I'm afraid that few people really "got it"—which is a shame, because I think it was funny as hell, and too many people thought it was serious. That probably turned a lot of people off, who didn't understand what the Serious Point was. I watched it with a dour theater full of self-serious people who glared at me…

I would hazard to guess that if you asked women what "The Lion King" is about, the last thing they would identify is the relationship between the father and son (I had forgotten that was a major part of the movie). I would have talked about the lion cub's story of growing up, the love story, or his saving his mother.

Serious question: what woman DOESN'T like horses and young Clint Eastwood?

I find the comment boards are interesting for shows or movies that no one else has seen in 20 years, like 1970s costume dramas or old documentaries. You'll be able to talk to the 3 other people who watched those works. No other site (including this one) gives you that opportunity.

ABC has promised to pick it up in its 8th season.

If Fox had only picked up Bob Loblaw's Lawblog Hour.

Needs more Paul Reiser.

I didn't say they watered down the homosexuality, I said that they watered down the homosexual martyrdom (by having the suicide occur off-screen and in a title card).

Is it sad that I am not sure if this comment is serious or not?

Perhaps it is particularly galling with Turing because: a) watering down his story as a homosexual martyr is offensive; b) he was such an unconventional genius and it felt like the story made him a conventional, "safe" genius.

Blunt should have gotten the Oscar for pretending to be attracted to aging Tom Cruise in Edge of Tomorrow.

Who Framed Roger Rabbit? totally deserves an exceptional accomplishment Oscar. Did the Oscars used to be cooler than they are now? I can't imagine the Academy noticing a film like that now.

Awww, now I'm wishing that Big Hero 6 had the writers of The Lego Movie. Hero was really cool and had such an interesting premise/world, and the design was so fun, but the dialogue and characterization was sadly lacking.

Yes, that annoyed me. Turing led such an interesting life, and that's what I was hoping to see on film. I was very underwhelmed. I would have liked less Oscar-baity, and more of a Coen-brothers-type treatment.

What did they do bad in the Selma campaign? I don't know anything about Oscar campaigns, so please tell me how it works and why this one fell short.

It's kind of absurd for the sound mixer to assume that most people watching the film would be at a 70mm IMAX theater.

North & South doesn't get enough attention. I blame the name. I know they felt they had to stick with Gaskell's title, but: a) I don't think Gaskell picked a very good name to begin with; b) today, it sounds like a Civil War story or a political documentary.

That would be the only polite thing to do.

I actually enjoy watching both works, as long as the third option is the Russell Crowe version of Robin Hood. Holy God was that awful.

Yes, the acting and costuming are pretty excellent. It's the plot and dialogue that make it a slog.