# The Oscars (79th Annual Academy Awards)



## aryayush (Feb 27, 2007)

Hello! 

I am surprised there isn't a thread about this yet (yes, I have checked).

Here is the list of Oscar winners:


> *ACTOR IN A SUPPORTING ROLE*
> Alan Arkin
> LITTLE MISS SUNSHINE
> 
> ...


OSCAR.com - 79th Annual Academy Awards - Winners

There are two types of movie buffs out there, those who love most Oscar movies and those who hate movies that make it to the Oscars. I belong to the latter category. Out of all these films, I would only want to watch _Happy Feet_. And that too because it is an animated feature.

So, guys - what are your reactions to the Oscars?


----------



## zegulas (Feb 27, 2007)

Who is Graham King's daughter, whats her name?


----------



## mail2and (Feb 27, 2007)

I don't know about most of the movies on that list.

But, then, 99% of the movies that I watch are made in Mumbai.


----------



## hailgautam (Feb 27, 2007)

i saw happy feet and liked it. 

missed departed.

never heard of the other. and i am of the first kind. love the oscar winning movies. hate 99% of the desi movies, incl bolly, tolly and molly and all other local woods.


----------



## hitman050 (Feb 27, 2007)

I think most of the awards here were spot on. Any of you who hasn't watched The Departed, watch it NOW, its a must, fantastic movie.


----------



## runeet (Feb 27, 2007)

departed is an awsome movie, it really eserves the best movie award, martin scorsese always makes damn good movies.


----------



## gdatuk (Feb 27, 2007)

in the list i have missed only pans labrynyth
will see it asap...and among the nominations i have missed apocalypso...wil see that next week!


----------



## aryayush (Feb 27, 2007)

WOW! That is some serious dedication.

My sister saw 'The Departed' in USA and told me it was not worth watching.


----------



## Tech Geek (Feb 27, 2007)

Thanks for telling


----------



## mail2and (Feb 27, 2007)

hitman050 said:
			
		

> I think most of the awards here were spot on. Any of you who hasn't watched The Departed, watch it NOW, its a must, fantastic movie.



It is also a fantastic rip off from a Chinese movie.


__________


			
				hailgautam said:
			
		

> hate 99% of the desi movies, incl bolly, tolly and molly and all other local woods.



Yes, every movie made in Hollywood is fantastic. They're thrilling, exciting, thought provoking and <insert adjective(s)>.



If you hate 99% of the hindi film industry movies, then you are watching the wrong ones.


----------



## mail2and (Feb 28, 2007)

Indyan said:
			
		

> Huh?
> Dude, do you even know the defination of a rip-off? What RGV and Bhatt camp does is ripping off. What Anu Mail does is ripping off.
> The Departed it a licenced adaptation of The Infernal Affairs. Also the director made it sure that he thanked the original movie, while recieving the awards.
> There is a difference in being an adaptaion and being a rip off.
> It's an adaptaion. So the script it not original. I look at it in the same way as adapting a novel. But, direction is about how the story is told. Not the script.



Yeah, yeah. And who are you to talk about direction? What do you know about cameras in the first place? Are you an authority on direction? Do you even know how to operate a video camera?

A licensed copy is another word for a rip-off. You don't see the Bhatt camp winning awards. They make movies in 1 crore, get 2 crores out of it, and are happy with it. Not even an insane person will call their movies even decent.

How do you tell a 'story' in a different way? It's not the same as adapting from a novel. It has been adapted from another movie, so there is bound to be something common even in the direction. 

I'm not saying it is a good movie or a bad movie, hell I don't even care for stupid awards. I still wonder why India sends its movies to such stupid awards. Whom do we want recognition from? What I mean is that a rip-off should NOT win an award.

Black was licensed, too; but weren't the rip-off sharks out in the open when it was released? 

What would you know about Hindi movies anyways? You haven't watched the best three hindi movies of all time. It's really sad that you can name all characters of the latest American cheap thrillers, but you can't name three theatre personalities. Then you start talking about acting, direction etc.


----------



## caleb (Feb 28, 2007)

Need Billy Crystal back as the host...no one else does it as good as Billy Crystal. Don't like any movie that made it to oscars this year except HAPPY FEET...it is more than worth a watch. On the whole the year 2006 was a "dry" year for Hollywood with a lot of bummer movies.


----------



## mail2and (Feb 28, 2007)

Indyan said:
			
		

> And you have directed many award winning films? Care to mention their names?



I don't go around on forums talking about how movies were directed. Unlike you, that is.




> I dont like most old hindi movies, and yes I havent watched almost all old great movies.
> But, I do watch recent hindi movies.



Further proves that you have no right to comment on Hindi cinema.



> Btw, who are you to comment on American tv shows? Have you ever watched them.



Who are you to comment on movies and their qualities such as direction?




> Anyway, I know you too well to start a flame war and end up getting a warning. Your judgement as always is clouded by your hatred for anything that is western.



And you have the most neutral judgement? Step down from the non-existent moral high ground. 
I'm not a <anything that is western> licker like you are. I like good movies. If you can't debate don't give a lame excuse such as getting warned. Stop acting like a sissy and start acting like a man.


----------



## aryayush (Feb 28, 2007)

caleb said:
			
		

> Need Billy Crystal back as the host...no one else does it as good as Billy Crystal. Don't like any movie that made it to oscars this year except HAPPY FEET...it is more than worth a watch. On the whole the year 2006 was a "dry" year for Hollywood with a lot of bummer movies.


I just searched for 'billy crystal' on IMDB. Last I saw him was in 'When Harry Met Sally'. It was such a shock to see him so old. When Harry Met Sally was a wonderful movie. Meg Ryan does not look nearly as aged as him.


----------



## hailgautam (Feb 28, 2007)

mail2and said:
			
		

> Yeah, yeah. And who are you to talk about direction? What do you know about cameras in the first place? Are you an authority on direction? Do you even know how to operate a video camera?



There is a saying in Oriya, "what if not got married, went to a marriage" meaning it is not necessary to do it yourself, observation is quite sufficient to comment on something.....

a person does not have to have a degree from the film institute to judge a film whether it is good or bad.....



> Yes, every movie made in Hollywood is fantastic. They're thrilling, exciting, thought provoking and <insert adjective(s)>.



No I don't agree on that...........you have not seen the crappy, disgusting, boring, stupid, senseless ones <insert adjective(s)> ones over there..... seems you been busy with the hindi movies over here.........



> If you hate 99% of the hindi film industry movies, then you are watching the wrong ones.



Negative again.......

I just watch the 1% good movies and try to avoid the bad ones..


----------



## mail2and (Feb 28, 2007)

hailgautam said:
			
		

> There is a saying in Oriya, "what if not got married, went to a marriage" meaning it is not necessary to do it yourself, observation is quite sufficient to comment on something.....



But, it's an observation, a view, an opinion. 

In CA lingo, it's akin to a CPT pass-out going to audit. 
__________


			
				hailgautam said:
			
		

> I just watch the 1% good movies and try to avoid the bad ones..



37.5% of the statistics are made on the spot.


----------



## aryayush (Feb 28, 2007)

It is 44% actually!


----------



## hailgautam (Feb 28, 2007)

mail2and said:
			
		

> But, it's an observation, a view, an opinion.
> 
> In CA lingo, it's akin to a CPT pass-out going to audit.
> __________


 For your kind information, CPT pass-outs do most of the audit work and the partners sign the accounts based on the work done by them (referring to the new course).



> 37.5% of the statistics are made on the spot.


 and 98% of all the statistics are made up


----------



## aryayush (Feb 28, 2007)

Both statements mean the same actually except for the different percentages.


----------



## mail2and (Feb 28, 2007)

hailgautam said:
			
		

> For your kind information, CPT pass-outs do most of the audit work and the partners sign the accounts based on the work done by them (referring to the new course).



They only do vouching, isn't it? My friend is CA-inter pass out and is the son of a partner of a big 4 firm. He told me that since the pass out in CPT in Mumbai was 87%, the quality of these 12th standard kids is not as good as that of say the ones that passed CA-Foundation or the ones that went to audit after Inter.

If I am not mistaken, most of the audit in big firms is done by grads+CA-inter(until recently). E & Y doesn't accept any CA-inter unless he/she is a grad.

Anyways, we are going off topic.


----------



## hailgautam (Feb 28, 2007)

^^ There is much more to do then vouching, big4 hardly do any vouching because it is pretty much useless to do vouching, just imagine a Rs. 1500 core company how much vouching you would be able to do and what would you do. 

Big4 rather depend on the internal controls and the processes and whether they are effective or not. 

E&Y used to not take any one who is not a grad.....for Internship, but they too take and we had many non-grads as interns, and yes I did my articles in E&Y 

Ya we are off topic in relation to forum.


----------



## aryayush (Feb 28, 2007)

mail2and said:
			
		

> Anyways, we are going off topic.


Actually, you guys weren't exactly on topic even before.


----------



## caleb (Feb 28, 2007)

aryayush said:
			
		

> I just searched for 'billy crystal' on IMDB. Last I saw him was in 'When Harry Met Sally'. It was such a shock to see him so old. When Harry Met Sally was a wonderful movie. Meg Ryan does not look nearly as aged as him.


 Well, Billy Crystal will be 60 years old in 2 weeks...Meg Ryan will be 60 in NOV 2021..so obviously he will look old...plus he doesn't use plastic surgery...I don't know if Meg Ryan has done any plastic job or not but genrally it is believed that Hollywood (and many Bollywood) Woman go in for plastic surgery.

Anyway coming back to Billy Crystal...bcoz he was so mazing, Billy was asked to host the Oscar's year after year for 7 years until they decided to get Chris Rock last year (Chris COMPLETELY screwed up the Oscar's with his cheap gimmicks it was so padestrian). This year Ellen DeGeneres (who although is a actor & writer she is more known as the day time talk show host in US). She was better than Chris Rock of last year but she is no where near Billy Crystal.

If you want to compare Billy Crystal (this is totally my opinion) with Chris Rock ...I would say imagine Amitabh Bacchan being replaced by Cyrus Barucha to host KBC...if you want compare Billy with Ellen DeGeneres...than it'll be Amitabh being replaced by Shoba de to host KBC (it's not an exact comparison but it'll give you an idea of how good Billy Crystal is...once again this my opinion which is generally echoed by many hard core "Oscar watchers"...or should I say I'm echoing what is generally agreed by Oscar fans).

Don't take my word, just walk into any decent Video renting parlour and ask for all the Oscar's hosted by Billy Crystal till 2004.


----------



## aryayush (Feb 28, 2007)

So, you watch the Oscars?

Wasn't Cameron Diaz the host this year?

Does it air on any channel in India? Which one?


----------



## caleb (Feb 28, 2007)

aryayush said:
			
		

> So, you watch the Oscars?
> 
> Wasn't Cameron Diaz the host this year?
> 
> Does it air on any channel in India? Which one?


 Yes I watch Oscars...it's fun...well atleast it used to be when Billy Crystal was around...these days it is boring with some padestrian hosts (compared to Billy).

No Cameron Diaz was not the host...Ellen DeGeneres was...a day time talk show host in US (also a writer & actress).

It is aired LIVE every year by Star World and it was aired live on Monday morning 26th FEB 2007 (which is basically Sunday night in US) and it was also re-telecast at 8pm (I think) on Star World...Star World has been doing this every year from over a decade now. They tend to repeat it the following sunday so you may want to catch up.


----------



## Pathik (Feb 28, 2007)

well did ny1 notice lisa ray ther??? she looked HOTTTT


----------



## aryayush (Feb 28, 2007)

Is it family friendly? an extremely conservative family, if I may say so.


----------



## caleb (Feb 28, 2007)

aryayush said:
			
		

> Is it family friendly? an extremely conservative family, if I may say so.


 Yes it is family friendly...maybe some people take offense when the awardee is being kissed on the lips n stuff. I find many of our Bollywood award ceremonies to be a bit vulgur with the girating movements and stuff...I remember Urmila Matondkar a few years wearing a certain stretchy pants which bordered way over decency even by western standards...so compared to that Oscars are a lot more decent. But as I said Oscar lost it sheen when Billy left the show.

@pathiks, was Lisa really there?...I didn't notice maybe I wan't paying attention or she was shown when I wasn't watching.


----------



## hailgautam (Mar 1, 2007)

aryayush said:
			
		

> Both statements mean the same actually except for the different percentages.


Nope.....they mean 100% different


----------



## aryayush (Mar 1, 2007)

How exactly?


----------



## hailgautam (Mar 1, 2007)

you can read?
out of 100%, 98% are made-up - this statement talks about the *authenticity* of the statistics.

2. 37.5% are made up on the spot - other 62.5% require some work on them to be done..........this statement talks about the *timing* of creation of the statistics.

 That's how exactly.


----------



## mail2and (Mar 1, 2007)

aryayush said:
			
		

> How exactly?



Don't bother. Some people argue for the sake of it.


----------



## aryayush (Mar 1, 2007)

But I intend to make it clear to him.



			
				hailgautam said:
			
		

> you can read?
> out of 100%, 98% are made-up - this statement talks about the *authenticity* of the statistics.
> 
> 2. 37.5% are made up on the spot - other 62.5% require some work on them to be done..........this statement talks about the *timing* of creation of the statistics.
> ...


No, you are absolutely wrong, and I do not mean that in disrespect. It is OK to be wrong sometimes, life would be pretty boring if you were always correct.

Both the sentences talk about the authenticity of most statistics. What mail2and posted is actually supposed to be a funny and self-conflicting post. But it takes a little bit of common sense to 'get it'.
It talks about how so many statistics are made up on the spot (i.e. inaccurate, artificial, incorrect, inauthentic - call it what you will) while it already supplements the statement with another made up statistic. That is the essence of it and it is funny if you understand in at once. 

I then posted another post with a changed figure to point out that 37.5% is in itself not a genuine figure and that it can be anything. You basically posted the same sentence again with a few different words and you think that the two are somehow different. 

mail2and's statement is the actual quote. It points out a truth. I myself sit with my friends sometimes and I will say something like - "Laptops occupy exactly 46.26% of the computer market." I haven't the slightest clue what the actual figure is and whether I am anywhere close to it, but I make it up because it makes me sound well-informed and knowledgeable - and because my friends have no clue either, it goes down well with them. 

Hope it is clear now!

:: Oh, I just love making issues out of thin air! ::

>>> Back to the topic, please!


----------



## hailgautam (Mar 1, 2007)

aryayush said:
			
		

> But I intend to make it clear to him.
> 
> No, you are absolutely wrong, and I do not mean that in disrespect. It is OK to be wrong sometimes, life would be pretty boring if you were always correct.


 Right - You should be wrong here...



> Both the sentences talk about the authenticity of most statistics.


 Agree.



> What mail2and posted is actually supposed to be a funny and self-conflicting post. But it takes a little bit of common sense to 'get it'.


 Agree



> It talks about how so many statistics are made up *on the spot *(i.e. inaccurate, artificial, incorrect, inauthentic - call it what you will) while it already supplements the statement with another made up statistic. That is the essence of it and it is funny if you understand in at once.


Read again your words only........



> I then posted another post with a changed figure to point out that 37.5% is in itself not a genuine figure and that it can be anything. You basically posted the same sentence again with a few different words and you think that the two are somehow different.


 I did not basically posted the same message. My message is different.....I was not referring to how statistics are made, but was referring to the general nature of the statistics themselves





> mail2and's statement is the actual quote. It points out a truth. I myself sit with my friends sometimes and I will say something like - "Laptops occupy exactly 46.26% of the computer market." I haven't the slightest clue what the actual figure is and whether I am anywhere close to it, but I make it up because it makes me sound well-informed and knowledgeable - and because my friends have no clue either, it goes down well with them.


There are 2 situations here:
1. You come out/produce/spawn/generate some number to suit your temporary and momentary needs - at that time you do not have the time/resource/opportunity to refer to any other outside source. Let us go with the number we got for this purpose for the time being - 37.5% of the times

However there are situations where to support your point/position/meaning/intention/argument/line of statement you do some research/study/investigation by spending time/resources/effort and support your point/position/meaning/intention/argument/line of statement  based on such research/study/investigation - This happens the remaining - 62.5% of the times.

2. However 98% of your your point is false/fake/invented/fabricated, irrespective of whether you have come out/produce/spawn/generate a number (37.5%)  due to some constraints (for obvious reasons) or did some research/study/investigation (62.5%) - spending time/resources/effort to support your findings.



> Hope it is clear now!
> 
> :: Oh, I just love making issues out of thin air! ::
> 
> >>> Back to the topic, please!



Ya now Now it can end.


----------



## aryayush (Mar 1, 2007)

LOL! OK. 

As you wish. Take it as you will, it's upto you.


----------



## caleb (Mar 1, 2007)

What happend to the discussion on Oscars?


----------



## Darthvader (Mar 1, 2007)

It vanished in all the statistical gibberish


----------



## mail2and (Mar 1, 2007)

Indyan said:
			
		

> Look who is talking. Everytime I see a fight in this forum, you are involved in it.



Go harp about it. Run around trees, streets shouting that. What a statement! 




> My point was that Martin Scorsese did plagiarise/rip-off .



 Even I said he ripped it off. I wonder why you realized it that late. Tsk. Tsk.


----------



## rockthegod (Mar 5, 2007)

Watched "Infernal Affairs" a long time back.... Departed is a much superior movie even for its adapted nature... All actors were simply fantastic and the script n screenplay is excellent !!!!!  Kusod to Scorcese though this movie would never be on the same lines as the legendary Taxi Driver and Raging Bull !!!!

All the Oscar decisions are quite good except I thought that CARS would would win over that extremely childish Happy Feet (the first animation movie that I didn't like). 

Pans Labyrinth was way above all others. The story is novel, intriguing and very well scripted. The soundtrack is JUST SIMPLY THE BEST !!!!!!


----------



## aryayush (Mar 5, 2007)

Which animation movies have you seen? Have you seen the seven Pixar movies?


----------



## rockthegod (Mar 6, 2007)

yep.. all Pixar and Disney muvis ever produced (even ancient disney classics) as I told ya I am a big animation fan and I seemed to like even the weirdest of animations of all kinds.... but it seems HAPPY FEET failed to impress me and this is the first time (mayb coz of the musicals.. I dunno !!!)... CARS was a damn excellent muvi.... I thought that it would definitely win... and Monster House was also brilliant though it seemed a little too scary for kids !!!!


----------



## aryayush (Mar 6, 2007)

Yeah, Cars should have won. It is a Pixar movie, after all.


----------



## rajasekharan (Mar 6, 2007)

i second you,.....even i did not like "happy feet"...the first animation movie that disappointed me...., its the story that i did not like , kind a like its gonna have a bad ending feeling , but it eventually had a forced good ending . but CARS was definitely more enjoyable..., but anyways its good to see SOFTIMAGE XSI getting some credits..., am not complaining , animation movies are the future , they portray a good story and a good morale . i dont watch other eng movies except animated ones...
__________
PS: oh yeah, by the way...head to cgtalk and check out the animation clips ....some of them are really really really good...


----------

