Patrick Sun
Senior HTF Member
- Joined
- Jun 30, 1999
- Messages
- 39,664
IIRC, Bullock said she didn't have cash, but had a credit card.
Guess I should have put a smiley or something in there. It was meant to be tongue-in-cheek, not a literal I want them gone. I'm aware that there are people who still enjoy watching a boring, predictable award show, which is perfectly fine.Robert Crawford said:As much as I have disdain for the Oscars, there is obviously a segment of the population that eats this stuff up so why should they nuke it to please a vocal minority? We can always exercise our right not to watch them nor participate in discussions about them.
I bet that's how Jack Nicholson felt back in 1989, that's when money was worth a little bit more too.Aaron Silverman said:One could make the argument that on some level, a $60 million payday for one movie is like winning the lottery.
Right there with ya. After hearing about Oscar voters that didn't even watch the film they voted for was the last straw(well that, and it has been quite stale the last couple years). If it were the Olympics and two judges scored an event without watching, it would be a redo. The Oscars is a competition, so what's the difference? Why this news was barely acknowledged is a mystery. I'm done with them forever.Edwin-S said:My feelings about the Academy Awards.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aCbfMkh940Q&html5=1
A sneaky suspicion, but until last week I really didn't think that was common practice.Cameron Yee said:I thought it was common knowledge voters don't always see what they vote for, in the same way politicians are not elected for all the right reasons.
I think we all had our smoking gun when "Brave" won Best Animated last year.Bryan^H said:A sneaky suspicion, but until last week I really didn't think that was common practice.
Once in a while, when they start giving the show a unified "theme" that reflects one of the better-known lead-favorite Picture nominees, it's usually because the insiders are nudging each other that "Hey, c'mon, YOU know who you voted for...", and that the Picture that's "destined" to win will wrap up and cap off the evening's motif. And when the theme was "Heroes struggling in the face of adversity", I don't think they were expecting it to be Sandra Bullock struggling with the space capsule.That "hero" montage was really dumb and a waste also IMO. I don't think they showed one shot of any previous Batman and not a single shot of Christopher Reeve as Superman. I mean come on, Christopher Reeve IS the cinematic Superman, how could they not include one shot. Man of Steel had about 50 shots though, guess we know which studio paid the bill for that clip.
Personally, if they are going to fill the show with these clips and montages, just bring back the honoree awards.
"Heroes struggling in the face of adversity" describes every movie that has ever been nominated for Best Picture.Ejanss said:Once in a while, when they start giving the show a unified "theme" that reflects one of the better-known lead-favorite Picture nominees, it's usually because the insiders are nudging each other that "Hey, c'mon, YOU know who you voted for...", and that the Picture that's "destined" to win will wrap up and cap off the evening's motif. And when the theme was "Heroes struggling in the face of adversity", I don't think they were expecting it to be Sandra Bullock struggling with the space capsule.
Point is, though, I'm guessing the show planners weren't wasting time expecting Wolf of Wall Street or American Hustle to take it either.Aaron Silverman said:"Heroes struggling in the face of adversity" describes every movie that has ever been nominated for Best Picture.