From: owner-joni-digest@smoe.org (JMDL Digest) To: joni-digest@smoe.org Subject: JMDL Digest V2006 #83 Reply-To: joni@smoe.org Sender: owner-joni-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-joni-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk Unsubscribe: mailto:joni-digest-request@smoe.org?body=unsubscribe Archives: http://www.smoe.org/lists/joni Website: http://jonimitchell.com JMDL Digest Tuesday, March 7 2006 Volume 2006 : Number 083 ========== TOPICS and authors in this Digest: -------- Re: Oscars, NJC [Bob Muller ] Re: Sweet Sixteen Joni Sampler [Bob Muller ] Re: Oscars, NJC ["Lori Fye" ] Re: Oscars, NJC [vince ] Re: Oscars, NJC ["Lori Fye" ] Re: Oscars, NJC ["mack watson-bush" ] Re: Oscars, NJC ["Lori Fye" ] Re: Oscars, NJC [Bob Muller ] Re: Oscars, NJC ["Lori Fye" ] Sweet Sixteen, Volume 1 [Bob Muller ] Re: Oscars, NJC [vince ] Brokeback-LA Times.njc [MINGSDANCE@aol.com] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2006 15:48:53 -0800 (PST) From: Bob Muller Subject: Re: Oscars, NJC But this can hardly be true when the biggest moneymakers (i.e. the most popular) weren't even nominated. Transamerica might get a post-Oscar bounce but it hasn't even made 5 mil. I saw it in NYC thinking it wouldn't play here, and it just opened here Friday - d'oh! What would your nominees have been, assuming you disagree with the Academy's choices? Bob NP: Let's Active, "Reflecting Pool" Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2006 15:56:00 -0800 (PST) From: Bob Muller Subject: Re: Sweet Sixteen Joni Sampler Interesting & crazy - that's me. At least I hope it's one way to describe me. Thanks for delurking for a bit and I'm glad you snagged and are enjoying the covers. There are so many great ones to choose from, and I just "named" 48 of my favorites, so you probably don't need to hear any more from me. The new release from Roine Stolt has a killer rockin' cover of Sex Kills though, I'll put in a plug for that one. And tons of great stuff up ahead, so don't touch that dial. As for kd covers, she also does a version of "A Case Of You" on her "Hymns of the 49th Parallel", I think it's not nearly as strong as that Jericho cover but if you're a fan you might want to seek out a copy. Bob NP: The Goo Goo Dolls, "Eyes Wide Open" Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2006 16:08:08 -0800 From: "Lori Fye" Subject: Re: Oscars, NJC > What would your nominees have been, assuming you > disagree with the Academy's choices? To be honest, I don't know. I don't spend enough time going to movies, or even seeing them on DVD, to answer that. I just don't have time for it. I do find it irritating, though, that awards often seem to be given not on merit for a particular project, but because "it's time" or for some such other bullshit reason. Speaking of time, though, what really amazes me is all the time that people seem to have to talk about the Oscars. Even more amazing is how enthralled everyone is by it. My roommate's girlfriend walked in last night and was honestly surprised that I didn't have the Oscars on. I swear, the whole country has become a Wal-Mart culture. Do you know what I mean? Anyway, I don't watch any of the awards shows. I might catch a few minutes here or there, but I just can't stomach all the hype. Curmudgeonly Lori ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2006 19:19:54 -0500 From: vince Subject: Re: Oscars, NJC Lori Fye wrote: > > >I swear, the whole country has become a Wal-Mart culture. Do you know what >I mean? > > > Thank you. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2006 16:53:58 -0800 From: "Lori Fye" Subject: Re: Oscars, NJC >> I swear, the whole country has become a Wal-Mart culture. Do you know what >> I mean? > Thank you. I'm glad at least one person besides me gets this, Vince. Thank YOU. Lori ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2006 18:32:56 -0600 From: "mack watson-bush" Subject: Re: Oscars, NJC > Speaking of time, though, what really amazes me is all the time that people > seem to have to talk about the Oscars. Even more amazing is how enthralled > everyone is by it. Heard on the radio this am it was the second lowest rated show ever. mack ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2006 17:15:34 -0800 From: "Lori Fye" Subject: Re: Oscars, NJC > Heard on the radio this am it was the second lowest rated show ever. Good. As crabby as this will sound, that actually warms my heart. : ) Lori ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2006 17:26:38 -0800 (PST) From: Bob Muller Subject: Re: Oscars, NJC - --- Lori Fye wrote: > To be honest, I don't know. I don't spend > enough time going to movies, or > even seeing them on DVD, to answer that. I > just don't have time for it. OK, so you don't watch movies but you make this kind of statement? Based on what? Just a kind of general disgust you have with the entire culture? Sorry - not valid. > Speaking of time, though, what really amazes me > is all the time that people > seem to have to talk about the Oscars. Even > more amazing is how enthralled > everyone is by it. Yeah, next thing you know there'll be a whole discussion list set up to talk about Joni Mitchell - and it'll thrive - even when she's long retired. Amazing. Since when is discussing the arts part of a Wal-Mart culture? Now, don't get me wrong - there are LOTS of things wrong with our culture at this point in time, but I think you're throwing the rock at the wrong target. Bob Neil Young, "L.A." Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2006 17:48:17 -0800 From: "Lori Fye" Subject: Re: Oscars, NJC > OK, so you don't watch movies but you make this > kind of statement? Based on what? Just a kind of > general disgust you have with the entire culture? > Sorry - not valid. Point well made (and expected) and taken. And ... yes, it's my general disgust with the entire, pie-eyed, robotic culture. "Did you watch the Oscars last night????" "You didn't? WHY NOT??" In other words, "What could you possibly have to do or think about that would be better?" Please. Aren't the movies themselves distraction enough? Or do we need to be constantly distracted from everything by analyzing it all, over and over, ad nauseaum? Don't know what's gotten into me. Lately I've been sort of put off by a lot of what I read here about Joni. She probably thinks we all ought to get a life, or worry about the war or people who live on the streets, or something more important than any of this. And she would be right. Lori, signing off for awhile, just because I think I should ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2006 17:58:11 -0800 (PST) From: Bob Muller Subject: Sweet Sixteen, Volume 1 I've already sent this link to Melissa and she's good to go with Sweet 16, Volume 1. Are you? If not, don't go 'round uncovered, for cryin' out loud: http://s62.yousendit.com/d.aspx?id=2N241CGWTUKET2XABU46F8B5WU Bob NP: Ani, "Shy" PS: Hey Patti - guess who's #1 in Men's Basketball? A clue...it ain't Dook. Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2006 21:20:45 -0500 From: vince Subject: Re: Oscars, NJC Actually Lori, friend, I meant it differently. I am one of those who watch the Oscars beginning to end year after year. I am the one who may never watch again because I am so pissed about best picture this year - not because I don't take it seriously - I haven't been so angry at the Oscars since 1992 when Jaye Davidson was passed over for Gene Hackman. I was kind of pissed when Y Tu Mama Tambien wasn't even nominated for anything, although part of the blame for that belongs to the Mexican film academy. If this means I have a Wal Mart culture - incidentally I will not step foot in a Wal Mart for any reason - does this mean I have to give up my opera tickets? The Oscars are taken seriously by some, not by others. It is a matter of preference, not culture, IMHO. I take movies seriously as one of the many art forms I take seriously, and I take the Oscars seriously, and even have inside stories from the Canadian set designer of the new Brad Pitt movie about Brad and Angelina but damn if I am going to share it now. :-) Ok, one tidbit, at the wrap party near Canmore they had a martini party but what went on there I am saving for the people I stand in line with at the store. Vince, who may never forgive the Academy for 2006 despite the Oscar for Best Foreign Language Film for Tsotsi and the 2002 and 1975 Oscars for Best Song. Lori Fye wrote: >>>I swear, the whole country has become a Wal-Mart culture. Do you know >>> >>> >what > > >>>I mean? >>> >>> > > > >>Thank you. >> >> > >I'm glad at least one person besides me gets this, Vince. > >Thank YOU. > >Lori ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2006 23:14:06 EST From: MINGSDANCE@aol.com Subject: Brokeback-LA Times.njc Why 'Crash' won, why 'Brokeback' lost and how the academy chose to play it safe. By Kenneth Turan, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer 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. ------------------------------ End of JMDL Digest V2006 #83 **************************** ------- Post messages to the list by clicking here: mailto:joni@smoe.org Unsubscribe by clicking here: mailto:joni-digest-request@smoe.org?body=unsubscribe -------