From: Irish Ranger <>
Subject: Re: Watching, or not watching, the Oscars
Full headers:
X-Received: by with SMTP id o63mr9829699iof.65.1520209114998;
Sun, 04 Mar 2018 16:18:34 -0800 (PST)
X-Received: by with SMTP id 5mr683851ota.0.1520209114887; Sun, 04
Mar 2018 16:18:34 -0800 (PST)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies.current-films
Date: Sun, 4 Mar 2018 16:18:34 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <>
Injection-Info:; posting-host=2600:1700:8310:5270:108c:b0f5:36ec:3f18;
NNTP-Posting-Host: 2600:1700:8310:5270:108c:b0f5:36ec:3f18
References: <> <>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <>
Subject: Re: Watching, or not watching, the Oscars
From: Irish Ranger <>
Injection-Date: Mon, 05 Mar 2018 00:18:34 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Lines: 15
Print Article
Forward Article
On Saturday, March 3, 2018 at 9:23:23 PM UTC-5, RichA wrote:
> Aside from the left-wingism of the Oscars, this year was dog's breakfast for movies on the whole. 
I remember one other year where it was lousy too, sometime in he 90's.  It would show a great deal
of integrity to simply say, "sorry, but no movie this year merited a best picture nomination so we
aren't granting an award." Plus, we ALL know that smaller movies which play only in restricted
markets rarely get nominated despite the fact some may be considerably better than the mainstream

I thought 1999, was one of the worst when they gave the Best Picture Oscar to 
"Shakespeare In Love" instead of "Saving Private Ryan".  That pretty much sums
up Hollywood and the Oscars.

Irish Mike