Thread: I'm pretty sure 2009 was the worst year in the history of movies
View Single Post
Old 01-18-2010, 05:08 PM   #25
thedamndest
A Property of Matter
 
thedamndest's Avatar
 
Posts: 25,543
thedamndest makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)thedamndest makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)thedamndest makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)thedamndest makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)thedamndest makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)thedamndest makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)thedamndest makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)thedamndest makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)thedamndest makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)thedamndest makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)thedamndest makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)thedamndest makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)thedamndest makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)
I guess it depends on how they value the nominating process. In the end, only one movie is going to win. Realistically that movie probably would never be a Dark Knight or a Wrestler. Does it really mean anything just to be nominated? If the answer is yes, then they should have kept a five film minimum and allowed, but not required, a max of ten.
thedamndest is offline   Reply With Quote