Posted on 12/22/2004 12:04:15 AM PST by nickcarraway
Both the Golden Globes and the Broadcast Film Critics passed over The Passion of The Christ for any major nominations this year. The American Film Institute made no mention of The Passion in its 2004 best films of the year announcement. And according to USA Today's Oscar Oracle, The Passion isn't on the radar screen for even a single nomination when the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences hands out nominations at the end of January.
In the shadow of a public debate over the propriety of the words "Merry Christmas" at department stores, a big battle in the culture war is looming. The Passion of The Christ, one of the most powerful, commercially successful, and, by any measure, brilliant films of the year is being utterly rejected by the Hollywood elites this award season, demonstrating yet again their tone deaf disdain for all things middle-American.
What's going on here? Well, the cultural elites took a whooping on Election Day, 2004. And they are taking it out on Mel Gibson.
The official reasons for denying The Passion an Oscar nomination are fivefold. Herewith, I will attempt to discredit them all:
The Passion is just a sadomasochistic bloodbath with quasi-religious overtones.
The body count in The Passion is one (actually it's zero, but that argument is too big a leap for the average Academy member, so we'll just stick with one), far fewer than Mel Gibson's 1995 Best Picture winner Braveheart, 1974's The Godfather Part II, or even 1991's The Silence of the Lambs in which the main character is a cannibal.
In 1994 The Academy nominated Pulp Fiction in which an overdosed woman is resuscitated with a hypodermic stab to the heart. Fargo, in which a murder victim is shredded to bits in a wood chipper, was nominated for Best Picture in 1996. And two years later Saving Private Ryan was nominated because it depicted some of the most graphic and realistic war scenes in cinematic history, not despite it.
The Academy has a long-running love affair with blood and guts, so the idea that The Passion was just too gory doesn't hold water.
The Academy doesn't do religious films.
This argument is a little sturdier. But on closer examination, we determine it, too is a fallacy. Ben Hur won the Best Picture Oscar in 1959. Schindler's List won in 1993. The Ten Commandments was nominated in 1956. The Diary of Anne Frank was nominated in 1959, as was The Nun's Story. The Exorcist was nominated in 1973.
Just last year The Lord of The Rings: The Return of The King won the Oscar for Best Picture and its director Peter Jackson won for Best Director. Said J.R.R. Tolkien of his master work, "The Lord of the Rings is, of course, a fundamentally religious and Catholic work; unconsciously so at first, but consciously in the revision."
The Passion just reflects Mel Gibson's obscure brand of extreme Catholicism.
Not true. Regardless of Mel Gibson's own denominational oddities, the film depicts an event no orthodox Christian -- Catholic or Protestant -- denies occurred. Contemporary non-Christian texts from Roman Jewish historian Josephus substantiate at least the gist of what Gibson captures on screen.
Moreover, Martin Scorsese was nominated for his direction of 1988's The Last Temptation of Christ, which includes artistic creations for which there is no scriptural support.
The factual errors disqualify the film for any nominations.
There are only two serious "errors" in The Passion so far as I understand this argument. The first is that none of the Gospels has Satan moving through the crowd of Jews during Christ's passion, as Gibson does in the film.
This is a legitimate theological gripe, but a cinematic one? Besides, who's to say Satan wasn't there? Satan obviously took a considerable interest in the life, suffering, and death of Jesus.
The second criticism is that the ten graphic minutes Gibson dedicates to the flogging of Jesus is drenched in gruesome detail for which there is no scriptural substantiation. Matthew, Mark and John only say Christ was flogged; they mention no amount of time and the severity is never indicated. But it would be irrational to believe the flogging was mild considering the intensity of Jesus' suffering throughout the balance of his Passion, about which the Gospels leave little to the imagination.
Regardless, given the Academy has named Titanic Best Picture and nominated Oliver Stone for Best Director (JFK), we can reasonably assert that historical accuracy is not a prerequisite for Oscar glory.
The Oscars don't do foreign language films.
This myth actually applies to the Golden Globes, not the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences. The Academy nominated La Vita é Bella (AKA: Life is Beautiful) for Best Picture in 1998. The film's leading man, Roberto Benigni, won the Best Actor that year.
This is not a legitimate reason to pass over The Passion.
Red Staters may have won on Election Day. But the cultural elites will always have Hollywood.
Patrick Hynes is an account executive with the Republican consulting firm Marsh Copsey + Scott and the proprietor of the websites www.passionforfairness.com and www.crushkerry.com.
The Hollywood Left hates Christ and His Truth.
Maybe they're afraid of what Mel might say after the speech he gave to theater owners?
What did people expect? The left hates to be accountable.
Communists don't believe in GOD.
God's blessings are to be preferred over the recognition of hypocrites, anyway.
Well, We know what the best movie of the year is, and the bottom line tells hollywood what the movie is. But no matter what -- as their ship sinks into the sunset they won't admit it....
1.The hollywood types sre hostile to God, Jesus and the Christians.
2.The Oscars are all about spending money to stroke egos and promote their product
Mel decided not to put out with the money, so therefore, no Oscar buzz.
I think this writer has the Oscar scene tabbed.
Why? He's not a Bush-bashing Lefty.
If Mel's 'Passion' does get an Oscar nomination and wins the award you can bet that it will be one of those Oscars given out before the live nationwide broadcast.
Time to boycott the hollyweird awards.
Acknowledging 'The Passion' would have taken an act of courage...Hollywood is short on courage, long on Liberal whackoism.
I pray the all come around before they draw that last breath.
Neither Mel nor Jesus need the "honor" of these awards. For Jesus, the trophy is all the souls who have and will turn to Him because of Mel's depiction of His life and mission.
I think you are right on. This lesson goes back to the story of Moses and worshiping the golden idol, in this case the Oscar statue.
From election day on - all the media affilliations have been astounded that Bush won- have declared that it was based on moral values , and have systematically attacked all things associated with religion, moral upstanding youth(boyscouts),etc- the Hollywood loonies are doing their part to reinforce anything against the right- they tried to make this movie a loser before it began and are still trying to figure out the power of Christ.They will never get it .It is a beautiful movie - and they are so political and liberal it is being rejected .you know what? SO WHAT!!!
Because Hollyweird sold their souls for filthy luchre and adoration of all who drink the maddening wine of her adulteries.
Rich, famous and drunk? Sounds about right.
I've not watched the Oscars for at least the past 10 years...simply a lack of interest. Now, it's time to boycott the charade. Same behavior, different motive.
I would submit that after 2,000 years, it has not.
Now I'm beginning to laugh...They are so irrelevant to the truth.
"Both the Golden Globes and the Broadcast Film Critics passed over The Passion of The Christ for any major nominations this year. The American Film Institute made no mention of The Passion in its 2004 best films of the year announcement. And according to USA Today's Oscar Oracle, The Passion isn't on the radar screen for even a single nomination when the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences hands out nominations at the end of January. "
The movie has made around a half billion dollars. People have changed how they live life after seeing this movie. This movie will be around 50 years from now and will be on the sale charts every year. The left could not have done a better job at playing the fool.
Gibson's biggest mistake was when he released the film. Almost every Oscar winner is released around Christmas, because those who do the nominations tend to have very short memories. And because films are coming out on DVD and VHS so quickly nowadays, many in the industry tend to forget which films are this years or last years. It used to be that a film was at least 18 months old before it came out for home viewing. Not any more.
As for this particular article, I would not refer to Schindler's List or The Exorcist as religious films. Schindler's List was an incredible piece of work, but the film was not religious in nature, the in the same way Passion is.
I wouldn't give this individual's pre-Oscar evaluations much value. Rolling Stone, about a left-wing a publication as you can get, list's Passion as one of its best movies and a possible Oscar contender.
The other side of the coin, and one that I know will not be popular here, is that as good as I felt Passion was, I don't think it is was good as other films that are out there right now. Hotel Rwanda was an incredible film, as good as anything I have seen. Beyond the Sea is also outstanding, as is Ray.
I have been wrong. I hated the movie version of Chicago, and felt Titanic was extremely overrated and certainly not the best film of that year.
If Mel wants an Oscar nod, he is going to have to spend the money to hype the film in the industry trades, as everyone else does. Unfortunately, that's the way the system works. It worked for Sean Connery.
I agree. Merely the words, "Well done, thou good and faithful servant" would have been reward enough.
Shallow me, my most favorite movies are those that I can watch, over and over, and which actually to some degree are quite content-less---"Captain Ron," "Star Wars" (any), early Stephen Seagal stuff, Jet Li, Jackie Chan, "Serial," "Zulu," "Siege of Firebase Gloria," "Payback," "Uncle Buck," etc. Some movies had a "hidden message" but most are just pure entertainment. In contrast, I do NOT watch "Schindler's List" frequently (maybe twice, ever); nor even "Private Ryan." I do like to watch "The Longest Day" and "Hoosiers" over and over.
Therefore, from MY critic's perspective, I would give "Passion" a 100 for significance; a 100 for topic relevance; but a 50 (or less) for entertainment value. I do not consider that a criticsm or a "knock." But that's just my shallow perspective. (Just guessing, but if Gibson made a film about the 40 days of Jesus' return and ascension, I'd probably watch that over and over.)
The question is, should Passion automatically get the Oscar simply because of its subject matter? Hollywood ends up in a lose-lose situation here. If it gets the nomination, many will claim that it got it as a nod toward Bush and the religious right. If it does not, it will come across as a slam against the religious right.
Mel seeks a greater reward..........
Didn't last year's Oscars broadcast have the lowest viewership ever?
Maybe it can sink even further next year.
Two points. Hollywood is the devil's stomping ground. These people are God-less. And #2, there are no cultural "elites" in Hollywood. Cultural "snobs" maybe, but definitly not "elites".
Tangentially off topic here but I take issue with this paragraph. The Old Testament lays out in pretty grim detail the severity of the scourging. (I can count all my bones). The error is that Roman law (as I understand it) limited a scourging to 40 strokes and Jesus took more than 40 in the film.
30 million to honor God in film.
5 million to worship God in a private chapel.
10 million for children's operations.
Zero dollars to advertise for Hollywood awards.
"For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also."
Gibson places Christ too far into their comfort zone.
The Hollywood Left is not quite ready for the concept that God is not really a billion miles away in space somewhere sitting on a throne.
God With Us, Emmanuel, standing next to us? Christ within us? No way!
Is there no escape?
No fig leaves or bushes to hind behind anymore?
Oh, woe.
Eh, Gibson getting an Academy Award is just not important. They are not relevant to what you or I do. They are starting to find out that folks just don't care what the Academy thinks - and they do not like it.
There were two others crucified with Jesus.
very much appreciated your response. i was surfing the web to try to find out why the "Passion" (film) was insulted the way it was by Hollywood. i, as a south asian, American-bred, muslim female (democrat and very liberal) was thoroughly moved by the awe-inspiring film. in response to your posting and other replies, i just want to add (fully understanding that i am a serious minority in this forum dedicated to the right wing), that not all liberals/leftists/democrats have disregard for the film. Many of us are quite horrified by the fact that "Passion" did not get nominated. Well Truth brings people of all opinions together so for the first time in my life, I agree with a political opinion of a republican.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.