Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Oscar© Autopsy

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Rocks perfomance left me wanting.
    While almost good enough at being irreverent, it was still a sanatized Rock. I realize that there were set limits, (which he probably pushed) it just sounded like rock-lite. Rock-like, isn't good enough.
    It's almost as if all his overconfident, absolutist assertions were spoonfed to him by a trusted website or subreddit. Sheeple
    RIP Tony Bogey & Baron O

    Comment


    • #32
      If they wanted a performer that mocks the self import of the industry and would be a decent draw, why didn't they go with Jon Stewart?
      "Just puttin on the foil" - Jeff Hanson

      “In a democracy, I realize you don’t need to talk to the top leader to know how the country feels. When I go to a dictatorship, I only have to talk to one person and that’s the dictator, because he speaks for all the people.” - Jimmy Carter

      Comment


      • #33
        He lacks the start power of Chris Rock.

        I thought he did OK, but yopu know what? They could have used Conan as well....Did he do the Oscars before, or was that the Emmy's?
        If you don't like reality, change it! me
        "Oh no! I am bested!" Drake
        "it is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong" Voltaire
        "Patriotism is a pernecious, psychopathic form of idiocy" George Bernard Shaw

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by rah
          Rocks perfomance left me wanting.
          While almost good enough at being irreverent, it was still a sanatized Rock. I realize that there were set limits, (which he probably pushed) it just sounded like rock-lite. Rock-like, isn't good enough.
          he used to be on SNL, he was lite back then as well.

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by GePap
            He lacks the start power of Chris Rock.

            I thought he did OK, but yopu know what? They could have used Conan as well....Did he do the Oscars before, or was that the Emmy's?
            Emmy's.

            Jon Stewart might be pretty good. Though I'm not sure is stand up monologues are his thing. And it'd be good if they had the whole daily show group and did some skits and stuff they do on the show.

            Comment


            • #36
              Jon Stewart would be good, but I don't know if he'd stoop to that level. And I don't know if he can work without a net. (No way would Oscar allow importation of the whole Daily Show retinue.)

              The Oscars demand someone sophisticated, hip, in-the-know, and, most important, able to ad lib and think on his/her feet. Those people are rare.

              Johnny Carson always gave a perfect blend of irreverence and charm. His act has never been topped, likely won't be. Billy Crystal was OK, but always seemed a bit needy up there.

              Chris Rock might grow into it if given a chance. I doubt that will be forthcoming, however.
              Apolyton's Grim Reaper 2008, 2010 & 2011
              RIP lest we forget... SG (2) and LaFayette -- Civ2 Succession Games Brothers-in-Arms

              Comment


              • #37
                Some Pole got an Oscar for music for some film, "Dreamer" of whatever. All that I know in this matter.
                "I realise I hold the key to freedom,
                I cannot let my life be ruled by threads" The Web Frogs
                Middle East!

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by -Jrabbit
                  Jon Stewart would be good, but I don't know if he'd stoop to that level. And I don't know if he can work without a net. (No way would Oscar allow importation of the whole Daily Show retinue.)
                  He started out as a stand-up comic. And all you need is a good routine, an ability to ad-lib a bit, and well-rounded telepromter reading skills to host the Oscars.
                  "I predict your ignore will rival Ben's" - Ecofarm
                  ^ The Poly equivalent of:
                  "I hope you can see this 'cause I'm [flipping you off] as hard as I can" - Ignignokt the Mooninite

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by Heresson
                    Some Pole got an Oscar for music for some film, "Dreamer" of whatever. All that I know in this matter.


                    You mean Jan Kaczmarek for "Finding Neverland", the story about Peter Pan author J.M. Barry starring Johnny Depp and Kate Winslet, right?
                    "I predict your ignore will rival Ben's" - Ecofarm
                    ^ The Poly equivalent of:
                    "I hope you can see this 'cause I'm [flipping you off] as hard as I can" - Ignignokt the Mooninite

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Surprise, the Oscar numbers were way off this year when the Red States were counted. http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=stor..._tv_ratings_2. Looks like the Academy might do well in the future to nominate the more popular films that American actually likes for "best picture" than to openly discriminate against them if they are "fantasy," "scifi" or "religious." This could well describe Spiderman II, Spotless Mind and the Passion.
                      Last edited by Ned; February 28, 2005, 23:09.
                      http://tools.wikimedia.de/~gmaxwell/jorbis/JOrbisPlayer.php?path=John+Williams+The+Imperial+M arch+from+The+Empire+Strikes+Back.ogg&wiki=en

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Spider-Man II? Passion of the Christ?

                        Lord I hope not. They have the People's Choice Awards (which has a far lower audience) for that.

                        Neither got discriminated against because they were scifi or religious. Spider-Man II just isn't BEST PICTURE material. Passion...well...MAYBE had a small chance, but it wasn't generally a good movie. The only good parts about it, guess what, DID get nominated.

                        I would rather they continue to nominate artistically worthy films then live by the standards of pop culture. Let those movies make hundreds of millions, and let these get the awards.

                        And the show was only off two million. That means that without an LOTR, they lost only 6% of the audience. Or, you could look at it as 41 million tuned in to see movies nominated for best picture that grossed less than $100 million. Either way, I'm not fearful of any of that, and neither should the Academy be.
                        "I predict your ignore will rival Ben's" - Ecofarm
                        ^ The Poly equivalent of:
                        "I hope you can see this 'cause I'm [flipping you off] as hard as I can" - Ignignokt the Mooninite

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Ned, the reason for that is that red-staters are ignorant religious hicks.

                          There are channels like Spike for them. They should leave the real people's TV alone.
                          Only feebs vote.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Hey, I'm watching Spike TV right now *******

                            WWE is on!
                            "I predict your ignore will rival Ben's" - Ecofarm
                            ^ The Poly equivalent of:
                            "I hope you can see this 'cause I'm [flipping you off] as hard as I can" - Ignignokt the Mooninite

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by The Emperor Fabulous
                              Spider-Man II? Passion of the Christ?

                              Lord I hope not. They have the People's Choice Awards (which has a far lower audience) for that.

                              Neither got discriminated against because they were scifi or religious. Spider-Man II just isn't BEST PICTURE material. Passion...well...MAYBE had a small chance, but it wasn't generally a good movie. The only good parts about it, guess what, DID get nominated.

                              I would rather they continue to nominate artistically worthy films then live by the standards of pop culture. Let those movies make hundreds of millions, and let these get the awards.

                              And the show was only off two million. That means that without an LOTR, they lost only 6% of the audience. Or, you could look at it as 41 million tuned in to see movies nominated for best picture that grossed less than $100 million. Either way, I'm not fearful of any of that, and neither should the Academy be.
                              Perhaps we ought to merely cut off consideration of the potential list for films that can be nominated to those among the top 10% of box office receipts at the time the ballots go out at the end of January. All films in that top 10% are automatically nominated.

                              I really believe the academy has it in for certain film types. Last year was a shock in that Return of the King won everything because it was considered to be a fantasy film. This year, I was totally impressed by Spiderman II, another fantasy film. It was a trememdous film. Spotless Mind, science fiction, was beautiful, well acted and truly inovative. Passion was powerful beyond all measure. No film ever was as moving as this one.

                              They all should have received nominations.
                              http://tools.wikimedia.de/~gmaxwell/jorbis/JOrbisPlayer.php?path=John+Williams+The+Imperial+M arch+from+The+Empire+Strikes+Back.ogg&wiki=en

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                To be honest, I think the foreign films kick your butt this year.
                                Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing?
                                Then why call him God? - Epicurus

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X