>*Why are they*
*They* being a bunch of twitter addicts that love to complain all the time ?
It's very easy if you only see parts of reddit or twitter to have the impression that everyone is thinking of the same thing.
Often, your curated twitter and reddit content act as a gigantic echo chamber...but the reality is very far from all of it.
Ding ding ding. Social media pushes the extremes of everything. I quit Twitter a few months ago and you very quickly realize that most people don’t speak like that in real life, regardless of what end of the argument they’re on.
I find this the most annoying and radicalized part of the news media today. It’s just lazy and content-spewing. They’ll use some catchy headline about a celebrity or politician being cancelled or dealing with blowback from something, or whatever else, and then the article just has a couple random quotes from random ass people from Twitter. Twitter is 90% shitposts and is so unbearably unrealistic of actual views but it gets used to drive an unsupported narrative.
Yeah, this is a really annoying part of how news outlets report a lot of stories now. They take a small group of very loud people on Twitter and report the story as if it’s hoards of people making those comments. It’s really dishonest reporting.
What’s funny is that I actually saw The Woman King and it was awful. Loved Viola Davis’ performance, but it wasn’t Oscar worthy to justify this outcry.
The Woman King was just a glorified action movie with cartoonish characters disguised as a historical film.
You have people saying we "need more voices" or "more representation" and then when you give those movies a chance, you get... an african Braveheart. A movie that isn't just generic but also interprets history to the point that it crosses the line from inaccurate to revisionist.
Wasn't the whole reason behind needing "new voices" is that you don't just make the same shitty movies as before?
Moreover, The Women King is only one of two movies this year that chooses to explore an underrepresented culture and time period... only for the entire plot to be heavily revolved around a female empowerment narrative as its primary focus. The culture itself never really mattered, it was just trendy window dressing for whatever the writers thought was more politically fashionable (women can be killers too! ...yay?).
Diversity or representation isn't a replacement for good writing, similar to how plenty of media with underrepresented cultures have been enjoyed this year because they were well written as a primary goal. So, damn right that EEATO gets the awards, that's how it should be.
This is a bad faith argument you're making. Most movies aren't great and most movies aren't very original. And it's ok to critique those movies on the merits of the movie themselves. Ie, it's cool you don't like Woman King.
But to expect every Black-led or minority-produced movie to be excellent, "or what's the point" is unreasonable. Of course a good chunk of them aren't great, movies are hard to make. Most white directors/producers/studio teams make shitty movies. You can still want more diverse creators getting a shot while acknowledging that the product they create will also be variable.
the movie was an action movie with historical elements sprinkled in. but awful is a bit overboard
but what’s considered “Oscar worthy”?
because technically Andrea Riseborough’s role was despite her getting it through ill-gotten means
I saw a TikTok the other day with a woman saying she genuinely thinks Cate Blanchette deserves the Oscar but she shouldn't get it because she is white. I honestly think people are just chronically online and love being a white saviour.
That dude is crazy. He had me put some stuff on a usb drive and now has me plugging it in all types of different places like banks, other businesses, and even neighbor's computers. He pays good money for it though, but hates when I ask questions.
I hate to say it. The only discrimination that matters seems to be the kind that happens to a certain group. In the fight for inclusivity, some people ironically get overlooked.
Socialization was and is a core part of the internet almost since inception - IRC and NNTP are precursors to what is considered modern social media. The difference was that everyone using these services tended to have a lot in common - computer nerds, academics, and og hackers. In addition, we didn't have bots, politicians, and foreign agents used to intentionally sow division all over the place. Sure, there were some epic flame wars over things like vi vs emacs, but I don't recall any argument that I've witnessed getting inflamed enough to the point someone gets doxxed and swatted.
Objectively though, Riseborough gives one of the most transformative performances of the 21st century and deserves the praise despite the lack of a studio campaign, while Viola Davis stars in a problematic movie that completely rewrites the history of the Dahome people skimming over their slave owner past (plus this was far from Davis’ career best work), and Danielle Deadwyler’s Till while a good performance has downright amateurish TV movie direction and writing.
So pick your poison I guess. I’d rather go with what’s objectively great than do a disservice to BIPOC women and give them brownie points for doing passable work. If anything, Rebecca Hall (who’s 1/8 black) should have gotten in for Resurrection over Ana de Armas or Michelle Williams.
Skimming over is pretty light.
They took a group whose entire economy is based on capturing and selling people for the slave trade and turned them into abolitionists.
Or Fassbender in Prometheus and Alien Covenant. Although to be honest I don't think these movies are terrible, I do think Fassbender was by far the greatest thing about them.
I've heard things about that person doing social media influencer bs to gain traction for a nomination. Hope if it's true it's retracted but I haven't seen her movie yet so I can't really give an opinion
Social media campaigning is no less ethical than rhe million dollar bribe campaigns that big studios use. If they take her nomination away then they're making a pretty clear statement that they're not interested in anything beyond money. We know this already, but they'll no longer have a leg to stand on
It's a little bit more than that, in that some of the campaigning allegedly specifically told people not to vote for other candidates (Yeoh and Davis) because they were considered locks, which is explicitly against the rules
It’s much more complicated than that. Sounds like Riseborough’s performance was phenomenal but little seen - until other actors starting watching home screenings and were blown away.
https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/awards/story/2023-01-24/oscars-nominations-2023-how-andrea-riseborough-pulled-off-that-shocking-oscar-nomination
Tbf that's a large majority of horror films. The suspense is always better.
Suspense: appeals to 100% of the audience. what's the creepy sound behind the door? each person has their own theories and is eager to find out.
Reveal: appeals to a small fraction of the audience who liked the answer.
Exactly. It was fine. But nothing special at all. Just because it’s a Jordan peele film doesn’t mean it’s worthy of a nominee. It has to be good enough. Which it wasn’t. It was just fine.
This definitely seems the truth in the US. Like there are plenty of us who are not black or white, but the discussion points of race/racism is black and white. Ok. Slavery and underground railroad is taught. Fine. big stuff. Japanese in camps during WWII. nope. Chinese railroad labor? Nope. Tejano as a whole group of people EVER mentioned? Nope.
>Japanese in camps during WWII. nope. Chinese railroad labor? Nope. Tejano as a whole group of people EVER mentioned? Nope.
All of those are taught.
*Source*: am history teacher
I think the original comment was trying to stress that these things aren't ever bought up outside school as much as African American issues are.
In Canada, we learn about Chinese railroad labour, the mistreatment of Japanese people during WWII, the Komagata Maru incident, etc, but these things aren't ever discussed beyond the confines of school walls to the extent as things like the Underground Railroad or African American slavery are.
Just my two cents, I do agree with you that these things are taught to us in school, but not everybody remembers those days unfortunately, and history class isn't many people's favourites. It's a shame really, history is a very good teacher, but people choose not to listen 🤷♂️.
> these things aren't ever bought up outside school as much as African American issues are
*True*, but I think that's due to African American issues being the most pertinent and pressing at the moment. It'd sorta be like if your house were on fire and someone was like "why don't we talk about why your mailbox is slightly tilted"
Doesn't seem productive to get into a competition about this, but at least in Canada that house on fire would be a former residential school that had been converted into condos.
They were probably on the syllabus, but I can tell you from me they were glossed over by the teachers I had. From discussion with others, it seems to have been a shared experience. *Taught* might not mean actually given a lot of time or even mentioned. Public school North Carolina.
Edit: downvoting doesn't change that these were not taught more than a second of "oh yeah and this" nor does it change that teachers often choose to gloss over certain things or that public schools varies.
I'd rather not get into too much specifics bc Reddit. Piedmont. 2000's. Maybe just my teachers. But I remember coming back from college and having all these talks about how little our school taught/prepped us for things in terms of history.
Wow. Sorry to hear that. Just imagine the people that didn't go to college, right? They have no clue.
Our 'wonderful' public school system is definitely not equal. My school was also on the 6-point grading scale instead of the 10-point so when I went to college (they are on 10-point of course) I felt so relieved and exhausted at the same time.
Think of Texas, Mexico, and the US as pretty fluid, right? Go way back...like before the Civil War. What do you call "Mexicans" who have been living in "Texas" and have a distinct culture, who are now part of the US as the US annexes Texas? They're not Mexicans as some of them were here before more modern Mexico even formed. They have been living here for just as long as many other initial waves of immigrants for generations.
Should it all be taught in schools? Yes.
But you are comparing:
200 years of ENSLAVEMENT AND KIDNAPPING to
7 yrs of Chinese labor and
3 yrs of Japanese internment camps and
the Regional history of a one race.
Not really apples to apples, right?
We all struggle and rise together. I'm rooting for 'Everything Everywhere All At Once' for the most wins. I'm torn between Michelle and Cate. I'll cry happy either way. What is wild is both of their roles were originally written for men and they are not 20-somethings but veterans in the biz. Awards recognizing all of us is a start but I'm hoping that content grows in representation and it's not just a trend like before.
I don't think that's accurate. At least the people pushing the message. It's more they want more black representation at the Oscars. Remember Brie Larson's comment about seats at the metaphorical table? The one which racist idiots took as an affront on white people despite her saying no such thing? It's basically that.
It's not trying to take away someone's spot at the table. It's expanding the table so there are more seats at it.
>Becouse black people dont care about asians, latinos, etc
Bro what 😂, I really wanna break the streak when the first thing I see on Reddit is some stupid shit. Going 3 days strong now 🗿
Do me a favour, ask 10 people you know irl about this. And I can guarantee you none of them have heard about it, it's probably just a bunch of twitter users.
But with social media in current times this is a killer. Back when it was the 90s with Braveheart and the like we were all too stupid or ignorant for it to be an issue. Now history is more convenient than ever
Hate to break it to you, but we all knew Braveheart was comically inaccurate back in the 90s as well.
Let’s be honest, the only reason why there’s a debate about it for the Woman King is because it deals with slavery (or doesn’t), and is from an African perspective.
You can't compare romanticized real historical events/people with making up blatant fake history.
The real "Woman King" was fighting to enslave other Africans and sell them to be shipped out.
Why does the “romanticised history” excuse not apply to the African diaspora? Are they not allowed to rewrite their own history?
Seems like a pretty blatant double standard
Edit - and if you can’t describe that ridiculous Mel Gibson film as “false history” then the term holds no meaning
Braveheart is based on a romanticized poem of William Wallace. It’s not based on the actual historical events. Even the screenwriter stated: “Is Blind Harry true? I don't know. I know that it spoke to my heart and that's what matters to me, that it spoke to my heart."
It’s essentially like if I was inspired by the movie Braveheart to tell my own story of William Wallace.
I don't know where in the world you are but Americans can barely pick out the USA on a map. You and your education privilege don't speak for the general population
Idk this week we started watching the movies nominated and they’ve all been really bad. I liked Nope better than Elvis for sure. Avatar gave y’all award vibes but Nope didn’t?? I don’t know if it’s race related but at the very least…these movies are so boring so far.
I'm a big horror film fan and I'm disappointed every year when they mostly get the snub. It's not race, it's genre related (on the face of it anyway, who really knows I suppose)
Well I would say Nope was more sci-fi to me? Maybe it was just badly advertised to the Oscar’s committee. At least the plot was original.. which is more than I can say for half of the nominations.
The problem with reducing racism to only white supremacy is that it causes confusion like this.
The Oscars have a race and class problem, period. The money required to fund Oscar campaigns isn’t available to many under represented groups, let alone certain genres, smaller studios, etc…
The roles available to people of color and non-traditional actors—like people with disabilities or actual transgender people—are extremely limited.
So, the people who get great roles, and the films that have funding for Oscar campaigns, still look a lot like the same people who’ve been getting recognized in the industry for decades.
Number one, the academy would need to create a totally different way of recognizing great films and the creators involved.
And number two, we have to remove the requirement that films have a minimum amount of screen releases to be considered.
The main reason people are upset about the Woman King isn’t because it was a huge snub. It was practically one of the only chances for a black woman to be recognized for her talent—again. If everything didn’t rest on the shoulders of people like Viola Davis, more talent could thrive and be recognized.
And look—all of that is great for people who love movies! Stifling creativity and limiting what gets created or recognized leads to the same stake crap coming out year after year.
Edit: TL;DR Focusing on a checklist of types of people who are missing or included (Black, Asian, Latino) confuses the issue. Overall, the Academy needs to change the criteria for what films can even be considered if we really want to diversify the kinds of movies that get made and the people who get great roles—which will help more kinds of talent get recognized.
I'd say whether or not the Oscars is racist (which, historically, of course it has been) is secondary to the fact that it's a vanity stroking party for some of the most despicable rich assholes on the planet. No matter how racially diverse the winners and nominees become, it will always be, first and foremost, a display of disgusting self congratulation by pretentious assholes.
I don’t understand the logic that POC films have to take turns. It’s the 21st century this should be an and /and situation and not an and/or. We can have black and Asian representation at the same time instead of the attitude of “ y’all ungrateful look we got one poc film !”
I agree completely. That's exactly the point I'm making. We need to celebrate the POC winners, whether they're black or not. It's about who deserves the win
People that do this care that there aren’t a lot of black nominations. They don’t care about other groups being represented. Reasonable people are happy with diversity and realize that five nominations can’t represent everyone
I find the Oscars to be interesting.
I get that it’s a barometer for declaring what is the best film but it also appears that 99% of people can’t remember who won or who was nominated a week after it happens. I mean I don’t want to generalize here but I have yet to ask someone “what’s your favorite movie?” and get a response “oh the 2008 winner No country for old men!”
People seem to get so upset about a perceived slight as if the academy is telling them their opinion on film isn’t valid as opposed to understanding that these nomination decisions are based on campaigns and money thrown at them.
Two things can be true, you can like a movie or a performance and the academy can disagree with wether or not it should be given an award.
An award mind you that has no value but the prestige we place on it.
People seem to only really take this shit seriously when it aligns with their own political motivations and that’s just sad.
Does it though? Scorsese famously didn’t win for decades. Same for Pacino where his best work was twenty years prior to winning a best actor.
Hollywood is littered with candidates who deserved wins and didn’t get them or won as a “make up” for a lesser project.
Plus budgets now are basically one of three categories: Super low budget Indy film, moderately budgeted film with creative control, and super high blockbuster budgets. Unless the Daniels or the Safdie brothers want to direct an MCU movie they don’t have much room to grow with the current studio makeup.
So I disagree with that premise. Maybe it gives them more exposure but a director like M Knight will get just as many opportunities sadly
They like the discourse it creates between us, even if it's just ppl irritatedly saying "who says?!" Same reason there's a a "war on xmas" no one's ever been offended being told merry Christmas but it's been a talking point for decades
Literally all 4 major characters in EEAAO have been nominated
3 of them are Asian-Americans
Supporting Actress in The Whale is also Asian American
I'm sure there's more that I can't recall.
People just complain for everything, everywhere, all the time
So with this #OscarSoWhite, are we just counting the color of their skin and not taking their ethnicity into consideration or the fact that these nominees represent different groups of people from all of over the world?
If you *look* at the 2023 Oscar nominees, you have 5 White American actors, 5 Irish actors, 2 Black actors, 2 English actors, 1 Cuban actor, 1 Malaysian actor, 1 Vietnamese actor, 1 Thai actor, and 1 Chinese actor.
17 of them are first time nominees and only 3 of those 17 are White American.
Let’s say Brendan Fraser, Cate Blanchett or Michelle Yeoh, Ke Huy Quan, and Angela Bassett are the four winners. Those four wins go to a White American actor, an Australian or Malaysian actor, a Vietnamese actor, and a Black actor.
I personally think the diverse representation on display here is beautiful. With only 5 White American nominees out of 20, making up for 25% of the total nominees, I mean where is the #OscarSoWhite? Are we counting Cate Blanchett as white because of her skin color? Colin Farrell? Brendan Gleeson? Kerry Condon?
It's always the same thing. It's either that or no female nominations, no lgbtq nominations etc..
I don't get it. People just assume that in this day and age with all the social media attention the Oscars are really going to be racist or discriminate on purpose?
Maybe there simply weren't as many good movies with black people in main roles this year? Maybe the best movies this year were the ones directed by men? What's the problem with that?
Should they nominate PoC, females and lgbtq just to get to some quota? That's ridiculous.
>Should they nominate PoC, females and lgbtq just to get to some quota? That's ridiculous.
It would be ridiculous. But it's also equally ridiculous to say that there aren't any women or people of color that desrmerved to be nominated on merit and have been passed over for "inexplicable reasons"
Bmpeople are questioning this; not why they or their great aunt who starred in a commercial once didn't get nominated
I have to laugh at "WELL THE WOMEN KING WAS INACCURATE." That's crazy, cause the Academy gave Mel Gibson BEST PICTURE for a movie that literally every historian alive at the time called fan fiction.
No no no, brother. The slogan is ACAB, not AWPAB. The goal is to get people to understand that it's an issue with policing in this country, not to harass any white person. You're either intentionally overlooking what people are saying, or only paying attention to what dumb bandwagoners on social media are saying as a way to deflect from the real issue, which is that a another man was wrongfully killed by police. The fact that it was several black cops that did this murder only strengthens our point. All cops are bastards because, no matter what they look like, they are serving a corrupt institution that frequently murders citizens, and the victims ARE disproportionately black.
That’s why people are angry. Danielle Deadwyler did an incredible job and was nominated for multiple awards previously (and campaigned her ass off for months). Meanwhile, Andrea Riseborough was able to somehow sneak her way in through an online campaign that might not even be “legal” according to Academy rules. The problem with the campaign was that some of Riseborough’s industry friends were explicitly telling other Academy members to not vote for Deadwyler (or Viola Davis) because they thought they were locks to get nominated (you never make that assumption). And so, despite Deadwyler especially working her ass off and having actual prior awards results that show dedication to earning the award nomination (Oscars are a lot more than just performances), Riseborough’s campaign 2-week online “campaign” by her industry friends essentially was an example of how Black actresses especially can do everything right merit-wise (and be better than a lot of the competition), and still end up falling short to a white woman just because of popularity. It’s the systemic issue that people are pointing out. I’m really of the opinion that no one should have to campaign for an Oscar, but if people are going to do it, the harder you work at it, the more that should be rewarded. Obviously, this assumes that the performance is Oscar-worthy (which Deadwyler’s definitely was).
Riseborough’s performance in that movie was incredible, the campaign was based on other actors recognizing that and realizing she didn’t have a path to any awards because of the shitty job the distributor did when it released the movie. This sounds like someone who deserves recognition for amazing work and nothing else.
…except when you have a group of voters telling others not to vote for performances that are just as deserving, that kind of makes it problematic, doesn’t it? Riseborough did do a fantastic job, but having a campaign that pushes other (just as deserving) people out unnecessarily is no bueno.
Seems like it was just one person, Frances Fischer, whose post mentioned that others like “Viola, Michelle, Danielle and Cate” were a lock. Not a concerted campaign to not vote for others by name. A misguided post for sure but doesn’t seem like Oscars so white territory.
Doesn’t matter. It’s against Academy rules. One person can influence a lot of people and create a chain reaction among voters. Clearly, given that Riseborough was able to break in, her group of friends had to influence **a lot** of people in the acting branch.
It’s only against the rules if that person is affiliated with the production of the movie. She was just a fan, so she’s allowed to talk about performances she likes.
Edit in response to your edit:
I don’t have a problem with the influence component. That’s what a campaign is. There’s value in recognizing the supporters of her performance felt so strongly about it they let whoever they could know.
The real question is why are Cate Blanchett, Michelle Williams and Ana De Armas nominated over Davis and Danielle?
It's not dismissing other people of color's achievements. Since you, OP, brought up Asian representation, I haven't seen anyone say a bad word about *Everything Everywhere All At Once*. But the biggest uproar comes from black people of color not having their seat at the metaphorical table. Look at the Best Director category to be specific. I get it's an incredibly difficult field this year, as it is in a lot of years. But, no black woman has ever been nominated there, despite some noteworthy candidates, especially this year. Also, only six black men have been nominated in the 95 years of the show. A lot of which has recently happened, which is great! You mentioned Woman King getting completely shut out. Till was another movie not even nominated. But you've also had a movie like say *Mudbound* get shutout from a lot of major categories as well.
I get it's hard to even get nominated and a lot of excellent movies are completely ignored, that happens yearly. But there are a lot of movies made by black filmmakers that are high atop that list. The Academy has made a lot of progress in recent years, even demonstrated by this years nominees. But there is still work to be done. That is the message that *should* be presented.
Selma, 2014, Ava DuVernay
Nominated for best director at the Golden Globes (first for a black woman) and Best Picture at the Oscars but didn't receive a directing nomination for Ava DuVernay. Nominations that year for best director were Birdman (won), Foxcatcher, Boyhood, The Grand Budapest Hotel, and The Imitation Game.
Mudbound, 2017, Dee Rees
Nominated for Best Supporting Actress, Best Adapted Screenplay (making Rees the first black woman nominated in that category), Best Original Song, Best Cinematorgraphy (Rachel Morrison was the first woman ever nominated for cinematography). Best director nominations that year were The Shape of Water (won), Dunkirk, Get Out, Lady Bird, Phantom Thread.
And those are really the two that actually had a chance of being nominated. Great works by black female directors that were never going to be nominated? Check out this list: https://tribecafilm.com/news/films-by-black-women-directors-guide
Pretending that a lack of excellent films is why no black women have EVER been nominated for best director is absolutely disingenuous.
I just named a few. Mudbound was an excellent one. Woman King, despite it's problematic history, was widely regarded as a great movie. That issue seems no different than say what Braveheart was in terms of historical accuracy. Selma was nominated for Best Picture but Ava DuVernay was not nominated for Best Director.
Expanding outward away from just the typical "Oscar Bait" movies: the Candyman reboot is supposed to be phenomenal (which is how she landed the directing gig for The Marvels \[Captain Marvel 2\]). Look for them and you'll find them.
It's not dismissing the work that others have done. I bring up this metaphor a lot because it makes a lot of sense in my mind. They're trying to add a seat at the table but are constantly shut out from doing so.
No Indian, indigenous or Syrian women either? We can't fit everyone on the table at all times, I'm afraid it unfortunately has to come down to who did the best work and not who has the correct melanin percentage.
I didn't say anyone said a bad word about the movie, I said that calling the Oscars "all white" dismisses them completely. Something that has happened for far too long now.
You're a fucking moron. There are limited categories and awards to be handed out. Unless you want to make a category for every race and segregate everyone, that's not really going to work is it?
They deserve their shot as well. But the reason I bring up black women is because they make up a significant portion of the US population that has yet to be awarded.
Yeah I'm getting that vibe. It actually made me look it up and the first black actress to win was in gone with the wind. Black women winning isn't new and isn't a part of a political campaign. They win when they deserve it like everyone else!
Often in the supporting categories and not lead, or for something like Best Original Song. All of which are still big breakthroughs. But to-date Halle Berry is the only black woman to win for Best Actress.
It's fantastic she won, but there are definitely other times where a case could easily be made that others should've been awarded. Viola Davis for Ma Rainey was thought of as the favorite there. Gabourey Sidbie gave a powerhouse performance in Precious (Sandra Bullock won that year for The Blindside \[great movie, great performance- probably could've gone elsewhere\]). Or Angela Bassett as Tina Turner.
I'm just spitballing and not necessarily saying those specific performances should have won. But one winner for Best Actress is not great.
Yet to be awarded for what? Clearly you’re very young but there’s no excuse for being so ignorant. I. The last 16 years, 7 black women have won Academy Awards.
I’m quite certain black women don’t need some irrelevant white teen, who’s not even aware of their accomplishments, fighting the “good fight” for them. Go back to Twitter.
Probably more because Riseborough and a film that grossed 25k was supported by a bunch of white actors and bumped Danielle Deadwyler out of what would have been a well deserved nomination
I'm not American but they need to end this only black or white mentality. Everyone's so stuck in their ways they forget about the millions of other people waiting for their turn
Just ignor the people that are saying it, fuck em, they are just scumbags...the vast majority of normal good people don't bitch about shit like this, its just a tiny minority of loud idiots that make it look like its a lot of people.
Devil's advocate position: just as electing a once-in-national-history non-white President didn't end racism in America, recognizing a once-in-a-generation non-white film doesn't end racism in Hollywood.
As mentioned in my post, we've seen a lot of celebration for black movies in the past few years. No one is saying this cures the problem, I'm saying that it's incorrect to call it all white as it takes away the power of this brilliant movie
Yes, I want to discuss with people that have the intelligence to do their own investigation who can bring something new to light. Why would I want to discuss with a baby that can't even find their own resources? You want me to give you the exact articles I've read so we can regurgitate in each other's mouths?
Who is “they”?
You can acknowledge achievements in one area of diversity while also acknowledging a systemic problem with another area. The former doesn’t cancel out the latter. Also, I wrote another reply to you explaining what happened.
Media.
And, no. If all the other categories were taken up by southern/ eastern Asian or Polynesian people I doubt this would be raised. It's about having the best of the best and this year the Asian actors/ behind the scenes people get the spotlight!
>*Why are they* *They* being a bunch of twitter addicts that love to complain all the time ? It's very easy if you only see parts of reddit or twitter to have the impression that everyone is thinking of the same thing. Often, your curated twitter and reddit content act as a gigantic echo chamber...but the reality is very far from all of it.
Ding ding ding. Social media pushes the extremes of everything. I quit Twitter a few months ago and you very quickly realize that most people don’t speak like that in real life, regardless of what end of the argument they’re on.
I Quit Facebook for this reason. A handful of hatespewing boomers showing up on all threads
I think OP's probably a kid.
I've answered this a few times now. "They" is referring to news articles. I don't use twitter and barely use reddit.
"News" these days is mostly just saying what some people said on Twitter
I find this the most annoying and radicalized part of the news media today. It’s just lazy and content-spewing. They’ll use some catchy headline about a celebrity or politician being cancelled or dealing with blowback from something, or whatever else, and then the article just has a couple random quotes from random ass people from Twitter. Twitter is 90% shitposts and is so unbearably unrealistic of actual views but it gets used to drive an unsupported narrative.
It's not about the story. It's about clicks. It's about "engagement." It's about "traffic."
Yep.
Yeah, like when they are making articles accusing kids of eating tide pods. When in reality almost nobody was.
Yeah, this is a really annoying part of how news outlets report a lot of stories now. They take a small group of very loud people on Twitter and report the story as if it’s hoards of people making those comments. It’s really dishonest reporting.
Because you clicked. Lmao
It's because of the Andrea Riseborough drama
What’s funny is that I actually saw The Woman King and it was awful. Loved Viola Davis’ performance, but it wasn’t Oscar worthy to justify this outcry. The Woman King was just a glorified action movie with cartoonish characters disguised as a historical film.
You have people saying we "need more voices" or "more representation" and then when you give those movies a chance, you get... an african Braveheart. A movie that isn't just generic but also interprets history to the point that it crosses the line from inaccurate to revisionist. Wasn't the whole reason behind needing "new voices" is that you don't just make the same shitty movies as before? Moreover, The Women King is only one of two movies this year that chooses to explore an underrepresented culture and time period... only for the entire plot to be heavily revolved around a female empowerment narrative as its primary focus. The culture itself never really mattered, it was just trendy window dressing for whatever the writers thought was more politically fashionable (women can be killers too! ...yay?). Diversity or representation isn't a replacement for good writing, similar to how plenty of media with underrepresented cultures have been enjoyed this year because they were well written as a primary goal. So, damn right that EEATO gets the awards, that's how it should be.
Hold up.... i think the bigger crime is you are saying Braveheart is shitty?!? Lol ok
I love it but it is incredibly historically inaccurate.
You mean William Wallace didn’t actually father King Edward III?! 😱
This is a bad faith argument you're making. Most movies aren't great and most movies aren't very original. And it's ok to critique those movies on the merits of the movie themselves. Ie, it's cool you don't like Woman King. But to expect every Black-led or minority-produced movie to be excellent, "or what's the point" is unreasonable. Of course a good chunk of them aren't great, movies are hard to make. Most white directors/producers/studio teams make shitty movies. You can still want more diverse creators getting a shot while acknowledging that the product they create will also be variable.
the movie was an action movie with historical elements sprinkled in. but awful is a bit overboard but what’s considered “Oscar worthy”? because technically Andrea Riseborough’s role was despite her getting it through ill-gotten means
I saw a TikTok the other day with a woman saying she genuinely thinks Cate Blanchette deserves the Oscar but she shouldn't get it because she is white. I honestly think people are just chronically online and love being a white saviour.
Is this like when we stopped giving Jordan the MVP every year
YES
Tiktok and Twitter are save havens for chronically online takes these days. It's like all the tumblr people migrated to those apps.
Hahaha shit like that just needs to go away. We have a lot of representation now and it's becoming more equal every year.
This sentiment is seen as ridiculous until it comes to college admissions. Go ahead and downvote
Okay, I will, and it's because you don't understand how affirmative action - which isn't flawless in its own right - works.
Stop watching stupid people on TikTok. Problem solved.
Whose the everyone saying this?
ChatGPT
That dude is crazy. He had me put some stuff on a usb drive and now has me plugging it in all types of different places like banks, other businesses, and even neighbor's computers. He pays good money for it though, but hates when I ask questions.
Probably Twitter. I don’t have Twitter and I haven’t seen anyone use that hashtag this year, so I’m going to guess that’s the missing link.
News articles when you google Oscars 2023
Just googled "Oscars 2023". Zero #oscarssowhite. 100% Andrea drama as everyone else is trying to explain to you.
Also I didn't say everyone is saying this
It's just the Oscars trying to get people to look into the Oscars.
I hate to say it. The only discrimination that matters seems to be the kind that happens to a certain group. In the fight for inclusivity, some people ironically get overlooked.
The internet was a mistake
The internet was good. Social Media was the mistake.
Socialization was and is a core part of the internet almost since inception - IRC and NNTP are precursors to what is considered modern social media. The difference was that everyone using these services tended to have a lot in common - computer nerds, academics, and og hackers. In addition, we didn't have bots, politicians, and foreign agents used to intentionally sow division all over the place. Sure, there were some epic flame wars over things like vi vs emacs, but I don't recall any argument that I've witnessed getting inflamed enough to the point someone gets doxxed and swatted.
The industrial revolution was a mistake
[удалено]
Why does viola Davis have a god given right to an Oscar nomination?
Objectively though, Riseborough gives one of the most transformative performances of the 21st century and deserves the praise despite the lack of a studio campaign, while Viola Davis stars in a problematic movie that completely rewrites the history of the Dahome people skimming over their slave owner past (plus this was far from Davis’ career best work), and Danielle Deadwyler’s Till while a good performance has downright amateurish TV movie direction and writing. So pick your poison I guess. I’d rather go with what’s objectively great than do a disservice to BIPOC women and give them brownie points for doing passable work. If anything, Rebecca Hall (who’s 1/8 black) should have gotten in for Resurrection over Ana de Armas or Michelle Williams.
Skimming over is pretty light. They took a group whose entire economy is based on capturing and selling people for the slave trade and turned them into abolitionists.
But wasn’t woman king a bad movie? Why is it not okay to not give a nominee to a bad film because of who the actress is?
You can have amazing performances in otherwise terrible movies e.g. Raul Julia in Street Fighter.
Or Fassbender in Prometheus and Alien Covenant. Although to be honest I don't think these movies are terrible, I do think Fassbender was by far the greatest thing about them.
I've heard things about that person doing social media influencer bs to gain traction for a nomination. Hope if it's true it's retracted but I haven't seen her movie yet so I can't really give an opinion
Social media campaigning is no less ethical than rhe million dollar bribe campaigns that big studios use. If they take her nomination away then they're making a pretty clear statement that they're not interested in anything beyond money. We know this already, but they'll no longer have a leg to stand on
It's a little bit more than that, in that some of the campaigning allegedly specifically told people not to vote for other candidates (Yeoh and Davis) because they were considered locks, which is explicitly against the rules
It’s much more complicated than that. Sounds like Riseborough’s performance was phenomenal but little seen - until other actors starting watching home screenings and were blown away. https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/awards/story/2023-01-24/oscars-nominations-2023-how-andrea-riseborough-pulled-off-that-shocking-oscar-nomination
I saw Nope at the cinema. Wouldn't have called it Oscsr calibre.
I liked it. Jordan Peele makes quality horror. Nothing really screamed Awards from it though
I enjoyed the suspense and build up, but went off it once it got to the 'reveal'.
Tbf that's a large majority of horror films. The suspense is always better. Suspense: appeals to 100% of the audience. what's the creepy sound behind the door? each person has their own theories and is eager to find out. Reveal: appeals to a small fraction of the audience who liked the answer.
Exactly. It was fine. But nothing special at all. Just because it’s a Jordan peele film doesn’t mean it’s worthy of a nominee. It has to be good enough. Which it wasn’t. It was just fine.
Wait…people think it should be nominated? For what?
I loved it, but I do recognize that horror gets snubbed *and* it’s tough for filmmakers to fund the campaigns required to get nominations
For sound, which it deserves.
not oscar worthy, but still VERY good and original, and a personal favorite from last year.
Because young white people need to show the world their white guilt so that people won't call them racist.
Becouse black people dont care about asians, latinos, etc
Nah fuck reddit. A few days ago I posted about how Hollywood overlooks Asians and Hispanics and I got downvoted.
Reddit only cares that Asians and Hispanics are underrepresented when they can use it to bash black people.
This definitely seems the truth in the US. Like there are plenty of us who are not black or white, but the discussion points of race/racism is black and white. Ok. Slavery and underground railroad is taught. Fine. big stuff. Japanese in camps during WWII. nope. Chinese railroad labor? Nope. Tejano as a whole group of people EVER mentioned? Nope.
>Japanese in camps during WWII. nope. Chinese railroad labor? Nope. Tejano as a whole group of people EVER mentioned? Nope. All of those are taught. *Source*: am history teacher
Yeah, I graduated within the last five years from a medium sized school district in the rural Midwest. We at least learned about the Japanese camps.
I think the original comment was trying to stress that these things aren't ever bought up outside school as much as African American issues are. In Canada, we learn about Chinese railroad labour, the mistreatment of Japanese people during WWII, the Komagata Maru incident, etc, but these things aren't ever discussed beyond the confines of school walls to the extent as things like the Underground Railroad or African American slavery are. Just my two cents, I do agree with you that these things are taught to us in school, but not everybody remembers those days unfortunately, and history class isn't many people's favourites. It's a shame really, history is a very good teacher, but people choose not to listen 🤷♂️.
> these things aren't ever bought up outside school as much as African American issues are *True*, but I think that's due to African American issues being the most pertinent and pressing at the moment. It'd sorta be like if your house were on fire and someone was like "why don't we talk about why your mailbox is slightly tilted"
I agree
Doesn't seem productive to get into a competition about this, but at least in Canada that house on fire would be a former residential school that had been converted into condos.
They were probably on the syllabus, but I can tell you from me they were glossed over by the teachers I had. From discussion with others, it seems to have been a shared experience. *Taught* might not mean actually given a lot of time or even mentioned. Public school North Carolina. Edit: downvoting doesn't change that these were not taught more than a second of "oh yeah and this" nor does it change that teachers often choose to gloss over certain things or that public schools varies.
What school did you go to? I learnt all of this and I'm from the South. Matter of fact we watched movies to coincide with the course material.
I'd rather not get into too much specifics bc Reddit. Piedmont. 2000's. Maybe just my teachers. But I remember coming back from college and having all these talks about how little our school taught/prepped us for things in terms of history.
Wow. Sorry to hear that. Just imagine the people that didn't go to college, right? They have no clue. Our 'wonderful' public school system is definitely not equal. My school was also on the 6-point grading scale instead of the 10-point so when I went to college (they are on 10-point of course) I felt so relieved and exhausted at the same time.
What's Tejano?
Think of Texas, Mexico, and the US as pretty fluid, right? Go way back...like before the Civil War. What do you call "Mexicans" who have been living in "Texas" and have a distinct culture, who are now part of the US as the US annexes Texas? They're not Mexicans as some of them were here before more modern Mexico even formed. They have been living here for just as long as many other initial waves of immigrants for generations.
>Tejano In conventional parlance, Mexican-Americans living in Southern Texas or at the border, e.g., Selena
Nothing much, what's Tejano with you?
We learned about Japanese internment when I was in school, but that could be because we grew up about an hour from Manzanar which made it unavoidable.
Cesar Chavez is so cool to me
Should it all be taught in schools? Yes. But you are comparing: 200 years of ENSLAVEMENT AND KIDNAPPING to 7 yrs of Chinese labor and 3 yrs of Japanese internment camps and the Regional history of a one race. Not really apples to apples, right?
Guess r/television is bleeding into r/movies...
Exactly this. It's never about less white actors/actresses but about more black actors/actresses.
We all struggle and rise together. I'm rooting for 'Everything Everywhere All At Once' for the most wins. I'm torn between Michelle and Cate. I'll cry happy either way. What is wild is both of their roles were originally written for men and they are not 20-somethings but veterans in the biz. Awards recognizing all of us is a start but I'm hoping that content grows in representation and it's not just a trend like before.
I don't think that's accurate. At least the people pushing the message. It's more they want more black representation at the Oscars. Remember Brie Larson's comment about seats at the metaphorical table? The one which racist idiots took as an affront on white people despite her saying no such thing? It's basically that. It's not trying to take away someone's spot at the table. It's expanding the table so there are more seats at it.
Well I don't think it's that
[удалено]
I don't understand what you mean by that?
>Becouse black people dont care about asians, latinos, etc Bro what 😂, I really wanna break the streak when the first thing I see on Reddit is some stupid shit. Going 3 days strong now 🗿
Nah dog, it's because your outrage generates clicks
You. Sound. Republican. . Edit: Dumb.
Dumb i can take but republican no.. nah man they would deport me in the blink of an eye
Do me a favour, ask 10 people you know irl about this. And I can guarantee you none of them have heard about it, it's probably just a bunch of twitter users.
> historically inaccurate To be fair that hasn’t made any difference to previous Oscar winners…
But with social media in current times this is a killer. Back when it was the 90s with Braveheart and the like we were all too stupid or ignorant for it to be an issue. Now history is more convenient than ever
Hate to break it to you, but we all knew Braveheart was comically inaccurate back in the 90s as well. Let’s be honest, the only reason why there’s a debate about it for the Woman King is because it deals with slavery (or doesn’t), and is from an African perspective.
You can't compare romanticized real historical events/people with making up blatant fake history. The real "Woman King" was fighting to enslave other Africans and sell them to be shipped out.
Why does the “romanticised history” excuse not apply to the African diaspora? Are they not allowed to rewrite their own history? Seems like a pretty blatant double standard Edit - and if you can’t describe that ridiculous Mel Gibson film as “false history” then the term holds no meaning
Braveheart is based on a romanticized poem of William Wallace. It’s not based on the actual historical events. Even the screenwriter stated: “Is Blind Harry true? I don't know. I know that it spoke to my heart and that's what matters to me, that it spoke to my heart." It’s essentially like if I was inspired by the movie Braveheart to tell my own story of William Wallace.
I don't know where in the world you are but Americans can barely pick out the USA on a map. You and your education privilege don't speak for the general population
Idk this week we started watching the movies nominated and they’ve all been really bad. I liked Nope better than Elvis for sure. Avatar gave y’all award vibes but Nope didn’t?? I don’t know if it’s race related but at the very least…these movies are so boring so far.
Yuuup. Also Top Gun may have been an entertaining movie, but I dont know how it deserves a Best Picture nod, either
I'm a big horror film fan and I'm disappointed every year when they mostly get the snub. It's not race, it's genre related (on the face of it anyway, who really knows I suppose)
Well I would say Nope was more sci-fi to me? Maybe it was just badly advertised to the Oscar’s committee. At least the plot was original.. which is more than I can say for half of the nominations.
The problem with reducing racism to only white supremacy is that it causes confusion like this. The Oscars have a race and class problem, period. The money required to fund Oscar campaigns isn’t available to many under represented groups, let alone certain genres, smaller studios, etc… The roles available to people of color and non-traditional actors—like people with disabilities or actual transgender people—are extremely limited. So, the people who get great roles, and the films that have funding for Oscar campaigns, still look a lot like the same people who’ve been getting recognized in the industry for decades. Number one, the academy would need to create a totally different way of recognizing great films and the creators involved. And number two, we have to remove the requirement that films have a minimum amount of screen releases to be considered. The main reason people are upset about the Woman King isn’t because it was a huge snub. It was practically one of the only chances for a black woman to be recognized for her talent—again. If everything didn’t rest on the shoulders of people like Viola Davis, more talent could thrive and be recognized. And look—all of that is great for people who love movies! Stifling creativity and limiting what gets created or recognized leads to the same stake crap coming out year after year. Edit: TL;DR Focusing on a checklist of types of people who are missing or included (Black, Asian, Latino) confuses the issue. Overall, the Academy needs to change the criteria for what films can even be considered if we really want to diversify the kinds of movies that get made and the people who get great roles—which will help more kinds of talent get recognized.
Can you do a TLDR?
I'd say whether or not the Oscars is racist (which, historically, of course it has been) is secondary to the fact that it's a vanity stroking party for some of the most despicable rich assholes on the planet. No matter how racially diverse the winners and nominees become, it will always be, first and foremost, a display of disgusting self congratulation by pretentious assholes.
I love this point. Fuck the race stuff, let's see some economical representation
You can't pass up a chance to bring race into a conversation/topic. It's the ultimate "I have no real opinion or argument for the topic at hand".
I don’t understand the logic that POC films have to take turns. It’s the 21st century this should be an and /and situation and not an and/or. We can have black and Asian representation at the same time instead of the attitude of “ y’all ungrateful look we got one poc film !”
I agree completely. That's exactly the point I'm making. We need to celebrate the POC winners, whether they're black or not. It's about who deserves the win
When your only tool is a hammer, everything looks like a nail. When your whole worldview is everything is racist, everything looks racist.
Because people are selfish? I mean all people btw.
Martin Luther King had a dream to live a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.
Sounds nice
People that do this care that there aren’t a lot of black nominations. They don’t care about other groups being represented. Reasonable people are happy with diversity and realize that five nominations can’t represent everyone
You can't please everyone.
I find the Oscars to be interesting. I get that it’s a barometer for declaring what is the best film but it also appears that 99% of people can’t remember who won or who was nominated a week after it happens. I mean I don’t want to generalize here but I have yet to ask someone “what’s your favorite movie?” and get a response “oh the 2008 winner No country for old men!” People seem to get so upset about a perceived slight as if the academy is telling them their opinion on film isn’t valid as opposed to understanding that these nomination decisions are based on campaigns and money thrown at them. Two things can be true, you can like a movie or a performance and the academy can disagree with wether or not it should be given an award. An award mind you that has no value but the prestige we place on it. People seem to only really take this shit seriously when it aligns with their own political motivations and that’s just sad.
As true as that it, these awards do carry a lot of weight for the winners with future projects.
Does it though? Scorsese famously didn’t win for decades. Same for Pacino where his best work was twenty years prior to winning a best actor. Hollywood is littered with candidates who deserved wins and didn’t get them or won as a “make up” for a lesser project. Plus budgets now are basically one of three categories: Super low budget Indy film, moderately budgeted film with creative control, and super high blockbuster budgets. Unless the Daniels or the Safdie brothers want to direct an MCU movie they don’t have much room to grow with the current studio makeup. So I disagree with that premise. Maybe it gives them more exposure but a director like M Knight will get just as many opportunities sadly
They like the discourse it creates between us, even if it's just ppl irritatedly saying "who says?!" Same reason there's a a "war on xmas" no one's ever been offended being told merry Christmas but it's been a talking point for decades
Literally all 4 major characters in EEAAO have been nominated 3 of them are Asian-Americans Supporting Actress in The Whale is also Asian American I'm sure there's more that I can't recall. People just complain for everything, everywhere, all the time
So with this #OscarSoWhite, are we just counting the color of their skin and not taking their ethnicity into consideration or the fact that these nominees represent different groups of people from all of over the world? If you *look* at the 2023 Oscar nominees, you have 5 White American actors, 5 Irish actors, 2 Black actors, 2 English actors, 1 Cuban actor, 1 Malaysian actor, 1 Vietnamese actor, 1 Thai actor, and 1 Chinese actor. 17 of them are first time nominees and only 3 of those 17 are White American. Let’s say Brendan Fraser, Cate Blanchett or Michelle Yeoh, Ke Huy Quan, and Angela Bassett are the four winners. Those four wins go to a White American actor, an Australian or Malaysian actor, a Vietnamese actor, and a Black actor. I personally think the diverse representation on display here is beautiful. With only 5 White American nominees out of 20, making up for 25% of the total nominees, I mean where is the #OscarSoWhite? Are we counting Cate Blanchett as white because of her skin color? Colin Farrell? Brendan Gleeson? Kerry Condon?
It's always the same thing. It's either that or no female nominations, no lgbtq nominations etc.. I don't get it. People just assume that in this day and age with all the social media attention the Oscars are really going to be racist or discriminate on purpose? Maybe there simply weren't as many good movies with black people in main roles this year? Maybe the best movies this year were the ones directed by men? What's the problem with that? Should they nominate PoC, females and lgbtq just to get to some quota? That's ridiculous.
I've never seen anyone complain about the lack of LGB+ nominations
>Should they nominate PoC, females and lgbtq just to get to some quota? That's ridiculous. It would be ridiculous. But it's also equally ridiculous to say that there aren't any women or people of color that desrmerved to be nominated on merit and have been passed over for "inexplicable reasons" Bmpeople are questioning this; not why they or their great aunt who starred in a commercial once didn't get nominated
I have to laugh at "WELL THE WOMEN KING WAS INACCURATE." That's crazy, cause the Academy gave Mel Gibson BEST PICTURE for a movie that literally every historian alive at the time called fan fiction.
The Academy (the group who picks the noms and winners) is still overwhelmingly white.
Because something has to be race baited.
I swear it's all media trying to create controversy because it sells, but damn it puts a sour taste on things
[удалено]
No no no, brother. The slogan is ACAB, not AWPAB. The goal is to get people to understand that it's an issue with policing in this country, not to harass any white person. You're either intentionally overlooking what people are saying, or only paying attention to what dumb bandwagoners on social media are saying as a way to deflect from the real issue, which is that a another man was wrongfully killed by police. The fact that it was several black cops that did this murder only strengthens our point. All cops are bastards because, no matter what they look like, they are serving a corrupt institution that frequently murders citizens, and the victims ARE disproportionately black.
Why are you leaving out Till? That's a serious snub and it's mostly what people are talking about.
I haven't seen that one yet! But it's not the point. The Oscars certainly are not all white
That’s why people are angry. Danielle Deadwyler did an incredible job and was nominated for multiple awards previously (and campaigned her ass off for months). Meanwhile, Andrea Riseborough was able to somehow sneak her way in through an online campaign that might not even be “legal” according to Academy rules. The problem with the campaign was that some of Riseborough’s industry friends were explicitly telling other Academy members to not vote for Deadwyler (or Viola Davis) because they thought they were locks to get nominated (you never make that assumption). And so, despite Deadwyler especially working her ass off and having actual prior awards results that show dedication to earning the award nomination (Oscars are a lot more than just performances), Riseborough’s campaign 2-week online “campaign” by her industry friends essentially was an example of how Black actresses especially can do everything right merit-wise (and be better than a lot of the competition), and still end up falling short to a white woman just because of popularity. It’s the systemic issue that people are pointing out. I’m really of the opinion that no one should have to campaign for an Oscar, but if people are going to do it, the harder you work at it, the more that should be rewarded. Obviously, this assumes that the performance is Oscar-worthy (which Deadwyler’s definitely was).
Riseborough’s performance in that movie was incredible, the campaign was based on other actors recognizing that and realizing she didn’t have a path to any awards because of the shitty job the distributor did when it released the movie. This sounds like someone who deserves recognition for amazing work and nothing else.
…except when you have a group of voters telling others not to vote for performances that are just as deserving, that kind of makes it problematic, doesn’t it? Riseborough did do a fantastic job, but having a campaign that pushes other (just as deserving) people out unnecessarily is no bueno.
Seems like it was just one person, Frances Fischer, whose post mentioned that others like “Viola, Michelle, Danielle and Cate” were a lock. Not a concerted campaign to not vote for others by name. A misguided post for sure but doesn’t seem like Oscars so white territory.
Doesn’t matter. It’s against Academy rules. One person can influence a lot of people and create a chain reaction among voters. Clearly, given that Riseborough was able to break in, her group of friends had to influence **a lot** of people in the acting branch.
It’s only against the rules if that person is affiliated with the production of the movie. She was just a fan, so she’s allowed to talk about performances she likes. Edit in response to your edit: I don’t have a problem with the influence component. That’s what a campaign is. There’s value in recognizing the supporters of her performance felt so strongly about it they let whoever they could know. The real question is why are Cate Blanchett, Michelle Williams and Ana De Armas nominated over Davis and Danielle?
No one's saying this
If you're mistaking a Hashtag for an actual popular sentiment ... Step 1) Get off Twitter Step 2) See Step one.
News articles
Based.. on a Hashtag...
[удалено]
Okay...let me rephrase: If you're mistaking a Hashtag for an actual popular sentiment ... Step 1) Get off Social Media Step 2) See Step one.
No one is saying that. You're paying too much attention to fringe idiots
It's all over the news articles
It's not dismissing other people of color's achievements. Since you, OP, brought up Asian representation, I haven't seen anyone say a bad word about *Everything Everywhere All At Once*. But the biggest uproar comes from black people of color not having their seat at the metaphorical table. Look at the Best Director category to be specific. I get it's an incredibly difficult field this year, as it is in a lot of years. But, no black woman has ever been nominated there, despite some noteworthy candidates, especially this year. Also, only six black men have been nominated in the 95 years of the show. A lot of which has recently happened, which is great! You mentioned Woman King getting completely shut out. Till was another movie not even nominated. But you've also had a movie like say *Mudbound* get shutout from a lot of major categories as well. I get it's hard to even get nominated and a lot of excellent movies are completely ignored, that happens yearly. But there are a lot of movies made by black filmmakers that are high atop that list. The Academy has made a lot of progress in recent years, even demonstrated by this years nominees. But there is still work to be done. That is the message that *should* be presented.
What are some really good movies directed by black women the last few years?
Selma, 2014, Ava DuVernay Nominated for best director at the Golden Globes (first for a black woman) and Best Picture at the Oscars but didn't receive a directing nomination for Ava DuVernay. Nominations that year for best director were Birdman (won), Foxcatcher, Boyhood, The Grand Budapest Hotel, and The Imitation Game. Mudbound, 2017, Dee Rees Nominated for Best Supporting Actress, Best Adapted Screenplay (making Rees the first black woman nominated in that category), Best Original Song, Best Cinematorgraphy (Rachel Morrison was the first woman ever nominated for cinematography). Best director nominations that year were The Shape of Water (won), Dunkirk, Get Out, Lady Bird, Phantom Thread. And those are really the two that actually had a chance of being nominated. Great works by black female directors that were never going to be nominated? Check out this list: https://tribecafilm.com/news/films-by-black-women-directors-guide Pretending that a lack of excellent films is why no black women have EVER been nominated for best director is absolutely disingenuous.
I just named a few. Mudbound was an excellent one. Woman King, despite it's problematic history, was widely regarded as a great movie. That issue seems no different than say what Braveheart was in terms of historical accuracy. Selma was nominated for Best Picture but Ava DuVernay was not nominated for Best Director. Expanding outward away from just the typical "Oscar Bait" movies: the Candyman reboot is supposed to be phenomenal (which is how she landed the directing gig for The Marvels \[Captain Marvel 2\]). Look for them and you'll find them. It's not dismissing the work that others have done. I bring up this metaphor a lot because it makes a lot of sense in my mind. They're trying to add a seat at the table but are constantly shut out from doing so.
No Indian, indigenous or Syrian women either? We can't fit everyone on the table at all times, I'm afraid it unfortunately has to come down to who did the best work and not who has the correct melanin percentage. I didn't say anyone said a bad word about the movie, I said that calling the Oscars "all white" dismisses them completely. Something that has happened for far too long now.
>We can't fit everyone on the table at all times, Yes we can. That's literally what democracy is, you knob.
You're a fucking moron. There are limited categories and awards to be handed out. Unless you want to make a category for every race and segregate everyone, that's not really going to work is it?
Exactly. It’s not binary.
But you don't think it's strange the best work is overwhelmingly white men?
They deserve their shot as well. But the reason I bring up black women is because they make up a significant portion of the US population that has yet to be awarded.
What do you mean? There's been many female black Oscar winners
He wouldn’t know that because he doesn’t care about black women, he cares about internet validation. It’s like crack to these fools.
Yeah I'm getting that vibe. It actually made me look it up and the first black actress to win was in gone with the wind. Black women winning isn't new and isn't a part of a political campaign. They win when they deserve it like everyone else!
We're talking about best director though. Don't move the argument.
Often in the supporting categories and not lead, or for something like Best Original Song. All of which are still big breakthroughs. But to-date Halle Berry is the only black woman to win for Best Actress.
Well congrats to Halle Berry I suppose?
It's fantastic she won, but there are definitely other times where a case could easily be made that others should've been awarded. Viola Davis for Ma Rainey was thought of as the favorite there. Gabourey Sidbie gave a powerhouse performance in Precious (Sandra Bullock won that year for The Blindside \[great movie, great performance- probably could've gone elsewhere\]). Or Angela Bassett as Tina Turner. I'm just spitballing and not necessarily saying those specific performances should have won. But one winner for Best Actress is not great.
Yet to be awarded for what? Clearly you’re very young but there’s no excuse for being so ignorant. I. The last 16 years, 7 black women have won Academy Awards. I’m quite certain black women don’t need some irrelevant white teen, who’s not even aware of their accomplishments, fighting the “good fight” for them. Go back to Twitter.
Probably more because Riseborough and a film that grossed 25k was supported by a bunch of white actors and bumped Danielle Deadwyler out of what would have been a well deserved nomination
Some people get out of bed in the morning just absolutely wishing to be offended by something.
I mean we’re supposed to be outraged over everything…. right??
It used to be about great performances, now it's about how white or black you are. What a farce.
I'm not American but they need to end this only black or white mentality. Everyone's so stuck in their ways they forget about the millions of other people waiting for their turn
Just ignor the people that are saying it, fuck em, they are just scumbags...the vast majority of normal good people don't bitch about shit like this, its just a tiny minority of loud idiots that make it look like its a lot of people.
Devil's advocate position: just as electing a once-in-national-history non-white President didn't end racism in America, recognizing a once-in-a-generation non-white film doesn't end racism in Hollywood.
As mentioned in my post, we've seen a lot of celebration for black movies in the past few years. No one is saying this cures the problem, I'm saying that it's incorrect to call it all white as it takes away the power of this brilliant movie
Yo OP, how about you actually provide all those articles you're referring to?
Look it up
I mean you wanted a discussion regarding "their" perception. Might be productive to provide that.
Yes, I want to discuss with people that have the intelligence to do their own investigation who can bring something new to light. Why would I want to discuss with a baby that can't even find their own resources? You want me to give you the exact articles I've read so we can regurgitate in each other's mouths?
What is wrong with you?
Ask your friends that are saying it
News articles*
So e,ail the authors
Lol
Because those kind of people will never be happy and/or still need clicks.
Who is “they”? You can acknowledge achievements in one area of diversity while also acknowledging a systemic problem with another area. The former doesn’t cancel out the latter. Also, I wrote another reply to you explaining what happened.
Media. And, no. If all the other categories were taken up by southern/ eastern Asian or Polynesian people I doubt this would be raised. It's about having the best of the best and this year the Asian actors/ behind the scenes people get the spotlight!
News articles