*** Official 2004 Academy Awards Discussion Thread (1 Viewer)

[Haggai]

Amen to that, Holadem.

Regarding one of the Rock bits last night, when he interviewed people at the Magic Johnson theaters, he of course didn't mention Ray when asking them if they'd seen any of the nominated films. His theme was about how all these black people hadn't seen the Oscar movies but all liked White Chicks, but of course most (maybe all) of them had probably seen Ray as well. Still, it was pretty funny, I liked the insertion of Albert Brooks declaring that White Chicks had gotten robbed.

 

[Zen Butler]

But posting in this "not for you" thread though?

 

[Jay E]

Thank goodness I have some restraint or i might be kicked off the forum for saying what i really think of your post.

Criticizing the show and criticizing the awards are 2 different things in my book. Where did I criticize the awards given out in my post? Where did I say I was upset about someone not winning? It's the presentation of the awards that I'm complaining about. There wasn't a single award given that I was upset about, but I was plenty upset about how they were given.

The Oscar show has less and less to do with the joy of film, and more & more to do with getting the biggest ratings. Cutting out the film montages, not showing clips of nominated short & animated films, not showing clips of the nominated films during the awrds show proper...I can go on and on, but since I'll get more posts like yours calling me a sore loser...

When you can separate the 2 in your mind, maybe you and others won't post such knee-jerk reactions.

 

[Steve Christou]

Thats the ol'Zen.

 

[Haggai]

Those damn gay midjets just don't seem to do much for Zen.

 

[Holadem]

Dammit Haggai, ya stole my post!

--
H - so... how about them Oscars?

 

[Zen Butler]

I was a spelling bee champ....It's "mijets"

 

[Haggai]

Yes, mijets, of course. I would lose early in any spelling bee judged by Rambo Rick!

Oh, right, the Oscars...well, I'm glad that Eternal Sunshine won for original screenplay. At least in the last decade or so, the screenplay categories seem to be a slot for rewarding some good filmmakers who seem unlikely ever to win the other major awards: the Coens for Fargo, Almodovar for Talk to Her, Tarantino for Pulp Fiction. Payne for Sideways is probably in that category as well.

 

[Jay E]

Since mature discourse about what I said has so far been non-existant, I'll try again.

If you disagree with my statement above, please explain why with examples. Again I'm talking about the presentation of the awards and not the awards themselves (which I think were pretty good this year).

 

[Haggai]

Jay, I see your point better now. Certainly Brando deserved more of a tribute. But, I think the point of some of the other posts here is that it's always easy to get bent out of shape if we approach the Oscars as serious film-buffs. I don't think it's ever been designed with us in mind, at least not that aspect of our enjoyment of movies.

This was one thing you said in a previous post:


But was it ever really about the joy of film above all else? It's always been about promoting the industry. You mentioned that they didn't show clips for the best picture nominees this time, that's true, but I don't think that was ever done without thinking about the ratings, or at least the promotional aspect of the show itself.

 

[Shawn_McD]

Sorry, LOTR is the greatest film epic ever filmed. I love Spartacus, Ben Hur, Braveheart, etc....

But LOTR takes them all, and its not that much CGI compared to all the other aspects.

Go watch the 8 hours of making and you will see.

 

[Jay E]

Haggi

Thanks for re-considering my post.

I remember in past years when the awards show use to have at least 2 segments which were a tribute to films themselves where they use to present a montage of films through history. I loved these segments, one of the reasons I would get so excited about watching the show. When I mention that the show is less about the joy of films, this is what I'm talking about.

The show is more & more trying to gear itself to the average filmgoer, in which I mean the average MTV generation TV viewer. Most of them know Brando as some old fat actor that people make fun of. The awards should have at least tried to educate viewers abou how important & crucial Brando was to art of acting in film.

 

[Mike Brogan]

It was probably just your tone which seemed to imply that if someone did actually enjoy the show then they must not be like you; a "serious film lover".

 

[Haggai]

Oh, yeah, you're right, those kicked ass. Too bad they didn't do that again. Well, they sort of did a montage-light at the beginning, I think, as part of the opening credits or whatever.

It would have been good if they had done something like you suggested with Brando, but I just don't remember that sort of thing ever happening at the Oscars. The montage of older movies in past years was more of a "greatest hits" type thing, not a "here's why these movies are still important" thing. I don't think we can chalk that up to the show gearing itself more to the average TV viewership, which they've always been after. Like when Johnny Carson hosted in the late '70s and early '80s, he was there to appeal to TV viewers. It probably also had something to do with why Bob Hope hosted for so many years: although he did have plenty of popular movies, he remained relevant to TV audiences long after he ceased to be a major movie box office draw.

 

[Zen Butler]

Yes, exactly and Talk to Her was probably my favorite film of that year. And a great year for foreign film it was. [/end Yoda] I too, understand your point a bit better Jay. Although, maybe a bit miffed at the delivery.

 

[Brandon Conway]

Marvin - I simply read the sentence wrong: I saw the words "could have" instead of "couldn't have". That's what I get for reading/posting late at night. My bad. :b

 

[Jay E]

Just a few years ago they did one for Kubrick. The awards would always have a dedication for someone really important who died, but those days may be over now.

At one time, the awards presentation use to make me fall in love with film all over again. This was the first year that it didn't, which is why I'm so upset with the presentation this year.

Sadly, the fact that most people would be happy if the show entirely omitted the "lesser" awards makes me very scared of what the future may hold. These people are just as deserving of honor and respect as Hillary Swank & Jamie Foxx.

 

[Edwin Pereyra]

I'll have to agree with Jay here. This year's telecast was not up to snuff. The Oscar show itself is becoming more of a pageantry rather than a celebration for the love of movies, the passion and what makes it great.


Based on the pre-Oscar show, it was more like the actors were promoting who designed their clothes, who did their hair and makeup and where they got their million dollar jewelry.

There were just something missing there when it comes to celebrating cinema itself.

~Edwin

 

[Holadem]

Jay, I understand your post, agree with the sentiment, and apologize for mine, though you're not blameless for ignoring the context in which yours came.

--
H

 

[Jay E]

Thanks Holadem. Perhaps I should have better explained myself in my initial post and maybe toned down the statement so I didn't come off to some people as a film snob. No hard feelings.

One positive note about the telecast was Sidney Lumet winning the LCA. Very deserving and a very classy speech. I watched the Oscars with a bunch of people at my friends house, and most of them didn't know many of the Lumet films shown in the montage. I'm sure this was the case with many viewers. I'm hoping that the montage may make a few people interested in checking some of them out (and getting some of them out on DVD too!).