But isn't he just the type of guy that can help force out the "old school" mindset, and have the whole industry stop taking itself so seriously? For somebody who was as incensed as you were, you should favor the oscars attempt to be more current, younger, and have no fear about offending the old establishments. Also, I'm pretty sure he knew the Lincoln joke would not go over well... hence the follow up "Oh c'mon! that happened 150 years ago... and its still too soon?" I thought that was actually funnier than the original line.
Whoa, whoa, whoa. Not "incensed", really. I just don't think a President killed by a head shot is appropriate for a joke, especially in that setting. I'd be the first to say that the Oscars are covered with barnacles and crust, and personally I would have loved Eddie Murphy as a host. But it wasn't to be. And when Oscar tries to go "current, younger", whatever, they screw up and wind up with an Anne Hathaway/James Franco debacle. I just don't think they know how to do it.
Agreed...wayyyy better than Franco/Hathaway last year...Don't think he'll be back next year, but who else?
besides flight and wreck it ralph if you had to pick three oscar related films i should see what would you choose.
open letter to Ang Lee from vfx artist http://vfxsoldier.wordpress.com/2013/02/24/an-open-letter-to-ang-lee/
Maybe you should learn terms like "fictionalization" and "dramatic license." While you gain the understanding of those terms, try to sort out the differences between a fictionalized movie and a documentary. FYI, Spielberg (or rather his screenwriter, Tony Kushner) did take creative licenses with Lincoln. Where to begin: 1) Mary Todd Lincoln never went to the house gallery to observe the passage of amendments. 2) Congressmen in 1865 did not vote by state as they do in the film, but alphabetically. 3) Lincoln's face did not appear on 50-cent currency (not seen, but referred to in the film) until 4 years AFTER his death. 4) Photographer Alexander Gardner never gave young Tad Lincoln any of his (quite valuable) glass plates. 5) All 4 of Connecticut's congressmen voted for the passing of the 13th amendment, despite the film showing two of them (rather dramatically) voting against it. Kushner stated in a letter to the Wall Street Journal that having those two members vote no gave the movie "dramatic tension." 6) There is ample evidence to prove that the amendment never was nor would've been referred to as "The 13th Amendment" back then! There are surely more, but those are the first 6 that a Google search could quickly get me. For the record, I loved both Lincoln and Argo (**** yourself!). But please, don't knock a Picasso because the eyes are not symmetrical. Don't criticize a Van Gogh because the starry night sky doesn't really have any deep dramatic brush strokes running across it in swirls. Don't hate on Inglourious Basterds because it didn't end with Hitler committing suicide in his bunker. Instead, understand the artist as well as the art and take a movie for what it is: two-ish hours of pictures of people pretending to be other people flashing before your face at a rapid speed. Enjoy them or not based on their artistic merit and not their factual accuracy, unless of course you're watching one of those "documentary" things I mentioned.
O'Bannion is no Picasso. Hell, he ain't even "Hook' level Spielberg. More like a poor mans Sydney Pollack. A very poor mans Sydney Pollack. Except Sydney was a better actor. Real talk son.
I'm not comparing Ben Affleck to Picasso or anyone else. I'm not even comparing one person's art to another person's art, for that matter. I'm simply comparing the criticism and study of a creative work to the criticism and study of a creative work. It's perfectly reasonable to dislike the movie on its artistic merits (or lack thereof in your opinion), but not on its factual accuracy when it presents itself as a fictionalized account of true events.
There's nothing interesting about this. They are picking on the wrong person and Ang Lee have nothing to do with it. Don't blame Ang Lee for low balling your price to compete against other bigger SFX company to get the gig and I'm pointing the fingers at R&H. I'm sure R&H got hired for $30 Mil and took the rest and paid their employees peanuts. Declare for bankruptcy so that they can keep the rest of the money to themselves and layoff they workers. What us little employees need in the SFX industries is a ****ing UNION!!
All I saw was the opening monologue and I liked it. I don't much care for Macfarlane (I couldn't even watch the commercials for Ted it looked so bad), but from what I've read about his hosting I liked it. See, for example, this article about his supposedly horrible sexist jokes, which I find to be hilarious: http://shine.yahoo.com/fashion/not-...anks-to-host-seth-macfarlance--155352960.html
The guy was really mad b/c Ang Lee didn't mention R&H in his award speech. Yeah sounds like R&H biz people didn't come out with a good deal and the biilable time they put in went over the buget. I can understand the frustration, but picking on Ang Lee ???, unless I miss something.
I'm sure they are pissed that Ang Lee took the foreign film subsidies. Can't blame the Ang Lee for doing it since FOX was cancelling the film because it was too expensive. R&H I don't know exactly their problem but I would like to see the money numbers that they got from FOX. I'm sure most of the people that are being let go at R&H are rotoscoping artist. That kind of work(rotoscoping) green/blue screen or cleaning the plates can easily be done in India for way cheaper. The problem right now is that there are so many SFX houses out there that are low balling to get the job. When you can find someone for cheaper and does the same kind of skill(s) you are going to lose out no matter what. I'v been in this business and it really suck and there's nothing you can do about it. That's why I have quit and start working for myself and learning something new like programming to go with my CGI skill sets.
This is what needs to be done. VFX Vet Scott Ross: 'A Trade Association Has to Be Put Together' http://effectscorner.blogspot.ca/2012/08/visual-effects-trade-association.html#.US11OYDWd7o
