PopcornTreeCt

What do you think? I think it pretty much lost all chances of consideration when America basically said "We're not buying it".

FinkPish

But America isn't voting in the Academy Awards, Hollywood is. And Hollywood tends to be fairly liberal.

scott shelton

Not now, not here, not again.

There's little need for another 9/11 thread.

I can beat 90% of you to the punch right now:

"Moore's a fatty boom blatty who is rich! Blaaaah!"

Thread closed.

cupcake jesus

Wouldn't it be out of contention because of the online & pay-per-view distribution just prior to the election? Anyone who knows the Academy rules, please enlighten.

Cheers.

-the Jesus

FinkPish

I don't see how the election would have any bearing on whether or not the film gets a nomination. It has had a fairly normal release pattern, probably accelerated a bit to compensate for the election, but that wouldn't keep it out of the running.

Rivero

I don't feel that's true at all. In fact, when this was first released I figured there was no chance in hell for this to get any consideration. But now, I expect it to be one of the names announced in January.

PopcornTreeCt

Could you elaborate more? I'm curious because the sole purpose of the film was to get Bush out of office and the film failed at that. If Kerry had been elected I would say the film was a success, and certainly deserve the nomination. To me its just that simple and there is no way to judge the film other than that.

Rivero

This makes no sense. That's like saying Titanic deserved all 11 Oscars only because it became the highest grossing film ever. Moore's film is a success. It is well made. It's the highest grossing documentary (pseudo-documentary, whatever) ever and will be for a long time. It being ineligible for Best Documentary and the number of liberals in Hollywood will only increase it's chances and support from people who will push it for Picture as a way of sending some kind of message. The fact that this has been a truly shitty movie year doesn't hurt.

FinkPish

I don't think the fact that the film didn't have the desired effect changes people's perception of the film. And I don't agree that the sole purpose was to get Bush out of office. I think that would have been gravy for Moore(fat joke), but I think he was also trying to enlighten people on something he wanted them to see.

Do you think Hoop Dreams wasn't a success because all the kids didn't make it into the NBA?

Michael T Hudson

I say there is no way it will win even if it does get the nomination.

Cygnet74

i think a nomination for best picture has always been unlikely. although, i'm sure it will be up for best documentary.

Jackskeleton

when it comes to movies that aren't Star Wars, I can agree with you.

You all may disagree with the views of moore, but you can't deny that this film was beyond successful.

Supermallet

Yes. And 2001: A Space Odyssey was a failure because it didn't come true, either.

PopcornTreeCt

Hoop Dreams is a good example, I guess I kinda see it now. But I still think Bush's victory has hurt its chances for a nom.

PopcornTreeCt

Your example, on the other hand, makes no sense at all.

FinkPish

With so many liberal people in Hollywood, I bet that it would at least get nominated as a nice "fuck you" to Bush.

conscience

I don't know about an Oscar, but here is a winner for sure:

MTV Movie Award:

George W. Bush - Best Villian

to go along with his other "top villian" award.

Travis66

You guys should check out the web-page oscarrace.com. It seems that they agree Fahrenheit 911 has lost its oscar consideration. If they do nominated as a "fuck you" to Bush, it would be a rather dumb thing to do. Bush can always say,"fuck you, Im STILL president." Fahrenheit 911 was good,but regardless of your politics, I want a movie to win Best Picture, not a documentary.

FinkPish

Yeah, but a lot of what they are basing it on is buzz from films that haven't even come out yet, and no one has seen. Did you see this on their main page, from the NY Times report on Academy screenings?:
I'm not saying it should or will win, I'm just saying look at the reaction.

Travis66

i did get my info from the oscarrace.com main paige Finkpish. They also have some predictions (although they all wont be right) and it seems that Fahrenheit 911,along with the other controversial movie The Passion, have been left out. In past oscars, films that received early oscar buzz seem to get the nominations and the wins.

ps.sorry for the lack of quates. Im still trying to get the hang of this.

FinkPish

Actually, most years it is the films that get later Oscar buzz that end up taking the most nominations. Something that came out in February is going to have a harder time getting the attention it needs, a opposed to something that comes out in December.

It looks like this year, we will end up with a lot of late bloomers (i.e. films coming out at the tail end of the season), so I think that will probably affect F9/11 more than anything else. I didn't think the film was as great as everyone says, and if enough good films are coming out this month and next, it could lose simply because of that. Though, it will be interesting to see how much politics plays a part in this year's Oscars.

Supermallet

That's actually a reference to a real article a film critic wrote saying that 2001 is completely overrated because it didn't come true.

Apparently the critic forgot that there's a line between fact and fiction.

PopcornTreeCt

Ah, I see.

Honestly I do not care if Fahrenheit 9/11 is nominated or not. I'm kinda hoping it doesn't win though because it is a documentary. If I had to choose between 2 movies, one of them a doc, the other fictional, I would give the award to the fictional movie, even if the documentary was clearly better. That's just me. I don't want to look through an Oscar list and see Braveheart, Gone With the Wind, Lawrence of Arabia and Fahrenheit 9/11.

nightmaster

I dunno.....53 million of us did buy it and 57 million didn't; I didn't see any landslides.
In any case, I think it should be judged on it's own merit, not seen as whether or not it was sucessful as a propoganda tool of some sort. I agree with several other opinions here, it's a documentary.....I'm okay with movies I don't like winning best picture, but a documentary is just wrong.

jaeufraser

Honestly, I hope it doesn't get nominated. Moore is a talented documentary filmmaker, he's good at what he does. but F9/11 (I'll admit I don't agree with his perspective) but nonetheless it's hardly even his best work.

What was exceptional about F 9/11 was its response, its effect, though as a film itself I'd say it actually is fairly weak. It's not bad, but hardly best picture material. This is a tough movie to judge properly (of course those who agree will see it much more positively then those who don't, though I doubt most of us here would claim F 9/11 to really be that exceptional in terms of docu filmmaking).

Nonetheless, I'm hoping the Academy doesn't cave to nominating a film just because of its popularity and anti-Bush sentiment. Now, I'm thinking that many will not want it as a nominee simply because it's not a traditional film (a sentiment I don't really disagree with). But the Bush win in many ways does marginlize it's chances, as its main purpose as a film was to dethrone Bush, which didn't happen and of course, makes it not quite the success as was seen before. Though, that's not diminishing the success it did have, which was substantial.