小妮子胡言亂語

以下英文評析為轉載自網路文章(因為看不到出處來源，所以無法標示)

Why 'Crash' won, why 'Brokeback' lost and how the academy chose to play it safe.

[i]Breaking no ground [/i]

March 5, 2006 Sometimes you win by losing, and nothing has proved what a powerful, taboo-breaking, necessary film Brokeback Mountain was more than its loss Sunday night to Crash in the Oscar best picture category.

Despite all the magazine covers it graced, despite all the red-state theaters it made good money in, despite (or maybe because of) all the jokes late-night talk show hosts made about it, you could not take the pulse of the industry without realizing that this film made a number of people distinctly uncomfortable.

More than any other of the nominated films, Brokeback Mountain was the one people told me they really didn't feel like seeing, didn't really get, didn't understand the fuss over. Did I really like it, they wanted to know. Yes, I really did.

In the privacy of the voting booth, as many political candidates who've led in polls only to lose elections have found out, people are free to act out the unspoken fears and unconscious prejudices that they would never breathe to another soul, or, likely, acknowledge to themselves. And at least this year, that acting out doomed Brokeback Mountain.

For Hollywood, as a whole laundry list of people announced from the podium Sunday night and a lengthy montage of clips tried to emphasize, is a liberal place, a place that prides itself on its progressive agenda. If this were a year when voters had no other palatable options, they might have taken a deep breath and voted for Brokeback. This year, however, Crash was poised to be the spoiler.

I do not for one minute question the sincerity and integrity of the people who made Crash, and I do not question their commitment to wanting a more equal society. But I do question the film they've made. It may be true, as producer Cathy Schulman said in accepting the Oscar for best picture, that this was one of the most breathtaking and stunning maverick years in American history, but Crash is not an example of that.

I don't care how much trouble Crash had getting financing or getting people on board, the reality of this film, the reason it won the best picture Oscar, is that it is, at its core, a standard Hollywood movie, as manipulative and unrealistic as the day is long. And something more.

For Crash's biggest asset is its ability to give people a carload of those standard Hollywood satisfactions but make them think they are seeing something groundbreaking and daring. It is, in some ways, a feel-good film about racism, a film you could see and feel like a better person, a film that could make you believe that you had done your moral duty and examined your soul when in fact you were just getting your buttons pushed and your preconceptions reconfirmed.

So for people who were discomfited by Brokeback Mountain but wanted to be able to look themselves in the mirror and feel like they were good, productive liberals, Crash provided the perfect safe harbor. They could vote for it in good conscience, vote for it and feel they had made a progressive move, vote for it and not feel that there was any stain on their liberal credentials for shunning what Brokeback had to offer. And that's exactly what they did.

Brokeback, it is worth noting, was in some ways the tamest of the discomforting films available to Oscar voters in various categories. Steven Spielberg's Munich; the Palestinian Territories' Paradise Now, one of the best foreign language nominees; and the documentary nominee Darwin's Nightmare offered scenarios that truly shook up people's normal ways of seeing the world. None of them won a thing.

Hollywood, of course, is under no obligation to be a progressive force in the world. It is in the business of entertainment, in the business of making the most dollars it can. Yes, on Oscar night, it likes to pat itself on the back for the good it does in the world, but as Sunday night's ceremony proved, it is easier to congratulate yourself for a job well done in the past than actually do that job in the present.

個人覺得本篇評論寫的很中肯

因為除了斷背山還有衝擊效應

其他的電影我沒有看過

因此實在無法評斷最佳影片應該獎落誰家

但是如同引用本篇作者所說：

【有時候你通過失去而獲勝，再沒有什麼比BBM在奧斯卡上的失利更能證明它是一部多麼強而有力、破除禁忌的影片。】

如我之前所述，衝擊效應確實點出社會問題

甚至試圖告訴大家

我有在想辦法，我希望可以解決並幫助這些問題

但實際上，它只是點出所有的問題

讓所有人心中的不滿都可以宣洩

好像靠著這部電影為社會上的不平等發聲

就可以弭平所有的問題

這樣的想法及意圖其實是很有趣的

但也因為這樣弔詭的人性

衝擊效應出線了，成為今年的最佳影片

將狀似具有前瞻性創意的片斷故事融合成一部創世巨作

不只沒有讓我感受到它的震撼力

反而讓我覺得這是一部完全沒有重點，沒有主軸的電影

看完後，只讓我有種遺憾的感覺

最後

本篇引用作者的結語真是說的太好了

【當然，好萊塢從來不是一個承載進步力量的地方。它是娛樂業，是娛樂的行業。奧斯卡之夜表彰了你過去的工作，但它不開拓未來。】

一針見血，解答了今年奧斯卡最佳影片的根本精神。

2006/03/10  15:50