re: I enjoyed Parasite but fairly surprised it beat out 1917.

Mark Strong is famous?

quote:

---

One film was directed by a white man and starred white men who are good people. One film was directed by a nonwhite man and starred nonwhites who are victims of evil Westernization, Doesn't take a genius to guess which one won the Oscar.

---

There are some movies where that line of thinking would be fairly accurate, but this one ain’t it

quote:

---

Original, wonderfully paced/filmed and unpredictable .... deserving

---

Disagree that it was original.

Sort of the Modus Operandi of Korean movies.

I revert back to Hong Kong and Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon and everyone in the West and Oscarland said how original and unique.

And everyone in the Far East said, dude it's an average Kung-Fu flick.

Parasite isn't an average Korean film but it's not a great one.

I guess Hollywood shouldn't award foreign pictures Best Picture because they seem incapable of judging them having ignored them.

How do you know what is supremely artistic and great in another countries film if you don't watch those films on a regular basis?

These one hit wonders from abroad seem more like marketing campaigns or political nods for whatever reason.

But Oldboy, The Wailing, Memories of a Murder, A Moment to Remember, I Saw the Devil, The Chaser, The Haindmaden, the Man from Nowhere...why weren't those ever nominated for overall Best Picture?

Parasite wasn't as good as any of those. Those were 3-D, 4-D layered; Parasite was 2-D.

quote:

---

But Oldboy, The Wailing, Memories of a Murder, A Moment to Remember, I Saw the Devil, The Chaser, The Haindmaden, the Man from Nowhere...why weren't those ever nominated for overall Best Picture?

Parasite wasn't as good as any of those.

---

As someone who watches a great deal of Korean cinema, I disagree. Oldboy, Memories of Murder, and The Handmaiden are the only ones you listed that I think are better than Parasite.

The idea of "deserving" is kind of silly. I really liked Parasite, and I thought it was the best movie nominated, butI think it's pretty rare for many good movies to be nominated, much less win. When the recent winners are decent to bad movies (Moonlight, Shape of Water, Green Book), why would I be mad that a really good Korean movie won, even if there have been better Korean movies?

And besides Memories of Murder, all the movies you listed live very firmly in genre filmmaking, which is often ignored by the Academy anyway. A few horrors, a few very violent action flicks, an erotic thriller (I haven't seen A Moment to Remember, but it' been reviewed negatively by the few I follow who've seen it. I'll check it out). These have all been ignored by the committee shortlisting Best Foreign Film mostly because of their heavy ties to genre. That category is often bullshite, lots of movies falling with "issues", much like best documentary categories.

Parasite lives in this venn diagram of dark comedy, sort of thriller, and issue-based drama that is above all super accessible. How many of your friends can sit through The Handmaiden or Sympathy for Mr. Vengeance, or would take films like The Host or The Chaser seriously? Very few people in this movie board can.

Additionally, I think Burning heavily contributed to the Academy taking Parasite seriously. When that Korean drama (that I think is also better than Parasite), from a very respected director, was ignored in Best Foreign Film last year, people freaked out. I think the Academy took note that they have been actively ignoring South Korean cinema for decades. Parasite showed up in an environment ready to welcome its accessible pleasures.

quote:

---

No, Clay Travis.

---

Clay Travis may have asked it on social media the day after Parasite won, but that question has been on the minds of everyone since Joker was released back in October. The two films essentially carry with it the same messages about the rich and class warfare. One film was almost universally praised by critics while the other one was called dangerous by those same critics and media personalities.

quote:

---

You know that's bullshite.

---

No, it's not bullshite. All you have to do is google the topic and a ton of links to articles and videos, explaining the dangers the new Joker movie poses, will come up. The U.S. Army even released a warning to its soldiers, advising them to avoid the movie on opening weekend. Some theater chains even banned people from going to see it by themselves because they feared a mass shooting.

This is all searchable history that can be found within 5-10 minutes.

quote:

---

How about this? One actually had a coherent message, artfully delivered. The other was a massive jumble of messages that ultimately said nothing. One had the distinctive camera style and tight editing of its director. The other aped the style of Martin Scorsese whole-cloth. One had a full cast of great performances. The other had one guy cackling and dancing.

---

All of which is your subjective opinion. Clearly the Academy thought well enough of Joker to nominate it for 11 Academy Awards (the most of any film). But that hardly changes the fact that print and visual media called Joker a dangerous film that was sure to encourage white incels to do something terrible, like shoot up a movie theater.

quote:

---

This is all searchable history that can be found within 5-10 minutes.

---

I know I'll find idiots on the internet doing this, but I'm more likely to find idiots in the internet talking about this without citing anyone, because only a few outlets did this. Once people actually had a chance to see the movie, no one cared.

quote:

---

All of which is your subjective opinion

---

One course it is, and that's why I get so salty when people like you and Clay Travis make it about diversity. Your film got the most nominations. People clearly liked it. There was no conspiracy against it. This group of voters liked one movie more than they liked your favorite movie. If you actually cared about subjective opinion, you wouldn't ask a question like the one you did.

ETA: oh, and Philips ripping off Scorsese's style is not subjective opinion. Joker could hardly be any more of a combination of Taxi Driver and King of Comedy.

quote:

---

Your film got the most nominations. People clearly liked it. There was no conspiracy against it. This group of voters liked one movie more than they liked your favorite movie. If you actually cared about subjective opinion, you wouldn't ask a question like the one you did.

---

1) It was not my film as 1917 was my #1 for the year.

2) There was a conspiracy against it in the United States. Before the Golden Globes, few had it as a viable Best Picture candidate. But then the Hollywood Foreign Press nominated it for Best Picture AND Best Director and that started turning heads. The British Academy of Film and Television Awards cemented the deal when it nominated it for 11 BAFTAs.

3) If not for overseas support, Joker doesn't get nearly the amount of Oscar nominations it eventually received.

quote:

---

With the exception of Birdman every best picture winner since 2013 has been anti-white, anti-Christian, anti-heterosexual, anti-military and/or anti-capitalist

---

Portraying a certain subject doesn’t mean it’s anti-whatever