Thanks, L.W., for the "afterelton" link to the outstanding Michael Jensen article. I hope most people on this thread use the link.
It's one side of the story but there are many sides to this story. It is a fair assessment based on what we know. I think it is a combination of things but I highly suspect the actor's bloc which is quite large in the Academy. Of course, "Crash" is primarilly and actor's film and I didn't find the script that outstanding. "Brokeback Mountain" is a director's film where the actors are part of the story but not all of it. It's told in tone and symbology -- for instance, Jack and Ennis always being by a flowing river.
I think it will take some, especially critics, many viewings before they are able to dig into the depth of this film. "Crash" let's it all hang out, but, don't get me wrong -- I still feel it is a fine film but not the best film of last year.
You are quite right about it being just one side of the argument. In fact I was worried for a moment when I read about the proposed ad rebuking Hollywood- an ad which was fortunately quashed by "calmer heads".
Like I posted here and on other forums -- the controversy is just as likely to shoot BBM back into the top ten as if it had won the Oscar. It's in the No. 10 spot again today.
And this just in:
Should have seen signs of "Crash" coming
Wed Mar 8, 2006 9:15 AM GMT
By Martin A. Grove - ANALYSIS
LOS ANGELES (Hollywood Reporter) - Looking back at how "Crash" climbed over "Brokeback Mountain" to take the best picture prize at the Academy Awards on Sunday, the question isn't "Why didn't we see it coming?" but, "Why didn't we believe we were seeing it coming?"
Despite the fact that "Brokeback" had swept the most meaningful awards races from December through February, the buzz was that "Crash" was gaining momentum while "Brokeback" was losing steam. Nonetheless, most Hollywood handicappers just weren't willing to believe the Oscar outcome would differ from all those earlier votes by members of the Producers Guild of America, the Hollywood Foreign Press Assn., the Broadcast Film Critics Assn. and the British Academy.
What some insiders are saying privately is that many Academy members felt so threatened by "Brokeback's" gay cowboy romance they couldn't bring themselves to view it even on DVD. As a result, many votes reportedly were cast much later in the game than is usually the case -- by which time "Crash" was being perceived as a worthy alternative. There also may have been fewer votes to count if reports are true that as many as 20% of Academy voters didn't send in their ballots.
If that's what happened -- the public will never know, of course, since the Academy never reveals the voting results -- it becomes easier to understand how "Brokeback" got trumped by "Crash." With 6,188 voting members of the Academy, if 20% of them abstained from voting that would remove 1,238 votes from the mix and leave just 4,950 to determine the outcome. In a race where every vote typically counts, that alone could dramatically alter the results.
Moreover, insiders are also pointing to a little known piece of Oscar trivia: not since 1980's "Ordinary People" has a film won the best picture Oscar without also having had a nomination for best film editing. "Brokeback" wasn't a film editing nominee this year, while "Crash" film editor Hughes Winborne took home the Oscar. Insiders claim that film editors don't vote for best picture nominees that aren't also best film editing nominees. There are 239 members of the Academy's Film Editors branch. If their votes are added to the 1,238 that quite possibly weren't cast at all, that's a total of 1,477 votes -- nearly 24% of the total Academy membership -- that didn't go to "Brokeback."
Actors, meanwhile, make up the Academy's biggest branch. There are 1,359 actors who vote and they represent nearly 22% of the Academy's membership. It's a safe bet that they preferred "Crash" to "Brokeback" since the Screen Actors Guild in late January gave "Crash" its Best Ensemble Cast award, its equivalent of a best picture honour. It was the only important vote that "Brokeback" missed out on, but it sent a signal that the movie wasn't resonating with actors.
By sending about 110,000 "Crash" DVDs to SAG's full membership, Lionsgate made sure that all of the guild's members had an opportunity to watch the film at home. This was the first time anyone had ever sent DVDs of an Oscar contender to the full SAG membership. Because this marketing technique worked so well, other distributors are likely to adopt the same approach next year. It's worth noting, however, that the reason Lionsgate was comfortable doing this was that "Crash" had opened in cinemas last May and had gone into DVD in September. The DVDs sent to SAG members didn't need to be specially watermarked or encrypted because awards season piracy wasn't something Lionsgate was worrying about at that point.
In future campaigns, however, studios with films opening theatrically in November or December will find themselves at a disadvantage since promotional DVDs have a much greater risk of being pirated. Their distributors will have to weigh the pros and cons of sending them on DVD to all SAG members.
"Crash" had an additional advantage with SAG and other union members because it was shot in the Los Angeles area. Unlike "Brokeback," which filmed in Canada, "Crash" provided jobs for actors and other L.A. based workers, who are increasingly frustrated by "runaway" productions that travel to far-flung locations where cheaper costs and tax deals are increasingly helping producers stretch their budgets.
Moreover, because "Crash" was a story dealing with complex racial relations in Los Angeles, it was something that L.A.-based Academy members could easily relate to. Nearly 80% of the Academy's membership lives in the L.A. area and Lionsgate was very perceptive to recognise how important a constituency that could be for "Crash."
All of these were factors that should have told Hollywood handicappers that "Crash" was a very strong contender that would give "Brokeback" real competition for best picture. But that message didn't really get across.
"Brokeback" was boosted by a steady stream of big victories over the entire awards season. In past years, that level of success would typically have translated into Oscar gold for "Brokeback." Not so this time around. Beyond the film's sensitive subject matter, it's also possible that Oscar voters rebelled at the prospect of looking like the last group to jump on the "Brokeback" bandwagon.
In applauding "Crash" over "Brokeback" Academy members were saying, in effect, that you can't take their votes for granted.
Reuters/Hollywood Reporter
Also would like to point out that Oscar certainly does not have an untarnished history as far as picking the wrong film. "Citizen Kane" lost to "How Green Was My Valley", "Grand Illusion" lost to "You Can't Take It With You", "High Noon" lost to "The Greatest Show on Earth", and "A Place in the Sun" and "A Streetcar Named Desire" lost to "An American In Paris." "GoodFellas" lost to "Dances With Wolves" (woof! woof!). And in one year three of the greatest movies ever made -- "All the President's Men", "Taxi Driver", and "Network" -- were all nominated. They lost. To "Rocky."
Academy fails to feel the pulse of the public
*Ah well, just one more year in which the Academy totally fails to
find any feeling at all for what film effort ( if any ) captured the
heart, the imagination, tapped into the hidden unconscious
of us all, leaving us still talking & thinking about a movie for days
after we've seen it. The Academy seems to make decisions that
Heaven only knows what motivated the choices for nominations,
let alone the winner of the award.
*Just a typical dull awards ceremony - yawn - no wonder I can't
bear to watch it anymore. I would far rather watch the MTV awards
or the Screen Actors Guild Awards: at least there I feel that
nominations and the ultimate winners were chosen by a group of
persons who actually "know the industry & know their craft well
enough to judge one another's performances."
*I love good movies. It's often WAY too long between the really
great ones coming along. I love drama, romance, action, just
about every genre except the western. ( I was born in the '50's
and watched too many episodes of Bonanza 
) The great
movies, like our universally unconscious love for certain fairytales
(which may alter a tad from one culture to the next) are telling us
a tale. They are speaking to us about who we are.... about the
times we are living in. About unconscious heroes and heroines
we unknowingly cherish.
* I'm sure sorry to hear that Joaquin didn't really cut it as a
Johnny Cash, but I've a feeling he'll be up in the saddle and on
his next comeback before this year is out. A young man with
prodigious talent and I hope to see it flourish.
Isn't it so very odd that one day, you will come along upon a
film made a year or two ago, but it never even got much
recognition at all, yet alone a nomination at the Academy, but
when you see it you are utterly spellbound. It makes you wonder
WHAT POMPOUS DULLARD passed over this movie and dropped
the ball on a really good one. How did it slip by with so little fanfare
or notice. And as years go by, it grows & grows more popular. I
love those kind of movies also. They keep the movie reviewers
HUMBLE.
Gore Vidal on "Brokeback," Truman Capote and the Oscars (he expesses dismay that he is, in fact, a member of the Academy):
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20060303_gore_vidal_sex_oscars/
This is a terrific lead to some fascinating
reading, thanks for the tip.
Why no mention of
Wallace & Gromit-The Curse Of The Were-Rabbit or
The Emperor's Journey(March Of The Penguins) Both Oscar winners.The only two films that will get repeat plays IMHO over the others
Right -- those rushing out to buy "Crash." How many times will they see this film again? That's the criteria of a true classic. I will definitely watch "W&G" and "March" again. Well, okay, I've seen "Brokeback" twice.
Watched the whole thing for the first time in years. I thought Clooney's speech was great, but Three Six Mafia took the cake. Crash taking Best Picture was well deserved and an amazing finish!
Sorry, but I believe the Academy has damaged is credibility once again. That's usually the opinion of all respected film critics including Ebert who has somewhat of a bias about "Crash." His wife is black.
Ebert has a bias because his wife is black. Agreed. And Gore Vidal has a bias because ?
If you read what Vidal has written, the bias does not effect his opinion. With Ebert, I'm not so sure. Not that latent racism does not need to be addressed. It needs to be addressed with the same urgency as homophobia. The gears have turned and "Brokeback Mountain" after winning the majority of awards will have the final revenge. In living well.
Are you kidding? I have read a great deal of Vidal and his bias affects almost everything he writes. Surely, you remember the famous face-off on TV between him and William F. Buckley.
Vidal is as outrageously up front as Truman Capote was.
Are you sure you have read Vidal????
Wouldn't that suggest bias on your part?
I would be very very careful about getting too close to Gore, if I were you, Light Wizard. He has a long long history and has had many many interactions.
