Will someone help understand?

I'm starting to think that the writers here don't know what TP is.

Anyways, Assassination of Jesse James is a must have for me, already picked up the new SE of Wall Street and Midnight Express, and I'm curious enough about The Brave One to give it a shot, but everyone I know who saw it and enjoyed it said the ending pretty much betrayed the whole rest of the film, so see how that goes I guess. Crimson Tide is another fun film, with a great ensemble cast, but again, already own it. Oh, and I thought Elizabeth: TGA sucked ass personally. Never been a fan of the massively over-rated Tootsie either. Wow, slow week for me, looks like...

this has killed whatever faith I had in Harry. MST3K is fucking brilliant, especially the early Joel portion of the series. To write it off as a "puppet show" displays a dangerous amount of ignorance. BOO!!

Contrary to the Quentin Tarantino school of thought, of which Harry is an obvious disciple, throwing some piece of shit exploitation movie from the 1970's on your shelf based on the cover alone makes you a huge fucking douchebag.

What a fucking tool you are, Harry. I don't think you will ever live down dissing MST3K, one of the most universally (geek universe) loved THINGS, not just series, but THINGS, of all time.

I guess it is just par for the course for the guy who extolled the greatness of HOSTEL II for like half the year.

As for Express, whatever you thought of the film's ending (I'm not disagreeing with you), look at your line in isolation. If you made the ending "a guy escaping from a prison boat" there are probably just as many people that would have found it just as outrageous/ridiculous in the context of the film, whether it was actually true or not. I'd lay a thousand bucks that it would have been ridiculed by the critics for an action ending, and wouldn't have been half the oscar bait it so assuredly was otherwise. Maybe totally unfair and he could have made a harrowing setpiece that would have knocked it out of the park, but I can understand why Parker wouldn't want to end such a heavy film with ostensibly an action setpiece. It's emotional and tonal logic (probably no such term but). Is that fair enough? Like I say, I'm just talking the action ending, not the one we got. Tonal inconsistency is a fair argument in this case. Cheers.

If you're right Zeke, that's some acting! "What, like a Volkswagon?"!

Is it that popular? A one-note joke taken way too far in my books.

That way, EVERYONE'S happy. Right? Right!

I thought JJ was incredible and yes "it wuz robbed". Go the Aussies and so on. And good on Pitt for putting his weight behind a 70s type film that would otherwise never have been made in the first place. If you love it, great. Everyone goes on about how fucked up the Oscars are in the first place. Wasn't Afflek nominated for best supporting? There's your typical Oscars farce right there. There were two lead actors in that thing. Pitt and Affleck. Affleck wasn't a "supporting" actor - but the studio labels him that way because politically it increases their chances for more statues.

Talk about apples and oranges. I also loved Juno (barring the quirkier-than-thou songs), so sue me. I was going to go into why, but there's not much point in justifying it to you, obviously. I don't even know where to begin with your hackneyed assertion that a comedy is inherently worth less than a drama. You're ripping on them for some sort of outrageously subjective process of elimination? Glass houses buddy. Ooh it's all a conspiracy. Ever consider that the thing's release and cut was fucked by its own studio for ages? Why would anybody be surprised if they hardly bothered to submit the thing - maybe screeners barely did go out as you say - so why then aren't you ranting against the studio instead of Juno? What the fuck does Juno have to do with anything? Whatever dude.

I don't think comedy is inherently inferior, I love comedy and think it gets a bad rap come Oscar time. Much worse off than dramas, but to me, comedy classics are films that would never have gotten nominated anyway. Movies like Trading Places or National Lampoon's Vacation, and Planes, Trains, and Automobiles last much longer than the kind of comedy that typically gets nominated and are, I think, pure genius.

What the fuck is it with you Juno fans, anyway? So you like the movie, good for you. I'm happy for you. Does that mean everyone else has to like it? I'm just saying that when it comes to that movie, a LOTTA people are saying the emperor has no clothes. As far as the Oscars go, it just crossed a line that something so obviously as great as Jesse James should be passed over... you're right, it's a failure of the studio, of Brad Pitt, of the academy, and of the media for inserting Juno as the 'Little Miss Sunshine' indie darling that I think we're now supposed to get every year. The studios will happily supply it and the media and the academy will gladly eat it up, whether the film merits it or not (again, subjective, but imho, some things are, empirically, great, and I think Jessa James falls into that category.) They'll eat it up because A)those movies are cheaper to produce and B) if you're the studio that has the one that's just marginally better than all the others, you just boosted your bottom line on DVD sales and Oscar hype. Cause hey... it MUST be that good if such a small movie could compete with NCFOM and TWBB, right?

I believe the same goes for Atonement, which fills in another 'niche' in the Best Picture category and that's sad that it even seems to be going more in that direction every year. Each film that's nominated seems to have to satiate a certain part of the public's appetite for the kinds of films they like. TWBB filled Jesse James slot, and there's just no room for two similar films anymore. Casey Affleck being nominated doesn't make up for shit. So your'e saying fans of the film should be thankful that he was even nominated? As though they're giving such a gift to the film? He SHOULD be nominated and they're the ones who would look like fools if he wasn't.

Lastly... dude... I'm not the only one saying this. Plenty of people agree with what I'm saying, although I'll probably just get attacked some more. Whatever to you too dude.

O.K. - you've got an ensemble cast. In that case you don't (IMO) pick a male and female actor and call them your leads for your campaign at the end of the year. They're all leads if it truly is a balanced ensemble thing. What about something like (the original) Sleuth. Two leads. At least if one was a woman it would some a headache for the studio and the Academy (sarcasm)!

It also shits me that Ratatouille wasn't nominated for best film. Not best animated film, best film period. And here we go again with the semantics - WTF do they mean by best animated feature anyway? Best feature that happens to be animated? Or best achievement in the actual ANIMATION? Because those can be two completely different things. Take Blue Sky for example. They're the only ones who compete quality-wise with Pixar for the skill of the actual animation. But their (Fox-driven) stories are shit. Then you have (this may be a bad example as I haven't seen it yet but will hazard a guess) say, Persepolis. Just say the story is fantastic. It work completely as a film. But the animation isn't particularly skillful and certainly doesn't push any boundaries. Which then would you call "best animated feature"? Same with costume design or art direction. I work in these fields so I'm in NO way saying it' as simple as looking up a textbook. But I'm always offended that sci-fi and fantasy films are inherently more ambitious (due to having to design an aesthetic to start with) in these disciplines and therefore should be considered at least equal if not MORE deserving in some cases than your average period drama. It's called best ACHIEVEMENT in art direction, or costume design or whatever.

Finally, which should have won for best ACHIEVEMENT in visual effects for 99? The Matrix, which had great effects (which were completely in context and in service to storytelling) but whose signature bullet-time effect was a small extension of the frozen moment (and stretched it conceptually no further than the sex scene in Fight Club) which had been around for more than a decade and reportedly more than two. Or Phantom Menace, which similarly didn't' introduce anything new, but combined every existing old-school effect under the sun with every digital one in a display of quality effects magnitude that pushed the whole industry forward (too bad the storytelling was crap). Before I get shit about how 'computery' it all looked I'd be willing to bet most don't realise that they used more miniatures than the first trilogy combined, matte paintings by the truckload and photogrammetry of real miniature landscapes - but combined with a whole bag of innovative digital techniques. I guess the answer all depends on how we (or the Academy) define "achievement".

As for the comedy being "inherently inferior" sorry but when I read your polemic that's how it came across to me. From your second post I can see that's not necessarily how you meant it. Can you see how I got the "shit on one to shine the other" from the initial one? So fair enough.

I will defend Juno in so much as it took on the challenge of numerous character stereotypes but when it came to the crunch turned them on their head by introducing a completely believable twist in perception or honest breakdown of those clichéd traits. Construction and pacing was spot-on too. The initial view of the 'cool' and 'uptight' adoptive parents changes in a perceptive (semantics!) way, and not with some dorky speech. Even Juno when it comes right down to brass tacks doesn't have some pithy or even tear-jerking monologue. She falls apart silently like anyone else in over their head. No fireworks. Sure it was always going to be an indy critical darling but it's a bit kneejerk myopic to hold that against it, and the same goes with the media darling "douchebag writer". Don't confuse the singer with the song. Generally I would run a mile from this kewler-than-thou verbal gymanstic stuff. I'm branded a heretic for saying the Buffy TV show used it as a big-arse crutch. So I was surprised at myself for finding that I felt the smart-arse shtik was a reasonable defence mechanism that fades away when the important stuff kicks in. Just valley girl for the naughties sorta stuff. The music did shit me a bit though. To be brutally honest with you, I don't even remember the Morgan Freeman line, so you may be right there. And I also don't believe that if Codywhatshermadeupname writes shit for the rest of her media spotlight time that it diminishes this film. That's like saying a sequel or remake ruins the original. Moronic. The original is still there. It's still good. The bit about Cody being a douchebag was the other reason I thought you were doing "the kindergarten thing". Who gives a fuck about her tabloid antics, it has nothing to do with the film in isolation. They don't interrupt the flick with ads showing her latest wacky exploits. She doesn't break down the fourth wall with commentary. Let it go man.

Anyway SK if you made it this far and haven't committed seppuku through boredom, I hope I explained things a bit better and hope we can agree to disagree on Juno. And be united in our revulsion for the studio fucking around with JJ for what, over a year? At least we got the Andrew Dominik cut in the end, even if they did disown it come Oscar time. I'm just saying that the Oscars are such a joke these days so don't tear yourself up too much about the injustice. There wasn't much to begin with! Cheers dude.

Bye, bye, HD-DVD.

Long live Blu-ray.