I liked “Rushmore” than Grand Budapest or Moonrise Kingdom.
Or The Sound of Music. And that was a lot further back than Argo. I think we can agree here that there’s a precedent for it.
When I was a kid our school went to see “The Sound of Music” as a field trip. For years, I thought that the people of Salzburg hated the Nazi Anshluss and treated them as foreign invaders. After all, didn’t they all defiantly join in the singing of “Edelweiss” at the Salzburg festival. (I knew that Edelweiss was a new song by Rodgers and Hammerstein, but I thought the Austrian sentiment was opposed to Nazism, as symbolized by the song).
Well, the Sound of Music was a musical; not something I’d expect to be very accurate. As my brother-in-law said, you expect “Lincoln” to be more accurate than “Abraham Lincoln, Vampire Hunter.”
Re: Mr Turner . I know a heck of a lot about JMW Turner. 18th - 19th century landscape painting is my area of expertise. The film Mr. Turner was brutally accurate, astonishing, gorgeous… and I was captivated. But then again, I am also a huge fan of Mike Leigh. Most people don’t like Mr Leigh’s films because he loves to tell the truth about people (Turner was both an SOB and a genius). He presents his characters as they are. And the general public does find reality either hard to believe or utterly boring. Too bad.
Interesting trivia about John Legend, nominated for Best Original Song (Glory):
He was accepted to Harvard, but turned it down in favor of U Penn.
Saw Selma and was a bit disappointed. It was nearly two hours of serious talking heads with a few minutes of exciting action thrown in. I thought David Oleywolo was excellent but the writers didn’t let him express any range of emotion and that could be why he wasn’t nominated.
Thanks, Musicamusica. I’ve been dying to see Mr. Turner. But along the lines of the criticisms of Selma, I’ve heard that Ruskin really gets a bad rap in the film. Did you think Ruskin was treated fairly/accurately?
Saw Whiplash last night. Not sure how I feel about it. The teacher is a very sick person.
@nottelling From my point of view the portrayal of Ruskin is dead on correct. (he was a bit of a pretentious jerk)
If you know anything about Ruskin’s life or behavior, you will especially appreciate a little scene in which Turner commiserates with Ruskin’s poor mistreated wife Effie.
I thought the portrayal was interesting. I just thought there were about 30 minutes too much truth in the movie.
Too much information on 19th century landscape painting? IMPOSSIBLE. 
Truth be told…it’s really not for everyone. I’m a real dork. Every time they showed Turner’s studio set up I gasped with excitement. And the way Timothy Spall held the brushes …SUBLIME. :x
Bay, I think I agree with you about Selma. The writers didn’t give the protagonists much to do. The director left a lot of interesting stuff out. I was surprised that she minimized the role of Diane Nash (more Civil Rights women need to remembered). And the Governor Wallace vs. Judge Frank Johnson (Martin Sheen) would have been a great subplot to follow.
Selma is on my list for this weekend. I’ve seen most all of the others. Attempted to watch The Grand Budapest Hotel the other night and couldn’t get past 15 minutes BUT I will try again.
Like others the publicity around LBJ in Selma is concerning. Like someone mentioned above, I think the way the director altered the truth in that one is much more of an issue than the storytelling of Argo or Imitation Game. It will definitely affect they way the un-educated-about-civil-rights-movement view him. It was nominated for best picture; if there was a snub maybe it was to the director for this artistic interpretation of history.
I also agree that there are so many actors who don’t get recognized and others that shouldn’t be recognized, but it is ALL opinion. Just opinion. And the academy has recognized a diverse group before I just don’t think it’s racial this year.
Why are there separate male and female acting awards?
I saw Selma last night and was disappointed–maybe it could never have lived up to all the hype. First, I think serious historical inaccuracy is unforgiveable in a film that purports to describe a critical time in recent history. A hatchet job on LBJ for the sole purpose of hyping the drama is shameful. But that aside, I just think it was a flawed film, strongest when it focused on the grassroots organizing efforts, on the arguments over strategy (the conflict between SCLC and SNCC), etc., weakest when it lurched through brief and entirely inadequate scenes of the White House and Alabama governor’s office. It just needed better focus. The cinematography was its strongest element–the shots of marchers on the bridge from various perspectives were breathtaking.
As for performances, much as I usually like Tom Wilkinson, I thought he was terribly miscast as LBJ. He never got the accent right, and good heavens, anyone who lived through those years can hear LBJ’s voice in his head like it was yesterday. David Oyelowo was adequate, but lacked the presence and stature to truly evoke MLK. He seemed smaller than life in every crowd scene. And speaking of accents, my H, who has a great ear for voices and had no idea Oyelowo wasn’t American, asked me two minutes into his first screen–“Is he British???” We both found Oyelowo’s accent to be all over the place. In general, the smaller roles were the jewels in this film. As an aside, I’m a bit offended at the use of so many non-American actors to tell an American story. It’s not as if we don’t have plenty of black actors who are underemployed in the US!
As I have no quibbles with Oyelowo not getting an Oscar nomination, I also have no issue with Ava DuVernay not getting a director nod. She has very limited directorial experience, and I think it showed in multiple ways–excessive use of close-up head shots, changes of scene that left the audience disoriented, the random insertion of FBI surveillance report captions to no particular end, etc. Perhaps some of these weaknesses were attributable to the screenwriters, but I think she has some growing to do.
I have not commented much but I am really enjoying this thread! Y’all are funny.
I thought David O’s performance was a bit wooden…not a lot of MLK letting down his hair, but as my son said, if you received daily death threats and were responsible for leading good folks into violent situations, maybe you would always be serious and subdued in private. So I don’t know enough to know if it was accurate. Same with the lack of chemistry between Martin and Coretta…by then, perhaps there was no chemistry.
I, too, missed the LBJ accent. Seems like Tom Wilkinson didn’t even try.
MommaJ, I too have noticed the “explosion” of British actors of color in American films. Not a bad thing but certainly curious. Did you notice how the major roles in ‘12 Years a Slave’ were all Brits, or in Fassbinder’s case, Irish? First recognized David O in ‘Rise of the Planet of the Apes’ a couple of years ago. And he had a featured role as an American pilot in ‘Red Tails.’ Pretty good Yank accent for a Englishman. The King voice is tricky for any actor because of MLK’s divine elocution. As regards Coretta Scott King, she was not a southerner by birth.
Thank you to the poster of the Still Alice trailer, I read that book years ago and found it deeply affecting. The continual check in on her phone with her self set questions, watching the the answers shift with the disease progression, then recalling the time when her answers indicated certain actions, wow, still makes me cry. It is a very provocative story and I still think about it, looking forward to the film.
@somemom, I plan to go see it tomorrow, when it opens here.
Today I slipped off on a cold, rainy day and saw Birdman. Wow.
First of all, I went to a new theater that has those amazing recliners that practically make a bed. It was nicer than our business class seats on our trip home from Germany. 
Secondly, it was a very intense film, with many great performances. I went back and forth between being engrossed in the story and disgusted by the narcissism displayed by several of the characters. I can’t imagine what it would be like to love an actor like those in this movie. Good grief, that would get old. I thought I figured out how it would end (pretty early in the movie), but I turned out to be mistaken. Sort of.
All in all, it was a wonderful film, highly deserving of all the accolades. Though it had some comical moments, I’m surprised it was in the comedy category at the Golden Globes. Michael Keaton was superb. I can’t wait to see who wins best actor this year; what a field.
Finally, I ate almost a whole bag of peanut M & Ms. Sigh. I rarely eat sugar, and I probably ate a year’s worth in one sitting. 