The Oscars controversy surrounding the lack of diversity

[prisonermonkeys]

The Hunger games proves that people like the Hunger Games series, not that audiences in general ready for female targeted franchises.

I still don't get why people like the Divergent series, but they're watching it, anyway.

The Hunger Games was a success because its thematic content resonated with its target audience. It's the sane reason Hollywood is sinking so much into adaptations of teen pop fiction - Divergent, The Giver, The Maze Runner, etc. Most of these stories feature teenage protagonists at a crossroads in their lives, trying to resolve the conflict between who they want to be and what society expects of them. The inevitable message is that they can make a positive contribution to society and even facilitate change without compromising their own sense of self; that their desires and society's expectations can not only co-exist, but compliment one another, rather than being in a state of perpetual conflict until you either conform and lose your identity, or assert yourself and become a pariah.

Personally, I don't have much time for them because to my mind, they're all so similar. None of them say anything that the others don't, much less something interesting. They only really serve as reassurance for their target audience at a time of turbulence in their lives. My Year 8 class last year had a wide reading assignment - we encourage the students to read as much as possible from as many sources as possible - and most of the class just did the same sort of thing.

The Hunger Games, Alien franchise and to an extent the Twilight series have proven that films with a female lead can be universally accepted with both male and female audiences and do really well at the box office.

Of the three, Alien is the only one with any merit - a large part of the success of The Hunger Games and Twilight rests on the way that they were adaptations of successful novels. They were pretty much guaranteed to be a box office success.

17% of the country is Hispanic, shouldn't they be complaining?

Alejandro González Iñárritu was nominated for Best Director for his work on The Revenant, and he won it last year for Birdman.

 

[Danoff]

Alejandro González Iñárritu was nominated for Best Director for his work on The Revenant, and he won it last year for Birdman.

12 years a slave cleaned up last year with tons of black people winning. Somehow that didn't stop the complaining this year. I suppose Hispanics should be ready to jump on that next year then.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

Somehow that didn't stop the complaining this year.

I think that's an over-simplification. The complaint is not "no African-Americans have been nominated", but rather "there are African-American actors who should have been nominated but were not, while there are Caucasian actors who were nominated when they should not have been". Case in point: Jennifer Jason Leigh got nominated for Best Supporting Actress for her role in The Hateful Eight, but if you have seen the film, she did absolutely nothing. She got hit by Kurt Russell a couple of times, pouted a lot, saw something happen off-camera, had blood vomited on her, and swore at Samuel L. Jackson and Walton Goggins a lot. In a three-hour film, she had maybe twenty-five minutes' worth of things to do. It was barely a performance, much less a performance worthy of an award nomination. Most of the nomination seems to have been down to the way Tarantino has a habit of picking up once-prominent actors, dropping them into his films, and getting the most out of them when most people thought they were a spent force and had forgotten about them. He did it with Pam Grier in Jackie Brown, Harvey Keitel in Pulp Fiction, and Darryl Hannah in Kill Bill.

 

[Johnnypenso]

I think that's an over-simplification. The complaint is not "no African-Americans have been nominated", but rather "there are African-American actors who should have been nominated but were not, while there are Caucasian actors who were nominated when they should not have been". Case in point: Jennifer Jason Leigh got nominated for Best Supporting Actress for her role in The Hateful Eight, but if you have seen the film, she did absolutely nothing. She got hit by Kurt Russell a couple of times, pouted a lot, saw something happen off-camera, had blood vomited on her, and swore at Samuel L. Jackson and Walton Goggins a lot. In a three-hour film, she had maybe twenty-five minutes' worth of things to do. It was barely a performance, much less a performance worthy of an award nomination. Most of the nomination seems to have been down to the way Tarantino has a habit of picking up once-prominent actors, dropping them into his films, and getting the most out of them when most people thought they were a spent force and had forgotten about them. He did it with Pam Grier in Jackie Brown, Harvey Keitel in Pulp Fiction, and Darryl Hannah in Kill Bill.

That's an oversimplification but your response to the question of whether Hispanics should be upset is that a Latino was nominated for an Oscar and won isn't?

 

[prisonermonkeys]

No, my response is that there is some degree of representation by prominent Hispanic crew members for quality work.

 

[Touring Mars]

If the rules on voting for acting awards were changed to compel people to include x black actors, y hispanic actors etc., there would immediately arise the question of whether a successful nomination or award was based entirely on merit (as it should be) or not. If an actor wins an award knowing that his or her award was won by a combination of talent and positive discrimination, it would probably feel inferior to an award purely based on merit. Furthermore, where do you draw the line? On what basis should the % of one subset or another be selected? Should there be separate awards for non-white actors? Race should not be a factor when casting ones votes for acting awards - but positive discrimination would guarantee that it is.

 

[niky]

Racial quotas are never fair. They're unjust towards people who should have been nominated.

That is not to say that everyone who deserved nominations this year got one... but personally... the issues with the Oscars run much much deeper than simple racism or sexism.

I think the straw that broke this camel's back... and possibly the lowest point for the Oscars, was when Palthrow won for Shakespeare in Love... a movie in which she was not at all bad, but not an Oscar-worthy movie or performance at all. The sheer backroom politics involved is absolutely sickening.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

I don't think anyone is asking for a quota. Rather, they just want the most deserving people to be nominated, and in this case they obviously don't feel like that is the case here.

 

[Famine]

Personally I'm disgusted at the obvious sexism of having women given a separate award with a sexist name - "actress". What, women need their own separate award because they're not able to compete with men and can't be actors?

And while we're on the subject, why are there only male and female awards? Where are the awards for trans actors? What about the nonbinary, genderfluid, trigender, two-spirit, fa'afafine, genderqueer and agender actors?


*retires 20 paces*

 

[Johnnypenso]

No, my response is that there is some degree of representation by prominent Hispanic crew members for quality work.

You realize a single winner in a prominent ethnic group is often referred to as a token right?

 

[prisonermonkeys]

You realize a single winner in a prominent ethnic group is often referred to as a token right?

Have you seen Birdman? It was a thoroughly deserving winner. It's very difficult to make the case that its nomination or win was nothing more than token recognition.

 

[Johnnypenso]

I wonder how this will go over on some future award show. Joseph Fiennes is going to play Michael Jackson in a British comedy show on the telly. Let's put them side by side for comparision:

As you can see Fiennes isn't a good choice, he's nowhere near white enough to play Jackson. I imagine the pc police are going to have a field day with this one

 

[TenEightyOne]

As you can see Fiennes isn't a good choice, he's nowhere near white enough to play Jackson... I imagine the pc police are going to have a field day with this one

It's a comedy about a fantasy road trip at a point in Jackson's life where he was deliberately racially ambiguous. The playing is already done, incidentally. Besides, it's made by a sister company of The Sun newspaper, not something you'd expect to be to sensible.

 

[Johnnypenso]

http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/30/entertainment/sag-awards-2016-feat/index.html

Looks like the SAG Awards met their quota for African American winners. All is well in awards land for a few days.

 

[A2K78]

http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/30/entertainment/sag-awards-2016-feat/index.html

Looks like the SAG Awards met their quota for African American winners. All is well in awards land for a few days.

The SAG in reality means nothing other than the fact its just another union award. Interestingly though I like Queen Latifah's response(even though I disagree with her on a ton of issues) on the importance of demand:

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/lists/what-happened-at-sag-awards-860481

 

[Lucas]

Does anyone really care about the skin colour of the person in the leading role? Really?

Apparently, yes, otherwise we wouldn't have this controversy.

I personally don't care in any way: the lead character of every single film could be white, or could be black, and I wouldn't care. Likewise, I wouldn't say "THERE SHOULD BE BLACK/WHITE LEADS".

I'm against the concept of diversity for the sake of diversity. If an actor is good enough for the role, it doesn't matter if he's black or white.

The only real controversy is whether good films and actors are being ignored because of their race. And then again, this is one thing I've never heard anyone say. Instead, they play the "diversity for the sake of diversity, there need be more X nominations, period".



PD: 12 Years a Slave was an awesome film. I had to make a short video (GRAPHIC) that was like a synopsis of the story, and me and my friend really enjoying making it because the film itself was fantastic.

Went down to the river Jordan where John baptized three...

 

[niky]

http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/30/entertainment/sag-awards-2016-feat/index.html

Looks like the SAG Awards met their quota for African American winners. All is well in awards land for a few days.

And yet, most of the winners were white.

The only real takeaway from this is that Idris Elba and Leonardo di Caprio seemingly got the awards they deserved... I say seemingly because I haven't seen either 'Beasts' or 'Revenant', and given my family status, probably won't till they come in home format... whereas Elba didn't even get a nomination at the Oscars... and, let's face it... we know at this point DiCaprio is never going to get one...

 

[Johnnypenso]

Apparently, yes, otherwise we wouldn't have this controversy.

I personally don't care in any way: the lead character of every single film could be white, or could be black, and I wouldn't care. Likewise, I wouldn't say "THERE SHOULD BE BLACK/WHITE LEADS".

I'm against the concept of diversity for the sake of diversity. If an actor is good enough for the role, it doesn't matter if he's black or white.

The only real controversy is whether good films and actors are being ignored because of their race. And then again, this is one thing I've never heard anyone say. Instead, they play the "diversity for the sake of diversity, there need be more X nominations, period".

PD: 12 Years a Slave was an awesome film. I had to make a short video (GRAPHIC) that was like a synopsis of the story, and me and my friend really enjoying making it because the film itself was fantastic.

Went down to the river Jordan where John baptized three...

There are plenty of times when colour matters to film casting. The obvious ones are situation/period specific. A black man shouldn't play Abraham Lincoln and a white man shouldn't play Martin Luther King in a biographical or documentary type of production for example. In a comedy/satire/parody of course all bets are off. If you're casting a movie about an African American, private all girls school in the 60's..well you get the picture.

Whether good films are being ignored because of race, I don't think so.? The whole argument is ludicrous IMO. Many AA actors have been nominated and won in the last 15 years, roughly proportional to their population in the U.S. Do one or two years of no nominations mean that the old and white Academy wasn't racist from 2000-2013 and all of a sudden they became racist the last two years? I don't think so. It's the same people year after year at the Academy I don't see how it's possible to have them all of a sudden become racist.

 

[Johnnypenso]

And yet, most of the winners were white.

The only real takeaway from this is that Idris Elba and Leonardo di Caprio seemingly got the awards they deserved... I say seemingly because I haven't seen either 'Beasts' or 'Revenant', and given my family status, probably won't till they come in home format... whereas Elba didn't even get a nomination at the Oscars... and, let's face it... we know at this point DiCaprio is never going to get one...

Black actors won 50% of the individual acting awards. Where exactly does the number have to be before we stop crying about racism?

 

[TenEightyOne]

Where exactly does the number have to be before we stop crying about racism?

It doesn't, that would be the "quota" that you spoke against. What we do need is a situation where two-years-worth of Oscar nominations aren't tainted by even the possibility that the overwhelmingly white-male-over-60 panel aren't representing diversity of choice. That's all.

 

[Johnnypenso]

It doesn't, that would be the "quota" that you spoke against. What we do need is a situation where two-years-worth of Oscar nominations aren't tainted by even the possibility that the overwhelmingly white-male-over-60 panel aren't representing diversity of choice. That's all.

Yes, because they've been so racist in the past right?

African Americans are are about 12.5% of the population of the U.S. according to Wikipedia.

21% of the last 15 Best Actors were black.
7% of the last 15 Best Actresses were black.
7% of the last 15 Best Picture winners featured black slavery.
7% of the last 15 Best Supporting Actor winners were black.
27% of the last 15 Best Supporting Actress winners were black.

13.8% = Average chance of winning over the past 15 years in one of the 5 major categories if you are black. Argue the merits of individual years all you want but the stats don't lie.

You're simply asking for a quota by a different name. Show us a few black award winners and we'll be happy right? How does 2 years of anecdotal data trump 15 years of anecdotal data, in an event whose winners are historically chosen through lobbying, favouritism, backroom deals, trendiness, sympathy and all kinds of other factors that have nothing to do with acting?

 

[Tornado]

What we do need is a situation where two-years-worth of Oscar nominations aren't tainted by even the possibility that the overwhelmingly white-male-over-60 panel aren't representing diversity of choice. That's all.

And it sounds like the Academy attempted to rectify that two weeks ago.


So, controversy over, right?

 

[Touring Mars]

And it sounds like the Academy attempted to rectify that two weeks ago.

By appointing more people to vote according to race?

 

[Tornado]

Primarily by acting to strip the voting powers from the overwhelmingly white-male-over-60 members who were juiced in from stuff they had done in the 80s and back. This is a voting demographic where it has been an industry in-joke for two decades that a white guy just needs to play an inspirationally retarded person around Oscar season and have the production house funnel money into the ceremony to guarantee a nomination. There's problems with transparency. There's problems with accountability. There's problems with who make up the voting group. There's problems with the selections seemingly having to do more with career choices than acting ability. The Academy, for their credit, seem to be taking these issues to heart when they could have just stonewalled because no one cares that Spike Lee is boycotting anything.






But when there's this insistence that this particular controversy isn't about establishing an affirmative action setup along racial lines for a corrupt awards show it rings a little hollow when it's also built on the supposition that the lack of any black people getting nominations must be for racial reasons, because otherwise where is the controversy?
Was Straight Outta Compton ignored for Best Picture because the white-male-over-60 members are a little racist? Was Straight Outta Compton ignored for Best Picture because the white-male-over-60 members didn't care enough about it to even look at it, just like they don't have to care enough to actually watch the movies they do vote for? Or did Straight Outta Compton get ignored for Best Picture because it was crap, a modern version of the acclaimed "inner city" movies from the early 90s repackaged for millenials based on thoroughly whitewashed versions of real people that was also made by those real people? It could be any number of the three, so I find it odd that we're supposed to assume it's the first one.

Maybe Michael B Jordan. Was it racism that kept him from a best Actor nod (since Academy members obviously watched Creed), or was it that even Stallone's nod was a pity nomination, or was it that Jordan was also stunt casted to star in a critically panned box office disaster tentpole summer movie that drew far more attention?

Will Smith: Racism that kept him from best Actor nod, or the fact that the movie that he gave his widely praised performance in was dismissed as Oscar Bait and the Academy does occasionally see through Oscar Bait movies?

 

[niky]

Black actors won 50% of the individual acting awards. Where exactly does the number have to be before we stop crying about racism?

Five acting awards, one show with a mixed cast. But one actor won two awards, and two of the awards were popular repeats. That's versus five acting awards for whites, and three awards for movies and shows with predominantly or exclusively white casts. Doesn't exactly scream of quotas.

But like I said... I'm not particularly bothered by claims of racism at the Oscars. It's a stupid claim, because these are the same judges who voted for the winners in predominantly black years.

Again, I see it as part of a larger problem of relevance to the industry. Can't claim that the SAG does any better, because I haven't seen everything nominated, but as the voting body is younger, more dynamic and more balanced group, that better reflects the state of the industry than a bunch of old suits.

Which is why... again... I have not watched the Oscars for years, and don't particularly care who wins.

 

[A2K78]

There are plenty of times when colour matters to film casting. The obvious ones are situation/period specific. A black man shouldn't play Abraham Lincoln and a white man shouldn't play Martin Luther King in a biographical or documentary type of production for example. In a comedy/satire/parody of course all bets are off. If you're casting a movie about an African American, private all girls school in the 60's..well you get the picture..

Its funny you say this and I point to the upcoming GITS(Ghost In The Shell) movie....whereas the main character(Major Kusanagi) is Asian(japanese), the role has been handed to a jewish actress(scarlett johansson). Now I understand the reason why is due to the fact that the studio wanted a bankable actress, when you think about it there are tons of other bankable Asian actresses who could've taken on the role.

Anyhow an interesting look at the Oscars voting process....

ttp://archive.fairvote.org/?page=706

 

[Famine]

Apparently, yes, otherwise we wouldn't have this controversy.

I would suggest that almost no-one does.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Its funny you say this and I point to the upcoming GITS(Ghost In The Shell) movie....whereas the main character(Major Kusanagi) is Asian(japanese), the role has been handed to a jewish actress(scarlett johansson). Now I understand the reason why is due to the fact that the studio wanted a bankable actress, when you think about it there are tons of other bankable Asian actresses who could've taken on the role.

Anyhow an interesting look at the Oscars voting process....

ttp://archive.fairvote.org/?page=706

Brings up an interesting conundrum. Piece of cake for a Japanese woman to convincingly play a Japanese woman, not so easy for a caucasian actress to convincingly play a Japanese woman. If ScarJo pulls it off perhaps her performance will be oscarworthy.

 

[niky]

Brings up an interesting conundrum. Piece of cake for a Japanese woman to convincingly play a Japanese woman, not so easy for a caucasian actress to convincingly play a Japanese woman. If ScarJo pulls it off perhaps her performance will be oscarworthy.

GITS, there's really no big reason for the characters to remain Japanese. The milieu in which the movie is set doesn't necessarily require ethnically pure characters. As opposed to something like Mulan... where they went to great pains to cast Chinese talents for the voices...

...only to have them speak wtih American accents.

If Scarlett can pull off a Japanese accent, she will do fine. Don't expect the Academy to pay attention, though.

I'm more excited to see how Joseph Fiennes does. And by excited, I mean morbidly curious to see whether it will be a train wreck or a touch of mad genius.

 

[W3H5]

I'll admit I haven't bothered to read most of this thread because I don't have the time but I'm going to throw in my opinion anyway.

I first heard about this when Will Smith started bitching about there not being enough diversity so he was boycotting the Oscars. I assume by diversity he means black people, but I may be wrong.

Firstly, if it is the case that this is about race and ethnicity then those who weren't nominated can take a good lesson from this: work harder and get nominated next year. I wouldn't expect that I should be nominated for an award if I haven't performed as well as my counterparts, no matter what their race or ethnicity.

Secondly, again, assuming that Will Smith is making this about black actors, wouldn't giving a nomination to someone who didn't deserve it over somebody who did just because of their ethnicity or race be exactly what afiative action is - racial entitlement?

An perhaps Mr. Smith forgot that there are a host of non-white people appearing at the Oscars for a number of reasons. I hear Will talking about how 'the diversity of America' is represented in Hollywood. Probably because Hollywood is massively Jewish. And as far as I can see, that seems to be working well and they're still making tons of money and some good films.

I really used to like Will Smith until he decided to be that guy.

I don't know the exact ins and outs of this story so I can only put together a moderately informed opinion for a few news articles I've seen.