miguel_fugdey
Member
anyone agree here, that the oscars are WRONG so often...i mean, if chicago wins, its bull (its a MUSICAL for gods sake) and did anyone see how much editing went into lotr? and beautiful mind last year, seriously? such a copout!
oscars are such a copout (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter miguel_fugdey
- Start date
Yeah its very much a popularity contest and also quite political. Like the Twin Towers short doco had to win because of the whole tragedy of Sept 11 etc.
It is weird with Chicago winning, I like it better the Golden Globes way where they file muscial along with comedy, not drama. But thats a very traditional American movie, lots of fuss and lots of american celebs , so I think they made it win to make everyone feel good about America.
For A Beatiful Mind, I reckon that was an alright choice for best picture. But Russell Crowe was robbed- he did that so well, had the weird walk and twitchy talk. Its so different to how his real-life persona seems, it was really good acting. Whereas he won Best Actor for Gladiator and all he did in that movie was grunt (ok, he occasionally frowned and looked sad, but seriously any beefy football player could have played that role).
But it is all popularity, he was 'in' the year before, and unpopular again the next year.
An interesting thing though was that Michael Moore won for his doco on Columbine. I mean he deserved it, but I didn't think the weird world of Hollywood would recognise that. Or that they would let him get up and make such an anti-Bush, anti-war speech. But that was good.
It is weird with Chicago winning, I like it better the Golden Globes way where they file muscial along with comedy, not drama. But thats a very traditional American movie, lots of fuss and lots of american celebs , so I think they made it win to make everyone feel good about America.
For A Beatiful Mind, I reckon that was an alright choice for best picture. But Russell Crowe was robbed- he did that so well, had the weird walk and twitchy talk. Its so different to how his real-life persona seems, it was really good acting. Whereas he won Best Actor for Gladiator and all he did in that movie was grunt (ok, he occasionally frowned and looked sad, but seriously any beefy football player could have played that role).
But it is all popularity, he was 'in' the year before, and unpopular again the next year.
An interesting thing though was that Michael Moore won for his doco on Columbine. I mean he deserved it, but I didn't think the weird world of Hollywood would recognise that. Or that they would let him get up and make such an anti-Bush, anti-war speech. But that was good.
tooheyz
- kmart supervisor -
yeah alot of people were making a statement about the war that night - good on them on using their chance to tv to tell bush what they think.
yeah my teacher told me that the president and his people r trying to get him banned from his next movie because of his speech. hmmm
but it was a good night - NICOLE WON!! hahaha thats all that matters.
miguel_fugdey
Member
yeah what they did with mike moore was pretty slack, but its great that he won - did anyone watch the movie show? they expected it to be too controversial...im not agreeing with chicago winning, just coz (this is kinda unfair though) its a music, and i dont see it as a movie that should win best pic - should be thrown in with comedies like the golden globes, and its no where near as good as ttt, the pianist OR the hours. i've seen all four. the hours was too female for the academie (they're majority male), and ttt is the middle movie so they cant give it to that, by the pianist was oscar material, i think
SoFTuaRiaL
Active Member
if chicago wins, its bull .......
as in Chicago Bulls ....... hehe
ezzy85
hmm...yeah.....
- Joined
- Nov 4, 2002
- Messages
- 556
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- HSC
- N/A
I havent seen the other movies but Chicago was a great film, regardless of whether or not its a musical. I thought it was a bit hypocritical where youve got Mike Moore getting booed off and then 10 minutes later Barbara Streisand comes on and says how we live in a democracy and we have freedom of speech. But after the "black oscars" from last year there is no way Ill watch the oscars and think the awards are legit again. Its all about who "should" win rather than who really deserves it.
Butterfly_Wings
Cornflake Girl
I didn't watch it all and missed Moores speech, but by the sounds of it-what a fucking champ. Even if you don't necessarily agree with what he said, I think it's still refreshing for someone not to get up and give the same old speech, wiping away a fake tear and thanking everyone for their brilliant support. There was certainly no need for him to be booed, but then again he's no idiot and I'm sure he wasn't doing it for the popularity boost.
I also liked Steve Martins comment at the beginning. "You'll be happy to know that all the money made tonight....will be divided up amongst huge corporations." lol, good on him!
I also liked Steve Martins comment at the beginning. "You'll be happy to know that all the money made tonight....will be divided up amongst huge corporations." lol, good on him!
miguel_fugdey
Member
yeah - adriens moving speech was good to, even if it was cliched. and there was another one i cant recall that was good...
i remember once i was so in awe of them (the oscars), when i was like 10, and now im so disillusion, with the black oscars last year, and the whole beautiful mind thing (although halle DID deserve taht year) and haley joel osment the year before missing out
i remember once i was so in awe of them (the oscars), when i was like 10, and now im so disillusion, with the black oscars last year, and the whole beautiful mind thing (although halle DID deserve taht year) and haley joel osment the year before missing out
-=«MÄLÅÇhïtÊ»=-
Gender: MALE!!!
did they even show the foreign films category on tv?
i thought Renee shouldve won. she is a much better actress. Nicole's speech was lame and she didnt seem that surprised when she won the award. it was like she knew she was going to win. i wouldve liked to see Renee's speech. at least she wouldve sounded more sincere.
miguel_fugdey
Member
she wasnt as good as nicole..and i think julianne should've gotten it for hours, cept she wasnt nminated..i agree about the boring speech though ( i hate her accent, even tho its aussie)
Butterfly_Wings
Cornflake Girl
Hey, I found this thing by Michael Moore about his Oscar speech. Thought some poeple might be interested:
By Michael Moore
March 27, 2003
A word of advice to future Oscar winners: Don't begin Oscar day by going to church.
That is where I found myself this past Sunday morning, at the Church of the Good Shepherd on Santa Monica Boulevard, at Mass with my sister and my dad. My problem with the Catholic Mass is that sometimes I find my mind wandering after I hear something the priest says, and I start thinking all these crazy thoughts like how it is wrong to kill people and that you are not allowed to use violence upon another human being unless it is in true self-defense.
The pope even came right out and said it: This war in Iraq is not a just war and, thus, it is a sin.
Those thoughts were with me the rest of the day, from the moment I left the church and passed by the homeless begging for change (one in six American children living in poverty is another form of violence), to the streets around the Kodak Theater where antiwar protesters were being arrested as I drove by in my studio-sponsored limo.
I had not planned on winning an Academy Award for "Bowling for Columbine" (no documentary that was a big box-office success had won since "Woodstock"), and so I had no speech prepared. I'm not much of a speech-preparer anyway, and besides, I had already received awards in the days leading up to the Oscars and used the same acceptance remarks. I spoke of the need for nonfiction films when we live in such fictitious times. We have a fictitious president who was elected with fictitious election results. (If you still believe that 3,000 elderly Jewish Americans -- many of them Holocaust survivors -- voted for Pat Buchanan in West Palm Beach in 2000, then you are a true devotee to the beauty of fiction!) He is now conducting a war for a fictitious reason (the claim that Saddam Hussein has stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction when in fact we are there to get the world's second-largest supply of oil).
Whether it is a tax cut that is passed off as a gift to the middle class or a desire to drill holes in the wilds of Alaska, we are continually bombarded with one fictitious story after another from the Bush White House. And that is why it is important that filmmakers make nonfiction, so that all the little lies can be exposed and the public informed. An uninformed public in a democracy is a sure-fire way to end up with little or no democracy at all.
That is what I have been saying for some time. Millions of Americans seem to agree. My book "Stupid White Men" still sits at No. 1 on the bestseller list (it's been on that list now for 53 weeks and is the largest-selling nonfiction book of the year). "Bowling for Columbine" has broken all box-office records for a documentary. My Web site is now getting up to 20 million hits a day (more than the White House's site). My opinions about the state of the nation are neither unknown nor on the fringe, but rather they exist with mainstream majority opinion. The majority of Americans, according to polls, want stronger environmental laws, support Roe vs. Wade and did not want to go into this war without the backing of the United Nations and all of our allies.
That is where the country is at. It's liberal, it's for peace and it is only tacitly in support of its leader because that is what you are supposed to do when you are at war and you want your kids to come back from Iraq alive.
In the commercial break before the best documentary Oscar was to be announced, I suddenly thought that maybe this community of film people was also part of that American majority and just might have voted for my film, which, in part, takes on the Bush administration for manipulating the public with fear so it can conduct its acts of aggression against the Third World. I leaned over to my fellow nominees and told them that, should I win, I was going to say something about President Bush and the war and would they like to join me up on the stage? I told them that I felt like I'd already had my moment with the success of the film and that I would love for them to share the stage with me so they could have their moment too. (They had all made exceptional films and I wanted the public to see these filmmakers and hopefully go see their films.)
They all agreed.
Moments later, Diane Lane opened the envelope and announced the winner: "Bowling for Columbine." The entire main floor rose to its feet for a standing ovation. I was immeasurably moved and humbled as I motioned for the other nominees to join my wife (the film's producer) and me up on the stage.
I then said what I had been saying all week at those other awards ceremonies. I guess a few other people had heard me say those things too because before I had finished my first sentence about the fictitious president, a couple of men (some reported it was "stagehands" just to the left of me) near a microphone started some loud yelling. Then a group in the upper balcony joined in. What was so confusing to me, as I continued my remarks, was that I could hear this noise but looking out on the main floor, I didn't see a single person booing. But then the majority in the balcony -- who were in support of my remarks -- started booing the booers.
It all turned into one humungous cacophony of yells and cheers and jeers. And all I'm thinking is, "Hey, I put on a tux for this?"
I tried to get out my last line ("Any time you've got both the pope and the Dixie Chicks against you, you're not long for the White House") and the orchestra struck up its tune to end the melee. (A few orchestra members came up to me later and apologized, saying they had wanted to hear what I had to say.) I had gone 55 seconds, 10 more than allowed.
Was it appropriate? To me, the inappropriate thing would have been to say nothing at all or to thank my agent, my lawyer and the designer who dressed me -- Sears Roebuck. I made a movie about the American desire to use violence both at home and around the world. My remarks were in keeping with exactly what my film was about. If I had a movie about birds or insects, I would have talked about birds or insects. I made a movie about guns and Americans' tradition of using them against the world and each other.
And, as I walked up to the stage, I was still thinking about the lessons that morning at Mass. About how silence, when you observe wrongs being committed, is the same as committing those wrongs yourself. And so I followed my conscience and my heart.
On the way back home to Flint, Mich., the day after the Oscars, two flight attendants told me how they had gotten stuck overnight in Flint with no flight -- and wound up earning only $30 for the day because they are paid by the hour.
They said they were telling me this in the hope that I would tell others. Because they, and the millions like them, have no voice. They don't get to be commentators on cable news like the bevy of retired generals we've been watching all week. (Can we please demand that the U.S. military remove its troops from ABC/CBS/NBC/CNN/MSNBC/Fox?) They don't get to make movies or talk to a billion people on Oscar night. They are the American majority who are being asked to send their sons and daughters over to Iraq to possibly die so Bush's buddies can have the oil.
Who will speak for them if I don't? That's what I do, or try to do, every day of my life, and March 23, 2003 -- though it was one of the greatest days of my life and an honor I will long cherish -- was no different.
Except I made the mistake of beginning it in a church.
By Michael Moore
March 27, 2003
A word of advice to future Oscar winners: Don't begin Oscar day by going to church.
That is where I found myself this past Sunday morning, at the Church of the Good Shepherd on Santa Monica Boulevard, at Mass with my sister and my dad. My problem with the Catholic Mass is that sometimes I find my mind wandering after I hear something the priest says, and I start thinking all these crazy thoughts like how it is wrong to kill people and that you are not allowed to use violence upon another human being unless it is in true self-defense.
The pope even came right out and said it: This war in Iraq is not a just war and, thus, it is a sin.
Those thoughts were with me the rest of the day, from the moment I left the church and passed by the homeless begging for change (one in six American children living in poverty is another form of violence), to the streets around the Kodak Theater where antiwar protesters were being arrested as I drove by in my studio-sponsored limo.
I had not planned on winning an Academy Award for "Bowling for Columbine" (no documentary that was a big box-office success had won since "Woodstock"), and so I had no speech prepared. I'm not much of a speech-preparer anyway, and besides, I had already received awards in the days leading up to the Oscars and used the same acceptance remarks. I spoke of the need for nonfiction films when we live in such fictitious times. We have a fictitious president who was elected with fictitious election results. (If you still believe that 3,000 elderly Jewish Americans -- many of them Holocaust survivors -- voted for Pat Buchanan in West Palm Beach in 2000, then you are a true devotee to the beauty of fiction!) He is now conducting a war for a fictitious reason (the claim that Saddam Hussein has stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction when in fact we are there to get the world's second-largest supply of oil).
Whether it is a tax cut that is passed off as a gift to the middle class or a desire to drill holes in the wilds of Alaska, we are continually bombarded with one fictitious story after another from the Bush White House. And that is why it is important that filmmakers make nonfiction, so that all the little lies can be exposed and the public informed. An uninformed public in a democracy is a sure-fire way to end up with little or no democracy at all.
That is what I have been saying for some time. Millions of Americans seem to agree. My book "Stupid White Men" still sits at No. 1 on the bestseller list (it's been on that list now for 53 weeks and is the largest-selling nonfiction book of the year). "Bowling for Columbine" has broken all box-office records for a documentary. My Web site is now getting up to 20 million hits a day (more than the White House's site). My opinions about the state of the nation are neither unknown nor on the fringe, but rather they exist with mainstream majority opinion. The majority of Americans, according to polls, want stronger environmental laws, support Roe vs. Wade and did not want to go into this war without the backing of the United Nations and all of our allies.
That is where the country is at. It's liberal, it's for peace and it is only tacitly in support of its leader because that is what you are supposed to do when you are at war and you want your kids to come back from Iraq alive.
In the commercial break before the best documentary Oscar was to be announced, I suddenly thought that maybe this community of film people was also part of that American majority and just might have voted for my film, which, in part, takes on the Bush administration for manipulating the public with fear so it can conduct its acts of aggression against the Third World. I leaned over to my fellow nominees and told them that, should I win, I was going to say something about President Bush and the war and would they like to join me up on the stage? I told them that I felt like I'd already had my moment with the success of the film and that I would love for them to share the stage with me so they could have their moment too. (They had all made exceptional films and I wanted the public to see these filmmakers and hopefully go see their films.)
They all agreed.
Moments later, Diane Lane opened the envelope and announced the winner: "Bowling for Columbine." The entire main floor rose to its feet for a standing ovation. I was immeasurably moved and humbled as I motioned for the other nominees to join my wife (the film's producer) and me up on the stage.
I then said what I had been saying all week at those other awards ceremonies. I guess a few other people had heard me say those things too because before I had finished my first sentence about the fictitious president, a couple of men (some reported it was "stagehands" just to the left of me) near a microphone started some loud yelling. Then a group in the upper balcony joined in. What was so confusing to me, as I continued my remarks, was that I could hear this noise but looking out on the main floor, I didn't see a single person booing. But then the majority in the balcony -- who were in support of my remarks -- started booing the booers.
It all turned into one humungous cacophony of yells and cheers and jeers. And all I'm thinking is, "Hey, I put on a tux for this?"
I tried to get out my last line ("Any time you've got both the pope and the Dixie Chicks against you, you're not long for the White House") and the orchestra struck up its tune to end the melee. (A few orchestra members came up to me later and apologized, saying they had wanted to hear what I had to say.) I had gone 55 seconds, 10 more than allowed.
Was it appropriate? To me, the inappropriate thing would have been to say nothing at all or to thank my agent, my lawyer and the designer who dressed me -- Sears Roebuck. I made a movie about the American desire to use violence both at home and around the world. My remarks were in keeping with exactly what my film was about. If I had a movie about birds or insects, I would have talked about birds or insects. I made a movie about guns and Americans' tradition of using them against the world and each other.
And, as I walked up to the stage, I was still thinking about the lessons that morning at Mass. About how silence, when you observe wrongs being committed, is the same as committing those wrongs yourself. And so I followed my conscience and my heart.
On the way back home to Flint, Mich., the day after the Oscars, two flight attendants told me how they had gotten stuck overnight in Flint with no flight -- and wound up earning only $30 for the day because they are paid by the hour.
They said they were telling me this in the hope that I would tell others. Because they, and the millions like them, have no voice. They don't get to be commentators on cable news like the bevy of retired generals we've been watching all week. (Can we please demand that the U.S. military remove its troops from ABC/CBS/NBC/CNN/MSNBC/Fox?) They don't get to make movies or talk to a billion people on Oscar night. They are the American majority who are being asked to send their sons and daughters over to Iraq to possibly die so Bush's buddies can have the oil.
Who will speak for them if I don't? That's what I do, or try to do, every day of my life, and March 23, 2003 -- though it was one of the greatest days of my life and an honor I will long cherish -- was no different.
Except I made the mistake of beginning it in a church.
miguel_fugdey
Member
michael more rocks...havent been to his site yet...i'd like to make that 20 000 001 hits a day
Butterfly_Wings
Cornflake Girl
Yeah, it is kinda backwards...they award him with an oscar for portreying a truthful opinion about a controversial topic, and then when he gets up and does the exact same thing-he gets booed offstage. Um, logic?
miguel_fugdey
Member
yeah, people are hypocrites (not just them, pretty much everyone is)...but he is a legend