Could this year's Oscar winner be the first Netflix movie to win?

[Anaconda_]

Alfonso Cuaron just won the Golden Lion at Venice Film Festival. Previous winners of this award and others in Venice have gone on to take home the Oscar in their category. Should this movie go on to win the Academy Award, it'll be the very first film made for streaming to do so, kicking off a new chapter in movie making. It's also a bit of an F YOU to Cannes - who banned Netflix movies this year - possibly marking the change in the roll of Film Festivals too. Exciting times.

On a side note, 4 of the last 5 Best Director Oscars have been Mexican. Cuaron, Inarritu x2 and Del Toro. Is Hollywood snubbing Hollywood directors?

[jonpais]

Yeah it’s an f u to cannes and a snub to hollywood alright! Great insights. Thanks for sharing.

[Tiago Rosa-Rosso]

2 hours ago, jonpais said:

Yeah it’s an f u to cannes and a snub to hollywood alright! Great insights. Thanks for sharing.

It's a bit more complex than that. Cannes didn't ban Netflix. There is a law in France that forbids any festival that takes place in France to exhibit a film in a festival that after doesn't have an agreement of release in movie theaters in France. It's simply obligatory. I partially agree that movies are to be seen in a cinema theater, but that's another conversation. Now, in fact, there was something rather good and refreshing about Cannes banning Netflix films because it gave room to other young directors. Who otherwise wouldn't have the possibility to be in. Don't get me wrong I think these platforms are great, but I don't see why isn't possible to have bought. A release in a cinema theater and then after a while in Netflix. I think most directors would agree that they would like there work to be seen in a cinema theater. I think Netflix is being a bit greedy, wanting all the profits just for them. And if you think about it might lead to a monopoly, that might have bad consequences for the art itself.  And correct me if i'm wrong but aren't Cuaron, Inarritu and Del Toro Hollywood directors? I think Cuaron only did y tu mamma tambien outside of hollywood, didn't he?

[Anaconda_]

@Tiago Rosa-Rosso Thanks for the intelligent, conversation inducing response. 

Yes perhaps they are Hollywood directors - but when someone says Hollywood to me, I wouldn't think of 'Birdman' or 'Shape of Water'. Maybe I meant they're not Hollywood because they're making original movies while everyone else is on a remake trip. If you watch the trailer for 'Roma', it certainly doesn't scream Hollywood. 

Then again, I'm probably wrong there too looking at other recent winners.

Another thing with Cannes is a lot of movies go there to find a distributer. If you make a film that's on Netflix, you already have a distributer, so the festival only serves as publicity. The shame is though, there wasn't all that many exciting movies in Cannes this year, which may or may not be a result. If memory serves, there wasn't a single English language film in the competition. Not to say foreign language movies aren't exciting, but it does seem worth mentioning. Also, I think there's some issue with Sony at Cannes too, and no Sony Pictures are shown at the festival at all - I don't know why though.

Jacques Audiard, who won the Palm D'or in Cannes a few years ago, has also said he has no interest in playing his films in Cannes anymore, at least in the competition. If one of France's biggest directors, and a pervious award winner isn't interested in the festival, I think that says something about the future of it. He's also uninterested in any type of film competition, so it's not just Cannes that he's opposing.

I think it would be amazing for a Netflix movie to be nominated let alone win the golden man if for no other reason than to shake things up a little. I don't think they're any different from say Universal, they just don't distribute the finished cut in the same way. Are the Academy judging the movie or the screen they watch it on? 

[Anaconda_]

Looking further, Cuaron, Inarritu and Del Toro formed a production company together and are often referred to as the Three Amigos. Cuaron recently won the Golden Lion, which was awarded to him by a jury headed up by Del Toro. I'm not saying anything fishy is going on, and his movie 'Roma' is getting some of the best reviews I've seen in a while, but it is an interesting point. 

[jonpais]

I’d rather watch a film on Netflix than at the theatre any day.

The top 20 spectacles account for around 40% of box office worldwide, making it increasingly difficult to see good cinema at a local movie house, even if you’re willing to shell out over $25/couple - more than double my monthly Netfix bill.

Garbage Hollywood blockbusters crowd out the marquees at cinemas everywhere you look.

If you want to see cinema, you’ve got to seek out an art-house theatre. There were a few in Detroit, one in Daejeon, South Korea and maybe one in Saigon - but neither of the latter two show international cinema.

In many countries - outside of the major cities - it’s virtually impossible to find a movie theatre at all, let alone an art-house theatre - and good luck finding any international titles at the big franchises. If you do, they’ve got a limited run in the cruddiest little theatre imaginable.

I lived in Korea for five years and theaters absolutely refused to show English-subtitled films and TV dramas. The situation is much better in Saigon.

I was only able to watch Y Tu Mama Tambien and Amores Perros thanks to the Detroit Film Theatre, one of the longest running art-house theatres in the USA.

This is all about money. Organizations fighting Netflix argue that festivals are in large part pubicly funded and that Netflix doesn’t contribute enough to promote their events. And because they’re publicly funded, they say the public shouldn’t have to pay for a subscription service to see the nominees. But the fact of the matter is, most of the films regalled at Cannes, Berlin, Venice and elsewhere aren’t even accessible to moviegoers around the world. 

[Tiago Rosa-Rosso]

1 hour ago, Anaconda_ said:

@Tiago Rosa-Rosso Thanks for the intelligent, conversation inducing response. 

Yes perhaps they are Hollywood directors - but when someone says Hollywood to me, I wouldn't think of 'Birdman' or 'Shape of Water'. Maybe I meant they're not Hollywood because they're making original movies while everyone else is on a remake trip. If you watch the trailer for 'Roma', it certainly doesn't scream Hollywood. 

Then again, I'm probably wrong there too looking at other recent winners.

Another thing with Cannes is a lot of movies go there to find a distributer. If you make a film that's on Netflix, you already have a distributer, so the festival only serves as publicity. The shame is though, there wasn't all that many exciting movies in Cannes this year, which may or may not be a result. If memory serves, there wasn't a single English language film in the competition. Not to say foreign language movies aren't exciting, but it does seem worth mentioning. Also, I think there's some issue with Sony at Cannes too, and no Sony Pictures are shown at the festival at all - I don't know why though.

Jacques Audiard, who won the Palm D'or in Cannes a few years ago, has also said he has no interest in playing his films in Cannes anymore, at least in the competition. If one of France's biggest directors, and a pervious award winner isn't interested in the festival, I think that says something about the future of it. He's also uninterested in any type of film competition, so it's not just Cannes that he's opposing.

I think it would be amazing for a Netflix movie to be nominated let alone win the golden man if for no other reason than to shake things up a little. I don't think they're any different from say Universal, they just don't distribute the finished cut in the same way. Are the Academy judging the movie or the screen they watch it on? 

"I didn't saw Roma" and I can't tell much by the trailer but it certainly doesn't look like one more marvel movie.

I understand your division between bad Hollywood and good Hollywood, but it's still Hollywood and it's still mainstream and profoundly ideological. Três amigos operate in Hollywood, money comes from Hollywood and the films they produce follow Hollywood classic models of storytelling. Yes, they are more inventive, than most of the other crap Hollywood produces, but I wouldn't call it disruptive, they don't add much to the medium itself. It's all a bit primary and basic, it lacks courage and poetry. The ideas are repetitive, and always placing the spectator in a passive point of view,  pleasing the spectator, because they have to sell. And it's alright as long as there is a place for the other side. For the one who is not looking to please you, the ones that don't want your emotional investment, who are willing to make you think instead of just convincing you. Having said that Hollywood it's a big industry and produces great movies and directors. 

I agree with you that Cannes is an amusement park full of directors and producers looking for distributors and vice versa, most festivals are. And competition in cinema is something I can't really understand and find it profoundly perverse. But I think that Cannes was far more interesting this year than last year when it comes to new directors and showing very different movies from what is usually shown. and again it wasn't a Cannes decision but a matter of law. Actually, Cannes was trying everything to have Netflix movies at the festival.     

There were at least Lars Von Trier movie and Spike Lee English spoken movies. But there were great movies far more inventive than any movie I've ever seen from Cuaron, Inarritu or Del Toro. Did you saw Diamantino that won la semaine de la critique or Chuva é cantoria na aldeia dos mortos or Lazzarro felice or Dogman or  Ayka or Une affair de famille? All great, and with a  different idea from what cinema can be or should be. I think it's at least refreshing to see these movies in a big festival. Hollywood tends to see cinema just as a medium to tell a story, but cinema can be much more than just this.

 

18 minutes ago, jonpais said:

I’d rather watch a film on Netflix than at the theatre any day.

The top 20 spectacles account for around 40% of box office worldwide, making it increasingly difficult to see good cinema at a local movie house, even if you’re willing to shell out over $25/couple - more than double my monthly Netfix bill.

Garbage Hollywood blockbusters crowd out the marquees at cinemas everywhere you look.

If you want to see cinema, you’ve got to seek out an art-house theatre. There were a few in Detroit, one in Daejeon, South Korea and maybe one in Saigon - but neither of the latter two show international cinema.

In many countries - outside of the major cities - it’s virtually impossible to find a movie theatre at all, let alone an art-house theatre - and good luck finding any international titles at the big franchises. If you do, they’ve got a limited run in the cruddiest little theatre imaginable.

I lived in Korea for five years and theaters absolutely refused to show English-subtitled films and TV dramas. The situation is much better in Saigon.

I was only able to watch Y Tu Mama Tambien and Amores Perros thanks to the Detroit Film Theatre, one of the longest running art-house theatres in the USA.

This is all about money. Organizations fighting Netflix argue that festivals are in large part pubicly funded and that Netflix doesn’t contribute enough to promote their events. And because they’re publicly funded, they say the public shouldn’t have to pay for a subscription service to see the nominees. But the fact of the matter is, most of the films regalled at Cannes, Berlin, Venice and elsewhere aren’t even accessible to moviegoers around the world. 

That's right! It's all about the money.

But if you had the possibility wouldn't you prefer to go to a movie theater? 

 

[Anaconda_]

13 minutes ago, jonpais said:

But the fact of the matter is, most of the films regalled at Cannes, Berlin, Venice and elsewhere aren’t even accessible to moviegoers around the world. 

My main work is based around film festivals and it always frustrates me when a movie shows somewhere and then I can't see it anywhere for months or even years, and it's in my industry. No hope for your average movie lover.

'Girl' is a Belgian movie, most likely their Oscar contender. I met and interviewed the director and lead actor in Cannes, but probably won't be able to see the film until at least February 2019, almost a year later. Same story with 'In The Fade'. Premiered in Berlin, I was there, spoke to Diane Kruger about it, but couldn't see it until it was released for home viewing over a year later. Partly my fault as I don't have time for the screenings at the festivals, but still, infuriating.

2 minutes ago, Tiago Rosa-Rosso said:

There were at least Lars Von Trier movie and Spike Lee English spoken movies.

You're right, I forgot Blakkklansman was in the competition, my bad - I did say 'If memory serves' ?. Lars wasn't in the competition though, and his movie still got more attention than the films that were, which says something. FYI, Star Wars also played this year and 'Gilliam's 'Who Killed Don Quixote'.

In my opinion, Cannes is becoming less relevant for those kinds of films, and placed like Toronto, which doesn't have a competition, are getting bigger and bigger. Maybe it's about the timing, and studios release this time of year to kick off the awards run, making Cannes just too early for them? Maybe it's behind the scenes politics?

[jonpais]

While living in Korea, I was invited twice to the Busan Film Festival and twice to the Jeonju Film festival, which was a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to meet some great directors like Bong Joon-Ho and see some marvelous films. Seeing Paolo Sorrentino’s Il Divo on the big screen was an experience I’ll never forget. Unfortunately, no great film festivals here in Saigon.

[Trek of Joy]

4 hours ago, jonpais said:

While living in Korea, I was invited twice to the Busan Film Festival and twice to the Jeonju Film festival, which was a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to meet some great directors like Bong Joon-Ho and see some marvelous films. Seeing Paolo Sorrentino’s Il Divo on the big screen was an experience I’ll never forget. Unfortunately, no great film festivals here in Saigon.

Just saw Train to Busan on Netflix. Kinda brings that full circle, ha, ha. But seriously its pretty good for a genre as tired as zombie movies.

11 hours ago, Anaconda_ said:

Alfonso Cuaron just won the Golden Lion at Venice Film Festival. Previous winners of this award and others in Venice have gone on to take home the Oscar in their category. Should this movie go on to win the Academy Award, it'll be the very first film made for streaming to do so

Icarus won Best Doc this past year. Its also really good, and has a great twist since I didn't know the whole story going in.

Its only a matter of time before Netflix captures more statues as they're investing so heavily in content, more than many studios. Shows like Ozark and Stranger Things demonstrate they are capable of producing something really good - or the complete opposite of Bright.

Chris

[anonim]

19 hours ago, Tiago Rosa-Rosso said:

It's all a bit primary and basic, it lacks courage and poetry.

I understand underlining point of view, but I think there's also generalization and forced manifesto (ideological-aesthetic wise) reading in such generalization.

Finally, "poetry" as quality, at the end of our limelight days, may be considered as the utmost "courage"... For mastering any art to the utmost level of its subtlety and messaging-capacity language , means much more subtle courage against external entropy of banality, than pure provoking  gestures... Cuaron and Inarritu have so many such deeply inspiring poetical touches and high-art solutions in their movies. (Del Toro, I'd say, not at all up to their level, being mostly dimension/levels-restricted in his themes and formal realization.)

But I'm sure you know it all better than I'm... I just wanted to add additional note.

[anonim]

19 hours ago, Anaconda_ said:

My main work is based around film festivals ...

'Girl' is a Belgian movie, most likely their Oscar contender.

Thanks for recommendation, I immediately noted it... I'll be so great if you can periodically make  your list of recommendation and post here from time to time... At least I'd be very grateful to see it, as I have to be more occupied with some other matters in near future (luckily, also creative one :)

[Tiago Rosa-Rosso]

1 hour ago, anonim said:

I understand underlining point of view, but I think there's also generalization and forced manifesto (ideological-aesthetic wise) reading in such generalization.

Finally, "poetry" as quality, at the end of our limelight days, may be considered as the utmost "courage"... For mastering any art to the utmost level of its subtlety and messaging-capacity language , means much more subtle courage against external entropy of banality, than pure provoking  gestures... Cuaron and Inarritu have so many such deeply inspiring poetical touches and high-art solutions in their movies. (Del Toro, I'd say, not at all up to their level, being mostly dimension/levels-restricted in his themes and formal realization.)

But I'm sure you know it all better than I'm... I just wanted to add additional note.

4

I agree. I think that in the realm of Hollywood they are exquisite, we could also add PTA and others to the list. Note that I said Hollywood produces great films and directors. But take for example Tarkovsky, Bergmann, Pasolini, Bela Tar and others. It's another gesture towards cinema, that in my opinion is, to some extent, more courageous and poetic in the sense of exploring the possibilities of cinema not just as a medium to convey a narrative.    

[Tiago Rosa-Rosso]

On 9/11/2018 at 10:05 AM, anonim said:

Thanks for recommendation, I immediately noted it... I'll be so great if you can periodically make  your list of recommendation and post here from time to time... At least I'd be very grateful to see it, as I have to be more occupied with some other matters in near future (luckily, also creative one :)

 

Just saw this short now. 

[anonim]

Thanks, wonderful, I'll share it! ... "Grow up, you baby..."

("Please not..." - of course I thought.)

[IronFilm]

On 9/11/2018 at 1:49 AM, Anaconda_ said:

My main work is based around film festivals and it always frustrates me when a movie shows somewhere and then I can't see it anywhere for months or even years, and it's in my industry. No hope for your average movie lover.

'Girl' is a Belgian movie, most likely their Oscar contender. I met and interviewed the director and lead actor in Cannes, but probably won't be able to see the film until at least February 2019, almost a year later. Same story with 'In The Fade'. Premiered in Berlin, I was there, spoke to Diane Kruger about it, but couldn't see it until it was released for home viewing over a year later. Partly my fault as I don't have time for the screenings at the festivals, but still, infuriating.

Ditto, is worse when it is even films you've worked on yourself. There are many cases like that for myself, I'll have recorded sound for some short film headed to festivals. Takes ages for them to get through post, then even longer to go round the festival circuit, until years later... it gets put up online and I'm able to watch and share it!

 

[Anaconda_]

On 9/11/2018 at 11:05 AM, anonim said:

I'll be so great if you can periodically make  your list of recommendation and post here from time to time

Well I've found myself in a place where I can see a lot of these films, and am hoping to see 'Girl' tomorrow morning. 

This afternoon I watched 'Beautiful Boy', and it was brilliant. Timothee Chalamet wasn't the most convincing, but he was far from wrong for the part. The camera and lighting was fantastic, and I like Steve Carell in these drama roles. 

I'll post back on 'Girl' when I can.  

[Anaconda_]

On 9/11/2018 at 11:05 AM, anonim said:

Thanks for recommendation, I immediately noted it...

So 'Girl' was brilliant, a very sensitive story, that I'd highly recommend. Aside from the obvious main themes, much of the underlying plot were the same as in 'Beautiful Boy', essentially both films about a child struggling with something within them, ultimately leading to self destruction, meanwhile the father tries desperately to communicate with, comfort and understand the inner-struggle. In my opinion, both movies were about the child, but the father was the main character.

I'm not sure if it's the screen I saw it on, which may have given the illusion, but it looks like 'Girl' was shot in a 4:3 format.

On 9/10/2018 at 12:43 PM, Anaconda_ said:

Jacques Audiard, who won the Palm D'or in Cannes a few years ago, has also said he has no interest in playing his films in Cannes anymore

Quoting myself to show the relevance here. I also saw Audiard's new movie 'The Sisters Brothers', his first English language movie. It was a very funny, quirky script and definitely worth checking out whether you like Westerns or not. The cast was just superb, and John C. Reilly surprised me a lot. It's not on par with the other films I've mentioned, and is much more easy going.

To bring this thread full circle, tomorrow morning I'll be seeing 'Roma', and I'm pumped. If there's interest, I'll post back again.

[Chrad]

On 9/10/2018 at 11:37 PM, Tiago Rosa-Rosso said:

There were at least Lars Von Trier movie and Spike Lee English spoken movies. But there were great movies far more inventive than any movie I've ever seen from Cuaron, Inarritu or Del Toro. Did you saw Diamantino that won la semaine de la critique or Chuva é cantoria na aldeia dos mortos or Lazzarro felice or Dogman or  Ayka or Une affair de famille? All great, and with a  different idea from what cinema can be or should be. I think it's at least refreshing to see these movies in a big festival. Hollywood tends to see cinema just as a medium to tell a story, but cinema can be much more than just this.

I haven't seen most of those yet, but Diamantino is essentially Zoolander, but with Ronaldo substituted in for a model, and 'topical' references to Brexit. It's hardly pushing new boundaries in cinema. Dogman is pretty conventional. I don't think it's fair to say these are more inventive than, say, Children of Men.
Heard good things about Lazzarro, seeing it tomorrow.

[Tiago Rosa-Rosso]

6 hours ago, Chrad said:

I haven't seen most of those yet, but Diamantino is essentially Zoolander, but with Ronaldo substituted in for a model, and 'topical' references to Brexit. It's hardly pushing new boundaries in cinema. Dogman is pretty conventional. I don't think it's fair to say these are more inventive than, say, Children of Men.
Heard good things about Lazzarro, seeing it tomorrow.

Hmmm. I think there is a big a big difference in form from diamantino to children of men, and I don't compare them on their purpose, I just think it's a relief to see other structures, forms and approaches.  Zoolander ?? Really?! I didn't saw Zoolander so I can't say you are wrong.