• Light/Dark

1917 has to be the most Oscar bait film of 2019

THErest

THErest

Member
Oct 25, 2017
7,152
I haven't seen it, but I must say, the trailer(s) always irked me because Colin Firth's character keeps on bringing up "your brother" and it takes me right out of it. Like, we didn't get it the first time. It's not just any old mission, your brother is at stake!

It's like the "baby baby baby" from Other M. And it's just the damned trailer.
 

Deleted member 47700

Banned
Sep 12, 2018
19,846
OP
OP
Armadilo

Armadilo

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
9,877
Asbsand said:
Why did we start having Oscar Bait again? Are these movies just market-researched and envisioned to seem artistic and dramatic as if emulating Titanic, or what is it? What actually constitutes "Oscar Bait" to us?

I swear to god high corporate art, and this is everything from games to film, has become way too institutionalized.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I think movie studios have cracked down the secret ingredient through research on the previous Oscar winners as they usually have something to them.

Even more so in the future like where Warner Brothers will be using an AI algorithm to decide which films should be greenlit.

More similar films in the future.
 
Sanjuro

Sanjuro

Member
Oct 25, 2017
31,471
Massachusetts
Just saw the film this morning. I liked it a lot. Some of the visuals in this film wete simply bananas.

This would be considered Oscar bait by someone who doesn't understand what Oscar bait is.
 
Z-Beat

Z-Beat

One Winged Slayer
Member
Oct 25, 2017
31,952
It prompted a post movie discussion with my friend about which war was worse, WW1 or WW2. I fell on the opinion that fighting in WW1 was worse because no one was prepared for all the military innovations and it was a clusterfuck of people on horses fighting machine guns and mustard gas over murder trenches, and WW2 was worse for everyone in general

she_esh said:
What weirds me out about the rapturous response to this movie more than anything is people acting like there isn't a blatant cut to black halfway through. The more I read people saying it's one long take (there's several moments where you can pinpoint them yelling cut too) I feel like I'm being gaslit lol.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Even with that black out it's impressive
 
Sordid Plebeian

Sordid Plebeian

Member
Oct 26, 2017
17,500
Sanjuro said:
Just saw the film this morning. I liked it a lot. Some of the visuals in this film wete simply bananas.

This would be considered Oscar bait by someone who doesn't understand what Oscar bait is.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
The trailers gave me a lot of Dunkirk vibes, would you say it's derivative of that movie or does it become its own thing?
 

Absolute

Banned
Nov 6, 2017
2,090
Saw this this evening. I had a fantastic time, really entertained. Brilliantly made film. Not sure where you are getting Oscar bait from really.
 
Avitus

Avitus

Member
Oct 25, 2017
12,955
Sordid Plebeian said:
The trailers gave me a lot of Dunkirk vibes, would you say it's derivative of that movie or does it become its own thing?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Dunkirk is a bad war movie and portrayed that battle/situation terribly IMO

1917 has a smaller scope but they execute it so damn well. When they peek over the trench and show no man's land for the first time the entire theater went dead silent. It's worth seeing on just a technical level but I also think it's a fantastic movie and did WW1 right. There are some instantly iconic sequences in this movie.

Music is also a 10/10. Dolby Atmos is a must.
 

Deleted member 1722

User requested account closure
Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,058
Strong disagree with this take. Very experimental and cutting edge film here.

If I were to really be critical, it would of the passage of time. It is very convenient that they didn't have to portray dusk or sunrise. Most of the time passage cuts in the beginning I felt were masterfully done. There is one before they reach the old German trenches that is both seamless and intentionally obvious that a few hours had passed. I was very excited to see how they transitioned through the night.. but they wrote around it.
 
Soap

Soap

Member
Oct 27, 2017
15,478
Didn't really view this as Oscar bait. It was a really well directed film with the burnt out buildings at night being a highlight.
 
Dr Doom

Dr Doom

Member
Oct 25, 2017
12,077
It was an ok ride.

The one shot take killed some of the drama that needed time to sink in
 
Arc

Arc

The Fallen
Oct 25, 2017
4,576
What is it with Era's Nolan-boner? I liked Dunkirk, but come on, this is leagues better. They're also totally different films.
 
Sabretooth

Sabretooth

Member
Oct 27, 2017
5,114
India
Sordid Plebeian said:
The trailers gave me a lot of Dunkirk vibes, would you say it's derivative of that movie or does it become its own thing?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I think the only thing it shares with Dunkirk that I noticed while watching the movie is that both have a very loosely horror movie approach to depicting the Germans. For all of Dunkirk and most of 1917, you don't see the Germans up close, they're remain an off-screen threat and bogeyman.

Other than that, the only shared elements are that they're both terrific films.
 
WillyFive

WillyFive

Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
6,994
It was a good movie, probably the best war movie I've seen since Saving Private Ryan, since it had the "experience" aspects of Dunkirk with much better human scenes, and more immersive than Iwo Jima.
 
Landford

Landford

Attempted to circumvent ban with alt account
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
4,678
Oscar bait in 2020 is "It was hard to shot therefore it must win an oscar. Did you know it was shot in a six hours single take using only natural lighting?"
 
Last edited:
HStallion

HStallion

Member
Oct 25, 2017
62,533
OP its cool to just say you don't care for something. No need to make your dislike into something far more grandiose than it needs to be. I don't really feel the Oscar Bait title really works unless you're complaining that a focus on the audio visual presentation or a very specific way of filming is somehow Oscar Bait.
 
Ithil

Ithil

Member
Oct 25, 2017
23,446
"Oscar bait" means absolutely nothing as a term nowadays.
The closest it comes to meaning something specific is referring to those generic cornball historical biopics that follow the same template (Darkest Hour, Bohemian Rhapsody, etc) based around an actor doing an easy caricature. But this "any film that's released around Oscar season and I decided I don't like is Oscar bait" is stupid and diminishing.
 
Last edited:
Psychonaut

Psychonaut

Member
Jan 11, 2018
3,207
OP has a very strange idea of what the phrase "Oscar Bait" means. The single-shot gimmick is a risk, whereas most people would classify Oscar bait films as being generally risk-averse. Although I haven't seen it, I'd guess Ford vs. Ferrari is the most Oscar bait-y of this year's bunch (which is exactly why I haven't seen it). Hell, Marriage Story, The Irishman, and Little Women are all things I'd call Oscar bait before 1917.

I still wouldn't say that about any of them, but they each still fit a certain profile of a winner. Domestic drama starring two first-class actors (GWTW, Kramer)? Check. Plodding character-study of a man who struggles to come to terms with the impact he's had on the world (Unforgiven, Amadeus)? Yeah. Adaptation of a foundational work of English literature (Hamlet, My Fair Lady, Oliver!)? Definitely. And yeah, 1917 is a war movie like All Quiet and The Hurt Locker. I guess. What keeps all of these films from being popularly classified as "bait" is the risks they take.

Might as well drop my hot take while I'm here: it's actually good that so much of the buzz around 1917 was focused on its single-shot premise because that kept me, as a viewer, more focused on the beauty of Deakins's cinematography than the unremarkable story and performances. I had a much better experience with the film for that very reason.
 
Lotto

Lotto

Member
Oct 28, 2017
2,396
Earth
Jtwo said:
Strong disagree with this take. Very experimental and cutting edge film here.

If I were to really be critical, it would of the passage of time. It is very convenient that they didn't have to portray dusk or sunrise. Most of the time passage cuts in the beginning I felt were masterfully done. There is one before they reach the old German trenches that is both seamless and intentionally obvious that a few hours had passed. I was very excited to see how they transitioned through the night.. but they wrote around it.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

i loved this the most about the film. the passages of time flowed insanely well and i kinda wish someone does a LotR-style adventure movie using this kinda technique. when they leave an area and move on to the next, there's obviously a huge chunk of time that passed but the movie moves on as a single seamless take. it works and it's fantastic.
 

Deleted member 31817

Nov 7, 2017
30,876
I still honestly can't believe that someone thinks 1917 is Oscar Bait lmfao, it was already a tenuous definition but come on.
 

Deleted member 47700

Banned
Sep 12, 2018
19,846
Probably in the minority but I preferred Dunkirk in every way. 1917 felt like a weak, contrived attempt to elevate a very simple story that honestly would have been better told in a more straightforward way whereas Dunkirk is a genuinely great piece of experiential cinema, disorienting and abstract to a point.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.