Why is the press making a big deal that Moore didn't get an Oscar nom?

[LynneSin]

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=598&e=5&u=/nm/20050128/film_nm/film_writers_dc

WGA officials said Moore's "Fahrenheit 9/11" was eligible but Moore elected not to submit it. Moore's "Bowling for Columbine" won the WGA Award for best original screenplay in 2003, the first time that a documentary had ever been nominated in that category.

"Fahrenheit 9/11" also failed to earn an Academy Award nomination this week. In that case, however, he had declined to submit "Fahrenheit" in the documentary category because he planned a TV airing before the Nov. 2 election -- and that disqualified the documentary under Academy rules. "Fahrenheit" was eligible in other categories, and Moore unsuccessfully campaigned for a best picture nomination.

---

The guy has already won a Best Doc Oscar. I'm sure if he hadn't of shown F9/11 before the election (thus nullyfying it under Best Doc Oscar rules) it would have been nominated. But Moore made a decision based on the fact he wanted to show the movie before the election. And I'm sure he realized it was an uphill battle to get a nomination for best Picture knowing he's competing with a very exceptional list of movies nominated. Maybe if 10-12 movies were nominated he might have had a chance.

This is just one of several article I've read where it seems like Moore is some sort of failure because of awards he wasn't nominated for especially one he didn't submit anything so he could even be nominated.

I mean, no one is making a stink that the Gibson bloodfest wasn't nominated for best picture? Sure it got a few noms for having pretty scenery, nice costumes and music. But then again even Armageddon & Pearl Harbor got nominations for some of those Oscar bids which have nothing to do with the overall merits of the film

[Dookus]

1. I don't think they're making a big deal of it

I think they're noting it.

[Enraged_Ape]

2. The Wall Street Journal featured an editorial about this...

proclaiming Moore a big LOSER.

It does seem like a big noise is being made about it, but then who can blame the whore U.S. media for magnifying ANY bad news about Michael Moore, who so regularly and deftly exposes how fucking pathetic they are?

[liberal N proud]

3. It is the only way they can claim victory over him

[The Backlash Cometh]

4. For the same reason that the media concentrated on Clinton for

so many years. They recognized the danger of a legitimate mouthpiece, so they did everything to demonize the individual so that person would not galvanize the left.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

5. of course, in this case

Moore has already galvanized the left.

[Racenut20]

6. "Corporation Democrats" want to blame the loss on MM and his followers.

[sinkingfeeling]

7. Because it's the 'liberal' media?