Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]



Hello, soap fans -- and welcome to Daytime Royalty!

For those unfamiliar, we are an uncensored community for fans and lovers of the daytime genre. We have a no-holds-barred atmosphere in regards to the shows, writers, actors etc. but we do not allow member bashing in any form.

You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.

Join our community!

If you're already a member, please log in to your account to access all of our features.

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
The 83rd Annual Academy Awards; 8:30PM/ET on ABC
Topic Started: Feb 27 2011, 01:01 PM (10,364 Views)
Mason
Member Avatar


How often is the real best picture of the year actually awarded that title, though? Many times, they're not even nominated.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Y&RWorldTurner
Member Avatar
Sharongate, bitches!

Mason
Feb 28 2011, 07:34 PM
How often is the real best picture of the year actually awarded that title, though? Many times, they're not even nominated.
Yep.

The Oscar's are all about the here and now. It makes no difference to the academy which films age better years from now. It's all a matter of opinion anyway.

Generally, I thought most of this year's nominees were very weak, so I didn't really care what won. Toy Story 3 might have been my favourite, but no way in hell would the academy award that Best Picture.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
PhoenixRising05
Member Avatar
GET EM STEPH!!

Y&RWorldTurner
Feb 28 2011, 05:46 PM
The King's Speech grossed more domestically and worldwide than Black Swan and The Social Network. What else do we use to judge a mainstream following other than box office gross? The critics also loved the film as much, and if not more so than the other two mentioned.

A film like Inception never stood a chance, it's not the type of film Hollywood honours, and sadly, Toy Story 3 being animated counts against it - when it probably was better than all the nominated films this year.

The Oscar's are all politics, like any award show. Outside of some popular films being nominated like Toy Story 3, they almost never give awards to films that have had a big popular following. The Oscar's are all about campaigning for films, as I doubt most of the Academy watches all these films.

The King's Speech scored well with critics and Hollywood insiders. I may not have been a big fan of it, but it was by no means one of the worst judged films last year. The reviews were very strong, and the film did gain an audience judging by the gradual box office response.
I get all that but I don't get why there has to be campaigning. Yes, award shows are all politics but so much of the Oscar's comes down to who had a better campaign when it should be about what voters felt was the best movie of the nominees. Other awards shows aren't that blatant (well, maybe the GG are but that's it). That is what angers me and I know it angers many others too. The Oscar's will never be relevant when junk like The King's Speech wins. No one cares. It did better than some usually do at the box office but that isn't saying much. No one will remember it and I always thought a best picture winner has to be something that will be remembered. Something that maybe elevated a genre or the industry. It needs to make an IMPACT. You can't make an impact if your not seen and, let's face it, most of the films that win don't get seen. Hell, before they expanded to 10 films, most of the nominees in the best picture category were films that were hardly seen. You can't make an impact if hardly anyone sees your movie. Think back to movies like Gone With the Wind, Citizen Kane, Titanic, On The Waterfront, etc. People actually SAW them. They stand the test of time. That is why I loved what Spielberg said. To me, if a best picture winner is forgotten a few months later by the bulk of the public, how is that right? I know the best film hardly ever wins or even gets nominated. I'm not saying that the best picture winner has to be do $300 million at the box office but there just needs to be less bias in the process. Get rid of campaigning. Just let the voters vote and leave it at that like other awards shows do. Obviously, you can't help the behind closed doors politics but the other campaigning is ridiculous and not needed. It just undermines everything.

And the fact that a film like Toy Story 3 being animated counts against it represents everything wrong with the process. If something is good, it's good. Who cares if it's animated or live action?

Something has to change or else it will be the same out of touch nonsense year after year.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
PhoenixRising05
Member Avatar
GET EM STEPH!!

Y&RWorldTurner
Feb 28 2011, 07:42 PM
Mason
Feb 28 2011, 07:34 PM
How often is the real best picture of the year actually awarded that title, though? Many times, they're not even nominated.
Yep.

The Oscar's are all about the here and now. It makes no difference to the academy which films age better years from now. It's all a matter of opinion anyway.

Generally, I thought most of this year's nominees were very weak, so I didn't really care what won. Toy Story 3 might have been my favourite, but no way in hell would the academy award that Best Picture.
You hit the nail right on the head. It just works against everything the best picture winner should be though. Ugh.

It's just so frustrating but I guess a film like Toy Story 3 can sleep easy knowing it is the largest grossing animated film and will likely be many's best film of 2010.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Drew
Member Avatar
#bbuk

Mitchapalooza
Feb 28 2011, 05:09 PM
I don't believe the rumours about Franco skipping because he was embarassed....he doesn't strike me as that kind of person. He has a "who cares? who gives a fuck" kind of attitude.

His hosting was pretty shitty, but the media is blowing it up into something it was not. It certainly was not the worst hosting duties on an award show (I am looking at you Vanessa Williams...). You could tell he just was not into it (certainly not as much as Hathaway was).

But whatever, people need to get over it and move on, so what, he bombed, big deal...I still like him.
Exactly!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Angie79
Member Avatar
Royal Reporter

Exclusive: Source: Anne Hathaway, James Franco "Hate Each Other"

No winners here!

A source tells Us Weekly that Anne Hathaway, 28, and James Franco grew to "hate each other" as they rehearsed to host the Oscars Feb. 27.

"She had to provide all the energy -- he was just phoning it in," says a second insider. ("James seemed in his own little world," during the Oscar telecast, says another source. "Producers were pissed.")

In fact, as UsMagazine.com reported Monday, after the awards, Franco, 32, skipped his own party at L.A.'s The Writer's Room.

"He went immediately back to NYC because he was pissed about how the show went," adds a third source.

Franco's rep responds, "This is absolutely not true, while Hathaway's rep says, "Anne had a wonderful experience with him."

Still, fans should expect a new MC in 2012. Insiders say both Hugh Jackman and Billy Crystal want the gig again.

UsMagazine

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
PhoenixRising05
Member Avatar
GET EM STEPH!!

I doubt Anne hates him but I'm sure she's disappointed. She doesn't seem like the type to hate someone LOL.

I figured Hugh or Billy would want it and I suspect they will chose one or the other for next year because they will want someone who is guaranteed to be a slam dunk. I don't think they will go with two hosts anymore, at least for awhile. I just wish they got Hugh back for this year. I know he was too busy last year but he was at the awards this year. They should've asked him to do it but they wanted the young audience so they went with Anne and James. The younger audience won't tune in for the hosts. They will only tune in if movies they like are in the mix and that won't happen at the Oscar's.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
King
Member Avatar


I thought the show was more awkward than boring. I didn't really think either of them were good hosts, but I think people are being way too harsh.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
LPS
Member Avatar


I think people are being way too harsh on Anne, but Franco truly sucked. He didn't even try. I'll at least give Anne an "A" for effort. With that being said, I hope they don't try Alex Baldwin again. I hate him as a host.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Angie79
Member Avatar
Royal Reporter

King
Mar 1 2011, 08:49 PM
I thought the show was more awkward than boring. I didn't really think either of them were good hosts, but I think people are being way too harsh.
I agree. I thought that did pretty good when they started the show. It went downhill after that, but I didn't hate them as hosts.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Rick
Member Avatar
Dreamlander

Franco had to fly back to NY because he had class the next morning. That's why he skipped the after party.

Damn tabloids

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
DealsFor.me - The best sales, coupons, and discounts for you
« Previous Topic · Primetime Discussion · Next Topic »
Add Reply