Why the Oscars Are Irrelevant

Mar 08, 2010 11:10

30,000,000 people were foolish enough to waste their Sunday evening watching a self-congratulatory wankfest where a bunch of people worship themselves for their belief that they're better than you. Ostensibly this was to determine the best movies of the year ( Read more... )

Leave a comment

Comments 17

Grammy other March 8 2010, 20:56:14 UTC
I had the opposite reaction to the Grammys. Up for album of the year were Taylor Swift, Beyoncé, The Black Eyed Peas, Lady Gaga, and Dave Matthews Band. *cough*

Why should I care about that? If I wanted to know who is popular, then I'd look at sales records, ask my nieces what they listen to, or figure out who is prettiest. The Grammys tell us nothing new. Now, if they instead told us what hardcore musicians think is the best stuff out there, then that is something. I wish the Grammys were more like the Oscars.

Of course, both award shows are unwatchable. Well, I download them and fast forward to when comedians are doing their bits while skipping everything else.

Reply

Re: Grammy boffo March 8 2010, 21:21:47 UTC
I know/care very little about current music, so I have no comment on the Grammies.

Reply


ernunnos March 8 2010, 20:56:46 UTC
"People" do not watch or care about movies that are 20 years old. Only film geeks care about movies more than a decade old. The exceptions are Disney movies, as Disney promotes the hell out of their back catalog, the occasional non-Disney kids movie (as kids are remarkably non-demanding of novelty), and movies that generate a self-sustaining fandom and/or a franchise. (Or inherit one from books/TV/comics.) Maybe the movies that start such fandoms should be singled out for recognition, assuming they're not already based on a valuable property. Other than that, if you're going to consider longevity at all, you might as well go with what the film geeks think, because they're the only ones who will care in 5 years anyway.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up