The Hollywood Reporter released two more of their “brutally honest ballot” pieces yesterday. I have to admit, these two are sort of letdowns after the deliciously offensive bitchery of the first ballot, which we covered yesterday. To recap, every year THR sits down with various Oscar voters in various branches and the voters fill out their ballots in front of THR. The voters get to speak their mind under the condition of anonymity, which historically has revealed some amazing WTF-ery of petty grudges, racism and gossip. The two ballots released by THR yesterday were not all that gossipy though. There were some interesting insights, for sure. You can read Ballot #2 (a voter from short films and animation branch) here. You can read Ballot #3 (a voter from the screenwriters’ branch) here. Some highlights:
Ballot #2: the voter is an Oscar-nominated member of the animation/short film branch. Thoughts on Best Picture:
Whiplash is offensive — it’s a film about abuse and I don’t find that entertaining at all. My kid would have told me if he had an abusive teacher. I would have sat in on the class, talked to other kids in the class and then said, “This a–hole has to go.” [The Grand] Budapest [Hotel] is beautifully made, but its story just isn’t special. I didn’t think Selma was a particularly good film, apart from the main actor [David Oyelowo], and I think the outcry about the Academy being racists for not nominating it for more awards is offensive — we have a two-term president who is a black woman [Cheryl Boone Isaacs] and we give out awards to black people when they deserve them, just like any other group.
Birdman, I didn’t get it at all — I look around and it’s doing so well and I just don’t get it. American Sniper glosses over feelings — how do you feel when you kill 170 people? You just see him hesitating in the one scene with the boy who briefly picks up the rocket and then you see him sitting at a bar looking depressed; that’s not enough. As far as The Imitation Game, Alan Turing was very much defined by his repressed homosexuality, and I just don’t think the film deals with that very well. I admired Boyhood and it didn’t bore me, but it doesn’t totally work. But Theory [of Everything] I loved. It was the only one of the nominees that fully worked as a whole film — it was beautifully performed, nicely directed and it was about something — although Boyhood is pretty special for its own reasons. Just because the Academy gives you a preferential ballot with a bunch of lines doesn’t mean you have to fill them all out. Those are only two that I find worthy of the award. MY VOTE: (1) The Theory of Everything, (2) Boyhood
*This person voted for Richard Linklater for Best Director because “It’s not even close for me because I didn’t especially like the other nominees’ pictures.” The voter went with Eddie Redmayne for Best Actor because “it’s an amazing performance” and they also went for Felicity Jones for Best Actress (interesting). This voter thought Meryl Streep was “unbelievable” (in a good way) in Into the Woods and ended up voting for Meryl instead of Patricia Arquette.
And here are some highlights from Ballot #3, from a voter in the screenwriters’ branch.
*The voter had nothing but compliments for all of the Best Picture nominees, except they weren’t all that jazzed about Boyhood. This was their final vote: (1) The Imitation Game, (2) Birdman, (3) Whiplash, (4) The Theory of Everything, (5) American Sniper
*Best Director was between Richard Linklater and Alejandro G. Inarritu and the voter went with the crazy-ambition of Inarritu.
*Vote for Eddie Redmayne because his role was the most “transformative.” Same with Julianne Moore – this person voted for Moore because her role was the most transformative.
*Another vote for JK Simmons and Patricia Arquette even though “None of the [supporting actress nominees] blew my mind.”
As I said, these weren’t as gossipy as the first one. For Ballot #3, the closest we get to gossip is when this guy (??) talks about how he like American Sniper and he didn’t think the “attacks” on the film were “legitimate” because at the end of the day, it’s not a documentary. Blah. I thought Ballot #2 shows (yet again) how Selma really irritated Oscar voters and the Academy really doesn’t like to be called out on their racist BS. Too bad.
Photos courtesy of WENN.
It sounds so soccer mommy-ish.
“I would have sat with my kids and taken those 3 hours off and I’d have made sure that man was looking for a new job! This wouldn’t happen with my special angel so I don’t see the point of this movie.”
Gotta say I truly do see why others have said the awards mean nothing. The more information leaked about them, from campaigning to voting, the more I realize these people barely give a damn if it doesn’t make them feel good.
IMO, the first voter did not understand Whiplash at all. Its not a film about an abusive jazz teacher, it is about the unyielding pursuit of excellence. Not competence, not common core skills, but inhuman levels of ability. Often, to be a great artist, one does so at the exclusion of other things in life that makes one a good person. It’s a universal theme that could have been about basketball, chemistry, or dance, but the story happened to take place in the context of music education.
This setting adds in interesting wrinkle to the story, probing the role of the teacher in developing true excellence. (When does pushing limits go too far? Can a true artist ever be pushed too far? What is the effect on students who are not excellent?)
But I must reiterate, it is not a story about abuse. It is very different from other commentors’ tales of sadistic primary school teachers delighting in public humiliation of 8-year-olds. When the father character reacts with horror in the final scene, it is not at his son’s return to an abusive relationship, but at the knowledge that his son is lost to him. He has sacrificed some part of his humanity in his quest for true artistry.
Of course, that’s one interpretation, but it makes me worried that an Oscar-nominated voter could only focus on that mean J.K. Simmons, and not consider a more nuanced analysis.
I agree, Gavin. Well stated.
It would be pretty hard to overstate how much I agree with what you’ve said here, Gavin – and admire how you went about saying it. To reduce this film’s equation to the dynamics of abuse is to miss the entire point of it, which is art itself, the driving need to make it, and what the passion and the obsession to perfect your art – not for fame or fortune, but for its own sake – can do to a person and to that person’s life and personal/familial relationships. That kind of artistic drive isn’t a choice on a “career path”; it didn’t begin with a conscious decision to “become an artist” – art was most likely alive and germinating in that person from earliest childhood, even if possibly it went unrecognized for a time, and eventually it had to come out. To say it’s a hard life is such an understatement. It’s rarely a comfortable existence. The occasional interlude of peace and deep joy for serious artists comes when they are writing/performing/playing music/painting/dancing. Nearly everything else in that person’s life, for better or worse, is done to support that need or compulsion to make art. Thanks for your post. You said it so much better than I could have.
I’m almost shocked at how much these articles discredit the Academy voters. It’s clear these awards are all based on personal opinions and very little to do with the actual films themselves. Makes me see the Oscars in a whole new light.
Ballot #2 basically said the same thing about Selma that Ballot #1 said, only more nicely. They didn’t like Selma period. It wasn’t about being racist. But it feels like you can’t say you disliked Selma without being called racist.
This exactly.
It’s the best picture nominee with the best reviews of the whole bunch. It’s crazy to argue that it’s not good at all. It might not be your taste, but please don’t act as if it isn’t a well made film.
That isn’t what Ballot 2 or someone said. Re-read what was written. I thought Selma was a good film but not great. I thought Oyelowo was fantastic and should’ve been nominated. I didn’t think the film was well directed. If I had a vote, I wouldn’t vote for Selma. None of that makes me a racist.
My point exactly. If Selma had had lukewarm reviews we could argue about that. At this point we know that the issue is about the politics besides the movie
Lots of films are ‘well-made films’ and don’t become Best Picture nominees, let alone winners. ‘Selma’ was in no way excellent, and if it had been directed by a White male we wouldn’t be having this conversation. Personally, I like Ava DuVernay – from the interviews I’ve heard with her, she’s a very positive person – and I look forward to her future work. But this was her very first major feature, and she’s got lots of time to grow her skills and make a movie that’s more imaginative and challenging.
I guess that means I’m a racist!
@ Cynthia and Wilam
Do you let reveiws dictate what movies you go see and whether or not you like them? Or do you go to movies you think look good and form an opinion of that movie for yourself ?
If it’s option 2 then why do you feel the voters should be held at different standard..
@JustNo
The argument that people are using is that it wasn’t good enough. If that’s someone’s opinion then fine. But for people to say that’s why it didn’t get more nominations when Selma is one of the most critically acclaimed films of the year (if not the most) is BS.
ToE, AS, or TIG didn’t get as much praise as Selma yet those films got plenty of nominations. Why is that?
Boyhood is the best reviewed movie among the Best Picture nominees, not Selma.
Boyhood: Metacritic = 100%, Rotten Tomatoes = 98% rated FRESH with average score of 9.3/10; IMDB = 8.2/10
Selma: Metacritic = 89%; Rotten Tomatoes = 98% rated FRESH with average score of of 8.7/10; IMDB = 7.7/10
Even so, it is ok to dislike Boyhood and offer arguments as to why it is not an excellent film, as it is the same with Selma.
@Beth
I did say one of the most. But nitpick if you want.
I also said if someone didn’t like the movie that’s fine but the argument that it wasn’t good enough when it was better reviewed than some of the other nominees is what I’m calling BS on.
@Nikki
Erm my remark was not aimed at you. It was directed at Wilma’s comment that Selma was “the best picture nominee with the best reviews of the whole bunch.” I should have used the “@Wilma” instead of just hitting reply on her post.
+1. I liked Selma. Thought it was a good movie and I am glad I saw it. Even more glad that I took my 12 year old to see it. That being said, of the other nominated films I’ve seen (American Sniper, Theory of Everything, Birdman and The Imitation Game), it isn’t in the same league. Not at all. If saying that makes me racist, so be it. At the end of the day, making movies is about entertainment. Selma entertained me. Good film. I will probably buy it for my DVD collection. I probably won’t buy all of the others.
They aren’t called racist for disliking the film – they are being called racist for acting like race has nothing to do with it. Isn’t it curious “black films” only get awarded when they are about thugs and slaves?
For me, Selma is no different from TIG. It’s a decent biopic with a fantastic main actor, but way too Hollywood’esque and glossy for it’s own good. But one film has 4 times the nominations of the other.
@someone says…Agree…I saw Selma, I thought it was a good movie which was elevated by David’s amazing performance.In my opinion he should have been nominated. I accept he was not, but he has the type of talent which says he will be in the future. I guess thia makes me both a RATIONAL black woman, and a racist.
Agreed. The Academy is not racist just because it did not nominate a film implicating black history with a black director. Why is this the premise this article works from? It would be racist to nominate a film just because of it’s black underpinnings. What is NOT racist is nominating films on their merits, based on the same criteria, WITHOUT regard to the race of the people behind them. There were many good films. Selma May be good, even very good, but a racism accusation because MANY Academy members apparently did not believe it to be among the BEST is itself racist.
To attack someone for not understanding the racism of the issue when the voter is trying to explain why he/she did not think Selma was a great film shows the illogical nature about the debate. The debate is not about the film’s merit, or lack thereof (keep in mind, opinions can fairly vary) – which should be the only discussion for a best film nominee – but about the color of those associated with it.
‘Whiplash’ was little weird with that abusive teacher and it’s ridiculous to think that students take that much of extreme craziness just to get approval or just to get their talent recognized. I would sue the mofo if I am treated like that.
Enough of ‘American Sniper’, moving on.
One would think so, but then it happens; and without even knowing you’re bowing down to your boss/teacher and blaming yourself for not being liked by them. It’s more typical for elementary/middle school (that’s when I experienced it), but it also happens in highschool. Messed up stuff.
If the Voter thinks their kid would tell them, she’s so naive. Or at least, not everyone can tell the parents, and often you don’t even recognize it as wrong.
I don’t know about that. I had an extremely abusive teacher (Grade 3) who publicly humiliated and belittled me. She once made me pack up all my belongings in my backpack, hung the bag on my neck, and made me stand in front of the class for an hour while telling me I might as well quit now because I would never amount to anything more than a trash collector while laughing in my face. She also made me clean up her phlegm bag everyday (it’s exactly how it sounds) along with loads of other demeaning chores.
I never told my parents.
Finally, one of my friends told her mother, and her mother told mine. So my parents went to the school and ripped her a new one. She never dared to so much as look at me wrong again.
I didn’t even want her to acknowledge me or want anything from her, yet I still didn’t say anything. So no, I don’t think it’s so ridiculous.
Whiplash is based off a teacher that the director had in music school. So I’m sure he tweaked up the intensity for the movies.
It is abusive. And that’s the point-the point is to have a movie with a abusive teacher and to show you how a student responds to that. I liked that it wasn’t the predictible-he’s a music prodigy that meets a tough teacher and overcomes by being awesome story. The kid practiced-worked hard-and still got zero recognition. Whiplash was awesome if you don’t go in expecting sunshine and rainbows. And Simmons is AWESOME. You forget that he’s not the main character.
It happens in public schools with teachers. It happens in sports big time. It happens everywhere. I think the movie may have been a bit OTT in getting Teller’s character to crack. But I think they really wanted to take it out of his hands, (and a big theme was that character wanting some kind of recognition of his talents and all his effort). The rest of the abuse though? Not that strange or OTT at all. I can tell you as a ballet fan the topic of teachers, choreographers and artistic directors being inappropriate, manipulative or just plain bullies is MAJOR. Because btw, in the movie we’re not even talking about lower education or a situation where a parent could gain access like that. #2’s comments just speak to naiveté and a rather infantile understanding of how these things actually happen. Frankly… It’s pretty damn stupid to think 1) Oh my son would tell me and 2) I would have words with the powers-that-be at this most prestigious conservatory. I personally have absolutely no patience for abuse and bullying. From Jerome Robbins to Derek Deane. But it never fails, you will always find people who will defend it. From the inside and out. You will hear dancers (Russian especially) say, “Yeah, my teacher screamed in my face, told me I was worthless, smacked me on the legs every now and then, but I needed that to motivate me”. Not all, but many students who receive that treatment rationalize it that way. They don’t want to be viewed as weak on top of it, (so they won’t even really complain. Forget “telling”). But they don’t necessarily see anything wrong with being pushed by fear and humiliation either. And Jerome Robbins is a perfect of example of the “it’s worth it” side. “It’s worth it for my career.” “It’s worth it because he will make me better.” Whiplash kept going back to an origin story legend that Bird would’ve been just another saxophonist if Jones hadn’t thrown a cymbal at his head, humiliating him and basically casting him out. It doesn’t matter if we believe that or think it’s right. I think the question is if Teller’s character believes it. That’s why I didn’t have a problem with the film. I don’t think it truly settles on one side or the other. And boy was I looking for it to.
The Academy must be so proud of it’s members. SMH
But what is waaaaayyyyy worse than these guys are the THR comments sections for each of these Oscar Voter posts (particularly the first one). Anyone who does not think ignorance and racism still exist in the U.S. must be forced to read the 300+ comments on THR.
P.S. Love J.K. Simmons!
The whole movie industry is a joke.
This is the first year when I have only seen one of the nominated films (The Grand Budapest Hotel). I guess I’m going to have to read up some more about them so I’m not lost this Sunday. These voters were rather boring. I hope the next reveals are a bit more juicy.
Wow. I love how they different in their views. I wish THR did a couple dozen of these interviews, just to get an insight from folks that work in the industry.
I love how the one voter just LOVED Hawking movie. But hated the Sniper movie. The the next voter LOVED the Sniper movie. Both giving very clear reasons for their views.
“we give out awards to black people when they deserve them” -my translation ” we just don’t nominate them that often to begin with and that’s just because there aren’t many roles in Hollywood for PoC, but how dare you calling us racist?”
And what does it say about the members, that Cheryl Boone Isaacs is President of the Academy? Members of the Academy still can be racist. America has a black President – does it mean there is no racism in America?
Totally a “we have a black friend” defense.
Exactly.
Hey, WE have a two term black President, too, so America couldn’t possibly be racist anymore, right?
THIS. If anything, Obama’s presidency has brought A LOT of previously “hidden” racism to light.
Yes! So utterly lame that that excuse was given. Many racists have even been in relationships with people of color and still held their racist beliefs. It matters not one whit.
Absolutely to everything you guys said. I was also thinking what makes it particularly bad is that this is now one of SEV.VER.RAL times I’ve seen her race mentioned as if such a thing is an automatic and clear indicator of how sooooo not prejudiced the Academy is. Just absolutely no chance of a whiff of institutional racism. “Look a black president!” I also wouldn’t be as inclined to seethe if I saw less “authorities” and voters vaguely dismiss Selma and then immediately (spending more time and energy) going on the defense, motioning to Isaacs, and basically telling people to stop *cough* stirring sh*t up. AMPAS members are all up in their feelings. I said yesterday the tone has too consistently sounded like “black people should be happy to even ride the bus”. “Look, a two-term black president. We gave Oscars to 12 Years A Slave. We do right by you people! What more do you want?” Plus, don’t forget the constant harping on the idea that you must “deserve” recognition. And I’m still waiting for someone to say why Selma and those involved didn’t deserve more and then also make a real argument FOR The Imitation Game and The Theory of Everything. Clarify exactly how those films alone, (in overall execution, craft, creativity, performances, historical inaccuracies, whatever and etc.,) are so remarkably different.
I still pick Boyhood as the best movie.
My sister and her friend saw The Sniper this week and said it was a fantastic movie. She said she was surprised how good it really is. She is a Democrat, against war unless absolutely necessary, against the Iraq War, and didn’t find it pro war at all. None of my liberal friends have who have seen it. It’s about the realities of war and its effects on the men and families, in particular Chris. She, like me, believes Boyhood should win the Oscar for best movie, though.
Ehhh, my liberal friends and family members (I am too) were so repulsed they had to leave the theater… separate people, not together. I know because they each warned me individually, knowing how I feel about war and violence. Kids were murdered onscreen for crying out loud… and the emotional nuances were barely there at all, according to the friends who tried to give it a chance to search for SOME meaning or critique.
Oh Lord… “We voted for a black president!! We’re not racist!!!”
so the abuse in Whiplash is not entertaining but sniping people is?
Yeah WHAT?! Smh
Lol @ “we’re not racist, our president is black!!!”
It’s just like the people who say the same thing about President Obama being in office, which obviously means that racism in daily life has completely ceased to exist or even when you call out someone for their foolery and they say “but my best friend is black!!!”
Just shhhhhh
Re the psychological bullying in Whiplash, I can see how it may be off-putting to some but you’d at least hope an AMPAS member would be more open-minded about their art tackling a range of challenging topics and, more importantly, assess the films on merit rather than a parochial sense of what is and isn’t offensive.
As for Selma, to me it simply isn’t an outstanding film and I am not outraged at the snubs. The excessive use of slo-mo in particular feels manipulative and the film could have benefitted from a lighter and more deft hand in the emotional scenes. If there is an excellent “black” movie like 12 Years A Slave then I’m all for showering it with awards, but that’s based on merit rather than diversity reasons. The exception is Oyelowo who gave a towering performance and deserves to be nominated. That said, I can somewhat empathise with the Selma fans as hackneyed, mediocre fare like TIG and TOE managed to rack up a bunch of nominations for attempting something similar and doing it worse. Though that is more a point of these two films being undeserving than Selma being undeniable.
And LOL at the AMPAS member voting for Guardians of the Galaxy in Best Hair and Make-up because of “the tree”. Indeed, those were some mad make-up skills as Vin Diesel was truly unrecognisable. WTF?!
“And LOL at the AMPAS member voting for Guardians of the Galaxy in Best Hair and Make-up because of “the tree”.”
Are you kidding me?! The awards really do mean NOTHING at all… even moreso in the technical categories, apparently. An actual voter couldn’t tell the difference between hair/make-up and CGI. I figured that you weren’t allowed to vote for categories that had nothing to do with your expertise… how naive of me.
It depends on the category. There are some where only those who work in that field can vote. I believe the Actor branch is the only who can vote in every category.
@Brittney B
Unfortunately this is quite common I suspect. It’s like the voter who admitted he/she doesn’t understand the difference between Sound Mixing and Sound Editing but still voted in those categories. People can overwhelming vote for a movie they really like, even in categories where they may not be the most deserving.
@M.A.F
I think all AMPAS members can vote in most (if not all) the categories in this final winners stage. At the nomination stage however, only the relevant branches would vote – i.e. the directors branch would vote for the directing nominees, acting branches for acting nominees, and so on. The only category in which everyone can vote at the nominations stage is Best Picture.
See I actually think that’s a fair critique of Selma. (I haven’t seen the film). I understand the technical reason you didn’t like it. These voters sound defensive and mildly racist when talking about Selma.
I love how pissed off people get when their racism gets called out. Let’s keep it going.
I will say this: I don’t like that the journalists don’t list their questions along with answers. It made the voter yesterday sound completely unhinged in regard to Selma. Recognizing the pattern of the answers indicates that they are being asked this question, rather than it being a stream of consciousness.
That being addressed, I still think that yesterday’s voter harbored deep-seeded racist, or at the least, heavily biased positions on color, in terms of her perspective on the t-shirt stand versus the political push by piggy-backing on blind patriotism with American Sniper, with the shit-stirring comment. Today there is the ‘we have a black president’ so no one is racist response. Where have I heard that before?
Is there one person who can at least admit that there should be a greater diversity in voters, instead of being defensive? I mean, how about answering for yourself, just tell the reporter the film didn’t seem special to you, but perhaps there should be a wider range of perspective, overall? This person’s responses are better than yesterday, but this is still a condescending comment, “we give out awards to black people when they deserve them, just like any other group”. Not the worst thing anyone can say, but it also may be a product of how the question is being posed?
Oh man, my Oscar predictions are all wrong. I disliked the Imitation Game a great deal because is was really corny and too obvious, and Whiplash is representative of many arts teachers from what I hear. I’m wondering if the Imitation Game WILL win because it’s an incredibly safe choice. I always knew some really odd things came into voting for Academy winners but it’s even less about who really deserves it for that role than I thought. To say Grand Budapest wasn’t a special story? Is he kidding? That movie is unique and special to it’s very bits.
I left this comment on first post but I’m gonna leave it here too.
Just because you support movies made by african-american woman that doesn’t make you a smarter, more aware person. I’m a feminist and a woman of color. Selma doesn’t build any suspense or effective narratives just as Birdman fails to reach enough climax. American Sniper and Unbroken have only one sided perspectives and poorly orchestrated. If you’re gonna call someone racist, at least have a good reason for it because that accusation should not be not something so lightly dealt with
I’ve got to agree with you here. Not a fan of Selma, and Birdman also did nothing for me – I found it cynical, with not a single character I could like or identify with.
One of my favorite movies of the year was ‘Gone Girl’, but that got pretty much 0 nominations, except for Rosemond Pike, who probably won’t win.
“Selma doesn’t build any suspense or effective narratives” is the perfect way to respond to the question posed, rather than saying ‘we have a black president’, but I suspect there was a certain degree of defensiveness cultivated by the interviewer.
@Shia/@UltraViolet…THIS….TO INFINITY. Finally voices of reason.
Whiplash comment was nonsense. 12 years was a film about slavery and everyone thought it was brilliant. “I don’t find abuse entertaining” is poor justification.
I know it is not a popular opinion here, but I don’t think Selma should get a nomination. Good movie, not great. That being said, I didn’t think The imitation game was great either. The theory of everything was really good, but not great, I felt the story was bigger than the movie itself , much like TIG and Selma were.
The only real snubs I can think of are “the lego movie” for animated feature film and Jake G. for best actor.
I don’t understand the racism complaint with Selma. Almost everyone on this site at least who has actually seen Selma said it was ok or good but not great. Most agree that Oyelowo did get snubbed but that it wasn’t best picture or director worthy. There was also almost no campaign for it. I really don’t understand the outrage, unless your sole argument is, it was a black film about good subject matter, so therefore should get all the awards.
Yes, the Lego movie was snubbed. That movie was unbelievable in script and scope. Hell, it was better than TIG.
There’s a small (but vocal) group of people who keep repeating that they didn’t like it. That’s fine, they’re entitled to their opinion.
But Selma has a 98% rating on RT and over 90 on Metacritic. It’s the best reviewed film alongside Boyhood. When people say the Academy is racist, they’re pointing out the racial bias the Academy has to disregard films not centered on white people (esp. white men). Yes 12 YaS might’ve last year but that’s clearly the expection than the rule.
For someone to say “we reward black movies when they deserve it” not only is condescending but shows the ignorance a person has for understanding the fundamental racism that’s a part of the Academy.
I don’t deny there is racism amongst AMPAS and certain within the movie industry more widely.
That said, Selma’s chances were also botched by the poor campaign waged by Paramount Pictures. I’m not sure how many people here follow its awards trajectory over the past few months but there were complaints among various awards groups (though not AMPAS) that Paramount did not send screeners to them in time. As such Selma was woefully underseen, especially in the weeks preceding AMPAS voting which were crucial for building buzz so as to encourage AMPAS members to watch the Selma screener amongst the tonnes of other movie screeners sent to them. As it turned out Boyhood, American Sniper, etc – even Whiplash – seized the attention, leaving Selma with a mountain to climb. The writing was on the wall.
Selma’s rather disappointing box office performance – despite being a film about a well-known leader, released near the MLK celebrations and having strong critical reception – also leads me to believe Paramount failed to build the traction for it to have a strong shot at the Oscars.
Racism in AMPAS may play a part and I am not absolving it, but Paramount basically blew its chances with an incompetent campaign.
I felt the same about Selma. It was good but not great. (Other than David O who was TRULY great.) But the same is true of “The Imitation Game”. Good but not great.
So IMO the more valid argument regarding underlying racism in the Academy voting isn’t “Selma deserved more nominations because it was one of the best reviewed films of the year.” It’s that in one case, a formulaic Oscar baity film garnered tons of nominations while in the other case, a formulaic Oscar baity film did not. And one of the primary differences between the two is race.
Basically what I’m saying is that NEITHER film deserved that many nominations.
So yes I DO think there’s some underlying racism in the voting. Basically so-called black films can’t get away with being formulaic and conventional and garner the type of unwarranted respect white films can.
It makes me laugh that the screenwriter picked TIG as his first. The screenwriting was the weakest part of that entire movie. This must have been graham moore’s ballot!
Agreed, TIG’s screenplay was pretty dire. Minimal character development, tired cliches and tropes, stilted dialogue (“Sometimes it is those people who nobody thinks anything of who do the things nobody can imagine…”) and always telegraphing obvious conclusions with a loud-hailer as if the audience cannot be trusted to interpret them.
I doubt Graham Moore is an AMPAS member though. Maybe his mum is? 😀
Sighs, me too! TIG? Seriously, with all the corny dialogue? Or that the other voter picked TTOE as their fav. WTH!! Those were the cheesiest and most formulaic of the bunch, tho’ ER was great as Hawking.
Oh, and just to comment on Birdman….I love this movie. It was innovative, engaging, well paced and thought provoking. I didn’t like the ending, but my husband and I came out of it wowed and actually discussing and dissecting it. That’s the mark of a great film for me. Maybe it helps that we’re both theatre geeks, but for me, it was a lovely change in the middle of a sea of “meh”.
I also liked grand Budapest hotel. For a lot of the same reasons. Whiplash never came here so I can’t wait to see it on DVD.
This is the “sighs” that speaketh sense! Agreed on Birdman and Budapest, tho’ I admit I was deeply touched by Boyhood. Someone wrote this week regarding Boyhood and Birdman, “‘Boyhood’ touches the heart; “Birdman” gets the heart racing.” Totally agree with that assessment.
You’re gonna love Whiplash. As a musician, that one had me thinking for days…
🙂
More, more, more! I want to see how many Oscar voters will contort themselves in knots trying to deny how much Selma offended them, and how it’s really all about “standards”, when films like Shakespeare in Love and Titanic take home Best Picture Oscars. More stupidity and cognitive dissonance please.
Whiplash – only movie that had me riveted to my seat, not able to predict what was gonna happen next. Incredible piece of filmmaking!
Honestly, I don’t think ANY of these films will be remembered much after this year. I still watch parts of Silence of the Lambs and Forrest Gump every time they are on television.
“My kid would have told me if he had an abusive teacher.”
The more I see from the Academy voters, the lower my opinion of them gets. They’re just not very bright.
LOL……. I read the phrase ” we have a two-term president who is a black woman” and thought he was talking about Obama until I realized he meant the Academy President.
I don’t think the Academy is racist for not nominating Selma for an Oscar, but their lame excuses are incredibly suspicious. So far, we have the following lame excuses: it’s not art, it’s not great, and the actors who wore those political t-shirts made me upset. The black President token mention is just like the black friend excuse. They can’t give legitimate reasons for their position–nothing which makes the sound knowledgeable about film, to be sure.
What’s amazing is how similar the storyline of Selma is to The Imitation Game and The Theory of Everything. All 3 pics could have been written by the same person. It’s the cliche of one man fighting against the odds to get something amazing done. All three included respectable acting, good direction, dramatic scenes, and an emotional resolution. To me, neither was all that much better than the other, except The Imitation Game had enough lies in it that it can also be called part fantasy. To say one is better than the other is splitting hairs and reveals a person’s tastes and biases more than anything else.
I think sometimes there’s a split in the nomination/awarding process. Being a great reviewed movie doesn’t necessarily mean anything–Guardians of the Galaxy was also one of the best received and I don’t think anyone thought it would get a nomination for best picture! Critics don’t have any say in the nominations. And they may love/hate a movie and actors/producers/directors/writers/other guild members completely disagree but their vote is what counts. And they will overlook more commercial films that are very solid–remember the days when a movie like Star Wars *could* be nominated–in favor of arty films that almost no one sees. American Sniper has probably made more than all the other nominated films combined. Hollywood often seesaws between art and commerce.
As for David O, yes I think he was snubbed. But so, in my opinion, were Jake Gyllenhal, Timothy Spall, Ralph Fiennes–and those are just the 3 that spring immediately to mind. The Best Actor field was so deep you could fill a separate ballot with deserving nominees. (Sadly the women’s field was a pretty shallow one). What makes one person over the other get in? Was Nightcrawler too weird? Was Grand Budapest too strange? Was Mr Turner too unseen? Was Selma too charged? Who knows. (And I personally think Jessica Chastain for a Most Violent Year and Rene Russo in Nightcrawler were *shamefully* overlooked for Best Supporting Actress. Patricia Arquette was good–a quiet, lovely performance–but I don’t know if it’s the best of the year, just the best of those nominated.