The Bigelow snub
We’re talking about what the trade press is dubbing “The Bigelow Snub.” This is the failure of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences to nominate director Kathryn Bigelow for an Oscar for her film “Zero Dark Thirty,” which depicts the hunt for Osama bin Laden. …
In December, Senators Dianne Feinstein, Carl Levin and John McCain wrote a letter to Sony Pictures denouncing “Zero Dark Thirty” for being “grossly inaccurate and misleading in its suggestion that torture resulted in information that led to the location of Usama Bin Laden.” The liberal press has gone further and expanded the denunciations to suggest that the film endorses the utility of “torture,” with some offering their usual subtle analogies to Nazis and slavery.
Whether the film—an action movie, not a documentary—really suggests this about the hunt for bin Laden is a matter of interpretation, and it certainly doesn’t condone torture. But the letter seems to have had an effect.
“Anyone who knows the academy’s traditional aversion to controversy,” writes Mr. Turan, “knew that letter meant Oscar trouble for ‘Zero.’ It’s not even that surprising that it was the directors who caved in to the drumbeat of condemnation. As one of the smaller branches of the academy, it is more susceptible to the vagaries of outside pressure.”











Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Meh. She won it for Hurt Locker. She don’t care.
John the Libertarian on January 12, 2013 at 11:47 AM
Hahahahaha!
Blake on January 12, 2013 at 11:47 AM
I was more surprised by the Affleck snub.
steebo77 on January 12, 2013 at 11:49 AM
Is there anyone who still believes the Academy Awards has very much to do with quality?
deepdiver on January 12, 2013 at 11:58 AM
Which is why Al Gore won for his completely non-controversial film Inconvenient Truth.
It would have been more honest of them to say they avoid controversies that don’t forward their own agendas.
JadeNYU on January 12, 2013 at 12:01 PM
Yes.
Titanic won 320 Oscars and is unarguably the best motion picture ever shot.
CorporatePiggy on January 12, 2013 at 12:02 PM
I wonder if the film had given more props to Obama, would this have been as much of an issue.
Dongemaharu on January 12, 2013 at 12:03 PM
On a wild hair I checked the award status of Last Temptation of Christ. Imagine my surprise to see a Best Director nomination from the Academy.
I suppose they didn’t realize there was a controversy when that film was being banned everywhere.
JadeNYU on January 12, 2013 at 12:03 PM
320, the new /s tag
deepdiver on January 12, 2013 at 12:14 PM
“Mr Hubble says trophies are for people with self-esteem issues.”
Flange on January 12, 2013 at 12:16 PM
It’s usually the ones nominated, not the winners, that are good.
John the Libertarian on January 12, 2013 at 12:18 PM
The nominating process is ridiculous. Anyone who’s seen “Django” knows the German actor Christoph Waltz? was in 90 percent of the movie and they put him up as Best Supporting Actor and the guy from the movie who should have gotten that nomination (Samuel L Jackson) wasn’t nominated because his role as the traitorous “house n-word” makes blacks the most uncomfortable. He was so scary he stole the movie.
Marcus on January 12, 2013 at 12:19 PM
What?! Sean Penn and Tim Robbins won because they were whining their brains out about the Iraq war, knowing full well Academy voters would reward them.
“Aversion to [certain] controversy.” FIFY!
rdbrewer on January 12, 2013 at 12:22 PM
Bill Murray’s performance that year in Lost in Translation was damned near mind blowing.
Robbed.
rdbrewer on January 12, 2013 at 12:24 PM
I liked “Argo”, never saw “Zero Dark Thirty” or that QT one, and LOVED “Les Miserables”. But can I say that these nominations reflect what I think were the best movies this year?
Nope. If I were to name off the movies I enjoyed the most this year they would be (in no particular order):
1. ‘Les Miserables’ – I think they did a fine job bringing the musical that I love so much to the movie. Is it perfect? Nope. But it’s pretty darn awesome.
2. ‘Dark Knight Rises’ – It was depressing as all get out, but I really did like the whole thing. It was a good ending to the movie trilogy.
3. ‘The Avengers’ – Fun popcorn movie. Highly entertaining.
So I don’t know about the Bigelow snub, but I’m highly aware of the Hooper, Nolan, and Whedon snubs.
mjk on January 12, 2013 at 12:31 PM
I’ve always seen these shows, the Globes, SAG awards, etc., as being PR shows for folks and projects that shouldn’t be overlooked. I’ve never liked it when the big blockbusters impose their might and lock out all the up and comers.
John the Libertarian on January 12, 2013 at 1:12 PM
She has won an Oscar already. She is no longer entitled to a gimme nomination for being a woman. Get over it.
Rocks on January 12, 2013 at 1:38 PM
Interesting. I think they should be awards for the best movies of the year. The most entertaining, the ones people will remember the most.
Will people remember “Black Swan” in 10 years? Nope. But they will remember “Toy Story 3″ and “Harry Potter”. And I enjoyed those “blockbusters” a H*ll of a lot more than Black Swan.
mjk on January 12, 2013 at 1:57 PM
Members vote for their friends.
Blake on January 12, 2013 at 2:16 PM
Yeah, it’s a shame that films like The Last Temptation of Christ and Brokeback Mountain are totally ignored. /sarc
The Academy is only adverse to films that trigger their cognitive dissonance.
jix on January 12, 2013 at 2:32 PM