FWIW the only Oscar ads I’ve heard on radio have been for Dunkirk.
Dunkirk Awards Season Discussion Thread
Because 10th posted
Sanchez wrote: ↑February 16th, 2018, 1:33 pmThis is nothing but bs. If you look at all the past picture and director winners at the Oscars from post-LOTR and up until last year, only three movies made more money than Dunkirk worldwide: Gravity, Life of Pi and The Revenant. And only Gravity made more domestically. And I'm willing to bet money that if you take all the nominees in those categories for this entire century, Dunkirk is among the 10% highest grossing.Reaveybeach wrote: ↑February 16th, 2018, 10:47 amI said it didn't draw *enough* people in with in relation to award ceremony voters. That it drew people in and that it was a success is obvious. Just not enough compared to it's competitors which had plot and characters.
Academy voters didn't skip Dunkirk. It was the biggest frontrunner for winning BP for three months before people knew much about the other films. It was one of the first films to send out screeners, and WB made high quality discs to give voters the better experience. They've had multiple exclusive screenings for members of the Academy, and we've heard rumors of it getting standing ovations during those.
It not being the frontrunner has absolutely nothing to do with people not watching it. If you actually believe that, you're making excuses for yourself.
Sanchez wrote: ↑February 16th, 2018, 4:02 pmBecause 10th postedSanchez wrote: ↑February 16th, 2018, 1:33 pmThis is nothing but bs. If you look at all the past picture and director winners at the Oscars from post-LOTR and up until last year, only three movies made more money than Dunkirk worldwide: Gravity, Life of Pi and The Revenant. And only Gravity made more domestically. And I'm willing to bet money that if you take all the nominees in those categories for this entire century, Dunkirk is among the 10% highest grossing.Reaveybeach wrote: ↑February 16th, 2018, 10:47 amI said it didn't draw *enough* people in with in relation to award ceremony voters. That it drew people in and that it was a success is obvious. Just not enough compared to it's competitors which had plot and characters.
Academy voters didn't skip Dunkirk. It was the biggest frontrunner for winning BP for three months before people knew much about the other films. It was one of the first films to send out screeners, and WB made high quality discs to give voters the better experience. They've had multiple exclusive screenings for members of the Academy, and we've heard rumors of it getting standing ovations during those.
It not being the frontrunner has absolutely nothing to do with people not watching it. If you actually believe that, you're making excuses for yourself.
Are you actually reading my comments? Why the hell does Dunkirk's box office numbers matter? Where did I say people aren't watching it? I said it didn't draw enough people in to vote for it at award ceremonies, it's getting a lot of nominations, but it isn't winning because the movie doesn't have any fleshed out characters or plot.
Which is what my original point was but you seem to not understand what I'm saying. Dunkirk is not an awards movie, which is why it's not surprising it's not winning compared to movies like SHAPE or THREE BILLBOARDS. Which are all about the characters, performances and story/screenwriting.
Another anonymous Oscar voter sharing their thoughts with Indiewire. This time it's a member of the film editors' branch.
Best Film Editing
For those that don’t really understand what editors do, it’s a safe bet to say that if you really enjoyed a story, editing’s a very substantial part of why you did. That’s the reason I believe “Three Billboards” should win. It was the most enjoyable of these five stories. The editing’s an ideal marriage of rhythm, handling of performance, comedic timing, and successful storytelling. But, as the consensus movie, “The Shape of Water” editing might benefit from that.
Although I wasn’t moved by “Dunkirk” — at all — I really admired the cinematic event it provided. The mathematical plans that guide it sometimes felt oppressive, but Lee Smith’s editing disguised that. In terms of a gripping experience, it really delivered. It’s the world’s most successful experimental art film.
http://www.indiewire.com/2018/02/anonym ... 201929363/Best Original Score
“Dunkirk” deserves to win. It’s such a sustained piece of anxiety and Zimmer successfully masks the cold formalism of Nolan’s diktat. “Shape of Water” could well win, which would be a matter of despair for me. It’s just such a by-the-numbers score. Such a well-trodden path.
The lushness of the “Phantom Thread” score was a beautiful departure from the more abstract contemporary work we expect from Greenwood. I also loved Daniel Hart’s music for “A Ghost Story,” it stayed in my mind a long time and I wish it was in the mix despite the film not being perhaps as captivating as its score.
I'm sorry, but your post was really badly worded. 'Draw people in with in relation to award ceremony voters' could just as easily been about voters choosing not to watch it. Next time just say it wouldn't get enough votes. You draw people to the theaters, voters doesn't need to be drawn in to anything, they're already going to vote for something.Reaveybeach wrote: ↑February 16th, 2018, 4:16 pmAre you actually reading my comments? Why the hell does Dunkirk's box office numbers matter? Where did I say people aren't watching it? I said it didn't draw enough people in to vote for it at award ceremonies, it's getting a lot of nominations, but it isn't winning because the movie doesn't have any fleshed out characters or plot.
Which is what my original point was but you seem to not understand what I'm saying. Dunkirk is not an awards movie, which is why it's not surprising it's not winning compared to movies like SHAPE or THREE BILLBOARDS. Which are all about the characters, performances and story/screenwriting.
Also I mildly disagree. Yes it was a risk to make it the way he did, but it obviously paid off. The critics' ratings tells you all you need to know about that. And we all know critics and academy members more often than not like the same movies.
I can definitely understand why people are frustrated with how little recognition it's getting.
The idea that Desplat could beat Greenwood or Zimmer makes me sick to my stomach.
Posts: 36
Joined:
February 2018
You completely misunderstand his point, though. When he talks about "enough" or "not enough", I think he's talking about the impact Dunkirk made on the voters, not the number of voters and people went to watch it.Sanchez wrote: ↑February 16th, 2018, 1:33 pmThis is nothing but bs. If you look at all the past picture and director winners at the Oscars from post-LOTR and up until last year, only three movies made more money than Dunkirk worldwide: Gravity, Life of Pi and The Revenant. And only Gravity made more domestically. And I'm willing to bet money that if you take all the nominees in those categories for this entire century, Dunkirk is among the 10% highest grossing.Reaveybeach wrote: ↑February 16th, 2018, 10:47 amI said it didn't draw *enough* people in with in relation to award ceremony voters. That it drew people in and that it was a success is obvious. Just not enough compared to it's competitors which had plot and characters.
Academy voters didn't skip Dunkirk. It was the biggest frontrunner for winning BP for three months before people knew much about the other films. It was one of the first films to send out screeners, and WB made high quality discs to give voters the better experience. They've had multiple exclusive screenings for members of the Academy, and we've heard rumors of it getting standing ovations during those.
It not being the frontrunner has absolutely nothing to do with people not watching it. If you actually believe that, you're making excuses for yourself.
No, I get that. But "draw people in" is a choice of wording that can lead to confusion. But screw that, it's offtopic. I still don't fully agree with him.
I'd give it to Greenwood. Zimmer did great, but all of PTA's films as of recent have been elevated by the music immensely. Zimmer seems like he's running out of ideas, at least to me.
I actually agree (not that Zimmer's running out of ideas, but as to who I'd give it to). Greenwood's score is what I'd give it to. Won't happen though. The Academy wouldn't give the award to a rock band lead guitarist.
