..Leonard Klady
..David Poland
..Ray Pride
..Patricia Vidal

WEEK THREE

It’s been a week for Oscar irony…

After all the screaming over the screener ban, the first major casualty of the lifting of the ban is Whale Rider. The true indie was always a long shot, but the fight for the honor of independent film seemed to give the film an opportunity for a lot of sympathetic attention. Not anymore.

I guess it’s more than irony when Jack Valenti pulls an LBJ. I am of the belief that the “Great Society” plan, which marked the start of the welfare state in this country, has had as much or more to do with keeping black America in “its place” than simple disorganized racism ever could. As long as I’ve opened the can of worms, I’ll quote Oscar winning songwriter Randy Newman’s classic satirical song, "Rednecks":

“Now your northern nigger's a Negro
You see he's got his dignity
Down here we're too ignorant to realize
That the North has set the nigger free

Yes he's free to be put in a cage
In Harlem in New York City
And he's free to be put in a cage in the South-Side of Chicago
And the West-Side
And he's free to be put in a cage in Hough in Cleveland
And he's free to be put in a cage in East St. Louis
And he's free to be put in a cage in Fillmore in San Francisco
And he's free to be put in a cage in Roxbury in Boston
They're gatherin' 'em up from miles around
Keepin' the niggers down”

I’m sorry if the word “nigger” offended anyone for its use. But obviously, there is a purpose here and it is a song mocking “rednecks,” but one that also questions the ethical position of urban white America, allegedly more open-minded than those reflecting some of the values of Dixie.

Jack Valenti understands the value of the cage that you don’t understand you are in - and moving the focus off of the jailers - as well as any politician in the history of this country. The multitudes attacking the screener ban kept their eyes on someone else’s prize and when the screeners were returned to the Academy, the battle was at once both won and lost.

Stunningly, in one stroke of a political pen, Valenti & Co. put the true indies right back in their place. At the same time, the importance of supporting studio dependent indies faded from sight.

Without picking his “oddsmaking” apart, The L.A. Times’ Patrick Goldstein put out his annual first column of Oscar possibles this Tuesday. And of 12 films he ranked, the first true dependent indie film was #10, Lost In Translation, followed by #11, In America. (If you want to count Cold Mountain, the $100 million (or $90m or $110m) epic from Miramax as an indie, I really have to laugh at you.) There was not a single title from a true indie even mentioned in passing.

The film he clearly advocates, which he has every right to do, is Mystic River, a small film from a major studio, made by an Oscar winning director, featuring a cast of five Oscar nominees (including Laurence Fishburne) and Kevin Bacon, who will probably be shut out again. Mystic, which will now be seen as an underdog, is followed by Lord of The Rings: The Return of the King, Cold Mountain, Finding Nemo and the other underdog, DreamWorks’ House of Sand & Fog. If S&F is too hard on Academy members, the next group is Master & Commander, Seabiscuit, The Last Samurai and The Missing.

So, the screeners help the indies? Are we still making that argument?

It is an awards year, as I have written for months, which always seemed likely to be driven by major studio movies. But where are all the picketers? Where is the rage? To where did all those rebels of just a few weeks ago disappear?

Well, they were never really rebels and they are standing right where they always stand… where it’s safe.

Meanwhile, the honor of the Academy has been impugned by some of its most venerable members, who have been telling folks that the real reason for the move by Frank Pierson that broke the ban was that AMPAS raised dues in the last year and that a large percentage of members maintain their membership only because they get value in the screeners. If the screener ban held, the theory is that a thousand or more Academy members would let their memberships lapse. This concern has surely been expressed in most groups where receiving screeners is the primary perk, but the Academy? That’s what I am told.

Finally, I experienced a little awards burn this week myself. I’ll keep the story simple. I have been expressing my love for In America for 14 months now. Yet, I keep talking to people who are “in the know” who say, “Yeah… gotta get to that… yeah…”

So I took the bull by the horns and contacted Fox Searchlight as asked whether they would provide a print and a screening room for me if I would invite a bunch of people that I wanted to see the film and feed them. It seemed simple enough. They said, “yes.”

When I sent out yesterday’s invitation to a bunch of people, there were responses of varying levels of amusement and interest from a number of studio types. And then there was one from someone who was not amused at all. “You have entered the domain of advocate, and no longer qualify as an unbiased observer.”

Interesting. I responded respectfully. I wasn’t buying it. Part of my job is being a film critic, after all. Each year, I bring my presumed support to various screenings in which I host the Q&A. I write criticism. I make subjective judgments in this very column. Is hosting a screening of my own a step closer to the line? Sure. But is this comparable in any way to the many, many guild screenings at which talent appear, the “we have to see it first with the biggest star in the film” screenings for HFPA or the Variety screenings which are interlinked with ad dollars? I think not.

The disagreement escalated to the point of veiled threats. The point was not to cause controversy, but to simply show a movie that I like. So that was that. I withdrew my invitation. The screening was cancelled.

So again, what is the purpose of all of this awards fever?

Meanwhile, the Chicago Film Critics are following LAFAC over the side of the cliff, albeit with significantly less impact. Variety is reporting that story and today’s various Jack Valenti sit-downs as though there is still a negotiation going on. There is none. Jack has made it clear to everyone who isn’t trying not to listen… it’s over.

SAG leadership contributed a “guest column” to Variety that is spectacularly convoluted before it gets to the point – “WAH! It’s unfair that the Academy gets screeners and we don’t! WAH!!!” The lies keep getting repeated… In The Bedroom didn’t have “the marketing resources of larger companies”… Monster’s Ball, from non-MPAA signatory Lions Gate, couldn’t be sent out today as a screener… Screeners and not critic’s awards drove the nominations for Boys Don’t Cry.

If people were spending half the energy getting behind the few true indies with real potential, one might get nominated. Instead of worrying about screeners, LAFCA could be calling attention to the many great documentaries or foreign language films out there. Why isn’t there great enthusiasm from everyone about the huge increase of opportunities to see films on the big screen, where they are meant to be seen?

With apologies to Mr. Newman…

Now your Academy voter's important
You see he's got his dignity
Down in Criticsville here we're too ignorant to realize
That the ban had set the voter free

He's free to be put in a cage in the Arclight on Sunset
And he's free to be put in a cage in the Grove at Farmer’s Market
And he's free to be put in a cage in a four-wall in Santa Monica
And he's free to be put in a cage in The Academy on Wilshire
They're gatherin' 'em up from miles around
Keepin' the indies down

______

The Rankings

______

20 Weeks To Oscar: Week Two
20 Weeks To Oscar: Week One
21 Weeks To Oscar
23 Weeks To Oscar
29 Weeks to Oscar

- by David Poland