Opinions on these films?

Opinions on these films?

Haven't seen Birdman.

Kings Speech, 12 Years a Slave and Spotlight were decent.

The Artist and Argo were boring.

I have yet to meet a person to whom any of these Movies would be among their favourites

Spotlight
12 years a slave
Argo
kings speech
The Artist
Birdman

All of them are pretty good imo

the kings speech was ugly and clunky and cheesy and the only thing good about it is colin firth being fucking moe
the artist was a fun homage but paperthin
argo was aggravatingly smug hollywood sucking their own cock and just loathsome in general
12 years a slave was an actually decent movie made by a decent director
birdman was a big well made spectacle of a film and ok
haven't seen spotlight

Birdman seems like the least "Oscary" and memeworthy of these films, so I guess you can find someone that likes that one.

12 years and Birdman are great films. My body is ready to be called a pleb for saying this.

Kings Speech is alright.

The Artist and Spotlight are extremely competent films that are mostly forgettable.

Argo was part of a propaganda media blitz to justify a war with Iran the US thought it wanted before that treaty.

Birdman > 12 Year a Slave > The King's Speech >>>>>>>> Argo > The Artist > Spotlight

King's - 2/5
Artist - 2/5
Argo - 1/5
Slave - 4/5
Birdman - 5/5
Spotlight - 1/5

birdman is really good

rest are shit

Birdman is the only one oscarworthy

I havent seen any of these except 12 years a slave. I know they're oscar winners but their premise seems just boring.

King's Speech>Argo>Autist>Birdman>12 Years of Torture Porn>Spotlight

I haven't seen The Artist

I love The King Speech, I've seen it 3 times and it's always a really delightful movie. It get's a bad rap for being a "safe" win but that doesn't mean it's bad.

12 Years a Slave was good but not as good as some say. The passage of time was extremely unclear and made his eventual sudden release seem even more sudden and arbitrary

Argo and Spotlight were incredibly mediocre. There's nothing for me to say about them either way

Birdman has it's moments but it's a really smug, pretentious film. I hated the surrealist elements and any time Inarritu decided "showbiz satire" meant "use character as soapbox to complain"

3/5
Haven't seen
2/5
4/5
4/5
3.5/5

King's Speech 4/5
Artist 3/5
Argo 2.5/5
12 Years a Slave 4.5/5
Birdman 5/5
Spotlight 2.5/5

Reminder: opinions

Kings Speech: 7/10
The Artist: 8/10
Argo: 7/10
12 Years A Slave: 9/10
Birdman: 7/10
Spotlight: 7/10

All pretty good best picture winners to be honest. Social Network definitely should have beat out King's Speech though.

I can't believe people here don't love the king's speech.

actually wait, i definitely can.

D R O P P E D

Kings Speech>Every other film

Is Spotlight worth watching if you don't give a shit about the """""true"""" story it was based on?

No. The whole film is built on assuming you're shocked by priests molesting kids as if that wasn't a national joke for the past 20+ years at least

Only if you're a completist of BPs, tb.h

7/10, 9/10, 6/10, 8/10, 8/10, 8/10

thought argo was really good, honestly was at the edge of my seat the whole time I watched it for the first time

delet this meme

however, i really think you can only watch it once after that its pretty boring ngl

12 Years was great.
Birdman and Spotlight were cool movies, no interest in watching them agian.
Forgot I had even seen Argo desu

Haven't seen The Artist or Kings Speech.

boring
haven't watched it, looks shit
was ok
kike propaganda
interesting, enjoyed it a lot
kike propaganda

Kings speech and The Artist are overrated and pretty boring, Argo is great, 12 years is overrated, Birdman is brilliant, Spotlight was above average.

Spotlight, kings speech, and argo are good (although I think spotlight and argo didn't deserve best picture). 12 years a slave is fine even if it is a 'white people are evil" movie. The artist was pretty meh, and I'm a pleb who didn't get birdman

The Artist was better than Birdman, and if you didn't think so you are cancerous "post-modern" trash.

>Movie shows the truth going on in the church of the dead kike
>Kike propeganda

>white people are evil
yeah those fucking jews acting like slavery was bad

I liked King's Speech because of the swearing bit.

I haven't seen the rest.

>King's Speech
probably my favourite out of the bunch, looks gorgeous and has incredible performances
>The Artist
a fun little film but nowhere near deserving best picture
>Argo
an utterly unremarkable, decently tense thriller, again not deserving best picture
>12 years
pretty great but you can't help noticing the oscar-baiting story and themes but enjoyable nonetheless
>Birdman
technically amazing and a great performance from Keaton but it does feel rather hollow, all flash with no bang
>Spotlight
feels more like a 10-part documentary series squashed into 1 part than a movie but it somehow succeeded in it

King's speech was pointless, trite oscar bait. Boring as fuck and repetitive.

Birdman I really liked. It was simple but entertaining and somewhat 'different', in a good way, from the usual shit I see in the theater.

The others I haven't seen.

Not that user, but there's a scene where the protagonist just stares at the camera for like 15 seconds with a look that says, "This was your fault".

I thought it was a great movie with fantastic performances and a really engaging story, but it really did go out of its way to make all the white characters except Brad Pitt's look like total monsters.

Only Birdman is good

I think you're projecting quite a bit there. I don't know that scene off hand but I assume the purpose was more to explore the emotion in his face rather than blame the audience. I never got that at all from the film

And yes, all the white slave owners are portrayed poorly because they owned slaves. Cumberbatch's character was very balanced though, and the film shows Solomon playing music for white people as a relative equal early in the film. It's not a story about white people, so there just aren't many to see in the film

>"""""true""""

it literally happened whether you liked it or not

The Artist was a gimmik film devoid of any substance.

>I don't know that scene off hand but I assume

You're assuming an awful lot. Watch it again and try paying attention to the camerawork.

An actor spiking the camera is unusual, it stands out. When he's not saying anything, there's no other characters in the scene, and he's just been through a gauntlet of tribulations at the hands of rich white people, then he turns to face an audience of cinemagoers who are in all likelihood white suburban Americans, his face contorted with a mixture of anguish and defiance, the directorial message is pretty damn clear.

I'm not looking to propagate any increase of racebait on this board because Christ knows there's enough of it, but it's a bit obtuse to try and deny that the movie portrays white Americans in the same way that Raiders of the Lost Ark portrayed Germans.

They're caricatures; at the time, there was a bit of upset from the descendants of the real guy that Cumberbatch was playing, precisely because it ignored his descriptions from the actual 1850s memoirs upon which the movie was supposed to be based and turned him from a humane slave owner into a giant pussy.

I'm not projecting, by the way, I'm not even American - if anything, I ought to identify with Pitt's character because my ancestors never owned slaves and they come from a country that abolished slavery far earlier than most of the world.

It was just an extremely heavy-handed moment in a movie that was already a little too heavy-handed in its preaching.

The fact is that not all slave owners were bad people, but it's so comparatively recent in American history that the pendulum of historical opinion is at the height of its swing against them.

It's not like people criticise Cicero or Caesar for owning slaves. Hell, Caesar spent most of his career capturing Germans and forcing them into either slavery or conscription, yet we think of him as the brave hero of the people who was murdered in cold blood by his closest friends and colleagues.

No, those fucking Jews acting like slavery wasn't a common theme throughout history and forgetting niggers would still be slaves if it weren't for white people

>Birdman wasn't

I'm not saying Birdman was bad, just that the Artist was better in literally every way.

>good
>bad
>good
>great
>great
>good

Birdman is a highly sarcastic movie so if you can't handle that then dont bother

> Thinking Fassbender's character was what actual slave owners were like

tl dr but what country?

good
great
good but muh white guilt oscar b8
great
never seen spotlight

Scotland. Slave trading was made a punishable crime in the UK in 1811, and ownership was outlawed in 1834.

IIRC only the Nordic countries made any serious moves to ban the practice before Britain did.

Not to mention the fact that my Celtic ancestors would have been dodging Roman slavers for like 400 years back in day.

Sorry, it still sounds like you're bringing personal politics into something that doesn't have it. I see a proud man being broken down by an evil system. You apparently see it as an attack on 21st century white people. I can't see how to discuss this if we're seeing it so differently

I don't see Cumberbatch as being a caricature at all. He seemed incredibly even in his character's portrayal of the average slave owner. He's a generally good person who lacks the moral fiber or monetary gains to abandon slavery even if he isn't completely comfortable with it. You can see him consider buying the mother and son but as soon as money comes up he decides it's not worth the expense. He stays up and guards Solomon with a rifle but settles on just selling Solomon away for his safety instead of standing by him. He tries to teach Jesus to the slaves but is also content to let vicious overseers abuse them

He isn't a bad person, just a man of his time and culture and that affects his actions in ways beyond his control.

>it's a bit obtuse to try and deny that the movie portrays white Americans in the same way that Raiders of the Lost Ark portrayed Germans
White americans involved in a morally heinous act. "White" is not the primary character description. "Slave owner" is. Compared to many other films and stories I think 12 Years showed a lot more understanding and sympathy for them than was to be expected

Regarding Fassbender, he's definitely a bit much but he serves a narrative purpose to put Solomon through the absolute worst of it and eventually break his spirit.

>Sorry, it still sounds like you're bringing personal politics into something that doesn't have it. I see a proud man being broken down by an evil system. You apparently see it as an attack on 21st century white people. I can't see how to discuss this if we're seeing it so differently

Firstly, I don;t see it as "an attack on 21st century white people", I see it as movie about a proud man being broken down by an evil system that is entwined with a heavy-handed appeal to white guilt.

It's not personal politics - it's current events. Not since the days of the civil rights movement have the press and politicians been whipping race relations into such a frenzy as they have been in the last few years.

In the last 4 years, more American cops were shot and killed than in the 30 years before.

Your country has been simmering with racial tension since Obama was elected POTUS for being black (which he was, and you know it), and while Steve McQueen is no Spike Lee, he was ultimately making a movie about a black man's struggle against white oppression, a struggle which he can identify with.

The movie exists in a symbolic past, not a historically-accurate one. It's not about white people, but it is about African Americans' relationship with the white society in which they found themselves imprisoned. Cumberbatch's character is the "good man who does nothing" - which is at odds with his real-life counterpart's description in the book - while Pitt's is the "good man who acts". Fassbender is the evil, the embodiment of an oppressor who has gone mad with power, and has grown to see himself as superior to those whom he dominates.

If you want to be wilfully ignorant of the movie's context and pretend it's not about race relations, and that it is just about 1853 without any commentary about its own time in 2013, that's fine.

Yeah, it's also about slavery, but there's a reason McQueen chose to adapt Solomon Northup's memoirs instead of the book of Exodus.

12 Years A Slave has some mesmerizing shots, direction and a a firm sense of dread throughout, but it's pacing is fucked and it's characters are a tad one-note.

Spotlight is occasionally interesting but ultimately meaningless twaddle with some of the most overrated performances I've seen.

Haven't seen the King's Speech, The Artist, 12 years a slave and Spotlight.

Birdman was.... alright. Not as good as Boyhood. Or whiplash. But I can see why it was awarded. Very reactionary film to the current capeshit fever.

Argo was o-kay. I swear there was a better movie than it back in 2012. But its not coming to mind.

Birdman is pretty good, havent seen the others

Birdman was alright. Lost my attention a couple of times. Too gimmicky.

Spotlight was very interesting and fun to watch. Not really that much of a standout but worth to see it.

Haven't seen the others but heard that they're mediocre and that 12 Years A Slave is an agenda pusher.

Only good one is Birdman.

Everything else is artsy fartsy, bland shit that was forgotten in a week.

>artsy fartsy

>literally the premise of Birdman