Crash- Page 4

[Unknown User]

Posted: 3/6/06 at 12:52am

No Erik with a K, BBM should have won at least over Crash because it is a far superior film - everyone BUT the Academy has come to this conclusion. Frankly all the nominees were fare superior to Crash, but all except Crash were politically charged. Even Tom Delay will tell people that he is against racism (even if he isn't).

But the Academy Awards have never truly been about only excellence. In recent years it has been much more important to peak at the right time, to have the "buzz" and to be about an appropriate subject. It had seemed that this would be a year when that could change, but it isn't.

Updated On: 3/6/06 at 12:52 AM

[slimandslam]

Posted: 3/6/06 at 12:52am

"No, Crash is the hugest upset ever because Brokeback had won the most precursor awards ever--statistically, it should have won."

Well, that's because precursor awards have been breeding like rabbits over the last five years or so. By my reckoning, the following movies had even more critical backing than _Brokeback Mountain_ did, yet were all shut out of Best Picture:

Atlantic City (1981)
GoodFellas (1990)
Pulp Fiction (1994)
Leaving Las Vegas (1995)
L.A. Confidential (1997)
Sideways (2004)

An upset? Absolutely. The hugest upset ever? No; it's just a matter of awards breeding expectations, and more awards breeding more expectations.

(Take note, though: I don't count the Golden Globes when assessing critical backing, because I think the Golden Globes are more a party than an award.)
Updated On: 3/6/06 at 12:52 AM

[Kringas]

Posted: 3/6/06 at 12:52am

everyone BUT the Academy has come to this conclusion

The Acadamy and quite a few people on this board.

[YouWantitWhen????]

Posted: 3/6/06 at 12:53am

That is your opinion, and you are entitled to it.

Give those who happen to disagree with you the same courtesy.

[zepka102]

Posted: 3/6/06 at 12:54am

ooooooooooo i LOVE LA Confidential

[Kringas]

Posted: 3/6/06 at 12:55am

In recent years it has been much more important to peek at the right time,


"Peek" or "peak"? And I'm not being an ass. That sentence could be taken two different ways.

[Unknown User]

Posted: 3/6/06 at 12:56am

Slim - I would love to see your methodology, but you aren't taking into account the major guilds - Crash won the SAG (which was expected due to the large ensemble), but BBM won the PGA, DGA and Writer's Guild, in addition to NY & LA Film Critics Circle and by far the most critics groups, and the BAFTA.

I also don't think you can exclude the Golden Globes, since they statistically are the most reliable bellweather (except that Crash wasn't even nominated this year).

And yes I edited the message above.
Updated On: 3/6/06 at 12:56 AM

[Jane2]

Posted: 3/6/06 at 12:58am

", BBM should have won at least over Crash because it is a far superior film - everyone BUT the Academy has come to this conclusion."

At least put the words "I think" or "It is my opinion", etc. Don't state your opinion as if it is fact.You aren't stating facts.

[YouWantitWhen????]

Posted: 3/6/06 at 12:59am

Jane2 - since he edited the message as suggested, how is the weather? Updated On: 3/6/06 at 12:59 AM

[Jane2]

Posted: 3/6/06 at 1:01am

I simply hate when people post opinion as fact.

[slimandslam]

Posted: 3/6/06 at 1:13am

"Slim - I would love to see your methodology, but you aren't taking into account the major guilds - Crash won the SAG (which was expected due to the large ensemble), but BBM won the PGA, DGA and Writer's Guild, in addition to NY & LA Film Critics Circle and by far the most critics groups, and the BAFTA."

I won't reveal the methodology fully - it helps keep an air of mystery, which makes it more fun. I will say that it's entirely based on the New York and LA Film Critics, as well as the National Society of Film Critics. This enables me to keep my methodology constant since 1977 (when the LA critics got their act together). Most other critics' awards are johnny-come-latelies compared with this bunch; if I included them, I'd have to rework things practically every year.

The guild awards are measures of peer approval, not critical approval. Moreover, they specifically only award the particular aspect of a film represented by the guild (acting, directing, writing, etc.), not the film itself.

I admit that I should have included guild awards in the general consciousness of "precursor awards." Many awards-watchers pay attention to them. I don't.

"I also don't think you can exclude the Golden Globes, since they statistically are the most reliable bellweather (except that Crash wasn't even nominated this year)."

As a bellwether, you're right, but I still can't take them seriously when they continue to do that silly Drama/Comedy division. Come on, folks, a movie is a movie. They only use that as an excuse to hand out twice as many awards.

I realize that there are two different ways to look at this issue generally, and at the Crash win in particular: (a) as an unpredicted win based on prior expectations, and (b) as an undeserved win based on perceived merit. By focusing on critical awards, I'm specifically only talking about (b) here. More specifically, I'm talking about the perception that it's an undeserved award, rather than my own assertion that it is such. (I haven't seen either movie.)

I imagine that this post makes sense only to me, because I'm tired. Night night.

[Kringas]

Posted: 3/6/06 at 1:16am

They only use that as an excuse to hand out twice as many awards.

It also serves to give awards to films and performances that are essentially shut out at every other major awards show.

[slimandslam]

Posted: 3/6/06 at 1:20am

"It also serves to give awards to films and performances that are essentially shut out at every other major awards show."

If the Golden Globes are going to characterize Walk the Line as a Comedy/Musical, who is shut out?

[bwaysinger]

Posted: 3/6/06 at 8:39am

Well, the only thing I have to say about Crash is that it was the weakest of all the nominees (which I've finally seen) and it is so heavy-handed in its "message" I had to get up and walk around a few times before I could finish it.

Finally, wrap your mind around this, ladies and gentlemen: a film in which Sandra Bullock appears has been named Best Picture.

[jrb_actor]

Posted: 3/6/06 at 8:46am

And she was good in it. I say cool that a film that has people reacting so passionately won. Usually everyone is fairly ho hum.

[Jon]

Posted: 3/6/06 at 8:56am

Describing CRASH as "a film in which Sandra Bullock appears" is like calling Brokeback Mountain "a film in which that chick from Dawson's Creek appears".

Sandra Bullock, among others, proved that an actor is only as good as the script they are given to work with. Nicole Kidman was in "Bewitched". Enough said.

[bwaysinger]

Posted: 3/6/06 at 9:04am

Nicole Kidman was also the weakest link in The Hours, in my oh-so-humble opinion.

And so sorry to have apparently bruised your ego with my estimation of Crash, Jon. It was a joke. Lighten up. My life has gone on even though the saviour of homosexuality did not win Best Picture. I simply think that, of the nominees, Crash was far and away the weakest picture and, therefore, the least deserving to win.

[popcultureboy]

Posted: 3/6/06 at 9:04am

They are going to claim that the country is turning more for "family values" and that the Oscar loss for BBM is just a sign.

If Brokeback lost to a film that advocated family values, you might have a point.

[Unknown User]

Posted: 3/6/06 at 9:28am

popcultureboy - I'm not saying that I agree with the right wing - it isn't MY point - quite the contrary. The right wing message machine has never relied upon logic to make their arguments, but on emotion and fear. BTW - someone did a word count, and Crash has by far the most profanity of any of the nominees, but two men (who aren't sissies) kissing trumps murder, violence and profanity.

L.A. Times critic Kenneth Turan: "Despite all the magazine covers it graced, despite all the red-state theaters it made good money in, despite (or maybe because of) all the jokes late-night talk show hosts made about it, you could not take the pulse of the industry without realizing that 'Brokeback Mountain' made a number of people distinctly uncomfortable. So for people who were discomfited by 'Brokeback Mountain' but wanted to be able to look themselves in the mirror and feel like they were good, productive liberals, 'Crash' provided the perfect safe harbor."

[jrb_actor]

Posted: 3/6/06 at 9:34am

I can entertain notions that Brokeback didn't win because of homophobia, but I refuse to believe that Crash isn't worthy. Additionally, I think the film that liberal Hollywood could have gone with if afraid of Brokeback was Good Night, and Good Luck--a piece that like The Crucible, uses history to point out the ills of the current day. It would have been a nice slap at Bush and Co.

But they didn't. The chose Crash, a film that is profound, poetic, passionate, stirring, and moving.

[smartpenguin78]

Posted: 3/6/06 at 9:45am

I have "officially" decided to watch Crash again to see if I can see any of this.
The problem I had was that the interlocking story seemed forced, and the moving moments all had the feeling of being contrived.
I must say though, it must indeed be profound and passionate to be stirring such a great love in the hearts of so many.

Many people love the film, no matter what I may think of it that is a legitimate reason for it to win.

Is there a certainty that some voters voted AGAINST BBM, sure. Some of those even did it because they were Homophobic. There were also large numbers who voted FOR Crash. The movie has been a darling of acting communities from the begining.

[jrb_actor]

Posted: 3/6/06 at 9:52am

I think Crash establishes its reality well--they aren't coincidences or contrived. It's theatrical. No more than Altman, PT Anderson, or many of the musicals we adore.

[Unknown User]

Posted: 3/6/06 at 9:53am

"The chose Crash, a film that is profound, poetic, passionate, stirring, and moving"

And I get criticized for stating opinion as fact! I found Crash to be patronizing, smug, self-righteous and unbelievable, certainly not profound. It had a good premise but ended up a poor man's Altman (ironic that they were honoring him this evening).

They could NOT give the Oscar to GN&GL because George Clooney is an outspoken liberal who has made a film critical of factions in power who use fear to create imaginary enemies and gain power - sound familiar? In a country where Ann Coulter makes six-figures at speaking engagements DEFENDING Joseph McCarthy, there was NO WAY they could give best pic to GN&GL without drawing the wrath of the right wing media.

There was also no way they could award Munich, a film which actually takes some time (only a little) to ponder the Palestinian point of view and comes out against eye-for-an-eye action. Nor would they ever give it to Capote, about an effete New York gay liberal.

No - Crash was the only safe choice - who is going to argue against a movie that is against racism via the media? (Well, actually some of the extremists will, but it's a better choice than kissing cowboys.)

[smartpenguin78]

Posted: 3/6/06 at 9:58am

Jerby, that is where we will be stuck on disagreeing.

"The chose Crash, a film that is profound, poetic, passionate, stirring, and moving"
Pseudulos, most of the things in this statement are EMOTIONAL responses, which people have had to this movie. The statement is fact. We can disagree with the validity of the responses, or say that maybe it was not poetic or profound. There is no way to argue that people do indeeed find it passionate, stirring and moving.

[Unknown User]

Posted: 3/6/06 at 10:20am

Hey smartpenguin: I know that jrb's reaction are emotional responses. My response is really to him and also Jane2, who earlier reacted against people who state opinions against Crash as if they were fact - so I was just sending it back.

I actually do understand the implied "I think" in jrb's sentence, but to me, I certainly didn't find Crash to be profound, poetic, stirring or moving (except in the wrong way). So while these reactions are fact to jrb, they don't apply to me.