contrary, it just reveals how artificial and fake it is.”
Honestly, all of the (actual) criticisms you make here sound very much like subjective takes on what many others see very differently from yourself. Stuff like “nor really poignant, to me” (subjective, and I disagree completely), “reminds of” (it reminds YOU of…), “it felt forced, coward and unimaginative” (couldn’t disagree more), or “the long shots gimmick has no real sense in the movie Iñarritu is shooting” (it very much does, it adds urgency, it stresses the constant pressure Riggan feels to rise above his ex-Birdman persona, which is driving him mad, and the hectic nature of theater life).
What other actual criticisms have you brought forth? That it’s supposedly a remake of JCVD? Pretty much everything’s been done before, it’s a known fact. If you’ve seen enough movies (which you clearly have, and good for you, but try to remain objective), everything will seem unoriginal/rehashed. I haven’t seen JCVD (and probably never will, I have no interest, as I’ve never been a fan of the guy), so I don’t know, but that’s not the point. Birdman does what is, you say, the same story, very, very well here. You disagree with that, though, it doesn’t work for you. And you’ve given your reasons, which are clearly a result of your own perspective on it. But let’s not try to convince EVERYBODY ELSE that your take is somehow the absolute truth in this, more so than that of people who love this movie. It’s a bit arrogant and (so far, at least) not convincing.
You can bash Birdman all you like, but don’t present purely personal points of view as though it were evidence that you’re right. It’s not. You keep saying “for me”, which I respect and acknowledge. I’m just trying to make sure you don’t, in your heart of hearts, think that there is only one truth possible in the matter, and it’s your version. Because, if you do, then you should probably just say so, and I’ll disagree, and then we’ll agree to disagree. 🙂 And if you don’t… then we’ll agree to disagree on our equally subjective impressions of the same movie.
P.S.: Will nobody here join the “I love Birdman” club with me? I know people who love it, some of them who’ve said so here as well… Or is it too late in the thread? Will I have to wait until the BP simulation to see if enough people here love it besides me? 🙂 Am I really the only one who’s going to defend it? It’s OK, I guess, I can live with that. I’d rather not have to, because I think it’s such an awesome movie that deserves tons of support everywhere… but I can. And I will keep defending it, until proven wrong.
Claudiu, I don’t mind saying that you make a better case for Birdman than mosr ‘professional’ critics ( some of whom enthuse about Birdman in the very same terms and tone as a marvel geek would swoon about Ironman *cough* Wells *cough*). You make me want to watch Birdman again, Claudiu — something I thought I wouldn’t say for months. You’re the first person to begin to convince tgat the single take trick had any real purpose (it mostly did nothing but annoy and distract me, first time around) but I will look at it now with less jaundiced eye, thanks to you.
“And I will keep defending it, until proven wrong.’
Nobody will ever be able to prove you ‘wrong,’ Claudiu. (But an Oscar won’t prove you ‘right’ either ) 🙂
The opportunity to reward one of the hardest working actresses in America, and one who has given a plethora of great performances in a 20 year period, is too good for a majority of members. While I haven’t seen Still Alice; i don’t sense this is just a career Oscar, but even if it is, it will be applauded. I don’t see Cotillard, already a winner, prevailing here. Best Actor still seems to be the one with the most tension in it. I am not convinced Cooper is the spoiler for Keaton; but if a surprise and a shock is coming it will be in this category.
I think everyone is bored by a lull in the race. American Sniper is not winning. If Saving Private Ryan couldn’t win, this won’t.
Half the time Keaton is on stage, there’s an audience. Then we’re told there’s an opening night? Huh?
I agree that Birdman was a bit shit, but this is no mistake. Those were soft openings.
I hated Birdman- what a bore of a film! I got a headache 10 minutes in from the continuous shot camerawork, there’s no story to follow, and the dialogue is horrifically hard to follow. Just a bunch of actors rambling about nothing. Half the time Keaton is on stage, there’s an audience. Then we’re told there’s an opening night? Huh?
Michael Keaton is playing a version of himself- nothing more. It’s ah adequate performance at best. Edward Norton’s weakest nominated role- why is he even nominated is more the question.
Emma Stone was the only character I cared about, and her nod is deserved.
Birdman is very overrated and I hope voters treat it like they did American Hustle last year. Sadly, that probably won’t happen.
I expect upsets in Best Actor and Best Actress. Both Cooper and Cotillard (who I predicted to be nominated) are miles better then their competitors. Both immerse themselves completely in their roles. Both are respected in the industry. Cooper is on his third nomination and everyone will see his performance. Cotillard barely managed to make it in, and now voters will be intrigued. Julianne Moore, while great in Still Alice, suffers from being in a bland movie that never really released. And Two Days, One Night is more interesting. I think precursors mean nothing this year.
OSCAR PREDICTIONS, January 21st:
BEST PICTURE: Boyhood
BEST DIRECTOR: Richard Linklater, Boyhood
BEST ACTOR: Bradley Cooper, American Sniper
BEST ACTRESS: Marion Cotillard, Two Days, One Night
BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR: J. K. Simmons, Whiplash
BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS: Patricia Arquette, Boyhood
BEST ADAPTED SCREENPLAY: Whiplash
BEST ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY: The Grand Budapest Hotel
BEST CINEMATOGRAPHY: The Grand Budapest Hotel
BEST PRODUCTION DESIGN: The Grand Budapest Hotel
BEST COSTUME DESIGN: The Grand Budapest Hotel
BEST ORIGINAL SCORE: The Theory of Everything
BEST SONG: “Glory”, Selma
BEST FILM EDITING: Boyhood
BEST SOUND: American Sniper
BEST SOUND EDITING: American Sniper
BEST VISUAL EFFECTS: Interstellar
BEST MAKEUP: The Grand Budapest Hotel
What a wonderful piece, Sasha!
Now, for laughs:
http://www.theshiznit.co.uk/feature/if-2015s-oscar-nominated-movie-posters-told-the-truth.php
Is there a chance that the controversy over the “white male” Oscars will make voters cast their votes for Selma and that Selma could therefore win Best Picture?
I do think Boyhood is way ahead, and I doubt that enough voters will change their minds for “political” reasons. Generally, political issues have actually backfired in the voting in the past. But I wonder if Selma will get a huge bump from the controversy.
I’m late to this particular discussion, and I haven’t read any of the above posts in depth, but I thought I’d share with you a sample of the response to American Sniper from the American public over the weekend on Twitter:
Dalton Sircy (@Dalton_Sircy): American Sniper was so worth the wait and makes me wanna drop kick a towel head
Sheriff Corey (@Clinesaucer02): American Sniper made me want to Stone Cold Stunner a bunch of goat fuckers while drinkin Busch lite over their corpse
Hunter Stienbarger (@HStienbarger): American Sniper made me want to grab a beer, the American flag, an then punch a sand nigger in the face!!#fuckyeah#Merica
Freedom Isn’t Free (@basedvegass): As a male if you watched American Sniper and you weren’t inspired to kill sand niggers then you might as well have a vagina
Barnabas Reynolds (@BeastM1ghty): I honestly hope those sand niggers get cancer #ArabAmericans #AmericanSniper – in the last three days, I’ve counted at least eight times this account has posted homophobic slurs also
These all from independent journalist Rania Khalek’s Twitter (@RaniaKhalek); she’s received death threats, including this one from Matt Wnek (@Mdogdizzle27): good those goat fuckers deserved it, you deserve a bullet in you too
P.S. No way do I think this film is gonna conk out any lower than $250 million. But Ryan’s right – the international take won’t be nearly as high. It has, however, just posted Clint Eastwood’s biggest opening weekend ever in the UK. That’s just about as similar a market to the North American market as exists worldwide, but that’s still a notable detail.
I’d like the Oscars (as the pinnacle of an artistic industry, rather than as an American film awards show) to be entirely disconnected from American culture, or politics first and foremost and be entirely about story telling in a visual art and if the best example of that visual artistry has political issues or is representative of culture or is agenda pushing, then all the better. But I don’t like the idea of it working the other way around, the best films don’t always have to be ‘important’ because of what they are about, they can be ‘important’ in the way that they push the boundaries of film-making.
I do generally love films that are issue laden and that speak about society and have something important to say, but I just don’t think that those films should automatically be pushed to the forefront of awards over films that are artistically better, but do not feature issues. Film is an art form, its a means of expressing oneself in any way, not just in pushing/voicing agendas.
@Jesus I don’t know where you live but here in the US our news coverage has switched to deflated (American) footballs.
BOG is reporting $9.9 mil for AS for Tues and people are going nuts at that number at the boxoffice forums. At that pace they say AS should be close to $200 mil by the end of the weekend. On its way to $300 mil and possible #1 for 2014. So many agree with Sasha where the film is heading box office wise.
I have to say, that the Charlie Hebdo event in France will only increase American Sniper’s b.o. and chances of winning the Oscar. It’s a film – supposedly – against terrorism, and you can’t really watch any news without terrorism in discussion. I hope I’m wrong, really hope it.
You’re all welcome in my club. 😉
Keifer, “kahunas” or “cajones”? You’re right though whether you were saying potato or potahto.
Thanks, you guys. I had to look it up to be sure
kahuna: (Hawaiian) magician, wizard, sorcerer
cajones: (Spanish) balls, nuts, stones
so… magical balls, wizard nuts, or… sorcerer’s stone (?)…
I graciously accept any of those permutations. Thanks again.
(but I do need to chill on this topic now)
Stephen Holt: “The average (AMAPS) age is 80 or 85. Not 62.”
Where did you get this statistic? According to their own records, the average age is 62. I might have misread the context . . . were you being satirical?
Ryan, your writings on this particular blog are truly inspiring.
You’ve got some major kahunas, big guy. Refreshingly, searingly honest.
critics fave isn’t a bad place for the Academy to land. But they are given to narcissism. Fortunately Birdman is the narcissistic choice this year. Not bad at all.
Among the outrages this year… saying that DuVernay’s depiction of Johnson was based on dramatic considerations. Patronizing, condescending and belittling. If that’s the best her supposed defenders can do, no wonder she didn’t get nommed. The lack of the nom is not that big a deal in the long run, but do you really mean to say that she wasn’t in complete command of the history, as she understood it?
Sasha and Ryan. Are you guys doing top 10s or top 20s or whatever?
(Room for one more in the club, Jesus?)
One of your premium posts, Sasha, and your last sentence is most revealing:
“I am left with the irony of the actor playing Chris Kyle being the one who knocked out the actor playing Martin Luther King, Jr.”
I think the international box office for American Sniper is going to surprise a lot of people. It might get a good opening due to the curious, but it’s not a subject that’s revered internationally. Strictly playing to the home crowd, Clint – preachin’ to the choir.
Yes, I’m actually hoping Oscar voters keep their heads in the sand this year and inadvertantly vote for the highest critically rated film of the year. It would be the second year in a row that the critics’ overall fave wins BP. Could we possibly have a trend starting?
Sammy: I think TGBH is a more formidable contender than most pundits seem to be expecting at the moment. AS and Selma will probably get a lot of votes (for, somewhat, political reasons), but, realistically, only four movies can still win: TBGH, Boyh, TIG and Birdman. Granted, TGBH has no acting nominations, but if it wins the SAG ensemble, then that concern will be toned down a LOT. IF it wins SAG ensemble I really don’t see why exactly it could not go all the way, even though Boyhood remains my firm favorite (and it will remain so, unless DGA opts for someone besides Linklater).
“Birdman is not in my top 25 of 2014. Jesus Alonso, can I join your club?”
Can I join too?
Chris Price, American Sniper is close to the 20 million euros mark in Italy, that means 26-27 million dollars. It’s a huge movie box office-wise.
Hate to burst the bubble, but this movie is getting nowhere near 350 million unless we’re talking about globally (and even then that’s a longshot). This movie will close with about 230 million domestic when all is said and done, and may get another 100 mil from the rest of the world but something tells me that’s a stretch.
Chris Price, yes.
Ordinarily we know there is a 33/66% domestic/international split for worldwide box-office. (In some extreme cases even close to 25/75% leaning very heavily toward the international haul.)
For a movie like American Sniper, though, flip those numbers. Lo and behold, the rest of the world is not so freakin thrilled by Americans roaming the world killing people en masse. Americans might like to see that (and even then, only a certain kind of American) but even Captain America himself has trouble getting even half as many people outside America interested in his exploits than those moviegoers inside American borders.
So, I think American Sniper will earn less than half globally what it earns domestically. And I also wonder if American Sniper is probably the kind of movie that people won’t be paying to see a 2nd and 3rd time like they did for, say, Gravity. It’s not really that much of fun carnival ride, is it?
It’s hitting big now because the audience for it has been whipped up by the Brietbart and Drudge and Hannity carnival barkers, but that audience is going to top out at about 30 million people I think, max. We’re looking at Gone Girl numbers plus maybe another $40 mil boost from this huge first week. Finishing up at $210-220 mil?
Still, nobody’s bubble is going to burst with anything over $200 mil. Stunning success by any yardstick.
But Gravity, this ain’t. I don’t think.
To put things into more context… this is my top 5 of 2014 so far (I still need to see Nightcrawler, for example, among other important films)…
1. Stranger by the Lake
2. The LEGO Movie
3. Snowpiercer
4. Boyhood
5. Grand Budapest Hotel
Those would be my Best Picture nominees. Also, best director and best screenplays of the year. In acting…
Lead Actor, a really difficult toss up between Keaton (Birdman), Evans (double whammo: Snowpiercer & Captain America: The Winter Soldier), Coltrane & Hawke (Boyhood), Fiennes (Grand Budapest Hotel), Oyelowo (Selma), Cumberbatch (The Imitation Game) and Redmayne (The Theory of Everything), it’s been a great year for actors. Oh, Bradley Cooper is more hot than good in American Sniper. Not a bad performance, it’s a good but not great one. Still bonus points for looking so hot.
On Actress, Patricia Arquette, Boyhood. Please stop saying she’s supporting. She’s colead with Hawke and Coltrane.
On Supporting Actor, Patrick d’Assumçao, Stranger by the Lake. Everything else I’ve seen, pales in comparison (including Simmons). Naturalistic acting, baring his soul, without ever needing to perform a show off Oscar clip.
On Supporting Actress, Tilda Swinton, for her Grand Budapest Hotel tiny performance and her caricaturesque tour de force in Snowpiercer.
Original Screenplay, The Lego Movie, but a close call with Stranger by the Lake. Probably a tie.
Adapted Screenplay, Snowpiercer. No competition.
Animated: The Lego Movie.No competition
“Foreign Language”: Stranger by the Lake (have to see plenty of competition, but I do think this one is one of the top 100 films I’ve seen in my life, so I really doubt lightning is going to strike again)
Antoinette (and others)… I saw Birdman, and inmediately thought it was the pretentious and coward american remake of Mabrouk El Mechri’s masterpiece, “JCVD”. They just changed van Damme playing himself, for Michael Keaton. B-Movie action films for Superhero blockbusters. The Post Office set, for a theater. While “JCVD” only made a couple of little concesions to “fantasy”, and featured a purely art-house monologue in which van Damme bares his soul in front of the camera, in “Birdman” it’s all about production values, an excellent cast provided of an Oscar-clip per scene, but Iñarritu does not go the extra mile El Mechri did, and renames Keaton and Batman, while Birdman is intended to be an allegory of Batman, but reminds of “Condorman” way too much for its own good.
For me, beyond doubt, “Birdman” is basically another Iñarritu gimmick to get an Oscar nomination (the man is obsessed with that, just look at his biography), and there’s nothing truly original in “Birdman”, nor really poignant, to me, it felt forced, coward and unimaginative, and the only scene that really woke me up of the snore fest, was the Times Square walk. That was more than OK. To see “Birdman” so highly rewarded, it’s painful, specially since the long shots gimmick has no real sense in the movie Iñarritu is shooting. It doesn’t add realism, on the contrary, it just reveals how artificial and fake it is.
To put this in context, my rating of the 8 nominees…
1. Boyhood ***** A-
2. Grand Budapest Hotel **** 1/2 B+
3. Selma **** 1/2 B+
4. The Imitation Game **** B
5. Birdman *** 1/2 C+
6. The Theory of Everything *** 1/2 C+
7. Whiplash *** 1/2 C+
8. American Sniper 0 – F
Birdman is not in my top 25 of 2014. Jesus Alonso, can I join your club? Everybody wetting themselves over this movie bewilders me.
I don’t care about LBJ’s legacy or historical “fact”. But the movie would have been more interesting if MLK’s politics with the president were more complicated.
The irony is that defending the movie for being an artful “interpretation” of history that doesn’t feel it needs to cling too closely to facts–which is a defense I would like to make for it–ends up exposing the movie’s biggest weakness: it’s not a particularly artful or creative rendering of history.
“They have been marginalized and deemed less important than maintaining the pristine image of Lyndon B. Johnson.”
Really Sasha? LBJ was one of the better presidents this country has ever had in regards to human rights and you think it easily dismissible that the filmmakers of Selma chose to tarnish his “pristine image”. His history is every bit as important as Martin Luther King’s in terms of veracity. They “marginalized and deemed less important” LBJ’s efforts. Selma creators did not have to make him a saint but they certainly did not have to demonize him to the point that some audiences hiss when he appears on screen. How would you feel if Spielberg was a character in a film and the creators thought, hey let’s add some drama and make him a pedophile. Cut to scene with Spielberg in a van offering a young boy candy. All for the greater good eh? LBJ was not a villain against blacks and this historical inaccuracy has hurt the film.
LBJ was not pristine. Far from it.
But anyone who thinks LBJ is portrayed as a “villain” in Selma I’m afraid has let himself be brainwashed by all the dumb noise. There is nothing villainous in LBJ in Selma. Get a grip. Think about some of the REAL villains who have infested the White House. Get a grip.
I like LBJ a lot but he was far from perfect. The LBJ of Selma is actually a very inspiring portrayal.
A truly “accurate” movie about LBJ would really have LBJ protectors in meltdown. I’d love to see an accurate movie about LBJ that showed him furious and on the defensive against MLK because MLK opposed LBJ’s Vietnam policies. Because that is the accurate historical fact.
That would be a fun movie, just to see LBJ’s adoring fans completely flame out.
People all up in arms, flailing around about lack of 100% accuracy in Selma — why aren’t those people pissed that Hoover wasn’t accurately portrayed as the repulsive sleazy spiteful little closet-queen he was?
LBJ and Hoover, cut to MLK and Coretta? Backlash consequence? Outraged media shit-storm over literally less than 15 seconds of suggestive devious string-pulling. A little nasty innuendo that caused no harm within the arc of the movie nor did it cause the slightest damage in real life.
But now here’s Eastwood. Splicing together WTC and 9/11, cut immediately to Chris Kyle signing up to kill Iraqis? … Backlash consequence? *crickets*
15 years of devastation. 2 trillion dollars in the pockets of war profiteers. 1.5 million lives destroyed. 500,000 American lives in mental ruin.
Backlash for Eastwood basing his whole movie on “avenging 9/11” by going on a murder spree in Iraq? No backlash consequence at all. Crickets. 9/11 connected directly to Iraq? Seems legit! Nobody in the corrupt media even raises a fucking eyebrow.
I’m quite sick of hearing about this “historical accuracy” bullshit. Unless people will apply the same standards to all movies then people need to shut up their whining about Selma “villains.”
Where’s the villain who sent Chris Kyle on his murder spree? Where’s the villain who is literally responsible for 1.5 million senseless deaths? American Sniper is so historically inaccurate, the truly sickening villain of Iraq doesn’t even get name-dropped for the war crimes he committed, unprovoked. But no, let’s just all pretend the only villains of the war in Iraq are those evil Iraqi “savages.”
===
Now that Selma has been slapped around enough to virtually destroy its Oscar prospects, can we at least now please stop crying about LBJ’s well-documented hesitancy to move so fast on Voting Rights and then his equally well-documented change of heart — and please stop calling that very human and very moving personal evolution a sign of “villainy.”
Please stop sticking this ridiculous “villain” label on LBJ, because Selma is primarily very fair to him. In real life, he was wisely politically cautious and hesitant to jeopardize other important pieces of legislation. In the movie, we see the shift in his priorities rather elegantly condensed and respcectfully expressed.
My god, some of you make it sound as if LBJ in Selma was meaner than Cruella de Vil.
If you need some grotesque historical accuracy to complain about, please open your eyes to the real murderous villains who have been completely swept under the red carpet in this year’s Oscar race.
I implore you, in all seriousness, if you want to see a US President who was a truly sick villain, responsible for hundreds of thousands of pointless maimings and murders and psychological torment, you will find him (or actually you won’t) in a whole ‘nother blood-soaked movie packed to the rafters with historical inaccuracy that makes LBJ’s silly spurt of “villainy” look like a friendly game of checkers.
But to be perfectly honest (and here’s my big confession to AwardsDaily), I don’t think SELMA is all that great a movie either. What a powerful story there is to be told. What a boring literal-minded way to tell it. It’s great that it’s in the airwaves and that people are seeing it–everyone should. But great cinema it is not.
“I am left with the irony of the actor playing Chris Kyle being the one who knocked out the actor playing Martin Luther King, Jr.”
AMERICAN SNIPER is a worse movie than SELMA that focuses on a person who is much much less worthy of our attention. But Bradley Cooper’s performance towers over David Oyelowo’s.
The SAG Ensemble Award is between ”Birdman” and ”Grand Budapest,” and I’d give the edge to the former. ”Birdman” already won Ensemble from the Broadcast Film Critics and the New York Film Critics, Online. ”Boyhood” doesn’t stand a chance with only 4 actors listed (too small). In the 20-year history of the SAG Awards, I believe only two other movies were ever nominated with a 4-person cast: ”Doubt” and ”Sideways,” which is also the only one to win. Personally, I’m rooting for ”Grand Budapest” for its kooky ensemble, led the criminally underrated Ralph Fiennes (hope he wins his 4th SAG nomination!).
I don’t want to get too political. But for the record, Democrats won the popular vote, but thanks to gerrymandering, Republicans carved out more victories. In 2012, the first congressional election after the last round of gerrymandering, Democratic House candidates won 50.59 percent of the vote — or 1.37 million more votes than Republican candidates — yet secured only 201 seats in Congress, compared to 234 seats for Republicans. The system’s rigged for the GOP.
http://www.republicreport.org/2014/gerrymandering-rigged-the-2014-elections-for-republican-advantage/
ANOTHER brilliant, impassioned piece of writing from Sasha, analyzing this past weekend’s rather astounding events at the box-office.
Sasha hasn’t dragged politics in to this year’s Oscar race, the movies themselves have, like it or not.
Tom O’Neill was raving about “American Sniper” on Entertainment Tonight for “livening up the Oscar race.” It DID look pretty boring and predictable, more so than ever, with Moore, Arquette and Simmons having all their categories, Best Actress and the two Supporting categories laid down in Grauman’s Chinese cement already.
But now comes “American Sniper” and SUDDENLY there’s actually something to DEBATE about. Something to write about for the blogosphere. But they are not Academy voters.
The Academy still has many members who DON’T EVEN HAVE A COMPUTER!?!? But are too ashamed to admit it, and the average age is 80 or 85. Not 62. As they are saying. Just attend an actual academy screening and the number of walkers and wheelchairs lined up at the back is staggering.
That said, AS doesn’t have a chance with the Left-leaning Academy. R U kidding me? It will never win Best Picture. They will think. “It’s gotten the $. It doesn’t need the awards” but it just might get something. Like the two sound awards.
Now, as far as Best Actor, if the sudden attention being paid to Bradley Cooper, translates into actual votes(and I wonder about that), it’s Michael Keaton who gets hurt by this. And the people who were going to vote for Eddie Redmayne are still going to vote for Eddie Redmayne. He’s playing a heroic, triumphant character, a real person who’s ALIVE. IN SPITE OF EVERYTHING.
And he’s playing a CHARACTER. Not himself, or a version of himself as Michael Keaton is doing.
Bradley Cooper may win an Oscar some day, but no GG, SAG, etc. percursor love, kills his chances but allows him to take “steak eater” votes away from Keaton. Everybody knows he’s going to get a Tony for Best Actor this year for “Elephant Man” on Broadway, and every other awards, too. They’ll let that be enough for him for this year. And vote for “Redmayne.”
And watch out for “Grand Budapest”! It could win the SAG Ensemble and then everything will be up for grabs.
Boyhood American Sniper Birdman, I LOVED that movie. I especially liked how Chris Kyle spent 12 years growing up learning how to become a douchebag before he rose up and flew away in his superhero birdsuit.
Anyway, I kid, but I have to admit, I liked American Sniper and Selma equally, and I think that just because you like American Sniper doesn’t mean your agree with it’s politics. I just happen to really like war movies, not matter how the “heroes” are portrayed.
Cirkus, you basically said america voted for our new republican congress. To be completely accurate you should of said 1/3 of America voted for our new republican congress, because the majority of Americans didn’t bother to vote at all.
@ Daniel,
I agree with you about the fact that Selma should appeal to conservatives too. There is no Selma vs Ametican Sniper story. Both are heroic stories of committed Americans.
I just got back from watching American Sniper. I can understand its popularity now. I think it is a fantastic movie in all respects. Whether or not I think it is the best of the year will have to wait until I see a Boyhood and The Imitation Game. I’ve never seen Bradley Cooper more brilliant in a film. Right now I’m having a very hard time deciding if I prefer his performance or that of Michael Keaton. I also think Sienna Miller got robbed of a supporting actress nomination.
@ Ryan Adsms,
I appreciated your thoughtful responses to my. Comment regarding Hollywood under serving the Red States. I hope you could recognize that I was playing Devil’s Advocate.
It strikes me as sort of funny that Clint Eastwood is getting both the credit and the damnation. When American Sniper was first announced as a film project, the director was supposed to be Steven Spielberg — hardly a bastion of conservative ideology. For reasons never made very public, Spielberg left the film and Eastwood was brought in at the 11th hour. It’s not like this was a pet project of Eastwood’s and that he had some passionate attachment to the material. It seems almost miraculous that he was able to get the film into theaters within a year.
When American Sniper was first announced as a film project, the director was supposed to be Steven Spielberg — hardly a bastion of conservative ideology. For reasons never made very public, Spielberg left the film…
I wonder if this question answers itself? 🙂
Movieram, I hope nothing I said sounded like I was scoffing at what you asked. I thought it was a really good question. it made me think. Your comment inspired me to say something. Thanks.
That’s what I was thinking Ryan. Michael Keaton is the one who would lose some of his votes to spoiler Bradley Cooper. They are the biggest Hollywood stars of the lot and if some voters felt that it was time to honor Keaton there’s an argument for Copper as well (third time nominated in the category) now that he suddenly has a high profile this season.
If one was a fan of Eddie Redmayne’s work before AS, one still is.
OK everyone needs to calm down a bit. Introducing politics into the AwardsDaily.com site really wasn’t necessary, but since it’s Sasha’s site she can do what she wants to. Calm down everyone, we still know that Boyhood is the favorite for Picture and Director and Birdman will probably get the screenplay award.
I don’t necessarily agree with these choices, but these are still the clear favorites. No matter how much money American Sniper makes or who it appeals to or offends.
Seth Rogan did nothing wrong, or are we now required to worship the Kyle hagiography?
You clowns scream blacklist and political persecution all the time but never can quite resist the urge to demand that actors toe your political line. Dixie Chicks part II
Cirkus you act as if it’s a 100 percent GOP congress. That’s the problem, you guys have 54 senators but act as if you have 100. The overreach will make that short lived.
By the way, if Kyle were alive would we a) be seeing this insane orgy of right wing hero worship and b) other studios pulling their pinches and actually pointing out Kyle’s penchant for lying,
And Seth Rogen’s movie loses 30 million dollars and almost gets the U.S. in a war with Korea and he’s talking shit about other movies?? Unbeliable!!
You mention an all Republican Congress as if it happened on accident. Americans voted for what they want now and it’s not Obama. Sorry
“To me, that means Hollywood does not often offer movies that appeal to conservatives. I believe that is true. Lone Survivor was the exception last year, right?”
I agree with you, partially. Actually, in some ways, Selma is a conservative movie, and it’s shame that it isn’t getting more box office support from people of all backgrounds. While not all conservatives are religious, and not all religious people are conservative, there are many conservatives who want to see Hollywood deliver more films with positive portrayals of faith.
I don’t want to see another Left Behind or another Kirk Cameron vehicle. I do want to see more great, intelligent movies that involve themes of faith (e.g., The Mission, Chariots of Fire, Brideshead Revisited (the mini-series) and this year’s Calvary). Selma correctly showcases the role of religious leaders, especially Christian leaders, in supporting MLK and the civil rights movement. I loved seeing nuns, priests, ministers and others marching in Selma. And MLK describes himself as a “Preacher from Atlanta.”
Selma isn’t just losing box office to American Sniper, though. Over MLK weekend, nearly three times as many people went to see Kevin Hart’s “The Wedding Ringer” as went to see Selma. Selma is a film that should have broad appeal (African-Americans, devout Christians, history buffs, etc,) but it seems that none of those groups are turning out in big numbers. If you think Selma is a movie that should be seen (and I do), then stop griping about Oscars and tell people to see it instead of The Wedding Ringer or Night at the Museum.
By the way, does anyone know a site that lists the demographic breakdown of audiences per movie?
Interesting read. But I have to disagree with the last paragraph, where Sasha writes that Oscar voters will “put their head in the sand and wait for it to go away”, and vote for Boyhood. Which is to say that Sasha will interpret Boyhood’s seemingly inevitable win not simply as good taste on the Academy’s part, but some kind of close-minded, tunnel-visioned avoidance of controversy. Perhaps more people here feel this way. Are we that jaded that we think Boyhood is a safe, conservative Oscar movie?
btw, I didn’t even know spokesfatty was a job. I’m totes qualified for that.
“Birdman – style over substance crowd, the ones that don’t mind the gimmicks, but like films to look cool (face it, that’s Birdman)”
That’s Birdman… only in your opinion (one with which many intelligent critics/pundits would completely disagree, though I’m sure there are those who agree with you as well)… so, no, we who love Birdman ON EVERY LEVEL don’t, in fact, have to face anything! 🙂 Your opinion does not equal truth, just as ours does not.
“Birdman was my favorite film of 2014 too, Antoinette. It made me ecstatic.”
I literally have to force myself to not rewatch it daily… This might be one of those movies (and there ain’t that many) I will never tire of, that’s how rich in content I find it to be.
“I’m back from watching American Sniper and, putting politics aside, I think it’s a mediocre movie. It’s too long, too boring, with a lazy, superficial writing and an overhyped lead performance.”
Good description (second phrase). I think “mediocre” might be a tad generous, though. 🙂
“Yet, AS is nominated for 6 Oscars and we just can thank God, good old Clint isn’t also nominated, otherwise it would be game, set and match already and AS would sweep.”
I honestly doubt it would have helped AS very much. It’s still way behind as far as precursors go (no SAG nomination, no Best Pic wins anywhere – it even lost Best Action Movie to Guardians of the Galaxy at the BFCA awards). You’ll see, it won’t get anywhere near winning the PGA and DGA. Then you’ll know 10 more votes (or whatever he needed to get nominated) for Eastwood wouldn’t have made much of a difference for its BP chances.
“but it’s going to take down one of the best reviewed films of all times… Boyhood.”
It most definitely will not!
“Bradley Cooper might win Best Actor,”
Also, Italy might attack Uganda tomorrow. But they won’t…
“those might not be the exact numbers, but all I mean is: last week, we felt sure we knew what was what.”
We did. Nothing’s changed.
I LOVE AMERICAN SNIPER! So chilling, raw, and awesome. Bradley Cooper is excellent in the movie. He nailed his character study as Chris Kyle.
Go Bradley go! Go Bradley go!
I have absolutely zero interest in seeing “American Sniper”, regardless of its box office success (which is usually a big clue to me that I won’t like it – I hardly ever agree with the masses) or its Oscar nominations (AMPAS’ taste in film has proven over the years to be “sketchy” at best).
Of the movies nominated for BP, the one which I truly enjoyed the most, and the movie I could never tire of watching, was the emotionally heart-wrenching “The Imitation Game”. Granted, it is filmed in a rather old-fashioned way, but what’s wrong with that? The subject matter actually called for that. I thought it was well written, directed and exceptionally acted. Mr. Cumberbatch gave us a wonderful, fully realized and complex character . . . I’d be voting for him if I were an AMPAS member.
No way Bradley Cooper can win Best Actor without some support from the precursors and he has none. No GG nomination, no BAFTA nomination, no SAG nomination, nothing.
Bradley Cooper might win Best Actor,
before $105 mil
37% Keaton
27% Redmayne
17% Cooper
19% everybody else
after $105 mil
27% Keaton
27% Redmayne
27% Cooper
19% everybody else
(those might not be the exact numbers, but all I mean is: last week, we felt sure we knew what was what. This week it’s suddenly a 3-way race)
Ryan, in all fairness, I was quoting DP 🙂
But we all seem to agree on Sniper’s political agenda, I found it frankly disturbing.
Roberto, I’ve been butting heads with DP nonstop for the past 2 days and you do a much better job making sense of DP than DP ever does.
DP
“As for AS, I do feel like it’s a Rorschach test. My bf came out of it thinking it was too pro-war. I thought it was anti-war. But it might also have something to do with how you view Eastwood’s politics. This article speaks about this: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/01/20/american-sniper-political-rorschach-test.html”
That’s the point. Clint wanted American Sniper to be politically vague and it indeed was vague.
“As for AS, I do feel like it’s a Rorschach test.
YES. Roberto from Italy! That’s precisely how I’ve been struggling to describe the slippery meanings of American Sniper, but I forgot what Rorscharch was. You nailed it. Perfect.
Birdman was my favorite film of 2014 too, Antoinette. It made me ecstatic.
Pete,
I still fail to see how all of these historians, TV commentators (most of whom are Liberal) and print i.e. Maureen Dowd, were somehow part of a coordinated campaign. Someone may have planted the seed but it became a conversation that everyone felt they needed to voice their opnion.
As for AS, I do feel like it’s a Rorschach test. My bf came out of it thinking it was too pro-war. I thought it was anti-war. But it might also have something to do with how you view Eastwood’s politics. This article speaks about this: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/01/20/american-sniper-political-rorschach-test.html
In terms of an organized smear campaign, it always felt like AwardsDaily kept beating up on Unbroken knowing that Selma and its female director would be the benefactor if it knee-capped Jolie and what was once considered a front-runner. How else would you explain Sasha’s sudden sympathy to Anniston getting a nod while disregarding the fact that it would come from a horribly reviewed film? With that logic, Jolie should have gotten in also, reviews aside, for the effort put in. Now that it’s no longer DuVarnay vs. Jolie, it’s Selma vs Sniper. (let’s not forget that both directors were snubbed). I’m sure you can easily pull out some pro-Selma tweets that disparages LBJ in the same vein as the ones she sampled above. Point is- why even bring it up (if only to equate AS with these loonies). But with Selma getting almost shut out and with Sniper receiving the noms and box office, I assume it will be non-stop anti AS here until Oscar night. Which is too bad, because I think both films have themes and relevance to our society now. I think Sasha pondered if it’s possible for the Academy to be in touch with the public when it comes to nominations- doesn’t the box office of AS prove that in some ways they are? This is relevant to the public. Everything does not have to be seen through the shades of Selma.
Why is Eddie Redmayne ranking a low third? A month back I thought he was golden, cementing it more or less when he won best dramatic actor at the Globes.
Birdman – style over substance crowd, the ones that don’t mind the gimmicks, but like films to look cool (face it, that’s Birdman)
Face it, that’s me. lol I am rooting for BIRDMAN. To me style is substance so the cooler the better. But I don’t like gimmicks though. What’s the gimmick in BIRDMAN? The long shots maybe? I’m a De Palma fan also. So there’s that.
Movieram,
I didn’t say that right wingers were behind the smears, I suggested that the people running AS’ Oscar campaign correctly picked their smear target (Selma) and executed it perfectly knowing that when the right wing outrage machine screams long enough, that squishy go along to get along mainstream media will soon feel obligated to pick up that bucket of water. None of the other contenders against Boyhood stood to gain from doing it given their place in the race was secure. AS was on the outside looking in and shoved out what they felt was the most vulnerable contender.
I give it about a week before some pundit suggests that there should be a write in campaign for Eastwood. Poor Linklater won’t know what hit him.
Ryan F. there’s more brilliance in Selma’s “marriage scene” than in the whole American Sniper film all together.
Yet, AS is nominated for 6 Oscars and we just can thank God, good old Clint isn’t also nominated, otherwise it would be game, set and match already and AS would sweep. It’s not going to take down many superior films at once (The Imitation Game, Grand Budapest Hotel and Selma, specially), but it’s going to take down one of the best reviewed films of all times… Boyhood. with a 100 in Metacritic.
The first “shots” against American Sniper came from writers who realized EONS ago that Kyle’s claims in his book didn’t pass the smell test. Idolizing this guy without question is telling a lot of unscrupulous politicians running to be the next President that launching the next elective war will be a walk through the park in terms of getting the public on board. Rogen wasn’t incorrect about what he said, and there is a certain irony watching people demanding apologies from him for what he said.
@ Pete —
“Dollars to donuts that’s were the smear campaign was formulated.”
I have trouble thinking that extreme right-wingers care very much about trying to sink a movies chances for awards. Also, I never met a right-winger who had anything good to say about LBJ.
I also don’t see anything in Selma that is overtly political one way or the other. It seems to me that it approaches the level of good, high quality drama that everyone should appreciate. I haven’t actually heard anyone bash the movie.
If there is indeed a smear campaign, I think the source is from a competitor. It might be the team behind American Sniper, but it could easily come from elsewhere too.
I’m back from watching American Sniper and, putting politics aside, I think it’s a mediocre movie. It’s too long, too boring, with a lazy, superficial writing and an overhyped lead performance.
I liked both AMERICAN SNIPER and SELMA. I must be mental.
Such a poignant read, thank you.
I wondered where the first shots against American Sniper would be fired after this box office weekend. Didn’t expect to find them here. This race must have really upset you even more than usual.
American Sniper earning an A+ average from its viewers doesn’t surprise me. But worries me.
Sasha, hats off to you for being the rare film awards pundit (if not the only one) who isn’t afraid to tackle these issues head on. You put your neck on the line knowing full well that you will be attacked and ridiculed on twitter et cetera, and you do it time and again.
The pundits choose to look the other way and keep it only about the awards race, failing to address that what’s valued in the film awards arena does in fact speak on a much large scope on where we are as a culture.
That being said, Bradley Cooper winning Best Actor would be a travesty.
I think one of these will happen.
American Sniper takes Pictue, Actor, Adapted Screenplay, Film Editing and both Sound. Linklater wins director. Iñarritu, original screenplay.
Selma wins Best Picture and Original Song (or loses song to Lego’s), Linklater wins director, Redmayne – Moore – Arquette – Simmons and Birdman and Whiplash at screenplays. Editing for Boyhood.
Boyhood wins Picture, Director, Arquette, Original Screenplay, Film Editing… Birdman takes Actor. Adapted Screenplay for Whiplash.
I don’t see Birdman winning big, sorry. Unless Selma, Boyhood and American Sniper split votes and leave Birdman for the win. Or The Imitation Game…
I think vote appeals…
Boyhood – art house crowd, indie-lovers, parents.
Birdman – style over substance crowd, the ones that don’t mind the gimmicks, but like films to look cool (face it, that’s Birdman)
American Sniper – NRA members
The Theory of Everything – classic Holllywood lovers
The Imitation Game – LGTB community
Selma – civil rights conscious AMPA members
Grand Budapest Hotel – a middle point between Boyhood and Birdman voters. It could perfectly be a consensus winner for the fans of both films, and The Imitation Game’s supporters.
As always, Sasha, thanks for words to chew on.
“”The Oscar race feels as disconnected from American culture than it has ever been.””
Hmmmm. It seems to me that American Sniper lines the Oscars and culture up a bit.
“”What good might come of it. The American hero everyone was talking about on Martin Luther King, Jr. day was not Martin Luther King, Jr. but Chris Kyle.”
Half true, maybe. It’s a great line though!
“Both it and Selma received the rare A+ from Cinemascore.”
Isn’t it awesome that these two movies are ranked so highly by the people who saw them? Isn’t that what we always want from movies — to inspire this kind of passion? I’ve always LIVED for movies that I could rate an A+. There are so few, and to find them is the main reason I go to movies.
In 2009, Kathryn Bigelow’s Iraq film’s $17 million box-office take sprung from the notion that it was a liberal, anti-war film, one that did not put enough blame on the enemy. It did not give us an enemy, in fact, because in that film Americans are defending themselves against citizens with IEDs who are fighting against the American invasion. They are undefinable, hard to locate and they are everywhere.
Gotta say, that I don’t entirely agree with your next political assessments — though I do disagree with our country’s Middle East entanglements.
“There are whole populations out there in the “flyover states” that are under-served by Hollywood. It took Clint Eastwood’s sensibilities to earn the prestige to get into the Oscar race, and his war sensibilities to woo the conservatives who see Eastwood as one of their own after her performance at the Republican National Convention four years ago. ”
OK…I’ll bite. Since I thought it was women and minorities who were underserved by Hollywood. If the Red States are also underserved, then who is the minority that Hollywood is serving? Also, aren’t you overrating Eastwood’s sensibilities quite a bit? I don’t recall Jersey Boys, J. Edgar, Hereafter, Invictus, Changeling, Letters from Iwo Jima, or Flags of Our Fathers setting the world on fire, impressed as I might be with one or two of those films.
“Michael Moore and Seth Rogan are getting hit with violent fury”
It’s unfortunate that their vitriol is being answered by vitriol that is just as deplorable.
“One thing does seem clear, though, Americans — be they sophisticated 1%-ers, Oscar voters, or dudes who stockpile weapons and live in caves in the Pacific Northwest — they like to be on the right side of white history. ”
Ouch. Personally, I think you’re above this kind of stereotypical remark.
“I am left with the irony of the actor playing Chris Kyle being the one who knocked out the actor playing Martin Luther King, Jr. ”
You don’t know that for a fact. I’d say it was (probably) Steve Carell’s nomination that knocked out Oyelowo undeservedly. But I’ll know for sure in a couple of hours, because I’m off to see American Sniper for myself right now. Funny, a week ago, I didn’t have a lot of interest in seeing this film. Now I can hardly wait!
Thanks for sharing your outlook on things!
If the Red States are also underserved, then who is the minority that Hollywood is serving?
I didn’t take that to mean that nobody in flyover states ever gets any movies they like. Obviously people in all 50 states love the all movies that becomes the Top 20 box-office movies every year.
Sasha writes: “There are whole populations out there in the “flyover states” that are under-served by Hollywood.”
I took that to mean specifically conservative citizens who rarely get to see their point of view on TV or movies except as backwoods ignoramuses. (not even realizing how Duck Dynasty makes them look to rest of us.)
To me, that means Hollywood does not often offer movies that appeal to conservatives. I believe that is true. Lone Survivor was the exception last year, right?
Not that American Sniper appeals ONLY to conservatives — obviously not. But we always hear that Hollywood pushes a liberal agenda on republican voters, right? (I sort of do believe that too).
American Sniper does not push a liberal agenda, and while its agenda is kept vague (necessarily so) it provides a carefully noncommittal observation on Iraq and soldiers and war that easily allows conservatives to overlay whatever message they want to find.
That’s a very tricky and skillful thing for a movie to do. That takes very adept writing, editing, and all the visceral things well-crafted movies do so well.
personally, I can acknowledge the consummate skill on display and still be a little repelled by the consequences, yes?
Is audience perception the fault of Eastwood or the fault of the movie? *shrug* What kind of director doesn’t have any idea how his movie is going to be interpreted? What kind of director seems not to care how his movie might be perceived?
“cha-ching, cha-ching, wow, lookee here, looks like we stuck a chord with conservatives. well whadyaknow! lucky for us how that turned out!”
Is Eastwood an extraordinarily clever guy or what? (yes) Or did he just stumble into this? (no)
“oops, but I’m anti-war, you all know I’m anti-war right? just because the movie gives you NO clue, surely you know I’m anti-war.”
*[cashes check for $350 million]*
dum-dee-dum, gee whiz, being “anti-war” sure is surprisingly lucrative in the red states!
===
But please listen, and I DO SINCERELY MEAN THIS:
I get to see lots and lots of movies that satisfy my liberal/progressive sensibilities. I am already very WELL-SERVED by the movie industry, by indies, and by international cinema.
So, I see no reason at all why “under-served populations in flyover states” should not also be entitled to watch movies that satisfy their sensibilities.
It’s just not for me, that’s all.
I know my own taste in movies is not for everybody, but I sure wouldn’t want anyone to say I have no right to watch what I like.
Yep, agree all around.
I suspect that right wing pundits are WILDLY overplaying their glee over American Sniper. Moore and Rogen were inelegant in what they said about the movie (but not necessarily incorrect), but they are basically being asked to apologize for failure to properly venerate Kyle. So do the Academy voters fold to the pressure, lest pundits who already hate Hollywood end up continuing to hate Hollywood, or do they protest against outsiders demanding AS be rewarded best picture as a measuring stick of “patriotism”? I would lean towards the latter, given that enough voters are smart enough to realize that placating the loons won’t actually change anything.
Again, it must be noted that some of the people blowing their wad in praise of AS are simultaneously contemptuous of Selma with equal ferocity (take a gander at Breitbart and Drudge to see this). I thought the Selma smear campaign was way too organized to be just an organic thing. AS clearly was the film that benefitted from Selma sliding the way it did. Dollars to donuts says that’s were the smear campaign was formulated.