#1  
Old 02-24-2013, 11:35 PM
The Oscars show SUCKS!

That's it. I am done. No more award shows of any kind anymore. I quit all the others years ago. This is the old fuck award show. The only reason I watched was because of seth macfarlane. Every good joke he made was like a shock and awe event. "How can he say that?" "Oh NO he did not!" Seth was not all that bad. The opening just sucked though. I was not amused by that whole Captain Kirk bit. This whole show is all about old people. I am tired of them honoring all the people that died during the year, most of them you never heard of. That is all old people honoring other old people. The show moves way to slow. They had way too much singing and dancing numbers. Why the fuck were they doing a song from Chicago?????? Why is it that most of the awards were given to those announced last on the list? Why is everyone so stiff? Even McCarthy and Rudd were stiff. Why was Harry Potter and Twilight bitch even there, let alone presenting anything? At the end, Seth made more jokes about how slow or bad or late the show was going. Why do they have so many presenters that have not done anything in years? Why are they using the Forrest Gump suite and Lion King as theme music? I have an idea....... let's use scores from the nominated movies. Silly fucking me. Why so many commercials between every fucking award? Why not change up the order for once? Surprise me dammit.

Good for Quentin. Too bad for Ben Affleck. He should have won. Or been nominated. Nice joke Seth I would like to point out there was a thread about who would win an another oscar first ben or matt. before argo came out, I picked ben.

Last edited by Erroneous; 02-24-2013 at 11:58 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 02-25-2013, 12:10 AM
Everybody always bitches about the Oscars. I'm so glad they've always avoided the temptation of changing the show because of the complaints. I never want it to change.

This year's show was good. Not perfect but still very enjoyable.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 02-25-2013, 08:11 AM
This was the best Oscar ceremony in recent memory. Seth MacFarlane killed it and there were a few good surprises and a few not-so-good surprises, but surprises nonetheless, which is, in and of itself, a nice surprise.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 02-25-2013, 05:20 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by magjournal View Post
This was the best Oscar ceremony in recent memory. Seth MacFarlane killed it and there were a few good surprises and a few not-so-good surprises, but surprises nonetheless, which is, in and of itself, a nice surprise.
Agree
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 02-25-2013, 05:49 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Erroneous View Post
This is the old fuck award show... This whole show is all about old people.
4 of the 8 major category winners were 40 or under, including 22-year-old Best Actress winner Jennifer Lawrence who beat out her 9-year-old competition. The oldest major category winner was 58.

If you're looking for a show that caters to an even younger set, the MTV Movie Awards and Teen Choice Awards may be the events for you.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 02-25-2013, 05:56 PM
Oh man, what a revelation. Next your gonna tell me that SNL isn't funny anymore and hasn't been funny since you were a kid.

Mind=blown


(And I bet Michelle Obama's appearance left you fucking pissed.)
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 02-25-2013, 08:02 PM
I was not going to complain about Michelle Obama, but why the fuck was she giving out a major award?

I know you all just love everything, but most out in the real world echoed by thoughts.

I am sorry Quentin you did not understand what I said. I said nothing about the winners in regards to age. I am happy you all loved it. Sorry to see no one picked up and was annoyed by Seth's constant apologizing for being funny.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 02-25-2013, 09:14 PM
Oh so Michele Obama was there I never thought she would turn up at the awards but l have to say that the Oscars can be,boring and you mostly watch it,if,there good actors being awarded a Oscar,but when they start awarding producer directors and,other half of the time you don't know them Erroneous you had me laughiing at your above post on Michele Obama
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 02-25-2013, 09:31 PM
I am a liberal and even i thought the Michelle Obama cameo was exploitative.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 02-25-2013, 09:50 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by QUENTIN View Post
4 of the 8 major category winners were 40 or under, including 22-year-old Best Actress winner Jennifer Lawrence who beat out her 9-year-old competition. The oldest major category winner was 58.

If you're looking for a show that caters to an even younger set, the MTV Movie Awards and Teen Choice Awards may be the events for you.
ZING! Well said sir, well said.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 02-25-2013, 10:02 PM
Well l think that you could have a variety of ages put in to judge a actors performance and if the judge the have now are over 50they wouldn't be able to look at things like a younger person would yes there award shows that have a younger ausiance but l still think that if the Oscars could get up with thing you would have more wanting to watch from start to finish
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 02-25-2013, 10:36 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Erroneous View Post
I am sorry Quentin you did not understand what I said. I said nothing about the winners in regards to age.
I am sorry that you did not express yourself well if what you meant was not "this is the old fuck award show" and "this whole show is all about old people" since what you said was:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Erroneous View Post
This is the old fuck award show.

This whole show is all about old people.
The fact that the most significant part of the show, the part the Oscar telecast is most about, the awarding of the major prizes, was at least half dedicated to awarding people very few would call "old" (22-40 year olds), there were very young nominees (a 9-year-old), and the oldest major winner was under 60 (which is where most reasonable people would begin to classify someone as "old") contradicts your erroneous assertion that "this whole show is all about old people" whether you actually meant that statement or not.

I thought the show was at least 90 minutes too long, with the Chicago/Dreamgirls/Les Mis numbers, Goldfinger sung in its fucking entirety, and extended Captain Kirk-based opening being the most unnecessary, boring, easily cut segments. It's really galling that they won't give a winner of an Oscar 90 seconds to make a speech because they need to make time for Catherine Zeta-Jones to dance. MacFarlane wasn't particularly good or bad, the hosts are so neutered they can even waste Chris Rock and Jon Stewart. It's hard to remember the last time a host did a great job.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 02-26-2013, 01:53 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by QUENTIN View Post
It's hard to remember the last time a host did a great job.
The last time Billy Crystal hosted.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 02-26-2013, 02:55 AM
I didn't watch it this year but my friends all liked Seth's opening monologue and they thought he did a good job hosting. Overall I was pleased with the results.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 02-26-2013, 03:43 AM
He did an okay job but I do agree with the criticism that his opening act went on way too long.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 02-28-2013, 11:05 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by QUENTIN View Post
I am sorry that you did not express yourself well if what you meant was not "this is the old fuck award show" and "this whole show is all about old people" since what you said was:



The fact that the most significant part of the show, the part the Oscar telecast is most about, the awarding of the major prizes, was at least half dedicated to awarding people very few would call "old" (22-40 year olds), there were very young nominees (a 9-year-old), and the oldest major winner was under 60 (which is where most reasonable people would begin to classify someone as "old") contradicts your erroneous assertion that "this whole show is all about old people" whether you actually meant that statement or not.

I thought the show was at least 90 minutes too long, with the Chicago/Dreamgirls/Les Mis numbers, Goldfinger sung in its fucking entirety, and extended Captain Kirk-based opening being the most unnecessary, boring, easily cut segments. It's really galling that they won't give a winner of an Oscar 90 seconds to make a speech because they need to make time for Catherine Zeta-Jones to dance. MacFarlane wasn't particularly good or bad, the hosts are so neutered they can even waste Chris Rock and Jon Stewart. It's hard to remember the last time a host did a great job.
I guess I expect better from you. My bad. Honestly, I think they do things like nominate a kid as gift or to make it seem like they are trying to give an honest effort. Sad fact is that year after year the same people get noms, because of their name. I look at the show as a whole and not just the best parts at the end.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 03-02-2013, 05:05 AM
Well l have to say that you had three sissies Jackie Weaver Niomi Watts and Hugh jackman at the Oscars l would have thought one of these three should have won but didn't l bet if we went behind the scenes it would be interesting how the judge each celeb
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 03-02-2013, 10:25 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ericdraven View Post
I am a liberal and even i thought the Michelle Obama cameo was exploitative.
Hey man, being liberal has nothing to do with it. I'm a progressive and I can't stand Obama, and I agree, having the FLOTUS present the award when Nicholson was just standing there was kinda lame.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ilovemovies View Post
The last time Billy Crystal hosted.
I thought he was okay. I think after Hathaway and Franco completely bombed, they were looking

Quote:
Originally Posted by Erroneous View Post
I guess I expect better from you. My bad. Honestly, I think they do things like nominate a kid as gift or to make it seem like they are trying to give an honest effort. Sad fact is that year after year the same people get noms, because of their name. I look at the show as a whole and not just the best parts at the end.
It's not just by name. Three of the Best Actress nominees were pretty much newcomers (Wallis, Lawrence, and Chastain), with Riva not so much a newcomer but definitely an unknown to most American audiences. With Best Actor, you've got two first-time nominations for Jackman and Cooper. Granted, it's easy to predict who will get nominated and who will win (for the most part), but I really don't think they're getting picked just 'cuz they've been acclaimed already or are big names.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 03-22-2013, 04:20 AM
After the boobs opening, I'm done with these shows, how tasteless and offensive and they let it happen.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 03-23-2013, 02:11 AM
OSCARS

The Oscars haven't been exciting or relevant since the early 90's, when actors like Pesci, Pacino, Whoopi, Foster/Hopkins & Kathy Bates all won!
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 03-23-2013, 08:05 AM
I have to agree the actors of today don't seem to have much go in them and the movies you think that will win a award seem to be left out in the cold and given to something that is crap
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 03-24-2013, 02:52 AM
I've always found it mind boggling that people bitch about how long the show is. For starters, take out the musical numbers. Why do they insist on peforming all the nominated songs? It's not like votes can be changed at the last minute. Also, even though I'm a Bond fan, when they do tributes and montages like this it just adds to the length. Aside from the In Memorium, all these other segments need to go. The 1 minute clips of the films nominated for best picture, gotta go. One thing I would add back into the show that used to be done back in the day is an award for best child actor. Other than that, there are ways to cut the show down to under 3 hours.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 03-26-2013, 07:47 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by blknge89 View Post
After the boobs opening, I'm done with these shows, how tasteless and offensive and they let it happen.
Yeah so tasteless to talk about women who were forced into doing things they didnt want to. Oh, no, wait, they all made the choice to do so. My bad.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 03-26-2013, 07:55 PM
The show should be two hours, tops. I dont think you can hold anybody's attention for longer. There's like six hours before the show begins where they just talk about what people are wearing, and then the show is like 4 hours at least, and then a wrap thing after and its just like... holy fuck ive been sitting in front of tv since this morning, I dont even care who wins for best sound design anymore.

I know it sucks for people in the technical fields, but you cannot fill two hours with this crap. You could easily have a show that aired online only, featuring all the technical awards and song performances and shit like that. It could even happen at the same time, just not on primetime TV. Then just air the Top 10 categories, keep it under two hours, stop over-producing the shit out of it, and let the presenters be themselves.

They dont even talk about movies anymore. IT's all about fashion and celebrity. Theres no magic of cinema there at all anymore. I mean, honestly, I'd much rather just listen to Kevin Smith podcast for 7 hours because he actually loves movies. I know the people receiving awards do too, but the show itself? Nah, I just dont see it. It's supposed to be a celebration of cinema, and its just not.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 04-07-2013, 08:55 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by adamjohnson View Post
The show should be two hours, tops. I dont think you can hold anybody's attention for longer. There's like six hours before the show begins where they just talk about what people are wearing, and then the show is like 4 hours at least, and then a wrap thing after and its just like... holy fuck ive been sitting in front of tv since this morning, I dont even care who wins for best sound design anymore.

I know it sucks for people in the technical fields, but you cannot fill two hours with this crap. You could easily have a show that aired online only, featuring all the technical awards and song performances and shit like that. It could even happen at the same time, just not on primetime TV. Then just air the Top 10 categories, keep it under two hours, stop over-producing the shit out of it, and let the presenters be themselves.

They dont even talk about movies anymore. IT's all about fashion and celebrity. Theres no magic of cinema there at all anymore. I mean, honestly, I'd much rather just listen to Kevin Smith podcast for 7 hours because he actually loves movies. I know the people receiving awards do too, but the show itself? Nah, I just dont see it. It's supposed to be a celebration of cinema, and its just not.
well said! i agree 100%
Do all the tech awards as the main people are walking the red carpet and pick a 5 min part in the middle when you annouce who won and a couple clips or pictures getting the award.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump