politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Ahead of tomorrow night’s Oscars Roger’s annual assessment & p

System

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Ahead of tomorrow night’s Oscars Roger’s annual assessment & predictions

2017 Oscars. They say when things aren’t going well the Oscars cheer themselves up by turning to fantasy. Enter the musical La La Land with a record 14 nominations. Cheesy and cheerful it might take your mind off Trump for a couple of hours but sadly the memory of it will disappear long before he does.

Read the full story here

Freggles

First.

And let me go instantly off topic: JCWNBPM

nunu

Denzel Washington will win best actor. Pressure from #oscarssowhite will ensure that.

(Not that he probably doesn't deserve it he is a good actor).

MTimT

Roger, thanks for the review. I do not bet, but find your posts on film informative as an occasional film watcher.

Not a betting tip, but a view from an occasional cinema-goer who watches the bulk of his films he bothers to watch on airplanes.

I will pay to go to the cinema to see La La Land
I will watch Hackshaw Ridge and Arrival on a plane once they get there
I have no interest in Manchester by the Sea, Moonlight, Fences (despite liking much of what Denzil has done over the years) or Hell or High Water
I am intrigued by Lobster, but doubt I'll see it until it is on cable TV as it does not seem airplane material
I might watch Jackie, but only if I'm on a 14 hour flight and I've run out of other films to watch and am too tired to work/read and can't sleep.
I did not like the Jungle Book, although that is probably because I saw the original as a kid
I've no idea was Lion or Hidden Figures are about

MonikerDiCanio

Thanks Roger. I'm amazed that you are still able to consume and analyze Hollywood's cinematic product. I lost my appetite for their garbage years ago.

foxinsoxuk

FPT

edmundintokyo said:

nunu said:

http://www.frommers.com/tips/miscellaneous/the-travel-press-is-reporting-the-trump-slump-a-devastating-drop-in-tourism-to-the-united-states#.WK-ZaHKDkZv.twitter

There's probably a similar story with conferences. Anecdotally, the Ethereum (fintech) developers' conference was previously in London then Shanghai, and the obvious next place would have been a US financial centre, like NY or Chicago. The organizers floated that it would be in "the Americas", I guess to see what the response would be like, and there was enough hostility to making people have to go through US immigration to get there that they ended up scheduling it in Cancún, which is handy for the East Coast US but still on the Free World side of the wall.

A major Spring research conference in my field (12 000 delegates plus industry reps) is down 25% in overall submissions and delegates this year. About 60% are non US usually, mainly Europe, Far East and Latin America. Assuming the number of US delegates is unchanged the overseas contingent must be down substantially.

I am not going this year, mostly due to cost, but also because the rival European meeting has much of the material later in the year.

Pulpstar

malcolmg said:

Pulpstar said:

7 out of 9 of Lucian Fletcher's tips have been cut in price from yesterday:

Danny Kennedy shortened to 1-5 from 3-10
Sandra Overend shorten to 4-6 from Evens
Jemma Dolan shortened to 4-9 from 15-8 !
McCandless shortened to 14-1 from 33-1
John Stewart shortened to 6-4 from 2-1
Alex Attwood shortened to 11-4 from 7-2
Nichola Mallon shortened to 8-11 from Evens

who are they , potential Labour leaders no doubt as I have never heard of any of them.

Morris_Dancer

Thanks for the tips, Mr. Roger.

I've backed Arrival, Portman and Kubo (half-stake on the first of these). I should warn PBers that in the past I have proven skilled at backing the Oscar tips that fail

BigRich

Beverley_C said:

» show previous quotes
I do not hope that the country will be economically ruined. I am convinced that the UK is harming itself, its economy and its people.

Personally I hope that Brexit is not a disaster.
In that case, you are a very lucky lady because your hopes are about to become true.

To be fair, non of us 'Know' what will happen, amongst other things, natural disasters, War, and so on could all intervene. But we do know that trade destroys poverty and creates wealth, and is the biggest overarching route to long term prosperity. Out side the EU and out side the Customs Union, we are likely to get more of it, as there will be less obstacles to us trading with the 93% of the would's population outside the EU who account for 84% of global GDP.

Morris_Dancer

Mr. Nunu, I'd forgotten about that. Must help Washington's chances.

Pulpstar

malcolmg said:

Pulpstar said:

7 out of 9 of Lucian Fletcher's tips have been cut in price from yesterday:

Danny Kennedy shortened to 1-5 from 3-10
Sandra Overend shorten to 4-6 from Evens
Jemma Dolan shortened to 4-9 from 15-8 !
McCandless shortened to 14-1 from 33-1
John Stewart shortened to 6-4 from 2-1
Alex Attwood shortened to 11-4 from 7-2
Nichola Mallon shortened to 8-11 from Evens

who are they , potential Labour leaders no doubt as I have never heard of any of them.

FPT: Northern Ireland Assembly, Lucian Fletcher's tips.

Have backed the Portman at 5-1 and Michelle Williams (Who wasn't tipped, oops) at 20-1 for the actresses.

MTimT

I posted here couple of days ago about a conference/competition I am involved with that is thinking of relocating to London from the US because of concerns about how perceptions of visa difficulties might adversely impact entry and participation.

foxinsoxuk said:

FPT

edmundintokyo said:

nunu said:

http://www.frommers.com/tips/miscellaneous/the-travel-press-is-reporting-the-trump-slump-a-devastating-drop-in-tourism-to-the-united-states#.WK-ZaHKDkZv.twitter

There's probably a similar story with conferences. Anecdotally, the Ethereum (fintech) developers' conference was previously in London then Shanghai, and the obvious next place would have been a US financial centre, like NY or Chicago. The organizers floated that it would be in "the Americas", I guess to see what the response would be like, and there was enough hostility to making people have to go through US immigration to get there that they ended up scheduling it in Cancún, which is handy for the East Coast US but still on the Free World side of the wall.

A major Spring research conference in my field (12 000 delegates plus industry reps) is down 25% in overall submissions and delegates this year. About 60% are non US usually, mainly Europe, Far East and Latin America. Assuming the number of US delegates is unchanged the overseas contingent must be down substantially.

I am not going this year, mostly due to cost, but also because the rival European meeting has much of the material later in the year.

TheWhiteRabbit

Some of these are desperately short but I have wagered a couple of quid here and there

My honest response to La La Land walking out was "wow, that was an interesting film" not "gripping" or "fantastic", but "interesting".

Sandpit

Oscars not really my cup of tea, but good luck to those betting and well done @Roger for taking the time to post this year's tips - hopefully they'll be as profitable as they've been in years gone by!

Richard_Tyndall

I was very sorry to see Amy Adams didn't get a nod for Arrival. She put in a stunning performance which carried what was for me the best film of the year.

CarlottaVance

Informative review as ever Roger. Agree on Jackie - though I wonder if the Academy might feel compelled to over-indulge Hidden Figures (which is good, but not quite top drawer). After I saw Hack Saw Ridge I read up a bit on the subject - unusually for Hollywood, if anything the real life character was more heroic than portrayed.

Morris_Dancer

Is the Oscars around 2-3am UK time?

ThomasNashe

Though it's an intelligent film, I didn't enjoy Jackie at all: too cold and one-paced. However, the score by Mica Levi is awesome.

foxinsoxuk

CarlottaVance said:

Informative review as ever Roger. Agree on Jackie - though I wonder if the Academy might feel compelled to over-indulge Hidden Figures (which is good, but not quite top drawer). After I saw Hack Saw Ridge I read up a bit on the subject - unusually for Hollywood, if anything the real life character was more heroic than portrayed.

Mel Gibson may not have the right CV for Hollywood, and I haven't seen the film.

I understand it is about a heroic conscientious objector, serving as an army medic. Interesting theme as rarely do COs get depicted positively in cinema.

MarqueeMark

Very hard to argue with any of those assessments, Roger. A far from vintage year summed up by the hilarity of the hugely underwhelming La La Land being up there with Ben Hur in the number of nominations (I'm reminded of the poster for Monty Python and the Holy Grail "makes Ben Hur look like an epic"). One of those films that within 5 years, people will be asking "what WERE they thinking?" I reckon that Hacksaw Ridge will be viewed as much the better film by then.

Animation - I think that Zootopia will get the nod in the Trump era, but Kubo and the Two Strings was quite excellent, if too dark for youngsters (Grandpa has taken one of our hero's eyes, and is coming for the other!)

Visual Effects - agree that Jungle Book was remarkable, but an honourable mention to Deepwater Horizon which went for old score explosions and making actors get battered, rather than filled with CGI. I've been on drillships like the DH and I thought it was brilliantly realised.

Original Screenplay - a nod to Hell or High Water for some very sharp writing.

Sound Editing and Sound Mixing - if La La Land isn't going to sweep the board, then I wouldn't be surprised to see Hacksaw Ridge take both.

malcolmg

MonikerDiCanio said:

Thanks Roger. I'm amazed that you are still able to consume and analyze Hollywood's cinematic product. I lost my appetite for their garbage years ago.

For once we agree Monica , a bigger bunch of overpaid ugly whinging nomarks you could not find. Churn out merde by the metric tonne.

FrancisUrquhart

FPT dr fox made some incorrect claims about online gambling re EU. There is already no free trade in gambling across EU (I have always wondered how it is legal that countries could impose these restrictions). All major countries in europe already ring fence and operators have to get a country specific license (but it is not based on where the operator is hq'ed).

Those that don't license, online gambling operates as a grey market served by operators located all around the world.

Brexit makes no difference one way or another to this.

malcolmg

Pulpstar said:

malcolmg said:

Pulpstar said:

7 out of 9 of Lucian Fletcher's tips have been cut in price from yesterday:

Danny Kennedy shortened to 1-5 from 3-10
Sandra Overend shorten to 4-6 from Evens
Jemma Dolan shortened to 4-9 from 15-8 !
McCandless shortened to 14-1 from 33-1
John Stewart shortened to 6-4 from 2-1
Alex Attwood shortened to 11-4 from 7-2
Nichola Mallon shortened to 8-11 from Evens

who are they , potential Labour leaders no doubt as I have never heard of any of them.

FPT: Northern Ireland Assembly, Lucian Fletcher's tips.

Have backed the Portman at 5-1 and Michelle Williams (Who wasn't tipped, oops) at 20-1 for the actresses.

Cheers Pulpster, I know zero about NI politics, given what I have seen in my life in West of Scotland , they are best left to it.

kle4

Best supporting actor nominee Mahershala Ali's given first name was Mahershalalhashbaz. Biblical name apparently, and no doubt quite the mouthful

Richard_Tyndall said:

I was very sorry to see Amy Adams didn't get a nod for Arrival. She put in a stunning performance which carried what was for me the best film of the year.

I enjoyed it but don't think it was quite as clever as it though it was.

But she deserved a nod.

As a non expect I'd always thought two fairly firm rules of the Oscars is they love past winners, so if someone was a best supporting actor probably a good bet for best actor if they are up for it, and that they love, love, love movies about movies or acting generally, so if it is about the magic of or dark underbelly of show-business, critics love it.

Manchester by the sea seemed just the kind of grim depressing take critics also love, if the grey trailers are any indication.

Alistair

Ftpt

Pulpstar said:

nunu said:

http://www.frommers.com/tips/miscellaneous/the-travel-press-is-reporting-the-trump-slump-a-devastating-drop-in-tourism-to-the-united-states#.WK-ZaHKDkZv.twitter

I'd have thought the main thing putting off British tourists was the very strong dollar/weak pound at the moment.

I work in the travel industry, it's a global reduction in flights booked to the US that coincides exactly with Trump winning. Not just the UK.

PlatoSaid

ITV News
Five teenagers appeared in court on terror charges, including plotting to join so-called Islamic State in Syria https://t.co/ImF9xugId6 https://t.co/WaNQ3DZD24

kle4

MTimT said:

Roger, thanks for the review. I do not bet, but find your posts on film informative as an occasional film watcher.

Not a betting tip, but a view from an occasional cinema-goer who watches the bulk of his films he bothers to watch on airplanes.

I will pay to go to the cinema to see La La Land
I will watch Hackshaw Ridge and Arrival on a plane once they get there
I have no interest in Manchester by the Sea, Moonlight, Fences (despite liking much of what Denzil has done over the years) or Hell or High Water
I am intrigued by Lobster, but doubt I'll see it until it is on cable TV as it does not seem airplane material
I might watch Jackie, but only if I'm on a 14 hour flight and I've run out of other films to watch and am too tired to work/read and can't sleep.
I did not like the Jungle Book, although that is probably because I saw the original as a kid
I've no idea was Lion or Hidden Figures are about

Apart from the airplanes bit, this is basically where I am. Most biopics are boring as hell, so only if word of mouth tells me it is really good will I see them. 'Important subject' movies are usually technically great, but I have to be in the right mood.

Blue_rog

Apologies, been out with the dog

FPT. Interesting from the Guardian (not often I quote from that news organ )


When the Guardian asked to participate, pointing to its possession of a “hard pass” that grants daily entry to the White House, an official declined.

“No, unfortunately a hard pass does not necessarily guarantee entry into the gaggle,” Catherine Hicks, a junior White House press aide, emailed in response.

MTimT

foxinsoxuk said:

CarlottaVance said:

Informative review as ever Roger. Agree on Jackie - though I wonder if the Academy might feel compelled to over-indulge Hidden Figures (which is good, but not quite top drawer). After I saw Hack Saw Ridge I read up a bit on the subject - unusually for Hollywood, if anything the real life character was more heroic than portrayed.

Mel Gibson may not have the right CV for Hollywood, and I haven't seen the film.

I understand it is about a heroic conscientious objector, serving as an army medic. Interesting theme as rarely do COs get depicted positively in cinema.

Based on the true story of this guy:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desmond_Doss

PS Read his Citation in getting the Medal of Honor. It is amazing

NickPalmer

foxinsoxuk said:

CarlottaVance said:

Informative review as ever Roger. Agree on Jackie - though I wonder if the Academy might feel compelled to over-indulge Hidden Figures (which is good, but not quite top drawer). After I saw Hack Saw Ridge I read up a bit on the subject - unusually for Hollywood, if anything the real life character was more heroic than portrayed.

Mel Gibson may not have the right CV for Hollywood, and I haven't seen the film.

I understand it is about a heroic conscientious objector, serving as an army medic. Interesting theme as rarely do COs get depicted positively in cinema.

Yes - I revised my opinion of Jojhn Buchan (usually a good read in his day but apparently an arch-Conservative with little nuance) when I read Mt Standfast, a sensitive and respectful depiction of a CO in World War 1, who is ultimately seen as the hero.

FrancisUrquhart

Blue_rog said:

Apologies, been out with the dog

FPT. Interesting from the Guardian (not often I quote from that news organ )


When the Guardian asked to participate, pointing to its possession of a “hard pass” that grants daily entry to the White House, an official declined.

“No, unfortunately a hard pass does not necessarily guarantee entry into the gaggle,” Catherine Hicks, a junior White House press aide, emailed in response.

When a ban is not a ban...where have we heard that one before?

Pulpstar

Alistair said:

Ftpt

Pulpstar said:

nunu said:

http://www.frommers.com/tips/miscellaneous/the-travel-press-is-reporting-the-trump-slump-a-devastating-drop-in-tourism-to-the-united-states#.WK-ZaHKDkZv.twitter

I'd have thought the main thing putting off British tourists was the very strong dollar/weak pound at the moment.

I work in the travel industry, it's a global reduction in flights booked to the US that coincides exactly with Trump winning. Not just the UK.

Wales this year for me, but Maine or Montana appeals long term for a holiday. Have done Florida/California already..

PlatoSaid

Antonin Romero
Great to hear that @Boeing, a global company in a global industry, plans to build new civil #aerospace manufacturing facility at #Sheffield https://t.co/5lbCczSWAk

MTimT

Pulpstar said:

Alistair said:

Ftpt

Pulpstar said:

nunu said:

http://www.frommers.com/tips/miscellaneous/the-travel-press-is-reporting-the-trump-slump-a-devastating-drop-in-tourism-to-the-united-states#.WK-ZaHKDkZv.twitter

I'd have thought the main thing putting off British tourists was the very strong dollar/weak pound at the moment.

I work in the travel industry, it's a global reduction in flights booked to the US that coincides exactly with Trump winning. Not just the UK.

Wales this year for me, but Maine or Montana appeals long term for a holiday. Have done Florida/California already..

Arcadia National Park if you're into Maine.

https://www.national-park.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Welcome-to-Acadia-National-Park.jpeg

Casino_Royale

Thanks Roger. I've gone for Portman and Huppert for Best Actress.

kle4

MTimT said:

foxinsoxuk said:

CarlottaVance said:

Informative review as ever Roger. Agree on Jackie - though I wonder if the Academy might feel compelled to over-indulge Hidden Figures (which is good, but not quite top drawer). After I saw Hack Saw Ridge I read up a bit on the subject - unusually for Hollywood, if anything the real life character was more heroic than portrayed.

Mel Gibson may not have the right CV for Hollywood, and I haven't seen the film.

I understand it is about a heroic conscientious objector, serving as an army medic. Interesting theme as rarely do COs get depicted positively in cinema.

Based on the true story of this guy:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desmond_Doss

PS Read his Citation in getting the Medal of Honor. It is amazing

Doss refused to seek cover and remained in the fire-swept area with the many stricken, carrying all 75 casualties one-by-one to the edge of the escarpment and there lowering them on a rope-supported litter down the face of a cliff to friendly hands

And that's just the start. Seems physically impossible what people are capable sometimes.

OldKingCole

TheWhiteRabbit said:

Some of these are desperately short but I have wagered a couple of quid here and there

My honest response to La La Land walking out was "wow, that was an interesting film" not "gripping" or "fantastic", but "interesting".

Good word; my wife and I didn’t think it quite hit the ‘like’ button but the basic story, and the twist was good.

foxinsoxuk

Alistair said:

Ftpt

Pulpstar said:

nunu said:

http://www.frommers.com/tips/miscellaneous/the-travel-press-is-reporting-the-trump-slump-a-devastating-drop-in-tourism-to-the-united-states#.WK-ZaHKDkZv.twitter

I'd have thought the main thing putting off British tourists was the very strong dollar/weak pound at the moment.

I work in the travel industry, it's a global reduction in flights booked to the US that coincides exactly with Trump winning. Not just the UK.

Interesting that it coincides with the election rather than with the recent visa ban chaos. Did that drop things further?

Ironically, I suppose mostly tourists go to the blue states, so the "flyover" states are unaffected, with Florida and Arizona being the exceptions.

I am planning Scandanavia this year.

SimonStClare

Cheers Roger. – As usual, I’ve seen remarkably few films at the cinema this past year, Arrivals (crap) La La Land (cheerful) Hidden Figures (great) Passengers (enjoyable) Doctor Strange (meh). As for the rest of the films mentioned, they all sound dull or depressing and not worth paying out for the privilege.

ThreeQuidder

Blue_rog said:

Apologies, been out with the dog

FPT. Interesting from the Guardian (not often I quote from that news organ )


When the Guardian asked to participate, pointing to its possession of a “hard pass” that grants daily entry to the White House, an official declined.

“No, unfortunately a hard pass does not necessarily guarantee entry into the gaggle,” Catherine Hicks, a junior White House press aide, emailed in response.

The gaggle, by definition, is a selected smaller group than a full briefing, is it not?

FrancisUrquhart

Saw "The Founder" at the big moving picture place this week, which is the story behind McDonald's, and was really rather good.

foxinsoxuk

NickPalmer said:

foxinsoxuk said:

CarlottaVance said:

Informative review as ever Roger. Agree on Jackie - though I wonder if the Academy might feel compelled to over-indulge Hidden Figures (which is good, but not quite top drawer). After I saw Hack Saw Ridge I read up a bit on the subject - unusually for Hollywood, if anything the real life character was more heroic than portrayed.

Mel Gibson may not have the right CV for Hollywood, and I haven't seen the film.

I understand it is about a heroic conscientious objector, serving as an army medic. Interesting theme as rarely do COs get depicted positively in cinema.

Yes - I revised my opinion of Jojhn Buchan (usually a good read in his day but apparently an arch-Conservative with little nuance) when I read Mt Standfast, a sensitive and respectful depiction of a CO in World War 1, who is ultimately seen as the hero.

Though Private Godfrey was a CO in Dads Army as I recall, so served Walmington on Sea as a medic.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_Godfrey

MM for service as a stretcher bearer on the Somme, as a CO.

kle4

The very hot favourite (it made the most money) ‘Zootopia’ was good but there has to be a limit to the number of times Disney can trot out the same old animals.

Nope. After losing their way after the 90s Disney have remastered their formula and their last lot of animated movies have been top drawer. I cannot judge if the other ones were better, I haven't seem them yet, but in animation and acting Zooptopia would be a worthy winner, and there is a big difference between a poorly written formulaic kids movie and a very well written one, and it was the latter.

Pulpstar

kle4 said:

The very hot favourite (it made the most money) ‘Zootopia’ was good but there has to be a limit to the number of times Disney can trot out the same old animals.

Nope. After losing their way after the 90s Disney have remastered their formula and their last lot of animated movies have been top drawer. I cannot judge if the other ones were better, I haven't seem them yet, but in animation and acting Zooptopia would be a worthy winner, and there is a big difference between a poorly written formulaic kids movie and a very well written one, and it was the latter.

I loved Zootopia

rkrkrk

ThreeQuidder said:

Blue_rog said:

Apologies, been out with the dog

FPT. Interesting from the Guardian (not often I quote from that news organ )


When the Guardian asked to participate, pointing to its possession of a “hard pass” that grants daily entry to the White House, an official declined.

“No, unfortunately a hard pass does not necessarily guarantee entry into the gaggle,” Catherine Hicks, a junior White House press aide, emailed in response.

The gaggle, by definition, is a selected smaller group than a full briefing, is it not?

Why do you think the wall Street journal said this?

"The Wall Street Journal strongly objects to the White House's decision to bar certain media outlets from today's gaggle," the statement read. "Had we known at the time, we would not have participated and we will not participate in such closed briefings in the future."

Sandpit

kle4 said:

The very hot favourite (it made the most money) ‘Zootopia’ was good but there has to be a limit to the number of times Disney can trot out the same old animals.

Nope. After losing their way after the 90s Disney have remastered their formula and their last lot of animated movies have been top drawer. I cannot judge if the other ones were better, I haven't seem them yet, but in animation and acting Zooptopia would be a worthy winner, and there is a big difference between a poorly written formulaic kids movie and a very well written one, and it was the latter.

Walt Disney won more Oscars than anyone else before or since. 22 I think.

rkrkrk

malcolmg said:

MonikerDiCanio said:

Thanks Roger. I'm amazed that you are still able to consume and analyze Hollywood's cinematic product. I lost my appetite for their garbage years ago.

For once we agree Monica , a bigger bunch of overpaid ugly whinging nomarks you could not find. Churn out merde by the metric tonne.

There are also far too many award shows...
Baftas, Oscars, Emmie's, golden globes, Brit awards, mercury awards, blah blah.
It amazes me a little that people care... And I sometimes wonder if they really do or if it's just the fact that it was on the news....

Can there be any actor without an award at this point?

JosiasJessop

rkrkrk said:

ThreeQuidder said:

Blue_rog said:

Apologies, been out with the dog

FPT. Interesting from the Guardian (not often I quote from that news organ )


When the Guardian asked to participate, pointing to its possession of a “hard pass” that grants daily entry to the White House, an official declined.

“No, unfortunately a hard pass does not necessarily guarantee entry into the gaggle,” Catherine Hicks, a junior White House press aide, emailed in response.

The gaggle, by definition, is a selected smaller group than a full briefing, is it not?

Why do you think the wall Street journal said this?

"The Wall Street Journal strongly objects to the White House's decision to bar certain media outlets from today's gaggle," the statement read. "Had we known at the time, we would not have participated and we will not participate in such closed briefings in the future."

There are several aspects to this. It was due to be a full press briefing on camera, but was changed into a gaggle for select journalists. This is worsened by the war of words coming out from the White House against media organisations that doesn't report things the way he wants.

Source: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-39088770

MTimT

kle4 said:

MTimT said:

foxinsoxuk said:

CarlottaVance said:

Informative review as ever Roger. Agree on Jackie - though I wonder if the Academy might feel compelled to over-indulge Hidden Figures (which is good, but not quite top drawer). After I saw Hack Saw Ridge I read up a bit on the subject - unusually for Hollywood, if anything the real life character was more heroic than portrayed.

Mel Gibson may not have the right CV for Hollywood, and I haven't seen the film.

I understand it is about a heroic conscientious objector, serving as an army medic. Interesting theme as rarely do COs get depicted positively in cinema.

Based on the true story of this guy:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desmond_Doss

PS Read his Citation in getting the Medal of Honor. It is amazing

Doss refused to seek cover and remained in the fire-swept area with the many stricken, carrying all 75 casualties one-by-one to the edge of the escarpment and there lowering them on a rope-supported litter down the face of a cliff to friendly hands

And that's just the start. Seems physically impossible what people are capable sometimes.

Recent research shows our brain fools us into believing we are exhausted well before we have actually reached our physical limits. You can see the evolutionary benefit of having something in the tank for true emergencies and crises. However, some, like Private Doss, seem able to tap into those reserves at will. Shackleton (I do a case study on him in Leadership) was another.

rkrkrk

JosiasJessop said:

rkrkrk said:

ThreeQuidder said:

Blue_rog said:

Apologies, been out with the dog

FPT. Interesting from the Guardian (not often I quote from that news organ )


When the Guardian asked to participate, pointing to its possession of a “hard pass” that grants daily entry to the White House, an official declined.

“No, unfortunately a hard pass does not necessarily guarantee entry into the gaggle,” Catherine Hicks, a junior White House press aide, emailed in response.

The gaggle, by definition, is a selected smaller group than a full briefing, is it not?

Why do you think the wall Street journal said this?

"The Wall Street Journal strongly objects to the White House's decision to bar certain media outlets from today's gaggle," the statement read. "Had we known at the time, we would not have participated and we will not participate in such closed briefings in the future."

There are several aspects to this. It was due to be a full press briefing on camera, but was changed into a gaggle for select journalists. This is worsened by the war of words coming out from the White House against media organisations that doesn't report things the way he wants.

Source: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-39088770

Indeed. I think probably not worth making too much fuss on this IMO...
If the White House does want to start restricting reporters... I think they will e pretty blatant about it. There will be clearer cut examples in future I think...

TwistedFireStopper

I'm more interested in how Trump reacts next day to the hammering he's going to get from Hollywood's finest. He won't be able to stop himself from getting involved.

Sandpit

MTimT said:

kle4 said:

MTimT said:

foxinsoxuk said:

CarlottaVance said:

Informative review as ever Roger. Agree on Jackie - though I wonder if the Academy might feel compelled to over-indulge Hidden Figures (which is good, but not quite top drawer). After I saw Hack Saw Ridge I read up a bit on the subject - unusually for Hollywood, if anything the real life character was more heroic than portrayed.

Mel Gibson may not have the right CV for Hollywood, and I haven't seen the film.

I understand it is about a heroic conscientious objector, serving as an army medic. Interesting theme as rarely do COs get depicted positively in cinema.

Based on the true story of this guy:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desmond_Doss

PS Read his Citation in getting the Medal of Honor. It is amazing

Doss refused to seek cover and remained in the fire-swept area with the many stricken, carrying all 75 casualties one-by-one to the edge of the escarpment and there lowering them on a rope-supported litter down the face of a cliff to friendly hands

And that's just the start. Seems physically impossible what people are capable sometimes.

Recent research shows our brain fools us into believing we are exhausted well before we have actually reached our physical limits. You can see the evolutionary benefit of having something in the tank for true emergencies and crises. However, some, like Private Doss, seem able to tap into those reserves at will. Shackleton (I do a case study on him in Leadership) was another.

Yes, there are plenty of documented exampled of supposedly superhuman levels of strength , endurance and pain, where someone's life depended on getting out of an unexpected situation. God seems to have given us something in reserve for those times that we really, really need it.

valleyboy

Thanks for the analysis Roger. Seen most of those films, the only one that had the wow factor, for me, was Hacksaw Ridge, but I agree that the average La La Land will win best film. Jackie to me decent but too much like a documentary. Portman will probably win best actress, but my money is on Denzil Washington for best actor.

nunu

She was inspired by May's conference speech.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4258066/amp/Copeland-MP-Trudy-Harrison-joined-Tories-year.html

Theuniondivvie

TwistedFireStopper said:

I'm more interested in how Trump reacts next day to the hammering he's going to get from Hollywood's finest. He won't be able to stop himself from getting involved.

*rubs crystal ball*
No, no, these semi-coherent & barely literate tweets are in fact a cunningly executed distraction from < insert whichever illiberal fuck up they're trying to get past the proles today >

justin124

For those who still fancy the idea of an election to be held on May 4th ,the clock is now ticking. For that to happen Parliament would have to be dissolved on March 27th – and any vote to authorise that would have to have taken place in the previous week. To block such a process under the 2/3 rule all Labour would need to do is abstain. I really cannot see Corbyn co-operating under present circumstances with such a plan by May should she have any such intention.Yesterday he refused 14 times to answer Michael Crick’s question as to whether he still favoured a general election.

CarlottaVance

TwistedFireStopper said:

I'm more interested in how Trump reacts next day to the hammering he's going to get from Hollywood's finest. He won't be able to stop himself from getting involved.

Yes, he doesn't do 'rising above it' does he?

MTimT

Theuniondivvie said:

TwistedFireStopper said:

I'm more interested in how Trump reacts next day to the hammering he's going to get from Hollywood's finest. He won't be able to stop himself from getting involved.

*rubs crystal ball*
No, no, these semi-coherent & barely literate tweets are in fact a cunningly executed distraction from < insert whichever illiberal fuck up they're trying to get past the proles today >

It's amazing how well this strategy is working, despite it having been openly discussed ad nauseum. The media and Hollywood are so self-absorbed that they cannot help but react to Trump's latest provocation at the expense of reporting on his governing, even when they know it is a smokescreen.

PS I was throughout an ABT, but my contempt for the Press far exceeds my dislike of Trump the man and most of his policies.

brokenwheel

justin124 said:

I really cannot see Corbyn co-operating under present circumstances with such a plan by May should she have any such intention.Yesterday he refused 14 times to answer Michael Crick’s question as to whether he still favoured a general election.

Why? It is the Left's best chance to rid itself of the Tories in the PLP.

Scrapheap_as_was

This thread is a PB institution - why does it seem to come around quicker each year though....

Richard_Tyndall

foxinsoxuk said:

NickPalmer said:

foxinsoxuk said:

CarlottaVance said:

Informative review as ever Roger. Agree on Jackie - though I wonder if the Academy might feel compelled to over-indulge Hidden Figures (which is good, but not quite top drawer). After I saw Hack Saw Ridge I read up a bit on the subject - unusually for Hollywood, if anything the real life character was more heroic than portrayed.

Mel Gibson may not have the right CV for Hollywood, and I haven't seen the film.

I understand it is about a heroic conscientious objector, serving as an army medic. Interesting theme as rarely do COs get depicted positively in cinema.

Yes - I revised my opinion of Jojhn Buchan (usually a good read in his day but apparently an arch-Conservative with little nuance) when I read Mt Standfast, a sensitive and respectful depiction of a CO in World War 1, who is ultimately seen as the hero.

Though Private Godfrey was a CO in Dads Army as I recall, so served Walmington on Sea as a medic.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_Godfrey

MM for service as a stretcher bearer on the Somme, as a CO.

Though I don't believe they were COs, two of the three men to win bars for the VC were medics rescuing men under fire.

TheWhiteRabbit

justin124 said:

For those who still fancy the idea of an election to be held on May 4th ,the clock is now ticking. For that to happen Parliament would have to be dissolved on March 27th – and any vote to authorise that would have to have taken place in the previous week. To block such a process under the 2/3 rule all Labour would need to do is abstain. I really cannot see Corbyn co-operating under present circumstances with such a plan by May should she have any such intention.Yesterday he refused 14 times to answer Michael Crick’s question as to whether he still favoured a general election.

I very much doubt May will call an election, which is playing the ace up your sleeve when faced with threes and fours and you're in one hearts.

PlatoSaid

TwistedFireStopper said:

I'm more interested in how Trump reacts next day to the hammering he's going to get from Hollywood's finest. He won't be able to stop himself from getting involved.

His base loathes luvvies - he'll tweet something to annoy liberals and get his side clapping. And then the liberal press will huff puff about it - again.

justin124

brokenwheel said:

justin124 said:

I really cannot see Corbyn co-operating under present circumstances with such a plan by May should she have any such intention.Yesterday he refused 14 times to answer Michael Crick’s question as to whether he still favoured a general election.

Why? It is the Left's best chance to rid itself of the Tories in the PLP.

The PLP would probably ignore him anyway!

MonikerDiCanio

TwistedFireStopper said:

I'm more interested in how Trump reacts next day to the hammering he's going to get from Hollywood's finest. He won't be able to stop himself from getting involved.

The American public views the Tinseltown shitbirds with silent stoic hatred. They'll relish the President telling the whining winners exactly where they can stick their statuettes.

PlatoSaid

This remains my favourite fake news reports - it's hilarious, Swaying camera... rock solid sea legs, no wind or spray...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wn5pIkEHPf0

AlastairMeeks

David Herdson gets a name check from John Rentoul in his column tomorrow:

https://twitter.com/johnrentoul/status/835496588168605696

DecrepitJohnL

CarlottaVance said:

Informative review as ever Roger. Agree on Jackie - though I wonder if the Academy might feel compelled to over-indulge Hidden Figures (which is good, but not quite top drawer). After I saw Hack Saw Ridge I read up a bit on the subject - unusually for Hollywood, if anything the real life character was more heroic than portrayed.

Hidden Figures has taken most at the box office, if I read this table correctly, so someone must like it (that is not a tip -- cinema managers don't get a vote).
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/oscar/chart/?view=&yr=2016&p=.htm

The_Apocalypse

One common thread between Trump and Corbyn supporters is that both groups hate the media. Personally, I'd trust journalists more than I'd trust any politician.

HurstLlama

MTimT said:

kle4 said:

MTimT said:

foxinsoxuk said:

CarlottaVance said:

Informative review as ever Roger. Agree on Jackie - though I wonder if the Academy might feel compelled to over-indulge Hidden Figures (which is good, but not quite top drawer). After I saw Hack Saw Ridge I read up a bit on the subject - unusually for Hollywood, if anything the real life character was more heroic than portrayed.

Mel Gibson may not have the right CV for Hollywood, and I haven't seen the film.

I understand it is about a heroic conscientious objector, serving as an army medic. Interesting theme as rarely do COs get depicted positively in cinema.

Based on the true story of this guy:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desmond_Doss

PS Read his Citation in getting the Medal of Honor. It is amazing

Doss refused to seek cover and remained in the fire-swept area with the many stricken, carrying all 75 casualties one-by-one to the edge of the escarpment and there lowering them on a rope-supported litter down the face of a cliff to friendly hands

And that's just the start. Seems physically impossible what people are capable sometimes.

Recent research shows our brain fools us into believing we are exhausted well before we have actually reached our physical limits. You can see the evolutionary benefit of having something in the tank for true emergencies and crises. However, some, like Private Doss, seem able to tap into those reserves at will. Shackleton (I do a case study on him in Leadership) was another.

Mr. T., I have known for many years that there is always "more gas in the tank" but, just as people like Private Doss maybe are able to tap into those reserves at will, some people never can and most don't know they are there to be tapped into. A big chunk of military training is in effect to show the recruits that they can do more than they think and perhaps the purpose of special/elite forces selection is to find the people that can tap into those hidden reserves at will.

Sandpit

justin124 said:

brokenwheel said:

justin124 said:

I really cannot see Corbyn co-operating under present circumstances with such a plan by May should she have any such intention.Yesterday he refused 14 times to answer Michael Crick’s question as to whether he still favoured a general election.

Why? It is the Left's best chance to rid itself of the Tories in the PLP.

The PLP would probably ignore him anyway!

And it needs only 19 Lab MPs to vote for an election for the motion to pass - assuming everyone else also votes in favour.

Roger

MarqueeMark said:

Very hard to argue with any of those assessments, Roger. A far from vintage year summed up by the hilarity of the hugely underwhelming La La Land being up there with Ben Hur in the number of nominations (I'm reminded of the poster for Monty Python and the Holy Grail "makes Ben Hur look like an epic"). One of those films that within 5 years, people will be asking "what WERE they thinking?" I reckon that Hacksaw Ridge will be viewed as much the better film by then.

Animation - I think that Zootopia will get the nod in the Trump era, but Kubo and the Two Strings was quite excellent, if too dark for youngsters (Grandpa has taken one of our hero's eyes, and is coming for the other!)

Visual Effects - agree that Jungle Book was remarkable, but an honourable mention to Deepwater Horizon which went for old score explosions and making actors get battered, rather than filled with CGI. I've been on drillships like the DH and I thought it was brilliantly realised.

Original Screenplay - a nod to Hell or High Water for some very sharp writing.

Sound Editing and Sound Mixing - if La La Land isn't going to sweep the board, then I wouldn't be surprised to see Hacksaw Ridge take both.

MM

I think your comment a few weeks ago that it is the most underwhelming list ever is about right. There really wasn't a film that'll be remembered with the possible exception of one or two of the animations.

I saw '20th Century Women' the other day after I'd sent my list in and I quite liked it. A bit self regarding but in with a chance of 'best original screenplay'. The dialogue was very smart. I didn't see 'Hell or High Water' so I'm not sure and I liked 'Lobster' in the same category but very much an acquired taste.

The film that left me most puzzled was 'Moonlight'. When I saw it I just didn't like it but it gets into your head and several critics think it's the runaway best film. I'm sure it's not that but I've obviously missed something.

'Fences' is interesting and I would certainly have chosen Denzil Washington for best actor but a downtrodden semi alcoholic just wouldn't have had such a perfect set of teeth or that switch on film star smile which in that setting really did get in the way.

justin124

Sandpit said:

justin124 said:

brokenwheel said:

justin124 said:

I really cannot see Corbyn co-operating under present circumstances with such a plan by May should she have any such intention.Yesterday he refused 14 times to answer Michael Crick’s question as to whether he still favoured a general election.

Why? It is the Left's best chance to rid itself of the Tories in the PLP.

The PLP would probably ignore him anyway!

And it needs only 19 Lab MPs to vote for an election for the motion to pass - assuming everyone else also votes in favour.

Neither of those things would happen though.

rottenborough

AlastairMeeks said:

David Herdson gets a name check from John Rentoul in his column tomorrow:

https://twitter.com/johnrentoul/status/835496588168605696

Well done David Herdson. Labour down to 50-odd MPs. It could happen.

peter_from_putney

FPT


Not wishing to upstage Roger, but presumably other PBers are allowed to forecast their Oscar winners. Mine are as follows for the 25 awards on offer, showing the best decimal betting odds currently available:

Best Picture : La La Land 1.2
Best Director: Damian Chazelle (La La Land) 1.06
Best Writing: Moonlight 1.2
Best Actor: Casey Affleck (Manchester by the Sea) 1.8
Best Actress: Emma Stone (La La Land) 1.17
Best Supporting Actor: Mahershala Ali (Moonlight) 1.2
Best Supporting Actress: Viola Davis (Fences) 1.05
Best Adapted Screenplay: Moonlight 1.20
Best Animated Feature Film: Zootopia 1.25
Best Animated Short Film: Piper 1.29
Best Cinematography: La La Land 1.20
Best Costume Design: La La Land 1.73
Best Documentary Feature: Made in America 1.17
Best Short Documentary: Extremis 2.5 OR The White Helmets 2.6 (Joint Picks)
Best Film Editing: La La Land : 1.17
Best Foreign Language Film: The Salesman 1.91
Best Live Action Short Film: Ennemis Interieurs 2.0
Best Make-up: Star Trek Beyond 1.44
Best Original Score: La La Land 1.13
Best Original Screenplay: Manchester by the Sea 1.72
Best Original Song: City of Stars 1.2
Best Production Design: La La Land 1.08
Best Sound Editing: Hacksaw Ridge 1.57
Best Sound Mixing: La La Land 1.17
Best Visual Effects: Jungle Book 1.22

Although I am very confident of having identified over half the winners, this is not on account of my having any specialised knowledge, but rather because of the 25 categories 23 have short odds-on favourites making it virtually impossible to show a profit. In fact I calculate that I would need to be correct in at least 18 categories to at least break even. Accordingly I will NOT be placing any bets from the above list.

Instead, I will be looking for a couple of left field picks from his list at longer odds. I notice that, probably wisely, he has omitted from making selections in a number of categories, whilst having alternative picks in others. This is probably the key to making profits overall, although the tactic is likely to prove unsuccessful should a whole raft of short-priced favourites come in.

Roger

CarlottaVance said:

Informative review as ever Roger. Agree on Jackie - though I wonder if the Academy might feel compelled to over-indulge Hidden Figures (which is good, but not quite top drawer). After I saw Hack Saw Ridge I read up a bit on the subject - unusually for Hollywood, if anything the real life character was more heroic than portrayed.

Hidden Figures was a strange one. Certainly the most watchable of the 'Black' films but as you say 'not quite top drawer' so a worthy second or third but there was always something a bit better in each category. I also thought the toilet scene was very hammy which after the third or fourth time became too much. Nonetheless apart from La La Land there was something of a shortage of nominated feelgood films this year. (If anyone can get 150/1 like Pulpstar grab it!)

PlatoSaid

CSPAN
DNC Party Chair Election – LIVE on C-SPAN https://t.co/58ITVF0YLu https://t.co/bV0Q8WIcJa

justin124

FPT
David Herdson referred to Labour's catastrophic defeat in 1931 when the PLP was reduced to 46 MPs with 6 ILP also elected. At that election the National Government parties basically ganged up on Labour with only one of their candidates standing in each constituency. Apart from the New Party candidates fielded by Oswald Moseley the election was a straight fight between Labour and National candidates. Such a scenario is not likely to occur again!

Roger

peter_from_putney said:

FPT


Not wishing to upstage Roger, but presumably other PBers are allowed to forecast their Oscar winners. Mine are as follows for the 25 awards on offer, showing the best decimal betting odds currently available:

Best Picture : La La Land 1.2
Best Director: Damian Chazelle (La La Land) 1.06
Best Writing: Moonlight 1.2
Best Actor: Casey Affleck (Manchester by the Sea) 1.8
Best Actress: Emma Stone (La La Land) 1.17
Best Supporting Actor: Mahershala Ali (Moonlight) 1.2
Best Supporting Actress: Viola Davis (Fences) 1.05
Best Adapted Screenplay: Moonlight 1.20
Best Animated Feature Film: Zootopia 1.25
Best Animated Short Film: Piper 1.29
Best Cinematography: La La Land 1.20
Best Costume Design: La La Land 1.73
Best Documentary Feature: Made in America 1.17
Best Short Documentary: Extremis 2.5 OR The White Helmets 2.6 (Joint Picks)
Best Film Editing: La La Land : 1.17
Best Foreign Language Film: The Salesman 1.91
Best Live Action Short Film: Ennemis Interieurs 2.0
Best Make-up: Star Trek Beyond 1.44
Best Original Score: La La Land 1.13
Best Original Screenplay: Manchester by the Sea 1.72
Best Original Song: City of Stars 1.2
Best Production Design: La La Land 1.08
Best Sound Editing: Hacksaw Ridge 1.57
Best Sound Mixing: La La Land 1.17
Best Visual Effects: Jungle Book 1.22

Although I am very confident of having identified over half the winners, this is not on account of my having any specialised knowledge, but rather because of the 25 categories 23 have short odds-on favourites making it virtually impossible to show a profit. In fact I calculate that I would need to be correct in at least 18 categories to at least break even. Accordingly I will NOT be placing any bets from the above list.

Instead, I will be looking for a couple of left field picks from his list at longer odds. I notice that, probably wisely, he has omitted from making selections in a number of categories, whilst having alternative picks in others. This is probably the key to making profits overall, although the tactic is likely to prove unsuccessful should a whole raft of short-priced favourites come in.

Yours is a good list. Hard to argue with any of them. It's a slightly unusual year with too few competitive films

FrancisUrquhart

SeanT said:

Roger said:

MarqueeMark said:

Very hard to argue with any of those assessments, Roger. A far from vintage year summed up by the hilarity of the hugely underwhelming La La Land being up th

MM

I think your comment a few weeks ago that it is the most underwhelming list ever is about right. There really wasn't a film that'll be remembered with the possible exception of one or two of the animations.

I saw '20th Century Women' the other day after I'd sent my list in and I quite liked it. A bit self regarding but in with a chance of 'best original screenplay'. The dialogue was very smart. I didn't see 'Hell or High Water' so I'm not sure and I liked 'Lobster' in the same category but very much an acquired taste.

The film that left me most puzzled was 'Moonlight'. When I saw it I just didn't like it but it gets into your head and several critics think it's the runaway best film. I'm sure it's not that but I've obviously missed something.

'Fences' is interesting and I would certainly have chosen Denzil Washington for best actor but a downtrodden semi alcoholic just wouldn't have had such a perfect set of teeth or that switch on film star smile which in that setting really did get in the way.

Hollywood film-making - global film-making - has been in decline for years. Maybe two decades. There are several explanations, many focusing on the need to please evermore youthful audiences, with simplistic plots, audiences which get smaller by the year, leading to a demand for commercially reliable, imaginatively tedious sequels. And Marvel spin offs.

Clearly, all the creative energy is now in TV drama. A great TV series like Breaking Bad or the Sopranos or Spartacus or The Killing (Danish season 1) utterly eclipses any movie in narrative power and thematic complexity. And the Golden Age of TV arrived just as movies declined. Surely not a coincidence.

Don't also forget the influence of trying to get access to the "new big money" ie the Chinese, when it comes to the blockbuster movies and their plots.

A movie equivalent of breaking bad has bugger all chance of getting past the Chinese moral arbitrors. Bland super hero movies with a Chinese actor crowbarred in on the other hand is perfect.

TwistedFireStopper

PlatoSaid said:

TwistedFireStopper said:

I'm more interested in how Trump reacts next day to the hammering he's going to get from Hollywood's finest. He won't be able to stop himself from getting involved.

His base loathes luvvies - he'll tweet something to annoy liberals and get his side clapping. And then the liberal press will huff puff about it - again.

Aren't you at least a little worried that it's all getting out of control-on both sides? Sure the winners of oscars could perhaps have a quiet word with themselves and think before they spout off about burning the White House down, live in front of millions, but on the flip side, Trump doesn't have to get so involved and so personal, feeling the need to explain himself, and also bigging himself up all the time. I reckon both sides need to try and calm it down, for the sake of the millions of Americans stuck in the middle.

AndyJS

AlastairMeeks said:

David Herdson gets a name check from John Rentoul in his column tomorrow:

https://twitter.com/johnrentoul/status/835496588168605696

It's good to see this site getting more attention in the mainstream press.

FrancisUrquhart

SeanT said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

SeanT said:

Roger said:

MarqueeMark said:

Very hard to argue with any of those assessments, Roger. A far from vintage year summed up by the hilarity of the hugely underwhelming La La Land being up th

MM

I think your comment a few weeks ago that it is the most underwhelming list ever is about right. There really wasn't a film that'll be remembered with the possible exception of one or two of the animations.

I saw '20th Century Women' the other day after I'd sent my list in and I quite liked it. A bit self regarding but in with a chance of 'best original screenplay'. The dialogue was very smart. I didn't see 'Hell or High Water' so I'm not sure and I liked 'Lobster' in the same category but very much an acquired taste.

The film that left me most puzzled was 'Moonlight'. When I saw it I just didn't like it but it gets into your head and several critics think it's the runaway best film. I'm sure it's not that but I've obviously missed something.

'Fences' is interesting and I would certainly have chosen Denzil Washington for best actor but a downtrodden semi alcoholic just wouldn't have had such a perfect set of teeth or that switch on film star smile which in that setting really did get in the way.

Hollywood film-making - global film-making - has been in decline for years. Maybe two decades. There are several explanations, many focusing on the need to please evermore youthful audiences, with simplistic plots, audiences which get smaller by the year, leading to a demand for commercially reliable, imaginatively tedious sequels. And Marvel spin offs.

Clearly, all the creative energy is now in TV drama. A great TV series like Breaking Bad or the Sopranos or Spartacus or The Killing (Danish season 1) utterly eclipses any movie in narrative power and thematic complexity. And the Golden Age of TV arrived just as movies declined. Surely not a coincidence.

Don't also forget the influence of trying to get the "new big money" ie the Chinese in the blockbuster movies.

Yep. American TV companies have a huge, educated, adult domestic audience, they don't need to worry about pleasing foreigners and simplifying everything.

Also the sheer length of a TV drama series allows more room to explore character and motivation, and to develop subplots - it's just a richer, more satisfying medium, at the moment.


The one exception to cinema's general decline is animation. Animated movies are at their peak.

Have to say rather enjoying twisted period drama Taboo on bbc / fx.

FrancisUrquhart

Vaguely on topic, this week's freakonomics is about vfx industry and why it is all in Canada and the UK.

In terms of UK, cliffs are ludicrously generous tax credits under blair / brown undercut the us market. Industry expert said for harry potter subsidiary was so generous they had to work really hard to find a way to waste a million quid. Canada is a similar story.

kle4

SeanT said:

Roger said:

MarqueeMark said:

Very hard to argue with any of those assessments, Roger. A far from vintage year summed up by the hilarity of the hugely underwhelming La La Land being up th

MM

I think your comment a few weeks ago that it is the most underwhelming list ever is about right. There really wasn't a film that'll be remembered with the possible exception of one or two of the animations.

I saw '20th Century Women' the other day after I'd sent my list in and I quite liked it. A bit self regarding but in with a chance of 'best original screenplay'. The dialogue was very smart. I didn't see 'Hell or High Water' so I'm not sure and I liked 'Lobster' in the same category but very much an acquired taste.

The film that left me most puzzled was 'Moonlight'. When I saw it I just didn't like it but it gets into your head and several critics think it's the runaway best film. I'm sure it's not that but I've obviously missed something.

'Fences' is interesting and I would certainly have chosen Denzil Washington for best actor but a downtrodden semi alcoholic just wouldn't have had such a perfect set of teeth or that switch on film star smile which in that setting really did get in the way.

Clearly, all the creative energy is now in TV drama. A great TV series like Breaking Bad or the Sopranos or Spartacus or The Killing (Danish season 1) utterly eclipses any movie in narrative power and thematic complexity. And the Golden Age of TV arrived just as movies declined. Surely not a coincidence.

I've had great enjoyment from many modern movies, so I do not deride them, but creatively, narratively, in terms of characterisation, production, writing, TV is the superior medium. No doubt the pendulum will swing in the future, but for now it is incontestable I think.

Roger

AlastairMeeks said:

David Herdson gets a name check from John Rentoul in his column tomorrow:

https://twitter.com/johnrentoul/status/835496588168605696

A good opening line by Rentoul "You have got to admire David Miliband’s sunny optimism about the Labour Party. “Labour is further from power than at any stage in my lifetime,” he said today. He was born in 1965. The party is plainly further from power than at any time since the Ramsay MacDonald split in 1931........"

Sandpit

FrancisUrquhart said:

SeanT said:

Roger said:

MarqueeMark said:

Very hard to argue with any of those assessments, Roger. A far from vintage year summed up by the hilarity of the hugely underwhelming La La Land being up th

MM

I think your comment a few weeks ago that it is the most underwhelming list ever is about right. There really wasn't a film that'll be remembered with the possible exception of one or two of the animations.

I saw '20th Century Women' the other day after I'd sent my list in and I quite liked it. A bit self regarding but in with a chance of 'best original screenplay'. The dialogue was very smart. I didn't see 'Hell or High Water' so I'm not sure and I liked 'Lobster' in the same category but very much an acquired taste.

The film that left me most puzzled was 'Moonlight'. When I saw it I just didn't like it but it gets into your head and several critics think it's the runaway best film. I'm sure it's not that but I've obviously missed something.

'Fences' is interesting and I would certainly have chosen Denzil Washington for best actor but a downtrodden semi alcoholic just wouldn't have had such a perfect set of teeth or that switch on film star smile which in that setting really did get in the way.

Hollywood film-making - global film-making - has been in decline for years. Maybe two decades. There are several explanations, many focusing on the need to please evermore youthful audiences, with simplistic plots, audiences which get smaller by the year, leading to a demand for commercially reliable, imaginatively tedious sequels. And Marvel spin offs.

Clearly, all the creative energy is now in TV drama. A great TV series like Breaking Bad or the Sopranos or Spartacus or The Killing (Danish season 1) utterly eclipses any movie in narrative power and thematic complexity. And the Golden Age of TV arrived just as movies declined. Surely not a coincidence.

Don't also forget the influence of trying to get access to the "new big money" ie the Chinese, when it comes to the blockbuster movies and their plots.

A movie equivalent of breaking bad has bugger all chance of getting past the Chinese moral arbitrors.

That's also true in India, another massive movie market where Hollywood is trying to usurp local production.

Here in the Middle East, as an example, The Wolf of Wall St was 45 minutes shorter than the director intended. Not quite sure how it worked at all with no sex, drugs, drunkenness or nudity! We all downloaded it.

Philip_Thompson

Sandpit said:

justin124 said:

brokenwheel said:

justin124 said:

I really cannot see Corbyn co-operating under present circumstances with such a plan by May should she have any such intention.Yesterday he refused 14 times to answer Michael Crick’s question as to whether he still favoured a general election.

Why? It is the Left's best chance to rid itself of the Tories in the PLP.

The PLP would probably ignore him anyway!

And it needs only 19 Lab MPs to vote for an election for the motion to pass - assuming everyone else also votes in favour.

A whipped abstention would be weak and provide a further humiliation to Labour in the press. They would both be accused of being chicken/frit and of being red Tories (by keeping the Tory government in power and the public would be confused as to why after say a 391 to 35 vote in favour of an election that one isn't happening.

It's just not a plausible situation and is the worst possible option. So with 2017 Labour we shouldn't rule it out!

Theuniondivvie

FrancisUrquhart said:

SeanT said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

SeanT said:

Roger said:

MarqueeMark said:

Very hard to argue with any of those assessments, Roger. A far from vintage year summed up by the hilarity of the hugely underwhelming La La Land being up th

MM

I think your comment a few weeks ago that it is the most underwhelming list ever is about right. There really wasn't a film that'll be remembered with the possible exception of one or two of the animations.

I saw '20th Century Women' the other day after I'd sent my list in and I quite liked it. A bit self regarding but in with a chance of 'best original screenplay'. The dialogue was very smart. I didn't see 'Hell or High Water' so I'm not sure and I liked 'Lobster' in the same category but very much an acquired taste.

The film that left me most puzzled was 'Moonlight'. When I saw it I just didn't like it but it gets into your head and several critics think it's the runaway best film. I'm sure it's not that but I've obviously missed something.

'Fences' is interesting and I would certainly have chosen Denzil Washington for best actor but a downtrodden semi alcoholic just wouldn't have had such a perfect set of teeth or that switch on film star smile which in that setting really did get in the way.

Hollywood film-making - global film-making - has been in decline for years. Maybe two decades. There are several explanations, many focusing on the need to please evermore youthful audiences, with simplistic plots, audiences which get smaller by the year, leading to a demand for commercially reliable, imaginatively tedious sequels. And Marvel spin offs.

Clearly, all the creative energy is now in TV drama. A great TV series like Breaking Bad or the Sopranos or Spartacus or The Killing (Danish season 1) utterly eclipses any movie in narrative power and thematic complexity. And the Golden Age of TV arrived just as movies declined. Surely not a coincidence.

Don't also forget the influence of trying to get the "new big money" ie the Chinese in the blockbuster movies.

Yep. American TV companies have a huge, educated, adult domestic audience, they don't need to worry about pleasing foreigners and simplifying everything.

Also the sheer length of a TV drama series allows more room to explore character and motivation, and to develop subplots - it's just a richer, more satisfying medium, at the moment.


The one exception to cinema's general decline is animation. Animated movies are at their peak.

Have to say rather enjoying twisted period drama Taboo on bbc / fx.

Agree, it almost makes up for the (so far) gashness of SS-GB.

FrancisUrquhart

Sandpit said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

SeanT said:

Roger said:

MarqueeMark said:

Very hard to argue with any of those assessments, Roger. A far from vintage year summed up by the hilarity of the hugely underwhelming La La Land being up th

MM

I think your comment a few weeks ago that it is the most underwhelming list ever is about right. There really wasn't a film that'll be remembered with the possible exception of one or two of the animations.

I saw '20th Century Women' the other day after I'd sent my list in and I quite liked it. A bit self regarding but in with a chance of 'best original screenplay'. The dialogue was very smart. I didn't see 'Hell or High Water' so I'm not sure and I liked 'Lobster' in the same category but very much an acquired taste.

The film that left me most puzzled was 'Moonlight'. When I saw it I just didn't like it but it gets into your head and several critics think it's the runaway best film. I'm sure it's not that but I've obviously missed something.

'Fences' is interesting and I would certainly have chosen Denzil Washington for best actor but a downtrodden semi alcoholic just wouldn't have had such a perfect set of teeth or that switch on film star smile which in that setting really did get in the way.

Hollywood film-making - global film-making - has been in decline for years. Maybe two decades. There are several explanations, many focusing on the need to please evermore youthful audiences, with simplistic plots, audiences which get smaller by the year, leading to a demand for commercially reliable, imaginatively tedious sequels. And Marvel spin offs.

Clearly, all the creative energy is now in TV drama. A great TV series like Breaking Bad or the Sopranos or Spartacus or The Killing (Danish season 1) utterly eclipses any movie in narrative power and thematic complexity. And the Golden Age of TV arrived just as movies declined. Surely not a coincidence.

Don't also forget the influence of trying to get access to the "new big money" ie the Chinese, when it comes to the blockbuster movies and their plots.

A movie equivalent of breaking bad has bugger all chance of getting past the Chinese moral arbitrors.

That's also true in India, another massive movie market where Hollywood is trying to usurp local production.

Here in the Middle East, as an example, The Wolf of Wall St was 45 minutes shorter than the director intended. Not quite sure how it worked at all with no sex, drugs, drunkenness or nudity! We all downloaded it.

Lol...so the plot of the middle eastern version was trader defrauds some people out of their money and doesn't spend any of his huge fortune. THE END.

isam

Oh the irony if Gareth Snell casts the deciding vote to veto Brexit

http://bit.ly/2moNmv0

chestnut

Fatherland and Dominion are better alternate WW2 histories than SS-GB, and I like Deighton. They would make superior source material.

Philip_Thompson

kle4 said:

SeanT said:

Roger said:

MarqueeMark said:

Very hard to argue with any of those assessments, Roger. A far from vintage year summed up by the hilarity of the hugely underwhelming La La Land being up th

MM

I think your comment a few weeks ago that it is the most underwhelming list ever is about right. There really wasn't a film that'll be remembered with the possible exception of one or two of the animations.

I saw '20th Century Women' the other day after I'd sent my list in and I quite liked it. A bit self regarding but in with a chance of 'best original screenplay'. The dialogue was very smart. I didn't see 'Hell or High Water' so I'm not sure and I liked 'Lobster' in the same category but very much an acquired taste.

The film that left me most puzzled was 'Moonlight'. When I saw it I just didn't like it but it gets into your head and several critics think it's the runaway best film. I'm sure it's not that but I've obviously missed something.

'Fences' is interesting and I would certainly have chosen Denzil Washington for best actor but a downtrodden semi alcoholic just wouldn't have had such a perfect set of teeth or that switch on film star smile which in that setting really did get in the way.

Clearly, all the creative energy is now in TV drama. A great TV series like Breaking Bad or the Sopranos or Spartacus or The Killing (Danish season 1) utterly eclipses any movie in narrative power and thematic complexity. And the Golden Age of TV arrived just as movies declined. Surely not a coincidence.

I've had great enjoyment from many modern movies, so I do not deride them, but creatively, narratively, in terms of characterisation, production, writing, TV is the superior medium. No doubt the pendulum will swing in the future, but for now it is incontestable I think.

In the era of Netflix and on-demand I don't see why the pendulum must inevitably swing.

Movies were superior as you could tell a much more compelling and detailed story in 90-150 minutes (typical movie length) than you could in 21-42 minutes (half an hour to an hour minus ads).

But in the 21st century we no longer watch episodes in isolation and/or need to wait a week before seeing the next episode. We don't need a 90 second recap at the start of the episode to remind us what happened last week in case we missed it. The medium is now completely different, a 10 episode series of 42 minutes each is 7 hours. A far more compelling story can be told in that time.

foxinsoxuk

Roger said:

peter_from_putney said:

FPT


Not wishing to upstage Roger, but presumably other PBers are allowed to forecast their Oscar winners. Mine are as follows for the 25 awards on offer, showing the best decimal betting odds currently available:

Although I am very confident of having identified over half the winners, this is not on account of my having any specialised knowledge, but rather because of the 25 categories 23 have short odds-on favourites making it virtually impossible to show a profit. In fact I calculate that I would need to be correct in at least 18 categories to at least break even. Accordingly I will NOT be placing any bets from the above list.

Instead, I will be looking for a couple of left field picks from his list at longer odds. I notice that, probably wisely, he has omitted from making selections in a number of categories, whilst having alternative picks in others. This is probably the key to making profits overall, although the tactic is likely to prove unsuccessful should a whole raft of short-priced favourites come in.

Yours is a good list. Hard to argue with any of them. It's a slightly unusual year with too few competitive films

Thanks for your suggestions. In the Oscars the favourite usually wins, but some of your second choices sound worth a punt. a have put a few quid on some of them. I thought the costumes in FFJ worth a token quid too.

Is it a vintage year? sometimes it has to be a year or two before we see what lasts and what doesn't.

TV and Movies are different art forms, and large screen home cinemas are blurring the boundary. I do find the compression required to pack a story into 2 hours a useful discipline in terms of plotting, though perhaps not allowing such nuanced characterisation. It requires a higher level of skill to make a good movie because of the need for that distillation. Too many TV series sprawl like the fat sofa sitters binge eating while binge watching them.

Morris_Dancer

Good afternoon, everyone.

Surprised Scotland's winning margin was so big. Nice to see them doing well this year. An upset against England is not impossible (I did check the odds for Scotland and France but decided not to back either).

MJW

SeanT said:

Roger said:

MarqueeMark said:

Very hard to argue with any of those assessments, Roger. A far from vintage year summed up by the hilarity of the hugely underwhelming La La Land being up th

MM

Hollywood film-making - global film-making - has been in decline for years. Maybe two decades. There are several explanations, many focusing on the need to please evermore youthful audiences, with simplistic plots, audiences which get smaller by the year, leading to a demand for commercially reliable, imaginatively tedious sequels. And Marvel spin offs.

Clearly, all the creative energy is now in TV drama. A great TV series like Breaking Bad or the Sopranos or Spartacus or The Killing (Danish season 1) utterly eclipses any movie in narrative power and thematic complexity. And the Golden Age of TV arrived just as movies declined. Surely not a coincidence.

The kind of artistic dramas the Oscars celebrates are doing fine - as are tentpole blockbusters pre-sold to audiences based on either comic books or publishing phenomena. Where there's a real hollowing out, and I think you're right to say TV has filled the gap is in mid-budget populist drama. Original, director/star-led thrillers or action movies when they do get made don't tend to feature at the top of box office lists anymore and so are made less and less.

They also have the biggest downside risk, as if for whatever reason they don't find an audience they can lose tens of millions. Why spend $75 million on an original idea that's pitched at the mainstream when you can spend half as much on three small Oscar bait films in the hope that one wows the film festival circuit and gets awards recognition and makes a bundle as a result, while the other two may find a small audience and break even? Alternatively, you double the budget for a movie you know fans of a franchise will watch anyway add extra pyrotechnics, market it like hell and hope it establishes itself as a major hit. If it's rubbish fans still watch it and you make changes for the sequel.

It's a shame, because there's nothing quite so joyous as a film that's both got high artistic and production values but isn't trying to take itself too seriously as anything other than popcorn entertainment. One of the better ones last year was The Nice Guys, Ryan Gosling and Russell Crowe's throwback cop drama. Arrival was also great as a proper science-fiction movie with ideas.

Theuniondivvie

chestnut said:

Fatherland and Dominion are better alternate WW2 histories than SS-GB, and I like Deighton. They would make superior source material.

Disagree, but in any case portraying Archer as a spivvy Prada model completely misreads the source character. It surprises me not a whit that some of the team from recent Bond movies are involved with SS-GB.

Sandpit

FrancisUrquhart said:

Sandpit said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

SeanT said:

Roger said:

MarqueeMark said:

Hollywood film-making - global film-making - has been in decline for years. Maybe two decades. There are several explanations, many focusing on the need to please evermore youthful audiences, with simplistic plots, audiences which get smaller by the year, leading to a demand for commercially reliable, imaginatively tedious sequels. And Marvel spin offs.

Clearly, all the creative energy is now in TV drama. A great TV series like Breaking Bad or the Sopranos or Spartacus or The Killing (Danish season 1) utterly eclipses any movie in narrative power and thematic complexity. And the Golden Age of TV arrived just as movies declined. Surely not a coincidence.

Don't also forget the influence of trying to get access to the "new big money" ie the Chinese, when it comes to the blockbuster movies and their plots.

A movie equivalent of breaking bad has bugger all chance of getting past the Chinese moral arbiters.

That's also true in India, another massive movie market where Hollywood is trying to usurp local production.

Here in the Middle East, as an example, The Wolf of Wall St was 45 minutes shorter than the director intended. Not quite sure how it worked at all with no sex, drugs, drunkenness or nudity! We all downloaded it.

Lol...so the plot of the middle eastern version was trader defrauds some people out of their money and doesn't spend any of his huge fortune.

I think he spent some of it on jewellery for his wife Definitely not on Champagne, cocaine or hookers though.

The local censor in the UAE actually (and unusually) went as far as to put out a statement saying that they had passed, uncut at 18 rating, what was put in front of them. It was the local distributor who presented the somewhat abridged version, probably the same edit made for a number of the more conservative markets around the world.

kle4

foxinsoxuk said:

Roger said:

peter_from_putney said:

FPT


Not wishing to upstage Roger, but presumably other PBers are allowed to forecast their Oscar winners. Mine are as follows for the 25 awards on offer, showing the best decimal betting odds currently available:

Although I am very confident of having identified over half the winners, this is not on account of my having any specialised knowledge, but rather because of the 25 categories 23 have short odds-on favourites making it virtually impossible to show a profit. In fact I calculate that I would need to be correct in at least 18 categories to at least break even. Accordingly I will NOT be placing any bets from the above list.

Instead, I will be looking for a couple of left field picks from his list at longer odds. I notice that, probably wisely, he has omitted from making selections in a number of categories, whilst having alternative picks in others. This is probably the key to making profits overall, although the tactic is likely to prove unsuccessful should a whole raft of short-priced favourites come in.

Yours is a good list. Hard to argue with any of them. It's a slightly unusual year with too few competitive films

Thanks for your suggestions. In the Oscars the favourite usually wins, but some of your second choices sound worth a punt. a have put a few quid on some of them. I thought the costumes in FFJ worth a token quid too.

Is it a vintage year? sometimes it has to be a year or two before we see what lasts and what doesn't.

TV and Movies are different art forms, and large screen home cinemas are blurring the boundary. I do find the compression required to pack a story into 2 hours a useful discipline in terms of plotting, though perhaps not allowing such nuanced characterisation. It requires a higher level of skill to make a good movie because of the need for that distillation. Too many TV series sprawl like the fat sofa sitters binge eating while binge watching them.

Making a good movie is probably harder given the constraints in trying to get it all into 2-3 hours. Personally I prefer to binge watch a series of tv, but I'd agree there are plenty of examples where people don't make use of the extra time appropriately. Some of the Marvel TV shows, for example, excellently acted and produced, still actually seem a little too long for the important content they have, as they bloat things out unnecessarily knowing they don't need to cut down.

rottenborough

Theuniondivvie said:

chestnut said:

Fatherland and Dominion are better alternate WW2 histories than SS-GB, and I like Deighton. They would make superior source material.

Disagree, but in any case portraying Archer as a spivvy Prada model completely misreads the source character. It surprises me not a whit that some of the team from recent Bond movies are involved with SS-GB.

Glad to see I am not the only one who was deeply disappointed by SS-GB. It was pants. The acting is dreadful and the endless, meaningless growlings by Sam Riley has been labelled 'mumblegate' by the press.

Sandpit

Philip_Thompson said:

Sandpit said:

justin124 said:

brokenwheel said:

justin124 said:

I really cannot see Corbyn co-operating under present circumstances with such a plan by May should she have any such intention.Yesterday he refused 14 times to answer Michael Crick’s question as to whether he still favoured a general election.

Why? It is the Left's best chance to rid itself of the Tories in the PLP.

The PLP would probably ignore him anyway!

And it needs only 19 Lab MPs to vote for an election for the motion to pass - assuming everyone else also votes in favour.

A whipped abstention would be weak and provide a further humiliation to Labour in the press. They would both be accused of being chicken/frit and of being red Tories (by keeping the Tory government in power and the public would be confused as to why after say a 391 to 35 vote in favour of an election that one isn't happening.

It's just not a plausible situation and is the worst possible option. So with 2017 Labour we shouldn't rule it out!

Yes. I don't think she will, unless the Lords force her hand on the A50 bill, but the prospect of the Opposition voting against a GE would be hillarious to watch. The PM must be tempted though. 434 votes needed though, which is a high threshold.