Author Topic: 2009 Awards That Are Not Filmspots.  (Read 50232 times)

ˇKeith!

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 26774
  • Bitch, I been around since LimeWire.
Re: 2009 Awards That Are Not Filmspots.
« Reply #10 on: December 04, 2009, 01:21:34 AM »
thats Randal Pink Floyd yr talkin to.

[/Wooderson]

FLYmeatwad

  • An Acronym
  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 28785
  • I am trying to impress myself. I have yet to do it
    • Processed Grass
Re: 2009 Awards That Are Not Filmspots.
« Reply #11 on: December 04, 2009, 09:38:46 AM »
How do you know those movies are bait? Couldn't they be good?

Do you mean to imply that 'bait' films cannot be good? Doubt was your favorite film of last year, correct?

Pink

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 189
Re: 2009 Awards That Are Not Filmspots.
« Reply #12 on: December 04, 2009, 09:58:46 AM »
How do you know those movies are bait? Couldn't they be good?

They could be good, yeah. I liked Up in the Air a lot, and that's Oscar-bait if there ever was one. In general though, I just grow weary of these prestige films paraded out in a trickle at the end of the year. I think most folks roll their eyes when they see a trailer that touts how many involved won Oscars or Golden Globes. It was nice to see some films released earlier this year on the list. Especially genre films, which generally are given little love.

And while probably unfair speculation, I'd put money down that The Hurt Locker, A Serious Man, and Inglourious Basterds are all better than Precious, Nine, or The Lovely Bones.

FLYmeatwad

  • An Acronym
  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 28785
  • I am trying to impress myself. I have yet to do it
    • Processed Grass
Re: 2009 Awards That Are Not Filmspots.
« Reply #13 on: December 04, 2009, 10:03:55 AM »
Well, IB and A Serious Man certainly are better than Precious. Not sure if The Hurt Locker is or not though.

Junior

  • Bert Macklin, FBI
  • Global Moderator
  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 28709
  • What's the rumpus?
    • Benefits of a Classical Education
Re: 2009 Awards That Are Not Filmspots.
« Reply #14 on: December 04, 2009, 10:18:41 AM »
I just don't like the term "bait" because it degrades the movie before anybody even sees it. It implies that the movie was made only to get awards. I doubt (get it?) that Peter Jackson was trying to get an Oscar with The Lovely Bones. He seems like a guy that makes movies because he loves film, not to make a speech.
Check out my blog of many topics

“I’m not a quitter, Kimmy! I watched Interstellar all the way to the end!”

ˇKeith!

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 26774
  • Bitch, I been around since LimeWire.
Re: 2009 Awards That Are Not Filmspots.
« Reply #15 on: December 04, 2009, 10:24:39 AM »
I just don't like the term "bait" because it degrades the movie before anybody even sees it. It implies that the movie was made only to get awards. I doubt (get it?) that Peter Jackson was trying to get an Oscar with The Lovely Bones. He seems like a guy that makes movies because he loves film, not to make a speech.

I think the "bait" term comes in above a directors head - the calculations are on the studio and producer level.

Junior

  • Bert Macklin, FBI
  • Global Moderator
  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 28709
  • What's the rumpus?
    • Benefits of a Classical Education
Re: 2009 Awards That Are Not Filmspots.
« Reply #16 on: December 04, 2009, 10:39:14 AM »
Perhaps, but I don't give a shit about that stuff.
Check out my blog of many topics

“I’m not a quitter, Kimmy! I watched Interstellar all the way to the end!”

Pink

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 189
Re: 2009 Awards That Are Not Filmspots.
« Reply #17 on: December 04, 2009, 10:41:35 AM »
I just don't like the term "bait" because it degrades the movie before anybody even sees it. It implies that the movie was made only to get awards. I doubt (get it?) that Peter Jackson was trying to get an Oscar with The Lovely Bones. He seems like a guy that makes movies because he loves film, not to make a speech.

I see your point. Same could be said for a "summer" movie. But at the end of the day, these movies are not degraded because of this status.  They will get more money, a wider audience, and greater critical emphasis (if not reception). I just have grown cynical to the process and was happy to see other kinds of movies on the NBR list.

ˇKeith!

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 26774
  • Bitch, I been around since LimeWire.
Re: 2009 Awards That Are Not Filmspots.
« Reply #18 on: December 04, 2009, 11:06:42 AM »
Perhaps, but I don't give a shit about that stuff.

sure, but its a bonafied way to market a film - slow roll out release pattern, previously nominated cast & crew, based on well regarded middle-brow source material.  The studio would call it a "prestige picture" but with so many of them in the water they act more like chum for the oscar shark.

Bill Thompson

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 17561
  • DOOM!!!!
    • Bill's Movie Emporium
Re: 2009 Awards That Are Not Filmspots.
« Reply #19 on: December 04, 2009, 03:23:38 PM »
I just don't like the term "bait" because it degrades the movie before anybody even sees it. It implies that the movie was made only to get awards. I doubt (get it?) that Peter Jackson was trying to get an Oscar with The Lovely Bones. He seems like a guy that makes movies because he loves film, not to make a speech.