|
05 Mar 06 - 09:20 PM (#1686076) Subject: OSCARS From: Leadfingers So Wallace and Grommet have another Oscar !! Any Argument ?? |
|
05 Mar 06 - 09:24 PM (#1686077) Subject: RE: OSCARS From: Once Famous Who cares?: |
|
05 Mar 06 - 09:45 PM (#1686088) Subject: RE: OSCARS From: WFDU - Ron Olesko I loved Wallace & Gromit, but Howl's Moving Castle was incredible. |
|
05 Mar 06 - 09:48 PM (#1686092) Subject: RE: OSCARS From: JedMarum I love Wallace & Gromit!! but as for oscars??? humbug!! A pox on their houses. Seems to me Hollywood never tires of congratulating itself! |
|
05 Mar 06 - 10:02 PM (#1686103) Subject: RE: OSCARS From: WFDU - Ron Olesko I agree with you to a point Jed. There are so many award ceremonies that have come along over the years, but I think it is important to remember that the Oscars were the first. Sure, there is way too much pagentry and self-indulgence, and the campaigning for the awards are a joke. However, I think the Academy Awards are an important evening. I am watching the ceremony as I type this. A few minutes ago they did a stirring tribute to films that have changed culture. I would argue that movies have become the ONE artform that truly makes a difference and gets people to think. The tribute showed clips from films like Grapes of Wrath, On the Waterfront, Network, All the Presidents Men, The Defiant Ones, Inherit the Wind and many others. For all the complaining, Hollywood has always found ways to tackle difficult subjects. For many people, these films have made changes in their thinking and has helped open doors. George Clooney said it best, in 1939 they gave an award to Hattie McDaniel when segragation was in full swing in this country. The films nominated this year also cover some tough subjects and unfortunately they are not the blockbusters that draw people into theaters. Subjects such as the blacklist, censorship, racism and tolerance are tackled in these films. Perhaps if these awards introduce the films and serve as "commercials", then I think it is doing a wonderful thing and might make a difference. |
|
05 Mar 06 - 10:11 PM (#1686109) Subject: RE: OSCARS From: number 6 The Oscars don't interest me in the least bit. sIx |
|
05 Mar 06 - 10:26 PM (#1686119) Subject: RE: OSCARS From: Peace I don't get it. Oscar Meyer's? It's a joke, right? |
|
05 Mar 06 - 10:29 PM (#1686122) Subject: RE: OSCARS From: number 6 Oscar Meyer is a hot dog from chicago. Louis B. Meyer is a home town boy from Saint John N.B. sIx |
|
05 Mar 06 - 10:43 PM (#1686135) Subject: RE: OSCARS From: Peace Ad Meyer is when ya really look up to someone. |
|
05 Mar 06 - 10:46 PM (#1686141) Subject: RE: OSCARS From: number 6 Meyer Lansky is actually someone ya wouldn't mess around with. sIx |
|
05 Mar 06 - 10:49 PM (#1686143) Subject: RE: OSCARS From: Peace Quag Meyer is when ya get stuck up to your navel in muck. |
|
05 Mar 06 - 10:50 PM (#1686145) Subject: RE: OSCARS From: number 6 I dare not ask what kind of muck. |
|
05 Mar 06 - 10:59 PM (#1686153) Subject: RE: OSCARS From: Peace "I dare not ask what kind of muck." Tuk. |
|
05 Mar 06 - 11:33 PM (#1686161) Subject: RE: OSCARS From: Bee-dubya-ell Oscar Schmidt? Oscar Pedersen? (Now it's a music thread.) |
|
05 Mar 06 - 11:38 PM (#1686166) Subject: RE: OSCARS From: Anonny Mouse The wifey was into it a bit--I'm in the "who cares" mostly. I read something I thought was interesting: that movie The March of the Penguins grossed more than all 5 of the "Best Pic" contenders...combined. And the "Best Song" was that Rap number about how hard it is to be a pimp. What crap. :>( |
|
05 Mar 06 - 11:45 PM (#1686170) Subject: RE: OSCARS From: Peace Penguins have pimps now? Where will it all end? |
|
05 Mar 06 - 11:48 PM (#1686172) Subject: RE: OSCARS From: John O'L "Best song" and "rap number" are oxymoronic phrases for mine. |
|
06 Mar 06 - 06:02 AM (#1686284) Subject: RE: OSCARS From: katlaughing I haven't watched the Oscars in years. I watched it this year because Jon Stewart was hosting. I was really surprised at how much they had changed, in presentation, set decor, etc. Stewart's humour seemed to breath new life into them and I thoroughly enjoyed it. I also liked that they honoured the orchestra and the conductor, Conti, AND that each recipient had a timer in front of them, so there were no long-winded thank you speeches. I think it is great that so many independent and socially aware movies were in the running this year. IMO, this was not Hollywood as usual. |
|
06 Mar 06 - 07:26 AM (#1686315) Subject: RE: OSCARS From: Rapparee I ate some great seaweed salad and some really good sushi, drank a little Kirin Ichiban, talked with an old friend while doing so, and went to bed. |
|
06 Mar 06 - 08:27 AM (#1686348) Subject: RE: OSCARS From: GUEST The Academy Awards "an important evening"? Please. If a film is great, or important, or whatever, it is that because it stands above the rest all on it's own. Without any of the decadent and obscene "glitter and glamour" crap. That said, I too watched for the entertainment value of Jon Stewart, but sadly, there was nothing he could do to save the day. This awards show must die. Jon Stewart struggled admirably to liven it up, but it is not to be. This is, quite simply, the most boring night on tv of the year. Best jokes of the evening: Billy Crystal and Chris Rock in the teepee & the Dick Cheney joke. |
|
06 Mar 06 - 08:56 AM (#1686356) Subject: RE: OSCARS From: Strollin' Johnny Overpaid people with their heads firmly stuck up their own arses, butt-kissing one another. Utterly vomit-inducing. |
|
06 Mar 06 - 09:29 AM (#1686370) Subject: RE: OSCARS From: WFDU - Ron Olesko Wow, talk about "heads firmly stuck up their own areses" - I guess I should not be surprised at the curmudgeonly reaction of Mudcatters, but I guess it does surpise me a bit that people have such negative reactions when it is obvious that they have not watched the awards in years and can comment on things they have not seen or heard - such as the song that won. I am not a rap fan, but the song impressed me as well as the film from which it came. I am impressed by the independent nature of the films that were up for awards this year and the topics they tackled. The awards are important, for those with open minds, and I now have several films that I want to watch based on what I saw last night. That is one of the reasons most people tune in. |
|
06 Mar 06 - 10:06 AM (#1686390) Subject: RE: OSCARS From: katlaughing Me, too, Ron. |
|
06 Mar 06 - 10:44 AM (#1686417) Subject: RE: OSCARS From: GUEST Actually, I've watched the Oscars all my life. I am a huge movie buff. But this awards show sucks, pure and simple. It just ain't what it used to be. Sure, I'll see some films that were honored last night when they are released on DVD. But not because they were honored with a nomination. I'll see them, because they look good. And I disagree that people tune into this broadcast to learn about the films. I think it is the celebrity watching people tune in for. That's what I tuned in for--to see Jon Stewart. But this bloated, behemoth of a broadcast just isn't worth 4 hours of my remaining time on earth anymore. Of course, I've been saying that for years, and still tune in most years for at least awhile. But this really has become an exercise in celebrities worshipping themselves and one another. It is vacuously disturbing to watch these people. Frighteningly so. And really, what was so different this year? Spielberg still lost, just like he always does. The blockbusters got the tech awards, the "brave" films got nods for writing. The pretty picture (Memoirs of a Geisha) won the costume, art, blah blah blah. Utterly predictable. Even the "surprise best picture" was predictable. They picked the film with the happy ending. Hollywood is a very scary place. Films made by Hollywood players and powerbrokers are NOT indie films, no matter what Robert Redford says at Sundance every year, or how "small" the budget by Hollywood standards. |
|
06 Mar 06 - 10:46 AM (#1686418) Subject: RE: OSCARS From: GUEST But I enjoyed the Altman bit. The only saving grace of the night. |
|
06 Mar 06 - 11:08 AM (#1686433) Subject: RE: OSCARS From: WFDU - Ron Olesko "I disagree that people tune into this broadcast to learn about the films. I think it is the celebrity watching people tune in for." Nothing wrong with either reason, as well as other reasons for choosing to watch or not. I do agree that last nights show was not very good entertainment. With live shows, it is difficult to manage. Jon Stewart was a bit stiff, the music playing under the speeches was tacky and insulting, but I did enjoy the rap song, Dolly Parton, Robert Altman, the gay western montage, and a few other moments. The speeches of George Clooney and Reese Witherspoon were heartfelt and endearing. "this really has become an exercise in celebrities worshipping themselves and one another" I honestly see nothing wrong with that. While many people think that creating films or television is easy work, it can be very hard. The work that these people have created deserves recognition, in my opinion. What you may consider "worship" is often congratulations on a job well done. Sure it may go over the edge, but we need opportunities to celebrate our victories and accomplishments in all walks of life. Ang Lee, who could not afford rent when he first came to Hollywood, is now at the top of his game. He deserves to shine. "Hollywood is a very scary place" So are Des Moines and Hackensack. It is what you make of it. Most people can see beyond the vapid trappings and recognize the true art that gets created there. The Academy Awards CAN sift through the crap and recognize the films that make a difference. Sure, the studios (or what is left of them) may be financing these "independent" films - but there spirit and message is not being shut out. To my way of thinking, that is an example of art shining over corporate trappings. |
|
06 Mar 06 - 11:08 AM (#1686434) Subject: RE: OSCARS From: number 6 Rapaire ... sounds like that was a pleasant evening ... good food, good wine, good conversation. sIx |
|
06 Mar 06 - 11:20 AM (#1686435) Subject: RE: OSCARS From: number 6 Oscar Brand .... now it's back to a music thread again. sIx |
|
06 Mar 06 - 11:39 AM (#1686446) Subject: RE: OSCARS From: GUEST Yes, Des Moines and Hackensack are scary too. But they don't do an annual four hour broadcast from those cities, showing it's citizens congratulating themselves and patting each other on the back for doing a hard job well. Give me a break. Why does Ang Lee deserve the attention and praise more than an insurance sales manager from Hackensack? Answer: celebrity worship. We all know "the Academy" doesn't reward excellence, except on a rare occassion. They reward their current "in group", their own taste in films, and box office. The Academy Awards are SO not about art. |
|
06 Mar 06 - 11:41 AM (#1686447) Subject: RE: OSCARS From: GUEST And certainly the "best song" category from last night proves that. |
|
06 Mar 06 - 11:49 AM (#1686452) Subject: RE: OSCARS From: WFDU - Ron Olesko "Why does Ang Lee deserve the attention and praise more than an insurance sales manager from Hackensack? Answer: celebrity worship" The insurance sales manager certainly deserves praise and attention if he creates something that can impact on so many people. There is nothing wrong with a degree of celebrity worship when someone is being recognized for their accomplishments. While you are an un-named guest and none of us can determine what your experience on which you base your opinions, I think most people do look up to those that can create great art or work that effects others. Your opinion of the "best song" is strictly your opinion. I think others, with more open minds, look beyond their preconceived notions of music and would realize that the song has value and context that made it stand above others. It isn't something that I will be humming throughout the day, but it was a performance that struck me by its openess and honesty. |
|
06 Mar 06 - 11:54 AM (#1686456) Subject: RE: OSCARS From: Strollin' Johnny Yuck. |
|
06 Mar 06 - 11:58 AM (#1686460) Subject: RE: OSCARS From: Peace Much ado about a puffed up industry. Make their own wind to fill the sails of their show. |
|
06 Mar 06 - 12:05 PM (#1686465) Subject: RE: OSCARS From: LilyFestre Oscar=a nice little fishy for your fish tank that can get quite large and aggressive rather quickly. Oscar, as in Oscar the Grouch. I love 'em both. Michelle |
|
06 Mar 06 - 12:14 PM (#1686477) Subject: RE: OSCARS From: Cllr Hi leadfingers I enjoyed I stayed up to watch as much as I could before I fell asleep I pleased rachel wiez (or however you spell it got an oscar I though she was great in Constantine and I am a big fan of wallace and gromit so that was nice. Cllr |
|
06 Mar 06 - 12:19 PM (#1686485) Subject: RE: OSCARS From: GUEST I saw all three films from which the best song nominations were made. Not one of the three songs was memorable in the context of the film, or on it's own. All three were bloody awful on their own. A movie song should trigger an emotional connection to the part in the film where it is placed, for it to work effectively "in context". All I could think of when I saw "Hustle and Flow" was--no wonder the guy is a loser, his song sucks. While I loved the performance of the actor, the song just threw me right out of the movie. Same thing with the "sweeping soundtrack" bit at the end of Memoir of A Geisha (which was nominated for best film score--a predictable, bland "lush" John Williams score) when she was standing out at the end of what looked like the bloody Cliffs of Moher, dropped there how? by helicopter? also threw me right out of the film. Now come on. Be honest. You are trying to justify the celebration of some very, very banal and pedestrian stuff here. Think of past best songs and best film scores. I can still hear the film scores from films like Out of Africa and Dances with Wolves in my head. But hey--just how many Best Song nominees or winners from the past can you name? I can't name a single one, because it is a complete fluff category of largely worthless and forgetable songs (just like this year). Film scores on the other hand, do sometimes rise to greatness, but only in the film context. I doubt the Vienna Symphony is playing stirring versions of the above mentioned film scores, except during their summer pop music series to pull in some cash. |
|
06 Mar 06 - 01:09 PM (#1686506) Subject: RE: OSCARS From: Alba I didn't see the whole program. I was happy to see Wallace and Gromit got another oscar (even it meant that a fellow Country woman in that category didn't..:( ) Crash is a very good film and I was glad it won in the Best Film category. I suppose that rather than watching the small part of the Oscar program that I did I could have come into the Mudcat and contributed to the many stimulating topics available for discussion down in the BS but as I have no opinion on wether a woman looks better than a man in shorts or have any knowledge about alien women with 3 green tits I opted for the 'banal' and spent my R&R watching the TV for an hour. I agree that the independent nature of the films and their wide range of social topics was of interest to me this year. I hardly bother with the Oscar Film song...to me that is like choosing a eurovison song contest winner. The Musical scores are a different matter entirely. J |
|
06 Mar 06 - 01:23 PM (#1686514) Subject: RE: OSCARS From: GUEST The biggest problem I have with the horse race, is it is a truly lousy way to judge art. If I were to pick a favorite among the best film category (amazingly enough, I saw all of these films this year--a likely first) it would be Good Night and Good Luck, with Crash a close second. Walk the Line was fun for watching Reese & Joaquin, but as a film, it wasn't very good. Same with Capote. It was SO worth seeing Hoffman channel Capote, but again, not a great story. I was underwhelmed by Brokeback too, but then Ang Lee makes pretty pictures, not really great ones. Altman he ain't. |
|
06 Mar 06 - 01:23 PM (#1686517) Subject: RE: OSCARS From: WFDU - Ron Olesko "You are trying to justify the celebration of some very, very banal and pedestrian stuff here." Don't make assumptions. I do not feel the song was "banal" or "pedestrian". Aside from your assumptions, you do make a good point about songs not being particularly memorable. You would have to go back a few decades to when musicals had a greater role to find really good songs. From the performances I heard last night, this was the best of the bunch. |
|
06 Mar 06 - 01:27 PM (#1686520) Subject: RE: OSCARS From: GUEST Which is a pretty underwhelming recommendation. Out of all the nominated films I haven't seen, I know I won't see Cinderella Man or History of Violence. But I will definitely see the animated film that should have won, North Country (gotta see my girl Frances), Mrs. Henderson Presents, maybe TransAmerica. Constant Gardener most definitely should have been on the best film list instead of Walk the Line, which was a joke of a nomination for best film. And I could go on and on forever about what SHOULD have gotten a nod that was a gazillion times better over the years... |
|
06 Mar 06 - 01:32 PM (#1686522) Subject: RE: OSCARS From: WFDU - Ron Olesko Again guest, not knowing who you are and without any reasons behind your opinions, they really have impact. First of all, "Walk the Line" was not on the best film list. Secondly, to call "Walk the Line" a "joke of a nomination" is wrong in my book. I felt the acting was wonderful, the construction of the film top rate, and the story compelling. I think it should have been included as best picture. For the catagories in which it was nominated, all were deserving for the reasons I mentioned above. |
|
06 Mar 06 - 02:18 PM (#1686556) Subject: RE: OSCARS From: GUEST Right-eo. I was wrong again, and isn't that horrible considering I had already fallen asleep by the time they announced "the big one". It wasn't Walk the Line nominated, it was Munich, that utterly predictable film of Spielberg's. I knew there was a reason they put him up front. Everyone loves to watch him be humiliated again and again. Spielberg knows about as much about making political films as Disney, and they all look like it. What on earth can ever save us from another Jews under siege film by Spielberg? His untimely death, perhaps? |
|
06 Mar 06 - 02:27 PM (#1686561) Subject: RE: OSCARS From: WFDU - Ron Olesko I have not seen Munich yet, so I can't comment. I did like Stewarts joke about Spielberg - saying that Spielberg gave us Schindler's List and now Munich, to which Stewart commented "I think I speak for all Jews when I say I can't wait to see what happens to us next" to which he added "Trilogy?" |
|
06 Mar 06 - 02:57 PM (#1686584) Subject: RE: OSCARS From: gnu I watched because of John Stewart. He was okay. But, the Oscar goes tooooo, Billy Crystal. As for the movies, never saw any of them. |
|
06 Mar 06 - 03:14 PM (#1686605) Subject: RE: OSCARS From: Peace "or have any knowledge about alien women with 3 green tits" That movie didn't win an Oscar either. |
|
06 Mar 06 - 03:15 PM (#1686606) Subject: RE: OSCARS From: Peace Did Hans Zimmer win anything? |
|
06 Mar 06 - 03:20 PM (#1686612) Subject: RE: OSCARS From: GUEST I did see Munich. It was no Z. |
|
06 Mar 06 - 03:24 PM (#1686615) Subject: RE: OSCARS From: Alba "That movie didn't win an Oscar either." Nope it didn't and that may have been a good thing!:) |
|
06 Mar 06 - 03:28 PM (#1686618) Subject: RE: OSCARS From: Peace Definitely. The story line was great, but the acting--well, it wasn't. The whole Mars scenes were terrible and as movie IMO it was 1 1/2 outta 10. But as a story--9 1/2 outta ten. How ya doin', Alba. Hope the music is coming apace. Looking forward to hearing the new songs. |
|
06 Mar 06 - 03:33 PM (#1686622) Subject: RE: OSCARS From: Scoville Mom and I watched the last little bit. I was impressed that there were so many good movies from which to choose--that doesn't always happen. Other than that, Oscars are sort of like voting for Prom Queen in high school; unless you have a real stake in it, you don't care. The great thing about TV is I can turn it off if I don't like it. I liked Capote--that is, I thought Philip Seymour Hoffman did a great job even though I ended up not liking Capote the character at all. I didn't mind that it was a slow story. I thought the woman who played Harper Lee was good but I didn't really think she had enough of a part to justify an Oscar (Reese Witherspoon got it, anyway. I'm not sure I agree with that, either, but whatever). I don't go to the movies much. I still haven't seen Good Night, and Good Luck but I really want to. I've always liked David Strathairn, and I couldn't stand George Clooney in his ER days but I've liked his movies much better. I haven't seen Brokeback Mountain and I don't even remember Crash. I would have liked to see Judi Dench get an award for something but oh, well. And I love Wallace & Gromit, too. |
|
06 Mar 06 - 05:29 PM (#1686700) Subject: RE: OSCARS From: Bill Hahn//\\ I sat through the thing for one reason and one reason only---JOn Stewart. His best moments came when he relaxed a bit and also used some of the clips and promos spoofing the contending ads for the nominiees---ala Daily Show. His comments re: the montages was, to me, priceless. "...later we will have a montage of montages--but we are out of film clips so please send some in". As to the nominations, the recipients---all opinions are subjective, obviously. So my thoughts--- Best acceptance speech (most touching) Philip Seymour Hoffman Classiest act on the dais---Altman As to the award winners--- I was happy to see the industry try to move away from the big budget blockbusters and reward independent smaller budget meaningful work. DId I agree with the choices---mostly NO. But--as said, that is subjective. I saw Crash and thought it just a later version of Altman's "Shortcuts" --which was a better film. Having seen all the others (except Brokeback---or as Mad TV called it Humpback Valley)I would have opted for Good Night/Good Luck. Capote was -=to me--just so-so with the exeption of Hoffman who, I felt, deserved his award. the film was merely a one man show of talent---he really channeled Capote. As to female actress--I cannot believe Witherspoon over some of the other nominees---especially Judi Dench. As to music---I did not think there was a decent piece of music in the bunch ---but to the Academy's credit they moved far-a-field (though I cannot abide Rap). I only wish that theaters would stop w/ all the commercials and let us see some of the short films that were on display last evening---they used to . I guess that is known as the good old days---or the less commercial ones. Bottom line---an industry event (which it was at the beginning) has turned into a spectacle that compares unlike things. After all performances were not contests---they were what they are called performances. As to the Hackensack insurance industry---or anywhere else---now that is a contest. Sell more policies---get the award. The envelope please---and the signed policy. Bill Hahn |
|
06 Mar 06 - 05:42 PM (#1686709) Subject: RE: OSCARS From: Greg F. Did Stewart have the rest of the Kingston Trio on with him? |
|
06 Mar 06 - 06:11 PM (#1686745) Subject: RE: OSCARS From: GUEST I thought Constant Gardener was a much better film than Munich or Crash. Ditto Squid and the Whale, which also wasn't nominated. A much better ensemble film ast year was Nine Lives, not even on most Hollywood radar. Also, if you didn't see Tommy Lee Jones' film that he directed--Three Burials of Melquiades Estrada--you didn't see one of the two best director/actor films in years (I hated last year's winner, Million Dollar Baby, a Clint Eastwood actor/director flick). I thought it was as good as Good Night and Good Luck, which I thought was excellent. But I liked Constant Gardener better than either of those two--just seemed better written to me. |
|
06 Mar 06 - 06:14 PM (#1686748) Subject: RE: OSCARS From: GUEST And another thing, I really don't think March of the Penguins deserved the win over the Enron movie, even though I loved it. Also, The War Within--much better than Syriana. |
|
06 Mar 06 - 06:42 PM (#1686785) Subject: RE: OSCARS From: John O'L I thought Jon Stewart tried too hard to be funny and ended up being unfunny. I didn't know who he was so I googled him, found his Today Show website and watched a few bits. He is actually a very funny entertainer. This of course means that it's the Oscars extravaganza that's the dud. No surprise there. It belongs to a more elegant era. (Giggle) |
|
06 Mar 06 - 07:22 PM (#1686821) Subject: RE: OSCARS From: DougR After listening to all the nominated songs, I had a vision of Henry Mancini, Franz Waxman, Ernest Lehman and several other previous Oscar winners spinning in their graves. I thought all the nominated songs were pure crap. I only saw a couple of the nominated movies for best picture (Crash and Capote, also saw I Walk the Line) but thought they were pretty weak movies. Didn't see Brokeback Mountain but I have a lot of respect for Larry McMurtry so I would imagine he deserved the award for best script adaption. DougR |
|
06 Mar 06 - 07:51 PM (#1686844) Subject: RE: OSCARS From: Bill Hahn//\\ John O'Lennaine---It is the Daily Show---and yes it is funny. Requires a different thing than hosting the Awards. Had he done it ( or been allowed to do it) the Daily Show way it would have been funny. He is, admittedly, not an MC---he is unique artist in his own right. Doug R--I am guessing that the era of those you mentioned is over. For better or for worse---but, then again, Mozart, Beethoven, etc; are also long gone and music evolves. I was going to bet on anything by John Williams. Guess his time is over as well. Perhaps mine is too--and, perhaps, not too soon. Don't want to sound morbid, but there are generational issues here. Yet---I can relate to Stewart because of cleverness and sarcasm---can't relate to angry Rap---talking blues (its roots---in my opinion) was not that. As I said-give the Acad. credit for widening their perspective---though I have to say I wonder (don't all take this the wrong way) who was voting and in what numbers and from what ethnicities---also from what commercial interests. Audience reaction to the music award seems to give a clue. May I add a humble YO here. YO --I did not like any of the music but would have settled for Dolly and her sort of gospel like piece. Bill Hahn |
|
06 Mar 06 - 10:55 PM (#1686937) Subject: RE: OSCARS From: John O'L The Daily Show it is, sorry. I agree, it's a different thing altogether. There are very few who could do an Oscars show successfully. In fact I can't think of anyone. They are an anachronism. There's no-one left who can do that sort of stuff. |
|
06 Mar 06 - 11:20 PM (#1686944) Subject: RE: OSCARS From: Elmer Fudd Hey, how about that Mafia 36?!! When one of them thanked Jesus after winning for a song called "It's Hard Out There For a Pimp" I almost fell off the couch laughing. |
|
06 Mar 06 - 11:30 PM (#1686948) Subject: RE: OSCARS From: Ron Davies I didn't see the whole thing--could only stand about 20 minutes, even with Jon Stewart--and I think he's the best thing to hit TV in several eons. I wish he'd said a lot more--but what I did hear was pretty good. After the Academy's self-congratulatory --(their strong suit)-- melange of clips from Guess Who's Coming To Dinner, All the President's Men, To Kill A Mockingbird and others, Stewart noted that Hollywood had dealt in movies with racism, discrimination, corruption, war, hatred and some other issues. And he said something to the effect that, as a result, those problems are all gone. |
|
07 Mar 06 - 12:52 AM (#1686974) Subject: RE: OSCARS From: Peace ". . . Stewart noted that Hollywood had dealt in movies with racism, discrimination, corruption, war, hatred and some other issues. And he said something to the effect that, as a result, those problems are all gone." Now, THAT'S funny! |
|
07 Mar 06 - 06:00 AM (#1687074) Subject: RE: OSCARS From: katlaughing There is a good article about the song which won and how some Americans of African descent feel about it on this page. I thought all of the songs nominated were markedly unremarkable and easily forgotten. Loved seeing and hearing Altman! |
|
07 Mar 06 - 07:05 AM (#1687112) Subject: RE: OSCARS From: GUEST,Oscar Brand I'm glad that walk the line got an oscar. |
|
07 Mar 06 - 07:35 AM (#1687139) Subject: RE: OSCARS From: Ron Davies Yeah, Stewart is great--but you have to see him in his habitat--the Daily Show. That's the first program I've wanted to see every day since 1966--at least the first half of the show --before his guest comes on--but even the guests have sometimes been worthwhile. He certainly has expert commentators (like Rob Kordry)--and Jon himself is the perfect straight man. |
|
07 Mar 06 - 08:00 AM (#1687159) Subject: RE: OSCARS From: GUEST Best song didn't bother because it was a rap song. I have no problem with rap. Problem I had with it, it was a BAD rap song, just like I thought Dolly's was a BAD gospel pop song. Most objections to the winning song are racist reactions, IMO. |
|
07 Mar 06 - 09:38 AM (#1687245) Subject: RE: OSCARS From: MMario I don't normally care about the Oscars - but would have like to watch them Sunday (not enough to skip seeing Seamus Kennedy) but only because a kid I used to baby sit for was ushering people to their seats. would have been fun trying to spot him. |
|
07 Mar 06 - 09:46 AM (#1687250) Subject: RE: OSCARS From: closet-folkie "I have no problem with rap. Problem I had with it, it was a BAD rap song...Most objections to the winning song are racist reactions, IMO." Huh? |
|
07 Mar 06 - 12:28 PM (#1687422) Subject: RE: OSCARS From: Mr Red saw Wallace & G and preferred (much to my amazement) Corpse Bride But Walk the Line should have won more. We watched every credit and it said that Rees Witherspoon & Joaquin Phoenix sang the soundtrack themselves. Very impressed. |
|
07 Mar 06 - 03:43 PM (#1687588) Subject: RE: OSCARS From: M.Ted just how many Best Song nominees or winners from the past can you name? "Somewhere over the Rainbow", "The Way You Look Tonight", "Moon River", "The Shadow of Your Smile", "Raindrops Keep Fallin' On My Head" and so on--and for those who feel folk music is left out, it seems like Bob Dylan and Buffy St. Marie got Oscars for one reason or another--my memory fails me, at this point, but there have been many great songs chosen, and many others nominated-- |
|
07 Mar 06 - 03:55 PM (#1687599) Subject: RE: OSCARS From: WFDU - Ron Olesko Dylan won for "Things Have Changed" from Wonder Boys and Buffy Ste. Marie won for "Up Where We Belong" from Officer & A Gentleman, which she co-wrote as I remember. |
|
07 Mar 06 - 07:05 PM (#1687798) Subject: RE: OSCARS From: DougR Bill H. and kat: I agree regarding Altman. He was a breath of fresh air, so to speak. And yes, Bill H., I'm sure I'm dating myself when I complain about the "best" songs. The days of beautiful tunes in movies is probably long gone ...gone the way of the Western. Also, I thought Jon Stewart did a fine job. After all, he didn't have a lot ot work with. DougR |
|
08 Mar 06 - 06:33 PM (#1688630) Subject: RE: OSCARS From: Bill Hahn//\\ Doug R---funny aside here. The expression---I am dating myself. A number of years ago Christine Lavin was on my show and she sang an older pop song and I made some comment like---"..hey,, I am dating myself but..." Her really quick and clever retort---"...Dating yourself---you are a pervert". I said, "... that like Narcissus I like to look at myself, hang around with myself, and sometimes I don't talk to myself for weeks on end." I never forgot the exchange---she is so clever and quick---as she left the studio she said---I remember this---"..I'm leaving now---feel free to do whatever you like with yourself". I can never hear that expression without thinking of that exchange with her Bill Hahn |
|
08 Mar 06 - 07:24 PM (#1688658) Subject: RE: OSCARS From: autolycus Didn't watch it. OKaaaaaaay? a) Use critics and friends' recommendations as better guides. b) Much prefer to compile my own favourites lists - so much more fun. c) Wouldn't an Awards channel, where the awards ceremonies in all areas of life, be more appropriate? awards ceremonies in the leather business?, Electronics Design? Top washing machine salesmen in the WHOLE of North Yorkshire? bet they'd be fabulous entertainment. Ivor |
|
09 Mar 06 - 12:13 PM (#1689307) Subject: RE: OSCARS From: DougR Come to think of it, Bill, it is a rather strange "saying." Takes a devious mind, though, to come up with that interpretation I think. My mind is always "pure" of course. :>) DougR |
|
09 Mar 06 - 04:36 PM (#1689493) Subject: RE: Oscars (2006) From: GUEST,M.Ted Thanks for spotting me on those tunes, Ron--i |