I was reading some article (blog post?) on Vulture about how ~HollyWoOd~*~ is all super anti-Netflix, and this is why
didn't get a Best Picture or Best Director nom. Or maybe it wasn't all of Hollywood, but like the people who are behind and vote for the Oscars. One guy was all We'Re the ACaDemy Of MoTIon PICTURE! Saying how the Oscar wasn't a TV or Entertainment award, but movie-specific. I guess basically saying shit that goes through streaming is not a real film. But if it's filmed as a film....
My thing is, streaming is the wave and not going anywhere? These hollywood people seem #shookaf that streaming is turning everything on its head. They're all like I'm Pro-Theaters!!!! But very few movies are even successful in the theater. Some people in the comments of that article made two legit points:
1. Theater owners only want those big superhero action films to get people in who are going to buy $50 fucking popcorn. Do theater owners really support shit like Mudbound which is likely to have a smaller, more niche audience? If Hollywood was only to go by keeping theaters alive, all we would have would be these shitty superhero movies. Thank god some other people can come through and give us variety. Why are they being fake and acting like theaters aren't dead? They literally keep pumping out all these trash ass Avengers movies because they're literally the only thing (with a few exceptions) keeping the industry alive...
2. Another thing someone said was if academy voters were so pro-theater, they should be required to go see every film that comes out in the theater, instead of expecting screeners. I was also reading some piece in Entertainment Weekly about the year Crash won over Brokeback Mountain and one of the reasons given for how this happened was that it was likely fewer people saw Brokeback, which I believe was a smaller film. One of the producers of BB was even informed by Paul Haggis' dusty ass that Clint Eastwood, who I assume is a voting member of the academy, did not even bother to see her film. The producer rightly was like, as a filmmaker, why wouldn't you see all the films. And anyone who is invited to the academy should consider themselves, if not filmmakers, people who care about good movies being made and recognized. Which, oh!, also brings to another point.
3. The criticism of Mudbound's award campaign and Netflix's lack of experience with one. Uh, first of all, award campaigns should not even exist. Literally every voting member should watch every fucking movie and vote on what they think is the best, end of. What do you mean people won't see a film if they don't get a screener, or aren't invited to some kiss ass awards dinner? The people speaking in the article made it clear these awards for the most part are bought. And if not outright purchased, people are expected to charm their way into getting one. Why can't people just watch these fucking movies and make the best decision they can in voting?
Like what? Reading that mess I was genuinely disturbed. But it explains why so much garbage gets nominated and wins awards. There are some true good things that get recognized, but I figure it works out like: Good Thing exists, Good Thing gets lucky ($$$) and has a successful campaign run, Good Thing gets awards. But even if a Good Thing lucks up and charms its way into recognition, there are still tons of other Good Things that never get that chance. Either because they don't have money or backing to do so. With Netflix it seems the industry & Academy is turning their nose up at them. Which I guess is how Beasts of No Nation went almost entirely unrecognized. At least this year with Mudbound, some shit slipped through. I feel with Mary J., she has a good ~story~ and is already a Brand. So that worked out well for her. But in the article they were like oooohh Dee Rees and them should've emphasized their ~story~. Basically saying how Dee should've played up that she is a black woman director, and also that her whole crew I think was entirely comprised of women. But like, shouldn't the story just be the great film? Like, how a good movie was made???????? Why a ho gotta be out here pimping her ethnicity or sexuality or tragic backstory~, all of that bullshit? It's not about the person, it's about the movie..... Like, these people interviewed for the article sounded highly embarrassing and sad.
But anyway, no one is going to the movies anymore unless it's a fucking event. Like Black Panther or something, which, duh, is another big ass tentpole superhero film. What else makes big money? Trash like Star Wars. Jurassic Park?? What else???? How are industry people still frowning at streaming and shit when a lot of people and films have been ignored over the years if they weren't in some Spielberg monstrosity or Daniel Day Lewis or being bulldozed into relevancy by Harvey Weinstein? Sam Rockwell just got his first nom this year, but ol' boy has been banging out performances for a fucking minute. He should've been nominated for Moon (which I saw on streaming btw becuz that shit was not in theaters near me), but guess what? Voting members prob aint even see that shit, so he wasn't. Lesley Manville getting her first nom this year is blasphemous. Why she aint get one for Another Year? Did none of the voting members see Another Year???????? It's all such a joke. But you know my dumbass gonna still be acting like these awards are relevant anyway. Like, Gwyneth Paltrow has an Oscar................ They are obviously NOT. Tom Hardy has NO OSCARS. Viola Davis only has ONE??? Steven Spielberg keeps getting nominated for his basic bitch ass movies??? Jake Gyllenhaal didn't get one for Nightcrawler????????????¿¿¿¿ Faye Dunaway didn't win every award for Mommie Dearest???? C. Thomas Howell for his ICONIC performance in Soul Man????????!?!? I meaaaan, this shit is a fucking JOKE!!!!!!!!!
Another thing brought up in the article was how certain things like documentaries don't even get seen until they reach TV/streaming. Like no one is going to see these things in the theater. I defo be watching mad more docs thanks to streaming. I never went to see one doc in my entire life in the theaters, never mind that these movies tend to get small releases. And not just docs, but literally every non-mainstream film I want to see does not reach the theater closest to my house. So now I gotta make some big trek every fucking time I want to see one of these non-mainstream films (which, let's face it, are the only films worth seeing), and I gotta pay some annoying ass amount of money for every one. Never mind being annoyed by literally so many annoying things that happen during your typical movie-going experience. It's just not realistic. I'm very pro staying at home and paying one set monthly fee for a streaming service to deliver a buttload of shit I could never see if I went to the theaters anyway. Like, right now, what's in the theaters for me to watch? I guess I am interested in Black Panther (hate superhero shit, but blackks!!! lol), and possibly Annihilation. Am I pressed enough to leave my house to see either of those films? Absolutely not. What would I leave my house for? For the movies I heard about this last year, Call Me by Your Name, and Three Billboards of Ebbing, Missouri. This year so far? I think this movie called The Party just came out sounds like something I'd really like to see. None of these movies touch a theater close to me... I thought 3 Billboards was getting a wide release after they got their noms? Well, not wide enough. Anyway, I'm staying in the house.
Mudbound was readily available online!!!! So I aint gotta worry about nunna that. Watching, all I could think was how it def should've got a Best Pic nom. Real talk, I saw the majority of the Best Pic noms, I think with the exception of The Post (no interest), and Darkest Hour.
Sis, I tried with Darkest Hour. For like...five minutes. But it was so horrible right away. It was so fucking...awful. My god. So...so.....awful lol. And the three main actors in that film I go the fuck up for, but sis PASS. Pass, okay? And I bet if I actually watched that film all the way through I would think it wasn't deserving of a Best Pic nom. I feel like people are just hype because of Gary's transformation, but all I was seeing in the five minutes I watched was some Whoville tomfoolery lol, sooooooo. Gary Oldman is a fave actor to watch, but not because I necessarily feel he is good lol. He mad ott. There's no way that performance is on-point and not a caricature. There's no way he's DDL doing Lincoln, lol come on now.
Wait, I was just dragging academy members (Clint Eastwood) for not seeing shit when I refuse to watch two of the main nominated movies lol. But come! on! Lol okay I'll force myself to watch them later, but honestly the fact that I feel like I have to force myself to watch two shits, is not a good sign. But did Clintward Eastbrick feel the same about Brokeback Mountain? Was he feeling all obligated, but secretly SICK at just the thought of Jake Gyllenhaal pressing his paper-thin lips on the behind of a horse while Heath Ledger sits in a corner hunched-over eating beans???? Was that what he thought the film was and just COULD NOT??? Like how I think The Post will be just a collection of dry ass scenes with Tom Hanks and Meryl Streep trying to lowkey highkey OUT ACT each other, but ultimately it'll just turn out that having the two in the same scenes together makes you realize how regular they really are???????? Idk!!
Anyway, Mudbound shoulda got a best pic nom. Or maybe not idk. But maybe. I mean, watching the other films (with the exception of the two I said lol) I feel it's an equal contender. The supposed front-runner, The Shape of Water, is like good? But not...breathtaking. None of the movies are. Of the nominated major films, the one that moved me the most and was The Best, would be Call Me by Your Name. And even that held back. Mudbound could def be up there. Like, Get Out is nominated. I'm excited for Jordan because he's so cute lol, but like? It's not that great of a film???? It's a great starter film?? But not like, nominate this for Best Picture award???? It's a run of the mill B-grade horror film that feels upgraded because it has Something To Say. It was nominated on impact alone. But sis, let's just put the films up that are actually great films???? And like is Lady Bird a Best Film? If so, like most of Judd Apatow's movies should be up there? Like it's a good movie, but best of the year? Wait, but what if it was? Like, sis, I doubt it. A movie about some quirky white teen from California who, like, has a boyfriend, and then another one, and she fights with her mom, and she's applying to colleges and wears purple nail polish, like this is #groundbreaking stuff, obvi. No shade, I liked the film lol but I'm lowkey underwhelmed by all these noms, and that being said, Mudbound could def be up there, which idk if that is also shade to them lol.
I don't even feel like talking about the movie because I have been talking shit for so much of this post lol. It's just I felt some type of way after watching the film and feeling like it deserved better. I felt that way after watching Dee Rees' Pariah, too. I just felt it put its emotional claws into me. And it was quite different, and left an impact. Wait, I just said shit shouldn't get nominated on #impact alone. Okay, but I said something about claws as well!!!!! Mudbound is one of those movies that's like a book. It was even being narrated a bit lol. It just had that whole Steinbeck vibe or something. I defo cared about the characters (mostly just the blacks lol) and was getting in my feelings and was all taken into the story right away and mad absorbed. The performances all around were really good. I actually felt a standout was the dad of the black family smfh what was his naaaaame. Idk lol (trash), but he stood out to me. He had a great face and was giving me #scenes. Mary was good. I liked the quietness of her character and how she'd just look. Like she was giving me #scenes from behind sunglasses and a hat, with minimal dialogue. ACTING. But why the Academy be ignoring Carrey Mulligan? Is it because she's not a glam diva?? Does she not campaign? Idk, but she gives #scenes as well. Pretty much everyone here does. No, like everyone. This was just a complete ensemble. And I thought it was good, and I am tired for going in so much earlier in the post lol. Do you think Mary could win Best Supporting? I think Allison is the fave. That's a good performance, kind of kitschy tho. I lowkey feel like my fave is Laurie Metcalf in Lady Bird. She made me tear up a bit. But if either of them win it won't be a thing like girl, why? Actually pretty much all the supporting actress noms are legit. With the exception of maybe Octavia Spencer. But that could be just cuz I don't like her lol. But if Mary won it'd be lit. No, you can't just vote for someone because "it'd be lit" smh, this is how Ordinary People won over Raging Bull!! Just kidding, it was the better movie. Suck my dick.
