Exactly my point, except not really. My point was that TV has managed to pump out quality products appeal to audiences and critics alike. The film industry has failed, either by not creating products that marry mass appeal with quality, or not knowing how to properly promote their best work (it probably doesn't help that the movie theater experience is, for what you pay, awful). And yeah, it doesn't help that the academy operates with the assumption that comedic films are inherently undeserving of serious consideration.
I was going through Wikipedia and saw how many comedic films won Best Picture: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academy_Award_for_Best_Picture The last two? 'Driving Miss Daisy' and 'Shakespeare in Love' (and did you know 'As Good as It Gets' was nominated?). 'Crash' doesn't count because the comedy was unintentional. So I guess you're right - the Academy can't judge comedy. Though 'Up' getting a nomination is nice.
This is all funny to me since I was in an argument at work a couple days ago where I was arguing television was better than movies (after it was determined I don't go out to the movies that much).
True, I just glommed on to one part of your post. We don't get out that much either, winter though, we get a lot from Netflix. TV fare is pretty limited. Most of the Netflix stuff we get is foreign or just plain offbeat. There's some great entertainment out there if you look. True yarn. We stopped at the video store a while back and picked up 5 foreign language films. At the checkout the young lady says "wow, you understand these languages", my wife says "No, they're subtitled, it's written on the bottom" so the girl says "Wow, you can read all these languages!!!" Yeh, I've posted this before but I still like it..
The last thing the Academy Awards needs is to have a "best comedy" category. Very few -- if any -- have ever deserved the honor an Oscar would bring. Remember that nothing dates faster than comedy. A list of "best comedy" films from the past would likely be more embarrassing than a list of "best picture" award winners. Besides, comedy is no more a valid genre than any other. Why not a "best fantasy" category to encompass everything from Harry Potter to Star Wars to Batman? In the past, they could have given out "best western" or "best musical" awards when those genres were thriving. Where would it stop? It's bad enough they honor cartoons made with computers. Look, I get it -- I realize from the "What Movie Have You Seen Recently" threads that many of you waste enormous amounts of time watching lame comedies for whatever reasons, but the little dignity the Oscars claim would be totally shot to hell if they went down that road. For what it's worth, comedies also very rarely take home Broadway's Tony Award. And they're not very well represented among the Pulitzer Prize winners, either. Although there was the notorious selection in 1945 of Harvey over The Glass Managerie!!! Oscar has made a lot of mistakes, but they never managed a whopper like that. Let's hope they never do. Nominate an occasional comedy, but then forget it exists when picking the winner -- please!
Wow. The Apartment MASH Some Like It Hot Annie Hall Rushmore Dr. Strangelove Bringing Up Baby The Philadelphia Story The General The Great Dictator This is Spinal Tap
I'm suggesting no such thing. I'm just saying the Academy needs to take a less riverplatian view of comedy, the idea that "nothing dates faster than comedy. A list of "best comedy" films from the past would likely be more embarrassing than a list of "best picture" award winners" is grounded in little more than uninformed prejudice and manufactured snobbery. "Annie Hall" and "Dr Strangelove" have aged just fine, while "Duck Soup" retains some of its charms. "A Fish Called Wanda" and "Big Lebowski" never got their hardware dues, and "The Producers" was clearly good enough to warrant a musical adaptation and a film adaptation of the musical adaptation. Speaking of adaptation, "Adaptation" was arguably smarter than just about any dramatic film of its era, and while "Harry Met Sally" may seem overplayed on cable, like the others above, it still holds up. And seriously, is there anything more slept on than "In the Loop", or anything that got so overrated that to the point where it's underrated, like "Juno"? And seriously, I'm all about "Rushmore" and "The Royal Tennenbaums" till I die. So I agree with rio plata to a point - please, no comedy category, because it just puts it into the same ghetto where great animated films end up and the Academy will nominate the wrong films. But not because there hasn't been great comedic cinema for as long as there have been movies.
Well James Berardinelli made a review of The Producers film adaptation of the play and he said exactly that it was dated and terrible and I have to agree with him. I think his review was dead on. I also think the Academy is badly qualified to award comedies and so I hope they never touch it. And color me not surprised at all that a curmudgeon like Riverplate doesn't like comedies.
It was also good enough to win an Oscar - Best Writng for the Screen for a certain Mel Brooks. That's right: Mel Brooks is an EGOT winner. Laugh at that!
What is it you don't like about. "The cum in the hair, kick in the nuts, pie in the face, get drunk/stoned, car crash, movies" No, don't answer that, I'm, to a point, on your side.
BUMP The emmys just gave Jon Cryer of Two and a Half Men the Best Lead actor in a Comedy series. Once again, Jon Cryer for Two and a Half Men. Until the Oscars give an Best actor to Chris Evans for the Advengers don´t tell me how the emmys are much more accurate.
Yeah that was bullshit. But they still got it mostly right. They gave Louis CK an Emmy, Homeland is excellent and it won most of the big drama awards, Game Change was excellent and it won. Aside from that award not going to Larry David or Louie the only minor issue I had was Peter Dinklage not winning but Aaron Paul is great in Breaking Bad.
It wasn´t just bullshit, it was beyond that. Like somebody in twitter said "Jon Cryer winning an Emmy is like Nickelback winning a Grammy". When people compare you to the grammies, you know it´s bad.
The Grammies are a mess but Crash won best picture at the Oscars some years ago. That was a joke. At lease the emmies are pretty good with their top prize the best drama category.
First off, why is the best drama the top prize? Who made drama the end all and be all. And the Crash oscar may have been wrong but it could be comparable to Jim Parsons winning the Emmy over Steve Carrell or something like that. But Jon Cryer winning is the equivalent of The Artist getting beat out by Twilight.
The Best Drama category is usually the last award given out just like Best Picture at the Oscars. I don’t make the rules but it is what it is. It’s usually considered top prize. And Jim Parsons is pretty great in that show actually. Even if the show tries too hard to be smarter than it is. Why are you fixating on one award given out of tons to make your point?
Well there always has to be a last award either way but I don´t know why the drama thing is equal because in categories they are divided equal as opposed to the oscars when they are all under the same category. Jim Parsons is great in the show but Big Bang Theory is not a great show, and is a tier under it. Still it´s a bad pick like most oscars are because although not the best, it is a good job and thus in that category. Jon Cryer being given the award is beyond garbage. He´s in a lower level and that something the oscars never or rarely do. It´s the equivalent of the MTV movie awards or something like that. It´s like Shia Lebouf winning for Trasnformers or something to that effect. That is why I´m concentrating on it because you had the argument about how the emmys are more accurate but it´s not true. They have bad awards a lot but this is the best exhibit since I don´t know how a prestigious award can do a mistake this bad.
As I said I don’t make the rules. I never said BBT was a great show. I said it tries to be smarter than it actually is. But Jim Parson’s is great in it. You bumped a post I made a while ago. Am I suppose to predict the awards the Emmys would give out later? Why are you bitching? If I had known they would make that mistake this year I would have probably changed my opinion despite the fact that in everything else they were mostly correct. But I’m not psychic and when I posted that what I said was completely true.
Well my point was always that the oscars were the best (or least bad) of the awards shows and gave reasons for it before. The Cryer thing just totally settles the point completely. And it wasn´t true then, least so now. As for BBT my point was though Parsons was great, the work to me is unworthy because the show isn´t as good but at least is good work unlike with Cryer.