MovieMan89

Why would they like it the most though if they don't like any individual elements about it the most? I just really don't see how it can be anything other than pity for the Affleck snub. I mean are you in all genuine honesty telling me the movie would have still won BP if Affleck had made the director noms and there was no snub backlash? I just really find that incredibly hard to believe.

So then since you're an awards expert can you answer my question as to how many BP winners bedsides Argo don't have a single acting, directing, visual, or sound award? I'm really curious if it's ever even happened.

Well obviously nothing is written in stone at the Oscars, I'm just saying the Argo BP win doesn't make a lick of sense, except as a political move to make up for the Affleck snub backlash. And to me that's not the way the Academy should operate, and it lessens the prestige of the award.

Well usually they do give most of the big awards to the BP winner, so I'm not sure what you mean by the "oscars don't work that way." I mean does anyone know how many times a movie has won BP without an acting, directing, sound, AND visual award (cinematography, art direction, effects, makeup, etc)? I bet it's not very many.

I don't think people get "offended" so much as disappointed, which everyone has the right to.

Except you're missing my whole point. I'm not saying Argo was undeserving because it wasn't my personal favorite, I'm saying it was undeserving because it won nothing else but editing and screenplay. That makes no sense considering all the other elements of a movie. Of which directing and acting are arguably the most important, and Argo didn't even have nominations in most of those categories! True Pi didn't have acting recognition either, but they gave it almost all the other big awards, so how could they not give it BP if they're gonna give it so much else? Directing+visuals+how it was shot+music should be more than enough to equal BP. If they had given it adapted screenplay then it REALLY would have made no sense not to win BP. It just shows that Argo's BP win was merely political for the Affleck snub, and otherwise there's no chance it would have won. That's why the Academy's decision was so flawed last night.

I guess basically all the critics and film award committees are insane and high then, cause I don't know any of them who thought Field was "incoherent" and doing her own thing. She was everyone's second choice at worst, and won her fair share at the beginning before Hathaway momentum kicked in. So if you think I'm the only one who thought her performance was excellent you're kidding yourself.

Hey I wasn't the one going around calling other people's opinions pathetic and insane just to try to justify to themselves that their own opinion is the only correct one . Some of you act like you know it all and that's arrogance. I bring up several valid questions and issues with the Academy and I get attacked by a few you. So some of you need to step out of your mob mentality when you see a different opinion and learn to reason before blindly attacking.

Since some of you are apparently so all knowing, then perhaos you can enlighten me then on how exactly Argo's BP win made any sense without much else of significance? I guess a movie doesn't need directing, cinematography, score, acting, or visual achievement recognition to be Best Picture worthy? Yeah that makes sense.

I'd agree with you entirely IF Field hadn't knocked her entire performance out of the park. If people here knew much about Mary Todd and how woman with depression behaved circa Civil War USA they would be blind not to see how dead on accurate and impressive Field's portrayal was.

His performance was more "Waltz playing Waltz" than "TLJ playing TLJ", that's for sure. No one said he wasn't good at it, just that it's the same thing we've already seen. Honestly some of you are showing your biases if you don't think Waltz won for just as much or more of the same character he always plays as TLJ Arkin, and Deniro. If TLJ won everyone here would be whining he won for doing what he always does. But because Waltz is so liked here he can win and no one complains about that? Puh-lease.

There's nothing "pathetic" about Field's performance and anyone who thinks so should be the one banned form analyzing film. Honesty I've never heard the opinion that Hathaway blows Field away outside this board. Real film analysts agree the performances are both great. But Field DID do more and hence why she was more deserving just based on the performance. Hathaway was more deserving though if you're going by the basis that Field has already had more than her fair share of time in the sun. And that's why Anne won most places (though Field won more places at the beginning of the season I'll remind people).

I love Anne and her IDAD performance is gut wrenching, but the performance begins and ends at that. Without it she would have gotten zero awards recognition. So sorry but a 3 minute scene is not enough to deserve to win in my opinion, no matter how great the scene is. Field commands the screen whenever she's on, and that is one insanely impressive feat given the fact that she's competing alongside one of the greatest acting performances of this generation. Without her "support" DDL could not have given quite as mesmerizing of a performance as he did, and that's what a great supporting role should do. Be memorable on its own, but also support and elevate the leads. Again I was happy for Anne though because she's one of my favorite young actresses and Field has won twice.

Boring show last night and really illustrated that the Academy makes no sense anymore. Waltz wins for more or less the same performance he won for just 3 years ago, and Argo carries its pity party all the way to Best Picture which was entirely expected but still annoying. How can a movie be Best Picture when the only other significant award it wins is screenplay? And pretty much no directing or acting recognition? Meanwhile LOP wins VFX, score, cinematography, and directing (essentially everything that makes up a movie aside from screenplay and acting) and doesn't win BP? Not that I'm saying I think LOP was the most deserving to win, but based on the other awards it won it made zero sense why it wouldn't win BP. And I think giving the award to Lee and not giving him BP for a second straight time was more insulting than if they hadn't given the award to him at all. On the plus side I was happy for Lawrence and Hathaway (even though Field was the better performance) and downright ecstatic Snore-More got shut out aside from Foreign.

Have you read the book? It's an outright miracle they were even able to adapt a coherent film screenplay for it, let alone one that worked. I don't think it's the "best" of the bunch, but it's easily the most impressive and that counts for soemthing.

Now that I'm in the right thread: This category is starting to drive me nuts to predict this year.It's bad enough that I was so torn between J Law and Riva as it is, but now I'm also wondering if Watts could be the true upset win, not Riva.In the latest Entertainment Weekly they asked 5 anonymous voters of the Academy to tell who they're voting for and 4 of the 5 said Watts. That's just as many of the 5 that are voting for DDL. Now I know that's just 5 people, but still all 4 seemed extremely passionate about Watt's performance and thinking she's paid her dues in Hollywood and should be rewarded now. At this point Wallis is the only one that would truly surprise me winning (although Chastain is seeming like a real longshot too these day).

Oops, I'm in Academy mode here so I got the 2013 thing confused as in the 2013 Oscars about to happen.

Actually Wallis was the very first "Best Actress" contender I heard about out of this year's bunch. Entertainment sites/sources were talking about her last Spring already, several saying she could even be the frontrunner (although I knew that wouldn't happen).

I'm really eager to see what gets the A. Screenplay award. If it goes to Lincoln I think Lincoln will end up with BP after all.

Did you come up with this game format Impact? Ever since I found it on here two years ago, it's been my favorite Oscar game to play with people.

At this point the only thing I genuinely want to happen on Oscar night is a total Argo shut out. This whole pity party for it since the Affleck snub has made me develop a certain hatred towards it. Yes it's a very well done movie, and Affleck probably deserved a nod (though the argument could certainly be made that his directing is very generic and Director's 101), but the film is not some modern cinematic masterpiece and Affleck is not some 60 year old Scorsese directing legend that is owed anything at this point. And before the Affleck snub it wasn't being treated as such like it is now. The Academy needs to send the message that they're not gonna be bullied into something and stand by their Affleck snub. And they can do that by shutting Argo out. I don't even care what they do it with anymore, hell I'll even root for Snoremour if it stops Argo at this point.

J Law was perfection tonight. I was happy to see her so happy, since I didn't get the impression winning was a big deal to her at the Globes. It was definitely a big deal to her tonight though, which always makes it cooler and more memorable to see.

It would be a crazy ass travesty too, since the infinitely superior A Separation and the masterpiece Pan's Labyrinth, received none of this undeserved Amour foreign love from the Academy.

1. Lincoln: A+ 2. Life of Pi: A 3. Argo: A 4. Django Unchained: A- 5. Zero Dark Thirty: A- 6. Silver Linings Playbook: A- 7. Les Mis: B+ 8. Beasts of the Southern Wild: B+ 9. Amour: D-

Hell maybe you are right. I mean the Academy is a bunch of old men that could easily connect to the subject. Amour is obviously capitalizing on that advantage. I just wish the subject matter could have been done in an even slightly interesting way that 90% of regular people could really connect with. I mean seriously, Amour makes Malick films look like general audience fare.