The Annual Academy Awards - General Discussion

[blackwing]

I think Jennifer Lawrence is overrated as well.  I think she is talented but I definitely think she is not so much more talented than others that she should get nominated every year.  I'm a bit annoyed that in the next X-Men movie, Mystique of all people suddenly seems thrust into a leadership role, which would never have happened had Mystique been played by anyone but Jennifer Lawrence.  So much of the Oscars is about campaigning and word of mouth.  I'm all about Cate Blanchett, I think she is the best actress of her generation, and if it were me, I would give her an Oscar every year.  I would like to see the incredible Maggie Smith and the unparalled Judi Dench each get another Oscar before they retire.  But it doesn't happen and probably won't.  It's always interesting to me how the Hollywood machine works.  I'm sure Brie Larson is great in "Room", but she is a fairly unknown actress, and the machine seems to have all but annointed her as Best Actress this year.

 

As for OscarsSoWhite, I have mixed feelings.  Yes, I'd like to see more diversity amongst the acting nominee slate.  But I don't want people to get nominated just to fill the token minority slot.  I feel like when the media complains about the whiteness, what they are really complaining about is the lack of black nominees.  How come nobody ever complains about the lack of Asian nominees?  Asians represent approximately 5% of the U.S. population.  Does this mean that there should be 1 slot amongst the 20 acting slots reserved for an Asian every year?  Why aren't there more Asian actors in Hollywood that get recognised and cast in leading roles?    For that matter, the Asian film industry is huge.  Why is it that someone like the French guy from that French film The Artist can win Best Actor when no one in Hollywood knows who he is?  Why can a then-unknown Marion Cotillard win Best Actress for a performance entirely in French?  But no Asian actor can ever get recognised for a non-English performance.  Where is all the outcry over the lack of Asian representation?  Get on that, Spike Lee.

Edited January 19, 2016 by blackwing

[DollEyes]

As for OscarsSoWhite, I have mixed feelings. Yes I would like to see more diversity amongst the acting nominee slate. But I don't want people to get nominated just to fill the token minority slot. How come nobody ever complains about the lack of Asian nominees? Asians represent approximately 5% of the U.S. population. Does this mean that there should be 1 slot amongst the 20 acting slots reserved for an Asian every year? Why aren't there more Asian actors in Hollywood that get cast in leading roles? For that matter, the Asian film industry is huge. Why is it that someone like that French guy from that French film The Artist can win Best Actor when no one in Hollywood knows who he is? Why can a then-unknown like Marion Cotillard win Best Actress for a performance entirely in French? But no Asian actor can ever get recognized for a non-English performance. Where is all the outcry over the lack of Asian representation? Get on that, Spike Lee.

 

    Re the first point, I believe that OscarsSoWhite is mad about the lack of any representation of non-White actors of any race. ITA that actors shouldn't be nominated just to fill a quota, but talented minority actors of any race shouldn't be ignored just because of their race, either. As for Jean Dujardin, I think that he won his Best Actor Oscar because his performance in The Artist  was the kind of role that hadn't been seen in decades in a kind of film that Hollywood hadn't made in decades. Asian actors getting Oscar nominations for a non-English speaking performance is rare, but it happens. Rinko Kikuchi was nominated for Best Supporting Actress for Babel 10 years ago. Asians behind the scenes have better luck. One of the best examples is Ang Lee, whose Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon was 2000's Best Foreign Language film, plus he won for Best Director for Brokeback Mountain & Life Of Pi. Before him was the late James Wong Howe,  the Oscar-winning cinematographer of classic films like Hud. The late Akira Kurosawa was nominated for Best Director for Ran in 1985. Composer Rikuchi Sakamoto won an Oscar for his Original Score of The Last Emperor, Tan Dun won for the score of Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon and A.R. Rahman won for his score of Slumdog Millionaire.   Despite these wins, I agree that the MPAA has done a pretty shitty job where all minorities are concerned.

Edited January 19, 2016 by DollEyes

[blackwing]

Asian actors getting Oscar nominations for a non-English speaking performance is rare, but it happens. Rinko Kikuchi was nominated for Best Supporting Actress for Babel 10 years ago. 

Ah yes, that is right.  But "Babel" was considered an American film as its main studio backing was an American studio.  I was more specifically talking about Asian actors getting nominated for films produced by the Asian film industry that are in their native languages.  I was making a comparison that it seems possible for white actors to win for a foreign language performance in a foreign film. like the two recent French actors, but impossible for any Asian actors to attain similar recognition.  For all the success of "Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon", the much lauded performances of Zhang Ziyi and Michelle Yeoh were ignored at the Oscars and the Globes.  If other actors can win for foreign language films, then why are Gong Li and Michelle Yeoh never recognised?

[KatWay]

 

I was making a comparison that it seems possible for white actors to win for a foreign language performance in a foreign film. like the two recent French actors,

maybe that only goes for French. Like, is there a big French segment in the Academy that we haven't heard of? Cause Emmanuelle Riva is the only other European actress for European project nominee that I can think of and that's once again...in French. (yes, technically produced by Austria, but French language and set in France).

[candall]

I haven't seen Creed, but Richard Brody had a few things to say about its omission in The New Yorker:

 

Thank you for posting the New Yorker snippet, which is the strongest argument I've seen for the #white controversy.  I have no opinion about Compton.  My dislike of their music pretty much rules out me lining up to see a biopic about N.W.A--which seems reasonable:  who went to Jersey Boys if they weren't exactly keen to hear that Frankie Valli falsetto style of music?

 

Will Smith.  If the Concussion movie had been about Dr. Ann McKee--who's been doing the same research for just as long--AND starred Meryl Streep, they would have just handed her the Oscar at the wrap party, so there's probably no question this one-person-takes-on-Establishment story is compelling enough to be Oscar material.  But, Smith is not Streep.  Did he bring the talent and get shut out because of his skin color?  Did he bring the talent and get shut out because of Scientology and promoting his kids to the nth degree and other stuff that should be irrelevant but still seems to factor into voting?

 

But singling out Sly from the Creed cast and ignoring a powerful lead's talent is a strong argument.  Like when the director of the Best Picture winner isn't even nominated--hmm, something's amiss here.

 

Oh, who the hell knows what's in those Academy voters' heads?

[slowpoked]

EW polled a few Academy members for their opinions on why Straight Outta Compton was shut out. Basically, it boiled down to, while it was a good movie, it probably wasn't the type of movie most of the Academy members would have been watching: 

 

http://www.ew.com/article/2016/01/18/oscars-straight-outta-compton-snub

 

On Jennifer Lawrence: it's interesting to see the dynamics of JLaw and Leo's stories colliding together at this year's Oscars. Not just here, but everywhere. No sides from me, but just very interesting to see how there's sudden resentment of JLaw being nominated again, when not too long ago she was everyone's favorite underdog. While Leo, who has been nominated a number of times, more than JLaw, is suddenly being rooted on as an underdog despite his presumed status as the front-runner this year. People want to see JLaw's fall from grace while they want to see Leo's overdue recognition, despite both being a staple of awards shows in recent years.

 

Granted, JLaw has won an Oscar, so she's reached the pinnacle, and Leo has not. So I can see where the warm fuzzies are coming from for Leo. But still, why is it so (suddenly) easy to hate on JLaw and Leo is just your lovable underdog? 

[truthaboutluv]

But still, why is it so (suddenly) easy to hate on JLaw and Leo is just your lovable underdog?

 

 

Because when it comes to celebrities, people love to build them up to knock them down. Like you said, Jennifer has reached the pinnacle. Girl is ridiculously successful at a very young age. Sooner or later, the "well she's not really all that" was bound to start and suddenly the same once liked star seems to be resented for daring to succeed. I feel like the tide towards Jennifer started turning slightly when she was nominated against Lupita that year and many were billing it as a race between the two of them. There was some racial talk then, people started going on about her not being all that and being too successful too young and then the dumbass O'Russell made some really stupid and insensitive comment in regards to the racial talk. Jennifer to her credit or her people's credit saw that tide changing and she pretty much vanished.

 

She did virtually no campaigning for that award season, even being criticized by some media/voters for that, because I think she and her people wisely realized the public was starting to get tired and the backlash was coming. Seems like that's the case again, so it'll be interesting to see what she does moving forward. I will say Jennifer is definitely not a celebrity I feel is constantly in my face and I'm constantly bombarded by. She does her movies, if she's nominated for stuff, she shows up for awards season but I almost rarely see her in magazines and media just being at events or even just hanging around LA. 

 

The anonymous comments from the voters are telling but not surprising. The Hollywood Reporter started doing this anonymous Oscar voter ballots some years ago and it is always interesting reading the comments from people who are actually voting on this. Many times people vote simply because they heard this person was great, meaning they didn't see the film themselves or they have no idea who a nominee is so they just ignore them or categories they don't even understand but they're voting on. Like I have learned that clearly, other than the people in the field, no one really knows the difference between Sound Editing and Sound Mixing. It's just amazing to realize the prestige attached to this and it is voted by a group of people that includes some who barely watch all the films sometimes or other times just randomly picks a name. 

[slowpoked]

Because when it comes to celebrities, people love to build them up to knock them down. 

 

I just feel like it's a gender issue again, because Hollywood likes only one woman at the top, while it has no problem having multiple powerful men being successful at the same time. When Julia Roberts was at the top, they shredded her. Same with Cameron Diaz, Sandra Bullock, etc. And now, JLaw. Probably the only "IT" woman that survived the peaks and valleys was Meryl Streep. But Hollywood has no problems celebrating George Clooney and Brad Pitt together. And Leo every other year, it seems. 

 

Like you, I don't feel like JLaw is being shoved at my face too (nowhere near Taylor Swift levels of exposure). She works hard as an actress. She happens to be in both blockbuster and small films. It so happens she gets nominated often. But if she doesn't have movies, I don't hear or see her anywhere. She doesn't headline People.com every other day. Even when she was with Chris Martin, she was pretty much on the DL. So it's just fascinating to see all this sudden resentment. I mean, eventually Meryl Streep is going to retire, get old and die. Why not groom the next one now?

[gator12]

Jennifer Lawrence has been nominate every single year it seems like since 2011. Leo went like 9 years between his first nomination and second. JLaw has also said some ignorant thing, which in the age of social media most don't likely forget but in the main media, JLaw is a media darling and a women that others should look up too. There is no pushback again her imo other than in social media.

Edited January 21, 2016 by gator12

[mansonlamps]

I never considered Meryl Streep and "It" girl, though, she was always considered a serious actress in my mind.  I put Jennifer Lawrence in the category of Roberts, Paltrow, Ryan, Diaz, Bullock and the like.  Even though she does more indie films than they did, she's still America's Sweetheart and tabloid fodder. 

[BitterApple]

Sorry but she's screwing someone to get to the top.

Lol, right? I mean she's good, but not that damn good. I saw Joy and it sucked. Her performance in that movie wasn't anything remarkable.

Benicio not being nominated for Sicario is an absolute travesty. If I was single and he was interested, I'd be on him like white on rice.

Edited January 22, 2016 by BitterApple

[mansonlamps]

Well of course, because we all know women can't be successful without having sex to get there.

 

 

Right?  I found that comment offensive and I try really hard not to be offended in this overly sensitive world.  Some groups just can't escape the ignorant stereotypes and woman seem to be at the forefront when it comes to being judged for their success.

[slowpoked]

I saw Joy and it sucked.

For me, the best thing about Joy sucking is I don't have to see Bradley Cooper get nominated again this year, and I guess O'Russell too. Cooper irritates me to no end.

People.com has a nice piece about this diversity issue:

http://www.people.com/article/oscar-diversity-not-just-will-smith

It does have a good point - Smith whining about not getting nominated seems rich just because he was supposed to be in contention this year.

[benteen]

I think Jennifer Lawrence is a good actress but I think her most recent nomination has more to with Hollywood's obsession with her than anything else.  Her Oscar victory for Silver Linings Playbook still baffles me.  Bradley Cooper was a revelation in that movie and deserved all the accolades while Lawrence's performance was average at best.  I thought she was far better in American Hustle even though the role wasn't that important to the movie.  Hollywood just seems to like her and all her attention-seeking moments.

 

It's been fun watching "We're better and more evolved than you" Hollywood being called out as racist.  Even funnier is all the self-important entertainment figures tripping over each other to weigh in like George Clooney and Mark Ruffalo.  This story is giving them all a chance for them to try to show how important they are when they're not. 

[BetterButter]

Charlotte Rampling: Promoting Diversity In Oscar Nominations Is 'Racist To Whites'

Michael Caine urges black actors to be 'patient' over lack of representation at Oscars

Edited January 22, 2016 by BetterButter

[gator12]

I want journalists at the Oscars RedCarpet to ask real questions to these Celebrities just to see how ignorant they are.

Jennifer Lawrence has made homophobic and transphobic comments in the media, there are legit reason to dislike her.

Edited January 22, 2016 by gator12

[twoods]

Charlotte Rampling does have a point (with the anti white stuff, not with the minority actors not being good enough). Everyone wants to be seen as an equal, but then race comes up every single time. Some of the boycotts make it seem that every single year there should be a few minority nominees because it is "fair." Is it fair that there are BET and Latino awards that are geared towards a certain race? Is it fair that by boycotting you aren't supporting your fellow actors who weren't at fault for getting chosen?

I think it sucks that Idris and Michael B Jordan got overlooked this year- not because they are black but because they are fantastic actors. Same with Johnny Depp or Charlize Theron. I just wish we can look past race and look at the actor or person for whom he or she is. Now next year they will likely overly nominate a few "ethnic" actors to hush the critics up, but then there will be others criticizing if they got nominated just because of their race. It's not fair.

Edited January 23, 2016 by twoods

[blackwing]

So the Academy's plan to combat the lack of diversity in the nominations is to add more black members to the voting membership?  Because black people only nominate and vote for black actors?  That seems a bit silly and almost offensive to me.  It says that minority voters can't look beyond race and will only nominate people the same race as them.

 

I don't know what the solution is, but I don't think trying to guilt people into nominating black actors is the right answer.  I want to see the best actors get nominated, regardless of race.  I do think that Will Smith and Idris Elba may have gotten snubbed, but lots of people get snubbed every year.  I didn't hear any outcry over Helen Mirren getting snubbed because she's an old white woman.

 

For all of the outcry over the lack of minority (black) actors nominations... I think it's worth noting that 4 of the past 9 Supporting Actress winners have been black.

[Laurie4H]

I agree that it should be about the actor and not the race. I think making it about race is racist. Like when Halle Berry won for Monsters Ball....they didn't make it about her performance (which I thought was overrated) but the fact she was the first black woman to win best actress. (and her mom is white). If Will Smith or Michael B Jordan etc....didn't get nominated, it isn't because of race but because there are many great performances (and some overrated). I think it comes down to who campaigns the most for votes.

In my opinion it seems the male winners are usually deserving....the winners usually have a great transformation in their rolls where they become the character. The females usually play a similar version of someone they play in every movie (yell a lot, and/or add in a few nudity/sex scenes) and they are the top contender. I'll never get over how Julia Roberts in Erin Brochovich beat out Ellen Byrnstyn in Requiem for a Dream.

Edited January 23, 2016 by Laurie4H

[truthaboutluv]

I try to avoid this discussion about the lack of diversity at the Oscars because it is a sensitive topic where one wrong word or badly phrased comment can be made into something else and frankly I'm just not here not for that. Also I don't consider myself well informed enough of the workings of Hollywood to expertly speak on it. That said, from the comfort of my home, far away from Hollywood, here's what I think. 

 

I can't remember who said it, maybe Viola Davis or Lupita Nyong'o, but this really is a systemic issue. I think the first problem is that it keeps getting narrowed down to the Oscar Award itself and that's a bit narrow thinking. Because to quote Viola Davis at the Emmys, a person cannot get nominated for roles that are simply not there. In other words, the real problem is the larger Hollywood community and the gatekeepers of Hollywood, the ones with all the power - the studio heads, the producers, directors, etc. These people who still write and create roles and movies that mostly go to white actors. I mean don't get me wrong, for sure progress has been made over the years but in my opinion, the reality is still that most roles and movies are made with white actors/characters in mind. 

 

Another issue is yes, the makeup of the Academy. I am sorry, the 92 percent white members is bad enough but to have over 50 or 60 percent of the voters white men who've been there since like the 50's because once you're a member, you're a member for life, is a problem. Even if there wasn't this current diversity issue and I found out about this, I'd still say it's a problem because no organization needs to have the same people there for that long making decisions. It means you're not evolving. So the makeup of the Academy needs to change. 

 

Another thing is the Academy Awards and Hollywood really has a diversity issue in general but that gets a little lost I think because the conversation gets sparked every year by the lack of black actors nominated. So some likely just dismiss it as a "black thing." When the reality is this is as much an issue with Latinas and Asians and other minorities. Plus not to mention equal pay for male and women actors is still an issue. So there is clearly a larger diversity problem in general and I just think that in itself gets a little lost. 

 

Finally, two other things bother me. I hate that so much focus gets placed on the acting categories. And I think that's short-sighted and again still not addressing the larger issues. Most of the media stories I've read since this whole thing began talks about all the acting nominees being white. There are some references to Straight Outta Compton not getting a Best Picture nomination but I feel like the focus of the complaints come down to the acting categories and like I said I think that is short-sighted because the Academy Awards honor so many categories because there are so many aspects of making movies.

 

And whether consciously or not, I feel like so many of those speaking out like a Jada Pinkett Smith and others, are making it just about the acting categories. Like where is more talk about once again the Director category being all male (oh and it's still been only one woman to win Best Director in the 80+ years history of the Academy) or people of color in the screenwriting categories, costume design, etc. 

 

And the second thing that bothers me is sort of what Whoopi Goldberg said about the topic (and I rarely like agreeing with Whoopi on anything). Basically, she noted that every year, only when the Oscar nominations come out, this becomes a thing, but where is the conversation the rest of the year? I will give credit to people like Spike Lee who has always been fairly vocal about this issue but for others it's like it is all about just the Oscars and again ignoring the greater issue. Which is why some are so skeptical and cynical about Jada Pinkett Smith's motives and believe she's really just upset her husband didn't get nomination. Most believe that if Will had been nominated for Concussion, she would have said nothing and frankly, I kind of agree. And for the record, Will was okay in Concussion but I don't think he was robbed of a nomination. 

 

Another example of how it seems some wait solely on the Oscars for the conversation to happen, is all the outrage about Michael B. Jordan not getting nominated. Except Michael B. Jordan has been snubbed all awards season. He didn't get a SAG, a Globe or Critics Choice nomination and while he was nominated in a few critic's circle awards, he didn't win. I was honestly confused that some seemed so surprised by his not getting an Oscar nomination because I thought that was obvious since all these other awards are basically precursors that indicate who will likely be nominated for the Oscar. So my point then was where was all the push and campaigning for him when it was clear he was getting ignored during Award season? But then the Oscar nominations come out and that's when some get outraged. 

 

Like I said, this is a complex issue and one that speaks to the larger problem in Hollywood, no matter how much progress that has been made throughout the years. It shows that there is still a long way to go (not that the current popularity of that tool Donald Trump isn't making that clear and saying a lot about what some really think in this country) and we'll see if anything substantial comes from this. I will say that it is a bit crappy for the people who are nominated, especially in the acting categories. I feel like this puts them in an awkward position. 

 

I think some feel like they are all obligated to say something (which I don't agree with) but really all they can say is that yes, more people of color of should have been nominated because otherwise they will get judged and maybe even called a racist. And that's not really fair I think. Also, the whole situation does raise an uncomfortable, "so basically you're saying someone else should not have been there...." Like my sister and I got into this discussion and she casually stated that Eddie Redmayne should have been the one not nominated in favor of Michael B. Jordan. Except she's never seen The Danish Girl or Creed by the way but the pundits say Michael was amazing in the latter and I guess well Eddie won last year, so let's boot him. And I had to say, "well pause, because I saw The Danish Girl and I think Eddie Redmayne absolutely deserves his nomination." 

 

Personally in my opinion, the people who were truly snubbed was Straight Outta Compton for Best Picture (I don't think it deserved to win though and for the record, I'm pissed about Carol not being nominated too and think that was some bullshit) and Idris Elba for Beast of No Nation. With regard to the latter, I actually think this was a case of politics not in terms of race but the fact that the film was distributed through Netflix. There is so much talk about shows on streaming sites like Netflix, Hulu and Amazon Prime winning television awards, with some feeling that it's not fair, that I just didn't see this same Academy made up of all these older, traditional people, voting for a movie that came from Netflix, fair or not. 

Edited January 23, 2016 by truthaboutluv

[BW Manilowe]

An article discussing the changes the Academy plans to make to encourage more diversity. Some of the longstanding members speak out.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/race/academys-new-voting-rules-raise-858388?utm_source=twitter

[pennben]

Damn, truthaboutluv, that may well be the best post that I have ever seen posted on this site.  As I was reading along with comments above yours, the voice of Viola Davis was in my ear.."you cannot win an Emmy for roles that simply aren't there", but I wasn't sure what to write beyond that, and how this isn't just about awards, but opportunity and how messy it is when it seems to only catch the news at awards time.  And then I read your post.  You captured it all.  Thank you.

Edited January 24, 2016 by pennben

[Irlandesa]

Charlotte Rampling does have a point (with the anti white stuff, not with the minority actors not being good enough). Everyone wants to be seen as an equal, but then race comes up every single time. Some of the boycotts make it seem that every single year there should be a few minority nominees because it is "fair." Is it fair that there are BET and Latino awards that are geared towards a certain race? Is it fair that by boycotting you aren't supporting your fellow actors who weren't at fault for getting chosen?

Except a big reason the BET awards and Image awards exist is because of the lack of recognition POC were receiving from the mainstream awards shows. And even they nominate white people.  So I don't think they're comparable, with their specific missions of representing POC, to awards shows that are supposed to be the best of everything yet continue to disproportionately celebrate white people. 

 

And I don't see how not going, which I believe is what both Jada and Spike have said, is the same thing as an all out boycott.  I think it's very fair to say why they don't want to go and play the game this year.  And I don't know who would get hurt by it other than Spike and Jada for being 'controversial'. 

 

And it is absolutely more nuanced than nominating POC.  The system is deeply flawed but nominations are absolutely part of that system. 

 

So the Academy's plan to combat the lack of diversity in the nominations is to add more black members to the voting membership?  Because black people only nominate and vote for black actors?  That seems a bit silly and almost offensive to me.  It says that minority voters can't look beyond race and will only nominate people the same race as them.

No, that's not the point of adding diversity.  The point of adding diversity is to get more representation from people who go see movies.  One of the reasons I heard Straight Outta Compton didn't get nominated was because it wasn't the "type of movie" voters would likely go see. 

And there's nothing nefarious in that.  We like what we like.  But if a group of white men over 60 created a list of the top 5 movies of the year and a group of Asian women created a list of their top 5 movies, there will likely be some different movies on those lists.  There will also very likely be some overlap.  The point of adding diversity is hopefully starting to recognize some of the movies that would make the group of Asian women's list instead of having the white old man's list reign supreme year after year.

 

I know the voters think they're being as objective as possible but we all filter what we see/read/do through our own life experiences.  Opinions are more subjective than sometimes we even realize.

 

Like where is more talk about once again the Director category being all male (oh and it's still been only one woman to win Best Director in the 80+ years history of the Academy) or people of color in the screenwriting categories, costume design, etc.

Last year that was the discussion with Ava DuVernay's snub.

 

And the second thing that bothers me is sort of what Whoopi Goldberg said about the topic (and I rarely like agreeing with Whoopi on anything). Basically, she noted that every year, only when the Oscar nominations come out, this becomes a thing, but where is the conversation the rest of the year?

She's wrong.  This is not a once-a-year conversation.  This conversation happens in the race and ethnicity thread on this site.  It happens whenever study comes out depicting what percentage of minorities (both POC and women) work in front of the camera and behind the camera and how they're portrayed.  It happened this summer throughout the season of Project Greenlight.

 

It just gets more focus and notice around this time of year.

Edited January 24, 2016 by Irlandesa

[truthaboutluv]

Last year that was the discussion with Ava DuVernay's snub.

 

Yes, there was talk about Ava but I felt it was more about the racial component and less about the issue of women rarely getting a Best Director win. Also, in my observation, more of the conversation seemed centered on David Oyelowo's snub. Similar to what I was saying about the talk now. Yes there are references to Straight Outta Compton not being nominated but I feel like a lot of the dialogue is about all the acting nominees being white. I may be wrong in my observation but that's how it's come across to me. 

 

She's wrong.  This is not a once-a-year conversation.  This conversation happens in the race and ethnicity thread on this site.  It happens whenever study comes out depicting what percentage of minorities (both POC and women) work in front of the camera and behind the camera and how they're portrayed.  It happened this summer throughout the season of Project Greenlight.

 

 

I don't think Whoopi was talking about general discussion about race and diversity and I certainly wasn't. Of course race has always been an issue and especially last year, how could it not be with the BlackLivesMatter movement and all the police brutality and protests about police brutality against black people. So I'm not referring to that and I don't think Whoopi was either. And of course I'm not referring to you, me and the average Joe on this board posting comments in a race and diversity thread. 

 

What I'm referring to and again maybe my perception is wrong, is the larger discussion of Hollywood's diversity issues. As I noted, of course there have been individuals talking about it like Spike Lee and there was Viola's speech at the Emmys that she got praised for and Lee Daniels going off on the other writers at THR round-table about the lack of black people on their show and yes the Project Greenlight debacle with Matt Damon. But those are all isolated incidents that seem to go nowhere and then it's back to the regularly scheduled program. But then the Oscars comes around, nominations come out and then its a firestorm of backlash. Like the Oscar is the only thing that seems to truly shine a light on the obvious issue they all already know exist.

 

And I don't see how not going, which I believe is what both Jada and Spike have said, is the same thing as an all out boycott.

 

And for the record, Spike Lee made it very clear in his GMA interview last week that he never used the word boycott, never told anyone to boycott. He said all he's said is that he and his wife will not be attending...that's all. 

 

Damn, truthaboutluv, that may well be the best post that I have ever seen posted on this site.  As I was reading along with comments above yours, the voice of Viola Davis was in my ear.."you cannot win an Emmy for roles that simply aren't there", but I wasn't sure what to write beyond that, and how this isn't just about awards, but opportunity and how messy it is when it seems to only catch the news at awards time.  And then I read your post.  You captured it all.  Thank you.

 

Thanks. 

Edited January 24, 2016 by truthaboutluv

[BW Manilowe]

Chris Rock is still hosting the Oscars, despite recent calls for him to boycott over the diversity issue, as a POC. He's currently rewriting the show to include comments on the diversity/#OscarsSoWhite issue.

http://variety.com/2016/film/news/chris-rock-oscars-diversity-1201687097/

Edited January 24, 2016 by BW Manilowe

[truthaboutluv]

I actually didn't get the impression Chris Rock was considering stepping down from hosting the show. There has been no reports or rumors suggesting he was seriously considering it, far as I can tell. Sure, some people like Al Sharpton are saying he should, but I didn't get the impression he was planning on it. 

[mansonlamps]

How stupid would it be to expect Chris Rock to boycott the show if the #Ocarsowhite people want timely commentary on the subject delivered to a mainstream audience? By a comedian that gets a lot of respect from a very diverse audience? That would make about zero sense.

[Guest]

Chris Rock is still hosting the Oscars, despite recent calls for him to boycott over the diversity issue, as a POC. He's currently rewriting the show to include comments on the diversity/#OscarsSoWhite issue.

http://variety.com/2016/film/news/chris-rock-oscars-diversity-1201687097/

 

I can understand why Rock is re-writing the whole show, but uggh.   I was so looking forward to an Oscars that had less of an opportunity for South Park to make a show about (Clooney's smug cloud).

 

They nominated Mad Max Fury Road and there is now almost zero chance that anyone is going to be playing a flaming guitar because we must take the award show so seriously in the face of such controversy.

[BW Manilowe]

Now, at least as of yesterday, after posting the original "Chris Rock's rewriting his part of the Oscars" article link, his Publicist is DENYING that's what's happening.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/chris-rocks-rep-shuts-down-858985

[Irlandesa]

Now, at least as of yesterday, after posting the original "Chris Rock's rewriting his part of the Oscars" article link, his Publicist is DENYING that's what's happening.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/chris-rocks-rep-shuts-down-858985

It was kind of a silly story to begin with. From what I understand, that show is being tweaked with while it's actually airing. So of course it's being written and rewritten a month out. That'd likely be happening regardless of what is going on.

Edited January 26, 2016 by Irlandesa

[Inquisitionist]

A.O. Scott (film critic for the NY Times) interviewed by Slate about movies and the Oscars.  Bold indicates the interviewer:

 

Leonardo DiCaprio is about to get a Best Actor Oscar for his 20th best performance where he doesn’t do anything but grimace.

Right, just because he grew out all his facial hair and grunted. DiCaprio’s performance in Wolf of Wall Street was just …

Amazing.

Tremendous, amazing, but again it is this idea, it’s part of the pretentiousness of the Oscars in a way that is consistent with their notorious bias against comedy, against comic storytelling and comic performances.

Eddie Murphy not getting a nomination for The Nutty Professor was the most astonishing example.

Incredible. That’s a great example because it’s such a tour de force. Again, it’s not an Oscar movie, but look at what Melissa McCarthy does in Spy.

 

[Dobian]

I personally don't care about all the controversy because who wins Oscars has no bearing on which movies and actors I think are great, and the fact that many deserving films and performances get overlooked every year.  And of course, who is being honored and gets all the glory at this event?  The actors, of course, along with the bigwig producers and directors.  But you look at any movie, and all the work and effort that goes into making it, the incredible technical expertise involved from sound to editing to sets to costumes to CGI, and all the skilled people who are the real reason why these films exist, much moreso than the people acting in front of a camera, none of them get any of the accolades.  The movie industry and the Hollywood celebrity subculture is entirely narcisistic and self-serving.  And of course driven by big money, which is why the Acadamy Awards are really just an elaborate advertisement for the major movie studios.  So while I can understand the argument that Will Smith got slighted, he still got a nomination for Ali and still gets to sit with the A-Listers at this super exclusive event, while there are countless people who are forever in the shadows working away to bring us these amazing films, and watching the Academy Awards from their living rooms.

Edited February 4, 2016 by Dobian

[Shannon L.]

 

But you look at any movie, and all the work and effort that goes into making it, the incredible technical expertise involved from sound to editing to sets to costumes to CGI, and all the skilled people who are the real reason why these films exist, much moreso than the people acting in front of a camera, none of them get any of the accolades.

Well, they do get awards and their moments in front of the mic.  It's the lesser crew members who rarely ever get acknowledgement:  Grips, gaffers, the guys and girls who set the stage and clean up afterward, the PAs etc.   They work longer and harder hours than the those at the top and almost never get a shout out from those who are accepting the awards.  That's why we always cheer when someone includes "the crew" when accepting their awards, or mentions them during interviews or are rumored to actually pay attention and be polite to them while filming.

[Dobian]

Yeah the different categories get recognized, I should have said that it's the top bosses who get their moment, but the guys and girls sitting in front of a computer making a dinosaur come to life or putting Matt Damon on the surface of Mars are prettty much anonymous.

[slowpoked]

Rebel Wilson pokes fun at the Oscars so white controversy at the BAFTA Awards:

 

 

That kind of joke (even if not against the Oscars) will never make it to the Oscar telecast. What is it with this ceremony that makes people act like proud stiffs all of a sudden when these same people can have fun and get loose at GGs, BAFTAs, SAGs, etc.

Edited February 17, 2016 by slowpoked

[reggiejax]

What is it with this ceremony that makes people act like proud stiffs all of a sudden when these same people can have fun and get loose at GGs, BAFTAs, SAGs, etc.

 

 

The Oscars are the only awards anyone in the industry gives a shit about. If you were to have a career where you won a dozen Golden Globes, SAG Awards, MTV Movie Awards etc, yet only ever earned one Oscar nomination, that one measly nomination would lead your obituary when you die. And why is that? Honestly, it’s because the Oscars are the oldest of the entertainment awards, older than the other film awards, older than the Emmys, older than the Grammys and even older than the Tonys. So yeah, you could go onstage to accept a Golden Globe by dropping trou and taking a dump onstage, no one would give a shit (pun fully intended). Try that at the Oscars, they will take notice and they will get upset. I mean they never asked David Letterman back, and all he did was just be a poor host. They take the Oscars seriously, that's just how it is.

[topanga]

 

Rebel Wilson pokes fun at the Oscars so white controversy at the BAFTA Awards:

Funny stuff. I really like Rebel Wilson. And I liked that she directed a few "you're so sexy" jokes toward Idris Elba because, well, he is. He just is.

[twoods]

Rebel Wilson is awesome. I would also be nervous if that fine man was sitting in the front- wouldn't be able to concentrate. Look how much fun the audience was having- at the Oscars we would just see sour faces.

[mansonlamps]

Agree that Idris Elba is really hot, disagree on Rebel being awesome although her Bafta performance is one of her better ones IMO. In everything else I've seen her in she seems to just be playing off of her size which is only so funny. I have kind of always felt that about Melissa McCarthy too so we'll see if that changes now that she's lost 75 pounds.

[Steph619]

I'm rooting for Leonardo DiCaprio and Brie Larson to win in their respective categories. Leo is one of my favorite actors and I've loved Brie Larson since I first saw her in "Scott Pilgrim vs. the World."

[Sandman87]

I find the current flap over lack of Oscar diversity funny. The Oscars aren't awarded on the basis of merit, and they never have been. They're awarded on the basis of the effectiveness of the lobbying campaigns that are mounted by the artists, studios, publicists, and managers. If you didn't get a nomination, it's because your lobbying wasn't as effective as your competition's or because you didn't bother to lobby at all. Period. You don't feel like kissing asses at the academy? Don't want to bother with the schmoozing and the bribery? Too fastidious to hang out with Hollywood sleazebags? Then I guess you don't want that nomination badly enough, let alone the award.

 

The part that amuses me is that everyone in Hollywood knows how the awards process works, so the celebrities who are wringing their hands are either hypocrites or clueless.

 

And by the way, the same is true of most industry awards, regardless of the industry. If your TV or radio station wants an award from the National Association of Broadcasters, you have to lobby for it. Etc, etc.

[slowpoked]

EW did a secret Oscars ballot among Academy Members. Includes one actor, one actress, a producer, a director, writer and a publicist. There seems to be a consesnsus between the Best Actor and Best Actress winners, but the Best Picture seems to be a wide open race this year, so that should make for an exciting last award:

http://www.ew.com/article/2016/02/12/oscars-2016-secret-ballot

I love when they do secret ballots. It's a real insight to how actual voters think. Ideally, the best should be rewarded, but obviously that's not always the case, and it's fun to see the why behind the voters' thinking.

[ABay]

If you haven't already seen it, you might enjoy Hollywood Reporter's Brutally Honest Oscar Ballot series.

[Chrissytd]

I think all the acting categories are up for grabs; and the major non-acting categories being a toss-up between The Revenant, and Spotlight.

[chitowngirl]

On Friday,  GMA interviewed the producers. They said they were changing up the order of the awards. While I imagine that Best Picture will still be last, it'll be nice to have some of the bigger awards interspersed throughout the show.

[Chas411]

The red carpet is starting soon...

[Chas411]

Do E! not have the usual full coverage?

[ABay]

I've E on mute and am ready to go PIP when ABC starts at 7. Did I miss anything up to now?

 

ETA: Seacrest and Rancic are on Eright now. I think they started at 5:30 Eastern.

Edited February 28, 2016 by ABay

[Chas411]

Not that I can see. Ryan seems to have a pretty lame spot on the carpet and the pieces with Guilianna and the ever annoying Ross Mathews are just fillers.I

 

Is Gena Rowland ok? She seems kind of out of it.

[Fostersmom]

I sadly thought she's showing the signs of Alzheimer's or dementia.