and parceling out credit. but i see what you're saying. with ides of march, the blueprint for greatness is there. moneyball is basically from scratch (at least the narrative). i'd just vote for whichever i thought was the better movie, and i'm guessing that's how 99% of awards voters operate as well. mostly 'cause it's just less work. as for assigning credit, i read your roundtable post and you're 100% right. some of the best lines are ad-libbed, some of the best screenplays make bad movies, and vice versa. problem is, it's just too much work to figure out who really deserves what. nobody's gonna read three dozen screenplays and familiarize themselves with all the source material, then cross-reference all that with what actually ends up on screen, so they can figure out who is truly deserving of the adapted screenplay award. at the end of the day, it's easier to just give the statue to the best movie.

i've heard a few people say they figured out early who the killer was in GWTDT (i realize that's not your primary critique, but it is for some). it's like, so what? it wasn't a whodunit where the whole point is to shock you with a big reveal. none of the developments were really shocking, and i don't think they were meant to be. the point was the how and why, and the journey there. i thought it was effective, relationships and all. you didn't. fair enough. but if i hear one more person say they figured out who the killer was...