75th Annual Golden Globes Discussion • Page 8

As someone who loved “Wind River”, am I crazy to think that maybe it didn’t get any nominations because it was produced by TWC?

 

Cross posting ..

 

Was genuinely happy to see Franco win before I saw that.

I noticed that the nominees for half of the acting categories were all white, and I'm pretty sure Aziz Ansari and Sterling K. Brown were the only POC who even won.

 

i liked Three billboards a lot, not at all angry with its win. Out of the movies I saw that were nominated (never saw call be my name) I thought it was the best.

i think Lady Bird is winning the oscar though.

 

Three Billboards was OKAY, but it taking all of those last night is making me dislike it now, haha.

 

ehhh not really. i loved it too but i’m not necessarily shocked it didn’t get anything, leaving the company behind it completely out of it

 

I feel as though Wind River had close to zero marketing when it was released and just didn't have any type of awards campaign. I really enjoyed it but only went and saw it because I heard it was from the writer of Hell or High Water

 

yes

 

right. i think it’s more than than weinstein funding it

 

oh my god

 

Also wrote Sicario! (and its upcoming unnecessary sequel)

 

What the Men Didn't Say

 

A racist character doing one moderately redemptive thing does not mean a film is inherently racist

I sincerely don't get it

 

The zero marketing part is kinda true about a lot of indie films that win during award season. I didn’t see a damn thing for “Moonlight” (not comparing the two films in quality) and it got a ton of momentum during award season.

 

dont worry this happens every year. Movies that people feel were average, that end up winning awards, all of a sudden get backlash (this happens in here a wholeeeeee lot).

I'm proud that at least you can admit it lol

 

In today’s climate especially, a movie that glosses over a police officer’s abuse of a black man, then dramatizes his violence toward another citizen, then gives him a redemptive arc that ends with the message that “everyone should be more empathetic” is a misguided, failed attempt to address race and gender violence in this country. Three Billboards fucking sucks.

 

I’m personally much more interested to know how the people responsible/the people actually getting the shade thrown on them (i.e. the HFPA) reacted. It’s a serious problem when the best-reviewed film of the year, that audiences also adored, can’t get in but a buzzless film re-shot at the last minute to remove Kevin Spacey could. They just really wanted Ridley Scott to show up, I guess.

 

I know I oversimplified the themes a bit and there’s obvious skill in the performances and craft of Three Billboards because it’s filled with great actors and is made by a great filmmaker but yeah, enough of average at best, racist at worst white movies beating out way better movies for awards.

Watch Mudbound. Detroit. Lady Bird. Call Me By Your Name. Personal Shopper. Get Out. There are some fantastic and actually really fascinating movies that came out this year and, even if they are just as problematic as Three Billboards (Detroit has serious issues regarding race), it’s at least a far more powerfully directed film.

 

By this logic every time a murderous character does something redemptive the film is condoning murder. Rockwell started as a piece of shit and the film ended with him being the same, if we aren't allowed to see flawed characters progress then what is the fucking point of anything we are doing? To say that someone terrible can't do one good thing is totally undermining the moral complexity of being flawed and human. In the final scene, Frances and Sam's characters are united over a common goal and are no less deeply flawed or wrong in their intention. The very concept of an antihero means you do not condone their motivations, to make the perplexing leap in judgement calling the filmmaker a racist is irresponsible and just thinkpiece bait. I highly doubt he wrote the thing and thought "let's make everyone fall in love with the racist cop". It's a reach.

I'm open to changing my mind and I've been misguided before and may be now, but I've read four of the seven articles posted in the thread and I do not get it.

 

You can basically go to the movies’ Rotten Tomatoes page, where basically any time a critic of color comes up, its a rotten review, and their words are far more valuable than mine. In my view, a movie that skates by police brutality and offers minuscule consequence at best and follows that up with redemption reinforces a pattern of who Hollywood chooses to forgive and give redemptive arcs. Of course movies are about flawed people. But when a movie doesn’t adequately recognize the gravity of a flawed person’s actions, especially when it’s a movie about forgiveness and vengeance and accountability, is wrongheaded and falls short.

April Wolfe, Ira Madison, and K. Austin Collins had good writeups. I recommend them.

 

I'll read through those, thanks. Still, the movie was obviously very anti-authority and not meant to provoke sympathy for those that abuse their power for their own prejudices. It didn't skate by brutality, it directly addressed it. The entire movie was hinged on the gravity of his actions, he had Molotov cocktails thrown at him and was forced to answer to a strong African-American superior - he was never painted as a victim and the film never positioned him as such.

The consensus seems to be that it is irresponsible to show that character doing ONE positive thing without reckoning with his awful racism. That would be a tidy ending and it would be fake. He's still a piece of shit, yet evidently possesses some sort of capacity for justice. More than ever, we should be emphasizing that. How are we ever going to change a bigot's mind if we assume they are incapable of being anything different? If that's the case, why are any of us trying?