Viewing Thread:
"Golden Globes 2003 - No love for Lord Of The Rings"

Not one.
Nope, not a single solitary award. Chicago did well though eh? A film based on a musical. And we know how much we all love musicals.
Peter Jackson ignored totally.

Wouldn't have anything to do with it not being a Hollywood flick by any chance? Made by New Line and featuring only Vigo Mortensen, Liv Tyler and Sean Astin as the American actors.
Special Effects by WETA (New Zealand), directed by Jackson (New Zealand) and starring mostly Brits and Kiwis.

No sir, there's no politics involved here. How dare you! Shame though, because I've come to realise that the Lord of The Rings movies (except for ROTK) have fast become some of my favourites. They reinvent spectacle, attempt to tell a vast story that employs long-term, resonation themes of friendship, love, bravery, loyalty and passion.

But Chicago won 3 and some Virginia Woolf-based movie. Who? You mean you've never read her stuff?

MoJoJoJo wrote:
> Meh, I still don't like Fellowship Of The Ring. I really need to watch
> it again, as almost all of my top films only seemed average to me when
> I first saw them. But it bored the heck out of me, no film should do
> that.

I feel like that too, I had to stop the film twice because I got that bored of it... I enjoyed reading the book more though in Year 9 or something. I felt as though it was an insult to the book.. go ahead, rant.

I think it's because of those feet though.. they scare me :(

That really is a sham! The Lord of the rings films are like the best films ever made.

*Goes back to reading The two towers*

Meh, I still don't like Fellowship Of The Ring. I really need to watch it again, as almost all of my top films only seemed average to me when I first saw them. But it bored the heck out of me, no film should do that.

I was meant to see Twin Towers weeks ago, but I'm still waiting. Doubt if I'll see it at the cinema now, but I'll make sure to rent/buy it on DVD.

Yep, you're right. Can't be any good. No need for you to watch it.

I still haven't got round to watching the beard film yet. I just can't bring myself to watch it, everyone says it's good but how can a film with so many beards be worth watching?

:D

Who cares?

Its your opinion of the films that count.

Even if they are under appreciated by a crappy award.....

Yeha.

They are set up.

What do you mean "set up"? They are voted for by members of the Academy i.e. old actors, producers, directors etc, so therefore are very open to political skewing.

A "real" one (I'm assuming you mean voted for by the public) would be even worse. Vin bloody Diesel would get best actor or something similarly awful. Academy members get sent out tapes of the short listed films so they can make an informed judgement, your average Joe has only watched Generic Gross Out Movie 13 and a handful of Generic Action Blockbuster . Not saying that's bad, but not my taste. All an award ceremony is is an expression of a commonly held consensus. Almost by definition that won't be the same as yours as an individual.

Conclusion, make up your own awards. Keep them in your head and maybe even have an imaginary awards ceremony. Woah! All the stars love you!

The oscars are set up.

Somebody should set up a website for 'real' oscars.

Interesting realisation - "awards mean crap" and "awards don't mean crap" mean the same thing despite the addition of a negative. Ermmm... rephrase that first line to something like:

"Awards do mean SOMETHING though." :)