Our BetterMost Community > Chez Tremblay
The Academy trying to prove it's not homophobic?
ednbarby:
--- Quote from: latjoreme on September 11, 2006, 02:12:50 pm ---Wow, that's even more impressive than Mel's boycotting determination!
Tell you what, though, I don't blame Lion's Gate -- or even Paul Haggis, for that matter. They just put out a movie. It's not their fault the Academy members are idiots and homophobes. I suppose the noble thing to do would have been to reject the Oscar and admit they're unworthy, but ... well, I guess that's more than I would expect, given human nature.
--- End quote ---
Actually, that's not true. Here's a little blurb from an article I just found, a link to which is posted below, that mentions what Lions Gate did to win the Oscar:
To bring it to the attention of the Academy, Lions Gate Entertainment Corp. spent nearly $4 million promoting "Crash," sending out multiple screeners of the film.
"This was by and large a triumph of marketing," said film critic Richard Crouse.
"They spent almost as much money in marketing this film strictly to the Academy Awards and the SAG Awards...as the movie cost to make."
Shot on a $6.5-million budget, "Crash" became a box-office success, grossing $55 million domestically.
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20060306/oscar_follow_060306/20060306?s_name=oscars2006&no_ads=
My understanding, and maybe Flashframe or someone else here can corroberate this, is that they sent a screener of "Crash" to all 130,000+ members of the Screen Actors Guild, planning to parlay a "Best Ensemble" win there into a Best Picture award at the Oscars. There was also talk of some underhanded things they did back on the old IMDb board (ads they took out that were vaguely homophobic was one of the things talked about) during the voting period to sway Academy voters against it. Because let's face it - everyone knows (now, anyway) that many of the voters, if not most of them, don't even bother to see the films nominated, so their votes are completely politically-based.
Some people hate Miramax for the "Shakespeare in Love" win over "Saving Private Ryan" in 1999 because the former "bought" the Academy by sending out slick screeners to every member, blah blah blah. But here's the difference - critical opinion was pretty evenly split between SiL and SPR leading up to the awards, and each had won a variety of the big critics' circle awards and Golden Globes, BAFTAs and SAG awards. And in my opinion, SPR was seriously flawed. The ending went on for 20 minutes longer than it should have, and the movie lost a lot of steam after the thrilling first 20 minutes. I was thrilled when SiL won because I thought it actually deserved to. I'm sure there are a handful of people who would say the same of "Crash." But pretty much everyone I talk to, for what it's worth, thinks SiL deserved to win but Crash did not.
Funny thing. When SiL won and there was all that backlash against Miramax afterwards, my husband, who *had* seen both movies, and in the theater to boot, said, "Well, you can't polish a turd."
Then, when Crash won in March and I was so livid I was nearly hyperventilating, he said, dumbstruck himself, "It turns out you *can* polish a turd."
I will never watch another Lions Gate movie again. I do blame them. They took advantage of the Academy's (and our society's) homophobia just so their crappy ass movie that shouldn't have even been nominated could take the big prize. I put them in the same category as the Bush Administration's taking advantage of the 9/11 attacks to start a war they were chomping at the bit before they were even put into power to start. Shame on them. They can all pucker up and kiss my lily white ass.
serious crayons:
Hmm... Well, I can understand your anger and you are absolutely entitled to act on it in any way you like, and I'm really reluctant to set myself up as the defender of Crash, a film I found mildly entertaining at best.
But I guess I still don't fault the studio for promoting its own movie. Even for spending a lot of money doing it. It might be crass, and shame on the Academy if its members were swayed by it, and if any of the marketing was even vaguely homophobic it's unforgivable.
But unless I'm missing something I don't find self-promotion intrinsically immoral on the order of the Bush Administration exploiting 9/11 to start a war. And I can't condemn some filmmakers for failing to back off or to acknowledge that a competitor's film was better. Again, underhanded marketing is another matter entirely.
In any case, feel free to boycott! That's just my 2 cents. :)
ednbarby:
Hey, you - get offa my cloud!
Lookit. If I wanna boycott an entire movie studio for silly, completely subjective reasons, that's MY business! Never underestimate spite. Mine keeps me warm at night. (Hey - I'm a poet and I don't even know it.) I try not to let the truth get in the way of a good Spite Fest. Now leave me be!
;D
serious crayons:
--- Quote from: ednbarby on September 11, 2006, 04:38:48 pm ---Hey, you - get offa my cloud!
Lookit. If I wanna boycott an entire movie studio for silly, completely subjective reasons, that's MY business! Never underestimate spite. Mine keeps me warm at night. (Hey - I'm a poet and I don't even know it.) I try not to let the truth get in the way of a good Spite Fest. Now leave me be!
;D
--- End quote ---
You are right. Sorry! I'm just so argumentative I'm willing to jump in and defend a movie I hold in contempt myself! (I'm not much for astrology, but it's classic a Libra trait of mine.)
::) :-*
adrian:
Let's face it, homophobia is the reason Bush got re-elected. His "manipulation machine" worked overtime appealing to the religious idiots to come out and vote AGAINST gay mariiage by voting FOR them. This worked, and frightened all the poor "sheep" of middle American right into their web. Now, most Americans feel, by recent polls, that they made a terrible mistake, and will probably try to correct it in November.
Well, this tactic worked again in Hollywood, but in a slightly different way. As you we all know, the gay cowboy jokes were rampant. Critics loved the movie but it slowly became unpopular to support this 'homosexual' film. So, Lion's Gate pushed their film as the one that supported all minorities, with a moral that 'healed' relations between all peoples, except gays of course, as there were no gay characters represented. Funny, being that it took place in Los Angeles. Anyway, their appeal to the older more conservative voters, the silent homophobic members and those on the fence, worked like a charm. We know Crash was the worst of the five nomimated for best picture, yet it took the prize. All that says to me is that the majority of this Academy is out of touch, and llike the Presidential election, voted for a movie that didn't deserve to win. Well, I am not, and never have been, "sheep", and like the voters will do in the November elections for the House and Senate, the Academy is trying to do now by inviting Jake and Heath to join the Academy and asking Ellen to host next year.
TOO LATE.
-Adrian
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version