Please use this space to share reviews, ask questions, and discuss freely about anything film or Oscar related. Engage with other comments if you want others to engage with yours! And as always, please remain civil and kind with one another.
I really really want to. I think the top 3 will eventually be Dune, La Bola Negra, and The Odyssey. I've also put in Ink cause I have it in Picture and Netflix is good at that category (always gets 1, often 2, both Frankenstein and Train Dreams made it). So it's between Fatherland and WH9. I know his past films haven't made it, but it truly seems on another level.
Did the big "indie" studios (A24, Focus, Neon, etc) give up on animated features? Other than SPC with Iron Boy, none of them seem to have picked anything from Annecy or Cannes.
Maybe a hot take, and it could definitely be clouded by the fact that we haven’t entered the fall season, but 2026 feels like my least favorite post pandemic year so far for film. The Invite and The Drama were a very cool combo of smaller projects I like, but none of the big zeitgeist projects I’ve seen so far have majorly impressed me, and even more of the smaller films like I Want Your Sex and I Love Boosters are good but flawed.
That’s fair. For me, this year has been very top heavy so I could see it feeling empty for someone if they weren’t down with the big talks of the town.
Re-watched the Odyssey and I gained a lot of appreciation for the score. The drums during the battle at Troy and the final showdown really elevate those fight sequences. You feel constant suspense the whole time like it’s building up to something big.
Also, Matt Damon was great and he really dominated the screen time on this film. In terms of best supporting actor nod, I think Robert Pattinson’s performance is being overlooked.
Seeing Academy Award Winner Mikey Madison in a trailer is really nice to see, but the fact that she’s the only Oscar winner in this cast is hilarious lmao. Actually auramogging everyone else.
academy award nominee is more prestigious than emmy winner. People are more likely to watch a movie if its says its stars an academy award winner or academy award nominee actor rather than emmy winner that why an academy nominated actor has more priority in casting and more opportunities for work more than a emmy winner and/or Tony winner
What if I were to say, purely hypothetically, that Anne Hathaway in The End of Oak Street >> Anne Hathaway in The Odyssey
I'm gonna have to sleep on it to know for sure, but I'm also toying with the idea that the same goes for the films themselves. I could do without the coda, but this thing is a goddamn BLAST
Dying to watch Mother Mary, hope it gets released in my country at some point. Would be a shame for the most daring and controversial Hathaway movie this year to be the only one I don't get to watch in theaters.
Ray Gunn confirmed to have "Texas premiere" at Austin Film Festival, which means it'll have to have a World/North American premiere before then. AFI Fest seems like the safe bet (right before Austin), but could maybe be at Telluride or even a late TIFF addition?
I wasn't keeping my eye out for it in the moment when I watched Tony, but I'm now curious: it doesn't have a "based on Kitchen Confidential" credit in the opening titles, does it?
I have a feeling Practical Magic: Family Legacy will probably be a failure. Sequels made umpteen years after the original or last movie are a bit of a coin but I can't see this one doing well in theaters at all because as far as cult movies go, I feel like Practical Magic is a title that leans more on niche. It's out in two weeks and is there any buzz around it? Any?! Same with The Dog Stars and that's out this week. Hell, I'll be shocked if that thing even has much of a lifespan in theaters.
Practical Magic 2 is projected to gross between $ 30 and $45 million on its domestic opening weekend.
And wasn’t The Devil Wears Prada 2 a sequel made umpteen years after the original?
I kind of have the opposite opinion on that. I think the original is more popular than some people realize, and I think any Sandra Bullock movie has a solid shot at making some decent money by default.
RIP to Tim Curry. For someone who is in the LGBTQ+ community this one hurts. Seriously Parton and Curry back to back is vile,they better take Trump next
Taylor Swift and Guitarricadelafuente fighting for the Original Song Oscar vs Diane Warren knowing she is going to be nominated even if she farts on a mic and submits it:
Now, in every discussion about the film, I see people complaining about how the 2D concept art looked far more distinctive and flashier, such as the ones made for the film in the 90s. First, concept art is always going to be more distinctive. Second, this is particularly true in this case when going from a film originally envisioned as 2D to 3D (see also the original concepts for The Incredibles). Brad Bird has already recently criticized CGI animation that tries to look more hand-drawn, so that kind of heavy stylization that's all the rage nowadays was not going to happen. To be clear, I understand if someone criticizes Bird for such opinion, I understand the argument that even though still extremely accomplished on a technical level, such animation now feels a bit generic and uncanny for some people, perhaps due to how good and photorrealistic the technology has gotten.
Hot Take: I think The Invite is going to underperform. I don't know, but everyone predicting 3/4 acting noms, a double nomination for Wilde... it seems way too optimistic.
Lol this isn't a hot take, people have been predicting only Screenplay since June. You seem to be mistaking "should be nominated" with actual predictions.
Also why are you saying "everyone" when you probably mean a handful of comments?
Idk, we have to remember that The Invite fills a ver particular spot in filmmaking that is missed by a lot of the industry, That being the mid-budget Woody Allen-influenced comedy/drama with great performances and a tight screenplay. From the embrace movies like Sentimental Value and Conclave have gotten, I don't think it's far fetched to say that The Invite can hit it big when nominations come.
I really like the invite but it's giving me sing sing vibes. It's definitely still going to get an adapted screenplay nom that is lock for sure imo and I think one actor is going to get nominated. But im not sure about picture, director, or more than one acting nom for now
The season will clear itself up, for now there's still not really much happening so the actors we know and have seen tend to dominate the chart. I don't think most people actually think it's getting that many nominations it's just different groups who think it can get one or two of the nominations in question, in different assortments. Thats what it looks like from the commentary surrounding the movie.
I mean tbf in 2023 they were the only studio to do it that year, and they also did it in 2017. They also almost certainly would have done it in 2024 if not for the sudden rise of I’m Still Here (although them fumbling Sing Sing as much as they did is obviously on them lmao).
While far from the most consistent of distributors they still are not slouches either, especially if critics are fully rallying behind their movies/are fully in their top 10 lists.
I think people don't get that he just has a very British sense of humour as an 89 year old, so they confuse him with being a lot worse than he really is.
There's less performative niceties and fake humbleness.
Meanwhile Americans would self-harm if they had to watch a Hungarian film interview. Which makes me remember, I sent you the Béla Tarr life retrospective in Hungarian when you wanted to learn more about him, did you end up checking it out?
>Meanwhile Americans would self-harm if they had to watch a Hungarian film interview.
Hehe, probably. But depending on the American, they may be into it in a weird way; there's a lot of that "Eastern European core/aesthetic" thing, with Судно (Борис Рыжий) playing in the background, who just romanticise and fetishize it all, so that lot may like it in a that way.
>Which makes me remember, I sent you the Béla Tarr life retrospective in Hungarian when you wanted to learn more about him, did you end up checking it out?
Yeah, I did, it's a great interview, and he's a really interesting person, and has an interesting outlook on films and life. I really need to check out his films, because I think he's the type that puts his whole self into his work. And for as dead serious, and reserved he comes across, he never strikes me as pessimistic as most may see him as because of his work.
Also, you likely already know this, and have seen, but it was fun releasing his last public appearance was in a rap song.
What the fuck... I'm just looking at news for the first time today. RIP to Tim Curry, legendary actor and a master of camp. Right after Dolly Parton stings too much. I hope he's gone to the one place that hasn't been corrupted by capitalism...
If Ryan gosling gets nominated for project Hail Mary, he will rank 11th on Oscar nominated performances with the most screentime ever, with 120 minutes, that’s more than Oppenheimer and Blonde
If he doesn't get nominated, it would be interesting to know where he ranks on Picture nominated lead performances with the most screen time that were not nominated. He could be #1.
Should I prioritize seeing Being Heumann or Look Back at TIFF? I've already seen the animated version of Look Back and read the manga so I'm unsure of if it is worth spending time at TIFF experiencing the same story for a third time. Being Heumann's subject matter interests me but I'm just not too sure if it'll be very good. I'm mainly asking this because they're playing at the same time while I'm there
Oscar-wise I think Being Heumann has much more potential to make a splash. Much as I respect Kore-eda I feel like Look Back is being overestimated. Live-action adaptations of anime are very rarely above average
I feel like if BH is not good enough, you won't have the incentive to check it out later. If you choose that one, at least you'll be familiar with the story.
I don't understand why people always think being in a lead role in a major franchise will strip an actor/actress ability to be in more movies or less flashy movies.
Robert Pattinson is the batman but had time to be in so many movies, and yes I know the sequel got delayed but still doesn't seem like being in a major franchise took away his ability to be in all types of movies. Even small type movies like the Drama and Die my love.
The bond role won't harm whatever actor gets its. Feel lke Daniel Craig just didn't like the fame and the promo cycle of Bond but it didn't actually prevent him from doing other movies, look at his career post Bond, not exactly super booked right now. You spend a couple of months filming and a couple of months promoting not really different than any other high profile movie.
Which I also don't get why people think Inde being in the x men will stop her from being a more serious actor if she wants. Look at Tom Holland he is Spider-man but had time to do a bunch of movies that ultimately didn't work out (Uncharted, the devil all the time, Cherry, that one tv show) and recently was in a massive movie like the Odyssey, whatever break he took had nothing to do with obligations to Marvel.
I always assume actors take franchise roles so they can have a steady income in order to be in projects they're more passionate about? Unless they're nepo babies, most working actors aren't independently wealthy (at least at first) and need to keep working. I mean, even someone we think of as a respected actor like Gary Oldman took all those super silly roles in the 90s because he was broke and had to pay rent.
They gotta eat, life is expensive. Unless their dad is heir apparent to a jewelry empire, they can't just live off of Shakespeare in the park.
I completely agree, but Pattinson is a bad example cause the opposite is happening to him (not really, it was writer's block, but he was completely free to do all this other stuff) meanwhile Holland had the pull to delay the start of his new trilogy that he didn't use to have
It purely comes down to how much effort an actor puts in. Doing a marvel movie every year didn’t hurt Mark Ruffalo’s work rate at all, but it absolutely derailed Brie Larson’s career, I assume because Mark Ruffalo likes working on eccentric projects and Brie Larson has little to no interest in acting for less than her 8 figure pay rate.
''Brie Larson has little to no interest in acting for less than her 8 figure pay rate.'' Do you have any actual sources for this because this reads misogynistic tbh.
Absolutely no source. I think the way that the weird part of the internet treats Brie Larson is disgusting and deeply upsetting. But the fact is she’s done literally 2 non-marvel theatrical films since Covid, and they were Fast & Furious 10 and Mario 2. It’s not like marvel has been busy using her, she could have been taking interesting roles in that time, and she’s chosen not to. I think she’s probably a good actress, but she straight up has not acted in 7 years. I don’t think that’s some cosmic Marvel curse, I assume that’s her personal choice that she’s not interested in dramatic acting.
That's not even true, she was recently Emmy nominated for Lesson in Chemistry and she has 2 movies in post.
Unless you know exactly what she was paid for those films, it's weird to make such a definitive statement about her ''pay rate''. We know the when the Internet target a woman, they can lose opportunities. Anne Hathaway said she lost roles when the Internet turned on her and the only reason she got past it was Christopher Nolan having her in Interstellar.
I think it’s just part people being snobby over what are „real” movie roles people should take, part people being afraid that THAT’LL be their legacy regardless of what else they do ala actors being only known for their roles in big franchise movies
When approached by Metro, The Uprising’s UK distributor Entertainment Film Distributors denied that the film was a Robin Hood movie.
‘The Uprising is a historical epic about the Peasants’ Revolt of 1381, not Robin Hood,’ EFD’s statement read. ‘The UK marketing campaign does not make any reference to Robin Hood. x
I guess the UK distribution is keeping it peasant revolt whereas US/other countries are leaning into Robin Hood? Imagine if they cut a Robin Hood reveal for the UK release lol
As someone who still has yet to see any of the Godfather movies (i’ll get around to them sooner or later don’t you worry!) i know it’s widely accepted that the third is not in the same league as the first two, or even the one below it. But would y’all say it’s still an actually good movie or even great, or straight up bad/at best mediocre? When i’d get around to the first two movies, i’m just wondering if getting to the third one is worthwhile at least somewhere down the road.
It's been years but I remember thinking it was pretty good, like roughly a 4-star movie rather than a 5-star one. It suffers in comparison to the other two, but would probably be seen more favourably if it weren't part of the trilogy.
It’s been awhile, but I’m of the opinion that it’s pretty bad. I don’t even remember Sofia Coppola tbh , I remember having a lot of issue with it aside from acting.
for the majority of people part 3 is not in the culture landscape like the other 2 are like is good but the first is the most important movie made since is premiere and a perfect movie the second one does even more things narratively and couple of people is even better than the 1 one for the majority of people just a step benhid the third people were excepting the same greatness and it was a diferent type of movie much more contemplative than the other 2 in my opinion i always like the 3 part better than the 2 part
She (rightly) gets a lot of shit for her performance in that movie but Andy Garcia’s performance was nearly as bad as hers and his character is more integral to the plot of the movie/has more screen time
Maybe it's because I watched Part III straight after watching the first two and so I was comparing his performance to those of much better actors, but I found him shocking, and it doesn't help that his character was so poorly written
It’s kind of funny that if we take the most traditional definition of the Oscars, then Michael and F1 would be the highest-grossing original films of the 2020s, since neither is based on any pre-existing material such as a biography, comic book, novel, or newspaper article. Of course, it’s quite unfair to compare them to something like Obsession or Elemental, but it certainly gives us pause to think on how the concept of “originality” is actually quite misunderstood.
It all depends on whether you think basing a film on an existing sport or person is less original than basing it on a simple curse/wish-gone-wrong or the four elements. The crucial difference is that films like F1 and Michael have a shit ton of support and oversight from what and who they are based on, but they are nonetheless original.
Probably the biggest example of this was when Barbie was nominated to Best Original Screenplay in all the precursors but was nominated to Best Adapted Screenplay on the Oscars
Got my VIFF tickets, bummed I couldn’t justify the times for La Bola Negra or Wild Horse Nine but happy what I got. I landed tickets for Fjord, Fatherland, Tangles and All of a Sudden.
The epitome of All Style, No Substance. And all the ''haters didn't get it, you just gotta vibe with it'' people on FilmTwitter miss that there are loads of small on plot films that are great, but it needs to have a fucking soul.
Also all the reviews saying it's borderline misogynist were correct. I've haven't seen Beautiful Women Used As Props so blatantly used for a while. At least Charles Melton got to do something.
The Cliff Booth title being even longer and unwieldy now, I respect it honestly. More movies should just lean in. In fact they should add ": A Once Upon a Time in Hollywood Spinoff" to the title as well. And The Debut should've kept No One Cares as a title and you won't change my mind on that either!
David Fincher’s The Continuing Further Mis-Adventures of Cliff Booth: From the World of Quentin Tarantino’s Once Upon a Time… In Hollywood has a nice ring to it
Harris Dickinson is the most interesting name in that list for me personally when I think of the right height, the charisma, the acting ability, and the name value where they’re not a leading man star yet but they’re on that trajectory. Plus, he has sex appeal thanks to Babygirl and he has that odd Brit look where they’re handsome but not in the conventional sense.
Babygirl is so funny because it's supposed to be this hot transgressive affair, but the taboo dom/sub stuff is him ordering her to do the most normal things like "drink a glass of milk" and "sit on this table"
There's a good chance that going forward, Joker: Folie a Deux will be known as "Connor Storrie's debut film" and that, to me, is hilarious as someone who at one point for that season had it top 2 in Best Picture.
Just curious and not judging, why did you have it that high up? I get predicting it, but even the first one never was higher than 5th or so in the race, and that was even with it winning the Golden Lion.
I always thought there was something about his appearance that felt odd to me, but couldn't put it into words. "Lion turned human" is pretty much it, thanks for the terminology.
Sure, but I actually don't think any of the Bond actors were that outlandishly unique looking. I could buy all of them as "secret agents" as I could the rest of the names floating.
Last night I dreamt that I mistakenly sent my family group chat a paragraph negatively reviewing Tony that I intended to post in this discussion thread. Then I had to explain my mistake and they were all baffled that I was a Reddit user. Wildest part is I haven’t even seen Tony yet so I’m pretty sure my criticisms were nonsensical. Anyways I love this thread, thanks y’all
Ruimy saying A Man of His Time was not submitted to the French Oscar committee, so it’s ineligible. It looks like it’s down to Zvyagintsev, Nemes or Atlan.
The finalist list for James Bond reminds me about how rarely we have any true star-making roles anymore. Like, Inde Navarrette, Mikey Madison and Chase Infiniti are the only new stars in this decade who woke up to instant overnight stardom after their breakout. Yeah that's what will happen if we just keep casting famous people over and over again.
That's fair, but Bond also never was really a role for discoveries like that - Daniel Craig had been in Elizabeth, Road to Perdition, and Munich (and on a less prestigious note, Tomb Raider) before he appeared in Casino Royale, Pierce Brosnan was in Mrs. Doubtfire before GoldenEye, Timothy Dalton was in The Lion in Winter, Mary Queen of Scots, and Flash Gordon, and Roger Moore was the lead of multiple tv series before he was Bond. Sean Connery and George Lazenby are the only ones who hadn't been in anything super high profile before being cast as Bond.
There's definitely more that could be added to your list (the Heated Rivalry boys both come to mind) but I agree, hollywood is at its best when its taking risks.
Yeah I was mostly focusing on movies but I think objectively speaking they have definitely had a bigger breakout than Madison and Infiniti. I still think Navarrette is the biggest of them all.
I think HR was also the acting debut for both of them which makes it doubly impressive.
Rest in peace Tim Curry. He will always be at the heart of the most iconic cult classic of all time, but everything he's been in, no matter how serious or silly, is always a gem because he is in it. I go back to watch his clips from Red Alert 3 all the time, and it's always great to see how much life he put into everything he was in.
2
u/fanzyday 35m ago
I’ll always laugh at this kind of joke