I agree with the people that say the Oscars are overrated, political, Hollywood-insider garbage. I have watched them <I>one time</I> in the last 20 years. I was stuck in a hotel room in Thrown Away, Kentucky, with nothing but a pizza and a couple of bottles of wine. <P>Though I understand rooting (cheering) for your favorite movie(s), whether it gets an award or not is meaningless. That is, to normal, everyday people.<P>I mean, if your movie (whatever it is) gets the awards you are hoping for, and the next day, you excitedly bring it up with your schoolmates or co-workers, you know what they are going to say? "Jerk. Get a life." And you can walk away muttering, "What do you know? It's a great movie."<P>And if it does not win, your schoolmates or co-workers will say, "Ha! We told you it was no good." In which case, you can walk away muttering, "What do you know? It's a great movie."<P>So I ask you, what is the difference?<P>P.S. Anyway, what is wrong with <I>Titanic</I>?<P>--Edit--<BR>Further evidence of worthlessness of Oscars and the nominating process:<BR>1. Ian McKellen and Sean Astin not nominated for RotK.<BR>2. John Wayne got his first (only?) "Best Actor" in his twilight years. Shows you what THEY know...<p>[ 12:43 PM January 27, 2004: Message edited by: Theron Bugtussle ]
__________________
For I was talking aloud to myself. A habit of the old: they choose the wisest person present to speak to; the long explanations needed by the young are wearying. -Gandalf, The Two Towers
|
01-27-2004, 11:38 AM
Hybrid Mode
