Follow TV Tropes
Thoughts so far:
Conclusion: 2019 was pretty much a film year. Massive successes and high-quality films, both recognized and ignored were placed left and right. Film overtook 2019 by a longshot, while the Anime medium takes second place and the videogame medium takes third.
Edited by HamanaHamanaHamana on Feb 9th 2020 at 9:27:29 AM
I thought both Klaus and I Lost my Body were absolutely great. Toy Story 4 didn't deserve to win from any of them independently, let alone both combined.
There were a few awards that I felt went haywire. Irishman and Lighthouse getting nothing and Endgame losing best special effects were my biggest pet peeves.
Endgame was pretty much a no-brainer, since it was Disney, but combined with the 2 talented directors, Scorcese and Tarentino, followed by two massive juggernaut films (Parasite and Joker), Endgame felt like it was basically the weakest alongside Rise of Skywalker.
As for Irishman getting nothing, well, Scorcese chose the wrong time to make his film haha. After being crowded with other major films, it looks like this year was unlucky for him. I still love The Irishman nonetheless.
The thing is that a lot of the categories are connected, that's why you tend to see the same five movies nominated for almost everything. Both Star Wars and Endgame had substandard direction and cinematography, so while it had some pretty special effects (due to throwing a lot of money at it) they couldn't compete with movies that had good special effects AND good direction and cinematography.
Engame also has a plot that's 70 percent fanservice involving other movies.
This. Avengers films feel like expensive tv series episodes.
James Rolfe said something similar in one of his Rental Reviews episodes. Specifically, I think, he said they were like modern day theatrical serials.
I have to say. The only award I actually got angry about was Best Animated Feature. Not that I thought You Story 4 was bad, but Klaus was just better to me. Plus did Pixar really need this again.
Edited by Bullman on Feb 10th 2020 at 6:48:52 AM
…I thought a film wasn't allowed to win both Best Film and Best International Film, but apparently not?
I won't complain, Parasite was my favorite movie of 2019, but basically winning the same award twice is a bit iffy.
Why wouldn't they be? Multiple films have been nominated for both. I mean it's just never happened before.
Edited by Bullman on Feb 10th 2020 at 6:55:04 AM
Dammit, I really wanted the speech from Blade Runner to book end the In Memorium. It would have fit so well.
Correct me if I am wrong but I was under the impression that Best International Film was like Best Animation: a separate category treated like the kiddie table, with movies who are considered being forbidden any other type of award (no best actor for international films, no best actress, no best soundtrack...)
That is, Best international is considered a punishment because your movie is not considered from as many angles as it could be if it was US-made thus eligible for others.
Edited by akanesarumara on Feb 10th 2020 at 1:57:31 PM
Oh no you're absolutely right about that, but multiple films have been nominated for both. It's just that until now no film has one both.
It's easy to view things that way, but if the category didn't exist there would be even less acknowledgement of foreign language films at the Oscars. The Academy is ultimately comprised of predominantly Americans who speak English and work in Hollywood, the Oscars really shouldn't be thought of as the standard of international collaboration.
Films nominated for Best Foreign-Language Film (or Best Animated) can still be nominated in other categories, and have been in the past.
Beauty and the Beast and Up were animated movies nominated for Best Picture.
Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon had loads of nominations in other categories (including Best Picture), and a few wins (art direction, original score, cinematography), but didn’t win any of the big categories.
Parasite winning Best Picture as well as screenplay and direction is unprecedented, though.
Edited by Galadriel on Feb 10th 2020 at 8:32:29 AM
I agree with the rest, and I kind of agree with this too, it's just easy to perceive the Oscars as the non plus ultra of movie awards.
As Bong Jon-hoo said it himself, the Oscars are a very local set of awards of limited relevance. Their credibility begins and ends with the fact they're the most popular award of greatest wide-reaching audience (which is why is beyond silly that they snub their noses at so many "popular" films).
The problem is that the oscars made themselves the "non plus ultra" of film awards to the audiences, so it's silly when they suddenly pull the brakes and say "oh no we're just American, no problem". It's a pretty naked attempt at dodging responsibility for a monster of their own making.
Edited by Gaon on Feb 10th 2020 at 5:41:36 AM
Idk if I got the idea from the forums or elsewhere but I'm morbidly curious to see if the character of the Joker takes off as a kind of Oscar Bait material for actors to flex about, which I was talking about with a friend a few weeks ago.
Edited by Nouct on Feb 10th 2020 at 5:56:20 AM
I think people would like it to be a purely objective celebration of the arts, but the award doesn't have the same recognition if there isn't some politics involved. It's because it's so much harder for foreign language films to get nominated that makes it valuable, and Award Bait came about because they saw positive financial returns to just getting a nomination.
It was almost four years ago when The Birth of a Nation (2016), a film about a slave uprising with a predominantly black cast and crew, was generating Oscar buzz right up until it was revealed the director and main actor Nate Parker had a college rape accusation, and everything fell apart (and this was pre-#MeToo). If it was just about the art, such a thing would be ignored too.
I had a friend who told me that The Birth of a Nation (2016) was So Okay, It's Average. That could have something to do with it. Then again I haven't seen it personally. So he might be wrong.
Edited by Bullman on Feb 10th 2020 at 8:24:18 AM
That seems like a very narrow definition of "art". Art involves what goes on behind the camera as well, as no work exists in a vacuum.
If the appeal of the Oscars is thus politics, then the decision to have "the greatest film award in the world" have a "best film" category and a "best foreign film" in which only one film per country in the entire non-American globe can compete is a political statement as of itself about American hegemony and cultural imperialism. In counter-measure, Parasite winning both would also undeniably be a political statement.
Let's also add that only 5 of those "only one of every country in the entire non-Angosphere" even make it to nominations each year.
You may double this count if you count short films, as they have their own international/foreign category too if I remember right.
I mean, one of the literal rules to qualify for an Oscar is to have a two-week run in a California movie theater. If virtually no tickets are bought that alone is a $150,000 investment, which edges out those micro-budget films that have no money to spare.
Thing is too that even though many people mocked the Oscars So White campaign a few years ago, the Academy did admit to trying to diversify their members a little more for the future. It's no surprise that Moonlight won the following year. That is really how this has to go, arbitrary recognition of good foreign films (which sometimes comes across as "this foreign film is better than all the slop you guys make") is less important than being more inclusive and collaborative with filmmakers around the world. It will be interesting to see how Parasite might change things.
Community Showcase More
How well does it match the trope?