Movies

Because she's got a great Oppenheimer!

bvz8gq9pqqv81.gif
 
ayayrawn said:
Because Emma's amazing in Poor Things. My heart said Lily, but it's not an undeserving win.
Click to expand...
No doubt Emma was great but so was Lily. Lily’s win would have been more poignant for what it represented on a larger level. Awards shows, by and large; are masterbatory gestures. All things being equal, why not take the opportunity to give the under-represented nominee the nod? It would have still been well earned.
 
TenderLovingKiller® said:
No doubt Emma was great but so was Lily. Lily’s win would have been more poignant for what it represented on a larger level. Awards shows, by and large; are masterbatory gestures. All things being equal, why not take the opportunity to give the under-represented nominee the nod? It would have still been well earned.
Click to expand...
Lily is a great actress and I'm hopeful she'll have more nominations in the future (watch her in Fancy Dance later this year). If the Oscars were always right she'd already have one for Certain Women.
That said, I think Stone's performance was an all-timer, so I'm good with it.
 
Last edited:
siremobunny said:
Lily is a great actress and I'm hopeful she'll have more nominations in the future (watch her in Fancy Dance later this year). If the Oscars were always right she'd already have one for Certain Women.
That said, I think Stone's performance was an all-timer, so I'm good with it.
Click to expand...
TenderLovingKiller® said:
No doubt Emma was great but so was Lily. Lily’s win would have been more poignant for what it represented on a larger level. Awards shows, by and large; are masterbatory gestures. All things being equal, why not take the opportunity to give the under-represented nominee the nod? It would have still been well earned.
Click to expand...
Lily is incredible, and I would've been elated with her win, but the international branch of the Academy really just seemed to prefer Poor Things (it swept 3 techs in a row earlier). Emma is what made the movie what it was, and it was my favorite of last year, so I'm fine with it as well. Also, as much as I follow and enjoy this stuff, none of it truly matters in the scheme of things.

I really just want to see Lily thrive and get a lot of work after this.
 
I didn’t see Killers so I can’t speak to Lily’s performance specifically but I would have really loved to see her win tonight because that would just have been such an impactful moment. Emma is amazing in poor things so I’m not mad she won (personally REALLY wanted Sandra to get it), but this is just gonna be one moment in her journey to probably being the most awarded actress of all time. I can’t see them falling in love with Lily again even if she gives another stellar performance
 
Fleetwood-Matt said:
I didn’t see Killers so I can’t speak to Lily’s performance specifically but I would have really loved to see her win tonight because that would just have been such an impactful moment. Emma is amazing in poor things so I’m not mad she won (personally REALLY wanted Sandra to get it), but this is just gonna be one moment in her journey to probably being the most awarded actress of all time. I can’t see them falling in love with Lily again even if she gives another stellar performance
Click to expand...
Mind me asking why they can’t fall in love with Lily again (especially after all the discourse)?
 
LeSamourai said:
I guess it's the whole "child-brain woman being taken advantage of by men" that makes me hesitate...
Click to expand...
I'm not a movie guy. but we watched Poor Things Saturday night since it's on HULU, and I didn't like a thing about it.

the premise is entirely off-putting. I had ZERO knowledge it was supposed to be (dark) comedy, nothing came close to making me laugh. there's just no consistency in the ways anyone behaves in this movie, but I guess it was needed to push the story along.

the whole thing was very, very messy to me. I can't begin to understand the appeal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top