Ok, the nominees are out and you can find them here... Nominees.

I'll admit that I haven't seen much in the theatres this year thanks to two children and very little chance to get out of the house. But some of these really surprise me. Gladiator was a decent film and the DVD set is bursting with "stuff", but it seems to me there were much more interesting mainstream offerings this past year. Also, Erin Brockovich?! Is Julia Roberts really worthy of a nomination? I really hate her and didn't see this on principle.

I used to follow movies very closely when I was in video rental retail. I spent 3 years helping to choose what came in our store and every year it was kind of silly to watch these nominations and the winners. Most times the public just doesn't know about the movie or could care less. Take Chocolat. It looks like something I'd really enjoy with my wife, but people will likely not watch it simply because it's too "artsy" for them. Even if the movie takes some of the awards it's up for, it won't help it commercially very much. Then again, I suppose it's good it gets recognized somewhere.

I do agree with one thing I saw Steve Bauman post in another thread here about Gladiator. Russell Crowe can make any script great with his acting. I loved The Insider and all the machinations of big business and big time journalism, but I could easily see someone getting really bored with the film except for one thing. Crowe somehow forces you to watch him. His emotions are there for you to see in his face and physical motion, but yet there's something more that lies under the surface. Damn... now I want to go watch L.A. Confidential again.

Anyway, what did you all think of the nominees? I still want to see Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon and might make that my bi-annual trip to the theatres, IF they ever bring it in here in Reading. *sigh*

--Dave

"I do agree with one thing I saw Steve Bauman post in another thread here about Gladiator. Russell Crowe can make any script great with his acting. I loved The Insider and all the machinations of big business and big time journalism, but I could easily see someone getting really bored with the film except for one thing. Crowe somehow forces you to watch him. His emotions are there for you to see in his face and physical motion, but yet there's something more that lies under the surface. Damn... now I want to go watch L.A. Confidential again. "

I thought the Insider sucked, Crowe or not. I'm sorry, it's BORING.

I've been a fan of Crowe since Romper Stomper. That's the movie you need to see, not pablum like Insider.

wumpus http://www.gamebasement.com

"I've been a fan of Crowe since Romper Stomper. That's the movie you need to see, not pablum like Insider."

I thought Russell Crowe was great in Pablum. He really made you care about the character, and was quite believable. At the end when he did that thing, man, that was so cool. And then when you find out about that one thing he did to play the character. Man, what an actor.

Oh, and The Insider neither sucked nor was boring. It was excellent. L.A. Confidential, however, did indeed suck.

Amanpour

"Gladiator was a decent film and the DVD set is bursting with "stuff", but it seems to me there were much more interesting mainstream offerings this past year."

I enjoyed Gladiator, but it was a hit and miss movie. The fight scenes were great, and I liked the little thing where he carries around wooden figurines to remind him of his family. However, between the fight scenes, the movie is a snoozer. The whole interaction between Commodus and his sister didn't server any purpose other than to annoy me. The end of the movie also was a real disappointment to me (WARNING: Spoiler ahead)... It wasn't the fact that they both died that got me, it was the fact that the people all loved Commodus because of the games, but suddenly at the end they would rather leave his body in the arena to rot. They didn't know he was a dick behind the scenes. They didn't know he stabbed Maximus in the back so that he would have an unfair advantage in their fight. And yet, they all act like they knew what he did. That whole scene was just poorly written in my mind.

I almost never agree with the winners of the Orscars. Romeo in Love was best picture, huh? And it beat out Saving Private Ryan! There is just too much politics in the voting to make me take it seriously.

(wow, I sure drone on sometimes...)

"I thought the Insider sucked, Crowe or not. I'm sorry, it's BORING."

I'm afraid we're going to have to ask you to confine you to the Counter-Strike threads, wumpus.

"I've been a fan of Crowe since Romper Stomper."

You actually saw Romper Stomper when it came out? I dug it up only after discovering Crowe in Quick and the Dead, but how on earth did you stumble across Romper Stomper before then? I agree, btw; it's a great movie. Maybe not as good as Pablum, but still very good.

-Tom

"There is just too much politics in the voting to make me take it seriously."

I agree, Jim. I don't know that it's politics, per se, so much as it's the weird sensibility of the people in the movie business.

-Tom

Actually, I think it is politics to a certain extent. At least in Miramax's case. How else to explain the fact that Chocalot, a film with only decent reviews and no audience exposure got nominated for best picture? Simple, Miramax's annual academy marketing machine. The same machine that produced a best picture nomination for Cider House Rules and that let Shakespeare in Love beat out Saving Private Ryan.

There has been a lot of talk in recent years that Miramax essentially "buys" Oscar nominations and I can't say I disagree.

"Oh, and The Insider neither sucked nor was boring. It was excellent. L.A. Confidential, however, did indeed suck."

Okay, Insider may not have sucked, but my wife and I found it boring. The first "thriller" where absolutely nothing at all happens. I just didn't care. And what's the big secret-- cigarette companies know about nicotine and increase it intentionally? Nigga, please.

There was some undeniably great acting going on, but I just.. didn't.. CARE.

"You actually saw Romper Stomper when it came out?"

Right after the video release, yes. Not in the theater. What can I say? I like neo-nazi gang movies. Of course that's not nearly as exciting as a thriller about a tobacco industry whistleblower.

Oddly, my awareness of Crowe goes back even further than that. My emotionally disturbed girlfriend circa 1992 (Amy, if you were wondering) rented the movie "Proof" on video and we watched it together. It's an Australian film about a blind guy and trust. I didn't register him then, but I sure did after Romper Stomper.

Quick and the Dead.. bah, what about Crowe as SID 6.7! Arguably his finest hour!

wumpus http://www.gamebasement.com

"Okay, Insider may not have sucked, but my wife and I found it boring. The first "thriller" where absolutely nothing at all happens."

Michael Mann's particular skill with The Insider, which appears in a less refined form in Heat, is his ability to take the mundane and infuse it with powerful themes of duty, family, and betrayal. Both Heat and The Insider are Shakespearean in structure, theme, and size. And stories about cops & robbers or corporate greed have much more resonance with a modern audience than stories about English kings.

This is apparently lost on someone who watches The Insider and thinks "nothing happened".

-Tom

"There has been a lot of talk in recent years that Miramax essentially "buys" Oscar nominations and I can't say I disagree."

Kevin,

Good point, but I don't think this is politics so much as commerce. Perhaps too fine a distinction, but Chocolat didn't get nominated because of Lasse Hallstrom's influence so much as Miramax's coffers. :)

-Tom

"This is apparently lost on someone who watches The Insider and thinks "nothing happened"."

C'mon Tom. The tension is so slight it's hardly there. This is a thriller? It was like watching the world's finest piano performance of "chopsticks". Sure, it was a fabulous performance.. but it's still just chopsticks.

I don't know about you, but I go to the movies to be entertained. What next? A thriller about Al Gore's tenure as vice-president?

I liked HEAT a lot though.

wumpus http://www.gamebasement.com

I think you missed a lot of the point of The Insider, wumpus. The fact that the tobacco companies were indicted by this man was an important part of the whole of the story. What he went through to blow the whistle is another part.

But what's MORE important than even that one man is how the news media was finally coerced into bending to corporate America's will. Many believe the death of real journalism happened right there on 60 Minutes when they DIDN'T run Wigand's story because of pressure from tobacco. It was the first time that program compromised its integrity and that of CBS News as well in the name of corporate will.

Like I said, I can understand that some could be bored with it. However, as a family man, I don't know how I could put myself through what Wigand went through to tell the truth and come out the other end with basically NOTHING to show for it. To sit there in front of the camera and have someone decide that it's in the corporation's best interest for the people not to know is disheartening in the extreme. I was riveted.

This is all outside of Michael Mann's excellent direction which also brought the story to life.

This comment...

---

Quote:

I don't know about you, but I go to the movies to be entertained. What next? A thriller about Al Gore's tenure as vice-president?

---

I have to put in another vote for The Insider. One of my favorite films of '99. I was certainly "entertained." It was fascinating on so many levels: the corporate politics at CBS, Wigand's personal odyssey, and all of the legal issues. Then again I think I would watch Michael Mann direct a barmitzvah.

"Then again I think I would watch Michael Mann direct a barmitzvah."

You're in luck. I think he is actually directing Will Smith's barmitzvah right now. Or maybe it's his bris.

Tom, your statement about the Shakespearean structure in Mann's last two films...very nice stuff. Well put.

w/r/t the wumpus complaint about Insider: I don't know that I would categorize The Insider as a "thriller" per se. Yes, perhaps it was marketed as one, but that was just to get us in the door. The marketing actually made me more dubious. After the trailers I would just say, "Now wait one minute here. Are they gonna say cigarette smoking is bad for you? Whoa...hold on there." I knew going in I was not going to see a thriller in the purest sense of what I consider a thriller because I knew how the story was going to shake out.

But then there *is* something inherently exciting about watching a film where you know what is going to happen and still experience suspense. One of my favorite examples of this is Apollo 13. We all knew how the story would end and yet I found myself on the edge of my seat. What's more, I was on the edge of my seat watching a bunch of nerds do math problems. More suspense there than in any moment of Hannibal.

Now then, I'm considering taking a bite out of the discussion of Oscar politics, but I think I'll wait on that. It's late. I will confess to loving the Academy Awards though, as silly as they are. They are the only awards I indulge in during this silly season. I know how utterly unimportant and ridiculous they are, yet I still become invested in them. Just like with presidential elections.

"They give themselves awards for everything out here...greatest Fascist dictator: Adolph Hitler."

Amanpour

"Like I said, I can understand that some could be bored with it. However, as a family man, I don't know how I could put myself through what Wigand went through to tell the truth and come out the other end with basically NOTHING to show for it. To sit there in front of the camera and have someone decide that it's in the corporation's best interest for the people not to know is disheartening in the extreme. I was riveted. "

Have you guys SEEN Jeffrey Wigand? He's a fat, happy, camera mugging publicity hound. Far from the emotionally tortured Russell Crowe we see in the movie. He knew exactly what he wanted to do and he did it.

http://www.jeffreywigand.com/insider/

I rest my fuckin'* case. Insider, my ASS.

wumpus http://www.gamebasement.com

* I blame the Sopranos

"What's more, I was on the edge of my seat watching a bunch of nerds do math problems. "

That reminds me of The Cube. Man, I loved that movie. Not sure why, exactly, but it was like the best episode of Star Trek I've never seen.

wumpus http://www.gamebasement.com

---

Quote:

Have you guys SEEN Jeffrey Wigand? He's a fat, happy, camera mugging publicity hound. Far from the emotionally tortured Russell Crowe we see in the movie. He knew exactly what he wanted to do and he did it.

http://www.jeffreywigand.com/insider/

I rest my fuckin'* case. Insider, my ASS.

---

"Look, I don't care what's inside of your ass. You're confusing film with reality. "

You want the inside of my ass? YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE INSIDE OF MY ASS!!!!

"I certainly expect the actor to work with what he feels is this man's motivation. Judging by what happens to EVERYONE that becomes "famous" in some way, I wouldn't call Wigand any more of a publicity hound than the people on Survivor. "

To me, Insider's plot felt about as realistic as one of those dramatic recreations on America's Most Wanted. Difference being, AMW dramatizations are much more exciting.

And the fact that you're drawing explicit parallels between Insider and Survivor does not help your case, Mr. Smaerty Mans!!

What I'm getting at here is that the subject matter, IMO of course, could not support the dramatic weight that was placed on it. Insider was the best boring movie I've ever seen. Bar none. Your mileage may vary. Just MHO and all that rot.

wumpus http://www.gamebasement.com

"That reminds me of The Cube. Man, I loved that movie."

Dude I totally know what you're saying. Gleaming the Cube ROCKED HARD!!! I think it's the best thing Christian Slater has done...I mean, like, ever. His hair was totally RAD in that film. And when he---

What's that you say? NOT Gleaming the Cube? Just The Cube? Oh...sorry.

I had that film--The Cube--in my Netflix queue for awhile. Never saw it. Everyone who has recommended it to me has done so ambivalently, like they are slightly embarrassed that they liked it. Not Hudson Hawk embarrassed, but more like a fear that eventually someone is going to say, "Oh you liked The Cube? Oooh, I'm sorry. You're out of the club. Turn in your spy decoder ring and never call us again."

We oughta start a thread that discusses Most Embarrassing Films that we like. We could all post to it as "anonymous" for added protection. That way people who run this website who may have liked Armaggeddon won't be ridiculed.

-Amanpour

Hey, come now...Armageddon was a good movie!! I mean, sure it wasn't the greatest movie ever made, but it was a good movie. Especially when you consider that it came out back to back with Deep Impact, and it beat the crap out of that!

"Especially when you consider that it came out back to back with Deep Impact, and it beat the crap out of that!"

Isn't that kind of like being able to beat your sister at wrestling?

Amanpour

"Dude I totally know what you're saying. Gleaming the Cube ROCKED HARD!!! I think it's the best thing Christian Slater has done...I mean, like, ever. His hair was totally RAD in that film. And when he--- What's that you say? NOT Gleaming the Cube? Just The Cube? Oh...sorry. "

Sir, I don't appreciate the critical aspersions you cast so freely on such a great film.

I do own Gleaming the Cube on DVD. One of my most prized possessions was a Gleaming the Cube sticker I found when I was painting this Korean family's house in 1991. In fact, talking about it now does make me a little teary-eyed.

You know Tony Hawk was in that movie, right? Those weren't "Xtian" Slater's (no relation, I presume) real feet!

"Oh you liked The Cube? Oooh, I'm sorry. You're out of the club. Turn in your spy decoder ring and never call us again."

Dude, I liked Gleaming the Cube. Admitting that I liked The Cube is really no big deal to me. But then again I don't pretend to have a sense of taste, like some notable game journalists do. I won't mention any names, but just between you, me, and this annoying Discus discussion board software, his initials are TC.

wumpus http://www.gamebasement.com

"Isn't that kind of like being able to beat your sister at wrestling?"

Perhaps, perhaps not. I have talked to a lot of people that really liked Deep Impact, thought I have no idea why. Perhaps that wasn't a good way to make my point, though.

Still, I enjoy watching Armageddon whenever it's on. I don't go out of my way to see it, but if it happens to be on, I don't steer clear from it, either. I think it's a movie of quite some merit.

It won some Academy Awards, too, and we all know how highly revered those are around here! ;-)

Armageddon was an appalling film. It was damn near a 2 hour long music video.

Not that I actually remember what a music video is like these days. I remember when MTV used to actually show music videos. Now it's all Road Rules and Real World and TRL.. and shit.

wumpus http://www.gamebasement.com

Oh, my, I don't know if I dare...I certainly don't feel passionate enough about it to engage in another of those week-long debates that are becoming so common on these boards, but I don't agree -- not at all. It is among my favorite movies. I think a good percent of the acting is good, though not everyone did a good job (though it certainly had some high-profile actors), and I thought the writing was pretty good. Really good, actually. And anyone who says they can watch the scene with Bruce Willis saying good-bye to Liv Tyler, and the scene where he flashes back at the moment of detonation, without having a little tugging at their heart strings -- well, I have to wonder if they have any emotions at all.

Isnt it nice for HollyWood to take a few months off its busy prodution shecudel for some slef-congratulation?

"That way people who run this website who may have liked Armaggeddon won't be ridiculed."

I freely admit that Armageddon (which I, unlike some people, can spell -- nyeh!) may not be a "good" movie.

Having said that, I loved it! Call it a guilty pleasure, but it completely worked for me. Yeah, it's as manipulative and meaningful as a slick Army recruiting commercial, but I get all choked up by those, too.

-Tom, being all that he can be

My guilty pleasure is Cloak and Dagger. . . Jack Flak (Dabney Coleman) is hilarious in that movie. . . anybody remember that movie? it starred ET's Elliot, plus theres a hilarious scene where the gamemaster asks the kid to get a twinkie for a secret message. . . cracks me up.

etc

"My guilty pleasure is Cloak and Dagger. "

I'll have to rent that. I never really saw the whole thing.

How about Flash Gordon? I have the DVD and the Soundtrack (don't tempt me) and both are outstanding.

wumpus http://www.gamebasement.com

Okay, no more harassing us for liking Armageddon, Wumpus!!

To each his own, I'd say. We all like a few movies that we know we shouldn't. Honestly, the movies I'm most ashamed of liking would be the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turle movies -- at least, the first two. I was at least young enough when they came out that I don't have to be too ashamed, but they just made me laugh. I'd wager I could go back and watch them, and still enjoy them.

"How about Flash Gordon?"

Oh man, this is still one of my favorite movies. The scene where they have to stick their arms into a giant ant hill is just to classic. :)

Transformers: The Movie is probably my big guilty pleasure movie. Even now that I'm a "grown up", I still love pulling out this movie now and then.

Ok... Armageddon... ugh, don't get me started. I liked Deep Impact, but watching Armageddon was like watching a Monty Python sketch. Every time I thought they had done the dumbest thing possible, something else showed up that was even dumber. A Gatling gun? Why the hell did they bring a Gatling gun with them to the asteroid?

Oh well, it definantly wasn't a movie for someone looking for a shread of realism. I tried to suspend my disbelief, but I failed miserably.

Jim, the Gatling Gun was built into the machine...Keep in mind, the primary purpose of this machine was not to traverse asteroids, nor to drill...

And, hey, nobody said the movie was realistic. But, for a lot of us, anyway, that didn't make it less enjoyable to watch. (I worked at a concession stand in a movie theater at the time of its release, so I know just how many people came to watch it!! And most of them left happy.)

I don't remember Flash Gordon, but the director, Mike Hodges, is a man of diverse talents. He did one of the best British movies ever made, a supercool revenge drama with Michael Caine called Get Carter. Don't even think about mentioning the Stallone remake.

Hodges also did one of last year's best movies, Croupier, starring Clive Owen, known to lesser geeks everywhere as the guy from Privateer 2: the Darkening.

Whoda thunk the guy who got stuck doing Flash Gordon had it in him...?

Anyone else have any obscure tangents for me to travel down?

-Tom, leave it to an Armageddon lover to bring a Gatling gun to an asteroid

Alright, wise guys...If you were going to fight an asteroid, what would YOU take?? A gatling gun seems perfectly acceptable to me, doesn't it to you, Tom?

"Jim, the Gatling Gun was built into the machine"

Well, yeah, but they loaded it and let some freaked guy indie actor shoot at stuff with it.

I have no doubt people loved the movie. It did over 100 mil in ticket sales and people around the water cooler insisted that I should see it. For me, it was a waste of $6.50 (of those bygone days of $6.50 a ticket). However, I'm not going to say that it wasn't a good movie just because I didn't like it. It was just a movie that I personally didn't enjoy.

Oh, and another guilty pleasure movie for me is Hudson Hawk. It was so bad that it wrapped around and became a blast to watch.

"Oh, and another guilty pleasure movie for me is Hudson Hawk. It was so bad that it wrapped around and became a blast to watch."

I'm so relieved that someone else mentioned Hudson Hawk first so I didn't have to. It is definitely a guilty pleasure of mine. I just love that "Swing on A Star" number. I don't care if the whole thing is a ridiculous ego-fest, I really liked it when it came out.

Problem is I just finished reading "With Nails," Richard E. Grant's collection of film diaries, and given the amount of suffering he and Sandra Bernhardt went through making it, I'm not sure I can watch it with the mindless pleasure I did before.

Amanpour, who cannot spell Armmaggeddonn but can spell 'likelihood'

"Amanpour, who cannot spell Armmaggeddonn but can spell 'likelihood' "

I hereby declare a global moratorium on pointing out anyone else's spelling errors. Each and every one of us has a little Mr. Smaerty Mans inside.

"Oh, and another guilty pleasure movie for me is Hudson Hawk. It was so bad that it wrapped around and became a blast to watch."

One word. Clifford. Martin Short and Charles Grodin. It's so bad, it's good. That scene where he's sitting all by himself, playing the recorder to pass the time just SLAYS me. It's one of those select 25 movies they play endlessly on Comedy Central; I recommend it.

wumpus http://www.gamebasement.com

I'm going to join those in favor of Armageddon. As much as I want to hate Michael Bay, I have to admit that he can make a dumb action movie like nobody's business. I mean, The Rock? Come on! Even Bad Boys is decent.

Armageddon had the added pleasure of Bruce who, in the right movie, is the last great movie star. Although Clooney might soon take over if he can redeem himself after The Perfect Storm.

The Insider was a great film, by far my favorite of 99. I'm worried about Mann's upcoming Ali biopic - I just can't see Will Smith as The Greatest. Who knows, though. I haven't seen Last of the Mohicans, but I tend to like Michael Mann's films, especially Thief. And Manhunter. So, maybe he can make The Fresh Prince find his inner Ali. I just think the guy is too happy looking.

And I'd like to start the CTHD backlash backlash here. It's a beautiful film, and I'm really glad to see it recognized. I've seen the classics in the genre, and CTHD is among the best, in my opinion. For those who hated it, I'd like to ask: Why? Is it that you didn't like the genre conventions? I'm curious. I was really moved by the film, even more so on a second viewing.

As for Gladiator, I thought it was pretty good. The nominations, though, baffle me. Oliver Reed's CG presence looked incredibly fake to me. So did the CG Rome. Perhaps most of the Academy watched the film on video.

"Armageddon had the added pleasure of Bruce who, in the right movie, is the last great movie star. Although Clooney might soon take over if he can redeem himself after The Perfect Storm."

I don't know about redeeming himself as a 'movie star', but he certainly redeemed himself as an actor in "O Brother Where Art Thou?" Of course, this brings to mind Peter O'Toole's famous line from "My Favorite Year": "I'm not an actor, I'm a movie star."

"For those who hated it, I'd like to ask: Why? Is it that you didn't like the genre conventions?"

Based on someone else's remarks here, I suspect some people missed the point and everything but the fighting scenes was lost on them. But even then, I'm a little mystified since the fighting scenes were so impressive.

It wasn't my favorite movie of the year, but it would certainly be one of the top 3 and I'm pulling for it to get *all* the Oscars. Every single last one. Here's the only thing that will make me happy at this year's Academy Awards:

"Gladiator: 0 Oscars, CTHD: 916 Oscars"

Actually, I saw Erin Brockovich last night and *really* liked it. They can give that one three or four Oscars and I won't mind.

-Tom

Okay, I feel like I need to watch some of these movies now, so that I can participate in this discussion...Perhaps over the weekend I'll do just that!

"Actually, I saw Erin Brockovich last night and *really* liked it."

I liked it as well, and not only because it was fun to see Aaron Eckhart play a nice guy. Soderbergh is the reverse of the norm - his films are becoming much better as he gets more restrained (I know you didn't like Traffic, but I enjoyed it - even more than Erin Brockovich).

"he certainly redeemed himself as an actor in "O Brother Where Art Thou?""

You know, I completely forgot about that movie, and I just saw it over the holidays. Los Bros Coen always have that affect on me. I like their films when I see them, but they fade quickly. I did like Clooney in it, though.

He was great in Out of Sight, which makes me all the more excited about Soderbergh's Ocean's 11.

I love it when seemingly disparate points converge.

And lemme just say I thought Three Kings was one of the best movies of 1999 and totally ripped off at Academy Award time. I thought Clooney was fantastic in that movie, as were Mark Wahlberg and Ice Cube.

"Actually, I saw Erin Brockovich last night and *really* liked it."

Erin Brockovich was okay. I liked The Limey a lot more, but it lacks the star power I guess. I'm not a big fan of Julia Roberts, either. I think she's really overrated as an actress.

"And lemme just say I thought Three Kings was one of the best movies of 1999 and totally ripped off at Academy Award time. I thought Clooney was fantastic in that movie, as were Mark Wahlberg and Ice Cube. "

Yes, I agree, great movie. I have the soundtrack if you want a copy.

"I'm worried about Mann's upcoming Ali biopic - I just can't see Will Smith as The Greatest"

Have you seen him in Six Degrees of Seperation? There is hope, young Jedi!

"Based on someone else's remarks here, I suspect some people missed the point and everything but the fighting scenes was lost on them. But even then, I'm a little mystified since the fighting scenes were so impressive. "

I got it; there just wasn't much there to get in the first place. I hate to break this to you, but it's a little cliched. I ascribe that to the genre and not to Ang Lee, though. The fact that he was able to wring any kind of depth from it at all is quite an accomplishment, and why I don't mind it being listed.

wumpus http://www.gamebasement.com

"I'm worried about Mann's upcoming Ali biopic - I just can't see Will Smith as The Greatest"


I trust Michael Mann. I wasn't interested when I first heard about the Insider- a movie about litigation against Cigarette companies, but it turned out great. If Mann thinks Smith will make a good Ali, then he's probably right.

"I liked it as well, and not only because it was fun to see Aaron Eckhart play a nice guy."

I had no idea Eckhart was in it until the credits rolled. I like him a lot and he was really warm and open in Eric Brockovich. I'm glad to see he's not just doing throwaway roles like his appearances in Any Given Sunday and Nurse Betty. Just look what happened to the other guy from In the Company of Men -- nothing but forgettable bit parts.

BTW, how did they do the opening scene in Eric Brockovich? It's one continuous take where Julia Roberts gets in a car, drives off, and another car plows into her at about 50mph and spins her car around a couple of times. Wha...?

-Tom

"For those who hated it, I'd like to ask: Why? Is it that you didn't like the genre conventions? I'm curious. I was really moved by the film, even more so on a second viewing."

See the CTHD thread for my thoughts on that. I wouldn't say I *hated* it-- that's putting it far too strongly. I think it's a very odd choice for best picture, but should be a shoo-in for best foreign film. Which is exactly where it belongs, IMO.

wumpus http://www.gamebasement.com

>BTW, how did they do the opening scene in Eric Brockovich? It's one continuous take where Julia Roberts gets in a car, drives off, and another car plows into her at about 50mph and spins her car around a couple of times. Wha...?

Cool special effect, no? Jeffrey Wells, of Reel.com, (formerly Mr. Showbiz) wrote a good column discussing that shot and how it was done. Essentially Julia never got in the car - she was drawn in over the stunt person.

Stefan

---

Quote:

And lemme just say I thought Three Kings was one of the best movies of 1999 and totally ripped off at Academy Award time. I thought Clooney was fantastic in that movie, as were Mark Wahlberg and Ice Cube.

---

---

Quote:

I haven't seen Last of the Mohicans

---

"Ugh... you guys are going to make me rent Erin Brockovich aren't you? I just ... can't... watch... Julia... Roberts... "

FWIW I didn't think it was all that it was hyped to be. Good, but as I said, Limey was a better movie to me. And definite agreement on Julia Roberts. I'm just afraid that huge mouth is going to split her head in half like a muppet and I'll be all grossed out.

wumpus http://www.gamebasement.com

"Erin Brockovich was okay. I liked The Limey a lot more,"

I wanted to like The Limey so much. It just didn't do it for me. Schizopolis is much better. I really love that film. I thought The Limey was wildly overrated.

"BTW, how did they do the opening scene in Eric Brockovich?"

This is actually quite simple. They filmed this scene just as it looks, with Julia Roberts getting in the car then driving into the intersection. Then they took a year off while Julia recovered from the crash. During the break Soderbergh filmed "Traffic."

Oh, and somebody just mentioned ...Mohicans as their favorite Mann film. I can only remember ill feelings for that film. Please, I beg of you, don't tell me I have to see it again. I can only have so many films in my Madeline Stowe oeuvre, and "China Moon" means I've bagged my limit.

Amanpour

"This is actually quite simple. They filmed this scene just as it looks, with Julia Roberts getting in the car then driving into the intersection. Then they took a year off while Julia recovered from the crash. During the break Soderbergh filmed "Traffic." "

ROFL. I wish. The problem is she isn't truly dedicated to method acting.

wumpus http://www.gamebasement.com

Okay, I guess I have to be the one to ask...any thoughts on the Academy Awards?

For once I thought the show was pretty darn good, but I'm not sure if this is due to the quality of the show or the quality of the company who watched it with me. I would have liked to have seen Crouching Tiger take a few more awards, and have some other minor gripes here and there, but I had a great time watching it. And I thought Steve Martin did an admirable job.

The funniest aftershock from the show for me, though, is hearing all these previously swooning women say variations of, "Russell Crowe sure is an ass."

Amanpour

I have no comment yet as I'm still suffering from dry heaves as a consequence of hearing "and the winner is...Gladiator" so many times.

Blehdt.

-Tom

Yeah, I thought Steve Martin was great and Best Supporting Actress was a nice surprise. I was thrilled to see Crouching win best score (my wife loves that disc - diggin the YoYo Ma baby) but...
Well.
Tom said it well.
Blehdt, indeed.

=Andrew
PS: Those small clips of Burstyn make me want to see Requiem for a Dream... is it, is she, as good as it looks?

Well, I told you guys CTHD would win a bunch of the ancillary awards but nothing substantial.

I'm still in shock that CTHD didn't win for best visual effects! It's a crime I tell you! A crime against man and wire!

wumpus http://www.gamebasement.com

Yeah, I don't pretend to be a movie buff, but Gladiator just wasn't really Oscar material, besides the special effects stuff -- the battle scene at the beginning was great.

It was a fun movie, but no way did it deserve the awards and nominations it got.

Sheesh as if Gladiator was so bad. . . what puzzles me is the Best Director with Soderbergh (a very good director) for Traffic. I thought Traffic was the most overhyped movie of last year. Traffic, based on the tv show, is exactly that, a TV show (except with faded colors and thirty something soft focus - BIG DEAL). Erin Brockovich was a better movie and a better directed film than Traffic was...though I really wanted CTHD to win EVERYTHING. all imho of course.

Remember we're dealing with a commitee that chose Shakespeare in Love over Saving Private Ryan and Thin Red Line... so I'm kind of surprised actually that Gladiator won! maybe alternate years they choose romance then period pic. or something...

etc

The Academy has always been big on historical epics, whether they follow history or not. Braveheart, Spartacus, Ben-Hur, Gladiator...

--Dave

"Braveheart, Spartacus, Ben-Hur, Gladiator"

Translated as: Decent movie, good movie, great movie, Gladiator...

""Braveheart, Spartacus, Ben-Hur, Gladiator"

Translated as: Decent movie, good movie, great movie, Gladiator..."

Exactly. They all kick Gladiator's ass. Gladiator's just in that second tier of historical epics, like The 300 Spartans, Barabas, The Robe, and others.

Anyone see that the ratings for the show were down seven percent? They're saying it was because the movies sucked last year. Heh.

Gladiator just follows in a long, endless line of mediocre movies that have won best picture. I mean jeez, it goes on and on:

Titanic, Forrest Gump, Terms of Endearment, Out of Africa, Chariots of Fire, Braveheart, Ghandi.

Does anyone give a shit now about any of these movies?

I did like Steve Martin a lot though.
Also: You Can Count On Me got robbed for Best Screenplay.

---

Quote:

Anyone see that the ratings for the show were down seven percent? They're saying it was because the movies sucked last year. Heh.

---

---

Quote:

Titanic, Forrest Gump, Terms of Endearment, Out of Africa, Chariots of Fire, Braveheart, Ghandi

---

Yeah, Titanic and Forrest Gump are far from mediocre. Gump is the special effects movie for people who hate sci-fi. It tells a good story of a simple man and Hanks' performance was excellent. Sure, we can all act like we're retarded, but he did it and was likeable in the role. Robert Zemeckis doesn't get nearly enough credit for his work IMO.

Titanic... it's truly epic. You KNOW the ship is going to go down and yet the whole time I was riveted. Once again, it's an effects movie for people who hate sci-fi and effects films. These films won as much for technology as story. If only Lucas had applied technology as well with Phantom Menace. There's a gigantic difference between Titanic and Forrest Gump in a comparison with Gladiator. Though I like Russell Crowe and IMO he carried that film on his manly man shoulders. Did anyone else get Conan flashbacks when he's fighting in the pit right after he came home and found his family gone?

Oh, and Leo DiCaprio? Everyone's whipping boy? Having seen him in What's Eating Gilbert Grape and The Quick and the Dead (with Russell Crowe!) before that (both good films), I was impressed with his character in Titanic. He's a very good actor.

Just saw Meet the Parents last night. Pretty decent... the airline stuff was right on the mark. Though I thought the movie had a hard time deciding if it was a wacky comedy or a more serious one. The tone was all over the place. But DeNiro... what more can you say, the guy is genius.

--Dave

From a technical point of view, Titanic was incredible. For some damned reason I've been a Titanic (and ocean liners in general) freak all my life, and the historical accuracy regarding the details of the ship and the sinking was remarkable. The script, on the other hand, was a whole different story. A whole ocean liner full of mind-numbing cliches. And Kate Winslet was nominated for what--most wooden performance by an actress who looks good wearing nothing but a fake diamond?

---

Quote:

Just saw Meet the Parents last night.

---

I loved Russell Crowe in Gladiator and thought he was worthy of the award. But I thought the script for Gladiator was idiotic (they spend the whole movie building up what a ponce and coward Joaquin Phoenix is--and then there's supposed to be some kind of suspense when he gets into the ring with Crowe?) and the special effects were way overrated. All I can remember about the fight scenes was wondering who was hitting who, too. I thought those scenes were very confusingly edited.

As far as Titanic goes--well, yeah, sure, as a spectacle it was great. I saw it twice. But best picture of the year? Uggh. Sure DiCaprio is a great actor--that's not the point. It was just a classier The Poseidon Adventure. And sure Forrest Gump had great special effects. But Woody Allen's Zelig had the same idea, years earlier. And it was funnier.

I dunno--when I look at the list of Best Pictures, a great majority of them don't look to me like movies that MATTER, that stand the test of time as MOVIES.

Here's some movies that never won best picture: Citizen Kane, Nashville, Vertigo, Raging Bull, Taxi Driver, Dr. Strangelove, The Wild Bunch.

Do any of the movies I cited above hold a candle to this list?

That "Movies that matter" rarely win Best Picture I'd take as a given. In addition to Jeff's list, I'd say Shakespeare in Love winning over Saving Private Ryan is another good example of the same phenomenon. The flip side of this is that the Academy often votes for movies that seem to matter because of their subject matter, even though as movies they're not really that good. Ghandi would be the prime example there, I think, and Dances with Wolves winning over Goodfellas.

Honestly Jeff, I think they do. Titanic is something you're not likely to see someone attempt again on such an accurate and sizable scale. They really BUILT the ship for chrissake... and while the story is a simple one of love lost, it's also compelling enough to draw you through the horrors of the event. I guess I've just got a softer heart or something... I felt for both Leo and Kate's characters and it was a good way to make me think about the ramifications of being on board.

Gump on the other hand is a great trip through American history wrapped up in this simple man. It works AND it's got slick effects. Once again, that movie really affected me personally. I was a mess when we left the theatre. It showed how precarious humanity is with an entertaining wrapper. I could watch it again today with no problem.

I could also say that those other films you cited that didn't win weren't any less deserving of Best Picture, but you'd have to look at what won in each year they lost. It's largely a subjective process just like reviewing is as many of us here already know.

Only Shakespeare in Love struck me as a bad choice recently along with Gladiator...

--Dave

Dave Long said:

---

Quote:

It's largely a subjective process just like reviewing is as many of us here already know

---

I think Jason's point is right on. The academy THINKS movies like Ghandi "matter" because of the subject matter, but the movies themselves are pedestrian. I think E.T. got robbed that year against Ghandi (seriously). And I *definitely* agree with you, Dave, that Shakespeare was a bad choice -- Saving Private Ryan was so clearly best picture I still can't believe it. That seems like a worse travesty than Gladiator winning, actually.

As far as Forrest Gump and Titanic go, yeah, I guess it's all just subjective, obviously. I hated Forrest Gump for what I felt was a very cloying manipulativeness (though I was perfectly willing to be manipulated by E.T.--so there ya go). I also hated what felt to me as this kind of weird underlying conservativeness in Gump, that the female "hippy" character was messed up because she didn't tow the straight-and-narrow like the Hanks character. But maybe I just didn't get what Zemeckis was trying to say there.

Can we at least all agree that Chariots of Fire sucked? :)

Jeff,
I agree that Chariots of Fire sucked.
But I do think Ghandi was a much better film than ET... and I don't think Saving Private Ryan was particularly noteworthy after the first 25 minutes but I agree that Shakespeare in Love was simply entertaining, but not particularly memorable.

I liked Gump and still admire much of it (it sputtered 75-90% of the way through, but the ending was great). Wasn't Gump up against Pulp Fiction?

How's this for controversial...
I think both Fight Club and Magnolia were superior films to American Beauty.

--Andrew

Fight Club, yes. Magnolia... well... The whole time I was watching it, I was saying to myself "this is a really well-made movie." But at the end, I was saying to myself, "I seriously don't know what happened there at all."

Jeff said:

"I loved Russell Crowe in Gladiator and thought he was worthy of the award."

I have to agree. Because really, the writing for his character was just okay, and Crowe managed to make the part riveting nonetheless. He has a way of doing that, in any role that he's in. Consider this his consolation prize for missing out last year. As for Gladiator, I liked it a lot--it was a really fun movie, and I loved that opening battle. But best picture? I don't really think so.

Jason said:

"I'd say Shakespeare in Love winning over Saving Private Ryan is another good example of the same phenomenon."

I dunno, I thought Shakespeare in Love deserved best picture. Comedies generally don't get much respect come Oscar time (and arguably, the only reason this one did was because it was based on the Bard), and SiL was a really great one--brilliantly written, and brilliantly acted. Was it better than Saving Private Ryan? That's a tough call--they are such different films. It's almost a matter of personal preference.

I would have given this year's award to CTHD, personally. I think Gladiator was the least impressive of the best picture nominees (with the exception of Erin Brockovich, which I haven't seen and thus can't comment on).


-Ben

"I would have given this year's award to CTHD, personally. I think Gladiator was the least impressive of the best picture nominees (with the exception of Erin Brockovich, which I haven't seen and thus can't comment on)."

CTHD deserves best foreign film and nothing else. And that's pretty much what it got. Heck, you guys ought to be thanking your lucky stars that Chocolat didn't win anything!

"I also hated what felt to me as this kind of weird underlying conservativeness in Gump, that the female "hippy" character was messed up because she didn't tow the straight-and-narrow like the Hanks character. But maybe I just didn't get what Zemeckis was trying to say there."

Actually I don't think that's it at all. I think it's about floating through life in a zen sort of way, rather than spending all your time and effort desperately seeking out your identity.

wumpus http://www.gamebasement.com

CTHD was a poor film, in my opinion. The action sequences were great, but the dialogue was just bland. Having to read the whole movie sort of detracted from the experience, too.

I really liked Erin Brokovich, and, believe me, I had NO desire to ever see that movie, because normally I can't stand Julia Roberts. (And I still don't see what the big deal is about her). But I went to see it cuz I've loved all of Soderbergh's movies (has anyone else ever seen Schizopolis? And The Limey is my fave). And sure enough the movie held up. It seemed like at any moment it could have veered off into TV-movie-of-the-week inanity, but Soderbergh always reeled it in and kept it intelligent. The DVD is really interesting too, just to see how much he cut out of the movie...

Wumpus: Good point about Chocolat. Yeeeeeesh. :)

Also Wumpus: "I think it's about floating through life in a zen sort of way, rather than spending all your time and effort desperately seeking out your identity."

okay, I can see that. But by making the one "desperately seeking an identity" (and thus completely weak, unstable, untrustworthy) the left-wing hippy type, I couldn't help but feel it was a comment that people who embraced causes like that at that time were, in fact, just weak. It seemed like a criticism to me.

Yeah but Jeff, but I'd argue that she kind of had to be the left-wing hippie type. Her personality was best summed up by this line: "Oh God, make me a bird. Let me fly far, far away from here"

The Hippie movement attracted much more than it's fair share of flakes. So, the implied criticism you see is actually valid one but not a sweeping one. I don't think she's meant to "be" every hippie. Contrast her with the real "toe the line" character in the film, "Lootenant Dan", who ended up being a real left wing radical hippie type by the end of the film.

Anyway, I sort of saw Dan as a counter-balance for her character.

What I didn't see is Gump as a right-wing or conservative character. He's status quo, surely, but he's equally at home speaking at the anti-war rally. Basically he's just kind of there sans agenda. Much like Zelig, as you pointed out.

Gump lost me when it got stupid. When he ran around for years and inspired every single catchphrase from the 70's. Yeah "Shit Happens"... right. But, I loved when he met his son... Haley Joel Osmond - or whatever ;)

-Andrew

Hmmm... interesting Jeff. I kind of saw the characters around Gump as this great big commentary on how people just do these things they do and there's so many reasons and you can't often explain their behavior. Then there's this guy who is so simple seeing it all and living it at the same time and yet he maintains that innocence we all wish we could have. Once again, I'm just a sappy moron sometimes and Gump really struck a chord. It was about life to me and seeing some horrible things through child-like eyes. Even the good things that happen to Gump don't "affect" him necessarily. He's this rock in a maelstrom. It's a cool movie...and I love Zemeckis' films. Contact is something I really enjoyed as well...

Erin Brockovich... there's a movie that I was determined not to see. I watched it on DVD after Tom and others commented on its quality. I'm glad I saw it. It's well worth it. I could identify with her plight with the kids, etc. But the story is so "American" and enjoyable to watch. Probably the only movie I've actually liked Julia Roberts in. I don't know that it was Oscar-worthy, but she was good.

I have to say though, this was one year I just wasn't that interested in the awards. I didn't watch much. I love all kinds of film but this year I just wasn't in tune. I think it's my two kids and the lack of time to go to the movies that did it. X-Men was my big movie event of last year. :) I also enjoyed Pitch Black. That's one of the best spaceship crash sequences I've ever had the pleasure to view and Vin Diesel is damn cool. David Twohy needs a huge budget and no Kevin Costner to ruin his story to make his masterpiece...

--Dave

---

Quote:

Ben: I dunno, I thought Shakespeare in Love
deserved best picture. Comedies generally don't
get much respect come Oscar time (and arguably,
the only reason this one did was because it was
based on the Bard), and SiL was a really great
one--brilliantly written, and brilliantly acted.
Was it better than Saving Private Ryan? That's a
tough call--they are such different films. It's
almost a matter of personal preference.

---

Aside from the twin Godfather pics my vote for Best Picture that won Best Picture would have to go to One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest.

Sorry, I just really felt the need to mention that movie. It just sort of sticks with me...

Actually there *have* been some great Best Pictures. The ones Bub mentions obviously. Midnight Cowboy, Patton, French Connection. Seems like the 70s were good for the Oscars---or maybe the movies were better.

BTW, just saw Bridge on the River Kwai for the first time (on DVD). Another worthy Best Picture. Great to see Alec Guinness as a young Obi Wan (sorry). Also, William Holden was quite the he-man. I never knew. Now all I can think about is greasing his pecs.

Did I say that out loud?

"Sorry, I just really felt the need to mention that movie. It just sort of sticks with me..."

Mmmm, Juicyfruit.

"I couldn't help but feel it was a comment that people who embraced causes like that at that time were, in fact, just weak. It seemed like a criticism to me."

Are you perchance wearing birkenstocks and patchouli as you write this? You're awfully defensive about this.. you long-haired hippie freak!

wumpus http://www.gamebasement.com

p.s. I still want a greenspeak archive. The people demand it.

am I the only one here that actually liked Gladiator alot? I really liked it...it's an epic tragedy movie done right...the end scene is also great in that they both die, hero and villain. I like Gladiator more in a literary sense, since it really does draw more from classic tragedy than from Hollywood (in tone that is). The denoument at the end is akin to a Shakesperean tragedy, not exactly happy but keeps the movie in a social context...like Julius Caesar. There's a death wish in that movie, a repition of, "we all are dead already." that's something foreign in almost all American movies, a stoic nihilism that pervades the movie, at least thats what i got...basically the vision in Gladiator feels more "mature" than say... Braveheart.

What I really don't understand is Braveheart...egad that movie was so boring. Even the battle scenes were ho-hum. I think the Patriot was a better movie than Braveheart, and says the same thing! FOR FREEDOM! bah...it was ok.

It seems alot of Best Picture has to do with the "cultural consciousness"...movies that aren't necceraily the best but are the ones most popular and passable as "deep" and "artistic". Which is more surprising when Shakespeare in Love won. I really hate movies that portray an artist (especially Shakespeare) in a romantic light (romantic in the literary sense). Shakespeare probably was more akin to...like Alfred Hitchcock in temprement imo...

I think the best picture Oscar to really be deserving its Oscar, recently, was The Unforgiven...Clint Eastwood is a great director imo.

etc

Time for some random junk from my head. Whether you file this under "Scooter's Smart Statements" or "Scooter's Stupid Sayings", is up to you...

Jeff Green, went and said,

---

Quote:

As far as Forrest Gump and Titanic go, yeah, I guess it's all just subjective, obviously. I hated Forrest Gump for what I felt was a very cloying manipulativeness (though I was perfectly willing to be manipulated by E.T.--so there ya go). I also hated what felt to me as this kind of weird underlying conservativeness in Gump, that the female "hippy" character was messed up because she didn't tow the straight-and-narrow like the Hanks character. But maybe I just didn't get what Zemeckis was trying to say there.

---

---

Quote:

From a technical point of view, Titanic was incredible. For some damned reason I've been a Titanic (and ocean liners in general) freak all my life, and the historical accuracy regarding the details of the ship and the sinking was remarkable. The script, on the other hand, was a whole different story. A whole ocean liner full of mind-numbing cliches. And Kate Winslet was nominated for what--most wooden performance by an actress who looks good wearing nothing but a fake diamond?

---

---

Quote:

Here's some movies that never won best picture: Citizen Kane, Nashville, Vertigo, Raging Bull, Taxi Driver, Dr. Strangelove, The Wild Bunch.

---

---

Quote:

Actually there *have* been some great Best Pictures. The ones Bub mentions obviously. Midnight Cowboy, Patton, French Connection. Seems like the 70s were good for the Oscars---or maybe the movies were better.

---

---

Quote:

am I the only one here that actually liked Gladiator alot?

---

Jeezus Scooter, lay off the Red Bull.

"Either Toy Story 2 or Being John Malkovich shoulda won last year."

Toy Story 2.

"LA Confidential instead of Titanic."

Yes.

"Fargo shoulda gotten it instead of English Patient."

Yes.

"Either Shawshank or Pulp Fiction shoulda won in '95"

Yes.

"I liked Braveheart."

You're fired.

Scooter:

---

Quote:

LA Confidential instead of Titanic.

---

Bernie:

---

Quote:

I also liked As Good as it Gets better than Titanic.

---

Thierry theorized (am I the first to use that?)

"Citizen Kane lost to How Green Was My Valley,"
AAAAaaah!

"Nashville lost to One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest"
And rightfully so I think.

"Vertigo lost to Gigi,"
Feh.

"Raging Bull lost to Ordinary People,"
Yes, and that is hard to swallow, but Ordinary People was/is a fine film.

"Taxi Driver lost to Rocky,"
--Pantomines shooting himself in the head--

"Strangelove lost to My Fair Lady,"
Eh, I can see that. Strangelove is not a film that SHOULD be appreciated in it's day and My Fair Lady had Audrey Hepburn.

"and Wild Bunch lost to Midnight Cowboy."
Again, I say deservedly so in this case. Midnight Cowboy is an amazing film. Wild Bunch is too, but ... well, everybody's talkin' at me and I can't hear a word they're sayin'.

Plus it's really cool that an X-Rated film won Best Picture (now watch as a bunch of people here rush out to rent Best Picture Rated X Midnight Cowboy and get severely disappointed...

--Andrew

PS: To wrap other stuff up...
As Good As it Gets was a great film until they decided that Jack needed to become lovable and worthy of love.

Schindler's List was the best-Best Picture of the '90's. imo.

Dafoe was the Best Supporting actor last year, even if the film he was in was a wash.

And... Gladiator doesn't fit any classical definition of "tragedy" by a long shot.

Leonardo DiCaprio CAN be good. Watch The Beach (what I thought was a surprisingly cool and funny movie) and Basketball Diaries. He's good. Titanic bored me to death, but that's another story altogether.

I think Gladiator deserved the nod for best flick this year, simply because the other movies weren't all that good. Gladiator's dialogue was rather boring, but the action sequences, and the story as a whole, were brilliant. Traffic was good, but not as good as it could have been. Had the stories intertwined as much as, say, Pulp Fiction, it could have been great. I've voiced my negative opinion of CTHD already. Chocolat... well, haven't seen it, but I'm just glad it didn't win. Erin Brokovich was a decent movie, but definitely not Best Picture material. Although it was nice to see someone who actually gave a shit win the Best Actress Oscar.

---

Quote:

Leonardo DiCaprio CAN be good. Watch The Beach (what I thought was a surprisingly cool and funny movie) and Basketball Diaries.

---

I beg to differ about Gladiator's action sequences. They were filmed MTV style, all quick cuts and jerky camera work. This CAN be done well, see Saving Private Ryan and CTHD, but with Gladiator it was painful to watch.

Also, I'm not a big fan of Phoenix's "acting", at least not in that movie. I didn't see the other one.

Gladiator was a fun summer movie. Worlds better than the Patriot (don't get me started) but certainly not remotely Best Picture caliber... imo.

-Andrew

I'm probably in a distinct minority here, but
I'll add a personal Oscar injustice: Dances with
Wolves over GoodFellas. I didn't think Dances was
bad by any means, it's just that I think
GoodFellas is a great mob movie, as great as the
Godfather in many ways.

"What do you mean, I'm funny?...You mean the way I
talk?...What's funny about it?...What the fuck is
so funny about me? Tell me?..."

---

Quote:

I'm probably in a distinct minority here, but I'll add a personal Oscar injustice: Dances with Wolves over GoodFellas.

---

Dancing with Wolves is another movie (joining Titanic) that bored me. Goodfellas was definitely a superior flick. Kevin Costner just irritates me. He was cool in Robin Hood, but that's about it.

GoodFellas is brilliant, and it gets better with repeated viewings. I think it's actually an amazing counterpart to the Godfather movies--like The Sopranos, it gives such a scary, brutal picture, minus any operatic romanticism, of what life must be like for those lower-level mob grunts. And the acting was incredible--Pesci and Ray Liotta were never better, and Lorraine Bracco! I love her.

Dances With Wolves I enjoyed at the time, once. But can you imagine sitting through that beast again? That's the thing about a lot of these "Best Pictures". They make an initial impression, but they're not the movies we end up wanting to watch over and over again.

And I'd agree with Bub (jeez--why do I keep agreeing with Bub? I must be losing it) that
Midnite Cowboy totally deserved its award, as did Cuckoo's Nest, and that Gladiator's action scenes were awful (except for the opening battle).

---

Quote:

Kevin Costner just irritates me. He was cool in Robin Hood, but that's about it.

---

"2001 lost to Oliver! (the exclaimation point is part of the title)."

Please sir, can I have some more?

My wife and I always say that to each other in our best Oliver! voice. Not saying it's a great film or anything, but it has its charms. Worth seeing.

"Leonardo DiCaprio CAN be good. Watch The Beach (what I thought was a surprisingly cool and funny movie) and Basketball Diaries."

I thought the Beach was damn close to a snuff film.

wumpus http://www.gamebasement.com

"(jeez--why do I keep agreeing with Bub? I must be losing it)"

Watch it Jeff, it becomes addicting! Goodfellas was indeed brilliant and bears repeated viewings. Most Scorcese does actually, except that recent Paramedic flick, what was that all about? Whew!

I also think Casino was very underappreciated. Particularly in Sharon Stone's performance. I'm not a fan of hers but damn, she was great in that role.

Back to the Oscar thing for a moment... why the hell did Basinger win for LA Confidential? I mean, great film and all but I really think anyone could have played that part.

Now, to piss off some people. I didn't think Almost Famous was very good. McDormand was great and I liked the story, but, well, it was missing something and I just couldn't feel anything for the groupie.

Agree with that Green?
--Andrew

"All I can add to that is my notion that Titanic had great directing weighed down by the inane romance. Cameron's writing when it came to relationships had trouble back in The Abyss, and Titanic showed no improvement. I thought it was justified for him to have received Best Director, but not Best Picture. "

You guys miss the point. We have a chunky, snickers-eating heroine who is asserting herself (smoking at the dinner table! egads!) in resisting patriarchial society. And she not only gets the hunky hero, but ultimately survives and learns from the whole harrowing experience.

Sisters are doing it for themselves, I say. Women made this movie huge. Can you blame them? It's not really for us, except as a disaster movie.

wumpus http://www.gamebasement.com

p.s. There's an interesting easter egg about Titanic in Fallout Tactics. Did I mention THAT I AM STUCK IN FALLOUT TACTICS AND I CAN'T GET ANYONE TO HELP ME!?!?!?

Ok Wumpus, pet peeve time.
Winslet is hardly "chunky". Unless you buy into that whole "starvation is beautiful/Heroine Chic/Calvin Klein thinks models should look like little boys" thing.

-Andrew

Yeah, I have to agree there. I don't care much for Kate Winslut -- sorry, I mean Winslet -- as an actress, but I wouldn't call her chunky -- not by a long shot. Even I thought she looked pretty dang good in Titanic, and the screenshots I've seen of her other movies - she's fairly attractive. But not chunky.

PS - Anybody else think "WinSlut" sounds like a XXX Windows application?

Dang it---I agree with Bub again. Winslet is NOT chunky, IMHO. She's babelicious.

Other Bub points: Yeah, Casino was waaay underrated. I'm not sure what happened there. Maybe people thought it was too much like Goodfellas. But DeNiro is awesome in that movie, and yeah, even Sharon Stone is good.

I loved L.A. Confidential but agree that Basinger was a bit of a nonentity. Russell Crowe (again) stole the show in that movie.

I never saw Almost Famous cuz I was afraid of it. It just looked too lightweight.

And good point about women and Titanic, Wumpus. But if sisters are doing it for themselves, can we watch?

Pssst Jeff, don't tell Mark and Tom but... well, I didn't like Disciples much either.

*-~Andrew

Jeff said:

---

Quote:

Other Bub points: Yeah, Casino was waaay underrated.

---

---

Quote:

I loved L.A. Confidential but agree that Basinger was a bit of a nonentity.

---

"Dang it---I agree with Bub again. Winslet is NOT chunky, IMHO. She's babelicious."

Well, I'd have sex with her, but then I'd have sex with almost any woman. Provided, of course, they have a full set of teeth and hair.

Winslet is definitely chunky. I didn't say ugly, guys, CHUNKY. And damn it, it's true. She looked good in Titanic. But she was right on the edge.

http://www.kate-winslet.org/photos/kw02/kw034.jpg

She really packed on the king-size Snickers bars after Titanic.

http://www.kwfc.com/gallery/general1/kwfc_0024.jpg

KWFC? should be just KFC if you ask me. (cue drum hit, cymbal crash)

And commenting on this is so impishly counter to the reasons that Titanic was loved by so many women-- eg, she represents a realistic woman-- that I just can't help myself. ;)

This brings up a related topic. Have I explained to you guys the Victoria's Secret Axiom? In every Victoria's Secret catalog, for some reason there's always *one* picture of an incredibly hot model where, inexplicably, she doesn't look good.

What can I say? That's what happens in college when you have a lot of time on your hands, no social life to speak of, and yet you keep getting these infuriating catalogs.

wumpus http://www.gamebasement.com

>>Winslet is definitely chunky. I didn't say ugly, guys, CHUNKY.

Um, that's not chunky. That's reality. It's how real women are actually built.

But I'm weird. I tend to like women that are built like, well, women.

And it would be hypocritical of me to call someone chunky when I myself am "big boned" at 215 pounds (which is down from about 250, thank you very much, though I am 6'3").

"What can I say? That's what happens in college when you have a lot of time on your hands, no social life to speak of, and yet you keep getting these infuriating catalogs."

Wumpus, this explains why you think Winslet is chunky. The no social life part (and the time on your hands part too ... but lets not go there).

Come to Milwaukee Wisconsin, a land where plastic surgery is used only on the disfigured, a home of beer, Bratwurst, and, frozen custard (a *more* fattening version of ice cream) and I'll show you women who are chunky.

Incidentally, Winslet is no larger in those pictures than Marilyn Monroe was, and also no heavier than the most beautiful woman who ever lived (aside from my wife), ahem, Betty Page.

--Andrew

"But I'm weird. I tend to like women that are built like, well, women. "

Pfft. That's just because dating supermodels didn't work out for you. ;) Speak for yourself, brother!

I just have little sympathy for movie stars who can't maintain their weight. It's their job! I'll be happy to rail against Marlon "huge fat ass" Brando in a similar fashion.

wumpus http://www.gamebasement.com

I admit, Wumpus, that her face is definitely rounder in the second picture, but the rest of her has never looked chunky. I haven't seen her in anything but Titanic, but I've seen shots and all, and at awards, and goodness knows she takes her clothes off in every movie she makes, and she's one of the most popular internet celebs. She never been chunky. Her face just got rounder.

"I just have little sympathy for movie stars who can't maintain their weight. It's their job! I'll be happy to rail against Marlon "huge fat ass" Brando in a similar fashion."
--------------------------------------------------

No, their job is acting. Not weight management nor is it message board geek sexual fantasy fulfillment.

--Andrew

"No, their job is acting. Not weight management nor is it message board geek sexual fantasy fulfillment."

Well if I wanted reality, I'd just leave the house every now and then. Reality sucks!

And that goes double for chubby women.*

wumpus http://www.gamebasement.com

* Damn, I'm funny.

Heh... I think it's people magazine that has a big article on the "meaty" look coming back. On the cover, they've got Drew Barrymore, Charlize Theron, Catherine Zeta Jones, and some other chick I think... all extremely attractive women. I'd rather go out with / nail any one of those three than like.. Kate Moss or someone like that. Meatier is good. I'm not saying I'd want to do some 300-pound beast, but a chick's gotta have at least a bit of meat on her bones. It's more cozy, and you never have bony hips poking into you.

"CTHD was a poor film, in my opinion. The action sequences were great, but the dialogue was just bland."

What? The dialogue was bland? Did you see the same movie---oh, wait a minute, you said something else after that:

"Having to read the whole movie sort of detracted from the experience, too."

Okay, I see where you're coming from now. Nevermind.

On to Forrest Gump. That belongs to that subset of films I initially liked then grew to doubt the quality because so many friends talked so disparagingly of it. Same thing happened with Gladiator. Still, every time I see Gump I like it. I think some of it is definitely ham-handed because Zemeckis has a little problem with gilding the lily, but I still like the film a lot. For my money, though, you get a better treatment of similar subject matter with Being There. That is a wonderful film.

Saving Private Ryan. I am dubious of the greatness of this film. I think it has much technical greatness it, but is flawed. The bookends are a huge problem; they play like a television director came in and tacked them on either end. Embarrassing. And yet not the biggest problem. The biggest problem is that the filmmakers either forgot or chose to ignore the basic rule of flashback: to be able to flash back to something you have to have actually been there at the event. Most of the story is the flashback of a single character who was not in many of the situations he is supposed to be flashing back to. Oops. Maybe he teleported.

But I cannot accept SiL as Best Pic that year either. I liked it just fine, but not as my Best Picture. The best film of that year--1998--was Rushmore, IMO.

Can't agree with LA Confidential over Titanic, because I just don't think LA Confidential is a very good film. I thought it was seriously over-hyped, but maybe I need to see it again. I probably would have chosen The Sweet Hereafter that year. Or Boogie Nights. Or maybe even Kundun. I liked Kundun a lot.

How about Silence of the Lambs? What do you guys think of that as a Best Picture?

Amanpour

Oh, and I have to get in on this thread about the lovely Kate and her alleged chunkiness. Kate Winslet is not chunky. Wumpus is once again proving that he is either out of his mind or living in some alternate universe that happens to share the same Internet as ours. Chunky. Come on.

Amanpour

Silence of the Lambs was a brilliant film, definitely worthy of the best flick award.

"Saving Private Ryan. I am dubious of the greatness of this film. I think it has much technical greatness it, but is flawed. The bookends are a huge problem; they play like a television director came in and tacked them on either end. Embarrassing. And yet not the biggest problem. The biggest problem is that the filmmakers either forgot or chose to ignore the basic rule of flashback: to be able to flash back to something you have to have actually been there at the event. Most of the story is the flashback of a single character who was not in many of the situations he is supposed to be flashing back to. Oops. Maybe he teleported."

I think one key indicator, for me, of any film's greatness is to come back to it at least one year later and watch it again. If it has the same (or better) impact on the later viewing, it's potentially great.

And oddly, I was underwhelmed with Saving Private Ryan on repeat viewing. Which was completely the opposite of what I expected-- I was very impressed with it in the theater! So I'd have to agree here. SPR just didn't quite make the cut in my book.

But Rushmore... if anything, I enjoyed that film even more the second and third times I saw it. Ditto for Silence.

"Oh, and I have to get in on this thread about the lovely Kate and her alleged chunkiness. Kate Winslet is not chunky."

I never said attractive and chunky were mutually exclusive.

It's just my objection to Titanic, the movie. Trust me on this: if they had cast a traditional hollywood actress (say, G. Paltrow, M. Sorvino, or L. Tyler) Titanic would _never_ have been the success it was. Chunkiness was part of the winning "everywoman" formula... this is my way of pointing that out.

Fairly radical choice for a big budget pic like that.

AND BLACK AND WHITE HAS A REFERENCE TO TITANIC TOO! The boat sequence-- check the front! I nearly laughed my ass off!

wumpus http://www.gamebasement.com

I always preferred Thin Red Line over Saving Private Ryan...Thin Red Line is a movie that got better with repeated viewings for me (and the first time i saw TRL I thought it was a smarmy poesy war movie) Not to knock Saving Private Ryan, but the whole movie basically IS special effects ala Jurassic Park. Spielberg is a great director no doubt, but he is too much of a cheerleader of popular opinion to really say anything else in his movies.

war movies i really liked, were Big Red One, Cross of Iron, Platoon ...in SPR, Spielberg just made a war movie of a war movie...nothing quite origninal but spectacular regardless. and in the real Private Ryan nobody was sent to rescue the guy, Private "Ryan" actually just walked to the CO and was released from duty.

etc

BTW Wumpus, do you think Dr. Laura is a hotty? she's not fat...

gross.

etc

The Thin Red Line is IMHO one of the worst movies I've ever seen.

Rushmore? Ugh.

I guess I'm just a plebe--I liked SPR, still do. I liked LA Confidential, still do.

Goodfellas, no thank you.

wumpus said:

"I never said attractive and chunky were mutually exclusive."

Nobody has said that you said that, but that doesn't change the fact that attractive or no, Kate Winslet is definitely not chunky. "Chunky" implies slightly overweight, which she isn't, unless you are measuring against the bulemic and unrealistic standard of movie stars, models, and Barbie dolls.

-Ben

"war movies i really liked, were Big Red One, Cross of Iron, Platoon"

My favorite "war" movie is Kelly's Heroes. Granted it's not so much a war movie as a movie set during a war, but I just love that film. I also really liked Three Kings, I guess sort of along the same lines. When Three Kings was being marketed I kept thinking it was just going to be a ripoff of Kelly's Heroes. It was gratifying to find that it was a wonderful film on its own.

As for the message from "Lando" two messages above this one...let me guess how you felt about Hannibal. You loved it, right?

Amanpour

I think I'm one of the few people who enjoyed Hannibal. People went in expecting it to actually be "Silence of the Lambs II," which it definitely isn't. It just happens to have the same characters. Hell, I read the book before seeing the movie, and still thought it was a great flick - not as good as SOTL, but good nonetheless.

Ah war movies...

I liked SPR and Braveheart (though that year I thought Rob Roy was superior (Rob Roy is not a war movie of course)). Glory is grand and Gettysburg is a fond part of my collection. Brannaugh's Henry V is fantastic. MASH and Full Metal Jacket, of course.

I loathed The Patriot.

Hmmm... seems I haven't seen that many war movies.

Andrew

I hated the historical liberties that they took in the Patriot, just to make the villains seem more evil and make the movie "more exciting" (as though the revolutionary war isn't already exciting enough without dressing it up).

That bothered me in Braveheart, too, although they did it less there, and the overall movie was much better.

The Patriot... blah... There's some good scenes, but most of the stuff they cut that's on the DVD is stuff I would have left in. Though it's not surprising, the film is directed by Roland "chop chop" Emmerich who is best known for Stargate, Godzilla and Independence Day. All movies where the editing is just atrocious and apparently he puts his hand into it pretty deeply.

His films always have appealing concepts that fall apart in execution IMO. So much so that I'm always unoptimistic when I watch one of his movies.

--Dave

---

Quote:

His films always have appealing concepts that fall apart in execution IMO. So much so that I'm always unoptimistic when I watch one of his movies.

---

---

Quote:

Bub: Gettysburg is a fond part of
my collection.

---

Ha!
Yeah, the fake beards and all the portly reinactors "portraying" starving Confederates. Jeff Danial's moustache also deserved an award. I actually think that one was real!
Yikes!
If so, that's more impressive than DeNiro's Raging Bull weight gain and Hank's weight loss put together!

-Andrew

---

Quote:

Unoptimistic? You pessimist. (Where'd you find that word? Unoptimistic?)

---

---

Quote:

Yeah, the fake beards and all the portly reinactors "portraying" starving Confederates.

---

"Add 2001 to that list. To address a point later made, about what ended up winning, 2001 lost to Oliver! (the exclaimation point is part of the title). I've never even heard of the damn movie. "

I gotta argue this one. I watch Oliver! every year. It's fun, and chicks dig it. I only watch 2001 as an alternative to prescription sleep aids. Revolutionary doesn't count for much without entertainment value behind it, I think. I did like 2010, though. Kind of uplifting, the way it took everything from hoplessness to a bright future.

Hey, Jeff, I know what you mean about the hippies and Forrest Gump. I just chalked Jennie's involvement with them up to the fact that they were, by definition, an easy culture, dedicated to equality, free love (mmm...free love), and smoking really, really large doobies. Most other groups would be too uptight for someone as messed up as that girl's character was. But the hippies would have taken a (flawed) hep chick hottie like her right in. I didn't think it made hippies look bad, it just showed them for what they were-an easy culture to penetrate.

Or so it seemed in my optimistic little world...

"I only watch 2001 as an alternative to prescription sleep aids."

Gotta agree with kazz on this one. 2001 is one of those films that is eminently frustrating to me. I try to watch it from time to time and it drives me nuts. I get a lot of it, meaning I get what all of the fuss is about in places, but there are stretches of time when I just want scream because it gets so self-indulgent. Oof.

I watch it every few years because I feel I should, and I hope that somehow I have changed enough to finally be able to find it as brilliant as everybody else says they do. This has yet to work. I've even seen it on the big screen (Cinerama Dome in Hollywood) to no avail.

Oh well. I guess there's always The Black Hole.

Amanpour

---

Quote:

I've even seen it on the big screen (Cinerama Dome in Hollywood) to no avail.

---

Saw Almost Famous last night. It was a worthy Oscar Nominee IMO. It's an enjoyable light hearted film about Rock and Roll. The performances were excellent and I thought the story was a timeless coming of age kind of thing. It put a big goofy grin on my face. Billy Crudup was right on as the brooding guitar god. Cameron Crowe has a fantastic ability to make simple moments in life stand out as life changing events. I also liked how real the characters seemed. There wasn't any Hollywoodizing of their personas.

I suppose if you've ever been in a band or hung around one for a long period of time you'll get more out of it. But it's still just about right. I also thought it was cool to see how much game journalism seems like rock journalism. Except without the sex, drugs and rock and roll of course... :)

--Dave

Hurm...
I dunno about the rest of the "game journalists" out there but my life is filled with sex and rock n' roll. (I've got a wife AND an MP3 player!)
But the drugs are all prescriptions nowadays and you just can't compare the highs of mary jane or shrooms with the comforts of Prilosec and Nasonex.

Man, I do wish I had a "deflowered" by a horde of groupies" moment in a hotel room memory though.
(And at that protagonists age we are talking about a "moment" here.)

Aw. Fuck Cameron Crowe.

-Andrew

Andrew said:

---

Quote:

But the drugs are all prescriptions nowadays and you just can't compare the highs of mary jane or shrooms with the comforts of Prilosec and Nasonex.

---

---

Quote:

Parents out there should be able to
appreciate this: These days the drug I'm happy to
have around the house is Benadryl.

---

Well, hopefully, Bernie isn't giving his toddler shots of Benadryl. Hear that Bernie? Save that stuff for yourself!