Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

wallinbl · Mar 15, 2006, 02:42 PM

http://www.cnn.com/2006/SHOWBIZ/Movi....ap/index.html

Looks like the author is a bit miffed about not winning Best Picture. Is it so hard to be gracious and say that Crash was a decent movie? Even if you have a legitimate argument, I don't think you come out and trash talk like that.

Tomchu · Mar 15, 2006, 03:06 PM

It seems to me like a lot of people are taking Crash's victory as a "OMG THEY HATE GAYS". Deal with it, you whiners. The award was given to Crash simply because the Academy thought it was a better picture.

For people who pretend to be very open-minded (Brokeback fans), their point of view is extremely closed.

Weyland-Yutani · Mar 15, 2006, 03:27 PM

"Rumour has it that Lionsgate inundated the academy voters with DVD copies of Trash -- excuse me -- Crash a few weeks before the ballot deadline," Proulx writes.

Bitter? Oh yeah

cheers

W-Y

Millennium · Mar 15, 2006, 04:18 PM

I have not seen any of the Best Picture-nominated movies, so I do not know whether or not Brokeback Mountain deserved to beat CRASH, or if CRASH deserved to beat Brokeback Mountain, or if one of the other nominees deserved to beat them both.

However, let's not kid ourselves about this: whether or not Brokeback took the Oscar, we'd be batting this question back and forth all the same. That's not right, and it's not fair, but it's inevitable: that's just the socio-political reality of this particular time period.

In fact, it could be said that Brokeback was made precisely because of this socio-political reality. In that case, I guess it might just be fair after all: it was made to generate controversy, and it has accomplished its goal. Seen in that light, just being nominated was the real victory; once it was on the Academy's ballot, it didn't matter whether or not it actually got the Oscar.

Kevin · Mar 15, 2006, 04:51 PM

If she would have won, The Oscars would be THE ultimate way of deciding talent!

Doofy · Mar 15, 2006, 04:52 PM

Crash has Tony Danza in it. Nothing trumps a film with Tony Danza in it.

ghporter · Mar 15, 2006, 05:00 PM

I saw "Brokeback Mountain" but not "Crash," so I can't say whether the better film won, but "Crash" would have to have been absolutely fantastic to beat out "Brokeback Mountain" if they were judged entirely on creative merits. However, the Academy Awards are anything BUT objective; they are based on the opinions of a large number of voting members, and those opinions can be swayed by all sorts of methods including advertising, arm twisting, and just plain lack of time to watch all the nominated films objectively.

I remind everyone that Ang Lee won Best Director for "Brokeback Mountain," while Paul Haggis, who directed "Crash" did NOT win... How can the best director NOT direct the best film, and conversely, how can the best film NOT have the best director? I think this sort of capsulizes the issue: Ang Lee won Best Director, but there was not enough "push" for "Brokeback Mountain" as Best Picture, so "Crash" won that award instead.

Frankly, I was never even mildly interested in seeing "Crash," but "Brokeback" seemed to be at least interesting enough to bother seeing. I'm glad I went to see it.

MindFad · Mar 15, 2006, 05:01 PM

Don't care enough about the Oscars or Anne Proulx—or this thread for that matter—other than to say that I saw Brokeback Mountain and enjoyed it. I did not see Crash, though.

Final note: Tony Danza for President.

Josh Reid · Mar 15, 2006, 05:06 PM

Yeah, yeah, yeah, and if Brokeback WOULD have won, the haters would have said that it "only" won because Hollywood has a big gay agenda..

Damned either way..

flabasha · Mar 15, 2006, 06:25 PM

Crash won because they had a full marketing blitz to voters. I'm in the WGA, and Crash is the only film nominated for Best Picture that I was sent on DVD, replete with embossed packaging. Its victory, silly as it is, was a statement against the MPAA, which recently has tried to prevent DVD's from going to voters. Same thing happened with the WGA awards, which went to the only other films I recieved.

Really stupid. But it will be effective. Next year I'm sure to get every movie nominated for anything ever. So I guess Brokeback loses, and I win.

dlefebvre · Mar 15, 2006, 06:36 PM

I saw both and I preferred «Crash» by a long mile.

Even if «Brokeback Mountain» was treating a touchy subject, it was not a ground breaking movie. The acting was great and it was a much better than average movie. But it's just a love story that goes nowhere. Society was not ready for this at that time and I agree it ask if society is ready for this today, but it's anecdotical at best. The story doesn't resolve or goes anywhere.

«Crash» was powerful and put everyone's tolerance in front of a mirror. There is no black or white (no pun intended) in this movie, just shades of gray. We've come a long way, but we are far from resolving the racial issue. It's everyone's problem. This movie makes you think a lot after the fact and the Oscar was fully deserved.

wdlove · Mar 16, 2006, 08:43 PM

Need to move on the Academy Awards are over..

itai195 · Mar 16, 2006, 08:52 PM

Originally Posted by ghporter

I remind everyone that Ang Lee won Best Director for "Brokeback Mountain," while Paul Haggis, who directed "Crash" did NOT win... How can the best director NOT direct the best film, and conversely, how can the best film NOT have the best director? I think this sort of capsulizes the issue: Ang Lee won Best Director, but there was not enough "push" for "Brokeback Mountain" as Best Picture, so "Crash" won that award instead.

It's happened a few times in recent years. For example, Gladiator won Best Picture but Traffic won Best Director a few years ago. There's more to a movie than the direction, which is something I came to understand when I saw Mystic River a couple years back. Great movie, amazing acting performances, but the overall direction was really mediocre. Conversely, something like Saving Private Ryan (which won Best Director) had great direction but wasn't really that amazing of a movie for other reasons (too formulaic).

Jawbone54 · Mar 16, 2006, 09:26 PM

Originally Posted by itai195

It's happened a few times in recent years. For example, Gladiator won Best Picture but Traffic won Best Director a few years ago. There's more to a movie than the direction, which is something I came to understand when I saw Mystic River a couple years back. Great movie, amazing acting performances, but the overall direction was really mediocre. Conversely, something like Saving Private Ryan (which won Best Director) had great direction but wasn't really that amazing of a movie for other reasons (too formulaic).

Good points. I've seen many a movie in which the director did the best he/she could with what they had to work with. That didn't mean that the movies were jaw-dropping enough to be considered a classic film.

itistoday · Mar 17, 2006, 12:10 AM

Originally Posted by ghporter

I saw "Brokeback Mountain" but not "Crash," so I can't say whether the better film won, but "Crash" would have to have been absolutely fantastic to beat out "Brokeback Mountain" if they were judged entirely on creative merits.

Uh huh... I haven't seen "Brokeback Mountain" but I've seen "Crash", and I can tell you, it was absolutely fantastic.

Before I was considering watching "Brokeback Mountain", but after reading this woman's rant, I'm having second thoughts. She calls "Crash" "Trash". WTF. That movie is anything but, and frankly I'm glad it won Best Picture.

Nicko · Mar 17, 2006, 02:18 AM

Well I read that giving Crash the best pic was a way for hollywood to bring the oscars back to home territory, since it was produced/filmed in LA. Besides, brokeback won best director - :/

Apple Pro Underwear · Mar 17, 2006, 06:43 AM

best movie should be the one enjoyed by the most people.

Soulplane should have won last year.

Weyland-Yutani · Mar 17, 2006, 07:09 AM

Originally Posted by ghporter

I remind everyone that Ang Lee won Best Director for "Brokeback Mountain," while Paul Haggis, who directed "Crash" did NOT win... How can the best director NOT direct the best film, and conversely, how can the best film NOT have the best director?

Because the award for the best film goes to the producer of the film and concerns the over-all result or aspect of the work. Everything. The director doesn't get credit for best film.

Directors sometimes have a lot of influence, but rarely. They are the on-set organizers, practical executives and day-to-day leaders among the actors. Producers are the leaders of the movie. They usually finance it and are the main influence of the movie. They hire the director, the editor etc.

Then there are the editors, who are no less important than the directors. They put their mark on the movie like no-one else. Half of the movie that a director shot ends up on the editing floor. Then there are the writers of the screenplay. Movie-making is a collaboration.

The director does not deserve the acknowledgement for best picture, nor does the editor, it is a producer award. A producer is the director of directors.

Of course, there are some directors who are influencial enough to be allowed to produce and even write their own movie. Like Kubrick, who was often writer/director/producer and even editor of his films. I can't possibly imagine anything more normal than one movie winning best picture and another best director. That is, after all, why these are two seperate awards.

cheers

W-Y

Dakar · Mar 17, 2006, 07:44 AM

Well put.

ghporter · Mar 17, 2006, 10:23 AM

Originally Posted by Dakar

Well put.

Ditto, though Lee was involved throughout the post-production of "Brokeback." Most directors are; how else can they make a final product that reflects what they intended with their direction of the actors than to ensure that each cut is just the right length, that scenes have the right pacing, and so on?

I think one big issue here is that "Brokeback Mountain" was not a "spectacle," as "Crash" seems to have been. Sort of like "Gladiator" being an immense spectacle while "Traffic" was a deeper story. Story over spectacle, direction over dazzle.

Dakar · Mar 17, 2006, 10:24 AM

I found Traffic terribly boring. Stories were there but I found the telling excruciating to sit through.

Eug Wanker · 10:41 AM

Well, I haven't seen Brokeback Mountain, but nonetheless I was shocked that Crash won... because after seeing it I was surprised it was even nominated. Although I thought it was OK, I thought it was far from great, and too often just like one long cliché.

ie. Crash was a renter, nothing more.

Hell, I enjoyed Harold and Kumar Go to White Castle much more than I enjoyed Crash.

OTOH, that author sounds like a sourpuss.

GFitzy · Mar 17, 2006, 01:40 PM

"It's hard out here for an Oscar winnin' PIMP!"

-gfitzy

olePigeon · Mar 17, 2006, 01:46 PM

Serenity shoulda gotten Best Picture.

Or, was that released in time?

itistoday · Mar 17, 2006, 04:03 PM

Originally Posted by ghporter

I think one big issue here is that "Brokeback Mountain" was not a "spectacle," as "Crash" seems to have been. Sort of like "Gladiator" being an immense spectacle while "Traffic" was a deeper story. Story over spectacle, direction over dazzle.

Ok, speaking as someone that saw both "Crash" and "Gladiator", I can firmly assert that "Crash" had very little in common with "Gladiator". It wasn't a "spectacle", but rather a collection of short stories concerning the issue of racism.

And to those that say it was "cliché", I'm willing to give you that, but only just a little. The only reason you think that is because the movie dealt with a topic that is all too common to us, however I feel that it did so splendidly, and even originally. I've seen many films regarding racism, and none were done in the same way as Crash. The acting in Crash was superb on almost everyone's part, and it did a good job showing that in real life there is no "good guy/bad guy", just a bunch of assumptions and prejudices, and people jumping to conclusions.

Don't be hatin' on Crash, 'twas an excellent movie, and if you haven't seen it then I highly recommend it to you.

ghporter · Mar 17, 2006, 05:04 PM

I didn't mean to imply that "Crash" was on the same footing as "Gladiator" in terms of breadth and "cast of thousands" and all that crap. Just that it was the "spectacle" of the year; something that people could become interested in for something other than the deep personalities of the characters. More of an issue of "this is about important stuff" than "this has huge vistas and enormous battle scenes."

volcano · Mar 17, 2006, 06:16 PM

I had no idea Proulx (the author who wrote the Brokeback Mountain short story) was 70.

I do, however, find it quite amusing and ironic that she vents her anger in a liberal English newspaper. If she were really angry and frustrated, wouldn't she be blasting the film here in the good ol' U. S. of A?

It's just sour grapes. Honestly, it sounds like she only agreed to have to story adapted to film just so it'd win an award ("It's a film about gay cowboys. That screams controversy! That screams awards! That screams money!"), and that's truly pathetic.

abe · Mar 17, 2006, 09:22 PM

Originally Posted by Weyland-Yutani

Bitter? Oh yeah

cheers

W-Y

Reminds me of another group of bitter folks.

abe · Mar 17, 2006, 09:25 PM

Originally Posted by Dakar

I found Traffic terribly boring. Stories were there but I found the telling excruciating to sit through.

It wasn't QUITE that excruciating to me, but I definitely thought Traffic was over rated.

Eug Wanker · Mar 17, 2006, 09:31 PM

Yeah, I thought Traffic was over rated too. Then again, I liked it more than Crash.

ambush · Mar 17, 2006, 10:11 PM

Originally Posted by flabasha

Crash won because they had a full marketing blitz to voters. I'm in the WGA, and Crash is the only film nominated for Best Picture that I was sent on DVD, replete with embossed packaging. Its victory, silly as it is, was a statement against the MPAA, which recently has tried to prevent DVD's from going to voters. Same thing happened with the WGA awards, which went to the only other films I recieved.

Really stupid. But it will be effective. Next year I'm sure to get every movie nominated for anything ever. So I guess Brokeback loses, and I win.

SEEEEEEED

itistoday · Mar 17, 2006, 10:15 PM

Originally Posted by abe

Reminds me of another group of bitter folks.

Yeah except they were actually justified.

abe · Mar 17, 2006, 10:32 PM

Originally Posted by itistoday

Yeah except they were actually justified.

If you are saying you agree that they were a pretty sorry bunch, I'll agree with you.

If not, then I'll be glad to continue the conversation in the thread you start in the P/L.

Or, you can pick a thread and PM me with the 411 and I'll join you there!

Otherwise, bitter, sorry, losers should try watching Dr. Phil or something.

itistoday · Mar 18, 2006, 02:58 AM

Originally Posted by abe

If you are saying you agree that they were a pretty sorry bunch, I'll agree with you.

If not, then I'll be glad to continue the conversation in the thread you start in the P/L.

Or, you can pick a thread and PM me with the 411 and I'll join you there!

Otherwise, bitter, sorry, losers should try watching Dr. Phil or something.

I say we take this one outside. Pistols at dawn?