The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum - View Single Post - Lord of the Rings: Both sides of the argument

Essex · 12-09-2003, 04:52 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR> Sheesh, thanks for making it clear. A film that has not been released yet and which you have not seen should get the Oscar irrespective of its merits because the previous 2 films (which were themselves nominated as separate entities) were good.<BR>Thanks for pointing out the logic of your argument. It makes sense now. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>I said nothing of the sort. I was only answering your incorrect point on the Academy's viewpoint of a Trilogy.<P>I did not say ROTK deserved the Oscar. I did not say that viewing the films as a trilogy was right or wrong.<P>I was just correcting your point. End of story.

12-09-2003, 04:52 AM	#21
Essex Ghost Prince of Cardolan Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Essex, England Posts: 886	<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR> Sheesh, thanks for making it clear. A film that has not been released yet and which you have not seen should get the Oscar irrespective of its merits because the previous 2 films (which were themselves nominated as separate entities) were good.<BR>Thanks for pointing out the logic of your argument. It makes sense now. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>I said nothing of the sort. I was only answering your incorrect point on the Academy's viewpoint of a Trilogy.<P>I did not say ROTK deserved the Oscar. I did not say that viewing the films as a trilogy was right or wrong.<P>I was just correcting your point. End of story.