'Brokeback' was robbed.
I'm pretty irritated by the outcome of lasts night's Oscars. My initial reaction was more surprised than angry, because I never expected anything other than Brokeback Mountain to win Best Picture, and the Best Adapted Screenplay and Best Director wins seemed to be leading up to it. It had occurred to me there might be an upset, because the winner never turns out to be who I think or hope it will be. I would have guessed Capote, if anything. But Crash? Shocked. Annoyed. Not, however, as infuriated as I thought I'd be. Do I think it deserved to win? No. Not in a million years. But at the same time, much like Brokeback Mountain, it deals with an issue close to my heart, and I'm glad to see it get some recognition. I think it's because of certain recent events/confrontations, and my deep, persistent anger over those events that I'm so quick to stand by it. It's definitely a movie that forces you to think about things in a whole new way, whether or not you agree with the way in which it does that (schmaltz, shameless pandering, etc. - I'll admit it) So they accomplished something there.
I do think that everyone should see Crash at least once, and take it as a chance to examine themselves and their viewpoints. That said, I think everyone should see Brokeback Mountain as many times as possible, and I understand why it's so significant that it didn't win. It was about more than saying "this movie is better than that movie": like it or not, it boiled down to the issues at stake, and racism is a much safer issue than homosexuality. For Brokeback to win Best Picture would have been a very important statement. As it is, it looks like all those nominations it got were merely obligatory. At the same time, the Oscars are NOT the be-all and end-all, and as someone on the red carpet said, it's still a "watershed." The fact that made such an impact on mainstream culture and has people talking means more than this little technicality.
When I really start thinking about it, it's the Acting categories that make me angrier than anything. I definitely would have given Best Supporting Actress to Michelle Williams (she kicked ass playing me in 10 years or so), and Best Actor to Heath Ledger - I mean, what's the point if Hoffman didn't even bark his speech? But most of all, it bothers me not so much that Gyllenhaal didn't win Best Supporting Actor, but the fact that he was nominated for Best Supporting Actor. How is that in ANY way a supporting role? Okay, so the movie focuses ever so slightly more heavily on Heath Ledger's character (this is more true of the short story, but we're not talking about the short story here). If this had been a story about a heterosexual couple, and both leads were nominated, they would have been up for Best Actor and Best Actress. Were they scared of nominating both of them for Best Actor? Why? Something seems very wrong there. If they both deserved a nomination, they should have both been nominated in the appropriate category.
I didn't intend for this rant to be as long as it is, but I could probably keep going even longer. If there's one thing I never, ever want to be accused of, it's not sticking by the things I believe in. I don't think anyone can ever be too vocal about their opinions, if they're passionate about them.
But go ahead and disagree.
I do think that everyone should see Crash at least once, and take it as a chance to examine themselves and their viewpoints. That said, I think everyone should see Brokeback Mountain as many times as possible, and I understand why it's so significant that it didn't win. It was about more than saying "this movie is better than that movie": like it or not, it boiled down to the issues at stake, and racism is a much safer issue than homosexuality. For Brokeback to win Best Picture would have been a very important statement. As it is, it looks like all those nominations it got were merely obligatory. At the same time, the Oscars are NOT the be-all and end-all, and as someone on the red carpet said, it's still a "watershed." The fact that made such an impact on mainstream culture and has people talking means more than this little technicality.
When I really start thinking about it, it's the Acting categories that make me angrier than anything. I definitely would have given Best Supporting Actress to Michelle Williams (she kicked ass playing me in 10 years or so), and Best Actor to Heath Ledger - I mean, what's the point if Hoffman didn't even bark his speech? But most of all, it bothers me not so much that Gyllenhaal didn't win Best Supporting Actor, but the fact that he was nominated for Best Supporting Actor. How is that in ANY way a supporting role? Okay, so the movie focuses ever so slightly more heavily on Heath Ledger's character (this is more true of the short story, but we're not talking about the short story here). If this had been a story about a heterosexual couple, and both leads were nominated, they would have been up for Best Actor and Best Actress. Were they scared of nominating both of them for Best Actor? Why? Something seems very wrong there. If they both deserved a nomination, they should have both been nominated in the appropriate category.
I didn't intend for this rant to be as long as it is, but I could probably keep going even longer. If there's one thing I never, ever want to be accused of, it's not sticking by the things I believe in. I don't think anyone can ever be too vocal about their opinions, if they're passionate about them.
But go ahead and disagree.
posted by Kristen | 8:56 AM
12 Comments:
That’s the BFF I know and love. It worried me a bit when you didn’t seem very angry at the outcomes of the Oscars. Of course thanks to being more than a little exhausted from lack of sleep, I was probably outraged enough for both of us. I do congratulate Crash for winning the Oscar, but they shouldn’t kid themselves to think that they won it for any other reason than the fact that they were the least controversial choice on the ballot. I will choose to concentrate more on the fact that a movie like Brokeback Mountain that takes such an unflinching look at gay love was not only made, but embraced by so many all over the world. It gives me hope that the world might still be able to grow and evolve to the point where a movie like Brokeback Mountain could be accepted completely. In my mind Brokeback Mountain has achieved so much already that whether it gets the awards it deserves or not is really not that important.
alright here goes...... i will agree with some points and others i just cant. Honestly i beleive neither one of those movies should of won. Just because they were issue oriented. What happened to just a movie made well. no issues, no social or racial overtones. Hoffmans portrayal of Capote was phenomenal. the movie on its own without that performance stinks. The actors in Brokeback Mountain were good , but not great. And honestly if there had been better movies this year, none of them would have been nominated. Sorry. It was a crappy year for movies. Thats the crop that had to be picked out of. If anybody should of won i would have chosen "Good night and Good luck". That was the least controversial.
Sorry to piss you off. But fire away
I haven't seen any of these movies and based on some of the suggestions I'm not so sure I will ever see any of these movies. I was told by someone that if I decided to go see Brokeback Mountain to take a kitchen knife to my wrist and then throw myself down a flight of stairs. Now - with that said - it had nothing to do with the controversy that the movie brings up. It had to do with the very poor story line and bad acting. So - from what I have read and heard, Brokeback didn't win because it wasn't really a good movie to begin with. I also read that it was only awarded from the last award ceremony (the emmy's??? - see I don't even watch the ceremonies so I don't know the names :P) was because of the controversy it brought up. I think that it is great that movies are not just boring and have these kinds of topics. I have no problem with someone's sexual preference.
I think that the issue of this movie has nothing to do with any of that.
*Make note - i have not seen any of these movies and all that was mentioned above was not completely my opinion - it is more information that I was given that I am just throwing out on the table :)
Lastly - Did you guys see the movie "In the bedroom" ?? I heard someone compare brokeback to that....
Not pissed off. Okay, maybe a little :). I was hoping to start a debate - it's what I do. So first of all, everything I know about movies - and, in fact, all art - is that any that are of any value have some kind of universal message. You would be VERY hard pressed to find a good movie, or any movie, that does not touch on some social issue. I think movies are the best catalyst for societal discourse we have in this day and age, and great art has always been about making a statement. I want a comprehensive list of all of these "movies made well" without "issues, social or racial overtones." I appreciate the quality films that have made an impact on the world - like The Color Purple, Norma Rae, To Kill a Mockingbird, Schindler's List, Hotel Rwanda...did none of these deserve the accolades they received? Were they only recognized because they dealt with issues? I don't believe Brokeback Mountain has received the recognition it has merely because it's controversial, and I believe it deserves its place in that list. After school specials dealt with issues, but you didn't see them winning awards. Now, to say that Good Night and Good Luck (which I very much want to see, and which would have been a daring social commentary if it had been made during the time period in which it takes place) should have won because it was the least controversial...isn't that just as bad as letting something win because it's the most controversial?
And did we even see the same movie? In my opinion, everything about Brokeback Mountain was stunning. Visually, it was beautiful, and as far as acting and storytelling go, it was absolutely heart-wrenching. We agree in a sense - the sense that I think Crash didn't win because it was better, but because of the issues it dealt with. In fact, my point is that it won because it WASN'T that controversial. Racism is kind of a no-brainer issue these days, while homosexuality is a much touchier, politically salient subject. But setting political correctness aside, like the Academy DIDN'T....based on quality alone, Brokeback Mountain blows Crash out of the water.
In conclusion, stop making me write novel-length comments. You know I can't control myself once I get started.
Still friends?
Short and simle... Movies are entertainment. Try not to over-analyze them, and use the energy that you use to interpret movies and apply it to your own life.
p.s. WTF is a bff?
(WTF= What the fuck?)
BFF = BEST FRIEND FOREVAHHHHHHH
:)
Of course we're still friends! Snuffs??? :)
gonna be an asshole again..........but unfortunately im gonna have to disagree with a point again. Racism will forever be the touchest and most controversial issue this country and the world will ever deal with. game, set, match.
still wanna make out?
Of course I still want to make out. Mind if I shoot your argument down first, though?
I should clarify something. I think you're right, in at least one respect. I don't believe that any issue will ever impact America with the same magnitude that race issues have. At least, I sincerely hope we never reach a low comparable to the age of slavery, or legally sanction any kind of discrimination to the extent that Jim Crow laws did (just to name a couple of examples). Nor am I saying that all race-related problems in this country have been solved....not even close. People around the world die for these issues every day. However, in this country, in the year 2006, racism is not much of a question anymore. For the most part (obviously, there are exceptions) you don't see people having heated debates over whether or not it is okay to be racist. It's not...it's an antiquated notion that has no place in an enlightened society. Racism = bad. We know this. On the other hand, this country is currently split on the issue of homosexuality. Gay marriage is arguably the number one hot-button political issue of our time. You'll find huge numbers of people in this country who believe that homosexuality is a viable way of life, and that gays should be afforded the same rights and protections as any other group of people. And you will find just as many people on the other side, who say it's a sin, and that it's destroying the fabric of society. At any given moment, there are people from each side picketing, protesting, campaigning, and lobbying for their viewpoint. No one would bother trying to pass an obviously racist piece of legislation - they'd be laughed out of Washington. But laws are currently in effect that deny gay couples the same rights as straight couples. And that is why it's the more predominant issue at this time.
Back to my original point, it's not at all dangerous to show support for a film whose underlying message is "don't be a racist." Everyone will stand up and applaud (including the church - now a formidable force in the political arena). But to champion a movie that furthers the the notion that it's okay to be gay, and that true love can exist between two men (or two women)...to do that is to show support for a movement that has a large part of the American population outraged.
once again, your saying the movie Brokeback should win because it brings to the forefront gay issues. My point is that the movies should win solely because they are a GOOD movie, issue or not.
But as a white male, living in the city, gone to an art school, and worked in a bookstores, i have had more problems by being white than for people thinking i was gay.
unless you have ridden both sides of the fence, there is no right or wrong for us to say.
If you were black, female and gay then you win!
One person's own personal experience is a very narrow window to look through. I've had problems being white. I've had problems being a woman. Not many; I've been very lucky. But my own experience does not define the magnitude of these issues. I'm sorry you've had the problems you've had - truly sorry. But just because no one ever beat you up in a back alley because they thought you were gay, that doesn't mean it doesn't happen. Just because a girl on the bus to school attacked me every day for being white and called ME a racist doesn't mean that black people are bad, or that racism on BOTH sides isn't a terrible, terrible evil. I don't need to be a minority to see that it's not easy to be one. I'm looking at the bigger picture - the curent political climate, and the types of issues that are driving our presidential elections. If our only way of understanding other people's lives and situations was to literally have their experiences, we would all live in total isolation, no one would ever take up a cause that wasn't their own or stand up against injustices they have not personally been victims of, and no minority group would ever have a say.
I have a feeling this could go on forever. Maybe we should take it to Thunderdome...two extremely stubborn people enter, one extremely stubborn person leaves...
yeah you bring the oil and i'll bring the condoms. See you in thunderdome!!!
brokeback is a pretty homoerotic movie. i jerked off to it and blew my load on the screen. then licked it off while my cat gave me a rim job.
i love g.i. joe.
Post a Comment
<< Home