February 22, 2013 at 2:57 pm #92232
Sorry if this has been discussed, but it a helluva funny article about a voter and his thoughts on the on films and nominees,,, Read it all!!! 🙂
February 22, 2013 at 3:03 pm #92234
I didn’t like a few of the comments, like on Amour. But I agree with director, the picture choices, and production design. It was nice to see somebody not slobbering all over SLP for once.February 22, 2013 at 3:08 pm #92235
yes, this mysterious director certianlly has a hatred for Amour,,,, this person is very burtal in their opinions, but its funny to see someone who’s not so diplomatic, even if we don’t agree with what he/she is saying,, 🙂Riley (the normal one, not the one who won the predictions contest)ParticipantFebruary 22, 2013 at 4:40 pm #92236
Good read.February 22, 2013 at 6:07 pm #92237
When you start a thread, please make sure there are no mistakes (especially in the title). Makes us all look bad.February 23, 2013 at 5:13 am #92238
I thought this was a brutally-honest funny read at times, but some things about it were annoying:
-His attitude to Quvenzhane Wallis’s name is rude and disrespectful. Though to be fair, he does go on to give a valid reason as to why he’s not voting for her.
-He immediately dismisses Christoph Waltz, saying that he can’t vote for him because he’s really a co-lead with Jamie Foxx. However, he then goes on to say he has no problem with voting for Hoffman in supporting, because if you get out a stopwatch it’s clear that The Master is really Joaquin Phoenix’s movie. That may be true, but by the same logic, isn’t Django Unchained Foxx’s movie? So his logic didn’t really make any sense there…
-His comments about Jennifer Lawrence’s SNL monologue. Completely irrelevant. Though to be fair, he does say he was on the fence anyway, and clearly preferred Chastain’s performance more.
Other than that, an interesting read to say the least…It was interesting to see that for best picture, you can leave the rest of the slots empty if you want. I wonder how many other voters were aware they could do that too?February 23, 2013 at 5:58 am #92239
Lol i love this ballot! and i do agree that Chastain will be the actress who in 20 years will have 10+ nominations.February 23, 2013 at 6:03 am #92240
I though Riva’s performance was great but Amour was so freaking boring! I still don’t understand why people believe that Jen’s performance was better than Riva’s, Chastains, or Watts.February 23, 2013 at 10:38 am #92241
“Brutally honest”? Well, I agree with some of his votes; sound(s), cin. But this is an indication of the guy’s brain imo:” Beasts of the Southern Wild is a movie that I just didn’t understand” LOLOL!!!!
I’d rather live in the Bathtub than have dinner with this guy.February 23, 2013 at 4:40 pm #92242
This article is interesting because it shows how much less a voter thinks about these races than we do. Heck, this guy voted for Animated Short without seeing any of the nominees.
Also, sometimes the justifications for voting for some categories can be so arbitrary. Emmanuelle Riva because she might die soon even though he hated her movie. He thought “Lincoln” was a bore but he wants to give Spielberg his due because of the good he does for Hollywood.
He also seems to have some “Argo” fatigue, and I wonder how much of that might have gone around. There are more and more precursors every year, and more of them were given to just one movie than has happened in a long time, maybe ever. “Argo” has been discussed as this year’s consensus choice, but if you’re one of those people who liked but didn’t love “Argo” (one of those people who might have ranked it #2 or #3 and helped it to win that way) and you’re wondering, “Yes, but why is it winning everything?” you might be less likely to mark it down in #2 or #3, or — like the guy in this article — you might leave it off your ballot altogether and replace it with something like “Lincoln” or “Life of Pi,” a movie that maybe doesn’t have as much passion but is respected and doesn’t have anything to show for it this season.
Then again, if this guy’s logic is any indication, maybe some people will vote for “Argo” because they like Ben Affleck’s hair, or “Life of Pi” because of the pretty colors. I really hope most voters are more thoughtful than this guy. But maybe they aren’t, because they don’t have to be.February 23, 2013 at 5:27 pm #92243
I certainly would hope this person is a rarity, as
far as voters go. I thought the piece
was funny but also kind of disheartening.
While its ‘just an award’, people work their whole careers and to be recognized
I think is an honor and important to them.
This persons reason for voting the way he/she is, is absurd and after I
read it I was hoping it was an “Onion” type of story.
Who knows what is in the voter’s minds. For
instance, I think if you vote, it SHOULD be for who you believe is the most
outstanding of the year, and not for the person who’s never won (or the
reverse, not voting for someone who’s won before), or who you personally like,
or ‘who’s turn’ it is, or a ‘make-up’ vote or as Tom would say, the ‘babe
factor’ (which by the way, I adore Tom but one of the few things I disagree
with him on is the supposed babe factor theory lol). And what is HORRIBLE, IMO, if people vote and
haven’t even watched the film/show/ performance. Talk about dishonesty and abuse of your
Daniel,,, tonight, someone put up a link in the chatroom while ya’ll were doing
the podcast. It was about how the Ex-Canada
ambassador, as well as former President Carter, weren’t too impressed with the depiction
of the Canadians involvement. I hadn’t heard any of this – Im not old enough to
have lived through it and I know very little of the events to have an educated
opinion on the matter. Have you heard of this supposed controversy? Thanks and thanks for replying earlier! J
February 24, 2013 at 8:37 am #92244
The writer of this article is such an ass-hat. He clearly didn’t do his research.
My main gripe is his lack of understanding of Beasts of the Southern Wild. I get that it’s stupid to react over someone disagreeing with your taste, but you know what? Fuck him. First of all, it really is not that complicated of a film. What is there to get? It’s a beautiful film that expounds on the universe in a microcosm. It turns squalor into true beauty. I mean, for goodness sake. You dumb fuck. Q. Wallis was five when she put in her work, not nine. The whole point of the performance is to be childlike and immature. If he had ACTUAL reasoning behind disliking the film, something intelligent maybe, rather than just being an ignorant piece of crap, then I would understand. But no. “I don’t get it.” I don’t get you, sir. I don’t get how you can make a living being stupid, and getting away with being such a stupid waste of space.
That being said, I do agree with a lot of what he says. So… we really are a divided nation.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.