PDA

View Full Version : Anyone seen this thread about Crash & Brokeback?


SeattleRedBear
03-07-2006, 08:01 PM
Man, just finished reading this (http://www.disboards.com/showthread.php?p=11806123#post11806123) and I'm ready to scream GET OVER IT! IT'S A FREAKIN' MOVIE!!!

Please, anyone, just shoot me if I ever run on for 33 lines without taking a breath.

Venting on the other thread would be non-productive and I'm about to explode. :furious: Rick, feel free to delete if not appropriate. Thanks all!

Ronda93
03-07-2006, 08:28 PM
Yeah, spoon seems a little manic in her writing. I agree it's a movie. Move on. Speaking of odd writing styles, I haven't seen mrFDNY lately.

JennyMominRI
03-07-2006, 10:18 PM
I'm really sorry about some of the stuff getting said over there.

Diva of Dragons
03-08-2006, 03:37 AM
Yikes! Her brain must be seriously lacking oxygen! Obviously, she never stops to take a breath! :sad2:

Kevin&Randall
03-08-2006, 05:41 AM
Wow.

I have a headache and only got through about 3 pages of that thread. I have never gone into the "community" boards, and thinking I won't again any time soon. I'm perfectly happy with this community.

Randall

:rainbow:

Dakota_Lynn
03-08-2006, 07:20 AM
That Chattyaholic pissed me off with her comments our immoral "lifestyle." Why get on a public message board where she knows there are many gay and lesbian people and spew out such garbage? Fine, she disapproves of us. I don't really care. But to say we lack morals and values? :rolleyes: On a brighter note, however, there really are a lot of straight people taking up for us these days and that is just plain wonderful! :love: It does my heart good to see it. Especially since my 14 year old daughter is also a lesbian. I really want the world to be a better and kinder place for her. When people like Chattyaholic make such comments, it really upsets me. A year ago I was able to let it roll off me more than I can now knowing that my gay daughter could have read that nonsense. :(

majortom
03-08-2006, 07:54 AM
Someone in that thread includes this quote:

Of course not. "Brokeback Mountain" was simply a better movie than "Capote." And "Crash" was better than "Brokeback Mountain," although they were both among the best films of the year. That is a matter of opinion. But I was not "discomfited" by "Brokeback Mountain." Read my original review. I chose "Crash" as the best film of the year not because it promoted one agenda and not another, but because it was a better film.

The nature of the attacks on "Crash" by the supporters of "Brokeback Mountain" seem to proceed from the other position: "Brokeback" is better not only because of its artistry but because of its subject matter, and those who disagree hate homosexuals. Its supporters could vote for it in good conscience, vote for it and feel they had made a progressive move, vote for it and not feel that there was any stain on their liberal credentials for shunning what "Crash" had to offer.

from Roger Ebert's article and argues that Ebert is biased against Brokeback Mountain because:

In other words, in the first paragraph, he states that Crash being a "better" film (ie, more to offer from a true artistic standpoit, better production values, etc) is simpy a matter of opinion...he then loses that credibility in the 2nd paragraph when he states that for those that wanted Brokeback to win was NOT a matter opinion, but a matter of politics "...those who disagree hate homosexuals." A bit hypocritical to state that your opinion is based on production values, but the opinions of people that don't agree with your are not. Ebert seems to be a bit prejudiced himself.

I found both comments to be interesting. I had very mixed feelings about this year's Best Picture nominees in that I wanted Brokeback Mountain for political reasons, while I actually felt that Crash was a better film. Ebert in his article states that it is his opinion the Crash was a better film and many of those arguing for Brokeback stated that anyone that did not agree with their opinion was a homophobe. These are both true statements. Ebert did not say that everyone that voted for Brokeback Mountain was doing so for political reasons, just that [many] of those attacking Crash were doing so for that reason.

While I often disagree with Roger Ebert, I have to say that I know him not to be a homophobe. I grew up in Chicagoland and am active in Mac OS X community there, as is Mr. Ebert. I have met him at many events and have many friends that are friends of his (I would not say that we are friends, just acquaintances). From statements he has made in private and from his actions (both public and private), I can certainly defend him against that charge.

Many straight male friends of mine have asked me if they should see Brokeback Mountain. My response has been, that if you want to go for political reasons, great, you should go. If you want to see a beautiful film with good acting, you should go. If you loved Bridges of Madison County you will like this film. I you hated it and want to go to be entertained, you probably will not like it.

I have seen Crash five times and each time I find something new. I have seen Brokeback Mountain twice and I did not find much new in it.

As much as I liked it, and as much as it is a welcome change from portrayals of Gay men as either serial killers, AIDS victims or comic relief, it is still a tragedy about how bad life was/is for some gay men and I cannot help but think that it is still overall not the film I want as my representative.

I think that Kiss, Kiss, Bang, Bang (a great film that you should all go see), has a better portrayal of a gay man and is closer to what I want in a film with gay characters - a movie where being gay is just like having black hair (i.e. a plot detail) not the main focus of the film.

/carmi

SunFloridaDisney
03-08-2006, 08:22 AM
I have never gone into the "community" boards, and thinking I won't again any time soon. I'm perfectly happy with this community.

Randall

:rainbow:

Sorry for your negative experience. We aren't all like that, many of us on the CB are quite friendly, accepting, and just like to have a good time. :wave2:

Just like in 'real life' there are always some jerks who have to display their ignorance, small-mindedness and critical attitudes. :guilty:

RickinNYC
03-08-2006, 08:57 AM
Dakota LYnn, EXCELLENT post!

Randall, you definitley should go to the Community Board and check it out. There are hundreds of great DIS'ers there. And whenever there are any anti-gay sentiments, the CSP come out in droves! They make us look like wusses by comparison! :rotfl:

SeattleRed, why would I delete your post? I think you should post your rear end off on that thread.

In fact, to ALL of you, gay or straight. Go that thread and post your head off! People need to hear from all of us, not just a couple of us.

curiouser
03-08-2006, 09:00 AM
wow, I'm glad that thread just ruined the movie for me :guilty:

Sounds like its time to call AT&T to reach out and slap someone...

SeattleRedBear
03-08-2006, 10:27 AM
Dakota LYnn, EXCELLENT post!

Randall, you definitley should go to the Community Board and check it out. There are hundreds of great DIS'ers there. And whenever there are any anti-gay sentiments, the CSP come out in droves! They make us look like wusses by comparison! :rotfl:

SeattleRed, why would I delete your post? I think you should post your rear end off on that thread.

In fact, to ALL of you, gay or straight. Go that thread and post your head off! People need to hear from all of us, not just a couple of us.
I think it's because I assume most people are reasonable and difference of opinion can be identified (and if possible resolved) through civil discourse. Someone like a certain poster on that thread (i really like that dakota) is just so off my radar that when faced with someone like that, I get this "dear-in-the-headlight" thing going on (literally, DH has broken the trance a couple times when I've been faced with unreasonable people in surreal situations and just stood there stunned that someone could say that). It's probably a good thing I'm in academia :rolleyes1

mickeyfan2
03-08-2006, 11:49 AM
Wow.

I have a headache and only got through about 3 pages of that thread. I have never gone into the "community" boards, and thinking I won't again any time soon. I'm perfectly happy with this community.

Randall

:rainbow:
We aren't all bad. ;) Give us another try. I too found "Sugar" way over the top. Now a gay pimp would really put her over the top!!!!! :lmao:

donald...really
03-08-2006, 11:52 AM
I started to read that thread but only read a few posts before I quit. I don't really want to go there. So, sorry if this has already been posted and discussed.

The idea of a Best Picture really is subjective. And I agree it's just a movie. But the Brokeback loss really did bother me, mostly because I, as well as other people, see it as hollywoods homophobia rearing its ugly head. It's difficult for me to not come to that conclusion when you have quotes from Academy members like this out there:

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."

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


Plus articles like this (Like I said, better picture is subjective, but the facts stated below are interesting):

The Brokeback Mountain Oscar Snub
by Michael Jensen, March 7, 2006

Sunday night, Hollywood spent over three hours congratulating itself for its tolerance and progressiveness. But when it came to awarding the Best Picture, Hollywood's cowardly actions proved louder than its pretty words.

Two days after Crash's history-making upset over Brokeback, a debate rages over why the upset happened. Was it homophobia? Was Crash simply a better movie? Did the far right's attack on Hollywood's morals frighten the voters? Or did Brokeback simply peak too soon?

First, the facts.

During the awards' season leading up to Sunday night's Oscars, Brokeback Mountain became the most honored movie in cinematic history. It had more Best Picture and Director wins than previous Oscar winners Schindler's List and Titanic combined. Just to name a few, Brokeback won various awards at the Golden Globes, the BAFTA's, Venice Film Festival, NY Film Critic's Circle, LA Film Critics, National Board of Review, and the Independent Spirit Awards.

Meanwhile, of the major awards, Crash managed to win only the SAG Award (for its ensemble cast), the Chicago Critics award, and an Image Award. And Crash won the Chicago honor mostly because Chicago-area film critic Roger Ebert relentlessly pushed it. Even then, Brokeback was the runner-up. How did Crash fare in all of the awards Brokeback won? It mostly didn't, rarely even showing up as a nominee. In fact, before the SAG awards, Crash barely merited mention as an Oscar contender.

Before Sunday night's upset, no film that had won the Writer's Guild, Director's Guild, and Producer's Guild awards did not go on to win the Academy Award for Best Picture. Additionally, the film with the most total Oscar nominations almost always wins the top prize; only four times in the past twenty-five years has the Best Picture winner not also been the film with the most nominations. This year Brokeback had the most nominations

Along with all these awards, Brokeback had also won the Golden Globe, all but assuring that it would win at the Oscars too. Only once, in 1973, did a film not even nominated for the Golden Globe's Best Picture go on to win the Academy Award (that movie was The Sting, and it wasn't nominated because of a mix-up at the Golden Globes). Crash did not receive a Golden Globe nomination.

Like most eventual Best Picture winners, Brokeback Mountain was by far the highest grossing film of the five nominees. It has earned $120 million worldwide, while Crash has taken in less than half that. Box-office performance has always been a factor in how the Academy votes.

One other fact: The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences is a conservative institution. It is not necessarily conservative in the political or religious sense of the word, but rather in that its members are firm believers in tradition and precedence. By every measure of previous Oscar winners, Brokeback should have been the movie announced by Jack Nicholson. Since it wasn't, there must be a very compelling reason for Crash to have won instead.

Was it Crash's critical acclaim? To be fair, Crash did come out quite some
time ago and it is common knowledge that Oscar favors, or at least remembers, movies released late in the year. Was it possible that Crash's earlier critical acclaim had been overlooked by virtually every others arts organization that dispenses awards? Perhaps once Academy voters were reminded of Crash's critical acclaim, they felt compelled to give it the Best Picture.

Turns out that can't be the case. Here again, Brokeback was clearly the frontrunner. Every year, both Premiere Magazine and Entertainment Weekly rank the year's movies according to the reviews they received. Brokeback came in first on both lists. Three other Best Picture nominees—Good Night, and Good Luck, Capote, and Munich —also placed in the Top Ten on both lists. Meanwhile, Crash ranked number thirty-six on Premiere's list, and down in the fifties on EW's. A half-dozen critics even gave it outright pans, saying it was a movie to be avoided.

Not exactly a critical darling, eh?

That means that in order for the Academy voters to have chosen Crash over Brokeback, they had to overlook the fact that Brokeback was the favorite by almost every measure the Academy has used for seventy eight years. And they had to be willing to overturn decades of Academy tradition as well. Let's be clear about something else: this disregard for tradition and precedence didn't happen because of a changing of the guard. It's not a case of new, fresh blood forcing the Academy to change their old, tired ways. Indeed, it is the old guard that upended their traditions in order to propel Crash past Brokeback.

Nor is this a discussion about the merits of Brokeback Mountain versus Crash. Art is subjective, and a Crash fan's opinion is every bit as valid as someone who loved Brokeback. What isn't subjective are the facts stated above.

The question remaining then is why did they Academy pass over Brokeback for Crash? Given the facts, there seems to be only one answer: good old-fashioned homophobia, or at least Hollywood 's fear of being perceived by Middle America as too tolerant of gay people, which is another kind of homophobia. Or perhaps it was some combination of the two things. But nothing else seems to fit the facts.

If rank homophobia was the reason, it seems Tony Curtis apparently spoke for many voters when he said he had no intention of seeing the movie and that it offered nothing “unique.” Since he hadn't seen it, it's hard to know on what basis Mr. Curtis made his claim. But clearly many Academy voters did not see anything particularly unique about it either.

Everyone watching knew this was a chance for the Academy to take a stand on what is arguably one of the most controversial issues of our time. Battles are being fought at ballot boxes, in courtrooms, schools and homes all around the country. Sunday night offered a chance for Hollywood to weigh in with their support.

Up until Jack Nicholson opened that envelope virtually everyone -- even the Las Vegas odds-makers, felt it a near certainty Hollywood would do just that.

But at the last second, the Oscar voters blinked. Or perhaps like a white person publicly professing their support for a black candidate, only to then vote for their white opponent in the privacy of the voting booth, Academy voters never intended to vote for Brokeback.

Some Crash supporters have argued the Academy had to choose between honoring two very worthwhile movies, one confronting racism, one homophobia, both subjects the Oscars have overlooked in the past. And while it was a difficult choice, they argue, it was a fair decision.

Hogwash. Hollywood has already honored numerous movies that confront racism. In the Heat of the Night won back in 1967, nearly forty years ago.
Schindler's List won in 1993. Other previous winners depicting racism have included Gandhi, Driving Miss Daisy, and Westside Story. And Halle Berry's Best Actress win was supposed to be the final nail in Hollywood's racist past. The point isn't to argue that racism is no longer worthy subject-matter, only that it is not groundbreaking, especially not nearly enough to overcome Brokeback's reasons for winning.

Indeed, a gay story, much less a love story, has never even been in serious contention for an Oscar. Hell, there hasn't even been a mainstream movie about a gay love story. Given just how groundbreaking Brokeback is, its being passed over for Crash -- a movie few cared about until six weeks ago -- only heightens the fact that homophobia is one of the obvious reasons for
the Academy having done so.

Professional awards analyst Tom O'Neil thought he saw something unusual brewing in Hollywood over the past several weeks. “Something weird is going on among Oscar Voters,” O'Neil wrote in The Envelope, an online site run by the Los Angeles Times. "Crash and Good Night, and Good Luck have their passionate supporters who gush their honest love of those best-picture nominees, but most non-Brokeback votes I hear from Oscar voters are really anti-Brokeback." And that translates to anti-gay.

Kenneth Turan, also of the Los Angeles Times, sees something similar in the aftermath of Crash's upset. “So for people who were discomfited by Brokeback Mountain but wanted to be able to look themselves in the mirror and feel like they were good, productive liberals, Crash provided the perfect safe harbor.”

In retrospect, it's hard not to feel a little stupid for hoping that Brokeback would emerge victorious. America truly seemed to be changing on the issue of homosexuality. For every joke that ridiculed the “gay cowboy” movie, there was a joke mocking the guys who wouldn't see it. Only things haven't progressed as much as thought.

Some argue Hollywood can't be antigay since the top acting prize went to Philip Seymour Hoffman in Capote. But I put that right up there with Tom Hanks' wins for Philadelphia (as a dying gay man) and William Hurts' win for Kiss of the Spiderwoman (arguably not even gay, since Hurt's character says he wants to be a woman). This is not meant to take anything away fromHoffman, but nonetheless it sure appears that Hollywood, like America, has a much easier time accepting gays when they confirm all their stereotypes of effete, lisping, asexual men. But a movie about two masculine guys in love? That's apparently a different story.

Some might even argue that not giving Hoffman the Oscar would have been a travesty, given that he had won virtually every other Best Actor award leading up to the Oscars. How could the award be denied to the man who was so clearly the frontrunner?

But that certainly didn't stop Academy voters when it came to selecting the Best Picture.

There is a second, more nuanced explanation for the Brokeback snub. As the presenters made clear during the telecast, Hollywood is feeling defensive about declining box-office revenue. And since the nominations were announced in January, much has been made about Hollywood supposedly being “out of touch” with mainstream America. Indeed, the day of the Oscars, CNN ran a piece called “Out of Touch” wherein a reporter visited a small town in rural America to ask if anyone had seen, or would see, Brokeback. The answer for most, of course, was an indignant, “No!”

Folks in Hollywood may fear the competition presented by today's varied entertainment choices. Perhaps they were feeling uncomfortable with being seen as so different from the heartland. Or maybe it is the confluence of the two. Whichever the reason, it was Brokeback and the gay community they sacrificed to “save” themselves.

No doubt, had Brokeback won, the media would be reporting that Hollywood had proven they were wildly out of touch. Now the story is that even Hollywood isn't crazy enough to give an Oscar to “that” movie. For gay men, that makes us damned if we'd won and damned that we didn't.

What's so disappointing about this for so many gay men is that Brokeback was our movie. For years, we've been presented as prancing, mincing stereotypes, pathological killers, or suicidal depressives. Mel Gibson even threw us out of a tower in Braveheart. But with Brokeback, we had finally been given a movie that reflected the real experience and emotions of many of our lives, even if those reflections weren't happy. And we were even led to believe that our movie had crossed over and would be honored as Best Picture.

In retrospect, it's arguable that winning final prize was never really an option, at least not at this time and place in history.

But the story isn't likely to end here. Like the Democrats trying to negotiate the tricky waters of gay rights, Hollywood 's snub of Brokeback is likely to please no one. Fundamentalist Christians are unlikely to suddenly decide Hollywood does share their values. And by selecting Crash, Hollywood alienated legions of fair-minded Americans who know a cop-out when they see it.

Tony-NJ
03-08-2006, 01:01 PM
OMG I just sat here and went thru 4 pages of that thread. I had to move away. Rick's right about the CSP. And about any gay topic that comes up on the cB - there are folks there that seem they can do no wrong and we should burn in hell. Sad....

SeattleRedBear
03-08-2006, 01:56 PM
Plus articles like this (Like I said, better picture is subjective, but the facts stated below are interesting):

The Brokeback Mountain Oscar Snub
by Michael Jensen, March 7, 2006
[snip]
This is a GREAT article! Yes, the value judgement itself is subjective but the facts are that with all those awards, there is no doubt that it was the voters of the Academy not giving the movie a fair shake!

minniedisney1
03-08-2006, 03:12 PM
:mad: I tried to read some of that thread, but could not get thru Spoons post. Yikes!!! Imagine having to listen :listen: to that in person. UGH!!!

Please don't be put off by the CB. We are not all bad, we just have a few rotten apples. Unfortunately, they are the ones that leave a lasting impression.

I do not agree with what I read on that thread & am sorry that crap is going on over there. :sad2:

nordkin
03-08-2006, 04:06 PM
I worked my way through that thread and was delighted to see the number of CSP supporting us. When I first started reading the thread I began to get angry and then remembered a saying my father used to always use which is "I don't discuss things with people more ignorant and closed minded than myself because I can't learn anything from them." He was one of those CSP that worked for our rights and was totally accepting of his two gay children.

I appreciate that there is a forum to discuss things on these boards and I am grateful their are people chiming in to show support for us.

Saxton
03-08-2006, 05:26 PM
I read the thread while I was at work today and I normally try not to do that while I'm at work ... but it was like a car wreck ... I didn't want to look but I couldn't stop myself! On the plus side it showed once again how many CSPs there are - thank you all!! And that makes the very few who posted negative comments in the minority .... wow, ignorant people are now a minority ... I wonder if they'll soon start to see things through our eyes. ;) No, probably not!

majortom
03-09-2006, 05:19 AM
The idea of a Best Picture really is subjective. And I agree it's just a movie. But the Brokeback loss really did bother me, mostly because I, as well as other people, see it as hollywoods homophobia rearing its ugly head. It's difficult for me to not come to that conclusion when you have quotes from Academy members like this out there:


I am curious, did you see all five nominees? Did you actually feel that Brokeback Mountain was the best of them? I saw all five. I think that Brokeback Mountain was an important film, but I do not think it was better than Crash.

/carmi

LukenDC
03-09-2006, 08:23 AM
I know that there is discrimination against gay and lesbian people. It still hurts, though, to read comments from people who believe that we are innately immoral and that we lack value to society.

It's at moments like this when I feel gay pride. Despite all of the hate and persecution over the centuries, gays and lesbians have continued to love and contribute to civilization.

LukenDC
03-09-2006, 08:31 AM
I am disgusted that some Academy members did not watch Brokeback Mountain. If they are going to accept the responsibility to vote on the nominees, then they have a responsibility to watch ALL nominated films so as to make an informed voting decision.

SeattleRedBear
03-09-2006, 09:37 AM
I am disgusted that some Academy members did not watch Brokeback Mountain. If they are going to accept the responsibility to vote on the nominees, then they have a responsibility to watch ALL nominated films so as to make an informed voting decision.
Agreed. They are provided with screening copies of everything they vote on (their own branch (e.g., directing) plus all the films that everyone votes on). For someone like Tony Curtis to say he would not watch Brokeback Mountain (when it's his job as a voting academy member) is just unprofessional, tacky AND homophobic. Do Academy members sign something or somehow indicate they've seen all the films??

LukenDC
03-09-2006, 01:35 PM
I was surprised that Tony Curtis of all people would refuse to watch Brokeback Mountain. Jamie Lee Curtis is the godmother of Jake Gyllenhaal.

RickinNYC
03-09-2006, 01:50 PM
I was surprised that Tony Curtis of all people would refuse to watch Brokeback Mountain. Jamie Lee Curtis is the godmother of Jake Gyllenhaal.

Tony Curtis? Yeah, he's so butch he wears silk scarves, Yoko sunglasses and more brush than a Grandma.

Saxton
03-09-2006, 02:17 PM
Tony Curtis? Yeah, he's so butch he wears silk scarves, Yoko sunglasses and more brush than a Grandma.

And he also dressed in drag in Some Like it Hot ... not to mention Sparticus. ;)

Viki
03-09-2006, 02:48 PM
I am curious, did you see all five nominees? Did you actually feel that Brokeback Mountain was the best of them? I saw all five. I think that Brokeback Mountain was an important film, but I do not think it was better than Crash.

/carmi

Hi, Tom, for many of the reasons outlined by Stephen King in his most recent articile on the topic, I thought Brokeback was a much, much better film than Crash. And, yes, I saw all five films , unlike many members of the Academy who freely admitted they were never going to see Brokback but were going to vote for another film anyway.

Here are my favorites from top to bottom (so to speak - yikes):

Capote
Brokeback Mountain
Good Night and Good Luck
Munich
Crash

Because it's hard for me to separate Hoffman's stunning portrayal of Truman from the film itself I might actually have liked Brokeback better and I am open to the argumnet that fifty years from now Good Night and Good Luck will be a classic while all the others are almost forgotten. I had a vested issue in liking Crash - my family is multiracial - but its treament of race relations was so thin I was disillusioned and bored halfway through. Frankly, I can't believe it was nominated and I know homophobia was the reason it won.

majortom
03-09-2006, 02:52 PM
Do Academy members sign something or somehow indicate they've seen all the films??

Not for Best Picture.

/carmi

bubie2.5
03-09-2006, 05:30 PM
Tony Curtis? Yeah, he's so butch he wears silk scarves, Yoko sunglasses and more brush than a Grandma.

I kept waiting for YEARS for him to come out... my gaydar is not working, guess I'm gonna have to ask for a refund.

OrlandoMike
03-09-2006, 08:48 PM
Not to change the topic here, but did anyone else read the point/counter point type of article in USAToday today? (3/9)

It was debating gay adoption, the last page of the first section.

If it we not so sad, it would have been comical.

donald...really
03-09-2006, 09:10 PM
"I am curious, did you see all five nominees? Did you actually feel that Brokeback Mountain was the best of them? I saw all five. I think that Brokeback Mountain was an important film, but I do not think it was better than Crash."

It really doesn't matter what movie I think was the best. Like I said, that is a subjective question. The facts speak for themselves (see the article I posted). A number of members of the academy said they would not see or vote for Brokeback Mountain because of the subject matter, and in any other year a movie with the awards and critical acclaim that Brokeback Mountain had (one of the most honored films of all time) would have won best picture. And a movie like Crash, with it's poor showing in other awards (including not even being nominated for the Golden Globes), and it's very mixed reviews and poor box office, would not have had a chance of winning.

This made me realize something that I have suspected for a long time, that the Academy Awards mean absolutely NOTHING. The awards are empty. And this has nothing to do with which picture won or lost. People can actually vote for Best Picture without seeing a single nominated film, or vote against a film for political reasons. How does that prove the merits of a film? I have not really been into the Academy Awards the past few years, but I don't think I will be watching them anymore. Like I said, they don't mean anything.

PlutoLuvr
03-10-2006, 01:21 PM
Hi, Folks :wave2:

I'm new to the DIS boards, was clicking around and stumbled on the link given at the beginning of this post. I'm blown away by statements made by some on that thread.

I'm straight, married to a great guy, who I was introduced to by my gay best friend in the early '90s (Chris Bunch, I know you loved Disney as much as we do...you here???). DH and I love Disney, and I love to chat with other Disneyfanatics.

Y'all seem like a really nice group of folks, and I can't wait to exchange lots of tips and trip reports :)

Viki
03-10-2006, 03:13 PM
Some folk have asked after the article. Here it is:


Analyzing Oscar

Stephen King rates the Academy Awards ceremony -- and explains how he
knew all along that ''Crash'' would score the top prize by Stephen
King

http://www.StephenKing.com/

BUCKLE UP FOR SAFETY Unfortunately for ''Brokeback,'' ''Crash'' is
the sort of movie Academy members eat up, says King

I know what you're thinking: You need another column on this year's
Oscars, especially at this late date, about as much as Dick Cheney
needs a few more jokes about hunting quail in Texas. But bear with
me; this is, after all, the only Oscar postmortem you'll read from a
guy who put The Devil's Rejects on his 2005 Ten Best List. Besides,
this year I actually picked most of the big winners, although I admit
there were some surprises - a rap crew wins for Best Song? Slap my
tail and call me stinky. I don't know if Academy voters were trying
to show their kids (make that grandkids) that they're still hep (make
that hip), but Three 6 Mafia's performance - and exuberant
acceptance - lit up the evening. And the ''clean'' version went over
pretty well; my elderly ears detected only a single ABC bleep.

I thought Jon Stewart was fine. The negative reviews of his
performance suggested to me that there have been so many hosting
changes in the last 10 or 15 years that it's hard to get comfortable
with any new face. More to the point, hosting the Academy Awards is a
pretty damned thankless job. It's almost like being a janitor in a
tuxedo - you bring on the talent with a joke and a wave, then
sweep 'em out again after they've made their little speeches and torn
open their little envelopes. I thought Stewart was sweeter-natured
than Chris Rock, and let's face it: The gay-cowboy montage was a hoot.

What I liked best about this year's show was that the cumbersome,
usually unfunny repartee between presenters was almost completely
gone. Good! Good! As for the hosting part, it may be that the job is
as dispensable as those tiresome jokes between presenters. If the
Academy can't settle Jon Stewart in for a nice long cozy run - and
certainly he's smart enough and talented enough to grow into the job
and make it his own - I'd love to see the show's producers test-drive
the No-Host Option. If it did nothing else, it might cut the still-
too-long show down to three hours.

But back to why I did so well with my picks this year: I had
Brokeback Mountain shut out of every major category except for the
screenplay adaptation, which I figured they had to give to Larry
McMurtry (they did - and he was ballsy enough to show up in jeans).
There's been a fair amount of talk about Brokeback being a
breakthrough, but that's nonsense. A check of Brokeback parodies on
Google should convince anyone with half a brain that the American pop
culture is intent on passing this passionate, well-meant, and well-
made movie like a kidney stone. And how does the American pop culture
pass what it cannot stand? Easy. It laughs that s--- right out of its
system.

You can say Hollywood has been here before, awarding gold to Midnight
Cowboy in 1970, but that's also bull - Midnight Cowboy is a movie
about a make-believe cowpoke (Jon Voight) who hustles to keep himself
and his ailing buddy (Dustin Hoffman) from starving. The movie's
major moment of catharsis comes when Joe Buck (Voight) beats a
harmless homosexual half to death. Cowboy is a well-made male weepie
about friendship. As such, it was rewarded with a Best Picture Oscar.
Brokeback is about enduring love and fierce sexual attraction between
two men. The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, at bottom
as conservative as the current U.S. House of Representatives, gave
Ang Lee one Oscar (which surprised me), the writing team of McMurtry
and Diana Ossana another...and with those bones thrown, felt free to
move on.

To Crash, of course.

Crash was the perfect alternative, and - ahem - I had it picked for
Best Picture the whole way. It's the sort of flick the Hollywood
establishment loves best and will always embrace, if given the
chance, one where the complexities are all on the surface; its issues
should come stamped GOOD FOR 2 SLICES OF PIZZA AFTER THE MOVIE (OR) 1
COCKTAIL PARTY. Crash says we have problems. Crash says we have
troubles. It says this modern life of ours is certainly a pain in the
***, especially this modern urban life. People keep ''crashing'' into
each other (heavy symbolism at work, better wear a hard hat). But in
the end - this is the part Academy voters like best - we can all get
along if we rilly, rilly TRY!!! You almost expect to hear ''Why Can't
We Be Friends?'' over the closing credits.

And you know, until I read that last paragraph over, I didn't realize
how bitter I've become about this process. Because I liked Crash. I
did. I happen to believe we can get along if we really try, that
coincidences do happen from time to time in the great Manhattan
Transfer of city life, and people sometimes do change. It's a valid
point of view, a decent theme, and Paul Haggis made the most of it.
But was it the best film of the year? Good God, no. Brokeback was
better. So were Capote and The Squid and the Whale, for that matter.

But let's let it go, okay? The lights are off in the Kodak Theatre
for another year. The set has been struck. The Academy sent the same
soothing message it almost always sends: Everything's all right,
everything's okay, the right movie won - the good movie, not the gay
movie. Go to sleep, and sleep tight. Next year we'll do it all again.

majortom
03-11-2006, 08:30 PM
It really doesn't matter what movie I think was the best.

It does matter. If you tell me that you have seen all 5 and you feel that Brokeback Mountain was the best picture of 2005, then I am happy to discuss statistics with you. If you tell me that you have not seen at least these two being discussed, then I am much less interested in hearing you quote statistics.

The author you quote misses one critical point - Crash is an actor's movie. Crash did well in the SAG awards. The actors branch is the largest in the Academy.

This made me realize something that I have suspected for a long time, that the Academy Awards mean absolutely NOTHING.

This is news how? :) These awards are industry people patting ourselves on our backs. Up until recently, one did not have to even sign one's own ballot stating that one had voted it oneself.

/carmi

Missy1961
03-14-2006, 07:08 PM
Wow.

I have a headache and only got through about 3 pages of that thread. I have never gone into the "community" boards, and thinking I won't again any time soon. I'm perfectly happy with this community.

Randall

:rainbow:

I'm a straight person & I wandered over here because I miss reading Rick's threads.

Please come over to the community board! Most of us aren't like some of the posters on that thread. I wanted to post on that thread, but it just upset me so much I knew it wouldn't make sense. The purpose of the thread, the tone of many of the posts, just made me cry. I simply refuse to believe that one's sexual orientation makes one "immoral", "evil" or anything other than human. I don't understand any other point of view.

I hope I'm making sense. If you choose not to visit the community board I understand. But I hope you do, because maybe someday (we can all hope) these kind of posts will cease to exist.

SeattleRedBear
03-14-2006, 09:15 PM
Hey Missy -- I'm one who monitors both threads (although to be perfectly honest, there's only the occasional thing on the CB that grabs my attention). Glad to see that you're coming over here as well.

staci
03-14-2006, 10:42 PM
[QUOTE=Missy1961]
Please come over to the community board! Most of us aren't like some of the posters on that thread. I wanted to post on that thread, but it just upset me so much I knew it wouldn't make sense. QUOTE]

I SO agree with you!! I read through some of it and I couldnt even come up with a logical reply to some of the garbage. But then I feel guilty :guilty: , because while I know that it is real easy for me to close the thread and go on with my life, there are people who have to deal with this type of ignorance every day and it just isnt right. :confused3

mrFDNY
03-14-2006, 10:51 PM
Yeah, spoon seems a little manic in her writing. I agree it's a movie. Move on. Speaking of odd writing styles, I haven't seen mrFDNY lately.
What did that mean?how did i get brought into this?Was that a flame for me and what did i do to deserve that?

Missy1961
03-15-2006, 06:54 AM
[QUOTE=Missy1961]
Please come over to the community board! Most of us aren't like some of the posters on that thread. I wanted to post on that thread, but it just upset me so much I knew it wouldn't make sense. QUOTE]

I SO agree with you!! I read through some of it and I couldnt even come up with a logical reply to some of the garbage. But then I feel guilty :guilty: , because while I know that it is real easy for me to close the thread and go on with my life, there are people who have to deal with this type of ignorance every day and it just isnt right. :confused3

That's it! That's exactly how I felt! Thanks for putting it into words for me.

Chattyaholic
03-15-2006, 08:50 AM
Just because I don't condone the gay/lesbian lifestyle does not make my opinion "garbage" or mean that I am "ignorant." We all have the right to express our opinions, and should be able to do so without resorting to name-calling. I don't feel hatred towards gay/lesbian people. In fact I used to work with a young man who is gay and he is one of the sweetest people I know. We got along great, and I still see him from time to time and we always stop and talk. I love him as a person, but don't condone his lifestyle. That doesn't make me a bad person. I think the gay/lesbian lifestyle is wrong, and I know there are many others here who feel the same way.

LukenDC
03-15-2006, 08:55 AM
I think the gay/lesbian lifestyle is wrong, and I know there are many others here who feel the same way.

How sad for you. If your view is based on religious teachings, I hope that for a moment you will consider the many "truths" that religion has embraced only to be proven wrong or to withdraw them in shame. Slavery, flat earth, witch hysteria, anti-Semitism, and on and on. Anti-gay sentiment strikes at the core of a gay or lesbian person and is intensely hurtful. There is nothing right or loving about causing someone such rejection and emotional pain.

pearlieq
03-15-2006, 09:19 AM
Wow.

I have a headache and only got through about 3 pages of that thread. I have never gone into the "community" boards, and thinking I won't again any time soon. I'm perfectly happy with this community.

Randall

:rainbow:

I know a lot of people have been encouraging you to not give up on the CB and spend some more time there, but I honestly don't agree. It's really not a nice place. For as many nice people as I've seen over there, I've met just as many jerks. I'm seriously hoping there isn't a limit to the number of people you can put on your "ignore" list, because I'm running out of room.

I still drop by once in a while, but the whole place just has this hostile vibe--and some of the most vocal folks are also the most narrow-minded.

If you have a choice between spending time on the CB and organizing your socks, I'd honestly pick the socks. I honestly have not gotten nearly as much good out of the CB as the bad. :guilty:

luvmydogs
03-15-2006, 09:23 AM
Just because I don't condone the gay/lesbian lifestyle does not make my opinion "garbage" or mean that I am "ignorant." We all have the right to express our opinions, and should be able to do so without resorting to name-calling. I don't feel hatred towards gay/lesbian people. In fact I used to work with a young man who is gay and he is one of the sweetest people I know. We got along great, and I still see him from time to time and we always stop and talk. I love him as a person, but don't condone his lifestyle. That doesn't make me a bad person. I think the gay/lesbian lifestyle is wrong, and I know there are many others here who feel the same way.

Please, please, please--as a straight woman, I've just got to know what this "gay lifestyle" is. I mean, if it's so much better than mine that others actually *choose* to live that way, then I've just gotta know all about it! I've said it before, I must've been absent the day we all *chose* our sexual orientation, and someone took it upon him or herself to check the "Straight" box for me--I sure know I didn't do it.

I read your post on the CB, and nowhere her do I see Dakota Lynn's post as a "personal attack"--she called you out on your opinions--ones you stated on a public message board. Now, we all realize we're entitled to post our own opinions within DIS guidelines, but don't expect others to sit back and not address bigotry and xenophobia--I wish more people would do so--gays and straights together.

If this 'gay lifestyle' is one where gays and lesbians are constantly judged by whom they love then I'm wrong--I certainly don't want to be part of that club. No wait--let me revise that. If my 'hetero lifestyle' is one of judging gays and lesbians by whom they love, then I don't want to be a part of that. Someone please send me an application for this Homosexual Club that you all have *chosen* to join--it seems much more accepting, supportive and non-judgemental that the club I'm currently in. :sad2:

Miss Jasmine
03-15-2006, 09:35 AM
Please, please, please--as a straight woman, I've just got to know what this "gay lifestyle" is. I mean, if it's so much better than mine that others actually *choose* to live that way, then I've just gotta know all about it! I've said it before, I must've been absent the day we all *chose* our sexual orientation, and someone took it upon him or herself to check the "Straight" box for me--I sure know I didn't do it.

I read your post on the CB, and nowhere her do I see Dakota Lynn's post as a "personal attack"--she called you out on your opinions--ones you stated on a public message board. Now, we all realize we're entitled to post our own opinions within DIS guidelines, but don't expect others to sit back and not address bigotry and xenophobia--I wish more people would do so--gays and straights together.

If this 'gay lifestyle' is one where gays and lesbians are constantly judged by whom they love then I'm wrong--I certainly don't want to be part of that club. No wait--let me revise that. If my 'hetero lifestyle' is one of judging gays and lesbians by whom they love, then I don't want to be a part of that. Someone please send me an application for this Homosexual Club that you all have *chosen* to join--it seems much more accepting, supportive and non-judgemental that the club I'm currently in. :sad2:
:cheer2:

bettyann29
03-15-2006, 06:18 PM
Please, please, please--as a straight woman, I've just got to know what this "gay lifestyle" is. I mean, if it's so much better than mine that others actually *choose* to live that way, then I've just gotta know all about it! I've said it before, I must've been absent the day we all *chose* our sexual orientation, and someone took it upon him or herself to check the "Straight" box for me--I sure know I didn't do it.

I read your post on the CB, and nowhere her do I see Dakota Lynn's post as a "personal attack"--she called you out on your opinions--ones you stated on a public message board. Now, we all realize we're entitled to post our own opinions within DIS guidelines, but don't expect others to sit back and not address bigotry and xenophobia--I wish more people would do so--gays and straights together.

If this 'gay lifestyle' is one where gays and lesbians are constantly judged by whom they love then I'm wrong--I certainly don't want to be part of that club. No wait--let me revise that. If my 'hetero lifestyle' is one of judging gays and lesbians by whom they love, then I don't want to be a part of that. Someone please send me an application for this Homosexual Club that you all have *chosen* to join--it seems much more accepting, supportive and non-judgemental that the club I'm currently in. :sad2:

:thumbsup2

OrlandoMike
03-15-2006, 07:49 PM
Your application is in the mail.

For extra credit go rent Funny Girl and brush up!

NYBlue1
03-15-2006, 08:30 PM
Please, please, please--as a straight woman, I've just got to know what this "gay lifestyle" is. I mean, if it's so much better than mine that others actually *choose* to live that way, then I've just gotta know all about it! I've said it before, I must've been absent the day we all *chose* our sexual orientation, and someone took it upon him or herself to check the "Straight" box for me--I sure know I didn't do it.

I read your post on the CB, and nowhere her do I see Dakota Lynn's post as a "personal attack"--she called you out on your opinions--ones you stated on a public message board. Now, we all realize we're entitled to post our own opinions within DIS guidelines, but don't expect others to sit back and not address bigotry and xenophobia--I wish more people would do so--gays and straights together.

If this 'gay lifestyle' is one where gays and lesbians are constantly judged by whom they love then I'm wrong--I certainly don't want to be part of that club. No wait--let me revise that. If my 'hetero lifestyle' is one of judging gays and lesbians by whom they love, then I don't want to be a part of that. Someone please send me an application for this Homosexual Club that you all have *chosen* to join--it seems much more accepting, supportive and non-judgemental that the club I'm currently in. :sad2:


Thank You for making my night and saying what I wanted to say back to this ignorant human being with much class and wit. People like you make my life and my families life alot more easy.

I would have been much more angry and im sure to have made a fool of myself in doing so, you know that they say about posting angry!!! :badpc:

As for the OP of this babble, yes you are entitled to your beliefs and your opinions but when you are outright disrespecting and hating with your words you would be best to keep them to yourself.

Maybe you are not aware but us Homosexuals are human beings and have the same feelings you do and cry the same tears. Something for you to roll around in your head, why in the WORLDS would any of us CHOOSE to live this way? Answer is, we would not, we are just being the people that God made us. Get over it and try to forget we exist, you will be a much happier person.

princess pooh
03-15-2006, 08:40 PM
:cheer2:

I don't think I'll be able to post what I want to say without getting myself banned so I'll just second your :cheer2:

Tinky
03-15-2006, 08:46 PM
I think the gay/lesbian lifestyle is wrong, and I know there are many others here who feel the same way.

Just makes you want to scratch your head, doesn't it? :confused3
I'm going to go with Granny's saying of "just look over people, God {or insert your higher power here } loves everyone"

If this 'gay lifestyle' is one where gays and lesbians are constantly judged by whom they love then I'm wrong--I certainly don't want to be part of that club. No wait--let me revise that. If my 'hetero lifestyle' is one of judging gays and lesbians by whom they love, then I don't want to be a part of that. Someone please send me an application for this Homosexual Club that you all have *chosen* to join--it seems much more accepting, supportive and non-judgemental that the club I'm currently in.

Awesome! :cheer2: :cheer2:

Mama Twinkles
03-15-2006, 09:25 PM
Just because I don't condone the gay/lesbian lifestyle does not make my opinion "garbage" or mean that I am "ignorant." ...I think the gay/lesbian lifestyle is wrong, and I know there are many others here who feel the same way.

Chatty, would you agree that your views place you at stage III (possibly IV) on Kohlberg's scale of moral development?http://www.austega.com/gifted/moralKohlberg.htm
http://faculty.plts.edu/gpence/html/kohlberg.htm

Viki
03-15-2006, 10:58 PM
Just because I don't condone the gay/lesbian lifestyle does not make my opinion "garbage" or mean that I am "ignorant." We all have the right to express our opinions, and should be able to do so without resorting to name-calling. I don't feel hatred towards gay/lesbian people. In fact I used to work with a young man who is gay and he is one of the sweetest people I know. We got along great, and I still see him from time to time and we always stop and talk. I love him as a person, but don't condone his lifestyle. That doesn't make me a bad person. I think the gay/lesbian lifestyle is wrong, and I know there are many others here who feel the same way.


Actually, you're non-condonence (whatever that means) of the "gay" lifestyle does make you a bad person. As people it is our spiritual responsibility to grow up into the sort of individuals who see and accept every single human being on this planet as "one of us," a child of God, an inheritor of the Kingdom. You're failure to see this is a failure of faith and vision. That makes you just like most folk. If you are a person of faith, why not dream bigger dreams? Why not see deeper? Why not love more?