|
Post by sgev1977 on Aug 7, 2021 15:02:47 GMT
He says he is based his predictions in rumors! And yeah, the rumor on award pundits sites is that Tick, Tock, Boom… will be huge for Netflix. Someone on Gold Derby who says has contacts with insiders says Tick, Tock… and TPOTD are Netflix priorities this year and that surprisingly they don’t think a film with Leonardo DiCaprio and Meryl Streep will be relevant for awards because it’s just a very light comedy; another guy on Reddit who also says has contacts with insiders at Netflix says the priorities are Tick, Tock… and Don’t Look Up (Leo’s film) and that TPOTD is just too disturbing and difficult to sell. Maybe this guy’s contacts are the same of the latter guy! Lol
It’s still too early but based on facts, TPOTD has the advantage until now because it’s the one in the line-up of all major Fall festivals. I can understand why Netflix wouldn’t be worried to sent Don’t Look Up to festivals: It’s allegedly an accesible comedy with huge movie stars. It just doesn’t need them; but until now Tick, Tock.. isn’t in any festival neither. Those guys think it will go to Telluride and who knows? Maybe NYFF will included it although it doesn’t seem their kind of film but it’s a film about New York (I think!) so who knows… I saw a tweet that suggested it isn’t finished yet but there is a trailer out there for months and if it could be ready for Telluride then it could be ready for the other festivals, too! Anyway, we will see!
I quickly checked the other day for recent films that were in multiple festivals and how they were received. I think the “weakest” film I found was Olivier Assayas‘ Wasp Network. Surely, there are others! I watched that film at the time and it seemed to me a very conventional kind of superficial and forgettable thriller based on real events. It is a Netflix original (I forgot included it in my list about Netflix films in festivals!) and it went to Venice, Toronto and NYFF (not as a centerpiece nor opening or closing film, though) so it only needed Telluride to emulate Roma, Marriage Story and, presumably, TPOTD.
|
|
|
Post by sgev1977 on Aug 7, 2021 15:12:46 GMT
CODA seems a very lightweight movie, too. But that actually could help with the Academy. It also is a “progressive” movie because its cast and the theme and it seems Marlee Matlin is already campaigning!
|
|
|
Post by sgev1977 on Aug 7, 2021 20:23:14 GMT
I had written a post about Davis new predictions but I don't know why it disappeared. He changed the predictions (if you click on the tweets from before you can see them) and now Jane Campion is 8th and The Power of The Dog is not even between the first ten. I guess BC will be dropped next. It must be true that you can't take his predictions seriously. The article hasn’t been edited but it seems BC is still in his second place. He just changed the actor in the first spot! Kirsten Dunst is now on third in supporting, Jesse Plemons disappeared but Jane Campion is predicted in adapted script and Johnny Greenwood in original score. I think it’s hysterical that with the exception of one, all the predicted original songs are called “Unknown possible song”! In other words, I don’t have any idea about them but I’m sure these unknown possible non-existing songs will be nominated!
|
|
|
Post by MagdaFR on Aug 7, 2021 20:56:53 GMT
I just saw it.
I think they're now in alphabetical order.
In actor he changed Denzel Washington for Dinklage.
Yes, it is incredible.
|
|
|
Post by sgev1977 on Aug 7, 2021 21:03:55 GMT
You are right it’s in alphabetical order so only BC and Dunst remain in the main categories.
It was weird that Washington wasn’t there the last time. I mean it’s Denzel Washington playing Macbeth!!! But there is a rumor that the movie was rejected by Venice and award pundits were deciding that it was a bad film last week! Lol
I see that the source of that gossip is now claiming that someone who watched was perplexed by the rejection (a fact now!) because it’s not that bad, it’s just “kooky”
|
|
|
Post by MagdaFR on Aug 7, 2021 21:18:35 GMT
CODA seems a very lightweight movie, too. But that actually could help with the Academy. It also is a “progressive” movie because its cast and the theme and it seems Marlee Matlin is already campaigning! I saw many critics praising it.
I find funny that some people are saying that The Power of Th Dog and BC's role are the baitest for the Oscars. I guess they know nothing about the novel.
Without having seen it Coda seems more like Oscar bait. And what about House of Gucci or Don't Look Up full of stars (and horrible wigs and transformative performances). Leonardo DiCaprio looked good.
Indiewire already made an article about shocking actor trnsformations, most of them were just good make up, some were really the actors who have changed, like Christian Bale.
I think they must receive some kind of incentives to write the articles. They obviously receive screeners or are shown the movies but some of these sites have ads.
|
|
|
Post by sgev1977 on Aug 7, 2021 22:11:48 GMT
They not just ignore the novel but also Jane Campion’s work! She isn’t an easy filmmaker! Who knows? maybe it’s because she is a woman or because she clearly likes (and viceversa) Hollywood actors that she is somehow interpreted as Oscar friendly but she isn’t!
Also some Kirsten Dunst fans are selling the book like Oscar friendly when it’s not. I saw a guy posting everywhere how he had read the book and that it was potentially divisive because the difficult themes on it: self-hating homophobia but also, he claims, implicit incest between the brothers and later between the uncle and a possible minor (step) nephew. A Dunst fan quickly said that it was a complete lie but the guy didn’t say “explicit” but “implicit”. I mean, I didn’t interpreted the book like there was really something sexual between the brothers. Clearly, they were very priggish in their relationship (I think the book mentions they never took their clothes off in front of each other. Actually, you never show yourself naked in front of another man so even in that there was something sexual and, obviously, that’s why Phil swimming completely nude is so liberating for him) but at the same time, they have a very odd relationship: they sleep at the same small kids room in a huge ranch with big empty rooms and, at some point, they sleep on the same bed. I just can’t see someone like Campion ignoring such a bizarre behavior or “whitewashing” it. She has a short that includes a very explicit sexual relationship between two siblings and then there is an almost comical but very twisted scene in which the disturbed Sweetie baths her old father in a very suggestive way. Those kind of sick scenes are right up her alley!
The transformative performance concept is a fraud. Most people don’t know what it means. They think it’s about not recognizing an actor so wings and makeup are a big deal.
|
|
|
Post by sgev1977 on Aug 8, 2021 2:17:55 GMT
OK. I deeply searched for films that were included in the 4 festivals in the last 10 years (Venice, Telluride, NYFF and Toronto). They are actually very few but it’s something more frequent in recent years. NYFF seems to prefer Cannes movies than the ones from Venice and Toronto shows too many films! I think that probably isn’t great for the quality but I bet is the funniest festival and the most diverse because you can watch almost any kind of film! 2020 Nomadland, Metacritic 93%, RT 94%, 6 Oscar nominations and 3 wins including Best Picture, Golden Lion and others, en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_accolades_received_by_NomadlandNotturno, Metacritic 75%, RT 82%, Italian entry for best foreign film in the Oscars. It wasn’t selected. 2019 Marriage Story, Metacritic 94%, RT 94%, 6 Oscar nominations and 1 win, more awards: en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_accolades_received_by_Marriage_Story2018 Non-Fiction Metacritic 78%, RT 87% Roma Metacritic 96%, RT 95%, 10 Oscar nominations and 3 wins. More awards, en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_accolades_received_by_Roma2011 A Dangerous Method Metacritic 76%, RT 78%. It seems it wasn’t nominated to the Oscars but it won a few awards and was in multiple critics’ best of the year lists, en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Dangerous_MethodShame Metacritic 72%, RT 79% No Oscars but again multiple awards and listed by a lot of critics in their Best of the year lists, en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shame_(2011_film)I hate Metacritic and RT because they are about consensus and that’s not always the right measure. I think a clear example is the last two films: both actually very well received but about sex so Americans weren’t destined to love them! Those numbers are still good, doesn’t? Nomadland, Marriage Story and Roma are also Centerpiece at the NYFF like TPOTD and the last two are also Netflix films. So yeah, very promising and hopefully TPOTD isn’t different to these films!
|
|
|
Post by sgev1977 on Aug 8, 2021 15:55:17 GMT
Another point of discussion between Oscar fanboys is about Dunst being lead or supporting. I, of course, don’t know what Campion did with the adaptation but solely based on the source material, I would say supporting. I mean the book spends a lot of time with her character and with Jesse Plemons’ character that you can say that all of them along Phil and possible Peter are leads. Who knows? Maybe if you count the lines, their characters are a little longer there than Phil but Phil is just EVERYTHING within the plot and those two are just very passive and reactive characters. Someone said that the plot is about Phil vs Rose but that’s not true, the first part is about Phil tormenting Rose and later, Peter vs Phil. Those two are the ones confronting each other. She is just a passive victim. That doesn’t mean is a bad character. It’s not! At all! It’s a great one! A weak harmless well-intentioned woman who somehow is seen as a threat by an evil man and tormented into alcoholism but it’s just not the usual strong female lead from Jane Campion’s filmography. She doesn’t do the actions, she reacts to them. In that sense, she is supporting and again, I don’t understand how the apparently absence of her first husband is an indication of her character beefed up to co-lead because if anything, she lost half of her story and now is everything about the brothers or more exactly, about Phil. I think her performance will be similar but maybe slightly more complex (because the alcoholism) than what she did in The Beguiled. She is an innocent woman who has to react to the craziness of those twisted characters around her. I guess the point in her favor (for being lead, again her character is actually wonderful!), is that the movie is directed by Jane Campion and I’m sure her influence will be seen on the screen version of the character but Campion has been saying for ages that this is her first film lead by a man. Quotes taken from this forum, variety.com/2019/film/news/benedict-cumberbatch-elisabeth-moss-jane-campion-power-of-the-dog-1203205974/www.screendaily.com/features/jane-campion-on-why-she-returned-for-a-second-series-of-top-of-the-lake/5130092.articlewww.theguardian.com/film/2018/may/20/jane-campion-unconventional-film-maker-macho-forcewww.ewawomen.com/interviews/interview-with-jane-campion/www.repubblica.it/spettacoli/cinema/2019/06/29/news/jane_campion-229927068/(She actually didn’t say anything about a male protagonist in this one but she says she appreciate that someone of BC’s caliber wanted to work with her. That’s like the biggest praise ever so…. 😉) www.ansa.it/sito/notizie/cultura/cinema/2019/06/29/jane-campion-metoo-come-fine-apartheid_3a508862-9cc6-4801-941b-db0c9cd67263.htmlwww.rac101.it/jane-campion-chiude-il-cinema-ritrovato-2019-insegnare-a-fare-il-cinema-e-impossibile/focus.knack.be/entertainment/film/jane-campion-27-jaar-na-the-piano-nog-altijd-de-enige-vrouw-met-gouden-palm-ben-het-kotsbeu/article-longread-1625893.html?utm_medium=social_knack&utm_source=Twitter&cookie_check=1596722437So we will see but I actually think she would have a bigger chance of getting an Oscar nomination (that’s what her fans want!) or even a win if she is supporting than lead. The movie would need to have a big impact with awards, tho. It’s still very early! I just don’t think that if Campion follows the book (and her own words) would be category fraud if she is considered supporting and not lead. (I just wanted to make a resume of Campion’s interviews before the new ones! 😉)
|
|
|
Post by roverpup on Aug 8, 2021 21:26:00 GMT
Sgev said - "Another point of discussion between Oscar fanboys is about Dunst being lead or supporting. I, of course, don’t know what Campion did with the adaptation but solely based on the source material, I would say supporting. I mean the book spends a lot of time with her character and with Jesse Plemons’ character that you can say that all of them along Phil and possible Peter are leads. Who knows? Maybe if you count the lines, their characters are a little longer there than Phil but Phil is just EVERYTHING within the plot and those two are just very passive and reactive characters. Someone said that the plot is about Phil vs Rose but that’s not true, the first part is about Phil tormenting Rose and later, Peter vs Phil. Those two are the ones confronting each other. She is just a passive victim. That doesn’t mean is a bad character. It’s not! At all! It’s a great one! A weak harmless well-intentioned woman who somehow is seen as a threat by an evil man and tormented into alcoholism but it’s just not the usual strong female lead from Jane Campion’s filmography. She doesn’t do the actions, she reacts to them. In that sense, she is supporting and again, I don’t understand how the apparently absence of her first husband is an indication of her character beefed up to co-lead because if anything, she lost half of her story and now is everything about the brothers or more exactly, about Phil."
Good jumping off point for discussions...
Well if she goes strictly by the book then the only lead character is Phil IMO. His character is the lynchpin for all other characters every plot line revolves around Phil and he influences their actions in profound ways.
I could see an argument to be made that Rose is a lead character as well but just a notch below Phil. The book devotes a lot of time to both Rose and Phil (especially Phil, when you consider that the subject of Phil occupies a lot of Rose's thoughts throughout the story.). Peter and George seem a distanced third to me (George because he is so taciturn and Peter is absent for large sections of the book).
Although George's action of bringing Rose to live at the ranch as his wife precipitates the overriding story arc of Phil's "war" with Rose, the story depends totally on Phil's reaction.
And as for Peter, he is more or less an instrument of Rose (definitely not directed by Rose, but his whole nature is fated to be what Rose needs to "win" over Phil, by who he is as a child of Rose - it's all in his backstory).
The protagonist is the character whose fate is most closely followed by the reader or audience and in this story it's got to be Phil. The story ends when Phil dies because all the of people aren't important enough to care about as to what happens next to their character.
Rose is the "victim". She is the one being hunted down by the powerful "dog". In a way she is an antagonist because she does fulfill the role of someone who vexes the key character but she doesn't do it with any overt motivation in mind. She is a passive character to be sure, but we spend so much time in her psych, that it's hard to not identify with her predicament.
Peter is definitely the main antagonist (who is not always a villain or opponent) - a character provided for the purpose of thwarting or vexing the protagonist. In some narratives, the protagonist is a villain and the antagonist is an opposing hero. Peter is comparable in some ways to Macduff in the Scottish play. Important role to be sure, but then there's a reason the play's not titled "Macduff".
And of course Phil's character is very complex so it defies easy definition. He is is a "victim" as well. There is so much repression and "false fronts" being put up, it could sink a battle ship!
If John isn't a part of the plot ut will change some of the dynamics but that may streamline some things and allow other aspects to be more fully explored.
|
|