Films/DVD Asylum

Posted by Harmonia (A) on February 26, 2008 at 23:47:23

In Reply to: RE: A fourth Bourne movie? Ugh! posted by Jazz Inmate on February 26, 2008 at 22:44:11

...and girl...are just trying to tell you that Bourne was well crafted and well edited.

There are conservatives in Hollyweird, but the town is fairly liberal and has been for quite some time. But I don't think that had a darned thing to do with Bourne winning for editing. The zealous G-man bad guy has been a stock figure in movies for a long time.

The editing branch of AMPAS (actual film editors) selects the finalists in this category, then everyone who is a member votes on the final awards winner. I just think most actors (who comprise the largest mebership of the Academy) were simply impressed by the speed & complexity of the intecutting. No more, no less. The movie was a kinetic, non-stop action ride for some folks, who loved it. I like Bourne II the best, personally.

A lot of people just like the movie, and like Greengrass.

Would I have voted for it? Naw, I already told which two who I would have voted for.

Cannes, whose jury is international, is located in a completely different political climate from southern California aka USA movieland. I don't see any connection between voting at Cannes and voting for the Oscars - in fact, there ain't much connection even between Oscar and Sundance. If any festival has an inkling of influence on AMPAS, it's probably September's Toronto fest, since many high profile films make their NA debut there. To be well received at Toronto is to get recognition and maybe a little boost or buzz going into the awards season. But even it's too early to have a major impact.

So who's seeing conspiracies?

Besides, I don't think Bourne is anti-US.