I still dont see how there's any proof Bradley didnt see 27 Dresses. 7 pm EST + 2 hrs = 9 pm, and he posted the review at like, 9:30 pm. How do you know he was still in Cali that day? Lotsa people travel for Christmas. I just think yr kinda ramming that point into the ground when there's at least one perfectly logical explanation.

Hey, thanx for the defense kypade! But it's really whipping a dead horse when you try using logic on loyal...

I have never written a review for a movie I haven't seen.

Worse things could happen than Juno winning Best Picture. Like, you know... throwing away the rulebook and nominating (and eventually giving the statue to) In the Valley of Elah.

Re: your letter.

While I agree, basically, that I dont want Juno to win (it could very well end up being my "least favorite" of the five, if Into the Wild gets in and There Will be Blood doesnt disappoint), I think you said it yrself. You're in a VAST minority here. It's number 5 on that CriticsTop10 consensus recently posted, with 126 mentions out of 400ish. I dunno that you can call it "slight", or claim it wont enter some filmic "pantheon" ten years from now just because you dont find it realistic. Yknow? Pantheons are formed from many, many opinions, and if it does indeed win Best Picture, that win could very well push it mainstream enough that it is culturally significant ten or twenty years from now.

For what its worth, last year on the same criticstopten site, LMS was number 6 with less number one mentions, and on Rotten Tomatoes, Juno falls right between Sideways and LMS (significantly better than the latter).

Unless you know something everyone else in America doesn't, I think this letter might be a little premature.

Wouldn't be worse than Crash winning, but yeah, this doesn't deserve even a nom, especially in such a good year. I saw it again last night and was even less impressed.

But at the same time it's sort of appears as a self-defeating argument. We're basically making the claim that since Juno can't stand up to the great comedies produced since Annie Hall, it shouldn't win. We're limiting the Academy from picking comedies even more than they do.
I think what we have to look to more than that it can't stand up to the great comedies is that it can't stand up to the great movies produced this year.

I read the letter and it seems Loyal thinks his opinion out-weighs all others. Just because he didn't enjoy the film at the magnitude as the majority of America doesn't mean this movie is not deserving.

That said, I haven't seen the film myself, but plan to soon.

It is time for Loyal, ironicly one of KJ's older and more wiser posters, to grow up and be a little more humble, denying this film a nomination will just further build the Academy as narrow-minded.

Ok, I can cheer to that!

I don't want it to win either. Though I haven't seen it, yet. It looks like it could be good, but it looks like a new kind of oscar bait, and I'm always rooting against the oscar bait.

I really hope Juno OWNs the comp, it is without a doubt the best film since 2003 and among my top 5 favorite comedies.

JUNO WILL WIN!!!!!

I agree.

But, more so, I agree because this is the first year in the 21st century where the Oscars have the ability to award an extremely personal, passionate project - a movie that could, actually, define the year; not some safe shit a la A Beautiful Mind, Chicago, Crash...even The Departed. With movies like There Will Be Blood, No Country For Old Men, Into The Wild, Eastern Promises, Once (just naming the ones with a chance at BP nominations) - for a movie as simply "cute" and nothing more as Juno to "define" the year for AMPAS voters would be an abortion. It was one thing when the other nominees were Brokeback Mountain, Capote, Good Night, and Good Luck, and Munich. But, this year? Juno would be the "Forrest Gump," preventing a more significant movie from winning what it and its crew deserve.

Juno wasn't bad, but it's not Oscar-worthy, especially this year.

PS: Has BJ ever been right?

Guess we don't have to worry now.

JP, BJ.

I now instantly hope Juno wins to spite you.

In all honesty, if my predictions for Best Picture end up coming true, I actually will be rooting for Atonement and Juno (my #2 and #3 of the year, respectively). Of course, I haven't seen There Will Be Blood or Into the Wild (two of the most likely candidates, along with Michael Clayton and No Country, imo) yet, but...

Atonement can win. Great movie.

Juno? It's not even funnier than LMS. If this movie tackled something other than pregnancy, it wouldn't even be a consideration. The critics just want something "out" there, even though this is hardly more controversial than the VeggieTales movie.

I'm with you on this one , Loyal.

Now, if Juno would have been directed by Clint Eastwood things would change. But luckily, it's not.

Juno was a very big disappointment for me. As far as the dramatic aspects go, it was a great film, but man oh man was the humor weak as weak can be [not to mention it really took up about half of the film]. I didn't laugh at one of those "hip" jokes [Homeskillet?" Fo shizz? I thought this kind of humor died three or four years ago...]. The only things I found funny were Allison Janney and Michael Cera, and they generally avoided that kind of humor. When it got serious, it worked really well, but the bad taste of the Napoleon Dynamite-inspired jokes and dialogue kept this from being anything more than good.

I really wouldn't wanna see this win over "There Will Be Blood" or "No Country for Old Men". But really, anything beating TWBB would be blasphemous, so I'm probably gonna get angry at something come Oscar night.

Would you...

go to each voter's houses in the middle of the night and slit their throats while they're sleeping???

After seeing the movie I'd have to agree, it really isn't that good, it was good don't get me wrong, but for a comedy it sure was not funny, although the dad had some good laughs and I enjoyed the lead character's attitude, but other than that I laughed more in a Sandler film.

As Billybob said, its dramatic elements and the film on its own was good, lightly great, but far from outstanding, and in an outstanding year, this film fell way short of much better films in Sweeney Todd and No Country For Old Men (and not to mention my three favorites of the year in Yuma, Legend, and Ratatouille)

love juno, but it doesn't need to win. i mean, i wouldn't be bothered if it did. who cares? the winner isn't as important as seeing who the nominees are imo. but im a twisted fuck that nobody listens to... so i again ask, who cares?

eh, there's a huge difference between being nominated for BP and winning BP. Do you realize that basically nobody has heard of "Reds" and "Chariots of Fire" is one of the most famous films of the '80s because of that Oscars upset?

i dont really care about lasting prestige and shit like that. i mean, to simply be recognized is an interesting bit of trivia. beyond that, i could care less.

chariots of fire? huh?

Reds is better the second time I saw it, IMO even better than my reaction to my second viewing of Chariots.

The Chariots score is so cheesy now in today standards but so memorable.