World of KJ
http://www.worldofkj.com/forum/

Mav, Have You Emailed Sasha Stone Lately?
http://www.worldofkj.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=16&t=23788		 Page 1 of 1
Author:  Anonymous [ Fri Sep 22, 2006 9:38 pm ]
Post subject:  Mav, Have You Emailed Sasha Stone Lately?
:tongue:


http://www.oscarwatch.com/news/2006/09/ ... thing.html

Why Nobody Knows Anything
While this website toys with the idea of doing a predictions section for the first time -- though we have writers who give us sight unseen predictions, we have never been ones to predict a whole a season long before films have been seen -- All the King's Men comes along and hits with a thud. This film was being tossed around from pundit to pundit, everywhere. The hype was so loud it was almost real. And then the other shoe drops. All the King's Men finds its way to Rotten Tomatoes with a 13% rotten score. That's bad, folks. Like Gigli bad. It isn't that critics are everything -- but they certainly aren't nothing. They matter even still. Even with new Oscar sites cropping up like poppies every day they matter. So we're wondering why we all continue to speculate about the fate of certain films long before they have been presented to the critics and the public. It doesn't really matter what people in screenings think, for the most part, unless you're dealing with a film whose power cannot be ignored (The Pianist, Schindler's List, Flags of Our Fathers...). We learned THAT lesson yet again last year when King Kong played so well in screenings and even with the critics - but the public and subsequently, the Academy turned up their noses.

Someone wrote me an email recently saying I lost all credibility when I (Sasha Stone, the main contributor and some time editor of this here website) fell ass over elbow for King Kong (a film I still believe was beyond brilliant and deserving of so much more -- but they were all sick of Peter Jackson and many of them wrote it off as being a remake, etc). I stand by that decision but it reminded me that it doesn't matter what one person in a screening thinks.


All of this to say that All the King's Men dive bombed out of competition this week, silencing all of the buzz in one fell swoop. And that, my friends, is that.
Author:  Maverikk [ Sat Sep 23, 2006 8:17 am ]
Post subject: 
:hahaha: Did you take a lucky guess?
Author:  Jonathan [ Sat Sep 23, 2006 12:52 pm ]
Post subject: 
Mav, what do you say we put our differences aside and declare The Departed this year's King Kong? :)
Author:  Maverikk [ Sat Sep 23, 2006 1:27 pm ]
Post subject: 
Positive Jon wrote:
Mav, what do you say we put our differences aside and declare The Departed this year's King Kong? :)


Cool deal, Jon. ;)

Dreamgirls is this year's King Kong, though. :tongue:
Author:  Jonathan [ Sat Sep 23, 2006 11:23 pm ]
Post subject: 
Maverikk wrote:
Positive Jon wrote:
Mav, what do you say we put our differences aside and declare The Departed this year's King Kong? :)


Cool deal, Jon. ;)

Dreamgirls is this year's King Kong, though. :tongue:


No, The Departed is a far better comparision:

-Most people weren't predicting it before it was screened
-People suddenly here a bazillion raves, start feverishly predicting it
-Movie comes out, everyone loves it. . .
-But not enough for decent B.O.
-Movie ends up not being to the academy's taste, snubbed for everything except what people were predicting it for pre-screenings

What you appear to think Dreamgirls to be is an All the King's Men or Alexander, a movie everyone predicts until its actually screened.

But even there you'll be wrong. :tongue:

But still, The Departed = Kng Kong. Deal?
Author:  Maverikk [ Sat Sep 23, 2006 11:44 pm ]
Post subject: 
Positive Jon wrote:
No, The Departed is a far better comparision:

-Most people weren't predicting it before it was screened
-People suddenly here a bazillion raves, start feverishly predicting it
-Movie comes out, everyone loves it. . .
-But not enough for decent B.O.
-Movie ends up not being to the academy's taste, snubbed for everything except what people were predicting it for pre-screenings

What you appear to think Dreamgirls to be is an All the King's Men or Alexander, a movie everyone predicts until its actually screened.

But even there you'll be wrong. :tongue:

But still, The Departed = Kng Kong. Deal?


The only comparison between The Departed and King Kong that is valid is that they are remakes, and that comparison is far more valid when comparing All the King's Men and King Kong.

I don't know anybody credible that was predicting All the King's Men after it was delayed a year. If they were, like Sasha, they need to study up and learn a bit more before making another prediction. (Speaking of which, somebody needs to tell Mary Hart of ET that it's not getting great reviews and Oscar buzz like she claimed it was yesterday...)

You're also forgetting very important details of KK. It was being hailed as an Oscar contender LONG before it was screened. The minute the 3 hour run time was found out, that + Peter Jackson = Oscar nominations across the board.

There is a big difference in a film like The Departed and King Kong, when we are talking about tastes. The Departed IS a film that's their taste. I don't know where the notion that it wasn't ever was invented. Kong was a popcorn flick (an overstuffed popcorn flick) about a giant monkey. It was being hailed as one of the big guns, though, and long before anybody saw it.

If you want a truely accurate comparison to Dreamgirls, however, it would be Jarhead or Memoirs of a Geisha. Films that people started referring to as a frontrunners and films that were screaming awards, even though they had never been screened. There actually isn't a KK comparison, if we want to get technical about it.
Author:  Jonathan [ Sun Sep 24, 2006 12:32 am ]
Post subject: 
Maverikk wrote:
The only comparison between The Departed and King Kong that is valid is that they are remakes, and that comparison is far more valid when comparing All the King's Men and King Kong.


All the King's Men has recieved some of the worst reviews of the year. KK recieved some of the best of the year last year. The onlt simularity is that they both won't have any major nominations. Bad comparision.

Maverikk wrote:
I don't know anybody credible that was predicting All the King's Men after it was delayed a year. If they were, like Sasha, they need to study up and learn a bit more before making another prediction.


Please stop trying to make yourself sound like a Oscar Afficianado. It makes you look like egotistical. :)

Maverikk wrote:
You're also forgetting very important details of KK. It was being hailed as an Oscar contender LONG before it was screened. The minute the 3 hour run time was found out, that + Peter Jackson = Oscar nominations across the board.


The 3 hour running time and Jackson just made some people go "What if. . .?" It wasn't until reviews calling it "one of the best movies of the year" came pouring in that everyone started predicting it. Just. Like. The Departed.

Maverikk wrote:
There is a big difference in a film like The Departed and King Kong, when we are talking about tastes. The Departed IS a film that's their taste. I don't know where the notion that it wasn't ever was invented. Kong was a popcorn flick (an overstuffed popcorn flick) about a giant monkey. It was being hailed as one of the big guns, though, and long before anybody saw it.


Um, it WASN'T being hailed as "one of the big guns." It was being "hailed" as an outside potential chance if there were the right circumstances (Raving Reviews + Uber-B.O.). When the former started pouring in, everyone naturally asumed that all the great buzz would translate into $300M+ box office (Except me and appearently you, Oscar God) because hey, it did for the hobbits and the high-pitched alien and the Storm Troopers, no?. And, well, it didn't. Now, the mobster genre has had better luck, yes. There was The Godfather, but that was a super-big phenomenon that set records at the time and was hailed to kingdom come. Hence, a Best Picture win. SOmehow, the sequel matched it, and another oscar. Now, Goodfellas hit it big, but that was a very serious-looking movie (And a decent sized hit, it was #26 for 1990, a rank that requires $80M+ today), while The Departed looks (And sounds like it from the reviews) a hyperactive gangster movie, kinda popcornish, what with the thumpa-thumpa music that plays over action movie trailers.

Maverikk wrote:
If you want a truely accurate comparison to Dreamgirls, however, it would be Jarhead or Memoirs of a Geisha. Films that people started referring to as a frontrunners and films that were screaming awards, even though they had never been screened. There actually isn't a KK comparison, if we want to get technical about it.


Jarhead got on mainly for its trailer and the fact that it looked like an easy B.O. hit (DP07 was predicting a $150M gross, if I recall correctly). Alas, the trailer was all flash, and the public quickly realized that (It had like, a 2.2 multiplier). Geisha was all about the pedigree behind it: A rising star, the director of a BP winner, and a prestigious source material. Niether movies had the kind of screenings that Dreamgirls have had, where they basically screens about 20% of the movie that has been completed. Buzz has been outstnding from those screenings, so the other 80% of it would have to suck bad for it to fall as low as those two. Does thaty mean it can't? Certainly not. Does it mean it has a better shot then you give it credit for and you're probably trying to double guess yourself? Maybe.

Bottom line for lazy readers: The Departed = King Kong 2006, NOT Dreamgirls.
Author:  Maverikk [ Sun Sep 24, 2006 12:46 am ]
Post subject: 
Ok... we are done with this conversation. I'm not putting in hours of my free time to chart stuff here so somebody can start arguing for the sake of arguing, while throwing in backhanded insults. Do it again, and you can explain to everybody exactly why there were no updates done to any charts.
Author:  Jonathan [ Sun Sep 24, 2006 12:48 am ]
Post subject: 
Maverikk wrote:
Ok... we are done with this conversation. I'm not putting in hours of my free time to chart stuff here so somebody can start arguing for the sake of arguing, while throwing in backhanded insults. Do it again, and you can explain to everybody exactly why there were no updates done to any charts.


Ohhhhhhh. Kayyyyyyy. When did I bring your charting into the conversation? :huh:
Author:  Maverikk [ Sun Sep 24, 2006 1:04 am ]
Post subject: 
Positive Jon wrote:
Ohhhhhhh. Kayyyyyyy. When did I bring your charting into the conversation? :huh:


You didn't, I did. The point being, you need to start showing a bit more respect to the guy who is going out of his way to provide all this info, but instead, your posts have been filled with animosity and with an insulting tone. Everybody can call something a lock, but you decided to start in on me about it. Telling me how to talk? I would definitely consider myself an Oscar aficionado. I can even spell it! I've been following this stuff long before you were even born, and I don't think anybody but you would claim that I'm not a devoted fan, or that it was egotistical to know that I actually know what I'm talking about. Why don't you go tell the people in the box office forum that they need to stop acting like they know what they're talking about because they are egotistical? It's like you only have an attitude toward me. Fact is, I've been following this stuff long before you were ever born, and I have devoted more hours than you can imagine studying this stuff, so if you think you and I are on equal ground, perhaps it's YOU who is egotistical.

I also don't care for the condescending "Um" you felt the need to throw in.

You've also got your facts wrong. That's why I said you were just trying to be argumentative. I don't mind debating anything, but when it's apparent that somebody is trailing after every word that I say, and I'm somehow their focus for being here, and not the films, that annoys me, and I also consider it to be disrespecting me and all the hard work that I put in to this forum that I don't have to. Think about that the next time you're looking for an argument. Perhaps you might want to pick somebody else who's not going out of their way to provide information after information. Do you see what I'm getting at?
Author:  Shack [ Sun Sep 24, 2006 5:03 pm ]
Post subject: 
Jesus, I'm getting some serious deja vu here. :fear:

Quote:
Ok... we are done with this conversation. I'm not putting in hours of my free time to chart stuff here so somebody can start arguing for the sake of arguing, while throwing in backhanded insults. Do it again, and you can explain to everybody exactly why there were no updates done to any charts

:lol:

:|
Author:  Maverikk [ Sun Sep 24, 2006 6:05 pm ]
Post subject: 
Shack wrote:
Jesus, I'm getting some serious deja vu here. :fear:

Quote:
Ok... we are done with this conversation. I'm not putting in hours of my free time to chart stuff here so somebody can start arguing for the sake of arguing, while throwing in backhanded insults. Do it again, and you can explain to everybody exactly why there were no updates done to any charts

:lol:

:|


Yeah, poor Jon probably has no idea why I had no patience and cut that off fast. I was serious, though. I've put up with enough of that crap for one lifetime. This forum exists to come here to talk about movies, not to argue with me. If anybody wants to debate something, I'm all for it, but if it's a case of having some axe to grind with me, like has been in the past, there's no way I'm going to be bothered providing any charts for that person. Who would? I think that's more than fair to expect after the hours of my time that I spend on this stuff to make it convenient for everybody here. Let's just hope he doesn't do what you did and start attacking me directly in the contenders thread, huh? :smile:
Author:  Dr. Lecter [ Mon Sep 25, 2006 10:00 am ]
Post subject: 
Maverikk wrote:
Positive Jon wrote:
Mav, what do you say we put our differences aside and declare The Departed this year's King Kong? :)


Cool deal, Jon. ;)

Dreamgirls is this year's King Kong, though. :tongue:


Hmm, in terms of awards I'd love that.

In quality, it certainly will be much inferior :P
Author:  Maverikk [ Mon Sep 25, 2006 12:49 pm ]
Post subject: 
Dr. Lecter wrote:
Hmm, in terms of awards I'd love that.

In quality, it certainly will be much inferior :P


You haven't been very high on Dreamgirls at all. Why is that? I think the so called experts are setting themselves up for a letdown by treating it as if it's the next great thing. Moulin Rouge! and Chicago gave us a mini revival of the genre, but everything since has fallen flat, and it's just a genre that isn't easy to pull off. The performances of Murphy and Hudson have a good chance, as does tech stuff, but the film needs lots of love. I actually think Jamie Foxx's persona during his awards sweep came off as unlikeable and people aren't interested in him anymore, and definitely don't want his lame ass up on stage wearing out that AAAAAOOOOOOO nonsense. If Austin Powers 3 is any indication, no awards are in Beyonce's future. (at least until Madonna gets an Oscar)
Author:  Dr. Lecter [ Mon Sep 25, 2006 1:51 pm ]
Post subject: 
Dreamgirls looks absolutely uninteresting, unspecial and fairly averagde/mediocre to me.

Coming from someone who liked Moulin Rouge and Chicago a lot and who anticipated Rent, The Producers and The Phantom of the Opera...
Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/