elperromagico
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-24-05 05:52 PM
Original message |
Poll question: Which of these last ten Best Picture Oscar winners least deserved it? |
Beaverhausen
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-24-05 05:59 PM
Response to Original message |
1. Who the hell voted for Lord of the Rings? are you kidding? |
|
did you even see that film? Let alone the two leading up to it?
|
hollywood926
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-24-05 06:05 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
9. I didn't pick Bored of the Rings, |
|
but I hated it. What a long drawn-out yawnfest!
Hated The English Patient more, however!
|
A-Schwarzenegger
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-24-05 11:04 PM
Response to Reply #9 |
38. Loved "The English Patient" on Seinfeld. |
Fenris
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-24-05 06:01 PM
Response to Original message |
2. Oh! So torn between "Titanic" and "Braveheart"! |
|
Titanic. As much as I hate "Braveheart," the dialogue beats the shit out of the cardboard that Cameron made Kate Winslet spew.
|
Richardo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-24-05 06:02 PM
Response to Original message |
3. Man, you look at that list and it's a celebration of mediocrity |
|
Edited on Mon Jan-24-05 06:03 PM by Richardo
Will any of these movies stand as the 'Casablanca' or 'Citizen Kane' or even the 'Gone With the Wind' of its day?
I don't think so.
|
meganmonkey
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-24-05 06:02 PM
Response to Original message |
4. I voted for the Titanic, which really isn't fair |
|
since I haven't ever seen it. I just have this feeling...
|
MuseRider
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-24-05 06:20 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
|
My feeling is that if certain women I know were soooo into it that they were going to it 7 or 8 times it has to be a pukefest. Ooohhh, lets all go together. We should have dinner and some drinks and go every Friday night. Jeeze, no thanks.
|
Hans Delbrook
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-24-05 11:01 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
36. Oh, you are indeed blessed |
|
If you did not lose three hours of your life to that drek. It was bad enough when some "friends" convinced me to go but I was also stupid enough to take my poor husband w/ me and do it on our birthday w/e! Then when it won Best Picture, well... it was the last straw. I've never forgiven James Cameron and I don't think I ever will. I only recently forgave Leo and only because he's so Blue!
|
djeseru
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-24-05 06:03 PM
Response to Original message |
5. My Oscar WTF moment... |
|
Edited on Mon Jan-24-05 06:04 PM by djeseru
...came when they gave it to Shakespeare in Love over Saving Private Ryan.
Edited for spelling error...
|
elperromagico
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-24-05 06:04 PM
Response to Reply #5 |
8. Especially after Spielberg won for Best Director, right? |
ronnykmarshall
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-24-05 06:13 PM
Response to Reply #8 |
12. There was some MAJOR lobbying going on. |
|
I think some slept with every academy member that year.
"Private Ryan" should have won.
|
djeseru
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-24-05 06:15 PM
Response to Reply #8 |
|
I enjoyed Shakespeare in Love but I thought that Saving Private Ryan was more powerful. For me, it brought home what the b&w D-Day footage never could, nor some history books.
|
stopbush
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-24-05 06:26 PM
Response to Reply #5 |
23. Mine came when they gave it to Ordinary People over |
terrya
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-24-05 06:04 PM
Response to Original message |
|
Did I miss something here? "Gladiator" was this...blah kind of movie. Great looking movie...but that's it. And Russell Crowe SHOULD have won Best Actor for "A Beautiful Man" instead of "Gladiator"
T
|
Hans Delbrook
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-24-05 11:05 PM
Response to Reply #6 |
|
He should have won for "The Insider" and I always felt they knew in their hearts they fucked up (I think Hanks won for the 2nd time that year?) and "gave" it to him for "Gladiator" to make up for it. And yes, he should have won his 2nd for "A Beautiful Mind."
(Even though he was as hot as molten metal in "Gladiator." :evilgrin: )
|
derby378
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-24-05 06:04 PM
Response to Original message |
|
Parts of it were stirring and very well executed, but the beginning of the film had too many technical problems, including a very visible film flub where a bagpiper at a funeral fingered the chanter out of sync with the music being played. Plus, there was the flub where King Edward kicked his son using a pair of boots that wouldn't be invented for another 500+ years.
|
stopbush
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-24-05 06:29 PM
Response to Reply #7 |
24. How about the Battle of Stirling Bridge...without the bridge? |
|
Edited on Mon Jan-24-05 06:29 PM by stopbush
The battle was lost because the King's forces got trapped on the bridge, except in Mel's "an open field=same as a bridge" flick.
I guess they spent most of the productoin $ on his hairdo...
|
jdonaldball
(684 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-24-05 07:09 PM
Response to Reply #7 |
31. Braveheart was historically bankrupt. More errors: |
|
1. The Scots did not paint themselves with woad in the Middle Ages. 2. William Wallace was a relatively wealthy Knight of some means, and he would have worn chain mail. 3. Bagpipes were not used as military instruments at that time. They were used mostly by shepherds, to frighten the sheep. And they came from the Middle East, brought to Scotland by returning Crusaders. 4. Edward the First did not die contemporaneously with Wallace. 5. Most of Wallace's followers were from the Lowlands or the Borders, where kilts and "tartans" and such garb were not worn, ever. Damn you Sir Walter Scott, for turning Scotland into a theme park! 6. Edward the First (Longshanks) and most of his knights and barons, spoke French and identified more with the French-speaking feudal aristocracy than with "England". They were oppressors of the English, even more than of the Scots. 7. Robert Bruce was a Norman Overlord of Scotland, closer in language and culture to the "English" aristocracy than to the Scots. 8. The "Irish" comrade of Mel Gibson in that movie, was eager to "kill English." This is an anachronism. No Irishman in year 1300 would think of "The English" as his enemies. "The English" had not even coalesced as a nation at that time, and neither had "The Irish." 9. It was not a war between Nations in any modern sense. It was a feudal war between competing feudal powers. And at that time (as is still the case in many ways) the common Lowland and Border Scots had more in common with the "English" than either of them had in common with their feudal overlords.
|
derby378
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jan-25-05 10:32 PM
Response to Reply #31 |
42. #5 reminds me of a Brian MacNeill song |
|
I can just hear your laughter You always get what you're after You've been trying to make us a theme park Since the Romans built the Wall
|
msgadget
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-24-05 06:10 PM
Response to Original message |
|
It was hard choosing just one.
|
AmandaRuth
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-24-05 06:11 PM
Response to Original message |
|
one of my closest friends got kicked out of the theater, for losing patience with the film midway, and asking them to sink the effing boat already a little louder than she realized. After seeing the film, i understand her sentiment.
|
swimmernsecretsea
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-24-05 06:49 PM
Response to Reply #11 |
25. Oh, I hate this film! Sink already! Sheesh |
|
And they mucked it up with that crappy love story, that stupid blue-diamond caper, and those hideous drawings that are the key to the whole stinko story. Ewww! I broke into applause when it cracked in half, thinking that the story's gonna move faster. Did it? Ha!
|
sundog
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-24-05 06:13 PM
Response to Original message |
13. none deserved it! The best movies never get anything. |
|
Edited on Mon Jan-24-05 06:15 PM by sundog
Oscars are bought & sold. It's all political shit.
|
flamingyouth
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-24-05 06:22 PM
Response to Original message |
16. I've never seen "Titanic" or "Braveheart" and don't plan to |
|
As a matter of fact, I've never seen "Shakespeare in Love" either, nor do I plan to.
I did actually like "American Beauty" and "Chicago," but I'm not sure if they were worthy of being named best picture. I love "LOTR:ROTK," though.
|
Liberal In Texas
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-24-05 06:23 PM
Response to Original message |
17. Forrest Gump, one of the worst movies EVER. n/t |
webjamn
(235 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-24-05 07:01 PM
Response to Reply #17 |
|
Forrest Gump was a very good film but The Shawshank Redemption should have won Best Picture that year
|
fishwax
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-24-05 10:59 PM
Response to Reply #28 |
35. Absolutely agree that Shawshank should have won |
|
Edited on Mon Jan-24-05 11:00 PM by fishwax
Actually, looking over that list, I'm not convinced that any of them should have won. I don't think I would have voted for any of them for that particular year.
On Edit: I do probably agree with American Beauty.
|
Balbus
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-24-05 06:23 PM
Response to Original message |
18. Why isn't Chariots of Fire on there? |
ronnykmarshall
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-24-05 06:23 PM
Response to Reply #18 |
19. Only the last ten years. |
Balbus
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-24-05 06:26 PM
Response to Reply #19 |
|
I guess I should've read the message instead of scan it.
|
ronnykmarshall
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-24-05 06:24 PM
Response to Original message |
|
I mis-read the topic and voted for "Chicago". I ment to vote for "Braveheart".
|
davidinalameda
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-24-05 06:26 PM
Response to Original message |
|
HATED that movie
I watched maybe half if that much and gave up
|
mcscajun
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-24-05 10:39 PM
Response to Reply #22 |
32. A more boring movie would be Very Difficult to imagine… |
|
…or produce.
Worst thing about it was a friend of mine wanted to see it, I didn't. We went. She said she enjoyed it; I said I loathed it. That was then. Fast forward to last year; brought it up and she said she never liked it!
Two hours of my life gone for nothing! I could have strangled her. :)
|
DrGonzoLives
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-24-05 06:51 PM
Response to Original message |
26. Tossup: Forrest Gump or Titanic |
|
But I give the edge to Forrest Gump, as at least Titanic can put some women in the mood...
|
SarahB
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-24-05 10:46 PM
Response to Reply #26 |
|
Never underestimate the power of the Gump.
|
deadparrot
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-24-05 06:53 PM
Response to Original message |
27. Titanic. Overhyped, overrated "chick flick." |
Seabiscuit
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-24-05 07:03 PM
Response to Original message |
29. Why are there so many "Titanic" bashers in the DU Lounge??? |
|
Neither "Titanic" nor "Lord of the Rings" nor "Forrest Gump" should be on such a list.
|
Withywindle
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-24-05 07:06 PM
Response to Original message |
|
between the tedious, pretentious, melodramatic Titanic and the loathsome, cloying patronizing Forrest Gump.
The latter "wins" in the end, though, because it's offensive on so many more levels than the boat flick, which at least has really cool sinking-and-screaming scenes.
|
Lydia Leftcoast
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-24-05 10:54 PM
Response to Original message |
34. So much mediocrity and only one vote! |
|
I couldn't settle on just one.
|
Beware the Beast Man
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-24-05 11:02 PM
Response to Original message |
|
Probably won for the simple fact that it was a hugely successful period piece that was a long shot to break even at the box office. "Braveheart" was great despite the glaring historical inaccuracies, and historical fiction ususally wanks, but "Gladiator" was deserving as well.
|
Downtown Hound
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-24-05 11:05 PM
Response to Original message |
|
I really could not figure out what the big deal about that movie was. Okay it had some good dancing. Big deal. The story was at best decent. Not a bad film in any sense but by no means the best picture of the year.
|
Bok_Tukalo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jan-25-05 10:40 PM
Response to Reply #39 |
43. I saw the show in New York before I saw the movie |
|
The movie seemed flat and completely uninteresting compared with the stage production.
|
NNadir
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-24-05 11:07 PM
Response to Original message |
41. Of the 5 I've seen in the list, "Titanic" was definitely the worst. |
|
Some of the others were pretty bad though.
"American Beauty," however is one of my favorite movies ever.
|
bigwillq
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jan-25-05 10:42 PM
Response to Original message |
|
Awful, awful cheesy inaccurate movie. Bad acting too.
|
PBR me
(70 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jan-25-05 10:43 PM
Response to Original message |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Tue Apr 23rd 2024, 10:57 PM
Response to Original message |