Guest El Satanico Report post Posted December 7, 2002 blah to the "LOTR got screwed" camp. Yes, Lord of The Rings: Fellowship of The Ring was a good movie, but A Beutiful Mind was also a good movie despite the claims of the "LOTR got screwed" fans. LOTR has three chances to win the damn thing , so save your "LOTR got screwed" whining until it goes 0-3 at the Oscars. What did you expect it to go 3-0 on Best Pictures? A good movie losing to an equally good movie isn't being screwed. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest godthedog Report post Posted December 8, 2002 blah to the "LOTR got screwed" camp. Yes, Lord of The Rings: Fellowship of The Ring was a good movie, but A Beutiful Mind was also a good movie despite the claims of the "LOTR got screwed" fans. LOTR has three chances to win the damn thing , so save your "LOTR got screwed" whining until it goes 0-3 at the Oscars. What did you expect it to go 3-0 on Best Pictures? A good movie losing to an equally good movie isn't being screwed. 'ghost world', 'mulholland drive', 'waking life' & 'memento' all deserved a best picture nod more than LOTR or 'a beautiful mind' did. EDIT: forgot to add 'bully'. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Conspiracy_Victim 0 Report post Posted December 8, 2002 The only time I ever turned off the TV before the end of the best picture speech was when Shakespeare in Love and it's publicity juggernaut screwed Saving Private Ryan. Yes I know Ryan was slow in parts and didn't really establish all the characters beyond most war movie stereotypes, but just about everyone I know thought it was light years beyond Shakespeare. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest WrestlingDeacon Report post Posted December 8, 2002 I never understood why so many people love Saving Private Ryan so much. I typically agree with William Goldman's excellent essay on the film. The beginning is amazing, but it's utter shit from a screenplay and story aspect after that and Goldman is someone who would know. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest C.H.U.D. Report post Posted December 8, 2002 If an abomination like Waking Life came even close to winning the best picture oscar, I would be floored. But then, The English Patient won. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest J*ingus Report post Posted December 8, 2002 I typically agree with William Goldman's excellent essay on the film. The beginning is amazing, but it's utter shit from a screenplay and story aspect after that and Goldman is someone who would know. He should've known... better than to let his writing degenerate into crap like Memoirs of the Invisible Man, The Ghost & The Darkness, and Hearts in Atlantis. What the hell happened to Goldman's talent? Anyone else find this talk of "this film was better and it SHOULD have won" kinda funny? I mean, it's art and entertainment, not algebra, it's all just subjective opinion anyway. (Except for Gladiator winning. That was the work of Satan.) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest godthedog Report post Posted December 8, 2002 Anyone else find this talk of "this film was better and it SHOULD have won" kinda funny? I mean, it's art and entertainment, not algebra, it's all just subjective opinion anyway. (Except for Gladiator winning. That was the work of Satan.) most self-negating post ever. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Edwin MacPhisto Report post Posted December 8, 2002 What's the deal with all the Lord of the Rings madness? A lot of times I feel like I'm the only person out there who saw it for the ponderous, awfully paced, ridiculous crapfest it was. I enjoyed the chase across the bridge in the mines of Moria and the radically wild style of the first 8 minutes, but how can everyone forget the RIDICULOUS moments in the Galadriel scenes, the stunning monotony of the Council of the Fellowship, and the generally stiff and piss-poor acting job of almost everyone involved? To me this is the epitome of a film that deserves all technical nominations and nothing else. Sure, make-up and sound were great, but good lord, how absolutely dull and completely devoid of the sort of imagination and spark that makes a fantasy story good. Oscar snubs happen all the time, but I'm pretty sure this one was the right call. On another year, I'm not sure what the beef is with Shakespeare and Love topping Saving Private Ryan. Both are pretty good, though I will say that it always throws me for a loop when someone wins the best director Oscar, yet his or her film does not win best picture. The director's job is to make the picture, and I don't really think you can have a great film without a great director. I suppose you can have a great director without a great film, but hell, then he didn't do his job. Pretty certain this division of awards exists largely to help deal with all the silly Academy politics. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest godthedog Report post Posted December 8, 2002 Both are pretty good, though I will say that it always throws me for a loop when someone wins the best director Oscar, yet his or her film does not win best picture. The director's job is to make the picture, and I don't really think you can have a great film without a great director. I suppose you can have a great director without a great film, but hell, then he didn't do his job. Pretty certain this division of awards exists largely to help deal with all the silly Academy politics. it's been happening at cannes since the dawn of time. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest WrestlingDeacon Report post Posted December 8, 2002 You can have a great film with more than just a great director. It takes all elements to make a great movie, cast, crew, director, screenplay and all the intangibles. You can have a director put in a better effort than another guy, but that director can still have the better film if he has the superior cast, crew and script working for him. Although, I do find it odd in most cases where a film is nominated for best picture and their director does not recieve a best director nomination as well. But I'm also put off when a best film nominee doesn't have that many other outside nominations, especially screenplay, either. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest What? Report post Posted December 9, 2002 er, that's what I meant, I know that A Beautiful Mind won Did you?....Did you really? *shakes fist* Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Narcoleptic Jumper Report post Posted December 9, 2002 The Academy Awards job is not to award the years best films. Its job is to make the film industry look good, and Frodo Baggins and his friends do not do that. However, a touching emotional drama about a mentally disabled man overcoming the odds does. The Academy only lets certain types of movies win best picture. For Oscars 2004, I see them honoring Peter Jackson with some sort of achievement award, nominate ROTK for a few awards and be done with it. That's just how the Academy works, ladies and gentleman. Fantasy/Sci-Fi films do not fit the bill of "Best Picture Winner". That's the reason Star Wars, 2001, A Clockwork Orange, etc. were all snubbed. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest godthedog Report post Posted December 9, 2002 That's just how the Academy works, ladies and gentleman. Fantasy/Sci-Fi films do not fit the bill of "Best Picture Winner". That's the reason Star Wars, 2001, A Clockwork Orange, etc. were all snubbed. whoa whoa whoa. 'star wars' lost to 'annie hall', a comedy, which the academy is notorious for never honoring. 'annie hall' was a much better film than 'star wars'. i think it's safer to say 'a clockwork orange' got snubbed because of the contraversy it generated, rather than being a sci fi film. i don't even know if i'd call it a sci fi film. '2001' has LOTS of detractors who dismiss it as pointless and boring, & it had a lot more detractors at the time it was released. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest DARRYLXWF Report post Posted December 9, 2002 Probably the worst: Rocky over Taxi Driver. Now I like Rocky, but wow, what a fuckup. 'ordinary people' over 'raging bull' was much worse. Meh, I thought Ordinary People was a better film than Rocky. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest C.H.U.D. Report post Posted December 10, 2002 He should've known... better than to let his writing degenerate into crap like Memoirs of the Invisible Man, The Ghost & The Darkness, and Hearts in Atlantis. Hey, I like all of those films. If they are "crap" to you, then you are very lucky, and have not seen many really crappy films. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest J*ingus Report post Posted December 10, 2002 Well, I admit to not having seen HiA, but it seemed to be universally panned. Invisible Man was mediocre to me, and Ghost & the Darkness just plain sucked, it was godawful, I don't see how anyone could've liked it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Lethargic Report post Posted December 10, 2002 I hated Hearts in Atlantis. It was one of those over-written dialogue movies. Where it seems every character talks like a poet. I hate that kind of stuff. I like to hear people talk like people and people don't talk like that where every single word that comes out of their mouth is some deep meaningful heart-felt statement of profound importance. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest NoCalMike Report post Posted December 10, 2002 I think a big problem with the Academy Awards is that they shy away from a lot of independent film nominees actually winning because they know that a huge portion of the general film audience has never seen their movies and doesn't even know who they are. In general, most EXELLENT indy movies hit their stride and/or prime a year-to-two years after they are released in the arthouse because they get more exposure sitting on a video store shelf then the $500 that is used to advertise and market them for the initial release. I must sight Ellen Burnstyn(sp?) as a case in point. At the time of her nomination, there is NO WAY IN HELL, then "general movie public" would accept her winning that award over Julia Roberts, even though most people with half a brain and interest in actual acting over "movie stars" knows Ellen was 10000x better than Roberts, HOWEVER, it has been a couple of years since Requiem for a Dream has been on the shelves of video stores and now it has had a LOT more exposure to the "general movie audiences" so maybe in 2002, people could accept Ellen B's performance as quite simply being SUPERIOR to Julia Roberts in Erin Brockavich. The problem is, they just don't put the awards on hold in time for more people to see certain movies. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest NoCalMike Report post Posted December 10, 2002 Oh and another thing. In the ratings game, the "general movie audience" is watching to see Julia Roberts win because that is who is plastered all over their TV, morning, noon, and night. Not some indy star, who they have never heard of.......Sad, very sad it is. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Lethargic Report post Posted December 10, 2002 Actually I would still doubt it. Requiem for a Dream has found it's way into many 10 dollars and under bargain bins at all the stores around here. So I would doubt that it's very popular on DVD as much as it should be. Even if everybody in the world saw Requiem, Julia still would've won. It was her turn. Every year at the Oscars it's SOMEBODY's turn. There's always one big hyped up thing leading up to the show where it's all about that one person. Form the first day somebody watched Erin Brokovich it was already set. It didn't matter who else got nominated because for the whole year before the awards it was Julia, Julia, Julia, Julia this, Julia that. There's always something like that going on. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest spiny norman Report post Posted December 10, 2002 Ellen Burstyn's a big star? I would think so, anyway. I actually have to admit something. I didn't like Requiem For A Dream too much. I had really high hopes when I went to see it, and was really disappointed. Ellen Burstyn, yeah, she was great, but I also think Julia Roberts's performance was really really good also, and it shouldn't be seen as too controversial. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest WrestlingDeacon Report post Posted December 10, 2002 What about Jim Broadbent winning last year? All across America people went "who?" And I don't know a soul who saw Iris. The Academy voters are generally sent tapes of movies by the studios toward the end of the year to refresh voters memories and makes sure they've seen everything they want to get votes. So, if you're not hooked up with some place like Miramax, you're going to get put on the extreme back burner. There was just no one pushing "Requiem for a Dream" regardless of whether it was a big critical and finacial hit or not. And I agree with Lethargic above, it was just Julia's turn and nothing was going to stop her from winning, it was a lock. I would say the academy generally likes Burstyn and it wouldn't suprise me if she was nominated or won if she was in a high profile enough role that was pushed by her studio. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest C.H.U.D. Report post Posted December 11, 2002 Well, I admit to not having seen HiA, but it seemed to be universally panned. Invisible Man was mediocre to me, and Ghost & the Darkness just plain sucked, it was godawful, I don't see how anyone could've liked it. Actually, Ghost and the Darkness is my favourite of those 3. The fact that it really happened is what I find most intriguing, but I found the movie very entertaining regardless. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest El Satanico Report post Posted December 11, 2002 I actually enjoyed The Ghost And The Darkness as well. I just found it to be an entertaining movie. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Lethargic Report post Posted December 11, 2002 I liked the original better. 1 - it was shorter. 2 - it was in 3D. Can't go wrong with either one of those. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
