Why is The Favourite getting so much hype?

[Didymus 32,709]

Just now, Morphine Prince said:

Have you seen The Killing of a Sacred Deer? 

Watched it this week, so weird but I loved it. 

I haven't, I know his films are super intense and different so I always wanna make special time for them and see them when it's "right" But it's high on my list, I'm glad you enjoyed it

[Morphine Prince 96,074]

5 minutes ago, Didymus said:

I haven't, I know his films are super intense and different so I always wanna make special time for them and see them when it's "right" But it's high on my list, I'm glad you enjoyed it

You definitely will need special time for this one  

Left me feeling so awkward at the end in a good way  

[StrawberryBlond 13,263]

18 minutes ago, Didymus said:

A normal person judges a movie based on the trailer but doesn't type a 400 word discussion thread about it on a forum Everyone in here is right in criticizing you for pretending your opinion about this is worth discussing when you haven't even made the effort of seeing the thing in full.

And this just takes the cake. Pure fiction. A movie doesn't get an 8.5/10 rating on Rotten Tomatoes and a 90/100 on Metacritic for having good actors. There's plenty of examples of movies who only get rewarded for acting performances and they don't have those scores, not near them.

Besides, the actual nominations speak against you in almost ludicrous fashion:

AACTA International Awards: Best Direction, Best Screenplay
AARP's Movies for Grownups Awards: Best Screenwriter
African-American Films Critics Association: Top Ten Films
Alliance of Women Film Journalists: Best Film, Best Director, Best Original Screenplay
American Film Institute: Movies of the Year
Austin Film Critics Association: Best Film, Best Director, Best Original Screenplay
Boston Society of Film Critics: Best Director
British Academy Film Awards: Best Film, Best Director, Best Original Screenplay
...

I worked alphabetically so you can imagine the rest. It's on ****ing Wikipedia, how lazy and intentionally stupid do you have to be to write what you're writing? Not even gonna read the rest of your reply since these blatant mistakes in your argumentation are just too pathetically obvious that you're not worth more of my time, sorry.

I'm asking a question - why does a film with such a terrible looking trailer getting praise? Seems like a valid, innocent question to me. I don't get why so many are attacking me for just putting my opinion out there. No, actually, everyone is wrong for being so rude to me. I'm fine with people defending it by saying it's good but they don't have to be rude to me in their response.

Haha, the next paragraph is the funny bit and shows how much you skim my opinions without taking them in! I was referring to The Wife's nominations when I made the comment about "the only nominations it has is for its acting." Now who's the one making blatant mistakes and looking like a fool? Now that really makes your big drop the mic moment of "I won't even read the rest of your reply after that" pretty moot now!

12 minutes ago, Didymus said:

Except for this:

Before you @ me with "those awards are too obscure", learn something about the movie business. You're seriously only going to look at the Globes and the Oscars, the most fake, mocked and corrupt movie awards out there?

The film is nominated for Best Picture, Best Director, Best Original Screenplay and many more categories in a lot of well-known and respected award circles, such as the British Academy Film Awards, the British Independent Film Awards, the Critics' Choice Movie Awards, the Dorian Awards, the London Film Critics' Circle, the Online Film Critics Society, and the Satellite Awards to only name a few, and guess what, the screenplay was even nominated at the Globes, completely annihilating every point you tried to make up there

It's incredible and embarrasing how little effort you put in those tediously long posts of yours, which, apparently, just come down to pure, intentionally ignorant arrogance.

Again, I wasn't referring to The Favourite (I know its been nominated across the board) but The Wife. It's incredible and embarrassing how much your last sentence of this reply sums you up. Why should i listen to your argument when you can't even read mine correctly and embarrass yourself by misinterpreting it?

2 minutes ago, Morphine Prince said:

You need to see the film first tbh, how else would you find out what all the hype is about? 

Right now you can only state what you THINK the movie will be like. 

Roma has gotten so much praise and due to that I watched it last night. It is beautifully shot. Not usually what I’d watch but I get why people who are into cinematography love it. And the storyline is very haunting yet beautiful at the same time. 

I realise this but I'm asking based on what I've seen of it so far. I'm not going to pay £9 to watch a movie that I have no real interest in. I'm just asking this on here because there's no one else in the real world I can ask this to. And I never mentioned Roma, so I don't know why you're defending it.

[Morphine Prince 96,074]

1 minute ago, StrawberryBlond said:

I realise this but I'm asking based on what I've seen of it so far. I'm not going to pay £9 to watch a movie that I have no real interest in. I'm just asking this on here because there's no one else in the real world I can ask this to. And I never mentioned Roma, so I don't know why you're defending it.

I’m using Roma as an example. I had not seen it but I didn’t have so many opinions on the movie and actors beforehand because I had not seen it. Seems like you have a lot of thoughts on this movie you have not seen. 

You could have asked without all of the extra opinions. 

“Don’t judge a book by its cover” at play here. 

[Spock 20,290]

lmao this thread is so funny. "Now, I haven't seen it, so I can't judge" and then we get a dissertation length essay judging the movie on its trailer  Also, using the excuse that "cinema is expensive" when I live in London of all places and can get movie tickets for £5  the screener also leaked the other day so there are ways of watching it, this thread is so transparent 

The Favourite is amazing and deserves every bit of praise it has been getting. No one said it was a historical movie about Queen Anne's regime, nor has it been advertised as such, it's a black comedy about how miserable human beings are. In fact, Yorgos has been quite upfront during the promo tour about how the movie ISN'T historically accurate and that they never intended it to be. 

It's a really simple straightforward movie with slapstick humor. And your "critiques" (lmao) on the lesbianism in the movie are so wrong and far from the mark it's crazy. If you had seen in, you would know that It's not used for  exploitation or attention. So embarassing 

[lost in limbo 6,035]

1 hour ago, StrawberryBlond said:

I'm asking a question - why does a film with such a terrible looking trailer getting praise? Seems like a valid, innocent question to me. I don't get why so many are attacking me for just putting my opinion out there. No, actually, everyone is wrong for being so rude to me. I'm fine with people defending it by saying it's good but they don't have to be rude to me in their response.

 

You can't write a rant on a movie you haven't seen and say it doesn't deserve praise and expect to get positive reviews  Maybe it's getting praise for the contents of the 120 minutes of movie you didn't watch and you can't understand why because of the 2 minutes of trailer you watched  

[Itsbrenda 2,983]

Just watched it, it was fantastic 

[gag 22,449]

It’s the funniest movie of the year. Its characters are well fleshed out and incredibly well-acted. Lanthimos has been building good will with the industry since The Lobster in 2015 and now there’s a relatively accessible film by him that they’re willing to reward. Next question.

ALSO: it leaked a week ago. You can watch it online if you want to, then maybe your criticism will have substance behind it. 

[Gagadonna 10,801]

Just watched it and that was brilliant

[Gypsy Life 118,907]

All this meltdown for a movie you haven't seen?

Anyway, it's a fantastic movie. Great humor, great story and great acting.

[Didymus 32,709]

3 hours ago, StrawberryBlond said:

I'm asking a question - why does a film with such a terrible looking trailer getting praise? Seems like a valid, innocent question to me.

It's not. It's a stupid as **** question because the answer is obvious: just watch it.

3 hours ago, StrawberryBlond said:

Haha, the next paragraph is the funny bit and shows how much you skim my opinions without taking them in! I was referring to The Wife's nominations when I made the comment about "the only nominations it has is for its acting." Now who's the one making blatant mistakes and looking like a fool? Now that really makes your big drop the mic moment of "I won't even read the rest of your reply after that" pretty moot now!

I do admit I misread that, since that person just asked "were you the same person..." I figured you were just continuing your argument of this thread and not talking about The Wife.

Also, my misreading was based on this bs which runs in sync with it:

"This director is known for his unusual, off the wall ideas (his most famous works before this are The Lobster and The Killing Of A Sacred Deer) that have never won huge praise before" which is a complete fabrication

[Ziggy 10,348]

3 hours ago, StrawberryBlond said:

I see a lot of you criticising me for not watching it but this is kinda what most people who aren't critics do. I can't get free screenings of every movie like a critic can. Movie tickets are expensive and movie-going takes up a lot of time. And you don't want to be spending time and money on something that you don't like the look of even if it's just to see how bad it is. Can't you just accept the behaviour of a normal person who judges what they'll watch based on trailers? And trailers kinda give it all away these days anyway, usually because they're super-long. I'm wary to watch any trailer that isn't based on a book I've read or a biopic as almost all the plot twists are revealed and you can guess the ending. Or all the best bits are saved for the trailer and the movie you watch is just those parts you already saw and a lot of mediocre parts in between.

I'm just someone who calls stuff as they see it. I'm just saying that if this movie wins a lot of awards, there's potentially going to be a lot of derision from the public who have thought a bit differently from the critics. This is clearly not a movie made for the masses, so why do so many critics like it? It doesn't make sense, based on the law of averages.

I'm only observing what its critics said - it was praised for its acting, but the actual story wasn't. Literally all its nominations have been for its acting and just the acting of one person at that. It can't be that good of a movie if its failed to be praised or nominated for anything else. Movies that are very one note and sedate like this tend to just be nominated for their acting but they don't actually hold up as a complete package.

Of course I'm annoyed that Gaga might lose to this but I'm annoyed that it's not just her that's being locked out of chances but other talented roles as well. I even said after the Globes that I'd watched the trailers for all these films and said that, if I was being completely objective and had no fan bias affect my decision, I'd say that Nicole or Rosamund deserved that award. These women were pushing themselves physically and emotionally, doing stuff that was unlike anything they'd ever done. The roles that Glenn and Olivia are playing are just not on this level but they're getting all the awards. I'm can deal with ASIB not winning as long as it loses against something that was even better. From what's been leading so far, I've been left unimpressed by what's being billed as top quality right now.

A trailer is usually giving away too much, if anything, as I said in my first paragraph of this reply. A trailer is everything a movie is and then some.

I don't think you need to be a learned film critic to know if something's good or not. Critics have agendas and some get paid for good reviews, it's a known fact. The public think differently because they're down to earth.

Historical accuracy kinda matters when dealing with such a sensitive subject. Queen Anne apparently had 17 miscarriages - surely the life of such a tragic figure should be dealt with more carefully and respectfully? There is no evidence that she actually had a lesbian relationship either, it's just rumour that has clearly been interjected here to get attention because it's scandalous and woo! lesbians. I thought that GGD of all places would really look down on any movie that exploited such a thing. Documentary or not, if it involves real people, you've got to do it right and portray accurately. I certainly wouldn't like the idea of dying and then someone inaccurately portraying me in a movie years down the line.

Well, thank you for the compliments but refer to the replies to others I've already made for your answer. Forums are for opinions, after all. Surely there's nothing wrong with asking something out loud because you can't find the answer yourself? I've got no one in real life I can talk to about things like this, so I thought here would be the next best thing.

Don't be rude. Where do you get off on calling someone an idiot who you've only just encountered? I don't mind non-mainstream, I care about good movies, mainstream or not. Just because something not mainstream doesn't automatically make it good. I don't appreciate it because it looks pretentious and like it's taking the p*ss and I don't find either of those things enthralling or amusing.

Look out, we've got a smart alec here, folks. I'm just doing what any other person does when they work out what movie they want to see - look at the trailer. Pardon me for asking what all the fuss is about because it bewilders me.

I've literally done this for one other movie. I already told you back then that I thought there were actresses other than Gaga who perhaps deserved the award even more but you seem to have glided over that part. I'm not biased, I'm judging the acting that's right in front of my eyes.

And he hasn't been universally acclaimed from the start. He's directed 8 films and his first 3 movies are basically unknown. His fourth got one Oscar nomination and a bunch of obscure ones. His sixth was kinda unknown. His sixth was pretty much the same as the fourth. The seventh was another niche unknown. It's only now that he's being picked up in a big way. And I wouldn't say "acquired" taste as that means something you have to get used to over time, but "subjective" taste meaning it's not for everyone. I'm confused why such a film, which should have a niche audience, is appealing across the board. If it was a bunch of no-names, it would probably be a very different story. I think something's amiss.

A spoiler-laden trailer is a very recent trend in the industry and definitely not the historical norm. Trailers are honestly their own industry and shouldn’t be regarded *too* much about the quality of a movie. Suicide Squad is a great example of how different they can be.

[That J 12,166]

23 hours ago, Bio said:

Are you the same person who said The Wife was bad without even watching it? 

I can say The Wife is AMAZING and if Glenn wins, I cant get mad. I was riveted which is powerful for a straight up drama. There is a tension building beneath the surface of that film at all times and all Glenn had to do in some scenes was open her eyes and you knew EXACTLY what she was thinking. It's an incredible story, performance and film. It makes ya mad but ...well, it's just one to see. To say too much wouldnt be right.  

As for the movie the OP mentions, I cant judge what I havent seen. I do know I loved Killing of a Sacred Deer so if this one comes around like The Wife did last week, I'll go and see what's up.  

[Didymus 32,709]

4 hours ago, StrawberryBlond said:

And he hasn't been universally acclaimed from the start. He's directed 8 films and his first 3 movies are basically unknown. His fourth got one Oscar nomination and a bunch of obscure ones. His sixth was kinda unknown. His sixth was pretty much the same as the fourth. The seventh was another niche unknown. It's only now that he's being picked up in a big way. And I wouldn't say "acquired" taste as that means something you have to get used to over time, but "subjective" taste meaning it's not for everyone. I'm confused why such a film, which should have a niche audience, is appealing across the board. If it was a bunch of no-names, it would probably be a very different story. I think something's amiss.

Since I did misread some stuff, I will respond to this comment

The "he wasn't acclaimed" argument is rubbish. You're talking about his first local low budget projects for which we don't even have accurate info. His first big release was Dogtooth and he actually did receive instant acclaim for his directing style, and has ever since, consistently

Again, wrong about him only making a name now. He made a name with The Lobster which was before Killing of a Sacred Deer, and the latter film had a huge online following, and it competed for the Palme d'Or and won the prestigious screenplay award at CANNES Again, nothing obscure about it.

About the subjective thing, don't agree. It's just obvious from first glance that the highest grossing films right now are the least original and the most prepackaged in terms of screenplay. Casual audiences don't care about quality of directing, cinematography, editing,... they just want a good absorbing story. Critics (good ones, anyway) and film fanatics have the finesse to recognize superior technique and originality, that's just how it is. I also wouldn't trust a local DJ to be able to appreciate a Beethoven manuscript

For some things you simply need dedicated study and a lot of experience that pushes beyond the typical. Like having gone to McDonald's all your life thinking the Big Mag is the best thing out there and then discovering the far more complex but refined gourmet restaurants. You might think what the hell at first, but for the people who have a passion for flavor, texture and presentation, it's worth the hassle of dissecting it for a solid review. Nothing wrong with the people who still want McDonald's, but they're not the ones who get to say that all gourmet restaurants are overrated

[Karl 2,801]

I absolutely loved it. Completely turned the sometimes dull period drama formula on its head, laughed out loud at some parts. Extremely dry sense of humour, I think American audiences will struggle with it as they take things very literally sometimes. Performances all round were brilliant, while I adore ASIB, it's nothing new, and awards and critics tend to go for something different or a film that defies conventions.