Hot gas at the Oscars
The Academy Awards and politics have always gone together like pickles and chocolate (think Marlon Brando's bizarre refusal of his best actor Oscar in 1973 because he was upset about the treatment of American Indians, or Michael Moore's embarrassing 2003 acceptance speech), but the political undertones of last night's telecast made me wince more than usual. This time, the political cause du jour happened to be a very important issue -- global warming. But after seeing the glitterati's attempts at consciousness-raising, I begin to think that the best thing Hollywood could do for the environment would be to shut up about it already.
Climate change took center stage largely because Al Gore's documentary "An Inconvenient Truth" was nominated for two awards and won both. Gore himself mugged with Leonardo DiCaprio in a semi-amusing take on Gore's presidential ambitions, with the actor fawning over the former vice president because of his leadership in the global-warming debate. Singer Melissa Etheridge turned up the heat with her acceptance speech, a ramble on the need for self-sacrifice and action to save the planet. Yet urgent entreaties for self-sacrifice, when they come from super-wealthy celebrities who would not feel the impact of a carbon tax even if one were imposed, do not play well in Peoria. And while Etheridge, who is proudly gay, had every right to kiss her wife on the lips and thank her for her support during her speech, it's not the sort of thing that wins friends and influences people in Middle America. There are plenty of conservatives who are on the fence about global warming, but this kind of thing pushes them right off it and into the arms of Exxon-Mobil.
Gore's film is great, and probably deserved the Oscar. But when it comes to politics, most movie stars would do better to let the movies talk for them.
Well, unless they happen to be the governor of California...
Subscribe to this Blog What is RSS?
Everyone has a right to speak about the issues, and that includes politics.
Rich, poor, or somewhere in the middle (where I am), it is important to take a stand, even if the only stand we make is on our heads.
If someone does not agree with us, fine.
If a person does agree, then more than fine.
Maybe the super-wealthy may not have to sacrifice when they ask others to do so, but hey, we others know that anyway.
Yes, there are some who will laugh, but you can't please everyone.
Politics will always find a way into the entertainment industry, and vice versa.
It is just more noticeable because it is in front of us.
Uncle Joe in Peoria will voice his views, and tell us what he thinks needs to be done with the climate, but no one in Miami will hear about it.
They will hear about Al Gore or Tom Hanks when they speak about the same thing.
That is just nature.
And those in Peoria can tune them out.
George Vreeland Hill
Posted by: George Vreeland Hill | February 26, 2007 at 05:47 PM
The Oscars stopped being about the movies a long time ago. It's about the dresses and the politics now. ...and lifetime achievement awards. Even the nominations are lifetime achievement awards--why else would Babel get nominated? Sure, there were a few interesting questions to be asked. (Was Pan's Labyrinth a better film than The Lives of Others?) ...but the questions were answered, for the most part, long before the the slithered up the red carpet.
A lifetime achievement award for Mirren in a film about politics, check. I guess Dench wasn't available. I presume there's something in production featuring Miss Manners from "Keeping up Appearances" to be awarded next year?
Forest Whitaker wins in a film about politics, check. By the way, not that Whitaker should be faulted for the script--an actor's greatest work is done with a bad script, I think, but with a subject as fascinating as Idi Amin, why write the film from the perspective of a semi-invented sex tourist? That could have been a great film if only... Oh well, as long as it's about politics.
And Best Film goes to *drum roll*
...Insert Legend for lifetime achievement.
So the Oscars aren't about the movies?! They're about dresses and magazines and politics and they have been for a long time. Maybe it's always been about dresses and magazines--I don't know. ...but about politics?
I blame the hippies.
Posted by: Ken Shultz | February 26, 2007 at 06:15 PM