Did you even see “The Artist”????
I’ve been seeing ads for The Artist on TV. You sure it won’t get the same audience as King’s Speech?
I think the dog who pretends to be shot puts it over the edge.
I haven’t heard any word about opening The Artist wider but I imagine they must be thinking about it….But, as a point of comparison, at this time last year, The King’s Speech already made $47 million. The laws of the box office are the laws of the Academy Award. I think a new favourite will emerge in the next few weeks.
This strikes me as more an argument for Hugo being the favorite.
The thing is, The Artist will have a lot of people biased against it because of the silent nature, but I think if the Academy told people to see it, the core academy audience would like it. It’s not like The Tree Of Life which mainstream audiences would hate if they saw. It is a very accessible, ‘feel-good’ film.
Yeah, if Hugo did better at the box office, I’d say it should be a favorite, but I think it’s – unfortunately given that it’s the best populist entertainment of the year but correctly given how much it cost – perceived as a box office failure. Alas, Tree of Life has no chance. Nothing that esoteric has ever won (besides its 13 million box office gross). The only way to analyze the Academy Awards is market/marketing based.
Are they doing the Roger Ebert/Mubi prediction thing again this year?
Of course I saw The Artist.
It was boring. Completely predictable. Like I said, they got the style of a silent film down. But they didn’t get the emotion. I’m not a huge fan of Hugo but that film did a much better job of nailing the emotion.
And yes, the people who loved The King’s Speech will eat up The Artist.
I have yet to see The Artist. Who knows, I may end up not liking it (though, I am really looking forward to seeing it and suspect I will like it). And I don’t normally care about the Academy Awards in the slightest.
But I really, really want The Artist to win Best Picture. I want silent films to make a comeback! They’re too wonderful to just be left in the early 20th century. Sure as far as contemporary stuff goes we have Guy Maddin (who rocks), and the occasional film like The Call of Cthulhu and La Antena (I really want to see those two). But that just isn’t enough. I want more!
The Artist is one of those movies that I REALLY want to see just to prove to myself that I won’t like it. It looks pretty stupid to me.
As Ebert says, a movie like The Artist winning Best Picture will do little to motivate studios and production companies to make more silent films. This isn’t Harry Potter or The Dark Knight. No, I think this is a one shot deal.
No, but it may motivate curious cinephiles to start exploring silent films.
@Drunken Father Figure Of Old
It’s got the same silliness level as Singin In The Rain but does hit the mark in terms of camp versus cleverness nearly as well.
I’ll say The Decendents.
The Artist is a nice film but it ends up feeling like a gimmick.
While The Decendents has all the elements that [I would think] Academy voters like; humor, sentiment and a universal theme about life and death.
But who knows how the voting numbers will shake out. Maybe Hugo or The Help will end up winning?
Par usual, none of these are truly the best films of the year.
I went into THE ARTIST expecting to just hate it, another gimmick movie, this one using silent Hollywood style for silly feelgood purposes, and the reports of the whole STAR IS BORN/SINGIN’ IN THE RAIN business only increased my reluctance.
And I was totally won over by THE ARTIST. I realized I was chuckling at Jean Dujardin’s antics during the premiere, with that big silly smile: I found him irresistible, like some combination of John Gilbert/Douglas Fairbanks and Fredric March. My guard came down once and for all during that wonderful sequence showing the multiple takes of George and Peppy doing the same dance over and over. Yeah, the film is a mass of influences, from STAR IS BORN through SINGIN’ IN THE RAIN and many many others, but I felt it made them live onscreen in a very intelligent and entertaining manner.
I got more of the whole “magic of the movies” thing, emotional involvement and all, during THE ARTIST than I did during Scorsese’s interminable kiddie flick HUGO.
The Artist might not have the appearance of a traditional Best Picture winner, in today’s times, but because of its originality in bringing back all the necessary cliches of the silent films, cannot be snubbed. IT MUST WIN BEST PICTURE. If not then maybe “Hugo”
Turin Horse will win.
By the way, choosing between The Artist and The Descendants is like choosing between green poop and brown poop.
The Artist is a good film. It’s just strictly entertainment. There’s only anything wrong with that if you expect anything different.
It entertained me. It intersubjectively succeeded.
Strange to see so much hate for The Artist. Looked really cool coming out of Cannes.
Its always kind of surreal to see these threads because I just assume no one on Mubi gives a shit. If nothing else, I would really love to see people like Shannon, Fassbender, and Chastain finally get some more mainstream recognition but that will never happen so I guess I have no reason to care.
“It’s just strictly entertainment.”
There’s nothing wrong with entertainment. But there are a ton of films that were “strictly entertainment” last year. What sets The Artist apart from those films? And more importantly, what makes it more deserving of “Best Picture” than films that are more than just entertainment?
“If nothing else, I would really love to see people like Shannon, Fassbender, and Chastain finally get some more mainstream recognition”
See I think these guys have gotten mainstream recognition. The roles they are now getting – Shannon is in Superman, Fassbender was in X-Men, and Chastain is in the upcoming Tom Cruise film – is evidence that they’ve broken into the mainstream. Whether they get awards is another matter.
Danny, check out Guy Maddin to understand why people aren’t really impressed.
@Santino they have all had roles in big films, but I would argue that none of them are huge movie stars yet. I know we all know who they are, but I really doubt the casual American film viewer would know any of them. I can see Fassbender and Chastain becoming very very famous in the coming years, though.
“Danny, check out Guy Maddin to understand why people aren’t really impressed.”
Ha,ha, Danny hates Canadian film almost as much as he hates George Clooney.
The Globes don’t mean anything. Look at history.
But The Artist is winning Best Picture along with Director, Lead Actor, Original Screenplay, and Original Score.
It’s a done deal, people.
I just saw that thread, Ari.
Danny, why do you put so much stock in the Academy’s opinions?
You know good films exist outside of Hollywood’s and Academy’s jurisdiction, right?
Because that’s what the academy awards are for! Entertainment that’s a little classier than the entertainment that makes nine or ten figures.
^hehe, that’s true
“By the way, choosing between The Artist and The Descendants is like choosing between green poop and brown poop”
Blue K reveals his odd corprophilia again. Anyway, isn’t brown healthy and green a bad sign? I’d choose the former then.
Rest assured, I’ll be back on this thread when The Artist loses to vindicate my predictions that the Artist cannot win (or choke on my words). Until now, I guess we’ll have new threads every day about the Oscar race which is slightly unfortunate.
Anyway, isn’t brown healthy and green a bad sign?
I don’t think green is unhealthy… it’s just what happens when you eat a lot of asparagus.
The Artist will not win.
What happened to the overwhelming appraisal for The Tree of Life? No Best Picture nom?
We all know Bucky Larson: Born To Be A Star is going to walk away with this.