Moonlight's success at the Oscars was pretty unprecedented in terms of the budget of the movie, the subject matter, the director and the actors were not really big names.
Film Oscars 2019
- Thread starter Pogue Mahone
- Start date
His real life Irish accent is fine and very neutral:
His in-film Irish accent though.......
*looks at winners and talking points of show*
Yup, seems pretty standard for the annual Hollywood Wokeness Award ceremony.
Yup, seems pretty standard for the annual Hollywood Wokeness Award ceremony.
Did you look at the list?
Fair enough, no argument there. Was limiting my thinking to the nominees with your statement.
Just no.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Beyond belief.
Already know it, the only one that is more greenscreen orientated is Avatar in 2009 and that revolutionised 3D cinema to what it is today and how it is shot, so rightly should of got it.
Are you confusing the visual effects award with production design?
Last edited:
Christ.
No I'm not. I'm saying it doesn't matter that they used greenscreen. What matters is what it looked like.
Of course he will have to lip sync a lot, comes with the role really.Almost half the film was him just lip syncing, even his nomination clip was of him lip syncing...
I highly doubt the panel that voted even watched interviewers/clips of Freddie Mercury and were aware of his demeanor, they probably were just given a copy of Live Aid to compare it to...
I'm referring to the demeanour itself, I do think he captured the essence of the character very well. It's bloody hard to play someone people know so well when you don't even look like him (unlike, say, Val Kilmer with Jim Morrison) and you are wearing some implants that make you look funny/grotesque.
There were several moments where you could vividly imagine Freddie Mercury delivering a line the same way. Even things that we know didn't even happen, you could tell the Queen contingent briefed him well and he embraced it.
That relates to visual effects though, not production design
That's why its ridiculous for him to win it, you could just get a random Freddie Mercury lookalike and do as good as job for those scenes, which is about 50% of the movie
His point wasn't the character was obscure, he was drawing parallels between Freddie's life and the obstacles he faced and his own story as an Egyptian immigrant who didn't quite fit. It sounded genuine really but he is clearly not the most articulate guy around.
Agree though that the film makes itself. So much so they didn't even need a director
I did enjoy it. I sense the polar opposite views I keep coming across go down to whether you approach it in a judgmental way ("can they capture what FM was to me?") or just as an excuse to reminisce, listen to great music and just get all pumped up.
As said, I think the outstanding thing is how he pulls it off without looking at all like him. It creates massive cognitive dissonance, yet about a third of the way through you are over it and watching Freddie Mercury, not some randomer acting the Freddie Mercury part.
The vocal tracks in Walk the Line were sung by Joaquin Phoenix.
Yah, wtf was that about? Very odd.
Prolly cos he's an arrogant douchebag?
Malek is a good actor, but the fact is, Freddie has such a striking face and personality with some features like the buck teeth and his theatrical poses that it makes it easy for a half decent actor to imitate him with some make-up.
In addition, Malek and Freddie aren't entirely dissimilar. They both have similar elongated faces and cheekbones to an extent.
I think he did a good job, but equally any actor could have done what he did -- I reckon Sacha Baron Cohen would have nailed it too (complete with Bruno styled gay orgies I suppose!!), he actually has a greater resemblance to Freddie.
Are there any photos of Sacha as Freddie?
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Which scene is that?
Sounds like BS. I mean the story is pretty Freddie-centric so i don't see why they would demand to be seen in one particular scene. I think its more a stylistic choice to show the back and forth banter and decision making but it doesn't work.
Fairly sure Brian May and Roger Taylor weren't producers on the film and when they raised questions about songs popping up in the wrong period they were told its a movie not a documentary.
Sure, but it was also produced by and campaigned for by Brad Pitt’s production company Plan B, who also produced 12 Years A Slave, Selma, The Departed, The Big Short, Tree Of Life, The Assasination of Jesse James, Moneyball etc and whose main raison d’etre is high brown awards fare to bring out around awards season.
Whether you’ve heard of the people isn’t the catch, it’s whether the For Your Consideration campaigns have reached the right people.
I can't understand what about Moonlight was worthy of the hype. I am all for inclusiveness but I have no interest in a film that is devoid of any actual script.
But all the winners tend to have a silly agenda.
That American bomb squad movie I didn't like.
Moonlight
Slum Dog millionaire (sure it's based in India but it was an average film by our industries standards too)
They'd be more credible if they dropped the pretentious awarding and maybe even gave some to more deserving sci-fi (is that allowed?) films like the brilliant Blade Runner 2049.
The one recent winner I really loved was Birdman.
You're mixing up what I'm saying. The visual effects in the movie were meh. The sets were great though.
Green Book is just Driving Miss Daisy Part 2.
This time the racist's in front*. To be fair Driving Miss Daisy won Best Film as well, so this shows the Academy hasn't really progressed that much.
*Stolen from Kermode and Mayo
They must have had quite a lot of say, as Sacha Baron Cohen quit due to creative differences with them years ago.
Just rinse and repeat on a sensitive subject and get a award.
Walk Hard should’ve killed the formulaic music biopic the way Austin Powers killed campy Bond (at least for a time) it’s baffling they’re still such award bait.
The Oscars have always been cheesy tbf so this is nothing new. From awkward teleprompter presentations with bad comedic timing and stupid lines to mostly poor hosts who often seem to just wing it after a drunken night. Remember Billy Crystal's last gig in 2012? Seth McFarlane and James Franco/Anne Hathaway's nightmare?
On the cocaine stories, all that info is out there in numerous documentaries where they speak openly about what they did, i don't think they shy away from any of that. The question is whether the studio wanted to focus on a sex and drugs filled film with an R rating or make it a lower rating and make bags of money off it. I think based on the box office and accolades they made the right call.
In terms of Sacha Baron Cohen, not doubting what he said but ultimately none of what they talked about made it into the film anyway. His death wasn't the midpoint, the film ends 7 years before his death which is just referenced as the final shot.
I didn't particularly like the movie but I just don't think the band had as much creative input as has been suggested. I do think it would have been an even worse movie if they had their way. Its a pity that they didn't make a better movie because it has all the ingredients to be a story of excess and tragedy.
I haven't seen this, just checked it up and saw it has John C. Reilly so I should check it out.
Movies in general are declining. Either that or I'm becoming old. Where are the Shawshank Redemption, The Godfather, Fight Club, Forrest Gump, Matrix, Silence of the Lambs, American History X, Full Metal Jacket, Heat type of generational movies that you talk about even decades after?
Prisoners, Shutter Island, Django, Nolan's Batman Trilogy would do as well?
A Quiet Place, IT Remake and John Wick were the only noteworthy movies in recent years for me.
Prisoners, Shutter Island, Django, Nolan's Batman Trilogy would do as well?
A Quiet Place, IT Remake and John Wick were the only noteworthy movies in recent years for me.
You're probably becoming old, looking at the spread of your movies apart from the hot streak of the 90's, that's a wide spread, what this tells me is that you are probably around 30-40.
Shawshank Redemption 1994
The Godfather 1972
Fight Club 1999
Forrest Gump 1994
Silence of the Lambs 1991
The Matrix 1999
Silence of the Lambs 1991
Full Metal Jacket 1987
Heat 1995
I know you probably didn't do an exhaustive list but generational movies are only in hindsight and there aren't that many of them, your talking 1 movie every three or 4 years. It's also entirely subjective, so it's probably a product of your formative era and the types of movies you watch.
Yup. Plus if you look at some of the things nominated in each of those years, you’ll find some similar turkeys and non-entities thatve dated badly. The English Patient, As Good As It Gets, JFK, Field of Dreams, Shakespeare in Love.. 1991 alone had Dances with Wolves, Ghost & Godfather III (yes, that was nominated for Best Picture!) nominated FFS .. even Forest Gump isn’t actually very good, and certainly wouldn’t fly now.
Pah, JFK is awesome! Resign etc! 
It’s fun, but like a lot of Stone’s films from that era, it’s stylistically seizure inducing, and full on batshit. Haven’t seen it in a while though, and it almost certainly can’t be as bad as Natural Born Killers.Pah, JFK is awesome! Resign etc!
He was at least doing interesting things back then though...
My taste must be crap, mate - for all its self-indulgence, I thought NBK had some important things to say (albeit heavy-handedly). Though I tend to read more meaning into films & books than perhaps the creator(s) intended...