Posted on 12/13/2004 6:29:24 AM PST by crushkerry
The red-state warriors and blue-state battlers are at it again. This time, the goal isn't the White House. It's the Oscar.
In one color-coded corner: Conservative groups pushing for nominations for The Passion of the Christ. In the other color-coded corner: Proud liberal Michael Moore pushing for nominations for Fahrenheit 9/11.
If the contrast holds, Academy Award season may bare more than a passing resemblance to this fall's divisive general election.
Promises Patrick Hynes: "It will be all that and more."
Hynes is a senior account executive at the Washington, D.C.-based GOP consulting firm Marsh Copsey + Scott. This week, he launched a new campaign, Passion for Fairness ( www.passionforfairness.com).
The Website is asking--"no demanding," it says up front--Academy Award voters to cast ballots for Mel Gibson (news)'s Passion in five top categories: Best Picture, Best Director, Best Actor, Best Actress and Best Supporting Actress.
"I am concerned the merits of the film are not going to be considered because the film is too closely [tied] with Christianity and political conservatism," Hynes says.
Gibson has made it known that he personally won't be buying Oscar ads for his religious epic. (He didn't say he wouldn't send out screeners, though. Passion DVDs went out to Academy voters a few weeks ago.)
Though his site asserts that Gibson's account of the final hours of Jesus "had better receive a fair hearing" come Oscar time, Hynes himself stops short of issuing an ultimatum.
"I'm demanding fairness," Hynes says. "I personally don't believe in boycotts. I believe they end up hurting people who have nothing to do with the problem."
Michael Moore believes Fox News host Bill O'Reilly and "a group of top Republicans" have no aversion to issuing such calls to action.
In an email to his troops this week, Moore warned that, with Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry (news - web sites) thwarted, Moore and his President Bush (news - web sites)-bashing documentary were the right-wing's next target.
Citing an ad that ran in USA Today, Moore said its backers have "issued a not-so-subtle threat to the Academy Award voters that, in essence, said don't even THINK about nominating Fahrenheit 9/11 for Best Picture."
O'Reilly, Moore said, also has raised the specter of a boycott against Hollywood. (Said O'Reilly on a recent O'Reilly Factor: "If Hollywood nominates this propaganda tract as Best Picture, you will see a backlash against the movie industry that you have never seen.")
What's an under-fire movie to do? Drum up votes for the People's Choice Awards. (Fahrenheit 9/11 is one of five finalists for Favorite Film of the Year.)
So, Moore's on the offensive (and on the talk-show circuit--in suit and tie, no less) and the Passion faithful are organizing. Are we headed for a final showdown in the Best Picture race?
While Hynes seems sure that 9/11's a lock ("It is going to be [the Academy's] revenge against George Bush (news - web sites)."), award-show expert Tom O'Neil thinks it's likely neither film will make the cut.
Passion, O'Neil says, suffers from "the Jewish problem"--i.e., the Academy's Jewish members may not take to a film long perceived by some Jewish leaders as anti-Semitic. (At a recent Passion screening for Oscar voters, O'Neil says he was told, "this religious movie triggered more cussing and swearing [among the audience] in the history of Academy screenings.")
To O'Neil, host of the award-show punditry site GoldDerby.com, 9/11 has its own perception problem. "I think there's the issue of liberal Hollywood shrugging off 9/11 saying, 'We lost the election. We want to move on,'" he says. (Fighting on, the Lions Gate people think they have 600 solid votes for Best Picture, O'Neil says. With about 5,800 Academy members, 9/11, by O'Neil's math, would have to score with about 20 percent of them, or 1,160, to land in the top five and net a nomination.)
Both films also share red-tape issues. When the Golden Globe Award nominations are announced Monday--kicking Oscar season into overdrive--Passion, as a whole, can't do better than a Best Foreign-Language Film nod. It was ruled ineligible for the Best Drama category because its dialogue is delivered entirely in Aramaic and Latin. Fahrenheit 9/11, meanwhile, can't do anything--the Globes doesn't do documentaries.
But if the two movies can recover from receiving little to no Globes bounce, the Oscars (news - web sites) are theirs for the taking (with the exception of the Best Documentary Feature category for 9/11--Moore didn't submit the film for a nomination there; and, the Best Foreign Film category for Passion--by Academy rules, it's not a foreign film).
But when the movies go for the taking, will the campaign become as taxing on Hollywood as the presidential election was, say, on Ohio?
"I would hope that it wouldn't come down to politics--conservatives voting for Passion, and liberals voting for 9/11," says one Oscar voter. "I vote for what moves me both emotionally and intellectually, regardless of politics."
"Last year it was Lord of the Rings," the voter says. "This year? Still too early too tell."
To Moore: I got your Oscar right here
Passion of the Christ is an account of a historical occurrence. Fahrenheit 9/11 is a made up story passed off as fact. It should be no contest.
Frankly, I'd rather see them give it to F 9/11. Let Hollyweird be Hollyweird.
I agree. Who cares what Hollywood does?
Right from the start, it was obvious that the plan for Passion was far more meaningful than an oscar. That is such small potatoes for this film.
The Director, and I mean the one above, will take care of whatever needs to happen.
Love your tagline. Pretty "polarizing", is it not?
The Golden Globes Nominations today gave zero to The Passion...unreal..and disgusting.
Thank You..... If logic still works in Hollywierd, then that's exactly what MM was saying and he didn't even realize it......or maybe he did......
Plus the Passion will be nominated in the end for only "best foreign language film."
I guess I share the late George C Scott's disdain of award shows. How do you choose between, say, Lawrence of Arabia and To Kill a Mockingbird as best picture (as Hollywood had to do in 1962. they gave best pic to Lawrence and best actor to Peck for Mockingbird)?.
The Oscars are nothing but a Hollywood self-love fest. I don't care who wins what.
Just so you know, RB, I live in SATANLAND, I work in SATANLAND (California), but I absolutely campaigned and voted JESUSLAND. Fight on!
Well! When we part the RED SEA (again!) You, my people, will be brought up out of the LAND OF SATAN and will posses the land of JESUS!
Awwwhhh poor Moore is the victim. . . BS!
So who do we nominate for the roles of Korah, Dathan, and Abiram? I say, Kennedy, Dean, and Macawful. Kerry can, of course, be Pharaoh.
Actually, Kerry can be one of the "ground-digested three". Kennedy has to be Pharaoh...contrary to the "Ten Commandments" movie, Pharaoh drowned with his army, so that would fit Ted to a T(-bird).
I just read the Golden Globe nominees. Didn't catch Mel or his film in there in any category.
Mel and Jesus and all who saw the film are the real winners, regardless of hollywood.
and in keeping with past trends, viewership for the Oscars will fall yet again...
Moore decided to shove his documentary out of the documentary class by showing it on tv right before the election so he could get nominated in the best picture category.
And the Golden Calves role goes to HILLARY!
Since the Golden Globes bypassed "The Passion", this is a sign of things to come with the Oscars.
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.