February 27, 2004

It’s not just that many of the Oscar races feel locked in…. it’s also that even when they seem open, not a single one of them seems to go very deep in the option pool.

In the pool of the five MCN writers (all male… Patricia, come back!) only two categories had as many as three different selections… in Best Original Song and Best Cinematography (where Ray Pride went for Cold Mountain… uh huh…). Of course, the big four locks remain unanimous: Best Picture and Best Director for Rings and Charlize and Tim. Perhaps the most surprising thing was that no one voted for Sean Penn as the likely Best Actor winner, as he has turned into an interesting underdog after months as the frontrunner.

Of course, Billy Crystal could be remembered forever and possibly burned alive on the way home by turning up on stage on a cross and loincloth. That would be funny. “I can see Charlize from here!”

I had a wonderful time at the IDA’s Oscar Nominee event at the Academy Wednesday night. The group of filmmakers this year is pretty laid back and all the films are good. I spent an hour with the co-director of The Weather Underground, Sam Green, just before the event. Good guy. But I don’t feel like writing about it right now.

The fight against Michael Eisner got a few more logs thrown on the fire on Thursday… zzzzzzzzzzz….

The second vote of the MCN 100 took place this week, but The Passion insanity got the best of many voters… so we’ll try to fill out the 100 fully next week. But in the meantime, there were two questions about the Oscars and the results for the votes that came are in are at MCN. I’ll just tell you that the “Worst Nomination Of The Year” vote was neck-and-neck between a horse and a bear. I will no doubt be accused of leading a conspiracy against one of the Oscar genius publicists who handles both films. But I prefer to think of it as a tribute to his skills.

And so, the end of a season will be here on Monday. Thank goodness. It looks like the first great film of the year might be Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, even if Focus is mysteriously hiding the film from some of us. Not everyone is in love, but a lot of the younger writers seem to feel that Michel Gondry and Charlie Kaufman found a blessed sync.

Forgive me for my brevity… have a great weekend… and I’ll see you all on the other side…

READER OF THE DAY: PG-MORE THAN 13 writes: “As a deeply committed Catholic Christian, I am thankful for Mr. Gibson's personal commitment of time and money to bring the passion of my savior to life. All the great Christian mystics and spiritual writers have said that to attain spiritual perfection one must meditate on the passion -- and the mystics who have had visions of the passion describe it much the way Gibson has. Indeed, it is from the writing of the mystics that he gets some of his extra-canonical details.

But I have wondered since seeing it last month and again last week (in private screenings), what will non-Christians think of this? Your review did a wonderful job of answering that question for me. I appreciate your honesty. It's unfortunate that Mr. Gibson didn't work harder to make a more contextual apologetic piece. This is definitely an "insider's club" affair. I wonder if he knew that? I mean, here he makes a film that absolutely relies on the shared culture of a single group, but wants the whole world to see it and be moved by it. Odd.

So, at the end of the day Mr. Gibson's film is a just an expensive "way of the cross" for Catholics to ponder during Lent. It certainly succeeds as such. It's much better than the cheesy depictions of Christ's death which hang on the walls of our Catholic churches. This is how Ebert reviewed it, and I agree.

The film has problems, and you point them out well. I appreciated your comments, especially as a Jewish person. Many have said it, but reading your review led me to the conclusion that Mr. Gibson really does have a sin of omission here in not showing (but for a few facial expressions) any real internal conflict in the Jewish leaders.

Thanks for a very good review. I think you summed it up well and with panache in this paragraph:

But I'm afraid that The Passion of The Christ tries far too hard to really be considered a success as a movie. As a way for Christians to find a new commitment to their faith… absolutely. As a recruiting tool… sure. As the source of a lot of dining room table debate… damned skippy. But does the film, in the end, hold up as anything more than a beautifully made curiosity? No.

It's a shame -- it could have been so much more. Still, I predict that this movie will make a ton of money and be the beginning of a rebirth of Biblical epics. Wouldn't you agree?”

E ME: Actually, I think it is a one off situation, but we’ll see. There was some buzz about a remake of Jesus Christ Superstar a couple of years back. What kind of biblical epic would you all like to see? Matt Damon and Greg Kinnear as Kane & Abel? Michael Moore as Leftie Moses? Chris Rock as The Pharaoh in a Holy Moses remake?