As for Penn's comments, did he say something about people protesting outside the awards ceremony, trying to keep him out or some such? I didn't see the show, but Mrs. B-Bob said there was some mention of that. If that's true, it is really odd. So people would protest the existence of a historical biopic that followed word for word a thorough reporter's account of the actual events? And hey, if you really hate gay people, then you could take solace in the fact that the loud, powerful gay man is executed in the end of the story.
I already agreed he's an *******. I only took issue with "of the highest degree." He doesn't have the power to be an ******* of any high degree. If you think it's stupid to listen to actors, fine. Be angry at people who do that, not at the actors who speak their minds. Everyone should be able to speak their minds and, in his defense, even when he's controversial he's usually right. Did you think what he said tonight was wrong? It's not like Penn said 9/11 widows were sluts or whatever it was Coulter said. He really hasn't said anything that bad at all. Feel free to be annoyed by him, but actually getting pissed at him? That's a serious LOL. He's just an actor. Like Mr. T or Mel Gibson, exactly. Basically a rich but insignificant so and so. *******? Totally. Like pretty much every famous actor or famous or rich anybody. ******* of the highest degree? You almost couldn't say anything sillier than that.
That's why I could care less what these individuals are like outside of the movies- or even those from other artistic genres. The members of Led Zeppelin could be jerks- does that make their music bad? Heck no. Tom Hanks could be a big-time jerk for all we know- does that have anything to do with his acting? You know, from all accounts, Daryl Hannah is a pretty nice person, but the woman is an average-to-bad actor. I don't watch film to see the people I personally like because I don't know any of them and I don't need to (closest I ever came was shaking hands with Clint Eastwood at a Lionel Richie/Sheila E concert at the Summit back in 1984 or 1985, I think it was 84- looks just as intimidating in person). Sean Penn is a very good actor who I enjoy watching because he absorbs himself into a variety of different roles, like the musician in Sweet and Lowdown, the mentally challenged guy in I Am Sam, the dude from Mystic River, Harvey Milk, and, of course, Spicoli. Who cares what he's like? You know, what you sometimes find out is that the people you think are jerks are actually very nice in person (e.g. Charles Barkley), and the ones you think are nice people aren't (have no idea who). So, I think it's just best to admire people for their art, nothing more. P.S. Mickey Rourke should have won. But only by a little bit.
is he not from a third world nation? what makes you think that a documentary filmmaker from Laos has the means to get elective dentistry performed? perhaps he was more concerned with bringing awareness to his cause... and although, I didn't see the Wrestler yet, it's not a big shock to see the MPAA vote Penn for Milk. I wonder if the protests he was speaking of were anti-Hollywood or anti-Milk specifically... this was the Academy's statement regarding Prop 8 in California, and Penn got his last word in to an audience that this did need to be lectured on such a matter. just my two cents...
An audience of tens of millions didn't need to be reminded of civil rights? I can think of at least two percent of the swing vote in California that should have payed attention. What better platform is there, the Super Bowl? If the telecast is supposed to be devoid of any grander ideas, what's the point of honoring great films in the first place: to ignore what makes these films great/relevant, look at designer dresses for three hours, and then complain about how self-involved celebrities are?
i see it as a time to honor the cast and crew that made the films so great. while I agree with Penn's statement, I didn't think it was appropriate to shame the 48% you mention... what I am saying is the film about Harvey Milk does nothing to change civil rights. HARVEY MILK did something to change civil rights.
He wasn't talking to those 48% or whatever it was, 110th St. He was talking to the nation. It's a rare pulpit, the Oscars, when people are watching. And the film he made put him in the mind of caring about civil rights. It is in no way unusual to talk about the cause your movie or the subject of your movie championed when winning an award for same movie. It is outrageous that an anti-gay civil rights initiative passed in CA. The movies are the entertainment. The Oscars are the one time when those who made the best movies get a legitimate mic. He was right to call shame on not just those Californians but those Americans who would deny equal rights to all Americans. I wish actors and others had done more with every mic they had for blacks and women previously and I'm glad every time that anyone uses a mic to talk about equal rights for oppressed classes now. You said it should be about honoring the people who worked on the film. Did you see the shots of those people in the crowd? Their eyes were welling with pride. They are a piece with Penn's mission here. They did feel honored.
We're still ignoring the real issue here. Benjamin Button != makeup. Best Visual Effects? Yes, sure. Dark Knight should have won best Makeup.
I see what you're saying, but disagree about the impact of Hollywood/celebrity ideals on the nation/culture at large. Which had greater influence on the nation's perception of race relations, Guess Who's Coming to Dinner? or one lunchroom in the '60s when one white family and one black family actually broke bread? The Cosby Show, or an actual '80s doctor who lived in the 120s, wore snazzy sweaters, and impressed his absolute normalcy on the five white people he came into contact with on a weekly basis? As a people, we Americans eat/sleep/regurgitate, Howard Beale-style, Hollywood and television. It is a, if not the, major influence in shaping how we think about our society. I think more people will end up seeing (or at least hearing about) Milk, the film, than ever heard about Milk, the man. While that indeed is likely a shame, films have that power over our perceptions. That most of them deal with animated Chihuahuas or lousy first dates, is not a reason to diminish those that actually can change the broader consciousness for the better.
True that. Who else sees Mickey Rourke being the villain in the next Batman sequel, then having his career flame out again, a la Thomas Haden Church (comeback = Sideways) in Spiderman 3?
That goes without saying. I got that out of my system when TDK wasn't nominated though, I've come to accept that TDK wasn't in the mix, even though it should have won.
I disagree, he could have used the life of Harvey Milk in a positive light, and instead he brought up 2008 California Politics. The screenwriter made a plea to promote equal rights in a way that didn't alienate viewers or make it about the election. Penn could have talked about the parallels of Prop 6 in 1978 and Prop 8 in 2008, the amazing things harvey Milk did for his cause, how Milk's work affects laws today, etc... It was a very moving performance. His speech? not so much. it's not a surprise these days to hear actors get up on their soapboxes and make asses of themselves. what good does it do again? If he wants to make a difference he should run for office, he has my vote.
His speech wasn't meant to be moving or persuasive. It was his time and he was pissed so he said so. Was there a better way to do it? Maybe. When you win an Oscar you can be more gentlemanly about it. I appreciated what he said. I'm pissed about it too. And I thought he was extremely eloquent in suggesting that the grandchildren of those voters would be ashamed of those votes. I think that's right and I'm glad he said it. Obama's been great about greasing the wheels on this sort of stuff, on soft entreaties to people who disagree. But that's not Penn's responsibility. This stuff is worth getting pissed off about and when he gets that mic and it's his and he's pissed, it's up to him what he says. I'm glad he said what he did while a lot of people were listening. I'm glad he told them they should be ashamed. They should be.
The nice part of this is Clint Eastwood going to a Sheila E & Lionel Richie concert, who'da thought? Thats like Robert Deniro going to an R Kelly concert. Agree, got too much going on in my own life to get all worked up about what some entertainer does in his. I'm more concerned with what actual politicians speaking politics do, not what some non-politician outside of politics says. But still entertainers speaking out on stuff is more annoying than productive. Like Fiona Apple years ago getting on her soapbox about dumb stuff. Really its as long as they're RIGHT in what they're saying its okay, or if they're raising awareness for something. Insulting the audience doesnt work
Yeah, it was in Houston in 1984, like May or June. We had floor seats and so did Clint and his S.O. Sondra Locke. My friend had the balls to push past his security guards and shake his hand, so since I was right behind, I did the same. Didn't seem too interested in interacting with the fans- don't blame him, really. Wasn't mean or anything- just had that look- I was ready for a barrage of Eastwoodisms: "Well, did I make your day? You feel lucky, punk, for shaking my hand? You know, we all have it coming, kid. Micushela." (the last 2, of course, would have been anachronisms since Unforgiven and Million Dollar Baby came out considerably after 1984).
the problem I have with Penn's speech is not what he said but how much he left the man, Harvey Milk, out of the equation. you should see the film, if you haven't.
I haven't seen the film. I will. I plan to. It's difficult for me to find two free hours in a row and when I do I usually spend them watching recorded Rockets games. But I do plan to rent this and Slumdog Millionaire and Frost/Nixon and that Brad Pitt movie eventually. I guess I can understand what you're saying, but this wasn't Milk's night. He's had his nights. This was Penn's. It was his speech to write and to say what he wanted to say. If he had a responsibility to honor Milk, it was in the movie. And though I haven't seen it I trust that he did that or he wouldn't have won. But I guess my main point is that I didn't find a single thing he said to be the least bit radical or objectionable and I'm surprised that it's even a little bit controversial. In fact, I think everything he said should be regarded to be conventional wisdom. And, since he was in his rights saying it given that it was him being honored (not Milk, for example) I was glad he felt moved to say it because it's not said enough - especially before a large audience. You wish he hadn't, or that he'd said it differently. I wish more people would say exactly what he said because I think more people need to hear it, and not in a gentle way. Maybe we'll just have to agree to disagree.
Interesting to look back on the Best Picture Winners so far this decade and see if the Academy really got it right. I don't think they picked the most deserving winner in 2001, 2002, and 2005. I think the others were all pretty good choices. 2000s * 2000 Gladiator o Chocolat - o Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon o Erin Brockovich - o Traffic * 2001 A Beautiful Mind o Gosford Park o In the Bedroom o The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring o Moulin Rouge! * 2002 Chicago o Gangs of New York o The Hours o The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers o The Pianist * 2003 The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King o Lost in Translation o Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World o Mystic River o Seabiscuit * 2004 Million Dollar Baby o The Aviator o Finding Neverland o Ray o Sideways * 2005 Crash o Brokeback Mountain o Capote o Good Night, and Good Luck. o Munich * 2006 The Departed o Babel o Letters from Iwo Jima o Little Miss Sunshine o The Queen * 2007 No Country for Old Men o Atonement o Juno o Michael Clayton o There Will Be Blood
