
Advertisement
February 25, 2009 | 6:30 pm
Posted by Danielle Berrin

I’ve wondered here if Kate Winslet was nominated for “The Reader” (a film, I admit, I found drab) over her superior performance in “Revolutionary Road” because Academy voters have some strange, ancestral penchant for Holocaust drama. But alas, I failed to consider the alternative: dirty, sneaky, Hollywood politics. Thank goodness for Tom O’Neil then, who is wonderfully illuminating in today’s LA Times, for suggesting that Harvey Weinstein perpetrated a full-throttle Oscar push for his “Reader,” leaving “Revolutionary Road” at a dead end. It seems the dead giveaway was when Winslet omitted Weinstein from her acceptance speech. Was that an innocent mistake? Or was Winslet’s collaboration with hubby Sam Mendes snubbed because Harvey is hot for little gold statuettes?
Of all people Kate Winslet should’ve thanked from the Oscars podium as she finally — after five previous losses — clutched that elusive statuette, Harvey Weinstein should’ve been first. That Happy Oscar Warrior took enormous abuse for daring to cram “The Reader” into this year’s derby while Winslet also competed with “Revolutionary Road,” directed by her hubby, Sam Mendes. A producer of both films, Scott Rudin (“The New Harvey,” some wags call him after he won best picture last year for “No Country for Old Men”) was so irked that he took his name off the credits of “The Reader.”
...
Does that mean she intentionally snubbed Harvey at the Oscars? Rumor has it that she was furious with him for challenging her bid for “Revolutionary Road.” Trying to negotiate the clash, the Weinstein Co. campaigned her “Reader” role in supporting, where she won at the Golden Globes and SAG, but Oscar voters weren’t fooled into buying that second-tier status. They promoted her “Reader” performance to lead and — oops — thereby snubbed that other role entirely. After all, they had to choose between one or the other. Actors are only permitted to be nominated once per category..

6.12.13 at 4:30 pm | Of the many upbeat ways to describe the dance. . .

5.29.13 at 3:24 pm | The Dreamworks Animation CEO borrows a lesson. . .

5.29.13 at 12:30 pm | Ratner's contribution is especially significant,. . .

5.23.13 at 5:48 pm | Was there no way to portray Fitzgerald’s Jew as. . .

5.21.13 at 9:43 am | Tribal affiliation notwithstanding, Apatow, 45,. . .

5.20.13 at 12:02 pm |

5.18.12 at 2:38 pm | Now in it's fifth season, Jewishness on "Mad Men". . . (1345)

6.12.13 at 4:30 pm | Of the many upbeat ways to describe the dance. . . (381)

5.22.12 at 10:21 pm | It took Daniel Mendelsohn's discursive and. . . (242)






We welcome your feedback.
Your information will not be shared or sold without your consent. Get all the details.
JewishJournal.com has rules for its commenting community.Get all the details.
JewishJournal.com reserves the right to use your comment in our weekly print publication.
hollywood jewish hollywood jew jewishjournal.com jewish journal israel celebrity storyblog bloghome film arts los angeles oscars sundance academy awards actor actress life movies natalie portman singer movie community music aaron sorkin madonna tv hollywoodjew entertainment jews tel aviv marriage television jesse eisenberg steven spielberg politics director holy rollers adam lambert judaism
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
| |||||||||