Save this article to read it later.
Find this story in your accountsSaved for Latersection.
But it means something for a film to win Best Picture, and that meaning often has political implications.
Both well-liked on their 1947 release,CrossfireandGentlemans Agreementtackle anti-Semitism, but their tones could not be more different.
Richard Brookss novel examines homophobia in the military, weaving several stories around the murder of a gay man.
With this switch, Scott tapped into another issue that postwar America was reluctant to address.
Anti-Semitism is not declining as a result of Hitlers defeat, Scottwrote in his pitch memo.
[And] anti-Semitism and anti-Negroism will grow unless heroic measures can be undertaken to stop them.
This picture is one such measure.
The movie opens on a fatal beating, played out in the shadows to obscure the killers identity.
It becomes clear, however, that he is a military man.
Per the PCAs request,Crossfireemphasizes that this killer is no ordinary soldier, but a volatile anomaly.
This business of hating Jews comes in a lot of different sizes, he says.
Theres the You cant join our country club kind.
And You cant live around here kind.
The You cant work here kind.
And because we stand for all these, we get Montys kind.
OnePhotoplayreader claimed that she took her entire high-school citizenship class to see it.
Gentlemans Agreement, based on Laura Z. Hobsons best-selling book, takes a different approach to a similar story.
This time, there is no shadowy intrigue or mystery to solve.
Zanuck used his standing to lobby the PCA for more leniency, particularly when it came to language.
But that sameVarietyreport made a tellingreference to the competition.
The controversy left many in Hollywood tongue-tied and skittish, especially asCrossfirestayed in the Oscar race.
Fast-forward to now, and were hearing strange echoes of this unusual Oscar race.
Will the Academy prize one approach over the other with a Best Picture win?
