Yes. I was mistaken in my belief that he was in the Best Actor category.
And I certainly am glad that he is not suffering from any of the problems from which the character he played is suffering.
Calling him a “bad actor” is really “small potatoes” compared to that.
I thank you for pointing that out to me.
Your list reminded me just how much I love the acting of Morgan Freeman, Don Cheadle, Halle Berry, Viola Davis and others.
IMO, such wonderful actors fully deserve their Oscars.
By the way, I started a duplicate thread in the forum IMHO.
In that thread (which is now closed), a poster named “gracer” made a wonderful point:
Gracer posted the following:
I have never given a second thought to the fact the Oscars have men and women in separate categories. Gracer is right on the money. This is 2016 and that is just ridiculous!
There is nothing at all ridiculous about separate acting categories for men & women since a large majority of the time, the roles played by men & women are different and could not be played by either sex. As I wrote in the closed thread, the Oscars have always had separate categories for men & women, as have the Tony Awards, Emmy Awards, etc…
I suggest you read your whole post again, and consider what it really says. You say it is “entirely reasonable” that, going by pure artistic worth alone, there be no black (or, presumably, non-white of any shade) nominees at all. As I said upthread, I find that borderline incredible for a single year. This is now the second in a row. Do you really believe that not one single non-white actor produced a lead or supporting performance worthy of being considered, in these two years? You find that an entirely reasonable proposition?
Can’t tell whether that last part there is sarcasm – or what those “quotation marks” are “for” – but for the record: Stallone is a knowledgeable writer and director who of course doesn’t actually talk like Rocky Balboa in real life; he’s been winning various supporting-actor awards for believably delivering his lines while in-character, but it’s all an act; and, IMHO, it’s a pretty convincing act.
No one has said that there were no non-white roles worthy of being considered. What so many people keep glossing over is that each category only contains the top five. For all anyone knows, the 6th & 7th choices could very well have been Black.
There are two possibilities for why there are no black nominees:
or
Based on the movies I’ve seen, and what I’ve read, 2 seems a lot more likely to me than 1. I think such a boycott is reasonable. Further, it would be damn effective. If no (or very few) prominent black actors and directors show up for the awards ceremony, the Academy will definitely reconsider how they do things. This is one of those times, like the Missouri college football team, in which such a boycott could actually work quickly.
If he is using that standard, its a misleading one. People will buy what they want to hear. The popularity of albums have little correlation on how many of those minorities are in power, either producing, directing, etc. The Oscars are seen as based on artistic merit, which disproportionately falls on the creators of a work, not which ones are popular. The most popular movies are often not the same ones nominated.
Indian Americans are less than 1 percent of the population. They are statistically below the margin of error, so you cannot hold them up as an accurate measurement because we don’t have a large enough sampling size. On the other hand, African Americans are 13% of the population, yet they didn’t get nominated once in 24 categories? You could throw darts at a board blindfolded and hit a 13% area at least once. When the difference is that lopsided, something fishy’s going on. Unless you simply think blacks are not talented enough to win awards.
Asians themselves are only about 6% of the population so again, very small sampling size. And yeah, I do think there’s a bias against Asians too so there’s another bit of discrimination there as well. But even though Asians do well economically, they are over represented in certain industries, like medicine. It may be that there simply isn’t as big of a desire for Asians to get into Hollywood as there is for blacks and whites, I don’t know, but again, small sampling coupled with skewed career paths makes it a little more understandable. Besides, you’ve misrepresented the stats. Black writers/producers/directors etc., not just actors, did not get nominated this year. Yet you limited the Oscar discussion for Asians to just actors. Why? Ang Lee won for Best Director in 2006 and 2012. The complaint about blacks is that they weren’t even nominated for anything else.
I’m not trying to say they must win 13% of the Oscars or get nominated every year. I’m saying when you take 13% of the people and reduce their contributions to 0, then there’s something other than random chance going on. Some years they’ll do better than average, some years they’ll do worse, but from 13 to 0 is a statistically significant shift that didn’t happen by random chance. My question is simply what is it that caused it then?
Where are you getting that young black men are more aggressive? And did you think to compare that to their economic situation?
Kung Fu is misleading. Asians are allegedly experts, but the stereotype also extends to kung fu masters being peaceful and calm and only attacking when they need to defend themselves or others (or avenging the death of their master). Given that stereotype, there’s not much negatives to go in and change.
By definition, the five nominees in each category are those deemed worthy of being considered for the award. That’s what “nomination” means.
Yes, but who nominates them? Academy members. Who are 95% white and 77% male. Who MAY not be voting for (or even watching) “black” films, and MIGHT not deem black actors worthy. That’s what “bias” means.
The nominations are derived from all the actors who are Academy members submitting up to five names and ranking them. If an actor doesn’t receive enough 1st or 2nd place rankings they’re not going to get a nomination. Without seeing those submissions this discussion is meaningless. It could be a majority of the ballots were not all white, but so many black actors were named no one received enough votes to make the nomination cutoff. Or maybe there were a few, but were only ranked 4th or 5th on the ballots that named them. Will Smith could theoretically been on every ballot and still not receive a nomination.
Indeed. The process has a structural bias.
How will this impact the annual Oscar Pool? Will there be a section where we have to click a “Race” button to ensure an appropriate level of diversity? I’d hate to see Spike Lee get his panties in a twist over this, too.
So are you admitting that you misrepresented what I said? Because people can easily go and read what I actually said and compare it what you claim I said.
As for the “entirely reasonable” bit, are you referring to this paragraph and misrepresenting my words again?
If so, I think it speaks for itself. Which part of it do you have a problem with? what do you disagree with? What error have I made? Or is that you just find me stating it distasteful?
Yes, I am equally sure that there were black actors and (even more) white actors whose performances were worthy of consideration and yet those other white actors didn’t get the nomination either. I know they are less visible but I’m sure they feel slighted nonetheless.
Elsewhere in the thread there are figures of nominations for acting oscars over the last 15 years or so and the %age of black people runs at around 10%. That’s in line with the demographics of the USA. I’m not sure what the complaint is about. With %ages of that nature you would expect clustering of nominations and non-nominations even with a perfectly random process. You certainly wouldn’t expect an equal spread of ethnic groups every year.
So what do you want? Mandatory quotas for all ethnic groups? just black people? in all categories or just some? every year or just now and again?
Or, perhaps just let the artists make good movies and nominate on the basis of merit rather than skin colour.
That’s what everyone wants!
Trouble is, there are a lot of people who are convinced that merit is NOT the basis being used. The nomination process is not transparent, so no one can be sure what basis is being used. No one can actually be sure that even the white nominees are the best of the year.
Is an average Academy member even qualified to judge what is or is not a “worthy” performance? Or are they just nominating their friends? or not nominating their enemies? Who knows!
Sure, an open and visible nomination process would be a great idea, as would a board representative of the population as a whole.
Still wouldn’t (and shouldn’t) guarantee black actors appearing on the nominations every year. And that’s the acid test for the Spike Lees of this world. Given an unbiased nomination process would they still accept an all-white best actor list?
I was not being sarcastic. I was genuinely thanking you for bringing that to my attention.
As far as the quotation marks go, I guess I have been using some search engines so often lately that I’ve gotten used to putting most any phrase into quotation marks. It was just a silly mistake.
He shouldn’t. I’ve always disagreed on quitting someplace where you disagree with how they are run. The best thing to do is to sabotage it from the inside. He should host it and do jokes about how white it is every segment and embarrass the Academy. Quitting gets him a few quick headlines, but they’ll just replace him with someone who will toe the line.