Official 2016 Oscar Nominations and Discussion Thread (1 Viewer)

[BobO'Link]

OMG, probably one of the worst shows they've ever done.

Especially that opening monologue by Chris Rock. Not terribly PC to say, but it was apparently bash white people time. Ten minutes of him whining about how blacks were passed over? There was nothing racist that happened this year, but no black people rose to the level of being nominated for an Oscar.

I was highly offended by many of the remarks made by Chris Rock and others. Had it been a white "comedian" making the same remarks about blacks he'd have been raked over the coals and possibly pulled from the stage.

Apparently his routine, and the diversity of non-white presenters, is because of a percieved lack of representation of non-whites in the Oscars.

Here is a breakdown of the rate African-Americans have won Academy Awards for Acting this century:

Best Leading Actor: 3 wins/16 years = 18.75%
Best Leading Actress: 1 win/16 years = 6.25%
Best Supporting Actor: 1 win/16 years = 6.25%
Best Supporting Actress: 4 wins/16 years = 25%

The average rate of African-American Oscar winners = 14.06%

Since 2001, African-Americans have won 14.06% of the Oscars for all of the Best Acting Categories. According to the 2010 US census, African-Americans make up 12.3% of our population. This is a slightly greater representation than their population.

African-American winners for Best Acting:

Denzel Washington.
Jamie Foxx.
Forest Whitaker.
Halle Berry.
Morgan Freeman.
Jennifer Hudson.
Mo’Nique.
Octavia Spencer.
Lupita Nyong’o.

After looking at these numbers, I fail to see how African-Americans are being unrepresented in the Academy Awards.

 

[Neil Middlemiss]

I suggest you read this, Bob.

http://www.economist.com/blogs/prospero/2016/01/film-and-race

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

The real Walter V. Robinson (played by Michael Keaton in Spotlight) wrote a fun article about his Oscar weekend:
Why Michael Keaton was sure ‘Spotlight’ would win best picture

 

[Mike Frezon]

Personally, I think Chris Rock did an amazingly fair job in the way he handled the "controversy" during his monologue. It just needed to stop there instead of being continued throughout the entire program.

I think Crawdaddy nails it by calling it a "so-called boycott." This was not a real (or "meaningful") protest. Just a few high-profile people making some noise.

I'm not a Chris Rock fan in the slightest. So to have him tear into the "boycotters" and their arguments was rather refreshing and surprising. Were there things I cringed at? You bet. And I really wish the entire broadcast didn't center on that aspect.

Even the pre-shows had the network and Academy going out of their way to make it as "diverse" an event as possible. Obvious and sad.

 

[Stan]

Followed by perhaps the worst Bond song in the history of the franchise winning Best Song.

We all have different opinions. I thought that was one of the best Bond songs ever, Sam Smith was great.

 

[BobO'Link]

I suggest you read this, Bob.

http://www.economist.com/blogs/prospero/2016/01/film-and-race

I did and it doesn't change my opinion or the facts. The writer seems to be going out of his way to spin it differently but the numbers show otherwise. If anyone should be complaining it's other races who *are* woefully under represented.

 

[Neil Middlemiss]

Well, you can lead a horse to water...

 

[Mark-P]

So instead of sweeping the controversy under the rug, the Academy decided to make it the theme of the show. Personally, I think that's a little bit brilliant.

 

[TravisR]

I don't think the problem is with the Oscars at all. The problem is with the movies and roles that studios put black people in. If there were more quality roles in better movies for them then they'd get more nominations and wins. The only realistic contenders were Michael B. Jordan & Idris Elba and they were excellent but I'd point out that it's not as if any of the guys who did get nominated were bad.

 

[Raul Marquez]

My thoughts on this year's Academy Awards:

Production and Direction:

After watching this event for over 40 years I must say this ranks as one of the worst in recent history.

To begin, I thought the production and direction not to be at the level of those of recent years with lousy camera shots and angles. Did anyone catch on the right side of the screen someone moving a piece of scenery on Lady GaGa's moving song which IMHO took away some of the impact of it by distracting our focus?

Lousy production on Sam Smith's SPECTRE's theme, particularly when comparing it to the one from 50 SHADES OF GREY theme. Sam Smith's camera shots emphasized his back-and-forth pendulum motion which was driving me crazy.

I love Bond theme songs, BUT did you notice that most Bond themes were used as filler music, as if they didn't have a rich library of movie themes to use. It may have made some sense last year with Bond's 50th Anniversary, but this year?

People watch the show to see the stars.... where were they?
I've seen pictures of many of them that attended the ceremony (Tom Cruise comes to mind), but where are the camera shots showing them in the audience?

When you have a special Oscar being awarded to celebrities like Debbie Reynolds and Spike Lee, THAT should have been given more importance. Would have loved to hear Spike Lee's acceptance speech.

Also, the bottom crawl ("ticker tape") of acceptance speeches "thanks".... another misfire.

Black & White:

Regarding the Black/White controversy, I hate the way ALL of the networks and the show itself tried to be so "politically correct" that most (if not all) presenters from CNN to ABC were black.

Chris Rock's opening monologue was just OK in my eyes, but some of the moments throughout the show were cringe worthy indeed (like when he introduced the actress from Clueless, Stacy Dash and her subsequent speech, and the 3 poor kids representing the Price Waterhouse firm).

Alejandro G. Iñárritu's remark during his acceptance's speech was more powerful to me than all of Chris Rock's monologues and skits:
That the industry needs to make the color of someone's skin as irrelevant as the length of one's hair.

Well, enough rambling....but,

I REALLY MISS BILLY CRYSTAL'S OPENING MOVIE MONTAGES.

NOW THAT WAS SHOWBUSINESS!

Stepping off the soapbox....

Raul

 

[SteveJKo]

Personally, I think Chris Rock did an amazingly fair job in the way he handled the "controversy" during his monologue. It just needed to stop there instead of being continued throughout the entire program...

My thoughts exactly Mike! Personally I thought it was the most enjoyable Oscar program in years, and I loved that no one movie took all the awards, it kept things interesting.

 

[Alan Tully]

Well done Leonardo, see, you just had to suffer a lot onscreen to get that statuette, but remember the great advice from Kirk in Tropic Thunder...never go full retard!

 

[PMF]

What is "Diversity" when it comes to the arts?

I never viewed diversity in the arts as a "race, creed, color, religion or sex" kind of thing.

Perhaps I need to update, broaden and further educate myself on today's definitions of things; but I thought that stuff had more to do with the work place and college applications.

To my mind, when it comes to the arts, "Diversity" is defined through the prisim of ideas, spirit, originality, invention, points of view and the unique talent to grab our imaginations or forge a new boundary that had never been considered before.

But, once again, I feel that the Honorary Oscar should never had been unplugged and relegated to an Oscar "Board-of-Governors" type luncheon. And, once again, I say that such a move finally caught up to "The Oscars" and bit the Academy in the preverbal buttocks.

Up until 8 years ago, when the Honorary Oscar was televised, the names and news of the recipient(s) were usually announced in conjunction to the early February morning announcement of Oscar Nominees. Oftentimes, the complete list of Nominees listed in the newspapers also cited and publicized the Academy's selection for the such said Honorary prize; as it, too, would be a much touted part of the Oscar night telecast. Now, with the Honorary Oscar(s) no longer televised the populace is less aware of whom was named for that given year. Even I didn't know, until the actual telecast, that Spike Lee was an Honoree. And, as I've said in Post #232, my favorite portion of the show had always been that specific category. I loved the pre-presentation selection of clips and the editing, as it told a broader story of the recipients body of work. I loved the prefatory speeches of the selected presenter; who was always a close, close friend or colleague. And, of course, I loved the entire living moment - on live television - of the Honoree and their life-time summations of what was being bestowed upon them. Indeed, millions wanted to tune in and see; if not for once again; such luminaries as Charlie Chaplin and his return to America, or what Peter O' Toole would have to say after almost declining the award. We wanted to tune in and return to the grace and refinement of Deborah Kerr, or feel the continued warmth and class of a Sidney Poitier within his advancing years. Had the Academy not broken with tradition of televising this aspect of their show, then the Honoree would had been well-publicized in advance. And this year, with controversy and all, Spike Lee's recognition for his body of work trumps all. In considerations for this years definition of "Diversity"; along with the recognition of Spike Lee's body of work feasibly being televised; the "lack of" charges may very well had taken a different path. Undoubtedly, had the Academy spotlighted and featured Spike Lee's award more people would had felt inspired, invigorated and recognized, as well. Here was a moment of opportunity and validation swept under the rug; not because the recipient was Spike Lee, but due only to this segment of the show being unplugged, nearly a decade ago. I agree about the "placating" aspects as cited by TravisR in Post #237. It would have been far less insulting and organically apropos had the presenters been, rather, a bread-crumb trail of past Spike Lee actors and collaborators leading up to their directors Honorary moment. And I would have selected Denzel Washington as the presenter, too. I dare say, had this retired aspect of The Academy Awards televised presentation - that being the Honorary Oscar - were still present, then maybe these past couple of months would had played out far differently.

Since 1927/28, the Honorary Oscar remains to be a recognition that is one of vast importance to each and every filmmaker; it has never faltered within its value; it is an accolade of the highest order; and this year it belongs to Spike Lee. The answer to "Diversity" was there all along - it was voted upon - and long before the "Nomination" charges had ever existed. But alas, this Honorary Oscar category; once found within this internationally televised event; was one that got buried after 2008. And that is regretful.

 

[KMR]

Actually the Oscars have only been held in April once in the last 30 years (1988, due to the writers strike), so yeah it has been a long time.

Well, it didn't feel like that long ago, so I guess I'm getting older than I thought!
Looking through the Oscars web site, it's fascinating to see how variable the dates have been. For the last 50 years, it was generally early/mid April (and as late as Apr. 18!) through 1988, although it was late March nine times. And it was typically Monday, but sometimes Tuesday (and even once on Wednesday and once on Thursday!). From 1989 to 2003 it was exclusively late March, and on Mondays 1990-2003. In 1999 they switched to Sundays, and since 2004 it's generally been late February (although three times in early March).

Okay, this is geeky to the max. But I just find it interesting...

 

[WillG]

So instead of sweeping the controversy under the rug, the Academy decided to make it the theme of the show. Personally, I think that's a little bit brilliant.

Well, it's an interesting take, but I suppose you may find yourself in the minority. I don't think I'd use the term brilliant. From what I see, Hollywood is very reactionary industry and most of the time, very risk adverse. I personally see the "theme" as a reaction to panic because there was no way they could have swept it under the rug. If they had ignored that elephant in the room there would have been outrage. However, that doesn't mean the show had overdo it by making it completely transparent either.

 

[Chris Will]

I also agree with Philip that most of this controversy may have been avoided if the Academy hadn't decided to bury the Honorary Oscar 8 years ago.


Oh, I watched Spotlight for the first time last night and boy, what a great movie. It got my blood boiling again because I still don't think the Catholic Church is doing enough to stop child abuse, but that is a discussion for a different place and time. Great movie though, I have no problems with it winning BP.