I'll just give an example from a few years ago. They were announcing the nominees for Best Short Film (or Best Foreign Short if that even exists, just one of those categories nobody cares about). I knew nothing about any of them two seconds before, but they gave a quick synopsis of each movie as they announced them as nominees. As soon as the one was listed as some person's experience during the Holocaust, I turned to the people I was with and said "that's gonna win." It did.

 

I agree. I feel like so many awards are won just for the role, not for the acting. Put a lot of other actors in some of those roles, and they would just as easily win the Oscar.

New movie idea: beautiful actress/handsome actor is given significant makeup job to make them look ugly/plain. They play a mentally-handicapped Jew escaping the Holocaust.

 

3 Oscars minimum

 

Not to mention a billion dollar take world-wide.

New movie idea: beautiful actress/handsome actor is given significant makeup job to make them look ugly/plain. They play a mentally-handicapped Jew escaping the Holocaust.

 

3 Oscars minimum

 

 

Watch the episode of "American Dad" titled "Tearjerker." It should air again tonight at 12:30 on Adult Swim.

I'm trying to figure out whether the original post was referencing that or not...

Not to mention a billion dollar take world-wide.

No, those movies don't make money, they just win Oscars.

No, those movies don't make money, they just win Oscars.

 

Some do, some don't. Shindler did decent. Rain Man was huge.

No, those movies don't make money, they just win Oscars.

I believe a "Best picture" win is typically worth something on the order of tens to hundreds of millions of dollars in receipts for movies that get them.

New movie idea: beautiful actress/handsome actor is given significant makeup job to make them look ugly/plain. They play a mentally-handicapped Jew escaping the Holocaust.

 

3 Oscars minimum

 

They're escaping with their over-the-top gay brother.

 

I'm trying to figure out whether the original post was referencing that or not...

 

I've seen it, but I wasn't even thinking about it at the time.

They're escaping with their over-the-top gay brother.

 

Played by Sean Penn of course.

I won't watch the Oscars until they apologize for giving the best picture award to Annie Hall and not Star Wars.

 

 

And Sean Penn. Another thing I hate is the way the Academy pushes their own agenda. They love straight guys who play stereotypically flaming homosexuals, and the Holocaust thing I mentioned earlier. I hated that they gave Jamie Foxx Best Actor for playing Ray Charles when both Leonardo DiCaprio and Don Cheadle were better that year. And in doing so, it screwed Joaquin Phoenix the following year (not giving the same award to another guy playing a recently-deceased music legend in back-to-back years) when they gave it to PSH for Capote. Adrien Brody stole Daniel Day-Lewis' in 2003, Roberto Benigni stole everyone's, Mickey Rourke getting robbed in favor of Penn, etc. They love to push their agenda.

 

Since 1960. There have been 9 awards out of 255 given to a movie or actor/actress involving either being gay, mentally retarded or the Holocaust.

 

Best picture - Rain Man, Forrest Gump and Schindler's List.

 

Best actor - Milk, Capote, Rain Man, The Pianist, Forrest Gump and Philadelphia.

 

 

I may have missed a few, but That's not really an agenda.

So my friends and I had a drinking Oscars watch party. What a terrible 3 hours. I mean, I hate these award shows anyway - millionaires circle jerking each other over what they do as if it's equal to curing cancer. But this one in particular made us laugh because Hollywood basically admitted that this year sucked and that in order for people to be interested they had to appeal to memorable movies from the past instead of focusing on the actual nominees. There were a couple of montages for no apparent reason other than to get a "hey remember that one?" reaction, Billy Crystal as a host, doing the same schtick he did 20 years ago, the cirque du soleil thing was just odd (when I watch a movie i'm not half naked doing one-handed hand stands). Just bad.

 

Since 1960. There have been 9 awards out of 255 given to a movie or actor/actress involving either being gay, mentally retarded or the Holocaust.

 

Best picture - Rain Man, Forrest Gump and Schindler's List.

 

Best actor - Milk, Capote, Rain Man, The Pianist, Forrest Gump and Philadelphia.

 

 

I may have missed a few, but That's not really an agenda.

don't try and use your logic here. it is unwelcomed with this crowd.

Since 1960. There have been 9 awards out of 255 given to a movie or actor/actress involving either being gay, mentally retarded or the Holocaust.

 

Best picture - Rain Man, Forrest Gump and Schindler's List.

 

Best actor - Milk, Capote, Rain Man, The Pianist, Forrest Gump and Philadelphia.

 

 

I may have missed a few, but That's not really an agenda.

 

The problem is that about half of those were chosen over better candidates. It's not just those particular cases either. Slumdog Millionaire won over about half a dozen better movies that year. I can't explain it perfectly, but it was shoved down our throats as a feel-good, never-give-up-hope, help-yourself picture in a down economic year.

 

It's just that they often choose a movie or actor to make a statement rather than the most deserving one.

The problem is that about half of those were chosen over better candidates. It's not just those particular cases either. Slumdog Millionaire won over about half a dozen better movies that year. I can't explain it perfectly, but it was shoved down our throats as a feel-good, never-give-up-hope, help-yourself picture in a down economic year.

 

It's just that they often choose a movie or actor to make a statement rather than the most deserving one.

i actually just don't think that's true. with Slumdog if Milk had won you'd be making the SAME argument. Or Frost/Nixon. If any of those had won you'd be saying there was an "agenda"

don't try and use your logic here. it is unwelcomed with this crowd.

 

First of all, I hadn't noticed until very recently exactly how snide you are. Not sure if that's a recent trend or if I just hadn't noticed.

 

Secondly, I added more than just the Holocaust/gay/handicapped scenario. The Jamie Foxx Best Actor was given to him for portraying a music legend that had recently died, except it wasn't the best performance that year. His portrayal of Charles was basically Eddie Murphy's impersonation of Stevie Wonder. The following year, unfortunately for Joaquin Phoenix since he provided a better performance and the best of that year, the same situation was there. But they didn't give him the award, and I'd bet it's almost entirely based on the fact that another actor won for playing a similar character only a year before.

i actually just don't think that's true. with Slumdog if Milk had won you'd be making the SAME argument. Or Frost/Nixon. If any of those had won you'd be saying there was an "agenda"

 

I was actually saying that Frost/Nixon was the best back then. It was discussed quite a bit on this site, as I recall. We came up with a long list of movies that was superior, some that weren't even nominated.

 

And in regards to your bold part (I don't care if this gets me suspended), go f*** yourself.

First of all, I hadn't noticed until very recently exactly how snide you are. Not sure if that's a recent trend or if I just hadn't noticed.

 

Secondly, I added more than just the Holocaust/gay/handicapped scenario. The Jamie Foxx Best Actor was given to him for portraying a music legend that had recently died, except it wasn't the best performance that year. His portrayal of Charles was basically Eddie Murphy's impersonation of Stevie Wonder. The following year, unfortunately for Joaquin Phoenix since he provided a better performance and the best of that year, the same situation was there. But they didn't give him the award, and I'd bet it's almost entirely based on the fact that another actor won for playing a similar character only a year before.

you didn't respond to my actual post. you said Slumdog won over other deserving films. which ones? and had one of those won over the rest, would you be claiming IT had an agenda instead? that's all i'm asking. sorry to be snide.

 

EDIT: nevermind. thanks for responding.

Edited February 28, 201214 yr by Reddy

Off the top of my head:

 

Frost/Nixon

The Wrestler

The Dark Knight

Wall-E

The Visitor

 

I'd even say The Curious Case Of Benjamin Button, despite it being an hour too long.

Slumdog Millionaire

The Curious Case of Benjamin Button

Frost/Nixon

Milk

The Reader

 

these were the movies nominated. I think The Wrestler should have been up there as well, but it wasn't. Out of THOSE 5 - I'd have liked to see Milk win. I liked Slumdog - but I wasn't rooting for it to win. I think Milk and Frost/Nixon were both better.

 

my only point was that both of THOSE films also have an agenda. That's the point of movies. And whichever won - people would have found ways to complain. That's all I'm saying.

The problem is that about half of those were chosen over better candidates. It's not just those particular cases either. Slumdog Millionaire won over about half a dozen better movies that year. I can't explain it perfectly, but it was shoved down our throats as a feel-good, never-give-up-hope, help-yourself picture in a down economic year.

 

It's just that they often choose a movie or actor to make a statement rather than the most deserving one.

 

I see what you're saying and I totally agree. When Octavia Spencer won the Oscar, and the crowd (98% white people) gave her a standing ovation, I just busted out laughing. She may well be completely deserving, I have no idea since I didn't see the movie. But the whole scene had this subtext (read in aristocratic english accent): "Oh! Look at us. We made a film about African Americans, and I dare say she was quite good. Yes, yes. Let's congratulate ourselves her for the work we she did. We're so forward thinking unlike the rest of the uncivilized masses in this country! Bravo!"

 

Maybe if Hollywood stopped the pretentious, arrogant bulls*** every year people wouldn't think that way. But it's hard not to when people like Clooney talk about movies single-handedly starting every minority rights/acceptance movement in the country's history. Or when they beat you over the head with "movies are what make us live from one moment to the next" crap.

Slumdog Millionaire

The Curious Case of Benjamin Button

Frost/Nixon

Milk

The Reader

 

these were the movies nominated. I think The Wrestler should have been up there as well, but it wasn't. Out of THOSE 5 - I'd have liked to see Milk win. I liked Slumdog - but I wasn't rooting for it to win. I think Milk and Frost/Nixon were both better.

 

my only point was that both of THOSE films also have an agenda. That's the point of movies. And whichever won - people would have found ways to complain. That's all I'm saying.

 

Milk was also better, but I think Frost/Nixon was clearly the best of the nominated bunch (haven't seen The Reader yet).

 

And I don't care if the movie has an agenda, as long as it's the best. I don't like that the Academy (IMO) often uses its agenda to take movies with the same agenda and raise them above better ones.

I see what you're saying and I totally agree. When Octavia Spencer won the Oscar, and the crowd (98% white people) gave her a standing ovation, I just busted out laughing. She may well be completely deserving, I have no idea since I didn't see the movie. But the whole scene had this subtext (read in aristocratic english accent): "Oh! Look at us. We made a film about African Americans, and I dare say she was quite good. Yes, yes. Let's congratulate ourselves her for the work we she did. We're so forward thinking unlike the rest of the uncivilized masses in this country! Bravo!"

 

Maybe if Hollywood stopped the pretentious, arrogant bulls*** every year people wouldn't think that way. But it's hard not to when people like Clooney talk about movies single-handedly starting every minority rights/acceptance movement in the country's history. Or when they beat you over the head with "movies are what make us live from one moment to the next" crap.

 

Yup.

I see what you're saying and I totally agree. When Octavia Spencer won the Oscar, and the crowd (98% white people) gave her a standing ovation, I just busted out laughing. She may well be completely deserving, I have no idea since I didn't see the movie. But the whole scene had this subtext (read in aristocratic english accent): "Oh! Look at us. We made a film about African Americans, and I dare say she was quite good. Yes, yes. Let's congratulate ourselves her for the work we she did. We're so forward thinking unlike the rest of the uncivilized masses in this country! Bravo!"

 

Maybe if Hollywood stopped the pretentious, arrogant bulls*** every year people wouldn't think that way. But it's hard not to when people like Clooney talk about movies single-handedly starting every minority rights/acceptance movement in the country's history. Or when they beat you over the head with "movies are what make us live from one moment to the next" crap.

wow. so here's the thing. actors and directors and filmmakers think their industry is important? what??? how dare they! Jenks do you think your job matters? do you think your job makes a difference? should we yell at you for saying so? come the f*** on.

 

and they were not giving her a standing ovation because she was black. Black actresses have won awards before. No longer is it groundbreaking. They were applauding because she's a friend who'd been working in the industry for 20+ years who FINALLY got offered a role that wasn't filled with fart jokes, and she delivered in a huge way. I thought it was awesome. that's what you don't get. the oscars are a party for this big group of friends to celebrate the good work they did in the last year. it's just like an end of the year office party, just televised on national tv. you don't like it, don't watch it.

wow. so here's the thing. actors and directors and filmmakers think their industry is important? what??? how dare they! Jenks do you think your job matters? do you think your job makes a difference? should we yell at you for saying so? come the f*** on.

 

and they were not giving her a standing ovation because she was black. Black actresses have won awards before. No longer is it groundbreaking. They were applauding because she's a friend who'd been working in the industry for 20+ years who FINALLY got offered a role that wasn't filled with fart jokes, and she delivered in a huge way. I thought it was awesome. that's what you don't get. the oscars are a party for this big group of friends to celebrate the good work they did in the last year. it's just like an end of the year office party, just televised on national tv. you don't like it, don't watch it.

 

It's a gigantic circle jerk is what it is. If it was all about friends getting together to congratulate themselves then do it in the Bel-Air Hilton ball room and shut the door. Instead it's an industry created slobfest that is broadcast to the world. It's made worse by the continuing reminder about how important it is.

 

 

It's a gigantic circle jerk is what it is. If it was all about friends getting together to congratulate themselves then do it in the Bel-Air Hilton ball room and shut the door. Instead it's an industry created slobfest that is broadcast to the world. It's made worse by the continuing reminder about how important it is.

sounds like you dont wanna watch. great thing about this country? freedom to not watch if you don't want to.