Cool News
GOLDEN GLOBE NOMINEES: FILM
Howdy, gang. ROBOGEEK here. Harry called in from Chicago, and asked me to post this up for ya so you can all have some fun in Talk Back. (If anyone posts "I'm first!" in their subject line, please spam the hell out of them.)
So in case you missed 'em, here's the list of Film nominees for the 57th Annual Golden Globe Awards, selected by the approximately 90 voting members of the Hollywood Foreign Press Association. The awards will be presented January 23rd, and broadcast live on NBC.
When I talked to Harry (who says hi, by the way), I discovered we both had the exact same reaction to the following nominations: WHERE THE HELL IS "THE IRON GIANT," one of the best reviewed films of the year? (We'd also have liked to have seen "Magnolia" and "The Green Mile" get nods.) Well, here's a clue from HFPA head Helmut Voss: "We are not critics, and we are not members of the movie industry so we definitely have a different perspective." Uh-huh. Anyway, while most of this year's nominations are infinitely more sane than last year's mess, the aforementioned omissions compel me to ask: "Are you on crack?"
Best Motion Picture - Drama
"AMERICAN BEAUTY"
"THE END OF THE AFFAIR"
"THE HURRICANE"
"THE INSIDER"
"THE TALENTED MR. RIPLEY"
Best Actress In A Motion Picture - Drama
ANNETTE BENING, "American Beauty"
JULIANNE MOORE, "The End of the Affair"
MERYL STREEP, "Music of the Heart"
HILARY SWANK, "Boys Don't Cry"
SIGOURNEY WEAVER, "A Map of the World"
Best Actor In A Motion Picture - Drama
RUSSELL CROWE, "The Insider"
MATT DAMON, "The Talented Mr. Ripley"
RICHARD FARNSWORTH, "The Straight Story"
KEVIN SPACEY, "American Beauty"
DENZEL WASHINGTON, "The Hurricane"
Best Motion Picture - Musical Or Comedy
"ANALYZE THIS"
"BEING JOHN MALKOVICH"
"MAN ON THE MOON"
"NOTTING HILL"
"TOY STORY 2"
Best Actress In A Motion Picture - Musical Or Comedy
JANET McTEER, "Tumbleweeds"
JULIANNE MOORE, "An Ideal Husband"
JULIA ROBERTS, "Notting Hill"
SHARON STONE, "The Muse"
REESE WITHERSPOON, "Election"
Best Actor In A Motion Picture - Musical Or Comedy
JIM CARREY, "Man on the Moon"
ROBERT DE NIRO, "Analyze This"
RUPERT EVERETT, "An Ideal Husband"
HUGH GRANT, "Notting Hill"
SEAN PENN, "Sweet and Lowdown"
Best Foreign Language Film
AIMEE & JAGUAR, Germany
ALL ABOUT MY MOTHER, Spain
EAST-WEST, France
GIRL ON THE BRIDGE, France
THE RED VIOLIN, Canada
Best Supporting Actress In A Motion Picture
CAMERON DIAZ, "Being John Malkovich"
ANGELINA JOLIE, "Girl, Interrupted"
CATHERINE KEENER, "Being John Malkovich"
SAMANTHA MORTON, "Sweet and Lowdown"
NATALIE PORTMAN, "Anywhere But Here"
CHLOE SEVIGNY, "Boys Don't Cry"
Best Supporting Actor In A Motion Picture
MICHAEL CAINE, "The Cider House Rules"
TOM CRUISE, "Magnolia"
MICHAEL CLARKE DUNCAN, "The Green Mile"
JUDE LAW, "The Talented Mr. Ripley"
HALEY JOEL OSMENT, "The Sixth Sense"
Best Director - Motion Picture
NORMAN JEWISON, "The Hurricane"
NEIL JORDAN, "The End of the Affair"
MICHAEL MANN, "The Insider"
SAM MENDES, "American Beauty"
ANTHONY MINGHELLA, "The Talented Mr. Ripley"
Best Screenplay - Motion Picture
ALAN BALL, "American Beauty"
JOHN IRVING, "The Cider House Rules"
CHARLIE KAUFMAN, "Being John Malkovich"
ERIC ROTH & MICHAEL MANN, "The Insider"
M. KNIGHT SHYAMALAN, "The Sixth Sense"
Best Original Score - Motion Picture
ANGELO BADALAMENTI, "The Straight Story"
GEORGE FENTON, "Anna and the King"
LISA GERRARO & PIETER BOURKE, "The Insider"
ENNIO MORRICONE, "The Legend of 1900"
THOMAS NEWMAN, "American Beauty"
MICHAEL NYMAN, "The End of the Affair"
JOCELYN POOK, "Eyes Wide Shut"
JOHN WILLIAMS, "Angela's Ashes"
GABRIEL YARED, "The Talented Mr. Ripley"
Best Original Song - Motion Picture
BEAUTIFUL STRANGER, "Austin Powers: The Spy Who Shagged Me"
HOW CAN I NOT LOVE YOU, "Anna and the King"
SAVE ME, "Magnolia"
WHEN SHE LOVED ME, "Toy Story 2"
YOU'LL BE IN MY HEART, "Tarzan"
-
+ Expand All
-
Thank god they didn't give Tom a nod just because he's Tom Hanks. I thought that the Green Mile was this years biggest dissapointment. Except for Michael Clarke Duncan, which they obviously noticed.
I think the best actor nods were the best set of choices, although Farnsworth doesn't have a snowball's chance in hell. -
Just Kidding, although I hope the NAAGP (National Ass. for the Advancement of Gungan People) marches. Maybe Spike Lee'll boycott.
-
All of the top Drama picks seem like really good films (haven't seen em all) and yet there are still excellent flicks being left out...
I think it just goes to show how good a movie year '99 was. Thats all that matters. By the way, where the hell is Keanu for best dramatic male.
'Whoa' -
I must say its a bit of a shocker that 'the end of the affair' did so well considering some of the other heavyweights. After seeing Magnolia last nite I'm doubting its going to fare much better at the Academy (too eccentric, ambitious, long, and puzzling to reap immediate accolades) -although Julianne's best performance this year was in that film rather than the two mentions she got here.
I thought The Iron Giant was more deserving than Toy Story 2 for placement here.
Nothing for 'Topsy Turvy' which is building momentum so perhaps that will be the wild card the Academy usually throws into the batch after the Globes.
-
No Kate Winslet or John Malkovich? Robbed!
-
Um folks, I've got some bad news. I just noticed that if you take the title, THE END OF THE AFFAIR, drop the word affair, turn the 'M' in AMERICAN BEAUTY upside down, steal one of Julianne Moore's 'O's, Borrow Mr. Ripley's 'l', pretend hurricane is spelled huricane, and take a 'd' from the category drama, well then it becomes THE END OF THE WORLD! I don't want to be one to spread Y2K Rumors on the internet, but this doesn't look good.
-
Its great that we finally have a year with no clear cut favorite fo awards. There's such a tremendous amount of good films out there, about people and without explosions etc. (not that there's anything wrong with that). Lets show hollywood that we appreciate the effort and go out and support these films with our wallets.
-
Sharon Stone? What the hell? Other than that though these are commendable choices, although if you're gonna nominate Reese Witherspoon, why not Matthew Broderick? Fight Club shouldn't have been overlooked but there it is easier to forgive considering the competition in Best Drama. They could have nominated Fight Club in Best Comedy cause it was funny as hell but you can't have a darkly funny movie like that or its a drama. I'm glad to see The Hurricane got recognized. Having just saw it, I was truly surprised as I was expecting another run-of-the-mill wrongfully accused, justice must be done flick. Everyone's talkin about the upset with Hanks but I'm more upset about Doug Hutchinson. He got robbed. Percy was one of the years best villans. At least Three Kings didn't get any noms. What an overrated shit pile that was!
-
But I also agree that the omission of Fight Club, Magnolia and Iron Giant is unfair, if not entirely unexpected. I haven't seen The End of the Affair, but I doubt it was more deserving than all three of those...seems like it got the "artsy costume thing" vote (a la English Patient). Didn't look exciting, I mean.
-
REUTERS, LA, Next March- In what seems to have been a revenge plot, Jim Carrey strolled onto the Universal backstage and opened fire.
Witnesses say he was shouting "First Truman, now Andy!" Many believe he was upset over last night's Oscar loss to surprise entrant Roberto Begnini. Roberto won for his role as Jar Jar Binks in the latest Star Wars installment. It was essentially the same as his character in the much praised LIFE IS BEAUTIFUL, either way you couldn't understand a damn word he said.
Carrey was subdued after taking the gun away from Ron Howard's head. Howard said "He told me I had better win him an Oscar or else. I just hope I can make HOW THE GRINCH STOLE CHRISTMAS that good."
Carrey's closest friends are shocked. They say he was a quiet man and he never would have done anything like this had it not been for that awful Begnini. -
What's the matter with these people. Fight Club was one of the best movies this year. No nods for Norton, Pitt, or Fincher? It's an outrage! Also, no South Park for Musical! People, get your heads out of your asses!!!!
-
I can't believe Fight Club didn't get any nominations.
I could see Best Drama Picture, TWO Best Actor nominees, and definetely Best Director.
---Sergei -
I think it's kinda messed up that they forgot Run Lola Run, in the best Foreign Film category. Also I may be alone here, but I think one actor really got no recognition this year, for what I thought was a great performance.
I don't remember his name, but he was in Three Kings. He was the one who tortured Mark Wahlberg, in that (for me anyway) classic scene. The reason I feel he deserves recognition, is because of the dialogue in that scene. If he would've played it any other way, it probably wouldn't have worked. -
I'm just curious on how many people out there actually liked fight club. I thought it was quite weak and not deserving of anything. It was overblown MTV nihilistic garbage.
just my two cents -
Seems like a pretty good selection to me, but then it was a pretty good year. Richard Farnsworth vs. Kevin Spacey? Tough call. IMHO The End of the Affair the best nominated picture of the year (the only one I've yet to see is Hurricane). The Iron Giant doesn't need any awards - it will remain the best US animated feature of the nineties; Fight Club is a great movie, but too nihilistic for most folks. The best picture of the year was Princess Mononoke.
-
Dec 21, 1999 12:45:59 AM CST
Calm the fuck down everyone...it is the GOLDEN GLOBES for chriss
by geekbasher 3.0
Hello you know this is just a fun little not take to serious type of things...JEEEZZZ!!!
WHERE THE FUCK IS RUN LOLA RUN????? -
Once again, I have to ask myself, "What are they smoking?". The category that really sets me off is supporting actor. I don't see Malkovich. Does anyone else see Malkovich? What about Christopher Plummer? Best supporting actress gets six spots, how come supporting actor only gets five? There are ten score nominees! Wait a tic, where the fuck is Phillip Seymour Hoffman? (I don't like using profanity, but I do like the alliteration there.)
What is this NOTTING HILL b.s? THREE KINGS owns that spot. ANALYZE THIS? SOUTH PARK should take that position.
And where the hell is MAGNOLIA? I haven't even seen it yet, but I know it will be the best of the year. Meanwhile, THE END OF THE AFFAIR, which I haven't read one positive review for, snags three! I guess ANY GIVEN SUNDAY is also out of the running. And of course DOGMA was completely ignored.
And just a sidebar here. Did CRADLE WILL ROCK meet the deadline, because I kind of expected to see that on here. SNOW FALLING ON CEDARS?
Apparently, THE TALENTED MR. RIPLEY is a dynamite flick. I'm glad to see THE HURRICANE on here. Very good movie. The screenplay nominees are pretty solid.
And what about FIGHT CLUB? Sadly, I expected the snub. But, it's okay friends. It's only after you've lost everything that you're free to do anything.
AND FUCK THE GREEN MILE!
-
At least, unlike the TV nominations, the film department has an "embarrassment of riches." There's been enough good film this year to cause an argument, unlike some years when one or two flicks dominated everything. Heck, even Entertainment Weekly, that Hollywood rag calls 1999 "The Year that Changed Film." Hope it continues into 2000. Peace.
-
I can not believe that PRINCESS MONONOKE is being left out of all of these year end lists and nominations. Was there a better movie this year? No. Nothing even came close. The fact that it doesn't even get a nomination for Best Foreign Film is really depressing.
Maniac Cop -
It's like the friggin' Grammies for movies for cryin' out loud! No Three Kings, no Malkovich, no South Park, no I.G., no American Pie, no David Lynch and so on and so on and so on...
-
Rule Number one: No one at AICN talks bad about 'Fight Club,' or anyone/anything associated with it. What are you going to do for your next trick? Bad-mouth 'The Matrix'? Confess to liking Jar-Jar? Say you hated 'Eyes Wide Shut'? Your adamant refusal to toe the AICN line disturbs me greatly. On the subject of the Golden Globes, for a bunch of taxi driving, hairdressing, third-worlders who never met a free buffet and autograph session they didn't like, they come up with some okay picks once in a while.
-
Dec 21, 1999 2:10:10 AM CST
SOUTH PARK, IRON GIANT, FIGHT CLUB, & THE MATRIX got robbed big
by darth siskel
Those were better than The Insider, ToyStory2, or American Beauty, although these three are on my top ten as well. Haven't seen the others yet, but really how can you top The Matrix?
Also I'd nominate SW:Ep1 for best drama just for the fact the settings in the movie don't exist and the drama created by them was astounding. FUckin' Jake Lloyd. -
Dec 21, 1999 2:34:39 AM CST
Not that the Globes are anything more than another excuse to put
by twisted mentat
I agree....Mononoke should of been in Best Foreign film. Though i am happy to see the Red Violin there.
Also...South park should of been in the Score...maybe they wanted to put it in, but they couldn't find a clip that they could show on network TV.
-
Of course The Iron Giant got screwed. The Globes are bought and paid-for awards. The HFPA is a group of about 80 wannabes, most of whom aren't working newspeople. Some don't even live in LA, others are merely spouses of members. They're notoriously easy to influence with Hollywood perks and schmoozing. They aren't even obligated to see the films they vote on. No one ever heard of them till their awards started being broadcast on NBC in '96. It's a big joke.
-
It was releaced in 1997, and yes, every one was pissed it was looked over then.
-
Best Score: the Dust Brothers(Fight Club)
Foreign Language: Run Lola Run
South Park was fucked over by all the big floppy donkey dicks.
-
I am always overjoyed to see well-made and entertaining movies like some of those mentioned in some of the above talkbacks supplanted by others than haven't even been released yet (i.e., "Man On The Moon", "...Mr. Ripley"). Whatever the criteria are or who the group of people nominating is, many good films are either overlooked or blatantly left out in favor of the movies everyone thinks the critics will have an orgasm over. Some of these nominations, to me, seem like the "Nirvana is the best band of the 1990s" mentality emerging yet again. I await the flames. Dick.
-
regarding above post about films not yet released, the critics (and voters here) see these films before the general public does. So I would say I have more faith in the nomination of something that doesn't have any word-of-mouth yet. If a bunch of critics have already started praising or bashing something, it might affect the voting. When Mr. Ripley was picked as runner-up film of the year by N.B.O.R., and Best Director given to Anthony Minghella for same film, they hadn't even seen the finished product yet. That's a pretty big vote of confidence. I wanted to make one point about Tom Cruise's nomination: He did a terrific job, but to nominate him and no one else for this film is an insult to the ensemble cast. Does he get the nom because he's a big star and wanted to go slumming with the indie film crew? That's not sending a very good message. The other actors in this group have slaved in a lower tax bracket on many great films, and to see the spotlight stolen by the Box Office Draw must be frustrating. Again, this isn't Cruise's fault, but I'm flabbergasted that Kidman was overlooked for EWS, probably what is most deserving of the Supporting award. But she got fucked on To Die For as well, so it's not too surprising. I'd like to raise a toast to all the others who are glad The Green Mile was acknowledged for the non-masterpiece that it is. And also, I wanted to second the opinion that Saving Private Ryan is 30 minutes of cool shit followed by nothing of note. If anything should have won over Shakespeare in Love, it should have been The Thin Red Line. But why would Spielberg want to make people really think about human nature and war, when he could just manipulate vulnerable veterans into feeling something? YOU WILL CRY NOW, SOLDIER!
-
I saw Ripley and it was decent but by no means better than Fight Club or Three Kings. MOST OFF I AM VERY FUCKIN PISSED THAT Iron Giant did not get any recognition. I cant take WB screwing that movie anymore, i am gonna firebomb those assholes soon.
-
She did a FANTASTIC job in Holy Smoke, wich is not releasad yet, just in LA!
AND ALL THOSE OTHER NOMINATIONS SUCK!!
THIS IS REALLY A JOKE!
The HFPA sucks ALL THE WAY!!
I hope we will see something diffrent at the Oscars!
-
She did a FANTASTIC job in Holy Smoke, wich is not releasad yet, just in LA!
AND ALL THOSE OTHER NOMINATIONS SUCK!!
THIS IS REALLY A JOKE!
The HFPA sucks ALL THE WAY!!
I hope we will see something diffrent at the Oscars!
-
Just wanted to say that Lazarus Long
-
well it would appear that WB execs have learnt nothing. The Iron Giant was released here in the UK last Friday, very low key only a handfull of showings per day (in the multiplexs). It's a very sad state of affairs
-
ok, first of all. Sharon Stone for "The Muse"? I really don't get that one. And here is a list of people I would have imagined would be among the nominees: Matthew Broderick, David Lynch, Kate Winslet, Philip Seymour Hoffman, Tim Robbins, Kirk Douglas, William H. Macy, Ralph Fiennes, Eddie Murphy (wasn't he just great in "Bowfinger"?), Susan Sarandon (if Streep can be nominated for each and every movie she does, then so can Sarandon), Emily Watson, Chris Cooper and Cecilia Roth (hell, they have nominated actresses for foreign films before and I would say she deserved to be among the nominees). And what is the deal with nominating Julianne Moore twice with so many other great performances this year? well, GG blows!
-
I really think that Fight Club is the best movie i have ever seen.
But the problem is that this film is just for a few people of this generation how are searching for the thruth of life. So if you are on of them the movie will change you. But if you one of this shiny littel world guys. You will defently not like it! But i also think that it must get an oscar or golden globe because it is a good movie but just no commercial shit that everyone likes. Come on you cant tell me that the talented mr. ripley is better directed than fight club. YOU CANT TELL ME THAT MATT DAMON ACTED BETTER THAN EDWARD NORTON.
if you look at the members of the
GG you will see that there are many many women. This is the reason why it is not n. for the GG. Fight Club is a movie for men.
I also think it is ok if somebody dont like FC but you cant tell me it is not worth to nominate it.
Sorry for my English :))
PS: i think the members of the GGA are just watching five movies and nominate them in best director, best actor, best actress and best music.
That methode really sucks -
I am very disappointed that they have not nomi. Fight Club.
Fight Club is the best movie of the year and the best movie i have ever seen (and i saw a lot).
But the problem with Fight Club is, that this movie is not for everybody.
If you are one of those Generation X guys who have searched for thruth of life in a modern way, you will LIKE IT it will change your way to look at life.
But if you are a normal person who don -
I'm most curious EWS has been nominated for best original music score since most people said one of the top worst things about the movie was the music score.
I myself found EWS to be okay but not great nor the worst ever. 1999's worst film was probably
a choice between The Haunting 1999
and Wild Wild West.
Speaking of EWS and Wild Wild West, I even said many months ago over e-mail with a lady named bagheera that Wild Wild West would bomb and EWS would be a hit. I was wrong and bagheera, wherever you are I ask for forgiveness for being such a jerk in my comments to you. You were right and time has proven you so...but thank you for responding to my e-mail.
But back to the subject at hand why nominate the music of EWS as an original score. After all as with most Kubrick films, wasn't the music in the film, pre-recorded ?
As for The Fight Club, I'm a fan of Fincher's work in The Game and Seven but never saw Fight Club and I'll probably see that movie
on video.
I know I'm probably in the minority on this, but for me
Toy Story 2 was 1999's best film
and I hope it wins the award for
Best Picture in Comedy/Musical.
It really did surprise me how good and clever it was. I thought Toy Story was a great movie which couldn't be equaled but it was and I thank John Lasseter and Co. for
doing so.
-
I'm surprised that nobody mentioned that Sixth Sense deserved more than just a Best Screenplay nom. Haley Joel Osment was extremely good, and I think that Bruce Willis has been trying hard to make these non-action movies instead of the-world-is-ending-fight-the-devil-Arnold movies, and he deserves a nomination, too. Just my two - er - six cents.
-
Did Damon "act better" than Norton? Granted, I haven't seen MR. RIPLEY yet, but everyone I know who has says it's a startling performance. This continued vociferous defense of FC against films that many of you have admittedly not seen is growing very tiresome *very* quickly. For a film with one of the most burdensome voice overs in recent memory, and a message seemingly delivered by way of Oliver Stone's sledgehammer, I think it would be a crime if it were nominated at all (though I could probably go along with a Best Supporting nod for Pitt.) I'd rather see PT Anderson get recognized for the messy, but often brilliant MAGNOLIA. And to second what Lazarus said above, if Cruise is deserving of a nomination, so are John C. Reilly, Philip Baker Hall and Melora Walters. As for Sharon Stone..... well, at least the Foreign Press members are returning those $300 Coach watches. IMO, she should send one to me for having actually endured THE MUSE.
-
Films like Fight Club and The Matrix are never going to get nominated for these kind of awards. Fight Club was an excellent film, but if you notice, most of the films that are nominated are an examination of the human condition. Fight Club was a dark comedy that was thought-provoking, but it WASN'T TAKING ITSELF SERIOUSLY. If you read interviews from Norton, Pitt and Fincher they all say this. It's clear these guys don't know how to categorize films like this. Notting Hill does not deserve a nomination. I think Hugh Grant was nominated just so they could get Liz Hurley in a skin-tight dress on the red carpet and up their viewership.
-
Denzel Washington deserves all sorts of acting accolades for his performance in this picture, but the movie is so damn convoluted. Not to knock on Jewison, but this picture has a lot of problems that should not have it up there as best picture. Also, anyone who thinks "Fight Club" should get any awards other than PERHAPS cinematography, is on crack.
-
In this case I think that Julianne Moore deserved a third nomination for her role in Magnolia. I just saw it on Sunday and the movie itseld was okay but the performances were incredible. And where is Nicole Kidman for Eyes Wide Shut? Is she just too beautiful to be taken seriously? Oh by the way the Space Monkeys will have their revenge
-
Kate Winslet Rocked Holy Smoke! She deserves not only a Golden Joke, whoops I meant globe, but a Oscar as well, Kate & Hilary were the best performances so far of the year that I have seen! Go see Holy Smoke and judge for yourself, but prepare to be blown away by Kate! Sigourney Weaver in Map of the World???? What about "GALAXY QUEST?" just kidding!
-
I mean please, Notting Hill with THREE noms? When will people finally take Julia Roberts off the screen? Put her in a toothpaste commercial, but for God's sake don't subject us to her innanity any more. And DON'T give her any kind of recognition with a nomination! Geez, who are these people? Have we been watching the same movies?
-
Dec 21, 1999 11:33:43 AM CST
THE YEAR OF THE BOXING MOVIE!!!!THIS MOVIES ARE FOR MEN,NOT YOU
by mickey rourke
WHY?.Well the top three movies of the year use it as the background to tell their wonderful stories of 'REDEMPTION AND DISORDER'.Of course the three movies in question are:1)THE FIGHTCLUB-A modern masterpeice that combines a multi-layered story with great acting and outstanding camerawork,not the like i've seen since the days of LEONE and ANTONIONI.2)THE HURRICANE-where 'THE GREEN STREAK OF PISS' gave us another tom-fucking-hanks performance that pulled at your heart strings so much,your brain turned to excrement,and as for that black dude,it was without doubt the most racist depiction of a black man since 'BIRTH OF A NATION',he was the nice nigger just the way they were in the good ole days of slavery,for fucks sake,it was writen by a in-bred son-of-a-bitch like steven king so what could you expect,this black dude was subservient to the white man,all 'yessum boss',man,it fucking disgusted me.i hate tom hanks,and i hate every fucker involved in that piece of racist,sentimental crap-whoooooooo,needed to get that off my chest,anyway back to better thoughts,ah yes,the wonderfully life affirming 'HURRICANE',man,this is so differnt from 'green streak of piss' its scary,what a great,great movie this was,please GO AND SEE IT,it just tells its story beautifully without trying to play the usual flowers and violin trick HOLLYWOOD FUCKING gives us all the time.3)PLAY IT TO THE BONE-This movie is one of the coolest,nastiest,funniest,
blackist movies you'll ever see,did you love 'WHITE MEN CAN'T JUMP',good,well,this is way beyond any shit in that movie,its just the greatest buddy-buddy movie of all time-Its like those 'ROAD MOVIES' made by BOB HOPE and BING CROSBY,but with them on PCP,wow,WOWOWOWOOWOOWOWOOWOWOWO,
you MEN OUT THERE ARE IN FOR A TREAT WITH THIS MOVIE,ITS GONNA MAKE YOUR PUBES TINGLE,BABY........ROLL ON THE OSCARS BABY!!!!! -
HOGARTH and LAZARUS LONG are the ones who seem to get what the Golden Globes are about: middle-of-the-road movies, campaigning for nominations and wanting big stars on your tv telecast(Sharon Stone? broohaha; and remember Madonna and Jim Carrey have won acting awards), ignorance of most movies released more than 1 month ago, and forget about animation and violent films unless they are extremely popular and generally regarded as landmark films.
......Just a word about MAGNOLIA - from what I've heard about it, a good film to compare it to would be Robert Altman's SHORT CUTS. That was a brilliant long multiple-storyline film with great performances (Julianne Moore too) and just when you think you see a connection in the plot strands (the dead body found) it makes a point about the randomness of life. Although I think Paul Thomas Anderson is a great filmmaker (see Hard Eight if you haven't yet) he seems to be copying other film's narrative styles (GOODFELLAS for BOOGIE NIGHTS and SHORT CUTS for MAGNOLIA). Oh well, at least he's inspired by the best.
-
Ok, so they didn't nominate Tom Hanks, big deal. But leaving out IG and THE GREEN MILE as nominees is just inexcusable. And how did that Phil Collins song from TARZAN get nominated?!? TARZAN was a piece of crap, and the music was only mediocre at best.
-
I'll take these as I listed them... A) Fight Club was a satire. It sent so many signals at the person that at times people didn't know how to react, but in the end it was suppose to be a satire. The "message" WASN'T "men have no emotions or meaning unless they hit each other." POSSIBLE SPOILER NEXT...Do we all realize that the end basically explains the movie as a look into insanity. That's the joke. The "blunt message" that everyone says Fincher "hit us over the head with" apparently was missed by a lot of people...B) The Golden Globes is nothing much more than a popularity contest, and the nominees, IN MY OPINION, are probably based on what people hear about the most, and famous names, hence Sharon Stone. She is an international star, that is easily recognizable. C) Why is it that everyone must get so anggry around here? It is one thing to be passionate about film and personal opinions, but the incoherent ranting and profanity only lessens the impact of a talkback.
-
Following 'Kubrick's post, yes, it is very odd that Eyes Wide Shut has received a Best Score nomination when the majority of its music is established classical and jazz material - the opening waltz is Shostakovich, the music at the party is all old standards (Strangers in the Night, etc), the fantastically melodramatic piano motif which riddles the second half of the film is Gyorgy Ligeti (although the deployment of it, in my eyes, definitely deserves some kind of statuette for sheer gawdy brilliance - nothing else like it since Jaws and Psycho), and the music in the morgue is Liszt. This leaves the seedy mute strings in Tom's stilted overdramatised flashbacks and, of course, the opulent centre-sequence at the orgy (which, actually, is an awesomely original bit of scoring by Ms Pook, but lingering for less time than a certain Judi Dench). It is an injustice that this film has been so overlooked so far, but hey, I don't suppose Stanley minds much. If we're looking at odd omissions from the Film Score section, though, let's just mention Mychael Danna who's been writing the best film scores for years and never had a mainstream nod (check out this year's stunningly scored 8MM, Felicia's Journey, and Ride With The Devil, which again is a great great film with no nods), and Cliff Martinez for his sublimely sparse accompaniment to 'The Limey'. These guys are just too good for words.
-
Ok i like Fight Club
but i also think
that the dust brother
have done a really great job.
The soundtrack kicks ass !!!
-
Since no publication (or this site) had listed it correctly, Lisa Gerrard is one of the nominees for Best Original Score for The Insider (they have been spelling it Gerraro). I guess there are not many Dead Can Dance fans out there. Nine nominations in this category (and they still missed people). It is nice to know that a $350 watch can make up for a lack of talent (you are pathetic Sharon Stone). It is too bad all those Princess Mononoke fans don't realize how late they are in their support of the film. Fight Club's acting and directing could not overcome a weak and convoluted script. The comedy categories were not at all well chosen, the drama categories did a pretty good job. It would have been nice to see Run Lola Run or Those Who Love Me Can Take the Train nominated in the foreign film category (assuming they were eligible). It is too bad that some of the films release earlier in the year were overlooked.
-
They should have chosen Pia Zadora over Lucy Lui for the third angel....anyone see her infamous breakdown scene in "THE LONELY LADY" ORDER UP MISS PIA ANOTHER GOLDEN GLOBE...PRONTO!!!!
-
Dec 21, 1999 1:39:07 PM CST
ok lets get down to the facts gentlemen ATTENTION ALL YOU FIGHT
by enigma
alright people, now i have your attention i own't be cliched and say why the movie is a genious landmark in modern film making
in stead, i want YOU, yes YOU, the people who hate the film to tell all us who love it and think it is one of the if not THE best film of the year, what is it that makes it bad? what is it that makes so shit in your oppinions?
i am awaiting your responses...
ps. to hose enlightnened enough to adore the film, remeber the slating Blade runner and citizen kane got -
in regards to to SPR, you're right, spielberg is a talentless hack in that dept,
people say that Fight Club is Fasicistic and nihilistic, did these people see how the germans are depicted in SPR? -
The Insider was EXCELLENT, but The Matrix was better. The Matrix was groundbreaking, can you say the same about The Insider?
-
You know those television commercials where the little kids talk about "clawing up into middle-management?" Well, that's "Fight Club" in a nutshell. It's up there with the Sprite commercials that relentlessly tell us that "image is nothing, thirst is everything." "Fight Club" isn't all that original, in fact, in theme. There have been many angry-young-men-rebelling-against-society movies, from "The Loneliness of the Long-Distance Runner" to "Clockwork Orange" to "Look Back in Anger." I'll admit, "Fight Club" had some great visuals, but other than that, it was really just a pile of repetitious rhetoric that exploited its ready, willing, and able audience of wannabe disenfranchised smack-talking white boys who make pathetic and voyeuristic attempts to emulate the violence they see in movies and hear on the radio. That's "Fight Club." I'd like to see any of these quivering morons actually wander into a actual (no TV violence here, gents) situation involving serious, life-threatening violence. Take a chill pill "Fight Club" fanatics and see Wim Wenders' excellent film, "The End of Violence." To those who claim "Fight Club" was a satire, um, well, no, it wasn't, but God, I wish it was. Kind of like the book version of "Forrest Gump" vs the eventual film version.
-
Spike should have been nominated for Being John Malkovich!
The Beastie Boys should crash the Golden Globes for this! -
Dec 21, 1999 2:00:44 PM CST
To answer the cries of injustice above, just like Mononoke, I be
by r_dimitri22
was not eligible for this. Mononoke was released in 1997; Run Lola Run was released in 1998.
-
I'm not a Tom Hanks fan or anything, but there really couldn't be any miscasting in a WW2 movie, could there? I mean, the participants were so numerous and diverse that anyone could be cast appropriately. Whether or not the performance was good is a matter of opinion. Also, everyone should know that Fight Club sucked rhino dick.
-
Iron Giant!? This movie recieves too much fan praise, It was a VERY GOOD animated flic I would even go as far as to say great. But it was lacking in several technical areas not the least of which was the shoddy WB animation itself...I love the movie I will watch it again and again but it in no way deserves to be in thes Award nominations....I do agree Sixth Sense deserves more. Fight Club deserves a nom for screenplay and maybe for cinetography(when the oscars come around) but not for best picture. I would like to have seen Green Mile get nominated, It was moving and beautiful but I think the choices were good ones. This year has been one of the best years in film of all time. It is hard to choose a winner but certian things are important to remember. As movie geeks certian films appeal to us through technical aspects or originality (Magnolia, Fight Club, Matrix, IG) Mass audiences don't see that. They are looking t just thebase story and how it is being presented, a strong case can be made that movies that when these awards are ones that best combine Artistic elements with those that tickle the public fancy. Isn't the definition of the best motion picture, the movie that the most varied audiences can appreciate its beauty. I heard a lot of people come out of fight club and say it was shit, It is one of my favorite movies ever. But those same people could appreciate the Mummy which I loathed beyond loathing. neither of these pictures are the best because we both absolutely loved American beauty. You guys always get on here and start typing in all caps and cussing up a storm like you are angry about this and you never really make any point by doing it. Its annoying to try and scroll through all the insults and rants which is why I hardly do this anymore. I have gone on a little too long but I never find that nearly as annoying as the people who spend all there time insulting Harry \...get off it make your own site, write your own reviews accept that your opinion will never be unaimosly(spelling) accepted and that art is relative, Give your own opinion dont insult the man brave enough to give his. See Ya, Ajax
-
I'm saddened. My personal pick is not represented anywhere here. How about a nod to Three Kings. I think Russel deserves at least a nomination for best director. O well, such is life. Being JM was also vastly underepresented.
-
Last year Life is Beautiful won big at the Oscars. My point is that it's technically a 1997 film, which only received North American release in 98. Likewise, Mononoke and Lola were released in North America this year, thus by Golden Globe standards they should be eligible for nominations. Furthermore, the current version of Mononoke (translated and dubbed)IS a 1999 film.
-
Listen, this is a group of entertainment reporters for the Berlin Grammophone and whatnot. They got a bunch of money together to buy TV air time for their awards ceremony years ago, and that is the ONLY reason anybody pays attention to them -- free advertising for their holiday season movies. Their awards have no more credibility or "authority" than if, say, the Mickey Mouse Club gave out awards.
///
Also, I believe these guys were the first to start the "me first" syndrome of naming the "best" of the year before it was over, thus leaving out movies that were not finished (like Any Given Sunday this year, 1999... which is not over, by the way).
///Finally, WHERE THE HELL IS IRON GIANT, as Harry and Robo asked? That these guys nominated ANALYZE THIS over IG... well, it speaks for itself. -
one last comment on Saving Private Ryan...I've mentioned this before, but to refer to some stuff from Jonathan Rosenbaum's critique from the Chicago Reader, this film winds up being what every other war film is: A recruiting film. No matter how much they try to show "the horrors of warfare", they still show the main characters as being heroes, and part of a worth cause. This is complete bullshit. There is no honor in killing anyone for anything, no matter who it is, Germans, whatever. But of course, veterans don't want to hear that there was no honor in what they participated in. They don't want to admit that they were in some way dehumanized by taking part. So Spielberg gives them a big ol' pat on the back and says "It's okay, man." What pandering. Now Thin Red Line, on the other hand, IN NO WAY glorifies or honors what took place in WWII. The whole plot revolves around taking one hill. This takes up most of the film. And when you relate this to Sean Penn's line "It's all about property" you can see what this film is trying to say. The goverment uses the lives of poor young men in their little chess games of property. And war is always a crime against humanity, always a crime against nature, no matter what evil human beings are defeated in the course of action. Malick's film dives deep into these issues, and shows the beauty of the world around us that becomes tainted with the evil of warfare. His use of the soldier's memories, the innner soliliquies. This is stuff Spielberg is probably afraid to say & address, not that he comprehends it anyway. To compare him with Renoir, Kubrick, Kurosawa, this is a total fucking insult. These men were driven by their own powerful, unique visions, and never gave a thought to what audience's preferences might have been. They took us to a new level of perception whether we liked it or not. Do you think Spielberg would criticize society as harshly as Renoir's "Rules of the Game" or Kubrick's "Clockwork Orange"? Fat chance. Spielberg will never be in this league because he's too afraid of offending anyone. Consequently, he winds up offending people like me who champion voice and originality in art.
-
Just read this on the IMDB. She apparently didn't name any sources, but she's got a fairly decent batting average. Sounds like YEAR ONE is definitely in the works.
-
...regardless of how great a movie it might be, regardless of how excellent all the performances were, and regardless of how gifted a director Fincher is [which I believe he's really not -- but that's another story] the movie suffers from a plot which will always be a completely and totally preposterous pile of steaming shit: Disenchanted wanna-be yuppies start beating the shit out of each other in the streets and form clubs to do it?!!? Are you kidding? Does this make any sense to anybody? So you're hanging out with your friends, bored because there's never anything to do on a Saturday night, and you just start fighting each other?!!? That's fucking ridiculous. And to add insult to injury, it's not as if there is one small club out there, which I might believe, IT SWEEPS THE FUCKING NATION! No movie with a plot that idiotic, sophomoric, and moronic could possibly hope to win any award from anyone.
-
the dude can't like ANY movie that was compared to a Kubrick flik. . . the wanna-be lame-ass critic has a friggin shrine to the guy. Fight Club had great acting? unique story? layers? BUT IT AINT KUBRICK SO IT SUCKS - right cornhole? . . .(just a lame-ass wanna-be, anyways) - - - -- - ya know it, cuz I AM yer daddy.
-
Well, we're just going to have to disagree...of course these guys would get destroyed in real violence...Fight Club wasn't about real violence. It was about feeling something in a world that has dulled everything with images. The men in Fight Club aren't fighters, they're losers, looking to latch on...that's why it is satire. In the beginning, it appears the movie is going to give an answer, but by the end it folds back in on itself. The twist, the insanity, it deconstructs what the movie built toward. And I would suggest that the book Fight Club took itself way more seriously than the movie did. The book plays itself straight, with no comedy. Of course, that's because, in literature, people can imagine different ideas for what is written, yet a movie must have a certain direction that is chosen by the director. I still don't think it was the best movie of the year - I have to say Sixth Sense is right up there. A good story, character development, finely structured. It worked on a lot of fronts and came out excellent. Very few movies these days actually build a story...too bad, and hopefully Hollywood learned a lesson with Sixth Sense. Though I doubt it.
-
...I see the twelve year old strikes again with his own brilliant blend of satire, criticism, witticism, and complete and total bullshit. Welcome back, baby! I don't think we could have gotten anywhere without your poignant prose to guide us; surely you shine as bright as the North Star must have to ancient mariners! However, you'd do well to take a cue from our friend AgentCole and build that shrine to Kubrick -- you might find yourself sounding a bit more bright!
-
i just read about ms stone's blatant bribery attempt of the foreign press. is this over-the-hill, zero-talent bitch lame or what?
-
Tom compare Fight Club with Clockwork orange isn't insulting to Kubrick. Kubrick's film still satnds as a masterwork to people, even though I am not one of those people. As for this stuff about comaping Fight Club and Orange, David Fincher himself adressed
this in an article in Entertainemnt Weekly and said the movie is not like ACO and is instead "a fairy tale." So if anything, Fight Club is fairy tale and not satire. As for the film, I have yet to see it but I got an e-mail that it's still playing at the movie theaters, so sometime during the holidays, I'll go and check out the movie for myself.
-
The children "subplots" in American Beauty were the heart and soul of the movie. Through them we saw how innocents view the adult world. Wes Bentley's character was the perfect anti-cynic. They were at the point of discovering everything that was fucked up about our culture's assembly-line drone mentality favoritism over individuality. They were the counterpoint to both Annette Benning's soulless character and Kevin Spacey's corporate clone at the beginning of the movie. The writing as I see it is superb. As for the direction, Sam Mendes brought great performances out of all his actors, good pacing, and a keen visual sense. As a fellow Lynch fanatic, I was surprised by your oversimplified take on the film.
-
AICN should do their own awards show, so the neglected great movies won't be left out.
-
first about spielberg, HE DOESN'T HAVE ISSUES
to quote mr makey spielberg style "Germans are badddddd"
except of course oscar schindler (even though his widow was outraged that Schindlers list showed oscar to ba a jew sympathiser rather than just a clever capitalist).
and as for Agent Cole, I htink the problem here is that we both see fight club the same way, but we look at it through different lenses. You see it as anangry young man style film, which i do too, but you see this as unb original, wheras i see it as original compared to everything else we have had recently, when was the last good film of this genre?
and i have to disagree, i never thought it was like a clock work orange, a clock work orange is a far deeper look at society, rather than fight clubs look into madness.
But it is original in the way it doesn't try to hide the fact it is a movie, ****SPOILERS****
when we are told about tyler's life style Norton talks directly to the camera, etc. etc.
and what about the scene involving the edges of the film vibrating.
*****End SPOILERS*****
now i am more than willing to let you not like fight club, i can see your opinion on it, can you see mine? -
to all those who say that in reality those guys would be dead from that sort of fighting...
answer me this, have you ever been in a fight? a real fight?
was that a no? oh well nevermind
because if someone would like to come forward and say that they themselves have experienced the sort of fighting in fight club and can testify that it killed them then so be it.
until then?
take a reality check boys
the film does implore violence, did you notice how the only person to die was shot ? not in a fist fight, shot by a cop. oops, i didn't just put my finger on why the old guys in limos won't nominate it did i? a film which shows anarchists to be honourable than your average cop? we can't nominate that surely.
to take ed nortons words "it would be a better world if people had started fighting with fists rather than shooting each other in the streets"
kudos oh norton -
Dec 21, 1999 7:16:30 PM CST
Will Fight Club vanish over time and become another forgotten ma
by el duderino
Because the majority of Americans are only interested in a past film if it has been mentioned by the Oscars, I fear that this film will just disappear over time. I must agree that in a year full of fantastic films ranging from American Beauty to the Matrix, this has to be the best. This is one of the only years where I haven't heard any old divorced whores bitch about how movies suck now. Because of this, I can sympathize a little with the voting committee, but does the voting committee even bother to watch all the movies that were released this year? Not only did this gem get overlooked, others like Dogma and the Iron Giant and Three Kings got overlooked. It's appalling, maybe not as appalling as when Sigourney Weaver got nominated for her performance in Aliens, but apalling nonetheless. Anyway, Fight Club, although the ending was very odd, was a visual and compelling masterpeice. The cinematography was breathtaking, and some of the effects used to tell the story (the introduction, the refrigerator shots, the rotating room with the designer items flashing, the crashing airplane) were magnificent, and David Fincher's direction made these scenes more compelling that they already were in the script version. In short, I love this film. I'm sorry, but Being John Malkovich blew. That sack of shit is all about kinky lesbian sex, and almost nothing in that film is funny. The only reason why they chose that movie was because it was "original". Which brings me to another point, if such a mountain of shit could get nominated for being "original", then how the hell can Fight Club not get nominated and win every catagory possible? The only thing I could find that you could complain about is that the story is very over-the-top and not very realistic, and the ending is twice as unbelieveable as the whole movie, but this is also why I love this film so much. If you haven't seen this film, do it while it's still in theatres. And while the marketing campaign of Fight Club wasn't spectacular, it never resorted to "Critics can't stop talking about Fight Club!"
-
ver yfew of todays classics one awards
Blade Runner, Citizen Kane, Star wars to name but a few.
Love Fight Club or hate fight club
you have to love the where is my mind song at the end credits
-
Is anybody but me pissed off that Three Kings isn't up for anything even in the fake awards? This movie got a LOT of good reviews and, while I don't think it should get any acting oscars, it definitely deserves something for Picture, Director, Screenplay, Cinematography . . . I know, action movies aren't oscar material, but this is one of the years three best films.
-
Read my lips: Three Kings is a better film that Private Ryan. Private Ryan is a good film, and features 30 solid minutes of the best battle scenes ever filmed, but it can't decide what it's about. Instead of treading the theme tightrope between heroism and insanity, Private Ryan jumps from side to side and creates an ending that we'll just call a Speilbergian tug to make us cry (Did I earn it? Come on, Matt . . .) Three Kings presents itself as action movie. It doesn't dwell on insanity, and it definitely isn't about heroics. It's Kelly's Heroes in Desert Storm with more heart and realism. We understand the politics of desert storm without becoming engulfed in them. The difference between Hanks' character and Clooney's is that Hanks does the really BRAVE thing while Clooney does what any rational human being would do. There isn't a big heave-out at the end because Clooney's character is written well enough that he can do the right thing without making a character reversal. The decision that Hanks' character makes is completely out of character with anything he has done previously in the film. It goes against everything he and his men agree with, and therefore murks up the theme. You could say, I guess, going against convential thinking is insane . . . yeah, but they go against conventional thinking to (again) do something REALLY BRAVE. And (spoiler) if there is a traditional hero, who is the hero at the end of Three Kings? Spike Jonze, the local idiot. In SPR it's Sergeart York / Audie Murphy / Dudley Doright, Tom Hanks. Clearly, heroism is presented less conventionally in what could be seen as the more conventional movie (3K), while Speilberg's meditation on war, definitely intended for higher ground, has the stereotypical "death for a cause." Three Kings has a political side, but the politics aren't anything groundbeaking (or presented as hindsight thinking as Speilberg's are), so the picture works on the ground of solid filmmaking and entertainment. Let's face it though, The Thin Red Line is the best of the three - a meditation on war in a TRUE sense (it really doesn't try to be anything else. A wonderful film) It is one of the best action movies of the decade, and is definitely deserving of at least a nomination. Also, to step on a few more toes - The Green Mile is the year's best film.
-
Best Picture (drama or comedy). In my book, MAGNOLIA is probably the best film of the year. THE STRAIGHT STORY also deserved a Best Picture nod. IXNAY THE END OF THE AFFIR, and just 86 the entire comedy category: the award itself has become a joke (Three Kings --- Bowfinger was the funniest movie of the year)
Best Actor and Actress. TERENCE STAMP (The Limey), JOHN C. REILLY (apparently being pushed for best actor for Magnolia), EDDIE MURPHY (comedically brilliant in Bowfinger)
In Support: PICK YOUR MAGNOLIA CAST MEMBER (Here's the Julianne Moore nod you should have given, Melora Walters, Jason Robards, Bill Macy), JOHN MALKOVICH (Being John Malkovich), CHRISTOPHER PLUMMER (The Insider), WHY THE HARD-ON FOR MICHAEL CAINE - HE WON (SOMEHOW) FOR LITTLE VOICE LAST YEAR?
BEST DIRECTOR - Mendes, Mann (though he could use some editing), and Minghella I'll live with -- yet the three strongest directorial efforts of the year came from SPIKE JONZE (BJM), DAVID O'RUSSELL (3 KINGS), AND PAUL THOMAS ANDERSON (MAGNOLIA).
winners: with these shitty nominees -- best drama winner should be american beauty -- best comedy winner should either be man on the moon or malkovich (i prefer the latter) --- best actor (drama) is farnsworth -- best actor (comedy) is carrey (even the most devout film fan must admit how scary he was) -- supporting actor is cruise -- supporting actress is keener (she was so fucking good!)
golden globes suck -- but that does not mean this is the place to spread your fight club propoganda -- sell that shit to the foreigners -- -
Okay...I'm far too tired to be at all eloquent tonight. I just wanted to bitch about the Golden Globes before I went to bed. Okay, first off, there were a lot of snubs this year, along with a lot of movies that should not have gotten any nominations whatsoever. But you all know that, don't you? To start with, the snubs: Where is Wes Bentley? I really would have liked to see him nominated for a best supporting actor role. Adrien Brody (Summer of Sam) also should have been nominated. I'm quite glad they finally recognized Jude Law (The Talented Mr. Ripley) for anything he has been in. He's quite a screen gem. Eyes Wide Shut was almost entirely ignored, which was quite unfair for the most artistically ambitious film of the year. Fight Club was ignored, which I expected. It was a flawed film, but, it was well-acted and directed, and it was also fairly original. eXistenZ was also unfairly ignored; it was quite unlike any film I have ever seen. While Reese Witherspoon deservedly got a nomination for Election, it was unfair to ignore Matthew Broderick in his most daring and wonderful performance to date. Magnolia's cast was slighted except for Tom Cruise. More nominations should have been garnered for a well-acted ensemble piece such as Magnolia. Ralphy Fiennes and Stephen Rea were ujustly ignored for their work in The End of the Affair. Where was Winona Ryder for Girl, Interrupted? No Onegin, no Topsy-Turvy? The Cider House Rules was the best John Irving adaption yet, and unfairly disregarded. Where was Limbo and where was Run Lola Run? Rosetta, Felicia's Journey? It seems you truly have to have a November-December release to get noticed. Now, for the movies that didn't deserve nominations. First, The Green Mile was a disappointment through and through. No nominations whatsoever deserved. The Sixth Sense's Haley Joel Osment? He was good, but no revelation. The movie itself was only at the high end of mediocre. Also, can we stop salaaming Meryl Streep? She's great, but let's not nominate her for every second-rate movie she's in. Same for John Williams! His film scores are comparable only to treacle. Notting Hill and Analyze This? Come on. Nothing special was going on in these comedies. Sharon Stone in The Muse? Let's just give that a resounding NO!!!! All in all, an interesting year. So that I have not completely and totally bashed the Golden Globes, I'll end this on a positive note. Here are the movies that I am quite glad the Golden Globes have given (almost) correct recognition to: American Beauty, The Talented Mr. Ripley, The End of the Affair, The Insider, Boys Don't Cry, The Straight Story, Sweet and Lowdown, Man on the Moon, Being John Malkovich, Tumbleweeds, All About My Mother, The Red Violin, Girl, Interrupted, Anywhere but Here, Toy Story 2 and The Hurricane. (Note: I do not think ALLl of the above movies in this last list are wonderful, just nominated in categories it deserved.) Well, I'll be off to bed now.
-
where is any of the nominations for three kings or for director screenwriter david russell.
-
I told you I was tired. Ummm...here is something I accidentally omitted from my last post. A huge mistake of a snub for Kate Winslet in Holy Smoke. She was absolutely phenomenal. Damn the Golden Globes.
-
If she gets snubbed come oscar time then that's the biggest injustice of all. She gave the best performance of the year by far. And only 24, Wow!
-
AMERICAN BEAUTY and THE INSIDER are excellent choices. I'll have no problem with either of them winning. TOPSY TURVY so rewarded by critics last week is completely ignored by Globes. Singular great acting can't save a movie: MUSIC FROM THE HEART, MAN ON THE MOON, BOYS DON'T CRY, ELECTION, GREEN MILE.
Long films are too boring and don't have command of the material, so DOGMA, EYES WIDE SHUT and GREEN MILE are ignored.
Best Picture doesn't start with Best Screenplays. CIDER HOUSE RULES and THE SIXTH SENSE begin as Best Screenplay but nowhere movies. STAR WARS 1--THE PHANTOM MENACE makes more money than everybody else and is ignored. Best Acting in ANALYZE THIS apparently is just the actors, not the screenplay. Critics glowed about MAGNOLIA and didn't mention the song, so it's nominated for Best Song. -
Hey, just where the heck are the nominations for Kubrick's final masterpiece "Eyes Wide Shut"? Nicole Kidman turns in one of the best performances of the year and no nomination for her? I guess history will have to be kinder to Kubrick, Cruise and Kidman than the Hollywood Foreign Press and perhaps even the Academy will be this year. If Kubrick were only alive, he perhaps would have invested in a healthy supply of watches to avoid this total snubbery by the Foreign Press.
-
The most ridiculous omission has got to be Wes Bentley in the supporting actor category. If ever there was a young actor to not get blown off the screen by Kevin Spacey, it's him. And as for Fight Club: guys, face it, it did nothing at the box office & was too unpopular, especially in the year of Columbine, to get any awards. It will be much more appreciated in retrospect, as was Psycho & 2001. Does it suck that it's getting the shaft? Hell yeah, but you can't possibly expect a much-despised bomb to get very many year-end accolades. And why are there 6 supporting actress nominations? Just curious on that point.
-
Kevin Spacey had better pick up that Golden Globe! I believe that he is the greatest living American actor. Just try to argue with me! (I'll just ignore all the flames) Incidentally, I enjoyed Fight Club, but it ain't the be-all and end-all, OK? P.S. Edward Norton is the *successor* to the greatest American actor throne; only Kevin beats him, IMHO.
-
Just a comment on Saving Private Ryan and the knee-jerk bashing it seems to recieve every now and then in the name of cinematic "art". First off, on a purely technical level, SPR is a near-perfect film (and I only include the "near" as no film is absolutely perfect). But as far as the virtues of cinematography, editing, etc., are concerned, SPR need answer to no one. It's beyond any rational cosideration a beautifully crafted film - which alone would absolve Spielberg from any armchair accusations of being a "hack". As for complaints that the film unfairly indulges in crowd-pleasing sentimentality and doesn't "challenge" the audience enough - this raises two points. One is that there's a such thing as good and bad manipulation in films. Every film ever made is manipulative in some sense. Every film seeks to involve an audience in its particular story. The constant knock against Spielberg is that he's "too maipulative" - which only comes from people who take the "sophisticated" positon that it's cheap to appeal to an audience's emotions. Which implies that it's only o.k. or intelligent to embrace something as long as it's jaded, cynical and angry at the world. A shared emotional response to a film just wouldn't be cutting-edge enough, would it? The second point is that showing inately decent people involved in a common struggle is somehow false, phony, or sugar-coated. Well, SPR doesn't portray its soldiers as saints with gleaming halos - they're just men sent to do a job who happen to rise to the occasion. They didn't question whether what they were doing was right or "worthless" - or if they did they didn't let that stop them from accomplishing what they had to do. And it's a lucky thing for all of us that they didn't. That war is "wrong" is certainly true but if any war had to be fought, it's WWII - the fact that we're able to sit here today in a free world and debate anything is due to the fact that decades ago, these men halted the progress of fascism. That's not hyperbole or exaggeration - it's the just the truth. In our post-modern, ironic age it may not be hip to acknowledge heroism and sacrifice but those qualities made the difference once upon a time. I guess it's easier to embrace the selfish, self-absorbed nilhilism of Fight Club, the superficial suburban malaise of American Beauty, or the whiz-bang virtuosity of The Matrix. The joke is that by and large the audience that embraces those films aren't being challenged or confronted at all. While those films all have many excellent merits, as "art" they merely reinforce and confirm feelings of frustration and isolation in a segment of the audience that mindlessly resonds to spoon-fed messages as eagerly as any other dupe. Just because the messages are disgruntled, anti-social ones doesn't mean it takes any special intelligence to absorb them.
-
excellent comments. I hope some of the more...uh...confused members of talkback read your post and think about what you have said. Admittedly Saving Private Ryan comes out in the end as pro-america. But throughout the course of the story, I don't think for a second it's ever advertising a pro-war ethic. i think that was speilberg's point.
And those of you who think the Matrix and Fight Club were original and thought provoking, you obviousy just forgot the MTV you were watching. Go rent some Hong Kong action flicks and watch Clockwork Orange. Much better then these two films. -
Veidt, I think you bring up a lot of good points. I enjoyed being manipulated in movies like E.T. and (one of my sentimental favorites) Hoosiers. I don't care how contrived the ending is because the film just works on that level. It STAYS on that level. But SPR, and let me reemphasize that I think this is a good film, just not a great film, is for all it's technical glory, muddled and jumpy. You mention that the soldiers aren't made to look like saints. I agree with you on one level. To look at the anger in Adam Goldberg's Meanish or the psycho religion in Barry Pepper's Jackson or even the cowardice in Jeremy Davies' Upham is a definite step away from the "I have but one life to give" depiction of American soldiers. But here's the things - somehow, by the end of this film, these guys become saints. Just look at the way the final scene with Miller is shot, when he says "Earn this." This isn't the insanity that comes through so clearly on the battlefield, this is a contrivance. Miller has just enough life left in him to give Ryan motivation to live his life. That only happens in movies! This is a very realistic movie but that realism can be shattered if the characters are inconsistent or at the mercy of screenwriters who are peeling metaphorical onions to make us teary-eyed. The movie is good in several ways - Upham doesn't become a hero, Meanish doesn't develop a heart . . . I agree that accepting a cynical message makes us all feel smart while we might feel stupid for accepting an uplifting message. American Beauty, for my money, has a very uplifting message but, like Lester Burnham, we must wade through the sloth and misery of a structured American society to find true beauty. Some movies show the end but not the means. Private Ryan's problem is that it trys to mix sly manipulation with blatant, overpowering realism. The two don't mix. The problems aren't technical (I agree with you, this is almost flawless on that level.) The problems are with theme and story. This leaves us with a flawed but fascinating film by one of our best filmmakers.
-
Lazarus Long, I thank you. You have conveyed my exact feelings for Steven Spielberg in a well-thought-out TalkBack.
-
Veidt mentioned that SPR is the recipient of kneejerk bashing...well, there are many films that get that treatment around here (Episode I, Fight Club, Eyes Wide Shut, that piece of garbage Lost Highway), but when you have a film that is lauded by so many people, its critics are going to be vocal enough to drown out what they view as false praise. So it's not uncalled for. If SPR had won best picture I assure you those voices would be twice as loud. I'd like to solve a simple debate right here over why Shakespeare in Love was deserving of the award last year. You have one film that is all about a great original screenplay, and amazing acting, and then on the other hand you have a film of great technical prowess by a major director. Now one is a war film, one a love story. I thought SIL was a lot more original for its type of film than SPR was. Some disagree. But as I quoted before, all SPR proves is that Spielberg has seen every war film. It says nothing new about war. So I think the film with the better screenplay has more of a right to be recognized than a film that was obviously budgeted to be as realistic as they wanted it. Now Titanic had a used-toilet paper of a screenplay, but it didn't win. SPR wasn't as dominating a film. And also Veidt, don't give us that "We wouldn't be here if it weren't for the soldiers of..." blah blah blah. We wouldn't be here if it wasn't for Christopher Columbus either, and he was a fucking douchebag. There's no such thing as a pro-war film (although John Wayne's Green Berets comes pretty close) in terms of "war is good". But what SPR did do, is GLORIFY the idea of heroics in war, and HONOR the idea of killing bad guys, neither of which are deserved. It may be necessary, but people shouldn't earn medals or commendations for killing people. And also, if the old guy is at the beginning, and we morph back into him at the end, it implies he's telling the story. But he wasn't there for the first, what, 2 hours of the film? How retarded. But I'm tired, and don't have time to list this films many flaws.
-
HELLO!!! HELLO??? HFPA wake up!!!
What on Earth is Sharon Stone doing in the nominees? Come on in all honesty that show was adjudged a critical and Box office FLOP!!! It should get a RAZZIE instead!!
AND am I mistaken in saying where the HELL is Michelle Pfeiffer OR Ralph Fiennes for that matter?? Both truned in phenomenal performances and they're ALWAYS snubbed. (RE: A Thousand Acres/ Deep End of the Ocean and Oscar and Lucinda)
WHAT is JULIA doing there too. Notting Hill was entertaining but not GG material.
Hugh Grant?? Oh please...It is obvious that the GGs are a farce!!
Toy Story 2 got a nomination when The Prince Of Egypt got snubbed last year??!!! I mean am I the only one going crazy here?? Where is justice I ask you?
AND will Meryl Streep QUIT making movies? Although she was good the movie stunk and If that can still get a person a nomination then I suggest give one to Glenn Close!!
AND isn't Julianne Moore just a tad overrated?
I hate the GGs...To H*LL with it.
-
If any of you who liked "Fight Club" can clarify or explain this to me/it wd be greatly appreciated: How can you be so enamoured of a film that didn't have the strength of it's own convictions?
I haven't read the Palanhiuk's novel/so I cannot say if it "took itself seriosuly" or not. But I don't understand why a screenwriter/or a director for that matter/wd spend 90 min. of movie time creating this incredible underground world/ dominated by the Janus-like characters of Typer Durden & Edward Norton's character (whose name escapes me -- he used so many of them during his support-group-fugitive phase...) 2 men who are such perfect oppsite sides of a single coin/only to turn around 3/4 of the way into the film & HAVE DURDEN TURN OUT TO BE NOTHING MORE THAN A FICITIOUS AVATAR!
The hook for the entire film was the fact that there cd be a Tyler Durden out there/waiting to suck in all the losers & wanna-be anarchists & anyone else numb or dumb enough to equate bare-fisted brawling with being anti-establishment or life-enhancing. But what we've all seen happen in Oklahoma City & Littleton & countless other places makes us all to too aware of how appealing the Typer Durden's of this world can be.
To have Durden end up being nothing more than Norton's a fictional alter ego reduced Norton's charcter to a garden-variety schizophrenic/just another psychopath w/a trumped up "other self" he can send out into the world to wreak the kind of havoc he is not-quite-insane enough to pull off in real life.
And it undermined the whole fallout btwn them when Norton became disillusioned that he was no longer Durden's ace boon-coon & partner in crime. He put a serious hurting on that Billy Idol wanna-be becuz of his jealousy -- becuase he "wanted to destroy something beautiful". Which I thought was supposed to be some sort of emotional turning-point for Norton's character.
And the whole business w/Marla became completely untenable once the big fraud was revealed. She wasn't anything more than "The Girl"/so who really cared what happened to her? But all of those scenes where she strolls into the kitchen after fucking like jack rabbits w/Durden & exchanges words w/the sullen Norton make no sense -- if we're expected to buy into the idea that Durden was just a fictional alter-ego of Norton's. She wdn't have had those little chats w/him/or been so aloof in the kitchen towards a guy she'd just gotten out of bed w/5 min. ago.
Finding out that Tyler Durden really didn't exist -- & seeing Norton shoot himself through the head AND LIVE! to hold hands w/his tawdry heroine & watch skyscrapers blow up/was worse than anti-climatic; for me/it was a chicken-shit way out of standing up for the fact that as awful as the Tyler Durden's among us may be/they are all we have to turn to if we don't have enough common-sense & moral vision to see outselves as something more than consumer clones. If you're going to take the time to create such a character/shdn't you -- as a director or screenwriter -- have the courage to beileve in him until the final credits roll?
But hey... than's just me, y'know? -
I know I've already thrown in my 2 cents but judging on one post here about her two nominations -I have to say PLEASE let there be no backlash brewing. Meryl Streep (and I don't feel the least embarassed by comparing the two) has had the same type of backlash over and over. And its sad. If you're nearly always great...you're nearly always great. period. (Now before we start posting how shitty Julianne was in such and such a film -consider the evidence of Safe, Vanya on 42nd Street, Boogie Nights, and this years five performances and try to say she's not the best actress to emerge in the 90s)
Julianne is phenomenal and while her best performance this year (and I've seen all five of them) was in Magnolia at least they thought to include her somewhere. My suspicion is that she'll be Oscar nominated for Magnolia and these two performances will miss.
-
Okay..the only real beef I have with this list is that DOGMA was not mentioned. I didn't expect Kevin to get a BEST DIRECTOR nod, or Linda Fiorentino to get a BEST ACTRESS nod either, but at LEAST a BEST SCREENPLAY for Kevin, or a BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR for Ben Affleck or Matt Damon, who by the way, KICKED SOME ASS in that flick. I'm talking about the scene where Bartleby finally snaps and forces Loki to follow him on his mission. Oh, and to HELL with EWS, because Sam Mendez DESERVES that Globe for BEST DIRECTOR, 'cause he actually finished his movie before it was released. Nooch.
-
Some good points. The conversations with Marla and the other 'discrepancies' regarding Tyler's alter ego are very cleverly handled, you'll notice upon second viewing. And while you may have been angered or disappointed at that particular twist (I'm just making an assumption based on your post), but I thought it was important and consistent with the kinetic, insane feel of the movie- it explained a lot. As for the storytellers taking time setting up a character whose ideals aren't upheld at the end.. personally, I don't think the storytellers intended for us to agree with Durden's POV or methodology. Sympathize yeah, but not agree. Oh, and as for Norton's character.. his name was Tyler Durden throughout the movie, though it was never said to in reference to Norton til the end. =) IMHO
-
Face it, none of the truly great films are ever nominated--or win--any of these silly awards. The Oscars and Golden Globes are BOUGHT anyways, and are very political. How can anyone take an awards academy seriously when they actually nominate one-note actor Matt Damon over a powerhouse like Edward Norton? Obivously, Miramax is busy buying up all the awards again this year.
Many other actors and movies have been ignored, too, in favor of the Mr and Ms Popular of 1999 but they are too numerous to list. Thank god the mega-overrated Tom Hanks wasn't nominated for anything. That's just one thing to be happy about. -
the whole point of Tyler Durden being a figment of Norton's imagaination is because he IS not a real perons, there is no rea ltyler durden, he is the manifetation of everything man wants to do but cannot in OUR world
listen tro THis is you r life to clairfy this
and Norton is credited as 'The Narrator' in the movie, yet some people still insist on calling him jack, why? cos they're a dense hacks -
They may have hated the film but they sure do embody its title. Eyes Wide Shut was hands down the best film of the year. Kubrick gave the best direction of the year as well.
I know you idiots will all disagree with me but most of your posts show just how dumb all of you are when it comes to film.
Iron Giant was good but not great. I am glad PT Anderson's shite was not nominated---when will people realize this guy makes movies that are incredibly banal. Hard Eight? Please. Boogie Nights? Please. And then he says Fight Club was bad because it was socially irresponsible. What a moron. He missed the whole point of the film.
TOP TEN 1999
1. Eyes Wide Shut
2. American Beauty
3. The Loss OF Sexual Innocence
4. Fight Club
5. eXistenZ
6. Being John Malkovich
7. Election
8. The Matrix
9. Go
10. Breakfast of Champions -
They managed to give American Beauty all those nods, but left out the amazing breakthrough performance of Wes Bentley as the creepy introvert who brought about the theme of the movie.
-
RC, the filmmakers of Fight Club aren't as dumb as you look. By the way, since when did we drop the spoiler warnings on this film? Is it okay to talk about now? I guess so. I read an extensive interview with Fincher in Film Comment a while back, and as I expected, they took great pains to assure that all the "loopholes" would be covered when people went back and saw this a second time. The reality is that the male/female relationship actually carries MORE weight with the viewer the second time. Her reactions to Norton make LESS sense the first time. The second time I saw FC I thought the interaction was heartbreaking. The character also has more weight in the book, but they kept enough. What does it matter if Tyler is "real" or not. One of his personalities is not real why the other is fake. There were contradictions inside that could not co-exist any longer, so they fought for superiority. As The Narrator sleeps more and more, Tyler takes up more and more of his life. Eventually his feelings for Marla combined with his discovery of his own "secret" cause him to fight back and take control, stopping the madness he has unconsciously unleashed. It's not THAT hard to figure out. I think a lot of people get angry when seeing this because they weren't given a chance to "figure it out". This isn't a fucking Agatha Christie whodunnit. The filmmakers aren't trying to go "Ha Ha! We got you!" You could maybe make that argument for the 6th Sense. Obviously no one here who hated the film is going to want to read the book, but it contains much insight. And you should at least view the film again before you criticize its inner workings, which are too intricate to possibly be aware of after the first time.
-
To try and draw an analogy between Columbus' discovery of the New World and the allied victory in WWII just doesn't measure up. Had Columbus not discovered America, someone would've - it's a pretty big area to miss forever. On the other hand, had the U.S. and its allies not intervened in WWII, who would've? Had we not won that war, we would still exist today but in a very, very different world. And if the soldiers that fought in that conflict don't deserve medals, what do they deserve - a kick in the nuts? It's very easy to be glib and self-satisfied about the wrongfulness of war while not thinking twice about taking the freedom we were born to for granted. As for loopholes in Fight Club, there's one that even after seeing the movie twice I still can't reconcile. In the scene in which Pitt and Norton are in the front seat of a car while two members of Operation Mayhem are in the backseat, it's hard to know how those men are reacting to the "conversation" taking place between Pitt and Norton. Are they hearing both sides of the conversation? Are they hearing only one man talking (something I did look for on a second viewing but it didn't seem to pan out)? After the accident Norton is logically standing off to the side while Pitt alone is helping the men out of the car but I'd like to know Fincher's take on the moments before the crash as it's the one scene in the movie that seems impossible to watch and have a clear idea of what's "really" happening.
-
There are several reasons why the golden golbes are inefficient measurements of talent in the motion picture industry. Here are some reasons why:
1)those who vote for the globes are "not film critics and not members of the movie industry." So what, then, makes them qualified?
2)Nottinghill has 3 nominations.
3) Sharon Stone is nominated.
4) Natalie Portman is nominated.
5) Fightclub is not.
6) and most importantly, Magnolia and Rushmore didn't make it.
Boycott the golden globes! -
Regarding SPR/War: Veidt, the first point you're missing is that these soldiers weren't chosen for any specific reason. If these guys died, there would have been more faceless pawns to take over (until one side runs out). And I didn't say veterans should be kicked in the nuts, or spit on (vietnam). That is reprehensible. But veterans are victims, much more so than those they have killed. Instead of giving them medals and making them proud of what they've done, the money spent for decorations should have instead funded counseling groups and "deprogramming", where they are able to learn that what they did may have been necessary, but it was in no way "good". If you shudder at my choice of words, what the fuck do you think happens to people in basic training? You are programmed, and brainwashed into becoming the best "soldier" you can be. Now this may be necessary to create a supreme fighting force, but you can't argue that it doesn't already dehumanize men before they even go into battle. But like some long-term policemen or detectives, it is hard to cope with the horrors of that job. Now theoretically police are to "protect and serve" so maybe they're worthy of commendation, but the military in war is used to kill, and occupy territory, that's it. Thin Red Line recognized that, SPR surely didn't. Now as for Fight Club, you can't really say that every time Norton talks to Brad he is talking out loud. Dealing with a split personality could be an inner monologue at times, which would have come off weakly on film. If you watch that car scene, the guys in the back do exchange weird looks. So they are obviously hearing Tyler talking to himself. Do they hear both sides of the whole conversation? I don't believe that is necessarily true. Even so, that's one questionable link in a really well put together piece of webbing.
-
It's clear during Fight Club that when Pitt/Norton are having conversations that often either one or neither of them is actually speaking. However, in every scene except the car scene, it's apparent how the scene is playing out in "reality." Regarding that single scene, I'd be interested in hearing Fincher's take on it (which may come about in DVD audio commentary) - as the rest of the film was so obviously thought-out to the letter I can't believe he wouldn't have a ready explanation as to what's taking place there. As for the issue of war/soldiers, etc., in the interest of not further side-tracking a talkback that's obstensibly about the Golden Globes any more than it already had been sidetracked, I'll simply agree to disagree. The only thing worst then sending men off to kill in the name of their country is to bring them back only to give them a lot of high-handed moralistic psycho-babble about how killing is wrong and they should take no honor for doing their country's dirty work. I have to imagine that there isn't a (sane) solider alive who is glad to have killed another man, no matter what the cause. To have a soldier recieve a medal, or commendation, etc., for duty served is just that - a recognition of duty served. It seems like the real problem that some people have with SPR is that it presents soldiers in such a favorable light without saddling them with the proper amount of liberal guilt. If the characters in SPR had spent more time bitching to each other about the godawful inhumanity of war, I guarantee it would have a few less critics. But what I liked about the film is that it showed these soldiers as men who dealt pragmatically with life or death decisions. And regarding the often mentioned fact that Matt Damon's Private Ryan narrates the story even though he didn't join up with Hanks' troop until well over halfway into the picture, I might suggest that Ed Burns' and Jeremy Davies' character would've surely had ample opportunity after the climatic battle to fill Damon in on the events that led up to their meeting. I'm not enamoured with SPR's bookends but I do think that explanation is as good as any.
-
Rushmore was released in '98. That's why there was all the talk about Bill Murray getting nominated for Supporting Actor earlier this year. Cut off's Dec. 31. As for Fight Club, the brilliant thing about it is the thing that most of its naysayers cite as convolution: it tells the story from the point of view of an insane man. Edward Norton's just as disoriented about how everything unravels as the audience is, and that was a masterstroke. But people who can't allow themselves to be manipulated like that are bound to view it as a weakness and the reason the movie sucks. And as for manipulation, as this label is so often tagged on Spielberg, a couple of notes: if his films were less successful, would those of you who so despise him relent? You're just like punk rock fans it seems: if something somebody makes is a money maker, it's a sell-out because only the aesthetically cool few truly know what's great, and so anything embraced by a large audience must be shit. And secondly, and this has probably been mentioned before, if you're going to rag on Spielberg's directorial skills- "He's a hack! He sucks. His balls should be cut off."- then why don't you direct a film and show us all how it's done correctly. If you're gonna be too big a pussy bitch to not actually do that, then quit with the fucking arm-chair directing. Oh, and if you're gonna complain that you don't have gobs of money at your disposal the way he does, then at the very least write a script and get it sold, then the funding will come and your excuses will be negated.
-
The reason that TSS is not on my list is quite simple----the movie was an overlong Twilight Zone episode. It was good the first time but it hardly holds up on another viewing. Way too boring to be an oft watched classic. The kid was good though.
American Beauty, in any other year, would be #1. I had no desire to see the film and did so only out of boredom. What I found was a deeply interesting film which was smashingly well done on all fronts. My only complaint is Annette Bening who I think is the worst. But every other scene and performer were brilliant. From the choreography of the cheerleaders to the pot smoking. I can understand one not liking it, but the movie just did it for me. The way Kevin Spacey lusts after both his wife's and daughter's attention through Mena Suvari is brilliant.
And Eyes Wide Shut was about the exploration of fear and temptation, not tits. -
Lazarus Log is right. 'Saving Private Ryan' tells us nothing new about war, and this is why it is a White Elephant of a movie. I am not knocking this film because it's trendy to do so, I am knocking it because it has false dignity. The gauntlet I throw down to all its fans: TELL US ONE THING, ONE SIMPLE THING, THAT SAVING PRIVATE RYAN TELLS US ABOUT WAR THAT WE DID NOT KNOW BEFORE. Answer that. Don't tell me about how brilliantly or realistically filmed or edited or acted it is - tell me what it tells about war that we did not know before. That's all I ask. That's my challenge.
-
I will say that I fundamentally agree with you about the overall quality of SPR. I am not a big fan of this movie, but there are parts of it that rank with the best moments in film. It's just too bad there are not enough of them to make the movie a classic.
SPOILERS
There are two sequences that stand out in my mind. One is the scene in which Mrs. Ryan gets the news about the deaths of her sons. Wordless, one long shot culminating with her collapse on the porch. The horror of war brought home. Intensely moving and really just about as good as you get in film. I think this is where Spielberg is at his best, when there is no dialogue and his weakness at directing actors isn't allowed to show through.
But your question was "What does SPR tell us about war that we didn't already know?" The answer is, of course, in the first twenty minutes of the film. The landing on the beach is one of the most gut-wrenching, visceral experiences I have ever had in a movie theater. It totally rerouted my thinking about the GI experience in World War II, and raised my standard of ranking move battle scenes (after I thought that nobody would ever outdo "Platoon"). No other war movie even comes close. A truly classic piece of filmmaking.
I have heard certain people say, "I didn't need to see that. I know war is bad." Bullshit. No one has ever captured the horror of war this completely. Everybody who ever opens their mouth in support of sending troops anywhere in the world should be made to see the first twenty minutes of SPR. And we should never forget that as tough as it is to watch in a theater, real men had to live and die through the reality of that experience.
Anyway, after the astonishing first act, the rest of the film goes downhill so badly that I can't think of SPR as being anything more than a film with a couple of wonderful moments in it. Hanks and the other soldiers philosophizing during their journey is lame, the cameos (especially by bartender Sam Malone) don't jazz up the action at all and, although the characters are distinct from each other, I never really cared about the members of Hanks' squad. And Matt Damon's teeth! I like Matt Damon, but Jesus! Big fat shiny full moon teeth in the middle of France in World War II! Couldn't they have had the guy eat some Oreos without milk before each scene?
The climactic battle at the end is just too drawn out and heavy handed, its symbolism really clunky and the need to deliver a message just insulting. The bookends with the old man and lady from the Retirement Home for Bad Actors are not terrible, but again at the end they just lay it on too thick, like the audience isn't smart enough to figure out what's going on.
I truly think that the vast majority of people who saw SPR were so totally awed, numbed, and devastated by the first twenty minutes that they gave a pass to the rest of the film and stamped it great in their minds. I think Spielberg has been unfairly maligned for the simple crime of being successful, but he has made greater films (Jaws, Raiders #1, ET, Schindler's List) and is rightfully honored for his overall excellent work as a filmmaker.
-
The Prince of Egypt didn't get nominated last year because ... drums please.... it SUCKED! It was a manipulative, overplayed, overacted, overly melodramatic, complete and utter borefest from beginning to end! By far the most disappointing movie of last year. Toy Story 2 wasn't a great movie, but it was a helluva lot better than POE. Of course I would've much prefered The Iron Giant or even Tarzan is it's spot though. The entire Musical/Comedy category is kind of a joke anyways - Notting Hill??? Please! ..... I was pleased that American Beauty was recognized and Hilary Swank in Boys Don't Cry, but this was expected ..... Also glad to see Reese Witherspoon recognized for The Election, a movie that I was sure was going to be forgotten by now..... The Fight Club was a decent film, but definitely not one of the 5 best dramas of 99. It won't even make my best 10 films by mile..... And Saving Private Ryan? Yes, I think it deserved to win Best Picture last year over Shakespeare in Love. It was a powerful film, deeply moving, and wonderfully acted. Movies are supposed to take you away, make you feel a certain way, tug at your heart strings or tickle your funny bone, if that makes them manipulative, then so be it, manipulate me all you like. Remember a time when people weren't so damn pretentious about the "art of films"?
-
...did you all happen to forget that "Jack" is a schizophrenic? Schizophrenics talk to themselves! Stop your bitchin'! Oh, and regarding the Globe nominations for best foreign film (pretend I'm shrieking like Heather Donahue here) WHERE THE FUCK IS LOLA RENNT?! WHERE...THE FUCK...IS LOLA RENNT??!!!
Readers Talkback
User Login
Top Talkbacks
- THE DARK KNIGHT RISES TV Spot Has New Footage And Dialogue! UPDATED To Add Second Spot! -- 275 total posts 275 posts
- G.I. JOE: RETALIATION Delayed Nine Months...Thanks To A Force More Sinister Than Cobra!! -- 267 total posts 266 posts
- Gary Oldman Joins The ROBOCOP Remake! -- 139 total posts 139 posts
- Remember when I said I’d kill The Behind the Scenes Pic of the Day last? I lied. -- 137 total posts 137 posts
- UPDATE!! What The Hell Happened With G.I. JOE: RETALIATION?! -- 133 total posts 133 posts
- Cats Beware!! An ALF Movie May Soon Come Our Way... -- 160 total posts 114 posts
- Who Is The Voice Of Batman In WB's Animated Two Part THE DARK KNIGHT RETURNS? -- 167 total posts 101 posts
- Quint has seen the brand new Jaws restoration and demands that Universal do a wide theatrical rerelease this summer! -- 81 total posts 81 posts
- THE EXORCIST Is Being Remade... -- 71 total posts 71 posts
- TODAY IS THE LAST DAY OF SWEEPS AND THE SEASON!! Chat Here About The Finales Of REVENGE, MODERN FAMILY, MIDDLE, BITCH, IDOL, TOW, ROCKERS, SVU And SOLD!! -- 51 total posts 51 posts