90th Oscars: Ceremony & Pre-Show Discussion

Big Magilla
Site Admin
Posts: 15566
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:22 pm
Location: Jersey Shore

Re: 90th Oscars: Ceremony & Pre-Show Discussion

Postby Big Magilla » Sat Mar 10, 2018 8:13 am

She seemed to be.

HarryGoldfarb
Assistant
Posts: 822
Joined: Fri Jan 10, 2003 4:50 pm
Location: Colombia
Contact:

Re: 90th Oscars: Ceremony & Pre-Show Discussion

Postby HarryGoldfarb » Sat Mar 10, 2018 6:46 am

Was Eva Marie Saint somehow disappointed Mark Bridges won? Maybe she was expecting one of the female nominees to take the award...
If moderation is a fault, then indifference is a crime.
- Jack Kerouac

Sabin
Laureate
Posts: 7301
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 12:52 am
Contact:

Re: 90th Oscars: Ceremony & Pre-Show Discussion

Postby Sabin » Mon Mar 05, 2018 9:51 pm

Mister Tee wrote
ON EDIT: The Shape of Water not only put an end to the SAG Ensemble as infallible precursor...

Your sentence goes on but I'm going to cut you off because you made a good point.

The night before the Oscars, I was weighing the pros and cons in my mind and kept going back to the SAG ensemble as a necessary precursor. There were a few things that kept throwing my predictions out of whack...

How can one predict Get Out or Lady Bird when they are not up for Best Film Editing?
How can one predict Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri when it's not up for Best Director?
How can one predict The Shape of Water when it's not up for the SAG Award?

Then we go back to the exceptions to the rules. Like Titanic winning without a Screenplay nomination or Birdman winning without an Editing nomination. And it all comes down to the fact that The Shape of Water not being nominated for the SAG Award simply meant that there were five better options. It meant nothing. Actors clearly loved the film as it was nominated for three acting awards.

Naturally, the year I think I have an ironclad formula is the year it would fail, or at the very least necessitate an addendum: the stuff that doesn't matter doesn't.
"If you are marching with white nationalists, you are by definition not a very nice person. If Malala Yousafzai had taken part in that rally, you'd have to say 'Okay, I guess Malala sucks now.'" ~ John Oliver

Mister Tee
Laureate
Posts: 6361
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 2:57 pm
Location: NYC
Contact:

Re: 90th Oscars: Ceremony & Pre-Show Discussion

Postby Mister Tee » Mon Mar 05, 2018 8:58 pm

Late chiming in, as usual, thanks to post-party exhaustion and, honestly, feeling there’s not much to say. It turned out a pretty drab competition – less than what the year deserved. Not to disparage most of the winners, many of which reflected my taste -- five of my favorite six films won prizes (sorry, Lady Bird) and accounted for ten awards, so, not bad. But any Oscar show without suspense in the acting categories, or a real surprise or two anywhere, ends up feeling lackluster, even if the choices are mostly pleasing.

To point up how predictable a night it was: I track assorted critics and friends, and, in the six or seven categories that yielded the most divided set of predictions, the wisdom of crowds pinpointed the winner in all but documentary -- where Faces Places had a 3-2 lead -- and visual effects -- where the hive mind Apes prediction gave it a 2-1 lead over Blade Runner. (To be fair, best picture was close to a tie, but Shape of Water eked out a 1-point victor over Three Billboards.)

Or, another way of looking at it: remember 2004, where we went in thinking the races were close, but we ended up with a winners’ slate that ratified SAG, WGA, and DGA for film and director? Well, we had the same thing happen last night, for the first time since. This year was almost last year in reverse: last year seemed predictable going in, but yielded surprises (best picture, of course, but also costume design, sound, editing, make-up, and Casey Affleck narrowly prevailing in actor); this year, there seemed lots of opportunities for the unexpected, but voters didn’t snap any of them up. It may be, as BJ says, it was a wish for normalcy after a chaotic year-plus, but it didn’t make for a particularly entertaining ride.

So, how was the show? It’s always hard for me to judge, because our party is so active that, if there are flat stretches, we cover them with banter. But I thought Kimmel’s opening was pretty solid (“Imagine a country with a black leader” was funny/poignant), and he managed to show due respect to the serious issues while leavening them with punch lines (such as “Now the ball’s in your court, Michelle”).

Not that it mattered, but I thought it was canny of the producers to lead with supporting actor (which seemed the less competitive of the two supporting awards), even though normally they’d flip-flop last year’s order. (In fact, there seemed a general awareness of the degree of competitiveness of various categories – early on, I was thinking that, except for documentary, I’d got most things right, because the awards I was most sure of were coming earliest.) Sam Rockwell’s speech was quite winning, and got the evening off to a nice start.

I had slight worries that everyone was overstating Phantom Thread’s chances under costumes, and was delighted to find out I was only being paranoid. It may be illustrative of how it won that two people at our party had seen the movie and disliked it, but both of them thought it deserved this category hands down.

I’ve been a long-time fan of Allison Janney, and, though I was rooting for Laurie Metcalf, I’m not unhappy to think of Janney as an Oscar winner; her speech underlined why I’ve always been a fan.

The songs mostly seemed well-rendered, though I did think Mystery of Love got somewhat short shrift. Everything else seemed to get a full-blown production number, but Mystery seemed cut short (I think even the version on YouTube has more verses.) As for the winner…Remember Me was kind of old school, but it’s a respectable song, and I much preferred it to This Is Me.

One thing I was right on in this year’s Oscar prediction contest was thinking that everyone was seriously underestimating how many standing ovations there’d be. Oddly, there wasn’t one for the #metoo group, but that was offset by the startling recognition for old-timers like Eva Marie Saint, Rita Moreno and Christopher Walken (it pains me to think of him as an old-timer). That’s not even getting into the fact that both winning screenwriters, the winning director, actor and actress all received the same treatment. This is a year where the crowd was truly enthusiastic about their winners.

The trip to the theatre across the street was just an unpardonable waste of time right at the point in the show when length was starting to become an issue. This is the downside of Jimmy Kimmel (who otherwise once again proved a solid host). The only saving grace of the bit was watching that guy mangle Tiffany Haddish’s name, which seemed rough justice for what she’d done to people’s names in the nominations announcement…

…following which, Haddish and Maya Rudolph absolutely killed as presenters. You watched their bit and could think, yeah, they’re funny, and their material is good, but maybe the most important thing is how well-rehearsed they seemed – their minutest reactions seemed perfectly achieved, and that’s something that doesn’t come without serious work. (Compare it to the non-communication between Jane Fonda and Helen Mirren, who appeared to be meeting one another for the first time.)

Two favorite moments among the below-line categories: Blade Runner winning visual effects (first because it meant I saw the race more clearly than the “experts” at Gold Derby; second because a win there seemed essential for Deakins to have a shot at cinematography), and then Deakins finally getting his long-deserved trophy. That was, in fact, probably my favorite award on the night. (Second place might have been doc short to Heaven is A Traffic Jam on the 405 –the three doc shorts I saw were all high-calibre, but 405 had the most artistry on display.) And, for those who said no one would be voting for Deakins based on reputation/his name wouldn't be on the ballot...doesn't it seem, given Shape of Water's overall success, that Deakins' career stats had to have something to do with his prevailing?

James Ivory’s win was also gratifying. He probably lucked out the way the screenplay categories broke this year – if he’d had to compete with something further up the best picture food chain, he might not have had the same result – but I’m happy for him all the same. And, while I didn’t think Get Out was best picture-worthy, and would have chosen Three Billboards or Lady Bird above it for screenplay, I’m not unhappy Peele got some reward for his success. (Funny, that the only award he won is one he couldn’t get even while triumphing at the Spirit Awards.) And his winning helped avoid what might have been the bad optics of no African-American wins, a year after they’d performed so well.

Damn: for months, I'd been thinking Jerry Lewis was the default choice to end the In Memoriam. But Saturday at the Spirits, some guy made a joke linking Lewis and Charles Manson, and I thought maybe he wasn't respected enough, so I switched to Jonathan Demme. Classic over-thinking.

Emma Stone’s intro to best director was a deft variation on Portman at the Globes. And Guillermo was disarming as always. Though now it seems inevitable, think how unlikely it would have sounded, for three guys who knew each other at film school in Mexico to all win best director Oscars within a five-year period. (Cuaron, who was the one to break the ice, now lags his fellow amigos: he’s the only one who didn’t get a best picture win out of it.)

As opposed as I was to the Oldman win, I thought his acceptance speech was graceful and likable. He even got a smile out of Denzel.

Foster and Lawrence were one of the best presenting teams, though their shtik was forgotten once Frances got up there and started to riff. McDormand has kind of done what Jack Nicholson did, decades ago: refused to play by the rules, insisted she be accepted for her ability alone, and got Hollywood to respect her all the more for it. She has one of the strongest two-Oscar sets of any actress in history – possibly not up to Vivien Leigh, but I’d say superior to anyone else’s.

I feel like best picture in the end went to the film that would piss off the fewest people. On one side, you had folks who just despised Three Billboards; on another, you had people who just couldn’t believe Get Out was taken that seriously. Had either won, I think their reputations would have suffered in history (Billboards on Twitter would have been more immediate, but I think Get Out would have taken a hit eventually). Shape of Water seemed an acceptable compromise, a movie a lot of people like and few truly hate or dismiss. And it proved that the link between best picture and best director is not completely a relic.

Well, for a guy who didn’t have much to say, I seem to have gone on at some length. Let’s cut it off here, and move on to other things.

ON EDIT: The Shape of Water not only put an end to the SAG Ensemble as infallible precursor, it also stopped what had been a growing trend: that, since Million Dollar Baby, no film opening in December had won best picture. This may not seem like such a big deal, since plenty of November openers have won, but, in fact, the list of movies that have fallen prey to this "curse" despite appearing to have a strong shot is eye-opening: Brokeback Mountain, Benjamin Button, Up in the Air, Zero Dark Thirty, American Hustle, The Big Short and La La Land.

User avatar
OscarGuy
Site Admin
Posts: 12527
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 12:22 am
Location: Springfield, MO
Contact:

Re: 90th Oscars: Ceremony & Pre-Show Discussion

Postby OscarGuy » Mon Mar 05, 2018 6:40 pm

It's a pattern of behavior, Nightwing
Wesley Lovell
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." - Benjamin Franklin

nightwingnova
Temp
Posts: 396
Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2011 4:48 pm

Re: 90th Oscars: Ceremony & Pre-Show Discussion

Postby nightwingnova » Mon Mar 05, 2018 5:46 pm

If I may add, this shouldn't necessarily be a matter of huge contention.

Some enjoy the Oscars with a good strong dose of politics. Others can agree with those politics and their advocacy, but still prefer a lighter dose during the Oscars with more of a focus on movies.

One or the other of these choices aren't wrong or better. Just a preference.


OscarGuy wrote:
Reza wrote:
OscarGuy wrote:I'm sorry, Reza, but you're wrong as usual. Since you're not an American and don't live in America, you can't possibly see or understand the sea change that is happening. It takes ripples and I've seen it in the environment I'm in. There's some backlash, of course, but I've seen a genuine effort to step up and acknowledge the worst and fight for the best and the Hollywood movement IS responsible.

All progress comes from a visible position where those in positions of power are held to a standard. We saw it in the rejection of Roy Moore. We saw it in the wave of Democrats taking contests in deep-red territories. What's happened in Hollywood has ignited a spark in this nation and if we ignore that and just "get over it" or "stop talking about it," it will fade. It will stop progressing. THAT's why America regresses is that we stop talking about it and think now we get it, but we don't.

What Hollywood is doing by keeping the movement alive is by not letting it fade to the background, not patting ourselves on the back for making small amounts of progress. You can't be a force for change by saying "we did enough" and moving on. As our own history has shown, doing enough really isn't enough. You don't win a war through a single battle or a series of battles and you certainly don't win by saying "well, we did our best."


I wish I had a magic wand. The first thing I would do is to change you, Oscar Guy, into either an African-American or a Hispanic. And after a year I would like to ask you about your experience living in that "great" country of yours wearing that coloured skin.

Speaking from your white priviledged position is one thing and speaking from a position of colour is quite a different reality. Dude stop living in La La Land. The folks in Hollywood (a mere drop in the ocean) are hardly the barometer to judge how much difference has been brought about. It's your common man who has to change and I hope it happens for your country which sadly continues to be one of the most racist countries in the world.

And dude I don't have to live in your country to know the situation. I lived there once for 8 years. And I know many people living all across different parts of your country. Let's just say things aren't as rosy as you picture it. Yes there is always hope but it's pretty much an uphill battle.


Well, since you seem keen on doubling down on your awful rhetoric, Reza...This FAGGOT knows a thing or two about bigotry in this country. So get off your high horse you sanctimonious jerk. Those very people you're talking to are also part of the various movements that are progressing through this country and we are all trying to make it better. Your kind of "observations" about America and how we need to stop talking about it are as uneducated as they are unconscionable.

As I said, had you actually read my post, if we stop talking about it, the status quo will be maintained. Only by staying on the subject and not letting the uncomfortable get away from it, we are forcing them to come to terms with a new order, a new way of doing things, and, after a time, we will be able to progress.

The reason the gay rights movement continued to gain moment was because we pushed and we pushed hard for years until we got as much equal treatment under the law and we're still fighting for that. We aren't sitting down and saying: "Ok, the Supreme Court gave us gay marriage, so we're good." No. We are still fighting because it still is not equal. Gay men in this country know quite a lot about being subject of death regarding who we are and who we love.

If you think for one moment that just because I'm white that I haven't faced discrimination, haven't feared for my own safety, and haven't struggled for acceptance, you are as ignorant as Trump is and probably worse because you should know better and choose to maintain your righteous indignation and you choose to believe that the status quo will persist no matter how hard we fight. Maybe that's how it works in Pakistan, but that's not the way it should work and it's definitely not the way it will work in America.

So, I'd suggest you find another tree to bark up. I am very low in my tolerance of bigotry and willful ignorance.

User avatar
Precious Doll
Tenured
Posts: 3224
Joined: Mon Jan 13, 2003 2:20 am
Location: Sydney
Contact:

Re: 90th Oscars: Ceremony & Pre-Show Discussion

Postby Precious Doll » Mon Mar 05, 2018 5:23 pm

Greg wrote:
Precious Doll wrote:The In Memoriam section was good. Pleasantly surprised to see that Idrissa Ouedraogo & Seijun Suzuki were deservedly included. I thought the actors they selected to show a short clip from were all well chosen, though I would have added Jean Moreau & Harry Dean Stanton myself.


I suppose the best clip for Stanton would be something from Paris, Texas. What do you think would be the best clip for Moreau?


Some many to choose from with Moreau.
"I have no interest in all of that. I find that all tabloid stupidity" Woody Allen, The Guardian, 2014, in response to his adopted daughter's allegations.

User avatar
flipp525
Laureate
Posts: 5806
Joined: Thu Jan 09, 2003 7:44 am

Re: 90th Oscars: Ceremony & Pre-Show Discussion

Postby flipp525 » Mon Mar 05, 2018 3:21 pm

...
Last edited by flipp525 on Mon Mar 05, 2018 6:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"The mantle of spinsterhood was definitely in her shoulders. She was twenty five and looked it."

-Gone With the Wind by Margaret Mitchell

User avatar
OscarGuy
Site Admin
Posts: 12527
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 12:22 am
Location: Springfield, MO
Contact:

Re: 90th Oscars: Ceremony & Pre-Show Discussion

Postby OscarGuy » Mon Mar 05, 2018 1:47 pm

Reza wrote:
OscarGuy wrote:I'm sorry, Reza, but you're wrong as usual. Since you're not an American and don't live in America, you can't possibly see or understand the sea change that is happening. It takes ripples and I've seen it in the environment I'm in. There's some backlash, of course, but I've seen a genuine effort to step up and acknowledge the worst and fight for the best and the Hollywood movement IS responsible.

All progress comes from a visible position where those in positions of power are held to a standard. We saw it in the rejection of Roy Moore. We saw it in the wave of Democrats taking contests in deep-red territories. What's happened in Hollywood has ignited a spark in this nation and if we ignore that and just "get over it" or "stop talking about it," it will fade. It will stop progressing. THAT's why America regresses is that we stop talking about it and think now we get it, but we don't.

What Hollywood is doing by keeping the movement alive is by not letting it fade to the background, not patting ourselves on the back for making small amounts of progress. You can't be a force for change by saying "we did enough" and moving on. As our own history has shown, doing enough really isn't enough. You don't win a war through a single battle or a series of battles and you certainly don't win by saying "well, we did our best."


I wish I had a magic wand. The first thing I would do is to change you, Oscar Guy, into either an African-American or a Hispanic. And after a year I would like to ask you about your experience living in that "great" country of yours wearing that coloured skin.

Speaking from your white priviledged position is one thing and speaking from a position of colour is quite a different reality. Dude stop living in La La Land. The folks in Hollywood (a mere drop in the ocean) are hardly the barometer to judge how much difference has been brought about. It's your common man who has to change and I hope it happens for your country which sadly continues to be one of the most racist countries in the world.

And dude I don't have to live in your country to know the situation. I lived there once for 8 years. And I know many people living all across different parts of your country. Let's just say things aren't as rosy as you picture it. Yes there is always hope but it's pretty much an uphill battle.


Well, since you seem keen on doubling down on your awful rhetoric, Reza...This FAGGOT knows a thing or two about bigotry in this country. So get off your high horse you sanctimonious jerk. Those very people you're talking to are also part of the various movements that are progressing through this country and we are all trying to make it better. Your kind of "observations" about America and how we need to stop talking about it are as uneducated as they are unconscionable.

As I said, had you actually read my post, if we stop talking about it, the status quo will be maintained. Only by staying on the subject and not letting the uncomfortable get away from it, we are forcing them to come to terms with a new order, a new way of doing things, and, after a time, we will be able to progress.

The reason the gay rights movement continued to gain moment was because we pushed and we pushed hard for years until we got as much equal treatment under the law and we're still fighting for that. We aren't sitting down and saying: "Ok, the Supreme Court gave us gay marriage, so we're good." No. We are still fighting because it still is not equal. Gay men in this country know quite a lot about being subject of death regarding who we are and who we love.

If you think for one moment that just because I'm white that I haven't faced discrimination, haven't feared for my own safety, and haven't struggled for acceptance, you are as ignorant as Trump is and probably worse because you should know better and choose to maintain your righteous indignation and you choose to believe that the status quo will persist no matter how hard we fight. Maybe that's how it works in Pakistan, but that's not the way it should work and it's definitely not the way it will work in America.

So, I'd suggest you find another tree to bark up. I am very low in my tolerance of bigotry and willful ignorance.
Wesley Lovell

"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." - Benjamin Franklin

Sabin
Laureate
Posts: 7301
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 12:52 am
Contact:

Re: 90th Oscars: Ceremony & Pre-Show Discussion

Postby Sabin » Mon Mar 05, 2018 12:51 pm

In a way, the conversation being had by Wes and Reza is how I felt watching the Oscars...

First off, I liked the Oscars. I thought it was pretty good show. To be more specific, the Oscars are usually a terrible show and for the second year in a row I thought Jimmy Kimmel did a very good job of staying present throughout, which I didn't find unwelcome. He was never hilarious but his best jokes managed to both play to the politics of the room while also poke it a bit.

For example: "There was a time when Hollywood said that women or minorities couldn't carry a superhero film. I remember because it was March of last year." Good joke.

But this was also a show that dedicated itself to a discussion of progress. The "Class of 2017 Montage" (don't know what else to call it) was especially strong. I loved Kumail's words about how his wife wanted to create a website devoted to Muslims having fun. But to me it was earned because it fit in line with so many of the films nominated for Best Picture. Yes, 2017 wasn't just a year of talking the talking. For movies, it was walking the walk, right down to something like The Big Sick, a fresh spin on that dead as a doornail genre the romantic comedy, being the hit that it was. And four of the five nominated songs were produced with the gravitas of the night's foregone conclusion winner.

On the other hand, it was also a night of a war movie montage. Or whatever the fuck that "Fuck Yeah, Movies!" montage was. It was a night of most of the same jokes from the Golden Globes, and Me Too and Time's Up, which ties into the biggest problem in the modern history of Democrats: a total inability to convey how what is happening matters to ordinary people. Take for example, Frances McDormand's speech which had the makings of the most electrifying moment of the night, because not only is it Frances McDormand in THE MOST Frances McDormand performance, but she's such a respected actor who has created such a remarkable career for herself without seeming to compromise, all while looking like the least Hollywood person in that room. She starts by drawing attention to "Joel McCoen" and her adopted son and thanked them for valuing and respecting everyone around them. For a moment I thought to myself: "Wow, this is going to actually be inclusive. This is going to be a feminist speech that thanks men." Not like we need it, but hey! And then she asked all the women to stand up and made a plea for better deals, inclusion riders (that must be a meme by now), and told the world that these are the stories that need to be told.

And all I could think was..."I don't care about the women in that room getting their stories told. I care about the women outside that room getting their stories told."

AND MORE TO THE POINT: I want to know what the Time's Up legal defense fund is doing. I want success stories. I want to be reminded of their successes at all times.

As for the show, it thrived mainly due to the satisfying outcomes to the tight races. The legacies of Agnes Varda and The Apes Saga remain unfulfilled, but Roger Deakins and Jordan Peele won their deserving Oscars. Indeed, Jordan Peele's win made the night for me. And yet, I struggle to remember any of the speeches. Sam Rockwell and Allison Janney both had great one liners in their conventional speeches. Guillermo Del Toro came across as such a sweetheart, I wish I liked his movie more.

Early on in the evening, I thought to myself "This does not feel like a Three Billboards... kinda night!" If one were to watch the clips, you'd get the impression that Three Billboards... is a homespun drama. None of the wit or electrifying tension was present in anything shown. And yet every clip shown from The Shape of Water was filled with earnest pleas for change and regret. A bit of commentary passed around my admittedly lousy Oscar party: "It can't be Get Out because this isn't a racism year, it can't be Call Me By Your Name because this isn't a gay year, it can't be Three Billboards... because it's so wrong!" Truly, that's how a movie like The Shape of Water ends up winning. Because it doesn't align itself with one thing or another. It's about empowering disempowered people. It's about all things, plus love and the power of the movies. Perfect fit for this room.
"If you are marching with white nationalists, you are by definition not a very nice person. If Malala Yousafzai had taken part in that rally, you'd have to say 'Okay, I guess Malala sucks now.'" ~ John Oliver

Greg
Tenured
Posts: 2693
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 1:12 pm
Location: Greg
Contact:

Re: 90th Oscars: Ceremony & Pre-Show Discussion

Postby Greg » Mon Mar 05, 2018 12:40 pm

Precious Doll wrote:The In Memoriam section was good. Pleasantly surprised to see that Idrissa Ouedraogo & Seijun Suzuki were deservedly included. I thought the actors they selected to show a short clip from were all well chosen, though I would have added Jean Moreau & Harry Dean Stanton myself.


I suppose the best clip for Stanton would be something from Paris, Texas. What do you think would be the best clip for Moreau?
A party without cake is just a meeting

― Julia Child

Reza
Tenured Laureate
Posts: 7768
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 11:14 am
Location: Islamabad, Pakistan

Re: 90th Oscars: Ceremony & Pre-Show Discussion

Postby Reza » Mon Mar 05, 2018 10:04 am

OscarGuy wrote:I'm sorry, Reza, but you're wrong as usual. Since you're not an American and don't live in America, you can't possibly see or understand the sea change that is happening. It takes ripples and I've seen it in the environment I'm in. There's some backlash, of course, but I've seen a genuine effort to step up and acknowledge the worst and fight for the best and the Hollywood movement IS responsible.

All progress comes from a visible position where those in positions of power are held to a standard. We saw it in the rejection of Roy Moore. We saw it in the wave of Democrats taking contests in deep-red territories. What's happened in Hollywood has ignited a spark in this nation and if we ignore that and just "get over it" or "stop talking about it," it will fade. It will stop progressing. THAT's why America regresses is that we stop talking about it and think now we get it, but we don't.

What Hollywood is doing by keeping the movement alive is by not letting it fade to the background, not patting ourselves on the back for making small amounts of progress. You can't be a force for change by saying "we did enough" and moving on. As our own history has shown, doing enough really isn't enough. You don't win a war through a single battle or a series of battles and you certainly don't win by saying "well, we did our best."


I wish I had a magic wand. The first thing I would do is to change you, Oscar Guy, into either an African-American or a Hispanic. And after a year I would like to ask you about your experience living in that "great" country of yours wearing that coloured skin.

Speaking from your white priviledged position is one thing and speaking from a position of colour is quite a different reality. Dude stop living in La La Land. The folks in Hollywood (a mere drop in the ocean) are hardly the barometer to judge how much difference has been brought about. It's your common man who has to change and I hope it happens for your country which sadly continues to be one of the most racist countries in the world.

And dude I don't have to live in your country to know the situation. I lived there once for 8 years. And I know many people living all across different parts of your country. Let's just say things aren't as rosy as you picture it. Yes there is always hope but it's pretty much an uphill battle.

Big Magilla
Site Admin
Posts: 15566
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:22 pm
Location: Jersey Shore

Re: 90th Oscars: Ceremony & Pre-Show Discussion

Postby Big Magilla » Mon Mar 05, 2018 9:32 am

I don't know why they do those clips of some actors and not others. They could include more people if they left the clips out altogether.

I don't know what the issue is with Dorothy Malone. Maybe she didn't keep up her Academy membership. Who makes these decisions anyway? It's hard to believe they didn't know who she was. Not only was she an Oscar winner, the film she won for was directed by Douglas Sirk, a God to many of the older members, who was cited by Guillermo del Toro and maybe others I missed last night. Humphrey Bogart was also cited. It was opposite Bogart in The Big Sleep that Malone made her first impact.

Maybe they just don't like Dorothys, other than Judy Garland's Dorothy in The Wizard of Oz. Shameful exclusion, really, just like Dorothy McGuire's exclusion at the 2001 awards. They've learned nothing in sixteen years other than to have someone sing to drown out the applause at certain mentions. If it's unfair to applaud some and not others, why is fair to showcase some and not others?

Uri
Adjunct
Posts: 1086
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 11:37 pm
Location: Israel

Re: 90th Oscars: Ceremony & Pre-Show Discussion

Postby Uri » Mon Mar 05, 2018 8:56 am

ITALIANO wrote:
Uri wrote:
But yes, what sealed the deal for me was the disrespect to Jeanne Moreau. Unforgivable. It only reinforces my stand that the Oscars should leave world cinema alone, since they are only capable of randomly hand it meager crumbs without ever fully recognize its true merit. Leave her out of your In Memoriam – you will have more room for people like Malone who truly belong there.


She was included actually.


Yes, but as an also-run, with no clip of her included, the way others, great in their own right yet lesser than her, had.

ITALIANO
Emeritus
Posts: 3955
Joined: Mon Jan 06, 2003 1:58 pm
Location: MILAN
Contact:

Re: 90th Oscars: Ceremony & Pre-Show Discussion

Postby ITALIANO » Mon Mar 05, 2018 8:28 am

Uri wrote:
But yes, what sealed the deal for me was the disrespect to Jeanne Moreau. Unforgivable. It only reinforces my stand that the Oscars should leave world cinema alone, since they are only capable of randomly hand it meager crumbs without ever fully recognize its true merit. Leave her out of your In Memoriam – you will have more room for people like Malone who truly belong there.


She was included actually.

But yes, terrible evening - boring, predictable, badly-written.


Return to “90th Nominations and Winners”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests