What Movie Did You Watch This Weekend?

[kathy]

"Life with Father"
So we are watching similar types of movie lately. We saw "Cheaper by the Dozen a couple weeks ago.
"Life with Father was just okay. I don require a intricate plot for films, particularly when they are more about the characterization. There wasn't a huge plot here and it was a bit light and fluffy except for one part that was really heavy and then completely glossed over. I found both the main characters played by Irene Dunne and Clifton Webb to be distasteful.  I understand that the play was written in the 1st 3'd of the 20th century and that is was about people in the late 1900's but both seemed over the top though i did appreciate his unwillingness to get baptized and was surprised to find that plot line in a movie from this time period. Even the Elizabeth Taylor character was grating.

Gosh, I loved the film 'Life with Father'.  I think anything with William Powell and Irene Dunne is wonderful anyway.  What actors they had then!  I can't begin to tell how much I loved some.  'Course, I'm a TCM - silents, pre-codes, old movies - fan anyway.  What great movies there were.

kathy

[Lyle (Mooska)]

It's not just over 50% are at least 60,
it's 98% are over 40.

The point being...?

[doodler]

The point is there is no appreciation of a younger person's point of view or interests. So AMPAS represents what the old guys like.

[Jeff Wrangler]

Gosh, I loved the film 'Life with Father'.  I think anything with William Powell and Irene Dunne is wonderful anyway.  What actors they had then!  I can't begin to tell how much I loved some.  'Course, I'm a TCM - silents, pre-codes, old movies - fan anyway.  What great movies there were.

kathy

Me, too. 

[Jeff Wrangler]

The point is there is no appreciation of a younger person's point of view or interests. So AMPAS represents what the old guys like.

And maybe plus one nun, Dolores Hart. 

[Lyle (Mooska)]

The point is there is no appreciation of a younger person's point of view or interests.
So AMPAS represents what the old guys like.

I think Hollywood gears much of its movie-making to the younger person's
point of view or interests which is why a lot of it is dreck, I'd say, but
depending on what you mean by "young person's" view I think I mentioned
what "young people' think in their own Kids and Teen award shows and it
isn't any better.  If you think young people's views are so great then we
should lower the age you can run for President.  (And other offices.)

There have been some recent additions to the Academy, like Abigail Breslin
and Dakota Fanning and Haley Joel Osment who were admitted to the academy
when they weren't even old enough to see some of the pictures they would be
required to vote on.

Also, why is AMPAS singled out to have to be diverse in all areas of award giving.
Are ALL organizations who give out awards that way?  Are film critics a diverse
age group?  Pulitzer Prize committee?  Just asking.

For example, I'd rather have Woody Allen and George Lucas vote on a film award
prize than Lindsey Lohan or Eminem (who does have an Oscar; don't know if he's
an ampas member).

I stated what I think is wrong with their admittance and voting policies and the
older age factor is a symptom of that.

[Lyle (Mooska)]

And maybe plus one nun, Dolores Hart. 

LOL!

[doodler]

Diverse? 2% under 40. What percentage of actors are under 40? I'm not saying it has to be representative according to age... ie: 10% of AMPAS must be under 25, 30% between 26 and 50, 45 % between 51 and 75 and the balance over 75 (or whatever the percentages are.) I'm just saying judging a picture's quality, an actor's performance, the value of a composition is not particularly enhanced with the judge's age and when the VAST majority of judges are middle aged or older, the results are skewed.

And by the way, you only have to be 35 to be POTUS.

[Jeff Wrangler]

Not that I actually give a rat's *ss about the Oscars, but what's wrong with awards being decided mainly/predominantly by people with long experience in the industry rather than by kids who are still wet behind the ears, so to speak?

Seriously, I really don't give a rat's *ss about the Oscars, but I'm just askin'. ...

[doodler]

I don't think someone knows more about a subject just because he's older than I am or LESS because I'm older than he is. And  "good" should never be decided by one narrow segment of society.

[Jeff Wrangler]

I don't think someone knows more about a subject just because he's older than I am or LESS because I'm older than he is. And  "good" should never be decided by one narrow segment of society.

Fair enough in general, I suppose, but you don't work in the movie industry, do you?

Just seems to me that points of view are like *ssholes; everybody has one. But perspective comes with experience, and experience comes with time.

[Lyle (Mooska)]

The take away from what I first wrote about in terms of the ampas members being of
a certain age is the rules by which membership is conferred.  If people are awarded a
lifetime membership it stands to reason that most of the people in the organization will
be older.  So that cannot be a criticism--that they're all old people voting if that is how
the system works is all I'm saying.

Besides, this idea that ampas picks the "wrong" movies all the time is misleading.
I read an article based on the L.A. Times article first printed (it's linked in the
Awards Aftermath thread by someone) and their headline is "Proof That the
Oscars Don't Matter."  It's all based on a supposition that because of the make-up
of the academy, that their decisions are faulty.

Well, I read an article a few years ago where someone put that notion to the test.
They got a group of the people together that were anti-ampas, in makeup, in other
words, lots of women and young people (under 40) and minorities and out gay people etc. --
they got the same number of people that were in ampas at the time from local
colleges in L.A. -- film and theatre departments and such (because most ampas
members are in L.A.) and they gave them all a list of the top six categories for
each year (they went back 25 years) and asked them what they would have cast their
votes for.  Now, the authors of this article freely admitted they thought the results would
be truer to what all the critics keep complaining about and the supposed right choices would
win, or at least better choices-- you know -- the people that think Sideways should have won
or GoodFellas or whatever.  L.A. Confidential.  You know what?  The results were not much
different than what ampas chose anyway.  The most different choices were in the supporting
acting categories, but the films chosen best picture by this group were nearly identical.

So, all this griping about the ampas membership is what it is--griping--and not based on much
fact based ideas, just personal biases.  Unless it's a specific group, like Image, or Glaad or whatever
that is picking choices based on merit for a particular group, you are basically always going to get
a more down the line pick for the top award.  You're not going to get that more daring film
choice that passioante arguers will argue about for eons.

Remember all the non-fact based stuff said when BBM was up for Best Picture.
Oh, liberal Hollywood will vote for the gay movie just because it's gay.  Where
were the facts behind all those statements.

I so wish I could find that article again, because it actually had some research behind it and
not just "ampas is a bunch of old people voting" griping.

When there are 5 choices in the categories to pick from, I would venture to guess that
nothing, or near nothing, gets over 1/2 of the total votes, which means majorities of
people never agree on any category!  I have a couple friends who vote in SAG and BAFTA
and I have never known them to even agree with all the winners as little as 10-20% of the
time!  In the last SAG awards for tv and film, my friend told me, out of about 15 categories,
he only voted for "2" that actually won.   I think this is pretty common even among award
voters.

[doodler]

Not only am I not in the industry, I no longer go to the movies. Haven't seen anything this year, even on dvd. The last film I saw in the theater was Super 8 and it was the only one I saw all year. I used to be an avid movie fan but the older I get, fewer and fewer films entice me and many of those that I might make an effort to see do not play in my area.

[Ennis Del Mark]

I know the following isn't answering the topic question. But the piece IS about movies!  I wrote it for my local paper.  Since we're movie lovers on this thread I thought you might like to see my predictions.  Moderators, forgive me, but I didn't know where else to put it.   

MY ANNUAL OSCAR PREDICTIONS

Believe it or not after the glut of awards given for movies in the last two months, there still is the chance for surprises at this year’s Academy Awards on Sunday, February 26.  There are several foregone conclusions, including wins for Christopher Plummer (“Beginners”) and Octavia Spencer (“The Help”) in the supporting acting categories, some forced banter among presenters, tedious exposition about “the magic of movies” (we KNOW they’re magic, already!), some tacky fashions, and grating shtick from host Billy Crystal and presenter Miss Piggy.  (Was anyone begging for return appearances from these two?  Not me, brother.)

But the show might be bearable if we have a few unexpected outcomes.  Here are some places to look for them:

 

“Hugo” vs. “The Artist.”  This year we have two nomination hogs, “Hugo” with 11, and “The Artist” with

10.  Both are paeans to cinema history, the former a talkie in 3-D and color, the latter a silent in glossy black-and-white.  That “The Artist” is a silent and so different from the other nominees gives it the edge.  The films are pitted against each other in seven categories so unless voters get lazy and throw everything one film’s way it might be like a tennis match, toting up the wins for each film.

 

Meryl Streep (“The Iron Lady”) vs. Viola Davis (“The Help”).  This one has been a tennis match, with both actresses being almost equally showered with prior awards for their nominated performances.   Since “The Help” was such a huge success and “The Iron Lady” isn’t—it’s only notable for Streep’s sterling portrayal of Margaret Thatcher--it would seem that Davis has the edge.  Or does she?  Or will both lose to a possible dark horse, Glenn Close, for “Albert Nobbs”?   

 

George Clooney (“The Descendants”) vs. Jean Dujardin (“The Artist”).  Another close race in which both front-runners could lose to a dark horse nominee, in this case Brad Pitt for “Moneyball.”  My choice is Clooney, who was wonderful in “The Descendants,” my favorite film of 2011, but the heretofore unknown but gaining more recognition daily Dujardin can’t be underestimated. 

 

Animated Feature:  Most agree that “Rango” is unbeatable but if enough voters found the film’s look a tad creepy (as did I) they may go for the jazzy “Chico & Rita.”   

 

Director:   Woody Allen and Alexander Payne will be compensated by victories for their screenplays, Allen, original for “Midnight in Paris,” and Payne, adapted for “The Descendants.”  This leaves the race between, once again, “Hugo” (Martin Scorsese) and “The Artist” (Michel Hazanavicius).   I think the voters will go with Scorsese, unless Hazanavicius loses his two other nominations (original screenplay and editing) or “The Artist” is an awards hog.

 

Documentary Short:  It would be great if the Academy honored “God is the Bigger Elvis,” about the pretty and talented actress, Dolores Hart, who left Hollywood in 1963 to become a nun, but in this category the graver the subject matter, the better chance the film will win, so Mother Dolores’ happy life in the convent probably won’t result in a victory for “her” film.  I hope it does.

 

MY OFFICIAL PREDICTIONS ON WHOM/WHAT I THINK WILL WIN, PLUS WHAT I THINK WILL WIN IF MY FIRST INSTINCTS ARE WRONG:

PICTURE:  The Artist (Hugo)

ACTOR:  George Clooney  (Brad Pitt)

ACTRESS:  Viola Davis  (Meryl Streep)

SUPPORTING ACTOR:  Christopher Plummer  (nobody; Plummer is a shoo-in)

SUPPORTING ACTRESS:  Octavia Spencer  (nobody; Spencer is also unbeatable)

DIRECTOR:  Martin Scorsese (Michel Hazanavicius)

ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY:  Midnight in Paris (The Artist)

ADAPTED SCREENPLAY:  The Descendants  (Hugo)

CINEMATOGRAPHY:  The Tree of Life (The Artist)

ART DIRECTION:  Hugo (The Artist)

MAKEUP:  The Iron Lady (Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2)

VISUAL EFFECTS:  Hugo (Rise of the Planet of the Apes)

COSTUME DESIGN:  The Artist  (Jane Eyre)

FILM EDITING:  Hugo (The Descendants)

SOUND MIXING:  Hugo (War Horse)

SOUND EDITING:  Hugo (Drive)

ORIGINAL SCORE:  The Artist (Hugo)

ORIGINAL SONG:  Real in Rio (Man or Muppet)

ANIMATED FEATURE:  Rango (Chico & Rita)

ANIMATED SHORT FILM: La Luna (The Fantastic Flying Books of Mr. Morris Lessmore)

LIVE ACTION SHORT FILM:  Tuba Atlantic (The Shore)

FOREIGN LANGUAGE FILM:  Monsieur Lazhar (A Separation)

DOCUMENTARY SHORT:  The Tsunami and the Cherry Blossom (Saving Face)

DOCUMENTARY FEATURE:  Pina (Paradise Lost 3: Purgatory)

 

[ingmarnicebbmt]

Lyle, you're so LUCKY!!  Knowing all those famous people.  I had to see the movie all by myself.

LOL