Wednesday, March 29, 2006

 

Sour Grapes

I promise this is the last post where I will talk about the Oscar's. I don't know why it is, but the Oscar's this year have had such a hard time going away.

Annie Proulx is the author of the short story that was the basis for Brokeback Mountain. She believes that Brokeback Mountain was robbed of the Best Picture Oscar. I would like to first share a few quotes of her's with you.


We should have known conservative heffalump academy voters would have
rather
different ideas of what was stirring contemporary culture.

Roughly
6,000 film industry voters, most in the Los Angeles area, many
living
cloistered lives behind wrought-iron gates or in deluxe rest-homes, out
of
touch not only with the shifting larger culture and the yeasty ferment that
is America these days, but also out of touch with their own segregated
city

And rumour has it that Lions Gate inundated the academy
voters with DVD
copies of Trash - excuse me - Crash a few weeks before the
ballot
deadline.

And that was it, three awards, putting it on
equal footing with King Kong.
When Jack Nicholson said best picture went to
Crash, there was a gasp of shock,
and then applause from many - the choice
was a hit with the home team since the
film is set in Los Angeles. It was a
safe pick of "controversial film" for the
heffalumps.

Wow! What a bitch!

I have already made my thoughts on the Best Picture Oscar known, but that isn't even why I am posting this. You know there have probably been many pictures over the years that thought they diserved to win and didn't. But I can't recall one other instance where someone involved with the picture took this kind of spoiled brat attitude about it.

She insults voters and other movies. She appears to be mad that voters preferred the other movie, if Crash was so unworthy why was it even nominated. But more importantly has she even given any thought to the people that worked on Crash. There were people there that worked hard, believed in what they did, and believe they deserve the award they won. Ms. Proulx is just pissing in their faces and pissing all over their accomplishment to make her selfish ass feel better. The voters job is to vote for what they think is the best picture hence the title BEST PICTURE. Their job is not try and please one bitter old skank. I am certain to her Brokeback was the best picture and if she had a vote I am sure that is what she would have voted for. I would also like to point out something in her remarks, it is not Academy voters job to be in touch with society, their job as I have stated is to pick out which movie they liked better, who gives a damn what everyone else likes. If we picked out what everyone else like then the highest grossing movie of the year would always win the Oscar.

Another thing is why is she dragging King Kong into this. What did Kong do to her and her precious movie to warrant being dragged through the mud by Ms Proulx. It wasn't even nominated for Best Picture and she still has to directly insult it. I guess she thinks Brokeback Mountain should have won those Oscars too, Best Special Effects: Brokeback Mountain.

Okay she can be mad at the voters, that is fair. God knows I am still mad at all the Bush voters from the last election. What is a real problem for Anne Proulx is calling Crash, Trash. It is not Crashes fault that you lost, if you don't like the movie that's fine, but the movie and the people involved with it didn't do anything to you, even if Lion's Gate distributed copies of it, you should know enough about the movie business to know that has nothing to do with the people who made Crash, you cantankerous old bat.

You may have noticed that I insulted Anne Proulx profusely through this article. Let's say I have lofty goals and hope by some miracle she ends up reading this and gets either hurt or insulted. Do unto others as they deserve, and maybe she deserves a good hard slap across the face. Then again maybe she just needs to get laid.

Also, if you are afraid that I might be taking her out of context and making her look bad for my own benefit here is her Guardian article.

http://film.guardian.co.uk/oscars2006/story/0,,1727312,00.html


Comments:
A similar situation happened last year when many thought that Mel Gibson's PASSION OF THE CHRIST should have been nominated for an Oscar. They claimed that liberal Hollywood hated Jesus, so that was why the film was not nominated. Personally, I thought PASSION OF THE CHRIST was innovative. I really liked what Gibson did, but there were several films I liked better. I liked COLLATERAL better. Does that mean that I love nihilism more than Jesus? Of course not.

Do gays and others now think that liberal (even though she calls them conservative)Hollywood hates gays? Movies should not win because of the social or religious agenda that they push; they should win because they are the best!

FWD:Annie Proulx
:))
 
I think there has been and will continue to be a debate about what warrants an Oscar.

None of the pictures nominated were in the top ten of highest grossing last year, and the same goes for 2004. In 2003 Return of the King was the highest grossing picture and the Oscar winner, the year before that Chicago was the tenth highest grossing movie. The movie you mentioned Passion of the Christ was the third highest grossing of 2004.

In all fairness I believe that Passion of the Christ was snubbed, I didn't like the movie, but I did think it was incredibly well done and visually stunning. Do I think it should have won best picture, no, Million Dollar Baby deserved that award and was clearly the best picture of that year, but I believe it should have been nominated for best picture instead of Finding Neverland (which I liked) and Mel Gibson definitely has every right to be pissed about not being nominated for best director, I mean Mike Leigh for Vera Drake, I have never heard of him or that movie.

But this year we are talking about two art house pictures, neither coming anywhere near box office smashes nor either won an absolute lock at the awards. No picture ran away with the Oscars this year like Return of the King or Titanic.

I never heard about the uproar of Passion's snub, but it doesn't surprise me. I don't believe the awards are infallable as it seems many are trying insist. The Oscars have made mistakes, in my opinion The Two Towers or Gangs of New York should have won in 2003 instead of Chicago, but they didn't ask me.

There are a lot of awards show out there that award the public's opinion, MTV Movie Awards and People's Choice Awards, Oscars are supposed to be picked by experts, people who supposedly know what makes a movie good.

I don't know exactly what point I was trying to make with this comment, but I guess I had a little more to say and I did want to point out that I agree with christians on Passion of the Christ.

The conservative Hollywood, that is just funny and scary, you can't even call Hollywood moderate. You have to wonder what she was thinking writing that. Winning or not they still nominated three Gay or Alternative lifestyle movies for many awards. I think Ms. Proulx must have got a little carried away there, but I guess she got a little carried away through her whole article.
 
Post a Comment



<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?