Author Topic: Coulter Oscar predictions (Read 5856 times)

Sandman · « **Reply #105 on:** March 08, 2006, 11:51:28 PM »

Oh no. You said, "The true indicator of a good film is how much $ it makes by people willing to fork over money to see it. That is the only test of popularity that counts."

Using the same logic, one can say that rap is good music simply because it's popular.

My point is that popularity is not necessarily a good indication of quality or even talent.

The same can be said for movies. IMHO most of the really bad movies are those that are made purely for profit.

There are some well made movies that aren't enjoyable to watch. There are also some crap movies that are great fun. I think the very best movies are those that manage to be both enjoyable and skillfully crafted.

Ever wonder why no one makes a big deal about the "People's Choice Awards"? Popularity means dick.

Leslie · « **Reply #106 on:** March 09, 2006, 06:12:24 AM »

You know, an enterprising and entreprenurial mind could probably take lemons and turn them into lemonade by starting up the "Artsy Fartsy Theater" shown late on Saturday nights. In it would be shown artsy films with off-the-wall commentary by the film audience, like with that sci-fi series making fun of B movies. Can't remember what it's called, but it was pretty darned funny.

This concept could actually be fun...and educational too.

I mean, if the idea is to make these films popular, then a lot of people have to see them, nay, look forward to watching them. Think how many of those films there are out there, that many people haven't seen. Let these films stand on their own merits. If it's a bad film, then more off-the-wall commentary is interjected.

This is something the artsy film makers might allow if they had confidence in their films. Many would take offense at critique, their serious films might be made fun of. So permission would have to be granted with full undertanding this might happen. Have to have a thick skin for sure, but if it made people laugh it would be a service to humanity. And it would make the films more widely seen, at least the good ones.

Les

lazs2 · « **Reply #107 on:** March 09, 2006, 08:10:08 AM »

I guess you would have to consider who is buying along with popularity. The vast majority of people don't buy any CD music anymore. It is a very few buying a lot of music that makes rap profitable... It would be like 5 million gays all going to brokebutt mountain 10 times each.

The director in question isn't even very good.... look at all the bombs he makes. Ride with the devil was the only movie he made worth renting. Not even interested in most of his stuff like brokebutt.

momus... to say that hollywood does not have a lot of liberal gay actors, producers and directors and writers... is pretty darn silly... to say that they don't have an agenda is going against the evidence. farenheight 911 got an oscar for "best documentary'?? and all the attention that fat bitter slug got from the effite liberl hollywood crowd?

lazs

EN4CER · « **Reply #108 on:** March 09, 2006, 08:22:05 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Sandman
My point is that popularity is not necessarily a good indication of quality or even talent.

He makes a good point Maverick as do you. Sandman’s statement above can be summed up in two words – PARIS HILTON.

Momus-- · « **Reply #109 on:** March 09, 2006, 09:44:16 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by lazs2
momus... to say that hollywood does not have a lot of liberal gay actors, producers and directors and writers... is pretty darn silly... to say that they don't have an agenda is going against the evidence. farenheight 911 got an oscar for "best documentary'?? and all the attention that fat bitter slug got from the effite liberl hollywood crowd?

Ok, so that's Farenheit 911 and Brokeback Mountain. Two releases out of many hundreds that you claim push a certain agenda.

Two out of many....

So, is that all you've got? That's a pretty weak foundation for an argument..where are the rest? Or are you seriously arguing that two films is a valid basis for asserting the existence of an industry-wide social agenda?

Mighty1 · « **Reply #110 on:** March 09, 2006, 10:23:13 AM »

V for Vendetta = anti-govt
Brokeback Mountan = gays have it rough
16 blocks = cops are bad
Freedomland = white woman are racist
Syriana = America is oil hungry and evil
Transamerica = transexuals are normal
Farenheit 911 = Bush is evil

These are just some of the most recent there are a lot more if you just open yours eyes.

Momus-- · « **Reply #111 on:** March 09, 2006, 10:30:06 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Mighty1
V for Vendetta = anti-govt
Brokeback Mountan = gays have it rough
16 blocks = cops are bad
Freedomland = white woman are racist
Syriana = America is oil hungry and evil
Transamerica = transexuals are normal
Farenheit 911 = Bush is evil

Great, so we go from 2 out of many hundreds to 7 out of many hundreds..good job on still not proving the theory....

Quote

These are just some of the most recent there are a lot more if you just open yours eyes.

A lot more..? Fine, please list them, go ahead..don't be shy..

EN4CER · « **Reply #112 on:** March 09, 2006, 10:30:29 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Mighty1
V for Vendetta = anti-govt
Brokeback Mountan = gays have it rough
16 blocks = cops are bad
Freedomland = white woman are racist
Syriana = America is oil hungry and evil
Transamerica = transexuals are normal
Farenheit 911 = Bush is evil

These are just some of the most recent there are a lot more if you just open yours eyes.

Thankyou. I don't know Mighty1, I'm sure some of don't think there's an agenda against Christmas also.

midnight Target · « **Reply #113 on:** March 09, 2006, 10:36:09 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by lazs2
farenheight 911 got an oscar for "best documentary'?? and all the attention that fat bitter slug got from the effite liberl hollywood crowd?

lazs

No it didn't.

Quote

The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, challenging conventional notions of Tinseltown as a knee-jerk liberal monolith, snubbed "Fahrenheit 9/11," Michael Moore's hostile documentary on President Bush, in this year's Oscar nominations, which were announced yesterday in Beverly Hills, Calif.

http://www.washtimes.com/national/20050126-121303-4575r.htm

Mighty1 · « **Reply #114 on:** March 09, 2006, 11:51:43 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Momus--
Great, so we go from 2 out of many hundreds to 7 out of many hundreds..good job on still not proving the theory....

A lot more..? Fine, please list them, go ahead..don't be shy..

I'm guessing that even if I were to go thru every movie out you would still say something like "299 out of 300 that still doesn't prove anything".

Look for them yourself. I just gave you a few examples.

Maverick · « **Reply #115 on:** March 09, 2006, 12:18:09 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by EN4CER
He makes a good point Maverick as do you. Sandman’s statement above can be summed up in two words – PARIS HILTON.

I don't believe I used the terms quality or talent in my posts. I merely was stating that the measure of success for an entertainer that counts IMO is how many people are willing to fork over the $ to see/ hear their "work". It may be pure unadulterated (or very adulterated, IE, michael moore) crap with no talent or redeaming qualities at all. If the buying public likes it, it is a good measure of success for the

Perhaps I didn't make it clear enough. To me the accademy awards, emmys, or any other kind of industry award is rather meaningless as an indicator of whether I should see or listen to anything the "artist" dumps on the market. I go to see and hear what I feel is something entertaining not what the "industry" decides to praise.

Frankly I think the reviews that I read here are much more relevent than what I see some "professional" put out.

Sandman · « **Reply #116 on:** March 09, 2006, 12:58:05 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Maverick
Perhaps I didn't make it clear enough. To me the accademy awards, emmys, or any other kind of industry award is rather meaningless as an indicator of whether I should see or listen to anything the "artist" dumps on the market. I go to see and hear what I feel is something entertaining not what the "industry" decides to praise.

The industry is praising the craftsmanship. They are not praising the entertainment value. So this fits.

Mighty1 · « **Reply #117 on:** March 09, 2006, 01:20:00 PM »

In this case I believe they are rewarding the "message" not the "craftsmanship".

Sandman · « **Reply #118 on:** March 09, 2006, 01:23:05 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Mighty1
In this case I believe they are rewarding the "message" not the "craftsmanship".

Have you actually seen it?

Momus-- · « **Reply #119 on:** March 09, 2006, 01:45:02 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Mighty1
I'm guessing that even if I were to go thru every movie out you would still say something like "299 out of 300 that still doesn't prove anything".

Come up with anything like that figure and you have a case. However it's my guess that you can't, hence the following bluster:

Quote

Look for them yourself. I just gave you a few examples.

Why should I go out of my way to prove your inane argument that you probably lifted directly from Anne Coulter, Rush Limbaugh or some other cheap talking head propagandist? If you'd arrived at your opinion by considering the actual evidence available yourself then you'd be able to reproduce it here rather than trying to dodge the issue.