2007-02-25 18:42:20 · 17 answers · asked by http://hogshead.pokerknave.com/ 6 in Entertainment & Music ➔ Movies
I think so. But I enjoy watching the show. I do think they play it out too long.. I really enjoy the pre-show just to see who is wearing what.
2007-02-25 18:46:42 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't think it reflects the people's views because if it did then the winners would always be the highest grossing films of the year due to the fact that more people had seen them. I don't think many people in the UK watch it though because it's on from around 1.00am and people have to sleep and go to work on Monday morning. Plus it's a really long show isn't it? I'm glad that Helen Mirren won and Forest for Last King of Scotland, but I'm disappointed that Scorsese won for such a mediocre film like the Departed. He should have won years ago for Goodfellas or Raging Bull. I suppose this year people felt sorry for him, which isn't the best reason to give someone an Oscar for.
2007-02-26 05:27:12 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I agree, rather than picking the best film of the year it seems that sometime it is a case of 'sods turn'. I saw 'The Departed' over the weekend, and although I wouldn't say it was bad, I wouldn't describe it as great either. I thought it was confusing because the two male leads looked so alike.
I saw 'Blood Diamond' at the weekend too, and thought that was a much better, tightly directed film.
I thought the best film of the year was 'United 93' which got nothing so shows how much I know.
So I guess the Oscars are more for Hollywood insider's than the general public.
2007-02-26 06:12:41 · answer #3 · answered by Corneilius 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Not a waste of time at all. Also, it does reflect what the public likes. A lot of those movies have been very successful at the box office.
2007-02-26 09:42:14 · answer #4 · answered by Film Jedi 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, it isn't a waste of time and it did reflect something I liked. I was really happy with the best foreign film win THE LIVES OF OTHERS. I actually think that one was the best of all the films up for the award.
2007-02-26 03:05:36 · answer #5 · answered by Murphyboy 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Sad but true. The judges for the Oscars will decide who will win and I suppose "to some justification as and when needed". Like the movie "Brokeback Mountain" was expected to win the Best Picture category but eventually went to "Crash". I think the former is a much better movie but because the film reflects homosexuality, it lose out!
2007-02-26 03:21:46 · answer #6 · answered by Troy Girl 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
It's not supposed to be a reflection of the regards of the movie-going public. It's the opinions of people in the industry.
The People's Choice Awards are for the public-at-large, I believe.
2007-02-26 04:52:45 · answer #7 · answered by ron w 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
This time I had not seen any of the nominated films. Babel would have been good. But the members of the Academy have different tastes. If you really want to be satisfied, wait for the MTV movie awards. They are more people friendly and the golden popcorn looks cool too.
2007-02-26 03:06:48 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The Academy Awards still interests me.
2007-02-26 02:57:29 · answer #9 · answered by Sakky 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It just generates more money to the industry. It doesn't have anything to do with the public other than watching the movies that win and making them extra millions.
2007-02-26 02:51:24 · answer #10 · answered by ReplicantZer0 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
that is what the "People's Choice Awards" are for.....
The Oscars are around so all the actors and directors and producers etc.. can go around patting each other on the back...
2007-02-26 09:16:17 · answer #11 · answered by Kookie 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋