Oscar night

Dregor Thule · Post by **Dregor Thule** » March 23, 2003, 4:39 pm

Well, it's the Oscar's tonight and I can't believe there hasn't been a predictions thread. I figured I'd kick one off with my list of who will win (note... who I think WILL win, not who I WANT to win. I'll provide one of those lists too actually!)

Best Film - Chicago
Best Director - Martin Scorsese
Best Actor - Jack Nicholson
Best Actress - Julianne Moore
Best Supporting Actor - Chris Cooper
Best Supporting Actress - Kathy Bates

And who I'd like to win...

Best Film - Two Towers (I know.. not a snowballs chance in hell!)
Best Director - Scorsese works for me
Best Actor - Nicholas Cage
Best Actress - Julianne Moore (mmmm)
Best Supporting Actor - Chris Cooper
Best Supporting Actress - Julianne Moore (2 oscars in one night would be the win!)

Soreali · Post by **Soreali** » March 23, 2003, 5:03 pm

I'll call it a win if all the anti-war assholes save their bullshit for another time and not use the Oscars as the place to talk about it.

kyoukan · Post by **kyoukan** » March 23, 2003, 6:15 pm

try the movie forum for predictions thread >_<

Millie · Post by **Millie** » March 23, 2003, 6:18 pm

Dregor,

There IS a movie forum here, you know.

Alternatively, you can go here:

http://www.fohguild.org/forums/showthre ... eadid=6336

Millie · Post by **Millie** » March 23, 2003, 6:19 pm

Soreali wrote:I'll call it a win if all the anti-war assholes save their bullshit for another time and not use the Oscars as the place to talk about it.

The overwhelming majority of people in Hollywood -- celebrities or otherwise -- are pro-war. So I don't know what the hell you're talking about.

Soreali · Post by **Soreali** » March 23, 2003, 7:30 pm

I'm aware that Millie. But for the few who are against it (Martin Sheen etc.) I would just like to see them keep their views off the stage. Everyone knows they're anti-war, they dont need to remind us.

Thats what I'm talking about.

kyoukan · Post by **kyoukan** » March 23, 2003, 7:49 pm

what difference is it to you what celebrities think or say?

Soreali · Post by **Soreali** » March 23, 2003, 7:51 pm

I dont care what they say. I care where they say it. The first time I see one of them start with the anti-war bullshit I'm changing the channel. Simple as that.

Millie · Post by **Millie** » March 23, 2003, 7:58 pm

Celebrities' sounding off on the political topics of the day is nothing new. Expect to be changing the channel quite a bit if you don't want to hear movie stars gracing us lowly peons with their lofty opinions.

That said, what's the difference between a celeb mouthing off against the war or for it? Does the fact that a star's opinion might differ from your own make it somehow invalid?

Regardless, I agree that the Oscar ceremony is probably a bad place to be delivering soap-box rants -- be they for or against war in Iraq. It doesn't matter what they think of the fight, or which side they're on. I just don't want to hear it during the awards.

Dregor Thule · Post by **Dregor Thule** » March 23, 2003, 8:38 pm

Hmm, I even checked for the thread there. Guess I'm going blind in my old age

Soreali · Post by **Soreali** » March 23, 2003, 9:25 pm

Thats what I meant to say Millie. I really don't care what side they're on, just save it for a peace rally and not for the Oscars.

Brotha · Post by **Brotha** » March 23, 2003, 9:45 pm

/agree Soreali.

If the hollywood idiots (go to http://www.hollywoodhalfwits.com/ to see some of the most ignorant and stupid ass shit you'll ever see in your entire life) want to take pot shots at Bush or whoever that just make them look like retards at every pro Saddam rally (or I guess you'd call them peace rallies?) whenever someone sticks a microphone in their face let them go for it, the vast majority of Americans could careless anyways. But there's a time and a place for it. Like Soreali, the second I see a self righteous, mislead hollywood buffoon start mumbling about American imperialism, the channel is changing.

Spangaloid_PE · Post by **Spangaloid_PE** » March 23, 2003, 9:48 pm

maybe it's irony but this oscar thread is turning into a war related thread

Millie · Post by **Millie** » March 23, 2003, 9:51 pm

Brotha wrote:...want to take pot shots at Bush or whoever that just make them look like retards at every pro Saddam rally (or I guess you'd call them peace rallies?) whenever someone sticks a microphone in their face..

Did you even read this thread before posting? If so, you'd notice that I said the vast majority of Hollywood players are pro-war and pro-Bush. They're on YOUR side. I don't see why you're chewing them out, unless you're just angry at them based on your own misinformed assumptions about their political leanings.

Zamtuk · Post by **Zamtuk** » March 23, 2003, 9:57 pm

U2 is on Bush's side. I never would have seen that coming.

Brotha · Post by **Brotha** » March 23, 2003, 10:08 pm

Millie wrote:Did you even read this thread before posting? If so, you'd notice that I said the vast majority of Hollywood players are pro-war and pro-Bush. They're on YOUR side. I don't see why you're chewing them out, unless you're just angry at them based on your own misinformed assumptions about their political leanings.

Yep I did, but since it had no relevance to the topic at hand I pretty much ignored it (the topic at hand as in what this thread has devolved to). If 99 out of every 100 people in Hollywood are pro war that's great, but the 1 out of every 100 that chooses to speak out all the fucking time, including at the Oscar's, tend to give more of an impression and be more of an annoyance than the silent majority (sort of like with the normal population). Get it?

kyoukan · Post by **kyoukan** » March 23, 2003, 10:22 pm

Brotha wrote:/agree Soreali.

If the hollywood idiots (go to http://www.hollywoodhalfwits.com/ to see some of the most ignorant and stupid ass shit you'll ever see in your entire life).

nothing on that site comes even remotely close to what comes out of your mouth every time you post.

Kelshara · Post by **Kelshara** » March 23, 2003, 11:34 pm

..want to take pot shots at Bush or whoever that just make them look like retards at every pro Saddam rally..

Oh yeah because if you are anti-war or anti-Bush you are pro-Saddam!!111!1111!

Fucking moron.

Soreali · Post by **Soreali** » March 23, 2003, 11:53 pm

I dont care what side they're on save the pro/anti-war bullshit for another time.

Brotha · Post by **Brotha** » March 24, 2003, 12:38 am

LOL I knew that would push some buttons.

Whether you realize it or not, when you're marching against this war, you're marching in favor of leaving Saddam in power rather than removing him. If you were marching on behalf of the Iraqi people like most of you claim (or if you haven't marched, this applies to those who have), you'd have free Iraq signs rather than Free Palestine signs and be supporting Bush rather than likening him to Hitler.

That guy from Bowling for Columbine was so stupid. I'm glad I didn't change the channel when he started speaking...I really got a good laugh. If he keeps it up he may have more ridiculous quotes than even Barbara Streisand on the hollywoodhalfwits site.

Keverian FireCry · Post by **Keverian FireCry** » March 24, 2003, 2:23 am

All I have to say about Oscar night is that Adriann Brody totally deserved best actor and his speech was great, it wasnt anti-war and it wasnt pro-war it was pro-humanity...and The Pianist was the best of the nominated movies and Chicago sucked ass. thx

Ennia · Post by **Ennia** » March 24, 2003, 2:27 am

well I've dreamed Pianist would win some, mostly because I'm Polish and that movie certainly hits home for me more than it does for a lot of you.
It's a great story and I'm happy it got recognized.

Chicago? I don't know, it's just a musical really, last year's Moulin Rouge was a bigger and better candidate for the best picture Oscar.

Axien_Dellusions · Post by **Axien_Dellusions** » March 24, 2003, 2:36 am

Michael Moore was more impressionable in his documentary. He should have saved his opinion for there, not national television where his credit just went way down hill....

kyoukan · Post by **kyoukan** » March 24, 2003, 2:41 am

Yeah I was surprised the pianist did so well. Although I was hoping Daniel Day-Lewis would win best actor I wasn't dissappointed with Brody taking it. And Roman Polanski did such a great job directing (like he always does) that I am glad he won.

Chicago was a can of ass tho.. and every time they won another award they clearly did not deserve it almost hurt my feelings. How could that fucking instant-movie cash in piece of crap win best costume over gangs of new york? It's a fucking travesty and the academy should be ashamed of themselves. Winning best picture is basically a contest to see who can kiss the most ass anyway, and the Weinsteins have that down to a science.

Moulin Rouge was a better film than Chigaco, but when it comes to those two movies that is kind of like preferring to smell shit rather than tasting it.

Keverian FireCry · Post by **Keverian FireCry** » March 24, 2003, 3:10 am

/agree 100% about Chicago kyo.
I walked out on Chicago because I couldn't stand ith. If you want to go see the broadway play go see the damn play not make it into a half-assed movie about it. My favorite movie of the year was well a toss-up between Adaptation and The Pianist, and since Adaptation didnt even get a nomination(what a load of shit!!!), I was 100% for the Pianist.

The Pianist was a beautifaul film and Brody deserved that award 100%(I have yet to see Gangs of New York/Daniel Day-Lewis, but to top Brody it would have to have been a truly amazing performance). Chicago was broadway bullshit. It's the FIRST and ONLY movie I have ever walked out on before in a theatre , I cannot beileve it got best film. Im truly saddened and dissapointed. If you thought that was the best of the nominated films, you surely could not have seen them all.

Aslanna · Post by **Aslanna** » March 24, 2003, 3:17 am

Martin Scorsese not winning is so wrong. Of course, I haven't seen all the movies in the category so maybe it didn't deserve it. Wonder if he'll ever win one or will he be the Susan Lucci of filmmaking.

(Yeah yeah I know she finally won.)

Millie · Post by **Millie** » March 24, 2003, 4:08 am

Brotha wrote:
Millie wrote:Did you even read this thread before posting? If so, you'd notice that I said the vast majority of Hollywood players are pro-war and pro-Bush. They're on YOUR side. I don't see why you're chewing them out, unless you're just angry at them based on your own misinformed assumptions about their political leanings.
Yep I did, but since it had no relevance to the topic at hand I pretty much ignored it (the topic at hand as in what this thread has devolved to). If 99 out of every 100 people in Hollywood are pro war that's great, but the 1 out of every 100 that chooses to speak out all the fucking time, including at the Oscar's, tend to give more of an impression and be more of an annoyance than the silent majority (sort of like with the normal population). Get it?

So in other words, anyone whose opinion differs from your own doesn't have the right to speak. I get it.

Millie · Post by **Millie** » March 24, 2003, 4:14 am

Aslanna wrote:Martin Scorsese not winning is so wrong. Of course, I haven't seen all the movies in the category so maybe it didn't deserve it.

You probably should see the other movies in the category before talking about it, then.

Hehe, I'm just giving you a hard time, but you know what I mean.

Martin Scorcese is a great director, but Gangs of NY did not deserve the Oscar. It was an unsubtle, meandering, poorly paced movie that was way too in love with itself. Polanski did a much better job directing The Pianist, and I'm both shocked and happy that he won.

Chicago didn't deserve a single award, though it's no surprise that it won as many as it did. The Weinstein brothers have perfected the art of buying and cajoling Academy votes. I, for one, wouldn't miss them if they suddenly dropped dead tomorrow.

Trek · Post by **Trek** » March 24, 2003, 4:32 am

'Insert witty I know more about stupid ass movies that get voted on at the Oscars then you do quote here'

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » March 24, 2003, 12:09 pm

Axien_Dellusions wrote:Michael Moore was more impressionable in his documentary. He should have saved his opinion for there, not national television where his credit just went way down hill....

what Michael Moore did was totally unprofessional.

for one, he called the other documentary filmmakers up there in some feign to say "we all are the winners",

then he uses them to buffet his own personal political opinion.

not surprised by his actions at all, he is all about grandstanding and opportunism. "Roger and Me" was a great movie, but at this point, Michael Moore is about promoting Michael Moore, in my opinion. He's like a photo-negative of Al Sharpton.

vn_Tanc · Post by **vn_Tanc** » March 24, 2003, 12:18 pm

Everyone else seemed to be content to have their fun and pretend there wasn't a war on unless they were voicing a few inoffensive platitudes.
I applaud Michael Moore for puncturing the complacency for a few seconds but I guarantee we won't see anything like that at an oscar ceremony again

Cartalas · Post by **Cartalas** » March 24, 2003, 12:29 pm

vn_Tanc wrote:Everyone else seemed to be content to have their fun and pretend there wasn't a war on unless they were voicing a few inoffensive platitudes.
I applaud Michael Moore for puncturing the complacency for a few seconds but I guarantee we won't see anything like that at an oscar ceremony again

And you wont see Michael Moore have much of a career after that either.

What a FuckStain

Gurugurumaki · Post by **Gurugurumaki** » March 24, 2003, 12:34 pm

Didn't even know the Oscars were on. Actors sure love to pat themselves on the back, don't they.

miir · Post by **miir** » March 24, 2003, 12:38 pm

And you wont see Michael Moore have much of a career after that either.

Do you even know who Michael Moore is?

Didn't think so.

miir · Post by **miir** » March 24, 2003, 12:43 pm

Just to clarify for your Cartalas...

Michael Moore has made a career of being opinionated, outspoken and caustic. What he did last night was totally in character and not surprising to anyone who is familiar with him and his work.

People were joking weeks ago that they couldn't wait to hear what he was going to say when he won....
If he had said nothing, he would have lost credibility.

Cartalas · Post by **Cartalas** » March 24, 2003, 12:44 pm

miir wrote:
And you wont see Michael Moore have much of a career after that either.
Do you even know who Michael Moore is?

Didn't think so.

You mean the Bowling for Columbine guy, yes I know who he is not that I want to.

rhyae · Post by **rhyae** » March 24, 2003, 12:49 pm

I love Michael Moore, and so what if he used the oscars to express more of his opinion, thats what he does!!!
And you're cheering on polansky, who fled the country to avoid rape and child molestation charges.. well go you then... but umm thumbs down from me.

Cartalas · Post by **Cartalas** » March 24, 2003, 12:51 pm

rhyae wrote:I love Michael Moore, and so what if he used the oscars to express more of his opinion, thats what he does!!!

Thats Fine he can make a movie to express his opinions So I have the coice to watch it.
And you're cheering on polansky, who fled the country to avoid rape and child molestation charges.. well go you then... but umm thumbs down from me.

This I agree with

miir · Post by **miir** » March 24, 2003, 12:53 pm

Thats Fine he can make a movie to express his opinions So I have the coice to watch it.

And you had no choice to watch the oscars?

rhyae · Post by **rhyae** » March 24, 2003, 12:56 pm

eww cart, fix your post so it doesnt look like i said something you said

Cartalas · Post by **Cartalas** » March 24, 2003, 1:00 pm

miir wrote:
Thats Fine he can make a movie to express his opinions So I have the coice to watch it.
And you had no choice to watch the oscars?

I had a choice to watch the oscars, but I had no choice but to hear 30 seconds of the Spewing shit out of his mouth before I could hit the Mute button.

Animalor · Post by **Animalor** » March 24, 2003, 1:06 pm

The fact is that he wasn't alone in this belief either. All the the nominees in the category were on the stage with him as well.

If Moore hadn't won then someone else would've said his/her own version of the exact same speech.

It's one thing to have a message, It's another to have the media in which to convey that message. They have 15-20 seconds to say whever the fuck they want after they win that statue. If they wanna use it to express their views on politics or whatever's happening in the world, all the more power to them.

*spelling and structure

Dregor Thule · Post by **Dregor Thule** » March 24, 2003, 1:09 pm

I just pushed the mute button on Cartalas

Cartalas · Post by **Cartalas** » March 24, 2003, 1:11 pm

Animalor wrote:The fact is that he wasn't alone in this belief either. All the the nominees in the category were on the stage with him as well.

If Moore hadn't won then someone else would've said his/her own version of the exact same speech.

It's one thing to have a message, It's another to have the media in which to convey that message. They have 15-20 seconds to say whever the fuck they want after they win that statue. If they wanna use it to express their views on politics or whatever's happening in the world, all the more power to them.

*spelling and structure

I dont agree with that and I hope Oscar changes it, What does winning a award have anything to do with ones political beliefs? It was a misuse of airtime in my opinion and it should of been edited as well as any Pro War comments.

The 15-20 secs are for the winners to thank people not to push there opinions onto me or anyone else.

Drolgin Steingrinder · Post by **Drolgin Steingrinder** » March 24, 2003, 1:13 pm

I found it interesting that he was so shaken, it seemed like he was surprised at the amounts of booing going on.

miir · Post by **miir** » March 24, 2003, 1:20 pm

I dont agree with that and I hope Oscar changes it, What does winning a award have anything to do with ones political beliefs? It was a misuse of airtime in my opinion and it should of been edited as well as any Pro War comments.

Michael Moore is a political filmmaker.
He won an award for a documentary that was replete with political opinion. Making a political statement for his acceptance speech is very appropriate.

Oscar Night is a television show.
It's supposed to be entertainment.
Michael Moore spouting an anti war message was, by far, the most entertaining moment of an exceptionaly boring program.

Animalor · Post by **Animalor** » March 24, 2003, 1:25 pm

Cartalas wrote:The 15-20 secs are for the winners to thank people not to push there opinions onto me or anyone else.

I found his beliefs much MUCH more interesting that the 20-30 names of people I don't really care about the other winners rattled off.

Cartalas · Post by **Cartalas** » March 24, 2003, 1:31 pm

Oh well I guess that the nice thing about this board is we are all allowed to have a opinion. Sorry you put me on Mute Dregor

Aslanna · Post by **Aslanna** » March 24, 2003, 1:33 pm

Oscar Night is a television show.
It's supposed to be entertainment.
Michael Moore spouting an anti war message was, by far, the most entertaining moment of an exceptionaly boring program.

Personal opinion I guess. I feel the exact opposite. Bringing in your political bullshit is not entertainment. Seems the only ones who found it appropriate are those who agree with his views.

Personally I could care less if his little spiel was anti-war or pro-war. It was just the wrong place and the wrong time. Glad he did it before Bowling came out on DVD. Now I don't have to buy it. Yay personal boycotts!

miir · Post by **miir** » March 24, 2003, 1:33 pm

Cartalas wrote:Oh well I guess that the nice thing about this board is we are all allowed to have a opinion

Interesting.....