Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Entertainment and Arts > Movies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 02-28-2017, 10:57 PM
 
15,546 posts, read 12,046,798 times
Reputation: 32595

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Icy Tea View Post
Mad Max Thunder Road, Rogue One, bad movies that are somehow supposed to be incredible. If you see an overwhelming positive response, wait a while and look what others are saying about it, not paid reviewers.
How long do I have to wait for these negative audience responses? Rogue One has an 8.1 on IMDB and an audience rating of 88% on Rotten Tomatoes. Mad Max: Fury Road also has an 8.1 on IMDB and an 86% audience rating on Rotten Tomatoes.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-02-2017, 07:10 AM
 
8,228 posts, read 14,233,952 times
Reputation: 11234
Quote:
Originally Posted by jojo775 View Post
I can't believe more people don't realize that. No publicity is bad publicity and this gets major buzz for a low rated Oscars.

Regardless of if Moonlight is a good movie or not....it's won for political reason.

Opinion is not fact. We will never know if this was staged but I don't think the Oscars needed more publicity esp negative publicity. The two people at Price Waterhouse have retained work at the company in a different office and will never work on the Oscars account again.
Nor do I think the chaos that ensued onstage could be planned an choreographed.
I tend to think not.

Lots of movies are political and they didn't win or get nominated. Not to say there isn't some truth in the subject matter being part of the attention for the film but that is sort of normal too. I suspect that any movie that was of some subject that persons xyz approved of wouldn't see that as an issue. In other words you wouldn't be thinking this if it was a movie that supported some opinion you have.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-02-2017, 08:09 AM
 
28,690 posts, read 18,842,628 times
Reputation: 31003
Quote:
Originally Posted by Giesela View Post

Lots of movies are political and they didn't win or get nominated. Not to say there isn't some truth in the subject matter being part of the attention for the film but that is sort of normal too. I suspect that any movie that was of some subject that persons xyz approved of wouldn't see that as an issue. In other words you wouldn't be thinking this if it was a movie that supported some opinion you have.
Last year's best picture was an example. "The Killing Fields" is another example. It happens quite often.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-02-2017, 06:12 PM
 
13,395 posts, read 13,530,686 times
Reputation: 35712
Quote:
Originally Posted by jojo775 View Post
I can't believe more people don't realize that. No publicity is bad publicity and this gets major buzz for a low rated Oscars.

Regardless of if Moonlight is a good movie or not....it's won for political reason.
So, a good movie won and that's political? Should a bad movie have won?

Surely you aren't Neanderthal enough to believe that all awards are given to movies with white casts and that a movie with a predominantly Black cast could never ever be a true contender against a white cast.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-02-2017, 07:33 PM
 
Location: Elgin, Illinois
1,200 posts, read 1,607,001 times
Reputation: 407
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ralph_Kirk View Post
Last year's best picture was an example. "The Killing Fields" is another example. It happens quite often.
If AMPAS still used the old voting system, I'm sure "The Revenant" would have won best picture last year and LLL would have won this year, but now they use a preferential ballot where they have to rank the picture nominees. The picture category is the only one that uses a preferential ballot, all other categories you only pick one film or performance from the list of nominees. When they had the old voting system picture and director wins usually went hand and hand, but since they introduced preferential ballot for best picture there have been splits between the the two categories lately such as:

Recent Picture/Director splits

2012: Argo/Life of Pi
2013: 12 Years a Slave/ Gravity
2015: Spotlight/The Revenant
2016: Moonlight/ La La Land
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-02-2017, 07:46 PM
 
Location: NYC
16,062 posts, read 26,772,592 times
Reputation: 24848
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-05-2017, 09:20 PM
 
3,110 posts, read 1,990,705 times
Reputation: 1795
Is the title of this thread talking about the Warren Beatty and Faye Dunaway flub?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-05-2017, 09:37 PM
 
3,110 posts, read 1,990,705 times
Reputation: 1795
Quote:
Originally Posted by jojo775 View Post
Regardless of if Moonlight is a good movie or not....it's won for political reason.
I've heard other people say this, that this movie is just propaganda to promote the gay agenda.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-05-2017, 09:39 PM
 
3,110 posts, read 1,990,705 times
Reputation: 1795
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlygal View Post
So, a good movie won and that's political? Should a bad movie have won?

Surely you aren't Neanderthal enough to believe that all awards are given to movies with white casts and that a movie with a predominantly Black cast could never ever be a true contender against a white cast.
I don't think that's what he's talking about.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-06-2017, 11:02 AM
 
Location: Sun City West, Arizona
50,933 posts, read 24,441,927 times
Reputation: 33013
Quote:
Originally Posted by William Taylor View Post
I've heard other people say this, that this movie is just propaganda to promote the gay agenda.
So if a film is about a person or people who are gay, it has an agenda.
But if a film is about a person or people who are straight, it doesn't have an agenda.

?????
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Entertainment and Arts > Movies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top