Say Hey Kid
War, children, it's just a shot away
- "American Fiction"
- "Anatomy of a Fall"
- "Barbie"
- "The Holdovers"
- "Killers of the Flower Moon"
- "Maestro"
- "Oppenheimer"
- "Past Lives"
- "Poor Things"
- "The Zone of Interest"
Last edited:
Movies: The 2024 Oscars Thread
- Thread starter Say Hey Kid
- Start date
NyQuil
Big F$&*in Q
I'm confident that the Best Director and Best Picture winners will be Barbie and Oppenheimer but neither film will win both.
I'd wager on Gerwig and Oppenheimer at this point.
I'd wager on Gerwig and Oppenheimer at this point.
John Price
Bet
- Sep 19, 2008
- 373,975
- 24,889
i'm not that kind of bro guy but ain no way Barbie should be best picture
I mean it's not that bad a movie and I think the pushback against it was lame
but let's be real
I mean it's not that bad a movie and I think the pushback against it was lame
but let's be real
I think Oppenheimer is a lock for best picture.
I agree with your predicted winners with one exception. I think this might be Emma Stone's year. And it is a big, showy performance. The Academy prefers acting by the pound. I'd personally give the award to Huller hands down.
I agree with your predicted winners with one exception. I think this might be Emma Stone's year. And it is a big, showy performance. The Academy prefers acting by the pound. I'd personally give the award to Huller hands down.
KallioWeHardlyKnewYe
Hey! We won!
- May 30, 2003
- 15,531
- 3,384
Didn't want to clog up the running movie thread with this. A little surprised there hasn't been a thread yet, but I suspect that's in part because of how uninteresting and undramatic this year's lineup is. Good movies for sure, but not a ton to discuss or dissect or argue about ... unless someone wants to prove me wrong!
Nominees:
www.oscars.org
Trenchant commentary:
Nominees:
2024
www.oscars.org
Trenchant commentary:
KallioWeHardlyKnewYe
Hey! We won!
- May 30, 2003
- 15,531
- 3,384
The headline snubs seem to be Greta Gerwig and Margot Robbie. Not stunned with the former, a little surprised at the latter. Comedy again gets short shrift from voters. Great performance. Conversely it's a little bit of a surprise that America Ferrara is nominated for a bit of a nothing role, though she does get the movie's big speech which undoubtedly was her selling point.
I think there's a good case to be made for Gerwig but when you look at who was nominated for director, it's not like there's a real weak link there.
I still have to knock out four of the 10 best picture nominees, but unlike past years, I genuinely want to see all four movies and don't view it as homework as it's sometimes felt in the past (still never got around to Elvis last year ...).
The Academy again falls all over themselves for showy biopic nonsense with five of the 10 leading acting nominees from biopics. Booooorrrring, though my rooting interest remains with Cillian Murphy. I didn't count Lily Gladstone who is playing a real person but not a famous person.
I think there's a good case to be made for Gerwig but when you look at who was nominated for director, it's not like there's a real weak link there.
I still have to knock out four of the 10 best picture nominees, but unlike past years, I genuinely want to see all four movies and don't view it as homework as it's sometimes felt in the past (still never got around to Elvis last year ...).
The Academy again falls all over themselves for showy biopic nonsense with five of the 10 leading acting nominees from biopics. Booooorrrring, though my rooting interest remains with Cillian Murphy. I didn't count Lily Gladstone who is playing a real person but not a famous person.
John Price
Bet
- Sep 19, 2008
- 373,975
- 24,889
I was waiting for someone to make this, I didn't feel like making it, but yeah Oppenheimer as expected took a lot of nominations as well as Barbie. Good Japanese movie I researched yesterday in the Foreign Films nomination. Going to check out 20 days in Mariupol in Documentary nomination
was also surprised Robbie didn't get nominated for Barbie
Say Hey Kid
War, children, it's just a shot away
Say Hey Kid
War, children, it's just a shot away
The 11 Biggest Snubs and Surprises From the 2024 Oscar Nominations
“There is no Ken without Barbie,” Ryan Gosling said in a statement in response to the nominations. “And there is no Barbie movie without Greta Gerwig and Margot Robbie.”
:max_bytes(150000):strip_icc()/oscar-snubs-and-surprises-012324-e8e0246bb7af4572ae895d248eed5b96.jpg)
The most shocking snubs and surprises of the 2024 Oscar nominations
From "Barbie" director Greta Gerwig and star Margot Robbie to America Ferrera and Sterling K. Brown — check out the biggest snubs and surprises from the 2024 Oscar nominations.
KallioWeHardlyKnewYe
Hey! We won!
- May 30, 2003
- 15,531
- 3,384
DaaaaB's
Registered User
- Apr 24, 2004
- 8,401
- 1,956
I've haven't seen any of the best picture nominees yet so I can't really comment. I did really enjoy Society of the Snow though.
What's so great about Scorsese's direction of Killers of the Flower Moon? If the direction was by Joe Blow, would he have gotten nominated? Scorsese is just getting points for being Scorsese. I would have slotted Gerwig in that spot easily.
Similarly, if Barbie had been directed by Joe Blow, would it still be considered a snub? It seems to me like Gerwig is just getting points for being a woman and having the most popular film of the year. Reading around, that's all the justification that I'm seeing for why she deserved a nomination. For example, the summary underneath the title of this Rolling Stone article reads "Barbie made $1.4 billion and was a cultural phenomenon, yet its director wasn’t nominated. Only eight women have been in its nearly 100-year history." I can't find a single argument for why she deserved a nomination for Best Director that's based on her actual direction. Also, if people are upset that the director of the highest grossing movie of the year wasn't nominated, it seems that they should also be upset at the snubbing of the two male directors of The Super Mario Bros Movie (which made nearly $1.4B, itself) and that nominations were given, instead, to the directors of The Zone of Interest (a measly $1.6M at the box office), Anatomy of a Fall (only $23M at the box office) and Poor Things (only $35M at the box office). There's no outrage over those, though, which just further suggests to me that there isn't good reasoning to be upset in the first place.
Last edited:
GKJ
Global Moderator
- Feb 27, 2002
- 187,240
- 39,278
I haven't seen them, and I intend to, but I'm kinda feeling Barbie getting shutout and everyone getting mad about it all over again.
However, I think a few things are possible and I'd be curious to hear what people think:
-the Academy usually does not ride the pop culture train, if anything they run from it, but gave it more nominations than they otherwise would have because they thought they were supposed to. Given the context of and theme of the movie, it doesn't track that such an accredited authority would nominate it for best picture and best supporting actor and best adapted screen play but not best actress or best director and credibly claim they 'got it' for lack of a better term.
-all the people mad about it are just people who just want to be mad, and their claims of being anti-feminist or whatever else, completely ignoring what is seen (and is) a historic nomination for Lily Gladstone that kills all their arguments dead. It made a billion dollars in box office, but that's never been the benchmark of what the Academy seems as 'the best.' Yes, it got great reviews, and obviously you make a billion dollars, there was a lot of rewatchers, and clearly great marketing, but Marvel and franchises like Fast & Furious made a billion dollars and they never get the A-list nominations either and there's never been any credible complaints even if they tend to remain more culturally relevant.
However, I think a few things are possible and I'd be curious to hear what people think:
-the Academy usually does not ride the pop culture train, if anything they run from it, but gave it more nominations than they otherwise would have because they thought they were supposed to. Given the context of and theme of the movie, it doesn't track that such an accredited authority would nominate it for best picture and best supporting actor and best adapted screen play but not best actress or best director and credibly claim they 'got it' for lack of a better term.
-all the people mad about it are just people who just want to be mad, and their claims of being anti-feminist or whatever else, completely ignoring what is seen (and is) a historic nomination for Lily Gladstone that kills all their arguments dead. It made a billion dollars in box office, but that's never been the benchmark of what the Academy seems as 'the best.' Yes, it got great reviews, and obviously you make a billion dollars, there was a lot of rewatchers, and clearly great marketing, but Marvel and franchises like Fast & Furious made a billion dollars and they never get the A-list nominations either and there's never been any credible complaints even if they tend to remain more culturally relevant.
Of the things I've seen, only thing's I feel stronly about are D'vine Joy Randolph winning for Holdovers. I personally preferred Holdovers over Oppenheimer, and would vote for Giamatti, but Oppenheimer is typical Nolan with heavy Oscar bait. Emma Stone owned Poor Things, although I found that film somewhere between genius and outright intentionally weird. Can't say I'm an exper as I haven't seen every film nominated (for example Barbie). But, from what I saw in theatre this year over multiple films, those were the impressions I left with. Granted, I find Nolan HEAVILY, overrated. I also love Scorsese (Goodfellas and Taxi Driver would be in my top 10), I found Killers of the Flower Moon also dragged and was Oscar bait too.
To quote from another thread, my reasons for rating Gerwig's direction highly include "Barbie is inventive; it's got a great look; it takes a potentially nothing subject and does something interesting and unexpected with it; it makes good points about gender roles and assumptions and about misogyny; and its approach to its narrative is cunningly subversive." That would pretty much encapsulate the reasons that I think she deserved a nomination for Best Director. You obviously see it differently. Fine. But I sure as hell don't think it is a case of her "being a woman and having the most popular film of the year" which strikes me as a blatantly sexist comment.
Say Hey Kid
War, children, it's just a shot away
KallioWeHardlyKnewYe
Hey! We won!
- May 30, 2003
- 15,531
- 3,384
Certainly Scorsese's name is half the battle and I too probably favor Gerwig, but it's not by a lot and it's not a travesty to see him here not her.
The thing I really appreciate about Killers is its patience and pacing. I said this in my initial review, but I think the length is a strength and is important to movie. Scorsese ... a man known for speed and flash tempers all of that in service of a story that wants you sit and linger in the awfulness of the crimes perpetrated. But he also still knows when and how to pull the trigger on sudden violence in the moments where it's needed. It is a subdued movie for sure. But that's why it works IMO.
Joe Blow wouldn't have the balls to do it that. Joe Blow probably would've made more of a Scorsese style FBI thriller (like the book).
Now, you want some unimpressive Scorsese directing, revisit The Departed, which he actually won the Oscar for. If it weren't for the repeated use of Gimme Shelter, I'd swear it was someone doing a bad Scorsese imitation. Heck I guess you could argue it IS someone doing a bad Scorsese imitation — Scorsese.
Last edited:
Pedantic, but Robbie was nominated for Barbie (as a producer of the film)
John Price
Bet
- Sep 19, 2008
- 373,975
- 24,889
JetsWillFly4Ever
PLAY EHLERS 20 MIN A NIGHT
I agree with you, much preferred Barbie to KOTFM and think Scorsese just gets nominated on name value.
I do think that most people on the internet though are just complaining to complain about sexism/misogyny and don't really know why Gerwig deserves a nomination more than anyone else. A lot of it has become about scoring morality points, hell look at Hilary Clinton's tweet, just puke.
You misunderstood. Those are the arguments of others that I was criticizing. My whole point was that the majority of critical reaction to the snub is about those two things. I gave an example with the Rolling Stone article, but do a Google search for "Gerwig snub" and pretty much all that you'll find are reasons for why she deserved a nomination that don't actually matter to the award. I appreciate that you shared much better reasons, but it's the only good argument that I've seen so far for why she deserved a nomination.
FWIW, I think that the nominations in the Production Design and Adapted Screenplay categories cover a lot of what you listed, so Gerwig and her team are being recognized by the Academy for those things, even if the voters didn't think that they added up to enough to warrant a Best Director nod, as well.
Last edited:
Ninja Turtles Mutant Mayhem not being nominated for best animated film but the absolutely horrid the boy and the heron being nominated simply because of that guy's past work is my biggest snub.
Godzilla minus 1 also deserved a best movie nomination, it was my favorite movie of the year.
Godzilla minus 1 also deserved a best movie nomination, it was my favorite movie of the year.
I didn't watch any movies released this year because I have been too busy working through an endless stream of great films on the Criterion Channel. I do plan on seeing Barbie, Oppenheimer and Anatomy of a Fall, as those look the most interesting to me. Younger me would have been itching to see The Holdovers, but Alexander Payne films simply do not resonate with me as much as they used to.
