HelloAngel
ONE love, blood, life
The point Diamond was making was that Catherine is an example wife for women worldwide to copy in order to keep their husbands happy.
mad1 said:if anything Im really really happy for the couple!
They love each other and respect each other, I dont know why pple fuss!
Im very happy for them, and hope Catherine gives birth to a healthy baby!
Oh and how cool was it to see father and son on stage together!!!!
cloudimani said:
I'm so sick of all the hype surrounding Chicago, there were 4 much better films nominated for the Best Picture award. But Chicago is an obvious, easy and uncontroversial choice, showing the Academy are as predictable as ever, and displaying their biases against certain types of films.
i know. it wouldn't have mattered if it had been bono up there blabbering about them winning the oscar for best song, i hate it when people (especially when it's their first nomination!) suddenly think they're so important that they can control when the show will go on. he sounded so humble at the beginning of his speech it made me happy for him, that as he got seemingly cockier throughout the speech, i was hoping he'd fall as he walked away from the podium or something.LarryMullen's_POPAngel said:Adrien Brody is hot, but he went on way too long. And actors who think they're too important to get cut off at the 45 seconds annoy the hell out of me. Like, get off the stage already.
yeah. i'm if anything shocked by eminem winning just because i thought he'd be the one who surely wouldn't win. i mean, after them asking him to tone it down, and then him saying he just won't come at all, i thought for sure that in addition to all the other controversy surrounding him that surely he wouldn't win. i guess i consider myself a fan, although i must admit this isn't one of my favourite songs. he's made better.LarryMullen's_POPAngel said:I'm really disgusted by the Eminem and Roman Polanski wins. When the academy chooses to award a known gay/women/etc. basher and a child molester, that's when I have to take a step back.
KhanadaRhodes said:as for roman, as someone else said, it really isn't right to mix personal opinions with business. but, didn't he drug and rape her? if anything, i just think he's a fucking asshole and a coward, for doing it, and for fleeing the country. i was so hoping when he won that he would show up to accept it, so he could get arrested. i'd feel that way about anyone who did such a thing, regardless of their fame. i didn't see the movie, so i have no idea how great it is really.
Bono's shades said:Maybe instead of mailing Polanski his Oscar they should tell him if he wants it he can come to L.A. to get it.
mad1 said:
I did too think U2 had it......but just because they didnt get it, doesnt mean they didnt win according to us lot here at Interland, right?
Originally posted by cloudimani
I'm so sick of all the hype surrounding Chicago, there were 4 much better films nominated for the Best Picture award. But Chicago is an obvious, easy and uncontroversial choice, showing the Academy are as predictable as ever, and displaying their biases against certain types of films.
Likewise there were better nominees for Supporting Actress, I'm not quite sure how bad singing from a frankly mediocre actress is enough to win the award.
The_Sweetest_Thing said:
How is Chicago's win predictable? By honouring a musical, as opposed to a drama, the academy went against precident. Moulin Rouge, also a musical, did not win last year. The past winners have all been dramas; A Beautiful Mind, Gladiator, American Beauty, Shakespeare in Love (sort of a comedy), Titanic, The English Patient, Braveheart, Schindler's List. How does Chicago follow any pattern here? Why does the best picture have to be controversial? Can a great film not just be appreciated for being a feel-good movie? In the age of Prozac and Valium can we not appreciate the value of a laugh or a song?
Granted, I believe the bias was shown toward Scorcese. However, I don't think that Chicago is really as bad as you make it sound.
As for Catherine, I haven't found any flaw with her performance. Her singing was/is phenomenal. Trust me. I've worked with dancers/singers/actresses before--Catherine's vocal performance was outstanding. Her live talents, as evidenced by last night, show that she is no 'fluke' but rather, quite a talented woman. You know of other Hoolywood stars (save Bebe Neuwirth) who really could have done better, and pulled it off with that much class?
The_Sweetest_Thing said:
How is Chicago's win predictable? By honouring a musical, as opposed to a drama, the academy went against precident. Moulin Rouge, also a musical, did not win last year. The past winners have all been dramas; A Beautiful Mind, Gladiator, American Beauty, Shakespeare in Love (sort of a comedy), Titanic, The English Patient, Braveheart, Schindler's List. How does Chicago follow any pattern here? Why does the best picture have to be controversial? Can a great film not just be appreciated for being a feel-good movie? In the age of Prozac and Valium can we not appreciate the value of a laugh or a song?
Granted, I believe the bias was shown toward Scorcese. However, I don't think that Chicago is really as bad as you make it sound.
As for Catherine, I haven't found any flaw with her performance. Her singing was/is phenomenal. Trust me. I've worked with dancers/singers/actresses before--Catherine's vocal performance was outstanding. Her live talents, as evidenced by last night, show that she is no 'fluke' but rather, quite a talented woman. You know of other Hoolywood stars (save Bebe Neuwirth) who really could have done better, and pulled it off with that much class?
cloudimani said:
Of course its predictable, I would've bet my house on it. Its exactly the sort of film the Academy will favour, not because its a musical, but because of the style in which its made, and the people involved in making it. Its glitzy, its glamourous, its feel-good, the Academy love this stuff. I'm not saying its a bad film, just that ALL of the other nominees were better films. Most real film fans would agree with me
LarryMullen's_POPAngel said:Adrien Brody is hot
IWasBored said:i'm too lazy to read the whole thread, i don't know if someone answered this, a bunch of people were wearing the same pin brody has on his lapel. was there some significance to it?
Anthony said:1) I thought Michael Moore's outburst was distasteful. It is true, you are free to say whatever you want and Lord knows I don't support the war, but there were plenty of other speakers last night who spoke their mind subtly, eloquently and rather movingly, I thought. Michael Moore's outburst was unintelligible, boorish, loud, arrogant and frenzied.
HelloAngel said:
I believe it was an anti-war pin... but I'm not certain.
Mrs. Edge said:Oh...that didn't come out quite right...I didn't mean relate/identify, I meant more "become involved with" or absorbed with the character in some way.
I also wish DDL would grow his hair back....
HelloAngel said:
Maybe I'm on crack rock, but wooo I think he's
The_Sweetest_Thing said:
Academy loves glitzy, glamourous? Look at the past winners:
A Beautiful Mind, Gladiator, American Beauty, Shakespeare in Love, Titanic, The English Patient, Braveheart, Schindler's List. Granted, Gladiator, Shakespeare, Titanic, and maybe Braveheart are BIG movies, large casts, special effects, but glitz and glamour and razzle dazzle? I don't see it.
For the record, just because I enjoyed Chicago and didn't think ALL the nominees were better films (maybe some, not all) doesn't mean that 'm not a 'real' film fan. We can have varied tastes and opinions, but still be educated, intelligent, informed, critical, 'real' movie fans.