I am not sure what you are getting at. Would you prefer that Oscar winners would refrain from making political statements in their acceptance speeches entirely? Or are you just concerned that criticizing Trump in these speeches becomes sort of a “going through the motions” thing like thanking the academy and thus makes the entire event more boring? If it is the latter, I am with you. If it is the former, I am not. Hollywood has always tried to be more than a factory for escapism that is entirely detached from the real world, and (some) hollywood celebrities have always commented on political issues that they felt strongly about. I am ok with that - as long as it does not get too repetitive and boring. Then again, when it comes to boredom, Oscar speeches of the past are not setting the bar all that high.
I would say it’s the latter. I mean, if someone truly believes that their win is tainted by happening at this time, under these circumstances, by all means, they can get it off their chest. But I’d wager more people will take swipes at Trump not so much because it’s in their heart, but because all the cool people are doing it. I’d rather hear people make positive statements, like “Let’s not lose sight of our goals.” Build up, not tear down.
Also, I’m getting uncomfortable with people, like Madonna saying she wants to blow up the White House, and Sara Silverman calling for a military coup, making inflammatory statements that are very probably for shock value. Attention hogs, like I said in the OP. And, I wonder if they want it on their conscience if some loose screw(s) decide to suit their actions to those words. If everyone takes the law in their own hands, that’s anarchy. I don’t want anarchy any more than I want fascism.
What times and/or places do you suggest? Maybe late night radio? Between 1-3pm on alternate Tuesdays at pre-approved venues in Outer-Bumfuckistan?
I don’t think you get it. People don’t just only hate Trump, they fear for the future of the world as we know it. This hatred of Trump hasn’t come about in a vacuum…his TWO WEEKS of presidency have shifted the world axis, and not in a positive way. Shit, when you have people who actually voted for him sincerely regretting their actions (not to mention the reservations of many other conservative politicians), then you KNOW there’s a major problem.
I normally avoid the Oscars and other pop-culture stuff because they’re dead boring time wasters, but this year I might deign to shelve my aversion.
Bring 'em on.
You don’t get it at all. That’s a very simplistic and short-sighted view of what free speech is about. First of all, people are not expressing simplistic “hate” of Trump, they are articulating well-substantiated opposition to his actions. The institution that holds the ultimate power over him is the US Congress, comprised of individuals who are mostly interested in their own political futures. Whether they enable Trump’s every wish, or move to oppose him and in the final extreme pursue impeachment proceedings to remove him, or anything in between, depends almost entirely on prevailing public opinion. Even if one is cynical enough to believe that Congress critters are driven entirely by self-interest and not patriotism, there’s probably not a single one of them willing to risk his or her career to support an unpopular idiot going down in flames. That’s the power of speech.
Did you even read what I wrote or did you just twist off reflexively the moment you saw the first thing you thought you could ridicule. I clearly accounted for everything you mentioned when I said:
See? What that means is that if you take all the people who aren’t getting their entertainment elsewhere and are going to the movies, the number would be much greater if Hollywood wasn’t pissing off and alienating half that group.
Really? China is this year predicted to account for over half of the worldwide box office totals outside the U.S. You are making a very familiar mistake, which is to think western Europe comprises ‘most’ of the rest of the world.
Yes, box office totals are up 2.2%, but it’s because of increased ticket prices and not because of increased attendance. This from Variety:
Am I mistaken, or is this thread about the political incorrectness of Hollywood stars making commentary on Mr Trump during the Oscars?
But, but, don’t Mr Trump and his bunch admire straight talking and long for an end to political correctness?
Isn’t this the direction the majority voted for? So why be butthurt that that Oscar crew is getting on board? Or is only he allowed to be both blunt and crude, anywhere, anytime, any setting?
Seems to me you don’t get to have it both ways! If Pres gets to tweet butthurt, and spread lies why should anyone have to hold back their thoughts?
If it doesn’t agree with you, don’t watch. Just that simple!
Exactly. Personally, I think an Oscars acceptance speech should be to thank the folks who helped the winner get there, not an opportunity for political grandstanding.
We live in a social media age; if actors want to tubthump or toot the horn of whatever popular bandwagon they’re on, they can do it on Twitter or Facebook or Instagram and have nearly every Anglophone media outlet in the world, and probably quite a few in non-Anglophone places, reporting on it a few minutes later.
True - attendance is not at the highest ever. But it is not at an all-time low either unless you use the somewhat strange construct of a “per capita” attendance. The first year I have attendance figures for is 1980, when domestic attendance (i.e. tickets sold) was 1.022 million. In 2016 it was 1.315 million - down from 1.320 million in 2015 but nowhere near a all time low.
The highest attendance, by the way, was during the period of 2002 to 2004 when yearly attendance was above 1.5 million. That was the Bush era when the last Gulf War was fought. Would you say that “liberal activism” in Hollywood was at an all time low back then?
The Variety article you have quoted is lamenting disappointing box office figures mainly because these figures would need to be higher in order to justify the rising production and marketing cost. It also names the 2016 movies, which have disappointed most in that respect: “Alice Through the Looking Glass,” “Warcraft,” “The Legend of Tarzan,” and “Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Out of the Shadows”. Do you really believe that these movies bombed because of any “liberal activism” displayed by their makers? Or could it be that they were simply not good enough to get people interested?
The Oscars have never been sober commemorations of Excellence in Film. The usual questions are: Which awards will make up for years of neglect, even if that latest project is Not All That? Which actresses, dressed by experts in borrowed couture & jewelry, will still manage to look like the dog’s breakfast? Will any of the musical numbers Not Suck? Now there may be a political edge–which will surprise only viewers with no sense of history.
It’s been pointed out that the “stars” only represent a small percentage of the film industry workers. The ones who can’t leave their houses without paparazzi shoving cameras in their faces. If they want to use that fame for good–why not?
I’d guess that more messages will be positive–reflecting the American (& International) values that Trump & his minions despise. Still, they will be controversial. Like that Budweiser commercial set for today’s Superbowl–a corny celebration of a German immigrant brewer. It was made long before Trump made “immigrant” a dirty word–and has inspired a boycott.
So, take a chill pill. Wash it down with a Coors…
Since I don’t live in the US, I’m not drinking either of those brands anyway. 
Indeed. The stats you’ve offered here, your careful research, is totally persuasive.
The millennial part is especially persuasive. Hollywood is notoriously unconcerned about decrepit old geezers and whether they go to any movies at all. Since decrepit old geezers tend to vote overwhelmingly Democratic, their shilling to the Democrats is pointless. It’s the 18-35 crowd who go most often to movies and for whom most movies are made–but as we all know, this is the most conservative bunch of people out there, so why is Hollywood making them angry?
Your post makes total sense, and is so well cited, it’s difficult to find any problem with it at all. Why are people making fun of you? I just don’t get it.
This is a warning for personal insults. If you feel you must, the BBQ Pit is right around the corner.
This is borderline. This could imply you are making the same comment, which would also be warnable. I’ll assume you meant this in some other fashion.
[/moderating]
If you dread it that much, why bother watching at all? You could DVR it and fast-forward through all that stuff.
Articulate, well-substantiated opposition is not what I’m objecting to*. You make a good point about Congress and public opinion**. But an Oscar presentation or acceptance speech is not conducive to an articulate, well-substantiated opposition. Winners only get two minutes before they get played off the stage. What kind of well-reasoned call to action can they make in that amount of time?
What I’m objecting to, potentially with the Oscars and in practice with Twitter and other social media, is people blurting out the first thing that comes into their head. Or, even if they’ve put some thought into it, they still don’t have time or bandwidth to get in-depth. Trump is being a brat on Twitter. But so is everyone else.
And to those who are suggesting that I DVR and scan, I can’t, unless I want to skip the party I’m planning to attend. We all fill out a betting sheet, watch in real time, and at the end, award prizes. It’s a fun social event, or at least it should be. If we get to talk about the awards and the gowns and the flashback reels, instead of what this or that person said about Trump.
*I’m currently reading What We Do Now, a collection of essays by Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, the guy who’s the head of the ACLU, and about twenty other people who know what they’re talking about. It has a lot of suggestions for avoiding the USA turning into a fascist state. Positive messages, not ranting and raving.
**I just hope change never comes at the cost of President Pence.
It’s not either/or. We can do both. And we must. Every show, from Jeopardy, the Price is Right, and award celebrations needs to be wall to wall “fuck Trump.” We have handed the Executive Branch to a ranting idiot with no morals or insight, this is not like we simply elected a person with different policies or qualifications. It’s fucking Trump. How is it different than electing that Duck Dynasty guy, or Carrot top?
Turns out that you are years late; and even if those were very short words, others then can explain, expand and ask the actors, directors or producers to talk about later and/or expand on what was said.
I stand corrected, then. That was a tasteful, thought-provoking statement.
Meanwhile, Procrustus: good luck. If you’re convinced that ranting is the correct response to ranting, I hope it works. But I’m not convinced.
Oh, and kambuckta, I keep forgetting to say, I’m sorry Zaphod hung up on your prime minister. Not cool, not presidential. :smack:
Yes, I do. Anytime the name Trump comes up in any conversation, the only proper response is “Trump is a dangerous and stupid asshole.” If that happens over and over and over again, it will be hard for him to get much traction. Just my opinion, but anything less than that normalizes a deplorable situation.
It will be hard for someone to get traction, but I don’t think that someone is Trump.
I agree completely, it’s disgusting how actors use their speeches to inject their personal religious messages. “God”, indeed. If you want to proselytize, make a movie about it or something, don’t shove it down our throats during your acceptance speech. And they do this sort of thing every year!
The rest of the sentiment expressed is fine, of course. Because it doesn’t offend me personally I give it a total pass, and it should thus be completely protected as free speech (unlike the part that I disagree with above.)