Awards Season 2015

Message

#351 Post by **swo17** » Tue Jan 19, 2016 9:15 pm

Altair wrote:Fact is, if people want inclusion every year, then, unless the industry changes radically (don't hold your breath), then they will need to have separate nominations: Best Actor for Person of Colour etc. I'm not being sarcastic. In a perfect world we would just have one Best Actor, regardless of sex, but if we did then women nominees would be in very short supply. So if the Academy already acknowledges a differentiation between gender has to be made, why not by race as well?

They could also just increase the number of nominees in general. If they did the acting categories like they do Best Picture, situations like this would happen far less often. (Moving from 10 total nominees to 20 takes the likelihood of a year having no black nominees down from 1 in 4 to 1 in 17.)

#352 Post by **Jeff** » Wed Jan 20, 2016 1:15 am

swo17 wrote:The last ten years of Oscar nominees fit an expected curve pretty well:

Another way of looking at it is that there have been 18 nominations in the past ten years compared to about 13 expected. Even if you look at only the last five years, there have been 7 nominees compared to like 6.6 expected. Yes, the last two years have been dry, but is this a trend or just a statistical eventuality (expected to happen about once every four years, all else being equal)?

The Academy really needs to hire a full-time actuary -- for P.R. if nothing else!

gcgiles1dollarbin · Fri Jan 22, 2016 10:31 pm

Charlotte Rampling makes an ill-advised contribution to the Oscar racial debate. "Ill-advised" because she could very easily be roasted alive in the internet kangaroo court, especially given her nominee status (which, I'm guessing, is why the NYT considered this "news"). While I disagree with her comments, I worry her standing as a respected, time-tested actress will not help her against the rabid vindictiveness that saturates this debate.

flyonthewall2983 · Fri Jan 22, 2016 10:36 pm

Worry not, she's likely already being roasted as we speak.

hearthesilence · Fri Jan 22, 2016 11:28 pm

I haven't seen enough films to know whether white performers truly and unanimously gave the best performances of the year, but for any given year, you can argue that if you're going to open the doors to mediocrity, you can at least make it diverse.

Ribs · #356 Post by **Ribs** » Fri Jan 22, 2016 11:33 pm

I think there is absolutely some degree that people should accept that some people just are of a generation and mindset that can't quite understand the problem, and that's fine, and what she said is disappointing, but she really shouldn't be lambasted because though these views really don't have any place in polite society anymore I don't expect her to totally redefine her opinions and understanding of the world after decades of experience.

But yes this is pretty terrible press to put out considering 45 Years' expansion into more major markets on the heels of her nomination.

TMDaines · #357 Post by **TMDaines** » Sat Jan 23, 2016 12:19 am

I don't speak French so cannot really comment on the entirety of what she said, although the translated pull quotes just seem to be very matter of fact. If you're going to vote for someone with one of the reasons being that they are non-White, then surely that is a case of racism. You might be doing this with the justification of diversity, but token support for one person means maligning someone who better merited recognition.

Additionally, is it really not plausible that in any given year that all the nominees may be of the majority ethnic background, especially when you consider the percentage of high profile roles that actors from said ethnicity are cast in? If you want to "fix" Awards Season, there needs to be more prestige films with non-Whites in high profile roles. Ultimately non-Whites are always going to be handicapped in the near future because much of Western history was dominated by Whites and this will be reflected in the casting of period pieces.

The farcical thing about this entire argument is that if the Oscars were really a meritocracy for all the eligible films then there would be far fewer African-Americans being nominated than there are now. You're already at a monumental advantage if you're working in America or in the big international, English-language films, even though everyone who has a qualifying run should technically be eligible.

aox · #358 Post by **aox** » Sat Jan 23, 2016 12:34 am

I might be the most bleeding heart liberal you'd ever meet, but I find this "controversy" just weird. I only saw 50 films this year, and the only non-white performance that stands out to me that I saw was Idris Elba's in Beasts of No Nation. Not only did he deserve the nomination, but I would be championing him over Michael Fassbinder (my pick for this year). But, what other performances are people really saying were snubbed? Benicio Del Toro was competent in Sicario, but not noteworthy. I didn't see Creed, but I have heard that touted.

gcgiles1dollarbin · Sat Jan 23, 2016 12:54 am

I do think invoking "merit" when it comes to the Oscars is mostly meaningless, no matter how you feel about the ceremony as entertainment; on the other hand, using this insanely visible contest as a means to publicize and foreground the ill effects of historical and institutional racism is not such a bad idea, even if this past year did not feature too many significant roles for blacks (which, of course, is one of those ill effects). It's a ripe political opportunity in an industry that is remarkably responsive to these issues, as this news confirms.

Given that I don't care that much about the Oscars even as I admit they are a powerful influence on careers, I am all too willing to sacrifice the misperception of their integrity and objective merit for the sake of what amounts to a universally noticed PSA. So, grain of salt...

But no one should suffer for offering alternate points of view on an issue that allows for them, and I'm hoping Rampling comes out unscathed.

Luke M · #360 Post by **Luke M** » Sat Jan 23, 2016 2:08 am

Julie Delpy has also said something dumb.

I enjoy looking forward to seeing who's nominated and watching the Oscars each year, but I'd really like to see a shake-up. I'd like to see less Oscar-bait projects get greenlit. If Tom Hooper or Ron Howard never made another film, would anyone care?

I'd like to see bolder features get recognized. Can you imagine if the two leads from Tangerine were nominated? They're just as deserving to be there.

I think there's a lot of room for the Oscars to move, to include people of color without succumbing to mediocrity.

flyonthewall2983 · Sat Jan 23, 2016 2:31 am

Luke M wrote:I enjoy looking forward to seeing who's nominated and watching the Oscars each year, but I'd really like to see a shake-up. I'd like to see less Oscar-bait projects get greenlit. If Tom Hooper or Ron Howard never made another film, would anyone care?

MongooseCmr · #362 Post by **MongooseCmr** » Sat Jan 23, 2016 3:49 am

I think the entire controversy around this is ridiculous and aimed to stay out of it (since this will definitely come out wrong and bother someone), but how is saying a non-white actor "should" be nominated over a potentially superior white performance regardless of acting quality not sort of racism in its own right? The whole thing sounds like advocating for tokenism

I fully support more racial and gender diverse casting in films. When that happens, we'll undoubtedly get more diverse nominees. Until then I can't understand the outrage that the half dozen ok-to-good performances from actors of color everyone cites as a snub are more outrageous than any white actor giving the same caliber performance being snubbed in other years.

essrog · #363 Post by **essrog** » Sat Jan 23, 2016 3:57 am

The Oscar Whiteness Machine by Richard Brody. A great essay that makes a strong case for Spike Lee's Chi-Raq and its cast being recognized, when all of the pieces I've been reading have been complaining only about Creed and Straight Outta Compton.

gcgiles1dollarbin wrote:I do think invoking "merit" when it comes to the Oscars is mostly meaningless, no matter how you feel about the ceremony as entertainment; on the other hand, using this insanely visible contest as a means to publicize and foreground the ill effects of historical and institutional racism is not such a bad idea, even if this past year did not feature too many significant roles for blacks (which, of course, is one of those ill effects). It's a ripe political opportunity in an industry that is remarkably responsive to these issues, as this news confirms.

Given that I don't care that much about the Oscars even as I admit they are a powerful influence on careers, I am all too willing to sacrifice the misperception of their integrity and objective merit for the sake of what amounts to a universally noticed PSA. So, grain of salt...

But no one should suffer for offering alternate points of view on an issue that allows for them, and I'm hoping Rampling comes out unscathed.

I was with you until the last part. An alternate point of view would be saying something along the lines of that they don't think a boycott would be effective, or that more attention should be paid to getting more films with black stars and black directors made. What Rampling said was just ignorant. Anyone who says anything is "racist to whites" is just asking to be called out.

gcgiles1dollarbin · Sat Jan 23, 2016 8:14 am

Not terribly eager to defend her, but however we judge her remarks, reiterated constructive arguments against her position serve social justice much better than the virulent shaming culture that flourishes online and often leads to incommensurate professional "punishment." As I wrote in my first post, I am just hoping she can escape the latter.

captveg · #365 Post by **captveg** » Sat Jan 23, 2016 9:10 am

What drives me crazy more than anything is that the only minorities that "matter" in these conversations are blacks and women. There hasn't been an asian acting nominee in five years and nobody protested that.

Did you know that the only asian nominee for best actree was Merle Oberon in 1935? And she wasn't thought of as asian by any means at the time, and was half-white. So yeah, how about we make some effort to get out first asian woman nominated for best actress in 80 years to happen.

Oscars so white... Except three best directors in a row haven't been white. Oh, wait, they're not women or black? Doesn't count. They're still "white".

TMDaines · #366 Post by **TMDaines** » Sat Jan 23, 2016 9:30 am

captveg wrote:And she Oscars so white... Except three best directors in a row haven't been white. Oh, wait, they're not women or black? Doesn't count. They're still "white".

The American race/ethnicity system is just perverse though. I'm certain that the latter two would both be considered White on this side of the pond, and would probably self identify as such. Cuarón certainly. Pretty sure Iñárritu's heritage is predominantly Basque too.

Trees · #367 Post by **Trees** » Sat Jan 23, 2016 9:32 am

Worst thread currently going at criterion forum....

captveg · #368 Post by **captveg** » Sat Jan 23, 2016 9:34 am

Probably, yeah.

When one looks at American TV you can see how much more ahead of this they are then the film industry. Not great, but definitely far more diverse. But then TV has always beat films to the punch. They've done so on topics like AIDS, LGBT, interracial relationships, etc. And now even the production values of TV are competative, and even supersede the dramas that usually get acting and picture nominations.

Altair · #369 Post by **Altair** » Sat Jan 23, 2016 9:41 am

I saw someone call Rampling a 'white supremacist'... Sigh. The outrage behind this is to an extent pretty disingenuous as people are saying there needs to be more African-Americans nominated, while neglecting Hispanics (where' del Toro's nom?), Asians and so on. Even the boycotters are only black. I'm somewhat dubiously by the knee-jerk rule change AMPAS has placed on members, meaning they have to be active in the past ten years for their voting rights to be kept and with three consecutive renewals given lifetime status. Problem is, this just rewards Hollywood professionals as for young, independent filmmakers, having a thirty-year career is not exactly guaranteed.

FrauBlucher · #370 Post by **FrauBlucher** » Sat Jan 23, 2016 2:17 pm

Can a mod create a new thread for this controversial topic. This doesn't seem to be going away anytime soon as the flames continually get fed, much like all of societal issues seem these days. (I'm not referring to forum members)

#371 Post by **domino harvey** » Sat Jan 23, 2016 2:20 pm

I more than understand a desire to not have to read post after post about this, but it's all definitely on topic

Randall Maysin · #372 Post by **Randall Maysin** » Sat Jan 23, 2016 3:39 pm

The 'let's boycott the racist Oscars' movement seems to me as ultimately a little self-centered and myopic. I mean, there are so many other things about the Academy Awards that are stupid and hypocritical and just as deserving of a boycott, and some that are more tangible than this, in terms of actual facts existing to back them up, rather than what may in this case just be a dry spell, or in any case, racism that can't really be 'proven'.

FrauBlucher · #373 Post by **FrauBlucher** » Sat Jan 23, 2016 3:55 pm

I wasn't referring to not wanting to read the posts. I have been. As much as I am not a fan of a subjective process like awards, especially the Oscars. Which I believe is based on money as much as anything. This controversy that could be around for years, and that's why I asked for a separate thread. Especially since the dissenters in the industry could be punished and see little work going forward. Although, as in the case of Rampling, she probably won't suffer any loss of work in her own country. I do think this topic is separate and deeper and more ingrained than the actual awards. The awards just bring it to light.

#374 Post by **swo17** » Sat Jan 23, 2016 4:09 pm

I fear that creating a new thread for this discussion would in some way be racist. As would not creating a new thread. I'll defer to domino on this one.

FrauBlucher · #375 Post by **FrauBlucher** » Sat Jan 23, 2016 4:15 pm

swo17 wrote:I fear that creating a new thread for this discussion would in some way be racist. As would not creating a new thread. I'll defer to domino on this one.

:-k

Site Menu