First it was Michael Moore, who hasn’t been relevant on the Hollywood scene in at least a decade — calling military snipers “cowards.” And then it was Seth Rogen, that brave soul who stood up to the North Korean Geek Squad last month by allowing Sony to capitulate on the train wreck that was The Interview, who compared it to the aforementioned Nazi propaganda.
Both men are kinda-sorta walking back those statements, but the envy on display is now completely apparent: Some in Hollywood just can’t seem to accept that a movie that primarily focuses on the human cost of war while honoring those who serve — especially one that emphasizes the mental aspect after
Despite Moore and Rogen being quickly dismissed, somehow another so-called controversy is rearing its ugly head in the form of a fake baby used in filming Sniper (currently the lead story on Drudge). But according to the Hollywood Reporter, the use of props — even fake babies — is only done out of necessity due to the following challenges:
Shooting in California poses some challenges when employing a real baby given the state’s strict laws (part of the movie was shot in Los Angeles). Infants must be at least 15 days old, and babies from that age up to six months can be employed for only one period of two consecutive hours in any given day. Moreover, that time frame has to be between 9:30-11:30 a.m. or from 2:30-4:30 p.m., and one studio teacher along with one nurse must be on set during filming.
Sniper‘s executive producer Jason Hall provided further explanation for the decision to not use a real baby, adding via Twitter (now deleted):
@MarkHarrisNYC hate to ruin the fun but real baby
#1 showed up with a fever. Real baby #2 was no show. (Clint voice) Gimme the doll, kid.
Regardless of the prop, Sniper is selling tickets at a record pace for a reason: It’s a wonderfully acted and compellingly human war biopic, if what critics are saying is any indication. Most of all, the direction of the film via Eastwood is easily his best work since the award-winning Gran Torino.
As noted in a previous column, all the attention is on the snubs of Selma for Best Director (Ava Duvernay) or Best Actor (David Oyelowo). But it’s not like Oscar voters only got it wrong with Selma (which the usual suspects blamed on racial motives): The powers that be also missed the boat by impossibly overlooking the 84-year-old Eastwood. Why? Is it because of age discrimination? Is it because he supported Mitt Romney in the last election season, even going so far to speak to an empty chair (representing the president) at the Republican National Convention? Because if we’re going to play detective and look for (ridiculous and baseless) dark motives behind each snub, that should apply to American Sniper‘s director as well, with the reasons just as nonsensical.
Again, Speilberg was overlooked for Best Director of the original Jaws. Why? Because he’s Jewish? Hitchcock wasn’t nominated for the same award for Best Picture or Best Director for Vertigo. Why? Because he’s British?
Or, just to avoid these kind of situations in the future, perhaps the Academy — which is led by Cheryl Boone Issacs, an African-American woman as its president — should simply allow more nominations by applying the same mentality expanding through our education system: Every child gets a prize to avoid headaches and hurt feelings, thereby rendering the prize meaningless.
American Sniper is a blockbuster hit at a time when Hollywood is coming off its worst year in ticket sales since 1995. Envy is all the rage as a result.
And in the end, those who complain sound just like babies — who unlike a fake one used as a prop — will never stop crying.
— —
>> Follow Joe Concha on Twitter @JoeConchaTV