Golden Globes Tonight

[HeyJude]

Another way to look at it, as far as Brian's nomination, is that if he *had* won, it kind of would have been more on the merits of his entire career than that particular song, which is probably how the nomination happened in the first place. Same reason McCartney, outside of arguably his album of the year nominations, has usually received token Grammy gestures based on his back catalog and name recognition.

I think Bruce Johnston is capable of making some really d**khead comments online (and elsewhere), and while he was not the most credible source to be making such a comment, that comment he made however many years back about how Brian won the Grammy for "Mrs. O'Leary's Cow" was kind of true. That was kind of an ass-backwards token gesture more representative of acknowledging Brian's entire career (and lack of a Grammy win prior) and an acknowledgment of the status of the "Smile" album than for that particular song, which is an amazing piece within the context of the "Smile" project but isn't, in my opinion, exactly an opus of a composition all on its own.

[Robbie Mac]

I hate to say it, but I think releasing the movie in June may have killed the film's chances at getting some serious awards.

[KDS]

I hate to say it, but I think releasing the movie in June may have killed the film's chances at getting some serious awards.

I agree 100%.  I didn't understand why it wasn't released last December after the buzz it generated at the Toronto FF. 

I think had that happened, One Kind of Love would've been eligible for an Oscar.

[HeyJude]

I don't know all the cutoff dates and whatnot, but I don't think the timing of the release would impact being eligible for an Oscar. It may be that it would have to be held over for the next Oscar ceremony, which would indeed perhaps impact how much it's in the minds of voters.

As for the film's release, it's very common for a film to play a festival (or several festivals) well in advance of release. In fact, I believe it was played at the Toronto Film Festival in order to gain a distributor. It didn't have a distributor at that point, and it was through the festival dog and pony show that it gained its distributor. As is also the standard for the industry, a distributor usually doesn't pick up a film and stick it right into the theaters. Both due to perhaps the need to do further edits on the film, and to fit in to the distributor's release schedule, it takes months and months at the very least usually to get the film actually released.

If the idea is that a late year (e.g. December) release helps a movie's award chances, they would have had to wait until the end of 2015 to put the thing out.

[the professor]

Stallone is deserving and Gaga too; I have to back the 2 Italians, of course. But the Martian?  The entire show was an embarrassment--I could tell from the news reports and clips--drunken, Anglophile idiocy--H-wood at its most classless and intellectually low. Nothing about aesthetics or dignity. I wish BW win win, but you can't be disappointed in that sick environment.

[MikestheGreatest!!]

Not a bit surprised that L&M got shut out.  As the Globes are often a fairly accurate predictor of Oscar winners, it doesn't look bright for our hero (heroes?).  Guess we will have to settle with the Mojo designation of best picture....Brits have better taste anyway!

[MaryUSA]

Hi all,

If Love & Mercy had come out in the fall of 2014 it would have won.  Yet since it is a movie about Brian/BB it will come out in the summer.  Talk about stereotyping!!!  I wish that Brian had won. 

[Juice Brohnston]

Since it is awards season, maybe the board should give out some. Call them the Wind Chime Awards, or the "Chimeys"...best performance in a Dramatic Thread,  most comedic post, Beat Supporting Troll....

[KDS]

Stallone is deserving and Gaga too; I have to back the 2 Italians, of course. But the Martian?  The entire show was an embarrassment--I could tell from the news reports and clips--drunken, Anglophile idiocy--H-wood at its most classless and intellectually low. Nothing about aesthetics or dignity. I wish BW win win, but you can't be disappointed in that sick environment.

We'll have to agree to disagree on GaGa.  

It seems like the Golden Globes had a set nomination for Jessica Lange each year for AHS.  So, they probably just swapped out names.  I think Kathy Bates or Sarah Paulson would've made a lot more sense for AHS Hotel.  

I don't think Lady Gaga was a good choice at all for The Countess.  I think that character should be a little more menacing.  

[Cristian Kiper]

Brian posted this picture on twitter.

"Thank you everyone for all the well wishes. I had a great time at the Golden Globes!"

[filledeplage]

Brian posted this picture on twitter.

"Thank you everyone for all the well wishes. I had a great time at the Golden Globes!"

Thanks for that photo -

Brian rocks the tux!

And, always the winner! 

[Sound of Free]

Black can be slimming, but it looks like Brian's dropped some weight. He looks great.

[KDS]

Black can be slimming, but it looks like Brian's dropped some weight. He looks great.

I was thinking the same thing. 

[sea of tunes]

Brian looks really sharp there.

 

[Robbie Mac]

I don't know all the cutoff dates and whatnot, but I don't think the timing of the release would impact being eligible for an Oscar. It may be that it would have to be held over for the next Oscar ceremony, which would indeed perhaps impact how much it's in the minds of voters.

As for the film's release, it's very common for a film to play a festival (or several festivals) well in advance of release. In fact, I believe it was played at the Toronto Film Festival in order to gain a distributor. It didn't have a distributor at that point, and it was through the festival dog and pony show that it gained its distributor. As is also the standard for the industry, a distributor usually doesn't pick up a film and stick it right into the theaters. Both due to perhaps the need to do further edits on the film, and to fit in to the distributor's release schedule, it takes months and months at the very least usually to get the film actually released.

If the idea is that a late year (e.g. December) release helps a movie's award chances, they would have had to wait until the end of 2015 to put the thing out.

Which would have been better than sending it out to be murdered by the blockbusters with no prestige cred to make up for it.

[Emily]

Brian posted this picture on twitter.

"Thank you everyone for all the well wishes. I had a great time at the Golden Globes!"

That's the best picture of Brian Wilson I've seen in a long time. He looks great.

It's also fun to see the shabby plastic stuff right by the red carpet. Show biz.

[HeyJude]

I don't know all the cutoff dates and whatnot, but I don't think the timing of the release would impact being eligible for an Oscar. It may be that it would have to be held over for the next Oscar ceremony, which would indeed perhaps impact how much it's in the minds of voters.

As for the film's release, it's very common for a film to play a festival (or several festivals) well in advance of release. In fact, I believe it was played at the Toronto Film Festival in order to gain a distributor. It didn't have a distributor at that point, and it was through the festival dog and pony show that it gained its distributor. As is also the standard for the industry, a distributor usually doesn't pick up a film and stick it right into the theaters. Both due to perhaps the need to do further edits on the film, and to fit in to the distributor's release schedule, it takes months and months at the very least usually to get the film actually released.

If the idea is that a late year (e.g. December) release helps a movie's award chances, they would have had to wait until the end of 2015 to put the thing out.

Which would have been better than sending it out to be murdered by the blockbusters with no prestige cred to make up for it.

December 2015 saw the release of probably the most highly-anticipated film of all time, so L&M would have been lost in the shuffle even more later in the year. One could at least argue anyway.

I also believe they may not have even expected L&M to screen in as many theaters as it did. I could have easily seen this go the route of playing festivals and having an extremely limited run followed pretty quickly by a "rent it while it's in theaters!" $6.99 deal on Amazon.

"Love & Mercy" pulled in more than $12 million in the US, which is pretty good for a movie that never went beyond 791 theaters (for a comparison, big blockbuster movies usually hit 3500 to 4000 theaters), and only spent a single week at a full 791 theaters.

The film has also pulled in at least over $16 million from non-US markets. So a worldwide total of $28 million-plus is pretty good for such a low-key, somewhat niche film. It has surely brought in additional revenue on the home video and rental market, surely numerous additional millions.

This film has easily turned a profit, got numerous TV appearances, two golden globe nominations, scattered other film festival/film critics awards, probably would have been nominated for some film score awards were it eligible, has made "Top Films" lists, etc. By any fair measure, this thing has been pretty successful. It was *never* going to hit any sort of critical mass of hitting #1 at the box office or breaking records. And we're better for it; the filmmakers and actors seem to have done "their thing" and not undercut it to make it a more standard "biopic" with a standard arc, filled with an hour of pre-1965 Beach Boys hits.

[HeyJude]

It's also interesting to note that L&M is #18 *all-time* on the list of what Box Office Mojo categorizes as music biopics, and was #2 for 2015 in this category. I think that speaks both to the film's success and to the fact that music biopics apparently and clearly are *not* usually huge box office draws, with obvious scattered exceptions. Only two have hit over $100M, and only six have hit over $50M.

[Mujan, 8@$+@Rc| of a Blue Wizard]

I don't know all the cutoff dates and whatnot, but I don't think the timing of the release would impact being eligible for an Oscar. It may be that it would have to be held over for the next Oscar ceremony, which would indeed perhaps impact how much it's in the minds of voters.

As for the film's release, it's very common for a film to play a festival (or several festivals) well in advance of release. In fact, I believe it was played at the Toronto Film Festival in order to gain a distributor. It didn't have a distributor at that point, and it was through the festival dog and pony show that it gained its distributor. As is also the standard for the industry, a distributor usually doesn't pick up a film and stick it right into the theaters. Both due to perhaps the need to do further edits on the film, and to fit in to the distributor's release schedule, it takes months and months at the very least usually to get the film actually released.

If the idea is that a late year (e.g. December) release helps a movie's award chances, they would have had to wait until the end of 2015 to put the thing out.

Which would have been better than sending it out to be murdered by the blockbusters with no prestige cred to make up for it.

December 2015 saw the release of probably the most highly-anticipated film of all time, so L&M would have been lost in the shuffle even more later in the year. One could at least argue anyway.

I also believe they may not have even expected L&M to screen in as many theaters as it did. I could have easily seen this go the route of playing festivals and having an extremely limited run followed pretty quickly by a "rent it while it's in theaters!" $6.99 deal on Amazon.

"Love & Mercy" pulled in more than $12 million in the US, which is pretty good for a movie that never went beyond 791 theaters (for a comparison, big blockbuster movies usually hit 3500 to 4000 theaters), and only spent a single week at a full 791 theaters.

The film has also pulled in at least over $16 million from non-US markets. So a worldwide total of $28 million-plus is pretty good for such a low-key, somewhat niche film. It has surely brought in additional revenue on the home video and rental market, surely numerous additional millions.

This film has easily turned a profit, got numerous TV appearances, two golden globe nominations, scattered other film festival/film critics awards, probably would have been nominated for some film score awards were it eligible, has made "Top Films" lists, etc. By any fair measure, this thing has been pretty successful. It was *never* going to hit any sort of critical mass of hitting #1 at the box office or breaking records. And we're better for it; the filmmakers and actors seem to have done "their thing" and not undercut it to make it a more standard "biopic" with a standard arc, filled with an hour of pre-1965 Beach Boys hits.

I hope thats not a reference to Star Wars. If it is, Id say its a stretch at best. Episode 1 was way more built up and anticipated because it was the first in over 15 years and the only movies were all beloved. Episode 7 was hyped up, sure, but Id argue it all happened so fast it wasnt quite the same. Episode 1 had years of good press and cover stories and intrigue. Episode 7 was also more tentative. I, and Im sure many others, saw it not expecting a whole lot--it was more just curiosity to see how someone else might handle the franchise and if it could be better.

Off topic, I realize. My bad; feel free to ignore.

[HeyJude]

I don't know all the cutoff dates and whatnot, but I don't think the timing of the release would impact being eligible for an Oscar. It may be that it would have to be held over for the next Oscar ceremony, which would indeed perhaps impact how much it's in the minds of voters.

As for the film's release, it's very common for a film to play a festival (or several festivals) well in advance of release. In fact, I believe it was played at the Toronto Film Festival in order to gain a distributor. It didn't have a distributor at that point, and it was through the festival dog and pony show that it gained its distributor. As is also the standard for the industry, a distributor usually doesn't pick up a film and stick it right into the theaters. Both due to perhaps the need to do further edits on the film, and to fit in to the distributor's release schedule, it takes months and months at the very least usually to get the film actually released.

If the idea is that a late year (e.g. December) release helps a movie's award chances, they would have had to wait until the end of 2015 to put the thing out.

Which would have been better than sending it out to be murdered by the blockbusters with no prestige cred to make up for it.

December 2015 saw the release of probably the most highly-anticipated film of all time, so L&M would have been lost in the shuffle even more later in the year. One could at least argue anyway.

I also believe they may not have even expected L&M to screen in as many theaters as it did. I could have easily seen this go the route of playing festivals and having an extremely limited run followed pretty quickly by a "rent it while it's in theaters!" $6.99 deal on Amazon.

"Love & Mercy" pulled in more than $12 million in the US, which is pretty good for a movie that never went beyond 791 theaters (for a comparison, big blockbuster movies usually hit 3500 to 4000 theaters), and only spent a single week at a full 791 theaters.

The film has also pulled in at least over $16 million from non-US markets. So a worldwide total of $28 million-plus is pretty good for such a low-key, somewhat niche film. It has surely brought in additional revenue on the home video and rental market, surely numerous additional millions.

This film has easily turned a profit, got numerous TV appearances, two golden globe nominations, scattered other film festival/film critics awards, probably would have been nominated for some film score awards were it eligible, has made "Top Films" lists, etc. By any fair measure, this thing has been pretty successful. It was *never* going to hit any sort of critical mass of hitting #1 at the box office or breaking records. And we're better for it; the filmmakers and actors seem to have done "their thing" and not undercut it to make it a more standard "biopic" with a standard arc, filled with an hour of pre-1965 Beach Boys hits.

I hope thats not a reference to Star Wars. If it is, Id say its a stretch at best. Episode 1 was way more built up and anticipated because it was the first in over 15 years and the only movies were all beloved. Episode 7 was hyped up, sure, but Id argue it all happened so fast it wasnt quite the same. Episode 1 had years of good press and cover stories and intrigue. Episode 7 was also more tentative. I, and Im sure many others, saw it not expecting a whole lot--it was more just curiosity to see how someone else might handle the franchise and if it could be better.

Off topic, I realize. My bad; feel free to ignore.

It certainly was a reference to Star Wars. I guess "most anticipated" could be replaced with something else to describe a movie as big as that one, which became the highest grossing film in three weeks or however long it has been.

I've of course lived through both the 1999 and 2015 iterations of the hype and hysteria, and I wouldn't say one was hugely more anticipated than the other. There was a bigger gap between 1983 and 1999, so there was more built up hopes I suppose. But 2015 forms of media have inundated us with the new film in a way not possible in 1999, so it's kind of a wash.

The general point, though, was simply that if the idea was to release "Love & Mercy" in a timeframe where it wouldn't be as overshadowed, I can't think of a *worse* time than December of 2015, during which the highest grossing film (in the US, not adjusting for inflation) of all time was released.

I don't even think L&M would have gotten the seemingly partly apocryphal stories of "overflow" box office traffic had it been released around the same time, as that void was filled with other comedies, animated films, etc.

Perhaps many others had noted it in the past, but I was surprised to see how few music-themed "biopics" have been monster hits at the box office. I think studios know they usually don't do HUGE business. Even one of the top films on the list is "Amadeus", which certainly some folks might put more in the "historical biography" category than the other films on the list which are largely 20th century music stories.

[Awesoman]

Ol' BW has really slimmed down!  He'd make a better window than a door at this point.  Hope the weight loss was intentional.

[Bittersweet-Sanity]

Oscar nominations are out, and Love & Mercy got shut out.

[jiggy22]

The fact that 50 Shades of Grey has an Oscar Nomination for Best Original Song while One Kind of Love was snubbed honestly kinda hurt me.

[Awesoman]

The fact that 50 Shades of Grey has an Oscar Nomination for Best Original Song while One Kind of Love was snubbed honestly kinda hurt me.

50 Shades is also the proud recipient of one or several Razzie awards so I wouldn't worry too much.  And was anyone really expecting "One Kind of Love" to be nominated for an Oscar?  It's really not that impressive a song and hardly the best song on BW's solo album.

Not terribly surprised Love & Mercy was shut out although I thought it at least had a chance to be nominated for something.

[Sandy Baby]

Sympathetic article:   http://www.cbsnews.com/news/oscar-snubs-the-force-is-not-with-star-wars/