Award archives...

[Ben]

Of course, it's DIRECTED by a Jew, too!

[ShyViolet]

Oh right, I forgot BZ is Jewish!

Spielberg might also have been an interesting choice to direct PE.

[Special_Ed]

I know many Jews and Musslums, even Jw's who celebrate Christmas....without the Christ and without the mass of course. Ah, stealing our holidaYys just for the gifts....

[Ben]

Edited a couple of posts here. Let's keep this on track people.

And Ed, please post your works on your own site (copyrighting something here is not only obnoxious, but also public domain).

[Special_Ed]

Everything everyone says on here is attributed to them and copyrighted by them. I was just making it clear. I was just inject a little fun in too. Nothing wrong with that. I've seen worse around here lately.

[ShyViolet]

I haven't seen PE yet but I'm not sure anymore if it should be counted as animation. I only recently "got" how it was done (Mocap and all that) and it kind of seems like the entire film is one HUGE special effect. Nothing wrong with that, the motion-capture is an aid, but should it really be counted as animation?

I mean, isn't animation supposed to come from the imagination? Tom Hanks "played" five characters in this movie, so it's partly based on live-action. IMO that's not the same thing...



*Hopes they'll bring back 2d!!!*

[ShyViolet]

And if BZ's Roger Rabbit came out in 2004 instead of 1988, I would say the same thing about that film: animation was an aid, a special effect, but it wasn't an animated film.

(*BTW I love RR so don't get me wrong! )

[ShyViolet]

Quite honestly, it wouldn't suprise me if Spongebob was one of the MAJOR contenders up there.

All in all though, I think Incredibles will win.
They BETTER win.
BECAUSE IF NOT
*shakes fist*

Wow, you sound really determined.

[Special_Ed]

If the character is animated it's animation. Gollum is just as much of an animated character as Elliot or Roger. No one ever said that live action/animation mixes are purely animation, but they are character animated performances. You can't deny that.

[mr. squarepants]

I was just watching the People's Choice Awards and something hit my mind. Tonight and in past years, no telling how many of this award show's winners are doing/have done less-than-fantastic at the box office/on television. And even some of the films/actors that won that have done well, did not do as well as their competitors, such as Fahrenheit 9/11 beating Shrek 2, Spider-Man 2, and The Incredibles.

So what's my point? Well, this is the People's Choice Awards. Aren't the people technically voting for their choice when they watch the shows and movies? In other words, if this really were the people's choice awards, then why do only a handful of "the people" have to vote for these things, when technically "the people" have already voted through box office numbers and Nielson ratings?

Do you see what I mean?

[Christian]

They also might be voting for a movie by watching pirated copies of it. Personally, I hate bootlegs. They just strike me as cheesy. But people still watch them.

[Ben]

The first part of your post was too much for my brain Mr SP - ouch!

But I kinda see what you mean. However, a flaw in your plan...


I went to see Shrek 2 and The Incredibles (as did many other people). But I also saw The World Of Tomorrow, I Robot and many more films this year.

Though the box office numbers would probably put Shrek at the top of the list, it doesn't mean that the amount of people who went to see that film would automatically forward it to be the best film. See what I'm getting at?

Basically, if I was following your logic, I "voted" for The Phantom Of The Opera. That I thought it was the biggest pile of pooh to come out last year would obviously stop me from voting for it in any polls (other than any "worst" lists).

Try to look at it as when people go to see things, that they are "auditioning" them for their likeability.

In short, just because someone went to see something, it doesn't mean they they enjoyed or would vote for it in a poll, not should the fact they simply saw it be counted as a recommendation from them (which it would in your way of doing things).

I've been longwinded about this - sorry - but you original post put me in a spin! Ouch again!

[mr. squarepants]

Hmmm...

I will admit that you raise a good point that I can't necessarily disagree with. Still, I just don't understand where all of these people who supposedly love Joey so much are on Thursday nights.

Nonetheless, here are some more things that are questionable about the People's Choice Awards:

1) Well, I will let you read about this one: http://www.imdb.com/news/sb/#2

2) Apparently, the awards ceremony isn't important enough to get its facts straight. What do I mean? At the 30th annual People's Choice Awards, Pirates of the Caribbean won "Favorite Motion Picture" (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0325980/awards). In fact, it was even reported at Animated News (http://www.animated-news.com/archives/00000626.html). However, the official website for the ceremony lists The Two Towers as the winner of the award (http://www.cbs.com/specials/30pca/nominees.shtml).

3) Who else thinks that the stars know they are going to win? It just seems as though the star who wins is always listed in the opening of the show, when it is announced who will be at the show. For instance, if Mel Gibson, Johnny Depp, and Tom Hanks are nominated in the same category, and Tom Hanks wins, he will be the one who is announced as present at the show's opening, and will likely be the only one of those nominees present.

4) Do you know how many people vote more than once for these awards? So, suppose there's someone out there who thought Phantom of the Opera was the greatest film of all time. If it were nominated, that person could vote as many times as he or she wanted, thus possibly affecting the results.

[GeorgeC]

It's a popularity contest and like anything people vote on, it CAN be manipulated if scammers are clever enough.

Frankly, I didn't think Shrek 2 should have been Numero Uno in its category, but we'll see what people think 10 years from now about that film.

It's kind of early to be declaring anything that came out in the last five years a classic now...

[Ben]

I just don't understand where all of these people who supposedly love Joey so much are on Thursday nights.

Suppose there's someone out there who thought Phantom of the Opera was the greatest film of all time. If it were nominated, that person could vote as many times as he or she wanted, thus possibly affecting the results.

Didn't get a chance to look at that link, but will explore the other points you raise.

Basically, the PCA is a TV show, and the only way to get stars to turn up at such events is to tell 'em they've won, or that they have a "very, very, very good chance of winning" (wink wink). Let's face it, the PCA is no-where as near important to Tom Hanks as the Oscars or even any other FILM-related awards show. Film is his business - the celebrity/People's Choice type things are an ocupational hazard. He, and others like him are not going to turn up at any old awards bash just to get their mug on the telly - what's the point in that when they are on every other TV show or magazine anyway?

I remember when the presenter of a daily TV entertainment show that I worked on won a lifetime type award. I cut the program in which she won, and I really thought that she didn't have a clue that she was going to be the name called out - it had not been "officially" advertised, and she went every year to this thing, so it wasn't like she was there especially. Anyway, as I was editing the thing, I made a comment that was along the lines of "ahhh, look at her face - she's so surprised!" and I really thought she was. The producer leant over and asked if I was serious, to which I said yes. Then Ms Producer told me that not only did the presenter KNOW she was going to have that awarded to her, but that she had been persuaded to go to the show, since she was going to pass this year! On top of that, her "acceptance speech" had been pre-written by her regular show writers - and approved by the presenter herself!

But, watching that show...you'd never know...


As for Joey... Well, if ten people watched Joey, and twenty people watched a competing program, then the competing one would win, right? Er, no, since out of those twenty people, it's likely only seven of them could be bothered to get off their bums and vote. Joey, on the other hand, might have a small but religiously devoted number of viewers, who ALL get off their bums and vote. So, say Joey gets nine out of ten votes - that beats the competing program's seven, don't it??

On to the Phantom (shudder) thing... Yes, it can be rigged, it can be fiddled. That's why voting doesn't always count for much. If it's super important, like the recent elections, systems are put in place to help prohibit rigging. Now, think about the amount of rigging that goes on in the country's ELECTIONS, for goodness sake, and you think they're going to be as stringent as even this for AN ENTERTAINMENT SHOW??

At the end of the day, Mr SP, the PCA is a piece of throwaway television designed to bump up the sales of what I believe is some sort of magazine tie-in (sorry, we don't even get it here in the UK), and I'm surprised that all this seems to be such a mystery to you.

It's a jaded and cynical place, the entertainment industry, and sometimes you need to think that way when things don't look as rosey and clear cut as they are supposed to!