GeneralZodLives
Super Freak
Avatar is pretty but the story is ****.
2015 Academy Award Nominations
- Thread starter Khev
- Start date
Help Support Collector Freaks Forum:
YankeesFanboy
Super Freak
"Interview" a future Oscar winner? Well, that's now off the ol' bucket list. 
The Clown Prince of Crime
Super Freak
Yes, that's the best source.
I wouldn't say that. Sure it's a story that's been done before ala Dances with Wolves, but it's definitely not ****. People love to hate on that movie, but IMO it was one of the most incredible theater experiences I've ever had. A lot of that had to do with the tech and visuals, sure, but I also found myself deeply caring for the Navi in the end.
Oh, and I just received my Neytiri LSF
GeneralZodLives
Super Freak
Agree to disagree. It was a beautiful film to watch and the designs were unique but everything in it was predictable--except them using their ponytail things to ride animals and have sex. I wasn't expecting that combo and it makes me wonder if the animals felt violated.
Not in my opinion. There's many a movie that I really like or even love that they hate. And I hate that fact that people can rate a movie before it even comes out.
The Clown Prince of Crime
Super Freak
They don't rate or review films. RT just gathers all the reviews from newspapers, magazines, websites...etc. Then they determine what percentage of all those reviews are positive. So for example, they gather 305 reviews and if 295 are favorable and only 10 are negative, then that means 97% (more or less) of the reviews are positive . So if a film has a low score, it means that of all the reviews they gathered from critics, many of those reviews were negative.
They also have the audience percentage, which doesn't always agree with the critics %, but that's a separate score. I don't know if people can rate a film before it comes out though. However, the "Tomatometer" as they call it, just gathers the critics reviews, and they have seen the film.
I prefer Metacritic to RT, not that either is perfect. But RT can be deceptive, in that movies everyone likes can get 90%+, but that doesn't mean the movie would rank as a 90/100 on a rating scale. Could be it's closer to a 60 or 70/100 in the minds of reviewers, but few reviewers really dislike it. Plus, I've seen lots of reviews that seem bad but are rated positive, or that seem positive but are rated bad, though on balance they seem to get it right. It's still a helpful heuristic when you're trying to decide which movies are worth your time though.
pturtle
Super Freak
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2013
- Messages
- 10,289
- Reaction score
- 36
I've been pretty busy lately so I haven't kept up with everything going on post-oscars but I had no clue about the whole Keaton speech fiasco.
Michael Keaton hides his Oscar speech after realizing he lost - YouTube
That's heartbreaking, he must have been pretty damn confident to have it out like that.
Michael Keaton hides his Oscar speech after realizing he lost - YouTube
That's heartbreaking, he must have been pretty damn confident to have it out like that.
How is that a fiasco? He had a really good chance of winning. So he had it out (assuming that's what it was) so that he wasn't nervously fumbling around with it on stage. It's not like he pulled a Zoolander or anything. I think that just makes him even more classy that he didn't try to hog the mic (he avoided it in fact) when his film won Best Picture. He apparently went from "I'm probably going to win" to "aw shucks, who am I kidding it's nice just to be on stage with my cast and crew." That's badass, IMO.
pturtle
Super Freak
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2013
- Messages
- 10,289
- Reaction score
- 36
I guess it's a fiasco because social media, blogs, and boards are treating it like it is one.
- Joined
- Nov 11, 2008
- Messages
- 32,452
- Reaction score
- 3,162
Yeah, people made a major league production out if it and the media ate it up. I wonder what it said.
There's speculation that Keaton and Redmayne might be going head to head again next year at the oscars. Redmayne will probably beat him again though because he's playing a biopic, period piece tranny which is bigger bait than Hawking. Keaton is going to be Walter Robinson from the Boston Globe and Ray Kroc (McDonalds).
There's speculation that Keaton and Redmayne might be going head to head again next year at the oscars. Redmayne will probably beat him again though because he's playing a biopic, period piece tranny which is bigger bait than Hawking. Keaton is going to be Walter Robinson from the Boston Globe and Ray Kroc (McDonalds).
Last edited:
The Clown Prince of Crime
Super Freak
Batman is always ready, and so was Keaton, but I still don't think he was snubbed. Jake Gyllenhaal on the other hand, was snubbed from the best actor category...yet they gave Maryl Streep another undeserved nomination for an average performance in a bad film 
Sidewinder
Super Freak
Batman is always ready, and so was Keaton, but I still don't think he was snubbed. Jake Gyllenhaal on the other hand, was snubbed from the best actor category...yet they gave Maryl Streep another undeserved nomination for an average performance in a bad film
I agree. It think Bradley Cooper should have been out and Gyllenhaal in.
I was happy with Redmayne's win. Keaton is getting more roles out of his fantastic work in Birdman, so it's really a win for him in the long run.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
The Clown Prince of Crime
Super Freak
Well, the long run is Kong: Skull Island (2017)
Unless he makes Beetlejuice 2, but it's funny how no one is talking about it anymore.
YankeesFanboy
Super Freak
I feel terrible for Keaton. Birdman won for just about everything but got shut out on the acting awards.
Similar threads
