>The Boston Online Film Critics Association announced its 2015 winners Saturday morning, awarding best picture to Mad Max: Fury Road.
>'Mad Max' scored five wins from the association.
>Critics opted for the Charlize Theron-starrer over Spotlight, the true story about the Boston Globe journalists who uncovered the massive scandal of child molestation by priests, followed by cover-up within the local Roman Catholic Archdiocese in 2001. Mark Ruffalo, Michael Keaton, Rachel McAdams, Liev Schreiber, John Slattery, Brian d'Arcy star in the Tom McCarthy production.
>Mad Max also scored big in four other categories, including best director for George Miller; best cinematography for John Seale; best editing for Margaret Sixel; and best original score for Junkie XL.
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/race/boston-online-film-critics-snub-846206
Confirmed Best Picture nominee at the Oscars
Spotlight is a movie I've heard nothing about from this board and it's really surprising
based mad max
spotlight is just shitty oscar bait anyway
>>63348108
I made lots of threads saying it wouldn't win because exposing homosexual pedophilia hits too close to home with Hollywood. No one responded
>>63348187
Because /tv/ is full of homos duh
>>63348108
>>63348187
Honestly, I think it's because that movie just looks like standard Oscar-bait, the same stuff that wins every year. It takes a controversial issue from the headlines, recent enough to be in everyone's memory, but not fresh enough to be genuinely upsetting or offensive. Tasteful, subdued, by-the-books filmmaking. Serious performances by respected actors.
I haven't seen it, so maybe it is truly exceptional, but it looks like the same thing we've seen a hundred times before. Manufactured for the sole purpose of winning awards. Whereas "Mad Max" might not be "serious," but it really was an ambitious, original, visionary movie, a real career-topping achievement for the director. Even if it's not done to your tastes, you've got to respect filmmaking like that.
I'm not saying Spotlight isn't any good, I'm just saying movies like that are made every year, whereas none of us had ever seen anything quite like Fury Road
>>63348108
It's a dramatisation about some guy discovering a story everyone already knows. It could be interesting as a documentary, but as it is no-one cares about it.
>>63348187
>it wouldn't win because exposing homosexual pedophilia hits too close to home with Hollywood
What are you talking about? They can just write it off with DUDE CATHOLIC KIDDYDIDDLING LMAO (oy, maybe you goyim should let priests fuck women)
>>63348804
>I haven't seen this movie but it's total Oscar bait because of its subject matter
It's actually really good and isn't just "THESE PRIESTS ARE FUCKED UP AYY LMAO". It's more focused on the journalism side of things
>>63348187
>Le conspiracy with Hollywood
>le scheming jews wouldn't allow
>le children
But, hey, keep spamming those threads. Must be good to be a braindead, /pol/
>>63349045
>muh /pol/ boogeyman
>>63348123
>based mad max
>spotlight is just shitty oscar bait anyway
T - male feminist, black nationalist, and BBC enthusiast
>the mad max fanbase
>>63349169
There's no way you can convince me this isn't satire. My ulcer shall not allow.
>>63349045
>it's just a conspiracy, I swear
top fucking kek
>>63348187
>not saying it won't win because it puts catholics in a really badspotlight
>>63349034
That's what makes it Oscar bait, though. They deal with controversial subject matter, but they tell the story from an angle very far removed from the real ugliness of the issue. They can have a "serious" take on serious matters without having to show the audience anything icky, upsetting, or alienating.
Again, I'm not saying it's a bad movie. Just that it isn't really ambitious or daring or original in any way, as a piece of filmmaking.
>>63349230
>>63349255
Tru dat. Looks like the typical 'safe movie for discerning adults'. Those are always nice and everything, but have no edge or strong cinematic virtues.
>>63348067
2015 is so disappointing, Fury Road is actually considered to be amongst the best of the year.
Maybe it's time to close Hollywood down.
>>63349266
Why would exposing jewish pedophilia belong on Reddit. This doesn't even make sense
>>63349543
>Sicario
>Jurassic World
Are you kidding me, familia?
>>63349543
But MMFR is one of the best of the year...
>>63349799
and that demonstrates what kind of shitty year this is.
>>63349684
Both of those movies were terrible.
>>63349684
>tfw Sicario will get snubbed
>>63348108
Because there are actual christians among the /pol/acks who infest /tv/ and a movie about pedopriests triggers them.
>>63349677
That's only for the rest of 4chan. Telling people to go back to reddit on /tv/ is just thing you don't agree with because this board is already tumblr 2.0
>>63349356
One of the reasons I dislike those type of movies is because they never seem to have much thematic depth. You can say what you want about Birdman, but I'd take it over another Argo win any day of the week.
>>63348187
The only movie about Hollywood pedophilia bombed and isn't getting any attention from awards.
Even that sexual assault on campus documentary that was riddled with inaccuracies got more attention
>>63348067
Is Spotlight good? I haven't heard much about it.
I enjoyed Mad Max but I like a drama now and again if it is decent.
Do people actually believe a fucking Mad Max movie will be considered for best picture?
>>63350022
It better at least get a cinematography and sound nod
>>63349850
or is it because you're a pleb mate?
>>63350315
if there's 10 nominees then there's a slight chance it'll get nominated but it's pretty unlikely
>>63348108
>>63350249
I've heard comparisons with All Presidents Men, journalists doing journalism with a sober script and good actors. Haven't seen it, though
>>63350403
>not liking Furry Road means you're a pleb
reddit is leaking again
Trolling aside, at what point does a finely executed movie (Mad Max, for instance) trumps a movie that is perhaps not as well made but has a social intention behind it (exposing pedos protected by institutions)? Should movies be "good" or "important"?
>>63350433
Django Unchained got nominated. With 10 options, all sorts of shit seeps in.
>>63350554
That this is a real question in the world is a large signal of decay.
OF FUCKING COURSE ALWAYS GOOD. QUALITY, MERITOCRACY IS WHAT MUST MATTER, NOT GOOD INTENTIONS
>>63350640
Probably Django would get in with 5. You just hate it because >le funny quarantola memes
>>63350699
Would Mad Max get in with 5?
>>63350755
No. Remember it was released in May.
>>63349230
>listen and believe
>>63350403
The movie has nothing to offer but a few well done action sequences. It's like The Matrix or Terminators, but not as good because the story is less thematically engaging and the characters are more formulaic/cliched. Fury Road is a second tier action movie, and it's a bad sign people other than video game players think it's remarkable. It's also smelly pleb-bait, by the way, since you used the word pleb.
>>63350699
Django is also a completely superficial cartoon movie. The Academy hasn't had any credibility for a long time, and you're not getting anywhere trying to sell it as a "good movie." Whether NEETS spam Tarantino memes here all day won't change any of the "qualities" of Django: Cartoon Violence for Fedoras.
>>63348067
>>63350554
Good. Movies are entertainment, first and foremost. Even bad documentaries can be about the most eye opening things and not be good movies.
>>63351093
>buzzwords and shitposting
Pity that you refuse to support quality filmmaking
>>63350554
This is a good question. Movies with "important" subject matter should not get a pass in terms of technical aspects, characterization, thematic portrayal, audio-visual storytelling, etc., although they very much do get a pass at the Oscars. Most movies that vie for and win Best Pic are mediocre or merely "good" in technical aspects, characterization, and visual aspects, but they happen to be concerned with an "important" person, social issue, etc., so the Academy likes them.
But to be sure, fine execution shouldn't be praised that much if that's all a movie has to offer, such as in Mad Max. Ideally, a movie that does most everything well should be praised more than all others, and the examples you've brought up do not.
>>63351093
>the story is less thematically engaging and the characters are more formulaic/cliched.
Are you seriously saying that The Matrix or the Terminators weren't filled with cliches? Someone once describe The Matrix as a pop-culture sandwich.
>>63351278
Of course you video game players are too fragile to deal with any criticism of your newest pet movie. Oh well, at least as culture gets lower and lower, you get to enjoy more "significant" praise of superficial cartoons like Mad Max.
>>63348187
>Busting pedo priests movie
>Near Christmas
Yeah Christians don't want to be reminded of this.
>>63351485
Almost nothing the 4-6 most prominent characters in Fury Road did or said wavered from what you'd expect in a mainstream film meant to appeal to the widest audience possible and foster a story with a traditional emotional arc.
Nux and the redhead's relationship, and Furiosa's story were the worst offenders. You could predict some of their dialogue and most of their reactions, and the "relationship" between Nux and redhead was simply awful.
The characters and most everything else in the movie were poorly to mediocre done, as the movie was really just an excuse to pull together a number of well done action sequences.
The Terminator movies, and to a lesser extend, The Matrix, had more to offer than a number of well done action sequences. I understand you want to "experience a contemporary action film as good as the greats" but MMFR isn't it.
>>63351759
>The Terminator movies, and to a lesser extend, The Matrix, had more to offer than a number of well done action sequences.
Stop kidding yourself. The Terminator movies are guilty of the same kind of mediocre writing you're accusing Fury Road of. The first one had a poorly done love story in the middle of it. The second one had a kid shoehorned just to show that a machine could be human. The Matrix again had that terrible tacked on romance that was "meant to be" because of oracular handwaving. Not to mention the fact that the entire trilogy hinges on it being "cool" and even calls attention to a typical three act structure.
>>63352043
I disagree. Arnold offered charm to those movies that no actor in FR can come close to. The kid being along with T-800 and his mother offered a more complete set of characters, since his mother is nearly on the "opposite" end of the "innocent/disillusioned" sprectrum as the kid is, and overall all three of them offered a decent set of foils/contrasts/complements to each other. (Don't get me wrong though, the characterization isn't spectacular here, but it's good enough to genuinely COMPLEMENT the action/events).
More importantly, the Terminator films have a more engaging story and themes. We don't really know the background of FR, why it's apocalyptic. Whereas in the Terminators, we understand the background and what's at stake (total annihilation). Also, the general subject matter of anti-human cybernetics and global annihilation are compelling in themselves if the story is competently told, which it is here.
With both characters that are better done and a more compelling story, the viewer cares more about the actual result of action sequences (whether so and so lives or dies), whereas in FR, I don't really care what happens next, I can only appreciate the action from a technical perspective.
>>63352486
>Arnold offered charm to those movies
What? By portraying a deadpan emotionless robot?
>The kid being along with T-800 and his mother offered a more complete set of characters, since his mother is nearly on the "opposite" end of the "innocent/disillusioned" sprectrum as the kid is,
Wouldn't that be a good example of cliched characters?
>We don't really know the background of FR, why it's apocalyptic.
Why does that matter? A detailed backstory is not required for a plot to be compelling. The Mad Max series (which also show total annihilation) require no background beyond "the world is a lawless desert" because the series doesn't revolve around why or how those apocalyptic events happened (as opposed to the Terminator where it's always the thrust of the narrative) but focuses on how the characters must survive in a wasteland. You could say the Terminator series is more based on story than characters while the opposite is true for the Mad Max movies.
>there are people who actually think The Terminator is better than Mad Max Fury Road
lel
>>63352793
>detailed backstory is not required for a plot to be compelling
Sure, but I think FR was hurt by the bare bones story. Survival is also key to the Terminators' characters, but if it were nothing but the characters' struggle not to be killed by the T-1000, as FR's story is nearly all just surviving the action, it wouldn't be as good overall.
Stand out action sequences + well-done context >>> stand out action sequences + bare bones story.
>Wouldn't that be a good example of cliched characters?
T2's characters may be a bit cliched, but not so much that you aren't interested in what happens to them, and Sarah Conner's arc in coming around to work with the T-800, and her character and acting in general are all 1-2 leagues above any character/acting in FR. The characterization and relationships in T2 aren't really remarkable, but they're more substantial than FR's.
The makers on T2 just put more effort into other parts of the film, whereas FR is really just a vessel for great action sequences.
>>63353151
Shouldn't you be playing CoD?
I can't believe there are people putting fury road on the same level as terminator and the matrix.
What the fuck is going on? Further Road wasn't even the best action movie of this year.
>>63354257
Yeah those two movies are iconic for good reason. Fury Road won't be remembered or written about in years to come with anywhere close to the reverence those movies are.
why has something got to be a 'feminist film' ?
they are just making up shit to fit their agenda
if you watched this with your grandpa or something he wouldn't say "ahh yes that was a pretty feminist film" it's just an action movie
also it's not even that good either
>>63348067
The women's category is a joke so I'm sure Charlize will get nominated. Especially since Brie Larson is killing her career
>>63354257
>>63354470
Oh, how deeply mistaken the kids of reddit are. Mad Max Fury Road will be remembered with a lot more intensity and respect, being it the more cinematic qualified and iconic of these three films.
How can' t someone not recognize how spectacularly kinetic Fury Road is? The contrarianism is ridiculous.
>>63354940
epic delusions bro (Mad Max Fedora Road is one of the more reddit movies of the year, btw)
>>63354981
>kinetic
Using a vague adjective to say roughly "the action is continuous" doesn't make the movie any better or make up for its lack of anything worthwhile other than the action sequences.
