Academy Awards Conspiracy(?)
Not-So-Bad Jerk Faces
07-03-2006, 17:19
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/03/07/MNGM8HJTPO1.DTL&hw=brokeback&sn=001&sc=1000
This just seems silly- "Conspiracy Theories Why 'Crash' best 'Brokeback.'
Can't these people just sit down, stop wasting peoples' time, and just accept that 'Crash' was just a better movie? Honestly, it seems like there are a LOT of sore losers.
It's all completely rigged and fake anyway...it's like somebody accusing WWE wrestling of conspiracy on one match.
Lots of Boobies
07-03-2006, 17:34
It's Hollywood, it's the film industry, and they want to give anything homosexual as many accolades as possible.
Crash was a WAY better movie than Brokeback Mountain.
Ytovian Churches
07-03-2006, 17:37
But you don't understand! The Academy Awards aren't about which movies was better! They're about political advocacy! :p
Meh. I suspect that the Academy voters were just tired of everybody telling them who they were voting for.
Seathorn
07-03-2006, 17:38
other surprises:
1998: "Shakespeare in Love" beats out "Saving Private Ryan" for best picture.
1998: Roberto Benigni ("Life Is Beautiful") beats out both Ian McKellen ("Gods and Monsters") and Tom Hanks ("Saving Private Ryan") for best actor.
1995: "Braveheart" beats out "Apollo 13" for best picture.
To which I say, wtf?
Roberto Benigni was a brilliant actor that most definitely beat Tom Hanks when compared in those two movies.
Shakespeare in Love and Saving Private Ryan. Hmm, Shakespeare in Love was much more interesting and original than another american war movie.
And Braveheart was pretty damn awesome.
So those should not be surprises, obviously, people suck at movies if those were surprises.