2020 Oscars are a sham...

[Dangerous]

Not 100% convinced Joker should have been nominated for best picture. Philips got too carried way in making sure Phoenix delivered the performance of a lifetime that he forgot about the overall scope of the movie.

Do you mean you think the story of Joker did not really do enough?
Story-wise, I thought Joker was a pretty solid alternative universe take on how Joker became who he was, whilst setting up the origin of Bat-Bat.

Joker is still a better nominated best picture movie than Black Panther....

Don't get me started on Black Panther....
I thought BP was one of the dumbest and weakest MCU films to date, and that it was only nominated because of the 95% black cast.

and a cleaner win than Heath Ledger winning for Joker. I will give it that.

You think Phoenix was more worthy?
After first watching Joker 2019 I thought Phoenix was the best live action Joker ever, but then later... I realised that the full expression of The Joker's ideology can only be revealed when in contrast to Batman's, thus in a way, Ledger's portrayal is still better.

[WebLurker]

Phoenix deserved to win.
As did the lady who scored Joker.

Honestly, I was rooting for John Williams. But that's just me.

People in general don't decide what lasts. They are not experts in the field to decide the long term ramification of movies.

They're the only people who decide. What "lasts" is what people re-watch and pass down long after the awards are over and the home video market is the only place to see stuff.

[Marvelgirl]

Do you mean you think the story of Joker did not really do enough?
Story-wise, I thought Joker was a pretty solid alternative universe take on how Joker became who he was, whilst setting up the origin of Bat-Bat.

.

Phoenix gave the best performance in a good movie. Its not everyday there are best actors wins from the best movie.

Don't get me started on Black Panther....
I thought BP was one of the dumbest and weakest MCU films to date, and that it was only nominated because of the 95% black cast.

Parasite has a 100% Korean cast with no English language. The film swept the Oscars in style. I have seen Parasite 3 times. Its get better with every watch. I didn't need to use English subtitles in my third watch. The Oscars must look like the biggest fools. They nominated Black Panther because of political correctness, why do such a foolish thing when a 100% non speaking English Korean cast can win all the awards without political correctness.

You think Phoenix was more worthy?
After first watching Joker 2019 I thought Phoenix was the best live action Joker ever, but then later... I realised that the full expression of The Joker's ideology can only be revealed when in contrast to Batman's, thus in a way, Ledger's portrayal is still better.

Ledger's portrayal was elevated because of the death of the actor. Phoenix's portrayal is decided on stable terms. Phoenix took us on a journey of the character. Ledger's performance is one note to make Batman miserable. Ledger's portrayal is a great evil caricature villain, who is evil for the sake of it. Phoenix's portrayal is a more evolved Joker story-wise than a caricature.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

People in general don't decide what lasts. They are not experts in the field to decide the long term ramification of movies.

What usually decides what lasts...
-- Lasting Popular Appeal: Casablanca for instance is not really the best plot in the world, nor is it the hard hitting movie about World War II but it's got the right cast playing the right set of characters and that gives it a lasting appeal. Same with Singin' in the Rain.

-- Critical Esteem <which overlaps with> Artistic Influence, which is the main thing and the big one.

The best definition is by Brian Eno, "Only a hundred people bought the first album by the Velvet Underground but every one of them started their own band"

The King of Comedy was a box office failure in 1983 and played for little more than 2 weeks and yet thirty-seven years later it got a $1bn semi-remake/homage with Todd Phillips' Joker.

Will Avengers Endgame have an artistic influence? Has any MCU movie had an artistic influence? Because if you consider superhero movies that have influenced people, you would have to look at stuff like say Sam Raimi's Spider-Man 1 and 2, followed by Chris Nolan's Batman movies especially The Dark Knight. More recently you have had LOGAN, a movie that inspired Endgame as well as Black Widow.

[Marvelgirl]

What usually decides what lasts...
-- Lasting Popular Appeal: Casablanca for instance is not really the best plot in the world, nor is it the hard hitting movie about World War II but it's got the right cast playing the right set of characters and that gives it a lasting appeal. Same with Singin' in the Rain.

-- Critical Esteem <which overlaps with> Artistic Influence, which is the main thing and the big one.

The best definition is by Brian Eno, "Only a hundred people bought the first album by the Velvet Underground but every one of them started their own band"

The King of Comedy was a box office failure in 1983 and played for little more than 2 weeks and yet thirty-seven years later it got a $1bn semi-remake/homage with Todd Phillips' Joker.

Will Avengers Endgame have an artistic influence? Has any MCU movie had an artistic influence? Because if you consider superhero movies that have influenced people, you would have to look at stuff like say Sam Raimi's Spider-Man 1 and 2, followed by Chris Nolan's Batman movies especially The Dark Knight. More recently you have had LOGAN, a movie that inspired Endgame as well as Black Widow.

A set of films that has done more harm to its own genre than helped it, is going to be the first we all wish to forget. Who did Bong Joon-ho mention when he won for best director. Martin Scorsese. The artistic influence or symbolic meaning has to be the biggest take away of a movie worthy or remembrance, Only a small visible number of people are influenced by Endgame/MCU movies. This is not to be confused with the adrenaline rush of enjoying unintelletcutal fast paced crowd pleasers movies.

[Username taken]

Joker was a pretty political movie. It was far more explicitly political than movies like Birds of Prey or Captain Marvel. Joker was pretty explicit about the failings of the healthcare system and maltreatment of the mentally ill, the poor and even minorities (the black nurse saying society doesn't care about people like us).Its just as political as Black Panther except it didn't bring anything new like BP did with afro-futurism and the issues of the black diaspora.

The only reason the tiny group of whiners online dont complain about Joker is because it stars a white man and was made by white people. If Joker starred Donald Glover, you'll see the same retrogressive PC arguments come up about how he only got the nomination because its PC. That's the problem with the "PC" argument, it comes from a point of view that isn't really all thought out and is fueled purely by ignorance/fear from a small group of people living in paranoia. I'm not saying that everyone that hates BP is a bigot but the folks that choose to see politics in only minority and female led movies when theres politics in white movies are being discriminatory and hypocritical in their views.

Anyway, the Oscar's have always been partial towards work that have strong social political themes, it's not something new.

That aside, you'll have to be all kinds of deluded to deny the MCUs influence on movies now. The only reason Sony and WB are doing what they are doing now with their shared superhero universe is because of what Marvel has done. Whether an individual likes or dislikes what they've done is up to each individual (old guys like Scorsese and Coppola and some hardcore DC and other comics companies fans on these boards have been vocal of their hatred). Marvel has found critical and commercial success that few can even dream of and that by itself is a note worthy achievement.

Peace out. I'm done here.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

Joker was a pretty political movie. It was far more explicitly political than movies like Birds of Prey or Captain Marvel. Joker was pretty explicit about the failings of the healthcare system and maltreatment of the mentally ill, the poor and even minorities (the black nurse saying society doesn't care about people like us).

This is true. I, and others, might not like Joker 2019 as a movie, or feel that it's execution wasn't great or at least a little confusing in packaging and meaning (since it tends to appropriate images and ideas that validate white nationalists as well as left-wing activists without any separation between them in terms of ideology and practice). But there's no question that Joker 2019 is an attempt to do something political with a comic book character, and the idea that the supervillain is who the audience is intended to relate with and empathize with, is gutsy as a concept.

But you know, LOGAN was also political and better executed. It's a movie about automation, corporate control, persecution of refugees and militarized borders. The sense of defeat with which the movie starts, about how mutants aren't the next step but some inconvenient thing for corporations to control...really captured the post-Trump malaise where everyone expected a big step forward and got the other thing instead.

That aside, you'll have to be all kinds of deluded to deny the MCUs influence on movies now. The only reason Sony and WB are doing what they are doing now with their shared superhero universe is because of what Marvel has done.

That's not really the same thing as artistic influence. Artistic influence is something where one movie does a deep dive and close reading of a previous work and really taps into it. Like The King of Comedy and Joker 2019. Doing a cinematic universe or post-credits scene is just trend-changing. It's more superficial. Like the reason why the Fox-Movies had superheroes wearing black in the X-Men is because that's how it was done in Tim Burton's Batman movies where colorful comics characters are all dressed in black, except for Joker of course. Does that mean Tim Burton's movies influenced the X-Men, no it just set a trend...being influenced by Burton means borrowing his hyper expressionist style and art direction/design which so few are.

Like at the end of the day, the MCU method of film-production, where some nuts-and-bolts are standardized and independent of any director's influence and say-so (Stunts, VFX, Second Unit action scenes which are often created and built before directors and others sign up) is not really practiced or repeated across Hollywood, or at least not yet. Zack Snyder love him or hate him, doesn't make his movies that way, nor Patty Jenkins, nor Joker 2019 or others.

[Kirby101]

A set of films that has done more harm to its own genre than helped it, is going to be the first we all wish to forget. Who did Bong Joon-ho mention when he won for best director. Martin Scorsese. The artistic influence or symbolic meaning has to be the biggest take away of a movie worthy or remembrance, Only a small visible number of people are influenced by Endgame/MCU movies. This is not to be confused with the adrenaline rush of enjoying unintelletcutal fast paced crowd pleasers movies.

How have the MCU done more harm to the genre?

[Steel Inquisitor]

Like at the end of the day, the MCU method of film-production, where some nuts-and-bolts are standardized and independent of any director's influence and say-so (Stunts, VFX, Second Unit action scenes which are often created and built before directors and others sign up) is not really practiced or repeated across Hollywood, or at least not yet. Zack Snyder love him or hate him, doesn't make his movies that way, nor Patty Jenkins, nor Joker 2019 or others.

A fair portion of the DCEU has movies which are heavily influenced by Marvel, whether it be Fox's Deadpool (Harley Quinn) or the MCU itself (Aquaman, Wonder Woman, Shazam). They started doing that with Wonder Woman, whose plot merged Thor and Caps first movies together. Snyders gone, Marvel's influence remains.

[Kirby101]

Talking about Endgame as a single entity makes no sense. It's like only talking about Return of the Jedi or Kill Bill 2 or John Wick 3 as if they were separate and not part of a longer narrative.
I think it's influence will be studios trying to create an expansive universe of films. I doubt any will succeed as brilliantly as Marvel did.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

Talking about Endgame as a single entity makes no sense.

Well then it begs the question if it's fair to nominate in the same category as other movies which are single entries. Granted the AMPAS recognized Godfather II and LOTR-3, and in the case of the latter it was definitely a gift for the whole trilogy...so there is precedent.

Even then The Godfather Part II still works standalone and tells an entirely different story with a new style than the first one. LOTR-3 is likewise an ending to a story, and unlike the MCU all three movies were shot at the same time.

I think it's influence will be studios trying to create an expansive universe of films.

Star Wars did that first, you know. Back in 1977, and in terms of a mega-franchise serial you have the Harry Potter movies. Then the LOTR movies as well. The concept of sequels shooting back to back was done by the Wachowskis for Matrix 2 and Matrix 3. Tarantino likewise with the two Kill Bill.

What made the MCU different was that it did that in the superhero genre and created the sense of crossover.

[Kirby101]

Well then it begs the question if it's fair to nominate in the same category as other movies which are single entries. Granted the AMPAS recognized Godfather II and LOTR-3, and in the case of the latter it was definitely a gift for the whole trilogy...so there is precedent.

Even then The Godfather Part II still works standalone and tells an entirely different story with a new style than the first one. LOTR-3 is likewise an ending to a story, and unlike the MCU all three movies were shot at the same time.



Star Wars did that first, you know. Back in 1977, and in terms of a mega-franchise serial you have the Harry Potter movies. Then the LOTR movies as well. The concept of sequels shooting back to back was done by the Wachowskis for Matrix 2 and Matrix 3. Tarantino likewise with the two Kill Bill.

What made the MCU different was that it did that in the superhero genre and created the sense of crossover.

Yes this, the MCU wasn't a single storyline, like Star Wars or Harry Potter, but a shared Universe. The way they interwove all those disparate movies into the Avengers saga was what was amazing.

I have no problem with Endgame not being nominated. I thought it was great for what it was, the Oscars were meaningless for it.

[WebLurker]

But you know, LOGAN was also political and better executed. It's a movie about automation, corporate control, persecution of refugees and militarized borders. The sense of defeat with which the movie starts, about how mutants aren't the next step but some inconvenient thing for corporations to control...really captured the post-Trump malaise where everyone expected a big step forward and got the other thing instead.

Noticed that the movie really showed, didn't tell it's ideas (as well as mixing them with non-political themes and story arcs). Wonder if that kinda "hid" the political aspects of it. Remember seeing a really toxic alt-right online content creator really praising Logan and completely missing that the movie was about the heroes trying to protect an undocumented Mexican immigrant from the authorities and the dehumanizing treatment that will follow (e.g. basically as anti-alt-right as you can get). Course, we see Trump's Wall as the dystopia and the filmmakers thought it fitting that the villain's name was "Donald," so no one probably should've been surprised.

Star Wars did that first, you know. Back in 1977, and in terms of a mega-franchise serial you have the Harry Potter movies. Then the LOTR movies as well. The concept of sequels shooting back to back was done by the Wachowskis for Matrix 2 and Matrix 3. Tarantino likewise with the two Kill Bill.

What made the MCU different was that it did that in the superhero genre and created the sense of crossover.

Eh, actually, Star Trek did the cinematic universe thing first. Heck, they managed to integrate their TV and film properties into a cohesive whole, something even the MCU failed to do. Food for thought.

[Marvelgirl]

The biggest political aspect of Logan was the USA/Mexico border crisis message.It was asked of Mangold if he was sending a message to President Trump about Mexico and immigrants. Mangold's response was if the boots fits you wear it. But Logan was a cumulation of many political messages, starting from the Auschwitz camps scene in the first movie.

Donner influenced Burton, Burton influenced X-Men, X-men influenced Nolan. Donner influenced Spiderman. The influence of MCU has never landed on two strong feet. Sony and WB tried to build a shared universe to no avail. Sony and WB had to look elsewhere They found Into the Spider-verse and Joker. Two movies that have won some impressive deserving Oscars

[Revolutionary_Jack]

Noticed that the movie really showed, didn't tell it's ideas (as well as mixing them with non-political themes and story arcs). Wonder if that kinda "hid" the political aspects of it. Remember seeing a really toxic alt-right online content creator really praising Logan and completely missing that the movie was about the heroes trying to protect an undocumented Mexican immigrant from the authorities and the dehumanizing treatment that will follow (e.g. basically as anti-alt-right as you can get). Course, we see Trump's Wall as the dystopia and the filmmakers thought it fitting that the villain's name was "Donald," so no one probably should've been surprised.

Some people are blind to what's before them. That happens with anything. Like Nolan's Dark Knight Trilogy is politically quite...well centrist neoliberalism is my polite word for it...not too right wing that it's faschy but quite anti-leftist. And yet Rush Limbaugh thought that Bane was a reference to Bain Capital, i.e. a company that Romney worked for. A political controversy can erupt over random things even stuff that's actually on the same side of that critic. And sometimes people miss more subtle stuff.

Eh, actually, Star Trek did the cinematic universe thing first. Heck, they managed to integrate their TV and film properties into a cohesive whole, something even the MCU failed to do. Food for thought.

Right. And you also had that Abbot and Costello and those horror movies which crossed over back in the day.

The biggest political aspect of Logan was the USA/Mexico border crisis message.It was asked of Mangold if he was sending a message to President Trump about Mexico and immigrants. Mangold's response was if the boots fits you wear it.

LOGAN is certainly more political than the Mark Millar comic it drew ideas from. Millar's comic is just a gore-fest about old dudes killing people in their final days and feeling guilty about stuff...whereas LOGAN is saying stuff.

Some of it is accidental. The movie was written, entered production, and was edited before Trump got elected and got released in March 2017, just months after his inauguration. Had Hillary won (and it was fairly close had she gotten the Rust Belt in line and gotten one of the swing states), I think the movie might have played differently. But the sense of righteous anger and disgust at the start...the fact that the superheroes didn't just lose but lost badly, and they lost anti-climactically to unworthy opponents really spoke to the sense of anger and bitterness people had about the 2016 election and just 2016 in general. I mean remember how many people joked about 2016 feeling like "the worst possible timeline" or out of something dystopian...well LOGAN really tapped into the zeitgeist.

It's quite a good thing that the first superhero movie in the Trump Presidency, which is what LOGAN is, is a story of a superhero failing and dying at the end. LOGAN is basically a movie for "The Resistance" you know the bad guys have won and are in power and the boomers and Gen-X'rs failed, and all those few old dudes who are still around and sad and hopeless can do is lay down their lives for the kids and the future.

Whereas Joker 2019 really feels astroturfed. It's a movie set in the '80s but is plainly about stuff that are hot topics of the last decade. It alludes to Bernie Goetz but doesn't deal with the baggage of that allusion. So it's got nothing specifically political to say.