Post-Academy Awards Thread: Most Apolitical Oscars Ever?

Question of the night: If The Hurt Locker had been made during the Bush years, anyone think it would have won Best Pic, let alone be nominated?

Surprisingly, the only foul moment of the night was Sandra Bullock mentioning homosexuals in her acceptance speech. Acting out your deviant perversion is NOT the same as the color of your skin.

But kudos to Kathryn Bigelow for her multiple shout-outs to the troops and people in uniform. Very classy…

I'm willing to make you a bet right now. One dollar. Next year the day before the Oscars, this website will run three or four posts denouncing all the horrible left wing political sermons at the 2010 Oscars. Never mind that it didn't happen tonight, it will be remembered that way.

WOW. And thus you missed the entire point of her speech.

Christoph Waltz won – that was the only thing I gave a damn about. But not enough of one to actually watch. I just logged on to this website to pee myself laughing at the comments. Damn, you guys are funny!

(Oh, and Nikki Finke also live blogged – nothing special unless you call whining every 5 minutes 'I want my 2 hours back' entertaining.) Oh, well, Christoph Waltz won – and Avatar's asshole director did NOT. Now that's what I call a productive night! When the Academy thinks a Nazi is better than Cameron.

Congrats to The Hurt Locker and its wonderful director!

'Best Picture' No One Ever Saw….haha, perfect.

Well I saw that film, and I didn't like it. I was disappointed, but what do I know.

If this avergage film can get Best Picture, then I gues a Barry can get a Nobel Peace Prize…oh, wait…nevermind.

Didn't see the Oscars this year, so how did Alec Baldwin & Steve Martin do as emcees?

There were "no political rants" and "troops thanked several times" because a Dem is in the White House – that's all there is to it. For eight years we had endless political rants and anti-troop films. Do you think Hollwood has all of a sudden seen the light? No. They only "support" the troops when their guy is in White House. I expect pro-troop, pro-war films for the next three years.

But, when January 2013 rolls around, the political rants and anti-war films will presume immediatly! They are fair weather troop-supporters. Whereas, conservatives support the troops regardless of which party controls the WH – that's what separates us from them.

Bullock only said your sexual orientation (race, etc) was no reason to think yourself better than others and that everyone is deserving of love. It seems – since God doesnt tolerate disobeying speed laws, cheating on taxes or homosexuality as anything less than 'missing His standard', she actually seemed to be correct – even to a conservative Christian. I accept the whole kissing Meryl as her way of being funny (although not mine) – but dont forget that she thinks Leanne Tuohey is the real deal as a Christian. We have to give people room to work through their own world views without condemning them.

Ewwww….TROLL…!

Hit it with a shoe….!

They were very funny.

Up was the best picture of this and a whole lot of other years.

My one regret of the night was that Tarantino walked away with nothing. I am glad Waltz won, but Tarantino should have gotten screenplay or director or both.

This HURT LOCKER winning these awards does not change Hollywood's hatred for the troops going back to 1970 when Hollywood made films spitting on our troops in every film they cranked out. I haven't see this film but from John Nolte's review here and John is always on the money with war films and he is honest about that one scene which throws the film in another direction. Hollywood will never changed their attitude towards our troops, they will make anti-troop films for as long as we all support them or until conservatives on this blog and around the country support films made by conservative filmmakers.

Don't rule out here that Hollywood gave this Oscar to a war film just to throw a bone to the troop and for the fact that a lot of people in the Academy don't like James Cameron or feel he has won enough awards for now. Just don't ever believe that this is a new leaf that Hollywood is turning over. Nothing has changed, because a film that no one has seen as won

So the only film without any cinematography in it won? How weird is that?

One of the strangest things of the night was how grumpy so many actors/actresses in the audience looked. Clooney barely smiled. Robin Williams was stone-faced. Charlize Theron looked pissed off at the world. I thought Steve Martin and Alec Baldwin did a decent job, but they sure didn't go over well in that room.

Although I can be cynical, the difference between you and me is that I'm more optimistic.

I never did say Sean Penn, George Clooney and the like have "seen the light", I'm just saying there's a glimmer of hope. Compare that to last year(when a dem was in the white house) when Sean Penn was being stupid or when they didn't nominate the conservative The Dark Knight(which was the whole point of the 10 nominations things).

Maybe your right and when Jan. 2013 comes, time will repeat itself, but as I said I am optimistic and I do believe Big Hollywood has an influence that is only in its beginning stages.

I don't know…I thought Martin was flat and Baldwin was flatter.

How would that be embarrassing? I saw big manly men baw like 2-year-olds in that film. I would be *more* ashamed at *not* having an emotional reaction.

I thought it was one of the worst Academy awards ever! The directing was bad with far off shots and multiple awkward moments- from the horrible gag writing all the way to the weird deal where they had peers of the nominees stand up there on stage and praise them it was poorly done. Martin and Baldwin weren't funny at all, and everyone looked uncomfortable and pissed off as it dragged out with inane tributes and even readings from the screenplays(!) while at the same time they had decided that they didn't have tiime for the nominated songs to even be sung! It was so poorly done it was hard to watch. The only bright spots were that the liberal tools didn't say nearly as many assinine things as usual, and little Jimmy Cameron was just downright ignored especially considering all the press and money that Avatar has gotten in the last couple of months. Maybe it IS true that the best picture has to "have it all" since Avatar had neither plot or dialogue worth mentioning, and was really only a visual feast for the eyes. Heck, the acting itself really sucked as well, and even Siguorney Weaver wasn't believable in the least. But it did look really awesome….

During the Bush years the Hollywood liberals didn't even know that our troops were fighting two wars. Now that we have a liberal President the Hollywood Liberals all of a sudden have become red, white, and blue, even praising our troops for being in the fight and wishing them well. Talk about liberal hypocrisy, well, we saw it at its zenith tonight at the Kodak theater.

Congratulations to all the fine winners, and kudos to Jeff Bridges and especially Austin's own (if adopted and now part time Austinite) Sandra Bullock. What a great classy lady.

I found myself standing near her years back at a concert. She glowed of Hollywood stardom (she had made several big movies by then) but she was kind and classy and "normal".

WE LOVE YOU SANDY!

I know a lot of you may not agree with me, but keep in mind the fierce insurgency I waged against the Academy on this very blog for nearly a year, and the fact I am now on the Academy's general email blacklist as a result. I have nothing to gain here, and no one has been more jaded or hostile toward the Academy than I.

Like most of you I fully expected tonight's show to suck balls as in the recent past, as in last year's intolerable four-hour politics-riddled insulting gay infomercial. Yet despite Nikki Finke's minute-by-minute savaging of the 82nd Oscars, I was very impressed. There were some dead spots for sure, like the horror montage that ran way too long, showed repeat clips of the same movies at length, then snippets of masterpieces you would miss with the blink of an eye.

But personally, I thought it was well-written and produced. Martin and Baldwin were actually funny, but they stepped back and let the films do the talking. I suppose with ten Best Picture nominees it was inevitable. But they pulled it off. Anyone notice the stunning lack of politics? Oh yeah, that's the title of this article, LOL!

Anyway, you all may feel free to savage me for praising Oscar instead of burying him. Just remember I spent most of the last year trying to do just that in the press after their moronic attempt at diplomacy with Ahmadinejad. A lot of good that trip did, huh? But credit where credit is due. I thought they pulled off a hell of a show tonight that avoided politics and spent most of the time focusing on the films than show-stealing hams or huge gay dance numbers. It was all about film, IMHO. Very modern 21st Century presentation, despite all the warts.

Patton may have been at war with Rommel, but he respected him. The Academy did good tonight. nuff said.

I personally liked The Hurt Locker very much and was moved by the comments about the troops. And it was great to see Bullock win for playing a southern Christian Republican, three groups not usually treated well by Republicans. Also Up for animated film and score got some deserved attention too. And Cameron had to sit there and see his film lose repeatedly, which was great.

(shhh… got J.Mama's racist garbage booted…don't t e l l anybody. There's getting rowdy and critical like I do regularly {oops} but straight up KKK racism is ignorant and low and unacceptable.)

In a perfect world, Hurt Locker would have been a faithful adaptation of David Bellavia's House to House memoir, grossed $3 billion worldwide, and won every Oscar.

keep dreaming

Amen to that Scott. 'House to House' was a tremendous read. In a perfect world, 'Shooter' would have been a faithful adaptation of Jack Coughlin's titular autobiography.

Thanks jaciscully, guess I'll have to see it myself.

Hey p, if Prop 8 were up this year and Obama wasn't backing it fully as President (as he did not do so in wishy-washy fashion on the campaign trail), you think A-list liberal lefties wouldn't be taking potshots at him? I explain the lack of politics on one of two factors. First, Obama is in trouble and they know it so they toned it down. Two, the new Academy leadership saw politics as a loss leader and laid down the law.

Larger point being, p, politics usually rules at the Oscars regardless of who's running Washington. I see that absence of politics not as perfection, but definitely progress. That's all I sought tonight, and that's what I got, IMHO. In fact, I'd have to say the politics were more centrist or right-leaning tonight. Somebody call Ripley's, LOL!

Briefly and as an example – there were two stories concerning the disgrace and obscenity at Mi Ly.

We all know the Lt. Calley angle and his failure of leadership and dereliction of duty in not stopping what happened.

We never here about the brave helicopter pilot who landed his chopper in the middle of the incident and with his crew stopped the massace. His window gunner aimed his .50 and they warned the out of control G.I.'s to stop or they'd shoot them dead, thus saving any civilians certain to be killed.

Americans always seem to be moral and forthright, somewhere, somehow someone steps up. Always.

Please note that said kick would be filmed at 25 trillion frames per second, slowed to a crawl just as the foot makes contact, and you'd hear a low grinding noise set to a bed of syncopated, atonal music.

Yeah, and Tina Fey had a walk on too. I cringed, waiting for her to flash her hand or something. But even she behaved.

First of all bravo for making a film, many of us dream of doing something like that but so few actually have the willpower and know how to go ahead. That said, I saw your film trailer, and while it looks professional and well made, it does not immediately strike me as the next Hurt Locker or Black Hawk Down. What makes you think your movie was denied because of its conservative politics? Maybe it is not quite up to the level of a theatrical release, or maybe it just wasn't sold forcefully enough, or maybe its just bad luck. Has your movie gotten a positive review from any mainstream critic? Every year plenty of movies get shown at film festivals, get unanimous praise, but never manage to get a distributor.

While I am sure there is a liberal bias in the industry, I don't for a second believe that a great conservative film will be shut out of public view. Hollywood is liberal, but greed tops liberalism. Also, yes its ironic, but you have to make a good movie before anyone gives you money. Even the James Cameron's of this world started very small. You wouldn't give 10 million to a man who claims he can invest it great, but has never invested before.

Damn! Never knew that about Hugh Thompson but you can bet your bottom dollar I am Goggling him now. Amazing story, James!

If Sunday's show proved one thing, it was the Hollywood actually did understand the negative box-office implications all those anti-war and other films mocking flyover country released during the Bush years had on their careers and companies. But to Hollywood, blowing millions upon millions of dollars apparently was the 'sacrifice' they had to make during the Bush years, in order to promote a change of leadership.

With Bush gone, and without a single Republican in power in Washington, Hollywood apparently decided 2010 was the time to finally start trying to appeal more to the public and less to their own shared ideological beliefs. It's OK to try and make money again by focusing on movies people want to see (though the bitter clingers still can't give up their BDS responses very easily). But rest assured, if the Republicans make major gains in November and take over one or both branches of Congress, the battle will be joined again at next year's Oscars, and all the political jokes they avoided Sunday night will be back in full force.

The Oscar committee should not be pressured to give out the best in any category if a certain level of accomplishment has not been reached, not unlike the International Tchaikovsky Competition which on occasion does not have a first place winner because no one performer has reached the top level of proficiency.

ZAZu, you can't compare my film to the ones you mention. They are funded with blank checks in the industry. I was told by studio execs that they wouldn't pick up this film because the Americans were not anti-heros. Their idea of an anti-hero is that Americans are the bad guys. MGM was going to take my film out 1000 prints in 91, that makes the film a studio level picture but the bank that provided the P&A funding wouldn't approve the funding. The guys that took out Platoon were going to take it out 900 prints but they would not put up any advance to cover my cost. In the end they took out a friend of mine's film and took off with his 4mill video advance. There was a small indie distributor offered me 2 mill up front and a 2 mill P&A campaign and the parent company killed the deal. Then there were lots of companies that wanted to take it off my hands as a favor and alli would get is a video on a shelf in some video store in north hollywood. That is the reality of filmmakers who can't get 5 million to 40 million to produce a film. So you have to make a decision, you either make a film or you throw your script in a box and put that box in your garage.

I know conservative writers, actors, and directors who came out and supported Bush and have not worked in A level studio films. You can't make a pro-troop film aka John Wayne film and get picked up. Hollywood is about agenda, that is why they can make film after film that loses money like Redacted, and all the rest of these films they make. They have the resources to fund anything and through millions to market it. They make profit but it takes years since they owned these films.

Giving me 10 million is way too much, but I can make a feature 35 for 2 to 3 million and make it look like the films you mention. What I spent on my film was nothing and Hollywood put a 3 million price tag on it. I played the greed factor and that only works with Hollywood if you give them your film for free. They will take anything for free to feed their overhead. As one studio exec told me, 'we don't pay for films" and I told him, "i don't make films for free' . You have to understand where in this Hollywood food chain I work at. I don't run with Cameron or at his level. I have made two films and they are in profit, the third on is bigger and better and the only thing I have in my film is that I showed the troops as real heroes as you would see in a film like OBJECTIVE BURMA or A WALK IN THE SUN. Trust me, I have sat in meetings and heard their opinions about heros on films. If my film was a lousy film, I wouldn't have made to those meetings.

Besides James Cameron was a key art designer for the very first distributor that picked up my first film with an advanced. Cameron first film wasn't Terminator he made a film about piranhas first. I started small,my 2nd film I did a 35 mm,pulled every favor in the book i had and shot this thing off a credit card with two cameras. I wasn't looking for a US theatrical then but worldwide video. The exec producer of that film screwed the deal because 99% of filmmakers are clueless in dealing with indie distributors.

An unknown director/owner like me doesn't get ten screenings from a major studio. You get two if you are lucky then you get a deal. No one gets ten, or 6 to 8 from the others. Columbia saw it 8 times the heads of distribution were mostly conservative but the marketing divisions are all liberals.

If you go to my site you can see the reviews from non jaded people out there in fly over country. One Vietnam Vet compared my film to John Wayne's Green Beret. Now, I am a big fan of the Duke's film and my small indie film is NO WAY near Green Beret. However, this is what he saw and felt and his letter was heartfelt and I want to tell you, it melted the 20 years of negativity, rejection, wise ass remearks from many people who have never made a film or will ever make a film. I would rather have one Vietnam Vet give me an 'attaboy' then the biggest film critic out there. Besides the late director Vincent Sherman saw my film in 91 and what he told me means more to me if even Speilberg gave me thumbs up. Sherman was a 40 year contract director to Warner Bros and MGM he was old school and what he told me has keep me going and I laugh inside by all the unknown critics who haven't made or even finished a film.

And the Hurt Locker screen writer did say that the war was an unpopular one in his acceptance speech. That bit of left side opinion did spill through.

I found The Green Berets to be offensively bad. The Vietnam veterans I talk to roll their eyes whenever I mention that film, it basically has nothing to do with that war or any war for that matter, just a collection of cliched characters and generic war film situations. Plus it is full of heavy handed politics which is always bad, be it left wing or right wing. I thought that the three best Duke pictures, were the ones where he played an anti-hero and not the goodie-good-shoes he is always caricatured as (The Searchers, Red River, The Man Who Shot Liberty Valence).

You are wrong about a pro-troop movie being impossible to release. Saving Private Ryan was absolutely pro-American, as was Black Hawk Down, Gettysburg, and The Patriot. Even something like The Deer Hunter which was very much anti-war, still showed compassion for the troops and never villianized them.

Either way, sincerely, best of luck to you and your film. I hope it finally find a home either in theater or on DVD. In an ideal world all films would be released and the only legitimate censor would be the public. Sorry, about your difficulties with the movie, I know coming within an inch of success can sometimes be worst than utter failure. Also, as a last resort, you can always release it on the internet. A young director who made a non budget movie on her computer recently released her flick just like that. The movie is called Sita Sings the Blues and millions of people watched and loved it on Youtube and other venues.

The only reason it was not political was because their boy is in the White House. Trust me as soon as he is gone, we will be back to bashing the new republican there. It's who they are, it's what they do. I want to know where George Clooney is now, the Sudan is worse than ever and yet we haven't heard a peep from that sunshine humanitarian.

How she feels about homosexuals is her business and she only mentioned it very quickly. Not something I'd nit pick or get angry about personally.

I'm so glad this crap is over with. Now for important threads like the Beastie Boys – Part 11 or whatever.

I'm not ashamed to admit, I cried during Up.

With Bush gone, and without a single Republican in power in Washington, Hollywood apparently decided 2010 was the time to finally start trying to appeal more to the public and less to their own shared ideological beliefs.

No wonder half the people in the theater looked like they were in a bad mood.

Here's the Memo from the DNC:

DO NOT give the Oscar to the anti-American picture because the goal was achieved and the most effective possible anti-American is in the White House (did you see Victoria Jackson's song?) and we sure don't want the knuckle-dragging Neadertals catching on.

And don't diss the troops this years — they're probably twitchy enough as it is what with The Obama talking about what inhuman basterds (sic) they are. We sure don't want no Pinochet moments, now do we? The Tea Partiers are scary enough.

And give the thing to Bulluck while you're at it. She's the "all American sweetheart" and while she wouldn't be getting work if her politics weren't correct, but at least she's not spouting off like Jennifer, Sarah Jessica or the big toothed red-head what's her name.

Might be nice to have an African-American in there. Thanks to Fox, the Internet and Talk Radio, we haven't been able to keep the lid on how we're keeping blacks ignorant via public education. Gotta show 'em we care, especially since we ditched Burroughs and Ford and are in the process of ditching Paterson. Blacks' votes are great; blacks in office – not so great.

Fondly,

DNC

Bested by his own ex-wife. Haw haw!

Did anyone find it weird that no one thanked God? I mean they always do that … what's up?