Brokeback Mountain

Quote:

---

Originally posted by travelinman:
Directed and co-written by Mel Gibson, one of Hollywood's most respected actors and directors, The Passion of The Christ dramatically and graphically captures the last 12 hours of Christ's life on Earth, based on the gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. The film-a project in which Gibson invested 12 years of his life and $25 million of his own funds-became the Oscar-winning actor's unique passion as he researched the details of the story that, in his words, "heals me."

"Making this film has been the most difficult thing I've ever done," Gibson told Outreach Magazine. " The film has stirred controversy, from difficulties finding a distributor to outright media hostility. "There have been a lot of obstacles thrown in the way," says Gibson.

-----------------------------

Anothere oscar deserving movie, but no one from that great liberal hollyweird group would touch it. This film had no push from any of the different liberal sources but stood on it's own.

Face it, if it wasn't for the hype brokeback would tank.

<font color="#a62a2a"><font size="1">[ January 18, 2006 10:00 AM: Message edited by: travelinman ]</font></font>

---

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">The problem with your analysis is that you blame the subject matter and not how the subject matter was treated by Gibson as the reason for the controversy.

I would have seen "Passion of the Christ" but I read enough about the heavy-handed treatment that I decided not to go. Plus there were accusations of anti-semitic undertones.

Hmmmm...think that just *might* have been a problem, trav? Afterall, no one likes a religous zealout.

A lot of the resistance for this movie came from jewish and Catholic scholars who ask for a rewrite of portions that deviated from Scripture and portrayed anti semitic scenes.

<font color="#a62a2a" size="1">[ January 18, 2006 01:24 PM: Message edited by: The Big Sexy ]</font>

But how he treated the subject matter and what his beliefs are have nothing to do with it. We have two controversial movies. One is someone?s view of the crucifixion of Christ the other is someone?s view of tragic love. Both should be respected and supported by producers and distributors and neither should be hyped because of a political agenda. If you expect people with my views to think of BBM as anything more than an attempt to shove the liberal agenda down my throat then you need pay the same respect to any other movie you want me to give to BBM. Again not only are liberals a bunch of hypocrites, they make things worse by pretending they are above all that.

<font color="#a62a2a" size="1">[ January 18, 2006 01:28 PM: Message edited by: travelinman ]</font>

Quote:

---

Face it, if it wasn't for the hype brokeback would tank.

---

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">This coming from the guy who first said it wouldn't make any money, then said it's return on investment wouldn't be all that great, then said...

If by hype you mean great reviews and great word of mouth, then I guess you're probably right.

Y'know, I've seen more than my share of movies with similar themes. But I haven't gone to see any of them twice. This one I did, because it was a good movie.

When "Passion" came out, the cable Christian channel aired long excerpts of it and ran listings of theaters in cities - state by state - so there viewers would go to see it. I don't see anything closely remote to that for Brokeback.

Hey, guess what?

That song from the soundtrack that I said I liked best won the Best Original Song in a Motion Picture Golden Globe!

"A Love That Will Never Grow Old"
Gustavo Santaolalla, composer
Bernie Taupin lyricist

performed by Emmylou Harris

Apparently my taste is good. Who knew? [img]wink.gif[/img]

Quote:

---

Originally posted by travelinman:
But how he treated the subject matter and what his beliefs are have nothing to do with it. We have two controversial movies. One is someone?s view of the crucifixion of Christ the other is someone?s view of tragic love. Both should be respected and supported by producers and distributors and neither should be hyped because of a political agenda. If you expect people with my views to think of BBM as anything more than an attempt to shove the liberal agenda down my throat then you need pay the same respect to any other movie you want me to give to BBM. Again not only are liberals a bunch of hypocrites, they make things worse by pretending they are above all that.

<font color="#a62a2a"><font size="1">[ January 18, 2006 01:28 PM: Message edited by: travelinman ]</font></font>

---

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Well so far, the only thing out of touch is you knowledge of the subject matter.

You go off saying the movie is this and that when it's nothing of the sort.

You complain about hype for one and not the other, but the hype for Gibson's movie was enormous, and distribution was enormous.

But I suppose to fit into trav's world of conservative persecution, we're supposed to ignore that Passion was given enormous support and the other one is being shut down in some cities.

You speak out of both sides of your mouth, at one point bragging that Passion is a blockbuster, making hundreds of millions, then conversely complaining that it was complicated by distribution and persecuted.

The problems Passion encountered were because not the result of some liberal bias, but concerns from religous scholars over anti semitic depictions in the screenplay.

Golden Globes:

Best Motion Picture - Drama
Winner: Brokeback Mountain (2005)

Best Director - Motion Picture
Winner: Ang Lee for Brokeback Mountain (2005)

Best Screenplay - Motion Picture
Winner: Brokeback Mountain (2005) - Larry McMurtry, Diana Ossana

Best Original Song - Motion Picture
Winner: Brokeback Mountain (2005) - Gustavo Santaolalla, Bernie Taupin ("A Love That Will Never Grow Old")
By the way, it is a shame this song was only very, very partially played in the movie. You get to hear part of the second verse and the chorus. It is playing on the radio as Jack drives back to Texas after Ennis tells him that even though Ennis got divorced he still doesn't think they can be together.

Other nominations but not wins in the categories of:
Best Performance by an Actor in a Motion Picture - Drama
Heath Ledger

Best Performance by an Actress in a Supporting Role in a Motion Picture
Michelle Williams

Best Original Score - Motion Picture
Brokeback Mountain (2005) - Gustavo Santaolalla

Also, when the big Hollywood studios told Gibson to shove it, did he run to the ACLU whining about discrimination? Hell no he spent 25 million of his own money, made a damn good movie and made a significant amount of cash.

Now I wonder what would have happened if the studios told the people who wanted to make BBM to take a hike? Does litigation for discrimination and possible hate crimes come to mind?

It is clear from both Passion and Brokeback that controversy sells tickets.

I did find it amusing that at least for Passion it could be said that the audiences generally had read the book ahead of time.
[img]biggrin.gif[/img]

Golden Globe Prez: 'There's a Quid Pro Quo in Everything You Do'

Last year, the Hollywood Foreign Press Association ? the group of 80 or so foreign journalists who vote on the annual Golden Globe Awards ? spent money like it was going out of style.

According to their federal tax filing for 2004-2005, the group forked over $521,380 on travel, another $87,000 on ?meetings and conferences? and $59,000 for ?on line research.?

They also ponied up $500,000 for salaries, $177,000 in legal fees, $70,000 for photography, $64,000 for ?outside services? and $26,000 for ?other? (the photography fee may be attributed to the fact that HFPA members are notorious for the cheesy practice of having their pictures taken with the stars of movies after they?ve interviewed them).

To balance this out, the HFPA gave away about $1 million to other non-profits including the Sundance Film Festival and a handful of humanitarian organizations.

But the remaining $4 million was either spent on themselves or banked. According to their tax filing, the HFPA has $12 million in assets.
All of this is in the name of picking nominees from about 20 movies and putting on an awards show. That?s the same 20 movies from which every other awards show and critics group selects their nominees and winners.

The only difference is that NBC Universal, which broadcasts the show, gives the HFPA about $5-$6 million in licensing fees for rights to the Golden Globes name.

The network is also underwriting, perhaps unbeknownst to NBC et al. stockholders, a floating junket of ?international? journalists who are living it up on the proceeds.

The fact is, the 80 or so members of the Hollywood Foreign Press ? the group that chooses the Golden Globe Awards ? are living the high life thanks to NBC?s licensing fee.

Last year, according to their federal tax return, the HFPA members who are mobile and compos mentis spent an average of $7,500 per person on travel alone. The total was over $600,000 for travel, plus meetings and press conferences.

That?s despite the fact that HFPA members are supposed to live in Los Angeles and report back from there to publications in their far-flung home countries. Instead, members of the HFPA ?many of whom are American but merely freelance for foreign journals ? globe-trot to numerous film festivals and press junkets to see movies they can easily see in Hollywood screening rooms.
They do so, according to president Philip Berk, not for purposes of voting on the Golden Globes, but to write stories for their publications abroad. Many of those periodicals are obscure and minor. None of them, according to Berk, will pay for the journalists to leave Los Angeles and get much needed ?scoops.? So the HFPA is happy to use its tax free money to fill that gap.

The group?s function is split in two then. Not just screening films for the Golden Globes, but to get the first ?exclusive? interview with movie stars like Nicole Kidman and Jude Law for weeklies in Malaysia, Ulaan Bator and Siberia. Apparently, the competition for ?gets? is just as tough in far away locales as it is in the West.
Berk says there is a rigorous process to become an HFPA member. But the prospective members, many of whom are elderly and few of whom are full-time journalists, only have to prove they?ve published four articles in the last year in order to qualify for membership in the HFPA.
Berk told me in a far-ranging interview last Friday that the total $600,000 in travel expenses goes to flying HFPA members around the world to press junkets.

Since movie studios usually pick up the tab for junkets, I wondered what he was talking about. Also, every one of the movies unveiled at junkets is screened in Los Angeles and New York many dozens of times before they?re released.
?Don?t you know that junkets are mostly held in New York?? Berk says, a statement refuted by many studio publicists who claim the lion's share is in Los Angeles. ?We go to all of them, and to international ones as well. Our members are writing for publications where they?re in competition. We have to get the stories published. We pay our own travel. The studios pay for our hotel accommodation. But they wouldn?t fly every member of the HFPA. All our members are invited.?

One longtime studio publicist confirmed that the HFPA pays their own airfare, but that?s all.
?They?re like everyone else on a junket. We feed them three buffet meals a day. We pay for their hotels.?

The HFPA members also often visit movie sets. ?It?s to put us on their radar,? a studio publicist says. ?And get in their good graces.?
Case in point: six years ago, one TV studio flew the members to London while a major mini-series was being filmed. The result: the show won the Golden Globe for Best Mini Series or Motion Picture made for TV.

And what of the $59,000 in online research? At first Berk said he didn?t know what I was talking about and consulted someone else in his office for an answer. Then he said that instead of just using free online reference guides like Google, Yahoo and the Internet Movie Database, HFPA members used the costly (and out of date) Baseline and Lexis/Nexis services to do their research. This is so they can be fully prepared for one-on-ones with various Gyllenhaals, Wilsons and Fienneses.

The HFPA, according to publicists, write their own bios for the actors they?re interviewing and hand them out at their press conferences. ?But there?s usually something wrong in them,? says a publicist.

?If that?s what it costs, that?s what it costs,? says Berk. ?I don?t scrutinize all these expenses.?

Of course, the research for interviews and the junket travel have nothing to do with the Golden Globes. Berk says that part is so the HFPA members can write timely stories for their publications ? even though those publications don?t pay expenses for their own journalists.
Since NBC is providing the annual $5 million nut for the HFPA, we can conclude that NBC ?perhaps unbeknownst to GE ? is footing the bill for international publications so they can get to participate in roundtable discussions with actors and directors.

This may be the greatest act of generosity any network has ever bestowed on writers in the name of international journalism. GE stockholders should be proud. Without the NBC fee, the members of the HFPA would be reduced to simply watching movies in a Los Angeles screening room and writing reviews.

?We need to be at the junkets where other people are given the same interviews. Our publications don?t pay. The only people who pay are distributors. If a distributor in Germany would like to send a member of the HFPA, then they will pay. Not the studio. The magazines can?t afford to pay [to send their journalists to the junkets].?

Berk is adamant about the need for HFPA members to travel extensively. ?You know how it works. You know there?s a quid pro quo in a lot of things you do. It?s true we derive benefits because we have the revenue from the Golden Globes. By the same token we create the show. Without our relationship to the studios, the stars and Hollywood, we wouldn?t be able to produce a show like the Golden Globes. This is part of the deal. We attend junkets in New York so when we produce a show in L.A., they will come and show respect to us.?

<font color="#a62a2a" size="1">[ January 18, 2006 02:04 PM: Message edited by: travelinman ]</font>

Lets se if you caught the significant thing in my post above. If not I will break it down for you.

The people who vote for the GG awards are a bunch of freeloading ?foreign journalists? who are living high on the hog all paid for by Universal Studios. Now what was the name of the Studio that produced and distributed BBM?