Let's take this paragraph by paragraph, shall we?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Yas
Are you talking about 300, which you havent even seen yet, or making a rather pointless statement?
|
As someone pointed out, the same can be said for you.
Quote:
| Bad films are based on opinion, and awards are just a mulitplied opinion themselves. The Oscars barely give awards to the right people or the right films. The best films arent even nominated a lot of time. Eternal Sunshine barely got looked at because of 'Crash', Sam Jackson lost to Landau, Halle Berry got one!?!?! |
So, award shows are imperfect so 300 should get awards? What exactly are you saying?
Quote:
| I think Snyder is a great director and I think the story of the 300 Spartans is a fantastic one. A real story about courage and bravery that doesnt involve cancer, bruce springsteen songs or Hilary Swank. |
I say you're wrong. Snyder has no sense of rhythm or pacing. His stuff is all atmosphere and no storytelling.
As to courage, the same can be said of what happened at the Alamo and we all know how that movie turned out. True stories of courage do not always end up as good movies.
Quote:
| Its not about awards really, its about recognition. |
Ah, contradicting your earlier statement. You're actually pissed that Sin City didn't get the recognition that you thought it deserved. Perhaps you should have said that.
Sin City got just enough recognition, in my books. It's a neat story in quirky packaging. There's no way it was good enough or interesting enough to set the world on fire. It got the recognition of "That was pretty cool" and that's all it deserved. The lack of a unique storyline or unique performances disqualifies it as a revolutionary filmmaking despite it looking different.