So I don't really pay attention to the Oscar's because I'm not American, but how exactly did La La Land not win, from an objective standing?
The academy voters thought that it was the best directed movie (won best director), they thought it was the best shot movie (best cinematography) and they thought that it had the best score (best Original Score) and they thought it had the best production design (best production design.
Why exactly did it not win?
Other urls found in this thread:
oscars.org
streamable.com
myredditvideos.com
twitter.com
Win best picture*
the fact that nocturnal animals wasn't even nominated for best cinematography is shameful desu
It lost because of a fucking hashtag. (#OscarsSoWhite). Hollywood didn't want to be viewed as excluding black people or congratulating themselves.
If the voting was only based on what was on the screen La La Land would have easily won.
Because there was controversy over it painting black people in a bad light. And after last year they needed a pro-black movie to win.
La La Land Blew a 5 Oscar blow out!
>I don't pay attention to anything nor do I know how to google so please explain to me what happened like I'm a fucking four year old
It's simple and has nothing to do with a black/Jewish conspiracy:
Directors vote for the director's award.
Cinematographers vote for the cinematographer's award.
Everyone from all categories vote for Best Picture.
Because a Picture is more than just cinematography, score, production design and direction.
And Moonlight was the better Picture.
>from an objective standing
From an objective standing: it lost because it got fewer votes.
From a subjective standing: it got fewer votes for reasons.
Any movie with Emma Stone in it shouldn't even be consider for best anything.
Well it's too bad that no one agrees with you and she won.
Is the Goose the new Leo?
Has the mantle been passed?
Will he go many awards shows constantly getting snubbed for decades until he finally wins not even for his best movie?
Emma Stone is best actress and best picture
Becuase last year, the Oscars got called out on black twitter with #Oscarssowhite
That paired with Trump winning, they had to push the diversity quota to the fucking max
These.
stop bulling me
Kek looks like it
see
And Moonlight was actually a better picture, pretty much every other film nominated was better.
Also, to be fair Silence had better cinematography and both Hail Caesar and Fantastic Beasts had better production design.
I think it's probably quite common to be undecided between two films and give a handful of best actor/actress/director/screenplay/cinematography to one and best picture to the other.
Best Picture is a pretty ridiculous award for that reason. Either there is a legit best, in which case it will win most other awards making the best picture itself kinda pointless, or there isn't an obvious best and it contradicts the component awards. But, of course, none of those awards generate the same spectacle.
Of course, you can argue the reason they were split with Moonlight is because of race. There's no real evidence of that, it's a decent movie, and going in it was one of three that could realistically have won along with La La Land and Manchester by the Sea. If you're sure that it just comes down to #OscarsSoWhite that just indicates you're obsessed with race. It's a possibility, but this situation has been common in academy awards past without the racial component.
If it was just race, I think Hidden Figures would have won. Moonlight paints the black community in a very negative (and realistic) light. There's no white villain or anything. All the characters are black and destructive. It even had a smaller audience than Hidden Figures, so it's not exactly a crowd pleaser in that sense.
Nobody asked for your opinion though
Why are you so assblasted?
Not OP, but I didn't realise this was how they did it. Makes some awards (Suicide Squad) even more confusing.
>Of course, you can argue the reason they were split with Moonlight is because of race. There's no real evidence of that
What about all the Hollywood race baiting last year and complaining about how the Oscars were too white?
What about the head of the academy calling for people to make a difference and make the awards more diverse?
If you actually think that there's "no evidence" you're an idiot, regardless of your stance on the matter.
Source?
The Academy votes based on mediocrity. You can't have a movie too polarizing win or half the audience will get upset. So instead they choose a movie that many people will enjoy, but neither love nor hate. I'm actually surprised Birdman won because a lot of people hated that movie.
Reality.
idk. Leo seemed like he was trying really hard to win every time, it came across pretty desperate. Goose comes across like he doesn't care one way or the other.
If Sup Forums had their way they'd vote for whatever the flavor of the year mindless action flick is.
>What about all the Hollywood race baiting last year and complaining about how the Oscars were too white?
This isn't evidence of influence on the academy.
>What about the head of the academy calling for people to make a difference and make the awards more diverse?
This is, and I didn't know that.
Of all the nominees, SS made sense.
the whole black discrimination was a trend before last year's awards were presented, why would they wait one whole year to "fix" it?
I mean, I can see some movies like 12 Years a Slave and Crash winning due to the thematics, but I doubt is really because of "minority" influences.
Anyone got the full video of the fail moment ?? Webm? cant find any video online in good quality you faggots
Why are you projecting?
It's a really shallow movie. Fun to look at, and I really enjoyed it, but there's nothing below surface level - just a pretty, feel good film to watch.
Moonlight won Best Adapted Screenplay. It was a better script than La La Land, I think that's pretty clear. It was deeper and made you think more than La La Land. Also it had the whole diversity factor going for it, it was something different and unique and emotional.
That being said I personally thought La La Land deserved to win, but Moonlight wasn't a bad pick. I don't think it will be remembered like La La Land will.
>n-no, you
CORRECTION - A LOT OF CRITICS HATED THAT MOVIE
The best reviewed Sup Forums movies of 2016 were BvS, The Neon Demon and Christine. All kino.
>This isn't evidence of influence on the academy.
Are you trying to say that the academy members who vote for what wins aren't influenced by that kind of stuff? Are you fucking serious?
>not Star Trek
But why Moonlight and not Hidden Figures? If race and giving in to dumb hashtags is the angle, Hidden Figures makes much more sense.
I'd say La La Land has better everything than Toni Erdmann except for script and Toni Erdmann is still the better movie. Can't say the same for Moonlight but it's the same reasoning.
You are doing it again
>objective
That would be true if La La Land was a music video, but it's a film. Mediocre script, mediocre ACTING don't elevate it against the other nominees.
La La Land's mistake was not releasing the bluray BEFORE THE AWARDS CEREMONY.
Seriously, the last 5 years, all the frontrunners have refused to do this because they expect to win and then expect people to only go to the cinema to watch it. That's retarded, it cost THE REVENANT last year, BOYHOOD before that.
WHEN WILL THEY LEARN
Because Moonlight was really well made. Hidden Figures wasn't.
Autism wins again
Plus, with Hidden Figures, you can add the strong female aspect. Wouldn't that be more appeasing to SJWs?
becauses the oscars aren't objective and subjectively everyone thought the movie of all black people about a gay black man deserved to win because it's 2017 and the oscars were too white in 2016
How though?
The protag is a jazz purist that adores black musicians and his sister is an interracial relationship with a black man, not to mention he earns money to open his club thanks to his black friend. I'm unable to see this retarded logic where La La Land is anti-black.
Moonlight had gays. There are very few movies about gay black men.
>It was deeper and made you think more than La La Land.
With Moonlight everything was surface-level. There was nothing to understand beyond what the actors explicitly said. "Poor gay black male struggles. The end."
La La Land is better crafted with many more thematic clues.
Right, so it's not just about race. And whether race was more important than the quality of the film in the minds of the academy can only be speculation, given that it was actually a "really well made" movie.
Star Trek was technically impressive, but like some user said on other threads, SS made some iconic makeup works.
The movie sucks balls, but I actually agree with that award, that is considering the other nominees.
because hidden figures had too many white people and moonlight was more oscarish. Moonlight has one of the same actresses as a strong female. It also had gays. Covered more bases.
Because the blacks were the sell-outs and Gosling was the one who wanted to take jazz back to it's roots and save the genre.
You can make a dumb oversimplification of anything if you want to. You're missing the duality of Ali's character for one example. In general, the film does make you empathize more with people you'd typically hate (drug dealers, addict single mothers, traitors etc.) without ever actually condoning their choices.
I think they also bring up the question of whether Chiron's struggle is really at least partially self-inflicted. I mean, he's not the only gay black man in the movie. His friend ended up happy or at least satisfied with his situation. I don't think "poor gay black male struggles" really accounts for that. Really, the struggle of the lead is quite universal as it has as much to do with his general introversion as any demographic he is a part of. His friend was always comfortable with himself and he ended up a lot differently.
Hacksaw Ridge should've won best picture
black rapppers make whole albums about wanting to sell out and make money, how is selling out a negative thing for them?
Because it didn't deserve most of their win and they knew it.
la la land was the poor mans hail caesar
Except it had nothing to do with Hail, Caesar. Neither thematically, nor aesthetically.
They're only alike in that they're both set in Hollywood.
both have inherently traditional messages as the main theme except in lx3 what her face is too much of a cunt and gosbro is "too busy" to get on a plane and go after the one he loves aka millennials the movie (giving up real life for a career)
>giving up real life for a career
I'd rather have a career and find another girl then be poor and miserable the rest of my life with the first girl I fall in love with.
But they didnt sell out they just played a different sort of music from what John Legend and Gozza were trained in.
If anything Gozza sold out
>I'd rather have a career and find another girl then be poor and miserable the rest of my life with the first girl I fall in love with.
except that doesnt happen, the movie clearly showed that "she was the one" but that they let their jobs get in the way and then at the end they find out they could have had both after a bit of time if they had gotten together but they wanted fame™ and the wanted it now!
They were doing shitty magazine covers making them look like a pop band. They were more focused on image then their music.
Maybe it would feel more substantial if I haven't watched The Wire three times.
It's like you didn't even watch the film. Like jazz, there was always going to be compromise. The question is if being stubborn and sticking to your dream was worth it. In the end I'd like to believe that Mia and Sebastian realized that it wasn't worth it but convince each other that it was.
Thinking the themes have been explored before is a lot different to thinking no themes were explored at all. If you only got "Poor gay black male struggles. The end.," out if it, having seen The Wire won't make a difference. If anything you won't have gotten much out of The Wire either.
This
But people also like to forget how they have always done shit like this.
Giving garbage like Hurt Locker best picture is pretty much russian tier war propaganda
>There's no real evidence of that
The wrong letter was the correct letter; PWC forgot that they were supposed to rig the competition in order to allay the racism accusations
Moonlight had a main character that was
>poor
>gay
>black
Literally the ideal trifecta for Oscar-baiting.
It also heavily criticised the black community and, indeed, even the poor gay black character came off in a mostly negative light.
>heavily criticised the black community
Source?
>it wasnt about race
lol stop kidding yourself
oscars.org
>Source?
I know it's a novel idea, but I watched the movie
Bullshit, no one watches movies here.
I thought you meant the black community criticized the movie. Obviously the movie isn't going to make poor black ghettos look like some fun wholesome place to be.
>I thought you meant the black community criticized the movie
You even quoted what I said
>Obviously the movie isn't going to make poor black ghettos look like some fun wholesome place to be.
Often movies make "the ghetto" look bad, but the people look good and not at all to blame for the quality of said ghetto (usually with the white man as the scapegoat for putting them in that situation). In this case everyone is two-dimensional and most characters made extremely morally-bankrupt decisions at some point in the film.
Because niggers
the movie was quite boring
that's why
Of the past 25 oscars, the best picture winner also:
Lost Director: Shakespeare in Love, Gladiator, Chicago, Crash, 12 Years a Slave, Spotlight, Moonlight - 7/25
Lost Screenplay (Adapted or Original): Unforgiven, Braveheart, English Patient, Gladiator, Chicago, Million Dollar Baby, The Artist - 7/25
Lost Both: Gladiator, Chicago
No Director Noms: Argo
No Screenplay Noms: Titanic
No Acting Wins: Schindler's List, Titanic, Crash, The Departed, The Hurt Locker, Argo, Birdman, Spotlight - 8/25
No Acting Noms: Braveheart, LotR: Return of the King, Slumdog Millionaire - 3/25
Lost Cinematography: Unforgiven, Forrest Gump, Gladiator, Chicago, No Country for Old Men, The Hurt Locker, The King's Speech, The Artist, Moonlight - 9/25
No Cinematography Noms: Shakespeare in Love, A Beautiful Mind, LotR: Return of the King, Million Dollar Baby, Crash, The Departed, Argo, 12 Years a Slave, Spotlight - 9/25
So historically, nothing that happened was really any different.
>A movie about a gay black man with an all black cast
if this isn't oscar bait, then I don't know what is
SHUTUP user ITS CUZ OF WHITE GUILT AND HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE QUALITY OF THE MOVIE!!! NIGGERS!!!! REEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!
Who should have won that year? It's competition that year was Blindside, shitty ass Avatar, Inglorious Bastards, Up and... Precious, I think.
Not him, but imho Basterds should have won.
And best ass, she looked fine in that gold dress.
It's like her ass gets bigger with every award she wins
>Inb4 "Script"
Was it really a great script? One where things are solved by time skips and one where there is no character progression?
I dont agree that best script= best movie but if i were to follow that rule then it should have gone to Manchester
nigros
This she is talentless. Worst emma.
