Golden Globe Nominations

ITALIANO
Emeritus
Posts: 4076
Joined: Mon Jan 06, 2003 1:58 pm
Location: MILAN
Contact:

Postby ITALIANO » Wed Dec 16, 2009 5:31 pm

Damien wrote:
ITALIANO wrote:
Joey wrote:"Dreamgirls" is right up there with "Cold Mountain" for me; two overblown, overrated films shoved down our throats by their Oscar campaigners (and people like Tom O'Neil), thereby making it even more delicious when they were righfully snubbed.

Why weren't you here back then!!! :;):

Marco, I didn't know you disliked Cold Mountain. :D

:D

I swear that's not ME!

User avatar
Damien
Laureate
Posts: 6331
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 8:43 pm
Location: New York, New York
Contact:

Postby Damien » Wed Dec 16, 2009 5:19 pm

ITALIANO wrote:
Joey wrote:"Dreamgirls" is right up there with "Cold Mountain" for me; two overblown, overrated films shoved down our throats by their Oscar campaigners (and people like Tom O'Neil), thereby making it even more delicious when they were righfully snubbed.

Why weren't you here back then!!! :;):

Marco, I didn't know you disliked Cold Mountain. :D
"Y'know, that's one of the things I like about Mitt Romney. He's been consistent since he changed his mind." -- Christine O'Donnell

ITALIANO
Emeritus
Posts: 4076
Joined: Mon Jan 06, 2003 1:58 pm
Location: MILAN
Contact:

Postby ITALIANO » Wed Dec 16, 2009 3:34 pm

Joey wrote:"Dreamgirls" is right up there with "Cold Mountain" for me; two overblown, overrated films shoved down our throats by their Oscar campaigners (and people like Tom O'Neil), thereby making it even more delicious when they were righfully snubbed.

Why weren't you here back then!!! :;):

User avatar
Sonic Youth
Laureate
Posts: 7443
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 8:35 pm
Location: USA

Postby Sonic Youth » Wed Dec 16, 2009 3:16 pm

Mr. Tee, your reply made the exact same points my initial reply did before I erased it... only far less patiently (which is why I erased it).
"What the hell?"
Win Butler

Joey
Graduate
Posts: 16
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 11:01 am
Location: NY

Postby Joey » Wed Dec 16, 2009 3:14 pm

"Dreamgirls" is right up there with "Cold Mountain" for me; two overblown, overrated films shoved down our throats by their Oscar campaigners (and people like Tom O'Neil), thereby making it even more delicious when they were righfully snubbed.

I think there's a somewhat similar correlation to "Precious" this year. It's Directing omission at the Globes is ominous, and there seems to be a small backlash (maybe wishful thinking on my part), not to mention the fact that "Up in the Air" is stealing its thunder in terms of perceived front-runner/buzz status. I think under the old better system, I'd have predicted "Precious" to be snubbed of a Best Picture nomination, but of course with ten slots, it will likely get in. Which is a shame. I didn't like "Dreamgirls" and "Cold Mountain" at all, but "Precious" is so much worse. To me, it's the most immoral film I've seen all year, for all the reasons delineated by Armond White (and other socially conscious critics).

Mister Tee
Laureate
Posts: 6793
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 2:57 pm
Location: NYC
Contact:

Postby Mister Tee » Wed Dec 16, 2009 2:56 pm

Big Magilla wrote:I'm not talking about the arrested adolescent boys who eat up every Michael Bay film like catnip or the adolescent girls who will boycott any award show that doesn't grovel at the feet of the stars of Twilight.

But that IS the young audience.

If you're saying the exceedingly small portion of the young audience that follows film seriously reads Rottom Tomatoes on a regular basis, well, I have no argument against that. But the way your initial comment read seemed to suggest that younger audiences were more attuned to reviews than older ones, and that (as Sonic and I both responded) flies in the face of all statistical evidence of the last several decades.

Both demographics, if they're determined to see a movie, will see it even in the face of critics screaming to the contrary (be in Transformers 2, or whatever geriatric favorite you can name). But, on the whole, older audiences are more apt to be drawn to movies because the reviews were stronger than younger ones; this is what all box office analysis has been telling us for a long time.

User avatar
Sonic Youth
Laureate
Posts: 7443
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 8:35 pm
Location: USA

Postby Sonic Youth » Wed Dec 16, 2009 2:53 pm

Big Magilla wrote:Sorry, Sonic and Tee, but Zahveed is right. Younger filmgoers DO follow Rotten Tomatoes and other internet sources more than older moviegoers, some of whom get their information on-line and some of whom still read the few critics whose reviews are still printed in newspapers and magazines.

I'm not talking about the arrested adolescent boys who eat up every Michael Bay film like catnip or the adolescent girls who will boycott any award show that doesn't grovel at the feet of the stars of Twilight.


Does no one realise when a joke is meant as nothing more than a joke?




Edited By Sonic Youth on 1260993317
"What the hell?"

Win Butler

Big Magilla
Site Admin
Posts: 16212
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:22 pm
Location: Jersey Shore

Postby Big Magilla » Wed Dec 16, 2009 1:46 pm

Sorry, Sonic and Tee, but Zahveed is right. Younger filmgoers DO follow Rotten Tomatoes and other internet sources more than older moviegoers, some of whom get their information on-line and some of whom still read the few critics whose reviews are still printed in newspapers and magazines.

I'm not talking about the arrested adolescent boys who eat up every Michael Bay film like catnip or the adolescent girls who will boycott any award show that doesn't grovel at the feet of the stars of Twilight.

ITALIANO
Emeritus
Posts: 4076
Joined: Mon Jan 06, 2003 1:58 pm
Location: MILAN
Contact:

Postby ITALIANO » Wed Dec 16, 2009 12:52 pm

flipp525 wrote:Oh, and Amanda Knox? Really? If there was ever any reason to doubt the medieval nature of the Italian justice system, there's the case right in plain sight serving up a heaping dose of justification. What a moronic, misshapen form of justice -- the victim rising from the grave to point a fallible, bony finger.

At least, my dear flipp flapp, we don't kill them. Remember this the next time you dare to speak about OUR justice system. And maybe, I say maybe, get more informations about how your "angel face" compatriot said lies after (proven) lies (including accusing an innocent man) during this trial. But then, let's face it, you'd have done the same, I am afraid. You are the perfect example of THAT kind of American, so please STAY there.

And as far as masturbation goes, you are the master onanist here, in more ways than one.

Ah, and one more thing now. I'm tired of you always insulting me even if I try to ignore you because I couldnt care less. Do this another time and I will sue you, and I am serious, I did it already to others.




Edited By ITALIANO on 1260986150

User avatar
Zahveed
Associate
Posts: 1838
Joined: Wed Nov 07, 2007 1:47 pm
Location: In Your Head
Contact:

Postby Zahveed » Wed Dec 16, 2009 12:21 pm

I know more young people (my age +/- five years, I suppose) that follow reviews these days than older people that have given up on reviews and, excuse me for the phrase, are set in their ways. It's the Age of the Internet where the word gets across at an alarming rate and for young people who are dedicated to the internet know RT can be a good barometer.

Then how does a film like Transformers become a bigger hit than a critic favorite if these sites supposedly work? That can be a number of factors. Newspapers and magazines are fading out, so the elder population that aren't as familiar with the net that might look to a review won't get it. Critically acclaimed films like to be unavailable to the public and most people won't drive to the one or two theaters in the country showing a movie to spend two hours on something they might or might now like. As for those that see a movie like Transformers and enjoy it are young kids, those who grew up with the toys and show, and those that don't care about reviews regardless of age, sex, or gender. Give or take...

Note: This is more of a Box-Office topic than GG.




Edited By Zahveed on 1260984123
"It's the least most of us can do, but less of us will do more."

Mister Tee
Laureate
Posts: 6793
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 2:57 pm
Location: NYC
Contact:

Postby Mister Tee » Wed Dec 16, 2009 11:53 am

Sonic Youth wrote:
Big Magilla wrote:
Zahveed wrote:To be fair, Nine only has 18 reviews and isn't released wide until Christmas day. A lot can happen in that week. Invictus, which was released Friday, has 148 reviews. The Lovely Bones, which was limited to 3 theaters, has 77 reviews and that count can be expected to double when it exands. Nine's Metacritic score (54), from a site that averages the actual ratings and not the number of good reviews it has, is also higher than The Lovely Bones (43).

Precious, Julie & Julia, and Where the Wild Things Are (be they contenders or not) all had mixed scores a week before their wide release date only to jump up 20 points later.

This is an excellent analysis.

The audience for Nine skewers older. I think those who intended all along to see will go to see it regardless of its generally negative reviews. Younger audiences, more given to following Rotten Tomatoes averages, may choose to skip it and see Avatar for a second time instead.

There's inverted conventional wisdom for you. Never thought I'd see the day when critics influence younger audiences while being ignored/disregarded by older moviegoers.

I have to back up Sonic here, Magilla. I see no evidence young audiences follow Rotten Tomatoes, or, in fact, anything but ad campaigns and the corporately-manifactured enthusiasms of their peer group.

Nine was a difficult sell on Broadway (though it won the Tony over Dreamgirls, Dreamgirls had 2-3 times the run), and, as an art-sical, never had the blockbuster potential of Chicago. The reviews clearly won't help, but I don't see it doing a complete belly-flop, simply because there's some built-in audience for musicals, and the cast is Weinstein-engineered to appeal to all sorts of demographics.

User avatar
Sonic Youth
Laureate
Posts: 7443
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 8:35 pm
Location: USA

Postby Sonic Youth » Wed Dec 16, 2009 11:46 am

Big Magilla wrote:
Zahveed wrote:To be fair, Nine only has 18 reviews and isn't released wide until Christmas day. A lot can happen in that week. Invictus, which was released Friday, has 148 reviews. The Lovely Bones, which was limited to 3 theaters, has 77 reviews and that count can be expected to double when it exands. Nine's Metacritic score (54), from a site that averages the actual ratings and not the number of good reviews it has, is also higher than The Lovely Bones (43).

Precious, Julie & Julia, and Where the Wild Things Are (be they contenders or not) all had mixed scores a week before their wide release date only to jump up 20 points later.

This is an excellent analysis.

The audience for Nine skewers older. I think those who intended all along to see will go to see it regardless of its generally negative reviews. Younger audiences, more given to following Rotten Tomatoes averages, may choose to skip it and see Avatar for a second time instead.

There's inverted conventional wisdom for you. Never thought I'd see the day when critics influence younger audiences while being ignored/disregarded by older moviegoers.




Edited By Sonic Youth on 1260981995
"What the hell?"

Win Butler

Big Magilla
Site Admin
Posts: 16212
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:22 pm
Location: Jersey Shore

Postby Big Magilla » Wed Dec 16, 2009 11:28 am

Zahveed wrote:To be fair, Nine only has 18 reviews and isn't released wide until Christmas day. A lot can happen in that week. Invictus, which was released Friday, has 148 reviews. The Lovely Bones, which was limited to 3 theaters, has 77 reviews and that count can be expected to double when it exands. Nine's Metacritic score (54), from a site that averages the actual ratings and not the number of good reviews it has, is also higher than The Lovely Bones (43).

Precious, Julie & Julia, and Where the Wild Things Are (be they contenders or not) all had mixed scores a week before their wide release date only to jump up 20 points later.

This is an excellent analysis.

The audience for Nine skewers older. I think those who intended all along to see will go to see it regardless of its generally negative reviews. Younger audiences, more given to following Rotten Tomatoes averages, may choose to skip it and see Avatar for a second time instead.

User avatar
MovieWes
Professor
Posts: 2019
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 12:33 pm
Location: San Antonio, Texas, USA
Contact:

Postby MovieWes » Wed Dec 16, 2009 11:10 am

Mister Tee wrote:
MovieWes wrote:Also, I'm fairly confident that The Lovely Bones will gross $100 million when it goes into wide release.

To paraphrase My Cousin Vinny...you're SERIOUS about that? Are you talking worldwide? Because, domestically, I think the film will miss that mark by a country mile.

Yes, I meant domestically, but maybe I'm wrong. My prediction was based largely on the box-office power of Peter Jackson and Steven Spielberg. However, I do think that it will gross somewhere between $70-80 million, similar to The Golden Compass.
"Young men make wars and the virtues of war are the virtues of young men: courage and hope for the future. Then old men make the peace, and the vices of peace are the vices of old men: mistrust and caution." -- Alec Guinness (Lawrence of Arabia)

Mister Tee
Laureate
Posts: 6793
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 2:57 pm
Location: NYC
Contact:

Postby Mister Tee » Wed Dec 16, 2009 10:15 am

MovieWes wrote:Also, I'm fairly confident that The Lovely Bones will gross $100 million when it goes into wide release.

To paraphrase My Cousin Vinny...you're SERIOUS about that? Are you talking worldwide? Because, domestically, I think the film will miss that mark by a country mile.


Return to “82nd Predictions and Precursors”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests