2003 Oscars - 75th Academy Awards

Sorry, Backfire, my friend. But I don't think "Rings" should win best picture, even though I think it was better than the first one.

i enjoyed it thoroughly, thus i think it should win best picture.

It was very good, don't get me wrong.

the first LOTR got outrageously robbed for Oscars, TTT is already outrageously robbed for nominations, I hope the last one gets all it has the possibility of getting...but then again the Academy Awards ain't much

One hour photo was awsome

oscars mean absolutely nothing. now the movie that wins is the one with teh most momentum when the awards come by. and in 20 years from now, when people look back to the beginning of the milenium, the lord of the rings movies will be known as the best movies, not chicago or beautiful mind or any of that crap.

It is doubtfull that The Pianist will be set up on theatres in Norway, Polanski never drew huge crowds here and the movie is so exspensive to buy so this one will go straight to video just like Ali did

sure bout that? im sure an oscar-winner'll get put up

Well at least that what they said on TV2 last night8absoulute film news), no one wanted to buy it in

Oscars had the lowest rating since 1953!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

No I had the lowest rating since 1974, because ratings system was not made before 1974, and in 74 was also the lowest rating...as far...The rating system in the USA is called Nielsen Media Research .

So unless you have a own system Finti to prove this, then you are wrong...BTW...this years Oscar had about 31 million veiwers, and last year had 41.
The best ever is 54 million, that was the year that Titcanic took home an hell of a lot of prizes!

well Thomas what I wrote came from BBC it said 20, 4 million viewers and it was the lowest audience since 1953 when Oscars first was shown on tv. Guess BBC just refering to other media reports, and Thomas there are more than the Nielsen Media Research in the States. There are competitive companies which is why you will get different rating numbers, so what I did was just refering to the ONE I read. And I guess they are just as right as the one you refered to http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/2883705.stm

Steve Martin was good, though...

BTW, as for LOTR, I think people make reasonable comment about people being reluctant to vote for it until ROTK comes out- it basically being one big film split into three.

it better get heaps of awards next year, and for CRYINGOUTLOUD; it _has_ to get Best Costumes award

Well, the Oscar's are dead and done for this year.

I agree with you on TTT not getting the deserved awards. The reason they weren't nominated for music is because of so much repeated themes, though I think that is bullshit.

I think the Oscars are overrated. Last year, I surely thought Sir Ian McKellan deserved an award. Oh who am I kidding? He won't get one cause the Oscars has already ignored other legendary greats in the past. Such as Peter O'Toole! And now they're giving Peter one to make up for it. Sheesh...
The Oscars is a snub and a half.

True but the most overrated award show is the Grammy you never going to see one person take home 5 grammy,the most I believe was Jack Nicolson with 3 oscars and that took him over 20 years to get that many and the record for grammy was 13 in one night thats crazy.

Who took home 13 oscars in one night?!

no one, thats the most any movie was nominated. titanic won like 11...as did a few other movies, but i dont remember what they were.

Oh, that was nominations...

Titanic was nominated for 11 or took home 11.