Posted on 03/02/2010 6:29:30 PM PST by shove_it
LOS ANGELES - A producer of the war story "The Hurt Locker" will not be allowed to attend Sunday's Academy Awards because of e-mails he sent urging academy members to vote for his movie, Oscar overseers said Tuesday.
But Nicolas Chartier will receive an Oscar at a later date if "The Hurt Locker" wins best picture.
The executive committee of the producers branch of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences imposed the penalty on Chartier, who violated Oscar rules that prohibit mailings promoting a film and disparaging another. ...
(Excerpt) Read more at oscars.movies.yahoo.com ...
The Oscars, Grammys, and Emmys have all been political awards for years.
I’ve heard excellent things about Brothers at War too. It’s the documentary produced by Gary Sinese.
http://www.brothersatwarmovie.com/
What about the Best Picture winners has been political?
Grrrr....I typed out a response, and then lost my internet connection and lost it. I think we’ve posted to each other on this in the past, and I know you follow these very closely. And I do take your views on movies and the awards industry seriously, although I disagree with some of them.
Short version - Today, I believe nominations are handed out to mediocre films if the actors and actresses are on the right side of the political spectrum, or if the movie material spits in the face of traditional, conservative, and Christian values. If Sean Penn or George Clooney release a home video, odds are good they get nominated for Best Actor.
There are movies I have liked that have been nominated and won (Gladiator, Braveheart, Titanic). However, movies that I find insulting have won more. Issue-oriented movies definitely have been nominated more. Since you wish to limit the scope to only Best Picture Winners:
If Clint Eastwood doesn’t help kill the female boxer, I don’t believe Million Dollar Baby is nominated, let alone wins.
American Beauty - hahaha.
Crash - I’m making this up on the spot, but I may be right. The 99 uses of the word “F***” in this movie is probably more than the Best Picture winners from 1927 to 1960 combined.
I remember some FReepers here said it was a great movie... others say it's not accurate. Which is it?
the hero is a psycho, over motivated, doing reckless acts and intentionally placing his men in dangerous positions that would not even begin to happen in real life
Since there are so many genuine combat vets now, the desire for accuracy is greater
the EOD guys think it is hilarious, it is supposed to have some secret phrases and incidents that are either jokes or real events that prove how stoopid some people are
wait for AMC is basically what I heard about this movie
It sat on a shelf, with no distributor for over a year precisely because it was such a tribute to these amazing men and didn't trash the war, the soldiers or Bush.
If you haven’t seen it, your opinion is worthless. The hero is hardly “psycho”. Its just an exaggerated character like in every movie. I put off seeing it because I didn’t believe the business could produce a war movie that was honest or showed the soldiers to be the heroes they are. I was wrong. I’ve watched the Academy screener five times and it takes my breath away every time.
He should have spent a million advertising in Variety and the LA Times like every one else; then his ethics would be pure.
That guy's opinion is questionable at best after reading about him. I stated that in a post upthread.
Admittedly, I haven't seen it, but upon seeing the story plot line and differing opinions, decided not to spend the hard earned money to watch it. There are very good reasons not to trust Hollywood but it doesn't mean the film doesn't have any redeeming messages or points aside from some stupid plot decisions (ie: the hoodie incident). I tend towards a black or white approach, the lead/good guy doesn't compromise his integrity or that of his men for entertainment purposes. Throwing in silly plot lines can make a film lose its believability fast and distract from what could be a truly great film for posterity. That's just MHO. We all tend to view films through our own personal biases, and admittedly I have many.
All that being said, I'm taking your word on it and respect your opinion on the film.
The movie itself was OK. It was like a documentary and it had flashbacks and it took a while to figure out what was going on. Personally, I didn’t think Academy Award when I was watching it. It seemed real until I heard soldiers who perform those missions say it wasn’t.
I thought everything you did and refused to see it. I’m glad I decided to watch it. I was wrong. While I’m sure so soldier would leave the base to search for someone like our hero, that had nothing to do with the mission or the main story. I forgave it because I hadn’t seen soldiers treated as actual heroes by Hollywood since...well, ever.
“...I forgave it because I hadn’t seen soldiers treated as actual heroes by Hollywood since...well, ever.”
*sigh* Totally agree. Really sad and a loss for Hollywood. (Though I hear that “Dear John” does a good job of demonstrating the commitment and the hard work of our soldiers.)
The storytellers are missing out on the heart of our troops and a feeling that runs deep inside of every true American’s heart. The selfless sacrifice and brotherhood of our troops which can go beyond comprehension, explanation or understanding. Hollywood is bound to screw that up, which is probably why they are so bad at portraying it.:)
It’s probably a very good thing that the film is causing discussion about the way our troops are portrayed. For future films as well as this one.
Now that it is Oscar time the disecting is naturally out there.
This guy loved it:
http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/mlong/2009/07/15/review-the-hurt-locker-3/
This guy, not so much:
http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/jjmnolte/2009/07/02/review-the-hurt-locker-2/
I have to say that the constant depiction of soldiers as either dead victims, blood-thirsty monsters or noble amputees had me totally demoralized and so I’m happy to report (spoiler alert!) not one of the main characters is killed, therefore, as far as I’m concerned, “The Hurt Locker” is a chick flick. Maybe that’s why I liked it. The people they spend two hours making you care about, actually survive.
Well, if you dont know me, then your opinion of me is worthless, too.
Feel better now?
Sorta.
And by the way, dub, I was asked what I was told about it and I answered.
If you dont like what I was told, go form your own opinion.
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.