comment #1

SHR says ...

Jeff Wells. Music critic.

comment #2

Jeffrey Wells says ...

Thank you. I think.

comment #3

bildeaux says ...

I thought you didn't like District 9. Coming around to it?

comment #4

COCO says ...

10 Excellent films.....they are there.....tell the Academy to look harder.....or open their Eloi minds.

comment #5

televisiontears says ...

I used to hate Oscar predictions, but the ten nominees this year has definitely got me guessing. We'll probably have more of the same baiting prestige films in the running, but I wouldn't rule out a crowd-pleaser or two.

District 9 has got to be at the top of that list. First off, it's a great film across the board. Performances, FX, an innovative narrative that seamlessly shifts into pleasure-center genre tropes. It even has an unobtrusive love story, which is the rare, to say the least. Most importantly, it has a racial subtext (if you can even call it subtext) that voters can pat themselves on the back for in the face of all the bloody carnage. Do you think Crash won for its quality?

I think it's a go for D9. IMHO it definitely deserves it, even if there were only five nominees.

comment #6

Glenn Whipp says ...

1939, you ask? Well, here were the 10 nominated films:

Dark Victory
Gone with the Wind
Goodbye, Mr. Chips
Love Affair
Mr. Smith Goes to Washington
Ninotchka -
Of Mice and Men
Stagecoach
The Wizard of Oz
Wuthering Heights

Will this year's 10 nominees hold up collectively as well in 2079? I wouldn't take that bet.

comment #7

Josh Massey says ...

I don't see most indie flicks until DVD, so there's a lot I haven't seen - but I haven't seen one movie this year that deserves to win Best Picture, much less ten.

I've seen about 40 2009 releases, and my favorite movie of the year? Notorious. Which means it isn't the year to expand the nominations.

comment #8

Gogocrank says ...

Considering the number of terrible films that have been nominated in the past, let alone the number of terrible films that have won, I'm sure they'll have no problem filling those ten slots *and* overlooking many of the year's best works.

comment #9

Gordon27 says ...

"Due respect but what is this person talking about? 1939?"

I find it surprising that Jeff has never heard of 1939 being almost universally regarded as one of the three (or so) best years to date for American film. It's also one of the only years with 10 best picture nominees where it seems at all justified by the nominated movies.

comment #10

DeeZee says ...

Speaking of disappointing, I paid a Fucklight ticket price to be completely let down by Boondock Saints 2. In fact, it was so disappointing, that I'm forced to take back my argument that you can't rip off a rip-off artist like Quentin Tarantino. No, you can do it, if you really try hard enough; so mission accomplished, Troy.

Christ, part of the flick felt like it was still trapped in 1994 with its blatant desire to ape Goodfellas and Pulp Fiction with a worthless back-story and the frequent need to turn the saints into a couple of wise-cracking buffoons. And the Jar Jar/Shia in this sequel's Mexican. I guess that was in order to be more politically correct with its frat-boy slurs. I will admit that Duffy knows how to cast hot women, but Benz ends up getting more screen-time than the lead characters. In addition, like Neeson in TPM, Connelly's the only reason to watch BS2. Jeez, I haven't been this underwhelmed with a sequel or follow-up since Indy 4 and Death Proof.

Anyway, new The Road trailer.
http://www.themoviebox.net/movies/2009/NOPQR/Road,The/trailer.php
Invictus tv spots.
http://www.themoviebox.net/movies/2009/IJKLM/Invictus/trailer.php
Avatar trailer in HD.
http://www.themoviebox.net/movies/2009/0-9ABC/Avatar/trailer.php
Also, since when is Little Miss Sunshine a star?
http://www.hollywood.com/news/Breslins_Broadway_appointment_met_with_criticism/5721237

comment #11

Scott Nye says ...

Yeah, if you haven't seen at least a handful of great films this year, you either a) aren't trying, or b) as Jeff said, hoping for the kind of film that just ain't made anymore (in other words, closed-minded about the kind of film that should win an Oscar). But this is the same group that, somehow, picked No Country for Old Men, so I can't give them too much crap.

I'm not saying this was a banner year or anything, but in spite of what the whiners say every December, there are at least five truly great films every year. I'll bet finding ten this year won't be too difficult. That doesn't mean they'll pick them (I have a hard time seeing Summer Hours get nominated, but that's in my Top 3), but they are out there.

comment #12

Gordon27 says ...

After all the movies DZ has dismissed out of hand without seeing, he bought a ticket to see 'Boondock Saints 2' in a theater on opening night?

That just about says it all.

comment #13

DeeZee says ...

Gordon: Yeah, I'm hoping Expendables saves the action genre, or at least makes it tolerable again. And I saw Watchmen the same weekend, so...

comment #14

M. Hulot says ...

VERY good point, Gordon.

There are two kinds of people in this world, those with brains and tasts, and those who like The Boondock Saints.

DeeZee has shown his hand once again. ANYONE who would willfully sit through a second viewing of the first Boondock movie cannot be trusted to criticize anything...probably not even something so mundane as a breakfast cereal. Furthermore, anyone who would support its sequel (especially if that someone would pay to see it in a theatre, on opening weekend) is a completely and utterly useless person.

Then again, we all knew that about DeeZee already.

I wonder if he is even able to dress himself everyday.

comment #15

DeeZee says ...

Hulot: "There are two kinds of people in this world, those with brains and tasts, and those who like The Boondock Saints."

Yes, because scalping corpses is quite witty and tasteful.

"ANYONE who would willfully sit through a second viewing of the first Boondock movie cannot be trusted to criticize anything..."

I'd trust their opinions more than the people who paid for the director's cut of Watchmen.

"Furthermore, anyone who would support its sequel (especially if that someone would pay to see it in a theatre, on opening weekend) is a completely and utterly useless person. "

As opposed to someone who spends their free time trashing them on a message board?

comment #16

M. Hulot says ...

Really, DeeZee? Are you a COMPLETE idiot?

You're trying to bait-and-switch, using what I can only believe is an Inglorious Basterds reference? What does that have to do with ANYTHING. I haven't even seen it. Which is why, unlike you, I don't bother to bash it.

Secondly, I am no fan of Watchmen, so again, what does that have anything to do with ANYTHING? Are you attempting to draw a parallel between you and your lack of critical sophistication with that of the supposed masses who have enjoyed Watchmen and Basterds? What's the point? I'm comparing you to me, and perhaps Gordon, as well. Not some group of people who have supported other films.

OH, the GREAT HILARiOUS IRONY and HYPOCRISY of it all!!

YOU, DeeZee, had the audacity to write the following:

"As opposed to someone who spends their free time trashing them on a message board?"

That is is the single most amusing thing I have ever read on the internet. And that's not hyperbole.

Of all the people on HE, you post the most negative comments about movies you haven't even seen, as well as your very much unappreciated posting of news links five or six times a day, then try and call me out for how I spend MY free time? That's so fucking hysterical!

comment #17

M. Hulot says ...

I wonder, how much time does it take you to post all those links, DeeZee? He. he. he.

LOSER.

comment #18

THE MovieBob says ...

By the time this goes down, "Trek" will be on DVD and it might have buzz again. That's a big factor that few people are looking at: It's not how hot you were when you came out, it's how hot you are when the voting happens.

Which isn't to say "Trek" deserves it - which it sure as hell doesn't - but it could happen, sure.

comment #19

Gordon27 says ...

"I'd trust their opinions more than the people who paid for the director's cut of Watchmen."

I didn't care much for 'Watchmen' myself, but it's not the individual movies that you knock so much as the general idea that you think Troy Duffy is a real filmmaker and Quentin Tarantino isn't. Even Zack Snyder is much closer to a real filmmaker than Troy Duffy.

comment #20

DeeZee says ...

Hulot: "I haven't even seen it. Which is why, unlike you, I don't bother to bash it. "

Did you see Boondock Saints 2?

"Are you attempting to draw a parallel between you and your lack of critical sophistication with that of the supposed masses who have enjoyed Watchmen and Basterds?"

No, I'm just stating that I'm not a tool who needs to be mentally or emotionally stroked by whatever bullshit artistic or populist endeavor you consider worthy of my opinions.

"Of all the people on HE, you post the most negative comments about movies you haven't even seen, as well as your very much unappreciated posting of news links five or six times a day, then try and call me out for how I spend MY free time? "

Yep. You're still doing a wretched job of defending yourself at it, too.

comment #21

M. Hulot says ...

DeeZee:

I didn't criticize Boondock 2, reading comprehension boy. I criticized those who would pay money to see it.

You post here more than anyone else. And you do so at all hours of the day, too.

I, on the other hand, only post on occasion. And dont spend the rest of my free time gathering links to post on a site where everyone hates me.

comment #22

DeeZee says ...

Gordon: "but it's not the individual movies that you knock so much as the general idea that you think Troy Duffy is a real filmmaker and Quentin Tarantino isn't. "

The problem is that QT's not a filmmaker, but a film remaker. I may have hated the fuck out of BS2, but at least it's still Duffy's baby, and not a bunch of other movies painted over with pointless extended dialogue sequences and torture porn.

comment #23

M. Hulot says ...

And, for the record, Boondock is UNWATCHABLE.

It is poorly shot, poorly written, and HORRIBLY edited. And the fact that you don't get that says to me that are a complete fucking idiot.

comment #24

M. Hulot says ...

Duffy's baby? Really, DeeZee? WHo is Troy Duffy's number one influence according to Mr. Duffy himself? QUENTIN TARANTINO.

DUuffy ripped off about a hundred genre cliches in Boondock. And I just read five reviews of Boondock 2, and every last one of them mentioned that he was, yet again, trying to rip off whom? Quentin Tarantino.

Film-remaker, indeed.

comment #25

Redmond says ...

Why is Star Trek even being touted as a contender for Best Picture? I enjoyed it as a summer flick with way more depth than Wolverine (Which didn't take much.), but there are two scenes that completely rip you out of the movie:

***SPOILER ALERTS***

1. Kirk running into Old Spock in a random cave on that ice planet. An entire planet filled with ice caves, look who somersaults in. TA DA!

2. Scotty teleports into the water pipes on the Enterprise. Haha! Space is WACKY!

***END SPOILERS***

I'll definitely give it another whirl on Blu-Ray where I'm sure it will look amazing, but considering it for an Oscar? No fucking way.

(Also, DeeZee, you really shot yourself in the foot admitting to seeing BS2 in the theater opening night. Unless you're a freshman in college, then it might be understandable. Maybe.)

comment #26

DeeZee says ...

"It is poorly shot, poorly written, and HORRIBLY edited. And the fact that you don't get that says to me that are a complete fucking idiot. "

Bullshit. If Boondock Saints was directed or produced by Besson or based on a franchise, you'd either be praising it as a fine example of the action genre, or as a bold take on the comic book adaptation fad like Wanted or TDK. Hell, it has the same kind of action found in the Matrix, but because the latter flick takes place on the Internet, it automatically gets a higher rank. Even Die Hard IV gets a higher rank, and it's just McClane in War Games. So really, it's just elitist geek snobbery which affects your opinion, and nothing more.

"WHo is Troy Duffy's number one influence according to Mr. Duffy himself? QUENTIN TARANTINO."

That might be the case, but Duffy can still make a movie which isn't based on the movies he's stored in his basement.

comment #27

Uncle Milty says ...

"That might be the case, but Duffy can still make a movie which isn't based on the movies he's stored in his basement."

But you're wrong about that. Completely. He's ripping off everything he saw in Pulp Fiction and Reservoir Dogs. The guy has never written a line, filmed a scene, or edited a gun battle that wasn't completely ripped from Tarantino.

"If Boondock Saints was directed or produced by Besson or based on a franchise, you'd either be praising it as a fine example of the action genre, or as a bold take on the comic book adaptation fad like Wanted or TDK."

Says you. It was an incompetently made film. Hip kids wanted to feel like they discovered the next Pulp Fiction so they decided it was a cult classic. It's a piece of shit film. Horrible.

"it has the same kind of action found in the Matrix, but because the latter flick takes place on the Internet, it automatically gets a higher rank."

I'm not sure what this means. Are you saying movies that take place on the internet are generally well reviewed? Can you back that up with a significant amount of examples?

DZ, are you Troy Duffy? That would explain how much time you've had to spend on the internet the past several years.

The fact that you paid to see that piece of garbage yet (repeatedly) rip on critically acclaimed, box office hits that you haven't seen pretty much closes the book on what type of person you are.

comment #28

DeeZee says ...

Mitty: "The guy has never written a line, filmed a scene, or edited a gun battle that wasn't completely ripped from Tarantino."

That's weird. I don't remember anyone with a vest of guns or a coroner's re-enactment of a shoot-out in a QT movie.

"Hip kids wanted to feel like they discovered the next Pulp Fiction so they decided it was a cult classic."

And hip Gen'Xers wanted to feel like they discovered the next Godfather, which is why they made Pulp Fiction a cult classic.

"Are you saying movies that take place on the internet are generally well reviewed? Can you back that up with a significant amount of examples? "

Minority Report, Die Hard IV, The Matrix, Avalon, Pelican Brief, Mission Impossible, A Scanner Darkly, Office Space, Juno, Ghost in the Shell, etc.

"The fact that you paid to see that piece of garbage yet (repeatedly) rip on critically acclaimed, box office hits that you haven't seen pretty much closes the book on what type of person you are."

Most hits aren't critically-acclaimed. They either get good buzz or a sizable audience which doesn't care about buzz. So I'm only putting the flicks in their place, according to their uninspired marketing gimmicks, which is par for the course on the internets.

comment #29

Renfield says ...

All of you. Shut the fuck up.

Jesus.

comment #30

Jeffrey Wells says ...

Wells to Gordon27: I'm well aware that 1939 has long been recognized as one of the great all-time film years, right up there with 1962 and 1999. What did I write or hint to indicate that I wasn't aware of this?

And my genuine thanks, by the way, to M. Julot and DeeZee for completey ignoring Glenn Whipp's piece and my response to that Academy member's observation, and just picking up the Chinese vase and smashing it on the floor and hijacking the thread with a Troy Duffy//Boondock Saints dispute.

comment #31

M. Hulot says ...

Wells,

Sorry, mate. You are correct.

But why have you not criticized DeeZee for hijacking the thread on EVERY OTHER POST BY POSTING ALL HIS LINKS, hmmmm???

DeeZee,

And this will be my final word on your idiocy...

"And hip Gen'Xers wanted to feel like they discovered the next Godfather, which is why they made Pulp Fiction a cult classic."

That comment is rife with inaccuracies, and, of course, rampant stupidity.

First of all, Pulp Fiction is not a cult classic by any stretch of the imagination. The movie practically built Miramax and made over a hundred million, domestically.Thus, calling it a "cult" anything is completely missing the point.

Cult films are not typically successful, financially speaking. That is why they are considered cult films because they have a cult following. A following by a small group of fanatics who have a cult-like appreciation for, and fascination with, a movie.

Secondly, Gen X'ers, as you say, had very little to do with the success of the movie, critically or financially. Sure, they lined up to see it just like everyone else, but Pulp Fiction was UNIVERSALLY acclaimed from the beginning.

After premiering at Cannes, where it garned UNIVERSAL praise. it then came back to the states where the great (and former) head film critic for the NY Times, Janet Maslin, wrote what was considered, at the time, to be one of the most praising reviews of any American movie ever, and that review was subsequently used, in full, as part of one Pulp's poster designs. Then the movie spread like wildfire.

Pulp Fiction is considered to be (by almost every single film critic, scholar, and cinephile worth their weight) a seminal piece of filmmaking, a game changer, a classic, one of the best American films in history.

That has nothing to do with any particular generational bent or preference. There are volumes of books written about it, about its impact and effect on American movies and the culture as a whole---and that continues to be the case.

As compared with the (ahem) work of Mr. Duffy, both Boondock Saints movies have been obliterated critically---and not just by those who know better, either.
Duffy's movies aren't even a footnote in history. They will be forgotten unless uncovered, and hence, rediscovered, by an Alien race sifting through a landfill, a thousand years hence, when they get to down to a bottom of a pile of dirty diapers and see it lying there in VHS or DVD.

Not only are you an idiot, you are also really quite naive.

comment #32

M. Hulot says ...

Oh, and thanks Uncle Milty.

comment #33

DeeZee says ...

Jeff: Alright, I'll get back on topic. If the Academy wanted something bold and grand, it wouldn't pick mediocre crap like Crash and Shakespeare in Love. No, it wants aesthetically-pleasing message movies where the messages are cliches.

Hulot: PF's never been a game-changer, as I've said earlier. Among the most talked-about movies of the 90s were T2, JP, Titanic, Jerry Maguire, and Boogie Nights. PF was talked about by an audience which grew up with too much junk from the 70s on their televisions. And no, the movie didn't get universal praise, as one of the people at Cannes referred to QT as a fascist, which was verified with Basterds. PF did better than average for an "indie" movie, but when you got shit like Juno raking in that kind of dough, nowadays, you start wondering if the whole Family Guy-esque approach to inserting pop culture references in movies did anything useful for the medium. At least Boondock Saints will have a legacy among action buffs.

comment #34

M. Hulot says ...

Again, you're a fucking idiot who knows little about movie history, aesthetics, theory, criticism, and/or the business/economics end.

You are a fool. Period. End of conversation.

comment #35

Howlingman says ...

You're right, Dee Zee -- when people talk about the movies of the 90s, nobody ever mentions Pulp Fiction.

comment #36

markj says ...

I'll never understand the critical raves that Star Trek received. I can only blame it on post-Bush euphoria or swine flu. Glenn Kenny was the only critic that got it right. To suggest Trek is Oscar-worthy is a kind of madness. Kurtzman and Orci can't write to save their lives.

comment #37

Uncle Milty says ...

"That's weird. I don't remember anyone with a vest of guns or a coroner's re-enactment of a shoot-out in a QT movie."

Yeah, those parts sucked so badly he must've used his own creativity for them. The slightly better stuff, and there isn't much, was ripped from Quentin.

"And hip Gen'Xers wanted to feel like they discovered the next Godfather, which is why they made Pulp Fiction a cult classic. "

Pulp isn't a cult anything. It was a box office success which won many awards, including best screenplay and best picture at Cannes.

And it wasn't discovered by Gen-Xers. Adult critics gave it excellent reviews, which led to the wide audience going to see it.

"Minority Report, Die Hard IV, The Matrix, Avalon, Pelican Brief, Mission Impossible, A Scanner Darkly, Office Space, Juno, Ghost in the Shell, etc. "

Wait, what do you mean by taking place on the internet? I think there's a misunderstanding. Because the Minority Report, Pelican Brief, Mission Impossible, Office Space, and Juno that I saw didn't take place on the internet. Also, Avalon? Ghost in the Shell? A Scanner Darkly? These were highly ranked films? A Scanner DArkly also didn't take place on the internet, by the way. The other two weren't even on my radar, so who knows where they took place or how high they were ranked.

"Most hits aren't critically-acclaimed. "

Pulp Fiction and Basterds were both. Boondock Saints was neither.

Your most recent post was just wrong. Pulp Fiction is one of the top five most influential films to come out since 1990. In fact, I'd say it might be the most influential film of the last twenty years. That's not to say it's the best, although it's up near the top, but it was a game changer.

"Jerry Maguire"

Yeah, I was just having multiple conversations last week about Jerry Maguire. How it impacted my life, my taste, my writing.

Oh wait, no I wasn't. The only long lasting that (pretty good) film had was a couple of silly quotes that have been used over and over in lesser movies and television shows.

Jerry fucking Maguire.

comment #38

Josh Massey says ...

Markj: Agreed. The critical and commercial raves thrown Star Trek's way were the most confusing of the year. Just a bad, lazily scripted film. And I say that as a JJ Abrams junkie.

comment #39

THE MovieBob says ...

1.) Star Trek COULD be nominated, if for no other reason than it's the only thing this year that - to The Academy - kinda resembles Iron Man or Dark Knight, the "should've been nominated geek/franchise" flicks who's absence (moreso TDK, yes) spurred this decision on in the first place. Plus, the franchise itself is old enough to actually have a sizable voting-bloc fanbase.

2.) The great irony is... I bet that if this was still The Bush Era (or if McCain had won) "Hurt Locker" would be a LOCK for a nomination if for no other reason than to make an angry "why are we still HERE!?" statement.

3.) D.Z. is an idiot.

4.) Setting it's overzealous fanboys and "Overnight" aside, "Boondock Saints" isn't really a bad little B action movie. The two leads work, Dafoe is great at "grit-camp" and it has Billy Connolly as a psycho-gunfighter. The sequel is basically a retread, but the stuff that worked still does and Peter Fonda puts in a good "WTF?" turn.

comment #40

DeeZee says ...

Howlingman: No, they just don't mention PF much, because it's dated horribly. And the only people who still talk about it are the ones who haven't seen the movies which were remade into it.

Milty: "The slightly better stuff, and there isn't much, was ripped from Quentin."

You mean Irish vigilantes going after gangsters? Yeah, totally QT, which is why his own vigilante movie wasn't even scripted until a year later. Nice try, though.

"Pulp isn't a cult anything. It was a box office success which won many awards, including best screenplay and best picture at Cannes. "

So is Star Wars. But it's still a cult movie.

"And it wasn't discovered by Gen-Xers. Adult critics gave it excellent reviews, which led to the wide audience going to see it. "

No one sees movies based on critical reviews, even 15 years ago, or ID4 would've bombed.

"Because the Minority Report, Pelican Brief, Mission Impossible, Office Space, and Juno that I saw didn't take place on the internet. "

They had internet themes in them. And that's bullshit that MI didn't take place on the Internet. The whole point of the flick was to crack a coded file
obtained online.

"Pulp Fiction and Basterds were both. Boondock Saints was neither."

Saints did well on home video. And Basterds is still a minor hit, due to its budget.

"Pulp Fiction is one of the top five most influential films to come out since 1990."

Except it's not, because you can't cite any significantly-received mainstream or arthouse movie based on it. Unless you somehow think Boogie Nights, American History X, the Green Mile, Fight Club were anything like PF.

"In fact, I'd say it might be the most influential film of the last twenty years."

Move it back 45 years, and you can cite Band of Outsiders being more influential, since that's what PF remade.

"The only long lasting that (pretty good) film had was a couple of silly quotes that have been used over and over in lesser movies and television shows. "

And that makes it different from PF, because...?

comment #41

The Winchester says ...

I think District 9 took the wind out of Star Trek's Oscar buzz sails by being a superior movie and having the extra added bonus of not having been adapted from a 60s TV show.

Wells, in a way, the DZ/Hulot hijack about Boondock Saints is a nice dovetail to the story (or encapsulated metaphor), showing how there's more talk to be had about this piece of shit movie than the award worthy ones.

comment #42

bluefugue says ...

>Hell, it has the same kind of action found in the Matrix, but because the latter flick takes place on the Internet, it automatically gets a higher rank.

I'm no Matrix fan but it's a considerably higher order of filmmaking than Boondock Saints, which is an incoherent mess. If you can't see the incompetence in the way it's shot, staged, and edited, then you need to study films more closely.

The one redeeming thing about BS is Willem Dafoe's running joke about making local cops get him coffee. That got a chuckle out of me, but it's a lousy movie. Tarantino's worst effort (not sure what that is -- perhaps Death Proof) is vastly more worthwhile than Boondock Saints.

comment #43

bluefugue says ...

Bah, sorry for contributing to the thread drift, Jeff.

comment #44

Gordon27 says ...

"What did I write or hint to indicate that I wasn't aware of this?"

The line I quoted, or pretty much the entire thing above, you seem to be indicating that (a) 1939 is chosen at random ["What is this person talking about? 1939?"], and (b) that anybody pointing to 1939 is only doing so out of nostaligia for a type of movie that no longer gets produced. Neither of these things is entirely true; 1939 has a wide variety of classic movies, many of which don't fit into the "Oscar mold" you're ascribing any more than 'No Country For Old Men' does.

comment #45

Gordon27 says ...

"Except it's not, because you can't cite any significantly-received mainstream or arthouse movie based on it. Unless you somehow think Boogie Nights, American History X, the Green Mile, Fight Club were anything like PF."

Those are incredibly stupid examples, but especially 'Boogie Nights'. PTA owes the beginning of his career completely to Tarantino. PTA got to make his first movie because Tarantino had made Sam Jackson a star, and his second movie because Tarantino had sparked people's interest in the '70's. Most of the third act is blatantly influenced by Tarantino.

But, seriously, if you can't even accept that 'Boondock Saints' was influenced by Tarantino, I'm sure I can't explain to you the ways that every movie you cited except for 'The Green Mile' was directly influenced by QT either.

comment #46

DeeZee says ...

fugue: "I'm no Matrix fan but it's a considerably higher order of filmmaking than Boondock Saints, which is an incoherent mess."

The only difference between the Matrix and Boondock Saints is simulated Virtua Fighter-style kung fu. Other than that, it's just Johnny Mnemonic with a better paint job.

"PTA got to make his first movie because Tarantino had made Sam Jackson a star, and his second movie because Tarantino had sparked people's interest in the '70's."

Um, IMDB has PTA making movies before PF. But, hey, next you're gonna credit "Do the Right Thing" happening because of QT. And there was already an interest in 70s nostalgia before QT came along; he was just the first to openly cash in.

"I'm sure I can't explain to you the ways that every movie you cited except for 'The Green Mile' was directly influenced by QT either."

You can't explain, anyway, because those flicks had nothing to do with QT's "style" any more than Kung Fu Panda had anything to do with Kill Bill.

comment #47

Uncle Milty says ...

"You mean Irish vigilantes going after gangsters? Yeah, totally QT, which is why his own vigilante movie wasn't even scripted until a year later. Nice try, though. "

You think that's an original storyline? I feel bad for you.

"So is Star Wars. But it's still a cult movie."

No.

"No one sees movies based on critical reviews, even 15 years ago, or ID4 would've bombed."

If that was true there would be no such thing as critics. ID4 is what is known as critic proof. I don't expect you to know what that means.

"They had internet themes in them. And that's bullshit that MI didn't take place on the Internet. The whole point of the flick was to crack a coded file
obtained online."

None of those movies took place on the internet. Mission Impossible didn't take place on the internet. Juno didn't take place on the internet."internet themes". I'm not even going to respond to that nonsense.

I'll be awaiting a list of actual "films that take place on the internet" that were rated higher than films not taking place on the internet.

"Saints did well on home video. And Basterds is still a minor hit, due to its budget."

Saints is a minor, emphasis on the minor, cult hit. Basterds is a box office hit.

"Except it's not, because you can't cite any significantly-received mainstream or arthouse movie based on it. Unless you somehow think Boogie Nights, American History X, the Green Mile, Fight Club were anything like PF. "

I'm not even sure why you named those four films. Especially The Green Mile. WTF?

"And that makes it different from PF, because...?"

Because Pulp Fiction has been influential and is still talked about Jerry Maguire was forgotten by 1998.

"The only difference between the Matrix and Boondock Saints is simulated Virtua Fighter-style kung fu. Other than that, it's just Johnny Mnemonic with a better paint job. "

Might be the single most uninformed thing you've ever said...wait, what the fuck am I thinking? It wouldn't even make the top ten.

"Um, IMDB has PTA making movies before PF."

Hard Eight (Syndey) came out in I think 1995 or 1996. Who gives a shit what short films he made prior to that. Gordon was obviously referring to Hard Eight.

Why did you name Green Mile? I guess in your world Green Mile is a memorable, right along with Jerry Maguire.

comment #48

DeeZee says ...

Milty: "You think that's an original storyline? I feel bad for you."

Didn't say it was original. I'm just saying Duffy didn't need QT's help.

"No."

Who the hell still buys into it, other than the movies?

"If that was true there would be no such thing as critics."

Well there isn't anymore, anyway.

"ID4 is what is known as critic proof. I don't expect you to know what that means. "

It means that what used to be shitty and bombed from bad reviews now makes money, in spite of bad reviews.

"None of those movies took place on the internet."

"Saints is a minor, emphasis on the minor, cult hit."

So was Reservoir Dogs once.

"Basterds is a box office hit."

it's a hit with better-than-expected box office, but it's not a box office hit.

"Because Pulp Fiction has been influential and is still talked about Jerry Maguire was forgotten by 1998."

That's weird, cus Jeff just brought it up a while ago.

"Who gives a shit what short films he made prior to that."

People who hired him for the gigs he did which didn't have anything to do with QT?

"Why did you name Green Mile? I guess in your world Green Mile is a memorable, right along with Jerry Maguire. "

No. I just mentioned it, cus it was the kind of drama people who grew up after PF watched, because they prefer context and narratives over homages. That's something QT will never have, even if, by some miracle, he gets nominated for an Oscar again.

comment #49

DeeZee says ...

Forgot one. Those movies used the internet as a gimmick in some form.

comment #50

Colin says ...

Just thought I'd add Scanner Darkly had nothing to do with the internet, DZ.

It was about the drug trade in America.

comment #51

Colin says ...

Neither District 9 or Star Trek belong anywhere near the best pic nods. District 9 used the deus ex machina device far too many times. Orci and Kurtzman are terrible writers did we really need slapstick comedy in a Star Trek?

And if the Academy can't find 10 films they're lazy
-A Serious Man
-Up in the Air
-Precious
-Up
-Adventureland
-White Ribbon
-The Hurt Locker
-An Education

Not even taking films I haven't seen yet: Invictus, Mr. Fox, Lovely Bones, Informant.

comment #52

Gordon27 says ...

"Just thought I'd add Scanner Darkly had nothing to do with the internet, DZ."

I can't remember the Internet in 'Juno' at all either; it's always amusing to watch DZ start to get specific.

comment #53

DeeZee says ...

Colin: I guess you forgot about that cybernetic stream of consciousnes metaphor from the high obtained from the drugs.

Gordon: Honest to blog.

comment #54

Gordon27 says ...

Just to recap for everybody, the question was:

"Are you saying movies that take place on the internet are generally well reviewed?"

One example DZ gave (amid a batch of equally valid claims) was 'Juno'. His reasoning, as stated above, is the use of the phrase "honest to blog".

You can't make this shit up.

comment #55

Colin says ...

I guess you forgot about that cybernetic stream of consciousnes metaphor from the high obtained from the drugs.

Cybernetic stream of consciousness? Dude if you're going to make things up...ugh.

The high was only representative of his split consciousness and loss of his identity.

comment #56

scamanti says ...

Good info thanks for sharing with us.


Peace, Love, Unity and Respect.Lets Be a friendship on the net with around the world via internet.Lets be talk about lifestyle like Astaga.com lifestyle on the net.Kalau sempat berkunjunglah di laen waktu ke festival museum nusantara untuk sekedar melihat barang langka yang ada di museum.Luangkan juga waktu sejenak kalau tidak keberatan untuk berkunjung ke Astaga.com lifestyle on the net.


Best Regards,


========================================================

Astaga.com lifestyle on the net | Astaga.com lifestyle on the net | Festival Museum Nusantara on Tutorial Digital

comment #57

aris says ...

Thank you for share it

Nulis Pena Kehidupan

comment #58

jimb12345 says ...

I am not sure who should win picture of the year. There is so many great films out there. ITs been a great year.
orlando assault and battery attorney

comment #59

winson says ...

comment #60

gaintwee says ...

The other BFCA Best Picture nommies are Avatar, An Education, The Hurt Locker, Invictus, Precious, A Serious Man, Up and Up in the Air. Online Web Development degree AND International business degree AND Degrees AND Psychology degree AND Law and legal studies degree