Posted on 01/15/2006 4:48:17 AM PST by napscoordinator
Columns Why I'm skipping the Oscars this year Jan 13, 2006 by Ben Shapiro ( bio | archive | contact )
Every year since I was old enough to stay up late, I've watched the Academy Awards. This year, however, I have absolutely zero desire to watch the Oscars. In recent years, lack of quality from Hollywood has turned the Academy Awards into a special-interest-group get-together. If you're crazy, gay, have a disability or are a member of a minority race, you'll likely be nominated for an Oscar; if your film tackles a "deep social issue" (normally an issue dear to the hearts of Hollywood's liberal glitterati), you'll have an excellent shot at grabbing a gold statuette. The combination of declining product quality and rising Hollywood disdain for mainstream America has opened the door to the agenda-film crowd. It began with the 1994 Oscars. "Schindler's List," "The Fugitive" and "In the Name of the Father" all received Best Picture nominations; other excellent films of 1993 included "What's Eating Gilbert Grape?" "Searching for Bobby Fischer," "Shadowlands," "Fearless" and "In the Line of Fire."
Still, Hollywood had to take a shot at mainstream America, and they found their vehicle in "Philadelphia," throwing their honorary liberal activism award to Tom Hanks for his weak performance as a dying AIDS-stricken gay lawyer in "Philadelphia." Unbelievably, Hanks' cheesy hospital-bed routine beat out Liam Neeson in "Schindler's List" and Daniel Day Lewis in "In the Name of the Father." "Philadelphia" is, clinically speaking, a maudlin, ham-handed attempt at social commentary.
The remaining 1990s were filled with weak movies and weak performances. On average, high-school audio-visual clubs make better movies than Hollywood put together in the late 1990s.
Then, our illustrious decade: With great films scarce and politically mainstream Academy voters even scarcer, 2000 featured the victory of repulsive anti-suburbia and pro-homosexuality hit piece "American Beauty." Of course, it beat out a film lionizing an abortionist ("The Cider House Rules") and another attacking the tobacco industry ("The Insider"). Most disturbingly, the Academy handed Hilary Swank a Best Actress Oscar for playing a transgendered biological girl murdered by a bunch of hicks. And 2002 was the year of the African-American honorary Oscars, when Denzel Washington took home Best Actor for his decent if overrated performance in "Training Day" and Halle Berry took home Best Actress for her highly touted simulated orgasms in "Monster's Ball." In 2003, homosexual agenda films like "The Hours," "Frida" and "Far From Heaven" grabbed the largest share of nominations. In 2004, Hollywood couldn't hold off "Lord of the Rings" any longer, but Charlize Theron, playing an ugly lesbian serial killer in "Monster," won Best Actress. And last year, the Best Picture was forgettable pro-euthanasia film "Million Dollar Baby."
And then there's this year. "Brokeback Mountain," the stomach-churning story of two 1963 cowboys who get cozy while bunking down in Wyoming and then carry on their affair over the course of decades, is likely to grab Best Picture honors. The critics love it, mostly because critics love anything that pushes homosexuality as normal behavior. The New York Times raves about it, mostly because the Times has always wanted to carry a ridiculous story proclaiming that "there has always lurked a suspicion that the fastidious Eastern dude of Owen Wister's 'The Virginian' harbored stronger than proper feelings for his rough Western compadres, and that the Red River crowd may have gotten up to more than yarning by the campfire whenever Joanne Dru was not around." Maybe that's what Pinch Sulzberger thinks about when he watches John Wayne on screen, but the Times should be more careful when speaking for the rest of us. By the way, don't believe the "hit movie" hype -- this supposed blockbuster has netted a grand total of $8 million. "Hostel," last week's No. 1 movie, a cheap horror film, has already netted almost $15 million.
Best Actor honors are likely to go to Philip Seymour Hoffman for his performance in "Capote" -- this would mark the first time that an actor in a gay role has actually deserved his Oscar. Best Actress will probably fall to Reese Witherspoon in "Walk the Line," but supporters of Felicity Huffman's transgendered father/mother in "TransAmerica" could push her over the top.
Aside from pimping for GLAAD, the Oscars will provide a platform for other leftist talking points. "Good Night, and Good Luck," George Clooney's blatant attempt to bash the Bush administration through the mouth of Edward R. Murrow, and "Munich," Steven Spielberg's attempt to equate Arab terrorism with Israeli self-defense, will likely garner nominations. And to top it off, Comedy Central partisan hack Jon Stewart (who is less and less funny each day) hosts this self-congratulatory leftist feting.
I won't be watching. Neither will most Americans.
I skip the Oscars every year.
I like to watch to see the dresses. That being said, I'm never that interested in the the show after the red-carpet parade. I got it a long time ago...it's just them giving awards to themselves.
I like to watch to see the dresses. That being said, I'm never that interested in the the show after the red-carpet parade. I got it a long time ago...it's just them giving awards to themselves.
I just bought the bootleg of that movie today. I'm looking forward to watching it.
(I'm not trying to rip anybody off. It's the only way we can see releases that haven't gone to DVD yet.)
You'll love it. Hopefully you got the Bugs Bunny cartoon, too. It's the one where Bugs tries to get a little penguin back home. Awwwww. They don't make toons like that anymore.
... and I can't tell the players from the cheerleaders.
"Skipping it this year? Heck, I can't remember the last time I even watched the thing."
Or actually gone out to see a movie. I've become allergic to anything having to do with showbiz!
Both of them are well worth the time. I saw them both in the theater last year. While waiting to get into The Great Raid we were treated to the ranting of a couple of '60s libs carrying on about the evils of the Iraq war. They were looking forward to seeing "Raid" because it portrayed a bad side of America, our failure to rescue the POWs sooner. I reminded them that their boy FDR was the president and his priorities were elsewhere during that era.
"Oscars,.... What's that??"
Hi, GeorgefromGeorgia:
The last time I sat and watched the Oscars, "Patton" was the big winner.
Jack.
the last award show I watched was in 1975. When the awardees were tripping all over each other praising the communist victory in Vietnam. Can anybody beat that?
I also prefer movies with birds to movies with birdbrains. If you liked "March of the Penguins," check out another great documentary from 2005, "The Wild Parrots of Telegraph Hill." All the parrots in my house give it two claws up. It just came out on DVD. http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000BB1534/qid=1137360403/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/002-6876502-3190446?s=dvd&v=glance&n=130
If Hollywood wants to stay in buniness, they'd better get off their silly soapboxes and stick to entertaining us.
I know a lady who watched "Brokeback Mountain" to see what all the fuss was about. She said that the music and scenery were beautiful, but otherwise it was DULL, DULL, DULL!!!
If it wins Best Picture, there's no doubt that these awards are given out for reasons not related to artistic merit.
Oscar who??? ;-)
Yeah, but the "dying guy" thing had a lot to do with it. More than anything political it's the "Rain Man," "My Left Foot," "Shine" syndrome -- alter your appearance enough, play someone with a serious enough disease or condition and you're on track for an Oscar. The next year they gave it to Hanks again for "Forrest Gump" -- a conservative picture, but a "Rain Man"-like role.
Of course the awards are nonsense. The Academy basically gives the award out in recognition that at some point the actor or actress has done or will do quality work, even if they aren't at their best or the best of the year in the particular movie that they win the prize for.
If the other networks and cable stations are really smart, they'll broadcast the movie "Patton" or do a live concert of the Eagles or Toby Keith while the Oscar show is on the air.
Those networks would surely pull in a big audience -- lots of folks don't want to watch the Oscars and just look for something better. Put on a big special, and they would get the viewers.
My wife is an actress and I've done a bit of it, too, and worked in the theater. Any actor will tell you that the hardest thing to do is comedy, but they never reward comedians because the good ones make it look easy (think of how effortless Cary Grant made his roles seem, but try to imagine anyone else doing them half as well). Putting on a lot of prosthetics and drooling and stuttering is the easiest way to get cheap sympathy, but it always wins awards, even though the actors voting on the Oscars should know better. That's why people like Chaplin, Keaton, the Marx Brothers, etc., always get honorary Oscars when they're over 80 or dead instead of getting them when they're doing their best work.
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.