Why did 'Brokeback' lose?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by XXXWriterDude

I know what you mean, Steve, and I think it's great that Brokeback has achieved all that it has, but like I said before...Hollywood making some kind of a statement

---

Well just call me GlassHalfFull !

why couldn't they have felt the directing was exceptional and felt thatthe film was not as exceptional? i lot of people have told me the middle was boring - and the people i know who saw crash went crazy for it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by XXXWriterDude

Obviously, there was an issue about the film's content. I see Brokeback's Best Picture loss as a snub, especially since Ang Lee was awarded best director. I simply can't see how you can say a director of a film was the best director, then say the film he directed wasn't worthy of the award. That's Hollywood for ya. They choose a really good cross-section of movies that represent diversity, then they go and give the awards to the big players (Reese, Clooney).

Jasun, the "Pimp" song actually sounded MUCH better in the movie. I think it's a great song in and of itself, but you're right; the way it sounded on the show last night made it sound horrible.

Lee, I don't share your opinion that Clooney is gay. I just don't see it. I do, however, think he is one of the coolest guys in show business. :)

---

Ya know I gotta love all this about Brokeback Mountain and the hysteria or dissappointment that it didn't win being some conspiracy or lack of balls by some. So in the spirit of throwing a monkey wrench into this, how about this scenario?

We all know that right after the Oscars the winners are all buying up huge ads in newspapers and television and such to tout their big win. After all they say an Oscar win is added revenue at the box office.

Now consider this, they gotta pay for that and for maybe a day or two after the Oscars, they get some free publicity in papers and such but that's about it. However if Brokeback had won that would have held true but now that they lost, think of all the lovely FREE publicity they will get for some time to come as every pundit, every homophobe or gay rights wacko is suddenly spouting off on why Hollywood ignored Brokeback Mountain.

All the mouthpieces who think every living being should see Brokeback Mountain will now be moaning on NBC Today or Good Morning America or ET about why Hollywood snubbed the gay community. Every know it all about movies and the importance of the cinema in society will be shouting at how cruel Hollywood is or how it caved to the religious right because it didn't award Brokeback Mountain the best picture award.

Every critic of Hollywood will use it to show they are out of touch, every admirer will tout how it is fair, and all the time Ang Lee and the production company will be getting tons of free publicity, driving more people to the show than had they won.

So was Brokeback losing so terrible?

Now if the goal of this movie and the reasons for seeing it is to spur discussion, spur debate, then surely the fact it lost and will be talked about far more than had it won, is achieving that end isn't it?

Just a different take on what it means that Brokeback lost... :honest:

there could be zillions of reasons. it's not like the best picture winner is always THE best pic of the year. but here's another possibility:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0375679/
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0388795/

compare the ratings.

maybe brokeback lost because of a consipracy or prejudice - it's very possible. but it's just as possible that the reasons it lost aren't significant at all - and it WAS nominated, after all.

i don't think any movie that was nominated for an academy award is a loser.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Scorpio

But why would people say they hate something just because everybody loves it? Well yeah, i can see that. It's like all those gay people loving this movie just because it's gay and they want to show their support to the gay community even if the movie is really so-so. I guess there are hypocrites on both sides :)

.

---

You guys are making it sound like anyone who says they liked it is a hypocrite or jumping on the bandwagon. Just because you say its a 'so so" movie doesn't mean others thought that. I thought it was one of the best movies of the year if not the last ten years and will go down in history as a classic. Im not saying that cause I'm gay or because of the hype I'm saying that cause the movie deeply touched me and weeks later after I saw it it stayed with me. Now thats a classic. You may not agree and i can say those who dont like it just arent smart or deep enugh to get it but i dont. Everyone has different ideas of whats good but dont accuse those who do like it of pretending too.

Once again, I never said EVERYBODY this or EVERYBODY that!

I was just making a comment as to what was said earlier. About people saying they hate a movie just because others like it. Same thing goes with SOME gay people EXTRA LOVING a so-so movie just because it's gay.

Anyway, so-so movie "to me" who didn't deserve the best picture of the year.

I'll keep my own opinion to myself next time :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Scorpio

Same thing goes with SOME gay people EXTRA LOVING a so-so movie just because it's gay.

---

Exactly!

The only reason this movie became as popular as it did was because it was marketed as a 'gay' movie when, in reality, it really wasnt, it was a love story, that just happened to have two guys as the leads. I was actually very disappointed by the movie after all the hype it received.

The only reason this movie did as well as it did was because of the recent spurt of gay topics in the headlines, marriage, divorce, etc etc

If this had been released 3 years ago it would have been a big flop.

Instead, you have all the pro-right gay rights people spouting off as if this is something visionary, it really isnt, it was just a movie and, in my opinion, a mediocre one at that.

The movie was marketed exceptionally well, from the leading actors through to the media spin on the movie running up to and, during its release, would this movie had done as well as it did in the box office had it not featured whats his name and thing-a-me-jig as its leading roles? I highly doubt it.

Regards,

Lee

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lee

Exactly!

The only reason this movie became as popular as it did was because it was marketed as a 'gay' movie when, in reality, it really wasnt, it was a love story, that just happened to have two guys as the leads. I was actually very disappointed by the movie after all the hype it received.

The only reason this movie did as well as it did was because of the recent spurt of gay topics in the headlines, marriage, divorce, etc etc

If this had been released 3 years ago it would have been a big flop.

Instead, you have all the pro-right gay rights people spouting off as if this is something visionary, it really isnt, it was just a movie and, in my opinion, a mediocre one at that.

The movie was marketed exceptionally well, from the leading actors through to the media spin on the movie running up to and, during its release, would this movie had done as well as it did in the box office had it not featured whats his name and thing-a-me-jig as its leading roles? I highly doubt it.

Regards,

Lee

---

I'll give you this, Lee: Brokeback wasn't all that visionary, no. It was a love story in the grand tradition of all great Hollywood love stories, nothing more. The only difference was that two men were the ones in love. But to me, that doesn't detract from the weight of its importance, or immediately put it into the mediocre category.

What I think is so silly about the notion that Brokeback wasn't a "gay film" is that I didn't actually realize that there was a criteria for a movie to be a "gay film." Just what is a gay film? Honestly, the majority of the movies I see made by and for the gay community are rather trite, cliche' ridden, and overwrought with melodrama. If Slutty Summer and Edge of Seventeen are the standards by which we should judge "gay films," then I'll take a NON-gay film like Brokeback any day of the week.

And, if we're going to talk about "visionary," then it must be said that Crash wasn't really all that visionary either. It was essentially just Robert Altman with racism and dirty language.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shelmal

You guys are making it sound like anyone who says they liked it is a hypocrite or jumping on the bandwagon.

---

That's not what **I** was saying. What I said was that there are a lot of people who feel compelled to hate a film just b/cuz everybody else likes it. I had friends who proclaimed how much they hated Titanic, even though they'd never even seen it. They just got it in their heads that, b/cuz it was such a huge hit, that it had to be awful. These kinds of people really annoy me. The anti-establishment cliches who suffer from superiority complexes who snub their noses at anything "mainstream." Talk about jumping on a bandwagon. :)

Maybe "Brokeback Mountain" didn't win because it just wasn't that good of a movie. It was fine, it was okay, but Oscar-winning, I don't know. When I listened to the media machine gush about it, I thought, "Did we see the same movie?" And actually, I liked it very much. My partner, on the other hand, well read for yourself Brokeback Mountain. I connected with the movie on an emotional level and like I said, I liked it, but it was not moving like Schindler's List, which I saw twice in the theatre and once on video.

Cheers
Michael

I might be wrong here, but I think its simple math.

Directors vote for best director, Editors for best editing, etc.
Everyone votes for best picture.

So if some of the directors loved Brokeback, they would choose Ang Lee and probably vote for the film as best picture. While at the same time, a lot of the actors might have chosen Capote or Walk the Line, after choosing Hoffman or Whitherspoon.. Leaving Crash to snag a few votes from each voting group and sneaking in ahead of the pack.

The scenario is that Crash probably won by a small margin because the other votes were so spread out. I don't think its a snub at all. Just a variety of films this year that all had merit.

By the way i should mention that the biggest block of voters in the acadamy is the actors. The producers of crash sent each and every actor in sag a free copy of the movie. I belive thats over 100,000 people. That also may have something to do with its win.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MiamiB

At least they gave the first Oscar of the night to a gay actor for the Best Performance in a Supporting Role - George Clooney!

I mean...there CAN'T BE ANYONE ON THIS PLANET who still thinks that man is STRAIGHT! PLEASE!

Lee

---

he's gay? really? seriously?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shelmal

By the way i should mention that the biggest block of voters in the acadamy is the actors. The producers of crash sent each and every actor in sag a free copy of the movie. I belive thats over 100,000 people. That also may have something to do with its win.

---

Ahhh, yes, you're right about that. I had forgotten the way that each category is voted for. For all I know, it could have just been a case of simple math. I'm still bummed, but that softens the blow. :)

Maybe Crash is actually a better movie than BB Mountain? Well I prefered it anyway. Yes BBM was daring and thought provoking but i found the story to be a bit flat. :coffee: