We’re days away from the Oscars, and this year has been one that has seen a lot of controversy emerge over the lack of diversity and representation among the nominees. The very well-reviewed "Selma," in particular, cited as a "snub" with only two nods (Best Picture, Best Original Song). It’s a complex issue, a conversation that is ongoing in Hollywood, and one that needs thoughtfulness in its approach. What it probably doesn’t need is a major industry trade magazine publishing the ramblings of one cherry-picked, headline-grabbing voter, just days before the Oscars.
But here we are. I get The Hollywood Reporter‘s decision to go with this juicy material because it’s hard to ignore. I probably would have, too. But let’s also remember how easy it is to say outrageous things under the cloak of anonymity. With no chance of actually being identified, THR has given a platform for somebody to say the things they probably wouldn’t if they had their name attached. It’s worth bearing that in mind when reading this voter’s following statements about how they’ll vote.
On "Selma": First, let me say that I’m tired of all of this talk about "snubs" — I thought for every one of [the snubs] there was a justifiable reason. What no one wants to say out loud is that Selma is a well-crafted movie, but there’s no art to it. If the movie had been directed by a 60-year-old white male, I don’t think that people would have been carrying on about it to the level that they were. And as far as the accusations about the Academy being racist? Yes, most members are white males, but they are not the cast of ‘Deliverance‘ — they had to get into the Academy to begin with, so they’re not cretinous, snaggletoothed hillbillies. When a movie about black people is good, members vote for it. But if the movie isn’t that good, am I supposed to vote for it just because it has black people in it? I’ve got to tell you, having the cast show up in T-shirts saying "I can’t breathe" — I thought that stuff was offensive. Did they want to be known for making the best movie of the year or for stirring up shit?
On "Inherent Vice": I put in the ‘Inherent Vice’ screener, and it became apparent that it’s a terrible, incoherent movie, so I turned it off. I thought it was not possible for me to hate something more than I hated ‘The Master,’ but I hated this more.
On Best Supporting Actress: …I’m voting for Arquette. She gets points for working on a film for 12 years and bonus points for having no work done during the 12 years. If she had had work done during the 12 years, she would not be collecting these statues. It’s a bravery reward. It says, "You’re braver than me. You didn’t touch your face for 12 years. Way to freakin’ go!"
On Best Original Screenplay: I’m not voting for ‘Nightcrawler‘ — that was really unpleasant. With ‘Foxcatcher,’ they said seven words in the whole movie and the rest of it was people staring at each other, so I’m not voting for that. "
On Best Cinematography: The ‘Birdman‘ single-shot thing gave me a headache.
Anyway, you get the idea. The impression reading the entire commentary is that Oscar voters don’t understand the technical side of filmmaking, are resistant to groundbreaking movies, and don’t like their personal politics questioned. But there are also over five thousand other members who probably approach these things with more of an even-keeled intelligence and respect. Let us know what you think in the comments section.
The guy has a point with the absurdity of Selma\’s marketing. I remember seeing a video on NYT front page of Common and John Legend performing their track from Selma at a country club or otherwise elite club. If you know Common\’s history in hip hop, the video would have looked like a farce to you. The guy came up in underground hip hop, rejecting much of the coarseness and commercialism of mainstream hip hop, instead focusing on political confrontation and celebrating Black identity with all its complexities. Now, he is in a suit and tie rapping at half speed for a room full of middle aged White folks in penguin suits, most of whom probably haven\’t listened to a single hip hop album in its entirety. Even Common\’s hand gestures in the song were tame, as if he was trying to make palatable an essentially unpalatable subject for the crowd before him. Selma and its marketing campaign suffers from some of the same problems as the state of the civil rights movement in America: the tension between appealing to the establishment and agitating on the fringes for change has shifted dramatically toward establishment-appeasement, and the muddled message aim towards provoking outrage and pity without outlining some common vision for how to move forward.
Hmm, I may be wrong but don\’t the Academy also vote under a veil of anonymity?
I agree with Alexander – a very anti-art approach to viewing films. Again, this is the Oscars, so no big surprise there.
Ah, the outrage! If there was true meritocracy in the movie industry we wouldn\’t be talking about most of these films, including Selma. This stuff would never have been made in the first place. Why should you care what a know-nothing Academy member says about a cynical industry which makes worthless movies to sell popcorn and soft-drinks and then congratulates itself for this feat at the Oscars? Let them have their party and celebrate themselves. None of it matters a damn.
While I don\’t agree with most of his drivel, I must say that I finally watched \’Selma\’ last night and have to agree. I was so disappointed. As for \’Inherent Vice\’\’ and \’The Master\’…..I love PTA but Joaquin really annoys me and I just couldn\’t get past that. I get people think he\’s really talented but he\’s bugged me ever since \’\’To Die For\’.
I checked out the original article and I think it said it was a woman.
You are deluded if you think the rest of the academy is even keeled and thoughtful. Do you know what one of the voters who were even bothered to view for best animated film last year has to say about their choice? "Of course I chose Frozen. It was the only nominated movie I saw and my kids loved it"
Selma was boring and only slightly better than something like The Butler or Freedom Riders or any number of any other historical biodramas. But so was Milk and Sean Penn somehow won an Oscar for doing a Harvey Milk impression. So maybe there is some sort of a discrimination thing among voters… but doesn\’t change the fact that Selma ain\’t a great movie.
My impression is that this Oscar voter is a woman. Having said that, why does the politics behind Selma bother her but the politics behind American Sniper does not? Why the double standard? It\’s hard to ignore the inherent racism. The Academy may not be a bunch of hillbillies but if most of the voters are like this woman,then Heaven help us.
He is a She. All the commenters are talking about the mysterious Oscar voter as a man, but the original article says it\’s a woman.
I\’m still stewing over this.. the most cynical approach to talking or thinking about films. The tone of the whole letter is horrendous, comes off as bitter. Is this someone that even likes film? I would like to meet them in a dark alley to strangle them with a 35 mm print of \’Selma\’
@Zack the anonymous person is a woman. So not a guy actually.
Some people like PTA, some people hate him. I would never hold it against this guy that he disliked Inherent Vice, as you either love it, or you hate it. Most great art provokes similarly polar reactions. But, y\’know, some of the other stuff he says is just f*cking ignorant.
I actually agree with this person\’s sentiments about Selma. And I don\’t say that lightly, given how obviously ignorant he or she is about the complex art of film making.
I didn\’t know Armond White was an Oscar Voter.
You\’d think this guy would love a movie about the virtue of ignorance.