Register  |  Sign In
View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Mon Jul 21, 2025 7:00 pm



Reply to topic  [ 63 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next
 RATE! RATE! 

Rate
A 22%  22%  [ 5 ]
B 35%  35%  [ 8 ]
C 13%  13%  [ 3 ]
D 13%  13%  [ 3 ]
F 17%  17%  [ 4 ]
Total votes : 23

 RATE! RATE! 
Author Message
Extraordinary
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 9:18 pm
Posts: 12159
Post RATE! RATE!
F for Fake


Mon Feb 23, 2009 12:57 am
Profile
Romosexual!
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2004 3:06 am
Posts: 32635
Location: the last free city
Post Re: RATE! RATE!
A for JAi Ho! :D

_________________
Is it 2028 yet?


Last edited by Rev on Mon Feb 23, 2009 1:02 am, edited 1 time in total.



Mon Feb 23, 2009 1:02 am
Profile
"no rank"

Joined: Wed Nov 29, 2006 8:43 pm
Posts: 24502
Post Re: RATE! RATE!
Bits that worked:

The Reader in the opening
The group of actors presenting
The running time
The stage design
Comedy contage (sort of)

Bits that didn't work:

Animation/Action/Romance montages
The rest of the opening
tribute to Musicals


Mon Feb 23, 2009 1:02 am
Profile
Extraordinary

Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2005 1:53 pm
Posts: 12197
Post Re: RATE! RATE!
loyalfromlondon wrote:
Bits that worked:

The Reader in the opening
The group of actors presenting
The running time
The stage design

Bits that didn't work:

Comedy/Animation/Action/Romance montage
The rest of the opening
tribute to Musicals


Bit that didn't work most for me was the singing during the In Memorium part. It just didn't work and was the lowpoint for the night. Otherwise overall I thought it was pretty good.


Mon Feb 23, 2009 1:06 am
Profile WWW
KJ's Leading Pundit
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 4:45 pm
Posts: 63026
Location: Tonight... YOU!
Post Re: RATE! RATE!
The whole thing was a mess.

They need to hire people that know what the fuck they're doing

_________________
trixster wrote:
shut the fuck up zwackerm, you're out of your fucking element

trixster wrote:
chippy is correct

Rev wrote:
Fuck Trump


Mon Feb 23, 2009 1:07 am
Profile
Quality is a great business plan
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 05, 2007 9:21 pm
Posts: 6787
Post Re: RATE! RATE!
I would give it a B. Group of ex-winners presenting the awards was an excellent idea.

_________________
The world is all about mind and matter, I don't mind and U don't matter

I used to be shawman.


Mon Feb 23, 2009 1:08 am
Profile
He didn't look busy?!
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 3:59 pm
Posts: 4308
Post Re: RATE! RATE!
that was a fabulous show. Not looking at the actual winners, but the ceremony and the nominations presentations and the speeches... it blew away anything that I'd seen before (but I'd say the first time I watched and was really aware of what was going on was Chicago's year).

_________________
Image
Retroviral Videos
A film-based project created for the purpose of helping raise awareness about HIV/AIDS, specifically in South Africa.


Mon Feb 23, 2009 1:13 am
Profile WWW
KJ's Leading Pundit
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 4:45 pm
Posts: 63026
Location: Tonight... YOU!
Post Re: RATE! RATE!
Ew.

_________________
trixster wrote:
shut the fuck up zwackerm, you're out of your fucking element

trixster wrote:
chippy is correct

Rev wrote:
Fuck Trump


Mon Feb 23, 2009 1:14 am
Profile
He didn't look busy?!
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 3:59 pm
Posts: 4308
Post Re: RATE! RATE!
which recent year would you deem better, and why?

Having five winners give a personal speech to each nominee > one person reading a short description of their characters.
Having Queen Latifah sing live during In Memorium > some old sappy music playing in the background
The numerous musical numbers > the bad Best Song performances (even though we had those as well this year)
Pineapple Express stoned cast laughing at The Reader > Some dramatic actor praising The Reader's "artistry"
etc...

_________________
Image
Retroviral Videos
A film-based project created for the purpose of helping raise awareness about HIV/AIDS, specifically in South Africa.


Mon Feb 23, 2009 1:15 am
Profile WWW
Online
Devil's Advocate
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2005 2:30 am
Posts: 40602
Post Re: RATE! RATE!
One part that really bugged me was cutting to Latifah and the moving camera during the dead montage, I couldn't read some of the names and positions.

Clips > actor descriptions. By far.

_________________
Shack’s top 50 tv shows - viewtopic.php?f=8&t=90227


Mon Feb 23, 2009 1:19 am
Profile
Wallflower
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 4:53 am
Posts: 35249
Location: Minnesota
Post Re: RATE! RATE!
The ceremony was alright. Not great. I miss the clips for performances. I certainly miss the way they used to do it.

On this scale I'd give it a B (my actual rating is a B-).


Mon Feb 23, 2009 1:19 am
Profile
htm
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 23, 2005 2:38 pm
Posts: 10316
Location: berkeley
Post Re: RATE! RATE!
loyalfromlondon wrote:
Bits that worked:

The Reader in the opening
The group of actors presenting
The running time
The stage design

Bits that didn't work:

Comedy/Animation/Action/Romance montage
The rest of the opening
tribute to Musicals


agreed on all counts, though i thought the comedy montage was a bit more charming - certainly more than the rest! ugh!


Mon Feb 23, 2009 1:21 am
Profile
loyalfromlondon
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 6:31 pm
Posts: 19697
Location: ville-marie
Post Re: RATE! RATE!
The In Memorium section was a total disaster.

The show started strong but ended weakly. The new presenters were stupid. Where were DDL and Javier?

_________________
Magic Mike wrote:
zwackerm wrote:
If John Wick 2 even makes 30 million I will eat 1,000 shoes.


Same.


Algren wrote:
I don't think. I predict. ;)


Mon Feb 23, 2009 1:22 am
Profile
"no rank"

Joined: Wed Nov 29, 2006 8:43 pm
Posts: 24502
Post Re: RATE! RATE!
zennier wrote:
loyalfromlondon wrote:
Bits that worked:

The Reader in the opening
The group of actors presenting
The running time
The stage design

Bits that didn't work:

Comedy/Animation/Action/Romance montage
The rest of the opening
tribute to Musicals


agreed on all counts, though i thought the comedy montage was a bit more charming - certainly more than the rest! ugh!


I'll actually pull back on Comedy, it was the better of the 4 and was actually produced vs thrown together.


Mon Feb 23, 2009 1:24 am
Profile
Stanley Cup
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 26, 2006 1:52 pm
Posts: 6981
Location: Hockey Town
Post Re: RATE! RATE!
i dont want actors telling me how great the performance was. I want to see clips from the movie to show me how great the performance was.


Mon Feb 23, 2009 1:25 am
Profile
htm
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 23, 2005 2:38 pm
Posts: 10316
Location: berkeley
Post Re: RATE! RATE!
trixster wrote:
The In Memorium section was a total disaster.


I'd agree with this in that it was quite frustrating, the way it was filmed and all. Watching it streaming over the net, I found it quite difficult to see many of the names. Did I just miss it, or was Heath not in this? Was he in last years? I forget - do they do this by calendar year or by "year" related to when the show broadcasts?

Granted, BSA was Heath's memorial, but still.

And, to emphasize, that stage design was gorgeous. Absolutely stunning.


Mon Feb 23, 2009 1:27 am
Profile
htm
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 23, 2005 2:38 pm
Posts: 10316
Location: berkeley
Post Re: RATE! RATE!
Nite Owl wrote:
i dont want actors telling me how great the performance was. I want to see clips from the movie to show me how great the performance was.


Why, so we can have an awkward, decontextualized + dragging "reminder" of their work? I much prefer the actors, if only for the spectacle of their entrance alone. Sexy!


Mon Feb 23, 2009 1:28 am
Profile
Pure Phase
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2005 7:33 am
Posts: 34865
Location: Maryland
Post Re: RATE! RATE!
The "In Memoriam" segment was poorly done, without a doubt. I thought most of the changes were superb and LOVED Hugh's hosting (voted A on the poll), but they should have left the "In Memoriam" presentation alone. Clips set to sentimental music. Using different cameras to film television screens showing the clips was a strange and nasty idea. I have a feeling it was done, at least in part, to incorporate Queen Latifah's presence and singing more ("See, we're not just playing music, we brought in a celebrity performer!"). Meh.

_________________
ImageImageImage

1. The Lost City of Z - 2. A Cure for Wellness - 3. Phantom Thread - 4. T2 Trainspotting - 5. Detroit - 6. Good Time - 7. The Beguiled - 8. The Florida Project - 9. Logan and 10. Molly's Game


Mon Feb 23, 2009 1:30 am
Profile
Extraordinary
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 9:18 pm
Posts: 12159
Post Re: RATE! RATE!
I'm in the "speeches about the actors rather than the work we're supposedly honoring" = worst decision of life camp. It made literally no sense, no sense at all.


Mon Feb 23, 2009 1:30 am
Profile
loyalfromlondon
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 6:31 pm
Posts: 19697
Location: ville-marie
Post Re: RATE! RATE!
zennier wrote:
trixster wrote:
The In Memorium section was a total disaster.


I'd agree with this in that it was quite frustrating, the way it was filmed and all. Watching it streaming over the net, I found it quite difficult to see many of the names. Did I just miss it, or was Heath not in this? Was he in last years? I forget - do they do this by calendar year or by "year" related to when the show broadcasts?

Granted, BSA was Heath's memorial, but still.

And, to emphasize, that stage design was gorgeous. Absolutely stunning.

Heath was in last year's, as he died in January.

But yeah, the moving camera + multiple screens made the whole thing impossible to watch and downright ugly.

_________________
Magic Mike wrote:
zwackerm wrote:
If John Wick 2 even makes 30 million I will eat 1,000 shoes.


Same.


Algren wrote:
I don't think. I predict. ;)


Mon Feb 23, 2009 1:31 am
Profile
Pure Phase
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2005 7:33 am
Posts: 34865
Location: Maryland
Post Re: RATE! RATE!
zennier wrote:
Nite Owl wrote:
i dont want actors telling me how great the performance was. I want to see clips from the movie to show me how great the performance was.


Why, so we can have an awkward, decontextualized + dragging "reminder" of their work? I much prefer the actors, if only for the spectacle of their entrance alone. Sexy!


I agree. I enjoyed the new way of presenting. Robert De Niro's introduction of Sean Penn, for example, was a lot more interesting and charming than a 10-second clip of him yelling "I'M HARVEY MILK AND I'M HERE TO RECRUIT YOU!" would have been.

_________________
ImageImageImage

1. The Lost City of Z - 2. A Cure for Wellness - 3. Phantom Thread - 4. T2 Trainspotting - 5. Detroit - 6. Good Time - 7. The Beguiled - 8. The Florida Project - 9. Logan and 10. Molly's Game


Mon Feb 23, 2009 1:31 am
Profile
Team Kris
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 28, 2004 5:02 pm
Posts: 27584
Location: The Damage Control Table
Post Re: RATE! RATE!
There was something Superman-like when past winners were standing on stage presenting the nominees. Reminded me of that scene when the Krypton tribunal was sentencing General Zod, Ursa, and Non.

_________________
A hot man once wrote:
Urgh, I have to throw out half my underwear because it's too tight.


Mon Feb 23, 2009 1:31 am
Profile
"no rank"

Joined: Wed Nov 29, 2006 8:43 pm
Posts: 24502
Post Re: RATE! RATE!
I'm still bothered that they didn't think it was appropriate to have 5 directors on stage. Who the fuck directs the actors?


Mon Feb 23, 2009 1:32 am
Profile
Extraordinary
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 9:18 pm
Posts: 12159
Post Re: RATE! RATE!
Furthermore, the presentation of the acting awards completely decontextualized the process for the audience, especially considering most viewers haven't seen the performances being honored, and reduced it, then, to merely a masturbation to starpower and sappiness.


Mon Feb 23, 2009 1:33 am
Profile
loyalfromlondon
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 6:31 pm
Posts: 19697
Location: ville-marie
Post Re: RATE! RATE!
How about when Alan Arkin called PSH "Seymour Philip Hoffman"? Or Christopher Walken mumbling through his lines?

I'll take clips, please.

_________________
Magic Mike wrote:
zwackerm wrote:
If John Wick 2 even makes 30 million I will eat 1,000 shoes.


Same.


Algren wrote:
I don't think. I predict. ;)


Mon Feb 23, 2009 1:33 am
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 63 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 23 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by STSoftware for PTF.