Comments for According to Colwell

Comment on Avatar v. The Hurt Locker by JC

JC — Tue, 09 Mar 2010 04:02:59 +0000

p.s. I wish The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring had won Best Picture instead of the final installment. I just thought the first one was the best of the three.

Comment on Avatar v. The Hurt Locker by JC

JC — Tue, 09 Mar 2010 04:00:23 +0000

I too thought it was peculiar that Avatar won for cinematography, which usually has to do with how things are lit by the D.P., and lost out on sound effects editing. As for which film deserved to win, I carefully avoided expressing an opinion on that matter in the post I said I thought Avatar would have won under last year’s voting and that a certain powerful faction of the Academy probably wishes that it had won Best Picture. I will now go ahead and state that had I been voting, I would have put Avatar first, The Hurt Locker second, and Up in the Air third (I have not yet had the guts to watch Precious). Kim, I’m guessing you would have put Avatar much further down the list, so that the balance of our two ballots would tilt toward The Hurt Locker, even though the tally of first place votes would balance.

Comment on Avatar v. The Hurt Locker by Aylia

Aylia — Tue, 09 Mar 2010 03:20:31 +0000

Well put, a good argument. I will quote you. AVATAR did deserve that oscar. I lost a lot of faith this year when they gave sound editing to Hurt Locker and cinematography to Avatar (when all the cinematographical choices in that movie were done in post-production…)
x

Comment on Avatar v. The Hurt Locker by The Ridger

The Ridger — Tue, 09 Mar 2010 00:43:22 +0000

I don\\\’t think Avatar deserved to win. It was a pedestrian, tired, and predictable plot with average acting. Sure, it was gorgeous, but is that enough?

Comment on Inglourious Basterds by Steve

Steve — Sat, 06 Mar 2010 16:55:40 +0000

Perhaps the misspelling was to distinguish this movie from “The Inglorious Bastards”, a 1978 film starring the immortal Bo Svenson and Fred “the Hammer” Williamson (thanks, IMDB).

Comment on The Lovely Bones by JC

JC — Sat, 06 Feb 2010 14:05:25 +0000

Cindee -
that seems to be the prevailing opinion: the book was far better than the movie.

Comment on The Lovely Bones by Cindee

Cindee — Tue, 02 Feb 2010 00:57:15 +0000

As someone who read the book and saw the movie, I will tell you that the movie (as movies typically do) falls light years short of the written word. It\’s a far better book, and the director completely missed the mark on this one. I will say, it probably still isn\’t a book you would enjoy, but the \

Comment on The Lovely Bones by The Ridger

The Ridger — Thu, 28 Jan 2010 23:32:23 +0000

Ah. Okay. Since I *do* know the rules, it doesn’t faze me.

The key to Gaelic especially and Irish to a lesser degree since they reformed their spelling is: half the letters are there to tell you how the other half are to be pronounced. They themselves are silent. You can pronounce anything once you get that down.

Comment on The Lovely Bones by JC

JC — Tue, 26 Jan 2010 02:18:56 +0000

My lame attempt at humor. It’s actually pronounced “seer-sha” or “sur-sha”. For someone ignorant of Irish (that is: me), the spelling bears about as much resemblance to its pronunciation as it does to “Jane”. Maybe?

Comment on The Lovely Bones by The Ridger

The Ridger — Tue, 26 Jan 2010 01:59:54 +0000

“Pronounced Jane”? I don’t get it… What am I missing?