I feel like I need to put this exchange here on the main page because frankly I’m sick of having to discuss this repeatedly. First, a reader named Andrew wrote:
I’m not sure what my not posting on other threads has to with anything, but I will make one point- I have been posting here for years, and have never had my posts deleted or moderated until this year. And it has been about one thing: my pointing out of the skewed Lincoln-loving and Argo-hating, from a site whose editor called Argo perfect.
Your comments were moderated and deleted because of their nasty, relentless tone – you don’t “post” here, you comment here. There is a difference. We were pretty up front about our Lincoln loving – and there was never “Argo hating.” Not once. Oh, maybe on Twitter when it kept winning everything – we are allowed to show our irritation.
We knew Lincoln was a tough sell, as was Life of Pi. That’s why we invested heavily in those movies – and in Beasts of the Southern Wild and Middle of Nowhere and many of the other seeming “lost causes.” Lincoln bothered people more because there was a uniform hate of it that started over at the New York Times where they made not one but two “why Lincoln is such a bad movie” videos. It didn’t stop there. It was savaged for all of the wrong reasons. If it was so bad why were the reviews so great? Why was it number 5 on the top ten lists of all of the critics and why did it eventually make $180 million? You see the dynamic we’re up against? You don’t think I saw this outcome from a mile away? I did but there wasn’t much to do but write about a movie I (we) felt deserved much better than it was getting. Probably the worst thing that happened to Lincoln, though, was when President Clinton intro’d the film at the Globes and the following morning the story was expertly spun into the David and Goliath narrative that would take permanent hold.
I think we will eventually be on the right side of movie history but you never really know about these things.