Is this movie legitimately amazing or does it only have an 8 because it panders to liberal propaganda?

First I have to say, I'm not an American and so I find this "Democrats/Liberals" vs. Republicans/Conseratives"-thing on many boards rather boring and stressful. I like some of the movies you mention like "Brokeback Mountain" (I haven't seen "Lady Bird" yet), but I would agree with you about "Moonlight". I found it pale in comparison to "La La Land", and I doubt that it would have won without the OscarsSoWhite-debate and the sudden eagerness of the Academy to prove that they are not racist.

"Call Me By Your Name" is a small movie but with great leading actors, a classy screenplay by the great James Ivory, beautiful Italian landscapes, a nice soundtrack and wonderful directing by Luca Guadagnino. The pacing is perhaps slow for some Superhero-film-fans, but it feels like a lazy Italian summer and like you spent the whole summer with the family through this. And it's a bit different than most films with gay characters, for example Elio's parents are understanding and not homophobic. There is also no preachy or dogmatic "gay rights" speech in the film, although we get that at least Arnie Hammer's character has problems with being gay (or bisexual, in fact both leading men also have affairs with women in the film). It's a sensual, light and beautiful love story, and the most revolutionary would be that it's not always in the foreground that it's a gay love story.

There is not really much political attitude inserted into the film. And this might be one the reasons why it has a better rating than most of the films you mention.

I thought Brokeback Mountain was a fantastic romance movie, with amazing performances. No pandering, just a great film.

I see this "panders to liberal propaganda" line in so many places and so many contexts. Let me just say, I consider it to be arrogant presumption; it is the writer proclaiming by fiat (without actually giving any reasons or arguments) that s/he is possessed of absolute truth and other people are just propagandist who are underhandedly attempting to deceive people into believing a lie.

Evidently "virus" is unaware that the point of art, literature, music, and much of social science is for the author/artist to present his or her vision as to what is true or real. It is up to the audience/reader to determine to what extent the author has been successful, how much the author's work corresponds with their experience of life and reality, etc. So, it is not a matter of propaganda (let me be clear, of there is such a thing as propaganda, virus' post being a perfect example of it) but of differing visions and conceptions as to what is true and real. One of the grave problems with the Right or "conservatism" at present is that they are obsessed with the notion that they are possessed of absolute truth, tending to declare the Bible as unassailable truth without any attempt to justify their view. Personally I believe it proceeds from a deep-seated sense of insecurity and the need to feel that there is a solid and unassailable set of facts and truth they can cling to. Maybe there is, but you are not going to convince everybody by just declaring it (or assuming it).

In short, I consider virus' post absolute rubbish, that isn't worth the space it uses up.

I didn't find it pandering to anyone at all. This was just a coming of age story that just happened to have 2 men as its romantic couple. It felt real to me and didn't have the liberal bent that there is sometimes in movies.

You know what virus? Let's simplify this. Thank God you were here. So many of us have fooled ourselves into thinking we could form an opinion on our own, possibly enjoy these films, and come here to discuss opinions we so carelessly formed. That is why we need YOU. You have set us straight. Thank you for keeping us so well informed on the twisted agendas of these films and their makers.

Now it's your turn to say something pompous and long winded.

I like Lady Bird, it's captivating and I enjoy every second of it. I think Moonlight is better than La La Land. I don't really like 12 Years a Slave, but I managed to finish it. Haven't seen Brokeback Mountain.

That said, Call Me by Your Name for me is rather interesting, because it was set in Italy and I love the sceneries and the way they live. Quite fascinating indeed. Even if it doesn't have gay love story I would still enjoy the film. It doesn't seem to pander to liberal propaganda. It's simply just a romantic story. No preachiness.

However, I felt the movie is too slow. Like really slow. Nothing really happens for much time. I just can't help to turn it off before it ends. And the Armie Hammer character is the worst. He's overly arrogant, egoistical and has no manners. I would rather watch a superhero movie than this character any longer.

I sincerely wouldn't give this movie an 8. But then again, I also wouldn't give La La Land an 8. According to me, both are overrated.

Speaking as a liberal, and a gay, I liked it well enough. But the pacing might be too slow for some people. There's only one scene that's a little weak (though other people seem to enjoy it), and that's the scene where Elio's father explains way too much what Elio should be feeling (and by extension, what we the audience should be feeling about what we have just seen). It's a fine movie. My guess is, if you ever had a fleeting affair with someone and wondered "what if" the movie will probably resonate, gay or straight.

What was pandering to liberal propaganda in Lady Bird? And why was it an Oscar bait?

Actually I did watch it just because it had Oscar nomination, as I usually like to see movies which were in the competition.

But can’t remember what was pandering about it. I really didn’t like the film the main character was annoying and the whole film was kind of meh. I couldn’t wait for it to be over and for the last half of it I didn’t even paid that much attention to it. So what did I miss?