Posted on 12/22/2005 8:26:10 PM PST by rightwinggoth
LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - Gay and political films are dominating this year's Academy Awards race with some experts expecting that Oscar will wind up wearing pink, either for left-leaning politics or sexual preference.
As Hollywood starts its annual awards season leading to the March 5 Oscars, key front-runners in main categories are either gay-themed or political films, with Ang Lee's "Brokeback Mountain," a drama of love between cowboys, leading the pack in the all-important best picture race.
"It could be the gay Oscars this year because gay-themed movies could win almost all the major awards," said Tom O'Neill, show business awards columnist for The Envelope.Com., referring to the sudden dominance "Brokeback Mountain" has gained so early in the race.
"'Brokeback' is going to be hard to beat. Rarely do we have this kind of award consensus for a movie, and its director (Taiwan's Ang Lee) is long overdue for an Oscar," O'Neill said.
"Brokeback," the first gay romance to make a bid for mainstream respectability, has already won the top awards handed out by critics in New York and Los Angeles and copped seven nominations for the January 16 Golden Globes, often a key indicator as to which way the Oscar wind might be blowing.
As for political films -- the field is crowded with potential winners: "Munich," "Good Night, and Good Luck," "Syriana," and "The Constant Gardener."
Many experts predict that "Brokeback's" toughest competition could come from either George Clooney's "Goodnight, and Good Luck," a steely-eyed examination of the McCarthy era, or "Munich," Steven Spielberg's study of the price Israel paid for its reprisals for the murder of its athletes at the 1972 Olympics.
DON'T COUNT "MUNICH" OUT
Before the race began and before anyone had a chance to see Spielberg's movie, it was being touted as the odds-on favorite to snare the best picture award, namely because Spielberg is a revered figure in Hollywood and had chosen to make his most serious movie since "Schindler's List."
The film is an examination of the cost of fighting terrorism and whether a democracy can use methods like targeted assassinations without destroying or shaming itself.
The film was hit by a backlash as soon as it was shown to Jewish American and Israeli groups, who argue that Spielberg ignored arguments that Israel was justified in using the methods it does in the war against terrorists.
New Republic literary editor Leon Wieseltier wrote that "'Munich' prefers a discussion of counterterrorism to a discussion of terrorism; or it thinks that they are the same discussion. This is an opinion that only people who are not responsible for the safety of other people can hold."
David Poland of Movie City News said that "Munich" has to overcome the impression that it is anti-Israeli and possibly can do this "because the anti-Israeli accusation is a neoconservative one and not a mainstream Jewish one."
He noted that at screenings at the headquarters of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, whose members give out the Oscars, "Munich" was well received.
Poland, himself, is optimistic, predicting that "'Munich will still win the Academy Award. I think 'Brokeback' will suffer when it goes into a wider viewing."
Other films with gay characters or gender-challenging themes that have won prominence this year include "Capote," thanks to its standout performance by Philip Seymour Hoffman as writer Truman Capote, and "TransAmerica," with Felicity Huffman winning rave reviews as a man on the verge of completing a sex change.
In this movie, she's a woman playing a man about to become a woman and if that sounds easy, rest assured it isn't.
"Brokeback Mountain" is also doing well at the box office -- even though it is only in 69 theaters, it was last week's eighth-highest-grossing movie.
They've made their choice. They want to propagandize, not entertain. They certainly deserve to reap the rewards. Bring on the backlash and the boycotts.
No, no, no.
It's in limited release. It's done $5 Million to date in 200 theatres or so.
It's not going to be "huge" - it's not going to make $300 Million. But it's going to make a massive profit. It'll do at least $50-$60 Million domestic box office, and rake in a few hundred million when overseas and DVD gross is factored in.
Of course, the real truth here is that Hollywood could make all sorts of similarly profitable movies, but chooses not to do so.
Basically, it's going to make money in this case because the budget is low - and because this thing scores through the roof with the female demographic all across the country.
The Continuing Story of Hollywood and Its Hand Basket.
I told people nearly a year ago that this was going to win Best Picture.
You can usually tell which movie is going to win based upon its politics.
That's how I knew that Million Dollar Baby was going to win last year.
People who know I'm into movies have wondered why I'm not going to see this, and I grow tired of defending my choice. If your idea of a good time is watching two annoying prettyboy actors for two hours, have fun. Some folks consider it tantamount to a hate crime to have no interest in this.
There are plenty of movies available for everyone out there, so I don't know why some people are so alarmed by this movie--they seem to think its existence will "turn" people gay. That's just silly. But it's equally silly to hear so many people calling this a classic when they haven't even seen it yet.
Might wanna check that paragraph--"it's not going to make $300 Million" and "rake in a few hundred million" seem to be contradictory.
I don't think it will take in a few hundred million when all the numbers are in, even with foreign and video. I'm guessing your domestic box number is correct, but I wouldn't count on a few hundred million from overseas and video. Dramas don't translate well, and a gay drama, no matter how popular, isn't going to do those numbers.
Projectilius vomitus.
When Hollywood really showed itself, some time back, I quit watching the Academy Awards -- the whacked out left just cannot keep their perverted politics to themselves when ever they get in front of a camera....they really stink.
I would rather watch Barney....higher intellectual content. :-)
Who will be emcee at the Oscars? Ellen DeGeneres, Nathan Lane, or Rosie O'Donnell?
In Europe?
This movie is going to be, if anything, a bigger hit in Europe. Especially once conservatives are through attacking it.
As for the DVD, I imagine it will serve as a sort of totem for "progressives" - a thing to own to show how politically correct they are.
And don't underestimate the number of women who will go to see it simply to see Heath Ledger/Jake Gyllenhaal without their shirts on.
It's sad. But it's a good example of the degeneracy of our culture.
I have no idea, and since I won't be watching I won't know till it's talked about here.
I was just thinking about the movies I saw in 2005--what an awful year. I think the only thing I really enjoyed was Star Wars, which was more entertaining than the previous three Star Wars movies, and a goofy independent flick called Me, You and Everyone We Know, which had some surprising digs at contemporary art. It's an insignificant little scrap of a film about a "kooky" heroine, but it had a few good laughs.
Otherwise, a complete waste of a cinematic year.
Giant Commie Robot sez:
YOUR TASTES IN ART ARE THOSE OF BOURGEOIS CAPITALIST SWINE! GAY PROGRESSIVE SHEEP HERDERS ARE THE HEIGHT OF PROLETARIAT AESTHETISM. YOU WILL BOW TO TONY KUSHNER'S POLITICALLY CORRECT UTOPIA OR THE SMERSH SHALL SILENCE YOU, PETIT-BOURGEOIS INTERLOPER..BEEP....
(A side note: This movie has FIFTEEN separate entities backing it financially, so there are a lot of folks looking for some of that cash, with lots of cross-deals.)
In Europe it may be a hit but it's just not going to bring in the bucks you're talking about.
People don't buy DVDs just to have them sit around the house as a totem, much as you might want to believe that.
As for Ledger and Gyllenhaal, check out the grosses of their last movies, then tell me how many women are going to see their movies. When it comes to shirt-off movies, you need to hang out with more women ;)--even "progressive" women, while they talk a good liberal game, are turned off by men doing it in movies. They want to pretend they've got a chance with them. It's just not the same as if, say, Angelina Jolie and Jessica Alba were starring in a lesbian story and men were buying the DVD.
As for the degeneracy of our culture, this is more an example of the independent movement in cinema allowing more "niche" marketing. The predecessor to this, believe it or not, would be The Passion, where someone got together a movie and aimed it at a niche as opposed to the "general public" which is becoming more diversified and harder to please.
Well, EYE won't be watching this year and I always have. This also means that, for the first time in a long while, I won't be looking at all (any?)the Oscar-nominated movies.
D'oh! Should be "continents"
Probably some cross-dressers as well.
heh I was thinking more along the lines of "Homo on the range" haha
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.