The Oscars controversy surrounding the lack of diversity

[squadops]

45, if we're still talking about JW's "white supremacy" comments, no?

I had to think for a second on that, JW's are these overly eager folks wanting to spread the word at your doorstep during dinner time

By this logic should we strip Jefferson from, well, everything?

 

[LeMansAid]

So I take it you are living your life based on what you think societal norms will be 100 years from now?

I don't care what "the norms" will be, have been, or are. I care about recognising what is right and fair, and pushing towards those things. Sometimes that will mean going against the grain, which Supremacist John Wayne (hereinafter referred to as SJW) would have had the option of doing, but seemingly didn't take.

I don't know about you, but most people that I know in their 60's are pretty set in their ways.

Bad luck. Their choice. What is right and fair doesn't care if someone allowed their roots to dig deep in to the unrighteous and unfair. Painful uprooting or condemnable stagnation are what those people set themselves up for.

SJW could have been an SJW, without being an "SJW".

 

[squadops]

Do you think if John Wayne was born today and grew to the same age as he was when he said those things his thoughts would be the same or different? Or as a matter of fact, would the questions even have been raised?

 

[Northstar]

I don't care what "the norms" will be, have been, or are. I care about recognising what is right and fair, and pushing towards those things.

So you're not expected to care, but John Wanye was?

Also, is freedom of expression not included in what's "right and fair"? I'm not trying to say Wayne's views were right, but he was more than within his rights to have them and express them.

which Supremacist John Wayne (hereinafter referred to as SJW)

I stopped reading here, you can call him whatever you wish, but I refuse to talk to people that intentionally change names to fit their agenda, it's just plain childish. If you want to be a grown-up and use actual names, let me know and I'd be more than willing to continue this debate.

 

[TenEightyOne]

So you're not expected to care, but John Wanye was?

That's Wanye Kest you're thinking of, he has enough on his plate as it is.

Also, is freedom of expression not included in what's "right and fair"? I'm not trying to say Wayne's views were right, but he was more than within his rights to have them and express them.

Absolutely right. Other people hold the same right of course, in the case we're discussing those people felt they didn't want to honour a (supremacist) JW day. That's the court of public opinion for you.

 

[squadops]

That's the court of public opinion for you.

I don't think it is though, it's the cali government.

 

[LeMansAid]

So you're not expected to care, but John Wanye was?

Seems you missed the point entirely - perhaps due to being too fixated on being offended by some light-hearted abbreviation play.

I'm sympathetic to a degree with the contexts that people lived in. In context, it may be that a person that treated their slaves well was a champion for human rights - while in an alternate context, they'd be deemed a downright abhorrent, human rights abuser, for having slaves. There needs to be some consideration of context - but with the goal of achieving what is right and fair for people, was Marion Robert Morrison ahead or behind the curve?

I comes down to two parameters - 1) How one wants to live, and 2) How possible it is to live that way, in context.

If having a gay friend meant that I'd be killed, I might at least ensure that I was not seen with them. If having a gay friend meant that I'd be beaten up, I'd be very mindful of where I was seen with them. If having a gay friend meant that I'd be verbally abused, I'd go wherever I wanted with them, but have a bias towards friendlier places. If having a gay friend meant that I'd be showered with gifts, I'd go to the most affluent parts of the city with them.

Behaviour can be context sensitive while still allowing intent to slightly, strongly, or overtly shine through. I don't see good intent having shone through in Marion Robert Morrison.

So....

So I take it you are living your life based on what you think societal norms will be 100 years from now?

.... again, I don't care what they will be, and neither should have Marion Robert Morrison. Marion Robert Morrison should have cared about what was right and fair. Societal norms may be worse in that sense in 100 years time for all I know. I could try and stay ahead of society's curve, or try and keep myself on the better side of righteousness and fairness. In some eras they'll be all but the same - in others, dramatically different. I'll choose not to be a slave to it's whims, thank you.

Context should not be discounted, but signs of intent should anyways trump.

 

[niky]

"I believe in white supremacy until the blacks are educated to a point of responsibility. I don’t believe in giving authority and positions of leadership and judgment to irresponsible people."

That's his quote and it's really just a rewording away from being pro-black.

"I believe that when properly educated the blacks could be given authority and positions of leadership."

No, that's pretty much the definition of racism. That assumes that all black people are uneducated, which was not true at the time, and that you could determine a person's education, culture and responsibility simply by their membership in a group.

-

It would be difficult to judge a person born in another era - Kipling comes to mind as an example - but there are people from that era who were more progressive and more forward thinking.

 

[A2K78]

Like I said, the only real way for minorities to create opportunies for themselves in the film industry is for them to invest thier time in those projects that the market want to consume thus driving demand.

 

[squadops]

Spike Lee does pretty good.

 

[niky]

Like I said, the only real way for minorities to create opportunies for themselves in the film industry is for them to invest thier time in those projects that the market want to consume thus driving demand.

Uh. They do. And the market does.

The only question is whether the producers are willing to fund these projects.

As I've pointed out, ad nauseum, the producers are simply too unfamiliar with the work or too set in their ways to bankroll these productions. There is a tendency to gamble more money on white-male led films that bomb horribly, and that anyone with half-a-brain knows will bomb horribly (anything by Adam Sandler in recent years is a good example of this), than to finance other films that have the opportunity to make decent money and to possibly open up new sections of the market.

Then again, it's their money, if they want to keep making more Lone Ranger, Blackhat, Jupiter Ascending, John Carter, RIPD, etcetera... eh... go ahead.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Uh. They do. And the market does.

The only question is whether the producers are willing to fund these projects.

As I've pointed out, ad nauseum, the producers are simply too unfamiliar with the work or too set in their ways to bankroll these productions. There is a tendency to gamble more money on white-male led films that bomb horribly, and that anyone with half-a-brain knows will bomb horribly (anything by Adam Sandler in recent years is a good example of this), than to finance other films that have the opportunity to make decent money and to possibly open up new sections of the market.

Then again, it's their money, if they want to keep making more Lone Ranger, Blackhat, Jupiter Ascending, John Carter, RIPD, etcetera... eh... go ahead.

Going back to 2010, Adam Sandler's last 11 movies have grossed approximately $990 million. That includes Men, Women and Children that grossed less than $1million. His lifetime gross is $2.66 billion.

 

[Tornado]

No, that's pretty much the definition of racism. That assumes that all black people are uneducated, which was not true at the time, and that you could determine a person's education, culture and responsibility simply by their membership in a group.

-

It would be difficult to judge a person born in another era - Kipling comes to mind as an example - but there are people from that era who were more progressive and more forward thinking.

What sticks out the most to me is that the John Wayne interview was conducted in 1971, not 1951 or even 1961 when those views maybe might have even been mainstream. I mean, I don't expect Wayne to have changed his views any from when they were set just for becoming unpopular, but he was talking about not letting black people into positions of power until they were sufficiently educated 4 years after Thurgood Marshall was appointed to the Supreme Court, as an example that sticks out in particular.

 

[niky]

Going back to 2010, Adam Sandler's last 11 movies have grossed approximately $990 million. That includes Men, Women and Children that grossed less than $1million. His lifetime gross is $2.66 billion.

Do note that this includes animation. Exclude both Hotel Transylvania movies and his batting average (for movies in which he gets top billing) in terms of gross income versus movie budget is pretty unimpressive.

That said, considering he has his own production company, he'll never lack for projects.

 

[LeMansAid]

Do note that this includes animation. Exclude both Hotel Transylvania movies and his batting average (for movies in which he gets top billing) in terms of gross income versus movie budget is pretty unimpressive.

I had to chuckle noticing the fitting irony though, that vampires are known for being about as white as a person could be.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Do note that this includes animation. Exclude both Hotel Transylvania movies and his batting average (for movies in which he gets top billing) in terms of gross income versus movie budget is pretty unimpressive.

That said, considering he has his own production company, he'll never lack for projects.

I only have a minute before I head out to work but I was looking up one of the movie production budgets and then checked a couple more and found that the link I used for his box office gross is grossly underreported. Wikipedia, for example, reports a gross of $243million for Pixels. That's more than 3 times what is in that link. Grown ups 2 was more than $246million vs. my earlier reported $133 million. Even Jack and Jill almost touched $150million. Given those three non-cartoons are almost $2/3 Billion it seems old Adam is one of the most bankable stars in Hollywood. Sorry old chap.

 

[Tornado]

The site you first used didn't underreport things. That same site is the source for Wikipedia's box office. You only looked at domestic sales.

 

[Johnnypenso]

The site you first used didn't underreport things. That same site is the source for Wikipedia's box office. You only looked at domestic sales.

I figured that would be the answer but didn't have time to check. So as it turns out, Adam Sandler is a box office behemoth. Surprising to me too

 

[20832]

I figured that would be the answer but didn't have time to check. So as it turns out, Adam Sandler is a box office behemoth. Surprising to me too

The stupidest and worst movies usually bank in the most cash. It's all about the marketing!
Also, I wouldn't be surprised that many people go into Adam Sandler's movies knowing it's going to suck and spend the money anyway. Some people are just masochistic

 

[A2K78]

One word ...stupid

http://deadline.com/2015/10/female-directors-hollywood-federal-investigation-eeoc-1201568487/

Per usual whenever he gets political Joss is wrong

http://screenrant.com/joss-whedon-female-superhero-movie-sexism/

 

[Tornado]

You don't say.

 

[Pupik]

For every Adam Sandler, there's a Tyler Perry.

 

[A2K78]

Joss of all people(being a ditector himself) should know better that gender let alone race, nationality have nothing to do with one getting a director or producer but rather the added market value said individual brings to the product for the studios..again supply and demand. Even Jodi Foster's ranting on the subject is down stupid.

Like I have said previously, the movie-making industry is a hit based and being so studio are going with actor/directors they feel would provide a return on thier investment. Its even so when we're now in a time when both the majority of box office recipts and investments are coming from foriegn sources such as China.

 

[TenEightyOne]

Joss of all people(being a ditector himself)

Smoke or carbon monoxide?

 

[JKgo]

Smoke or carbon monoxide?

....

You so mean.

Like I have said previously, the movie-making industry is a hit based and being so studio are going with actor/directors they feel would provide a return on thier investment. Its even so when we're now in a time when both the majority of box office recipts and investments are coming from foriegn sources such as China.

...What's China got to do with female actors/directors being given a wide berth, so to speak? Do you even have a concrete source, other than your gut feeling, that confirms this "fact"? Not trying to be a smartass here, just curious.

 

[niky]

I only have a minute before I head out to work but I was looking up one of the movie production budgets and then checked a couple more and found that the link I used for his box office gross is grossly underreported. Wikipedia, for example, reports a gross of $243million for Pixels. That's more than 3 times what is in that link. Grown ups 2 was more than $246million vs. my earlier reported $133 million. Even Jack and Jill almost touched $150million. Given those three non-cartoons are almost $2/3 Billion it seems old Adam is one of the most bankable stars in Hollywood. Sorry old chap.

We were looking at the same domestic grosses.

Adam, forgive me.


-

But your movies still suck.

 

[Johnnypenso]

After two consecutive years in which all of the nominees in each of the four main acting categories were white, sparking #OscarsSoWhite boycotts and protests, seven people of color landed nominations this year: Denzel Washington for Fences; Ruth Negga for Loving; Mahershala Ali for Moonlight; Dev Patel for Lion; Viola Davis for Fences; Naomie Harris for Moonlight; and Octavia Spencer for Hidden Figures. The nominations for Davis, Harris and Spencer mark the first time in Oscar history that three black actors were nominated in the same category in the same year (Best Supporting Actress). Meanwhile, the Documentary category features three films about black life in America: Ava DuVernay’s 13th, Raoul Peck and Hebert Peck’s I Am Not Your Negro and Ezra Edelman and Caroline Waterlow’s OJ: Made in America. Fire at Sea, Gianfranco Rosi’s film about the migrant crisis on the Sicilian island of Lampedusa, and Life Animated will also compete in the category.

Source

 

[Carbonox]

Oh great, this crap sneaking itself into the news again...

It's a sad world view when some people's idea of diversity means as many non-whites as possible.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

It's a sad world view when some people's idea of diversity means as many non-whites as possible.

How would you define "diversity", then?

 

[Liquid]

I didn't post but I did read this thread when this was being discussed last year. I don't know why people care so much. None of this matters. The Academy Awards are a lot of superficial self-slaps on the back and, pertinently, a private show who can do whatever they want and indulge in all the cronyism, nepotism and secret handshakes you'd expect from a show business awards ceremony anyway.