Tuesday, December 9, 2008

Fans doing the work for the production companies


Yesterday I started an email conversation with a fan at Awards Daily because in one of her comments in support of the movie and cast of In Bruges, she said that she was on a personal mission to do what Focus Features was not doing for In Bruges. It appears that she was doing the same thing that I am trying to do on behalf of Hunger. I wrote to her telling her a bit about my blog and my reasons for cheerleading on Hunger and Michael this awards season. Like Focus Features, I explained that IFC Films has failed to market Hunger and Michael Fassbender properly in this Oscar race and it's really perplexing.

Julianna shared with me that she was on the set briefly for the filming of In Bruges and was so impressed with the end product and seeing how Focus Features wasn't doing much to promote it, that she created a fan site to rally up support for In Bruges. Luckily for her however, she has received some neat gifts from FF in appreciation of her work, but they have not answered her questions about why they are sitting out on campaigning for In Bruges.

With blogging becoming an ever more popular tool of communication for novice writers and/or fans of a particular subject or person, I think it's apparent that when production companies of a film that is respected enough to be nominated for awards that lead up to the Granddaddy of them all, the Oscars, fail to make a sincere effort in promoting their film, it may just take a grassroots effort by a fan or two, or three hundred+ to help get the ball rolling and bring attention to great films that are the victim of being released very early in the year and forgotten (In Bruges came out in February), and being low-budget independent UK/European productions. So kudos to Julianna and her efforts, and just talking to someone like her helped motivate me a bit more and made me feel more comfortable in what I'm doing here at Fassinating Fassbender.


While engaged in another chit-chat at Awards Daily yesterday, there is a thread that posed the question about will Brad Pitt be snubbed this year. The theory behind the potential snub is amazingly silly - Brad Pitt could be too pretty and is not yet taken seriously as a 'serious actor'. I laughed and blinked hard at the same time too when I read that. But the remaining conversation began to make sense. Go check it out here - http://www.awardsdaily.com/?p=4652
~~~~~~
Basically, the point was being made that although the Academy loves to give PYT females the golden boy, the same cannot be said for men. When it comes to good looking men that really grab the attention of audiences and AMPAS for that matter, they are: Ruggedly Very Handsome, or, Beautiful. For example, as per the comments at AD, George Clooney and Ralph Fiennes are very handsome, whereas, the late great Paul Newman and Brad Pitt are beautiful. Very handsome men can be guys that generate great appreciation and respect with a dash of envy. Pretty/Beautiful men are simply dismissed as just inhumanely beautiful and simply cannot be taken serious, they are the object of jealousy, ridicule, disrespect, and even hatred (refer to all the anti-Brangelina hate). Only until a beautiful man reaches the age of 50 where his prettiness fades into a more respectable realm of absolutely fucking handsome, only then will he be accepted as a serious actor. Brad is 44, he still got a ways to go. Note, Paul Newman won his first Oscar when he was damn near 70.
~~~~~
I asked Alfredo at the thread, what he thought of Michael Fassbender. And this is what he said, "Simone, Fassbender def does not fall under the pretty category. I’d put him in the Viggo Mortensen category. You know, handsome but not too handsome where I think he’s not human." Fair enough, I feel the same way too. I never thought Michael was pretty, just merely fucking hot. So the point of my asking this question was that in the event Michael were nominated for an Oscar, I didn't want his looks to get in the way. But then again, beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and his good looks could be the political barrier to still prevent him from being taken seriously and not garner a nomination. He will be viewed as just another gorgeous guy who uglied up for his Oscar baity role. Yeah, there's lots of jaded folk in la la land. Be warned.

4 comments:

Tina said...

You know it is interesting you bring up the lack of marketing of IN BRUGES. You know why I went to see it?? A blog I read posted a trailer! I had never heard of the movie and would never have gone to see what I think was the 2nd best movie of the year had it not been for this blog!

Brad Pitt is defintely pretty boy, but what a shame that it would stop him from being nominated if he deserves it.

Michael is defintely not Pretty Boy...he is all manly hot! lol

Simone said...

I didn't learn about 'In Bruges' until I Netflix 'British' films to see what was hot a new. Along with In Bruges, I rent Run, Fatboy, Run. I never heard of In Bruges before August, but better late than never.

In the early days of getting in to Michael, I thought he was kind of pretty, esp in Hex... he was totally wearing eyeliner and mascara! He looked 'pretty'. But in his true self, he's a fine mofo, period. ;-)

Alice said...

Very interesting convo you've had, Simone. I learn a little bit more everyday.

I think that if Michael were too pretty, he wouldn't be winning awards already. Yeah, darn hot! And humble, too.

Simone said...

Here is Julianna's support page for -

In Bruges