[Overtaxed]

Oh, that Weinstein. But then again, I'm confused because I hear "right-wingers" complain that ABM glossed over the gay part to deceive the movie-going audience and the "gay faction" complain that the gay part was left out in order to please the movie-going audience. If Weinstein's involvement with LOTR is indirect, I don't see why everyone who worked on LOTR directly should be shamed because of his comments.

[Lucius Cornelius Sulla]

I don't see why everyone who worked on LOTR directly should be shamed because of his comments.

I don't think I want to go any further here, but profiting from the cheating of another party is not the way I want to win something. If I am in a race, running third, and one of the first two fouls the other one and is disqualified, and I win because of that, it would not be the same as if I beat them.

[Penny1]

The one thing that I think glossing over some stuff in ABM should affect is the "Best Adapted Screenplay." I doubt that FotR will be able to beat out ABM for that, but IMO its faithfulness to the story and book compared to the omissions and changes to ABM should give FotR the win in that category.

IMHO, of course. ;)

[Penny1]

It's not a matter of being ashamed, I don't think, but it does cause one to question the worth of the win itself. It's kinda like the Australian who won the gold in Short Track because he was the only one still standing on his skates by the end of the race.

However, having seen our hobbits' response to the question about FotR winning the Best Picture Oscar, I don't think they would care in the slightest, lol...