Crash's Upset- Page 6

[jrb_actor]

Posted: 3/7/06 at 1:52am

oh yeah--no denying it was a shock. It was a huge (I believe the hugest) upset in Oscar history.

But we did see it coming. Just very few people wanted to believe it could happen, myself included.

As an Oscar nerd of sorts and viewer since 1988, I have to say that it seems to me that the Academy has grown more and more rebellious about not falling in line with the precursors and precedents. Every year lately they seem to break "rules" and destroy "reliable precedents".

[Kringas]

Posted: 3/7/06 at 1:56am

And that's what makes me actually want to watch them. Whenever I hear all this talk of who will win, I wonder, then what's the point? As a casual viewer, it certainly makes the reasons to watch more compelling if it actually seems there's chance of actual competition. If not, then just give one award to one damn movie and be done with it.

Posted: 3/7/06 at 8:37am

"Pseudololus - looking at the entries in your blog, I could have guessed you would have been a "BBM homophobia conspiracy" advocate sight unseen. My feeling is that you are probably the one here unable to entertain a two sided civil debate on the issue."

That's interesting - I've been pretty busy and haven't updated my blog lately (in about a year, I'd say). I'm not talking about conspiracy - I just think it's silly and a bit dangerous to dismiss outright the probability that homophobia played a role. I actually started a thread about CRASH being the safe alternative about a month ago, so as JRB says we saw this coming.

That said, I do think, as stated before, that West Coast myopia also was a factor as well. The Times this morning has an article that talks about CRASH as being "more representative of the industry . . ."


Los Angeles Retains Custody of the Oscars (login required)

[bwaysinger]

Posted: 3/7/06 at 8:58am

Wow. I have nothing to add to this "discussion" as that's hardly what it is. But, really. Both sides of this debate (at least here in this thread) believes it's the one presenting its opinions rationally while the other said believes the reverse. So we're really not getting anyhwere.
Hasn't everything been said? Time to put it to bed, guys. Some people liked Crash. Some people liked Brokeback. Some people might have liked something else.

Posted: 3/7/06 at 9:14am

"What if GOOD NIGHT AND GOOD LUCK had won over CRASH and BROKEBACK? Would the Academy be both racist and homophobic? Or would that be fine, since GOOD NIGHT AND GOOD LUCK is more political than just social?"

I gave my opinion on this on another thread, but here goes another try. BBM had a consensus up to the day before the nominations were announced. Then the SAG awards happened, and suddenly the media annointed CRASH as BBM's competition, Roger Ebert started his campaign (3 articles and many appearances), and the other three movies were pretty much ignored. A backlash starts.

I think there was a bit of "picking one's poison" this year - GN&GL was made by one of Hollywood's big "liberals", in an age when the likes of Ann Coulter goes around making big bucks on speaking engagements defending Joseph McCarthy. No matter what the perception is, Hollywood is about making money, not being liberal.

CAPOTE has the East Coast liberal tag (and was the smallest of the films anyway). MUNICH is an interesting film - a flawed but very brave film that takes on the eye-for-an-eye mentality of the fight against terrorism. The right wing media machine spent about a month attacking Speilberg and this film when it came out - a win by this film would have really stirred the pot.

Thus we have CRASH - a film made in and about Los Angeles, about "racism" in Los Angeles (directed and written by a rich white guy), as the easiest film to embrace for many in the Academy - the same Academy that snubbed Spike Lee for DO THE RIGHT THING 15 years earlier. I guess that is progress - it's hard to argue against being against racism in 2006. I don't think a loss by CRASH would have been perceived as racist though - the lack of black producers/directors is more the issue there (and there actually has been progress).

Personally, I would have respected a win by GN&GL or Munich more than CRASH because of my own opinions on the merits of each film - the merits of these films were more universally accepted by critics anyway (Metacritic scores for GN&GL - 80, Munich - 74), but these films were never in the running. It was CRASH (Metacritic rating 69), the lowest rated, worst reviewed film of the five nominees that was chosen to be BBM's competition following the announcement of the nominations.

[melissa errico fan]

Posted: 3/7/06 at 9:35am

Some of the posts on this thread make me want to scream. So what if BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN didn't win Best Picture. Get over it! Life isn't going to end because one picture didn't win the top honor. BBM, even though it lost, is STILL the most talked about movie of the year. If you're depressed and tying the noose because it lost, you need a life...

Thanks to Munk, MB, Addy, etc. for being voices of reason on this thread. Personally, I loved BBM, but all of this conspiracy theorism is starting to turn my stomach. And, as Munk said, if the Oscars WERE homophobic (which they aren't) Philip Seymour Hoffman wouldn't have (deservedly) won Best Actor for playing a gay icon.

The Brokeback conspiracy theorists (on this thread, at least) are coming off as windbags who just love to hear the sound of their own voice. So what if it lost. The sun is still going to rise tomorrow morning.

Posted: 3/7/06 at 10:06am

I guess, with MEF's post, it's time for us all to bury our heads in the sand and move on, lest we get screamed at once again. I will be moving on.

Bwaysinger - I hear you - Other than a response to one inane post claiming there is no homophobia in Hollywood, I believed I was very reasonable. I think some people who responded were trying to be reasonable. Yet certain people insist that I am "attacking" because I don't like a film and give reasons why. I simply can't dismiss homophobia as a factor in the voting process, any more than I can dismiss myopia, because I've seen homophobia too clearly in my life experience.

I've also been dismissed by some who disagree with me as someone "who would have been a "BBM homophobia conspiracy" advocate sight unseen." This is a lie, and this poster knows nothing about me accept some of my politics - I call them as I see them - but we live in a country that re-elected George W. Bush, so maybe we just aren't ready to deal in reality just yet.

It's very difficult getting into a discussion on this board because young people are taught today that everything is "us vs them" - a simplistic and dangerous mentality. And if you agree with someone then they become the "voice of reason" for slinging insults and calling names. The world doesn't have to be a Bill O'Reilly show. The one thing that CRASH does get is that there is a meanness in our discourse that is unnecessary.

[zepka102]

Posted: 3/7/06 at 10:15am

you know what Pseudolus, i stated my opinion which i thought was alright here and i totally backed myself up. i never put anyone down or anything and you went and attacked me and proved in your last post that you won't give it up. what is you f-ing problem... seriously

[robbiej]

Posted: 3/7/06 at 11:33am

Ah, Kringas...you know you're still the twin that was ripped from my mother's womb and sold on the black market.

Honestly, a response this intense to a movie losing an Oscar is NOT RATIONAL. Now...some here are young and figuring stuff out...just like I was at some point. I understand the grandness of emotions during that time of life. So, it's all good. But I couldn't help but thinking whilst reading this article, 'THIS IS A GROWN MAN????'

And then it dawned on me. How completely insecure does a grown man have to be to have such a reaction? How irrational is it to become so invested in a movie that your response is that of a loss of a loved one? Why are people looking to movies to validate their lives? Their existence?? Ya know...I have LOTS of problems with BM; both as a work of art and the media/politics around it. What is highly insulting is the insinuation that JUST because these are macho men who have sex, they are far more valid than Hoffman's exemplary work in the oh-so-boring CAPOTE. How can people simply not see that BM is simply another variation of stereotype regarding gay men. The tragic victims who inspire nothing so much as pity. It's so freaking Children's Hour. Hell, even 1961's VICTIM was even more queer positive than BM.

I could never get behind BM as a movie or Oscar contender simply because absolutely nothing felt 'gay' about it. From top to bottom, it was a straight version of what our lives were. This movie didn't represent our voices. No...you don't have to be gay to make a movie about gay folk. But if ya fail at presenting us as we actually are, I'm gonna call you out.

Perhaps homophobia did play a part. I have no idea what Tony Curtis was talking about since he has been becoming progressively more lesbianish the older he gets. But it certainly is not the only reason CRASH won the Oscar. And to say so is not only intellectually inept, but also very dangerous.

Updated On: 3/7/06 at 11:33 AM

[broadway86]

Posted: 3/7/06 at 11:35am

Whoa! This thread is really getting out of control. One more thing, and then I'll (probably) let this go: Whatever the reasons were, Crash beat the odds and became part of one of the biggest upsets in Oscar history. I have absolutely nothing against Crash, but as a passionate fan of Brokeback, I was heartbroken and disappointed that it didn't win. However, BBM fans, it isn't finished. The impact that the film has had all over the world will continue to resonate for... I don't know how long. Just love the movie the way you have been, and this landmark film won't be forgotten. Updated On: 3/7/06 at 11:35 AM

[zepka102]

Posted: 3/7/06 at 12:12pm

see 86, thats the attitude i like. i said the same thing. it's still going to be a movie that will be remembered for what did... it not winning does not take anything away from it. only time will tell how much of an impact it will have, but hopefully it will be a positive one.

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 3/7/06 at 12:14pm

I am waiting for the re-release/special edition dvd in 2020 when they are able to use state of the art digital technology to fix the awful wigs and aging makeup.

[robbiej]

Posted: 3/7/06 at 12:16pm

God...I hope they leave Hathaway's wigs alone. They were the only moments of levity in the film!

And even though I REALLY didn't like the movie, if it helps in getting THE FRONT RUNNER made, I would be eternally grateful.

[zepka102]

Posted: 3/7/06 at 12:16pm

let's hope technology can do that by that time >_<

[DBillyP]

Posted: 3/7/06 at 12:36pm

Joe Solmonese, President of Human Ricghts Campaign, had this to say, "I was certainly disappointed, but I would trade that Oscar for all the positive conversations that this movie spurred between parents and their gay children, or between employees and their gay co-workers. That impact transcends any accolades."

I, too, was disappointed. If I had to be honest, however, and was forced to pick the nominee that I thought was the "best" film of the year, I would have to choose GOOD NIGHT, AND GOOD LUCK. That is part of my frustration: while I appreciated CRASH and thought it was a good film, I think there were better films.

I believe the Oscar voting system needs to be changed. Instead of picking one winner, voters should rank the nominees in any given category. This allows voters to give a more accurate assesment of how worthy they think each nominee is. (Now, before you start in with the "but they would all have to see every nominated film" argument, that is a problem currently as well.)

[NYadgal]

Posted: 3/7/06 at 12:40pm

robbie, I would LOVE to see The Front Runner finally get made! It's been out there for SO long, and would be a wonderful movie.

[DayDreamer]

Posted: 3/7/06 at 12:44pm

Too bad Paul Newman is a little too old to play the coach anymore. (I think he's the one who originally had the rights to it)

[robbiej]

Posted: 3/7/06 at 12:44pm

Ya know...I probably sound like a hypocrite, being pissed off about the tragedy involved in BM and yet being thrilled about the posibility of THE FRONT RUNNER. But the character of Billy Sive (sp?? it's been a while since I read it) is such a strong, out, self-aware and proud character that it makes all the difference.

ETA: Day-Dreamer...what about Clooney?

Updated On: 3/7/06 at 12:44 PM

[NYadgal]

Posted: 3/7/06 at 12:45pm

He did have the rights, DD. He secured them right from the beginning, but I believe they've been released.

It's such a beautiful love story. I should re-read it. It's been years...

edit: Robbie, we were posting at the same time. The characters in that book are so well defined. I loved it.

Updated On: 3/7/06 at 12:45 PM

[DayDreamer]

Posted: 3/7/06 at 12:46pm

I remember crying, not sobbing but CRYING like a baby reading that book.

[NYadgal]

Posted: 3/7/06 at 12:47pm

I did, too, DD.

robbie, it's not hypocritical at all.

[robbiej]

Posted: 3/7/06 at 12:48pm

And HOT. Sober sex in the woods after a run is SO MUCH HOTTER than drunken spit sex in a pup tent!

Just read an article that claims the rights have reverted to Patricia Nell Warren, who is receiving much interest in the project again.

And again...I say Clooney!!! With some good, young hot actor (I'm becoming a fan of Joseph Gordon Levitt from Mysterious Skin...but he may just be a touch too young-looking for it).

[bwaysinger]

Posted: 3/7/06 at 12:50pm

Did...you...just...suggest...Clooney...as...a...gay...track...coach?

*Head explodes from happiness*

[DayDreamer]

Posted: 3/7/06 at 12:51pm

Clooney would be great. With an unknown HOT YOUNG actor. I don't really see JGL... but who knows, right?

[robbiej]

Posted: 3/7/06 at 12:51pm

Isn't that just the most? To say the very least???

Who to play Billy? Let's cast it right now!