81st Oscars: Actor

Post by **inky** » Wed Feb 25, 2009 9:31 am

rain Bard wrote:Inky, I'm enjoying your reports from how Penn's win was received by the Singapore press. Has your article been appreciated among your peers for its perspective?

So far, no one discussed my article with me. Thanks to my invovlement on this board, I've been considered by the editor of the newspaper I am freelancing for as the most knowledgeable person among the pool of their film reviewers to write Oscar reviews. I started writing Oscar reviews back in year 2000 (the AMERICAN BEAUTY year) and will celebrate the 10th anniversary next year.

Post by **rain Bard** » Tue Feb 24, 2009 2:11 pm

Inky, I'm enjoying your reports from how Penn's win was received by the Singapore press. Has your article been appreciated among your peers for its perspective?

I never really wavered in my expectation that Penn would win, at least not once it became clear that Milk had no chance in Picture/Director. All of Rourke's "precursor" wins felt to me like nice consolation prizes for him.

Post by **Big Magilla** » Tue Feb 24, 2009 12:08 pm

inky wrote:Just saw the recording of the last 1 hour of encore telecast on Singapore TV. Sean Penn's plea for gay rights and "You son of ..." were censored. (I didn't hear the last word clearly during the live telecast. Was it "gays" or "guns"?) Of course, the "thank you" part of his speech is kept.

The comment was "you commie, homo loving sons of guns."

Post by **Reza** » Tue Feb 24, 2009 10:56 am

This was thankfully my ''surprise'' moment at this boring Oscar ceremony as I had convinced myself weeks ago that Mickey Rourke would win. So I was relieved when Penn won instead. All the Oscar wins before had all been so predictable (save for Japan winning) that Penn at the podium was such a welcome sight. In hindsight I can understand why Penn's win was important over Rourke winning.

Post by **inky** » Tue Feb 24, 2009 4:31 am

inky wrote:Oscar was live telecast at 9.30am-1pm Monday in Singapore in its entirety. When I saw the 2 gay kissing shots in the montages, I knew they wouldn't survive when the lightly trimmed down (mainly for saving time, like cutting short the applauses) encore telecast at 11pm-2am the same evening.

I watched the encore telecast till 1am and found out that the two gay kissing shots were indeed censored. The rest of the references to Milk In the 1st 2 hours were kept intact. I recorded the rest of the show and went to bed. Will check out the recording tonight.

Just saw the recording of the last 1 hour of encore telecast on Singapore TV. Sean Penn's plea for gay rights and "You son of ..." were censored. (I didn't hear the last word clearly during the live telecast. Was it "gays" or "guns"?) Of course, the "thank you" part of his speech is kept.

One of the Singapore reviewers' article quips, "... I was so sure that Rourke would nail it because, for one, host Jackman hinted at a 20-minute delay for Rourke's no-holds-barred, return-of-the-living-dead winning speech." Obviously, this reviewer totally missed the sarcasm.

I cited the line in my own article as well, though in totally different pretext, as I made reference to the "naughty" things he did prior to the nite. It seems that most of the Singapore reviewers usually do not factor in (and therefore don't bother to monitor) the studios/distributors' campaigns and individual nominees' long/short-term PR in Hollywood when they make predictions/analysis.

Edited By inky on 1235468281

Post by **Hustler** » Mon Feb 23, 2009 11:44 pm

I was almost convinced about the certainty of Rourke´s chances.

Post by **inky** » Mon Feb 23, 2009 11:35 pm

Yap. I think many of the Singapore reviewers rootted on Rourke themselves and they made use of his globe win to convince themselves that he was the frontrunner.

Oscar was live telecast at 9.30am-1pm Monday in Singapore in it's entirety. When I saw the 2 gay kissing shots in the montages, I knew they wouldn't survive when the lightly trimmed down (mainly for saving time, like cutting short the applauses) encore telecast at 11pm-2am the same evening.

I watched the encore telecast till 1am and found out that the two gay kissing shots were indeed censored. The rest of the references to Milk In the 1st 2 hours were kept intact. I recorded the rest of the show and went to bed. Will check out the recording tonight.

Post by **cam** » Mon Feb 23, 2009 10:29 pm

inky wrote:Almost all Oscar reviews on the newspaper in Singapore touted Rourke's loss the biggest shock of the night (one of the exceptions is my article in Chinese) - it seems that most of the film reviewers here had presumed Rourke to be a SOLID frontrunner due to his Globe and BAFTA wins. In my article, I asserted Penn being the frontrunner (not a solid one) by the eve of Oscar night but it seems that many of my fellow reviewers disagree. What do you think?

Were references to Milk blanked out in Singapore?

Edited By cam on 1235446250

Post by **Damien** » Mon Feb 23, 2009 10:14 pm

Flipp, I didn't see any of the protestors, but I only had to walk around the corner from my hotel to get to the red carpet. I was further east on Hollywood Boulevard earlier in the day, but they hadn't shown up yet.

Inky, I think Sean Penn was the frontrunner all along, but a precarious frontrunner because one couldn't quite gauge the level of sentiment for Rourke. I always did think that ultimately Penn's amazing incarnation of Harvey Milk (he simply didn't seem to be acting; he WAS Harvey Milk) along with the Prop 8 issues would lead to his victory.

Post by **OscarGuy** » Mon Feb 23, 2009 9:51 pm

Penn's win was twofold. First, he gave a hell of a performance and his film was a Best Picture contender. Second, Rourke continued to shoot himself in the foot by his foul-mouthed acceptance speeches and questionable behavior in the run up to the event. Both issues compounded the other and the end result was a Penn win.

Post by **inky** » Mon Feb 23, 2009 9:47 pm

Almost all Oscar reviews on the newspaper in Singapore touted Rourke's loss the biggest shock of the night (one of the exceptions is my article in Chinese) - it seems that most of the film reviewers here had presumed Rourke to be a SOLID frontrunner due to his Globe and BAFTA wins. In my article, I asserted Penn being the frontrunner (not a solid one) by the eve of Oscar night but it seems that many of my fellow reviewers disagree. What do you think?

Edited By inky on 1235443692

Post by **flipp525** » Mon Feb 23, 2009 4:15 pm

About those protest signs Penn mentioned in his Oscar speech:

It sounds as if they were the handiwork of the infamously antigay Westboro Baptist Church, which announced plans on its website to picket the show. Backstage, Penn has no response to one of the Kansas-based group's more hateful signs, "Heath in Hell," which it debuted at the 2008 Screen Actors Guild Awards just days after Ledger's death. Says Penn: "It's just meaningless jibberish."

Post by **flipp525** » Mon Feb 23, 2009 10:49 am

One of the best winners in this category in years. Perhaps this decade.

Sabin · Post by **Sabin** » Mon Feb 23, 2009 3:39 am

Ladies and Gentlemen...one of the great winners of this category.

Post by **Franz Ferdinand** » Mon Feb 23, 2009 1:26 am

Not gonna lie, I was a little disappointed the Rourke Express didn't reach the final destination, but Penn was a worthy winner, and he delivered a great speech filled with emotion. It also made me smile to hear his tribute to Rourke.

Unofficial Academy Awards Discussion Board

The internet's oldest Oscar discussion forum.

81st Oscars: Actor