DGA Nominations

[MaxWilder]

Please explain to me how the Academy becomes "low-brow" if they choose Malek?

It's a bad, dumb movie. There used to be a show on American cable called Behind the Music, which chronicled the rise, fall and rise again of rock bands. Bohemian Rhapsody is a big budget, feature length Behind the Music special. Every choice is the most obvious one. (How do we address controversies? Have reporters bring them up at a press conference! How do we know he has HIV? He coughs!)

Taking a minute to show us bad reviews of "Bohemian Rhapsody" (the song) was especially telling. Look how wrong these snobs were! Real people know what's good and what's not. This us-vs.-them attitude extends to the movie's fans. Whenever I see it brought up in a comment section, it's a point of pride how much money the film has made in the face of bad reviews.

As for Malek, he's good but a nomination is enough. The teeth alone get him 25% of the way toward Freddie Mercury. The parts of the movie people really respond to--the live performances--are just pantomime.

[Sabin]

I think you’re just making up arguments for the sake of making up arguments, so you can take from my thoughts what you feel like.

[Reza]

Because Rami Malek embodies everything that everybody loves about Bohemian Rhapsody and everything that everybody hates about Bohemian Rhapsody. Yes, it's basically a $50 mil soundtrack recreation, but the film is at heart a character study of a queer outsider who desires family and audience. That is insanely in tune with the times and probably why it connected with audiences. However for purists, Rami Malek's performance betrays the swaggering spirit of Freddie Mercury that audiences were denied in this film.

This is not the only film that is "in tune with the times" for not only the public but also the Academy. One can argue that about most of the nominated films or performances this year or any year in fact - Black Panther, BlacKkKlansman, Beale Street, Green Book, Vice, the character played by Glenn Close in The Wife just to name the most obvious. They resonated with ethnic groups or with genders and were subjects very much in tune with what is the mind set today. And that's perfectly fine.

I don't understand what is meant by the "swaggering spirit of Freddie Mercury that audiences were denied". Did these so called purists want blatant sex scenes with lots of nudity to show Mercury being the "real" Mercury? Surely it was implied in the film without resorting to pornography. So don't know why people are whining over this silly point. I think Malek otherwise did a pretty good job in his portrayal of a very familiar person.

[Sabin]

Reza wrote
Please explain to me how the Academy becomes "low-brow" if they choose Malek?

Because Rami Malek embodies everything that everybody loves about Bohemian Rhapsody and everything that everybody hates about Bohemian Rhapsody. Yes, it's basically a $50 mil soundtrack recreation, but the film is at heart a character study of a queer outsider who desires family and audience. That is insanely in tune with the times and probably why it connected with audiences. However for purists, Rami Malek's performance betrays the swaggering spirit of Freddie Mercury that audiences were denied in this film.

Bohemian Rhapsody is being punished a bit for its success. It's not seen as a serious film. It simplifies its subject matter and arguably betrays it. To be fair to its critics, it certainly wears its gawdiness on its sleeve with its gauche city names popping at the screen in neon lights. I think it's seen as commerce in betrayal of art. But why is it subjected to a different kind of vitriol than Anthony McCarten's other scripts? Darkest Hour and The Theory of Everything all have the same unconvincing distortions, conflicts, resolutions, and water-treading. Why were they largely given a pass while Bohemian Rhapsody is being called out of the same sins? Also with Bryan Singer at the helm (for as long as he was there) it doesn't have the window dressing pretenses of art present in Darkest Hour and The Theory of Everything. So, it was "made" for audiences. I would argue that it's not just entertaining bullshit, it's a better pairing for McCarten's script.

And also, of course, film critics and fanboys probably know more about Freddie Mercury than Winston Churchill and Stephen Hawking. So it's a culture and education thing. In 2019, a botched Kennedy biopic will get less vitriol than a botched Spider-Man film.

(Quick sidenote: if Leonardo DiCaprio hadn't already won an Oscar for The Revenant, I'd imagine he'd be in contract negotiations with McCarten for a Napoleon biopic or something. Rami Malek is poised to become the third performance he's penned in three films to win Best Actor).

[Big Magilla]

Obviously I'm in the minority on this one, but it just struck me as an amateurish version of Sixteen Candles updated to embrace the YouTube era with an even younger heroine.

I don't get this Sixteen Candles/John Hughes comparison. It seems like we saw different films, Magilla. I don't think Bo Burnham wasn't trying to channel John Hughes. He seems closer to Richard Linklater, if anything. I mean, even teens and tweens raised on social media and YouTube deserve to have their coming-of-age stories told too.

Did I say they don't? Look no further than Searching for a really good film about the use of social media.

[Reza]

Best Actor in doubt? You still think Bale or Cooper could win this? I think Malek is clearly the frontrunner at this stage and will easily sail to victory.

Call it foolish optimism but I don't think the Academy is low-brow enough. I'm going with Bale.

Please explain to me how the Academy becomes "low-brow" if they choose Malek?

[anonymous1980]

Obviously I'm in the minority on this one, but it just struck me as an amateurish version of Sixteen Candles updated to embrace the YouTube era with an even younger heroine.

I don't get this Sixteen Candles/John Hughes comparison. It seems like we saw different films, Magilla. I don't think Bo Burnham wasn't trying to channel John Hughes. He seems closer to Richard Linklater, if anything. I mean, even teens and tweens raised on social media and YouTube deserve to have their coming-of-age stories told too.

[Big Magilla]

I'm not the biggest fan of Cooper's film, but losing is one thing, losing to a John Hughes wannabe is something else. I thought if he had to lose it would be to someone more serious like Matthew Heineman for A Private War.

Magilla, I know you have this deep-seeded hatred for Eighth Grade (which I don't understand; it's easily in my Top 5 of the year), but to not call it serious seems completely unfair. You may not like the film, but it seems obvious that Burnham is trying for something more than just being a John Hughes wannabe (Hughes could never have written the fire-side scene) and that Burnham is a "serious" filmmaker.

Obviously I'm in the minority on this one, but it just struck me as an amateurish version of Sixteen Candles updated to embrace the YouTube era with an even younger heroine. I did like Burnham in The Big Sick so I know he's talented, but then so was Hughes to a point. I guess I'll just have to wait for his next film to see whether I want to see more of his work.

[Big Magilla]

It should be a real nail-biter up to the opening of that last envelope with Best Actor the only one of the other major awards still in doubt.

Best Actor in doubt? You still think Bale or Cooper could win this?

I think Malek is clearly the frontrunner at this stage and will easily sail to victory.

No, I never did think Bale or Cooper could win, but I do think Dafoe could.

[MaxWilder]

Best Actor in doubt? You still think Bale or Cooper could win this? I think Malek is clearly the frontrunner at this stage and will easily sail to victory.

Call it foolish optimism but I don't think the Academy is low-brow enough. I'm going with Bale.

[Sabin]

Mister Tee wrote
Observation: it's not that common for SAG Ensemble/PGA/DGA to all go to different films, and in the years where they have split like that, generally one of them has also won the Drama Globe (Gladiator 2000, A Beautiful Mind 2001, The Aviator 2004, 12 Years a Slave in in 2013,The Revenant in 2015), not the case this year.

And we have a chance to add another film to the mix, if The Favourite wins BAFTA. The acting awards may fall into place (pending BAFTA), but best film is wildly up in the air.

More to the point, if The Favourite wins the BAFTA, then this will be the first time that all four awards to go to different films.

[Reza]

It should be a real nail-biter up to the opening of that last envelope with Best Actor the only one of the other major awards still in doubt.

Best Actor in doubt? You still think Bale or Cooper could win this?

I think Malek is clearly the frontrunner at this stage and will easily sail to victory.

[FilmFan720]

I'm not the biggest fan of Cooper's film, but losing is one thing, losing to a John Hughes wannabe is something else. I thought if he had to lose it would be to someone more serious like Matthew Heineman for A Private War.

Magilla, I know you have this deep-seeded hatred for Eighth Grade (which I don't understand; it's easily in my Top 5 of the year), but to not call it serious seems completely unfair. You may not like the film, but it seems obvious that Burnham is trying for something more than just being a John Hughes wannabe (Hughes could never have written the fire-side scene) and that Burnham is a "serious" filmmaker.

[Big Magilla]

Win some, lose some.

I'm not the biggest fan of Cooper's film, but losing is one thing, losing to a John Hughes wannabe is something else. I thought if he had to lose it would be to someone more serious like Matthew Heineman for A Private War. On the other hand, I did think they would give the documentary award to one of the two films snubbed by the Academy with the Mister Rogers film having a slight edge over Three Identical Strangers although if I had a vote it would have been for Strangers, too.

After the Burnham win, though, I was prepared for an Adam Mackay win over Cuaron but thankfully that didn't happen.

With the preferential ballot anything is possible in Best Picture, but I don't see A Star Is Born winning. Those who love it, are apt to vote for it to win but if it doesn't get 50% plus one. which it won't, it won't pick up a lot of other votes because the non-lovers will put it much further down on their ballots. It should be a real nail-biter up to the opening of that last envelope with Best Actor the only one of the other major awards still in doubt.

[The Original BJ]

Just to clarify: yes, Burnham beating out was a major shock, and tells us something about the overall gestalt. (And makes one wonder if Bradley Cooper did one of those "three wishes I'll grant you, great wishes or small, but make a fourth wish and you lose them all" deals with a leprechaun. Yes: a Darby O'Gill reference.)

This is essentially what I meant -- anyone still wondering if enthusiasm for Cooper will allow him to eke out a win in Actor or Adapted Screenplay as a consolation prize, or even that A Star is Born could end up a middle-of-the-road consensus Best Picture winner on a preferential ballot, certainly has to feel like the goose is cooked at this point.

Anyone starting to wonder if "Shallow" is even a sure bet?