Xixax Film Forum

Film Discussion => News and Theory => Topic started by: USTopGun47 on May 17, 2003, 05:25:53 PM

Poll
Question: Were You Pleased With the 2003 Oscar Results?
Title: 2003 Oscars = Crap of the Earth?
Post by: USTopGun47 on May 17, 2003, 05:25:53 PM
OK.  The 2003 Oscars.  Anyone else feeling some MAJOR disapointments?  CHICAGO?  An organization to sell out to such modern, mainstream entertainment should be asahmed of themselves.  I mean, sure, they had some good nominations.  Adrian Brodery's win was nice, though acting wise was he not more visual and pacifistic?  How about the complex role of Nicholas Cage in Adaptation?  Meryl Streep?  Polanski was a good win.  But with scripts like Y Tu Mama Tambien (its only nod) and Donald Kaufman being flushed down the toilet, we must ask, is this really fair?
Title: 2003 Oscars = Crap of the Earth?
Post by: godardian on May 17, 2003, 05:41:11 PM
I was just disappointed with the nominations, as usual. I actually thought Chicago was a pretty good movie. It didn't deserve the awards, though.

The Academy Awards are very rarely based on quality, though, don't you think? They're based on sentimentality, politics, money, all before worthiness, right?
Title: 2003 Oscars = Crap of the Earth?
Post by: Duck Sauce on May 18, 2003, 01:02:29 AM
Im dissapointed that the Oscars mean so much...
Title: 2003 Oscars = Crap of the Earth?
Post by: Derek237 on May 18, 2003, 09:27:07 AM
I'm starting to like the Oscars much much less and the Golden Globes much much more. I was way more pleased with some of the GG winners like Jack Nicholson (if any actor on the face of the planet deserves 4 Oscars it's him), Meryl Streep, Richard Gere, Renee Zellwegger, and of course, Martin Scorsese!! Even the nominations were better. About Schmidt got 5 GG noms, including best picture, it WON for its screenplay, and come Oscar time it only got nominated for best actor and supporting actress. Arg!
Title: 2003 Oscars = Crap of the Earth?
Post by: Pedro on May 18, 2003, 01:12:23 PM
Even though Chicago won best picture, as we all knew was going to happen, the Pianist was the big winner of the night.  Screenplay, Actor, and Director.  Adrien Brody's award was completely deserved.  And I know I'll get DianeLaneShouldHaveGottenitBITCH!ed on this one but I was happy like i slapped my pappy when Nicole Kidman won best actress.  Kaufman should have won best screenplay, I know, but at least the best movie of last year got some recognition.
Title: 2003 Oscars = Crap of the Earth?
Post by: USTopGun47 on May 18, 2003, 01:59:22 PM
It is so true that the quality comes second in the Oscars.  They sell out to epis and big production wayyy to much (ie English Patient)... I do agree that the Grammy's were much better this year.  Chicago is grammy level, but they really did justice to Cage, Streep and Scorsese.  It would be very pleasing to see some of that Oscar hype die down .....
Title: 2003 Oscars = Crap of the Earth?
Post by: Sleuth on May 18, 2003, 02:02:17 PM
Scorsese is my favorite Grammy winner
Title: 2003 Oscars = Crap of the Earth?
Post by: USTopGun47 on May 18, 2003, 02:03:33 PM
Its really too bad Scorsese doesn't get much Oscar attention.  It would be nice to see a win.  Think he might get one?
Title: 2003 Oscars = Crap of the Earth?
Post by: Redlum on May 18, 2003, 02:10:25 PM
They are *industry* awards. Largely voted by 'old timers' who are still suckers for grand epics, which is nice in a way. I dont think they need to be taken that seriously.

I hadn't seen many of the nominees around oscar time, but im gradually becoming more and more impressed with the acting catergories.

Also I dont like to bash the oscars because in a way it undermines truly deserving, proud and humbled winners such as Chris Cooper this year. Who gave a brilliant acceptance speech and was the highlight of the evening for me. Its moments like that that make the oscars.
Title: 2003 Oscars = Crap of the Earth?
Post by: ©brad on May 18, 2003, 02:28:40 PM
Quote from: Duck SauceIm dissapointed that the Oscars mean so much...

nah, they really don't to anyone except ppl in hollywood.

anyway i thought the oscars this year were pretty good for a change.
Title: 2003 Oscars = Crap of the Earth?
Post by: Pedro on May 18, 2003, 03:02:03 PM
Quote from: cbrad4d
Quote from: Duck SauceIm dissapointed that the Oscars mean so much...

nah, they really don't to anyone except ppl in hollywood.

anyway i thought the oscars this year were pretty good for a change.
agreed.
Title: 2003 Oscars = Crap of the Earth?
Post by: bonanzataz on May 18, 2003, 09:40:53 PM
i saw unfaithful and didn't think ms. lane was THAT great. it was definitely a good performance, but nothing really oscar worthy. the movie was good and it stays with you for about a week after you view it, but once the week is up, who really cares? i doubt i'll watch it again. out of all the nominees (i forget who was nominated, actually) i'm glad kidman won.
Title: 2003 Oscars = Crap of the Earth?
Post by: godardian on May 18, 2003, 09:44:19 PM
Quote from: bonanzatazi saw unfaithful and didn't think ms. lane was THAT great. it was definitely a good performance, but nothing really oscar worthy. the movie was good and it stays with you for about a week after you view it, but once the week is up, who really cares? i doubt i'll watch it again. out of all the nominees (i forget who was nominated, actually) i'm glad kidman won.

Kidman was worthy, but I preferred Julianne Moore, possibly because I preferred Far from Heaven to The Hours.
Title: 2003 Oscars = Crap of the Earth?
Post by: The Silver Bullet on May 18, 2003, 09:52:52 PM
I hope Scorsese never wins an Oscar, which may sound terrible, but the hope comes from a good place. If Hitchcock, Kubrick, Kurosawa and Chaplin never won an Oscar for best director and yet people like Mel Gibson and Kevin Costner have, then I think I would rather see Scorsese go down in history with the former group than with the latter.
Title: 2003 Oscars = Crap of the Earth?
Post by: godardian on May 18, 2003, 09:58:19 PM
Quote from: The Silver BulletI hope Scorsese never wins an Oscar, which may sound terrible, but the hope comes from a good place. If Hitchcock, Kubrick, Kurosawa and Chaplin never won an Oscar for best director and yet people like Mel Gibson and Kevin Costner have, then I think I would rather see Scorsese go down in history with the former group than with the latter.

That is an extremely cogent thing to say. It makes me feel a lot better. Woody Allen once said something great about awards that similarly put them in perspective. I wish I could remember it.
Title: 2003 Oscars = Crap of the Earth?
Post by: AlguienEstolamiPantalones on May 18, 2003, 10:02:23 PM
Quote from: The Silver BulletI hope Scorsese never wins an Oscar, which may sound terrible, but the hope comes from a good place. If Hitchcock, Kubrick, Kurosawa and Chaplin never won an Oscar for best director and yet people like Mel Gibson and Kevin Costner have, then I think I would rather see Scorsese go down in history with the former group than with the latter.

no i hope he does win, he could get on stage and except it for Hitchcock, Kubrick, Kurosawa, and The guy who directed Booty call
Title: 2003 Oscars = Crap of the Earth?
Post by: oakmanc234 on May 19, 2003, 05:54:21 AM
I'll pretty much remember 2003's Oscar's for being the one that ignored 'PDL' and snubbed 'Gangs' (two films I love). At least '8 Mile' got something.
Title: 2003 Oscars = Crap of the Earth?
Post by: Pedro on May 19, 2003, 07:12:48 AM
Quote from: SantaClauseWasA BlackMan
Quote from: The Silver BulletI hope Scorsese never wins an Oscar, which may sound terrible, but the hope comes from a good place. If Hitchcock, Kubrick, Kurosawa and Chaplin never won an Oscar for best director and yet people like Mel Gibson and Kevin Costner have, then I think I would rather see Scorsese go down in history with the former group than with the latter.

he could get on stage and except it for...The guy who directed Booty call

Ah yesss.  Who could forget Pollack.
Title: 2003 Oscars = Crap of the Earth?
Post by: SoNowThen on May 21, 2003, 10:45:54 PM
Daniel Day-Lewis got raped. That's all I can say.
Title: 2003 Oscars = Crap of the Earth?
Post by: modage on May 21, 2003, 11:24:48 PM
i think woody allen said something to the effect of if he was going to buy into the hype of awards for doing something worthwhile he would also have to believe that not being awarded/recognized also had equal merit.  basically he didnt care about the oscars for annie hall because he knows he's doing what he wants to do and if he were to believe the awards had power over him to make him feel appreciated they had the power to do the opposite as well.  a good bit of wisdom, especially from him.
Title: 2003 Oscars = Crap of the Earth?
Post by: USTopGun47 on May 22, 2003, 07:12:59 PM
Yeah ...the Oscars are most defenitly production awards.  It's that grandiosness of Dances With Wolves that steals from quality films with more personality like Scorsese.  Man goes to fronteir and meets Indians.  Smokes pipe and old wise man speaks words of wisdom to the setting sun as the culture is erased.  Elaborate, lengthy on location shooting.  Best Picture.  NYC, brilliant, innovative crime film becomes a classic.  Nomination?  Maybe.