Posted: Mon Mar 25, 2002 3:20 am
I havn't slept last night- so I am very grouchy, critical, and confused- so Please don't attack my word too strongly. If there is anything you want clarification about- post it, and I will answer it when my mind has cleared up.
I just got back from doing some errands (The oscars finish here at about 7:30 AM) and here is my evaluation:
1. Best Picture: As I said in the other thread - ABM was a sure winner- I now (after seeing it again) think that it was a pretty average film- but because of the love, drama, and the fact that its a true story, the acadamy saps picked it. IMO it should have gone to Moulin Rouge or Gosford Park.
2. Best director:
A. IMO They gave to Howard as a life time achievement- they could have given it to Altman
B. Ridley should have gotten it- he deserved it last year. (IMO Traffic and Erin Brokovich were not very good)
C. IMO- Luhrman deserved it most of all.
3. Best actor: Denzel was the best actor (in the specific character) out of the five- he certainly deserved it.
Smith: over-acting.
Crowe: The movie was too easy- he did't have to act too much to get into character.
Wilkinson: I havn't seen the movie yet.
Penn: It would have been pointless to give it to him- he already said he wouldn't accept.
4. Best actress: definatly PC- Nicole Kidmen was soooooo much better.
5. Supporting actor: I think Broadbent should have won for Moulin Rouge- he was great as Ziedler. Given the choices- Ian should have won.
6. Suppoting actress: I think Magie Smith was better, but she was good too.
7. I am here expressing my extrieme dissapointment that Howard Shore won for the score- I think it was a good score, but not the best.
James Horner didn't have enough versatilety(sp) to produce a great score for ABM- he reuses the same kind of tunes- just look at Titanic and Braveheart.
Randy Newman- he is just someone who will always be nominated.
Like John Williams- who out of the past 34 years hasn't bben nominated in 8 of the oscars. He has been nominated 2 in the same year- 10 times. 3 times in the same year- 2 times. Altogether 41 times 26 years- out of them 5 wins.
Anyway in past years I've routed for Williams, even though he wasn't the most deserving. Like last year- IMO Hans Zimmer should have taken it for Gladiator- despite the fact that Williams was nominated for the Patriot. Instead Tan Dun won for Crouching Tiger- an unimpressive score for a bad movie.
Bottom line- HP had the best score this year- Williams should have won.
@Tami: I thought Shrek was very good, but could have been better. Monsters was for a younger audience, and either way could have been much better. The best part(like in all pixar movies) was the bloopers. They are hillarious.
Whoopi Goldberg was not funny enough in the short period she was in it. The best oscars ever, were the 69th and 70th (English patient,Titanic), Billy Crystal was hillarious in them.
The Cirque De Soleil was nice, although nothing like seeing it live in a theater- I saw them in "La Nuba" two years ago, it was the best live preformance I've ever seen. It was amazing. Of course, that was only because a very rich freind of mine orders tickeats 6 months in advance for 600 dollars a piece- giving us the front row.
I just got back from doing some errands (The oscars finish here at about 7:30 AM) and here is my evaluation:
1. Best Picture: As I said in the other thread - ABM was a sure winner- I now (after seeing it again) think that it was a pretty average film- but because of the love, drama, and the fact that its a true story, the acadamy saps picked it. IMO it should have gone to Moulin Rouge or Gosford Park.
2. Best director:
A. IMO They gave to Howard as a life time achievement- they could have given it to Altman
B. Ridley should have gotten it- he deserved it last year. (IMO Traffic and Erin Brokovich were not very good)
C. IMO- Luhrman deserved it most of all.
3. Best actor: Denzel was the best actor (in the specific character) out of the five- he certainly deserved it.
Smith: over-acting.
Crowe: The movie was too easy- he did't have to act too much to get into character.
Wilkinson: I havn't seen the movie yet.
Penn: It would have been pointless to give it to him- he already said he wouldn't accept.
4. Best actress: definatly PC- Nicole Kidmen was soooooo much better.
5. Supporting actor: I think Broadbent should have won for Moulin Rouge- he was great as Ziedler. Given the choices- Ian should have won.
6. Suppoting actress: I think Magie Smith was better, but she was good too.
7. I am here expressing my extrieme dissapointment that Howard Shore won for the score- I think it was a good score, but not the best.
James Horner didn't have enough versatilety(sp) to produce a great score for ABM- he reuses the same kind of tunes- just look at Titanic and Braveheart.
Randy Newman- he is just someone who will always be nominated.
Like John Williams- who out of the past 34 years hasn't bben nominated in 8 of the oscars. He has been nominated 2 in the same year- 10 times. 3 times in the same year- 2 times. Altogether 41 times 26 years- out of them 5 wins.
Anyway in past years I've routed for Williams, even though he wasn't the most deserving. Like last year- IMO Hans Zimmer should have taken it for Gladiator- despite the fact that Williams was nominated for the Patriot. Instead Tan Dun won for Crouching Tiger- an unimpressive score for a bad movie.
Bottom line- HP had the best score this year- Williams should have won.
@Tami: I thought Shrek was very good, but could have been better. Monsters was for a younger audience, and either way could have been much better. The best part(like in all pixar movies) was the bloopers. They are hillarious.
Whoopi Goldberg was not funny enough in the short period she was in it. The best oscars ever, were the 69th and 70th (English patient,Titanic), Billy Crystal was hillarious in them.
The Cirque De Soleil was nice, although nothing like seeing it live in a theater- I saw them in "La Nuba" two years ago, it was the best live preformance I've ever seen. It was amazing. Of course, that was only because a very rich freind of mine orders tickeats 6 months in advance for 600 dollars a piece- giving us the front row.