#23 Posted on 28.2.05 1607.19 Reposted on: 28.2.12 1609.03
I thought Rock held back - he had a chance to really zing when he introduced Rene Zellwegger by saying that she gained 30 pounds for her role as "Bridget Jones" and that she would be gaining 80 pounds for her next role as "Deacon Jones" - shouldn't the line have been - for her next role as "Star Jones" ???? I mean how many people in that audience and watching at home even knew who Deacon Jones was ?
#28 Posted on 28.2.05 2019.19 Reposted on: 28.2.12 2021.36
My two cents on the Penn/Rock thing:
The joke wasn't meant to be mean-spirited, as Rock even poked fun at himself. Penn came off as an ass, and needs to keep his mouth shut. Chris Rock's not a photographer, Sean, he may swing back.
As for Rock as host, I thought he did a tremendous job for his first outing and gave the show a light-hearted feel it's been missing for quite awhile. I think the reasons the Oscars in recent years went down in ratings is because it was too stuffy, everybody took themselves way too seriously, and too many winners/presenters came off as pretentious hacks.
Originally posted by Parts Unknown I didn't think Rock was offensive or over the top, just trashy for something as glamorous as the Oscars.
Two more awards I would give out: Best cleavage: Salma Hayek
Since last post: 3297 days Last activity: 3297 days
#29 Posted on 28.2.05 2136.54 Reposted on: 28.2.12 2139.33
Exactly! Rock was just the right amount of light-hearted humor. I was hoping for a bit more bite to the jokes, but I guess he has to be careful the first time out. For the first time in many years or EVER, I looked forward to the in-between segments when Rock would be back on TV.
Since last post: 4087 days Last activity: 4018 days
#30 Posted on 28.2.05 2306.40 Reposted on: 28.2.12 2307.29
I didn't find Rock all that funny and his whole "I'm not going to bash Bush but here's a bunch of reasons why we should hate him" spiel (and the crowd's reactions) gave FOXNews even more ammunition in their crusade against Hollywood.
Since last post: 4048 days Last activity: 3704 days
#31 Posted on 1.3.05 1212.22 Reposted on: 1.3.12 1217.51
The obvious choice for who should have been dropped is Clint Eastwood. He played the same role he always plays, the grizzled old, stine faced tough guy. Just because he emotes on screen about how real lemon pie makes him happy, does not mean he did a good job acting in the film.
I never saw Sideways, so I can't speak for Giamatti's snub, but Jim Carrey definitely deserved a nomination ahead of Clint.
And as for best Director, am I the only one who felt like Million Dollar Baby was two seperate movies, an hour and half boxing movie and a 45 minute tear jerker. Isn't it the director's job to make sure the entire film works as a cohesive unit? The Aviator kept my attention wrapt for 3 hours, a sure sign of directing prowess.
#32 Posted on 1.3.05 1925.38 Reposted on: 1.3.12 1927.31
Originally posted by zolsticeThe obvious choice for who should have been dropped is Clint Eastwood. He played the same role he always plays, the grizzled old, stine faced tough guy. Just because he emotes on screen about how real lemon pie makes him happy, does not mean he did a good job acting in the film.
(edited by zolstice on 1.3.05 1540)
I haven't seen "MDB" yet either, and the clip they showed during the telecast seemed eerily reminiscent of his performance from "Heartbreak Ridge." Of course, I loved "HBR," so I'm sure I'd like Clint's performance here, but have to agree that from that clip it didn't look like he'd broken any new ground. Actual viewing of the movie might change that opinion, of course.
ALL ORIGINAL POSTS IN THIS THREAD ARE NOW AVAILABLE