deadhead | 27 Feb 2017 2:34 a.m. PST |
Well, after last night, we could do the same thing. Something like the Prize for the best new figure in different scales in 2016/17 Nothing could possibly go wrong with that………. |
Sho Boki | 27 Feb 2017 5:21 a.m. PST |
Good idea! :-) First nominant – Best Murat 2016. ;-)
|
skipper John | 27 Feb 2017 6:35 a.m. PST |
Poor guy never could act… now we learn he cannot read either!! Sad. |
deadhead | 27 Feb 2017 6:43 a.m. PST |
He chickened out. He knew something was wrong so he handed it to Fay Dunaway. I think he really thought that age was catching up and he was misreading it…it said the actress' name, with the film title below it. Ergo it must be…….. It is one of the two reps next to the stage that will be crucified. Now here is a conspiracy theory. Who could have benefited most from a total foul up at the Oscars, such that all speeches are totally forgotten? Is this the new grassy knoll or is it "Oscargate" all over again? Murat..for me the one on the left. Daft rig….. somewhere between Jeb Stuart and ECW Cavalier. |
David Manley | 27 Feb 2017 7:07 a.m. PST |
Management of the event and the envelopes resided in PWC, a firm of accountants, so its not surprising it was a . In fact reading about the process they followed I'm astounded it didn't happen before |
whitejamest | 27 Feb 2017 7:26 a.m. PST |
My first thought was that it was an intentional tactic to get more people talking about it all. |
Sysiphus | 27 Feb 2017 8:24 a.m. PST |
Nope, clearly a case of Affirmative Action in the Arts. The foul-up highlighted the preferred choice prior to the pc choice being awkwardly presented. |
streetgang6 | 27 Feb 2017 9:02 a.m. PST |
|
skipper John | 27 Feb 2017 9:59 a.m. PST |
HA! Streetgang6 you're killin me… too funny. |
Dave Jackson | 27 Feb 2017 10:59 a.m. PST |
so…..we can say tho….that "Moonlight" won the popular vote but "La La Land" won the electoral college? |
DeRuyter | 27 Feb 2017 11:26 a.m. PST |
Or you can put it this way: "La La Land" was a bit of nostalgia, pining for the good old days of the 1950s that aren't coming back despite the promises. "Moonlight" was a serious look at the reality of some people's struggles in our society today. Was it pc @Ogdenlulimus? One usually doesn't see comedies and musicals in the best picture category, so maybe it is not all that surprising and is nothing to do with affirmative action. |
Khusrau | 01 Mar 2017 4:13 p.m. PST |
|
4th Cuirassier | 02 Mar 2017 5:39 a.m. PST |
A lot of people went to see and enjoyed La La Land, which pretty much ruled it out of a Best Picture Oscar as these only ever go to deeply worthy, feelbad, boring films that nobody wants to see again, much less buy to re-watch at home on DVD. OK, that's a generalisation, but not a very gross one. If we look at the 1990s, for example, the Best Picture winners were: Dances With Wolves The Silence of the Lambs Unforgiven Schindler's List Forrest Gump Braveheart The English Patient Titanic Shakespeare in Love American Beauty Of those I suggest the only ones anyone still seeks out to sit through would be Titanic and Silence of the Lambs. Nobody's talked about the others in 20 years. Movies passed over in that decade include: Goodfellas Pulp Fiction Shawshank Redemption LA Confidential The Full Monty Saving Private Ryan The Sixth Sense - all of which I suggest are better and more fondly remembered than most of what actually won. It's the same story in any decade. Winners in the 1980s included Ordinary People, Gandhi, Terms of Endearment, Amadeus, Out of Africa and Driving Miss Daisy. Losers in the 1980s included The Elephant Man, Raiders of the Lost Ark, E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial, and Fatal Attraction. Broadly an Oscar-winning film is no more likely to be a memorable picture than any other considered; perhaps less so. In 1982, Gandhi beat ET as best picture, and I suggest that exactly the same thing just happened this week. It's not about the quality, it's about the virtue signalling. |
Murvihill | 02 Mar 2017 10:29 a.m. PST |
The Oscars are decided by a bunch of people whose living it is to make movies. They are serious about it. Regular moviegoers are there to be entertained for a couple hours. The difference is why the Oscars aren't a good judge of what makes a movie popular. (BTW, Forrest Gump and Unforgiven are both worth a couple hours' watching as well) |
deadhead | 02 Mar 2017 2:16 p.m. PST |
The music in Forest Gump alone is worth the Film/Movie. OK nothing by the Grateful Dead or the J Airplane, but the Byrds…..makes me shiver still. So what gets the Oscar for the best figure released in the last year? How many other categories? Best supporting character (a camel?). Best female (a camel?) Best 6 mm figure (who can tell?). Best piece of scenery? …… All we need now is a venue…gents in a tux and glamorous women in long dresses and very little underwear, ….. the press and TV. I can see it now as the Perrys trip in along the red carpet. And here from Gringos40 is Ged, da man etc etc Just needs bit of imagination and…do they call it crowd funding? There is this chap in Nigeria prepared to run this, it seems and, if you send him your credit card details…….. |
4th Cuirassier | 03 Mar 2017 10:46 a.m. PST |
link
‘We're currently showing a selection of award-winning movies, plus some films you might actually want to see.' |