I'm surprised that so few people are talking about Hany Abu-Assad's acceptance speech last night at the Golden Globes. Though I respect his mettle to speak for a free Palestine at perhaps the largest pro-Israeli commingling of wealthy and powerful people, I was deeply disappointed that he did not take more advantage of the exposure to millions that he had in those few moments onstage. In fact, he fumbled his way around the name of the granting party (the Hollywood Foreign Press Association), and misconstrued an award for his film, as support for a liberated Palestine "unconditionally."

I don't think that's what the HFPA was bargaining for when they chose this film, and I think he's severely hurt his chances for an Oscar. Because if a Globe is deemed to be recognition for Palestinian autonomy from within Hollywood--- what would an Oscar be?

I know it's a trite criticism--- but when he had won, I sat up in my seat, pleased that a film not only from Palestine, but one that deals with such necessarily controversial material, had won an award that could help it attract a mainstream audience. When he had finished his three sentence speech, I slouched back in my chair with assignation. For those who are unaware of what the film is about, his last sentence was like a nail in the coffin of public interest.

But, anyway... it seems like no one really cared. Maybe they expected it. But in previous interviews he has spoken with an eloquence about the impetus behind this particular film, and its political relevance. The audience who had tuned in to see what Eva Longoria was wearing may well have benefited if he had reitereated some of his previous comments. Then again, maybe those people turned the volume down and went to the kitchen to grab another beer saying, "Who's that guy, anyway?!"

Link to article: today.reuters.co.uk storyID=2006-01-17T060102Z_01_N1727 8051_RTRUKOC_0_UK-LEISURE-GOLDENGLO BES-PARADISE.xml