Unofficial Academy Awards Discussion Board

I didn't think Tee was being intentionally demeaning. I think it just came out wrong, but that's my impression. I wasn't on the receiving end of the comment which does change how the comment is perceived.

Okri wrote:Loved the Emma Stone bit. Thought Jonah Hill in the audience was surprisingly humourless about it, though.

His reaction seemed rehearsed to me.

Which is fine, OscarGuy. I was put off by Mister Tee's suggestion that I must've "imagined" what I had heard (when, in actuality, I had to explain to him what was even said). I'm not implying that the Christopher Guest gang is racist or were actively going for a "blacks are monkeys" joke, but the timing of the line seemed, at the very least, ill-wrought. An observation.

Honestly, I didn't take it offensively and I didn't see it as anything but a natural segue from an earlier part of the bit. Saying "I hope it has 'Flying' Monkeys" would have been too many words for comic timing, IMO, so they did it right. And I doubt that group of left leaning comics ever had any intention of just such a meaning. I understand people are upset, but they should be more upset about the Billy Crystal Blackface thing than this one...I admit they could have also said something like "Wuthering Heights" or another big film of 1939, but Gone WIth the Wind was a huge film of that year and an obvious point to get to.

Mister Tee wrote:

Okri wrote:That whole article is pretty emblematic of seeing problems when none are there (and I say this "as a person of colour")

This is why I reacted so strongly (and for my effort got labelled "smug"). For me, when liberals react to non-existent threats like this, they given demagogues like Rush Limbaugh license to caricature those of us on this side of the aisle as over-sensitive and not reality-based.

This is, for Christ's sake, the Christopher Guest gang. Can it really be anyone's first assumption that they were, for no reason, trying to throw a racially offensive joke into a throwaway Oscar sketch? The thought never crossed my mind. Fred Willard was, as always, playing a clueless idiot. The only thing he really liked about The Wizard of Oz was the flying monkeys -- so much, that he hoped there'd be monkeys in the next movie he saw. How you leap from that to "it must have been referring to the black characters in Gone with the Wind" strikes me as requiring a wild imagination. (Even that article flipp linked allowed it MIGHT have been unintentional -- which is a step short of "Did you hear that racist joke/why wasn't it cut?")

I guess it's symptomatic of how little anyone cared about the Oscars this year that this ends up being in the day-after conversation.

I never said that it was intentional, Mister Tee. But the association was there, whether they intended for it or not. I heard it and several others I was watching with did as well. And we're not hyper-sensitive, race-baiting liberals (thanks for taking it to that bizarre place and grouping me in with some lunatic fringe). In fact, one of the people who reacted most strongly to it is a legislative assistant to a very Republican Congressman, so not sure where you're going with that one.

And I called you smug because rather than saying, "Oh, okay, I can see where you might've heard this or that" like someone with whom I've been in discourse for over a decade, you dismissed me outright with a flick of your hand as some sort delusional idiot. It was a classless response from someone I usually quite respect.

Okri wrote:Loved the Emma Stone bit. Thought Jonah Hill in the audience was surprisingly humourless about it, though.

You are aware of the fact that his reaction was very obviously a part of the scripted gag, aren't you?

As for The Artist being conceived as a comedy – it's all about the fact that it was made as an homage – the fact that it was a style oriented film making and not a content, or narrative oriented one rendered it as an emotionally non committed piece, so it's not a DRAMA, you know. Not the most profound way of evaluating films, but then again, what's new?

Mister Tee wrote:Unless my memory's playing tricks, every time Colin Firth presented best actress this year (Globe/BAFTA/AMPAS), the winner was Meryl Streep. Given their co-starring past, that seems an eerie coincidence.

Colin Firth was visibly moved when he opened the envelope at the Oscars. He gave a short interview to Kelly Rippa afterward saying the moment meant as much to him as winning his own Oscar. It was obvious he meant it.

Loved the Emma Stone bit. Thought Jonah Hill in the audience was surprisingly humourless about it, though.

Mister Tee wrote:What in the world makes The Artist a comedy?

I just got my New Yorker in the mail and David Denby went on a diatribe about how Dujardin and Bejo weren't expressive enough in their "silent" film and could never measure up to Fairbanks and Brooks statuses (No shit, David).

Denby did mention though, in his lengthy tribute to silent film, that a silent comedy is much more marketable and easier to sit through (Give me The Gold Rush over Pandora's Box any day). The fact that there's humor and dance numbers and Dujardin's godly smile and charm make this a comedy as well as any bit (minus the whole fire part) with Uggie. I have never seen a film with an animal who can steal a scene so marvelously. Also, George and Peppy's relationship is never sexual in the film. This lightens the mood and makes their relationship platonic and less intense. Their friendly nature allows for more comedy and less "everything-they-do-is-leads-to-drama" dramatic. They are able to be pals with huge smiles and not have to be worried about boning each other and that act's consequences.

What should be more head-scratching to you is that My Week with Marilyn was submitted to the Globes as a musical/comedy when it is clearly a dramatic (albeit a light one) picture. This was clearly done so Williams would win and gain momentum but still. A comedy with the only laughs coming from a magnificent, angry Kenneth Branagh? I think not.

The win by A Separation was a rare return to the old Foreign Film category tradition. Back in the day, a typical foreign-language slate consisted of four movies you've never heard of, and Amarcord (or Day for Night, The Discreeet Charm of the Bourgeoisie, etc.). Those years yielded some terrific winners, but rarely much suspense. Then someone got the bright idea to create more suspense/level the playing field by requiring all voters to sign affidavits they'd seen all five films. The slates still would consist of "four unknowns and one hit", but suddenly the unknowns started winning. Those of us around at the time still remember the consternation surrounding Black and White in Color, or Moscow Does Not Believe in Tears. The decades since have often reduced the category to random-ness: the oddball choice with some sort of old-folks appeal has been far more likely to win than all but the most popular hits. How many winners this past decade or so really stood out the way Bergman's and Fellini's (or Kadar's or Costa-Gavras') films did in their day? Crouching Tiger, maybe The Barbarian Invasions or the Lives of Others. It's to the point where a beloved film like a A Separation eking out a winner constitutes an upset.

A few other late-in-the-day thoughts:

Unless my memory's playing tricks, every time Colin Firth presented best actress this year (Globe/BAFTA/AMPAS), the winner was Meryl Streep. Given their co-starring past, that seems an eerie coincidence.

Did everybody enjoy Emma Stone as much as I did? It wasn't an easy bit to pull off, but she did it really engagingly. She hasn't shown any great depth as an actress yet, but I think she's got a hugely winning personality, and that might carry her a long way.

Did anyone respond to Cirque de Soleil with the same enthusiasm as the in-theatre crowd? I've been a fan of them (seen them two or three times), but I didn't quite get the point of what they were doing, and the segment left me cold.

It's funny, I got through my original summary without really mentioning The Artist. I guess I was just relieved the film didn't barrel through all the categories. I could have used one less victory (preferably best actor, in favor of Brad Pitt), but in the end I just kind of ignored its win.

Also forgot to mention Woody Allen, who last won screenplay a few months after I got married -- I just celebrated my 25th anniversary. Not one of his landmarks, but I was happy to see him win one more time.

Someone at another site mentioned that all the recent comic films to win best picture -- Shakespeare in Love, Chicago, now The Artist -- were shepherded by Harvey Weinstein. (This is the first time he brought the director along as well) This raises a question I might have asked at Globes time had I seen the film by then: what in the world makes The Artist a comedy -- more than, say, The Descendants (which I think was correctly Globe-slated under drama)? The fact it has a completely unmotivated happy ending?

On any level, though, this was a big night for Harvey -- sweeping the top three prizes as he did in '98, and taking the documentary prize to boot. Now, can he do the same for someone like Paul Thomas Anderson?

Well, I didn't expect my night to be ruined right off the bat, but as soon as Tom Hanks came out to present Best Cinematography, I sunk into my seat, waiting for my fear to be realized. Obviously, we discussed Hugo as a very possible spoiler in this category, but it still stung to see Lubezki lose again. I'd thought The Tree of Life's Best Picture nomination might have been enough to put him in the winner's circle, but, of course, in a five-wide field Tree of Life wouldn't have had any better credentials than Children of Men, and Lubezki lost (as he did in '06, as well as '05) in a situation where Cinematography was voted upon essentially as an add-on to Best Art Direction. In addition to what Mister Tee wrote about this being a uniquely disappointing category in recent years, it's worth noting that several of our very best cinematographers (Lubezki and Roger Deakins) can't seem to catch a break AT ALL, despite numerous ASC Awards, totally Oscar-bait work, and overdue status. Obviously the latter doesn't matter as much in tech categories as many of us wish it did.

The rest of the ceremony was mostly uphill after that, with A Separation's Foreign Film prize the absolute highlight. I saw In Darkness yesterday afternoon, and sat through the entire thing fearing it would upset that evening, it seemed practically engineered to stoke the fires of this branch's saccharine Holocaust-drama sensibilities. But Italiano was absolutely right -- in the end, A Separation was just too good a movie to lose.

I actually thought the biggest surprise of the evening was Hugo's visual effects win. I thought Planet of the Apes had it in the bag...but clearly the Best Picture pull wasn't insignificant. I'd underestimated Dragon Tattoo in Editing as well, partly based on the precedent that it's pretty difficult to win ONLY Best Editing, and I didn't think it would take anything else. (Most of the non-Best Picture contending winners in this category, like Bourne Ultimatum, The Matrix, and Roger Rabbit, were big tech favorites.) Someone else pointed out that Dragon Tattoo is the first film since Bullitt to win this category and nothing else.

As for the "big" upset, Meryl's win definitely provided the ceremony with a much-needed jolt -- everyone at my party had predicted Viola -- but I can't say that it was quite a "break-from-narrative" victor. She'd won the NYFCC, the Globe, and the BAFTA, and was neck-in-neck for the win all season. It's probably nice that Oscar's acting slate didn't just mirror SAG once again, but I still lament how some of these winners (i.e. Spencer and Plummer) just ran the field all season, and how other seemingly strong candidate (Michelle Williams, and especially Brad Pitt) seemed all but out of the race by Oscar night.

This is the second year in a row where Director has been presented before Lead Actor and Actress, and, like last year, I wish it hadn't been. I didn't think The Artist was vulnerable in Best Picture, but any question about whether tech-magnet Hugo could have staged an upset was pretty instantly quieted the moment Hazanavicius won. And The Artist is the first movie about Hollywood to win Best Picture, right? How ironic that it hails from France.

Okri wrote:That whole article is pretty emblematic of seeing problems when none are there (and I say this "as a person of colour")

This is why I reacted so strongly (and for my effort got labelled "smug"). For me, when liberals react to non-existent threats like this, they given demagogues like Rush Limbaugh license to caricature those of us on this side of the aisle as over-sensitive and not reality-based.

This is, for Christ's sake, the Christopher Guest gang. Can it really be anyone's first assumption that they were, for no reason, trying to throw a racially offensive joke into a throwaway Oscar sketch? The thought never crossed my mind. Fred Willard was, as always, playing a clueless idiot. The only thing he really liked about The Wizard of Oz was the flying monkeys -- so much, that he hoped there'd be monkeys in the next movie he saw. How you leap from that to "it must have been referring to the black characters in Gone with the Wind" strikes me as requiring a wild imagination. (Even that article flipp linked allowed it MIGHT have been unintentional -- which is a step short of "Did you hear that racist joke/why wasn't it cut?")

I guess it's symptomatic of how little anyone cared about the Oscars this year that this ends up being in the day-after conversation.

That whole article is pretty emblematic of seeing problems when none are there (and I say this "as a person of colour")

I might be alone here; but, I though Justin Bieber was funny in the opening. I do not care for his music; however, I like him as a comedic actor. I can see him playing a character such as the Cary Grant/Ryan O'Neal ones in Bringing Up Baby/What's Up Doc?

You mean like Halle Berry? Shudder.

ITALIANO wrote:

flipp525 wrote:http://thinkprogress.org/alyssa/2012/02 ... ?mobile=nc
?

Sometimes racism is in our eyes, inside us. It was just an innocent line.

That's a piece full of confused, and confusing, paranoia. And why should Meryl Streep winning over Viola Davis be considered racist - as it implies?
I will be honest: had Viola Davis (undeservedly) won, THAT would have been a sign of racism.