Why Best Picture Nominees Fare Poorly at the Box Office

[BelowTheMasonDixon]

:hitch: :smugford:

Dude is talking crazy, somebody show this motherfukker out of the film room.

 

[David_TheMan]

:hitch: :smugford:

taste is subjective.

 

[BelowTheMasonDixon]

Rogue One and Civil War could have got the spots from Hacksaw Ridge, Arrival, or Lala Land in my view, it was far more entertaining than either of those 3. To me the key part of a movie is entertainment, just like any story, if it can't capture your mind or make you want to finish its failed at its job, the 3 movies I posted all failed at their job of being entertaining and engaging film. Let me add that overrated Hell or High Water too.

Maybe you're just basic than a muthafukka.

 

[David_TheMan]

Maybe you're just basic than a muthafukka.

so you don't think the purpose of entertainment products is to entertain?

 

[Soymuscle Mike]

Arrival and La La Land were both amazing, I rarely REALLY love the movies that get nominated but these two - fukk they were good.

 

[BelowTheMasonDixon]

so you don't think the purpose of entertainment products is to entertain?

Movies are a form of Art. And what entertains one doesn't entertain all.

 

[David_TheMan]

Movies are a form of Art. And what entertains one doesn't entertain all.

art is a form of entertainment.
Also commercial films are in the business of generating interest and entertaining people so they want to see it and make the investors money back and hopefully add profit.

As for what entertainment being the same for everyone, never argued that, like i always say in these discussions, taste is subjective

 

[BelowTheMasonDixon]

art is a form of entertainment.
Also commercial films are in the business of generating interest and entertaining people so they want to see it and make the investors money back and hopefully add profit.

As for what entertainment being the same for everyone, never argued that, like i always say in these discussions, taste is subjective

They are also in the interest of making good film right? In theory investors aren't in the business of spending 200 -300 million dollars on a shytty film. Isn't that why heads rolled after "Monster Trucks" didn't turn a profit and was panned. It's a reason McG isn't helming big budget products anymore.

 

[David_TheMan]

They are also in the interest of making good film right? In theory investors aren't in the business of spending 200 -300 million dollars on a shytty film. Isn't that why heads rolled after "Monster Trucks" didn't turn a profit and was panned.

I would posit that good is a subjective classification that people try to apply in a objective manner. Either you personally like a movie or you don't, outside of that there is no such thing as a "good" or "bad" film, since taste differs so much.

The CEO was fired before Monster Trucks released, I believe and he had a string of poor box office performance, but yes managemnt usually gets fired if they don't produce.

As for investors money, most will split the financing with other studios or other investors if you get a project that costs 200 - 300 mil, That is what Fox did with avatar.

 

[Cryptocurrency Scarface]

because they lack explosions

explosions are best on bigger screens

I like both oscar bait and blockbusters but Oscar Bait can be viewed on your tv screen without ruining the experience you can't get the same amount of satisfaction watching Dr Strange at your house. But you can equally enjoy Fences at home without compromising your experience.

 

[BelowTheMasonDixon]

I would posit that good is a subjective classification that people try to apply in a objective manner. Either you personally like a movie or you don't, outside of that there is no such thing as a "good" or "bad" film, since taste differs so much.

The CEO was fired before Monster Trucks released, I believe and he had a string of poor box office performance, but yes managemnt usually gets fired if they don't produce.

As for investors money, most will split the financing with other studios or other investors if you get a project that costs 200 - 300 mil, That is what Fox did with avatar.

You're in the wrong forum then. Go talk about how Transformers "Dark Of The Moon" got robbed for an academy award in The Locker Room. That shyt might fly there. But as far as criticism of film goes saying there is no such thing as a good or bad film is nonsense. If you can't understand why "Goodfellas" is better than "Shottas" then you probably should just watch films instead of discussing them.

 

[David_TheMan]

You're in the wrong forum then. Go talk about how Transformers "Dark Of The Moon" got robbed for an academy award in The Locker Room. That shyt might fly there. But as far as criticism of film goes saying there is no such thing as a good or bad film is nonsense. If you can't understand why "Goodfellas" is better than "Shottas" then you probably should just watch films instead of discussing them.

Not in the wrong forum and i'm not going anywhere.
I personally dont like any Transformers movie and I never argued that it should get any award outside of SFX and editing.
You can criticize things you don't understand and criticize concrete things and explain why you don't like them, but your opinion will always be your opinion.
There are some people that don't like Goodfellas you can't say they are wrong or their opinion doesn't apply to them, it simply is.
Instead of worrying how others thing though, might need to spend more time exploring and focusing on what you like and why you like it, if anyone was to ask your opinion. Thats what i do.

 

[the next guy]

They're art house films, that's why.

 

[Cattle Mutilation]

lol at Vin Diesel trolling the Oscars with another stupid Fast and Furious movie.

 

[NobodyReally]

I wonder if the rift between popular movie sales and critics' and actors' choice is mirroring what we're seeing in politics. Where the people who really study the craft have a wildly different idea about what makes a good movie than the people who just consume movies as escapism.