Alas here we are again trying to explain our "Way Out" again. It's like a tired minstrel show
on tour. But the tour left without the crowd this time. We simply don't get 'it' any longer.
What has happened to Hollywood has become a worldwide epidemic of sorts. The head
no longer moves without the body ie; the body being the rest of the world. At least the world
has moved on but who am I to say otherwise. The stale rooms of Oscarville have forgotten
it's craft altogether. But now it's all meanless with more mundane and meanless folk running
and ruining the show in the altogether. Hollywood is mined with metphores and globblins.
The kind we are reminded about in the Wizard of oz with the Wicked Witch of Hollywood running
things into the ground with their pen in hand "Wonged Harpies" otherwise known in the trades
as a tideous and tired old show. Just when you thought the road was widening for new ideas
and thoughts the old ways have all but disapeared showing up in new lifeless faces. Thsi
time ghurls lets face the music cause ain't no plastic surgeon from beverly hills to Norway can
fix this mess that we are faced with. The United States has become a symbol of the satle the
tired and the broke from BrokeBack Mountain and more and it's population will wake up one
day top find that the world has forgotten us, the US and who will think about the cavilier
attitude about us and the arts. Hollywood no wonder you are dying out cause the mold
from the old studios has gotten way deep inside your bloodstream. The dawn of the living
dead cast you shadowless reminder that U are no longer relevant but those who have gone
before us must be turning over in their graves like a spitted calf dripping over a cold flame.
Denial I heard is somewhere over in Egypt????

Nathan who has thought you guys out!!! out of hollywood out of the Oscars and out of
a beautiful film like "BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN"..shame shame on "U" you have betrayed
our thoughts our blood and our hopes..once again but no more I say toss the old dish
rag out......I hear someone in Oscarland screaming right now!!!!

Tom, your report has disturbed me all week on many levels. But the one that friends and I keep coming back to is this: Academy voters have a responsibility to see all five best picture nominees before voting. The fact that Tony Curtis and his cronies refused to see one of the nominated films, regardless of their views, shows irresponsibility on their part and a huge flaw in the Academy voting. If anything, this is the time there should be a call to action to change the rules. If voters must prove they saw all five documentary features and all five foreign films before voting, the same should occur with best picture. Otherwise, years like this will continue, when voters refuse to see films based on personal opinion and/or prejudices, and members can be swayed by a massive DVD mailer campaign. Would a change have made a difference in this year's outcome? Who knows. But the playing field would be more level. How can the academy be approached about changes?

hey todd

don't look under the bed

Passing trivial point: Annie Proulx spells the name Ennis del Mar, no capital D.

"The presentation of gay love was often quite brutal, quite agggressive, and not the sweet love story so trumpeted in the studio hype. No one would have noticed this cliched, soporofic cowboy movie were it not for the gay slant." - posted by Michael Cross

I have a good friend who also did not like the presentation of gay love in BBM. He was concerned that his family were going to view the first sex scene and immediately attach to it the stereotypical idea that gay men just jump into sex without any love involved. I said to him "I don't think it's the movie's responsibility to help us become more palatable to our relatives and straight friends - the depiction of the desperate and seemingly frantic love scenes was meant to reflect something very specific in the character of Ennis. He's wound up really tight and when he expresses emotions it's like an explosion." I don't think it's hard to see this, but if you're more concerned about how the movie is going to help the gay movement and the acceptance of gays you have to really let Ang Lee and Annie Proulx help out with their slightly different take on things. Ennis lived under a great societal pressure and he lived in fear ever since seeing that gay man who had his penis tied to a horse and then dragged to his death. I completely understood the compressed, oppressed nature of Ennis' personality. There are people who are freer now, but everyone's experience is not the same, so why not take a look at someone else's point of view.

Another interesting reaction to that frantic sex scene was from a friend who in fact had a similar experience. He knew a guy who identified as straight. They worked together on some show in Tennessee and after a few weeks of getting to know each other, they suddenly, very frantically had sex. After the summer was done they went their own ways and never talked about it. When he saw Brokeback Mountain he completely related to that first sexual encounter.

You say no one would have noticed the movie if it weren't for the gay slant, but the point is that the love story between two men is not so different from the love story between a man and a woman, so why is there such a repulsion toward the love between two men, if it's so similar to other relationships? Why not let such relationships exist freely? It's more damaging when they have to exist covertly - wives and families suffer, as we saw in BBM.

A month ago everyone was saying how wonderful and open-minded the Academy was for nominating so many gay-themed movies and giving 8 noms to BBM. This was the "gay Oscars". The Academy had finally thumbed its nose to conservative America and showed its sympathy for gay rights.

Now BBM wins three awards -- as many as any other film, including Crash, and Capote gets a major award too, but the Academy is rife with homophobes and is supposed to be ashamed.

Gimme a break!!!

I am a totally out gay man who has been very active in gay politics. It is important to root out homophobia. But it is just as important not to blame homophobia where it does not exist. Falsely blaming homophobia just discredits the gay rights movement.

Yes, there are undoubtedly people who voted against BBM because they hate gay people. But there are also undoubtedly some people who voted FOR Brokeback Mountain -- e.g. some gay people in the Academy -- just for the reason that it was a pro-gay movie.

I don't think you can really make any generalization about why the thousands of members of the Academy voted for Crash rather than BBM. We don't know if Crash won by a landslide or by just one vote. There are dozens of possible explanations why Crash won -- including the fact that lots of people thought it was a great film. Personally, I found it heavy-handed and obvious, whereas BBM was subtle and graceful. But lots of people disagree.

And a lot of the people who voted for Crash would be inclined to be sympathetic to the message of BBM too -- both films were politically progressive and were indictments of America. Sometimes people want to see homophobia where it doesn't really exist.

Brokeback Mountain: "The face [of gays] that launched a thousand ships." (or shall I say keyboards?)
This is a film that provokes thought and discussion, brings bashers' anger to the printed word, such as the anger displayed by the bloggers who proclaim--"get over it" ^&*@! etc. This is the film that has triggered true-life recollections of abuse and alienation by many gay men in America; it shows the hatred toward gays like Matthew Shepherd and others who remain nameless and forgotten, killed for being gay "in the wrong place, the wrong time" [we're dead!]. BBM provides a glimpse of gay life and suffering in a Red State, and shows a Blue Hollywood's hypocrisy. [Here I could insert a litany for the dead that I have known in my life].
This film, thanks to Ang Lee, Annie Proulx, the producers, and the actors, shows a rigid belief system that American homophobes don't want others to see--yet, it stands as a Mountain of Triumph for gays who have been mocked by caricatures such as Capote, Jack McFarland, Paul Lynde, and other gay stereotypes. Though these portrayals show the comic mask of gayness, the characters in Brokeback show the heart of gayness--a sexual orientation based on love, not on affected witticisms or clever costumes of flamboyance.
Now, to my acceptance speech:
I personally thank all those associated with the development of BBM; the film is pivotal in American history and film. I would like to thank the Academy and Tony Curtis for inadvertently opening the door to this forum of discussion. I would like to thank those who died before me that I might live, and I would like to thank those who tortured me so that I might become strong. I would like to thank those who hate me, that I might be open to love. I would like to thank the radio d.j.’s and the late-night talk show hosts who laugh about me, and the cartoonists that mock me, that I may stand tall as this mountain and proudly state, “I ain’t queer.”
I am a homosexual man who has been promised “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” --And I don’t need a trophy to validate my existence or my success.

Homophobia – the debates have focused from total denial to accusations of blatant prejudice. However, if you look beyond the noise the real issue here is not the extremes, but the subtle shades and varying degrees of prejudice: covert vs overt…implied vs blatant.

In early February, actor Tony Curtis verbalized his bias: “Tony recently told Fox New’s Bill McCuddy that he hadn’t yet seen ‘Brokeback Mountain’ and had no intention of doing so. He claims that other Academy members feel similarly.” From this statement, Mr. Curtis does not make a blatant homophobic remark. However, it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to read between the lines that he is verbalizing his own internal homophobia. Thus, for the naysayers who boldly indicate that there was no homophobia with this event are either naïve or disingenuous.

It is my opinion that we should not be telling the AMPAS what film is Best Picture for that year. Each Academy voting member earned their right to this highly acclaimed membership and thus as a collective body make the most important decision within the motion picture industry.

What really disappoints me is that it has became clear that many AMPAS members would not bother to even screen Brokeback Mountain based upon their own internal homophobia. For many straight males in mainstream America – this problem was expected. And yet, Brokeback Mountain’s box office performance has been stellar in light of this situation. However, for such a prestigious institution, many of us falsely assumed that Academy voting members would have a higher standard and do their diligence in screening all nominees before making their final decision. I’m not an Academy member, but at least I took the time to watch all 5 best picture nominees before coming to my conclusion that Brokeback Mountain was the best picture for 2005.

Thus, with a significant portion of AMPAS members voting upon an anti-Brokeback platform, Crash was selected as a safe alternative. Keep in mind two important points: first, Crash won NOT based upon its filmmaking merits; and second, with Crash’s racism message, this helped to assuage the AMPAS members on the anti-Brokeback platform of their liberal guilt. At the end of the day, the collective internal homophobia of so many Academy voting members turned into a result of blatant homophobia against Brokeback Mountain.

What can be learned from this?
First, the Oscar race is done – let’s move on. In hindsight, I’m actually glad that Brokeback Mountain lost – it’s loss shed an unflattering light on the subtle homophobia that pervades both the AMPAS and American society at large and a win would have glossed this situation over. Also, this movie has transcended so far into the popular American culture that it does not require a validation from the Academy for its groundbreaking depiction of real gay relationships.

Second, Crash can learn a lesson here. Present-day real prejudice – whether sexism, racism or homophobia – occurs much more at the subtle levels and not in your face as depicted in this film. Oscar snubs have occurred in the past. However, AMPAS’ image and integrity has been forever tarnished with this ugly event.

Third, many liberal folks who claim NOT to be homophobic are in denial. Though they indicate that other depictions of gay men have been rewarded (i.e. Phillip Seymour Hoffman in Capote), it’s clear that these depictions are stereotypical, effeminate men who are completely asexual. Forget about lesbians – they are completely invisible. But, two virile cowboys who demonstrate true human emotions ranging from repression to rage; vulnerability to love – wow, this somehow endangers and threatens insecure straight men’s masculinity.

I – for one – will be celebrating the future best pictures during the Golden Globes. At least the folks over at the Hollywood Foreign Press Association do their homework and preview ALL films before making a decision. Amazingly, they were not afraid to award the best picture to a film that also made them uncomfortable in their seats – they understood and properly acknowledged great art.

>> Aloysius

Some good discussion, as well as some rants, which is par for the course with blogs (and this is one of the better ones).

- a timely reminder from Maya that the final ballots are a free-for-all, whereas the noms are restricted to the respective branches. Maybe someone can tell me why the Academy thinks the noms should be restricted to the specialists with the expertise to judge their own craft, but in the final awards costumers suddenly acquire the knowledge to critique editors, and sound guys can suddenly judge acting? Doesn't make much sense. I think what Matt describes is maybe the way it SHOULD be.

- SteveH212's point about the Academy usually following trends rather than setting them is well taken. It actually was out of character for them to ignore all the precedents this year, which means that enough of them really wanted to make a point about sticking it to Brokeback.

- To Vin, well, yeah, WWII vets sure had a right to be pissed, but they're getting on in years and not exactly the most ardent bloggers, which didn't even exist yet. Not being a vet, but rather a gay man (although those categories do overlap), I'll stick with what I know.

- I'll just add to Woody's posting about seeing the film again: when the DVD comes out, buy TWO copies to boost sales. Besides, you're going to wear one out anyway!

p.s. why does is seem to be mostly straight people who say homophobia (or whatever word you choose) doesn't exist? Curious.

For those here who wish to denigrate or insult those who believe that BBM was egregiously and unjustly snubbed by losing to Crash for best picture, go right ahead. You can't destroy for me what was an extremely emotional and enlightening experience. I finally went to see BBM the day before the Academy Awards and I had really low expectations due to all the hoopla and hype and some comments from people who didn't think it was that great. I was completely and totally enthralled with this beautiful story about two men involved in a forbidden and tragic love affair. I finally had to confront my own misconceptions and uninformed ideas about gay people. This was an extraordinary moment for me, as I felt myself becoming more and more involved in their passion and love. I found myself rooting for them and wanting them to be together and reveling in their happiness and joy when they were with each other. All the chatter and even some of the cheap shots here will not change what happened to me when I watched this movie. It changed me forever and I am so glad that I was able to get to the point where I could see these two men as just two human beings desperately and passionately in love with each other. I don't know if we will ever know for certain exactly why this move didn't win best picture. I do think that there was some homophobia involved here and those who attack the most should take a moment and examine their own hearts and minds before they dismiss this out of hand. This prejudice is real and it still exists and it probably will not go away easily. There may have been other factors involved, issues that have been discussed at length here. But for me this was not only the best picture of the year, it will remain as one of the most moving movie experiences I have ever had. Yes, it won almost every award leading up to the Academy Awards and rightly so. I don't expect or insist that everyone else agree with my feelings about BBM, but those of us who love this story and this brilliant movie are entitled to respect from those of you who do not share the same opinion. Shame on anyone who would attack and belittle those who are championing what they see as a brilliant cinematic achievement. I believe that BBM speaks for itself and it will ultimately triumph and be remembered long after Crash has become but a distant memory.

I am a supporter of gay rights and gay marriage. I have a transgendered daughter. And I thought BBM was not a very good movie. The presentation of gay love was often quite brutal, quite agggressive, and not the sweet love story so trumpeted in the studio hype. No one would have noticed this cliched, soporofic cowboy movie were it not for the gay slant. So it lost because Crash was promoted by a $4million campaign and because people looked again at BBM and saw it was a very ordinary movie. I didn't like Crash much, thought it was way over the top. But as movie making, it was clearly better than BBM. Had I a vote, it would have been for Good Night and Good Luck.

Ted Casablanca's latest column: "Academy of Motion Picture Arts & Sciences member who requested anonymity, when asked at the big shoo if she had voted for or against the defeated Brokeback Mountain: '[Several Academy members] didn't see it. We won't vote for a movie like that.' GLAAD, you online right now?"

http://www.eonline.com/Gossip/Awful/Daily2006/060308.html

And Ted Casablanca is not a Brokeback supporter, he hated the movie.

Wow! A lot of comments! I really think that the listing of all the awards won by "Brokeback Mountain" compared to the few insignificant wins for "Crash" was really dispositive for me.

Clearly, some other principle or process was at play in the voting for Best Picture which caused a statistically anomalous event. Members of minority groups are used to being in the position of asking "Why did this strange thing just happen to me?" and trying to decide whether its because of who they are.

It's interesting to see how people who strongly believed BBM would win are now having to deal with the cognitive dissonance of discovering maybe the world doesn't work the way they thought it did.