The Academy Awards

aerius · Post by **aerius** » 2005-02-27 11:40pm

Gandalf wrote:I'd say it's to reach out to the teen markets. IIRC they don't watch the Academy Awards that much. If at all.

I can't blame them. I don't have the patience to sit through 3 hours of shitty acceptance speeches, nevermind the teenies. I'd rather do homework than watch the Oscars, it's that bad.

Post by **Gandalf** » 2005-02-27 11:46pm

aerius wrote:
Gandalf wrote:I'd say it's to reach out to the teen markets. IIRC they don't watch the Academy Awards that much. If at all.
I can't blame them. I don't have the patience to sit through 3 hours of shitty acceptance speeches, nevermind the teenies. I'd rather do homework than watch the Oscars, it's that bad.

They lost me the moment I saw a tap-dancing routine attached to Saving Private Ryan. I don't know what I was doing there, but that's when they lost me.

Does anyone who watches the Oscars know if the limit they've placed on acceptance speeches has done anything?

SylasGaunt · Post by **SylasGaunt** » 2005-02-28 01:22am

Oscar winner Jamie Foxx.. brain... locking.. up *falls over*

Odd that the first role I remember seeing him in was as a dog-ugly woman on In Living Color

Durandal · Post by **Durandal** » 2005-02-28 01:24am

Gandalf wrote:Does anyone who watches the Oscars know if the limit they've placed on acceptance speeches has done anything?

No. The people who usually wrap up in 30 seconds or less, like the small documentary film makers (Michael Moore notwithstanding), editors and technicians are people with enough respect not to think they can just take all day up there anyway. So they play by the rules.

The big stars like Hillary Swank and Adrien Brody, however, parade high over everyone else, telling the orchestra that they can't be played off. After all, they were too stupid to prepare a 30-second-or-less acceptance speech and are incapable of accepting an award in a dignified manner.

And the orchestra lets them get away with it. If I were the conductor, I'd have those fuckers drowned out the second they told me not to do my job.

Post by **Dalton** » 2005-02-28 01:56am

Dalton wrote:What was that music playing under that short clip about film restoration?

And now I forgot how it went. Fuck!

Styphon · Post by **Styphon** » 2005-02-28 04:30am

couple things...

Robin William's speech on animation: best part of the show.

I'm really not that thrilled with Lemony Snicket beating out The Passion... I mean, we've got Bond villain look-alikes with impossibly fake eyebrows beating out some of the most painfully realistic wound make-up in memory... WTF?

ok, so, what's with The Aviator winning practically every award it's nominated for? is there a new rule that a single film gets to completely sweep things since they let the Return of the King do it?

and I really quit with the Oscars after 2002 when everybody won just for being Black... I seem to remember them giving a lifetime achievment award to Sidney Poitier and thinking, "wow, he looks pissed that they're giving him an award just to go with the Black theme tonight"... mostly watched them tonight because my mom asked me to record them for her...

Isil`Zha · Post by **Isil`Zha** » 2005-02-28 04:45am

SylasGaunt wrote:Oscar winner Jamie Foxx.. brain... locking.. up *falls over*

Odd that the first role I remember seeing him in was as a dog-ugly woman on In Living Color

ugh, as soon as I saw him nominated I said "bah, the guy that played the handicapped/crippled person always wins best actor."

Robert Treder · Post by **Robert Treder** » 2005-02-28 06:53am

Dalton wrote:Hell, they replaced Minnie Driver with Beyonce to sing one of the songs so they could get bigger draw.

Which was a good choice, considering that, being a professional singstress, Beyonce is better than Driver. Plus, Beyonce is fine as hell.

I don't get why people are bitching about Jamie Foxx winning. Out of the nominees, who gave a better performance? Did any of you actually see Ray?

Crown · Post by **Crown** » 2005-02-28 07:47am

I hear a rumour that Prince was going to present an Oscar, true?

Caius · Post by **Caius** » 2005-02-28 07:52am

yeah prince presented best song.

Crown · Post by **Crown** » 2005-02-28 07:53am

Caius wrote:yeah prince presented best song.

Sweet.

jegs2 · Post by **jegs2** » 2005-02-28 08:40am

Saw the news about the Oscars. Somehow, watching a bunch of overpaid and overcelebrated actors and actresses celebrate themselves for a full night has just never appealed to me as anything but wasted time I'd never get back.

Chmee · Post by **Chmee** » 2005-02-28 09:31am

Durandal wrote:
Gandalf wrote:Does anyone who watches the Oscars know if the limit they've placed on acceptance speeches has done anything?
No. The people who usually wrap up in 30 seconds or less, like the small documentary film makers (Michael Moore notwithstanding), editors and technicians are people with enough respect not to think they can just take all day up there anyway. So they play by the rules.

The big stars like Hillary Swank and Adrien Brody, however, parade high over everyone else, telling the orchestra that they can't be played off. After all, they were too stupid to prepare a 30-second-or-less acceptance speech and are incapable of accepting an award in a dignified manner.

And the orchestra lets them get away with it. If I were the conductor, I'd have those fuckers drowned out the second they told me not to do my job.

Anybody who would rush Hillary Swank offstage should be beaten like a redheaded stepchild. They understand their audience, nobody is tuning in to see the best lighting effects guy.

SAMAS · Post by **SAMAS** » 2005-02-28 09:39am

Isil`Zha wrote:
SylasGaunt wrote:Oscar winner Jamie Foxx.. brain... locking.. up *falls over*

Odd that the first role I remember seeing him in was as a dog-ugly woman on In Living Color
ugh, as soon as I saw him nominated I said "bah, the guy that played the handicapped/crippled person always wins best actor."

Check out some of the movie's reviews. Even the ones that said the movie was bad were praising his work in it.

Better yet, see the movie, and try to find Jamie Foxx in it. A lot of good actors can put in good or even great performances. But all the same, their presence often overrides their role.

Foxx won that Oscar because he let the role override him. It also gave me a new appreciation for Superman. Lemme explain:

By the end of the movie, when he had that vision of his mother and brother, and they showed him without his glasses, I had actually forgotten it was Jamie Foxx playing Ray.

IoW, I can see now how Clark Kent can disguise himself with just a pair of glasses.

Dahak · Post by **Dahak** » 2005-02-28 12:39pm

Styphon wrote:ok, so, what's with The Aviator winning practically every award it's nominated for? is there a new rule that a single film gets to completely sweep things since they let the Return of the King do it?

*cough*Titanic, Dances with Wolves, Ben Hur, Gone with the Wind,...*
It is nothing new that some films sweep most Oscars. Most Oscars by Film

And btw, Aviator didn't win any of the "Major" Oscars.

The Kernel · Post by **The Kernel** » 2005-02-28 12:47pm

Robert Treder wrote: I don't get why people are bitching about Jamie Foxx winning. Out of the nominees, who gave a better performance? Did any of you actually see Ray?

He was good, no question, but Don Cheadle turned in a better performance in Hotel Rwanda. The thing about this is, the Oscars are so political that Foxx was predestined to win because of a number of external factors that have nothing to do with his acting performance. This is the problem at the heart of the Oscars: instead of giving awards based purely on merit, they also take politics into consideration.

Stravo · Post by **Stravo** » 2005-02-28 12:53pm

I haven't seen Ray, I'll eventually get to it, but can you call it acting when you're doing an impression of Ray Charles? Jamie Fox is a comedian that specializes in impressions. Is it that much of a stetch for him to do impressions of Ray Charles? His work in Collateral says alot more about his acting talent than a two hour long impression routine of Ray Charles I would imagine. At least in Collateral he is not imitating a famous person, he's building his own unique character.

Overall this was a BORING show, no real surprises and nothing to be emotionally invested in. I didn't see a single best picture nominee so I could care less who won. Probably the first Oscars I can think of in recent memory that I surfed through and didn't really watch.

Chris Rock was safe. Boringly safe. Cowardly safe. But the no good joke goes unpunished reward has to go to Sean Penn who HOURS later had to attack Chris on the joking about Jude Law and his career. Hey, Sean, here's a dollar, buy yourself a sense of humor ass.

Col. Crackpot · Post by **Col. Crackpot** » 2005-02-28 12:58pm

gah! i hate the Oscars. Even more i hate the hours of pre-award show programming that assaultus with high school culture by reminding us that you are only as good as the label on your clothes. I watched law and order reruns and played with my puppy.

Pablo Sanchez · Post by **Pablo Sanchez** » 2005-02-28 01:10pm

Gandalf wrote:"WAAHH! Hollywood has an anti-Christian bias!" - Fundies, tomorrow.

I didn't watch the Oscars (I never do) but, indeed, this is what is happening.

The Passion didn't win any Oscars because it fucking sucked, not because the Hollywood conspiracy disliked it. The Passion was a morbid piece of shit and the only redeeming factor was Caviezel, whom I like in virtually any role. Only people who doesn't really know film wants to watch Mel Gibson masturbate over his "I'm more Catholic than the pope" bullshit--because that's what The Passion was really about.

THEHOOLIGANJEDI · Post by **THEHOOLIGANJEDI** » 2005-02-28 03:55pm

The Oscars. Saw them with some friends and talked though a majority of it. Painfully boring. Chris Rock was the high point in my opinion. Even though he washolding back he was still funny and a high point for a typically dull show.

Oh and a question to all the Chris Rock naysayers: Have you actually watched his standup to assume that all his commentary is about the differences between Blacks and Whites?
Chris Rock, plain and simple, is a stand up who does social commentary and one of his subjects just happens to be race.

SylasGaunt · Post by **SylasGaunt** » 2005-02-28 07:44pm

Robert Treder wrote: I don't get why people are bitching about Jamie Foxx winning. Out of the nominees, who gave a better performance? Did any of you actually see Ray?

I'm certainly not doing it. I rented Collateral after seeing him get nominations in both actor's slots this year. I'm just having to make a sudden reevaulation about what I thought of him as an actor. Kind of the same one I had to make with Jim Carrey.

Azazel · Post by **Azazel** » 2005-02-28 08:21pm

Didn't watch em but glad Spiderman 2 got something.

I want to see Ray though.

Post by **The Wookiee** » 2005-02-28 09:00pm

I saw "Collateral" in the theater and pieces of "Ray" from the DVD as one of the artists here watched it. I have to say that Jamie Foxx more than deserved his Oscar.

Admiral Valdemar · Post by **Admiral Valdemar** » 2005-02-28 09:10pm

I'm pissed that Collateral didn't get anything then. If it hadn't been Morgan Freeman's night (finally), then I'd have liked to see Jamie get an Oscar for being in Collateral, but then I hear Clive Owen was brilliant too, though most admit it was high time Freeman got one.

Post by **Vympel** » 2005-02-28 10:34pm

I've never watched the Oscars in my life. What'd chris rock say about jude law's career?