To all of you saying that Keaton should of won, did you even see The Theory of Everything? IMO Redmayne well derserved the oscar. Keaton was great yes, but Redmayne had Hawking down perfectly. And to say how sad you are that keaton was shown hiding his oscar speech, give me a break. The guys a millionaire. You know how many nominees have oscar speechs sitting in their pockets waiting to be read?
shareit was OK, you have to take into account the politics behind the Oscars. $$$$... why has DiCaprio not won one single Oscar? he played a biographical character(aviator) and he did a far better job than Redmayne...actually blew his performance to *beep* Keaton should have gotten it , he is a legend for taking out that speech out prematurely that was the best part of the Oscars this year.
OH and bring back BILLY CRYSTAL to host lol!
I don't think he was hiding it, he was just discreetly putting it back in his pocket, in full view of the cameras, the people on the stage and the people around him. If he wanted to hide it, he could have quickly tossed it on his seat and sat on it, or thrown it on the floor between the chairs. He could have got rid of it before Eddie even left his seat, and nobody would have noticed.
I doubt he cares, he's getting more publicity from this than Eddie Redmayne is for winning.
Redmayne was great, the movie not so much...
Keaton was better and Birdman was MUCH better.
CG GORE IS THE WORST THING THAT HAS EVER HAPPENED TO THE HORROR GENRE!
I wouldn't assume he's currently a millionaire... that was pretty much his last chance.
shareHe is a millionaire.
shareYeah, at least Keaton gave the Oscars a little life there at the end. At least he was excited.
A couple becomes a couple when there's a house on the horizon
...should HAVE won... ;)
shareTo all of you saying that Keaton should of won, did you even see The Theory of Everything? IMO Redmayne well derserved the oscar. Keaton was great yes, but Redmayne had Hawking down perfectly. And to say how sad you are that keaton was shown hiding his oscar speech, give me a break. The guys a millionaire. You know how many nominees have oscar speechs sitting in their pockets waiting to be read?
I don't buy that stuff about Redmayne being more deserving because he 'had Hawking down perfectly'.
I believe creating a character NOT based on a real person is so much harder than playing a real-life persona because there is no refenence point. If you are playing Stephen Hawking, or Johnny Cash, or Ray Charles, you can watch hours and hours of video, listen to hours of audio, speak to people he knew, and study, study, study and eventually come up with an impression.
Creating a character from scratch yet giving him all the dimension of a 'real' person is so much tougher. There are no wives or relatives to interview, no video to study, there is just yourself and what you can find from your own psyche to bring the character to life.
It's just too easy to watch an actor playing a real-life person and say 'wow he's exactly like him' and praise the performance endlessly. Creating a great performance from nothing but words on a page is so much harder.
Never defend crap with 'It's just a movie'
http://www.youtube.com/user/BigGreenProds