[Reaper16]

Originally Posted by Silock

Look, Birdman wasn't my favorite film of the year. Not even close. But I totally get WHY it won. It's fresh and original. I didn't personally identify with it, because I'm not an actor, screenwriter, performer or creative. It was a film for "those" people. And I think if I had the eye to look at it that way, I would probably have liked it a whole lot more. And I DID like it; I just didn't LOVE it.

I thought Foxcatcher was a better film. Yes, it was slow. It was deliberate storytelling, and I think making it a faster paced film would have ****ed the whole vibe up. I thought it had better acting than Birdman, too, from everyone in a starring role. BUT, I get why it didn't get nominated. Hell, I thought Whiplash was better, too, but that's because I identified with it more as a musician. I get why it didn't win, too.

If Birdman didn't have the apparent stigma of being about showbusiness then it would be hailed as the kind of movie that doesn't tend to win the big one. It is, as you say, fresh & original. It's got its own frenetic energy. It's meta. It's darkly comic. Its choice to score only using jazz drums is unique. This win feels like the Academy going out of their collective comfort zone in many ways.