Chapter 457: 457
If audio player doesn't work, press Stop then Play button again
In a blink of an eye, 2011 is about to enter March. With the end of the 83rd Oscars ceremony, the 2010 Hollywood situation finally came to an end. The awards season, which lasted for nearly four months, finally settled and hibernated again, like a behemoth entering hibernation, waiting At the end of the year, the land woke up again.
The so-called awards season means that there are winners and losers. Some people are happy but others are worried.
"The King's Speech" and the "Social Network" competed for hegemony, and finally ended with the victory of "The King's Speech". This work puts the weight of the best picture, best director, best actor and best original screenplay into four weights. The first-level golden man was in the bag; and the "social network" had the last laugh in the three departments of the best adapted screenplay, the best original soundtrack and the best editing.
The four major awards in the acting department were calm. Colin Firth and Natalie Portman won the emperor, while "Fighter" Christian Bell and Melissa Leo won the supporting roles. In addition to the technical department, "Inception" became the biggest winner. The best sound editing, best sound effects, best photography, best visual effects, a total of four trophies, and "The King's Speech" led the night of the trophy Number ranking.
In addition to this, the acclaimed "Children are all well", "127 hours", and the nominees for the strong counterattack "Thunder of the Earth", as well as the "Bones of Winter" and "Buried Alive" which represent independent films. All came back empty-handed.
The results of such awards have attracted a lot of criticism from the media, especially the direction of the best director.
The "Hollywood Reporter" said mercilessly, "This is the best director in the history of the Oscars." Without giving Tom Hober any face, he directly regarded him as a model, and made complaints by name. Not because the "king's speech" is not good enough, but because there are even more commendable objects this year.
During the eighty-three years of the Oscar so far, there have been a lot of controversies, the best film is especially prosperous, but this is not surprising, because the best film considers the overall quality, time, location, people and lack of one. Can't--
"Chicago" defeated the "Pianist" because the Iraq War officially broke out in early 2003. Compared with heavy reflection, people need the comfort of singing and dancing.
"Crash" defeated "Brokeback Mountain" because at that time **** movies still failed to break the blockade of conservative forces, and racial issues easily prevailed.
"Forrest Gump" defeated "Shawshank's Redemption" and "Pulp Fiction" because the film reflected the ultimate meaning of the American spirit and American dream. In the past two years, it has experienced the racial riots, the Gulf War and the financial crisis. The United States needs such a dream.
Therefore, in the long river of history, there has never been a lack of controversy about the best film. Everyone has their own choice for the best film. The choice of the academy is not necessarily correct, but it is in line with the times. Even if there is a historical "mistake" such as "Shakespeare's Love History" overturning "Saving Private Ryan", people have also witnessed the brilliant debut of the college's public relations.
However, relatively speaking, disputes over the position of the best director are very rare.
Even if Stanley Kubrick lost to Milos-Forman, Alfred Hitchcock (alfred-) lost to John Ford (john-ford). At every moment, people can only sigh "time and fate", which makes people feel stunned, but they are also convinced.
Because the best director is a personal award, the contest is about the level of personal ability, presenting the peak of personal skills, and the influence of political factors, current situation, and historical causes have been weakened to the minimum. Only art is used to discuss heroes. Art cannot be the winner, but there is only one statuette, and it is destined that only one person can win. This is the difference between art and award ceremonies.
In this year's competition, David Fincher can almost be said to stand out.
The work of "Social Network" itself may not be pleasing, because it is too advanced with the times, because it is too sharp, because it is too harsh, because it is too real and dark, for the old conservative academy, I want to say It is not easy to say "love you"; but no one can deny the excellence of David Fincher.
As a director, David showed a strong personal style, fierce and clean, deep and heavy, cruel and wise. You can feel David's strong temperament in every detail of the whole movie, which is simply amazing for shooting the case; not only that. David’s credit cannot be underestimated. The excellent works of "Seven Deadly Sins", "Fight Club", and "The Curious Case of Benjamin Button" have been recognized by time and the public, and the "social network" is fully equipped with great achievements. Qualifications for the head guard.
Don’t talk about Tom Hopper. In the entire award season, there are almost no directors who can compete with David. He swept the Golden Globes, the British Academy of Film and Television Arts Awards, the National Critics Association Awards, and the North American Radio Film Critics. People Association Award, New York Film Critics Association Award, Boston Film Critics Association Award, Chicago Film Critics Association Award...
Simply put, almost all heavyweight weather vanes are included. Compared to Colin Firth's best actor, best director is the least suspenseful award in this year's awards season.
However, after the Golden Globe Awards, the situation took a turn for the worse. Under the operation of the Weinstein brothers, "The King's Speech", Tom appeared in major publicity occasions; on the other hand, there was negative news about "social networks". Flying all over the sky, the art of college public relations has been brought to the extreme, and then the Directors Guild of America Awards broke out, Tom defeated David; and then the Oscar broke out another upset, Tom was strong.
This is not a victory of strength, but a victory of public relations. Typical Weinstein model. After "Shakespeare in Love" defeated "Saving Private Ryan", the Weinstein brothers once again wrote the miracle of public relations. This is not a time to celebrate, but a moment of anger, sadness, and disappointment.
Tom Hopper defeated David Fincher, and "The King's Speech" completely crushed the "social network". It was not only a victory for public relations, but also another victory for the conservative forces of the Academy.
Again.
First of all, after "Lord of the Rings 3: The Return of the King" won the Oscar for Best Picture, in the next seven years, only two commercial films were nominated for Oscar for Best Picture, last year’s “Avatar” and this year’s “Pirates”. "Dream Space", last year James Cameron was overthrown by the Hurt Locker under the circumstances of a rainbow of momentum, and this year Christopher Nolan was even more disregarded, and even the best director was not nominated.
Secondly, since the two black independent works of "Old Nowhere" and "The Blood Is Coming" shining throughout the awards season in 2008, the college has made a conservative choice for three consecutive years. This time, they gave up their aggressiveness, innovation and boldness. The "social network" that is advancing with the times has once again chosen the "king's speech" that is stable, full of craftsmanship, and cherishes the memory of the past.
The Oscar, who claims to be constantly pursuing the balance between business and art, lost the domineering and courage of business, and lost the breakthrough and focus of art. The conservative forces are losing their enterprising spirit, becoming more and more decadent, utilitarian, and arrogant. And arrogance.
Once upon a time, works such as "Male and Female Thief", "Sunset Boulevard", "Midnight\/Cow\/Lang", "Pulp Fiction", "A Clockwork Orange", and "2001 A Space Odyssey" can be released on Oscars. It's brilliant, but now, it is "The King's Speech" that has been ineffective academic works.
In fact, such a result was already expected before the award ceremony began. In the second half of the awards season, the "King’s Speech" was so powerful that it was almost unstoppable. After the list of awards was released, people did not. accident. But it is precisely the result of such a lack of surprises that proves the school's conservative and stubbornness.
The Oscar awards are becoming "predictable", which makes speculators like the Weinstein brothers become "experts", turning the film industry upside down as businessmen. "The King's Speech" is a case in point, Nata Li Portman is another case, a typical public relations victory, lack of surprises, lack of magic, and Oscar lacks charm.
It is really disappointing.
As an authoritative professional media in Hollywood, looking at the sharp remarks of the "Hollywood Reporter", you can see the direction of the public opinion of professionals. Tom Hopper is just a scapegoat under their guns. The real allusion is the industry. The deep entanglement behind ~www.novelhall.com~ Not only that, but senior professional media such as "Variety Show", "New York Times", "Voice of the Village", "The New Yorker" and other senior professional media have also expressed similar views and conducted reports on the college. Severe criticism. The awards ceremony ended, but the noise has just begun.
Year after year, day after day, Oscars are the same as Golden Globes and Grammys. Major award ceremonies are facing more and more challenges. Authority, attention, and popularity are gradually declining. This year It has reached a new high.
"Social Network", a work focused on the Internet era, failed in an all-round way. At the same time, it led to a sharp decline in ratings and viewership. Coupled with sharp criticism from the media, it has gone through the Oscar of the 83-year journey. The steps began to falter.
The best film debate will not dissipate for a long time to come. Just like "Brokeback Mountain" and "Crash", "Shakespeare in Love" and "Saving Private Ryan", time will prove the choice of the college this time. is it right or not.
Of course, as an annual film festival, the focus on Oscars is naturally not only that, there will be criticism, there will naturally be praise, controversy, and naturally there will be pursuits. In addition to the best film and best director controversy, in addition A big focus is Natalie Portman.
The actress who was born as a child star and became famous at a young age succeeded in getting rid of the crisis of the "stand-in door". When she was about to turn thirty years old, she successfully aspired to the Oscar queen and became the first actor in the y generation to harvest a figurine. He deservedly became the leader of the new generation of actors. The limelight is gaining momentum, even surpassing Colin Firth and Tom Hopper, for a while.
Shrouded in Natalie's dazzling light, the haze of the double door disappeared, Lan Li-Hall became a yellow flower of tomorrow, and all the noise began to settle. Not surprisingly.
Please report us if you find any errors so we can fix it asap!
In a blink of an eye, 2011 is about to enter March. With the end of the 83rd Oscars ceremony, the 2010 Hollywood situation finally came to an end. The awards season, which lasted for nearly four months, finally settled and hibernated again, like a behemoth entering hibernation, waiting At the end of the year, the land woke up again.
The so-called awards season means that there are winners and losers. Some people are happy but others are worried.
"The King's Speech" and the "Social Network" competed for hegemony, and finally ended with the victory of "The King's Speech". This work puts the weight of the best picture, best director, best actor and best original screenplay into four weights. The first-level golden man was in the bag; and the "social network" had the last laugh in the three departments of the best adapted screenplay, the best original soundtrack and the best editing.
The four major awards in the acting department were calm. Colin Firth and Natalie Portman won the emperor, while "Fighter" Christian Bell and Melissa Leo won the supporting roles. In addition to the technical department, "Inception" became the biggest winner. The best sound editing, best sound effects, best photography, best visual effects, a total of four trophies, and "The King's Speech" led the night of the trophy Number ranking.
In addition to this, the acclaimed "Children are all well", "127 hours", and the nominees for the strong counterattack "Thunder of the Earth", as well as the "Bones of Winter" and "Buried Alive" which represent independent films. All came back empty-handed.
The results of such awards have attracted a lot of criticism from the media, especially the direction of the best director.
The "Hollywood Reporter" said mercilessly, "This is the best director in the history of the Oscars." Without giving Tom Hober any face, he directly regarded him as a model, and made complaints by name. Not because the "king's speech" is not good enough, but because there are even more commendable objects this year.
During the eighty-three years of the Oscar so far, there have been a lot of controversies, the best film is especially prosperous, but this is not surprising, because the best film considers the overall quality, time, location, people and lack of one. Can't--
"Chicago" defeated the "Pianist" because the Iraq War officially broke out in early 2003. Compared with heavy reflection, people need the comfort of singing and dancing.
"Crash" defeated "Brokeback Mountain" because at that time **** movies still failed to break the blockade of conservative forces, and racial issues easily prevailed.
"Forrest Gump" defeated "Shawshank's Redemption" and "Pulp Fiction" because the film reflected the ultimate meaning of the American spirit and American dream. In the past two years, it has experienced the racial riots, the Gulf War and the financial crisis. The United States needs such a dream.
Therefore, in the long river of history, there has never been a lack of controversy about the best film. Everyone has their own choice for the best film. The choice of the academy is not necessarily correct, but it is in line with the times. Even if there is a historical "mistake" such as "Shakespeare's Love History" overturning "Saving Private Ryan", people have also witnessed the brilliant debut of the college's public relations.
However, relatively speaking, disputes over the position of the best director are very rare.
Even if Stanley Kubrick lost to Milos-Forman, Alfred Hitchcock (alfred-) lost to John Ford (john-ford). At every moment, people can only sigh "time and fate", which makes people feel stunned, but they are also convinced.
Because the best director is a personal award, the contest is about the level of personal ability, presenting the peak of personal skills, and the influence of political factors, current situation, and historical causes have been weakened to the minimum. Only art is used to discuss heroes. Art cannot be the winner, but there is only one statuette, and it is destined that only one person can win. This is the difference between art and award ceremonies.
In this year's competition, David Fincher can almost be said to stand out.
The work of "Social Network" itself may not be pleasing, because it is too advanced with the times, because it is too sharp, because it is too harsh, because it is too real and dark, for the old conservative academy, I want to say It is not easy to say "love you"; but no one can deny the excellence of David Fincher.
As a director, David showed a strong personal style, fierce and clean, deep and heavy, cruel and wise. You can feel David's strong temperament in every detail of the whole movie, which is simply amazing for shooting the case; not only that. David’s credit cannot be underestimated. The excellent works of "Seven Deadly Sins", "Fight Club", and "The Curious Case of Benjamin Button" have been recognized by time and the public, and the "social network" is fully equipped with great achievements. Qualifications for the head guard.
Don’t talk about Tom Hopper. In the entire award season, there are almost no directors who can compete with David. He swept the Golden Globes, the British Academy of Film and Television Arts Awards, the National Critics Association Awards, and the North American Radio Film Critics. People Association Award, New York Film Critics Association Award, Boston Film Critics Association Award, Chicago Film Critics Association Award...
Simply put, almost all heavyweight weather vanes are included. Compared to Colin Firth's best actor, best director is the least suspenseful award in this year's awards season.
However, after the Golden Globe Awards, the situation took a turn for the worse. Under the operation of the Weinstein brothers, "The King's Speech", Tom appeared in major publicity occasions; on the other hand, there was negative news about "social networks". Flying all over the sky, the art of college public relations has been brought to the extreme, and then the Directors Guild of America Awards broke out, Tom defeated David; and then the Oscar broke out another upset, Tom was strong.
This is not a victory of strength, but a victory of public relations. Typical Weinstein model. After "Shakespeare in Love" defeated "Saving Private Ryan", the Weinstein brothers once again wrote the miracle of public relations. This is not a time to celebrate, but a moment of anger, sadness, and disappointment.
Tom Hopper defeated David Fincher, and "The King's Speech" completely crushed the "social network". It was not only a victory for public relations, but also another victory for the conservative forces of the Academy.
Again.
First of all, after "Lord of the Rings 3: The Return of the King" won the Oscar for Best Picture, in the next seven years, only two commercial films were nominated for Oscar for Best Picture, last year’s “Avatar” and this year’s “Pirates”. "Dream Space", last year James Cameron was overthrown by the Hurt Locker under the circumstances of a rainbow of momentum, and this year Christopher Nolan was even more disregarded, and even the best director was not nominated.
Secondly, since the two black independent works of "Old Nowhere" and "The Blood Is Coming" shining throughout the awards season in 2008, the college has made a conservative choice for three consecutive years. This time, they gave up their aggressiveness, innovation and boldness. The "social network" that is advancing with the times has once again chosen the "king's speech" that is stable, full of craftsmanship, and cherishes the memory of the past.
The Oscar, who claims to be constantly pursuing the balance between business and art, lost the domineering and courage of business, and lost the breakthrough and focus of art. The conservative forces are losing their enterprising spirit, becoming more and more decadent, utilitarian, and arrogant. And arrogance.
Once upon a time, works such as "Male and Female Thief", "Sunset Boulevard", "Midnight\/Cow\/Lang", "Pulp Fiction", "A Clockwork Orange", and "2001 A Space Odyssey" can be released on Oscars. It's brilliant, but now, it is "The King's Speech" that has been ineffective academic works.
In fact, such a result was already expected before the award ceremony began. In the second half of the awards season, the "King’s Speech" was so powerful that it was almost unstoppable. After the list of awards was released, people did not. accident. But it is precisely the result of such a lack of surprises that proves the school's conservative and stubbornness.
The Oscar awards are becoming "predictable", which makes speculators like the Weinstein brothers become "experts", turning the film industry upside down as businessmen. "The King's Speech" is a case in point, Nata Li Portman is another case, a typical public relations victory, lack of surprises, lack of magic, and Oscar lacks charm.
It is really disappointing.
As an authoritative professional media in Hollywood, looking at the sharp remarks of the "Hollywood Reporter", you can see the direction of the public opinion of professionals. Tom Hopper is just a scapegoat under their guns. The real allusion is the industry. The deep entanglement behind ~www.novelhall.com~ Not only that, but senior professional media such as "Variety Show", "New York Times", "Voice of the Village", "The New Yorker" and other senior professional media have also expressed similar views and conducted reports on the college. Severe criticism. The awards ceremony ended, but the noise has just begun.
Year after year, day after day, Oscars are the same as Golden Globes and Grammys. Major award ceremonies are facing more and more challenges. Authority, attention, and popularity are gradually declining. This year It has reached a new high.
"Social Network", a work focused on the Internet era, failed in an all-round way. At the same time, it led to a sharp decline in ratings and viewership. Coupled with sharp criticism from the media, it has gone through the Oscar of the 83-year journey. The steps began to falter.
The best film debate will not dissipate for a long time to come. Just like "Brokeback Mountain" and "Crash", "Shakespeare in Love" and "Saving Private Ryan", time will prove the choice of the college this time. is it right or not.
Of course, as an annual film festival, the focus on Oscars is naturally not only that, there will be criticism, there will naturally be praise, controversy, and naturally there will be pursuits. In addition to the best film and best director controversy, in addition A big focus is Natalie Portman.
The actress who was born as a child star and became famous at a young age succeeded in getting rid of the crisis of the "stand-in door". When she was about to turn thirty years old, she successfully aspired to the Oscar queen and became the first actor in the y generation to harvest a figurine. He deservedly became the leader of the new generation of actors. The limelight is gaining momentum, even surpassing Colin Firth and Tom Hopper, for a while.
Shrouded in Natalie's dazzling light, the haze of the double door disappeared, Lan Li-Hall became a yellow flower of tomorrow, and all the noise began to settle. Not surprisingly.
In a blink of an eye, 2011 is about to enter March. With the end of the 83rd Oscars ceremony, the 2010 Hollywood situation finally came to an end. The awards season, which lasted for nearly four months, finally settled and hibernated again, like a behemoth entering hibernation, waiting At the end of the year, the land woke up again.The so-called awards season means that there are winners and losers. Some people are happy but others are worried."The King's Speech" and the "Social Network" competed for hegemony, and finally ended with the victory of "The King's Speech". This work puts the weight of the best picture, best director, best actor and best original screenplay into four weights. The first-level golden man was in the bag; and the "social network" had the last laugh in the three departments of the best adapted screenplay, the best original soundtrack and the best editing.The four major awards in the acting department were calm. Colin Firth and Natalie Portman won the emperor, while "Fighter" Christian Bell and Melissa Leo won the supporting roles. In addition to the technical department, "Inception" became the biggest winner. The best sound editing, best sound effects, best photography, best visual effects, a total of four trophies, and "The King's Speech" led the night of the trophy Number ranking.In addition to this, the acclaimed "Children are all well", "127 hours", and the nominees for the strong counterattack "Thunder of the Earth", as well as the "Bones of Winter" and "Buried Alive" which represent independent films. All came back empty-handed.The results of such awards have attracted a lot of criticism from the media, especially the direction of the best director.The "Hollywood Reporter" said mercilessly, "This is the best director in the history of the Oscars." Without giving Tom Hober any face, he directly regarded him as a model, and made complaints by name. Not because the "king's speech" is not good enough, but because there are even more commendable objects this year.During the eighty-three years of the Oscar so far, there have been a lot of controversies, the best film is especially prosperous, but this is not surprising, because the best film considers the overall quality, time, location, people and lack of one. Can't--"Chicago" defeated the "Pianist" because the Iraq War officially broke out in early 2003. Compared with heavy reflection, people need the comfort of singing and dancing."Crash" defeated "Brokeback Mountain" because at that time **** movies still failed to break the blockade of conservative forces, and racial issues easily prevailed."Forrest Gump" defeated "Shawshank's Redemption" and "Pulp Fiction" because the film reflected the ultimate meaning of the American spirit and American dream. In the past two years, it has experienced the racial riots, the Gulf War and the financial crisis. The United States needs such a dream.Therefore, in the long river of history, there has never been a lack of controversy about the best film. Everyone has their own choice for the best film. The choice of the academy is not necessarily correct, but it is in line with the times. Even if there is a historical "mistake" such as "Shakespeare's Love History" overturning "Saving Private Ryan", people have also witnessed the brilliant debut of the college's public relations.However, relatively speaking, disputes over the position of the best director are very rare.Even if Stanley Kubrick lost to Milos-Forman, Alfred Hitchcock alfred- lost to John Ford john-ford. At every moment, people can only sigh "time and fate", which makes people feel stunned, but they are also convinced.Because the best director is a personal award, the contest is about the level of personal ability, presenting the peak of personal skills, and the influence of political factors, current situation, and historical causes have been weakened to the minimum. Only art is used to discuss heroes. Art cannot be the winner, but there is only one statuette, and it is destined that only one person can win. This is the difference between art and award ceremonies.In this year's competition, David Fincher can almost be said to stand out.The work of "Social Network" itself may not be pleasing, because it is too advanced with the times, because it is too sharp, because it is too harsh, because it is too real and dark, for the old conservative academy, I want to say It is not easy to say "love you"; but no one can deny the excellence of David Fincher.As a director, David showed a strong personal style, fierce and clean, deep and heavy, cruel and wise. You can feel David's strong temperament in every detail of the whole movie, which is simply amazing for shooting the case; not only that. David's credit cannot be underestimated. The excellent works of "Seven Deadly Sins", "Fight Club", and "The Curious Case of Benjamin Button" have been recognized by time and the public, and the "social network" is fully equipped with great achievements. Qualifications for the head guard.Don't talk about Tom Hopper. In the entire award season, there are almost no directors who can compete with David. He swept the Golden Globes, the British Academy of Film and Television Arts Awards, the National Critics Association Awards, and the North American Radio Film Critics. People Association Award, New York Film Critics Association Award, Boston Film Critics Association Award, Chicago Film Critics Association Award...Simply put, almost all heavyweight weather vanes are included. Compared to Colin Firth's best actor, best director is the least suspenseful award in this year's awards season.However, after the Golden Globe Awards, the situation took a turn for the worse. Under the operation of the Weinstein brothers, "The King's Speech", Tom appeared in major publicity occasions; on the other hand, there was negative news about "social networks". Flying all over the sky, the art of college public relations has been brought to the extreme, and then the Directors Guild of America Awards broke out, Tom defeated David; and then the Oscar broke out another upset, Tom was strong.This is not a victory of strength, but a victory of public relations. Typical Weinstein model. After "Shakespeare in Love" defeated "Saving Private Ryan", the Weinstein brothers once again wrote the miracle of public relations. This is not a time to celebrate, but a moment of anger, sadness, and disappointment.Tom Hopper defeated David Fincher, and "The King's Speech" completely crushed the "social network". It was not only a victory for public relations, but also another victory for the conservative forces of the Academy.Again.First of all, after "Lord of the Rings 3: The Return of the King" won the Oscar for Best Picture, in the next seven years, only two commercial films were nominated for Oscar for Best Picture, last year's Avatar and this year's Pirates. "Dream Space", last year James Cameron was overthrown by the Hurt Locker under the circumstances of a rainbow of momentum, and this year Christopher Nolan was even more disregarded, and even the best director was not nominated.Secondly, since the two black independent works of "Old Nowhere" and "The Blood Is Coming" shining throughout the awards season in 2008, the college has made a conservative choice for three consecutive years. This time, they gave up their aggressiveness, innovation and boldness. The "social network" that is advancing with the times has once again chosen the "king's speech" that is stable, full of craftsmanship, and cherishes the memory of the past.The Oscar, who claims to be constantly pursuing the balance between business and art, lost the domineering and courage of business, and lost the breakthrough and focus of art. The conservative forces are losing their enterprising spirit, becoming more and more decadent, utilitarian, and arrogant. And arrogance.Once upon a time, works such as "Male and Female Thief", "Sunset Boulevard", "Midnight\/Cow\/Lang", "Pulp Fiction", "A Clockwork Orange", and "2001 A Space Odyssey" can be released on Oscars. It's brilliant, but now, it is "The King's Speech" that has been ineffective academic works.In fact, such a result was already expected before the award ceremony began. In the second half of the awards season, the "King's Speech" was so powerful that it was almost unstoppable. After the list of awards was released, people did not. accident. But it is precisely the result of such a lack of surprises that proves the school's conservative and stubbornness.The Oscar awards are becoming "predictable", which makes speculators like the Weinstein brothers become "experts", turning the film industry upside down as businessmen. "The King's Speech" is a case in point, Nata Li Portman is another case, a typical public relations victory, lack of surprises, lack of magic, and Oscar lacks charm.It is really disappointing.As an authoritative professional media in Hollywood, looking at the sharp remarks of the "Hollywood Reporter", you can see the direction of the public opinion of professionals. Tom Hopper is just a scapegoat under their guns. The real allusion is the industry. The deep entanglement behind ~www.novelhall.com~ Not only that, but senior professional media such as "Variety Show", "New York Times", "Voice of the Village", "The New Yorker" and other senior professional media have also expressed similar views and conducted reports on the college. Severe criticism. The awards ceremony ended, but the noise has just begun.Year after year, day after day, Oscars are the same as Golden Globes and Grammys. Major award ceremonies are facing more and more challenges. Authority, attention, and popularity are gradually declining. This year It has reached a new high."Social Network", a work focused on the Internet era, failed in an all-round way. At the same time, it led to a sharp decline in ratings and viewership. Coupled with sharp criticism from the media, it has gone through the Oscar of the 83-year journey. The steps began to falter.The best film debate will not dissipate for a long time to come. Just like "Brokeback Mountain" and "Crash", "Shakespeare in Love" and "Saving Private Ryan", time will prove the choice of the college this time. is it right or not.Of course, as an annual film festival, the focus on Oscars is naturally not only that, there will be criticism, there will naturally be praise, controversy, and naturally there will be pursuits. In addition to the best film and best director controversy, in addition A big focus is Natalie Portman.The actress who was born as a child star and became famous at a young age succeeded in getting rid of the crisis of the "stand-in door". When she was about to turn thirty years old, she successfully aspired to the Oscar queen and became the first actor in the y generation to harvest a figurine. He deservedly became the leader of the new generation of actors. The limelight is gaining momentum, even surpassing Colin Firth and Tom Hopper, for a while.Shrouded in Natalie's dazzling light, the haze of the double door disappeared, Lan Li-Hall became a yellow flower of tomorrow, and all the noise began to settle. Not surprisingly.
