Posted on 01/22/2006 4:47:02 PM PST by Dr. Scarpetta
LOS ANGELES (AFP) - Gay cowboy romance "Brokeback Mountain" has left its competition in the dust, surging to the front of the Oscars race just as voters cast their ballots for next week's Academy Awards nominations.
Taiwanese director Ang Lee's story of forbidden macho love in 1960s Wyoming got a huge boost by reining in four Golden Globe Awards, Hollywood's second-highest plaudits, just five days before polls were to close ahead of the January 31 unveiling of nominees for the 78th annual Oscars.
The 5,798 Academy members had until Saturday evening to fill out their nomination ballots and hand them in to auditors, who will tally the votes under great secrecy and determine the identity of the nominees in 24 categories.
But Hollywood pundits are already convinced that in a lacklustre awards season, dominated by smaller independent movies rather than major studio productions, "Brokeback" is the unequivocal early favourite for the top Oscars.
"'Brokeback' is way, way out front and was given major momentum by coming out the most honoured movie at Monday's Golden Globes," said Tom O'Neil, writer for the GoldDerby.com and the Los Angeles Times's TheEnvelope.com.
"But the race isn't over yet, and a lot could happen between now and the Oscars ceremony in March," he said of the prospects of the film starring Australian Heath Ledger and American Jake Gyllenhaal.
"Brokeback" is based on a short story by Annie Proulx and tells of two farmhands in rural America who fall in love and maintain an unfulfilled relationship over two decades. Lee won the best director Golden Globe for his interpretation.
The Johnny Cash biopic "Walk the Line," starring Joaquin Phoenix and Reese Witherspoon, is also a hot Oscars contender and is considered by many a favourite for best picture, best actor and best actress nominations, after picking up three Globes, including best musical, best actor and best actress.
"'Brokeback Mountain' and 'Walk the Line' are now the Oscars frontrunners, and I think that 'Capote' is a potential winner with good strength, not only for Philip Seymour Hoffman but also as a potential best picture nominee and winner," said Marty Grove, columnist for the HollywoodReporter.com.
Hoffman won the Golden Globe for best actor in a drama -- beating out Ledger for the prize -- for his startling turn as US author Truman Capote in the story of the circumstances surrounding the writing of his book "In Cold Blood."
George Clooney's politically charged drama "Good Night, and Good Luck," the story of 1950s US television anchorman Edward Murrow's crusade against the communist witchhunt of Senator Joseph McCarthy, is also seen as a likely best picture and best director contender at the Oscars.
Also vying for Oscar nods is Paul Haggis's racial drama "Crash," starring Sandra Bullock, Don Cheadle and Matt Dillon, which O'Neil said could make a strong showing in the Oscars, despite its low awards profile so far.
"Crash" and "Good Night, and Good Luck" could be serious competition down the line for "Brokeback," O'Neil told AFP, warning that the Clooney film may yet snatch the best picture and best director statuettes from "Brokeback" and Lee.
But, experts said, while major studio epics -- including Peter Jackson's much-vaunted remake of "King Kong," starring Naomi Watts, and "Munich," Steven Spielberg's drama about Israel's hunt for Palestinian terrorists -- may win some Oscar nods, they are unlikely to dominate the awards.
Creating additional uncertainty in this year's race is the fact that Oscars organisers pushed back the ceremony to March 5 from February, creating an awards season vacuum in usually frantic February.
"There is this wild card this year, as the season is interrupted after the guild awards in January and then resumes in March, which could give Oscar voters the time to get bored and change their minds about their early favourites before the Oscars," O'Neil said.
The very influential Producers Guild awards will be given out on Sunday, the Directors Guild honours will be doled out on January 28 and the critical Screen Actors Guild awards will be handed out on January 29 -- more than a month before the Oscars.
"We'll have to wait and see whether this will be a boring Oscars year, where the outcome will be clear from the day of the nominations, or whether it will be one full of suspense and surprises," O'Neil said.
"Walk the Line" is a very entertaining, and highly viewable, film, however, by comparison.
Johnny Cash's family had some differences as to how their Johnny Cash was depicted, but, other than that, as a film, as entertainment, Joaquin Phoenix (as Cash) and Reese Witheerspoon (as June Carter, Cash's second wife) provide really great performances.
It's a highly viewable and enjoyable film and I'd encourage anyone who wants to go the movies to go see "Walk the Line" -- and spare yourself and everyone you care about the rotten experience of hunting down "BM" and wading through the ugly thing.
What is your honest opinion of the movie?
Sorry, typo, previous (^^): Reese Witherspoon.
Phoenix and Witherspoon worked hard and achieved great performances.
I'm assuming you saw Brokeback?
Walk the Line was a great film. Don't forget to mention that Joaquin Phoenix and Reese Witherspoon sing their parts! If it were up to me, they'd get the Best Actor & Best Actress Oscars. Witherspoon seems to be a lock for Actress but Actor is almost definitely gonna be Philip Seymour Hoffman for Capote, or Heath Ledger if it's not Hoffman.
Yes, I wrote a movie review for FR. I tried to give it an objective review such as I would give say, "The Family Stone" or some such movie. It was a very poorly made film and one that was, to be blunt, exploitive of both audience and gay men.
Your review is different from the liberal media. They're raving about this movie. I think I'll go with your opinion and not see it.
Given who among "the Academy" votes, yes, they will mostly continue to salivate over Ledger.
I think Heath Ledger is an excellent actor but he's made poor choices as to the roles he's performed and that indicates to me he's making poor choices based upon his character...which indicates a problem there, also as reflected in some of his recent comments in "defense" of the film, "BM."
If it was a good film, even at all, he'd not be having to make those defensive comments about his role...which is another indication to me that "BM" as "good film" is pure Public Relations mudpack.
It's marketing baloney, that the title purveys worth, is my point here.
But I think Ledger is immature and also, intensely rationalizing his liberal, morally equivalent views. Which is working against his success, in my view.
I AGREE THAT Joaquin Phoenix and Reese Witherspoon, by comparison, have provided far more valuable and credible performances, are both far more worthy than anyone else for these Awards.
Ledger kissed another guy on screen with theatrical, artificially produced "passion." O.K., that took "acting."
On the other hand, Phoenix sang his own renditions of Johnny Cash, of all people (!) performances (and Phoenix is not even a singer by trade or ability but performed as Cash for this film and for this performance and even managed to do that quite convincingly), enacted Johnny Cash, not a simple thing to do, and has a legacy of pretty remarkable performances already accomplished (I really like his work and always have).
Witherspoon, also, did likewise, similarly, for her role in "Walk the Line."
I agree that Philip Seymour Hoffman is an immensely talented actor. His work as "Capote" was interesting but I didn't find it stellar or remarkable given that Hoffman begins from a point of noteworthiness.
However, Hoffman's work in other titles has been dubious, has not been remarkable (he's had his misses), like, for instance, the waste of space in his rendition of the preacher character in "Cold Mountain," utterly unconvincing and awful (not the character but Hoffman's performance of it).
I didn't find "Capote" to be as great an achievement of skill and craft as was Phoenix and Witherspoon's work in "Walk the Line."
If there's a winner this year, it's Phoenix and Witherspoon for "Walk the Line" -- compared to "BM," I mean, there's no comparison. Men have been having both actual and pretend homosexual acts with other men for a long time in "movies" and I can't see anything remarkable nor noteworthy in "BM" that hasn't been done before.
This year's AAwards are boiling down to how many times and how much todo can be made of and about homosexuality, more than about the excellence of filmmaking and the art of performing.
Correction to article headline:
"Brokeback Mountain Prances to Lead in Oscars"
Well, I'm not really much of a movie critic at all. When I watch a film I tend to take it on its own terms; if a film loses me for whatever reason, I just flip it off or walk out. Anyhow, let's just say that I can see why BM is gonna win the Oscar for Best Picture. On my part, 'mildly stunned' is the best way I can think to describe my reaction. Needless to mention, this was very different from anything I've seen on film before, and IMHO the cinematography and the acting were exceptional. If there was any fault in my view, it was in aspects of the storyline that occurred to me afterward (especially in reading McVey's review). I agree with McVey to an extent that it stereotyped straight men and was exploitative of gay men, but I disagree that it was a poorly made film.
That's just my view, but again I'm not a very critical film goer and I didn't go in looking to see what all I could find wrong with it. A movie either bores me or it doesn't, and this one didn't bore me. It made me think, which isn't usually why I go to the movies, because I'm more of the popcorn fare type! (yeah, I tend to be shallow when it comes to movies - oh well) To me it was a movie about letting life slip you by without ever getting what you want out of it. So, it worked for me on that level. But I don't think it's a film that'd work at all for someone who can't get past the subject. I imagine then it'd be very boring since it's all about the main characters and if you can't engage the characters in some way then there's nothing else but the novelty factor.
I did have a tough time watching the seminal scene, fwiw! Actually, I sort of zoned out, but it went past quick.
PS. Just to be clear, when I say it was very different from what I've seen before I'm referring to the frank depiction of the relationship between the two men. Aside from that, it obviously wasn't much different, but that was more than enough to make it distinctive, at least for me!
I agree that "BM" is exploitive. I don't agree that people should "do all that we can" to "make sure" "BM" is seen and awarded/rewarded.
The best people can do is do all that we can to discourage anyone from wasting so much as a dime on this rubbish.
And probably write letters of complaint to Universal about the rubbish they've released.
"BM" is pornography and does not belong in neighborhood, nor even multiplex, theatres. Complaints to whatever exhibitors are showing this title is also a very good idea, letters of complaint to the CEOs (Edwards, whatever, wherever it's being shown in respective neighborhoods by whichever theatre organizations).
The most "effective" tool to communicate to the motion picture industry, unfortunately, by consumers is through the box office. If it's a bad film, don't bother with it and tell anyone asking not to, either.
The film industry only "listens" to box office, as to distributors (Universal, Paramount, Disney, Fox, Sony, et al.).
Maybe I'm sick, but I have to chuckle at the people who saw BM after being misled by the ads, which promised a "family" picture. Elton John's family might like it, perhaps.
BUT, it's false advertising, no doubt about it and every.blasted.time a studio/distributor resorts to this type of -- even overtly in this particular instance -- misdirecting adverttising, consumers should KNOW they're being misled for whatever other reasons, but that there is certainly some ulterior purpose to a title.
Otherwise, why the false, misleading ad campaign at all? Studios resort to this type of plastic-advertising-surgery to present product that would otherwise be outright passed over by people searching for decent entertainment.
Universal had to manipulate public interest in this film and has worked overtime (to say the least) on hyping this film beyond the predictable, homosexual audience.
It's no more a "love story" than "The Pit And the Pendulum" is, although, granted, the latter title is not filmed. The former is mere "pretty cinematography" adaptation of an ugly short story by the same name, however ("BM").
I'm curious if I'm among the one or few consumers who really mistrusts false, misleading advertising, and those who engage in producing/using it. It strikes a new low for Universal, I have to say, that they'd dare to hype "BM" as they have. All for their dollars...
It's the height of liberal ripoff artistry, to my view: as long as they get their end result (popularity in box office and publicity), they disregard honesty in method.
If I film gets enough buzz I always end up seeing it, even if I ordinarily wouldn't. Other good examples for me were The Blair Witch Project, My Big Fat Greek Wedding, Fahrenheit 9/11, and Passion of the Christ. I am weak that way. :)
Actually, I don't think people should go see it. It is a lousy movie. I want people who back us (but don't DO ANYTHING)to get mad enough over the fact that "their" film industry and "their" courts care nothing for "their" community values, to finally do something.
McVey
In your post #44, when you wrote that we/some of us with other values "should do all we can to make this one win" or something to that effect...it gave me the impression that you were encouraging people to see it.
The ticket buy and theatre attendance is what Universal and the filmmaker will use to evaluate their "success." I think Hollywood doesn't have any other "value system" where films are concerned otherwise.
I'd say that we should do all we can to encourage no one buy tickets. My only point. Though I realize your reasoning, earlier, thanks.
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.