View Full Version : Mandatory oscar thread.
03-24-2003, 10:42 AM
What were your opinions on the happenings last night?
The awards were handed out as shown here (http://us.imdb.com/RTO/2003/Oscars/).
Steve Martin presented the awards, and the bad jokes were entertaining. Also, Moore really should have kept his mouth closed, they were all asked to keep politics away from the private event, but of course, he had to get some of that attention. I'm also glad to see that Polanski wasn't discounted due to his personal life. Other than that, I wasn't incredibly impressed or shocked by any of the awards; although it was an entertaining show.
03-24-2003, 10:56 AM
Originally posted by scabb
I'm also glad to see that Polanski wasn't discounted due to his personal life.
Yeah, child rape really gets a bad rap.
03-24-2003, 06:18 PM
I only just woke up. Maybe I shoulda recorded it. Heh, it was worth it just to see the Jonathan Ross bits during the ads.
Anyway, I'm under the assumption that the acadamy are waiting for LOTR part 3 before dishing out any oscars for it, so what happens if in the next year a truly amazing film is made, that really deserves the best picture / best director oscars? Someone is going to lose out. They shoulda given it last year, instead of A Beautiful Mind, when they had a chance. If LOTR doesn't win ANY major oscars over the whole trilogy, then the acadamy will lose a lot of respect I think.
03-24-2003, 06:58 PM
None of The Lord of the Rings trilogy have been worthy of "best film" or "best actor/actress" really. I can understand them winning awards for production and special effects, but when it comes down to it, the scripts are just lame.
03-24-2003, 07:47 PM
Not a bad show (I like Steve Martin), and although I think most of the nominated movies were lame, they at least gave a handful of the awards to some un-expected recipients. As for Moore, I've always had a love/hate relationship to him, something his little... outburst... re-inforced. Good message, bad way of expressing it. Susan Sarandon did it with a lot more style.
Also, I will lose the last ounce of respect I have for the academy if LoTR wins any major awards.
03-25-2003, 05:33 PM
Ok, the first LotR deserved to win. The Two Towers was nothing new in terms of the wow factor, except for the battle scene. And Gollum. But I think it will be an injustice if these films, which have taken years of effort to make, and are loved by most people who watch them, even the critics, and are actually true epics are completely overlooked.
03-25-2003, 08:27 PM
"congraduations" -Cameron Diaz
03-26-2003, 01:43 AM
I don't see a reason why LOTR shouldn't win an Oscar. People may think that it's just a book adaption or has too many action scenes, but that doesn't matter at all. My take is that the movies count. Therefore you got an epic story, astonishing visuals etc. etc. -> Academy Award
03-28-2003, 04:34 AM
Originally posted by RemiO
As for Moore, I've always had a love/hate relationship to him, something his little... outburst... re-inforced. Good message, bad way of expressing it.
Same here. I thought his Bowling For Columbine would suggest easy solutions like banning all guns. Instead it showed that Canadians like guns, too, but don't go around shootin' each other.
The Brits did that, you know, banning all guns. It resulted in an outburst of people getting killed with weapons. I've got some statistics which I may post later or maybe LucasTones or someone else can comment on that.
03-28-2003, 11:28 AM
What was Moore trying to say in Bowling for Columbine? He began by trying to find out why gun-crime was so high in America. He concluded that the reason was the media. So he guilted the president of the NRA, after manipulating footage of him beforehand to make him sound like a much bigger ass.
I did enjoy it though, it was great, despite the apparent "nitpicks (http://www.hardylaw.net/Truth_About_Bowling.html)", some of which are incredibly irrelevant. I do like what Moore stands for, but he generally goes about it in his own subjective fashion, which is irritating.
03-28-2003, 04:27 PM
Its not that hard to get guns in the UK really, its just they aren't readily available in the high street. In the USA you can buy guns in Walmart, in the UK you need to have a damn good reason for wanting one, and a whole loada other crazy stuff. The issue of crime - well, if people wanna kill each other, they'll do it somehow, guns or no.
03-29-2003, 07:16 AM
It is true that you get get hunting guns and so forth from shops in the UK but I think it's easier to kill someone with a gun than most other methods.
03-29-2003, 04:13 PM
Yes... but not the best way if you intend to get away with the murder. Guns are easier to trace than, say, knives.
vBulletin®, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.