Random Leftover Thoughts from Oscar Night...
Thursday, March 2, 2017 at 8:00AM by Nathaniel R
Yes, I'm trying to stave off the annual Post Oscar Depression. It's a real thing even if the medical community doesn't yet recognize it. So herewith some random final screengrabs from Oscar night and accompanying thoughts on topics we haven't totally covered yet over the past 3 days of Oscar reactions, recapping, post-mortem. (I promise we'll quit with Oscar 2016 by tonight and move on to other topics for those of you who've already moved on)
Did you gasp with how flowy Scarlett Johansson's gown was as she presented. I mean, did they have a wind machine on her or does she just walk really fast?
Speaking of Scarjo, she seemed unfazed when Jungle Book won Visual FX and the camera was on her but she was far more animated while Denzel Washington was being chatted up from the stage. When it it going to be Scarlett's turn to win some damn prizes? She's such a major talent and getting better all the time. Perhaps the right combo of role and film and year just hasn't presented itself yet.
I'm glad that someone (by which I mean Isabelle Huppert) enjoyed the joke about no one seeing Elle because I did not (we bitched about this on the podcast). This screengrab made me wonder though what Terrence Howard (love him checking Huppert's reaction out, here) and Brie Larson (also giggly about the joke) thought of Elle. Nothing would make me happier than to know which acting branch members gave Huppert the nomination via their #1 placements on ballots. (I mean Jessica Chastain obviously but who else worships Huppert?)
Keith Urban is low maintenance obedient. Jimmy Kimmel tells him to close his eyes and imagine treats and he totally does. Nicole pretends to close her eyes and then just flicks them right back open. Does she also shake her Christmas gifts to determine contents? Maybe she doesn't like surprises?
Leslie Mann and John Cho, who were such good funny presenters when they shared the Sci-Tech winners, were very excited about the candy coming down. As was I. I don't know why since I wasn't eating it. This is the moment I realized that Dominic Cooper had shown up (even if he's not sitting with his girlfriend -- why are they so shy about publicity together?) and that Rosemarie De Witt, who has a small part in La La Land, was also in attendance.
But back to Leslie Mann & John Cho. Rewatching the show I can safely say they were the funniest presenters (Kate McKinnon's comedy a runner up) -- so charming and funny that we need them co-starring in a comedy real soon, okay, Hollywood?
And I think Viola & Denzel & their spouses will totally back me up on this as they were here for that presentation.
The candy falling from the sky followed by donuts and cookies paid unexpectedly great dividends with reaction shots. May we also have a reteaming of the Hidden Figures cast with a Nicole Kidman cameo? Loved that seating arrangement.
Speaking of Candy, this was the most clever dish at my Oscar party. Jason brought in gummy brains on a pink pillbox hat in honor of Jackie? In poor taste, purposefully, but poor taste in that John Waters kind of fun way perfect for Oscar parties that made everyone giggle.
More tales from my party. I can't remember if I told you - I probably did, at least on instagram? -- but when Lin-Manuel Miranda came out to do his new Moana rap, Christopher (my furry house guest) sat on the remote and abruptly changed the channel to screams from the room.
A minute later into the song he did it again after which we had to hide the remote.
Christopher very much enjoyed the party but not the Oscars. He is still pissed that Lion, his favorite, lost. His favorite hiding spot (though he doesn't hide much as an attention hogging non-shy cat) is behind or on top of the DVD right by the screeners.
Remember that moment when Matt Damon "tripped" Jimmy Kimmel and they glared at each other? On second viewing, the audience cackling is much funnier -- they are really into it. Especially seat mates and copresenters Shirley Maclaine and Charlize Theron who are all but screaming with laughter.
Guess you had to be there?
In Sunday Night's performance the role of Everyone Around the World Watching Viola Davis Win the Oscar will be played by Russell Hornsby.
Admit it you teared up, at least inside, too!
How cute was it when Meryl tried to hide from the cameras behind her ever patient hubby Don Gummer (think of how often he's had to sit for hours in uncomfortable suits while his wife was celebrated. We're talking thousands of hours! If anyone would like to do a montage of Meryl & Don from the 1980s through now sitting in their Oscar seats I bet it would provoke just buckets of tears from their stability... and also the realization of how much older we all are every time Meryl is given a trophy.
We also learned that Don feeds his wife. She wiggled her fingers in anticipation as he handed her Junior Mints to nibble.
We considered doing a whole piece on star reactions to their clips but there weren't enough really amusing ones this year to make it worth the time. But consider these three screen caps, post performance clip:
It's safe to say that the number one most effective and most endearing way to deal with awards show nerves, and the anxiety that comes from sitting in a room in which you're being lauded and forced to watch your own work in bite-sized often oddly chosen form in front of all of your peers, is to have a really grounding loved one right next to you. After your clip you can turn to and share a warm conspiratorial smile. They know you. They probably know how you really felt on set that week or about that whole performance. They love you off screen, too.
I know not everyone was happy about Casey Affleck winning but as someone who firmly believes in separating art from artists (I mean, I can't keep up with all their personal lives, can you?, plus I don't even want to in most cases) and someone who thinks the performance is pretty great (not Best of the year, but almost) I was okay with the win, even though I would have far preferred Viggo's first or Denzel's third. But this hug moved me.
There aren't that many sets of Oscar winning siblings in the world and most of them aren't as close as the Brothers Affleck (with their lifelong friend Matt Damon, captured applauding them accidentally off to the side -- scratch that. There's no way the Oscar directors/cameraman didn't position themselves to not have Damon in the shot). There's Joan Fontaine and Olivia de Havilland (who were famously not fond of each other), there's Warren & Shirley (who aren't that connected in pop culture to the point where people are often surprised to learn they're brother and sister -- yes, even now that they're ancient. Every time I mention it, as with this tweet
In hubbub over EnvelopeGate, let us not forget the cuteness of Shirley MacLaine waving to her little brother from the audience! #Oscars pic.twitter.com/ox5kSXWZPn
— Nathaniel Rogers (@nathanielr) February 27, 2017
I can safely expect someone to explain:
They're brother and sister ?!?!?"
as its happened every time I've ever mentioned it whether it's the 80s, the 90s, the Aughts or this week!
One of the reasons it's great when any Oscar night spreads the wealth is that you get to see more than just one team in closeups. As a longtime fan of Denis Villeneuve, I was thrilled that he was thanked from the stage for Arrival's one win. (Look to the left: They sat the real Saroo Brierley behind him... not sure where they were seated but it seems kind of far back)
Even though the men of Moonlight got a lot of exposure and probably career boosts this year, we still didn't get to see enough of Trevante Rhodes and Andre Holland on Oscar night so here they are clapping for a Moonlight win, I forget which.
Even though it was hard to process Moonlight's win on the night of the Oscars, given the fiasco in presentation (which we've amply covered), it's settling in how beautiful and historic the choice was, isn't it? The cast was quite understandably overwhelmed. I mean look at this perfecct cap of Jharrel Jerome (who plays the teenage Kevin) hugging Alex R Hibbert (who plays the littlest Chiron)!
Finis.
Please do share all of your random leftover thoughts that you don't know quite what to do with it. Post Oscar Malaise can wait until tomorrow to arrive!
Reader Comments (58)
I hated the fact that Halle Berry got to sit front & center in the audience? Is she really anybody important? Her distracting Bozo hairdo must've really bothered the person stuck sitting behind her. Even when the local yockels came off the bus tour, none of the regulars knew who she was or bothered to greet her. Even the sexual predator from Chicago kissed Meryl's wrist, skipped Halle 'whoever that is' and kissed the next wrist in line.
TOM: The first -- and so far only -- African American to win Best Actress ALWAYS will be someone important even if she does nothing else but wear bad wigs for the rest of her career. The perception that "local yokels" may not know who she is is completely immaterial.
I think this is an Oscar for the ages, very enjoyable and unforgettable. I want to live through it again.
The season has left me exhausted. Although, I'm happy with most of the results. And feel we had a superior year for movies over 2015 (yuk). It's sort of irksome everyone celebrates Moonlight's best picture win as a surprise. Since the expansion of the best picture roster from five to anywhere between five and ten – there are usually at least two or three movies vying for the main prize. La La Land wasn't loved. But Moonlight was and for those who didn't love it they certainly respected its execution and intend. By the way, like 12 Years a Slave, only three wins for the black movie. The same categories too (supporting actress/actor), adapted screenplay, and best picture.
Did you find Jimmy's Moonlight happy ending joke funny?
The girl sitting behind Halle Berry deserves a tribute.
Faye Dunaway deserves one last great role. To see her was great, even in that disaster.
I need more Kate McKinnon coverage. I mean, can she host everything from now on? Including my life?
Also, you bring up Rosemarie de Witt. I had to actively contain a squeal of delight when she popped up in La La Land (out of respect for fellow filmgoers). And even in her 14 seconds of screentime she was so so damn perfect and mesmerising to watch.
I need Kate McKinnon hosting my life an Rosemarie de Witt appearing in a movie I can watch each night. Ideally for more than 14 freaking seconds. (Though I'm not bashing La La Land! I'm sick of people doing that. Misguided souls that they are)
cal, you read my mind! Now that is a star.
No one believes in an absolute separation of art from the artists, just like no one believes an absolute freedom of speech. It simply comes down to what bad behavior you're willing to draw a line on. If tomorrow, the president of the United States astonished the entire world by getting involved with an Oscar-caliber movie of some sort and receive a subsequent nomination, I'm not so sure the artist/art purists would continue to insist on a dogmatic separation.
Anyway, in Affleck's case, the line is nearly nonexistent, as his personal behavior was directly intertwined with his art and how he chose to pursue it.
This is really really disappointing Nathaniel. You can't be offended by Trump and turn s blind eye to cases such as Affleck's. Actors-directors-celebrities CANT be held to different standards from everyone else. We can't, as a society, give them a pass.
How do you think women feel seeing men such as Affleck and Gibson being lauded and awarded? It's a SLAP in the face. How do you think former victims of sexual assault or harassment feel? What example does it set to boys???? It reminds me so much of that epic Michelle Obama speech. It normalizes, approves of and rewards behavior that can't and shouldn't be tolerated.
It's about example. It's about what we as a society consider more important. Is being good in a movie more important than human decency and respect???
You are so sensitive, rightfully so, to LGBT causes, but your "forgiveness" of cases such as Allen and this one really may rub people the wrong way.
Couldn't see shit but I was happy to be there!
I love how the Internet has decided that Larson is our new Rosa Parks because she kissed but did not clap Affleck. The stupidity of the times is unspeakable.
This article is really good.
http://www.elle.com/culture/movies-tv/a43408/casey-affleck-oscar-win/
Its really interesting that people are having this discussion after an OJ-centric awards season.
Not comparing what OJ dos with anybody else's misdoings, but how celebrity clouds and judgements.....
Denzel seemed arrogant to me. As if he had directed Citizen Kane or something.
Busy + Michelle 👯👯👯👯👯❤️❤️❤️❤️
Peggy Sue - Ha! It's inevitable that she'll eventually do a movie with some man accused of some serious misdeed (Hollywood is full of them, after all). That will be an interesting press tour.
I really enjoyed the show even with the big screw up over BP. Meryl was funny,the stars looked wonderful, there were some good songs. And a big finale.
I re-watched Arrival, Moonlight & LLL to get past my feeling of post Oscar depression.
Maybe it was because I enjoyed the films more this year but this is way better than watching The Revenant win all those awards. Films with women, and films about gays - great year.
Have they ever used that many crystals on stage before? Evidently many found them distracting, but I loved it. If you can't use them for the Oscars, then when?
The hug between Jharrel Jerome and Alex R Hibbert was my favourite moment of the night hands down. The academy snapchat also has a video of Jharrel and Ashton Sanders hugging and crying, which is a must see: http://lunadiego.tumblr.com/post/157790859975/capitancassian-tarell-alvin-mccraney-ashton
Like Amanda and many others I AM NOT happy with Casey's win. Obvisouly we all know that Nat does not condomn Casey's horrible actions, but I kind of understand what he means Amanda when he says "believes in separating art from artists ". Watching movies is not my job, so I can choose to see or not see certain films regardless of the accolades that they receive (I skipped Mel's latest and have recently decided to stop watching Woody Allen's new entries). But when it comes to people like Nat or newspaper critics or even youtubers, thats how they pay their bills so, by covering the entire awards season and all that it entails. I wish that films by Mel Gibson, Polanski, Woody Allen, etc, etc were not in the conversation but that's the way its been unfortunately.
If anything while I love some Hollywood trivia about its various families, I wished that Nat hadn't written that text about Casey. For the very simple reason that I hope that he never enters another wards race again, and I don't want to read more about his win.
Those are my 2 cents. NOw if you excuse I'm going to watch my BLuray of Moonlight and cry a bit more.
Amanda and Milton -- i understand why people want blanket condemnation but i'll just never be that guy. I believe in the law and in 'innocent until proven guilty' and in the courts and in civilized society rather than banishments and torch mobs and the like. I speak out all the time on misogyny and homophobia and all these other things and will continue to do so but i'm just not willing to vilify individual people who I don't know. It's not in me.
And Trump is an entirely different matter. He is an elected government official who has admitted to abusing women and lies every single time he opens his mouth and invites treasonous behavior and has power to destroy the world and does not back our allies of decades. If you can't see the different here between a powerful poitician with power to actually affect all of our lives and filmmakers and actors making art I just have no idea what to say.
Obviously with some people i have stronger opinions then other. I grew up watching Mel Gibson movies and listening to his interviews and seeing his breakdown so I believe he's an anti-semite and homophobe because I've seen ample evidence. But even so if he makes a masterpiece, it'll still be a masterpiece (if you remove art by people who have questionable morals or beliefs you will have not much art left because no one is perfect)
but the reason i object to Mel Gibson being invited back into Hollywood's good graces is because he's not a good filmmaker! Braveheart was awful and sadistic and homophobic and Hacksaw Ridge is corny.
I don't "forgive" any of these things because a) i wasn't there and don't know what occurred and b) i am not the one who has to forgive as I was not the victim. I'm not going to relitigate anything here but there is a HUGE difference between convicted crimes wherein we have all the details and people settling out of court or not being charged at all.
I actually had the feeling Moonlight might upset in BP for the last week. Although I'd never imagined how it DID happen.
It's still.... wow!
Meryl and her husband are always cute to watch.
I liked that Can't stop the Feeling was the opening act. Everyone had fun.
As i watched the telecast from France, i was sooooo tired at the end that i just turned off my laptop when Faye said "LaLaLand" and went to sleep (it was 6:15 am in my part of the world). I think it was the first time in thirteen years i didn't watch through the Best Picture acceptance speech. So imagine my surprise when i woke up to realize i missed the moment from the night the world will remember (too bad because it was a pretty good night, from the gorgeous sets to the great job from Kimmel).
Another thing i need to come out is my surprise each time i read that Washington's overacting in Fences (just as difficult to bear for me as Meryl's work in August) is Nathaniel's top choice from all the male performances of the year ...... From a man with such a great taste (i mean, the Kidman obsession is proof enough), i just don't understand. Would you explain ?
2015 - Spotlight
2016 - Moonlight
Future predictions:
2017 - Starlight (?)
2018 - Headlight (?)
Will they try to tie the supporting actress winners from 1978-1981, when all shared the same initials (M.S.)?
I don't understand all the hate towards Halle Berry, the first, and so far only, black Best Actress Oscar winner.
As for the controversy over Casey Affleck and Mel Gibson, I agree in theory that we shouldn't honour those performers who display egregiously bad behaviour, including domestic violence and sexual assault, in their private life, but if we're genuinely going to punish bad behaviour, where do we start? The reality is that talent and virtue don't always go hand-in-hand, and it's unfair to those of us who aren't successful actors, filmmakers, and writers, to pretend otherwise. The lack of Oscars on our mantlepiece aren't a sign of moral failure, and neither are the Oscars won by Roman Polanski and Woody Allen, to name two, indicators of their moral rectitude.
Also, I think Presidential candidates and other politicians should be held to a higher standard than artists. Of course criminal behaviour should never go unpunished, but as far as moral behaviour goes, a political representative, particularly one that is supposed to represent an entire country, should not be a racist or a misogynist, because their role requires them to act on behalf of all people. By contrast, a great performance or piece of filmmaking can, and should be, judged in isolation of a performer/filmmaker's personal life, otherwise, where would that leave thd likes of Wagner or Charles Dickens?
Let us not equate Trump with Allen/Affleck/Polanski please. The former has control and/or influence of our civil rights, while the latter can only present us with options on how to use our money, time, and attention. There is a difference in the sphere of influence, and while there are links and symptoms shared that are grave and require conversation with both camps, to treat them as equal is a dangerous game.
The only thing that sometimes gives me hives in this site is that sometimes, "art is separate from the artist" becomes "defend the artist because they create or participate in the art that we love," which are two entirely different things. I acknowledge that that is indeed a tricky line to navigate, but I think it's a line that should at least be attempted to stick to.
I'm not sure if Nat misread stella's post intentionally or not - but as I read it - they were making a perfectly sound analogy...
"If tomorrow, the president of the United States astonished the entire world by getting involved with an Oscar-caliber movie of some sort and receive a subsequent nomination, I'm not so sure the artist/art purists would continue to insist on a dogmatic separation."
...yes, Trump as president is an exception. No, Trump as actor/producer/director is not. That's the ever-loving point. We could even strip the presidency away from Trump (in an alternate universe) and it still wouldn't make a difference - that art/artist dogma would evaporate - for obvious reasons.
So then it becomes about what we choose is acceptable and not. Obviously, sexual assault accusations and pay-offs are perfectly acceptable in some circles. Innocent until proven guilty applies in a court of law. Not public opinion - and certainly not awards season. Unless we're willing to assert that Bill Cosby or OJ (for that matter) are perfectly innocent.
KBJr, exacly. What we choose as acceptable or not.
KBJr -- i understand passions on all sides of this issue but let me just say you need citizens like me (haha) who can serve on juries because we're relatively uninterested or swayed by courts of public opinion when it comes to accusations of crimes.. I would urge everyone who likes to join in the public shaming of people for accusations of crime (no matter how repulsive the crime) to watch the Meryl Streep classic A CRY IN THE DARK. It's a searing damning account of courts of public opinion... as is the classic THE CRUCIBLE.
In reality not everyone who is accused of a crime has committed one so even if that margin is only 1% it's best under simple laws of humanity to extend people the benefit of the doubt unless they've actually been prosecuted or there is public proof of what you're upset about if it's not a crime so much as a gross character flaw (like racism or homophobia).
. I know it's complicated for people, emotionally, but it's possible to do this and still condemn rape culture, hate crimes, and everything else.
I always feel so icky having to type all this up but it comes up from time to time and I'm just not going to change my opinion about it. I'm not even a fan of Casey Affleck (though i like both of his oscar nominated performances a lot) but rewarding an actor for being a good actor is not remotely the same thing as saying they're a great person.
in the end we have to live within civilization, not mob rule.
the only people who should be judging crimes are the people involved with investigations, prosecution and defense thereof.
KBJr -- i'm not sure what OJ or Cosby have to do with this discussion. There is shitloads of evidence against both of them which has been well documented for years, exhaustively really. Cosby seems like a really horrible person but i'm not going to pretend he wasn't really really funny on The Cosby Show or that it wasn't a seminal sitcom in US history. I dont like fantasy rewrites of history.
Anyway, this is much different than having an opinion that you're willing to crucify someone else for about things you've heard about them that you have no real evidence for or that they haven't been charged with (just rumored to have done) or where there is great conflicts abotu the details of alleged crimes and so on...
Clement - i've already written about FENCES in both post form and in my awards and on the podcast so that's all i really have to say about that performance. I love it.
Hi Nathaniel
I am not having a go at you, but would actually love to hear your reflections on the fact that you said LA LA LAND was a lock and the key had been thrown away (or something similar) for Best Picture (and obviously you were wrong on that). Is the Academy changing, and do pundits need to recalibrate their way of predicting?
(If you have already addressed this, apologies and please direct me to the post. (I haven't had a chance to listen to the podcast yet, either.))
1. there's always something a little off with Streep's Oscar outfits. At first i thought - wow, she has a decent looking outfit on. then i realized she also had pants on. 2. i, too, hope faye dunaway gets at least one final great role - she can eat up the screen in a good way, too. 3. you heard it here first....Annette Bening, next year could be here time, for playing the dying Oscar winner & neurotic / nuts actress Gloria Grahame.
Your cat has very good taste...the Afleck bros hug is sweet...and I do hope we see more of Jharrel Jerome in the future
I wonder if there has ever been a wrong envelope before but no-one reported it because it did not change the outcome. Consider if LaLaLand had been voted Best Picture winner, then no-one would have had to interrupt the speeches and announce the real winner. Similarly, if the wrong envelope was Best Supporting Actor and Faye Dunaway said "Moonlight". Was Warren Beatty wondering whether, given La La Land was expected to win, would it make any difference?
Now, when watching any old ceremonies, should we try and read the outside of the envelopes.
Jharrel Jerome was just so full of emotion.
what are the odds of kate mckinnon playing faye on this weekend's snl?
somebody put michelle williams and busy phillips in a film together!
thanks for reminding me of the leslie mann/john cho bit - they were great
vaus -- i think this and the incident in 1963 (which we shared the video of) reveal that if there was ever an error in the past, it would have been corrected on the broadcast, no matter the embarrassment level. Therefore everyone needs to let the Marisa Tomei rumor go.
jimmy -- after snubbing her best performance ever this year, i'm not going to bank on anything happening for Bening (beyond an Honorary which I feel sure will happen if she lives to her 80s.
Travis -- i mean i definitely need to adjust my thinking. precursors especially are no longer the 'bank on this' thing they used to be which is SO GOOD FOR THE OSCARS I CAN'T TELL YOU. It always sucked how predictable everything was. (that said the winners of acting remain the place where having an early lead means you'll win. People just dont get overthrown once they've given a few speeches.
I believe Michelle Williams and Isabelle Huppert are kind of close (they've been photographed talking to each other a lot at these events). Michelle would be the kind of actor with the taste to nominate Huppert #1 on her ballot. Jessica Chastain, of course. Maybe Tilda and Nicole Kidman, too.
I respect you Nathaniel, and love this site, but your ability to "separate art from artist" speaks to your privelege in this situation. I am a sexual assault survivor. This Oscar season was just another reminder that there are no repercussions for men who harass and assault women. I don't have the benifit of emotionally detaching from this. I also experienced harassment and alienation at a place I worked, and ultimately had to leave, when I married male superior hit on me and I reported it. It hurt my career as he went unaddressed and thrived. This is the exact case for Affleck. As someone who loves actresses and diversity and women's voices, Affleck used his power and position to harass women working for him. The industry chose to reward him anyways. It may not have the far reaching effect of 45, but it certainly impacts how women in the industry (one of the women was cinematographer) feel about their safety and security and the value of their voices.
Who believed the Tomei myth? Some gay with a pen was being cruel because out of the nominees in her category she wasn't suppose to win. But bizarre winners were standard in supporting actress for decades prior to.
@Nat
Great fan of "A Cry in the Dark" - but I'm in no way advocating the public shaming of Affleck. I simply believe that assigning the benefit of the doubt can (and should) be divorced from rewarding someone with an ultimate prize. One can proceed with caution (i.e. steering away from reverence) without publicly condemning the accused. That's ultimately my tact in this case. None of that entails mob rule. But it does erase even an inadvertent nod in support of perpetuating rape culture.
As a Coen brothers fanatic, I feel the need to point out that there is another pair of Oscar-winning brothers who are indeed very close!
Nathaniel, it's hardly mob rule to withhold a degree of cultural prestige and acclaim from someone who has been accused by a reasonably believable individual of rape, sexual harassment, or other vile behavior. That's different from saying anyone who's ever been accused by anyone of something unsavory is undeserving of human dignity and should go to jail. I may criticize the Academy for honoring an accused sexual harasser, but if I were a juror in a criminal trial, I would of course vote to acquit a defendant if there's reasonable doubt. There's a difference between an Academy Award and constitutional rights.
My issue with the dogma of art/artist separation is that it abdicates the role of the Academy, the movie industry, film critics and even movie-goers as arbiters of success in a highly visible and influential industry. You might see yourself as just some guy who blogs about movies, but as an institution, film critics can be kingmakers in an influential industry. So, of course, are Academy voters. The notion that accolades *should* reflect nothing about an actor's virtues is nice in theory, but I don't think anyone can seriously deny that actors nonetheless *are* many of society's biggest role models and that movie-makers do shape morals and values through cultural influence and ability to connect with audiences.
I suppose if you were an Emmy voter in the 1980s, you might have voted for Bill Cosby out of admiration for his work on the Cosby Show. I don't dispute that you would have done so with good intentions. But neither are you free to deny--especially had his alleged crimes been widely known then--that there are serious moral issues with giving him further professional success and power. Your view is dangerously close to saying, "I don't care how many women he allegedly raped or assaulted, as long as I can satisfy myself that there's a possibility that he didn't do it, and in some cases even if I can't, I'm going to keep supporting and enabling him because he creates worthy art."
Nathaniel- thank you for all the delicious and insightful content you've provided this and previous Oscar seasons! I check your site multiple times a day and am so appreciative of all the quality and enthusaism always present.
You articulated the dangers of the court of public opinion so beautifully (this is a conversation I've struggled with this week as simply mentioning that I enjoyed Affleck's performance in Manchester earned me an accusation of being a "rape apologist"). While I certainly recognize and fight against (and know you do as well) the highly rampant and problematic culture of sexual assault, harassment, and objectification, and while I believe with all my heart that any accusations of such nature should be taken very seriously, I'm with you in simply refusing to hate someone just because a buzzfeed article told me to, especially when I'm privy to absolutely none of the details or evidence. I just rewatched A Cry in the Dark (on a Meryl marathon following her Globes speech) and you are quite astute in referencing that film in this situation.
Anyway, thanks again. Looking forward to this year's coverage!
Great words Percy.
John Cho and Leslie Mann were so good, especially her dig about the SciTech awards being so prestigious nobody at the Oscars was invited.
Leslie Mann and John Cho were adorable and charming. They'd be great as hosts. I didn't find Kate McKinnon particularly funny.
Well, Nathaniel, you just lost another reader. Perhaps if you take the time to read through your posts and comments thereto, you'll find that you were not the one to share the video of the 1963 envelope problem. I don't want credit for being the one to point it out, but I don't want you taking credit either. Signing off forever.
Nat, the 1963 mixup is not quite the same. What would they do if the film announced was the winner in both the category being presented and in the wrongly provided envelope category? Would they speak up? Maybe they would not if it was the right answer via the wrong process.
In all the discussion of the process of two envelopes, I have not seen any mention of if and when the second envelopes are opened by the accountants to check the announcement. Or have the accountants memorised the winners before the ceremony. If they do open the
second envelope, then the Lead Actress envelope should have been already open before being given to Dunaway and Beatty.
If I were an employer within the film industry, I would refuse to work with, far less hire, Casey Affleck, on account of the credible sexual assault/harassment allegations made against him and his decision to settle out-of-court, which indicates likely guilt. If the industry is sincere about women's rights, I would expect them to effectively blacklist the likes of Affleck and Mel Gibson, until they had undergone a thorough sexual assault awareness program or the like, and perhaps some form of appropriate counselling. That said, in the absence of a criminal prosecution, I'm not sure it's healthy to condemn such individuals for life, but only for as long as we believe is necessary for them to undergo genuine rehabilitation.
But when it comes to awards, I'm afraid to say, I'm a purist. Are these awards supposed to honour individual achievement and excellence in art, or are they supposed to honour virtue and moral character? If it is the latter, as I believe is the intention, I'm afraid we must separate the art from the artist, and judge the former on its own merits, irrespective of how vile we may consider the artist's personal life to be. To do otherwise risks discrediting and invalidating the entire purpose of the awards in question. If one believes that Affleck gave the best lead actor performance of the year, one should honour that performance with the Best Actor prize.
That said, as I stated above, however impressive Affleck's ability as an actor may be, I would certainly not hire him, were I in the position of a producer, director, or studio executive, and I would make it clear that he was being blacklisted on account of his alleged sexual misconduct. Refusing to hire and work with such people would send out the right message, and serve as an appropriate form of punishment.
RJL --i have NO idea what you're talking about. I specifically credited Scott Feinberg (who i found that from in the post). I always try to give credit. bye.
Marco -- this. That's what i'm talking about. I wouldn't want to work with these people either but you have to judge art on art. I mean, if we're going to start chucking out people with icky lives we lost probably about half of the masterworks of the world because most people have done a questionable thing or two in their lives and some have even done criminal things. I mean do you really want to go without HITCHCOCK films? I will never.
if you dont separate art from artists you will never be able to enjoy art with anything like consistency unless you are going to do complete moral criminal and intellectual background checks on any performer or filmmmaker before you watch their films.
Doug -- thank you. it can feel lonely to refuse to accept the internet's absolutist judgment on every situation. Just yesterdday I noticed that the feminist filmmaker Ana Lily Armipour was being attacked endlessly and considering leaving twitter simply because she stated that she loved Casey Affleck's performance and people turned on her.
but this is a weird thing for me to now have to talk about because i have no particular feelings about Casey Affleck and was hoping he wouldn't win (because i preferred two other performances and because I didn't want people to be hurt or feel gross about it given the allegations) so I regret posting the photo now.
sigh.
i'm just trying to do my best to fill the blog with content each day.
/3rtful -- i know it's silly but obviously a lot of people believed that Tomei myth because it was talked about for years thereafter.
Percy -- i appreciate your calm rebuttal even if i dont share your conclusion (i am not a rape apologist. but I am also deeply deeply uncomfortable that the internet has slowly turned people into raging idealogues and everyone into the judge of everyone else in the past 10 years especially-- i don't think it's good for people's critical thinking skills or even their mental health to carry all this mental rage for other people (mostly strangers) around with them and be on guard for offenses and outrages 24/7. There are enough real problems in the world and real evil people attempting to destroy the lives of others for their own personal benefits for people to get this angry with each other about all the time about what celebrities say or do or are rumored to have done.
S -- I appreciate this and I know if there was a gay basher running around being lauded it would also gross me out all season. I understand it as a frequently oppressed minority (I can't believe that we have to worry about our civil rights STILL in 2017, and we have to be thankful that some rich man's daughter happens to not hate us in order to maintain them).. But I do think it's important (for mental health) to be able to enjoy art without constantly monitoring who made it for fear that you're enjoying something someone awful made. Thousands of people are involved in making each film we enjoy. I am quite sure that there are homophobes, racists,and misogynists on every film set in some capacity (just as there are in every field of employment). But if that means we can't enjoy any film or television show (or anything else really) because of moral issues with the artists... i'm afraid it's become our problem and not theirs.