Thespeckledkiwi
Vice Admiral
Master and Commander! 
K
ktanner3
Guest
2001 space odyssey : I can watch it only when I'm drunk. With vodka, the movie makes sense, at last
Wow if I did a poll in this thread I'm sure it would win hands down. It seems to be the least popular "supposed" classic in the room.
Master and Commander!
Really? I loved the film's authenticity. I've never seen anything else so thoroughly or accurately recreate life at sea in the early 1800s.
2001 space odyssey : I can watch it only when I'm drunk. With vodka, the movie makes sense, at last
Wow if I did a poll in this thread I'm sure it would win hands down. It seems to be the least popular "supposed" classic in the room.
It's pretty much love it or hate it. I like the Dave & Hal stuff but other than that, I hate it.
Spider-Man 2 was a whiny, angsty piece of shite. It occasionally had something interesting to say but mostly it was just belaboring the same simplistic plot points over & over & over. Harry Osborn was reduced to a seething charicature who did nothing but fume for 2 hours about how much he hated Spider-Man. Dr. Octopus was there for the perfunctory action scenes but had absolutely nothing to do with the rest of the movie. And none of this would be nearly so infuriating if I weren't THE ONLY PERSON ON THE PLANET THAT SEEMS TO REALIZE THIS (except for JacksonArcher).
So long as we're mentioning Oscar winners, I couldn't stand The English Patient or Shakespeare in Love. The 1998 Oscar should have gone to Saving Private Ryan (especially since it was the last good movie that Steven Spielberg ever made).
2001 space odyssey : I can watch it only when I'm drunk. With vodka, the movie makes sense, at last
Wow if I did a poll in this thread I'm sure it would win hands down. It seems to be the least popular "supposed" classic in the room.
It's pretty much love it or hate it. I like the Dave & Hal stuff but other than that, I hate it.
Spider-Man 2 was a whiny, angsty piece of shite. It occasionally had something interesting to say but mostly it was just belaboring the same simplistic plot points over & over & over. Harry Osborn was reduced to a seething charicature who did nothing but fume for 2 hours about how much he hated Spider-Man. Dr. Octopus was there for the perfunctory action scenes but had absolutely nothing to do with the rest of the movie. And none of this would be nearly so infuriating if I weren't THE ONLY PERSON ON THE PLANET THAT SEEMS TO REALIZE THIS (except for JacksonArcher).
So long as we're mentioning Oscar winners, I couldn't stand The English Patient or Shakespeare in Love. The 1998 Oscar should have gone to Saving Private Ryan (especially since it was the last good movie that Steven Spielberg ever made).
You didn't like even 'Catch Me If You Can?' I knew of controversy regarding the quality of his other recent films, but not that one.
That's ridiculous.
I agree about Spiderman 2, but I have to say that Spiderman 3 was much much worse.
Amen to that (again).
I enjoyed it for what it was, but the fact it won Oscars was a joke, and further proof (if any was needed) of the the general irrelevance of the Oscars. They've long been a matter of money (namely, which picture and people have the best advertising campaigns) over substance. Gwyneth Paltrow "winning" Best Actress ahead of Cate Blanchett was utterly laughable. Blanchett in a coma would be a better actress than Paltrow could ever be.
Revenge of the Sith. Sorry, but being a slightly more entertaining turd than your turd predecessors doesn't negate your own vast and overbearing turdness.
DOCTOR WHO SPOILER??!?!?!??!???!?!11111
But they just had to throw in that stupid shit about Jack & Rose.
DOCTOR WHO SPOILER??!?!?!??!???!?!11111
Last edited:
Braveheart does play differently in a country where it is shocking to think that Scotland had its own history or that our English forebears (refer to previous item!) weren't always lords of creation. But it's true---worthy of Best Picture?
For a romance melodrama, The English Patient was a stellar example of its kind, as Silence of the Lambs was a stellar horror movie. The question of whether a superbly done genre piece is inferior or superior to a more ambitious work less well executed is beyond my power to decide.
And Shakespeare in Love was a rare example of twee academic humor getting on screen. Again, though---Best Picture?
While I frequently disagree with the decisions of the Oscars, often to the point of astonishment, I think credit should be given where credit is due. Sure, many questionable decisions have been made, but also ones which stood the test of time - such as the Best Picture win for Sunrise, at a time when sound had trimphed and silents such as this were tanking at the box office. More recently, The Lives of Others for Best Foreign Picture in 2006 and No Country for Old Men for Best Picture in 2007 were good calls in my book.
As Jeff Foxworthy can tell you, the Southern version of The Sound of Music is worth it:
Doe, a deer I shot last month
Ray, a guy that pumps my gas,
Me and him got in a fight,
Fa is where I kicked his ass...
I've never heard this Jeff Foxworthy version...but this is hilarious!
I love that guy. He helps the people of this state not take ourselves too seriously.
As Jeff Foxworthy can tell you, the Southern version of The Sound of Music is worth it:
Doe, a deer I shot last month
Ray, a guy that pumps my gas,
Me and him got in a fight,
Fa is where I kicked his ass...
I've never heard this Jeff Foxworthy version...but this is hilarious!
I can't remember which of his CDs that bit is on. I hope it's not those really old ones that are now way the hell out of print.
Thespeckledkiwi
Vice Admiral
Master and Commander!
Really? I loved the film's authenticity. I've never seen anything else so thoroughly or accurately recreate life at sea in the early 1800s.
Well authentic it crapped all over the book and the studios were afraid of it becoming 'anti-American' because they had the Americans as one of the bad guys instead of the French.
I don't know about that last bit. Here are the nominees in 1939, a year which is generally regarded as the best year ever in the film industry:
Gone with the Wind - MGM (Vivien Leigh, Clark Gable) - winner
Dark Victory - WB (Bette Davis, George Brent, Humphrey Bogart)
Goodbye Mr Chips - MGM (Robert Donat, Greer Garson)
Love Affair - RKO (Charles Boyer, Irene Dunne)
Mr Smith Goes to Washington - Columbia (James Stewart, Jean Arthur)
Ninotchka - MGM (Garbo)
Of Mice and Men - UA (no actors people around here would normally recognize)
Stagecoach - UA (John Wayne)
The Wizard of Oz - MGM (Judy Garland)
Wuthering Heights - Goldwyn (Laurence Olivier, Merle Oberon)
With the exception of Of Mice and Men, every single one of those films has held up, stood the test of time, and are still considered to be brilliantly made and brilliantly acted pictures. Several of them on are the AFI's top 100 films of all time list.
I by no means believe The Wizard of Oz to be the clear winner, even taking GWTW out of the race completely. My personal vote, taking GWTW out, would have gone to Mr Smith Goes to Washington. But then you have Stagecoach...which is one of the top 3 contenders for the best western ever made. Goodbye Mr Chips is an incredible film, and given that Robert Donat completely and utterly dominates every single scene of the picture, and he won the Best Actor Oscar, is a viable contender. And Wuthering Heights is Laurence Olivier at his best (at least of his screen work).
1939, in short, was a rockin' good year in the film industry...and I personally by no means think The Wizard of Oz was 'robbed' or anything like that. It was a strong contender...but then, pretty much all of those films were worthy of Oscars.
If you want to talk about an Oscar-nominated film that was robbed, better to talk about High Noon, which was robbed of an Oscar in 1952 by The Greatest Show on Earth...which hasn't held up well at all in most film buffs' view.
The Fountain.
Similar threads
