Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Agree or disagree with Ent. Weekly?


Matt Foley

Recommended Posts

In their post Oscars issue they list Best Pictures from years past that shouldn't have won and those that should have. I take issue with a couple of them and wondered what you think...(I'll start with 1980 because not many people remember movies from the 50s and 60s, including me)...

1980

Winner: Ordinary People

EW's winner: Raging Bull

Agree or disagree: I agree

1981

Winner: Chariots of Fire

EW's winner: Reds

Agree or disagree: Both. Raiders of the Lost Ark should have won

1990

Winner: Dances With Wolves

EW's winner: GoodFellas

Agree or disagree: Disagree. DwW was one of my all time faves

1994

Winner: Forrest Gump

EW's winner: Pulp Fiction

Agree or disagree: Disagree. See Dances with Wolves above

1996

Winner: The English Patient

EW's winner: Fargo

Agree or disagree: Both. Neither of those movies should have won

1999

Winner: American Beauty

EW's winner: Being John Malkovich

Agree or disagree: I'll take Sixth Sense

2005

Winner: Crash

EW's winner: Brokeback Mountain

Agree or disagree: Saw both. Neither was great.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Acadamy alway goes for the safe choice. Goodfellas is a classic. It makes me sad that Kevin Costner won Best Director over Scorsese that year. Pulp Fiction was a game changer in movie making. Nobody had ever seen a story told like that before. American Beauty wasn't great. But it was better than the others. Hated Crash, saw it once and don't have a desire to see it again. Saw Brokeback a few times and thought it told a great story. (All jokes aside). 1996 just sucked. Jerry Maguire was nominated for Best Picture for God sake.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just a few of my own..

1941 - Citizen Kane > How Green Was My Valley

1948 - The Treasure of the Sierra Madre > Hamlet

1949 - Battleground > All the King's Men

1951 - A Streetcar Named Desire > An American in Paris

1952 - High Noon > The Greatest Show on Earth

1955 - Mister Roberts > Marty

1956 - The Searchers > Around the World in 80 Days

1964 - Dr. Strangelove > My Fair Lady

1969 - Once upon a time in the west > Midnight Cowboy

1977 - Star Wars > annie Hall

1979 - Breaking Away > Kramer vs. Kramer

1983 - The Right Stuff > Terms of Endearment

1989 - Field of Dreams > Driving Miss Daisy

1997 - L.A. Confidential > Titanic

2000 - Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon > Gladiator

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just a few of my own..

1941 - Citizen Kane > How Green Was My Valley

1948 - The Treasure of the Sierra Madre > Hamlet

1949 - Battleground > All the King's Men

1951 - A Streetcar Named Desire > An American in Paris

1952 - High Noon > The Greatest Show on Earth

1955 - Mister Roberts > Marty

1956 - The Searchers > Around the World in 80 Days

1964 - Dr. Strangelove > My Fair Lady

1969 - Once upon a time in the west > Midnight Cowboy

1977 - Star Wars > annie Hall

1979 - Breaking Away > Kramer vs. Kramer

1983 - The Right Stuff > Terms of Endearment

1989 - Field of Dreams > Driving Miss Daisy

1997 - L.A. Confidential > Titanic

2000 - Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon > Gladiator

good call on almost all of those.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i love once upon a time in the west (best first 15 minutes of any film EVER) but I think Midnight Cowboy is probably a better film.

It has...you know... acting.

You want bad acting? How bout the dude who played Johnny Ringo in Tombstone? Or the guy who played Kyle in The Terminator? Or the guy who played the crazy guy in The Abyss?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1997 - L.A. Confidential > Titanic

2000 - Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon > Gladiator

LA Confidential is so underrated. It actually had a good plot as opposed to a film where we already know the ending.

Crouching Tiger is not better than Gladiator.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LA Confidential is so underrated. It actually had a good plot as opposed to a film where we already know the ending.

Crouching Tiger is not better than Gladiator.

Love Crouching Tiger but i'm a sucker for those kind of films.

Hero, The seven Samurai, the Bruce Lee movies, hell i even

love Kung Fu Hustle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Now now now, I wouldn't say there is no logic, but there's just not a lot of in-depth thought put into Barnwell's  "analysis." Now to be fair to him (and other national writers), pre-season team rankings are basically clickbait. And...Barnwell, himself, said that "there's a lot of projection here." He basically admits that he doesn't know how the hell things are going to turn out with our receiver group. He also said that "I find myself" more intrigued by Coker than Legette; that does not mean that he said that fans should be, or that Coker will even be better than Legette (regardless of ESPN's per-route-run stat). So, yeah, Barnwell said some things, but even he has to basically admit that he doesn't know how bad or good that our playmakers will be in 2025.  Overall, what Barnwell is basically thinking is that the Panthers have gotten worse at the offensive skill positions, and baked into that is that others have gotten better. That's the argument in July (meaning, please don't give this any more weight than it's due). I would personally be surprised (not shocked) if we end up worse than the Titans, Pats and Giants at least. Once you throw in the Bills, Giants, Jets, Steelers, and even the Chargers, I personally think there are several teams' skill groups that may end up ranked lower than ours by the end of 2025.  @kungfoodudeis one of my dudes, but like others he is over the tipping point. He's had enough. Seeing is believing. I will say this though: Barnwell's piece is less about logic than just good ol' opinion. And to be honest, he might as well be a Huddler throwing out sh¡t in the summer based upon nothing but good feels or bad feels.  Our offense as a whole (just like any other team's) is going to depend upon the play of the O-line and especially the QB. How you can even rank the skill positions without expressly baking those two things in the cake is beyond me. I would dare say that that's not even logical. 
    • Football is not the professional sport where timidness and apprehension are justly rewarded. 
    • Bryce Young had a super high floor definitely at least won't be a bust safe pick we allegedly had seen in some time.......and went on to have one of the worst rookie seasons of all time.  They are all lotto picks.  And that is especially true for whatever they will be day 1 in the NFL.  I don't think Tmac is a sure thing year 1.  It's not like we watched him do his thing in the SEC.  He was a PAC12 guy.  I'm sure it will take time
×
×
  • Create New...