Gays and Transsexuals Not the Only Academy Awards Controversy

Posted on | March 6, 2006

And so the Academy Awards are over. Brokeback Mountain won three of the eight awards it was up for and Transamerica’s Felicity Huffman was denied Best Actress in favor of Reese Witherspoon. However I will let other bloggers discuss the controversy of homosexual cowboys and pre-op transsexuals and focus on another Oscars controversy.

The file ‘Paradise Now’ managed to piss off a few people as well. Days before the Academy Awards, a petition was given to the Academy of Motion Picture Arts & Sciences demanding the removal of the film. The reason Israelis dislike the film, which won a Golden Globe and was nominated for an Oscar in the Best Foreign Language Film category but lost to the South African film ‘Tsotsi’, tells the story of two Palestinian friends from the West Bank who carry out a terrorist suicide bombing in Tel Aviv.

The individuals behind a petition drive to have the Academy rescind its nomination say that the film glorifies terrorism, explains away the actions of terrorists, and so forth. I think a lot of the negativity that people have about the film is simply because it is from the Palestinian perspective and people do not happen to like what that perspective is. But here is the clincher folks… the "terrorists" in Paradise Now do not actually kill anybody. In fact on of the film’s tag lines is "Sometimes the most courageous act is what you don’t do" while another is "From the most unexpected place comes a bold new call for peace."

The Academy refused to bow to the pressure stating through its spokesman, John Pavlik, that "we’re not going to disqualify films because some people don’t like the content." And why should the Academy remove the film? The film ‘Munich’ covers Palestinian terrorism too but it shows it more from the Israeli side so I guess that makes it okay. Thank the gods the Academoy of Motion Picture Arts & Sciences has balls.

While I abhor terrorism in all forms, I support this film because of one philosophy that Margaret Cho summed up during her ‘Revolution’ show when she was discussing the whole Dixie Chicks "scandal" after singer Natalie Maines made comments that were unsupportive of George W. Bush in London. Margaret put is best when she said:

"Artists are supposed to comment on culture. That is the function of art."

I could not agree more. That philosophy says nothing about having to like the expression and comment the artist makes, all you have to do is deal with the fact the artist made it.

I have not seen the film yet. I became aware of the film while at a screening for Sarah Silverman’s ‘Jesus is Magic’ and the trailer was shown. But I think it is pretty safe to say that ‘Paradise Now’ is a comment on culture. It comments on a culture of people who have been screwed over constantly and have reached the breaking point. It shows the a desperate person can engage in a desperate act such as sacrificing themselves to take out some of their enemies in a Klingon sort of way. What I am also willing to bet money on is that the vast majority of the films detractors have not seen it either. I make this bet because these individuals do not seem to be aware of the fact that the two Palestinian men portrayed in the film, while recruited to carry out a suicide bombing, pull back from the precipice.

I wonder how many of the films detractors are also supportive of Denmark and the other targets of Muslim wrath after the publication of the infamous "Muhammad Cartoons".
I bet many of them are. Any person who supports the publication of those cartoons but is against ‘Paradise Now’ is a hypocrite.

Blog Links:

External Links:

Filed Under Discrimination |