Forum Replies Created
February 15, 2019 at 1:48 pm #1202777765
I actually loved the pictures of her at the U.S.-Mexican border. After this campaign is long gone, she’ll have this semi-topical photo spread to look back on.February 15, 2019 at 7:25 am #1202777250
Not that this matters in terms of Oscar race, but found it interesting that the NAACP Image Awards nominated: Amandla Steinberg (The Hate U Give); Constance Wu (Crazy Rich Asians); Kiki Layne (If Beale Street Could Talk); Viola Davis (Widows); and Sanaa Lathan (Nappily Ever After) but not critics favorite Regina Hall for (Support the Girls).February 14, 2019 at 2:47 pm #1202776358
False equivalency.February 14, 2019 at 12:53 pm #1202776276
The issue is that I’m actually reading what you’re writing and quoting you verbatim.February 14, 2019 at 12:30 pm #1202776264
Honey there’s nothing “angry” about my previous post and I didnt use the literal meaning of runner up which I very clearly explained but you and the other cunt made an attempt to be funny and troll so now you gotta own it, stop playing the victim.Pasive agressive people is truly the worse huh…
Just cause a song is second doesn´t mean it´s literally a runner up.No other song apart from Shallow is in the run anymore, it´s already a lock because no one is demanding and expecting the rest of the songs to win while Bradley deserving best actor is a pretty popular opinion in here so don´t be surprised to see it as an upset in this forum.
The only person playing victim is you after people were confused by your usage of the word “runner-up” and posted about how everyone was trying to troll you “for likes” indicating you think there’s some group out to get you. Look at your disproportionate reactions to these posts. You already lost it. What’s the purpose of telling people they’re going on ignore if you don’t actually ignore what people are saying?February 14, 2019 at 11:15 am #1202776141
I was having a rational conversation and that user instead of keeping it that way started trolling and you are doing the same so fuck you and stop bothering me.It’s really sad that you only post in here to troll, it adds nothing to the conversation.
You were not having a rational discussion. You were getting angry about some people, rightly or wrongly, saying that Black Panther song may have a chance of winning. Then things escalating and you started calling people names like “cunt”. You were not responding rationally any further and then you didn’t understand what the word “runner-up” meant. My post was just a response explaining why there was such a violent reaction to people simply saying why they think Shallow may not win even though it’s the heavy favorite and pretty much a lock. Then you went all crazy on me telling me to have better reading comprehension. I think I read you just fine which is why you responded with a “fuck you” even though you were the one who got all aggressive while acting like people are trolling you when they’re just responding to what you actually wrote. Anyway, I thought you had me on ignore.February 14, 2019 at 10:37 am #1202776083
I´ll put you on ignore too because I literally talk about every category of the oscars on this forum but everytime I touch something my fave is on you start discrediting and censoring me as if I couldn´t have a subjective opinion hence why I insult you.Stop being a fucking pain in the ass piece of shit xoxo Joanne
That’s because you go off the deep end when it comes to that and start losing it. In other categories, you seem ok.February 14, 2019 at 10:02 am #1202776031
The discussion wasnt even about Shallow why do you have to be so fucking stupid? Take a fucking class of reading comprehension before trying to be shady because you fucking suck at it XOXO Joanne
Everybody knows what this is really about so don’t act like you have anyone fooled, especially when you sign a post off with “Joanne”. If I need to take a reading comprehension class, then you need to to go back to school and learn some vocabulary and add in some anger management courses.February 14, 2019 at 7:53 am #1202775917
2009: Avatar; The Hurt Locker; Inglorious Basterds; Precious: Based on the Novel ‘Push’ by Sapphire; and Up in the Air
with maybe The Blindside getting a surprise nomination because it would be one of those WTF choices that they make some times.
2010: Black Swan; The Fighter; Inception; The King’s Speech; and The Social Network
2011: The Artist; The Descendants; The Help; Hugo; Midnight in Paris
with The Tree of Life or Moneyball possibly sneaking in over Hugo and The Help or Midnight in Paris.
2012: Amour; Argo; Life of Pi; Lincoln; Silver Linings Playbook
with Zero Dark Thirty or even Les Miserables (considering what a box office hit it was) sneaking in over any four not Argo.
2013: 12 Years a Slave; American Hustle; Gravity; Nebraska; and The Wolf of Wall Street
2014: American Sniper (steak eaters); Birdman or (The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance); Boyhood; The Grand Budapest Hotel; and Whiplash
with The Imitation Game and The Theory of Everything possibly getting in because it hits all Oscar bait points.
2015: The Big Short; Mad Max: Fury Road; The Revenant; Room; and Spotlight
I usually wouldn’t put Mad Max in here, but it won so many Oscars that it leads me to believe there was a whole lot of Academy support to make it go over the top to receive a nomination. As much as I loved Brooklyn, I don’t think it had a chance.
2016: Hacksaw Ridge; Hidden Figures; La La Land; Manchester by the Sea; and Moonlight
2017: Darkest Hour; Get Out; Lady Bird; The Shape of Water; and Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri.
It was between Darkest Hour and Phantom Thread for me, and I just chose what seems to be more up Oscar’s alley.
2018: Um, this one is actually pretty hard.
BlacKkKlansman; Bohemian Rhapsody; The Favourite; Green Book; and Roma
I can see Vice sneaking in there with its Best Director nomination and Black Panther too with its populous appeal and narrative. I actually had a hard time taking A Star is Born out but I think it wouldn’t have both Bohemian Rhapsody and A Star is Born if there was only 5 and it seems Bohemian Rhapsody has more support and fans.February 14, 2019 at 7:29 am #1202775899
I’m chilling, just that some of y’all get your panties in a bunch when users discuss an upset in Best Original Song.
That’s probably because they already dealt with some trauma with how the Best Actress race evolved from pre-Golden Globes to now and can’t even entertain the idea of “Shallow” losing.February 13, 2019 at 9:12 pm #1202775420
@SHTL you are right. Colman was good and all that. But it is so unfair they will deny Close for the 7th time and (3 or 4 time she was really deserving.) It’s not like Frances McDormand was showy last year. She was as subtle as Close. The showiest was Robbie and yet she lost. Even Hawking did a better job that McDormand. If we go on that basis, Colman has no right winning. But Glenn did That. She acted her ass off to be able to do what she did. There are showier performances that lost. So Colman wouldn’t be the first.
To me, McDormand just became this juggernaut and a way to reward Three Billboards. She cursed and had major grief, but she showed that through revenge and anger. There were some scenes that showed her vulnerability like the doing voices with her slippers scene. I think what did it was that her character was so active throughout the movie and propelled that story. Then she got her own learning arc through the ending with Sam Rockwell where one can argue both characters grew and maybe went past their initial stages.
Close’s character is a bottle of decades old resentment and anger (that older people will truly understand but younger people may not) she didn’t quite understand she had or why she had it since it was her plan or wasn’t particularly ambitious/or knew the degree in which she had that anger and resentment until the Nobel Prize hoopla made it all come out and then that rage was channeled towards her husband and let out the end. But then afterwards she went back to being a loving wife protecting her husband’s legacy publicly in a way that I bet confused a lot of people (but I think a lot would have understood why). She does get an ending where her character may start taking back some of her autonomy and power but it’s not really a “here I am moment” but more of a “ok, I can start small and go from there while protecting my husband’s legacy and letting him be what people thought he was.”February 13, 2019 at 9:01 pm #1202775398
https://www.esquire.com/uk/culture/a26301822/why-an-oscar-win-for-olivia-colman-would-be-the-academys-best-decision-in-years/ Fuck the media. They been pushing for Gaga, but now that she ain’t winning shit, they trying to push for that Old British Bitch. She ain’t winning nothing. I swear to God this old ugly ass Woman is winning nothing. Sorry but I got to let it out.
There’s no need to trash Colman. This article by Brit version Esquire is just run-of-the-mill badly thought out campaign material. It may work and maybe other people feel the same way. However, the talk about “old guard” sounds ageist (make room for young talent!) which was borrowed from some Lady Gaga fans. Going into her background is just irrelevant but part of the campaign. Glenn Close has enjoyed similar write-ups like the LA Times article that said Close shouldn’t win just because she’s overdue but because her performance in The Wife is deserving but went ahead and still summarized her background, career, and impact. You shouldn’t take it so seriously. It’s just campaigning.
I think you’re starting to believe Colman is going to win which is why you’re reacting this way. If she does, so what. Close will be fine. Two to three people in this thread will gloat about it and say “I told you so” but we all know their “victory” is hollow because they didn’t do anything to achieve this result and bashing Close and seeing her lose doesn’t make their lives any better. Some of them who jumped on the Colman train after targeting Close as public enemy no. 1 (you know who you are) will find out Colman winning won’t fill the emptiness that will happen due who they truly wanted to win losing because they were so heavily emotionally invested in that person winning and beating other pop divas.February 13, 2019 at 8:53 pm #1202775386
https://www.latimes.com/entertainment/envelope/la-en-mn-oscars-ballots-how-they-voted-20190213-story.html 3/4 voters here said they’re voting for Olivia Colman.
What they said about Olivia Colman covering all the bases and showing range is why Glenn Close said she didn’t think “Joan Castleman” was an Oscar-baity role. It really isn’t. Performances that forces actors to show emotional range in obvious ways tend to win Oscars while performances that are more deeply into single-tone even if done well and showing depth into it don’t tend to capture as many voters because they want to see a role where a character laughs, cries, acts fun, acts serious, etc. There’s always a bias against performances that don’t do that. 2012 is the perfect example. That’s why Gaga was hyped up so much. That role was written to attract what Oscar voters like. She got to act insecure, happy, frustrated, scream, punch people, enjoy highs, be insecure again, and deal with tragedy and through song. I wasn’t very convinced by her performance but on paper it was made for awards.
The above is no knock on Colman who I think did a masterful performance and had such pitch perfect line delivery with the best facial expressions to go with it. I would be so happy if Colman won even if my heart really wants Close to win for a myriad of reasons, including getting a role that isn’t the most Oscar baity to win.