Betsy's Page
HOMEAdvance your career by earning a masters degree
online.
Betsy neither necessarily uses,
nor endorses,
the products advertised on this site.
Advance your career by earning a masters degree
online.
The truth about Avesil
Wikio
Get exclusive travel deals and book discount cheap flights
Comments from an AP history
and government teacher in Raleigh, NC.
e-mail betsynewmark AT gmail.com
Commissions earned from selling items through Amazon will go towards buying materials for my classes. Thank you.
Site Feed
The truth about Avesil
Wikio
Get exclusive travel deals and book discount cheap flights
Comments from an AP history
and government teacher in Raleigh, NC.
e-mail betsynewmark AT gmail.com
Commissions earned from selling items through Amazon will go towards buying materials for my classes. Thank you.
Site Feed
Monday, March 06, 2006
My impression, from the on-and-off viewing that I did of the first half of the Oscars is that there were two basic themes. One was the typical Hollywood self-congratulation about how important movies are. This year, the focus was on the social and political impact that movies have had on America. You guys in Red America upset about some of the messages in this year's nominees? Well, remember how noble "To Kill A Mockingbird," "All the President's Men," or "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington" were? See, we are important; we truly are. All those montages did was remind us of how much better films were then.
The second theme of the evening was: Please, pretty please, keep going to the movie theater to see our movies and stop waiting for the DVD to come out. They showed a montage of epic films like "Sound of Music," "Ben Hur," and "Lawrence of Arabia" that just wouldn't look as wonderful on a TV as they would on the big screen. Again, the main impact was to remind us of all the really great movies the like of which aren't being made anymore.
From what I saw, I thought Jon Stewart did a fine job. Tom Shales, with whom I rarely agree, thinks that Stewart bombed. Maybe, he had me from the beginning with his joke to the Hollywood crowd that, in voting for Oscar nominees, it was probably the first time in a long time that they've voted for a winner. That and a joke about Cheney shooting Bjork were about as political as Stewart got and that was a relief. (But then, I went to bed after the pimp song; perhaps I missed some moments.) There was enough politics in the movies; we didn't need it rubbed in our faces by the host.
There does seem to be a divergence of opinion on Stewart's performance. Shales might have hated him, but the critics from the New York Post and the Boston Globe think he was a hit. In fact, I think the canned bits from the Comedy Central team showing what Oscar campaign ads might be like if done by 527s were very cute.
0 comments
Comments:
My impression, from the on-and-off viewing that I did of the first half of the Oscars is that there were two basic themes. One was the typical Hollywood self-congratulation about how important movies are. This year, the focus was on the social and political impact that movies have had on America. You guys in Red America upset about some of the messages in this year's nominees? Well, remember how noble "To Kill A Mockingbird," "All the President's Men," or "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington" were? See, we are important; we truly are. All those montages did was remind us of how much better films were then.
The second theme of the evening was: Please, pretty please, keep going to the movie theater to see our movies and stop waiting for the DVD to come out. They showed a montage of epic films like "Sound of Music," "Ben Hur," and "Lawrence of Arabia" that just wouldn't look as wonderful on a TV as they would on the big screen. Again, the main impact was to remind us of all the really great movies the like of which aren't being made anymore.
From what I saw, I thought Jon Stewart did a fine job. Tom Shales, with whom I rarely agree, thinks that Stewart bombed. Maybe, he had me from the beginning with his joke to the Hollywood crowd that, in voting for Oscar nominees, it was probably the first time in a long time that they've voted for a winner. That and a joke about Cheney shooting Bjork were about as political as Stewart got and that was a relief. (But then, I went to bed after the pimp song; perhaps I missed some moments.) There was enough politics in the movies; we didn't need it rubbed in our faces by the host.
There does seem to be a divergence of opinion on Stewart's performance. Shales might have hated him, but the critics from the New York Post and the Boston Globe think he was a hit. In fact, I think the canned bits from the Comedy Central team showing what Oscar campaign ads might be like if done by 527s were very cute.
0 comments
My impression, from the on-and-off viewing that I did of the first half of the Oscars is that there were two basic themes. One was the typical Hollywood self-congratulation about how important movies are. This year, the focus was on the social and political impact that movies have had on America. You guys in Red America upset about some of the messages in this year's nominees? Well, remember how noble "To Kill A Mockingbird," "All the President's Men," or "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington" were? See, we are important; we truly are. All those montages did was remind us of how much better films were then.
The second theme of the evening was: Please, pretty please, keep going to the movie theater to see our movies and stop waiting for the DVD to come out. They showed a montage of epic films like "Sound of Music," "Ben Hur," and "Lawrence of Arabia" that just wouldn't look as wonderful on a TV as they would on the big screen. Again, the main impact was to remind us of all the really great movies the like of which aren't being made anymore.
From what I saw, I thought Jon Stewart did a fine job. Tom Shales, with whom I rarely agree, thinks that Stewart bombed. Maybe, he had me from the beginning with his joke to the Hollywood crowd that, in voting for Oscar nominees, it was probably the first time in a long time that they've voted for a winner. That and a joke about Cheney shooting Bjork were about as political as Stewart got and that was a relief. (But then, I went to bed after the pimp song; perhaps I missed some moments.) There was enough politics in the movies; we didn't need it rubbed in our faces by the host.
There does seem to be a divergence of opinion on Stewart's performance. Shales might have hated him, but the critics from the New York Post and the Boston Globe think he was a hit. In fact, I think the canned bits from the Comedy Central team showing what Oscar campaign ads might be like if done by 527s were very cute.
Comments:
Post a Comment
