Anyone care about the Oscars?
Comments
-
It's Hollywood and it's 99% red.
-
No you woodnt2001400ex said:Don't know about the feminism stuff, but wood. Over and over and over.
-
-
Best picture is trending to shit. It's become a circle jerk of "which movie is the most ambiguously artsy/inclusionary and has a boring script made for actors to act.".
They don't care about entertainment value at all. Not to say that every movie sucks, but I'd be hard pressed to watch a lot of them for a second time... and some I couldn't be assed to watch a first time (Shape of Water, The Artist, Crash, etc). No winners this decade will be rewatched and remembered 20 years from now.
The 2000's had some actually good winners though... Hurt Locker, LOTR Return of the King, Gladiator, No Country for Old Men, The Departed... -
Crash didn’t suckNEsnake12 said:Best picture is trending to shit. It's become a circle jerk of "which movie is the most ambiguously artsy/inclusionary and has a boring script made for actors to act.".
They don't care about entertainment value at all. Not to say that every movie sucks, but I'd be hard pressed to watch a lot of them for a second time... and some I couldn't be assed to watch a first time (Shape of Water, The Artist, Crash, etc). No winners this decade will be rewatched and remembered 20 years from now.
The 2000's had some actually good winners though... Hurt Locker, LOTR Return of the King, Gladiator, No Country for Old Men, The Departed...
-
-
You dipshits left out the 90's. Braveheart, The Unforgiven, American Beauty, The Silence of the Lambs, and Dances with Wolves (shout out to me).
But, the 90's also featured the first time I can recall of useless artsy tripe beating a legit great movie - when Shakespeare in Love beat Saving Private Ryan. 1998. That's where shit started going off the rails. Since 2010 it is rare where some useless artsy fag shit doesn't win. And Hollywood wonders why nobody tunes in anymore. -
This. I wish I had read this before I wrote my crap above. This nailed it, minus my profound addition of 90's movies and the data point that Shakespeare in Love ruined the last vestiges of Hollywood.NEsnake12 said:Best picture is trending to shit. It's become a circle jerk of "which movie is the most ambiguously artsy/inclusionary and has a boring script made for actors to act.".
They don't care about entertainment value at all. Not to say that every movie sucks, but I'd be hard pressed to watch a lot of them for a second time... and some I couldn't be assed to watch a first time (Shape of Water, The Artist, Crash, etc). No winners this decade will be rewatched and remembered 20 years from now.
The 2000's had some actually good winners though... Hurt Locker, LOTR Return of the King, Gladiator, No Country for Old Men, The Departed...
Also, was just looking at the list of winners and nominees and everything from 2010 on is a complete farce. Look at 2015 - Spotlight (lolwut?) beat Mad Max: Fury Road and The Revenant? Get the fuck out of here Hollywood. Fags. -
Just to unfag Shakespeare in Love, Gwynneth showed off some nice tittays and fucking skills.
-
You are young. Amadeus beat out The Killing Fields in 1984.Swaye said:You dipshits left out the 90's. Braveheart, The Unforgiven, American Beauty, The Silence of the Lambs, and Dances with Wolves (shout out to me).
But, the 90's also featured the first time I can recall of useless artsy tripe beating a legit great movie - when Shakespeare in Love beat Saving Private Ryan. 1998. That's where shit started going off the rails. Since 2010 it is rare where some useless artsy fag shit doesn't win. And Hollywood wonders why nobody tunes in anymore.
And an overly large group of one-dimensional caricatures tromping around Normandy Saving Matt Damon was NOT a legit great movie. Spielberg's one legit great movie from the 90's was Schindler's List, not some high-production-value suckoff to the GG.
