How much weight do awards and accolades received carry in your decision to watch a movie or not?
Do they impact your perception of such movies in any positive or negative way?
>>67108950
They have a marginal impact, but they do have some.
I don't watch new movies in the theater often, or if I do I want some genre-stuff that is fairly safe by my personal tastes (sci-fi, horror, comedy). Or if I fancy myself patrician on a given day, I will instead get a disc. The point being that I don't take chances on a first screening too often.
So if something gets Best Picture and it actually looks like something I'd like to watch just to be able to say I had, I'll do it. I saw Chicago once, Slumdog Millionaire too (which was interesting, I could stand to watch that again). But if it's naked oscar bait/identity politics, I'm less interested. Best Picture tends to have a little more to it than a Monster's Ball, or a Revenant, or an I Am Sam, which I infer are actors' exercises "k gimme statue now".
>>67108950
I'm more hesitant to watch films which have been nominated for Best Picture in recent years. I feel like a lot of them are chosen because they're "serious" films about "serious" issues, which end up being quite boring most of the time.
almost none. if it's outside my tastes, maybe a bit more, although im more likely to be swayed by actual analysis and discussion to see if the subtext and thematic explorations are closer or farther from my alley than i originally thought. when i see "technical" criticisms i usually shut down and stop caring about what im reading (ill be the judge of that) and "technical" acclamation is only very marginally more influencing (oh, really?). more often than not, that's all critical reviewers know how to do. it's embarrassing.
if it's closer to my tastes and genre preferences im going to watch it. so, not at all.
t. cynically pretentious dbag
>>67109379
Joy is a good example of naked Oscar bait
>>67109434
fucking this, It's always the most important topic that wins Best Picture because "muh art form"
Where's best pictures nominations for Creed? Ex Machina? Sicario? Straight Out of Compton?TFA?
Be instead we get bullshit like 45 Years and Carol.
>>67109607
I was surprised Mad Max was nominated at all, that was way out there for the Academy.
I don't watch anything that doesn't have at least an 80% on IMDb
>>67108950
1lb 3oz
>>67109657
>I don't watch anything that doesn't have at least an 80% on IMDb
Depends on the award. Movies at festivals tend to be chosen by critics and committees rather than plebs like people or actors, technicians etc. that happens at the most high profile awards. That doesn't mean that the decisions made by those better suited to judging films is final but they do offer more than the usual schmaltz honored at the Golden Globes or Oscars. Festivals also tend to masturbate to political stuff (Dheepan won last year at Cannes) but their picks are often more nuanced than say tripe like Selma. And international festivals bring non-English, non-Western films to the forefront which is always a nice change (but by now means an accurate judge of quality) and an exposure to different aesthetics that otherwise remain obscure titles on blogs and karagarga. Even Tarantino was praised by Kiarostami because he championed a little known filmmaker from Uzbekistan or somewhere when he was one of the jury members at Cannes.
>>67109634
I think it was a love/apology letter of sorts to George Miller, for all the shit he went through trying to make it.
>>67109634
It was very well received critically, had a feminist theme, was big on spectacle and technicality and was pretty popular.
>>67109657
I'm the same with Metacritic. I don't watch anything that isn't green or yellow. and yellow I'm very cautious about.
also awards don't usually hold up over time because the very idea of awards inherently caters to a time and a place, and usually favors topical pandering over actual merit.
there's also a cultural and historical element that is important to note, a lot of these award givers are plebs and don't have much understanding beyond surface levels so in essence, things get lost in translation. sometimes a bunch of people will prop up something for the wrong reasons and get exposed as total retards for it; the academy gets out fucking skilled on this level constantly, especially in this day and age.. look at the dumb fanboying over crouching tiger (still a good movie) and their reasons for liking it, or worse, slumdog millionaire (absolutely not, one of the most offensive movies ever made).
it's just not worth it to invest in these peoples opinions when they fall for the same shit (meme cinematography is another example) and keep making the same mistakes. no thanks.
>>67109949
yeah thats the stuff
>>67109944
>meme cinematography
>>67109908
>technicality
And yet the visual effects Oscar went to fucking Ex Machina.
>>67109944
>meme cinematography
I almost thought your post was good but you ruined everything and proved you don't know what you're talking about.
>>67109634
I didn't watch this Oscars, but I know that they "opened up" the Best Picture category several years ago. They expanded it from 5 nominees to 10. In the same year, Avatar and District 9 were nominated for best picture, along with more serious fare.
I interpret this opening-up as a way to give legitimacy to certain sci-fi/horror/capeshit pictures, which turn the money wheels. But no one is serious about any of them winning prestige awards, and most of the time probably for good reason. But it would be an exceptional thing if some monster movie or *gasp* a comedy actually won, and I therefore don't expect it in my lifetime.
>>67110363
ahahhahaha i laugh at your misfortune.
Word of mouth and/tv/s opiniongenerally have more to do with getting me off the fence than bullshit awards.
>>67110223
>>67110309
yea because spamming pretty pictures like a toddler with no restraint so hard that it keeps drawing attention to itself even if it's not thematically appropriate constitutes "cinematography"
just fucking kill yourselves
>>67109657
This. I need a movie to be >90% certified fresh on rottentomatoes.
I also look at Roger Ebert's review, and if he didn't give 4 stars, I drop that garbage.
>>67108950
Why is she lying on the ground? It's disgusting. Is she a slut or something?
>>67110754
>cinematography is functional
This is the real meme
>>67109908
where was the feminist theme though? i never got that from Fury Road. i hate femnazi bullshit like nobodies business but that movie didn't flick on my radar at all.
i usually watch movies with people i recognise
>inb4 go away
>>67111666
>>67108950
I would say best picture nomination greatly increase my interest in that. The winner is must see to me. And I felt patrician after seeing winners.
>>67111666
A woman accomplishing or doing anything of her own accord is feminism these days
