2016 Academy Awards

Posted by: Lampshade

2016 Academy Awards - 02/27/16 10:38 PM

I have not seen many of the movies nominated and I have very little interest this year. I thought Chris Rock was funny twenty years ago. Not anymore.

Am I the only person that thought Mad Max was a let down? Why is it nominated? Tom Hardy just grunted through it. I always loved The Road Warrior and the Mad Max reboot should have been incredible.

I'll watch The Revenant someday. Maybe it's good. Dicaprio can be a good actor(great actor in Gilbert Grape) but he is mostly annoying.

Bridge of Spies was a pleasant surprise of a movie. It was good. Spielberg was actually telling a story again. It's good, but not Schindler's List.

The only performance I saw that I think truly deserves an award this year is Richard Kind for his portrayal of Bing Bong. But he can't get one.


Posted by: Adrian

Re: 2016 Academy Awards - 02/28/16 10:03 AM

We watched The Revenant a couple of weeks ago. That 'they' are calling this an Oscar favourite tells me there must be a slew of mediocre films out this past year. Some good, if not excellent acting at times, but the story was long, not really believeable and somewhat boring with similar scenes seemingly played over and over again.
Posted by: exlabdriver

Re: 2016 Academy Awards - 02/28/16 02:47 PM

Hopefully this is the end of the ubiquitous 'award shows' for the season. There seems to be more & more of these needless spectacles every bloody year. Again, I won't be partaking.

The entertainment industry has to be the most narcissistic on the planet...

TAM
Posted by: BobKay

Re: 2016 Academy Awards - 02/28/16 03:37 PM

I will be NOT be attending the Academy Awards (show on TV) this year (::imagine that I'm flailing my arms and hands, in a "Pinkett-Smith" sorta way, then bringing them back together, in a prayer position::) as there are no Italian/German/American/Senior/Gay people represented as nominees.

Let's look at some numbers. The black population of the US is 12%. Yes, that IS correct, 12%. So, Jada, if every 8th movie made were done entirely with people of color, and they were all really good, the odds would remain the same, 1 out of 8, on a completely level playing field.

It is also making the statement that people of color were excluded for that reason, which is nonsense, like that Scien... thing

If gay men demanded to be represented in 10% of everything (I have always though that # was a bit high, but...), professional sports would cease to exist, construction and maintenance would halt, manufacturing would all be foreign and everyone would be just a designer. Oh, don't worry, it ain't ever gonna happen, and we'll still help you to you look good and not have ugly crap in your house, on your shoulders, and, especially, on your arm. Just ask.

I really don't know the answer, but is any nominee Scien, Sciento, you know, thing? How come she ain't bitchin' about that? If she were here right now, I'd flip my hair at her, if I had any.
Posted by: BobKay

Re: 2016 Academy Awards - 02/28/16 03:50 PM

Oh, I forgot. You DO know that I HAVE TO watch this, the whole fthing, or turn in my "card" immediately, like "at the FedEx office by 8 Monday morning" immediately, right?! I will watch and report back for all of you tomorrow. No, it cannot be DVR'd for any reason, except to re-watch it (OMFG)! It must be "witnessed" live, which means you have to live in EST. That alone has been, for over 45 years, the ONLY reason we haven't ALL moved to San Francisco. They have to wait 3 hours. (I know, right?)

In these days of social media, people in PST will have to wear tinfoil hats and lock themselves in bathrooms, because there will be a 3-hour stream of "Spoiler Alerts" in every media format! Ahh, To Live and Die in L.A
Posted by: fredk

Re: 2016 Academy Awards - 02/28/16 05:06 PM

I'll do the same thing I do every Oscar's season. Totally ignore the event.

Bob. Do let me know how they get around the 'one thank-you' thing will you?
Posted by: CV

Re: 2016 Academy Awards - 02/28/16 05:16 PM

Originally Posted By Adrian
We watched The Revenant a couple of weeks ago. That 'they' are calling this an Oscar favourite tells me there must be a slew of mediocre films out this past year. Some good, if not excellent acting at times, but the story was long, not really believeable and somewhat boring with similar scenes seemingly played over and over again.


First, the Oscar nominees never tell the full story of what's been put out. Yes, there are more mediocre films than good, but that's always been the case. Let's not pretend there's ever been a time where there wasn't more filler than not. And while the Oscars are supposed to represent the height of the craft, what year are you thinking of where you agreed with the majority of the choices?

I enjoyed The Revenant. Sure, the pacing isn't going to keep your blood pumping for the duration, and some of the moments that were supposed to get you there were trying too hard, but I still felt satisfied at the end. Honestly, one of the main reasons I wanted to see it is because of the way-cool shots in the trailer, and while I liked a lot of those, the most annoying parts for me were along the same lines, of trying to be too arty in the filmmaking. But hey, I'd rather a director with ambition than someone following what they think is a successful Hollywood formula.

And since someone else mentioned Mad Max: Fury Road, I'll say I enjoyed that one, too. Yes, it fell short of my wildest dreams, but I haven't tried to watch the old ones in forever, so who knows how they stand up. This new one strikes me as more of a popcorn affair. Some aspects of it were a little cardboard and lifeless for me, but then other parts of it surprised me with their goofy inventiveness. I'll probably expect more out of the sequel(s), however.
Posted by: BobKay

Re: 2016 Academy Awards - 02/29/16 10:10 AM

Originally Posted By fredk
I'll do the same thing I do every Oscar's season. Totally ignore the event.

Bob. Do let me know how they get around the 'one thank-you' thing will you?


It didn't quite end up like that, but every nominee was made to turn in a "thank you" list beforehand. If they won, those names scrolled across the bottom of the screen as they walked up to the stage. There were only a small few for whom the music had to drown them out as they were finishing.

Counting the red carpet crap, it went from 7-midnight!

Chris Rock did a great job of not ignoring the 800 pound gorilla, over and over. Others joined in the lampooning.

Yes, you are all correct. None of you missed anything. I merely fulfilled a sub-cultural obligation.

(He DID mention, rather early on, that Jada Pinkett-Smith wasn't invited to the Oscars in the first place.)
Posted by: brendo

Re: 2016 Academy Awards - 02/29/16 09:38 PM

I have a rule of thumb to avoid any of that crap. Even more if it wins, then it's more of a guarantee it's ultra boring.
My wife's a diCRAPprio fan and thought the revenant sucked. Titanic is one of her faves along with Basketball diaries, To which I could have missed completely and been much happier, having never viewed.

Though there's lots of people that believe those kind of awards are to acting credentials as opposed to a popularity contest.
Posted by: MatManhasgone

Re: 2016 Academy Awards - 03/01/16 06:39 AM

I am still waiting for the "Speakies" so that everyone inside the Audio Speaker design community can have a large galla televised to that the public knows what a great job they did designing speakers. I think that Axiom should sweep the "wow, they sounded so great" category. We will need to make sure there are enough of the 'black' oak speakers entered into the running to get the diversity card played. But I think that the Cocobolo should win the 'it looks so good in the room' category. But we all know how biased the judges are and will give the award to the white maple, and there will be riots in the streets.

I however will miss the award ceremony for the 'cleanies' as I think it's just too much for the Joe Janitor to get an award for cleaning toilets at the local TTC station as they do such a crap job at it anyways.
Posted by: exlabdriver

Re: 2016 Academy Awards - 03/01/16 12:38 PM

My wife advised me that the 'Revenant' guy went off on his usual 'greenie' agenda - as expected.

This from a hypocrite who's 'carbon footprint' is exponentially higher than any other mere mortal on this planet, much like Gore's & Suzuki's. Do as I say, not as I do - from that elite crowd.

The Revenant, nor anything else that he does, is not on my 'to watch' list...

TAM
Posted by: BobKay

Re: 2016 Academy Awards - 03/01/16 05:33 PM

Originally Posted By exlabdriver
My wife advised me that the 'Revenant' guy went off on his usual 'greenie' agenda - as expected.

This from a hypocrite who's 'carbon footprint' is exponentially higher than any other mere mortal on this planet, much like Gore's & Suzuki's. Do as I say, not as I do - from that elite crowd.

The Revenant, nor anything else that he does, is not on my 'to watch' list...

TAM


Oh, like so totally! (I have no idea where that "valley girl" thing just came from!)

You cannot own multiple homes around the country and/or around the globe and commute between them by private jet and be allowed one word on the topic of "green." Al Whore's ATL house is over 12,000 sq. ft.! The landscaping and swimming pool(s) put his property in the "high use" category, so he pays a surcharge for the excess consumption. I will bet my M100's that it is still fully air-conditioned when no Gore is anywhere NEAR the state of Georgia.

However, if we are going to go there, and apparently we have, then if you are driving a 4-door, F350 Lariat Super Duty "doolie" to commute------anywhere, then you are using way more than your fair share of gas while simultaneously contributing far more emissions.

The, "well, they're not that green" list is endless; ??? faithfully recycle everything your town will take, re-use paper and plastic bags and baggies, compost all possible waste, buy existing housing, used tools, etc.???

I'm hardly a termite-loving tree hugger, but it takes, like, six 75'-tall pine trunks to keep a kid in Pampers (registered TM) for 2 years. Our standard of living in N.A. will be less and less sustainable as the globe reaches, in this century, it's maximum population of 9 billion.

I once saw an aerial video of few acres of land with an avg. house and garage. Also on the land was everything one family would consume in a lifetime. NOT after the kids left home, just to "raise a family of 2, live there until and after retirement, then croak." Laid out on the grass were 8 cars, 5 washers, 6 dryers, 5 refrigerators, 4 sofas, a couple dozen chairs, toys, bikes, beds, beds, beds, athletic/beach/boating gear, 8 TV's, computers, gaming crap, phones, heaps of clothing, linens and shoes that could surround and blot out the house, mounds and mounds of foodstuffs, from meat to candy, paper goods, disposable plastics, construction demo rubble (that stone counter top from 12 years ago that's starting to look a bit shabby and cracked), a bath tub, 3 toilets, GALLONS of paint---it was nuts. And then there was the water. OM-G, the water.

I know the person doing this report probably has 3 houses by now, but it really changed the way I look at everything I consume.

I consider myself by no means green enough to preach. However, I can still judge others. (You're supposed to laugh, you self-righteous bastard.)
Posted by: brendo

Re: 2016 Academy Awards - 03/01/16 08:45 PM

In my neighbourhood that exact picture is quite regular, and the bloody washers and driers are still working fine there just not brand new.
They even pave the yard to park all the cars. That's what we get from a disposable society, nothing's made to last any more.
Posted by: fredk

Re: 2016 Academy Awards - 03/01/16 10:24 PM

Originally Posted By BobKay
...

However, if we are going to go there, ...

Thank you Bob, for making me feel better about living in my crappy recycled concrete bunker with a stove from the 80s (that recently replace the one from the 60s that died) and driving an ugly metal box that gets a gazillion kilometres to the litre as it turtles along.

Ex lab dude. What's the carbon footprint of one of those military whirleyjigs? Just sayin...
Posted by: exlabdriver

Re: 2016 Academy Awards - 03/02/16 02:22 AM

If someone in trouble requires the services of such a fine rescue craft, it is doubtful that the 'rescuee' would really care, ha!

TAM
Posted by: Adrian

Re: 2016 Academy Awards - 03/02/16 06:50 AM

Originally Posted By fredk

Ex lab dude. What's the carbon footprint of one of those military whirleyjigs? Just sayin...

That analogy is quite ridiculous.
Posted by: MatManhasgone

Re: 2016 Academy Awards - 03/02/16 07:26 AM

Originally Posted By exlabdriver
If someone in trouble requires the services of such a fine rescue craft, it is doubtful that the 'rescuee' would really care, ha!

TAM


If you were in Ontario and Wynn figured she could charge the rescuee for the carbon footprint to get that money to pay for her budget promises she would.
Posted by: exlabdriver

Re: 2016 Academy Awards - 03/02/16 12:22 PM

Matt:

Shhh!!

You'll give our new touchy-feely, greenie, European style federal government more bizarre ideas...

TAM
Posted by: BobKay

Re: 2016 Academy Awards - 03/03/16 04:37 PM

Since this thread was long ago hijacked, it's a good place to bury things, I think.

How is it that when you guys from Canada talk politics, you hardly ever go all Naomi Campbell on each other. We can't do that. and now more than ever in my politically-aware lifetime!

So if you've been paying any attention, you may have heard the ex-pres of Mexico, Vicente Fox, remark on Mr. Trump's idea of a border-long wall and making Mexico pay for it (it involved an f-bomb). And, once again, if you've been paying attention to what's going on down here, CANADA should build a wall. You cannot care WHO pays for it. It's too late for that. You gotta start now!

In the old days, it was easy to tell from which camp those rushing north emanated. They were either running from a crime, or they were committing one by going just by going there---knowingly.

Now, unfortunately, you, CANADA, run the risk of any and everyone trying to flee over your borders. Unlike Syria, or Iraq, those who may come from here will have no paramount reason. They will still be arguing over the reasons they are fleeing in the first place. It's gonna make the re-unification of Germany look like coaching a high school marching band.

I'm tellin' ya, "loogout."
Posted by: AAAA

Re: 2016 Academy Awards - 03/03/16 07:47 PM

We are aware of it.

You are welcome here.

A real website. smile

http://cbiftrumpwins.com/#intro

We are terrified for you all down there.
Posted by: fredk

Re: 2016 Academy Awards - 03/03/16 09:04 PM

Originally Posted By Adrian
Originally Posted By fredk

Ex lab dude. What's the carbon footprint of one of those military whirleyjigs? Just sayin...

That analogy is quite ridiculous.

Yup. As ridiculous as the original assertion. Sometimes there are good reasons for flying around in things that pump lots of carbon into the air. smile
Posted by: fredk

Re: 2016 Academy Awards - 03/03/16 09:06 PM

Originally Posted By Serenity_Now
We are aware of it.

You are welcome here.

A real website. smile

http://cbiftrumpwins.com/#intro

We are terrified for you all down there.

Yeah, but what if The Donald loses and all his supporters want out? Yes Bob, we do need a big wall.
Posted by: brendo

Re: 2016 Academy Awards - 03/04/16 01:09 AM

I actually saw some face book proposing of such measures. The wife spends most of the days on the social media. They were saying we'll need the wall if the Donald gets in.
He seems to much, Vancouver is still very old style Redneck town, and he seems to be the same 1920s racist as the ones here.
Posted by: real80sman

Re: 2016 Academy Awards - 03/04/16 08:32 AM

Originally Posted By BobKay
And, once again, if you've been paying attention to what's going on down here, CANADA should build a wall. You cannot care WHO pays for it. It's too late for that. You gotta start now!


We have been paying attention LOL
Posted by: BobKay

Re: 2016 Academy Awards - 03/04/16 10:10 AM

Fred, Trevor, Shawn,

Your compassion and understanding have touched me. Now that I'm old and dumpy, I don't look so good in summer clothes anyway. Like "Rhoda" said, maybe I'll "keep better" in a colder climate. I'm also certain that I will move considerably more slowly up there, so as long as I stay to the right, I shouldn't be too big a bother.

Thanks for the links. You ARE paying attention! I like when that happens.
Posted by: CV

Re: 2016 Academy Awards - 03/06/16 06:42 PM

Originally Posted By exlabdriver
This from a hypocrite who's 'carbon footprint' is exponentially higher than any other mere mortal on this planet, much like Gore's & Suzuki's. Do as I say, not as I do - from that elite crowd.


Is the only problem the hypocrisy, or do you also believe humans have no impact on the environment?
Posted by: exlabdriver

Re: 2016 Academy Awards - 03/06/16 08:27 PM

Presently the earth is still coming out of the end of an ice age. In another 10,000 years or so, my wonderful lush green island off the west coast (where I have grown a 20 foot palm tree) most likely will be under a hundred feet or more of ice, just like it has been in the recent (geologically) past. It is a natural cycle that will continue until our sun eventually destroys the planet.

Improvements & regulations made in pollution controls over the past decades is most welcome, after all, we don't want to crap on our own doorstep; however, humans have made only minimal impact on climate. It would be nice though, if we could stop & even decrease world population levels so that remaining resources are sustainable for a reasonable standard of living for everyone. But it seems that this will not happen as religious & cultural beliefs are not on side with this notion.

In the end, the earth is going to do what it wants to. All of the Carbon Taxes, Carbon Offsets & wealth redistribution schemes dreamed up by these hypocritical environmentalist gurus won't change a thing except to make most of our wallets lighter & a few others in the third world more wealthy.

Let's hope that when they all go to the next big climate conference in some exotic place in a foreign land - many on the taxpayers' dime - that they all walk and/or swim there to prove that they are really environmentally conscious. That way their carbon footprint will truly be minimal, unlike that last big party in Paris where a good time was had by all. Canada sent 383 delegates - more than the UK, Australia and US combined - preposterous! It's OK, just add the bill to our national debt.

Many, many tons of petroleum products were consumed (burned thus releasing nasty CO2) to make this gathering happen. Somehow I suspect that evil pipelines, tanker trains & monstrous oil tankers were involved at sometime during the process of transporting the delegates from all over the world there & back.

Hypocrisy at its finest...

TAM
Posted by: pmbuko

Re: 2016 Academy Awards - 03/07/16 06:31 PM

Originally Posted By exlabdriver
humans have made only minimal impact on climate

diCaprio's hypocrisy notwithstanding, this is simply not true. The last ice age ended about 12000 years ago, but let's say you are correct that we're still emerging from the last one. Global surface and ocean temps are increasing 20x faster than the last end of an ice age. That's not insignificant and strongly points to the opposite conclusion than what I quoted above.

Sure, if you increase the scale of human impact to hundreds of thousands of years, our impact on climate is only a blip, but our lives -- and the lives of those who come after us and have to exist in the mess we're creating -- are short.
Posted by: AAAA

Re: 2016 Academy Awards - 03/07/16 07:54 PM

Dude! Yuck.

Watch Merchants of doubt on Netflix.
Posted by: exlabdriver

Re: 2016 Academy Awards - 03/07/16 08:27 PM

I came across this simple chart in another debate that looks reasonable to me. How true the data is I don't know but it is probably as good as any:

http://www.uigi.com/Temperature_swings_11000_yrs.jpg

Believe what you want & I'll stay with mine. That is the trouble with this subject. It seems that everything is based almost solely on beliefs on both sides - much like religion. The only truth in this whole fiasco is that nobody really knows what Mother Nature has in store. Our climate has continually changed ever since day one on this planet - long before humans were here - & will continue to do so until it is all over.

All of the phony, feel-good wealth redistribution schemes will not make one iota of difference in controlling climate trends; however, they will help to needlessly drain some treasuries even more to fatten others.

Having said all of that, the whole point is moot. There are dire situations that are looming on this planet - economic, political, ethnic, & religious turmoil along with over population - that will render Climate Change to be a very minor player, if at all.

I wouldn't worry about it...

TAM
Posted by: fredk

Re: 2016 Academy Awards - 03/07/16 09:16 PM

Originally Posted By exlabdriver
...
Having said all of that, the whole point is moot. There are dire situations that are looming on this planet - economic, political, ethnic, & religious turmoil along with over population - that will render Climate Change to be a very minor player, if at all.

I wouldn't worry about it...

TAM

The sum of the whole is much nastier than its individual parts. It all adds up to a big mess eventually. That said, you tell Pacific islanders who's homes are slowly disapearing beneath the waves that climate change is minor. Its a matter of perspective.
Posted by: exlabdriver

Re: 2016 Academy Awards - 03/07/16 10:08 PM

Yes, it is a matter of perspective; however, I live at about 15' ASL within 150 yards of the Pacific Ocean & have observed over 20 years no such changes here. I heard a radio commentator 2 days ago who has been living on a beach in The Bahamas for the past 51 winters. His observations, although not scientific, are the same as mine. Nothing has appreciably changed in his little part of the world.

Back to the chart, I wish that someone could explain the 8 red humps above the norm 15C when humans were few & far between. Just using common sense & reasoning, I'd say that it is normal warming cycling followed each time shown by blue dips of cooler periods.

Now if that chart is wrong (perhaps as accurate as the infamous hockey stick chart), then maybe I'm full of crap & so are those who authored it; however, it won't alter my beliefs, ha!

TAM
Posted by: AAAA

Re: 2016 Academy Awards - 03/08/16 04:44 AM

You really gotta see the doc. Merchants of doubt. Very interesting.
Posted by: Ken.C

Re: 2016 Academy Awards - 03/08/16 10:48 AM

And as we all know, anecdotal evidence is much more accurate than scientific evidence. Because the scientists are out to get... something? Grant money? Or something?
Posted by: AAAA

Re: 2016 Academy Awards - 03/08/16 11:28 AM

If that's for me you just gotta watch it. Not like a Michael Moore thing.
Posted by: exlabdriver

Re: 2016 Academy Awards - 03/08/16 01:13 PM

Searching that stalwart (not!) IPCC outfit in the UN, I just came across this article that shows the disparity in thought & conclusions by 2 opposing groups of supposed experts/scientists. Worth a read (2 pages):

http://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/201...e/#328960395097

After reading that, how is the layman supposed to make an informed opinion? I saw on the news last night that this winter (year?) in NA was the warmest on record whereas there is another study that says that there has been no temperature increase in the past 18 years. What the hell?? Again, I have to conclude that no one really knows on either side & if they claim that they do, then they are highly suspect.

I don't trust either side of the argument as being correct or truthful; however, I vehemently distrust our touchy-feely politicians who have their grubby hands on our purse strings - a purse that is already largely empty...

TAM
Posted by: AAAA

Re: 2016 Academy Awards - 03/08/16 03:51 PM

I read your link. I feel bad. It's like hearing about someone scammed by a foreign lottery phone call. You really need to watch the doc. At this point it is important.

The NIPCC is not a legitimate organization. At all.....

Hate movies? Here is the book.

https://www.amazon.ca/gp/product/1608193942?*Version*=1&*entries*=0

I hope this doesn't come off too high and mighty. I don't mean it that way at all. Whenever I encounter someone with these views I feel obligated to help them. This doc is the most concise and professional way I have encountered yet. I sincerely hope a few people are curious enough to watch it. It is not a junk youtube sensationalized hype thing. Not even close. If you think I'm being an ass watch the doc, you will understand.

Please watch it. wink I'm done now. Reset to speaker nerd mode. lol.
Posted by: BobKay

Re: 2016 Academy Awards - 03/08/16 05:08 PM

And the award for most hijacked thread goes to...

"Climate Change!"

Accepting the award will be Planet Earth, who managed just fine without people for billions of years and is seriously considering a return to those good ol' days.
Posted by: exlabdriver

Re: 2016 Academy Awards - 03/08/16 05:44 PM

Considering that the IPCC is a 'legitimate' organization, it certainly has a checkered & controversial past.

With the best of intentions, I checked out the link for the book & was greeted with this endorsement:

"Anyone concerned about the state of democracy in America should read this book. Former Vice President Al Gore, author of An Inconvenient Truth.

Therefore, I think that I'll pass. Enuff said on this sordid subject.

So has anyone seen any good Oscar winning movies lately?? My choice was 'Bridge of Spies' but it didn't do as well as I thought that it might...

TAM
Posted by: fredk

Re: 2016 Academy Awards - 03/08/16 08:04 PM

Originally Posted By BobKay
And the award for most hijacked thread goes to...

"Climate Change!"
...


See. It is real. It even won an award!