Mister Tee wrote:As for the "double standard" usage: that was in specific response to rolo's comment -- which he's since told me was facetious -- that the critics essentially had to be punished for lining up so unanimously behind Social Network. My feeling was 1) Social Network was, whether you or I agree or not, the most highly-praised studio film in many years (it won the Sight & Sound poll, for Christ's sake, which Hollywood films NEVER do) and it would have been dishonest for critics not to support it; and 2) it seemed disingenuous to call critics to task for that when just a year ago the critics had done the same for another film -- one that, I'd wager, wouldn't have had a chance in hell at the Academy best picture without its critics' sweep -- and these same folk hadn't raised a peep of protest . As I say, though, rolo has since said he was being facetious, so it's a moot point.
Hmmmm. There may have been another misunderstanding. I absolutely think the critics are stupid for all supporting one film when there were many great films this year (and their reviews reflect that). I just did not want anyone to think I actually support the conspiracy theory that THE SOCIAL NETWORK is being punished by the Academy because it won so many awards. It is a stupid idea, and anyone who agrees with it is as dumb as those who think Marisa Tomei won an Oscar by accident.
I also have to point out once again that I am not a hypocrite because I did not complain when THE HURT LOCKER supposedly won every critics award. I have said before I was under the impression UP IN THE AIR won the majority of critics awards. It has recently been pointed out to me this is incorrect, but up until a couple weeks ago I just did not know THE HURT LOCKER had done so well.
I offer up this post from a thread on the San Francisco Crtics Circle award winners as proof I was under the impression UP IN THE AIR was dominating the critics awards.
rolotomasi99 wrote:Damien wrote:This Hurt Locker nonsense has got to stop!!!!!
UP IN THE AIR has to stop being nominated and winning everything first, then we can talk about THE HURT LOCKER.
http://uaadb.oscarguy.com/ikonboa....y167789
As you can see this post has not been edited, so there is no trickery involved here. I really was that stupid, though it is interesting no one corrected me. Whenever I say something incorrect, people always rush to tell me. Here, it seems, other people at that point seemed to think UP IN THE AIR was winning enough awards to make my post somewhat accurate (even if you disagree with the opinion I am expressing).
Anyways, I just hope we can stop this whole accusation that I am somehow suddenly changing my position on the critics awards or am being hypocritical because I am not a huge fan of the film that dominated the awards this year. I genuinely did not think THE HURT LOCKER was sweeping all the awards, so I never thought there was a reason to complain about the hive mind of the critics.
I do not think the Academy is or should be punishing THE SOCIAL NETWORK for what the critics did, but I do sincerely hope they learn their lesson from this experience. I do not care how good a film is, there is just no excuse for giving out the same awards as every other group. THE TREE OF LIFE could be the best movie of the year or even the past decade, but I will once again be pissed if it wins Best Picture from almost every single critics group.
The critics awards are already redundant as a whole, but at least do not make them repetitive and unimaginative. When the Online Film Critics Society gave Melanie Laurent from INGLORIOUS BASTERDS their Best Actress award, that certainly was more interesting than it going to Streep or Bullock. I like a little imagination from critics awards. Basically, I am saying to them “Tell me something I don’t know” rather than just giving me the same names over and over again.
Edited By rolotomasi99 on 1297444762