This pretty much was a lifetime achievement award, though you probably could have said the same thing if it went to Angel Bassett. I like JLC and I think it's cool that she has an Oscar, but her performance was definitely the least interesting of the bunch

Most recently, Jamie Lee Curtis over Stephanie Hsu

He's actually been on kind of a run over the last 5 years or so. Pig might be the best performance he's ever given

I haven't seen it. I've heard it is extremely faithful to the novel and also not that good

The problem is that you're comparing it to the book. Kubrick didn't care about the story, themes, or characters that King wrote. He just wanted to use the setting and premise to do his own thing.

The Shining fucking rules. It's not a good adaptation but it is one of the best movies ever made

Like you said, they just have limited screens. Beyond that some studios will only allow theaters to screen their movies if they get a certain number of screenings in premium formats. You can Google how Disney screwed Tarantino out of the Cinerama dome when Star Wars came out

High and Low

Seven Samurai

Throne of Blood

Yojimbo

Rashomon

Give the second film a shot. I kind of felt the same way about Blade Runner but I love 2049 and I think it actually made me appreciate the original a little more

5 speeches is a lot and and giving 5 acting awards for lead and supporting waters down the value of the award. I'd be into adding more acting categories, maybe separating drama and comedy like the golden globes do, but just awarding the top 5 seems dumb.

As long as people have internet connections, discourse is going to be terrible. I don't really think that's a good reason not to do this. The real reason not to do it is that you'd be removing two awards from the show. People watch the Oscars to see famous people win awards. They're struggling for ratings as it is. I don't think removing two famous people giving speeches is going to help that

Crimes of the Future

Independent animated movies don't really make money. It's just not worth it financially for most distributors.

The movie would be better if it were

Cocaine Bear

Gattaca is about designer DNA but same kind of deal

Lucy fits your theme but I think that movie blows

Sorry to Bother You is fucking weird but you should definitely check it out

The best advice I can give you is to just do it. You're probably going to be pretty bad at first. That's okay. You'll get better. The more you think about this kind of stuff, the better you'll get at it and you'll develop a system that works for you. Just don't get discouraged when you inevitably flop at first.

Blue Velvet

It's the type of action movie that no one would actively seek out unless they're just a fan of the genre. Most of the shitty Liam Neeson movies have decent ratings for the same reason. Everyone that would dislike the movie knows that they're going to dislike it so they don't bother seeking it out.

Did we watch the same movie?

It's rated PG. Kids can absolutely watch and enjoy the movie

If they got into it 5-6 years ago you might be right. I think it's too late now. Nobody wants another streaming service at this point.

I think streaming is going the other way and you're more likely to see some of these other streaming services fold. Sony understood the market was saturated and it's safer for them to just license their content to other streamers.

Dial it back a couple dozen notches

Cloverfield