Gold Derby

Tom O'Neil has the inside track on Oscars, Emmys, Grammys and all the award shows.

« Previous Post | Gold Derby Home | Next Post »

Beware: Next comes the Oscars' 'smear campaign'?

November 6, 2007 |  4:51 pm

If a fury erupts over the accuracy of "American Gangster" similar to the one that blew up over "A Beautiful Mind," the next installment of this soap opera is easy to predict: everything will get blamed on an imaginary "smear campaign"! (Not up on this new Oscars Soap Opera? CLICK HERE to read more about the "American Gangster" hubbub.)

That's what everybody swallowed during the "Beautiful Mind" scandal a few years ago. Today it's remembered as one of the most infamous periods in the history of American showbiz awards — when Hollywood was at its ugliest and got caught! The problem is: the infamy never happened. It was another one of those fabulous fictions hatched in a town that makes billions selling fantasy on film to the world.

Crowe_pq2

The fact that Ron Howard and his film were able to withstand such an assault against the movie's integrity and still win best picture is dramatic evidence, I think, of how strong two factors are in the selection of Oscar winners: advantage of the early frontunner and the firm bond between the awards for best picture and director. No matter how ugly things could've gotten that year, one thing was clear. Ron Howard was finally going to win best director. TV's former Opie Taylor had suffered enough disrespect from the Hollywood elite. How much grief does a guy have to take to be sufficiently punished for the crime of once having been America's Dimpled Everyboy? Back in 1995, Howard's "Apollo 13" was so widely acclaimed that many Oscar pundits, including the L.A. Times, predicted it would win best picture. It got upset by "Braveheart," but the fact that "Apollo 13" had such serious support is significant because the voters didn't feel the same way about Howard. He wasn't nominated for best director. That's especially odd considering he had won the DGA award for "Apollo 13." That almost never happens!

So, by 2001, Oscar voters knew they owed Opie big time. Therefore, "A Beautiful Mind" was the early frontunner to win best picture. It looked like Russell Crowe would go along for the ride and end up doing what Tom Hanks had recently done: win two Oscars in a row. Hanks had snagged consecutive golden boys for "Philadelphia" and "Forrest Gump." Crowe had won the previous year for "Gladiator."


But then the scandal erupted over the accuracy of "A Beauitful Mind." Russell Crowe was in separate trouble after his clash with a British TV producer at BAFTRA. This scandal was much bigger. It could bring down the whole film. The hubbub grew slowly, outcry by outcry, finally reaching such a tempest that an exasperated studio exec could take it no more and screamed, "Conspiracy!" Because the media loves a good conspiracy — especially when it involves Hollywooders — journalists suddenly started reporting on the "smear campaign" as if it was a matter of fact.

The Washington Post claimed that the devious campaign "included well-placed calls to reporters, gossip columnists and Internet webmasters noting that the real-life protagonist of best picture nominee 'A Beautiful Mind' had alleged 'homosexual incidents,' was an anti-Semite and had abandoned a child he had out of wedlock."

Director Ron Howard fumed that the campaign was just as bad as the dirty tricks political campaigns against presidential candidate Michael Dukakis.

Actually, there's no doubt that Nash once abandoned an illegitimate child. The child's mother denounced Nash publicly for it, even calling him "really sort of mean" instead of the heroic figure portrayed by Crowe. The homosexuality claim stemmed from Nash once being arrested in a men's room and his harsh views of Jews were outrageously expressed in a letter Nash wrote in 1967.

Much of this scandalous info had been public record for a long time — reported in Sylvia Nasar's best-selling book, upon which the movie was based. It had been in print for years. Millions of copies. So what was the problem?

There wasn't one. Neither was there a conspiracy. The editors of GoldDerby.com, predecessor of TheEnvelope.com, teamed up with reporters from USA Today to find evidence — any evidence — of studio skullduggery and discovered nothing. We contacted scores and scores of top journos to locate just one who'd received a phone call from a rival studio trashing "A Beautiful Mind" and came up with scratch.

What was really going on was that Matt Drudge set off several media stampedes by calling attention to some shocking things he read in the book — which he had at his bedside throughout awards season. Every now and then, when he'd come across another doozy that didn't jibe with Nash's saintly portrayal in the film, he'd cry, "Hey, wait a minute!" Then lots of other journos started investigating the claims. It took Drudge a long time to finish reading the book, frankly, so he set off a few waves of investigation and the whole drama played out over months. Thus the feeling that there was a "conspiracy."

Post a comment
If you are under 13 years of age you may read this message board, but you may not participate.
Here are the full legal terms you agree to by using this comment form.

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until they've been approved.

If you have a TypeKey or TypePad account, please Sign In





Comments

Ron Howard is the best director in Hollywood and the most unrecognized and underappreciated Director. I think it is scandulous that he doesn't get the recognition he deserves.

Jack D, does Professor Steven Jones have a theory as to how it is possible to strategically plant explosives in the upper floors of two high rise buildings without attracting the attention of the thousands of people occupying those buildings 24/7 and contrive and coordinate an elaborate multiple plane hi-jacking and fly them into the buildings as a cover?
Just wondering

Obviously Mr. Ricardo Maxwell has also been duped by Hollywood's plethora of films and TV shows that depict Italian-Americas as gangsters. This perception was prevelant in the decades before Italian actors actually even were allowed to 'portray' gangsters. Jewish actors ,i.e. Edward G. Robinson, George Raft, were employed to subvert the American consiousness about Italians.
Now if anyone believes that the todays American gansters (and have been for the last 3 decades) are not African Americans and Hispanics, they must be living in Iceland or glued to the tube watching the next Sopranos episode of dreck!
I live in New York City my friend, check out the daily police blotters in cities like Detroit, Washington,D.C., Houston or any big urban city and then welcome to 'reality;.

The African-American gangsta Rappers have also had a huge impact on our society and children for more than 3 decades, which is also promoted by the 'velvet Mafia' in Hollywood!
Even the New York Times actually reviews these 'Gansta' Rappers CD's and live shows!
Imagine if an Irishman, Italian, Jew or Muslim were making CD's with lyrics that were misogynist,homophobic and spewed out rants about Jews, Italians or for that fact whites in general and put guns, drugs, murder and the exploitation of their young woman on a pedestal.

Everyday I wake up wondering what Hollywood will be doing to day. Can we impeach Bush for not making the Earth rotate around Hollywood instead of the Sun? Bla bla bla... Hollywood could care less what I think, all’s they care about is their bellybutton..... I’m rambling

pep

Ricardo Maxwell, apparently you've never heard of Frank Lucas, an African-American drug dealer from the 1970s, who is the subject of "American Gangsters."

Very little of what comes out of Hollywood is worth the price of admission. Movies fit for family viewing that makes millions and millions of dollars are completely ignored when it comes time for the Hollywood crowd to give recognition or an award but let some movie riddled with political inaccuracies , thinly veiled political agendas and attempts to brainwash the public and Hollywood will literally fall all over themselves to declare it a Masterpiece. Michael Moore and Al Gore are perfect examples of this. Fortunately, Americans aren't nearly as stupid as Hollywood believes us to be and we vote with our dollars. If a movie is a dog the word gets out pretty fast from the early goers. Hollywood hasn't broken this code yet and probably never will.

I always feel stupider after reading about Hollywood "news".

Keep in mind, this industry is based on entertaining it's customers. I for one, have been highly entertained just watching these so called "elites" as they realize that their ship is sinking. It's a better story line than anything they have been producing.
And the battleship "Hollywood", once strong and mighty and influential, is sinking fast. When you come out of port, and continuously steer left, eventually, you're going to smash into the dock and sink.

Recardo Maxwell said:
"To place a black man in the role of classic American gangster, when all of America knows that they are usually immigrants (Italian, Irish, Jewish), is typical of Hollywood and the "entertainment" industry. After all, we must have at least one of each minority in every film and TV show. While the twist to this plot might be refreshing (How many more Italian gangster movies can we take?), it is obviously not based on reality."

I agree with everything you said until this. This was based on a true story, and the gangster was in fact a black man who went against the prevailing crime families. Dispite the discrepancies from the real life version, this was a very good movie.

First of all, I don't think people are going to get riled up about this controversy. Second, since people aren't riled up, I don't think anyone is going to start the "smear" campaign thread. Third, I don't think this will hurt the film's Oscar chances at all. Fourth, (this is entirely opinion) "A Beautiful Mind" could have been interesting but was boring and weak and neither it or Ron Howard should have won Oscars for it ("Apollo 13" was eons better and should have won over "Braveheart"; it was also directed tighter).

Lastly, Ricardo Maxwell's comment is not only incredibly offensive, it also makes no sense. If Frank Lucas wasn't a big time drug dealer why was he arrested twice for a drug trafficking organization that once rivaled the Italian mafia in sales. Racism is a funny; now black people can't even be compared to white criminals.

What the hell? There are people that expect a fictional movie to be factual? Just how stupid has our culture become?

American Gangster wasn't even that good.

It won't take a "smear" campaign (albeit one from the actual subject of said film) to destroy its Oscar chances. It just wasn't good enough.

Srsly.

If the Hollywood movies that are selected to win the Oscar's are supposed to be true and accurated, how do you explain Al Gore winning for his fictional documentary? It's entertainment, not real life to be taken seriously.

Please learn you history. American Gangster is based on the life and times of a black man, Frank Hughes. A real person living in N.J.

Yep, We, the people, are just on the edge of our seats waiting with baited breath to get to the bottom of this mess, afterall, hollywood is important, right?
As has already been mentioned above, you have the media/journalists, who no longer have the trust of the American people because WE KNOW they're biased, WE KNOW they lie, and then you have a crop of, generally under-educated and under-intelligent, folks who sit around just waiting to hear what hollywood has to say... but the vast majority of the American public has time and again made it clear to the factually challenged socialists in hollywood that 1)We aren't buying what you're selling 2) YOU ARE NOT IMPORTANT TO US, YOU ARE ENTERTAINMENT, pure and simple, and 3) We don't particularly care about you - see 2. All of you, actors, directors et al are very easily replaced in our lives.

Keep having your pathetic little marathon pat each other on the back sessions extolling your greatness, afterall, that is what you do best, and we'll keep ignoring you and not watching you fawn all over each other.

I guess when hollywood figures out they're the modern equivalent of the court jester we may actually start seeing something worth seeing and hearing a whole lot less of stupid people instructing us how to live. Personally, I'm paid to think for a living and, well, hollywood you aren't.

Nash wasn't portrayed as saintly at all. He was portrayed as a jerk when he was not crazy and he almost drowns the baby in the bathtub out of neglect.

So you were calling the people at the studios and expecting they would tell the truth? Huh? What? Is that accurate?

YAWN !!!!!!!!!!!

Don't use exclamation points for emphasis. It's really stupid!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Hey KC, 9/11 keeps lingering because the so called msm reporters refuse to report the facts and irregularities of that day. I'd be questioning things too when crash sites have no wreckage or video is confiscated by the FBI minutes after the crashes. Our gov't brings it on themselves hiding evidence that would either exonerate or indict them in a minute.

I remember Brad Pitt and "Seven Years in Tibet" when hollywood tried to whitewash an Austrian Anti-Semite, Its always the same story- like Chinese illegal contributions to the Clintons, they keep coming back

Even PBS 'documentaries' are filled with innuendo and other beliefs that might not be supported by facts. To start a firestorm two that cannot really stand true scientific scrutiny are evolution and global temperature change. You can find anecdotal evidence galore, but where are the true link creatures? And look at the temperature of Alaska over the last 100 years. If you discount Pacific Water warming trends that ebb and flow you will see the average temperature is not rising with any dramatic increase if at all.

So, when Hollywood which has to sensationalize everything has a true story they can resist punching it up, or if the character is more inline with their beliefs then they will sand down the rough edges so to speak.

First you decry an alleged Hollywood conspiracy and then end your piece by conjuring up one of your own? Do you have one shred of evidence that "What was really going on" was that Matt Drudge behind it all? Give me a break.

The only thing that gets smeared in Hollywood is the United States of America. The American People don't care about what Hollywood 'celebrities" say and do anymore. Hollywood has proven itself to be full of drug-addled nutcases. What comes out of Hollywood is nonsense.

Even if films are not accurate (what movie is?), this is all about the First Amendment. Let's not follow the gov't down the path of censorship. After all, censorship is becoming America's favorite past-time. The US gov't (and their corporate friends), already detain protesters, ban books like "America Deceived" from Amazon and Wikipedia, shut down Imus and fire 21-year tenured, BYU physics professor Steven Jones because he proved explosives, thermite in particular, took down the WTC buildings. Free Speech forever (especially for movies).
Last link (before Google Books caves to pressure and drops the title):
http://www.iuniverse.com/bookstore/book_detail.asp?&isbn=0-595-38523-0

And "Inconvenient Truth" is a documentary, right? One thing for sure this time around, not a single Oscar juror read the actual IPCC report. Gore's movie is science fiction, "Water World 2".

 


Stay Connected:


Advertisement

About the Blogger


The Dish Rag
Pop & Hiss
Notes on a Season
The Circuit: Awards and Festivals News



Categories


Archives