Comments on: Jeff Bridges Wins Best Actor Oscar, Ajami Loses

By: david

david — Sun, 14 Mar 2010 16:28:38 +0000

Thanks for the clarification. I did not see what Copti said prior to the Oscar's remarks- at least not specifically in rebuttal to anyting Livnat said earlier on. I did see many (not all) of the "push' for the film leading to the Oscars. I saw them as promoting a good film made in Israel. Yes, the topic was mentioned about Arab/Israeli relations (and tensions), but maybe not to the degree you would have liked.

By: richards1052

richards1052 — Sun, 14 Mar 2010 02:21:43 +0000

Ajami has been touted by multiple American Jewish film festivals as the cream of the crop of the Israeli film industry. The MFA was in overdrive promoting it for its Oscar consideration. It did so w/o any regard to content or substance. For them, this was merely an Israeli product to be sold to the world. This annoyed Copti.

Have you actually read what Limor Livnat has said about Copti & the film both before & after the blow up?

By: david

david — Sat, 13 Mar 2010 18:57:11 +0000

Yes it is my opinion… that's what I think and what my experience tells me. Correct, time will tell how it effected his future with the Israeli film industry AND receiving funding from the same organization.

Just a clarifiaction please; "Various Israeli flag-wavers then attempted to hijack the film for political-patriotic purposes. Copti then renounced the hijacking effort of his work."
Please back this up, with a link- I don't know where youg got this. Who said what to "politically hijack the film"?

By: Shirin

Shirin — Sat, 13 Mar 2010 05:55:14 +0000

Yeah, nobody likes an ungrateful, uppity n***** Arab. He should never say what is really on his mind, but act like a good little n***** Arab and keep his mouth shut, grin, look down at the ground, shuffle his feet, and say "thank you, suh. massa, fo' the opportunity you have give me to live heah in De Onlies' Democracy In De Middle Eas'™. Ah 'preciates everthing y'all has done to fo' me heah, an' Ah hopes ya'll will let me stay heah and serve you fo'eva."

By: richards1052

richards1052 — Fri, 12 Mar 2010 19:27:37 +0000

I see no attack whatsover by Copti on the Israeli film industry or the agency which funded him. And for the 3rd time (ea. time you neglect to mention this) the executive who runs the film agency was at the after awards party & was interviewed by the Jewish Journal & said he was happy w. the film & had no problem w. what Copti said. YOU can take what Copti said in any way YOU want. But that's not what matters. What matters is how he is viewed within the film industry & agency. And if he is viewed negatively whether he can find other funding sources. I maintain he will likely be able to surmount these obstacles in his career & may even benefit.

By: david

david — Fri, 12 Mar 2010 11:47:34 +0000

Who said he did that? Plain and simple. The film fund that gave him 2 million NIS is part of the Israeli government- and Israeli film industry. Copti said: " Technically, the movie represents Israel. I am a citizen of Israel but do not represent it. I cannot represent a country that does not represent me," LA times article- http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/babylonbeyond/201... I take that to mean that he is dissassoicating himself from Israel-the govenment, thus the fund that supported his project. I suppose you think he endeared himself to the fund by doing so?

By: richards1052

richards1052 — Thu, 11 Mar 2010 07:35:52 +0000

Have they taken monies from a Fund, then after receiving it dis-associate themselves from the funder

This is all "noise." Of course filmmakers have taken funding fr. producers & then dissociated themselves fr. them. But that's not precisely what's happened here. Copti took money from the Israeli film industry agency, whose director had no problem w. Copti's statement. Various Israeli flag-wavers then attempted to hijack the film for political-patriotic purposes. Copti then renounced the hijacking effort of his work.

He has not dissed the agency that provided him funding or any Israeli who honored his artistic integrity & independence. His problem is w. the Limor Livnat's of Israeli politics. We shall see what happens in future. Either he will work with the film agency again & it will be shown to have some independence fr. gov't hack bureaucrats like Livnat. Or he will be ostracized & forced to make other accomodations.

It is an issue of integrity of using funds.

This is more "white noise" & means nothing. Copti showed integrity by his behavior. To have acquiesced to the Israeli gov't pandering would've shown no integrity.

Copti could have made his point without spitting in the face of the film fund by cutting off all association with them.

Who said he did that? One rule here is that commenters not make stuff up. If this indeed happened you need to present proof it did. If it didn't don't waste our time w. tall tales. I can't stand that.

By: david

david — Thu, 11 Mar 2010 06:27:38 +0000

" …. and some davke BECAUSE they stood up for their political & artistic principles".

Yes, that's what I said when you " pay the consequences" (good or bad). You skirt my point. Have they taken monies from a Fund, then after receiving it dis-associate themselves from the funder not just expressing POVs? Standing up for " their political and artisitic princiiples" is not taking money given by a sponsor and then saying I don't asociate myself with that person or group. This is being ingeniuous and deceiving.