Vescey: What? I used RT ratings for 28 Days Later because Chump change over there said I was an idiot for giving it a B. Then you take three of my favorite movies from this year and compare them to the three LOTR movies. Ok, the LOTR movies had higher percentages of crictics liking them. I respond with the percentages of three of my favorite movies of all time. You "ROFL" because none of them were up for Best Picture? I didn't realize we were still talking about the 2003 Oscars, since you were talking about movies from 2002 and 2001. Just calm down, your movie won Best Picture. Be happy. I'll just light a candle in quiet recognition for the best movie of the year, which wasn't even nominated.
I don't know why you guys still are arguing with Nomar, or taking any of his claims about films too seriously. The issue has long been solved here: Quote: Originally posted by Nomar No, I didn't. So my comments regarding Best Actress were more emotional and irrational than actual informed opinion. So sue me. The rest can be dismissed.
What, we aren't talking about THIS YEAR'S Oscars anymore? Eh... all right. Fine by me. I've made my argument, and I'll leave it as such. *shrug* Rottentomatoes.com and MY favorite movies (besides LOTR): Citizen Kane - 100% (not really my favorite, but I think it's the best ever) Die Hard - 91% Ferris Bueller's Day Off - 90% Patton - 100% Toy Story - 100% The Matrix - 87% (I imagine dialogue probably held it back) Dazed and Confused - 96% Empire Strikes Back - 98% Raiders of the Lost Ark - 96% Not bad. I can't believe the Matrix is in last place on my list...
I don't believe that anyone has mentioned Cidade de Deus (City of God). Whilst I haven't seen all of the films nominated, this was the best of all of the ones I saw. I thought it was too old to be eligible for this year's Oscars, but obviously not. Go and check it out, no big Hollywood names over-acting in this one in an attempt to get best acting nominations.
Now that we are talking oscars again... Anyone who says Peter Jackson doesn´t deserve it for best director is insane! He had 7!! film crews working at a time where normally you have no more than one. That he managed this is a huge accomplishment especially considering the truly unique outcome. No one else should even be considered for that award this year
Actually, there's often a second unit in most Hollywood movies, but yeah, seven is a lot, though I don't know that management skills really factors in to the decision for Best Director, especially since the UPM handles the logistics and heavy lifting of that.
MrPaige.. What you wrote is probably true but he was still personally directing all the crews and that says a lot. He was moving from location to location all the time. His work effort and enthusiasm during the making of the movies is legendary now. If you don´t get the award for best director after making three so big movies when should you ever get it then?? The most obvious choice ever..
Making big movies doesn't guarantee an Oscar. I'm not saying he wasn't a fine choice, but lots of more celebrated directors have never won Best Director (including Martin Scorsese and Alfred Hitchcock, among others). The Best Director award is for artistic achievement. It's not the scope of the movie or how many crews you've got running or how many set-ups you get per day or anything like that. It's for artistic achievement, not for being the best crew manager. And I guarantee that even Jackson himself would give credit to his UPM and ADs in terms of managing the crews. But that's not what the award for Best Director was for.
