Oscar nomination of "Alone Yet Not Alone"

[thoughtful]

So, I was at dinner tonight (Brent's Deli, Westlake Village, CA) and in comes Joni Eareckson-Tada! Mr. Womb and I were already seated and her party goes by. I'm thinking, I know that face. She was with her husband and what I assume to be another couple. I overheard some Jesus-y conversation and they said a somewhat long grace at the Jewish deli (to the great inconvenience of the server, who had to wait for it to be over to access the table [due to the hand holding]).

------

I know, I know, you're not impressed. But, still, I had to put it out there just in case someone cared (Mr. Womb sure as hell didn't :lol: )

I care!

She seems to have become the "face" of the "don't pick on the innocent Christian song and the nice people behind it" talk.

The nomination is for the writing of the song, though -- not the singing.

[Trynn]

Did you read Indian Captive: The Story of Mary Jemison by any chance? I think I've still got a copy that my girls read when they were younger. Mary lived until she was 90 years old among the indigenous peoples.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Jemison

I read that book too, among a lot of other ones.

[thoughtful]

Being beautiful, starring in a film, and maybe being Jim Leininger's daughter is no protection from . . . (cue ominous music) . . . the attack of the giant flower!

http://www.imdb.com/media/rm746889984/n ... ll_pbl_45#

:D

[hoipolloi]

Being beautiful, starring in a film, and maybe being Jim Leininger's daughter is no protection from . . . (cue ominous music) . . . the attack of the giant flower!

http://www.imdb.com/media/rm746889984/n ... ll_pbl_45#

:D

Or poor clothing choices!

http://www.imdb.com/media/rm1353178368/ ... md_md_nxt#

[RachelB]

Or poor clothing choices!

http://www.imdb.com/media/rm1353178368/ ... md_md_nxt#

Bzuh? A see-through bustier atop a little white t-shirt? Sort of 1980s Material Girl + 1990s grunge? I find that combination confusing.

[Anise]

Or poor clothing choices!

http://www.imdb.com/media/rm1353178368/ ... md_md_nxt#

Bzuh? A see-through bustier atop a little white t-shirt? Sort of 1980s Material Girl + 1990s grunge? I find that combination confusing.

It's the white modesty undershirt that is de rigueur of fundie weddings.

Seen also here: http://www.imdb.com/media/rm1023976960/ ... mmd_md_nxt

And in brown: http://www.imdb.com/media/rm3934500608/ ... mmd_md_nxt

[RachelB]

It's the white modesty undershirt that is de rigueur of fundie weddings.

Seen also here: http://www.imdb.com/media/rm1023976960/ ... mmd_md_nxt

And in brown: http://www.imdb.com/media/rm3934500608/ ... mmd_md_nxt

Hm. Okay. What baffles me is that once you put a see-through bustier on top of it, there's nothing modest about it.

[thoughtful]

This woman is no longer following anything remotely resembling fundie modesty, if she ever did, so I can't imagine that's why she's wearing the t-shirt (and belt and beads! :lol: ).

I don't know how she was brought up when it comes to that stuff -- if she is actually Kelly Leininger Welch, the only pics I could find were of her in hunting gear, so she's very covered up, but in pants. I don't know if Jim imposed modestly standards on his wife and daughters.

[Palimpsest]

I read that book too, among a lot of other ones.

The Unredeemed Captive by John Demos is good too. Eunice Williams did not want to return to her family.

[thoughtful]

I wonder if Leininger ever addressed the guy who made this comment, which DomWackTroll found and posted, starting the previous thread about the movie (and I wonder if the guy knew who Kelly is, if, in fact, she is . . . well, you know):

Well, I know I am setting myself up for criticisim for saying the following but my conscience leads me to give others warning. We saw this movie at the SAICFF and it was better than what you generally see in the theaters, BUT the young woman that plays the lead had "seductive eyes" with heavy eye make-up and a flirty attitude towards the end of the movie. If you are descriminating about what you expose your family to, beware. The message is a good one and if this kind of thing doesn't bother you, enjoy it.

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid ... 963&type=1

He is in San Antonio, so he may know who's who.

[DomWackTroll]

I wonder if Leininger ever addressed the guy who made this comment, which DomWackTroll found and posted, starting the previous thread about the movie (and I wonder if the guy knew who Kelly is, if, in fact, she is . . . well, you know):

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid ... 963&type=1

He is in San Antonio, so he may know who's who.

:lol: I love how passive-aggressive that comment was. Translation: "Well, if you're not a really good Christian, like I am..."

[Anise]

Hm. Okay. What baffles me is that once you put a see-through bustier on top of it, there's nothing modest about it.

I can't think of any other reason why she would wear a white t-shirt underneath a formal dress with cutouts. :ew:

[Kira]

"Alone Yet Not Alone" is no longer a Oscar contender for "Best Original Song". It was disqualified due to illegal campaigning.

[Aggie2145]

Something seemed really fishy to me about this nomination - and I guess there was. The nomination was rescinded today for improper lobbying: http://www.thewrap.com/songwriter-loses-oscar-nomination-illegal-lobbying/

[anjulibai]

I'm almost disappointed. It would have been awesome to have this at the Oscars, and seeing the reactions to it.

[DomWackTroll]

I'm almost disappointed. It would have been awesome to have this at the Oscars, and seeing the reactions to it.

And once again, Dominionism will fly just under the radar, right where its leaders want it to be.

[FloraDoraDolly]

LA Times article:

Citing direct campaigning that created “the appearance of an unfair advantage,†the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences has revoked an Oscar nomination for “Alone Yet Not Alone,†the tune from the faith-based movie of the same name that had been nominated for original song.

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/en ... z2rqJ69Mmp

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/en ... z2rqIaQjzB

I'm sure the usual suspects will be out there claiming this is a case of Christians being persecuted.

[NotALoserLikeYou]

LA Times article:

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/en ... z2rqJ69Mmp

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/en ... z2rqIaQjzB

I'm sure the usual suspects will be out there claiming this is a case of Christians being persecuted.

I was coming to post this! Wow! I can only imagine how they are going to freak out!

[duplessis3]

Cheating for the glory of Jesus!

[thoughtful]

Good for them!

Well, good for them assuming it was an honest decision, and not due to some pressure from Jim Leininger or someone else who didn't want all of the backstory about Dominionism exposed.

I'm getting so suspicious these days.

Can't wait to hear all of the cries of "Persecution! Everyone hates Christians!" :roll:

[TheSassyOne]

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/race/a ... ong-675480

Disqualified. HA!

[hoipolloi]

Too bad. Was looking forward to the festival of asshattery surrounding this piece of dreck.

However, 'tis fun to read the FB comments and their astounding combination of victimhood + sour grapes! Even Broughton's wife gets into the act (https://www.facebook.com/aloneyetnotalone):

Belinda Broughton: Bruce did nothing wrong, this is part of a huge smear campaign by the big production companies whose songs weren't nominated and the Academy is trying to distance themselves from it by rescinding the nomination. Watch ABC news tonight at 11pm and CBS News tomorrow morning at 7.30.

And on her own FB page (https://www.facebook.com/belinda.broughton):

I cannot believe that the Academy just did that to Bruce. Bruce has given hours and hours of his time to the Academy over a period of 30 years, has tirelessly fought for composers, is the only top composer I know who will generously lend out his scores to composers, spends hours having lunches giving advice to up and coming film composers. The poor huge production companies who had their noses put out of joint by a little song. All I can say is, they must have been terrified by the song and it's one damn good song too. Well, they are happy now, they can play together in the same sand box again. Shame on you Motion Picture Academy for taking the low road, saving your own butts and doing this to one of your former Governors and Head of the Music Branch. Maybe a phone call to Bruce, from one of the Academy Governors of the Music Branch would have been nice too? (Angry wife!)

Nice to know that there are some things Jim Leininger's money can't buy! :lol:

[Marian the Librarian]

"Alone Yet Not Alone" is no longer a Oscar contender for "Best Original Song". It was disqualified due to illegal campaigning.

:clap: Good for the academy. The thought of this dreck getting nominated was downright depressing.

Nice try, Leininger/Broughton/Dougie/et. al. :nenner:

[LucySnowe]

Haha, yay! I love the "gosh, it was just a little teeny-weeny bit of grassroots campaigning!" argument.

I eagerly await the consoling "GOD is stronger than the Academy" remarks.

What I don't get is why they can't add a 5th nominee in. The comments on that Hollywood Reporter story clearly show it's possible - just bump up the song that came 6th on the list. Maybe it's because they'd have to fit in another performance, but given that it would likely just be a question of replacing one song with another, I don't see why they don't.

Not that the show needs to be any longer, of course.

[uber frau]

And they don't when have SACFF to fall back on anymore. The poor old Christian films might just have to rely on such outragous things as talent and high quality production to win themselves a gong. My heart bleeds...

I'm sure Bruce Broughten would have cherished a Paedo statuette ensconced on how mantlepiece.