Movie Avengers Endgame harsh reality

It's not only about money it's also about lobbying and insider influence, if not Netflix would have won 24 oscars instead of 2 (for more than 20 millions of $ spent it's quite a poor return for them, as they spent more on promotion than what their movies cost)...

Well, at least Parasite is a good movie (the big winner of this year)...

 

Oscars is not a thing anymore though, plenty of controversial choices over the years decreased its importance. Is just a big excuse to make a big party and have famous people to wear fancy dresses. If you want people that reward movies for its content rather because the big shoots have investments in them or as a big promotional stunt, then i suggest you to look at minor awards.

 

Probably because it had forced some cringe feminism sh#t in there that was absolutely cringe. Now even the new movie with whats her face margot robbie all girl cast well that went down the drain. Havent seen it heard bad reviews. Aint watching it. Political correctness doesnt belong in movies. Shpuld stay out of it.

 

Love your explanation: Oscars the P2Win awards lmao.

 

To be fair, Endgame is a disappointment for me. I love Infinity War for its daring direction but Endgame is just a mess that is not well-thought-out other than 'wow cool time-travel scene and a fight scene with almost no tension'.

 

Who is this Oscar guy why would we care about his opinion anyway?

 

Well, there is Joker...

 

Dont feel bad, Jared Leto's joker also didnt have a chance. while 2 of the joker has, new one and predecessor.

 

What do you reckon it should've won in? If 'budget' was a category, maybe it would've won. Or they could make a 'best superhero movie' category to be fair. It's like how horrors don't normally win oscars. They need a 'horror movie' category. It was a good movie with good actors and it did its job of entertaining millions of people, but there was nothing reward-worthy in it. They mostly award 'boring' movies (honestly, I'm not pretentious enough to like them, either). When directors aim for oscars, they don't pick a commercial movie. They choose to make a biopic, an artistic film (usually filled with human suffering and grim reality, but you sometimes get an uplifting story), or a historical film (bonus points for WW2).

And when it comes to actors, they'll award the ones who took the most challenging roles and owned it. A role that made you feel and think and left you with an impression, maybe even changed you. Or if they acted in a WW2 movie, that counts too.

I'm not saying they're always right and can do no wrong. It's just that their criteria are different, and let's be honest, they're also biased.

 

Ricky Gervais had been shitting on these awards shows for years now and yet he still kept on winning and hosting. Which proves his point that it's kinda meaningless, but just a sense of formality to serve as a guide for snobbish people to pick which movie to watch.