Perhaps, but you have to also consider the competition’s major flaws (in the eyes of Academy voters), and what the Academy is trying to showcase. For example, despite being extremely popular, Roma was not gonna get to be #1 due to ignoring the Box Office – Hollywood just ain’t ready for a internet movie winner; 2) Action Blockbusters just don’t win top votes – sorry, Black Panther. 3) Rock song to win? Hahahaha. Buh-bye Queen. 3) Vice – obvious weaknesses in a factually-challenged story. The others weren’t diverse enough.
fwiw: I picked Green Book to win best picture in our pool based on guessing voter’s preferences. (and I haven’t seen any of the nominated movies.)
There is a good article by Richard Brody in the New Yorker that accurately, I think, characterizes why many people are unhappy about the Best Picture winner and some of the other awards.
I think they still have most technical/behind the scenes awards in a separate ceremony- I only noticed the usual ones (even though I hated the loud music levels as above). Without a host an announcement about them may have been missed.
@jshain , almost all the time I completely agree with audience Rotten Tomatoes. I think critics really are looking for other things than pure enjoyment and escapism.
@sly123 Someone today was explaining an Oscar voter ranks Best Movies 1 through 8 and they then calculates top votes. I never knew, just assumed each voter picked their favorite movie!
I find Brody’s article to be lazy. Why isn’t it possible that the Academy simply liked Green Book the best? And if they did, so what? And I love how he taints the wins of Regina King and Ali. And I find it insulting that he calls the first Oscar wins by black women for costume design and production design “ consolation prizes”.
Except:
"But more often, critics (used to be) in sync with the rest of the world. The Los Angeles Film Critics Assn. voted best-picture awards to “One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest,” “Rocky,” “Kramer vs. Kramer,” “Terms of Endearment,” “Amadeus” and “Schindler’s List” — movies that also won Academy Awards and earned box office glory.
What changed? For one thing, many magazines and newspapers have either disappeared or downsized their film critic staffs in the last couple decades. There are fewer popular forums where critics have a chance to proclaim their favorites. Many critics have gravitated to the fringes of the internet, websites that pride themselves on their anti-populist credentials. And some of the mainstream critics who endure have joined the crusade against feel-good entertainment."
Shockingly bad movie? I don’t know that many people would agree with that. I avoided it for many years because I don’t care to see graphically violent movies, particularly when they are based upon truth. But what a phenomenal movie…engrossing story, exceptional actors, a movie that I won’t forget. I can’t imagine anyone classifying it as shockingly bad.
Critics like Richard Brody are writing serious film criticism, which I think is valuable whether or not it’s deliberately anti-populist. He isn’t just telling readers whether they’ll enjoy a movie - he’s putting films in historical and artistic perspective.
I don’t often agree with him, and frankly I occasionally don’t understand what he’s talking about. But I read every column and consider it. He writes for the New Yorker, and fits comfortably in their history of stern movie critics. Their other film critic, Anthony Lane, is more accessible and certainly more fun.
So then … what makes a film Oscar worthy? DH and I were discussing this before the show. For years it seemed like a popular movie could not win Best Picture. It had to be a serious movie or a period drama etc.
What type of movie should be honored? There were several last night that were based on true stories so does that come into play? (Would Green Book or BlackkKlansman be as good a movie if they were totally fiction?)
Do you base it on character development? Theme? Good old fashioned enjoyable story? Acting?
These aren’t awards, though, for populist opinion or a contest about revenues. It’s the industry voting for its own. And a site like RottenTomatoes takes its pro reviews from the newspapers and journals (and a few websites) those folks work for. Mostly, the same biggie media as 20 or 40 years ago.
The question, to me, is has the viewing public been dumbed down? Not, are critics wrong for not appreciating the public’s sense of two hours of fun. Or, what’s just ok for their 10 or 15 bucks.
I don’t know. I read the reviews of Bohemian Rhapsody and I get why the critics were disappointed. There was an even better movie that could have been made. But I think they kind of missed how much fun the movie that did get made was. I never worry too much about awards, it’s fun, but really I liked every nominee I saw in different ways - I didn’t feel anyone shouted at me as the obvious pick for Best Picture.
We saw Black Panther, BlacKkKlansman, A Star is Born, and Bohemian Rhapsody. Liked them all, but thought BlacKkKlansman was the most significant film of those four. Did not see the others. To be honest, I usually watch the Oscars while doing something else, but this year we waited breathlessly to see if DIL’s late father would be recognized in the “In Memoriam” segment. He was, and it was so meaningful to her entire family for his work to be publicly recognized by his peers. A bittersweet moment to be sure.
I think part of what happened this year was that there were at least five (or six) films with some strong support (including by the public), some clear element of quality, and some clear flaws as well. None of them was so compelling that it demanded the Oscar. In that context, it probably didn’t take that much to win – just enough to be a hair better than the next best film in the voting scheme. Green Book may not have had as many as 20% of voters ranking it first among the candidates. So while it is tempting to pontificate the way Brody does about how retro this proves Hollywood to be, I doubt it proves much of anything. The “popular” vote got split four ways, the “art” vote got split three or four ways. the “progressive” vote got split three ways, and one way or another Green Book sneaked in there. Not my choice, or my second choice, etc., but good for them. I don’t think any of these films will be looking like stone classics ten years from now.
Excerpt:
"Walt Disney Co.’s “Captain Marvel” is expected to open with a spectacular $100 million in ticket sales from the U.S. and Canada alone next month. And yet, according to the highly influential website Rotten Tomatoes, only 28% of moviegoers are interested in seeing Marvel Studios’ first superhero film with a solo female lead. What gives?
Blame online ■■■■■■, who have previously waged campaigns to lower audience ratings for movies including “Star Wars: The Last Jedi” and “Ghostbusters” by flooding their pages with negative, sometimes sexist comments. Such “review bombing” efforts are a serious problem for Rotten Tomatoes, which depends on credible ratings to drive traffic to its free website."
If you’re referring to my affection for RT, the audience numbers don’t influence me. “Want to see it” is often accruing numbers even before critics previews are available. Based on what?