Oscars 2007 discussion

[fizz]

I think the producer took it too personally and does not have a sense of humor.

Tell that to someone who shoots for a documentary for 3 years and accumulates over 300 hours of footage.

[kaytee]

Tell that to someone who shoots for a documentary for 3 years and accumulates over 300 hours of footage.

I would if I meet him.

I'm sure Seinfeld's comments were in good spirit.

Why didnt the other nominated documentary producers come forward and say anything against Seinfeld? Didnt they put effort into making the movie? The same should go for any movie which is made fun off or spoofed.

[X.]

ak...for someone who walked out of Iraq in fragments, i think those are some pretty harsh words. (retard, hack).

Why would you hold that against me? I walked out of “Iraq in Fragments” because I didn’t think it was worth my time. May be you don’t listen to BBC or NPR as much as I do. May be that is why you were awestruck by 'new' information in the documentary. Well, I wasn’t. Personally, I don’t think the policy of watching a film to the bitter end is obligatory. You may beg to differ, that's your perogative.

Back to why I called him “hack” and “retard,” I think John Sinno is not the only guy in this thread low on humour. On the same subject, read your statement again:

I won't even bother defending the film or its producer (who makes more of a valid argument in the quote you've posted).

On the one hand you’re saying you won’t defend the film or its producer and yet on the other you claim he makes a valid argument. So what will it be? Sorry, but seems to be like you’re fence-sitting. Plus, we could learn a thing or two about passive-aggression from you…

The period after Oscars is quite lucrative for producers and right owners. DVD sales of Oscar winners and nominees are brisk. I wouldn’t be surprised it Sinno used this delicate time to get PR mileage for him. I don’t know Sinno personally and neither does Fizz; we judge him based on his public persona. We all have our opinions.

[X.]

I think the producer took it too personally and does not have a sense of humor.

Tell that to someone who shoots for a documentary for 3 years and accumulates over 300 hours of footage.

Who asked him to do that? The mere act of comprehensiveness does not entitle one to a state of grace.

Barbet Schroder is one of the greatest living documentary and narrative filmmakers around. When he made a biography of Idi Amin, at one point he decided that the information -- fascinating and provocative -- was becoming repetitive. He thought about what he set out to do: make a one-and-a-half film or a one hour TV program. He didn’t hang out with Amin for years. It was all over in a matter of weeks. He got the footage he needed, and that was that.

Work smart, not hard.

[fizz]

May be you don’t listen to BBC or NPR as much as I do. May be that is why you were awestruck by 'new' information in the documentary. Well, I wasn’t. Personally, I don’t think the policy of watching a film to the bitter end is obligatory. You may beg to differ, that's your perogative.

What made you think i was 'awestruck' by the information in Iraq in fragments? I had different reasons for liking and recommending it, and a lot of it had to do with its aesthetics and look, not just its content. Also you and I both know that it is important to watch a film completely and then judge it as being a failure or not. You may deny this all you want, but a lot of films make or break in their third act. How meaningful would 'Pulp Fiction' be if you watched it half way through and then just stopped?

[fizz]

Back to why I called him “hack” and “retard,” I think John Sinno is not the only guy in this thread low on humour. On the same subject, read your statement again:

Plus, its very easy to hide under the guise of humour and take little responsibility of what one might end up saying.

[X.]

Also you and I both know that it is important to watch a film completely and then judge it as being a failure or not. You may deny this all you want, but a lot of films make or break in their third act.

No, I don't agree with a blanket rule to watch every movie till the last frame before judging it. But that’s just me. I especially don’t believe that films make or break in the third act. That’s a classic Greek playwriting archetype. Films and storytelling are not so linear and black-and-white anymore. You mentioned “Pulp Fiction” as an example. Tell me something – what *third act* of the movie made or broke it. I’m really interested to know…

[X.]

Back to why I called him “hack” and “retard,” I think John Sinno is not the only guy in this thread low on humour. On the same subject, read your statement again:

Plus, its very easy to hide under the guise of humour and take little responsibility of what one might end up saying.

LOL, dude, what are you -- a Moral Values cop?

[fizz]

Also you and I both know that it is important to watch a film completely and then judge it as being a failure or not. You may deny this all you want, but a lot of films make or break in their third act.

Films and storytelling are not so linear and black-and-white anymore. You mentioned “Pulp Fiction” as an example. Tell me something – what *third act* of the movie made or broke it. I’m really interested to know…

If you consider films (or documentaries in this case) as works of art...then yes, viewing them completely is essential. The third act, as you've rightly said, is no rule, but more often than not, they add an element of meaning or connection or relevance to everything. To answer your trick question - my use of 'third act' isn't a rigid term, it is the crescendo or the climactic segment (which may not necessarily be the third act). Because of the very fact that Pulp Fiction was not linear, it made more viewing sense as it went tying multiple things together till it reached the bizarre end. This made it essential to view the end to get everything. Thats the third act, the 'I get it' moment in that film.

[fizz]

Back to why I called him “hack” and “retard,” I think John Sinno is not the only guy in this thread low on humour. On the same subject, read your statement again:

Plus, its very easy to hide under the guise of humour and take little responsibility of what one might end up saying.

LOL, dude, what are you -- a Moral Values cop?

see what i mean...

[X.]

Actually, no; I don't know what you mean. Please explain for my benefit.

[kaytee]

Time Out!!! Time for a commercial break. Please go have a Kit Kat and we will be right back after the break.



And we are back.

Fight!

[X.]

I'm pretty sure we won't be hearing from Fizz again in this thread.

SCORE
ak: 1
fizz: 0

ak wins!

[fizz]

This was a game?

[weirdo]

I hate ppl who take themselves and their work too seriously

I mean if you cant take a joke or two, then stay out of the fucking kitchen

fizz you too need to fucking chill dude