Hollywood is trash ,too political ,and UNFAIR by Windwalker

And *ahem* didn't deserve it.

Just like Star Wars will win multiple awards because it's the "end" of an era.

It's also just all a scam. Do you really think that its about "good cinema" these days? I mean, has anyone seen 1963 Orcar winner Lawrence of Arabia. It won because of great-just-about-everything.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 18, 2006 10:47 AM

KSC

I beg to differ on BOTH points. LOTR has steller acting performances and SW wont win anything! Lucasfilm, one of the biggest effects houses in the world still lost to The Matrix in '99 and The Two Towers in '02. As much as I love SW, they are just fanboy cannon fodder at this point. They try to revolutionize and end up getting beat down by fledgling artists. As far as acting, in a SW movie,dreadful at best.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 18, 2006 10:56 AM

KENT

The gay agenda!
The widespread homosexual conspiracy!
The enormous pressure from society to make you fornicate with people of your own gender!
Hollywood constantly forcing you to watch movies with gay people in them!

It's madness! Madness!

Give me a break. It's a great movie, and getting the attention and credit it deserves... deal with it.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 18, 2006 11:03 AM

I'm also not disputing the fact that SW is crap nowadays, but it's the principle of the thing, they will win because it's then end of the "epic saga."

LotR won for the same reason, it wasn't RotK that won specifically, it was all the films put together. My opinion on it, the acting was okay, the effects: not so great. The directing...well, don't get me started on PJ.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 18, 2006 11:05 AM

KSC

Quote:
Originally posted by FlipDog:
...well, don't get me started on PJ.

Well considering he's one of my favorite directors from Braindead to Kong, I wont.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 18, 2006 11:06 AM

EMPXENU

LotR's effects "not so great"? What kind of standard do you go by?

----
"I think, therefore I am... I think"

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 18, 2006 11:14 AM

By "not-so-great" I mean it looked fake at times. For example, my favorite piece of bad green-screening: Aragorn's speech to the troops. The backdrop had no depth and just so flat. The CG in FotR and TTT was mcuh better than RotK. It looked rushed and thrown together.

My standards are along the lines of not getting up and saying "It's a beautiful CG day outside." (As in PotC) My standards are about using models and techniques that don't 100% take place in a computer. Yes, there are some things that work, but it's like shooting on digital as compared to film. There's no personality to it, it's "too perfect." Oops, I screwed up...oh well, fix it in post.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 18, 2006 11:21 AM

Well, what makes good cinema (or just about anything) is subjective, and what one person thinks is "great", another person can see as "poop" (I don't care how many art schools you went to, I wouldn't dirty dog vomit by putting a Picasso next to it.)

But, I agree with Windwalker in that there is certainly a political agenda in Hollywood -- and it's far left. Naturally, I'm a conservative who's so far to the right that next to me Ronald Reagan was commie.

But, in all seriousness, did anyone notice how "The Passion of the Christ" was ignored by the award-nominating powers that be last year? Granted, I saw the film, and I didn't think it was stellar, but the point is, if the film were something that degraded Christ, it probably would've been nominated for fifty thousand awards (and won most of them).

It's no secret that Hollywood is not only left of center, but left of left. Even though family oriented movies continue doing well at the box office, they prefer to throw their awards at liberal garbage. Go figure.

Then good taste never was one of Hollywood's strong points. Just look at Firefly's multi-seasoned run.

That's my opinion.

"You don't pay me to talk pretty."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 18, 2006 11:31 AM

A-freaking-men!

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 18, 2006 11:37 AM

DERANGEDMILK

Quote:
Originally posted by Kent:
The gay agenda!
The widespread homosexual conspiracy!
The enormous pressure from society to make you fornicate with people of your own gender!
Hollywood constantly forcing you to watch movies with gay people in them!

It's madness! Madness!

Give me a break. It's a great movie, and getting the attention and credit it deserves... deal with it.

Thankyou Kent.
-e

"Storms getting worse."
"We'll pass through it soon enough."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 18, 2006 11:50 AM

I beg to differ
It's just another part of the Hollywood overkill.

I've seen things you people wouldn't believe. Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser gate. All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. Time to die.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 18, 2006 1:05 PM

Poop is a good term

I've seen things you people wouldn't believe. Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser gate. All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. Time to die.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 18, 2006 1:18 PM

SAMEERTIA

I think "Brokeback Mountain" was one of the best films of the year. The script, cinematography, and acting were all superb.

Have you seen it, and if so can you point out to me where it is undeserving of any of the recognition that it has recieved? Because I've seen it twice, once caught up in it and once with a more critical eye, and have found it flawless.

I think comparitively it is a slightly better made film than "Walk The Line" - the other big favorite at the Golden Globes.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 18, 2006 1:22 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Windwalker:
Poop is a good term

Would poop by any other name smell as sweet?

Of course, you know there are going to be people defending other people's right to poop. Not that I have anything against anyone pooping -- but, I'd prefer they do it in private, and not expect the rest of the world to watch and applaud while they do.

"Sir, I think you have a problem with your brain being missing."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 18, 2006 1:30 PM

I've seen things you people wouldn't believe. Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser gate. All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. Time to die.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 18, 2006 2:21 PM

Only the nose knows

Quote:
Originally posted by cartoon:
Quote:
Originally posted by Windwalker:
Poop is a good term

Would poop by any other name smell as sweet?

Of course, you know there are going to be people defending other people's right to poop. Not that I have anything against anyone pooping -- but, I'd prefer they do it in private, and not expect the rest of the world to watch and applaud while they do.

"Sir, I think you have a problem with your brain being missing."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 18, 2006 2:28 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SameErtia:
I think "Brokeback Mountain" was one of the best films of the year. The script, cinematography, and acting were all superb.

Have you seen it, and if so can you point out to me where it is undeserving of any of the recognition that it has recieved? Because I've seen it twice, once caught up in it and once with a more critical eye, and have found it flawless.

I think comparitively it is a slightly better made film than "Walk The Line" - the other big favorite at the Golden Globes.

I thought it was mediocre and definitely not deserving of all the praise that it gets. However, I’ve thought that about a lot of films that were highly praised so maybe that doesn’t mean much. In the end, I’ve never been one for love stories. “Walk the Line” was miles better then “Brokeback Mountain,” but I’m a big Johnny Cash fan, so maybe that biases me. Still, I doubt I’ll ever see “Walk the Line” again. It was, after all, a love story.

But back to the point at hand, Hollywood is a joke. It always has been. It’s a place were trendy politics, mostly Left-wing, is more important then art. And so it is no surprise to anyone that in the midst of gay-rights trendy politics fad, Hollywood comes out with a basket full of gay films and gives them all Golden Globes. In the end, however good these films were artistically is second to Hollywood’s shallow and self-involving desire to sit around in trendy coffee shops and pat themselves on the back for being so damn trendy. No one can honestly take any of it seriously, and that is not only unfortunate for the films, many of which are pretty good, but also for the socio-politics, some of which is actually important, but Hollywood wouldn’t know an important issue if it fell into their tofu and pineapple salad while they are doing Pilates on the veranda overlooking all those people in housing projects in East Hollywood they couldn’t give a shit about.

So there.

Oh, he's so full of manure, that man! We could lay him in the dirt and grow another one just like him.
-- Ruby

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 18, 2006 3:12 PM

JUBELLATE

The day I care about award shows is the day I take myself out back and end my miserable life with a 12 gauge. You can assured that day is a long way off.

The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule. – H.L. Mencken

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 18, 2006 3:19 PM

MAUGWAI

I'm curious. How many people who keep going on about how aweful Hollywood is have actually lived here or been involved in the industry? It's really easy to talk crap about a place in which you've never actually spent any time, especially if you've never been in the industry and have no idea how films really operate.

"Dear diary, today I was pompous and my sister was crazy."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 18, 2006 3:38 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by maugwai:
I'm curious. How many people who keep going on about how aweful Hollywood is have actually lived here or been involved in the industry? It's really easy to talk crap about a place in which you've never actually spent any time, especially if you've never been in the industry and have no idea how films really operate.

I've never been inside a colon, either, but I know poo when I see it.

Just my opinion.

""Time for some thrillin' heroics."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 18, 2006 4:04 PM

JUBELLATE

oh, I like movies and I like people who make good movies, but all the self congratulation in the world could not stir my interest.

The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule. – H.L. Mencken

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 18, 2006 5:36 PM

One problem with the Hollywood Overkill theroy is that Brokeback Mountain is that it's an Independent film... a movie that was made out of Ang Lee's pocket. He didn't go to some big production company... he did it all on his own.

One thing that is cool is that Independent movies are being recognized... and they're coming into their own... there was quite a few good ones last year and I guess... there are quite a bit this year.

LOTR:ROTK won all the awards they were nominated for because first off... the Academy turned a blind eye to TTT and Fellowship... Reason being is that had they awarded them awards for those movies... it'd be snubbing people in three years instead of one.

Star Wars won't get much attention at the oscars... maybe "Best Score" but nothing huge... I mean they won "Favorite Drama" at the People's Choice Awards... but this year was a joke... look at who won.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 19, 2006 6:49 AM

MAUGWAI

Quote:
Originally posted by cartoon:
Quote:
Originally posted by maugwai:
I'm curious. How many people who keep going on about how aweful Hollywood is have actually lived here or been involved in the industry? It's really easy to talk crap about a place in which you've never actually spent any time, especially if you've never been in the industry and have no idea how films really operate.

I've never been inside a colon, either, but I know poo when I see it.

Just my opinion.

""Time for some thrillin' heroics."

So in other words, you don't actually know what you're talking about. So let me school you.

If you really look at the industry, this year has been great for the film industry's state. Lately, the only movies executives want to greenlight are existing properties because they're safe. Executives get fired and promoted at the drop of a hat, and every movie that tanks is one more way to lose your job. Taking a risk is, well, it's just too risky.

So that's how we get so many adaptations and remakes: they're safe. By the way, Serenity actually falls into that category.

That's also why nobody makes "R" rated comedies anymore. Most movies are geared to adolescent boys because they tend to go to the movies more than anyone else, but they can't get into an "R" rated film.

Yet this year, King Kong did not do as well as exepected. Neither did Memoirs of a Geisha or Be Cool. Formulaic romantic comedies had mediocre returns. (anybody remember The Wedding Date?) Batman Returns didn't do well because it was Batman; it did well because it was good.

Sure, some crappy movies did well. People still pay to see crap. But the biggest surprise to everyone out here were two comedies: Wedding Crashers and Forty-Year-Old Virgin. Those are "R" rated comedies that smoked the crap out of the competition. The trades can't stop talking about Wedding.

Then there were two brilliant films that were completely original properties: the contorversial Munich and the controversial Brokeback Mountian. If there's one thing executives have learned this year, it's that we're not all adolescent boys. The execs who took risks and greenlit those pictures, especially Brokeback Mountain, will be rewarded.

Hollywood is first and foremost a business. Everyone involved needs to make money or they lose their job. Keep going to good films and they will keep making good films. But don't call everybody out here names. There are idiots within the industry, just like in any job. But there is some amazing talent out here too.

"Dear diary, today I was pompous and my sister was crazy."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 19, 2006 6:55 AM

SPINLAND

Thanks for a breath of fresh air and intelligence, maugwai. Although I can't help but wonder: what does this thread have to do with general discussions about Firefly? Isn't there a different forum for real world events?

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
"That's what governments are for, [to] get in a man's way." -- Malcolm Reynolds

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 19, 2006 7:46 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Spinland:
Thanks for a breath of fresh air and intelligence, maugwai. Although I can't help but wonder: what does this thread have to do with general discussions about Firefly? Isn't there a different forum for real world events?

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
"That's what governments are for, [to] get in a man's way." -- Malcolm Reynolds

OK hair splitter. It is relevent to FireFly
I was ranting about how Serenity didn't get zip and Hollywood has overlooked one of the greater SciFi flicks of the 21st century for a sexualy oriented piece of garbage.
FireFly/Serenity are going be let it slip into obscurity by the Hollywood moguls
Just wait

I've seen things you people wouldn't believe. Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser gate. All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. Time to die.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 19, 2006 8:00 AM

SPINLAND

*shrug* Okay, I'll grant that. It's definitely disappointing that Serenity got snubbed, I agree. But what makes Brokeback Mountain any more a "sexually oriented piece of garbage" than any other romantic comedy/drama out there?

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
"That's what governments are for, [to] get in a man's way." -- Malcolm Reynolds

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 19, 2006 8:14 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by maugwai:
So in other words, you don't actually know what you're talking about. So let me school you.

Know what I'm talking about as regards to producing a movie? No. Guilty as charged, there.

Know what I'm talking about when I see a turd dropped in front of me and someone tries to tell me that it's "art". Sorry. I beg to differ.

Correct me if I'm wrong, Windwalker (as this was YOUR thread), this thread wasn't about what's popular or makes money, and what isn't popular and/or loses money, and why.

It's about how Hollywood goes all googoo-eyed over radical crap and bows down to itself as the purveyor of progression, when all it's doing is alienating a huge chunk of it's audience by it's self-aggrandizing behavior of material so far to the left, that a majority of Americans wouldn't wipe their posteriors with it.

As to the comment as to how one can't understand how something works if one has never worked in that field -- my previous comment was a more than sufficient reply to that allegation.

In case it needs some clarification -- I've never been inside a colon and watched the process of excrement being produced. I can't give you a specific list of ingredients or the chemical make-up of the product, or venture a guess as to the scheduling of the production or expulsion of said product. But, I can certainly recognize the end result when I see it, smell it ,or (unfortunately) step in it.

And, as I also said previously, I haven't anything against anyone pooping -- but, I'd prefer they do it in private, and not expect the rest of the world to watch and applaud while they do (which is exactly what Hollywood is doing everytime they bestow "honors" on their radical garbage).

I agree, Windwalker, "Serenity" deserved acknowledgement from the industry and was ignored. As I've repeatedly said elsewhere, Summer Glau's performance alone deserved a nod. It's a darn shame that the industry, instead choses to glorify its excrement.

""Time for some thrillin' heroics."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 19, 2006 8:29 AM

GEEJAKE

Quote:
Originally posted by derangedmilk:
Quote:
Originally posted by Kent:
The gay agenda!
The widespread homosexual conspiracy!
The enormous pressure from society to make you fornicate with people of your own gender!
Hollywood constantly forcing you to watch movies with gay people in them!

It's madness! Madness!

Give me a break. It's a great movie, and getting the attention and credit it deserves... deal with it.

I thought it was piece of crap!! If you liked the film great, but if you dont think that this film is part of a far left agenda your kidding yourself...I dont mind movies that have a progressive message in it ( i am a huge fan of Robert Altman,Mike Nichols,John Sayles etc..)but i am getting tired of progressive messages being disguised as movies...Nice rant but it has nothing to do with people saying "hollywood wants you to be gay" the film in question had very little reason to me made much less raved about....

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 19, 2006 9:23 AM

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 19, 2006 9:30 AM

LOL

Wind, you're just killin' me with these pics.

LOL

If I didn't recognize my Dad's favorite comedians (I loved them, too), I'd think you were putting up pics of an earlier version of the current film you're complaining about.

BTW, I know this is a bit off-topic, but I prefered L&H's silents over their talkies. Unfortunately, I haven't seen head nor tail of their silents since PBS (yes, believe it or not, at one time I actually watched PBS) ran "The Dawn of L&H" (I think that was the mid 1970's).

"You don't pay me to talk pretty."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 19, 2006 10:10 AM

Why do you keep posting that?

The thing is, Maugwai is right to most extents. I work in the business, its not nice, its not happy, and people are stupid. Yes, good films usually get snubbed. Unless its an artsy fartsy film that is uncharacteristically well made. And the gou se eye-candy is loved for eternity.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 19, 2006 10:38 AM

NEVERED

Cartoon and Windwalker: have you even watched the movie?

or do you just call it shit (which seems to be the only thing you can say) out of habit?

Brokeback Mountain isn't getting awards because it 'makes a statement' or 'progresses the hollywood liberal agenda' it's getting awards because it was a damn fine movie with brilliant acting, and wasn't another cookie cutter romantic comedy, like so much of the garbage being released these days.

sure Serenity wasn't recognised. but you know what? i'm not really suprised, nor particularly angry. hell, i can pretty much see why they didn't (though i may not agree with them)

Serenity was a great action flick, an enormously entertaining sci-fi thriller, and overall just lots of fun. i really had a good time watching it.

but compare it with what else is out there, and the acting isn't really top notch and the directing falls short of most great dramas.

i would watch Serenity over anything else out there at the drop of a hat, but I can't really say that fillion acted better than ledger or that whedon directed better than lee.

Serenity was fun, entertaining, thrilling, and any number of other superlatives; but that's not the stuff that wins awards at the globes.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 19, 2006 11:02 AM

Actually i like Mel Brooks Westerns and movies
they deal with the subject more realistically
I think the Gay Movement takes itself too seriously

After a while it gets boring.
the references i don't mind but I see a trend in the different shows that I watch and being of a scientific nature i see a pattern and I know how propaganda works ...being that i was in an intelligence group for years.

The profile is there.
Or are we really that dumb not to see a blitz of political trash when we see it.

i say look at the pattern and count the references in your shows.
Environmental comments, sexual orientation comments, morality comments.

Hide and watch as i used to say in the bush

I've seen things you people wouldn't believe. Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser gate. All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. Time to die.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 19, 2006 11:24 AM

CITIZEN

Quote:
Well considering he's one of my favorite directors from Braindead to Kong, I wont.

Have you seen Bad Taste?

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
The statistics on sanity are that one out of every four persons is suffering from some sort of mental illness. Think of your three best friends -- if they're okay, then it's you.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 19, 2006 11:35 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by nevered:
Cartoon and Windwalker: have you even watched the movie?

No, I haven't seen the film. I don't go to see films in which I have no interest.

And I don't go see films I am interested in without first reading reviews by critics whom I respect and trust. (I've only gone to see one film in the last five years for which I first hadn't read one of their reviews, and that was "Star Wars: Episode 3". Yes, I even read reviews of "Serenity" before I went to see it.)

Why do I read reviews even before going to see a film I'm interested in? Because I'm offended by blatant sexuality, inordinant foul language and/or certain subject matters. As my income is limited and hard earned, I chose not to waste it on things which will offend me, or in support of causes to which I do not ascribe.

There have been a multitude of movies I "wanted" to see in the past years which I passed on after reading a review. BTW, I don't read reviews which just say "Fantastic!" or "Hated it!" I read reviews which provide me with the detailed info I need in order to make a well-informed decision.

Have I always agreed with the critics whose reviews I check? No. Is the information they provide me always accurate? Yes.

Firstly, I had (and still have) no desire to see this film. Secondly, the reviews for it (on which I depend) clearly show that it contains one or more of the criteria which are clearly red flags for me, and therefore cause to me pass on it even if I had been interested in seeing it.

Quote:
Originally posted by nevered:
Serenity ... (snip) but compare it with what else is out there, and the acting isn't really top notch and the directing falls short of most great dramas.

Well, I sort of agree, and sort of (respectfully) disagree with you, here. And I am not speaking as a Browncoat, but as someone who has seen several hundred films in threatres and probably ten thousand more on TV.

"Serenity" doesn't rate in my top 10. It does rate in my top 20, not because it's "great art", but because (if for no other reason) it's the only film in my life which I watched 5 times in 3 days -- and I felt if a film could addict me to it that much, it has to find a place in my list somewhere.

Regarding the acting, I do think Summer Glau's performance was outstanding. I won't go into details, as I've already done that here elsewhere, but she covered such a wide range of emotions so well -- and for someone so young, with relatively little or no major acting experience behind her -- for her to be ignored is criminal in my opinion.

Should "Serenity" have been nominated for "Best Picture"? Heck no. "Most enjoyable", perhaps. "Most addicting", definitely. Should Summer's performance have gotten a nod? In my opinion -- not just a nod, but a win.

Have I seen every film made this year, so I can compare it to them? No. Obviously not. (Thank God.) I can only base it on what I have seen, and compared to every acting performance I've ever seen, it may not be the very best. But it certainly warrants more notice and respect than it's been given.

Perhaps if Summer kissed a girl in "Serenity", she'd have been nominated. Alas, "Serenity" wasn't pushing enough of a political agenda to get Hollywood's attention.

"These are stone killers, little man. They ain't cuddly like me."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 19, 2006 2:42 PM

In other news... the OFCA cast their winners...

Best Picture
A History of Violence

Best Director
David Cronenberg, A History of Violence

Best Actor
Philip Seymour Hoffman, Capote

Best Actress
Reese Witherspoon, Walk the Line

Best Supporting Actor
Mickey Rourke, Sin City

Best Supporting Actress
Maria Bello, A History of Violence

Best Original Screenplay
George Clooney and Grant Heslov, Good Night, and Good Luck.

Best Adapted Screenplay
Larry McMurtry & Diana Ossana, Brokeback Mountain

Best Cinematography
Robert Rodriguez, Sin City

Best Editing
Robert Rodriguez, Sin City

Best Score
Gustavo Santaolalla, Brokeback Mountain

Best Documentary
Grizzly Man

Best Foreign Language Film
Downfall

Best Animated Feature
Wallace & Gromit in The Curse of the Were-Rabbit

Breakthrough Filmmaker
Paul Haggis, Crash

Breakthrough Performer
Owen Kline, The Squid and the Whale

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 19, 2006 3:03 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by maugwai:
I'm curious. How many people who keep going on about how aweful Hollywood is have actually lived here or been involved in the industry? It's really easy to talk crap about a place in which you've never actually spent any time, especially if you've never been in the industry and have no idea how films really operate.

I’ve never been to Hollywood, and I know nothing about the industry. But then I’m not talking about either of those things. I’m not even talking about the movies. I’m talking about a subculture driven by fabulously wealthy and famous people who are completely divorced from reality. And anyone who thinks that all these gay films appeared out of nowhere and all ended up winning awards by coincidence is probably also a little shy in the reality department.

But that's just me. What do I know.

Oh, he's so full of manure, that man! We could lay him in the dirt and grow another one just like him.
-- Ruby

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 19, 2006 8:31 PM

So... why didn't De-Lovely get all the praise these movies got... hell why didn't Alexander get all the praise it's supposed to get... I mean... come on they both have Gay references to them...

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 20, 2006 2:19 AM

I don't know anything about De-Lovely, but Alexander stunk. However, this just proves my point. Alexander came out in 2004 and so did De-Lovely. These movies would seem to all a part of the exact same phenomenon.

Oh, he's so full of manure, that man! We could lay him in the dirt and grow another one just like him.
-- Ruby

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 20, 2006 3:15 AM

CAUSAL

Quote:
Originally posted by Kent:
The gay agenda!
The widespread homosexual conspiracy!
The enormous pressure from society to make you fornicate with people of your own gender!
Hollywood constantly forcing you to watch movies with gay people in them!

It's madness! Madness!

Give me a break. It's a great movie, and getting the attention and credit it deserves... deal with it.

Actually, I believe that the point isn't so much that this will make people become gay; rather, the idea seems to be to normalize homosexuality in a culture that has historically been hostile to it.

________________________________________________________________________
I wish I had a magical wish-granting plank.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 20, 2006 5:59 AM

QUEENOFTHENORTH

Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
I don't know anything about De-Lovely, but Alexander stunk. However, this just proves my point. Alexander came out in 2004 and so did De-Lovely. These movies would seem to all a part of the exact same phenomenon.

Oh, he's so full of manure, that man! We could lay him in the dirt and grow another one just like him.
-- Ruby

Yeah, Alexander was quite possibly one of the worst movies I've ever seen. The sad part is, I really wanted it to be good. I love the story of Alexander the Great. But the movie - ewwgh.

"I'm having one of those things - a headache with pictures."

"Of course I'm right. And if I'm not, may we all be horribly crushed from above somehow."

Like books? Go to this thread: http://www.fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=2&t=14862
to find out how to buy mine!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 20, 2006 8:43 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
I don't know anything about De-Lovely, but Alexander stunk. However, this just proves my point. Alexander came out in 2004 and so did De-Lovely. These movies would seem to all a part of the exact same phenomenon.

Okay here's one... go watch "The Lion in Winter" with Kathrine Hepburn...

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 20, 2006 8:51 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by TheCollector:
Okay here's one... go watch "The Lion in Winter" with Kathrine Hepburn...

I've seen "The Lion In Winter", and the bit I believe you're referring to was just a passing reference, hardly a full-blown, in your face endorsement like in many of today's films. Granted, that was then, and this is now, and things have changed a whole lot since then.

BTW, that passing reference is based on an essentially unproven historical assumption about Richard I. I've read things which show things were one way, while other things show they were the other way. Of course, given that homosexuals weren't applauded for their behavior in the 12th century as they are today, there would be little written evidence if Richard actually were, so it's practically impossible to prove, one way or the other.

As a side note, that film features one of my favorite exchanges of character dialogue in any movie, ever. The "Let's strike a flint and find out" line, and the bits which immediately preceeded it.

"These are stone killers, little man. They ain't cuddly like me."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 20, 2006 9:28 AM

PINBALLWIZARD

It's just the nature of Hollywood (and many american buisnesses in general) to find some new idea that captivates, intrigues, or outrages the population, then suck it's potential dry. Then they move on to the next new idea. This has been going on for more than 200 years, since the pre-dawn of the Industrial Age, and there's no way it's going to stop now. Buisness and art is frequently a bad combination.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 20, 2006 11:49 AM

NEVERED

Quote:
Originally posted by cartoon:
Quote:
Originally posted by nevered:
Cartoon and Windwalker: have you even watched the movie?

No, I haven't seen the film. I don't go to see films in which I have no interest.

In other words, you're complaining that a movie you've never seen doesn't deserve an award?

who the hell are you to judge?

you haven't even seen it!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 20, 2006 12:18 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by nevered:
In other words, you're complaining that a movie you've never seen doesn't deserve an award?

who the hell are you to judge?

you haven't even seen it!

And, apparently YOU didn't bother to read my entire post. Or you'd have seen the sufficiently detailed reason about why I didn't go and waste my money on something, based upon specific, minutely-detailed reviews from sites I respect and trust.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 20, 2006 12:29 PM