If I may spread some internet frustration about last night's Academy Awards onto this forum; King's Speech?? Really??
The Academy screwed up big time. The King's Speech is a good movie, albeit nothing all that special. I normally support the Academy Awards, and in most recent years they usually don't make blunders this big (maybe Crash...). But is anyone going to remember the King's Speech 10 years from now? 5 years from now? Hell, I think people are going to have to be reminded The King's Speech won this come next year's Academy Awards!
In a year with plenty of great films (Social Network, Black Swan, Inception, to name a few) I can't believe they picked the one that looked like a BBC made-for-TV movie. In what universe did Tom Hooper do a better directing job than David Fincher? Not only that, I thought Hooper robbed a nomination from Christopher Nolan for Inception and even Danny Boyle for 127 Hours. I felt like he was given a 'pat on the back' nomination, the Academy saying "Well, we liked the King's Speech a lot, so well nominate you as a friendly gesture." I can't believe he actually won it... Am I missing something? Can someone give me some examples of how Hooper did a good job? He basically plopped the camera down in front of some brilliant actors. That's what made the Kings Speech good, the brilliant actors and a decent script. I actually thought Hooper's directing was mediocre. He crafted a better film than Social Network and Inception? Even the BAFTA Awards gave the directing prize to Fincher! They're British!
In a year when the top prizes were actually correct for the Golden Globes (Social Network) and the Independent Spirit Awards (Black Swan) it makes the Academy's decision this year look even worse. Even the Grammys were good on their top prize (Arcade Fire) for the first time, in, well, I can't think of any other recent time the Grammys were correct about Album of the Year.
If I wake up the day following the Oscars, and I'm complimenting the Grammys, something has gone horribly, horribly wrong.
When you set a DVR to record a live event and it goes past the scheduled end time apparently the technology does not exist in 2011 to automatically extend the recording. Seriously? We put men in the moon 40 years ago.
That's my rant.
Happy Natalie Portman won. She can put Amidala behind her and never have to work with Ashton Kutcher again.
Yes Fincher was robbed. But Trent Reznor was a nice surprise.
I thought Kirk Douglas stole the show. He should have hosted. The Oscars should be hosted by a COMEDIAN not two actors with no chemistry or charisma. Boring.
I have not yet seen Kings Speech. Good for Colin Firth.
What I liked most was the motif of featuring a classic movie to setup an award and the use of some nice projection technology around the proscenium.
Glad the award season is over. Now we can focus on anticipation of Transformers 3!
Forget Transformers 3, are you aware that there is a FIFTH Fast and the Furious movie coming out this year? It's called Fast Five, but I would have went with the title Fa5t and the Furiou5. Thinking about it already gets me excited for next year's awards season (I think this will finally be Vin Diesel's year!).
I also agree with you on the hosts (just horrible) and the digital backdrop highlighting old films (pretty cool).
I long ago stopped actively caring who wins best picture or best actor. Naming a group of nominees I think is good, to show a class of film and actor that stand above the rest... but putting such diverse films and talents against each other to choose an overall SINGLE "best"? Sounds ridiculous to me, especially after years of seeing movies I thought were worthy, not win. The voting process is all political and has been forever, it really isn't about the craft any more after the nominees are named. The whole premise of a single winning film is not viable, IMO.
I have a system, it has stuff in it, and stuff hooked to it. I have a camera, it can record stuff. I read the manuals, and know how to use this stuff and lots of other stuff too.
You should be suitably impressed...
I couldn't agree more, it just goes to show that, if a movie is based on a true story and is a british period piece, it's a shoe-in to win.
The Oscars have their own aesthetics and they rarely stray from them.
The Kings Speech wasn't bad, I enjoyed it. The bottom line is, it should'a been nominated, but should'a lost to the social network.
I think history is gonna be kind to the Social Network. I loved Aaron Sorkin's script. I'm looking forward to Moneyball with Brad Pitt. based on the book by Michael Lewis.
Yeah I've been following Moneyball too. It seems like it's going to be awesome, with a lot of creative minds behind it. I kind of wish Stephen Soderbergh was still making it though, but I guess he got too ambitious with his vision (wasn't he requesting a budget of something like $100 million for it, then got immediately fired?).
But Brad Pitt, Philip Seymour Hoffman, and now (!) Jonah Hill seems like an awesome cast to me.
For whatever reason, I don't see it as a mediocre-potential project, more of a complete hit-or-miss kind of thing.