I agree. There are films I support which I haven't seen. Like King Kong.

Reese was nominated for a GG for Election in 1999. The award should go to the best performance of the year, no matter what the actor has done in the past. Plus, Knightley is highly respected, especially in her home country so it's not like she's an unknown.

And how much of those budget costs were offset by various ways and means? You don't know? Then why did you try to bring up a base sum like you did know?

Again, the constant trolling you've done concerning Witherspoon is well documented by now, so this denial isn't surprising from you.

Reese has earned the accolades for her body of work. Kiera Knightly is new. How exactly, taking out your obvious dislike of Reese, is she "ahead of the game"? That makes absolutely no sense to even say, and I'd like to read your explanation so I can get a good laugh about it.

I'd guarantee Reese has built up more respect than Knightly has...

Your level of repsect for her will not be taken under advisement by the academy, I'm sorry to say.

There's a difference. I back my statements up with stuff that I don't pull out of my ass.

But there's a huge difference between what should happen and what usually does happen, and overdue status will help any actor.

There's also a huge difference between what YOU think is the better performance of the year and what actually is/what most other people believe to be.

Witherspoon has received the most best actress mentions this year.

Ugh, as i said - fall asleep at 6 am, wake up at 2 pm

oh well

PS, Didnt kypade say something about pic, dirc, screenplay and supactress for match point?

kk

Jackson did not stay as close to the material as many think for LOTR.
Alot of his changes were my problems with the movie.

As for King Kong, he has changed it quite alot. Remaining true to the original story but adding alot of his own stuff and being praised for his screenplay or so I hear from alot of critics.

Knightley received her first GG nom. at a younger age than Witherspoon received her first.

You don't know about JLH and whether it has costs offset. You can't tell me Dreamworks didn't want more from it.

Witherspoon is not a lock like Jamie Foxx was last year. Far from it. She may win but it's not a sure thing like Foxx winning was.

If Jackson had stayed true to the material, we wouldn't be talking about LOTR years after its release, because it would have bombed.


Cinema has a different set of demands than literature or drama; to not adapt is to perish.

And she'll lose to the more accomplished Witherspoon, no doubt.

ALL movies have costs that are offset, and it's a part of the way the business is structured. You can't be that naive as to truely want to debate that?

You can't be truly stupid enough to believe that you know anything about the business aside from box office. And who said I wanted to debate it, you conceited motherfucker that with any luck, dies sooner rather than later?

Reese Witherspoon is the front-runner to win this at the Globes by quite a distance.

However, should an upset occur (Which is highly unlikely) it will be Knightley. For some reason, she does have some weird support all of a sudden that doesn't seem to have come only from this movie, though it placed her on the map!

But what does Knightley getting her first nomination have anything to do with who is more likely to win? Witherpoon didn't win from her first nomination.

It's not like she's gonna follow in Witherspoon's footsteps now just because she has a GG nomination . I think she very welll could but it wouldn't be the first time an actress has a great role and is never able to repeat it again.

And it still has nothing to do with why she is more liekly to win this year, which is what I think you are trying to argue. In fact, everything you mention just makes her LESS likely to win.

And what has Knightley done to make her the big box office draw that you seem to think she is and Witherspoon isn't. Domino was a bigger flop than Just Like Heave if you wanna argue flops.

The only blockbuster she's been in is POTC, and it did not become the huge box office hit it was because of her.

All the critics who have considered it in their awards, you mean? Those critics? Raffi, I know you love the guy and his films, but take a look at the reality. Kong is not getting any mentions. Don't you even question why, or are you in such denial that the question isn't even registering?

The only ones that I've heard praising Kong as a best picture candidate, and I mean no offense by this, are the people who are huge fans. The Globes and critics awards aren't supporting any such theories. Honestly, look for yourself if you think I'm making it up. It's got NOTHING.

Knightley is not as well-known here so Domino flopping can't be considered her fault. Tony Scott's name was the draw for the film, as far as it could be considered to have a draw. No one has deemed Knightley a draw as of yet.

Guys, could you please take this one anywhere else if possible. Like to a non-Golden Globes thread? Please?

Kiss my ass, you dumb piece of shit. If you really wanted to convince anybody that you are at "a prestigious university", you just convinced us all what bullshit that was by your stupidity, and I'm sure the rest of the guys that know how the business operates are laughing at your ignorance as much as I am.

............................................

Im happy for Violence and Gardener because they're good movies, but common? They get a nod before Munich. Screw that, they didnt even nominate the best thing about Constant Gardener, Ralph Fiennes. Terrence Howard is getting so overated, the performance in Hustle was good, but I mean oscar worthy? The guy says mayne ( suppose to be man ) like a million times in it.

I dont even wanna get started with this Johnny Depp - Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, just bend over for Depp every chance you get you homo foreign press.

You're just following suit. And I do attend a well-known university. And what do I care if anyone here believes anything I say? It's not like anyone here will ever meet anyone else here.

Also, aren't you like 40 years old Mav? Shouldn't you be spending your time elsewhere? Most people here seem to be quite a bit younger than that.

A lot of them are women What should they do?

Well it is a a discussion about the Globes, for better or worse.


But yeah I believe I'm donwe with Joe I've saiud everything I had to say...

But why say Witherspoon's chances are diminished cause she is no longer the box office draw she used to be and then not use the same thinking for Knightley, who has NEVER been a box office draw to begin with.

Because Knightley was never touted as the next Julia Roberts the way Witherspoon has.

The critics I was talking about are critics, not critics awards. I'm talking about reviews.

I'll post all the praises it's gotten once I have the time to really go into it (which won't be till Friday) so I guess we'll just leave it at that for now.

I don't know why you're having such a hard time with this remake thing. Almost every single reviewer has said it lives up to the original, and then some.