|
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 292 responses total. |
senna
|
|
response 28 of 292:
| 
Mar 23 20:21 UTC 1999 |
This response has been erased.
|
richard
|
|
response 29 of 292:
|
Mar 23 23:59 UTC 1999 |
I wouldve rather seen either "the Truman show" or "Pleasantville"
as best picture-- everything else is so formulaic. Those were movies
I'd never seen before. "Saving Private Ryan", "Thin Red Line" were
great but genre films. "Shakespeare in Love" same thing. Ive seen
those movies many times before.
|
jazz
|
|
response 30 of 292:
|
Mar 24 00:30 UTC 1999 |
"The Truman Show" was extraordinarily formulaic; the idea's been done
several times before.
|
mic
|
|
response 31 of 292:
|
Mar 24 00:51 UTC 1999 |
THe Truman Show was crap. Saving Private Ryan rocked and should've got best
picture. I agree on the demographic reasons. I'm glad Life is Beautiful did
so well, because it was a fabulous production. By the way, they got the best
actresses (in the same movie) mixed up!
|
mary
|
|
response 32 of 292:
|
Mar 24 02:19 UTC 1999 |
"Schindler's List" was a better story.
|
scg
|
|
response 33 of 292:
|
Mar 24 05:45 UTC 1999 |
I haven't seen Shakespeare in Love, so I can't judge it.
Some article I read said that this was the first time in something like ten
years that best director and best picture had gone to different movies. Given
that they're usually tied together, I wonder if dividing them up is a way of
declaring a tie.
|
aruba
|
|
response 34 of 292:
|
Mar 24 05:52 UTC 1999 |
Maybe 9 years; I remember that Driving Mis Daisy won best picture in 1990
but wasn't even nonimated for best director.
|
md
|
|
response 35 of 292:
|
Mar 24 21:42 UTC 1999 |
We rented BULWORTH (B-) the other day. I think I was prejudiced
against it by Mr Cranky's list of things that hearing Warren Beatty
try to rap is worse than. (Eg, hammering the wrong end of a nail
into a steel girder with your penis.) It is pretty bad, and requires a
bigger suspension of disbelief than usual for a movie. In addition,
there is an obviously unintended but nonetheless disagreeable
strain of racism. (The black drug czar who has an army of little
kids peddling for him becomes a saintly say-fellas-let's-clean-
up- the-neighborhood kind of guy after meeting the heroic white
Senator.) The movie does have its moments, though. It reminded
me a little of Mickey One, if anyone remembers that movie, with its
air of paranoid dread. Also, it was great fun seeing Amiri Baraka
in the recurring cameo role of the street poet. I wonder what chit
Beatty called in to get him to agree.
|
remmers
|
|
response 36 of 292:
|
Mar 24 23:53 UTC 1999 |
(remmers and md are two of the very few people on the face of this
earth who remember "Mickey One".)
|
richard
|
|
response 37 of 292:
|
Mar 24 23:53 UTC 1999 |
I think BULWORTH is a terrific film about being true to yourself and
media manipulation-- warren beatty should have been nominated for
best director.
.\
|
md
|
|
response 38 of 292:
|
Mar 24 23:57 UTC 1999 |
(I liked Mickey One, remmers. Do you see the resemblance
with Bulworth?)
|
remmers
|
|
response 39 of 292:
|
Mar 25 00:06 UTC 1999 |
(Haven't seen "Bulworth"...)
|
cyklone
|
|
response 40 of 292:
|
Mar 25 00:46 UTC 1999 |
Re #35: I read that Bulworth was in fact made as an "owed favor" to Beatty.
Which begs the question as to what he did previously to be owed such a favor.
|
scg
|
|
response 41 of 292:
|
Mar 25 04:09 UTC 1999 |
I've been wanting to see Bulworth. The video store was out of it last night.
|
jazz
|
|
response 42 of 292:
|
Mar 25 16:38 UTC 1999 |
Bulworth was about a senator being true to himself by emulating
his poorer black constituents? Eh. I thought it was amusing and worth-
while as it lampooned both white and black subcultures.
Speaking of Saving Private Ryan, has anyone seen Welcome to Sarajevo?
|
md
|
|
response 43 of 292:
|
Mar 25 17:38 UTC 1999 |
I think what Richard meant by "true to himself" is that Senator
Bulworth was a good liberal when young, as proven by the
pictures early in the film of a young Bulworth/Beatty hobnobbing
with Jesse Jackson and others. The only conclusion you can
come to is that he'd been corrupted in the years since then and
was now owned by the insurance companies. The painful
conflict between his idealistic youth and his cynical old age is
what caused the emotional breakdown we see him in at the
start of the movie. It's only when he returns to his ideals that
he can finally get a good night's sleep.
All of which is way too much analysis of what is essentially a
cartoon figure.
|
giry
|
|
response 44 of 292:
|
Mar 25 21:14 UTC 1999 |
Agora 18 <-> Cinema 27
|
darbha
|
|
response 45 of 292:
|
Mar 26 07:39 UTC 1999 |
Did any one notice? The Oscar for Best Actor/Actyress in a supporting role
is getting more and more insignificant. The reason why Judy Dench should get
an award is still not known. May be it's the Shakespeare fever.But it is not
entirely false either that even in paast years these awards have been given
more as a sort of consolation ..not to displease any one. In fact there is
now n abundant chance of winning an award for any kind of performance ...if
u take account of the no.of institutions giving away awards.
|
senna
|
|
response 46 of 292:
|
Mar 26 14:18 UTC 1999 |
Honestly, despite little time on screen, I felt that Judy Dench's
performance was spectacular. Her presence, not just her character,
changed the entire movie, and I walked away from it the first time
notably appreciative of the performance she gave. You don't need two
hours of screen time to show up in a movie. The best actors make the
roles.
Which reminds me, anyone recall how many minutes Jack Nicholson actually
had on Easy Rider, which he won an Oscar for? It was a similarly small
performance.
|
aruba
|
|
response 47 of 292:
|
Mar 26 14:43 UTC 1999 |
And Robin Williams was nominated for best actor for "Dead Poets Society",in
which he had very few lines. (Though of course the action centered around
him.)
I though Judy Dench was good too, but I do think giving her an Oscar for 8
minutes of work is a little unfair to the other actresses in the category.
|
fitz
|
|
response 48 of 292:
|
Mar 26 15:28 UTC 1999 |
Re: Judy Dench as Best S. Actress, Myra and I agree that the Academy award
was given for her previous--and unrecognized--work in *Mrs. Brown*. I agree
with all who have noted the brevity of the role and I would add that the role
in *Shakespear in Love* was strictly character.
|
drewmike
|
|
response 49 of 292:
|
Mar 26 15:43 UTC 1999 |
For that matter, Anthony Hopkins won Best Actor for 17 minutes
in "Silence of the Lambs".
|
mcnally
|
|
response 50 of 292:
|
Mar 26 19:34 UTC 1999 |
But it was a pretty notable 17 minutes.. (whether or not you liked it,
it was pretty key to the movie..)
|
senna
|
|
response 51 of 292:
|
Mar 27 05:47 UTC 1999 |
"Notable" is like saying Clinton's affair with Lewinsky "brought up
some issues."
|
md
|
|
response 52 of 292:
|
Mar 27 11:49 UTC 1999 |
There were advance showings of NEVER BEEN KISSED (A) at
a few local theaters last night, so we caught one of them.
Executive Producer Drew Barrymore plays a newspaper reporter
assigned to go undercover as a senior at a local highschool.
Things like this have been done before, and, given the premise,
the result is apt to be a bit simpleminded. My prediction is
that the critics will tear this one to shreds for that reason.
The plot twists, if you could call them that, are all contrived.
For example, Barrymore's slutty office friend (SNL's Molly
Shannon) shows up at the school and is mistakenly dragged into
Barrymore's class as a -- what else? -- substitute sex ed
teacher. Incredibly, it all works. I can't remember when I've
heard an audience laugh so hard. They cheered at the sentimental
conclusion, they gasped an "Oh man"'d at the two or three nasty
parts (one of which was *so* nasty I wouldn't be surprised if it
gets cut from he movie), and they laughed until they were gasping
for air at the slapstick parts. The message -- tolerance for
the geeky unpopular kids at your school -- is secondary to the
fun. I'm giving it an "A" in deference both to the response of
the audience and to the ratings ("A++!") my own kids gave it.
If it had starred someone edgier than Drew Barrymore, who seems
to glow benevolently from inside, it might have been a better
movie but I personally wouldn't've liked it as much.
|
