Academy Awards

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Asher
It's about John Nash, who struggled with, of many things, Paranoia.

His paranoia doesn't appear to have been caused by his bisexuality, Asher. Furthermore, as his bisexuality wasn't the focus of interest for the movie, I fail to see the reason why you feel it should have been mentioned in the movie.

[Asher]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
His paranoia doesn't appear to have been caused by his bisexuality, Asher.

Did you see my last post?
Of course it doesn't cause it, much the same way his being white didn't cause his paranoi nor his name.

They're using a real world character and they changed who he was in the film. The book talked about it, why didn't the movie? It wasn't that long at all, so the argument that they cut it out to save time is just silly.

[Asher]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
Furthermore, as his bisexuality wasn't the focus of interest for the movie, I fail to see the reason why you feel it should have been mentioned in the movie.

I fail to see why it couldn't have been mentioned at all. It doesn't have to be the focus of the movie. The reason why it wasn't mentioned at all was so it make the film more accessable to the public. That much is painfully obvious.

The book told the truth about the entire story.

The fact is, no matter how much you guys enjoyed the "story" of it, it was a horrible adaptation of the book, and shouldn't have even been nominated for the "best screenplay adaptation" award. That's what I'm saying. If it had stayed more true to the book and to the real story, I would have probably enjoyed the film more and also think it could be up for the award.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Asher
I fail to see why it couldn't have been mentioned at all.

His sexual history is as periphial to his real life as it was in his "reel" life.

Also, Nash doesn't seem to consider it an ommission of any import.

[Guynemer]

Originally posted by JohnT
Oh, to be young again and so passionate about things that don't really matter.

You calling me old, old man?

I couldn't give half a flying rat's ass about all that nonsense. I'm just glad we got some extended time to ogle Halle Berry.

[Sarxis]

Originally posted by David Floyd


...and the only redeeming quality of Moulin Rouge was Nicole Kidman

That is true of most movies she is in.

I actually fell asleep watching them; hardly made it past Whoopi's first appearance.

But like my brother-in-law says: "A bunch of rich people pattin' another bunch of rich people on the back for a job well done".

[Lung]

Originally posted by The Templar

Denzel in "Training Day" was a great performance - better than Russel. (And what in God's name has Crowe been in that required any acting chops other than "The Insider"? "Gladiator" was just "LA Confidential" in ancient Rome.)

Do you always just shoot your mouth off, Templar?

You can answer your own question by going through all the movies he's been in. In movies you obviously haven't heard of, he's played (ironically, considering the current hoo-ha about A Beautiful Mind ) a homosexual in The Sum of Us and a neo-nazi in Romper Stomper, among others. I was happy to see Denzel Washington win, even if only for past performances (i haven't seen Training Day), but i was unhappy that big Russ didn't win, only because the film won most everything else. It suggests that Crowe's performance was below everything else about the film. I don't give a rats arse about the Imran vs Asher crap, but i do believe that A Beautiful Mind shouldn't have won "Best Screenplay Adaptation" with the glaring omissions.

One of the other strange quirks of the academy was Kidman's nomination for Best Actress in Moulin Rouge, when it was widely considered that her effort in The Others was far better. Baz Lurhman may be a genius, but Moulin Rouge was all over the place like a mad woman's custard

And wasn't Nicole Kidman absolutely gorgeous? Halle Berry was, too, but in a different way

[JohnT]

ramblings...

Nicole was hot, no question about it. Caught myself almost making a comment about it to the wife!

I agree with Asher though: if the man is suffering from paranoia, and he is bisexual in a repressed society, then that will play into the paranoia and is a necessary element for character development.

But... I haven't heard how Nash and his wife feel about the movie and we probably won't, but I would think that at the beginning they were rather pleased about it all: the fact that she left him was unmentioned, the more sordid parts of their relationship was left unexplored, and all in all they came off looking noble and long-suffering. It was a lie of course, but a pleasant lie that did no harm and might've helped the couple seen the last 40 years in a different light.

I don't think the Nash's had much to do with it anyway. Did you notice that he was in the audience... all the way against the back wall on the first level? Also they didn't exactly trot him out when the B. Picture award was given, and I don't remember any teary testimonials about how a great and brave man he was (Oh, Howard might've touched on that a bit), nor anything about his wife.

Anyway, this just emphasises the value of the #1 rule of B. Picture picking: Never bet against the gimp.

[WhiteElephants]

Originally posted by Asher
Sexuality is not something you tuck away when it's convenient. It's as much of being a person as a skin color is, skin color is simply more superficial.

Wouldn't you agree that both race and sexuality are pretty superficial? It would seem so from your statement "more superficial". I think that sexuality is a very touchy issue right now and that's the reason your trying to force this issue down our throats, but I do agree with you that it was probably ommited due to the sensitivity surrounding sexuality, but I also agree that it was left out because I'm not sure what bearing it had on the story, which I think was about overcoming mental illness or more simply overcoming.


I'd also like to say that Emilie (spelling?) should have gotten something I don't really know what, and perhaps it could be argued that what it got was the recognition from just being nominated that it deserved. I haven't seen Mouline Rouge, but Emilie was in a class of its own and I think getting an Oscar would have tarnished it in my eyes by clumping it into the class of movies and actors that were recognized -- Gladiator for God's sake!

And as much as it irks me to agree with Snapcase I understand what he means about LotR. As much as I liked the movie (and I like it alot) it was rather traditional (nothing wrong with that) and I think for me to take these awards seriously the movies awarded should be pushing the edge of movie making, not telling the same old stories with different settings, time frames, character, or what have you.

[devilmunchkin]

i wonder what nicole kidman was thinking as her ex husband stood on stage inthe opening monologue?????? I see him as such a creepy now for some reason.

and yes....LOTR got JIPPED!

[DanS]

I don't get it. You guys must not have been seeing the movies I was seeing. LOTR, A Beautiful Mind, and Moulin Rouge were all great, enjoyable movies.

To tell the truth, I was surprised that A Beautiful Mind won because it didn't take advantage of the full range of the movie arts, as did LOTR. But A Beautiful Mind was a well acted movie and definitely is punching above the narrow niche box office that movies like that normally do. People are voting with their pocketbooks.

And whoever said that Russell Crowe hasn't earned his acting chops must have been locked in a padded room for the last 10 years.

Lastly, Strangelove should get an Oscar for adapted screenplay.

[Lung]

Originally posted by DanS

And whoever said that Russell Crowe hasn't earned his acting chops must have been locked in a padded room for the last 10 years.

It was The Templar

[SnowFire]

Having fun, y'all?

I was rooting for LOTR too, but A Beautiful Mind is a good movie, so I won't begrudge the choice too much. The time to get up in arms would be if a bad movie wins.

JohnT, concerning your quote, yes, ABM was the favorite, but saying "there's no way" may have been a bit much. I know my roommate upon hearing of the awards and having not even seen A Beautiful Mind pronounced it the winner, but LOTR had a lot going for it to make it not quite certain. The one bit of the Awards I watched, the best Picture & Best Director parts, somebody said that the vote was very close. Good enough for me, because I can bet which picture was the one that was close.

Looking back at the awards though, it's too bad Memento got gypped in Editing and screenplay. Blackhawk Down had great editing though, so I won't begrudge that one much either. Never saw the screenplay winner.

Not all mathematician/scientists are nerds who can't maintain a conversation!

Yeah, but Nash was. For those concerned about historical accuracy, this is something they got right.

[DanS]

The first movie that I saw RC in was Proof, a small Aussie independant film. To this day, it's one of my favorite movies.

Snowfire: You moved to Oberlin?

Anyway, Black Hawk Down and Memento were also great, enjoyable movies. We had a lot of these this year. Not quite Best Picture winners, but a very strong range of enjoyable movies.

[Sharpe]

They did say that there were many tight races this year and the results did prove that as many professional critics seem to have been surprised by the picks.

People seem to be especially stunned that "Gandalf" lost for supporting actor (I forget his name).

By the way, Asher, aren't you forgetting that John Nash has denied that he was ever gay or bisexual in his interview with 60 Minutes?