March 2, 2004

I’m still hung over…

And I’m not talking about liquor. It is a moment of transition. Los Angeles is rainy, the next story hasn’t really come along yet. The entire city is essentially walking behind the elephant saying, “What? And get out of show business?”

There are 100 things I’ve thought I should write about today. They come and they go.

There were two major moments yesterday. The first is the 11 Oscar sweep for Lord of the Rings: Return of the King and the other is the $125 million start for The Passion of The Christ. Oddly, each story seems to be both ubiquitous and somehow boring. So I guess I’m not the only one suffering a hype hangover.

The success of The Passion of The Christ is a truly historic moment for the film industry. Like most such moments, it is singular and unlikely to ever be repeated. But while $125 million grosses have a tendency to get people buzzing about the business side of things and to silence many of the voices attacking the film (and I mean attacking, not just disliking), we should take time to genuflect.

Various things have occurred to me about the film. One is that it has quickly become marginalized, even as the margin it speaks to shows itself to be huge and willing to spend to have what they seem to feel is a life-changing experience. In an odd way, the split of viewers between the “we don’t get it” and the “of course you don’t get it, we’ll pray for you” groups has made the film quickly feel less dangerous, even if that notion was a bit overstated in the first place. The separation is so profound that there is no real basis for argument. Either you are with it or not. $125 million later, the ramifications of the film – or lack of such – have evolved into a much bigger kettle of fish.

The situation is very much like a political election cycle for a candidate that has some hardcore supporters and hardcore detractors. As the candidate, in this case the film, enters the race, there is an effort by detractors to marginalize it and its potential while the supporters lay out their strategy, which is more often than not to accuse the accusers of being afraid of the power of the candidate’s message. As the primaries come along, the candidate, now considered a big underdog, suddenly has a huge victory and the entire tenor of the discussion about “his” legitimacy changes. Both supporters and foes have to change their tunes to meet the new, unexpected popularity. And the media has to start doing its real work, examining the reality of the candidate and not just the image and their preconceived notions.

As I wrote in my MCN commentary on some of the mail we have received since we started covering this film, people are showing their true colors. I am a great believer that sunlight is the best disinfectant. And for all of my issues with the choices Mel Gibson has made, mostly before the film was released, I have to say that I am pleased with the strong rays of light is has shined on society and the media. I will still get mail that accuses me of doing Satan’s work and prays for me to find Christ (thanks… I know where he is for me already) so that I may be saved. And I will get mail that prays for me without condemning me to hell. And I will get mail that feels I am being too generous to Mr. Gibson and his film. But these are the moments that define who we are and who we will be.

These are not gargantuan moments. They are moments of quiet humanity and they tend to offer far greater clarity than those bigger moments. Personally, I don’t think that rising to the moment when the adrenaline is pumping and you can cover yourself in heroism is all that challenging. But to offer love and acceptance to your fellow beings and to yourself in the quiet moments… these are the moments that define us.

So what comes next?

Well, it’s almost impossible to say right now. But The Christians are out of the closet and how long they stay out and how powerfully this moment becomes is up to a number of key people, not one of whom it me.

My biggest question right now is, what will Mel Gibson do with the money? Because while I have no interest in counting Mel’s money for him or telling him what to do with it, you have to wonder, how much can a man with the complete focus of the media and hundreds of millions to spend, on top of his already enormous wealth, do to change our country, whether through religion or some other religion-free community effort?

With $200 million, less than half of what Mel will personally make on this film in the end, he could build a few private schools to bring education and religion to, say, inner city children who can afford neither.

He could fund a series of films, say 5, from production to P&A, to be made by filmmakers who wish to tackle subjects that Hollywood generally shies away from, like religion. This would not only bring real opportunity to some filmmakers, but also has the potential to spawn another significant income producer that would allow the cycle to continue.

He could give a lot of money to charities of his choice.

He could evangelize and try to build support, with the help of the funding, to galvanize believers into an openly acknowledged political powerhouse, above the politics of many of the very political groups that often use religion as a shield.

It will all be quite interesting to watch. Certainly more so than the controversy leading up to the release of the film, don’t ya think?

One last note. Richie Roeper predicted that the film will not be nominated for Best Picture at next year’s Oscars and that Gibson will not be nominated for Best Director. I beg to differ. While Hollywood is dominated by Jews, I expect that there are enough “believers” in the Academy and enough people who will feel obliged to acknowledge the influence of the film that there is a very real chance that it will be nominated for both Best Picture and Best Director, as well as garnering nominations for Jim Caviezal, Caleb Deschanel, and perhaps Maia Morgenstern. Ironically, it will not qualify for Best Foreign Language picture, although it might be possible for the United States to offer a foreign language film, just as English-speaking Canada and England do. I’ll have to get back to you on that.

AS FOR LORD OF THE RINGS, amazingly enough, Peter Jackson and Fran Walsh will probably clear just a few more dollars for their seven year effort than Mel will for his effort. You kinda have to wonder what the tax bracket for that is in New Zealand.

I will say that when I ran into Peter Jackson, he looked as relaxed as a man with an Oscar in each hand can look. The New Line crew wasn’t quite as relaxed when Jackson, Fran Walsh, Phillipa Boyens and the rest of the parade pulled into the New Line party at 1:30 a.m. after partying at the Onering.net party for hours. I take that back. They were even more relaxed because most of them were home and asleep by that hour.

The biggest story of the night for me was not the boredom, but the ratings boost that iced the unmitigated cake of success that the Academy’s move to an earlier date was. People hate change. But you have to give it up to the change this year.

The Golden Globes were turned into an also-ran and with its rating boost, thanks in no small part to its not having to face the competition of NFL playoff football, you can expect it to stay right in its new slot on the off-week between the football conference championships and the Super Bowl. They will surely be touting their 9 correct picks in 10 analogous categories. But I would argue that BFCA showed much greater influence with their 9 matching winners and Oscar nominations for 2 of the 3 analogous category BFCA winners who went on not to get Oscars. The one BFCA winner not to get an Oscar nod was the song, “A Mighty Wind,” though you could surely say that BFCA helped keep the idea of a song from the film A Mighty Wind in Oscar voters’ minds. (I am, by the way, a BFCA member. And the BFCA president would want me to remind you that the Golden Globes have 4 split categories – drama/comedy that the BFCA does not.)

Anyway, more on the big win for the AMPAS in this season’s last 20 Weeks To Oscar column, this Wednesday at MCN.

READER OF THE DAY: UP ALL NIGHT writes: “Of course The Passion Of The Christ hit big. The only surprise is how surprised people are about it--which, sadly, underscores the point conservative Christians are always making that they are underestimated.

All you needed to see this coming was two points: 1) there's a shitload of dedicated Christians out there, and 2) it became an article of faith for them to see this movie. 2) was obvious, I think, once the culture war started. So if you underestimated the box office potential of the movie, you clearly missed 1). Score one for Michael Medved, et al.

Disclaimer: I am personally a devout atheist, but was raised in the Methodist church, in the South, amongst Baptists, etc.”

STACIE writes: “Dear David, Apparently the box office sales speak for themselves. I found it so humorous you Hollywood types think you know what people outside of LA

like. Looks like Mel Gibson will have the last laugh. The good guys win again! Sincerely, Stacie”

And this from FREE TO BE: “There are all sorts of great stories in the Bible, but for starters, I'd like to see Universal (or whoever owns the rights nowadays) re-release

Scorsese's THE LAST TEMPTATION OF CHRIST, even if it's only limited to a few theaters. It's only gained in stature over the years (as has its director's rep) and I even know of fairly devout people who avoided it in the theaters, caught up with it later, only to find themselves deeply moved by it. I happen to think it's one of the 3 or 4 best films Scorsese ever made, and it's certainly the best performance Willem Dafoe ever gave.

I know it'll probably never happen, but in the current climate, where the cultural conservatives are finding themselves on the free speech side of the debate vis-a-vis Gibson's film, Scorsese's masterpiece might actually have a chance of something resembling a fair shake.”

Finally, this coming from THE LEMON LIME: “2004 Oscar A to Z

Adrian Brody is a pretty funny guy.

Bill Murray makes losing look cool.

Charlize Theron's face will never work the same for me again.

Edwards, Blake still hasn't made as many good movies as Christopher Guest.

Francis Coppola hasn't made a good movie since 1979.

Gay Harden, Marcia apparently wore one of Natalie Portman's dresses from that last Star Wars movie.

Hobbits are really, really short... even without the CGI.

In America was indeed the best movie of last year (good on you, Dave).

Jack Black and Will Farrell should be allowed to sing the best song nominees

Keisha Castle-Hughes and Jennifer Beals must be related.

Lost In Translation is a movie only a critic in mid-life could love.

Mystic River is likewise only a three star movie.

Nicholson, Jack is the new Jack Palance

Owen Wilson and Ben Stiller should apply for a marriage license in San Francisco.

Penn, Sean's third great performance involved seeing him smile at least half a dozen times last night.

Question any movie award ceremony where Oprah Winfrey is a presenter.

Richard Roeper is starting to grow on me (for West Coast viewers only)

Shohoren Agdashloo was easily the most attractive woman on the red carpet.

Triplets Of Belleville number was the only good one.

Uma looked like a matador in that dress.

Vin Diesel can't act – this random fact is a great way to fill in this letter.

Winona Ryder should have accepted the original screenplay award in place of the enduringly vapid and phony Sophia Coppola.

XXX sucked big time — it's also a great way to fill in this letter.

You have to admit, the Eugene Levy/Catherine O'Hara kiss was just as creepy Sunday night as it was in the movie.

Zellweger, Renee completely deserved her Oscar this year.”

E ME: What letter turns you on?