Hulk 2 Movie is TOAST

[Scheradon]

Saving Private Ryan was one of the few that got to me. I was ticked when that didn't win the Oscar.

 

Did you ever read William Goldman's thoughts on this movie?

 

I hadn't read his thoughts. Here's a tid bit I just found which pretty much gives me the sense of what he thought:

 

William Goldman Calls Private Ryan "Detestable"

27 April 2000 (StudioBriefing)

Oscar-winning screenwriter William Goldman (Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid (1969), All the President's Men (1976)) has launched another one of his routine missile attacks on Hollywood. In an interview with Britain's Empire magazine to promote his latest book, Which Lie Did I Tell?, Goldman, among other things, referred to Saving Private Ryan (1998) as "a detestable piece of s***." After allowing that the first half hour of the movie featured some "brilliant stuff, " Goldman went on to remark that the last hour "is as bad as a movie can be."

 

I obviously disagree with him. But, that's his viewpoint and many would disagree with him.

 

So, since he thinks that about what I consider to be a great film, should I call him "unknowledgeable" or label him with "poor taste"? I prefer to say he has a different point of view than I do.

[Scheradon]

While some may find a movie like Amadeus to be great, there are many who don't have that same feeling about that movie. They shouldn't get insulted as having "poor taste" or "unknowledgeable" about films just because they don't agree with the elitists' view.

 

no offense, but you're the first college-educated person i have ever heard say they didn't like "Amadeus."

 

 

I don't think it's the worst all-time film or something. It's not like I'm saying it resides side by side with "Attack of the killer Tomatoes". It's just not one of my all-time top five movies and doesn't do anything for me. It's not my kind of movie.

 

I was more moved by 'The Natuaral" that year and more entertained by "Beverly Hills Cop". Call that what you will.

 

I'm still sensing this elitist point of view..."college-educated". So know everyone who didn't go to college are dumb arses with no 'taste" or movie "knowledge". And know their votes are the only ones that should count. I've worked with some guys before that had immense movie knowledge, but never went to college.

 

you're sensing something that isn't there.

 

and then adding a bunch of stuff on top that really makes no sense

 

Well, if you hadn't put the 'college-educated" part in your sentance, I may not have got the feeling you were downing people who did not go to college. Since many points in this discussion have been referring to people who didn't like this movie as "unknowledgeable" or "uneducated", that's where I felt your angle was comming from.

 

I can however assure you that I am not the only college educated person to have not liked this film. I prefer to say the subject matter was not of interest to me, than say it was some bad film. I think the two are not mutually exclusive.

[Ze-man]

 

I'll give you an example, I just took my kids to see Curious George,:

 

 

JC, I thank you from the bottom of my heart.

 

Even in my darkest hour, when I am at my lowest point. I will think back to you sitting at the movies watching Curious George. Our own JC, the most beloved naysayer, foreteller of doom and gloom watching a curious little monkey with his kids.

 

Good for you JC , there is yet hope for all of us..

 

Thank you for that memory, I must admit, I was already warming to your posting style this past few weeks, but now it is clear, you are not as evil as I once thought.. Everything else you say henceforth will be tainted with a slight glimmer of hope, all thanks to one little monkey.

 

BTW, did Ron Howard ruin another great memory I had as a kid, like he did with the Grinch?

 

Kenny

[Aman619]

I skipped thru the thread, and havent reda everything, but I wanted to try to clarify the meaning of the Oscar Awards and why it doesnt reflect anything more than what is really is.

 

Its a vote by less than 5000 people who all work in the movie business. Many have been voting for 30 years or more. Its like a very public vote for high school president. And the publics fascination with the winners, and their insistence that the choices actually SAY 'something' about the cultural state of things in Ameroca has AFFECTED the choices over time. Originally it was just a trade dinner announcement, like a private club voting for the most popular members that year. And a way to recognize success and legitimize the fledgeling film bizness which hade been an immigrant fly by night endeavor that had "made it".

 

Its still a closed affair, but the mainstream press has become so fixated on the Entertainment Biz that while the voting STILL is a "who do I want to make sure loses cause he's such a jerk already" process, or a "okay, it should be me, but I can stand to see so-and-so win more that that other guy who deicked me out of a job last year" etc etc. EXCEPT, a creeping "theyre all watching" thing has taken over a bit, so picking Best Picture is today VERY MUCH about "what kind of signal are we sending here".

 

Its like Heisenbergs principle that the fact that something is being observed actually CHANGES what is being observed.

[Aman619]

well, looks like The Academy voters went for the home team. Not the gay team with Brokeback, but the hometown Los Angeles story of race and human relations. Big surprise, although there was a feeling of late that CRASH WAS COMING ON STRONG. BUT I DONT THINK TOO MANY PEOPLE FELT IT HAD ENOUGH MOMENTUM TO UPSET BROKEBACK - - AS WAS EVIDENT FROM THEscreams of surprise at Jack's reading of the winner.

 

 

 

caps lock....

[tth2]

The guy who directed "The Hulk" already has 2 Best Director nominations and probably will own an Oscar before the night of March 5 is out.

This and Witherspoon winning best actress were probably the closest thing to a lock this year, although in retrospect Hoffman was a lock too.

[Aman619]

didnt Ang win for Crouching Tiger? I can never remember..

[tth2]

No, just nominated.