The Daily Egyptian is published by the students of SIU at Carbondale. Except during vacations and exam weeks, The Daily Egyptian is published Monday through Friday during the fall and spring semesters and TWThF during the summer semester."

Academy should grow up for Oscars

Every year there's heavy contention among critics as to which film will win the "Best Picture" category at the annual Academy Awards ceremony. This year, two of the most highly controversial films ever made are going head to head for the title. Although it would seem both Michael Moore's "Fahrenheit 9/11" and Mel Gibson's "The Passion of the Christ" have an equal shot because of the vast demographics they appeal to, there are a few out there who would disagree.

One faction of the Moore vs. Gibson dilemma feels that "Passion" might actually get snubbed from even being nominated at this year's ceremonies. Part of this situation deals with the traditionally Jewish Hollywood executives and older members of the Academy's voting committee viewing Gibson's film as greatly anti-Semitic in how it portrays the Jewish authorities and populace in "Passion." There are members of the voting committee who outright refuse to view the film even for voting purposes. This element alone could put the film's chances in jeopardy.

Another factor is that Gibson has essentially snubbed the major Hollywood studios by choosing to go the often treacherous route of releasing "Passion" on his own, funding the project entirely with his own bank account. For many Hollywood elite this choice isn't just about Gibson not playing fair. This is about choosing to not play ball at all.

On the other end of the other side of the issue is "Fahrenheit 9/11." "Fahrenheit" was considered by critics and analysts to have the "Best Documentary" category in the bag until Moore opted to have his film shown on pay-per-view just prior to the election, thus making it ineligible for that category. However, some believe it could go all the way and win "Best Picture" instead of "Passion."

One of the things that could stop the film's momentum though is the possibility of Bush getting re-elected. Right now, the numbers aren't entirely in John Kerry's favor. If Kerry is elected, then "Fahrenheit" will stand as the film that just might have helped get Bush out of office. If it doesn't, then that would deliver the notion that the media would not have as much influence over the public as once thought, thus dooming "Fahrenheit" to the status of being a semi-failure in its message.

In recent years Disney CEO Michael Eisner has come under fire for his decision to forbid Miramax Films from distributing "Fahrenheit." Because of Disney's and Eisner's ties with the Bush regime, Eisner would not allow a film so vehemently casting Bush into such a negative light to be released under his watch.

So, Lion's Gate Films released "Fahrenheit" instead of Disney. Because the film was released anyway by LGF without Disney seeing the astronomic profits from it, many Hollywood and industry analysts would consider "Fahrenheit" earning "Best Picture" as the ultimate raspberry in the face of the ultra-conservative, family values-based Disney.

While both "The Passion of the Christ" and "Fahrenheit 9/11" have many things going against them, such as religion and politics respectively, they both have the same elements working for them. One of the things people need to remember is that the film makers didn't make these movies for the people who are being offended by them. They made the films to reach out to those who have a direct interest and have the ability to gain something from each of these films.

Gibson made "Passion" because he had gone through a period of depression and when he renewed his religious faith, he produced a film to reach out to others who had been going through the same things he had, and to help re-affirm the feelings of those who'd been devout Christians for some time, but perhaps hadn't always been fully aware of everything that went into Christ's sacrifice.

Moore made "Fahrenheit" because he feels, just as many Americans do, that George W. Bush is essentially using the United States as a means to further his own private financial and political interests, rather than acting out what's better for the nation and the world. In the end, both films should be judged as they were supposed to be in the first place. And that manner of judgment should be on message, over-all quality of direction, acting and story behind the actions. The Academy should put aside personal politics and forget about the hype.

3

[Macro error: Can't include because the file is larger than 32767 characters.]

Today's News | Sports | Voices - Editorial | Letters
Newsbriefs | pulse - Arts & Entertainment | Calendar | Photo Staff
Apts & Rentals | Photo Personals | Live DE NewsCam | Classified Ads