#oscarsstillsowhite
January 14, 2016 7:44 AM   Subscribe

The Academy Award nominations are out, and for the second year in a row, the twenty acting nominees share a common thread besides being good actors: every one of them is white.

The Revenant leads the pack with 12 nominations, including Best Picture, Best Director, and Leonardo DiCaprio as Best Actor (there is no Best Bear category).

Mad Max: Fury Road snagged a Best Picture nomination (in a field of eight due to the expanded and complicated nomination process), a Best Director nomination for George Miller (his first, though he has an Oscar already for Happy Feet of all things), and eight other nods.

Experts say there are no definite front-runners for the major prizes.
posted by Etrigan (170 comments total) 10 users marked this as a favorite
 
Again, I know the Oscars noms are hot garbage but no nod for Michael B. Jordan in Creed?? And yeah, she's a white woman, but nothing for Charlize Theron's role in Mad Max??

HOT. GARBAGE.
posted by Kitteh at 7:48 AM on January 14, 2016 [66 favorites]


Couldn't agree more. That is some straight-up Oscar-grade bullshit.
posted by blucevalo at 7:49 AM on January 14, 2016 [2 favorites]


And yeah, she's a white woman, but nothing for Charlize Theron's role in Mad Max??

A less charitable person than I would point out that she's African by birth, ergo...
posted by Etrigan at 7:51 AM on January 14, 2016 [11 favorites]


This is great, thanks for posting it!
posted by clavdivs at 7:51 AM on January 14, 2016


It's not great at all, but thanks for posting it!
posted by justsomebodythatyouusedtoknow at 7:52 AM on January 14, 2016 [6 favorites]


I assume the nominators who are mostly older white men, I believe, looked long and hard and had no idea that there were any POC actors of any skill?

I mean, makes sense, this seems to be the excuse a lot of casting directors have.
posted by qcubed at 7:56 AM on January 14, 2016 [1 favorite]


The Academy has been very generous in terms of giving me reasons to ignore the Oscars altogether over the past many years. This latest offering just makes it a moral imperative rather than merely an aesthetic one.
posted by Ipsifendus at 7:57 AM on January 14, 2016 [13 favorites]


"You know what that sign said, Senor Bob?"
posted by Capt. Renault at 7:58 AM on January 14, 2016 [6 favorites]


Also worth noting no nominations for women directors (in feature film) and no women cinematographers, no women composers, etc etc. Women EDITORS, which is great, but this almost proves the rule since George Miller apparently went out of his way to use a non-traditional editor (and I believe JJ Abrams wanted specifically to use women editors as well).

The lack of diverse voices, and eyes, and ears in filmmaking is hurting the art and the industry, and it sucks.
posted by selfnoise at 7:58 AM on January 14, 2016 [26 favorites]


A Los Angeles Times study [from 2012] found that academy voters are markedly less diverse than the moviegoing public, and even more monolithic than many in the film industry may suspect. Oscar voters are nearly 94% Caucasian and 77% male, The Times found. Blacks are about 2% of the academy, and Latinos are less than 2%.

Oscar voters have a median age of 62, the study showed. People younger than 50 constitute just 14% of the membership.
A median age of 62.
posted by Etrigan at 7:58 AM on January 14, 2016 [37 favorites]


A median age of 62.

Look, let's not blame this on age. Please.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 7:59 AM on January 14, 2016 [13 favorites]


They really went the extra mile by nominating only the white people involved with Creed and Straight Outta Compton.
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 8:00 AM on January 14, 2016 [107 favorites]


I said it a couple months ago on MeFi, so I guess I'm obliged to say it again now: sadly, 2015 was a pretty lean year for notable performances by actresses (and now, I add, actors) of color, so it was quite predictable it would be a lean year for nominations.

Of course, the fact there were so few meaty roles for these actors in the first place does certainly seem to indicate a problem. It's a problem that happens long before nomination time, though.
posted by rokusan at 8:00 AM on January 14, 2016 [4 favorites]


I mean, I suppose it also makes sense that older white men would want to continue a long and storied tradition about writing and telling histories about themselves.

Given the exclusion, maybe POC should have their own awards?

Wait, no, nevermind, I know how that'll end up. "Why do they get to have their own awards?"
posted by qcubed at 8:01 AM on January 14, 2016 [18 favorites]


It's always seemed to me, and moreso as I get older and enjoy some of them, that the Oscars are about a very particular kind of movie. They're not a universal award even though they pretend to be. I know there are a lot of classic movies from 50-60 years ago that were never honored with Oscars and the Oscar-winners from those years are forgotten. It seems to me that we're going to see more and more of that kind of divergence between long-term critical evaluation and the Oscar results as time goes on and the Oscars stay so narrowly focused.
posted by immlass at 8:05 AM on January 14, 2016 [3 favorites]


Idris Elba should've got a Best Supporting nod for Beasts of No Nation

My guesses right now based not so much on the performances but the politics of Oscars.

Best Picture: Revenant
Best Actor: Leo because it's finally time
Best Actress: Brie Larson because Cate Blanchett already has 2 and the Room is a better movie than Carol
Best Supporting Actor: Stallone because the voters are ancient
Best Supporting Actress: Probably Rooney Mara as she's been solid in a string of movies
posted by vuron at 8:06 AM on January 14, 2016 [5 favorites]


If it's any consolation, I'm pretty sure the group of this year's Tony winners is going to be almost exactly as colorful and diverse as the cast of Hamilton.
posted by schmod at 8:06 AM on January 14, 2016 [53 favorites]


Apologies to all of the other films nominated for any of the design/editing awards, for having the misfortune of being released in the same year as Fury Road.
posted by schmod at 8:08 AM on January 14, 2016 [4 favorites]


A median age of 62.

Look, let's not blame this on age. Please.


It's worth noting that older voters are less likely to see and/or be as absorbed by movies like Straight Outta Compton, Dope, Beasts of No Nation (which wasn't widely released because Netflix bought same-day streaming rights), Tangerine, etc.
posted by Etrigan at 8:09 AM on January 14, 2016 [11 favorites]


Oh, crap. I can't believe that Idris Elba wasn't nominated. I had lots of problems with the film, but can't deny that his was a pretty exceptional performance.
posted by ChuraChura at 8:10 AM on January 14, 2016 [6 favorites]


I thought these canned events were made to generate positive, happy, and feel-good press. I guess the Academy did not get the memo...
posted by Alexandra Kitty at 8:11 AM on January 14, 2016


Look, let's not blame this on age. Please.

Sincere question: why not?
posted by witchen at 8:12 AM on January 14, 2016 [23 favorites]


It's worth noting that older voters are less likely to see and/or be as absorbed by movies like Straight Outta Compton, Dope, Beasts of No Nation (which wasn't widely released because Netflix bought same-day streaming rights), Tangerine, etc.

Although Compton did get a nomination for screenplay, so obviously they saw it.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 8:13 AM on January 14, 2016


Sincere question: why not?

You'll understand when you're older.
posted by Ian A.T. at 8:14 AM on January 14, 2016 [21 favorites]


I don't think anyone is trying to be ageist, but when the median age of the Academy Board are white men in their 60s', it's sort of obvious being out of touch is starting to look like a point of pride with them.
posted by Kitteh at 8:14 AM on January 14, 2016 [16 favorites]


I don't think anyone is trying to be ageist, but when the median age of the Academy Board are white men in their 60s', it's sort of obvious being out of touch is starting to look like a point of pride with them.

Fair enough.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 8:15 AM on January 14, 2016 [2 favorites]


They really went the extra mile by nominating only the white people involved with Creed and Straight Outta Compton.

As Mark Harris pointed out on twitter earlier today: "Note: "The Academy" doesn't watch Compton & say, "Ehh, give the white people screenplay." WRITERS honor the movie; other branches ignore it."

Most, if not all, of the categories have the nominees chosen by that particular branch of the Academy. So the Writers Branch chooses writing nominees, Cinematographers Branch chooses the cinematography nominees, etc (it's still really fucked up that only white people were nominated for SOC and Creed! I just want to add some clarification).
posted by everybody had matching towels at 8:16 AM on January 14, 2016 [31 favorites]


Maybe Metafilter should do its own version of the Oscars on Fanfare.
posted by a lungful of dragon at 8:17 AM on January 14, 2016 [10 favorites]


Although Compton did get a nomination for screenplay, so obviously they saw it.

Keep in mind that the nominations are done only within each academy branch. So the screenwriters nominated Compton, but the rest of the Academy had nothing to do with that selection.
posted by parliboy at 8:18 AM on January 14, 2016 [3 favorites]


Apologies to all of the other films nominated for any of the design/editing awards, for having the misfortune of being released in the same year as Fury Road.

If Fury Road doesn't win for editing I'm going to be REAL salty.

Look, let's not blame this on age. Please.

Sincere question: why not?


Part of the problem is the voters, maybe? But the fact that diverse talent is not promoted to the level of even being seen by these people is a much bigger problem. Particularly behind the camera; white male directors surrounded by white male production crew that then rise through the ranks. There's been an epidemic lately of people complaining "why the hell did they give this guy all this money?!" from Josh Trank to Colin Trevorrow to whoever else, and these things happen for a reason.
posted by selfnoise at 8:18 AM on January 14, 2016 [6 favorites]


Keep in mind that the nominations are done only within each academy branch. So the screenwriters nominated Compton, but the rest of the Academy had nothing to do with that selection.

You learn something new every day, thanks.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 8:20 AM on January 14, 2016 [2 favorites]


I mean Stallone was good but you're really gonna give him an award for playing the same role he has in six movies already?
posted by Drinky Die at 8:23 AM on January 14, 2016 [5 favorites]


And given this great interview with Ryan Coogler about the need for more female voices and the mention that he hires women behind the camera for his films and wants women to get more directorial opportunities, I'm even saltier about the glaring omissions for Creed.
posted by TwoStride at 8:29 AM on January 14, 2016 [7 favorites]


Women EDITORS, which is great, but this almost proves the rule since George Miller apparently went out of his way to use a non-traditional editor (and I believe JJ Abrams wanted specifically to use women editors as well).

This doesn't really say much for either Miller or Abrams since film editing has traditionally been thought of as women's work (Moviolas being somewhat similar to sewing machines is sometimes cited as one of the reasons). There have always been lots of women in the editing profession, including some of the best in the field; Thelma Schoonmaker and Verna Fields are two conspicuous examples.
posted by wabbittwax at 8:29 AM on January 14, 2016 [12 favorites]


Nostalgia is big driving force for the Academy plus it's not like the Best Supporting Actor is particularly strong this year. Rylance's role is too small and BoS is boring and predictable, and I can't see Bale, Ruffalo or Hardy doing anything other than splitting the vote but Hardy could win if Revenant ends up being an unstoppable juggernaut.

Best supporting actress is a pretty weak category as well. Winslet is probably the best actress in this group but Steve Jobs was a failure and really how many times are we going to do Jobs biopics. My guess is Rooney mainly because Weinstein Brothers arm-twisting.
posted by vuron at 8:31 AM on January 14, 2016


Sincere question: why not?

You'll understand when you're older.


Nah. Aging Gen X/Millennials will have, I think, different sensibilities than aging Baby Boomers. If nothing else, we'll be more accustomed to a world where segregation is a Bad Thing, rather than the norm (or, worse, "tradition").
posted by witchen at 8:34 AM on January 14, 2016 [11 favorites]


Hardy could win if Revenant ends up being an unstoppable juggernaut.

I was confused by this at first because Slate's nominee list says that Hardy's nomination was for Mad Max. Heh.
posted by amarynth at 8:37 AM on January 14, 2016


Best supporting actress is a pretty weak category as well.

Saoirse Ronan was exceptional in Brooklyn.
posted by fairmettle at 8:37 AM on January 14, 2016 [1 favorite]


Wow. Yeah, the only category that has me actually really interested is Animated Feature. Anomalisa, Marnie Was There, Boy and the World. I really, really hope they don't just hand over Pixar yet another (completely undeserved oscar).

Creed is a huge snub. No Michael B. Jordan? No Ryan Coogler who directed and co-wrote the thing? I'm really happy to see Jason Leigh being nominated, I doubt she'll win but she was utterly captivating in Hateful Eight and it's hard to envision anyone else in that role. No best actor for Oscar Isaac and Ex Machina? Sure, just give the nomination to another cis white man who has the "courage" to play a trans woman.
posted by Neronomius at 8:40 AM on January 14, 2016 [1 favorite]


Saoirse is up for best Actress not Best Supporting otherwise I'd agree. However I think Brie Larson is pretty much unstoppable in that category but I figure Saoirse will get a oscar in the next couple of years if she avoids being put in a string of flops.
posted by vuron at 8:40 AM on January 14, 2016 [1 favorite]


I said it a couple months ago on MeFi, so I guess I'm obliged to say it again now: sadly, 2015 was a pretty lean year for notable performances by actresses (and now, I add, actors) of color,

Lean, maybe, but there was Tangerine, which is the best film I've ever seen about the neighborhood that is Hollywood, rather than the industry that is Hollywood. The film starred Kitana Kiki Rodriguez and Mya Taylor, and they were superb. There was even an Academy Award campaign for them that was utterly ignored.
posted by maxsparber at 8:45 AM on January 14, 2016 [4 favorites]


Sincere question: why not?

You'll understand when you're older.

Nah. Aging Gen X/Millennials will have, I think, different sensibilities than aging Baby Boomers.


In fairness to roomthreeseventeen, I sympathize with the idea that "Old people are always bad at racial issues" is tired and trite. I highlighted the median age point just because it astounded me that you could assemble any group of people the size of the Academy and have the median age be 62.
posted by Etrigan at 8:46 AM on January 14, 2016 [13 favorites]


Old people may not necessarily be bad at racial issues, but old rich entitled people who have surrounded themselves with yes men for thirty years have a bad track record.
posted by maxsparber at 8:49 AM on January 14, 2016 [36 favorites]


Maybe there weren't many strong roles for non-white actors, but there are some pretty undeserving nominees up there this year, I doubt that there are NO strong performances that could take their places.
posted by jeather at 8:52 AM on January 14, 2016 [1 favorite]


I am enjoying this rant as well as a similar one on Vox... It is just so frustratingly obvious, as the DB opinion points out--that even traditionaly Oscar-baiting stunts (period pieces, Serious Social Issues, biopics, accents)--are worthless if a PoC does them.
posted by TwoStride at 8:53 AM on January 14, 2016 [6 favorites]


Well, maybe Chris Rock will say something. Neil Patrick Harris did.
posted by qcubed at 8:55 AM on January 14, 2016 [3 favorites]


I'd say that's a safe bet.
posted by Optamystic at 8:56 AM on January 14, 2016 [1 favorite]


qcubed: Given the exclusion, maybe POC should have their own awards?

Or the nominees could all boycott the awards.

Or everyone who wins could go up, denounce the awards selection committee/ process and hand the award back until the whole thing is more balanced.

That would be awesome.
posted by filthy light thief at 8:59 AM on January 14, 2016 [12 favorites]


Funnily enough, this year Chris Rock is the host of this year's Oscars. There hasn't been a person of color hosting since…the last time Chris Rock hosted. That was more than 10 years ago, in 2005.

From the Vox rant TwoStride posted.
posted by qcubed at 9:00 AM on January 14, 2016 [3 favorites]


I didn't see that many movies last year, so all the "why wasn't X nominated?" articles are giving me a great list.
posted by jeather at 9:01 AM on January 14, 2016 [1 favorite]


The nominations made me realize another issue I had with The Revenant: There are no good Native roles in it. And the subtext of the film is the genocide of the Native people. Yet we get two fairly slight Native role -- the son, who bows out quickly without having done anything other than be slightly temperamental, and a random passing Native American man that Leo meets, builds him a tend, and throws some grass on his back, and then is gone again. There's also a character who is presumably a Arikara chief, who mostly appears on horseback, looking vaguely constipated. Leo also has a Native wife, but she only appears wordlessly as a ghostly memory.

So they have been reduced to set dressing in their own story. And they didn't need to be. There may be issues with these films, but nonetheless there are American westerns that gave really great, really interesting roles to native performers. Chief Dan George has great roles in both Little Big Man and The Outlaw Josey Wales. -- and the latter was written by a racist!

Graham Greene has a real role in Dances with Wolves -- he was nominated for an Oscar for it! Gary Farmer had the best role of all in Dead Man. Wes Studi basically has a character that might as well just be called Wes Studi, in the same way Michelle Rodriguez has a Michelle Rodriguez role.

But there was nothing comparable in The Revenant. The bear had more screen time than many of the First Nations actors, and was a more developed character.

It's a damn crime. I mean a real crime. It's the artistic expression of genocide.
posted by maxsparber at 9:03 AM on January 14, 2016 [26 favorites]


From a tweet by Saladin Ahmed: @saladinahmed
There are more nominations for white men named Mark than there are for people of color across all acting categories.
*sighs*
posted by Fizz at 9:05 AM on January 14, 2016 [25 favorites]


"For an actor, success is simply delayed failure."

-Graham Greene
posted by clavdivs at 9:10 AM on January 14, 2016 [1 favorite]


Speaking of Oscar-baiting, Is there any site rating the nominees according the size of the bait they're using?
posted by lmfsilva at 9:11 AM on January 14, 2016 [1 favorite]


Re: The nominations process, I realize that it's not the same people reviewing actors and screenplays, but it still says something about the systemic bias in play when across the board, when the academy looks at the year's movies about black experiences in America only the white people are deemed worthy of recognition.
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 9:12 AM on January 14, 2016 [5 favorites]


Where's Wallace at? Where the fuck is Wallace?
posted by mbrubeck at 9:15 AM on January 14, 2016 [10 favorites]


It's simple everyone! I am Generation X so Baby Boomers are old and out of touch, and Millennial are entitled! For Millennials, Gen X is old and out of touch and whatever the generation below Millennials is called is entitled!
posted by josher71 at 9:21 AM on January 14, 2016


Given the exclusion, maybe POC should have their own awards?

Wait, no, nevermind, I know how that'll end up.


With nearly a half-century of doing exactly that that no one knows about except people who either A) complain about it (as you noted), or B) use it as an excuse for not bothering to seek out non-white performances to applaud.
posted by Etrigan at 9:34 AM on January 14, 2016 [3 favorites]


A reason to not blame things on age can be to remember when people whose average age is 62 grew up. I'm 50, and I was just old enough to latch onto the coattails of second-wave feminism when I got to college in 1983. People 10 years older than me were old enough to be aware of the counter-cultural movements of the late 60s and 70s. They were old enough to be a part of them. They were old enough to read the books and alternative newspapers. They were old enough to take in the elements of feminism and anti-racism that made it to mainstream media. They grew up during or after the Civil Rights movement. This is to say, they may be old, but they're young enough to have no excuse not to be aware of feminist and anti-racist critiques of the industry they work in. We can't just write them off as old and wait for them to die off. They've had, and wasted, decades to hold themselves accountable to meeting a higher standard.
posted by not that girl at 9:34 AM on January 14, 2016 [43 favorites]


It's simple everyone! I am Generation X so Baby Boomers are old and out of touch, and Millennial are entitled! For Millennials, Gen X is old and out of touch and whatever the generation below Millennials is called is entitled!

Except our sense of entitlement is for a more representative selection of people, especially when the top movies of the year weren't nearly as bleached as the list of nominees.

Yes, it's "just" an awards ceremony of an already biased system that features more white men at every level of development and management, but it's the awards ceremony everyone pays attention to, so the fact that the nominees are more white-washed than the movies of the year is a significantly big thing.
posted by filthy light thief at 9:35 AM on January 14, 2016 [3 favorites]


Oscars so white that my mayonnaise is angry.
posted by Fizz at 9:35 AM on January 14, 2016 [12 favorites]


Idris Elba should've got a Best Supporting nod for Beasts of No Nation

I have a reservations about the movie as a whole, but HOLY SHIT both he AND Abraham Attah were fucking amazing.
posted by mandolin conspiracy at 9:37 AM on January 14, 2016 [3 favorites]


White breads burden.
posted by clavdivs at 9:37 AM on January 14, 2016 [2 favorites]


I know the Oscars noms are hot garbage but no nod for Michael B. Jordan in Creed??

Stallone actually set the precedent for this snub by not mentioning Jordan's name in his Golden Globes acceptance speech.

"salty..."
Speaking of things that are cranky-making, I guess I'm just going to have to get used to seeing this word popping up frequently on MeFi from now on. *pouts*

posted by Atom Eyes at 9:39 AM on January 14, 2016 [3 favorites]




but old rich entitled people who have surrounded themselves with yes men for thirty years have a bad track record.
...also the yes men they surrounded themselves with...

I'm two years under the 'average Academy member' and much less rich but have experienced as much white privilege as most, and I see it as moderately shameful but don't see it improving for at least a generation. And if the "startup generation" is the next generation, not much. Welcome to America.
posted by oneswellfoop at 9:50 AM on January 14, 2016 [4 favorites]


Sincere question: why not?

You'll understand when you're older.


Well, speaking as someone who's older? I think it's incredibly relevant. There's a huge difference in how people think of the other sex (if the generation one older than I)/sexes (if the generation one younger than I) and other skin colors between them. The older generation thinks white male because they lived pretty much their entire life with that being the default dominant person. It wasn't even talked about, it just was, for the large majority of the population who was involved in movie making.

Since the academy voting skews very heavily to the two generations that are older than I am, barely represents my generation and completely ignores the younger generation, it's clear to me that what's happening is the white male bias they've had their entire life is just as strong as it ever was. If the inverse was true -- if the older than 50 were 14% of the vote, I think you'd see a very different thing, since 50 is basically the age where the Civil Rights Movement has always been* rather than older, where they remember the world before that.

So, they're not seeing movies like Mad Max or Straight Outta Compton because they have no interest, and when they do, they don't rate them highly because they're baised.

Although Compton did get a nomination for screenplay, so obviously they saw it.

Note that the nominators only come from that branch of the Academy. Screenwriters nominate for Best Screenplay, actors nominate the acting awards, directors nominate Best Director, and so forth. For the technical, documentary and foreign awards committees selected from all branches do the nominations since there aren't separate branches. Special awards are also selected by committee, the general membership of the Academy isn't involved at all.

Best Picture, however, is nominated/voted by the entire Academy as a whole.


* Yes, a lot of the stuff in the Civil Rights Movement happen in the late sixties. You know, when 50 year olds were 3-5 years old. You don't really "link" with the world until you're approaching 10 years old, before that, the entire universe revolves around whomever is raising you. The earliest famous event I can remember personally seeing (on TV) was the Skylab-1 launch, which was May 1973 (I was 6 and a half.) There might have been things earlier that I used to remember, but don't know. I don't remember the Apollo landings, though Apollo 17 (Dec 1972, I'd just turned 6) didn't have the coverage that Apollo 11 (July 1969, I was 2 and half) did.
posted by eriko at 9:52 AM on January 14, 2016 [7 favorites]


I'm really happy to see Jason Leigh being nominated, I doubt she'll win but she was utterly captivating in Hateful Eight and it's hard to envision anyone else in that role

She was utterly captivating. But I find it funny because within five minutes, I leaned over and noted they wanted Holly Hunter's character in A Life Less Ordinary.
posted by politikitty at 10:02 AM on January 14, 2016


But the Animated Feature category... semi-wow. Marnie and Shaun and Boy & the World. Of course Pixar is the odds-on favorite (and with a Screenplay nom, unheard of for a toon) with Charlie Kaufman's slumming in the category the main challenger (when he's considered a relatively-mainstream choice, you know things are changing). The Animated Short category is quite cool, but it has been for some time; Feature is finally catching up. (I'm personally partial to the 'mainstream outsider' Don Hertzfeldt, but even the Pixar nom there is pretty worthy)

If the toon-heads are 'getting it', maybe it'll take less than a generation for the rest of the Academy.

Sorry, Minions, back to Villain-Con for you.
posted by oneswellfoop at 10:13 AM on January 14, 2016


One of my best friends in high school was the daughter of a Hollywood director. (Not someone huge, but busy. If you're a Gen-Xer, you've seen one or two of his films.) Naturally, we had most of our parties over at her house, because she was the only one of us who *had* a house of any size.

As I was helping her clean up before such a party once, she went through the mail on the kitchen counter and said, "Junk, junk, Dad's Oscars membership...all junk."

"That's junk?"

"Yeah, you have to sign up every year. The whole thing's stupid."

"Why's it stupid?"

"Because it costs $1500 to vote. It's a scam to make money."

And with that, I lost any and all interest in the Oscars. As I have grown up, I've found that disinterest is justified time and again. The racial angles don't make me feel bad about that disinterest at all.
posted by scaryblackdeath at 10:20 AM on January 14, 2016 [23 favorites]


OK, I discounted Elba in Beasts of No Nation because I somehow thought of that as a TV movie. Blame Netflix, I guess.

Yes, he should get a Best Supporting nod for that.
posted by rokusan at 10:25 AM on January 14, 2016


Yup, I liked Tangerine a lot. Definitely one of the best films of the year for me.
posted by rokusan at 10:27 AM on January 14, 2016 [6 favorites]


I didn't know what I was getting into with Tangerine, but it played at the filmhouse that's a few blocks from my house, so there it was.

I loved the main plot, but the sideplot with the cab-driver seemed to lose its way, and didn't quite balance the comedy and tragedy at the end. Performances were great; I've been really put off my histrionic characters before, but these ladies were entertaining and engaging. Hollywood was, as ever, unbelievably warm and sunny on Christmas, and looked great. Some solid direction there, filming on half a mile of a public street in natural lighting like that.

And considering they filmed it on some phones inside a lens/lighting rig, a technical achievement award wouldn't be undue either-- low-tech is tech too.
posted by Sunburnt at 10:36 AM on January 14, 2016


I really liked Room a lot, skip the trailer, it's just great. I'm surprised the kid in it didn't get a nomination.

But I'm totally pulling for Fury Road for best picture, director and editing.
posted by Catblack at 10:48 AM on January 14, 2016 [1 favorite]




What? No Best Lead Actor nod for Mark Hamill? WTF?
posted by mazola at 10:51 AM on January 14, 2016 [4 favorites]


but the sideplot with the cab-driver seemed to lose its way

I liked it because this is literally the first movie I have seen set in Hollywood that shows any awareness of the fact that there is a sizable Armenian community there. I mean, there's an entire section of Hollywood called Little Armenia.

It's an immigrant town. 54 percent of the population were born in other countries. It has the largest Thai community outside of Thailand. When I worked as a movie extra, I was astonished at how many of the younger women who were on set were Ukranian. I just never see a hint of that in movies and tv shows set in Hollywood.
posted by maxsparber at 10:52 AM on January 14, 2016 [9 favorites]


Sanjay's Super team (Pixar animated short nominee) was my favorite film of the entire year. So much awesome storytelling packed into 5 lovely little minutes. If it wins, I'll give the academy a pass for the year.
posted by billyfleetwood at 10:54 AM on January 14, 2016


Eddie Redmayne: go fuck yourself. And anyone involved with that piece of shit movie
posted by odinsdream at 11:29 AM on January 14, 2016


I'm just happy about Fury Road. I saw that movie SIX TIMES in the theater. The last time I saw a movie TWICE in the theater was 1998, when Titanic came out. I was a college freshman girl. I was kinda required to see it more than once.

Anyways, I keep telling my friends it's the best movie I've seen in the past 5 years, and they just keep being bemused. While I know the Oscars are bullshit, I am still chuffed they are nominated. It's a wee bit of validation.
posted by Windigo at 11:34 AM on January 14, 2016 [8 favorites]


Or the nominees could all boycott the awards.

Or everyone who wins could go up, denounce the awards selection committee/ process and hand the award back until the whole thing is more balanced.


or ...

No acting award for Peter O'Toole, no directing awards for Alfred Hitchcock or Stanley Kubrick -- this Academy doesn't even have a clue about white men.
posted by philip-random at 11:35 AM on January 14, 2016 [1 favorite]


Of course Pixar is the odds-on favorite (and with a Screenplay nom, unheard of for a toon)

Screenplay nominations are not unheard of for animated films since the turn of the millennium and especially not for Pixar. Starting with Toy Story, there have been seven screenplay nominations for Pixar films alone -- six original (Toy Story, Finding Nemo, Incredibles, Ratatouille, WALL-E and Up) & one adapted (Toy Story 3)). Inside Out is the eighth.
posted by tittergrrl at 11:37 AM on January 14, 2016 [1 favorite]


So, no love at all for Vin Diesel?
“Universal is going to have the biggest movie in history with this movie,” Diesel said in a lengthy interview with Variety for this week’s cover story. “It will probably win best picture at the Oscars, unless the Oscars don’t want to be relevant ever.”
I think he was at least half right.
posted by Alter Cocker at 11:38 AM on January 14, 2016


No acting award for Peter O'Toole, no directing awards for Alfred Hitchcock or Stanley Kubrick -- this Academy doesn't even have a clue about white men.

There have been four black actors who have won Best Actor in a Leading Role. Four in the entire history of the Oscar. In 88 years.

They have a clue about white men in general, if not those three you listed.
posted by maxsparber at 11:39 AM on January 14, 2016 [7 favorites]


Why so many for Mad Max? Is it the Return of the King for this year?
posted by Apocryphon at 11:46 AM on January 14, 2016


What is the demographic for who watches the Oscars? (Genuinely curious.) Am wondering if that lines up with the racial and age makeup of nominees, generally.
posted by a lungful of dragon at 11:50 AM on January 14, 2016


Why so many for Mad Max? Is it the Return of the King for this year?

Have you seen Mad Max
posted by clockworkjoe at 11:51 AM on January 14, 2016 [30 favorites]


Why so many for Mad Max? Is it the Return of the King for this year?

Because it's a really amazing film, a minimalist art-house flick wrapped up slyly in the clothing of a big loud action film. It's spectacular.
posted by Windigo at 11:55 AM on January 14, 2016 [11 favorites]


Why so many for Mad Max? Is it the Return of the King for this year?

Absolutely not. It's one of, if not the, best film of the decade so far. (Her is the only film that comes close.) I get paid to watch and critique movies, and I paid my own money to see Fury Road three times in the the theater. It's a masterpiece. Don't take my word for it. Watch it. It's on HBO and iTunes streaming right now. You won't regret it.

I thought for sure Straight Outta Compton would have snagged a best picture nomination. And Sam Jackson should have been nominated for The Hateful Eight.

But the biggest snub of all for me is Best Of Enemies getting shut out of the Best Documentary category. It's on Netflix right now, and it's timely and extremely well done.
posted by vibrotronica at 11:57 AM on January 14, 2016 [7 favorites]


Because it's a really amazing film, a minimalist art-house flick wrapped up slyly in the clothing of a big loud action film. It's spectacular.

And simultaneously it's the fucking pinnacle of big loud action film. It's got one foot in a different genre altogether and it still kicks the rest of explosion-based cinema's collective ass.
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 11:59 AM on January 14, 2016 [16 favorites]


Also there's a guy with a guitar.
posted by maxsparber at 12:09 PM on January 14, 2016 [19 favorites]


Why so many for Mad Max? Is it the Return of the King for this year?

That would be Star Wars. I'm reading at places people are saying it's a snub that Star Wars only got nominated for sound editing, sound mixing, visual effects, film editing, and score. Basically kept out of all the directing, acting, screenplay, and best film awards.
posted by FJT at 12:15 PM on January 14, 2016


Ehh, Star Wars can look after itself. Also I'd agree with whoever said it was a solid 7. I mean, I loved it, it was fun, I'll be looking forwards to more, but it's got no place in any of the major categories.
posted by Artw at 12:18 PM on January 14, 2016 [8 favorites]


As far as Star Wars goes, I'm skeptical it would have gotten any big nominations under any circumstances, but Disney made its decision long ago when it decided not to screen the film in advance of the deadlines for the major critics' awards and some of the guild honors. Example: the SAG award nominations were announced before anyone had been allowed to see Star Wars.
posted by Mothlight at 12:20 PM on January 14, 2016


I would say The Force Awakens got precisely the nominations it should have.
posted by prize bull octorok at 12:21 PM on January 14, 2016 [3 favorites]


I stand by Best Picture. And Daisy Ridley deserves something.

I guess they will wait and give awards to one of the sequels.
posted by Drinky Die at 12:27 PM on January 14, 2016 [1 favorite]


Hertzfeldt's nominated for World of Tomorrow. Everything else is irrelevant.

(well, feeling a bit patriotic, I'm happy for Vikander because she's awesome even if she's probably nominated for the wrong film, and a nod to The Makeup Designers' aging work in these "bah, let's use computers for that" days was a nice one.)
posted by effbot at 12:28 PM on January 14, 2016 [2 favorites]


No acting award for Peter O'Toole, no directing awards for Alfred Hitchcock or Stanley Kubrick -- this Academy doesn't even have a clue about white men.

There have been four black actors who have won Best Actor in a Leading Role. Four in the entire history of the Oscar. In 88 years.


Take a look at the nominees -- for both Lead Actor and Lead Actress, every black nominee has been for an explicitly black role (i.e., the role is either based on a real-life black person, or the point of the role is that the character is black), except for Denzel Washington in Training Day and Flight. That's 93 percent.

Oh, but white people often play real-world white people, right? For this year, it's only 3/5 for Actor and 3/5 for Actress (and I'm being fairly generous in defining "real-world" there).
posted by Etrigan at 12:32 PM on January 14, 2016 [3 favorites]


Predictions:
Best Picture: Spotlight
Best Actor/Actress: DiCaprio/Larson
Best Direction: Iñárritu
Best Supporting Actor/Actress: Stallone/Mara
Best Original Screenplay: Spotlight

The real Group of Death is Best Adapted Screenplay: The Big Short, Brooklyn, Carol, The Martian, and Room.
posted by alby at 12:46 PM on January 14, 2016


… except for Denzel Washington in Training Day …

"Why Denzel have to be crooked before he took it?"
posted by alby at 12:48 PM on January 14, 2016 [2 favorites]


Spotlight seems pretty likely, which is a bit of a shame. It's a well made movie, it's maybe an important movie, which the Oscars love, but it's not a great movie. It's just... very solid. I would sooner see it go to Room, which takes more chances.

Anyone seen Bridge of Spies? Is it the tame slot filler I suspect?
posted by Artw at 1:00 PM on January 14, 2016


It's a surprise not to see a nomination for Will Smith in Concussion. It's like they are going out of their way to be extra-racist.

My picture of the year was Star Wars TFA by a large margin, and I think many actors from that deserved nominations including John Boyega.
posted by w0mbat at 1:02 PM on January 14, 2016 [3 favorites]


If it's any consolation, I'm pretty sure the group of this year's Tony winners is going to be almost exactly as colorful and diverse as the cast of Hamilton.

No doubt. This comparison really highlights how out-of-touch Academy voters are with what kind of entertainment most people find compelling these days.
posted by Solon and Thanks at 1:03 PM on January 14, 2016


I enjoyed Bridge of Spies, it's exactly what you think it will be, it does it well. I don't think it deserves the nomination, but it's a good movie.
posted by jeather at 1:04 PM on January 14, 2016 [1 favorite]


Yeah, pretty much what I expect of Spielberg-Hanks.
posted by Artw at 1:06 PM on January 14, 2016


A friend of a friend on Facebook was going on a "no this isn't racist, YOU'RE racist for playing the race card" rant that included the claim that "Creed didn't get the nod because the Academy doesn't like action movies!" to which I explained that the Rocky movies are sports dramas, not action flicks; and Rocky received 10 Oscar nominations (in 9 categories), including the "big five" of Picture, Director, Actor, Actress, and Screenplay. (It won Picture, Director, and Film Editing.)
posted by duffell at 1:10 PM on January 14, 2016 [2 favorites]


It's like they are going out of their way to be extra-racist.

Now, now, let's be fair. They might be equal parts "extra-racist" and equal parts "beholden to mega-media conglomerates who make billions from the NFL and tried to get the movie quashed from being made in the first place".

Still extremely racist! But also venal, and cowardly.
posted by a fiendish thingy at 1:11 PM on January 14, 2016 [3 favorites]


If it's any consolation, I'm pretty sure the group of this year's Tony winners is going to be almost exactly as colorful and diverse as the cast of Hamilton.

— No doubt. This comparison really highlights how out-of-touch Academy voters are with what kind of entertainment most people find compelling these days.


I can't wait for the 2018 Academy Awards, where I'm certain Hamilton will clean up in all the big categories:

Best Actor — Hugh Jackman as Alexander Hamilton
Best Actress — Anne Hathaway as Eliza Hamilton
Best Supporting Actor — Kevin Spacey as Aaron Burr
Best Director — Mel Gibson
posted by Atom Eyes at 1:26 PM on January 14, 2016 [11 favorites]


Look, let's not blame this on age. Please.

Sincere question: why not?


When I was 13, I couldn't wait for all of the old people to die so we could be rid of racism.

That was in 1967.

What I didn't know: while cool young people filled the media, the George W. Bushes of the world were tucked away at places like Yale, training to run the world. There are young people at places like Yale today, training to run a future you won't feel very good about.
posted by Superfrankenstein at 1:38 PM on January 14, 2016 [30 favorites]


I thought Mad Max was a very elegant action movie, so I'm happy it got nodded.

And, hi, I'm a millenial. I've met a lot of bigoted white and POC people who are in my age group who have written awful, racist and self-internalized racist writing, and a lot of politically conscious people who have written beautiful, illuminating anti-racist writing, and then everyone else in-between who just wants to write. I've also been introduced to such great anti-oppression writing from decades in the past, that have been forgotten by history.

As long as the moneyed bigoted mentors continue to mentor those similarly bigoted classmates of mine and be uncaring about their biases, it's going to stay hellish unless we continue to make spaces and push forward. We have a lot more work to do that requires absolutely everyone in any age group. The critical discussions have to continue, with resources, money, space, and mentorship for those who want access to get their stories out there. We need everyone.
posted by yueliang at 1:57 PM on January 14, 2016 [7 favorites]


I can't wait for the 2018 Academy Awards, where I'm certain Hamilton will clean up in all the big categories:

Best Actor — Hugh Jackman as Alexander Hamilton
Best Actress — Anne Hathaway as Eliza Hamilton
Best Supporting Actor — Kevin Spacey as Aaron Burr
Best Director — Mel Gibson


"What do you mean, whitewashed? We cast Cuba Gooding Jr as Hercules Mulligan!"
posted by Solon and Thanks at 2:01 PM on January 14, 2016 [6 favorites]


Best Supporting Actor: Stallone because the voters are ancient

Also: Sylvester Stallone is now the new record holder for longest span between two nominations for playing the same character. The previous record holder was Paul Newman for The Hustler and The Color of Money. Like Stallone, Newman was nominated in the lead role category the first time out and the supporting role on the second pass. Newman won Best Supporting Actor.
posted by ricochet biscuit at 2:17 PM on January 14, 2016 [2 favorites]


And yeah, she's a white woman, but nothing for Charlize Theron's role in Mad Max??

A less charitable person than I would point out that she's African by birth, ergo...


Actually, when Charlize practices her acceptance speech...
posted by P.o.B. at 2:35 PM on January 14, 2016


Example: the SAG award nominations were announced before anyone had been allowed to see Star Wars.

Hypothetically, does that mean Star Wars is eligible for 2016 Oscars, or that it missed out, having fallen through the gaps? (Or both? eg that it is technically eligible but in reality has almost certainly fallen through a gap of tradition?)
posted by anonymisc at 2:44 PM on January 14, 2016


My dad sees all the movies. He walked out of Mad Max.

I was surprised to see Bridge of Spies nominated. It was good but in some ways, I felt like I had seen it before.

I'm disappointed that Inside Out wasn't nominated for Best Picture. It was my long-shot hope.
posted by kat518 at 2:58 PM on January 14, 2016


Did your dad find it....

Mediocre?
posted by Windigo at 3:01 PM on January 14, 2016 [22 favorites]


Everything else is irrelevant.

Actually, while World of Tomorrow is by far last year's best movie, I'm a bit annoyed that nobody from Sicario got an acting nomination. I haven't seen as many of the others as I should, but they must be insanely good with that as a baseline (The Martian definitely isn't, despite being a perfectly fine feel-good sci-fi).

Hopefully it'll give Deakins an award after 14 nominations, though, but given how they've treated him this far, that's only because Lubezki has won two years in a row now, and Richardson already has three wins.

I think many actors from that deserved nominations including John Boyega.

Star Wars is fun and all, but unless perhaps if Rian Johnson takes #8 in a totally unexpected direction, the only way for it to win acting Oscars is if everyone else decides to take a year off, so it ends up competing against some "everyone involved in this should be banned from industry" Adam Sandler atrocity :-)
posted by effbot at 3:08 PM on January 14, 2016


Sorry if this was posted already: Why Creed's Best Picture Snub Matters.
I know I shouldn't be surprised, but I am so, so angry about it this year--I think the Slate author is onto something here about how now not even "non black" black movies can get a chance, either.
posted by TwoStride at 3:51 PM on January 14, 2016 [3 favorites]


“How Are Oscar Nominees Chosen?” Sean Hutchinson, Mental Floss, 16 January 2014

“Ask The Experts: The Economics of Oscar Season,” John S Kiernan, WalletHub, Undated

“There’s More to Winning an Oscar Than Meets the Eye,” Stephan Heyman, The New York Times, 28 January 2015
posted by ob1quixote at 4:10 PM on January 14, 2016


I wouldn't peg the racism and sexism directly to the age statistic - the age statistic is just notable in itself because the median for the US as a whole is 37.
posted by atoxyl at 4:16 PM on January 14, 2016 [1 favorite]


The median age of Fox News viewers is 68, draw your own conclusions.
posted by Artw at 4:52 PM on January 14, 2016


A friend pointed out that everyone has overlooked the fact that the lead character in Shaun the Sheep is black. Though there's a counter-argument that he's not black, he's a blackface sheep, and then there was more trouble.
posted by Hogshead at 5:06 PM on January 14, 2016 [1 favorite]


And yeah, she's a white woman, but nothing for Charlize Theron's role in Mad Max??

I've hardly seen any of the films from 2015 so I can't judge a lot of these, but I did see Fury Road and she was excellent. Giving the film so many nominations while snubbing Theron smells like bullshit.
posted by homunculus at 5:14 PM on January 14, 2016


I can't wait for the 2018 Academy Awards, where I'm certain Hamilton will clean up in all the big categories:

Best Actor — Hugh Jackman as Alexander Hamilton
Best Actress — Anne Hathaway as Eliza Hamilton
Best Supporting Actor — Kevin Spacey as Aaron Burr
Best Director — Mel Gibson


Yeah, but if it doesn't clean up, we all know who Mel is going to blame.
posted by mandolin conspiracy at 5:34 PM on January 14, 2016


There have been four black actors who have won Best Actor in a Leading Role. Four in the entire history of the Oscar. In 88 years.

88 x 12.6% (US Census 2010 percent Black) x 50% (male, roughly) = 5.544 Black Best Actors under a proportional regime. This is an overestimation, as the 12.6% is the highest percent Black during the relevant period, having risen from a bit under 10%. Basically one Black man away from proportionality.

The 20/20 White people is more telling - of the 20 you'd expect under proportionality 2 Black people, an Asian person, etc... the absence of any one ethnicity is not hard to see as noise, the absence of all of them not so easily explained.

But there's an interesting thing where people think there are a lot more racial minorities in American than there are - same thing goes for gays, too, I believe.
posted by save alive nothing that breatheth at 6:45 PM on January 14, 2016


Hollywood doesn't draw it's actors randomly from the whole of America. It draws mostly from the population of Los Angeles, which is 38 percent black.

Believe me, if you live in LA, Hollywood movies look like they are deliberately excluding people of color, and the Oscars seem to do so to a perverse extent.
posted by maxsparber at 6:53 PM on January 14, 2016


I think I'm missing something in your math, because women can't win best actor -- assuming that there are about equal proportions of black men and women, so somewhere between 10-12% of men are black, we'd expect something like 8 or 9.
posted by jeather at 6:59 PM on January 14, 2016 [3 favorites]


No you right I fucked up with an extra /2, DISREGARD THAT I FAIL MATH.
posted by save alive nothing that breatheth at 7:20 PM on January 14, 2016


Hollywood doesn't draw it's actors randomly from the whole of America.

No, about half the nominees are foreigners (off the top of my head Redmayne, Bale, Rylance, Hardy, Winslet, and Rampling are British, Blanchett Australian, Fassbender German, Ronan Irish, and Vikander Swedish.)
posted by effbot at 8:57 PM on January 14, 2016 [3 favorites]


It draws mostly from the population of Los Angeles, which is 38 percent black.

I... what?

Los Angeles is less than 10% black. The proportion of African Americans in Los Angeles is less than the proportion in the country as a whole. Where did you get 38%?
posted by Justinian at 11:43 PM on January 14, 2016


My own bad math.
posted by maxsparber at 4:05 AM on January 15, 2016 [2 favorites]


I just want to use this moment to express my unabashed love for Charlotte Rampling.
posted by Sphinx at 6:04 AM on January 15, 2016


Hypothetically, does that mean Star Wars is eligible for 2016 Oscars, or that it missed out, having fallen through the gaps? (Or both? eg that it is technically eligible but in reality has almost certainly fallen through a gap of tradition?)

Star Wars is eligible for this round of Oscars. It screened in LA and NYC before the end of 2015 (I believe that's the rule. Studios often open movies only in LA and NYC for a brief period in December just to get eligible, then open nationwide in January.) Star Wars did get technical/effects nominations.

SAG nominations help build buzz for Oscar nominations. They clue in Oscar voters who to pay attention to. By skipping the ability to get SAG nominations I think Disney was essentially saying they knew they didn't need any awards to promote the film and weren't bothering to try for them.
posted by dnash at 9:37 AM on January 15, 2016 [1 favorite]


The Oscars have become meaningless to me since Walter Monheit died. His 'Blurb-o-Mat' picks were the ones that really mattered.
posted by mazola at 11:06 AM on January 15, 2016


Mad Max is indeed a great film, but I thought in the sense that Pacific Rim or Snowpiercer were great films- really well-made sci-fi action-adventure pieces with good diverse casting and MeFi darlings. But not movies that would deserve a bunch of Academy nominations.
posted by Apocryphon at 11:24 AM on January 15, 2016


I think the Oscars would be a lot more interesting if they recognized that genre films and comedies are just as worthy of kudos as turgid dramas.
posted by maxsparber at 11:28 AM on January 15, 2016 [10 favorites]


The Golden Globes don't even recognize comedies and they have a category for it.
posted by Artw at 11:34 AM on January 15, 2016 [2 favorites]


I thought the Golden Globes was a fictional television comedy where a bunch of actors play satiric versions of themselves. It's an actual award?
posted by maxsparber at 11:46 AM on January 15, 2016


Remember that one time the Academy nominated both District 9 and Avatar for Best Picture?
posted by Apocryphon at 11:48 AM on January 15, 2016


Surely Mad Max is as good as American Sniper, Birdman, Gravity, Argo, District 9, Juno, Babel, Crash, and The Return of the King (which were all previously nominated films)?
posted by FJT at 11:49 AM on January 15, 2016 [2 favorites]


Won't dispute that. But the fact how it's sweeping a bunch of nominations in other categories reminded me of Return of the King, which received those nominations because it was more of a legacy recognition for the entire series. It's not the Best Picture nom that surprises me.
posted by Apocryphon at 11:56 AM on January 15, 2016


Fun Facts:

Charlize Theron is the first African actor to win Best Actress.

Lupita Nyong'o is the first Mexican actor to win Best Supporting Actress.

As for Furiosa, I think that's a massive damn shame not to be nominated here. In a year where Vikander and Mara both campaigned to have their lead performances nominated as Supporting so as to diminish their competition, these categories get more meaningless than ever, but much like with Heath Ledger's Joker, there should be room for the actor who creates the most iconic performance of the year, and that was her. It's some bullshit not to see that recognized.
posted by Navelgazer at 12:54 PM on January 15, 2016 [5 favorites]


My feeling is that the ostensibly purpose of the oscars (recognising and awarding excellence in the industry) is less important to the industry than maintaining the Hollywood glamour facade. The PR benefits to the industry of the oscars is something I would have put a higher priority on than leaving alone the politics of what kind of movies the academy members are into.

People screaming "How can [movie/actor] not have won!!! What is wrong with the Academy?! It's a travesty!" is good industry PR. People saying "Wow, Hollywood really is one of those ugly racist throwback old-boys clubs isn't it?" is not good PR.
posted by anonymisc at 2:59 PM on January 15, 2016 [4 favorites]


Not only is Mad Max better than all the Oscarbait, it is obviously the best picture of the bunch this year -- and not only because the selection this year is rather sad. It could go toe-to-toe with any serious best picture nominee from the past.

I say this because frequently best picture nominations might as well be plays or books - they're notable more for the story and dialogue than for doing anything truly innovative with film. On the other hand, Mad Max is art that could only happen in the medium of film, and which uses film to its fullest extent. Many people have pointed out how it's practically a silent picture, and in that way marries the best parts of early film (the use of action and mime to convey story) to the best parts of modern film.

Better yet, it doesn't repeat most modern sins. It picks and chooses the best tools available to tell the best story it can. Check it out:

- It has tons of special effects, but pairs judicious digital technology with a solid grounding in practical effects. It feels like an another world, but grounded the way movies that misuse CGI (Star Wars prequels, Avatar, Transformers, etc.) don't
- It focuses on big action and has almost no dialogue... yet uses this conceit to tell a story about bodily autonomy, and how women and people with different abilities are more than capable and deserving of being the center of these stories. People make a big deal about Furiosa being a woman, but what about the fact that she's missing an arm? Or that Max himself has a leg brace? It's so smoothly played it doesn't even register as being groundbreaking.
- Has a sense of postmodern humor (that guitarist!) but doesn't throw away sincerity in favor of cheap irony or winking at the audience.
- The craftsmanship is masterful. Despite many 'similar' chaotic action movies being totally impossible to follow, in Mad Max it's very clear what's happening at any given moment - despite it having nearly zero exposition. Check out this analysis.
- Great score and brilliant use of both dietetic and non-diegetic music.
- Knows you don't need to dumb down a big budget movie for it to be wildly popular. It trusts the audience. Again: nearly zero exposition.

I think perhaps after a brief inevitable backlash, in the future Fury Road will be even better considered than it is now as an example of groundbreaking filmmaking; and not in the cheap way of Avatar, but in a real way that highlights the potential of the film medium. And beyond that, it's a really good, enjoyable, compelling film. Totally deserves the spot.
posted by Solon and Thanks at 11:57 AM on January 16, 2016 [15 favorites]


I just saw The Revenant. I am now even angrier about this year's Oscars.
posted by TwoStride at 7:34 PM on January 17, 2016


Spike Lee announces his boycott of this year's Oscars with a Hamilton reference!
posted by TwoStride at 6:35 AM on January 18, 2016




The Revenant is basically a remake of a 1971 Richard Harris movie. Not the kind of originality that deserves Best Picture.
posted by w0mbat at 10:30 AM on January 19, 2016


Three out of the last five Best Pictures are basically remakes of history, but that doesn't mean they're not artfully done.

(And let us not forget that one of the most creative auteurs of his generation finally got his Oscar for a straight-up remake.)
posted by Etrigan at 10:38 AM on January 19, 2016


The Revenant is very pretty,but it all feels very empty. DeCaprio is a bit try-hard in it too.
posted by Artw at 10:47 PM on January 19, 2016


Academy Members Defend Their Oscar Votes

TL;DR:

Penelope Ann Miller: #NotAllWhiteOscarVoters! What about other overlooked white people? Blame the studios!
Anonymous Voter: I voted for one, count them, one colored person!
Jeremy Larner: Sorry, that weren't me.

Their defenses don't help them nearly as much as they think they do.
posted by qcubed at 9:12 PM on January 20, 2016 [1 favorite]




I just stumbled across the fact that Lady Gaga is now an Oscar nominee for co-writing "Til It Happens to You" (previously) since The Hunting Ground apparently got a theatrical release. So... that should be an interesting performance in what's already going to be a very weird program.
posted by psoas at 1:20 PM on January 21, 2016


Clorox's Official 2016 Academy Award Predictions

Notes:
-I have only seen Inside Out, Straight Outta Compton, and Star Wars: The Force Awakens
-I literally flipped a coin between Straight Outta Compton and Bridge of Spies for Original Screenplay. Based on my results in several March Madness pools, this means Bridge of Spies will win
-For categories which included films I haven't seen (every category), I based my predictions on a variety of factors which included, but were not limited to, critical reviews, essays, popular reception, perceived themes and plot, country of origin, nominated individuals, nominated studios, title (official English translation, if applicable), and poster (as shown on http://oscar.go.com/nominees)
-The scratched-out prediction for Makeup and Hair is Mad Max: Fury Road
-The scratched-out prediction for Short Film (Animated) is Bear Story
-I am supremely confident in my predictions
posted by clorox at 1:41 AM on January 22, 2016




The British seem to have a different relationship with race. Even though their countryman Idris Elba has been pointing these problems out.

Also, they're from another generation?

I dunno. (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻
posted by qcubed at 9:49 AM on January 22, 2016


The amount of comments I've seen about "maybe the black actors just weren't good enough" is starting to become physically painful to me. It's just so out of line and like, really gross and stupid to mention like, Hattie McDaniel, like that makes up for it.

I haven't seen Creed, but Michael B. Jordan is one of the greatest actors of his generation, not to mention Idris Elba, Will Smith - they're not good actors? Please, what?

And then it's like, well, minorities just don't act as much or make films, whatreyagonnado and like, hey let's give prizes to EVERY black actor. I kind of think, yes, let's, if only to honor the amazing amount of systemic bias and racism that they had to not just ignore but also learn how to bypass and sidestep in order to make anything of any merit.

Also, the "other generation" thing WRT Charlotte Rampling is pretty crap.
posted by sweetkid at 11:06 AM on January 22, 2016 [3 favorites]


Yeah, I dunno. There's really not much left to say--those were the only two excuses I could think of and they're shit excuses, too.
posted by qcubed at 12:45 PM on January 22, 2016


The British seem to have a different relationship with race.

No, I'm pretty sure I'm this case she's just being a jerk.
posted by Artw at 12:48 PM on January 22, 2016


Could be worse.

Rich, coming from a group of people that likes to erase minorities when they can.
posted by qcubed at 12:57 PM on January 22, 2016


And then Michael Caine chimed in with some helpful advice that definitely was not dismissive or incredibly wrong-headed, gosh no, the opinions of old white men who only work when they want a new addition to their villa in the south of France are super important
posted by palomar at 2:24 PM on January 22, 2016


And then the Academy announced that it's going to overhaul its membership rules so the voters will more closely track the people actually working in film in a surprisingly non-kneejerk response that actually goes after the root of the problem (old white dudes dominate the voting membership) and not just the symptom.

Well, I'm surprised.
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 4:12 PM on January 22, 2016 [5 favorites]


That seems... a good idea?
posted by Artw at 4:45 PM on January 22, 2016


Looking through some of the other major1 film awards turns up the following nominees:

Best Actor2:
  • Michael B. Jordan, for Creed (Online Film Critics Society)
  • Will Smith, for Concussion (Golden Globes, Satellite Awards)
Best Supporting Actor:
  • Benicio del Toro, for Sicario (BAFTAs, Online Film Critics Society, Satellite Awards)
  • Idris Elba, for Beasts of No Nation (BAFTAs, Golden Globes, SAG Awards)
  • Oscar Isaac, for Ex Machina (Online Film Critics Society)
No women of color among any of them. So yeah, there's probably something to rokusan's comment way upthread that, at least for the women, it's more of a Hollywood problem than an Academy problem. (I chose not to count Jennifer Lopez's Razzie nomination for Worst Actress.)

1By which I mean "the ones I had heard of before" from Wikipedia's 2015 film awards category. In addition to the ones mentioned, I looked at the New York Film Critics Circle Awards, but that also had an all-white slate of acting nominees.
2Including both the Drama and the Musical or Comedy nominees from the Golden Globes
posted by DevilsAdvocate at 5:46 AM on January 23, 2016 [1 favorite]


And then the Academy announced that it's going to overhaul its membership rules

the predictable boring tone deaf response is obviously not worth discussing but if you're curious:
"Notes from the soon-to-be-retired peanut gallery," was the subject line of an email I received from one older member of the writers branch whose credits all came in the 1970s. "I'm an obvious candidate," he acknowledged, "which does not bother me too much. But I have voted, often, for Denzel Washington, Halle Berry, Samuel L. Jackson and other people of color. And such a procedure does raise the question of the nature of the Academy: is its membership based on merit and accomplishment or in-tune-ness with all that is currently popular?"

Some were even less accepting of the news. "It's trying to clear the decks so the show can go on in February without people screaming," vented Sam Weisman, 68, of the directors branch. "As a member who has stepped partially away from the industry, it feels like someone like me is being victimized." He continued, "I'm in the mentoring phase of my life — I teach — so I'm now supposed to not be relevant, even though I'm being as relevant, in working with young artists, as people who have current credits are..."

Tab Hunter, 84, a member of the actors branch, concurred, calling the announcement "bullshit." He elaborated, "Obviously, it's a thinly-veiled ploy to kick out older white contributors — the backbone of the industry — to make way for younger, 'politically-correct' voters..."

Documentary branch member Arnold Schwartzman, an Oscar winner for 1982's Genocide... "I just resent being characterized by some people as a racist. We judge films on the merits. There were some great films with white people that didn't get in that I was upset about. Race had nothing to do with any of it."
...
Another member of the PR branch who wished to remain anonymous fumed, "They did a knee-jerk reaction, when in fact the issue around actors [of color not receiving nominations] is in the actors branch — they are the ones who do the nominations!" He continued, "This 30-year rule is going to hit the PR branch and executives branch the hardest. What are you going to tell Bob Iger? He got in in 2005 when he took over Disney. He leaves in a year and goes to the NFL. So is he out? He is only building the Academy Museum."

A member of the documentary branch posted a bitingly sarcastic statement to Facebook: "The Motion Picture Academy, in the spirit of Affirmative Action (which has worked so well in our universities), is determined to take the Oscar vote away from the Old White Guys (including mine, possibly). Personally, I wish they'd examine their complex preferential ballot procedure which clearly isn't working right. But no, blame the Old White Guys."
tl;dr-- merit, no racism, affirmative action, white people being victimized, won't someone think of Bob Iger.
posted by twist my arm at 2:24 PM on January 23, 2016 [2 favorites]


Danny Devito:
“There were some good performances by people of color, and yeah, it’s blatant,” DeVito says. “We do live in a racist country. We have to evolve and have to realize that truth and reconciliation is here, too—it’s not only in South Africa or Cambodia. Young people have to learn what happened in our history, and we need people to know that we’re walking on the boards of genocide.”
posted by octothorpe at 2:06 PM on January 24, 2016 [14 favorites]


I kind of had know idea that DeVito was so enlightened. I knew he was a lot smarter than the characters he plays given the solid director's career he had but I had no idea about his politics.
posted by octothorpe at 3:23 PM on January 24, 2016


SNL: Screen Guild Awards
posted by homunculus at 4:17 PM on January 24, 2016 [2 favorites]


To this, another hot take.

To which I can only say, #MaherGobi.
posted by qcubed at 7:22 AM on January 27, 2016 [2 favorites]




« Older Can we go back to Hannibal? Or Mansa Musa?   |   You're sat at your desk, and you're reading... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments