Sunday
Mar032019
Podcast: Reflecting on the big show. Plus "Greta"
Sunday, March 3, 2019 at 9:30PM with Nathaniel R, Murtada Elfadl and Nick Davis
A week after the Oscars we reflect on the big night. Which wins will age well? Was this a fluke year or telling for the future? Should actors speak out on their problematic films? As an after-dinner mint, we nibble on Neil Jordan's stalker thriller Greta with Isabelle Huppert and Chloe Moretz.
You can listen to the podcast here at the bottom of the post or download from iTunes. Continue the conversations in the comments, won't you?
Reader Comments (45)
1. I think King and Coleman will age well, as will many of the craft wins. I think Cuaron might be viewed as an odd choice, historically, but not bad.
2. I would like actors to engage with problematic aspects of their films, but I have no idea how you do that but avoiding the backlash.
Spike was a gift this awards season but agree he kind of messed up his speech.
Spike Lee is seen as antagonistic with an opinion about everything. So asking him about Green Book is playing into what has been established in his public persona.
Close's defeat overshadows everything for me. I'm glad people are pissed Green Book won, it's a little consolation that everyone can feel a collective misery about the 2019 ceremony results.
Thank you for this podcast guys...
While I don't hate Green Book (it has plenty of merits), it really had no business being nominated for Best Picture (let alone winning) and personally, it frustrates me that it ended a five-year streak of good-to-great Best Picture winners (12 Years a Slave, Birdman, Spotlight, Moonlight, The Shape of Water). After five straight years in which the Best Picture winner was a film I could call among the better films of the year (if not necessarily THE best), it's disheartening to then get a winner I can merely live with. But then, as Nathaniel said, we've survived worst.
As for Best Actor, you guys say you don't care much for the winners except for Daniel Day-Lewis (who is amazing in all three films he won Oscars for) and the fact that Leo has one, but I want to bring up a Best Actor winner who I think would be remembered as one of the best of the Best Actor winners if it weren't for all the baggage surrounding him, and that is Casey Affleck in Manchester by the Sea. I know it's probably not right to praise him nowadays, but I'm sorry, that is such a devastating performance!!! A harrowing portrait of self-destructive grief that I spent days trying to shake off and just couldn't. More performances like that one should win the Oscar for Best Actor rather than the constant biopic mimicry (though I do think Eddie Redmayne had some great moments in The Theory of Everything, as did Gary Oldman in Darkest Hour).
I also think Olivia Colman and Regina King's wins will age quite well. Fun fact, now 5 of the last 10 winners for Best Supporting Actress are women of color (Mo'Nique, Octavia Spencer, Lupita Nyong'o, Viola Davis and now Regina King). I do feel sad that Mo'Nique hasn't had the career she should have had after that tour-de-force that was Precious, hopefully there's still time.
Thank you for your coverage of the awards this year and I hope we have a better season next year. I definitely want to hear you talk about Gloria Bell (I loved it!!! John Turturro should be nominated for that)...
I agree Malek handled the situation poorly and came off poorly. I don’t blame anyone who doesn’t want to hear from him for awhile. Kind of funny how he went from the Internet’s boyfriend to the complete opposite. But I also agree that before Bohemian Rhapsody it’s not like he was being offered substantial leading roles in movies. I also believe he was cast before Singer was announced as director. He probably pushed the negative energy surrounding Singer to the side because he felt it was an opportunity of a lifetime. Not defending it but just trying to look at it from another perspective. It’s also not like he ever praised Singer (and he did denounce him), they didn’t get along on set. On another note I watched an interview with him after he won the Oscar that all the winners do and he acknowledged how the movie was not a critical favorite (lol) but that he still appreciated reading all of the criticism about it and how he grew up studying and paying attention to film criticism.
Unpopular opinion, since a lot of people don’t like his win/performance, but I do think Malek’s performance will stand out. Compared to recent biopic wins in Best Actor, his performance is a lot more engaging and charismatic. It’s also not a typical Oscar baity performance despite the transformation.
I do feel sad that Mo'Nique hasn't had the career she should have had after that tour-de-force that was Precious, hopefully there's still time.
She publicly disparages other industry people she has grievances with. Which justifies Hollywood's unwillingness to yield to her financial and diva demands.
Dujardin's and McConaughey's are legitimately great Best Actor wins, I feel.
I'm gonna be on pins and needles waiting for future "Bohemian Rhapsody"/"Green Book" exposés in the future. Sorry, Nathaniel. Do you not want their truths and opinions to be revealed? Voters need to stew in their basic tastes and feel guilty at least ONCE about them. If Malek's thirsty ass is seen as "ungrateful" for biting the hand that fed him, it serves him right for winning an Oscar under false pretenses. I'd never wish anything bad for Mahershala Ali. Maybe his case would serve as a refreshing confession of sorts for him, and based on his immense goodwill, would shield him from any potential backlash. I applauded Viola for addressing the inherent flaws in "The Help" (and to be clear, they were in the book too). I'd like to see the same level of honesty from those two men too. It will probably all be moot anyways since NDAs can last a lifetime of done well, so....... the secrecy, lies, and white-washing will only continue.
Disagree. McConaughey robbed DiCaprio and Ejiofor that year.
Reynolds -- i mean... if we're going to go there with Malek, Mahershala also won under false pretenses since he's definitely a leading man... and how is he exempt from "thirst" for gold when he already had an Oscar ...and campaigned again!?! Its so funny to me how the internet selectively applies judgment of actors. I'm sure I do it too to some extent (I'm guessing a lot of it unsconcious, based on how much anyone doing the judging enjoys the work of various actors) but it's still hilarious in an annoying way.
both male acting categories left such a bad taste in my mouth this year. I didn't like either of the winning performances, both are very stereotyped demeaning depictions of "queerness" and there was no reason for either of them to win with world-class work nominated against them in their categories.
Richter Scale -- Affleck was tremendous in that movie, yes. My preference was Denzel that year but both were amazing performances.
I don't care that Colman was clearly better. Past performances and careers should count. Change the title to Best Actress in a Leading Role with Career Context Considered, I don't care! I have to wait two years for Close's inevitable win now.
I’m not going to judge Mahershala for campaigning when Green Book was the “best” role he was offered AFTER winning the Oscar for Moonlight. TFE fave Nicole Kidman campaigns every single year she has a prestigious movie out despite being an Oscar winner with multiple nominations yet no goes after her for that.
I’m just glad this season is over. The complaints about it may have truth to them, but it’s just redundant to hear at this point.
Thank you Richter Scale, it would be an honour to be nominated. Also hopefully my good friend Woody Allen is allowed to work freely and be rewarded for his future works.
At least /3rtful is open and honest about his thoughts. It reminds me of Dancin' Dan (I think it was he) admitting he thought Weisz was definitely Lead, but voted for her in Supporting for The Team Experience Awards. It's not great, but we have to admit that, like these two, many voters treat categories as more serving suggestions, and any loopholes or allowances outside of the true spirit of the award will be exploited. For whatever personal satisfaction is gained.
I don't care that Colman was clearly better. Past performances and careers should count. Change the title to Best Actress in a Leading Role with Career Context Considered, I don't care! I have to wait two years for Close's inevitable win now.
March 4, 2019 | Unregistered Commenter/3rtful
I didn't write this.
I don't care that Colman was clearly better. Past performances and careers should count. Change the title to Best Actress in a Leading Role with Career Context Considered, I don't care! I have to wait two years for Close's inevitable win now.
March 4, 2019 | Unregistered Commenter/3rtful
I didn't write this.
March 4, 2019 | Unregistered Commenter/3rtful
Oh shit, Close's loss has caused splintering of the minds! To be fair, it sounded like you.
I didn't find Mahershala "thirsty" for the second Oscar win. Sue me. Not to the extreme level Malek was. I also don't find category fraud the mortal sin that you do either. Different strokes.
Reynolds, oh i didn't either. Malek was capital T thirsty. Mahershala was just sort of there, campaigning (but campaigning nonetheless). I'll never understand why people think he needed a second Oscar for a far inferior performance to his winning one just two years prior.
The very least plausible parts of Greta were Chloe Grace Moretz just immediately accepting someone's 6-CL shift, which has never happened, and her being allowed to make multiple phone calls while on shift *in the kitchen* **during her shift** and it took me out of the movie every time. It's pretty fun in some moments - all of them Huppert related - but like. They could've cut a lot of stuff.
I think a major change I'd like to see in Oscars going forward is giving Bradley Cooper an Oscar. And I'd be very interested in seeing what a winning set voted on only by people in their own categories.
Thanks for listening and for the comments everyone.
If I could chime re Ali - as I say on the pod, I don't tink his running in supporting is egregious. Shirley is concieved as "less than" Lipp, only there to serve as a device for Lipp to learn a lesson and become more human. The film isn't interested in him at all. If the film thinks of the chracter as lesser, why couldn't the actor run in supporting?
So Bradley Cooper wasn’t thirsty himself?
@Anon; how was Cooper thirsty when he didn't campaign...like at all. If Cooper had been thirsty, he may have actually won an Oscar...
He did campaign and the Star is Born campaign with Gaga was OTT. It just seems hypocritical to go after certain actors for campaigning but not others.
Bradley Cooper did not campaign much. He didn't even attend the Governor's Awards (there was media speculation as to where he was) or do many tv appearances (Colbert begged him at the NBR Awards to come on his show - which he did).
That NYT profile probably damaged him, but it was correct in the sense that he was obviously uncomfortable talking about himself, and a lot of campaigning seems to be talking about one's personal experience. (It will be interesting to see if big stars refuse to be profiled by that writer in the future. She did a number on Gwyneth as well.)
I don't think Mahershala was very thirsty either; Supporting Actor just became a convenient place to reward Green Book. No one should blame him for that! He handled it gracefully. I do wish Viggo had won instead, though, since he was a 3-time nominee with no Oscar.
Also it’s not Ali’s fault he won again. He’s Waltz 2.0 but his winning performances display more range.
Agree to disagree. Maybe it’s true Bradley didn’t campaign much in Best Actor, but Best Director? Absolutely. And it’s not like he didn’t promote the movie at all. And he’s been very thirsty in the past. Yet he gets a free pass on here.
Murtada -- but this is forcing your own politics (which I agree with in this case) on to a case of storytelling. However poorly the movie conceives Dr Don Shirley, he is a co-lead. It's a story of the relationahip between two men on the road together. They cannot be supporting and lead with the way the film is structured.
If the film isn't interested in him enough that's a qualitative problem. It does not change the fact that it's a story about the relationship between two people only (the film has literaly no other plot!): thus both leads.
Re: Ali
Well, we'll always have "Moonlight", Nathaniel! :-D
Wonderful podcast, guys! You are all just delightful, even when the Oscars...are Not.
I didn't get the answer to the burning question: Did Murtada break his sobriety when the Green Book wins came in? But in all seriousness, thanks Murtada for your constant upbeat attitude all season while also speaking the truth about Green Book's othering of the black experience.
Great podcast gentlemen. I thought it was one of the best Oscar ceremonies in years. Loved Colman's shocking win but my heart breaks for Close.
San FranCinema - ha ha the hard drinking started immediately after the anooucement of original screenplay.
Two comments:
--I don't buy Murtada's argument that Dr. Shirley is viewed as "other" throughout the whole of Green Book. You can say the focus is on Tony Lip - I might agree with that - but more specifically, it's on Tony Lip realizing that Dr. Shirley is no different than he. How can he be both "other" and "deep down the same"?
--MLK said, "Let us realize the arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice." The stakes are clearly much lower, but the same goes for Oscar. Oscar is slowly changing for the better. There will be some steps backwards as many believe there were this year, but on the aggregate there are more steps forward. I'd even argue that despite wins for Green Book and Bohemian Rhapsody, there were many more steps forward this year than in 2016/2017 when people were happier with the Best Picture winners. Just ask Hannah Beachler, Ruth Carter, Alfonso Cuaron, Mahershala Ali, Regina King, Olivia Colman, Spike Lee, etc...
Evan - if you think that by the end of the movie Tony and Dr Shirley are "deep down the same" then we fundamentally disagree. I never said that they become the same - why is that in quotes? I don't think they ever become equal or are seen as equal at anytime in the movie and that is because Shirley is always othered. It's what I said in the podcast.
Huppert was fun, but Greta was a disappointment. Neil Jordan is not the director to whom I turn for chills anymore.
https://humanizingthevacuum.wordpress.com/2019/03/01/muddled-greta-still-proves-isabelle-huppert-is-a-singular-white-female/
Murtada - I put "deep down the same" in quotes so that it would be typographically the same when I contrasted it with "other." I know that you don't think the film portrays Shirley as an equal. But I do, and I think it does so even when the Tony character doesn't realize they are. I think it actually portrays him as Tony's intellectual and moralistic superior. So yes, we fundamentally disagree - that much is clear.
Replacing Joe and Katey would always be hard, but, wow, this has been the worst podcast season in TFE history and this episode the worst of the worst season.
I think the only worse podcast season I have ever witnessed was that King Speech season of All This and The Oscars Too when Sasha Stone was struggling with severe depression and it came thru in the podcast.
Murtada is a terrible, joyless, buzzkill of a cohost, brings very little to the table other than a better-than-thou unearned attitude and obvious "woke" talking points that only make sense inside of his political bubble. He's probably second worst podcast contributor ever (after that pretentious twat Guy Lodge).
People who think themselves miles above the content they are reviewing and the audience listening rarely ever make good podcast personalities, and when they do, they usually have a lot of knowledge and wit to back it up (say Armond White) or they play it to humourous effect (a la Dave Chen of the Slashfilmcast).
Take as long as you need to come back, but do so with people who are FUN to listen to.
You lost me at thinking Armond White had wit. He did in 1990.
As for Murtada's "woke talking points," whatever that means, he's doing his job as a critic: explaining why the Academy accepts terrible films. If you think it's condescending, you must feel guilty about your taste.
Alfred - Check Armond White on the Slash Filmcast, he always brings it. Usually an antagonistic view, but surely well based and riveting/raucous guest.
You know exactly what woke talking points are, since you were offended by it and decided to attack me, personally.
I can assure I feel zero guilts about my tastes, as I have (in over a decade as a somewhat regular poster on the blog) been both in agreeance and disagreeance with the majority and never had any qualms about voicing my opinion.
This season was awful, the new cohost is weak compared to talent featured before. I stand by it.
For reference, listen to Chris Feil's and Joe Reid's This Had Oscar Buzz or Jennifer Owen Young's and Kristin Russo's Buffering the Vampire Slayer. Two shows with strong "woke" voices that don't talk down to the audience and are radiant FUN listens. Tone matters a whole lot.
Anne Marie was an amazing contributor. Whatever happened to her?
That podcast about Kate Hepburn with Nick and Anne is a highpoint and another good reference for how joyous a listen this podcast can be.
The best moment of any episode ever still remains, of course, Joe on the Supporting Actress Smackdown for Hush, Hush, Sweet Charlotte, screaming "Fuck respectability, I'm gonna die in this house!!!!"
Carmen - I’ll remind you of your own point: “Tone matters a whole lot.” Be respectful.
Murtada - You do you. Even if you’re wrong, I’ll be listening. :-)
Evan - Fair point, but I have been quite at liberty with my tone for the past two years since it has become ok for commenters to tell each other to go fuck themselves and nothing has been done of it.
I actually enjoy listening to Murtada on the podcasts, especially compared to others...
Nathaniel. Nick. Murtada. All 3 are great. Bring Joe and Katey occasionally and that’s all we need. Thank you all.
Special thanks to Nick - his concerns about critics pre-judging of the Wife are as usual cogent, insightful and it goes far to explain the final Oscars outcome.