|
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 153 responses total. |
bru
|
|
response 113 of 153:
| 
Mar 6 00:55 UTC 2006 |
dolly got nominated? hadn't heard that .
|
bru
|
|
response 114 of 153:
|
Mar 6 01:42 UTC 2006 |
I apologize, I was apparently mis-informed.
|
mcnally
|
|
response 115 of 153:
|
Mar 6 03:10 UTC 2006 |
By whom?
|
cyklone
|
|
response 116 of 153:
|
Mar 6 03:25 UTC 2006 |
That damned liberal media!
|
furs
|
|
response 117 of 153:
|
Mar 6 10:58 UTC 2006 |
there was one song maybe on the list that was "unfit", but the other
two were fine, I thought.
anyway, any thoughts on the show from last night?
|
bru
|
|
response 118 of 153:
|
Mar 6 13:01 UTC 2006 |
you wil;l; notice that the song that won was the one that hed to be bleeped
every line.
|
richard
|
|
response 119 of 153:
|
Mar 6 16:04 UTC 2006 |
I hate it when something wins best picture and not best director. If Paul
Haggis directed the Best Picture of the year, Crash, than why was he not
the Best Director. Conversely if Ang Lee did the best directing job of
the year did he not direct the best picture?
|
fudge
|
|
response 120 of 153:
|
Mar 6 16:06 UTC 2006 |
it's just an excuse to have more prizes available. they're all pre assigned
anyway, you don't really think they get voted do you?
|
richard
|
|
response 121 of 153:
|
Mar 6 16:10 UTC 2006 |
they are not all "pre-assigned", don't be ridiculous.
IMO Jon Stewart was a bust as the host. I like Stewart on his show a lot,
but I don't think the Oscars is the best gig for his skills
|
richard
|
|
response 122 of 153:
|
Mar 6 16:36 UTC 2006 |
Also I suppose the conservatives considered Dolly's song unacceptable because
its the the theme song for a movie about a transexual-- TransAmerica. "God
made me fo ra reason and nothing is in vain", the lyrical lament of the
transexual she is writing about.
|
marcvh
|
|
response 123 of 153:
|
Mar 6 17:32 UTC 2006 |
Is the conservative position that God makes some people for no reason and
some things are in vain? Actually that does make a lot more sense. Maybe
I'm a conservative.
I enjoyed Jon Stewart's hosting, but I'll certainly admit that wasn't
his crowd and the fit wasn't as good as, say, Billy Crystal when he was
at his best.
|
furs
|
|
response 124 of 153:
|
Mar 6 17:45 UTC 2006 |
The opening thing with the previous hosts was funny, as were the
campaign commercials for best actress. I also thought Ben Stiller was
pretty funny.
|
tod
|
|
response 125 of 153:
|
Mar 6 17:52 UTC 2006 |
I liked seeing Steve Martin with his kids.
|
edina
|
|
response 126 of 153:
|
Mar 6 20:11 UTC 2006 |
I thought Jon Stewart did a great job. The show seemed to move faster than
it normally does, and the only thing I didn't like was that they played music
while people were giving their acceptance speeches.
|
mary
|
|
response 127 of 153:
|
Mar 6 21:04 UTC 2006 |
Robin Williams. Next year. Please.
|
marcvh
|
|
response 128 of 153:
|
Mar 6 21:13 UTC 2006 |
Agreed, provided we can get a time machine and bring back the Robin
Williams from twenty years ago, and then give him plenty of cocaine.
|
richard
|
|
response 129 of 153:
|
Mar 6 21:42 UTC 2006 |
well Stewart wasn't as bad as the year David Letterman hosted. Letterman
didn't even take the awards seriously. You don't need a host who has contempt
for the whole deal.
Next year just get Ellen DeGeneres.
|
johnnie
|
|
response 130 of 153:
|
Mar 6 22:03 UTC 2006 |
The awards are meant to be taken seriously?
>I hate it when something wins best picture and not best director.
Here's a shocking notion for you: It takes more than just one guy with
a megaphone to make a good movie.
|
marcvh
|
|
response 131 of 153:
|
Mar 6 22:07 UTC 2006 |
No, but the director is the one person responsible for the movie as a
whole. Have you ever said "Boy, that was a good movie but the directing
was terrible" or "Wow, what terrific directing, but it's a pity the movie
blew chunks"?
|
johnnie
|
|
response 132 of 153:
|
Mar 6 22:27 UTC 2006 |
The first statement is rare, whether it's regarding directing, acting,
writing, or whatever, but the latter statement is fairly common
("so-and-so gave a terrific effort, but ultimately it wasn't enough to
save this stinker of a flick.").
Sometimes a director brings a movie up a level from Great to
Spectacular, and sometimes it's the actors or writer or special effects
responsible for that.
|
aruba
|
|
response 133 of 153:
|
Mar 7 17:24 UTC 2006 |
I thought Jon Stewart did a fine job. My favorite part, though, was Meryl
Streep and Lily Tomlin introducing Robert Altman. I often wonder why most
of the presenters, who are professional actors, seem so stiff when reading
their lines on stage. Can't they memorize those short intros? Those two
ladies showed everyone how it should be done.
|
tod
|
|
response 134 of 153:
|
Mar 7 17:30 UTC 2006 |
Maybe a third of the folks actually go to the pre-Oscars luncheon where
they're to learn their lines and learn about Oscar etiquette. These people
aren't being paid and would rather pump up their "could give a damn" personas
while on camera.
|
richard
|
|
response 135 of 153:
|
Mar 7 21:31 UTC 2006 |
re #133 Or maybe most presenters should spend their time before presenting
back at the bar downing drinks like Jack Nicholson. Why do you think he was
so relaxed when he came out to present best picture? Because he didnt waste
his time sitting in the audience getting nervous thinking about it :)
But he's Jack, and there's only one Jack
|
tod
|
|
response 136 of 153:
|
Mar 7 21:55 UTC 2006 |
Jack was in the front row the whole time. What're you folks yapping about?
|
remmers
|
|
response 137 of 153:
|
Mar 7 23:02 UTC 2006 |
The remarks by the president of the Academy (I think that's who it was,
can't recall the name) caught my attention. He asserted that the best
way to experience movies is in a theater, not at home watching a DVD.
The times are changing. He's a bit out of touch with some current
realities.
|