Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
2010 Oscars 2010 Oscars

02-04-2010 , 05:56 PM
Well I just read a couple of his reviews and the guy is pretty clearly an idiot.

Quote:
(none of Bay’s mechanical anthropomorphism matches the wit of how Torque’s human characters live through their vehicles)
Wat?
2010 Oscars Quote
02-04-2010 , 05:57 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by SarcasticRat
Dude really likes Norbit imo.
But has no tolerance for Batman (or TWBB):

"Unlike Nicholson’s multileveled characterization, Ledger reduces The Joker to one-note ham-acting and trite symbolism. If you fell for the evil-versus-evil antagonism of There Will Be Blood, then The Dark Knight should be the movie of your wretched dreams."


Loves him some Transformers 2 though:

"Bay’s post-nuclear version of Hoffman’s The Nutcracker stirs emotion from our pop culture, industrial experience then connects to ancient spiritual myths (like Kingdom of the Crystal Skull). It’s too much the production of industrialization to be considered magic, yet Bay’s sheer fascination with seeing is impressively communicated."

?huh?
2010 Oscars Quote
02-04-2010 , 06:06 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlie.Dont.Surf
God the move to 10 nominees turned out horrific.
maybe more ppl will watch these movies, and the studios will get more $$$
from a casual oscar watcher/fan prospective, you are right, most of these movies blow.

When was the last time there should have been 10 nominees? 1944?
2010 Oscars Quote
02-04-2010 , 06:07 PM
http://www.pinnaclesports.com/Contes...ing/Lines.aspx

My favorite Armond White
Quote:
Does the Wayans family realize that the concept behind*Little Man, their latest collective project, makes it a near-classic comedy? Director Keenen Ivory Wayans and his performing brothers Marlon and Shawn are notorious for childish impudence and sarcasm in such hits as*Scary Movie*and*White Chicks. But in*Little Man, dealing with their habitual irrepressible immaturity unleashes something poignant. It makes this silly, lightweight film almost deep
2010 Oscars Quote
02-04-2010 , 06:13 PM
You dont need to know anything more about anyones film taste than their opinion on Transformers 2.

If someone thinks it's anything but a cinematic abortion they know nothing about film and their opinion can be forever ignored.

This is all you need to know about Armond White.

The good thing about Trannies 2 is that it's a pure litmus test.
2010 Oscars Quote
02-04-2010 , 06:15 PM
Armond White, GOAT
2010 Oscars Quote
02-04-2010 , 07:22 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clovis8
You dont need to know anything more about anyones film taste than their opinion on Transformers 2.

If someone thinks it's anything but a cinematic abortion they know nothing about film and their opinion can be forever ignored.

This is all you need to know about Armond White.

The good thing about Trannies 2 is that it's a pure litmus test.
I'm sure there are plenty of people with terrible taste in movies who'd trash Transformers II. Some critics will auto-hate any big studio release and anything that grosses over 100mil.


That said, I can't imagine anyone with good taste liking it.
2010 Oscars Quote
02-04-2010 , 08:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Erinsbrough
I thought the Avatar nomination was merely political to include a blockbuster within the extended category. In other years surely it wouldn't have been nominated? Its not even the best sci fi film of the year!
Avatar would have clearly been nominated every year since 1927, and would have won the vast majority of them. It's also a better film than many winners of years past.

The best movies as judged by qualified filmies rarely win the oscar.
2010 Oscars Quote
02-04-2010 , 08:22 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wires
Loves him some Transformers 2 though:

"Bay’s post-nuclear version of Hoffman’s The Nutcracker stirs emotion from our pop culture, industrial experience then connects to ancient spiritual myths (like Kingdom of the Crystal Skull). It’s too much the production of industrialization to be considered magic, yet Bay’s sheer fascination with seeing is impressively communicated."

?huh?
wow...
2010 Oscars Quote
02-04-2010 , 08:25 PM
I'm seriously starting to like this Armond guy. If I were to start a parody blog reviewing films, it would be word for word this guy's canon. The way he talks about genuinely **** movies as if they were art is inspiring. If you read his reviews as satire, they're genius.
2010 Oscars Quote
02-04-2010 , 08:43 PM
really really hope avatar doesnt win

it can win some technical awards, but no way is it the best movie of the year

the plot was just terrible
2010 Oscars Quote
02-04-2010 , 08:46 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duke
Avatar would have clearly been nominated every year since 1927, and would have won the vast majority of them.
this is simultaneously the most erroneous and funniest thing I have ever read on 2+2.
2010 Oscars Quote
02-04-2010 , 09:02 PM
I really love Avatar, but I doubt it wins most years. The only massive technologically advanced science fiction film I can think of like Avatar is Star Wars, which didn't win. Maybe King Kong and 2001 if you want to stretch it, but they didn't win either.

But this is a perfect year for Avatar to win it, and probably will.

Also, I love complex deep movies as much as the next person. But lol at hating Avatar because it wasn't deep and complex.
2010 Oscars Quote
02-04-2010 , 09:04 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by chuckleslovakian
I really love Avatar, but I doubt it wins most years. The only massive technologically advanced science fiction film I can think of like Avatar is Star Wars, which didn't win. Maybe King Kong and 2001 if you want to stretch it, but they didn't win either.

But this is a perfect year for Avatar to win it, and probably will.

Also, I love complex deep movies as much as the next person. But lol at hating Avatar because it wasn't deep and complex.
no one is hating it because it isnt deep and complex. they are hating it because it has a generic storyline that is both unoriginal and stupid
2010 Oscars Quote
02-04-2010 , 09:08 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by chuckleslovakian
I really love Avatar, but I doubt it wins most years. The only massive technologically advanced science fiction film I can think of like Avatar is Star Wars, which didn't win. Maybe King Kong and 2001 if you want to stretch it, but they didn't win either.

But this is a perfect year for Avatar to win it, and probably will.

Also, I love complex deep movies as much as the next person. But lol at hating Avatar because it wasn't deep and complex.
I have a standing offer that I will bet it does not win? Care to wager?
2010 Oscars Quote
02-04-2010 , 09:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clovis8
I have a standing offer that I will bet it does not win? Care to wager?
I'm far from a baller, but I'd be willing to put a little money on it.
2010 Oscars Quote
02-04-2010 , 09:17 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by chuckleslovakian
I'm far from a baller, but I'd be willing to put a little money on it.
PM sent
2010 Oscars Quote
02-04-2010 , 09:47 PM
I'll bet some amount that Avatar wins BP too
2010 Oscars Quote
02-04-2010 , 09:55 PM
Too bad this song didn't get an Oscar nod.
2010 Oscars Quote
02-05-2010 , 04:34 AM
so, i dont want this be my blog, but i figure at least a couple of you might be interested.

AMC is doing the best picture showcase this year, and they are showing all 10 movies, split into two saturdays. 5 movies a saturday, Feb 27th and March 6th. Roughly 11AM to 11PM. The package where I am is 40 bucks for all ten movies if you are a member of AMC moviewatchers (which is free). SCORE.

So excited about doing this. It's not at every AMC or even most AMCs. If you are interested I would go to http://www.amcentertainment.com/BPS/ which should have all the info you need

So excited about this. 40 bucks for 10 great movies is INSANE.
2010 Oscars Quote
02-05-2010 , 12:07 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clovis8
this is simultaneously the most erroneous and funniest thing I have ever read on 2+2.
Perhaps you should watch every best picture. I could be slightly wrong about "vast majority" but it clearly wins most of them. The earlier you go the greater the discrepancy in effect quality, so you need to have a pretty awesome movie (as far as writing/acting/story go) to beat it.

Watch Sunrise, which I can only assume won in 1929 because of the awesome effects. Cells on top of each other to make it look like there were ghosts, and an interesting choice to put a camera on a swing. Best sound effects for its time. The plot was borderline ******ed, but it won. If Avatar shows up in 3d with 10' tall blue people and dragons, it obviously wins.

Something like "The Godfather" has a chance to beat it based purely on acting, but there is no way that "The Greatest Show On Earth" beats it - Charlton Heston or not. "The Sound of Music" has a good chance, but "Around the World in 80 days" does not.

If you hadn't seen this same plot before (Dances With Wolves, or whatever - take your pick) it's clearly not as bad. For a lot of those years it would have been a new idea, so the story itself probably wins some votes. Hell, the acting was better in Avatar than in a lot of the older oscar winners. For a long time actors had no idea how to act for film, and overdid everything so it looked absurd.

Hell, if you release "Transformers" in 1950 it wins hands down, and the quality of the movie has nothing to do with it. The filmies will disagree, saying that "All About Eve" is clearly a better acted movie, but it would be absurd to think that the academy wouldn't vote for the one with effects they can't even begin to understand.

If you change the rules to something like "make Avatar with whatever technology is available 5 years ahead of the year in question" then there are a lot of years where it wouldn't have been released since it would have sucked so bad.
2010 Oscars Quote
02-05-2010 , 12:12 PM
Avatar was good...but not Oscar good
2010 Oscars Quote
02-05-2010 , 12:46 PM
It's exactly Oscar good.
2010 Oscars Quote
02-05-2010 , 01:15 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DannyOcean_
so, i dont want this be my blog, but i figure at least a couple of you might be interested.

AMC is doing the best picture showcase this year, and they are showing all 10 movies, split into two saturdays. 5 movies a saturday, Feb 27th and March 6th. Roughly 11AM to 11PM. The package where I am is 40 bucks for all ten movies if you are a member of AMC moviewatchers (which is free). SCORE.

So excited about doing this. It's not at every AMC or even most AMCs. If you are interested I would go to http://www.amcentertainment.com/BPS/ which should have all the info you need

So excited about this. 40 bucks for 10 great movies is INSANE.
Huge Thanks for mentioning this by the way. I didn't even know it existed. Now I am going to scramble for a babysitter so the wife and I can go to both days. Of course the nearest AMC for us is an hour drive, but it's worth it I am sure

It does mean I am going to have to pay retail for the tickets online though, since I won't drive an hour to buy the tickets for a discount.
2010 Oscars Quote
02-05-2010 , 01:21 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duke
Perhaps you should watch every best picture. I could be slightly wrong about "vast majority" but it clearly wins most of them. The earlier you go the greater the discrepancy in effect quality, so you need to have a pretty awesome movie (as far as writing/acting/story go) to beat it.

Watch Sunrise, which I can only assume won in 1929 because of the awesome effects. Cells on top of each other to make it look like there were ghosts, and an interesting choice to put a camera on a swing. Best sound effects for its time. The plot was borderline ******ed, but it won. If Avatar shows up in 3d with 10' tall blue people and dragons, it obviously wins.

Something like "The Godfather" has a chance to beat it based purely on acting, but there is no way that "The Greatest Show On Earth" beats it - Charlton Heston or not. "The Sound of Music" has a good chance, but "Around the World in 80 days" does not.

If you hadn't seen this same plot before (Dances With Wolves, or whatever - take your pick) it's clearly not as bad. For a lot of those years it would have been a new idea, so the story itself probably wins some votes. Hell, the acting was better in Avatar than in a lot of the older oscar winners. For a long time actors had no idea how to act for film, and overdid everything so it looked absurd.

Hell, if you release "Transformers" in 1950 it wins hands down, and the quality of the movie has nothing to do with it. The filmies will disagree, saying that "All About Eve" is clearly a better acted movie, but it would be absurd to think that the academy wouldn't vote for the one with effects they can't even begin to understand.

If you change the rules to something like "make Avatar with whatever technology is available 5 years ahead of the year in question" then there are a lot of years where it wouldn't have been released since it would have sucked so bad.
lol
2010 Oscars Quote

      
m