No more free screeners. The horror!
This has me wondering if Smith took steroids to bulk up for his role in Ali and then just kept using them. It was such an irrational act that continued after he had a chance to sit down and cool off.
That assumes Smith was indeed hot with anger (and therefore incoherent with rage). I posit the possibility that he was acting angry after seeing his wife roll her eyes and seeing an opportunity to boost his ego as a spouse defender, a champion of women and a macho man to boot.
I don’t think that’s any more paradoxical than a grown man laughing at a joke, then turning on a dime into real, uncontrollable rage.
Of course, you’d have to be a pretty good actor to pull it off convincingly…oh, that’s right, he is an actor. In fact, according to the Academy, he’s the Best actor of the year.
I suspect that steroid use is behind most physical transformations which actors do for Hollywood roles. Anabolic Steroids is a catch all term for synthetic testosterone, which any middle aged man can get prescribed to him at one of those virility clinics.
But, having done it myself (even at higher doses than what what would be considered “therapeutic”), I think it’s an exaggeration to say that it makes one irrationally angry or overly aggressive. I think that comes instead from the macho culture found in most gyms.
I suspect that Will Smith doesn’t really like the idea that his wife sleeps around on him, and is really on edge about the whole thing, but has some personal pride issue preventing him from getting a divorce. That’s some seething anger on display.
And it really wasn’t that hurtful or mean of a joke. Jada chose her look even if she didn’t choose her alopecia condition. She’s wealthy and in Hollywood - she could have worn any number of wigs if she wanted to have that be her appearance. Instead, she chose to go with the shaved head. That was her decision. Chris Rock lightly derided that choice; it was a throwaway comment by a guy who was there to present one award and get a gift bag valued at over $100,000 and then go to a party and see some drunk famous people before getting ready to go out on tour.
That was supposed to be his night. He wasn’t expecting this at all.
I noticed that - right after he was hit - he looked offstage, like “Are we going to commercial? Should I confront him?” It seemed like he got a cue to “keep going” and, being a professional, did just that.
The idea that Chris Rock deserves opprobrium over his joke just doesn’t make sense to me.
Me neither. That’s what he does, and that’s what’s accepted of him. He called a lifetime achievement recipient a “rat” on an Oscars show years ago and continues to be invited back by the Academy. His treatment of the Smiths was no worse than what hundreds of other privileged attendees have endured over the years with a smile.
Makes sense to me.
[Going back and forth and back and forth on whether I should give my take on this. Seriously pondering if I want to have any take whatsoever. Considers starting another thread on video games. Thinks better of it. Considers weighing in on the war in Ukraine. Backs away very nervously. Checks the calendar, sees that the season finale of Domino Masters is three weeks away. Takes several deep, cleansing breaths.]
All right, let’s get this the hell over with…
-
Few things about this country infuriate me more than the notion that certain people should be allowed to spew infinite verbal diarrhea with complete impunity. I was on the receiving end of these human cesspools for nearly my entire childhood, and it has done more to wreck my prospects for future happiness than every economic meltdown of the past 40 years put together. And being able to do it for a living, AS WELL AS shout down anyone who questions the validity of such a livelihood in the vilest manner imaginable (“Hey, I don’t remove the penis from your mouth when you’re working!” is a timeless classic.
) is an abomination against, if not nature, than at least the idea of civilization. There is no profession in the world I respect less than comedian, except maybe genocidal warmongering dictator or anything with the word “Republican”. That a useless hack like Chris Rock is probably going to get a career boost out of this is nauseating. Enduring William Hung was painful enough. -
Nonetheless, the proper way to deal with a loudmouth jerk isn’t to hit him… ye gods… it’s to be a counter-loudmouth jerk. Confront him, but keep your distance. Call him out, make vaguely challenging gestures, refute, deny, obfuscate, and above all else, waste as much of his time as humanly possible. THAT’S how you throw him off his game.
-
And since no one else seems to be interested in asking this for some reason: Is it now possible to get on stage and interrupt an award ceremony without anyone even trying to stop you? We all remember how Kanye West made a complete mockery of the VMA awards, and not only did he suffer zero repercussions but his career shot into the damn stratosphere (before he went full on fascist abusive stalker, but that’s another thread). All I’m saying is, if I ever cause a massive disruption and it becomes clear that I’m the king of the world and can do whatever I want, the hell with defending-the-fair-maiden’s-honor crap, I’m having me some fun. That touchdown dance I perfected last week, whip out a protest sign, impromptu John Oliver impression, shout-outs to my homies back on the ranch, borrow a trumpet from the band and give it a whirl. You only live once!
I disagree strongly. It was definitely performative.
No one goes from politely laughing at a lame joke to unable to think coherently on a dime based a seeing a look of disapproval from their spouse.
Anyone who thinks that was rage or misguided (and frankly misogynistic) protection of his “diseased” wife (with no alopecia patches to be seen) really needs to click that link given by @Magiver I think in post 502 and look at the freeze frame of Mr Smith’s face as he walked away. Incoherent with rage or even anger? Definitely not. Unsure what the exact mix of smug, “that felt good”, and evil that smile was, but that was not an out of control angry expression.
It isn’t like he hasn’t previously fantasized about doing very evil things thinking that he could get away with them by virtue of his acting skills. His father was old and infirm by then:
Well the performance he gave at the Academy Awards was not at that level.
I do both tremendously respect and feel for Mr. Rock. He ad libbed a line calling attention to the bold fashion choice Ms Smith was making (and her buzzed hairdo was NOT alopecia), not mocking it just noting it, reacting surprised when he noticed her eye roll with “that was a nice one!” He did the job he was being paid for, trying to deflate some egos and make people laugh at their own self-importance. And he was, on live TV, a grown man, “slapped the shit out of”. He took the hit without losing stride, and dealt with it with consummate professionalism, with Mr Smith then digging himself deeper by further verbal and vulgar assaults from his chair.
It is a lot to process.
Anyone else other than Mr Smith would likely have been thrown out. Any other show that Mr Rock performs at would have a person who did that arrested after being thrown down to the ground by security.
OTOH I suspect that Mr Rock has in his head some compassion for recognizing that Mr Smith has to have something really effed up going on in his head to have done that. But no one else would be getting that compassion …
Then factor in having to be conscious of impact on his own career. How do I respond in a way that is least likely to make this be what defines me going forward?
Yeah a lot to process is right.
I agree that Chris Rock handled the situation brilliantly. I wish I could be as unflustered as he after being unexpectedly slapped hard in the face. He’s a pro. A very funny pro.
Bringing assault charges against Smith would make Rock appear weak. Suing him for money he doesn’t need and Smith wouldn’t miss, would likewise make him look weak, and probably make Smith look like a victim. His best course going forward is to ridicule Smith mercilessly in his act for a long time. I hope that’s what he plans to do. Rock doesn’t need lawyers or a good right hook to avenge his honor, he’s got his wit. A very sharp wit.
People who can’t take a good-nature ribbing are people I wish not to associate with. Like the late Don Rickles, I believe Chris Rock has a honey badger exterior, but a heart of gold. I’d be tickled pink if either of them insulted me during a show (…well, I’d be amazed if Don did, considering his unfortunate post-mortal condition). In fact, if I did have terminal cancer I’d love to be ridiculed about that too. Laughing at one’s misfortunes can be very cathartic if you aren’t paper mache skinned with a stick up your ass.
What dictates the trajectory of a performers career is no longer dependant on a review in the New York Times, or by talking heads on Broadcast TV. Social media can now make you a star, or torpedo your career at light speed. If your online content doesn’t load and grab your audience’s attention in ~3 seconds or less, you get clicked away; you’re toast. Someday soon it will be measure in milliseconds. That’s the world we now live in, like it or not.
If you don’t want to be a has-been performer you better be on the right side of social media. I believe Rock will remain on the right side. I’m not so sure about Smith.
The first production fallout, Netflix taking a step back from Smith.
Will Smith Netflix Movie on the Backburner After Oscars Slap – The Hollywood Reporter
Bad Boys 4 at Sony had been in active development — Smith received 40 pages of the script prior to the Oscars — but will now pause, a source said.
Heh. What kind of odds could you have got that WILL SMITH would be the one to derail a Bad Boys movie?
Both CNN and MSNBC had expanded coverage of this story, today–possibly on the theory that a weekend audience would gravitate away from the Ukraine story and toward less horrifying news.
In any case, the story continues to ‘have legs’ as the saying goes.
In this thread there have been references to commentary focusing on the 'black guy does something that pleases white supremacists by giving them the chance to argue that black people are inherently violent’. (For example, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar’s piece “Will Smith Did a Bad, Bad Thing.”) That’s clearly going to be the main message of the Smith/Rock incident for many.
I have the luxury of having less need to focus on race. So for me the ‘pleasing white supremacists’ aspect–while entirely valid and important–is less prominent.
For me the incident reflects other major stories we’re being hit with now; specifically, Putin’s choice to invade Ukraine, and the (so far) lack of accountability for crimes and other misuse of power by Donald Trump and a large number of his associates.
When the Oscars audience stood and gave Will Smith a standing ovation, minutes after he’d decided to deal with words he didn’t like by using violence, they were giving a dramatic demonstration of their adherence to one particular philosophy:
Now, I’m pretty sure that very few of those standing and applauding Smith would agree that “might makes right” is their guiding principle in life–or even that this was the message they were hoping to convey with their standing ovation.
Nonetheless, that’s the value they were supporting. The same value that many in this thread have noted the Academy supporting in the past: rewarding Harvey Weinstein despite widespread knowledge that he abused women, and supporting Woody Allen and Roman Polanski despite credible accusations against them.
Might makes right. Specifically for the movie business: those who make a lot of money for others get a pass for conduct that would be condemned in less-successful members of the industry.
Weinstein wasn’t brought down until his movies started being less lucrative for his business associates. Similarly, Bill Cosby’s and Woody Allen’s work had less “gold mine” and more “sell some tickets to older fans” records by the time the rumors about them became part of the mainstream conversation.
Last Sunday night, a ‘still makes a lot of money for a lot of people’ guy struck a ‘makes some money but no comparison to what the other guy makes’ guy. And the instinct of a large part of the Oscars audience was: let’s find a reason to support the guy who’s more powerful in our industry.
I’m not saying that a majority of the Oscars attendees are pro-authoritarian. But I do think most of those people, successful-enough in their business, got that way by being deferential to the powerful. It’s a hierarchical business. When you’re starting out you want that reputation for being “cooperative”–aka “respectful” to those with the juice to do your career some good.
Supporting the more-influential guy over the less-influential guy would be something that people in that room wouldn’t really be inclined to think through. But it would be something that over many years, they’d trained themselves to do (perhaps while avoiding thinking about it).
And the world’s response to Putin’s 2008 (Georgia) and 2014 (Crimea) aggressions has something in common with the same phenomenon: a lot of people, in Europe and elsewhere, reacted with ‘yeah, that’s not really good, but this guy has a lot of oil and natural gas that we need, and he has a powerful intelligence service that does a lot of stuff to those who oppose him, so maybe we’d just better make the best of it and not bring up awkward topics like international law.’
And now that ‘let’s just let it go’ attitude is being severely tested. People are having to make a stand. The choice between
is standing out as a stark decision. We’re all, in one way or another, trying to figure this out: how much ‘above the law’ conduct are we going to accept? How much ‘one rule for those at the top, and another for the rest’ will we tolerate?
Yeah, many of them would claim they make the “punching up” vs. “punching down” distinction, but in this case they acquiesced to a literal “punching down”, and as you say, probably did not even pause to consider it. If we brought it up to them, like you suggest, years of conditioning in playing by this town’s rules would lead to some sort “but you can’t understand, from a different experience” attempt at explanation. They instinctively closed ranks around the individual who is a closer part of their world.
(Can’t help but get the feeling that around that table there was a feeling that Will’s triumph as an actor would also be a proxy vindication of al the Pinkett-Smiths in all their other facets, and that little crack was a reminder it wasn’t.)
May I add, Smith’s Academy resignation notice is a far better expression of apology than the earlier one, as it contains no wording attempting an explanation or justification but a straight admission of being wrong.
I’m sorry for your loss. Not all comedy is hateful or mean, or even teasing. It can be fun and uplifting, too. Or just absurd.
(e.g. Mitch Hedburg never did anybody wrong, as far as I recall)
How was the joke tasteless or misogynistic?
Jim Carrey, from the linked video.
That video is gonna be there forever. It’s gonna be ubiquitous.
Yes, yes it is.
One small plus to come out of this fustercluck: Nobody gives a shit about Sean Penn smelting his Oscar.
I always thought Will Smith was a class act. I’m disappointed to learn he has no class. Less than low class even, just simply no class at all.
The joke is, “ha, ha, a woman without hair is unfeminine”
And your analysis is: “A woman in the military with short hair isn’t feminine.” (In other words, I think the perceptions you’re assigning to Rock, are your own, rather than his.)
Yeah but “unfeminine” is the easiest thought to connect. Its probably what everyone concluded, even though it isn’t exactly what Rock said.