MovieChat Forums > Once Upon a Time in... Hollywood (2019) Discussion > Possible Best Picture Winner Because....

Possible Best Picture Winner Because....

posted 5 years ago by ecarle (14979)
10 replies | jump to latest

..because QT swears that OATIH is his "second to last movie," it got a lot of good reviews, it stars three of the most major stars in Hollywood(Leo, Brad, and Al), plus a hot new star(Margot Robbie) and...

...if the final movie isn't as good as this one...the Academy will never get a chance to award QT a Best Picture, ever.

Also, like Scorsese's "The Departed", this would be a chance to give a "lesser" movie (than Taxi Driver or Raging Bull; than Pulp Fiction or Jackie Brown) by a famed director the Oscar anyway.

I wonder if Scorsese realizes this -- after all, he is now suggesting that maybe, The Irishman is HIS final film.

[–] FilmBuff (7235) 5 years ago

Sicilians, always fighting...

[–] ATG6 (3000) 5 years ago

Movies about movies always get nominated, but they rarely win.

[–] ecarle (14979) 5 years ago

True...though this is another reason that -- all other factors considered(QT's second-to-final-film, the major stars in it)...it COULD win.

Maybe.

Who knows.

[–] dmac8 (5050) 5 years ago

QT has already softened his statements regarding a self-imposed cap (personally, I never believed it).

And I didn't take Scorsese's comments that way (clickbait headlines aside).

And if they win, it won't be b/c the Academy feels pressure to do this now or else...

[–] ecarle (14979) 5 years ago

Fair enough. I'm just speculating...

I think the "pressure" issue has to track with something else. Usually that enough "dues have been paid" and that the competiton is weak. This is how and why Scorsese won picture and director for "The Departed" in 2006.

Militating against QT EVER winning a Best Picture Oscar is that he makes violent genre pieces. Hitchcock never got a Best Picture(after the rather twee and stately Rebecca); Brian DePalma never got a Picture or Director win; Don Siegel(Dirty Harry, Charley Varrick, The Shootist) was a great genre director and many stars worked for him (McQueen, Eastwood, Marvin, Matthau, Bronson, Reynolds, Wayne...) but he never rated Oscar noms. Etc.

That'll be interesting if QT reneges on his "10 and done" statement. One thing I read -- and its clearly a "dodge" -- is that he will consider the 10 films when finished to be "his major list of works" and any movie he makes later on is his "old man work." Or something like that.

And yeah, I read Scorsese's full quote. He was suggesting if Marvel takes over the theater screens, The Irishman could be his last movie. Just a scare tactic....but he's probably a little competitive with QT this year.

[–] dmac8 (5050) 5 years ago

I saw QT on one of the late-night shows, I think. He gets asked that question much more now b/c there's only one pic left -- but he changed from his 10-pic-canon-as-finished-book tune to "But if I get excited about something..." which to me makes him sound like any other director who gets an idea for a next project. Hard to walk away from the thing that makes you "it". Filmmaker is his identity and he's not an old man in director years. Whether it's in film, tv, popular music, or pro sports, "retirement" is tenuous at best. The "comeback" makes for great theater and brings all the juice of the spotlight -- and all that comes with it -- back to you. And sometimes the "comeback" leg of the career is even longer or more voluminous than the pre-retirement announcement leg.

[–] ecarle (14979) 5 years ago

Whether it's in film, tv, popular music, or pro sports, "retirement" is tenuous at best. The "comeback" makes for great theater and brings all the juice of the spotlight -- and all that comes with it -- back to you. And sometimes the "comeback" leg of the career is even longer or more voluminous than the pre-retirement announcement leg.

---

All true. The most prominent example of this that I can recall is when Frank Sinatra "retired for good" in 1971. But he came back with a new album about 2 years later, and kept going as a concert act(with a few albums) into the 90's.
On the other hand, while Frank was still a concert draw to almost the end, his concurrent "major movie stardom" pretty much DID end in 1971 , with the terrible movie "Dirty Dingus Magee." He made a TV movie and one more feature film(The First Deadly Sin), but his days as an in-demand movie star were over by '71.

QT has been making a bit of an error basing his retirement on how a bunch of "old time directors"(Hitchcock, Hawks, Wilder) made fairly bad movies in their later years. But those guys were of another generation and their health failed faster and Wilder(for one) wrote his own movies in a rather old-fashioned style. QT's PEERS are directing well into their 60's, 70's and 80's, in good health and with big stars.

On the other OTHER hand, QT was smart this way: a lot of critics are doing what critics always do when a filmmaker or star has been out there too long -- stopping all the big praise, saying "he's lost it," etc. Its human nature for critics, and QT's "retirement" was maybe a way to shut them up. (And yet -- and maybe BECAUSE of QT claiming retirement -- Once Upon a Time in Hollywood got mainly good reviews.)

Oh, well. We will see. The thing is this. Both QT and Scorsese have Oscar-worthy films this year. Will these "names" score...or will the awards go to less starry films?

[–] dmac8 (5050) 5 years ago

I think Sean Penn made 30 films and won 2 Oscars since he quit acting -- b/c he found the process too taxing and he didn't enjoy it any longer -- in the early '90s.

He claims to have retired again for similar reasons -- but I'm sure I missed a few retirements in between.

[–] Ace_Spade (9544) 5 years ago

Even taking Quentin's promise to not make more after ten (or whatever that number was), the Academy might feel like, "Well...how many more good ones does he have in him?" and give him his "due Oscar" (which you point out they do often).

On the other hand...

Quentin is a bit of a maverick. I'm thinking about things like, "I reject your hypotheses," which might make the Academy dislike him for being too much of an "old boy".

For my money, I think they're both excellent movies. I think The Irishman is better, but they're hard to compare, too...

[–] jejebinks (67) 5 years ago

That’s the way I see things too. Unfortunately, Quentin and Scorsese were a victim of time. Don’t want to sound like a purist, but the competition was tighter back in the day, which made it harder for them to win their respective awards. Standards have dipped lower over the years. And the name factor plays a big role. It’s like if you have been nominated so many times, this year needs to be your year, and now it just seems like it’s a lifetime achievement award and not getting rewarded for that specific work you’ve done.