Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: CHARLITE
(Of course, I’m sure it didn’t help the movie’s chances that Mel Gibson refused to campaign for it. But I think many of us found his attitude a rather satisfying rejoinder to all the people who hated the movie but nevertheless felt it their duty to tell him how he should spend the profits from it.)

This is spin, and an extremely important point which pretty much squashes the argument. In Hollywood, if you don't campaign for an Oscar, you ain't getting one. Look at Michael Moore--no one can tell me he is not loved by Hollywood, yet he deliberately avoided the Best Doc category (and put the movie on TV before the allowed date) to get Best Pic. He failed because of the politics of wanting to give those noms to movies with directors and producers who could give the Academy members work (and hwo are the voters friends).

I didn't know Gibson didn't campaign; this puts a whole other reality on the table. Not campaigning is a snub of the process, and is flipping them the bird. No wonder they didn't nominate the movie.

3 posted on 02/26/2005 5:01:56 PM PST by Darkwolf377 (Condi Rice: Yeaaahhh, baybee! http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1350654/posts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Darkwolf377
I didn't know Gibson didn't campaign; this puts a whole other reality on the table. Not campaigning is a snub of the process, and is flipping them the bird. No wonder they didn't nominate the movie.

Nonsense.

12 posted on 02/26/2005 5:30:17 PM PST by GhostSoldier
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson