I’m not really sure what you mean here, but then-again I’m not to sure what I meant either. Probably just that the explanations about the upbeat/conventional film that flattered Hollywood made sense but I couldn’t be bothered repeating or acting like it was my own opinion.

That Tarantino won, another, best screenplay Oscar would suggest he is not despised by Hollywood, but it is crazy that he does not get more credit on the directing side of things (or that he and Aflec would be considered in t he same league).

P.s Probably unlikely that you’d see this comment anyway and I am just talking to myself, maybe some kind of facebook ‘someone has replied to your comment’ type of thing? No idea of the technical side, probably a bit of a pain in the ass I expect.

“but it is weird that that readers here wouldn’t prefer Zero Dark Thirty or any of the other films for that matter.

Also, the master should have been on the list to correct the mistake.”
true, and agrred.
looks like people do like to be ‘helped out’ in their choosing, doesn’t it.
i love everything about the master except the tone (in lack of a better word) – it’s too much like a dirge, you can’t feel good about it..

Also, the master should have been on the list to correct the mistake.

like this.. what makes it better than django?
and: why the academy preferred it to ANY tarantino?

it is a loaded question, since i am thoroughly convinced no matter what this guy makes, these other guys will hate, envy, dispise and dismiss – which clearly hapened here.

on the opposite side, the spoiled youngen got way too much for his ohkay & forgettable work.