Western Standard

The Shotgun Blog

« No one wants to be Liberal leader | Main | Hot-rod Caddies »

Tuesday, January 31, 2006

Oscar Shmoskar

In this year’s Oscar nominations, politics apparently continues to enslave art (to borrow an expression from Camille Paglia). Nominated were “Capote” (about a gay author), “Brokeback Mountain” (about gay comboys), “Transamerica” (about a transsexual), “Syriana” (about how oil is bad, and about how big and bad those naughty oil companies are), “Good Night, and Good Luck" (about a journalist who –oh,. such courage!-- takes on Senator Joe McCarthy), and “Munich” (a values-free romp that refuses to assign blame to Palestinian assassins for their cold-blooded murder of Israeli athletes during the 1972 Olympics).
If these movies did not deal with subjects dear to the hearts of the elitist leftists who dominate the art world and academia, would they be on Oscar’s short list?

crossposted at vadum.blogspot.com

Posted by Matthew Vadum on January 31, 2006 | Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d834515b5d69e200d83470e0af53ef

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Oscar Shmoskar:

Comments

What about Team America? That movie ruled big time.

Posted by: underemployed buddha | 2006-01-31 5:52:54 PM


Good point. I have no desire to see any of those flicks. A History of Violence and Crash (not the Cronenberg movie) were fantastic movies which should receive awards if they haven't already.

Posted by: Michael Dabioch | 2006-01-31 6:06:19 PM


Sounds like a good time to dig up the rant that the Globe and Mail didn't find fit to print:

http://3edgesword.blogspot.com/2006/01/worms-coming-out-from-under-rocks.html

Posted by: Feynman and Coulter's Love Child | 2006-01-31 6:11:18 PM


I've pretty much been ignoring Hollywood fare for a while now. Mostly leftist propaganda masquerading as "critically-acclaimed" entertainment. Hollywood has gone to the moonbats.

Something much more important than a movie about a couple of cowboys:

IRAN TARGETS CANADA FOR JIHAD WITH SUICIDE BOMBERS AND MISSILE BORNE WMDs

http://thecanadiansentinel.blogspot.com/2006/01/important-info-on-irans-war-intentions.html

Posted by: Canadian Sentinel | 2006-01-31 6:46:49 PM


I agree with you. I also agree with Chris Rock. The Oscars are for fags and women. This list of nominees is about as gay as it gets. Meanwhile, Narnia has made almost 300 million dollars and hace a decent message. Cinderella Man was another positive film. Too bad they was lost on those deviants in la la land. Thanks for saying what needed to be said, Matthew.

Posted by: Leonard D | 2006-01-31 7:45:36 PM


Gee. FACLC,
Can't imagine why the Globe would reject your deep thoughts. I mean, it seems at least borderline literate (which side of the border, of course, is constantly in doubt) and you even managed a couple of sentences that don't run-on. And since you make Harper sound like the right-wing's answer to Stalin's Cultural Commissar, surely those Liberal dupes on Front Street would leap at the opportunity to print your screed, if only to make your fearless leader looks as goofy as possible.

Posted by: truewest | 2006-01-31 8:06:39 PM


H-o-o-o-M-o-o-o-s on de-range
where the queer and the antelope play
where seldom is heard a discouraging word
and guys are now faggy and gay

Posted by: fjb | 2006-01-31 8:58:20 PM


fjb
Ned Sublette was about 30 years and some measure of wit ahead of you when he observed, some time ago, that "Cowboys are frequently secretly fond of each other."
But nice try. Have fun at the fraternity hazing, where you'll engage in all manner of homoerotic play, just to prove to each other you're not fags.

Posted by: truewest | 2006-01-31 9:17:03 PM


I stopped watching the Oscars when Shakespear in Love won best movie

Posted by: Stopthetrain | 2006-01-31 10:19:41 PM


I saw "Capote". A good little independent movie. But better than "Walk The Line"?

NO. FRIGGIN'. WAY.

Not even in the same league.

Jeez, they could've nominated at least one dang movie that the rest of us -- the non-lefty, non-gay part of the world -- enjoyed. But no. And they wonder why they just had a completely awful year at the box ofice. Yeah Hollywood, keep blaming it on DVD's.

Posted by: David Crawford | 2006-01-31 10:55:21 PM


Hey trueleft you've misnamed yourself. You're not 'truewest' at all but thanks for trying.

Really, who cares about heterophobes and their stylistics, rantings and cowboas and as David Crawford points out, Hollywood's declining box office is no mystery and look how it seems to parallel society's rapidly declining common sense.

Didn't you know the Left considers it a rightwing conspiracy that no one is interested in the gay agenda enough to protest and lobby against this cowboa movie?

But with the trend established, betcha Hollywood will soon come out with a series of docufantasy 'what if' tales of true gay love for all former leading men...Rock on! More Oscars to come!

Posted by: wharold | 2006-02-01 1:02:57 AM


Crash and Walk the Line are my favorites of the year.

I'm tired of Hollywood pushing their extreme views down my throat, and I will not support in any way ones that are excessively political.

Posted by: Joel K. | 2006-02-01 3:19:58 AM


wharold,
As I've reminded others on this board, you don't have to crazy, conservative and Christian to be a Westerner. Nor do you have to believe any portrayal of gay people that does not involve them wearing horns and pointy tails is a conspiracy to destroy the family and seduce straight males. (Why it is that you guys are obsessed with people shoving things down your throats, I'll never figure out.)
While I understand that you might have a difficulty with the message of Brokeback Mountain -- basically, it's tough being a cowboy in love with another man in a world where people like you risk being murdered by your neighbours -- I thought you might take some pride in the fact that most of the movie was shot in Alberta. Apparently not.
btw, cowboa is kind funny.

Posted by: truewest | 2006-02-01 7:26:49 AM


truewest, "people like you"? Explain please.

Posted by: BoomNoZoom | 2006-02-01 8:40:17 AM


I would think Hollywood's coffers would bulge if they got rid of the metro/homosexual "I'm in touch with my feelings" crap and replaced it with a testosterone fueled, good versus evil, Bruce Willis style, "yippee kay yeah mother$ucker" kill all the terrorists bloodfest. Good grief, just the Nascar crowd alone would gurantee the film maker an affluent retirement!

Stay tuned for Willis playing Michael Yon in an upcomming movie. I'll go out on a limb and predict that just like The Passion of the Christ, the left/Hollywood will pan it (before the picture was even finished being filmed!), but be proven wrong as the Willis flick brings in millions compared to the latest sissy movies that Tinseltown will be offering a gullible and ignorant populus.

Unfortunately 9/11 didn't bring out the "Marlboro Man" in western society. Instead, the west gave itself a queer eye makeover and 5 years later some still have the gonads to wonder "why do they (still) hate us?"

Posted by: Eskimo | 2006-02-01 9:04:48 AM


BoomNoZoom,
If you read in context, "people like you" refers to the characters in the movie, not to people like wharold.
Eskimo,
Have I missed something? Has Hollywood stopped making action movies? If it has, it's because it has to pay people like Bruce Willis more to star in them than combined production budgets of Brokeback Mountain and Capote, which to date have grossed about about $50 million more than they cost to make.

Posted by: truewest | 2006-02-01 9:15:10 AM


Bruce Willis is a seasoned actor with a proven track record at the box office, thus he can command (and receive) more money than the latest pussy boy starring in the latest "Will and Grace" fad movie.

Twenty years from now no one will remember "Bareback Mountain" or whatever the hell it's called, but Bruce and Demi's kids will be served umbrealla drinks next to the pool thanks to Die Hard royalties.

Posted by: Eskimo | 2006-02-01 9:43:28 AM


Oscars are so ahead of the Grammy Awards. It is obvious to me that hip hop and it's homophobic ilk still hold sway over the music awards industry. Otherwise, Cher would clean up every year. She breaks box office and attendance records every time whe tours. Not that there's anything wrong with that.

Posted by: BoomNoZoom | 2006-02-01 10:06:55 AM


truewest, everything I read from you I read in context. Just sayin.

Posted by: BoomNoZoom | 2006-02-01 10:08:41 AM


BoomNoZoom,
I confess I could have been clearer. As for your comments on the Grammys, I think it's pretty clear that music awards are more sales-driven than movie awards. Cher does not sell as many records as say, 50 Cent.
However, like other acts with a substantial back catalogue (in Cher's case, she can legitimately claim to have had hit records in five decades) her live shows sell like crazy.
Case in point: Billy Joel hasn't had a hit in years, but he's on his way to selling out nine shows at Madison Square Garden. Not that there's anything wrong with that.
Eskimo,
I'm sure I'll still be enjoying all the Die Hard movies and Brokeback Mountian 20 years from now. (I take it you haven't seen the latter. Wassamatta, you afraid you might like it?)
I'm not sure Bruce's later movies -- The Whole Nine Yards, f'rinstance - will fare so well. As for Die Hard 4.0 - we'll see.
Now, your next assignment: 1500 words on homoerotic subtexts in 1990s buddy movies.

Posted by: truewest | 2006-02-01 10:25:14 AM


Truewest,

So "Capote" and "Brokeback Mountain" have grossed a profit of $50 million dollars. Well, isn't that special. NOT. "The Passion of the Christ" had a gross profit of $1 billion dollars.

I guess Jesus triumphs over pillow-biters by a factor of 20 to 1. And, of course, "The Passion of the Christ" never even received a nomination for Best Movie. Hollywood couldn't even begin to lower themselves to such an act. Now if the movie had implied that Jesus was gay, it would've been number one on the Oscar list.

Posted by: David Crawford | 2006-02-01 10:36:40 AM


It's a little hard to discern a pro-gay message in "Capote", which explicitly presents the eponymous hero as a hypocritical, exploitative. egocentric, manipulative, lying, emotionally immature vampire who steals a story by feigning friendship with a killer, writes one book, never completes another, and dies a burned out alcoholic.

Posted by: balbulican | 2006-02-01 10:42:45 AM


David,
To the best of my recollection, Jesus preached love. So why do you think it's okay be such a hateful little weasle?
And the reason Passion never received an nomination? Because it was a piece of crap -- borderline S&M porn dressed up a religious drag.

Posted by: truewest | 2006-02-01 10:53:15 AM


David,
To the best of my recollection, Jesus preached love. So why do you think it's okay be such a hateful little weasle?
And the reason Passion never received an nomination? Because it was a piece of crap -- borderline S&M porn dressed up in religious drag.

Posted by: truewest | 2006-02-01 10:54:47 AM


I suggest it's frightening. Think of the number of children who will watch those movies.

Homosexuals are pushing their agenda through all kinds of medias including movies.

Posted by: Rémi houle | 2006-02-01 10:59:33 AM


I just read truewest comment on The Passion of Christ.

A piece of crap he said. So all those people who went and watched the movie were pieces of crap? 1 billion dollars at the box office is not enough for moonbats and deviants.

Posted by: Rémi houle | 2006-02-01 11:08:21 AM


I'm tired of liberals saying silly things like: "Jesus preached love" - as if that settles it. If they actutually read the Bible they'd know there's far more to it than that. By "it" I mean love.

Jesus cleared the temple with a whip. Why? Because he hated to see his Father's temple defiled - he loved his Father. Another example: "the lukewarm I will spew from my mouth." I could go on

truewest - get off your behind and actually read the Bible. Then maybe you wouldn't have such simple minded ideas about what it says.

Posted by: Pat | 2006-02-01 11:19:52 AM


Not elitist enough for TW . Anything appealing to the right wing rabble could not possibly be accepted by the Hollywood pansy crowd. A piece of 3 rd grade trash such as BB Mt.which elicits anger from the right , will serve to keep these desperate egomaniacs ,' relative '

Posted by: dave | 2006-02-01 11:21:41 AM


Homoerotic sub-texts in early 90's...perhaps. As Mark Steyn commented in a recent article; "The point about a sub-text is that it's supposed to stay sub-." Sub-text evolving to the super-text of today makes "The Kids in the Hall" look subtle by comparison.

Posted by: BoomNoZoom | 2006-02-01 11:44:48 AM


There was a time when Oscar audiences had the good grace to boo the likes of Michael Moore. I have no doubt that this year's crop of podium pimps have their insightful and spontaneous anti-Bush bon mots already ghost-written and rehearsed. The line-up starts on the left.

Posted by: BoomNoZoom | 2006-02-01 11:53:25 AM


"esus cleared the temple with a whip. Why? Because he hated to see his Father's temple defiled - he loved his Father."

As I recall, it was the merchants and money lenders he chase out, wasn't it?

Posted by: balbulican | 2006-02-01 12:08:28 PM


I've heard and read lots of sissies say 'The Passion' was too violent. Apparantly nobody gave Mel Gibson the memo that Jesus was tickled to death, not beaten.

Posted by: Eskimo | 2006-02-01 12:11:44 PM


""politics apparently continues to enslave art"

YOu people are total barbarians. Completely anti-intellectual and utterly STUPID.

I think it's hilarious how you people come on here and cry and complain about Hollywood but you don't make your own films. Let's see how good they would do.

Jesus was a fag.

Posted by: Justin | 2006-02-01 12:13:43 PM


Oh, but were there such a thing as a conservative with creative talent (or brains for that matter).

Therein lies the problem.

Posted by: The Big M | 2006-02-01 12:16:15 PM


BoomNoZoom,
Actually, the booing of Michael Moore was from the cheap seats and represented a tiny minority of the audience. Because, yes, Hollywood is overwhelmingly liberal. (Except for Chuck Heston, Mel Gibson and a few b-listers).
.
As for the rest of you, watch whatever crap you like. You want to spend your $10 bucks watching some guy playing Jesus (or Bruce Willis) bleed all over the screen? I say more power to you.
As the Romans used to say, de gustibus non est disputandum.
That said, if the thoughts you've expressed here, your gustibus stinks.

Pat, your Jesus sounds like the Jesus imagined by the late great Bill Hicks. (Don't look him up, he'd be wasted on you) who, based on the rantings of folks like you, imagined him returning brandishing an Uzi: "Prince of Peace, my ass! Jesus is Back! And He's Pissed!" Of course, Hicks also wondered if Jesus did come back if he'd be pleased to see people wearing crosses. "Isn't that a little like going up to Jackie Kennedy while wearing a little tiny sniper rifle?"

Posted by: truewest | 2006-02-01 12:22:34 PM


Hey Justin: Mel Gibson couldn't get Hollywood to look at his movie. He invested 30 million of his own dollars and 'Passion' is poised to gross over one BILLION dollars. Not bad for a 'fag' movie as you would call it, seeing you equate Jesus as being homosexual.

The trouble with 'Bareback' is that it's so quintessential Hollywood, offering nothing more than jumping on the queer bandwagon. Hollywood's latest fascination with the rectal lifestyle will go down in history as nothing more than the new millenium equivelant to disco of the late 70's. Like Pet Rocks, crystals, smokless ashtrays and Veg-o-matics, people will tire of this fad and move on to the next perversion sweeping the globe. Who knows what the next 'thing' will be.

In as little as 5 years time, expect to see flee markets and garage sales across the western world packed full with leather chaps and berets, purple mesh tank tops, the complete "Queer as Folk" on DVD and "hardly used" tubes of Astro-Glide.

Posted by: Eskimo | 2006-02-01 12:34:33 PM


Hollywood neurotics being predominately liberal matters little to me as their self-centered ravings are non gradus anus rodentum.
However, homines libenter quod volunt credunt.
Die dulci fruere.
Mihi ignosce. Cum homine de cane debeo congredi.

Posted by: BoomNoZoom | 2006-02-01 12:45:19 PM


Eskimo,
So, homosexuality is a just a fad? A phase we've been going through (albeit for the past several millennia)?
And it's going to end in five years? Wow, you guys must be relieved.
On the other hand, the folks at Home and Garden Television must be absolutely frantic.
Or do you simply mean that treating homosexuals as part of the human race is just a passing fad and, once its over, folks like you can go back to beating them up and harrassing them without fear of punishment or reprisal?

Posted by: truewest | 2006-02-01 1:09:12 PM


Hey BoomNoZoom

Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur
Homines libenter quod volunt credunt.
Caesar si viveret, ad remum dareris. Vadum locuta est. Causa finita est.

Pax et Corripe Cervisiam -

Shhoter

Posted by: Shooter | 2006-02-01 1:18:49 PM


truewest: the 'fad' I'm referring to is the cult-like worship Hollywood/the left has for all things queer.

Posted by: Eskimo | 2006-02-01 2:21:21 PM


Eskimo,
I see. So you would distinguish this from the unthinking fear and loathing that the religious right has of all things, as you say, "queer", which I presume is timeless and unchanging?

Just out of curiosity, have you actually seen Brokeback Mountain? Or would that make you a sissy? A pansy? A pillow-biter? A fudgepacker? An ass-bandit? A friend of Dorothy?

Or worse, would it make you think? Can't have that now.

Posted by: truewest | 2006-02-01 3:04:50 PM


Hey Shooter,

All true except for Caesar's implied ill will toward me.
Pax indeed. And make mine a Guinness please.

Posted by: BoomNoZoom | 2006-02-01 3:19:49 PM


Homosexuality is not a fad, which is why it is and should be illegal to discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation.

Gay is a fad, and, indeed, a left-wing political movement, which is why the statutes should not be modified to redefine the traditional meaning of the word "marriage".

It seems to me that mostly Hollywood doesn't understand this, and sometimes they do, but I'm not the one to ask since the last movie I saw was in 1979.

Posted by: Vitruvius | 2006-02-01 4:53:18 PM


I was sitting right in front of you. Do you have to tie on the feed-bag everytime you go to a movie?

Posted by: EBD | 2006-02-01 5:40:42 PM


Speaking of feed bags, EBD, you might enjoy the lyrics to "I'm A Woman" by Maria Muldaur.

I can wash out forty-four pairs of socks
And have them hangin out on the line
I can starch and iron two dozen shirts
Before you can count from one to nine
I can scoop up a great big dipper
Full of lard from the drippin's can
Throw it in the skillet, go out and do my
Shopping and be back before it melts in the pan
'Cause I'm a woman
Double U O M A N
I'll say it again

I can rub and scrub till this old house
Is shinin like a dime
Feed the baby, grease the car and
Powder my face at the same time
Get all dressed up, go out and swing
Till four a.m. and then
Lay down at five, jump up at six
And start all over again
'Cause I'm a woman
Double U O M A N
I'll say it again

If you come to me sickly, you know
I'm gonna make you well
If you come to me hexed up,
You know I'm gonna break the spell
If you come to me hungry,
You know I'm gonna fill you full o' grits
If it's lovin' you're lackin, I'll kiss you
And give you the shiverin fits
'Cause I'm a woman
Double U O M A N
I'll say it again

I can stretch a greenback dollar bill
From here to kingdom come
I can play the numbers, pay my bills
And still end up with some
I got a twenty dollar gold piece says
There ain't nothin I can't do
I can make a dress out of a feed bag
And I can make a man out of you
'Cause I'm a woman
Double U O M A N
I'll say it again
'Cause I'm a woman
Double U O M A N
And that's all

Back in the days when the Entertainment Industry produced entertaining productions, the above lyrics could still be appreciated from an orthogonal perspective), via these lyrics from the "South Pacific":

Sailors, Seabees and Marines:
We got sunlight on the sand,
We got moonlight on the sea,
We got mangoes and bananas
You can pick right off the tree,
We got volleyball and ping-pong
And a lot of dandy games!
What ain't we got?
We ain't got dames!

We get packages from home,
We get movies, we get shows,
We get speeches from our skipper
And advice from Tokyo Rose,
We get letters doused with perfume
We get dizzy from the smell!
What don't we get?
You know darn well!

We have nothin' to put on a clean white suit for
What we need is what there ain't no substitute for...

There is nothin' like a dame,
Nothin' in the world,
There is nothin' you can name
That is anythin' like a dame!

We feel restless, we feel blue,
We feel lonely and in grief,
We feel ev'ry kind of feelin',
But the feelin' of relief
We feel hungry as the wolf felt
When he met Red Hiding-hood
What don't we feel?
We don't feel good!

Lots of things in life are beautiful, but brother,
There is one particular thing that is nothin' whatsoever
In any way, shape or form like any other.

There is nothin' like a dame,
Nothin' in the world,
There is nothin' you can name
That is anythin' like a dame!

Nothin' else was built the same,
Nothin' in the world
As the soft and wavy frame
Like the silhouette of a dame!

There is absolutely nothin' like a frame of a dame.

So suppose that dame and bride
Are completely free from flaws,
Or as faithful as a bird dog,
Or as kind as Santa Claus,
It's a waste of time to worry
Over things that they have not,
We're thankful for the things they got!

There is nothin' you can name
That is anythin' like a dame!

There are no books like a dame,
And nothin' looks like a dame.
There are no drinks like a dame,
And nothin' thinks like a dame,
Nothin' acts like a dame,
Or attracts like a dame.
There ain't a thing that's wrong with any man here
That can't be cured by pullin' him near
A girly, womanly, female, feminine dame!

[ So, have I pissed everybody off yet ;-) --Vitruvius ]

Posted by: Vitruvius | 2006-02-01 6:38:27 PM


A few decades ago, I thought that homosexuals were being given a bad deal by a system supposedly based on good people. So, I have been in favour of the breaking down of what I've always thought was an artifical barrier. Returning to the entertainment industry, we might consider these lyrics from Donna Summers:

There's a new me coming out
And I just had to live
And I wanna give
I'm completely positive
I think this time around
I am gonna do it
Like you never do it
Like you never knew it
Ooh, I'll make it through

The time has come for me
To break out of the shell
I have to shout
That I'm coming out

I've got to show the world
All that I wanna be
And all my billities
Ther's so much more to me
Somehow, I have to make them
Just understand
I got it well in hand
And, oh, how I've planned
I'm spreadin' love
There's no need to fear
And I just feel so glad
Everytime I hear:

I'm coming out
I want the world to know
Got to let it show
I'm coming out
I want the world to know
I got to let it show

That was good stuff. However, as I alluded to above, what I'm concerned about now is that the homosexual's case has been taken over by a self-serving activist ideology, commonly known as gay, that is having a net negative effect on our society as a whole precisely because it *has* become a fad, and worse now a political aberration, rather than simply being an actual natural sexual orientation.

Posted by: Vitruvius | 2006-02-01 6:55:26 PM


One of the things I observed over twenty years of spending early Sundays in discotheque nightclubs is that from time to time, in the middle of a dance floor of, oh, say 100 people, like, totally tripping out to the music, man, a pair of people, gender irrelevent, would more or less (if you'll excuse my language) start dry humping on the dance floor.

Interestingly, the general reaction of the dancers tended to be, "GET A ROOM!"

It doesn't matter so much, from society's perspective, that a small percentage of people turn out to be physically attracted to people of the same gender. What matters is that peoples' sexuality does not dominate the commons. At least, not when there's kids around, and not before I've had breakfast, thank you very much.

Posted by: Vitruvius | 2006-02-01 7:19:43 PM


It`s starting to hit me why queer people [ as was the term ] were shunned and even attacked in the past. It was the only way they could be restrained from inflicting their nastiness upon the rest of us.

Posted by: dave | 2006-02-01 7:37:53 PM


It pains me to say this, Vitruvius, but I have to disagree with you. You've made a fundmental error.

I'm Coming Out was performed by Diana Ross (you can call her Miss Ross), not Donna Summer.

As penance, please post the lyrics of It's Raining Men (co-written by Canada's own Paul Shaffer).

On a more serious note, how do you maintain the traditional definition of marriage without discrimination against homosexuals?

Posted by: truewest | 2006-02-01 7:39:41 PM


Oh bother, you're correct truewest, it was Ross, not Summer, I was thinking of "Sunset People". You may be interested to know that I actually played tambourine with the Weather Girls when they sang "It's Raining Men" at Greg's Blue Dot in Los Angeles, back in the mid-80's.

On the matter of the legal definition of the word "marriage" per Canada's statutes, I just don't see the need to change it in order to obtain rights that are equal upon principal, so since it has historic value as a cultural-o-biological signifier, I'd like to keep it for that purpose.

So, go ahead, call me a borborygmic logophile, it's not like it hasn't been done before.

Posted by: Vitruvius | 2006-02-01 8:11:21 PM



The comments to this entry are closed.