Forum Replies Created
September 21, 2019 at 3:36 pm #1203091259
The problem I have with a lot of people on these forums is that if they don’t like something, it means it’s bad. It’s fine if something doesn’t work for you but that doesn’t mean it sucks. Why can’t people just be objective for once. There are plenty of great movies/shows that I don’t like but that doesn’t mean they’re bad.
Exactly, and if they don’t minimally like it they need to constantly drag it to the pits of hellSeptember 21, 2019 at 1:19 pm #1203091089
I’m just going to assume that you’ve never seen the show. Putting the word “barf” even remotely close to Barry is a clear indication.
I second that. And not being a comedy doesn’t make it any less of a great show. If Barry was in drama I would probably be rooting for it.September 21, 2019 at 7:49 am #1203090564
What does this mean? Voting 1-6 like how Australians vote in elections, with lowest being kicked out until someone is left with 50% + 1?
Yes, this method. Some time ago I saw people discussing how this method was used at the Emmys (at least in the acting categories) but I can’t find now how much it lasted and which categories followed itSeptember 20, 2019 at 8:14 pm #1203090020
I mean, bold from trying to be modern. Let’s see if it’ll work out. Tho I believe this comeadian providing funny commentaries as winners went up stage were already used in the 2017 ceremony and it was… okaySeptember 20, 2019 at 8:11 pm #1203090016
If anything, Emmys awarding and nominating these shows from cable and streaming gives a spotlight for shows that doesn’t have large appeal and could easily be overlooked. And in the era of internet is much easier to find watch these shows now after hearing about them in a ceremony (that what made me watch Mrs. Maisel and thank God I did while I had already heard and appreciated The Good Place coming from their big popularity)
Just like Oscars (and more specially Gotham and Indie Spirit) can broad some audience to pictures without large or more of a niche distribution.
So, pieces with big audiences already have that as a compensation and recognition, I believe I follow these award seasons mostly cause it offers me more work it would totally be overlooked anywhere else. Otherwise it feel redundant to see Avengers winning every award when they already have box office records and shit. Okay, GOT is an exception in this but still had a lot of work put on it than any broadcast show right now so it results in such massive fanbase and love from the industry.September 20, 2019 at 3:35 pm #1203089700
I believe the Lifetime Achievement win at Venice made AFI realize she wasn’t awarded yetSeptember 20, 2019 at 3:33 pm #1203089690
Prior to 2015, voters got tapes containing a single episode by every acting nominee (and with six episodes – in three couples for series). Voters based their choice on the episodes alone and it was evident from their choices over the years. Some people argued that this old system helped actors with good single episodes but prevented actors with great overall seasons but no standout episodes from winning. But in my opinion, it was a great system and it worked wonders in terms of helping actors from lesser known shows winning. Bryan Cranston’s first Emmy wouldn’t have happened – ever! – without the old system. And Dinklage wouldn’t have won the last two times under the old system. One more thing: Under the old system, actors voted in a limited number of categories (don’t remember the exact number). So a category was decided by a “panel” of let’s say 100 to 200 people (the number needs to be checked).
Under the new system (since 2015), every actor can vote in every acting category and it’s obvious that nobody is watching the tapes. People vote based on buzz, momentum… many winners just feel random. This is a very brief overview.
Great explanation. Can someone also tell when plurality vote started and if all categories were preferential ballots before?September 20, 2019 at 7:46 am #1203088653
I gotta admit Oscar choices tend to leave me sad but at least they didn’t commit the mistake of nominating Farrelly for directing.September 20, 2019 at 7:44 am #1203088649
It’s pretty funny that people actually thought Mary Poppins Returns would get nominated for Best Picture and Best Actress just because the first one did over 50 years ago. I always knew Blunt would miss the nomination to Aparicio.
It was clear Aparicio was gonna quvenzhané-wallis the race. And a Disney children live action nominated at acting awards? In 2018? People just didn’t want to see it.September 20, 2019 at 7:40 am #1203088642
People really tend to forget Roma was slow, b&p and in a foreign language. The whole 2018 was about how this would be the detractors. Many voters watch these small releases at home with screeners anyway, it’s not like Roma was a crime to their precious cinema experience. That’s more cinephile talk anyway.
Netflix can easily land these 2 nominations (if The Irishman is not some total crap) and a possible 3rd one if The Two Popes slays at precursors. But this ‘bias’ will not be the main problemSeptember 20, 2019 at 7:30 am #1203088615
ASIB for AOTY looks so much like Black Panther last year where we assumed it had a shot for being so popular and no undeniable contender around. At the same time people agreed it would taste bittersweet for Kendrick to win for the soundtrack after such good albums nominated,just like Gaga.
Guess we’ll have to look for the Golden Hour to happen then.September 20, 2019 at 4:53 am #1203088363
Nah. BP was only nominated because it was Kendrick, and it was connected to a movie that was a huge cultural phenomenon.
If ASIB gets nominated it’ll be because of Gaga.
I seriously doubt they’d have nominated Frozen if there were 8 slots in 2015, or The Greatest Showman if Black Panther didn’t exist.
However Let It Go would have probably been nominated for ROTY and SOTY in a 8-slot fieldSeptember 19, 2019 at 8:27 pm #1203087881
It’s definitely a dramedy but I personally always thought Barry was funny in a dark, twisted way…
Indeed. Thay achieve that perfectly in the first season and what helped that was Barry’s kind of apathy and stiffness.
When he start to loose his feeling and reflects on his actions the thing just got plain serious. Basically the twist in the season 1 finale darkened the show to a point of no return because for the first time he had to kill over a context he was emotionally invested. And that is not a problem, the narrative asked for that and was really well executed (as a dramatic story).
The show still keeps great comic reliefs, specially Anthony Carrigan. And Bill Hader’s overall ludicrous irony is impressive. Both of them would be fine winners.September 19, 2019 at 7:58 pm #1203087850
Just finished watching Barry. That was totally terrific but, how come OITNB is considered cut from comedy but not this? It just went straight drama, not even dramedy territory anymore. They really should see that next year
Also the ronny/lily episode was greatly choreographed with perfect plan-sequences. But it had no correlation to the rest of the story and its plot was totally forgotten by next episode. Still I’ll give Bill Hader his due for directing tho, he sure had to worked a lot on that one.
Thanks to the ones who recommended it. This field is fantastic and is giving much anticipation for sunday