|
|
Post by Citizen Snips on Jan 18, 2015 15:19:20 GMT -5
Saw Boyhood last night, found it very underwhelming. I thought the unseen story of Patricia Arquette's character was far more interesting than Boy's.
But as The Artist proved a few years ago, a good gimmick can lead to a ton of awards for an average film.
|
|
|
|
Post by Saul Goodman on Jan 18, 2015 20:11:19 GMT -5
Seems like no one cares that the Razzies put out their nominations.
|
|
|
|
Post by BayleyTiffyCodyCenaJudyHopps on Jan 18, 2015 20:21:57 GMT -5
Seems like no one cares that the Razzies put out their nominations. The Razzies have had too bad a tendency to go after popular stuff regardless of its reception over the years. They were beating the Twilight horse to death long after most people stopped caring about it. |
|
pegasuswarrior
El Dandy
Three Time FAN Idol Champion
@PulpPictionary
Posts: 8,748 
|
Post by pegasuswarrior on Jan 18, 2015 20:45:28 GMT -5
Seems like no one cares that the Razzies put out their nominations. The Razzies are the Oscars of nominating bad movies. {Spoiler}That means not always the worst movies. |
|
|
|
Post by Red Impact on Jan 18, 2015 23:35:16 GMT -5
The Razzie's are pretty tame this year. The only funny nominations are in the onscreen couples awards.
|
|
|
|
Post by Duke Delicious on Jan 19, 2015 0:22:43 GMT -5
Maybe it's because i liked the filming process of filming the movie over 12 actual years of these actors lives and seeing them actually grow/age over time as opposed to a regular movie that uses either make up or different actors to show age change but i really liked Boyhood.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 19, 2015 2:36:47 GMT -5
Maybe it's because i liked the filming process of filming the movie over 12 actual years of these actors lives and seeing them actually grow/age over time as opposed to a regular movie that uses either make up or different actors to show age change but i really liked Boyhood. I honestly thought it was a good time capsule film, with some pretty interesting stories/characters, and some weirdly nostalgic moments. Even though I found the last bit years were the least interesting though. But the weird thing was the end kind of wanted me wanting more like f*** it. I want a sequel from college to reaching 30. Then another sequel all the way to the characters eventual death from old age in a retirement home all with the same actors and cast. |
|
|
|
Post by walterharrow on Feb 19, 2015 10:53:11 GMT -5
Just read an interesting article by an anonymous member of the academy. She reveals her votes but one thing i find strange about it is her reasons for some of the votes.
For example, she basically says that she is voting for Michael Keaton for Best Actor because he seems like a nice guy and she likes hsi interviews (i personally also want Michael Keaton wot in) and then says she is voting for JK Simmons for best supporting actor because he was in LAw and Order and has been acting for ever
My point is, shouldnt they just be looking at the film/role they are nominated for and forget about what they have been in before and how they come across in real life etc? It just doesnt seem fair to vote for someone because you think they are nice guys.
|
|
Famous Rocking Chimes
Dennis Stamp
Made Famous
My general reaction to WWE right now
Posts: 4,548
Member is Online
|
Post by Famous Rocking Chimes on Feb 19, 2015 12:56:57 GMT -5
Just read an interesting article by an anonymous member of the academy. She reveals her votes but one thing i find strange about it is her reasons for some of the votes. For example, she basically says that she is voting for Michael Keaton for Best Actor because he seems like a nice guy and she likes hsi interviews (i personally also want Michael Keaton wot in) and then says she is voting for JK Simmons for best supporting actor because he was in LAw and Order and has been acting for ever My point is, shouldnt they just be looking at the film/role they are nominated for and forget about what they have been in before and how they come across in real life etc? It just doesnt seem fair to vote for someone because you think they are nice guys. I would definitely agree with that. Wasn't there a bit of an uproar about last year's awards because a few of the voters came out and admitted they voted for 12 Years a Slave without even seeing it? |
|
Crimson
Hank Scorpio
Thank you DWade
Posts: 6,511
|
Post by Crimson on Feb 19, 2015 13:01:33 GMT -5
Just read an interesting article by an anonymous member of the academy. She reveals her votes but one thing i find strange about it is her reasons for some of the votes. For example, she basically says that she is voting for Michael Keaton for Best Actor because he seems like a nice guy and she likes hsi interviews (i personally also want Michael Keaton wot in) and then says she is voting for JK Simmons for best supporting actor because he was in LAw and Order and has been acting for ever My point is, shouldnt they just be looking at the film/role they are nominated for and forget about what they have been in before and how they come across in real life etc? It just doesnt seem fair to vote for someone because you think they are nice guys. Oh yeah, it's pretty ridiculous. The Hollywood Reporter does an article on it every year revealing their thinking process behind their votes. It gets really bad with the animated categories since most voters don't even bother watching the movies because they're "beneath them" and simply vote for the one that has the most hype behind. |
|
|
|
Post by Beets by Schrute on Feb 19, 2015 17:42:45 GMT -5
As we approach Oscars weekend, I thought it would nice to do a throwback to what I now consider an emotional moment. I hope the tribute they give to Robin is a phenomenal one that reminds everyone of the impact he made on the industry:
|
|
Mochi Lone Wolf
Fry's dog Seymour
Development through Destruction.
Posts: 24,175
|
Post by Mochi Lone Wolf on Feb 20, 2015 18:24:00 GMT -5
Finally saw Birdman. It's a great movie with some fantastic performances worthy of winning nearly every acting nomination.
However, I hope like hell that Alejandro González Iñárritu doesn't win best director. The performances by Keaton, Norton, Stone, and Watts were good enough to ensure that the movie wasn't too bogged down by the director being so far up his own ass. The movie could have been so much better if the director wasn't such a pretentious douche.
|
|
