Will You be Watching The Oscars??

Bonnie

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2004
9,476
673
48
Wherever
I used to stay up late to watch with my parents every year, but I haven't had the desire to watch now for at least ten years.....Nor do my parents




Every year since I was old enough to stay up late, I've watched the Academy Awards. This year, however, I have absolutely zero desire to watch the Oscars. In recent years, lack of quality from Hollywood has turned the Academy Awards into a special-interest-group get-together. If you're crazy, gay, have a disability or are a member of a minority race, you'll likely be nominated for an Oscar; if your film tackles a "deep social issue" (normally an issue dear to the hearts of Hollywood's liberal glitterati), you'll have an excellent shot at grabbing a gold statuette.
The combination of declining product quality and rising Hollywood disdain for mainstream America has opened the door to the agenda-film crowd. It began with the 1994 Oscars. "Schindler's List," "The Fugitive" and "In the Name of the Father" all received Best Picture nominations; other excellent films of 1993 included "What's Eating Gilbert Grape?" "Searching for Bobby Fischer," "Shadowlands," "Fearless" and "In the Line of Fire."

Still, Hollywood had to take a shot at mainstream America, and they found their vehicle in "Philadelphia," throwing their honorary liberal activism award to Tom Hanks for his weak performance as a dying AIDS-stricken gay lawyer in "Philadelphia." Unbelievably, Hanks' cheesy hospital-bed routine beat out Liam Neeson in "Schindler's List" and Daniel Day Lewis in "In the Name of the Father." "Philadelphia" is, clinically speaking, a maudlin, ham-handed attempt at social commentary.

The remaining 1990s were filled with weak movies and weak performances. On average, high-school audio-visual clubs make better movies than Hollywood put together in the late 1990s.


Then, our illustrious decade: With great films scarce and politically mainstream Academy voters even scarcer, 2000 featured the victory of repulsive anti-suburbia and pro-homosexuality hit piece "American Beauty." Of course, it beat out a film lionizing an abortionist ("The Cider House Rules") and another attacking the tobacco industry ("The Insider"). Most disturbingly, the Academy handed Hilary Swank a Best Actress Oscar for playing a transgendered biological girl murdered by a bunch of hicks. And 2002 was the year of the African-American honorary Oscars, when Denzel Washington took home Best Actor for his decent if overrated performance in "Training Day" and Halle Berry took home Best Actress for her highly touted simulated orgasms in "Monster's Ball." In 2003, homosexual agenda films like "The Hours," "Frida" and "Far From Heaven" grabbed the largest share of nominations. In 2004, Hollywood couldn't hold off "Lord of the Rings" any longer, but Charlize Theron, playing an ugly lesbian serial killer in "Monster," won Best Actress. And last year, the Best Picture was forgettable pro-euthanasia film "Million Dollar Baby."

And then there's this year. "Brokeback Mountain," the stomach-churning story of two 1963 cowboys who get cozy while bunking down in Wyoming and then carry on their affair over the course of decades, is likely to grab Best Picture honors. The critics love it, mostly because critics love anything that pushes homosexuality as normal behavior. The New York Times raves about it, mostly because the Times has always wanted to carry a ridiculous story proclaiming that "there has always lurked a suspicion that the fastidious Eastern dude of Owen Wister's 'The Virginian' harbored stronger than proper feelings for his rough Western compadres, and that the Red River crowd may have gotten up to more than yarning by the campfire whenever Joanne Dru was not around." Maybe that's what Pinch Sulzberger thinks about when he watches John Wayne on screen, but the Times should be more careful when speaking for the rest of us. By the way, don't believe the "hit movie" hype -- this supposed blockbuster has netted a grand total of $8 million. "Hostel," last week's No. 1 movie, a cheap horror film, has already netted almost $15 million.

Best Actor honors are likely to go to Philip Seymour Hoffman for his performance in "Capote" -- this would mark the first time that an actor in a gay role has actually deserved his Oscar. Best Actress will probably fall to Reese Witherspoon in "Walk the Line," but supporters of Felicity Huffman's transgendered father/mother in "TransAmerica" could push her over the top.

Aside from pimping for GLAAD, the Oscars will provide a platform for other leftist talking points. "Good Night, and Good Luck," George Clooney's blatant attempt to bash the Bush administration through the mouth of Edward R. Murrow, and "Munich," Steven Spielberg's attempt to equate Arab terrorism with Israeli self-defense, will likely garner nominations. And to top it off, Comedy Central partisan hack Jon Stewart (who is less and less funny each day) hosts this self-congratulatory leftist feting.

I won't be watching. Neither will most Americans.

http://www.townhall.com/opinion/columns/benshapiro/2006/01/13/182213.html
 
Between 24 and what I have Tivo'd from the previous week, Nah.

I will probably Tivo it so if something controversial happens, I can watch it sometime later that week.
 
I started not caring about the Oscars when "Saving Private Ryan" got practically none of the "big" Oscars (like best picture, best actor, etc.) and was beaten for best picture by "Shakespeare in Love." I really stopped caring when I found out that the year Star Wars was released, "Annie Hall," which is a frickin' Woody Allen movie of all things, won best picture. That's bullcrap.
 
Bonnie said:
I used to stay up late to watch with my parents to watch every year, but I haven't had the desire to watch now for at least ten years.....


Yup that pretty much applies to me as well.
 
Besides airing only those portions pertaining to major awards, what could be done to make the Oscar show more interesting? Most of the awards presented are of interest only to people in the industry. It seems to me they could start making better quality movies that people would care about and, thereby, want to tune in to see the show.

Below are some tongue-in-cheek suggestions from The Chicago Tribune.

It's Time to Give Ol' Oscar A New Shine
By Maureen Ryan, Mike Esposito, Phil Vettel and Alison Benedikt
January 16, 2006

Choosing Jon Stewart as host is a fine start to improving the ever-sagging Oscar telecast. But, hey, don't stop there. The Chicago Tribune Subcommittee To Preserve Awards Shows has 15 more suggestions:

1. No musical numbers. Seriously. Unless they're performed by the academy's accountants--that might be entertaining.

2. Live voting on the best Oscar gown, with a show the next night crowning the winners and losers. It works for "American Idol" and "Dancing With the Stars." And all we really care about is the fashion anyway.

3. No more than 20 "Brokeback Mountain" jokes. We're eager to see what Stewart and his crew will do with the gay cowboy movie, but we think some quota might be healthy.

4. Move telecast to HBO. The more profanity, the better.

5. Skip the best song award; instead, nominees get bus tickets to the Grammy Awards.

6. Install a trapdoor behind the podium for long-winded winners. The orchestra playing loudly just isn't working.

7. Shorten the show: Two hours tops. So, at 1 hour, 59 minutes, the orchestra starts playing. Sixty seconds later, cut to commercial. If that doesn't leave enough time for best picture award, save it for next year.

8. Get Andy Samberg and Chris Parnell to present. They saved "SNL," didn't they?

9. Kathy Griffin has been kicked off the E! red-carpet broadcast in favor of Ryan Seacrest, which is just wrong on so many levels. How about putting Griffin inside the auditorium as a roving correspondent? Because egomaniac stars just think her pomposity-puncturing humor is sooooo funny.

10. Show audience shots that cover more than just the front rows. How many close-ups of Charlize Theron will we need? Where's Johnny Knoxville?

11. Have Professor John Frink (scientist geek on "The Simpsons") announce the technical achievement awards.

12. The Academy president doesn't need to talk. He just doesn't.

13. Eliminate scripted banter. What's the point of pairing Shirley MacLaine and Don Cheadle as presenters if they just read lame material from a TelePrompTer. Let them wing it and add some suspense to the evening.

14. Let Jon Stewart protégé Stephen Colbert interview stars on the red carpet, presenting them with an ego that is way bigger than even the most overpaid actor's.

15. More cowbell!
 
Bonnie said:
I used to stay up late to watch with my parents every year, but I haven't had the desire to watch now for at least ten years.....Nor do my parents

I'll see your ten years, plus ten more, since I've had any desire to watch the narcisists of hollywierd give themselves awards for being exactly what they want to be. "Liberal Activists".

No I won't be watching. What an absolute waste of time that would be.
 
Globes Cash In, Scale "Mountain"
Tuesday January 17 1:39 AM ET


Walk the Line burned burned burned the competition at the 63rd Annual Golden Globe Awards.

The Johnny Cash biopic announcing itself up as a serious Oscar foil to the Brokeback Mountain buckaroos, snapping up a trio of trophies Monday night: Best Picture, Musical or Comedy and Best Actor and Actress honors for leading duo Joaquin Phoenix and Reese Witherspoon, who portrayed Cash and June Carter Cash in the film.

Phoenix offered his thanks to "John and June for sharing their life with all of us," while Witherspoon said the film was "about where I grew up, it's about the music I grew up listening to, so it's very meaningful."

Continuing its winning streak, the gay cowboy romance Brokeback Mountain scaled yet another lofty awards show peak, taking home a leading four awards in all: Best Picture, Drama, Best Screenplay, Best Original Song and Best Director for Ang Lee. The film came in with a field-best seven nominations, but fell short in several key categories, including Best Actor, Drama (Heath Ledger) and Supporting Actress (Michelle Williams).

"I think this has been an amazing year for American cinema," Lee said. "So I just want to give my first thanks to my fellow filmmakers for strengthening my faith in movies."

Felicity Huffman's turn as a cross-dressing man desperate to become a woman in Transamerica earned her the award for Best Actress, Drama, while Philip Seymour Hoffman's portrayal of gay author Truman Capote's obsession with the murders of a wealthy Kansas family in Capote earned him the Best Actor, Drama prize.

George Clooney, a triple Globe nominee, walked away with the Best Supporting Actor award for Syriana, while Rachel Weisz earned the Best Supporting Actress prize for The Constant Gardner.

On the small-screen side, HBO miniseries Empire Falls was the lone contender to notch multiple wins, earning the awards for Best Miniseries or Movie and Best Supporting Actor for Paul Newman.

ABC's plane wreck survivor saga Lost was found worthy of the Best Drama Series hardware. Hugh Laurie took the Best Actor, Drama prize for his work as a grumpy, but highly skilled doctor on House, while Geena Davis won the Best Actress, Drama for playing the United States president on Commander in Chief.

Though four out of five of the leading ladies nominated in the Best Actress, Musical or Comedy television category were Desperate Housewives stars, Mary-Louise Parker, the lone nominee not featured on the ABC show, took home the award for her work on Showtime's Weeds. Backstage, Parker expressed surprise that Huffman didn't repeat her Emmy success and win the Globe, too.

But some solace for the ladies of Wisteria Lane came in the form of the award for Best Television Series, Musical or Comedy, won by their show for the second straight year in spite of its questionable comedic status. (Ironically, the Golden Globes moved this year's show from Sunday to Monday to avoid a showdown with Housewives.)

Less in dispute were the comic talents of Steve Carell, who won Best Actor, Musical or Comedy for playing an incompetent boss on The Office.

Notable shutouts included Good Night, and Good Luck (four nominations, zero wins), Match Point (four nominations, zero wins), The Producers (four nominations, zero wins), The Sopranos (four nominations, zero wins) and The Life and Death of Peter Sellers (yup, four nominations and, you guessed it, zero wins).

The night's only sure winner, Anthony Hopkins, was presented with the Cecil B. DeMille Award by his seemingly pregnant Proof costar Gwyneth Paltrow, who called him "the greatest actor of our generation."

"Ready when you are, Mr. DeMille," Hopkins quipped upon accepting the award.

Globe recipients were determined by the 80 members of the Hollywood Foreign Press Association, an organization made up of foreign journalists based in Los Angeles.

While not infalliable, the Golden Globes have a relatively strong track record when it comes to predicting the eventual winners of the Academy Awards. Oscar nominations will be announced Jan. 31 and the awards will be presented Mar. 5.


Complete list of the winners of the 63rd Annual Golden Globe Awards.

http://movies.yahoo.com/mv/news/eo/20060117/113749074000.html


Naw, they don't have an agenda :gay:
 
Nope. I dont watch much TV as it is and dont feel like changing that to watch Hollywood give itself awards. Especially when there was the only real good movie from last year was Batman Begins.
 
i don't watch anymore because of the attitude of most of the actors. All it is, is the whole group of them patting each other on the back. It's not like the rest of America gets to actually choose the winners or even nominees.

I do like to read the entertainment magazines to see what they all wore though. I like seeing how they try to out-do each other on wackiness and designer names, and total expense...plus I get design ideas for dresses I create for weddings.
 
Avatar4321 said:
Nope. I dont watch much TV as it is and dont feel like changing that to watch Hollywood give itself awards. Especially when there was the only real good movie from last year was Batman Begins.

What about The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe? I also thought Revenge of the Sith was worthwhile, but they won't get any awards, since they're movies that normal people like and have no 'artsy subtleties.' Heck, if Return of the King hadn't been just overwhelmingly good, there's no way it would have even been nominated, much less won, best picture.
 

Forum List

Back
Top