This news has gone viral out of the Academy luncheon so rather than keep thanking people who send it my way (thanks Wayman, etc) I will instead echo it here. The headlines read:
Steven Spielberg Overheard Telling Tom Cruise He “Saved Hollywood’s A**” With ‘Top Gun: Maverick
And the video:
Steven Spielberg to Tom Cruise at the #Oscars luncheon: “You saved Hollywood’s ass… you might have saved theatrical distribution.”
(via @marisatomay)
https://t.co/0tkBwqVQLU— Film Updates (@FilmUpdates) February 14, 2023
First off, I love Steven Spielberg. There will never be another. We’re all very lucky to have lived in the era where he was making movies because I promise you, that will never be repeated. From Jaws all the way to the Fabelmans — aka my entire lifetime — the man has SHOWN UP.
Top Gun Maverick is the Jaws of 2023. I didn’t know that Joseph Kosinski was a great director before this but he is, indeed, a great director. You don’t get a success like that unless the writing, the directing and the acting is top notch. And it is. It’s a perfect 10. When I watch movies on Amazon I always look at the rating. I’ve never seen anything like this:
Sometimes you get it just right. It doesn’t happen often – in fact, it never happens. Movies like that don’t win Best Picture – they hardly ever have. But it’s the kind of thing that happens once in a blue moon.
It isn’t just an action movie. It’s a love story. It isn’t just a love story between Maverick and Penny, it’s also a love story between Maverick and Rooster and Maverick and Iceman. It’s also a love story between the entire team tasked with getting along and flying the mission. It’s a story of making good on the promise to a best friend to look out for his
As a friend of mine said, these were the kinds of movies we used to get every week in the 1990s. And it’s true. We did. If a single one of those movies was made and released in theaters now, people would flock to them just like they did Top Gun Maverick. It’s especially so now. People say movies and movie theaters are over? They aren’t over. They’re still a fun thing to do if THEY’RE FUN. Not if they’re fast food franchise movies that barely move the needle and blur into one another but if they’re original stories that take you somewhere.
All of those superhero and franchise movies got really depressing, didn’t they? It was like all of a sudden everyone thought it was their job to BUM US OUT for eternity. And then the clouds parted.
I mean….
It’s like crawling through a frozen landscape, an apocalypse and coming upon a crackling blazing fire with an ice cream machine and a hot tub. SIGN ME UP. Our country might be screwed up in a lot of ways but one thing we can do like no one else? Movies like this.
So yeah, Spielberg knows what he’s talking about because he knows everything.
It’s so good it even works with a cat.
This is 2015 all over again; critics swoon over the wrong boxoffice hit, and snooker EVERY creative arts organization into believing it’s ALL THAT. Meanwhile, the movie that beats it in every way; story, acting, Directing, 4-quadrant success with critics/fans gets kicked to the curb, then onto the street right in front of a passing bus.
Top Gun Maverick is 2022’s Mad Max Fury Road and Avatar: Way of Water is this year’s Force Awakens.
Are you trying to say that ‘Force Awakens’ is better movie than ‘Mad Max: Fury Road’?
Mad Max was hardly the box office success that Top Gun is. It was however the best film of 2015.
Why are people still going on about Maverick when in the past months of 2022 a better movie that made more money and had a bigger impact was released? If this conversation is going on then why aren’t people saying The Way of Water saved Hollywood?
Avatar 2 also saved Hollywood.
Even more so is my point but people aren’t really discussing that and are still obsessing over top gun months later
Of course, it was also because of Spielberg’s remark. Pundits and people just kind forget about Avatar 2 that made twice as much as Top Gun.
Fellow Avatar 2 fan?
Yeah I think it’s great! It is in my lower top 10 of the year and it absolutely deserves/ justifies the box office
4th in my own top 10, but I’ve only seen about half of the number I usually get to, so it could get to the lower half in mine, as well, if what’s left is, on average as good as what I’ve seen so far. 🙂
Well, everything you said is true but I guess people just like how nice of a guy Mr Cruise is…
And forget about his horrible actions towards Ms Holmes or the fact that now he’s the face of a money grubbing fake “religion”.
Why? Conspiracy theory! Because how else can we explain why such film is even in the conversions, let alone Oscars savior and leader?
Since I won’t be able to see any more of the big 2022 films I still want to/feel like I should see (The Eternal Daughter, Eo, A Couple, One Fine Morning, Stars at Noon, Close, The Whale, Close) for at least a few weeks, I thought this would be a good time to compile my ballot for the best of the year. Since I’ve done this in the previous few years, I’ll also post them here with (admittedly rather silly) image collages.
The following is a list of the achievements in film that I’d award and nominate as the best of 2022 in the following 14 categories: Best Film, Best Director, Best Original Screenplay, Best Adapted Screenplay, Best Ensemble, Best Leading Performance, Best Supporting Performance, Best Editing, Best Cinematography, Best Production Design, Best Costume Design, Best Original Score, Best Sound Design and Best Makeup/Hairstyling. Every category has five nominees except for Best Film, Best Leading Performance and Best Supporting Performance which have 10 nominees. These lists are based on the viewing of 103 films that received their non-festival US release (or in the case of short films worldwide premiere) during 2022.
First, I’d like to note that despite going to the theaters quite a bit, I feel like I watched too many of the best films of the year in non-theatrical contexts. The film distribution landscape seems to be still reeling from the pandemic and we need to support the theatrical experience in all ways possible to help alleviate this issue. Films like Top Gun: Maverick or Avatar: The Way of Water alone are not going to save the cinema in the way we know it, the only way to save the full breadth of the cinema and make sure that it can be available as widely as possible in the world is that we have all kinds of movies making money at the box office. This is important because the last thing that theaters would stop serving is action spectacles but instead, they might start removing almost everything else. We are now in a fragile position and need to care for and about the theatrical experience even more strongly than we usually do.
Now, let’s look at the nominees. The nominees are listed in each category in alphabetical order with winners in bold and runners-up in italics:
Best Makeup/Hairstyling:
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/08ccf65a504b1fdd0b56990d09e61eaf0c391cb040f83ced6360026f0da6e756.png
Babylon
Black Panther: Wakanda Forever
Crimes of the Future
The Northman
Three Thousand Years of Longing
Best Sound Design
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/0b641c4b3c7d793a0c76c1249d067b7e2298105f5a0d69b255f11681bef13a8c.png
Babylon
Il Buco
Nope
Moonage Daydream
TÁR
Best Original Score
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/85dfd55bf80bcc693e25fe6c262ff8faa42c33f3288ad5e6168d3d18efe81721.png
Babylon
Black Panther: Wakanda Forever
Broker
Marcel the Shell with Shoes On
Women Talking
Best Costume Design
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/a67f6ac70c68303193dba85cd5b402e7955843a5b5c764689d367769c362f1c8.png
After Yang
Babylon
Black Panther: Wakanda Forever
Three Thousand Years of Longing
The Woman King
Best Production Design
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/6f82b84272942d1abdb82d9b61ce7c729d47bf415408dc9353bf0da4e383a78a.png
After Yang
Babylon
Crimes of the Future
Fabian: Going to the Dogs
Three Thousand Years of Longing
Best Cinematography
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/7a3e740c34a6be23c23401b52fc85877307028075314c68bbcaceaad0a921daa.png
Aftersun
Kimi
The Novelist’s Film
Onoda: 10,000 Nights in the Jungle
RRR
Best Editing
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/bd77dcf165325293ff3724925269e4f32d1bbfa5c53437510fb3a12c3c542293.png
Aftersun
After Yang
Benediction
Kimi
Murina
Best Supporting Performance
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/fc690511a133517b52d1772c0589655a067347f1c84529edb1d1961a187743c8.png
Kerry Condon (The Banshees of Inisherin)
Anthony Hopkins (Armageddon Time)
Barry Keoghan (The Banshees of Inisherin)
Lashana Lynch (The Woman King)
Rooney Mara (Women Talking)
Oh Kwang-rok (Return to Seoul)
Andrew Scott (Catherine Called Birdy)
Kristen Stewart (Crimes of the Future)
Jeremy Strong (Armageddon Time)
Mark Rylance (Bones and All)
Best Leading Performance:
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/bebc79a469b2dd0a3fd94dccb14d99a6037a12d35115087e0df54389a45511b3.png
Cate Blanchett (TÁR)
Rebecca Hall (Resurrection)
Gabriel LaBelle (The Fabelmans)
Jack Lowden (Benediction)
Guslagie Malanda (Saint Omer)
Paul Mescal (Aftersun)
Park Ji-min (Return to Seoul)
Franz Rogowski (Great Freedom)
Taylor Russell (Bones and All)
Anamaria Vartolomei (Happening)
Best Ensemble
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/0535a6aabecc6712845c1b2fecb890bb15a1e47b7d2e17f5657aabac4305b45c.png
Babylon
Broker
Crimes of the Future
The Fabelmans
Women Talking
Best Adapted Screenplay
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/9a36dbfaa9ab7320fb1a945b7d79bba3f6a80d5d3295ca11c2bfc98f549d76ee.png
After Yang
Both Sides of the Blade
Happening
Marcel the Shell with Shoes On
Women Talking
Best Original Screenplay
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/868a9593141189551b2cc4b5ea473ce095a7abf6d8aa177f44051141e8d91b31.png
Aftersun
Armageddon Time
Benediction
Crimes of the Future
TÁR
Best Director
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/a32c3cf14643ad711d6494c05fa83536286a9fba16985fb86ccbe0a15181adb7.png
David Cronenberg (Crimes of the Future)
Todd Field (TÁR)
Kogonada (After Yang)
S.S. Rajamouli (RRR)
Charlotte Wells (Aftersun)
Best Film
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/71d412b426f7d02a2db50f360ded2fa82399b65d82ad458926f7bc5a1c45bd9c.png
Aftersun
After Yang
All the Beauty and the Bloodshed
Benediction
Crimes of the Future
The Fabelmans
Marcel the Shell with Shoes On
RRR
TÁR
We’re All Going to the World’s Fair
And to close out, here are my favorite films of 2022, ranked:
1. Crimes of the Future
2. Aftersun
3. After Yang
4. TÁR
5. All the Beauty and the Bloodshed
6. RRR
7. Marcel the Shell with Shoes On
8. The Fabelmans
9. We’re All Going to the World’s Fair
10. Benediction
11. Armageddon Time
12. Happening
13. Kimi
14. Women Talking
15. The Novelist’s Film
16. The Banshees of Inisherin
17. The Cathedral
18. Babylon
19. Saint Omer
20. Cow
21. Resurrection
22. Murina
23. Both Sides of the Blade
24. Return to Seoul
25. Nope
26. Glass Onion: A Knives Out Mystery
27. The Quiet Girl
28. Catherine Called Birdy
29. Broker
30. Onoda: 10,000 Nights in the Jungle
31. The Woman King
32. Great Freedom
33. Bones and All
34. All That Breathes
35. Bruiser
36. Decision to Leave
37. Introduction
38. Three Thousand Years of Longing
39. Fire Island
40. Black Panther: Wakanda Forever
41. Elvis
And here are also a few exceptional films I’ve seen that have been or will hopefully be released in the US in 2023: De Humani Corporis Fabrica, Enys Men, Godland, I Want to Talk About Duras, Knock at the Cabin and Will-o’-the-Wisp
Quite liked your picks and noms. Especially Women Talking in Ensemble. It should win SAG in a just world.
I would pick Triangle of Sadness myself.
Me too. It underperformed at the Guilds for whatever reason. I think it should have made the cut at PGA, DGA and SAG.
I’m not surprised ”Triangle of Sadness” underperformed at the guilds, but then I found it interminable. I’m flabbergasted that it got the Oscar nominations that it did. Guess I’m too ”square” for ”Triangle.”
It just seems to be much more loved internationally than in America (see European film awards, BAFTA, palme d’or) so it isn’t too surprising that the very American guilds skipped but the much more international academy didn’t.
Thanks Ferdinand, terrific list as always!
I really love the picture collages, that makes it easy to see at a glance all the nominees, and perhaps even to compare the works a little bit.
Just a point of curiosity: in the last section you list 41 out of the 103 films you’ve seen. Where’s the cutoff? Is #41 something you still loved, or is it the lowest thing you didn’t hate, or somewhere in the middle?
The cutoff point is approximately the line between a 4 star film and a 3.5 star one. Basically, the 41 films were ones that I liked a lot, they are the films that really impressed me and felt like the essential films of the year for me.
Totally agree. Going to the theatre is still one of my favourite things and – compared to the last two years – I already went to see quite many films (by my standards) this year. I´m also looking forward to see “Tar” for the first time on the big screen (after having streamed it some time ago) when it´s released here in early March (I guess this film might really benefit from the theatre experience since it´s so much about atmosphere).
Besides, great work and many great choices! (now I need to see RRR, I guess, before I can finish my own Top 10).
I’m not sure if you’ll like RRR (it kind of sounds like you might be considerably less into action movies than I am, even if I’m not really that big a fan of the genre in general either) but to me it was just such joyous and exciting pop filmmaking, a film of mythic proportions expressed with an agility and confidence that is astounding to see. Think something between John Ford and George Miller.
A lot more George Miller than John Ford. John Ford? Why/how?
I also wonder if the kind of complaints Ford’s films experience these days in relation to their portrait of the US (basically that they’re fetishizing a certain type of outdated American masculinity) can be in some way compared to the criticisms of RRR as nationalistic and casteist. I’m an outsider in both discussions and thus don’t really know whether they can be compared but both Ford’s work and RRR feel like they very strongly exist in a nationalistic context, partially through the very myth-focused storytelling that I mentioned in my previous comment.
“RRR? John Ford? Why/how?”
She Wore a Yellow Ribbon?
[ducks] https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/e5017789bc5eec71e2081375bf4c2b770bdada13eefab53c3cf6bdfd6a2d800e.jpg
It’s not in any way visually reminiscent of Ford but I think the film has at its heart a Fordian quality. I think of how Sarris describes the Fordian hero in the entry on Walsh in The American Cinema: they are driven by the why rather than the what (like the Walshian hero) or the how (like the Hawksian hero). This leaning on the why makes the films have this kind of elemental quality in my opinion, they are stories about individuals but they also move from it to contemplating the sweep of history and the ideas and emotions that create communities, their identities and most importantly the myths that uphold both of those things. And despite the visual intensity and maximalism of RRR being very different from Ford’s more calm imagery, I think the storytelling of RRR has that same elemental quality, it is similarly about the creation of communal myths and its heroes are driven by the same why as the Fordian ones.
Got it. Content-Ford, style-Miller. Perhaps that’s why I didn’t feel that the movie was as “fresh” as its surface promises to be. If there’s Ford inspiration, it felt over worn and pedestrian at the core.
RRR is definitely a must see for any cinephile.
So you did like The Fabelmans – alright! We can work with this… 🙂 I don’t get the people who think it’s mediocre or even bad. I don’t get that at all, especially after rewatching it a couple of days ago.
The reason I haven’t talked about it before is simply that I didn’t see The Fabelmans until last week. But it is absolutely wonderful, a smart and .
often surprising riff on topics that I feel too many directors would be too overwhelmed by nostalgia of their youth to actually get into. To me it’s less of a movie about the idea of CINEMA or INSPIRATION in big block letters (which is how it was advertised) than it is about reflecting on the things that mold a person into their adulthood and what it means to want to become a filmmaker or an artist in general. The notion that it’s pretty much the story of Spielberg’s own childhood (although the exact factuality of any film that in its first third has a character ask: “What kind of movie we’re going to make” at a screening of The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance should probably be questioned) is in my opinion somewhat irrelevant because the story is just as fascinating in the context of the character as it is in the context of the real world story. I guess that’s the difference between someone making an intimate film and someone making the kind of “personal” film that feels like little more than crass myth-building. And as usual, it is impeccably crafted on all levels.
As for the complaints about it, this is not meant in any way to argue that all complaints about the movie are about this thing or somehow wouldn’t be valid but isn’t this the case with most of 21st century Spielberg films? I rewatched a bunch of his movies before The Fabelmans (and also rewatched a lot of the other ones when I couldn’t go rewatch West Side Story when theaters were closed due to COVID here about a year ago) and it strengthened my general argument on Spielberg: he’s a filmmaker of very different eras that approximately move by the decade but there is a particularly defined break around the beginning of the 2000s. I think a lot of his best work (especially Catch Me If You Can, West Side Story and A.I. Artificial Intelligence, all of which are top 5 Spielberg for me) comes after this dividing point. However, I feel like the general narrative concerning Spielberg almost seems to ignore everything after Saving Private Ryan, that is treated as the last classic that Spielberg has made and everything after it seems to be treated almost with an attitude “and he continues making films after Saving Private Ryan”. And this is exactly when he becomes even more interesting to me, it’s when Spielberg challenges the notion of what a Spielberg film is like. As a result, I can’t help but feel like almost like people wrote the story of Spielberg too soon and now are looking at over 20 years of work in that context when more often than not the work doesn’t really fit that pattern they defined for him.
Because of this, I think you have people who like the old Spielberg films and are disappointed by this as well as a lot of the other new ones. And then there are those who dislike everything Spielberg represents to them even if some of these things are perhaps not things that Spielberg’s current films are representative of. Thus I think the concept of a new Spielberg movie is always a somewhat complicated notion, especially when few would argue that the kind of filmmaking Spielberg represents is particularly “cool” (mentioning predictions quickly, this is pretty much the logic that made me originally start predicting The Daniels to win the directing Oscar in approximately November because I just didn’t think Spielberg making a film about Spielberg would work as the kind of narrative that would eventually work in the Oscar race becuase of these complicating factors).
No, I knew you hadn’t seen it yet. 🙂 And, because of that, I had my fingers crossed and was a bit nervous about it, didn’t know where you’d land on it. Very happy and relieved to see you’re on my side of things.
“the story is just as fascinating in the context of the character as it is in the context of the real world story.”
Absolutely! That’s why I’m so surprised people are taking it the way they are.
“I feel like the general narrative concerning Spielberg almost seems to ignore everything after Saving Private Ryan, that is treated as the last classic that Spielberg has made”
To be fair, the stuff he did pre-2000 is full of huge classics… But, yeah, I don’t think his work since then has been particularly less impressive. I have at least 3-4 movies he’s done since that I absolutely love, even if they’re different from yours. 🙂 Quite possibly also because I just haven’t yet seen Catch Me If You Can and A.I. yet, they came precisely in that weird decade-long blind spot for me between 2000 and 2010 or so, when I mostly watched BP nominees (during high-school and especially college and the commute to Bucharest, when I got too busy to watch TV anymore, whereas from the 90’s I saw a lot more stuff because I was watching everything I could on TV, 2-3 years after theatrical release), before I started watching a lot more stuff again, around 2011. I also haven’t seen Minority Report yet, for the same reason. 🙂 All 3 are high on my list, but the list keeps getting additions and I end up picking other stuff to watch. There’s always some reason. I should force myself to just do a Spielberg catch-up one of these months and see everything more important he’s done I haven’t seen yet – I love his movies that I’ve seen too much, I really probably should…
“Because of this, I think you have people who like the old Spielberg films and are disappointed by this as well as a lot of the other new ones. And then there are those who dislike everything Spielberg represents to them even if some of these things are perhaps not things that Spielberg’s current films are representative of.”
Theory sounds spot-on, unfortunately… People love to put one in a box and never take them out unless something truly shocking happens to make them reconsider. We need clarity about as many things/people as possible, in order that the world not become, overall, too overwhelming in its complexity. I think that’s how the human brain works, or at least that’s how I’ve always explained this phenomenon (and others like it) to myself. If I’m right, I think this might also be one of the reasons for of a few of the nastiest episodes in history, both contemporary and more remote – I very much have this tendency, too, but I am at least aware of it and do try to keep it in check, whenever I actually notice myself doing it. Which is the tricky part, at least for me. Not forgetting to also be the observer, every now and then.
No amount of praise is gonna polish this turd….there is nothing special about this movie. It’s a paint by numbers action movie. Tom cruise can jump all he wants from the couch onto an airplane into a rocket ship. What he can’t manufacture is a good script. He can manufacture dialogs and stories that fit into his action set pieces but his movies will never feel organic or interesting to me. They all like those fake fruits in model houses that are made to look like real ones but they just aren’t.
It is a paint by numbers action movie. Although Mission Impossible films are awesome and Tom Cruise is a very impressive, once in a lifetime movie star.
the film that’s going to save the industry/ even if it only makes 5% of top gun’s usa boxoffice is…’cocaine bear’
this will be the film to get people back to the theatres, that haven’t been. and the only film of 2023, that has chance of bringing everyone together. 😉
BTW, new Empire magazine has a big interview with Andrea Riseborough talking on her career, touching on the “controversy” of her nomination but overall seeming awed after so many years stealing movies in small roles, she’s finally at the forefront and comes off quite well.
Same in The Hollywood Reporter — top story.
I hope she wins after all this crap.
Whatever happens at the Oscars, Riseborough looks like she’ll be better known for how she got nominated than her actual performance.
The best picture of the year in my opinion
i’m still going to be ‘top gun’ free. i’m going to stand above the crowd/because i’m allowed. 🙂
You’re more of a contrarian that believes your taste is so exquisite that Top Gun 2 is just a B movie that does not deserve anything. Well it was nominated by the writers and industry at large. Are you telling me you are a better writer or a better filmmaker? Sure, you are allowed to think Top Gun 2 is a POS, but at the end of the day, you are still in the minority, and that should have been fine.
got to leave the comp for the night. and no i’m not being contrary. i just don’t like films like this. these sort of films just make me feel worse/more depressed.
and to be contrary, yes i’m saying i’m a better writer/film maker than those that did top gun. no matter how much my version of anything sucked. i’d like it a lot more than top gun. takes a bow… 😉
not caring about crap like top gun. “can right all the wrongs i can’t right. and pay all the debts i can’t pay. and turn my weakness to might !!!!!”
😉
You can’t say it’s crap without seeing it. You’re too extreme. Taking pride of not wanting to see is just silly, extreme, and totally snobbish, but whatever, it has been nominated.
and i’m saying it and i’m saying it with a smile !!!! 🙂
and yes it has been nominated. and i’m sure if i watched ‘top gun’ i’d hate it even more. 😉
there’s plenty of people on this site. that have seem to have seen ‘top gun’ and they dislike it too. 🙂
but again chung, knowing my taste i’ll just skip the watching part. 😉
and there’s a lot of humor mixed with “pride”. maybe someone will notice someday… 😉
i also haven’t watched ‘tar’ yet. so i guess i’m a weird type of “snob”. 😉
at least my not watching this film has nothing to do with cancel culture. takes a bow. 🙂
if you could recommend any silly and extreme films. i might like to see those. i doubt there’s anything “extreme” about ‘top gun’.
if my not watching this film. because i don’t give damn about “popcorn’ action movies makes me snob. i guess i’m not insulted at all. 🙂
You still have not seen it. I would suggest to see it first then trash it, that would make your criticism of this movie more credible.
note; i didn’t claim nor try to do any criticism of the film. and i only threw the crap bit because i was getting annoyed with you. dismissing the valid reasons to me for not watching it.
not only have i not tried criticism of the film. i haven’t even attacked tom on a personal level like several others have.
and no i’m
still not going to watch the film. i’ve been very transparent.
transparent enough that someone could read my words and view it as credible or not. mission accomplished. well maybe everyone expect for you. ha ha. 😉
Transparency doesn’t give you any legitimacy on your opinion of this film if you have not seen it. Sorry, I can’t take your criticism seriously if you have not seen it.
do you just want the last word ? or have i not explained this you 1700 times ???
and if i saw the film and hated it. which i’m sure that’s what would happen. you still wouldn’t take anything i’d say seriously either. so let’s just eliminate the middle man. and not watch it. and yes i can say the same stuff. the next 18 times too. if needed. i’ve explained my view enough for others to judge.
maybe that’s too fair for you. yawn. you’re the one that wants to keep this going.
your fave ‘top gun’ as got the nom. but you want to argue with me. over points i’m not going to change. and i’ve explained to you 47 times. ha ha ha.
this is worse than any ‘snob’ allegations you could ever throw at me even in your dreams.
as usual you can count on someone pushing something super popular. to set the worse example. you’re so much worse than any ‘crimes’ you could throw at me.
and whatever the next film i watch. it’s definitely not going to be ‘top gun’ now ! 😉
You have explained it over and over again without saying anything new. You just haven’t seen it, so you criticism of the film can’t be taken seriously.
and what new did you add in your replies to my answering the same questions. you keep asking/the same points you kept mentioning ??
i love how you exempt yourself from these things. even though your more guilty than anyone.
repeat. you’re the one that turned this. well into this. it’s your fault.
and i’ve said that 87times. maybe on the 200th it finally get’s through to you.
and you’re so loyal to your game you end things with my criticism of the film. when i said i have given no criticism and you can’t give an example of criticism i mentioned.
jesus f**king christ. this is the sort of crap i have to deal with. no wonder i can’t function in society. 😉
as usual the people that dismiss anything i say. being beyond worthless and making zero sense.
but i guess i should take you seriously since you watched ‘top gun’. 😉
Why would I care if you take my opinion about Top Gun seriously? You have no seen the film, so your criticism of this film can’t be taken seriously. Yes, it is a broken record
i don’t take your opinion about ‘top gun’ seriously. have i said anything about your opinion ‘top gun’ ?? nope..
you just keep falling down in road. and falling again. and just keep imagining crap i haven’t mentioned or even hinted at.
that’s all you got ??? you’re not much of a “maverick” at all. 😉
Relax and maybe you should take the award season less seriously.
Not my intention to make you feel that way. I have deleted many of my comments. Peace.
Sure, whatever you think. I apologize if you feel that I was trying to push Top Gun down your throat, not my intention. Have the last word if you wish.
You still have not seen it. It is silly to have an opinion on a film you haven’t seen, that is just not debatable. Transparency has nothing to do with your credibility.
if people feel i have no credibility on this issue my transparency covers that.
but hey, it seems to you people that have watched the film and didn’t like it. have no “credibility” either. some accomplishment. 😉
No your transparency doesn’t cover that. Why should it? You can’t have an opinion on something you have not seen. The people who have seen this film and didn’t like it fall into tye category “different opinion”. Yes, they have way more credibility than anyone who refuses to see it. False equivalencies.
aside from the fact i never claimed to have any “credibility” on this issue. but i guess you gave me some. since you keep arguing with me.
again what claim to ‘credibility’ did i make ?
yes, i want to see you further embarrass yourself. by trying to have an answer for that.
i did say i have zero interest based on my taste. which probably in your deranged mind did equal “credibility”
seriously you’re so far out and gone with your ‘interesting” and mostly worthless interpretations. who knows what you’re thinking. aside from whatever you’re thinking has zero to do with what i’m thinking. all to do with your delusions and ‘bullying’ me see ‘top gun’.
not much humor in this post. so maybe you won’t get confused.
*sigh*
My continuation of going back and forth with you really doesn’t give you more credibility. You’re spinning out of orbit here. It is fine if you are proud of not wanting to see the film.
and did i claim our back and forth was giving me any credibility ??? no i didn’t again what the hell are you thinking ???
orbit… you’re the one that pushed into outer space to start with.
like a serial killer you don’t think or noticed you did anything wrong. 😉
i’m not proud of not wanting to watch ‘top gun’. in a real life discussion. i’d mention i don’t want to see it. and if asked say i have no interest in this type of film.
and i won’t be crucified by even 3% of the degree you attempted in this thread.
people make fun of my film taste all the time in real life. or they make fun of me for reading lots more about film than actually watching them. there’s a joke or two and that’s it.
but i haven’t had to deal with whatever crap you tried to pull in a long time.
and yes i’m someone that talks to “normal” film fans that hate the oscars .and just like top 5 boxoffice for the weekend stuff.
i talk to people about stuff i have no interest in seeing all the time e.g marvel films or whatever. very un snob like. 😉
but they know, i’m not going to see the film. no bloodshed. 😉
Sure, don’t see it. I never had the intention to force you to see something you don’t want to see. Ok ok, you’re not a snob. Won’t say that anymore.
Your pride of not wanting to see it and doubling, tripling, quadrupling down on that is really a waste of energy and time though. It doesn’t make you superior or taste better than others, it is just too much drama. I don’t care if you want to see Top Gun2 or nor, but to claim or imply you have better taste because you don’t watch “popcorn movies” is futile and does nothing really.
“futile and does nothing really”
Want to know what’s even more futile and achieves absolutely nothing? The way you chase people down and harass them if they don’t want to waste their time on the movies you like.
We see glimmer keeping his upbeat and nonchalant demeanor while we watch you get more and furious about his laid-back attitude.
How about you just enjoy whatever you want and stop trying to nag people into watching something that they know they have no interest in seeing?
Ok, I just personally think it is strange to have an opinion whether it is negative or positive without seeing a film, that’s all. I will end the back and forth, thanks for the reminder. Not my intention to nag or harass Glimer into seeing Top Gun 2. I thought I was debating. In my defense, I may have been persistent about this idea of having an opinion on a film after seeing it, but maybe I went a bit far by calling him a snob. However, Gilmer’s attitude was definitely not upbeat and positive, I have to respectfully disagree, he also chased me
down and responded to me in even more of an agreessive matter, but whatever, since you are the moderator,
i have to be respectful of your rules. I already attempted to make peace. Like I said, I just called him out because he was trashing TG2 without having seen it. Maybe I shouldn’t have, but I definitely didn’t intend to chase him down and force him to see this movie like you suggested I deleted and rescinded many comments already. Hope it is acceptable to you.
chung i’m not claiming it makes me superior or superior to the taste of others. i said that with my taste i know i wouldn’t like it/ nor have an interest in it. but thanks for not paying attention and twisting things to fit your world view. maybe that’s the real waste of energy, on your end.
because notice anything you’d mostly say as doubling or tripling down. has to do with doing replies to you !!!!!!!! 😉
anything or almost anything etc. you claim as doubling down has to do with tieing things in to clarify things to you. based on your questions !!!!!!!!!!!!
so any claims of superiority etc. exist solely in your head.
repeat emphasis i didn’t claim to have better taste. expect when i threw your joke about me having exquisite taste back at you.
or was that too subtle for you to follow ?? sarcasm mode activated. you’re not to be trusted with your “interpretation” skills…
and repeat emphasis. if i have no interest in an entire genre that’s not really an insult to ‘top gun’. but will explain to you why i have zero interest in seeing it. which should be seen as fair enough. and i threw in the crap comment because i was getting annoyed. with trying to be level headed with you. and your just continuing.
and i threw in the popcorn bit since everyone else on this site is using that term. but i guess i can’t because i haven’t watched it, got it. rolls eyes.
but if you want to twist it to my claiming to have superior taste. that’s on you.
i explained several times why i don’t want to watch this film. your continuing is what’s really futile and will do nothing. impressive.
repeat i said i have no interest in this genre. i wasn’t meaning that as having superior taste to those on this board. that’s your lame interpretation.
even if i hadn’t have used the term ‘popcorn film’. you would have found a bunch of crap that mostly only exist in your head to attack me on. and that’s fair because i’m not watching ‘top gun’ at all. 🙂
by saying i have not interest in this genre. i thought was fair to get things across without offending anyone. but if you’re offended you can stay offended.
and yes i do think films like this are crap. and it’s
best i avoid them. how that equals claiming to have superior taste over others or your view that i see things that way. is all in your head. i started this with a just a joke comment or two not to be taken seriously.
but who pushed things in this direction ? you.
Once again. I can’t take your criticism seriously because you have not seen it. Nothing to do with what direction I was trying to push.
dude, you’re the one that pushed things in this direction. that pushed this conversation to this tone.
you’re even the one that keeps saying you can’t take me seriously because i haven’t seen the film. you’re the one that keeps replying. so yeah, i say pushing direction indeed.
you’re the only i keep having to clarify things for. based off of your questions/comments. so how does that not count as push ? you’re beyond delusional….
and one more time. i haven’t tried any criticism of the film.
Go ahead and rise above it, lol
raised above it. and left you behind. 😉
How can you be taken seriously without even seeing it?
because
said i have exquisite taste in film, remember ? 😉
i’ve not been wowed by plenty of things the public or a.d. likes. and no one took me seriously then. even when i say watched the film… 😉
for keeping my sanity’s sake i’m not watching ‘top gun’. la la la la la…
and when it all looks brighter. 🙂
Every man over 60 is depressed today.
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/4f188eb9cd98495117f9397a9f2d0eb20350b0ff9ea1db34808c4eab163736a4.jpg
The 2022 Set Decorators Society of America (SDSA) Winners
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/9315a804043250b0ae81a29fa45a5925099e6f0c3ab1a748b7d31dddf397cb75.png
The Set Decorators Society of America (SDSA) has announced the winners for its third annual SDSA Awards for Best Achievement in set decoration in film for 2022. Here are this year’s winners…
Contemporary Film
Bardo, False Chronicle of a Handful of Truths
Bullet Train
Glass Onion: A Knives Out Mystery
TÁR (TIE)
Top Gun: Maverick (TIE)
Period Film
Amsterdam
Babylon
Elvis
The Fabelmans
White Noise
Fantasy/Science Fiction Film
Avatar: The Way of Water
The Batman
Black Panther: Wakanda Forever
Don’t Worry Darling
Everything Everywhere All at Once
Musical/Comedy Film
Bros
Lyle, Lyle, Crocodile
Roald Dahl’s Matilda the Musical (TIE)
Spirited
The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent (TIE)
https://media0.giphy.com/media/2mmVOscYUY5C1Zkgxy/giphy.gif
Jesus, Way of Water can’t even beat EEAAO in set decoration??? WHAT SET DECORATION?
I have asked this question before and you ridiculed me and claimed I was trolling, but I have a genuine, honest question that I literally don’t know the answer to and would love to hear a proper answer. Can you help me with which scene in Avatar was filmed on a set as opposed to a greenscreen?
Set Decorators Society is another good win for ”Elvis.” There’s a 26-minute video called ”Just a Boy From Tupelo: Bringing Elvis to the Big Screen” on YouTube, and it includes glimpses of the painstaking detail they took to re-create Memphis’ famed Beale Street, as well as the exterior and interiors of Presley’s Graceland mansion … in Australia!
Over the weekend, ”Elvis” also picked up 2 prizes from the Make Up Artists and Hair Stylists Guild (MUAHS): for Best Period and/or Character Makeup (Shane Thomas, Angela Conte) and Best Period and/or Character Hair Styling (Shane Thomas, Louise Coulston). And the Advanced Imaging Society gave two of its Lumiere Awards to ”Elvis” for Best Motion Picture – Musical and Best Musical Scene or Sequence, and Austin Butler presented Baz Luhrmann with the Society’s Harold Lloyd Award.
Racquel Welch has died.
RIP
RIP
Hey, Steven; 80 for Brady has made 2x the boxoffice than The Fabelmans. Let THAT sink in, dude.
Jane Fonda saved Hollywood!
80 for Brady opened on 4,000 screens and The Fabelmans opened on less than 700. They’re not really comparable.
absolutely they are, if there was desire to see The Fablemans it would have been on 4000 screens.
Its earliest opening had a $40,000 per-screen-average. Clearly it could’ve made a dent if opened wide and given an actual marketing push.
If you saw my post on the 40K a theater the weekend it opened, you would know that is no number to brag about. In fact, for a movie of that stature, it’s really rather medium to crappy.
Top Gun: Maverick saved Hollywood, yes and no.
Yes, because audiences wanted a feel good movie after a painstaking pandemic.
No, Maverick is not the best sequel. T2: Judgement Day, Godfather part 2, LOTR: TTT and ROTk, The empire strikes back, Son of Kong are all better.
Yes, because Tom Cruise is back at the top of his game, once again in years. Cruise was a huge star in the 80’s with Risky Business, The Color of Money, All the Right Moves, Rain Man and of course the original Top Gun.
No, Maverick soars but it’s a inadequate kind of movie.
Yes, because the Oscars need a boost in the ratings and Tom Cruise is the only star in the room to boost those ratings.
No, Maverick has box office inflation and the soundtrack to the original was amazing.
Yes, Maverick is a masterpiece in cinematography and acting.
Isn’t it a little early to state whether Hollywood has indeed been saved at all? Furthermore, to ascribe that to a singular film, not even a year after it’s release?
There is that, although to be fair reading between the lines the author appears to be arguing that films with subject matter she personally disapproves of shouldn’t be made to begin with.
Spielberg, just as Sasha, is preaching not in favor of cinema’s survival but in favor of the money inflow. In the end, they are preaching in favor of mediocrity. Top Gun: Maverick is a mediocre piece of s**t.
I agree, but are there levels to being a POS? If it’s a mediocre one, is there a strata worse?
Great directing, WRITING, acting… A perfect 10??
I’m not sure I saw the same Top Gun: Maverick. Its Box Office numbers don’t make the movie any better for me.
The Top Gun I saw was pretty weak and had no business getting nominated at the Oscars.
If another Pirates of the Caribbean movie comes, propelling Johnny Depp’s career back in the air, will that movie be nominated for Best Picture? Will Steven Spielberg whisper the same thing in Depp’s ear?
Well, Mr Depp is apparently not as nice to everyone as Mr Cruise seems to be but if he becomes nice and Mr Bruckheimer produces, then it may get nominated and save cinema again. At this rate, I’m just waiting for Oscar nominated Armageddon 2 to arrive.
Of course Top Gun 2 is not Razzie worthy but even bringing such a popcorn movie into serious awards discussion is a dangerous slippery slope. I love The Menu (2022) but made with care or not, these are the same as nominating cheese burgers as the best food of the year and calling it savior of chefs around the world.
i’d buy you a cheeseburger and would even make sure it was american cheese too… 😉
Just because it makes 1.4 billion doesn’t automatically think it is less. Obviously thousands of individuals that work in the film industry disagree with you. Your attempt to equate Top Gun 2 to Pirates of the Caribbean made you lose your credibility as a critic, your anti big blockbuster sentiment is silly.
Who says I’m anti-blockbuster? LOTR deserved its wins. Titanic Deserved its wins. I’m even fine with Avatar scoring nominations. But, I’m sorry Top Gun does not even come close to blockbusters with substance. If a bunch of stunts put together with flat characters, scenes, and dialogues works at box office, so be it. But that doesn’t render a movie worthy of Oscar nominations. If you think a film with a bunch of classy stunts deserves Best Picture and Best Screenplay nominations, then it’s your comment that makes you come across as silly and makes you lose your credibility (if there ever was one) as a film critic.
I personally enjoyed the film and the dynamic between Ice Man and Maverick is pretty touching. Obviously, the industry overall thinks it is worthy of important nods. I guess you just don’t like it as much, and that’s fine
the industry, the industry, blah blah…
do you agree with everything the industry does or champion ?? since you keep hammering the industry point…
So what? Yes, I am talking about the people that work in the film industry. No, I don’t always agree with them, but sometimes I do. I happen to like Avartar 2 like the majority. I think it is a great cinematic achievement and it deserved to be recognized. What? You got a problem with that?
dude, or whomever you were the one going on about the industry. and i know you don’t always agree with them/ no one does. so you shouldn’t be surprised if someone throws that bit back at you. 😉
and no, i have no interest in either top gun nor avatar. but don’t worry, i’m a failure at life. and it’s not like my views ever count anyway. 😉
and maybe i’m a failure because i don’t like those things. and if that’s the case i want to fail completely. 🙂
Top Gun 2, just a pop corn movie that doesn’t deserve shit, blah, blah, blah, yawn. Whatever, you’re allowed.
the actual yawns, would be if i watched ‘top gun’. 🙂
and don’t worry i’ll let the industry know this too… 😉
You have not even seen it.
correct i haven’t. but i know myself enough to know if watched it. i’ll hate it.
and even if watched it and liked it (unlikely) i still wouldn’t want it to get a best nom. yes, the weirdo novice has spoken. 😉
p.s.
i’m giving you an upvote for your comment. 😉
Come on, maybe you should go see them and then criticizing them.
i’m allowed to dream my dreams aloud. i might be proud. 😉
Johnny is a wife beater and has a long history of violence in general
I don’t see how anyone can read the book Going Clear or the companion Alex Gibney film of the same name and not come away with a very negative opinion of Mr. Cruise. And before anyone tries to say “separate the art from the artist” Cruise uses his fame and status in Hollywood as a means of recruiting people to his cult. Frankly, after the hit Scientology took after the Katie Holmes debacle, Top Gun has helped mainstream it again.
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/9339ffbc030eb0428b981cd4a8117baabf4a94f1d98dbcbfcb417a059494bb70.gif
The Scientology & opinions on Mr Cruise himself are IRRELEVANT when judging the film or his performance. This film should NOT be in the awards discussion because it is a safe pop-corn sequel to a fun 80s b movie and if this is going to save cinema and the Oscars, then we might as well change the name to People’s Choice 2.
That said, I see and agree with your point on the unbelievable status of general opinions regarding Mr Cruise (That movie alone should have ended his “lovable everyman” shtick but sadly it didn’t).
The same pundits who literally called Sam Smith a “satanist” for his Grammy performance are also telling people to ignore all of Scientology’s crimes because Cruise rocks a flightsuit well.
With that said, what goes through your head when you hear Michael Jackson sing Man in the Mirror. If it isn’t complete revulsion, there is something wrong with you.
🙂
Again, Cruise uses his status and power in the industry as a selling point for that horrific cult that he is the de facto leader of now that David Miscavige has gone on the lam to avoid being served in an abuse lawsuit. Have we all forgotten how Katie Holmes literally had to smuggle her child out of Cruise’s house because “church” officials were keeping her under surveillance. Guy’s a scumbag and I have a hard time compartmentalizing that in the case of this film.
I don’t care about what a despicable human he is. I don’t want to judge him.
But he’s a truly meh actor, and his film this year is garbage. It doesn’t deserve to be mentioned in the same breath with Best Picture.
I agree completely.
Who cares what’s he leading and what he did to Ms Holmes and her kid?
Just look at him! Such a nice and kind man. Let’s give him a couple of Oscars so he can save movies and Oscars.
(That said I must still insist that even if he had done NONE of those horrible deeds and was a literal saint, this movie still does not and should not win any artistic / cinematic awards.)
Where do you draw the line? Statutory Rape? Attempted Murder? Genocide?
Leni Riefenstahl would like to know.
Well, I’ve actually been having a lot of recent discussion around Riefenstahl (Even before TÁR really reheated debates around here).
I know this is not a really popular opinion but between artist and the artwork, I absolutely believe they should be separate. We shouldn’t judge the latter based on the former. There should be no effect, as hard as it seems and feels to be.
So the line: Even rape or genocide don’t matter when comes to artwork from artist. Artist can be a disgusting piece of human garbage who deserves to die. Doesn’t matter when it comes to his or her artworks. They have their own separate value.
I love how Spielberg sceptic knitpick here. Almost like people attitude apallingly is like: “enough of Spielberg you been too dominant” . “enough of Cruise you been too dominant”
But OMG what a cop out NOT ONE SINGLE post of scepticism has focused on redeeming and powerful implications of a film of Calibre of Top Gun Maverick.
It is simply indisputable that Spielberg’s words carry much influence as Sasha says he the ‘director who shaped my lifetime viewing experiencing movies in a way no other filmmaker has’ – apologies for incorrect refrence to specific quote but it gist what Sasha said.
Maybe they were bit tipsy i really dont know – but unlikely the ‘qualification’ of notion that Top Gun Maverick saved Hollywood is simply that extent Hollywood has found itself tongue tied and opting for too many lesser known options and yes specifically theatrical releases worth and value to the Oscars has been undermined atrociously because of it.
Tom Cruise is a man on a mission sure he box office gold- elite..but Spielberg is not one to just mention anything loose to ANYONE unless he sincerely MEANS IT.
Tom Cruise is not just a brand unto himself..he really truly is a driving force of inspiration in films he been in more often than not. He is the ultimate star power (and clearly people have forgiven him for his Oprah couch jumping scene oy vey..)
So yes.. that the ONLY qualification OSCAR CHOSE FAR TOO MUCH in last 14 years esp last decade to undervalue and hence undermine big screen movie. IT IS ENTIRELY COS OF THEIR CHOICE tha capability and hope Top Gun Maverick brings has a triple !!! to it:
As follows:
! mark one – Avatar Way of Water may more than double Mavericks overall total but that just pretentious comparison in count up till Oscar year season went full circle till nominations announced TOP GUN MAVERICK RIGHTFULLY is HIGHEST GROSSING MOVIE of 2022 period!
! mark two – May not be best written story BUT… it simply grabs and mesmerises you from opening frame to the last so script fused with acting- could it be first film win adapted screenplay enhanced by seemless blending of not just Cruises superb performance but even younger supporting actors and ever classy graceful Jennifer Connely and Val Kilmer in arguably one best chameo performances of his career! – in other words the performances ENHANCE the script there NOT many movies that grab you from opening frame right till last – for a 150min run time that is no mean feat..esp nowadays
! mark three – Could we be looking at redefinition of Oscars perception of best picture when it comes to modern blockbusters? snub film so blatantly obviously earnt cinematography HELL it revolutionised next quantum leap of all too common military/ naval/ flying drama it IS COMPARABLE TO WINGS for WINGS was first onset of motion suffice to say first ever oscar winner was setting in air in dogfights! Then Kosinski/ Mcquarrie/ Cruise along with their seemless slick and at times necessarily gritty realistic cinematography amplifying the drama in cockpit to CAMERA MOUNTED ‘jet cam’ actors who REALLY TRAINED some of them cl;early Cruise at front of pack insistence of Kosinski to Capture AS MUCH OF MOST EXTRAORDINARY flying scenes cinema has seen since ‘wings’ even for it time…the commitment and flawless craft seldom blended in a movie and lead to such incredible level of praise by BOTH critics and public.
In end, it is handed greater lattitude, in elevation and flight and speed , The Academy has to TOP GUN MAVERICK status as true contender through oscars stubborn, persistent ignorance- makes already absolutely dime in a dozen brilliant masterpiece of Top Gun Maaverick all more potent and important as as Spielberg says: “The film that is saving Hollywood- be fair i think it more ti save Hollywood crowning awards season from self imploding”
So i supose it nobody fault some of you have wrinkled your nose at generic claim lo and behold danger of a ‘twitter grab’ but all more reason Oscar should think very carefully before they SNUB Top Gun Maverick it gives me mild hope maybe bit more following this revelation.
That Best picture winner MAYBE might be recalibrated where all film making elements of TGM combined with Cruise as Producer being oscar nominated and ‘i owe you’ least 3 times over in his career: “Rain Man, Jerry Maguire and Minority Report”. that Oscar feel film so seemlessly blends all filmmaking elements counts more to picture than cinematography or acting nominations..
However esp IF still very tragically for Hollywood awards season need saving from itself…(THAT is ‘proviso’ Spielberg meant) and ONLY IF IT FEELS THAT WAY WHICH DAMN WELL SHOULD BUT VERY UNLIKELY – it still defies all manner Logic Top Gun Maverick didnt get bloody cinematoraphy, actor for Cruise, Supporting Actor for let be frank MILES TELLER AND Val Kilmer.
Top Gun Maverick win would usher in whole new era and generation established and newer filmmakers who seek be inspired going forward to believe that A SEEMLESSLY NEAR FLAWLESS CINEMA EXPERIENCE can triumph over Awards season DANGEROUS obsession with films largely both big screen and streaming that pander to activist causes that as history proven lead to drastically reduced streaming popularity and public appeal and care in cinemas. But win for Top Gun Maverick WOULD MEAN FAR MORE TO INDUSTRY IF OSCAR HEAVYWEIGHTS AND GUILDS LOOK OUTSIDE THEIR OWN PANDERING SELVES would really galvanise big studios to seek to replicate in cinematic not just box office terms i call ‘modern-traditional filmmaking hollywood’ i KNOW EXACTLY WHAT SPIELBERG MEANT it just shame it was a twitter grab where every word is dissected to nth degree and sentences miscontrued cos of online collusion and obstruction of message by twitrterati hacks.
Kosinski by way has unquestionably rocketed himself with this film ALONE behind his contempories JUST of Jackson, Nolan, Villenue, then KOSINSKI,
IT IS THE 3RD BEST SEQUEL THAT LIKE OTHER 2 IN THIS ORDER :
1. LORD OF THE RINGS THE TWO TOWERS (NOTE EVEN BEFORE ABSOLUTELY STUNNING UNFORGETTABLE EXTENDED EDITION)
2. THE DARK KNIGHT
3. TOP GUN MAVERICK
That exists as standalone in it own right largely not just part of a sequel and admittedly while The Rock 2 and Con air 2 and revival of 90’s to certain degree been reaction big hollywood big budget filmmakers which i champing at bit to see how sequels take shape- esp Rock 2 HUUUGE challenge no Sean Connery? oy how on earth can they top best lines by far he had and moments in original brilliant THE ROCK? BUT IF TOP GUN MAVERICK WINS BEST PICTURE THEN ANY BIG BUDGET SEQUEL OR STANDALONE FILM – (LET SAY COMBINATION EFFECT BE FAIR )LET ALONE ONE WITH 30 YR GAP ALWAYS HUGE GAMBLER PAID OFF WITH DIAMONDS AND RICHES GALOR FOR MAVERICK HERE! ANY BIG BUDGET EVENT SEQUEL MADE VERY WELL WITH QUALITY SCRIPT AND EXCELLENT ACTING AND SOME TRULY STANDOUT MEMORABLE MOMENT ANYTHING IS POSSIBLE ….
“All those superhero and franchise movies…
….A sequel to a 1986 hit doesn’t count as a franchise entry? One that was so highly hyped and frankly retreads much the same ground as the original?
Not when it’s 36 years after the original, it ain’t.
Not when it’s 36 years after the original, it ain’t.
It’s a very good movie but “the Jaws of 2022″ is just….a tad hyperbolic.
Well, a way of not considering it as a franchised / sequel is through the day and night difference in approach from viewers & pundits.
Back then people saw it for what it was: A fun b movie and that’s it.
But now? it’s THE SAVIOR of films and Oscars as well an artistic achievement beyond the technical values (So let’s forget about the miraculously challenging aspects of Avatar 2 or the fact that it sold more tickets because Mr Speilberg & Academy likes Tom who SAVES cinema).
But it’s not a showcase for acting. I’m glad for the film but I’m also glad Tom Cruise didn’t get nominated. His performance was pretty weak, but he’s acted awesome in the past.
I also am glad that most of Hollywood is ignoring his religion and separating the art from the artist
I’m grateful Tom Cruise brought tons of moviegoers back to the theaters for ”Top Gun: Maverick.” And no doubt they’ll return for his next ”Mission: Impossible” sequel. But Cruise is a movie star with the power to get any film made. I wish he’d return to the types of movies that really challenged himself as an actor: like ”Born on the Fourth of July,” ”Jerry Maguire” and ”Magnolia,” all of which earned him Oscar nominations. (I also enjoyed the young Cruise who was willing to play wingman to veterans, like Dustin Hoffman in ”Rain Man” and Paul Newman in ”The Color of Money,” both of whom earned Oscars opposite him.) Everyone knows Cruise can do stunts in action movies, but I want to see him take real emotional risks. Cruise can be such a terrific actor, and it’d be great to see him explore even more of his range..
He’ll eventually retire the action blockbuster lead roles, but for the time being his face is carefully managed on screen, and has been for a decade now. The persona comes with a certain vanity. e.g. look at the way he was shot in Rogue Nation; his films are designed around not breaking the illusion. Once he finally hangs up the stunts and explores character work he can relax into the wrinkles and be less rigid on screen. Best to just let him maximise the action legacy stuff for a few more years and leave the rest for later.
He’ll eventually retire the action blockbuster lead roles, but for the time being his face is carefully managed on screen, and has been for a decade now. The persona comes with a certain vanity. e.g. look at the way he was shot in Rogue Nation; his films are designed around not breaking the illusion. Once he finally hangs up the stunts and explores character work he can relax into the wrinkles and be less rigid on screen. Best to just let him maximise the action legacy stuff for a few more years and leave the rest for later.
And Eyes Wide Shut!!!
His best performance and movie in my opinion. That same year he had Magnolia. Should have been double nominated and win one.
They’re both BP nominees this season 🙂
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/68646e23203ae29577eb8544fed0c61de6d6800ba782901ded74624aab8a2f7d.png
He was actually quite good in American Made a few years back. I would have had him on my top 5 list for that, actually, and even given him an Oscar over Gary Oldman. He was very intense, portrayed exhaustion well. It was kind of a Wolf of Wall Street role.
Huh…it’s almost as if industry revulsion about his Scientology escapades has had an impact on his Oscar prospects since his last nomination nearly 25 years ago.
Yeah, but he’s not the only scientologist in Hollywood and there are also other religions I’m not a fan of.
I don’t believe Jesus is the son of God and I find the idea patently absurd and even harmful. Still, I wouldn’t take my anger out on all Christians.
He’s not just ANY Scientologist. He’s literally the #2 guy in that cult.
I haven’t heard complaints about how he treats stars.
I’ve heard that people like Kirk Cameron can be toxic as Christians because they are proseletyzing to all their co-stars.
There were stories about him on the War of the Worlds set. I think people got a window into his real persona when Katie Holmes literally had to smuggle their child out of his house.
Yeah, but I also get the sense that Tom Cruise might not be fully aware of himself. He’s an intense person. I’d still put him way below domestic abusers. I get the sense it’s more Cruise’s handlers.
Still, if she ever tells her story in more detail, we’d know more.
I read Going Clear and watched the movie as well. It’s pretty much down to “Cruise doesn’t realize Scientology is a scam and truly believes that the Church has made him a literal superior human being” or “Cruise knows it’s a scam and really gets off on the power”. Neither scenario is a great look for him.
Holmes is likely bound by an NDA or non-disparagment agreement as part of the custody deal, but she literally had to smuggle the kid out of the house. Nicole Kidman famously LOST her kids to Scientology.
People who kiss that creep’s ass are deserving of any contempt they get.
I think Spielberg meant and did qualify that Cruise saved the *theatrical* business.
Hollywood produces TV and streaming content as well. Unless old Spielberg thinks Hollywood equates the theatrical movie studios, which would be limited thinking.
And besides, these are Hollywood schmoozing events. Hyperbolic praises are always uttered. Like, “OMG! You look AMAAAAZING!” “Gurrrllll, You SAAAVVVVED Hollywood!”
Exactly what I was thinking. The title of this entry is absolutely misleading and biased. The quote is “You saved Hollywood’s ass… you might have saved theatrical distribution.” (It says a lot about his latest movies)
Everyone is aware of Spielberg’s position regarding the film submissions of streaming services for the oscars. According to Vanity Fair March2, 2019: “In March of last year (2018), he told ITV News “Once you commit to a television format, you’re a TV movie. You certainly, if it’s a good show, deserve an Emmy, but not an Oscar. I don’t believe films that are just given token qualifications in a couple of theaters for less than a week should qualify for the Academy Award nomination.”
Nauseating. It’s a soulless, corporate-fueled, diva-fueled movie for Tom Cruise to prove once more hey, look how manly I am! And the fact this stuff got a screenplay nomination from the Writers Guild…hell, I’d vote for an Uwe Boll classic than TGM.
How fitting that old white men think they are (as always) SAVING something. There will be no saving anything if Millennials and Gen Z aren’t doing the work, because all the olds are gone soon. Get it? It’s all irrelevant if there isn’t a desire for it to exist by those that will actually be here for it. This continual argument has become irrelevant.
I don’t think anything has been saved. A sequel to a blockbuster from the 80s did well at the box office and perhaps gave people a reminder of what movie stars used to do. But that’s it. It’s just a reminder, nothing more. Nostalgic was doing a lot of the heavy lifting. The future is more films like Everything Everywhere. A bit of mix of genre and serious social commentary.
Hey, Hollywood is Saved! Can’t wait for St. Elmo’s Fire: The Golden Years.
“Tom Cruise and Top Gun Maverick Saved Hollywood”
If the Hollywood is as desperate as needing a Top Gun: Maverick save, then it’s game over for it already..!
You don’t look at it from the right angle. if anything, Spielberg took a swipe at superhero overkill. Don’t remember his saying that NWH saved cinema when it actually did in the middle of pandemic.
And how exactly did Tom Cruise save cinema with this mediocre action movie?
Top Gun: Maverick hit cinemas at the end of May, three months later it was available on VOD.
Avatar: The Way of Water made so much more money. And it probably won’t be on VOD next month.
But hey, as Spielberg showed us in that terrible movie The Fabelmans, he loves kissing jocks’ a**es.
It may not be the best movie of the year or even the movie that saved Hollywood however I would re-watch Top Gun: Maverick before I’d ever re-watch 7 of the other 10 best picture nominees I know that. Of the 10 nominees, I only appreciate TÁR and Banshees more.
Spielberg forgot about Avatar 2 and James Cameron. It made twice as much as Top Gun 2 and still making money, 2.2 billion and up as we speak.
But Avatar 2 is not a movie, it’s a video game disguised as a movie.
Top Gun is military porn disguised as a movie and weirdly called art by some people.
And I would agree with that. Not really my type of movie.
Why do you think that if I’m badmouting Avatar at the same time I must be Top Gun fan?
Honestly, the whole “unnamed enemy” thing took me right out of the whole thing.
Never said that, was just agreeing with your take on Top Gun
Oh please, give me a break, even real Avatar haters don’t think like that. Your opinion about it is laughably phony and shallow, try harder, lol. Go argue with people who work in the film industry and see how many think it is a video game.
Damn, my comment above really hit the nerve.
A lot of things you say about film and Oscars are just so foolish. Not worth getting into a silly argument with you. It is just the opposite in terms of who hit whose nerves, dude.
What exactly I said about movies and Oscars was foolish? Tbh, I don’t take Oscars that seriously anymore so if I said something “foolish” recently about them It was very likely intentional. Don’t even remember because it’s not that important to me.
But what exactly I said “foolish” about movies in general? Give me some proof here.
I already explained. I am not going to give you any proof because it has been said.
Just stating a fact. You’re in minority on this, lol. I would take anyone’s opinion from the film industry that nominated Avatar 2 over someone who attempted to Top Gun to Pirates of the Caribbean any day.
???
I compared ‘Top Gun’ to the ‘Pirates of the Caribbean’? Where?
Are you sure you’re talking to the right guy? Or you are just plain drunk?
And to respond to your post overall – yeah, I’m aware that I’m in the minority but still claim the same. Interesting, right? I certainly do not need majority to influence my opinion.
It is ok if you are in minority. No need to be so up and arms about it. Yes, that was someone else that said that, I apologize, but your attitude in general about film is still foolish.
Ok, ok… I will not call Avatar 2 “disguised video game” anymore.
🙁
😉
This from a guy whose life story only made 15 million at the box office!
of course he sees it that way.
Thank God there could never be another Spielberg. One was enough. Shoulda stopped after Duel.
He should’ve retired after Munich, in my opinion. The guy’s lust for winning another Oscar has kept him going.
If Spielberg were a tennis player, he’d be Pete Sampras. A guy with one trick who won because it was an amazing trick. But that trick is boring for the viewer after a while.
Yuss!
Munich was his last great film.
It should have swept the Academy Awards back in 2006.
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/54a4706306c676d7b702649f43cbf0d904c9fb3498cba2a998a08355d4c753e2.png
Um West Side Story was his last great film.
I can’t quite get to great. Almost, so I’d go with very, very, very good, okay, excellent, and in places wonderful, e.g., the balcony scene, “Officer Krupke” and the rumble.
“The Dance at the Gym” and “Cool” are two of the best dance numbers I’ve ever seen in a movie. I wonder which director working today could have lit, shot and cut those two numbers better than Spielberg.
Chazelle? Okay, yes, I’d like to see how he would have gone about shooting those two numbers — with the proviso that he’d have to stick with Justin Peck’s inspired choreography.
I can’t quite get to great. Almost, so I’d go with very, very, very good, okay, excellent, and in places wonderful, e.g., the balcony scene, “Officer Krupke” and the rumble.
“The Dance at the Gym” and “Cool” are two of the best dance numbers I’ve ever seen in a movie. I wonder which director working today could have lit, shot and cut those two numbers better than Spielberg.
Chazelle? Okay, yes, I’d like to see how he would have gone about shooting those two numbers — with the proviso that he’d have to stick with Justin Peck’s inspired choreography.
Right Sasha and everyone i compiled just for you all i welcome feedback both good and bad, what filkms you have in your best 32 and order of them my 32 IN 22 years.
I DID include triogies where were any as one ranking- and extended directors cutrs as i felt they shuld been version out in cinemas + in timeline of 32 in 22 , these extended cuts were released in that period so doesnt just include films only showed in cinemas. I forgot one edit the AVATAR EXTENDED cut is far better than original where i said bAVATAR i really meant the extended version.
NOTE: THIS WAS DAMN HARD LIST TO COMPILE i might do rerelease of them NOTE Top Gun Maverick Rating- far HIGHER than any other oscar winner in Post ROTK – or oscar nominated best picture era.
I welcome your feedback curious your 32/22 since including 2000.
You all inspire me including intruth even my detractors- specifically those who are constrjctive not insulting in their criticism … https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/049d2826ca5c0506b242a4b5f2cdc2357bec5f2b81b874864d0b19bb2c4bb6f0.jpg
Oh nooo i need to rerelease of this i should taken bit more time… before releasing it to you all…I ,missed:
and will have find way to integrate:
The Hobbit: an Unexpected Journey
The 12th Man
The Invisible Man
The Original Taken
Knives Out
uh oh i not sutre i can fit them all in top 32 in 22 lol someone help i welcome your inpuit where i fit it in return with updated list ltr in week. .had feeling someit was bit..off.
But what is SET is top 5 is locked in..surprise surrise in that top 5 is TOP GUN MAVERICK!
I’m glad you went with a lot of the character-driven indie films in the Top 10.
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/c8cc6a6aec0d25a2e66fbc1129806db80c642a5cc2e65a7c6a8819303409892a.gif
lol Chase you soo funny …well see my comment below i admitted: n
The Hobbit: an Unexpected Journey
The 12th Man
The Invisible Man
The Original Taken
Knives Out
and how could i forget Stigg Larssons epic provocative masterpiece adaptation of the ‘MILLENIUM’ trilogy. the ORIGINAL that never needed the Fincher remake which really was just rehash in more modern setting …and quite overrated despite CRaigs outstanding performance.. the ORIGINAL ‘MILLENIUM trilogy’ was enormously engrossing, didnt hold back and was close to pitc perfect filmmaking so yea i gonna have to rerelease update somehow tomorrow or ltr in week fdor you all..maybe some indie-ish films there in it yet 🙂
The success and the hope Top Gun: Maverick brought can not be denied. But it winning so that the voters can make a vital statement through its win? Isn’t that the logic this site has been criticizing in recent years?
On one hand, we are kinda overdue for a big movie to win BP and yeah they used to win very often. On the other hand though, there is still that extra attention that comes when you win BP. Avatar (a bigger movie than Maverick) or Top Gun don’t need that. A film like Banshees (an instant classic imo) could really use that boost. A lot of my friends & family never even heard of CODA before the Oscars and now they love it.
Yeah… that’s a swipe left. TGM just trotted out a dude with severe three quarter-life crisis, basically played into MAGA style nostalgia for “simpler” (re: white cisgender middle age male dominated) times and brought people over 50 into theaters 1-2 times. Avatar, Black Panther, The Batman – all made $770M+ globally (Avatar has made almost 2x as much as TGM) and actually moved the cinematic art and audience experience forward in a meaningful way, not just for Americans but for the global audience. Hollywood needs filmmaking that speaks across cultures, races and generations and brings global audiences into theaters – that’s what saved Hollywood.
Not really. Spiderman brought people back to the theater
What a nauseating quote ! Spielberg should be ashamed of himself.! Spielberg once said that Amistad and Empire of the Sun must not have been any good because they made no money ! Does he really believe that bilge ? By the way Spielberg has made a lot of great movies The Fabelmans is not one of them !
Except that it is.
I know that I am basically fanboying at this point but this:
https://youtu.be/igaXsfQlYy8
If they wanted to Speak To Our Times ™, they should have fought with balloons.
AD readers, I’d like to gather some anecdotal data about your film viewing tendencies and preferences. Could you reply with responses to the following questions?
-How many 2022 releases have you seen so far?
-Of those 2022 titles, how many did you see in theaters?
-How many did you watch via streaming subscriptions?
-How many did you rent (digitally or physically)?
-Other means of viewing?
-Do you prefer watching movies in theaters or at home? Why?
-What’s the biggest barrier to you watching more movies in theaters?
-What have been you favorite theatrical experiences this year?
Total 2022 releases seen so far: 56
In Theaters: 33
Streaming Subscriptions: 19
Rentals: 4
Other: N/A
If I could, I would watch every single movie in theaters. For me, it’s the optimal viewing experience. Big screen, clear projection, surround sound, dark space, no phone distractions, no opportunity to “pause” and be taken out of the story, focused viewing.
Biggest barriers to watching more movies in theaters: my personal schedule, which can be quite busy during the fall and winter; the 90 minute round trip drive to arthouse cinemas; and the increasingly short theatrical release schedules for many films.
Favorite theatrical experiences this year:
–Titanic (25th Anniversary Re-release)
–Top Gun: Maverick
–Nope
–TÁR
–Barbarian
–The Batman (IMAX)
This is my list best to worst, and what I watched in theaters. Asterisk means I watched it in theaters:
1. Top Gun: Maverick*
2. Amsterdam
3. Triangle of Sadness (tried hard to watch it at the Middleburg Film Festival but didn’t make it in time)
4. RRR
5. Women Talking* (Film Festival)
6. Vengance
7. Where the Crawdads Sing*
8. Armageddon Time* (Film Festival)
9. Fabelmans*
10. Deep Water
11. Metal Lords
12. The Bubble
13. Luck
14. Death on the Nile*
15. Rosaline
16. Greatest Beer Run Ever
17. Do Revenge
18. The Batman*
19. The Valet
20. The Lost City
21. Enola Holmes 2
22. Glass Onion: A Knives Out Sequel
23. The Bad Guys
24. Hotel Transylvania 4
25. I Used to be Famous
26. Emily the Criminal
27. Windfall
28. The Hustle
29. Elvis*
30. Dr Strange and the Multiverse* (with drugs in my system!)
31. Everything Everywhere All at Once (on an airplane intermittingly)
32. The Whale* (film festival)
33. Don’t Worry Darling
34. Spiderhead
35. Banshees of Inisherin
36. The Adam Project
37. Senior Year
38. Master
39. Interceptor
40. I Came By
41. Marry You
-How many 2022 releases have you seen so far?
33
-Of those 2022 titles, how many did you see in theaters?
14
-How many did you watch via streaming subscriptions?
5
-How many did you rent (digitally or physically)?
0
-Other means of viewing?
Screeners; airplane
-Do you prefer watching movies in theaters or at home? Why?
Prefer theaters and normally I would have seen at least three quarters of the above that, but COVID and time constraints got in the way this year; I like to watch on the biggest screen possible and some films work better when seen with other people
-What’s the biggest barrier to you watching more movies in theaters?
See above
-What have been you favorite theatrical experiences this year?
EEAaO, Nope, God’s Country, Bullet Train, TÁR, The Batman, Wakanda Forever
I will try and answer as best as I can (I know these numbers don’t add up, I did this weirdly in pieces where I first counted the amount of films and then started counting the types of viewing and that was not a good approach as a few that I assume I calculated correctly for the general amount don’t seem to be in any group, there are a few shorts which should explain most of this but otherwise I’m not sure where the missing few films go) for first viewing of a film:
Total 2022 releases (by US release date) seen so far: 104
In theaters (regular release): 28
In theaters (festival screenings): 22
Streaming subscriptions: 17
Disc: 4
Rental: 2
Screener: 26
Online festival screening: 1
Preferences: always theatrical, home viewing is a bad excuse that we all use because it’s somewhat necessary. Barriers to the theatrical experience: mostly to me it’s a question of availability in relation to the films I did see. Many films that I want to see either go directly to streaming or were simply not released around here, and thus the handful of screeners I get are a lifeline in terms of a lot of the important films of the year. As for the things I didn’t see, I mostly blame timing issues and the fact that I have a good repertory theater near me (which means that I often just go see older movies there instead). As for my favorite theatrical experience of the year, I for some reason think of a festival screening of The Banshees of Inisherin, where the audience was very much into the movie. Otherwise I’ve mostly appreciated the rather intimate-feeling moviegoing experiences of the year (in particular After Yang, Crimes of the Future and The Novelist’s Film).
My favorite theatrical experience of the year is All Quiet on the Western Front.
It showed, as few war movies have done for me, that war is
(1) the men (and, nowadays, women) around you trying to survive (a) often horrendous living conditions and (b) the bullets coming at you, and
(2) when there’s a lull in the fighting, wondering what’s over the next hill, which is more likely than not coming to kill you.
That’s it. War as it’s being fought has no other horizons or hopes. I’ve gotten the same feeling from two other war movies: 1917 and Paths of Glory.
Other favorite theatrical experiences this year:
-Blonde
-Till
-Close
Good movies can be (1) epic or (2) up-close-and-personal. That’s one of the greatest features of the medium: its scope can be radically extensive or intensely concentrated, sometimes within the same movie, within the same scene, even within the same shot.
Movies seen in 2022:
Theatrically:
The 355
Scream
Death on the Nile
Uncharted
The Batman
Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness
Top Gun Maverick
Jurassic World Dominion
Lightyear
Bullet Train
Black Adam
Black Panther: Wakanda Forever
Avatar: The Way of Water
Streaming:
Everything Everywhere All At Once
Tar
The Northman
Ambulance
Elvis
RRR
Do Revenge
Emily The Criminal
Not Okay
Weird: The Al Yankovich Story
Sonic 2
Prey
Samaritan
The Princess
Glass Onion: A Knives Out Mystery
Depends on where it’s showing, my schedule and if it interests enough to see on the big screen.
Best theater experience probably Black Panther Wakanda Forever with some great emotion for scenes.
-How many 2022 releases have you seen so far?
33
-Of those 2022 titles, how many did you see in theaters?
14
-How many did you watch via streaming subscriptions?
5
-How many did you rent (digitally or physically)?
0
-Other means of viewing?
Screeners; airplane
-Do you prefer watching movies in theaters or at home? Why?
Prefer theaters and normally I would have seen at least three quarters of the above that, but COVID and time constraints got in the way this year; I like to watch on the biggest screen possible and some films work better when seen with other people
-What’s the biggest barrier to you watching more movies in theaters?
See above
-What have been you favorite theatrical experiences this year?
EEAaO, Nope, God’s Country, Bullet Train, TÁR, The Batman, Wakanda Forever
I have no desire to count.
Biggest obstacle to seeing more movies in theaters.
Access!
I have no desire to Trek into downtown Philly to go and see all the foreign films and art films I would love to see. Sure, I could go to Bryn Mawr Institute but that place is extremely uncomfortable.
The problem is that certain theaters get a monopoly on certain films and the suburban megaplexes with their 20 screens can’t show them as result. It’s not like they would be huge successes, but I find it hard to believe that a movie like Close wouldn’t sell more tickets than Missing in its fifth week. Or that a major transportation hub like King of Prussia wouldn’t be easier to reach.
My favorite theatrical experience is Triangle of Sadness (saw it three times in a theater).
It really needs to be seen on a big screen – gorgeous cinematography, gorgeous actors, etc… 🙂
I will try and answer as best as I can (I know these numbers don’t add up, I did this weirdly in pieces where I first counted the amount of films and then started counting the types of viewing and that was not a good approach as a few that I assume I calculated correctly for the general amount don’t seem to be in any group, there are a few shorts which should explain most of this but otherwise I’m not sure where the missing few films go). For first viewing of a film:
Total 2022 releases (by US release date) seen so far: 103
In theaters (regular release): 28
In theaters (festival screenings): 22
Streaming subscriptions: 17
Disc: 4
Rental: 2
Screener: 25
Online festival screening: 1
Preferences: always theatrical, home viewing is a bad excuse that we all use because it’s somewhat necessary.
Barriers to the theatrical experience: mostly to me it’s a question of availability in relation to the films I did see. Many films that I want to see either go directly to streaming or were simply not released around here, and thus the handful of screeners I get are a lifeline in terms of a lot of the important films of the year. As for the things I didn’t see, I mostly blame timing issues and the fact that I have a good repertory theater near me (which means that I often just go see older movies there instead).
As for my favorite theatrical experience of the year, I for some reason think of a festival screening of The Banshees of Inisherin, where the audience was very much into the movie. Otherwise I’ve mostly appreciated the rather intimate-feeling moviegoing experiences of the year (in particular After Yang, Crimes of the Future and The Novelist’s Film).
My favorite theatrical experience of the year is All Quiet on the Western Front.
It showed, as few war movies have done for me, that grunt level warfare involves:
(1) the men (and, nowadays, women) around you trying to survive (a) often horrendous living conditions and (b) the bullets coming at you, and
(2) when there’s a lull in the fighting, wondering what’s over the next hill, which may be coming to help you or to kill you, you can never be sure which.
That’s it. War as it’s being fought has no other horizons or hopes. Strategy and tactics aren’t in the hands of the individual soldier. I’ve gotten the same feeling from two other war movies: Paths of Glory and 1917.
Other favorite theatrical experiences this year, all of them more up-close-and-personal (with, for sure, larger social relevance):
-Blonde
-Till
-Close
Good movies can be (1) epic or (2) up-close-and-personal. That’s one of the greatest features of the medium: its scope can be radically extensive or intensely concentrated, sometimes within the same movie, within the same scene, even within the same shot. Novels, plays, poetry, opera and ballet don’t have the same means for telling a story or revealing character. They do those things in other ways.
Great to see Till mentioned!
I cannot disclose the numbers but I go to the movies a lot less since I have a projector and can watch them at home on a large white wall. It’s not exactly the same experience as watching them in a theater but close enough for me and it’s much more convenient as I don’t have to worry about traffic, screening times or the cleanliness of seats.
I do pay attention to release dates at the end of the year to make sure I catch those films that may not make it online in time for the simulated ballot deadline, and if there’s a film I really can’t wait to see I’ll catch it in a theater too but it only happened once or twice last year.
We have very similar approaches.
I’m not going to answer all of these. 🙂 The total so far is 42. And I will say I prefer to watch some types of movies in theaters and some at home. Entirely dependent on the type of movie. I don’t like to watch certain movies with other people. Like, movies where I’m likely to get teary-eyed, musicals, maybe comedies… I’d much rather watch most of those alone, at home.
Biggest barrier… Budget, probably. 🙂 Also time and availability. Favorite experience is between The Fabelmans and Avatar: The Way of Water, and I can’t decide. I like the former more as a movie but the latter was probably more impressive to watch in the cinema, for obvious reasons.
My wife and I had such a great time seeing Titanic in theaters over the weekend. It’s the perfect epic, and pop filmmaking at its finest, and it still holds up after 25 years. The entire theatrical experience brought me back to 1998 when I saw it in theaters for the first time when I was 9 years old. A truly seminal film in my development as a cinephile. And I still have a huge crush on Kate Winslet.
Same, I was 9 too and it remains the most impactful cinema viewing of my life.
“Geez. You guys act like it was Benji or something”, said my 9 year old self.
Great story! I saw it when I was 11 and dragged my family to it instead of “Tomorrow Never Dies” – my little brother hated me for weeks because he wanted to see the Bond Movie lol
“You might have saved theatrical distribution.”
This I can agree with. Not saving movies or Oscars but theatrical distribution in some way.
Of course I still fully believe that future is digital and theater going has gone the way of record label, something which (sadly) a lot of fans including our great Sasha and this director refuse to accept (who has been so against digital releases that even fights to delay digital release of his films and if I’m not mistaken really fought to prevent Roma from winning BP).
With that beautiful statement, Steven Spielberg acknowledges the power of Tom Cruise and now Top Gun Maverick is poised to win at the PGA and DGA! Spielberg essentially forfeited the DGA. However, Tom Cruise didn’t direct Top Gun. He acted and of course produced it and was the driving force behind it. Him and Christopher McQuarrie. But nowhere is Joseph Kosinski mentioned.. That would be interesting. Although talented, Kosinski doesn’t have the gravitas of Tom Cruise. So, the question is – can he win the DGA?!
Nope!
Nice to see them getting along after their rumored tension.
Thanks for bringing back the upvote!
Avatar: The Way of Water 2.2 billion
Top Gun: Maverick 1.4 billion
I’m no mathematician, but….
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/8b838a23c508aa7f1c88b99e95c7abf7f25e560922f69c61292d6323baf0c9c0.gif
I thought you were FeelingBlue.
haha There is a difference between Facts and Fanaticism
Yes, absolutely.
This is the perfect example that Hollywood only cares about the domestic box office. Wall Street (on the other coast) cares about International.
It’s not a part of the agenda. Truth or facts are never a part of the agenda.