Same reason say Enemy at the Gates didn't get the attention Saving Private Ryan did. Two films about the same overall event but with different tones and motives.

How could anyone not like UA93? Heartless bastards.

Um....Enemy at the Gates (which I like a lot) didn't get the attention SPR got simply because SPR was the freaking better movie.

that aside, if WTC was first out the gates and the only 9/11 film released this year, I think we'd be touting its chances.

If Enemy of the Gates was out before Saving Private Ryan it'd have received zero Oscar noms, just like it did when being released after Ryan. Same goes for WTC and U93. Did The Pianist get average reviews because it was released after Schindler's List?

Let's back up a bit. I compared SPR and Enemy because Jon mentioned WTC, another 9/11 films. That's the end of the comparisons. WWII and a cultural phenom like 9/11 are two different beasts.

There's no way to prove what I'm saying but I feel strongly that whichever 9/11 film cornered the market this year, UA93, WTC, Pentagon911, whatever film was released, it would automatically be considered for a BP spot. WTC had unfortunate timing, any quality isssues aside. We all know quality has nothing to do with BP noms.

But we are talking reviews here and "quality". Snrub said it wouldn't be because of quality implying that its quality (U93's) is not great to begin with which is something that reviews do often indicate and it really doesn't have much to do with release dates, as simple as that. The movies are very different. It's not like Armageddon and Deep Impact. If both had been great, both would have been lauded. I have seen neither, but what I'm saying is that U93 would have gotten the same reviews if released a year later and same goes for WTC.

I have yet to read a UA93 review that keeps it simple and deals with the film as a film. They all dive into the 9/11 mythos and how their emotions were affected. Using that rationale, every film ever made about a tragic event should get an automatic pass.

I'm working on a script about the Boxing Day Tsunami. Since the death toll is higher, it should be an opus. I need a shaky cam though.

So.

The film won't get nominated because the critics liked it simply because it was about 9/11, and we should expect the Oscars to be able to remove all emotional blocks and judge it simply as a movie?

My fucking ASS.

In that case Schindler's List was only hailed because it was about the holocaust.

UA93 is no Schindler's List.

Can no one see the difference between the events of 9/11 5 years ago and something like, say the holocaust from half a century plus ago? Critics couldn't remove themselves from the event and judge the movie on its own merit.

I'm just happy that UA93 won't be nominated so we can lay this dog to rest. Wake me when an interesting, well-made 9/11 film is released.

I honestly don't care if U93 gets nominated... but if it wins... I'll be EXTREMELY angry.

Not on the level of how angry I was when Crash won... but pretty close.

Im in a very fragile state right now and after the shit combo of Million Dollar Baby and Crash, I can't take another mediocre BP winner.

I know. I can't wait for the academy to judge the film on its own merit and not let their emotions get in the way, just like they did with CRASH and MILLION DOLLAR BABY.

You mean one that fits your conspiracy theories?

Ah, loyal is letting his personal opinion and bias cloud his judgement regarding possible contendors and their quality.

I can't blame him though. I mean Crash winning, let alone even being NOMINATED last year for Best Picture, kinda blew me away. I am still trying to comprehend what was given/done to the Academy for them to nominate AND give the Oscar to such an unworthy film, especially considering the quality films they could have awarded in that particular year. I mean, it's below even their standards, in my opinion.

And again, it all comes down to opinion.

It's so weird, but I consider last year's Oscars so monumental only because it feels like everything has been thrown out of the window and ANYTHING can be nominated or win now. Heh.

That's my random tangent of the day.

Oh, but I must add that I hate conspiracy theories. Don't ever expect my support when it comes to conspiracy theories.

PEACE, Mike.

Crash was great and an (almost) deserving winner. Not to say that the win didn't surprise me...




I must say that I feel absolutely the same way!

Even if United 93 was entirely fictional, and space aliens were responsible for throwing cows into the World Trade Center, it would STILL be a great film and a document of the prevailing attitude about the event at this moment. Yes, the fact that it's topical helps it. But Crash was topical and you fucking bought the DVD (you fucking traitor ). Munich was very topical (and largely fictional) and nobody (here) had a problem with that.

I know you hate the shakey cam loyal. And although it is my greatest wish this year (that United 93 is nominated) I think it's not even 75% likely to happen. But of the films released at the moment has the most potential (meaning, to me, it's the only single one that has ANY potential at this moment of releases). The reasons for this are listed previously.

I just don't really see any reason that you've provided for it faring badly with the Academy. I think the two things that hurt it the most would be The Good Shepherd and it's low box office.

1) Box Office
2) Release Date

Two thing that could have been applied to Crash just as well, only considering that Crash's reviews completely pale in comparison to U93's reviews.

Lionsgate's DVD push to voters certainly played a large role in Crash's win.

I'm enjoying the fallback analysis that because of its critical response, UA93 is in like flint. Dozens of films each year have great critical response and fail to earn BP noms. Hell, LMS has had greater critical response but oh yeah, it doesnt bleed red, white, and blue. No rah-rah-rah, no sobbing, no hysterics.

Edit

My statement was kinda stupid.

Umm, America has already given their opinion on 9/11 movies by not seeing them. Obviously they arent gonna support the film if they didnt even care enough to see them.

U93 just doesnt feel like a movie that the Academy would support much, does it have a chance to be in the best picture race? Yeah, sure, is it anywhere close to a lock to get a nod? No f'in way.

Another thing I dont understand is who exactly is gonna push the film? Studios arent pushing it, Universal has Good Shepard & Children of Men coming out in December, those are obviously gonna be their oscar pushes.

No one is talking WIN here, though, Loyal. Keep that in mind please. Oh and LMS did not have greater critical reception. Not at RT (see average grade and COTC), not at Metacritic (3 100 scores as opposed to 19 and overall 90/100 vs. 78/100) and not at BFCA: Stop making things up, Loyal, that is beneath you.

I have not seen the movie. Missed it in theatres sadly. I have never been supportive of 9/11 films, thinking it is actually too early. But people who try to make this movie seem hailed *only* (not as just one of the many reasons) because of the so-called patriotism and importance start making me sick. I have read and heard more than enough of it by now to know that this is bullshit. Most people on this site are as unpatriotic as it gets and they loved the film. Levy from the GCT who as far as I know not exactly a fan of American patriotism gave it the highest grade. Several people I know here in Germany who all hate patriotist etc. etc. saw the movie expecting it to be the so called "reh-rah-rah USA!") flick came out stunned. What you are talking there stinks to me, Loyal.

Well... imo, I still think Crash won because the Academy was scared of a backlash if they voted against it because they could be seen as "racist"...

So... in retrospect... could they be scared of a backlash if they don't vote for U93 and be seen as "un-american"?

See, but Hollywood does hate America. Ergo, no Best Picture nomination for United 93.