CODA: Yeah.... I don't get it.

[iamwhatiseem]

We watched the trailer for this Academy Award for Best Movie several weeks ago and wasn't impressed.
It looked like a movie that has been done 10,000 times.
It has been done 10,000 times.
After seeing it won the award, we decided to give it a try.
This movie has the quality of a made for TV film. Mediocre acting (at best), unremarkable story that is 100% predictable and formulaic.
This could have been one of a 100 Hallmark movies. Seriously.
How in the world this thing got best picture of the year????

 

[rightwinger]

To be honest, I wasn’t impressed with any of the Best Picture nominations

Didn‘t see CODA and really wasn’t interested.

I saw Power of the Dog and it was one of the worst movies I ever watched. Nothing happens. Westerns are not supposed to be boring.

King Richard was a typical sports movie. Like you said, it’s been done a thousand times. Watchable but hardly Best Picture

 

[iamwhatiseem]

The movie P I G .... odd movie, but soooo much better than CODA
The Card Counter... also a bit predictable, but waay better than CODA
Tom Hanks Finch... 2 full stars better than CODA

None of the above movies would I say is a Best Picture of the Year movies... but they were all measurably better than CODA.
CODA in the world of ice cream, would be that half gallon pail of vanilla that is always on sale.

 

[fncceo]

"Casablanca", "The Best Years of Our Lives", "Schindler's List", "The Godfather", "The Apartment" ...

... THESE are BEST Pictures. Movies that made it on their own merits and not from massive amounts of lobbying Academy members.

 

[rightwinger]

West Side Story was also a nominee

I love the original and had no interest in seeing a remake

 

[iamwhatiseem]

The movie "Old Henry".... on what planet is CODA better than this one??
If you haven't seen it - I recommend it. Solid movie.

Old Henry... streaming now.

This is a good one. Well done in all aspects of a movie, acting/writing/scenery - it has it all. With a little twist at the end. Highly Recommend it.... isn't it interesting that most of the good movies this year were not made by the big Hollywood Studios.

www.usmessageboard.com

 

[fncceo]

West Side Story was also a nominee

I love the original and had no interest in seeing a remake

I'm not a huge fan of capital punishment ... but the only just punishment for re-making a perfect movie is a slow and painful death...

"Point Break"
"The Day The Earth Stood Still"
"Arthur"
"Ghostbusters"
"Robocop"
"Poltergeist"

-- to name just a few of the souless cash grabs that sullied the name of really good movies.

 

[rightwinger]

"Casablanca", "The Best Years of Our Lives", "Schindler's List", "The Godfather", "The Apartment" ...

... THESE are BEST Pictures. Movies that made it on their own merits and not from massive amounts of lobbying Academy members.

I watched To Kill a Mockingbird the other night and wondered why it didn’t win Best Picture

The winner that year was Laurence of Arabia

Other movies that year were The Longest Day, The Music Man, Mutiny on the Bounty, The Man who shot Liberty Valance, The Manchurian Candidate, Birdman of Alcatraz, Days of Wine and Roses, The Miracle Worker

1962: The Year Oscar Really Needed 10 Nominees

This year Hollywood nominated 10 films for Best Picture instead of the usual five, leaving some movie buffs feeling nostalgic for years that honestly could have used more Best Picture slots. Critic Bob Mondello points to one year in particular that had more than its share of potential contenders.

www.npr.org

 

[fncceo]

I watched To Kill a Mockingbird the other night and wondered why it didn’t win Best Picture

The winner that year was Laurence of Arabia

Other movies that year were The Longest Day, The Music Man, Mutiny on the Bounty, The Man who shot Liberty Valance, The Manchurian Candidate, Birdman of Alcatraz, Days of Wine and Roses, The Miracle Worker

1962: The Year Oscar Really Needed 10 Nominees

This year Hollywood nominated 10 films for Best Picture instead of the usual five, leaving some movie buffs feeling nostalgic for years that honestly could have used more Best Picture slots. Critic Bob Mondello points to one year in particular that had more than its share of potential contenders.

www.npr.org

I suspect, "To Kill A Mockingbird", being made in 1962, was ahead of its time and Academy Members were afraid of alienating moviegoers in The South. It was definitely a superior film to "Lawrence of Arabia".

All those other movies you name were made in an era where all that mattered for achieving "Best Picture" was to actually make THE BEST PICTURE.

Now, the only way to win is to make some sort of cultural or political statement and then try to influence The Academy members.

 

[JoeMoma]

I haven't seen the movie, but my guess is that it pressed many of the right buttons to get the votes from the Academy.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

I haven't seen the movie, but my guess is that it pressed many of the right buttons to get the votes from the Academy.

Absolutely... but why?
No LGBQT wokeness. No minorities that I can think of at all... not even one.
No making conservatives look bad etc.
Just a boring, very vanilla movie that has been done over and over and over.
The acting was, at best, mediocre.
Even the soundtrack sucks.
Seriously, there is nothing in this movie that is notable. Nothing.

 

[shockedcanadian]

I haven't seen this movie, but I will say that movies in general today are cookie cutter. Much like music today and auto-tune. I read an article somewhere that older music from the 60s and 70's was outselling new music in online downloads. This should suggest that a growing generation is unhappy with their options. The music today doesn't connect with them on a human level.

It's difficult as a movie studio I suppose. You need to turn a profit first and foremost, this means sticking to a formula that is a proven approach so that you can secure funding. Than you market it to hell and hope it sells.

Art is at it's best when it comes from a place of passion and creativity. Not, when it just needs to be marketed to success, even if few movie goers talk about it much to their friends.

I always considered a movie like Ghostbusters to be an example of a gamble that on the surface seemed like a loser. Not to be confused with great movies of the past, it did what was intended: to entertain, young and old. It worked. Even as it was silly and didn't fall into a genre, it came from a place of heart and everyone involved from the writers, to director and actors believed in it (eventually).

Not all movies can or should be blockbusters. They must be different though.

 

[Devils_Advocate]

"Casablanca", "The Best Years of Our Lives", "Schindler's List", "The Godfather", "The Apartment" ...

... THESE are BEST Pictures. Movies that made it on their own merits and not from massive amounts of lobbying Academy members.

Braveheart was also great and let not forget the original Rocky!!!

Today films are just old bad scripts remade and Hollyweird trying to sell them as great…

 

[rightwinger]

I haven't seen the movie, but my guess is that it pressed many of the right buttons to get the votes from the Academy.

How to get an Oscar

Play a retard (Rain Man, Forest Gump)
Play a blind person ( Scent of a Woman)
Play a deaf person (CODA, Children of a Lesser God)
Play a cripple (My Left Foot, Midnight Cowboy)
Play a gay person (Philadelphia)

 

[iamwhatiseem]

How to get an Oscar

Play a retard (Rain Man, Forest Gump)
Play a blind person ( Scent of a Woman)
Play a deaf person (CODA, Children of a Lesser God)
Play a cripple (My Left Foot, Midnight Cowboy)

I suppose... but then why not "Sound of Metal"? About a drummer going deaf.
Minimum 10 times better than CODA.

 

[Devils_Advocate]

How to get an Oscar

Play a retard (Rain Man, Forest Gump)
Play a blind person ( Scent of a Woman)
Play a deaf person (CODA, Children of a Lesser God)
Play a cripple (My Left Foot, Midnight Cowboy)
Play a gay person (Philadelphia)

Be named Tom Hanks or Meryl Streep…

 

[rightwinger]

Be named Tom Hanks or Meryl Streep…

Both are very good actors
But in many cases they get by with playing a “character”

 

[Devils_Advocate]

Both are very good actors
But in many cases they get by with playing a “character”

Paul Newman is my favorite actor and I actually like Meryl Streep acting…

 

[Flash]

I suspect, "To Kill A Mockingbird", being made in 1962, was ahead of its time and Academy Members were afraid of alienating moviegoers in The South. It was definitely a superior film to "Lawrence of Arabia".

All those other movies you name were made in an era where all that mattered for achieving "Best Picture" was to actually make THE BEST PICTURE.

Now, the only way to win is to make some sort of cultural or political statement and then try to influence The Academy members.

In 1952 "High Noon" was passed over for best picture because the producer was a commie. Instead "The Greatest Show on Earth" was chosen.

TGSOE was a little entertaining if you like the circus but hardly the quality of High Noon.

 

[Flash]

Absolutely... but why?
No LGBQT wokeness. No minorities that I can think of at all... not even one.
No making conservatives look bad etc.
Just a boring, very vanilla movie that has been done over and over and over.
The acting was, at best, mediocre.
Even the soundtrack sucks.
Seriously, there is nothing in this movie that is notable. Nothing.

There was a Black kid in the music group. They also mentioned that the fish were less plentiful because the water was getting warmer so that was Libtard AGW bullshit.

A little stupid wokeness but for Hollywood nothing outlandish.

I actually liked the movie and so did my wife. This is not the typical kind of movie I would watch but I was entertained and so was my wife. We very seldom watch the same shows.

The lead chick did a good job as did the guy playing the music teacher. If anybody in the movie should have got an award for best supporting actor it should have been him.

I liked the background music but not the songs they sung.