Meet The New Catwoman!

[kav]

also heath ledger was ok-what do i want a calm hannibal lecter type for the joker??? he's a wacko....

[sakaridis]

fair enough. the english patient was bad enough that seinfeld devoted an entire show to mocking it but i guess enough people liked it. i personally thought ledger way overacted in that role but that's just my take on it-most people didn't have a problem with it. as slym once said it's useless to argue who's opinion is 'right'....because no opinion can be 'wrong'.

Have you actually seen the English Patient?

 

You keep using it as some "super strong argument" to put down the Academy's taste, but the truth is that it also has an 83% on Rotten Tomatoes (84% from the audience), an 87 on Metacritic (which translates to "universal acclaim), and a 7.4 on IMDb.

 

I personally think it's a near masterpiece and definitely one of the 8-10 best movies of the 90s. I know not everyone agrees with that, but you're presenting it like it's Indiana Jones And The Kingdom Of The Grey Skull.

 

If you want an actual strong argument against the Oscars, you should probably start using Crash.

 

And as someone said before, the Academy's awards for acting are far more "reliable", or at least universally accepted than the ones for Best Picture, because a) the acting nominees are selected by the actors branch only, while the BP ones are selected by all the members of the Academy, and b) there are far more elements in what makes a picture "enjoyable" or "admirable", which sometimes skews the results.

 

But seriously, stop using the English Patient winning BP as evidence that bad films win Oscars.

[kav]

that dang seinfeld. i wouldnt have used it as an example if not for him. i'm going with crash.

[ComicConnoisseur]

fair enough. the english patient was bad enough that seinfeld devoted an entire show to mocking it but i guess enough people liked it. i personally thought ledger way overacted in that role but that's just my take on it-most people didn't have a problem with it. as slym once said it's useless to argue who's opinion is 'right'....because no opinion can be 'wrong'.

Have you actually seen the English Patient?

 

You keep using it as some "super strong argument" to put down the Academy's taste, but the truth is that it also has an 83% on Rotten Tomatoes (84% from the audience), an 87 on Metacritic (which translates to "universal acclaim), and a 7.4 on IMDb.

 

I personally think it's a near masterpiece and definitely one of the 8-10 best movies of the 90s. I know not everyone agrees with that, but you're presenting it like it's Indiana Jones And The Kingdom Of The Grey Skull.

 

If you want an actual strong argument against the Oscars, you should probably start using Crash.

 

And as someone said before, the Academy's awards for acting are far more "reliable", or at least universally accepted than the ones for Best Picture, because a) the acting nominees are selected by the actors branch only, while the BP ones are selected by all the members of the Academy, and b) there are far more elements in what makes a picture "enjoyable" or "admirable", which sometimes skews the results.

 

But seriously, stop using the English Patient winning BP as evidence that bad films win Oscars.

The English Patient was a good movie. (thumbs u

[sakaridis]

The English Patient was a good movie. (thumbs u

(thumbs u

[krighton]

Empire of the Sun was a good movie

[Darkowl]

I miss Michelle Pfeiffer