Why is Parasite nominated for best picture, when it's a foreign film?
 

I just thought it was interesting, how Parasite was nominated for best picture, and best foreign language picture, cause usually the Oscars only put foreign films in the best foreign language film category.

Is this the first time the Oscars have done this with a foreign language film? Is it a cheat to put it in both best picture categories?

Re: Why is Parasite nominated for best picture, when it's a foreign fi
 

Just last year Roma was nominated also - and should have won.

Green Book winning just underlined how behind the times the Academy is, by virtually revisiting and repeating when Driving Miss Daisy won.

Roma
Amour
Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon
Life Is Beautuful

Those are off the top of my head. All nominated for Best Picture.

Re: Why is Parasite nominated for best picture, when it's a foreign fi
 

Foreign films have always been available for Best picture. As far back as 1971, with The Emigrants, and Cries and Whispers the next year. Some have even had best director nominations, without a best pic nomination to go with it. (See Fellini, Kurasawa, Bergman).
I don’t consider it a cheat to include them in both, as they are spectate categories.

But Green Book is a lot better than Driving Miss Daisy though, or at least I thought so.

Because otherwise they would have to call the category "Best picture in the English language'

The fact that there have only been around 9 non English language films ever nominated for 'best picture' in 92 years of the Oscars show how dreadfully xenophobic and racist the whole ceremony and organisation is.

That's not really the point though. IMO, neither film deserved the top prize, but that is not the point either. And both had tremendous acting performances by both of it's leads, but like so often strong central performances can colour people's opinions of the entire film as a whole. Just look at Joker this year, for instance.

What was my point, is that by recognizing Green Book last year and giving it the Best Picture honour is simply highlighting how the Academy has not really moved on in 30 years. In recent years #ocarssowhite & even #metoo have raised awareness over the lack of representation of minorities and the sexist attitudes in Hollywood, and have shed more light on the workings of the film industry, how it operates and even to an extent what it chooses to honour, for reasons other than what is actually the best film, irrespective of language.

I mean, at its heart the Oscars is an American institution. While yes they could be more inclusive it makes sense why they don't put as much focus on foreign films. Most of the movies playing in theaters are English-language ones.
The fact that Roma and Parasite are best picture nominees so close to each other shows that they are slowly getting better at being more inclusive as well.

While the Oscars have plenty of problems, I think the racism is something people overblow nowadays. Don't forget how many categories Black Panther was nominated for as well, to the point where it channeled Bohemian Rhapsody.

I have a problem with this argument.

It's true that only a few foreign films get to be nominated for Best Picture, and that is indeed a problem but I don't believe it comes from a racist place. It's just the people who vote for this stuff are more used to watch American cinema, because the Academy is an American institution.
What they did in order to fight the entire #Oscarssowhite thing was to invite a broader variety of jury member, namely women and foreigners, and while that didn't made black people being nominated more (because, guess what?, the problem was not racism, at least on this level), it did create conditions for Parasite to be nominated.

Maybe in the future, the foreign film category could be eliminated if American and non-American films had the same shot at winning an Oscar but that is highly unlikely.

The numbers unfortunately don't back up your argument. It's not just best film category either. It's almost every category.

The actors and actress categories almost never seem to have anybody other than the Hollywood elite in. Parasite is nominated a few times, yet none of the cast seem to be getting any mentions anywhere.

If,a s you say, it's because "people who vote for this stuff are more used to watch American cinema", then they really need to start calling this pathetic sharade "The American film awards".

The pathetic charade is not called the World Film Awards nor the American Film Awards. It is The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences Awards, nicknamed The Oscars. The AMPAS began in Hollywood and remains rooted there. There's not a conspiracy. They are what they are.

I don't disagree with any of that. It doesn't really have any relevance to the points being discussed though.

Re: Why is Parasite nominated for best picture, when it's a foreign fi
 

Agreed. The academy is scared of leaving its comfort zone, simple as that. Like the movie or not, Green Book is pure oscar bait.
There was The Artist back in 2011, and I don't know if the academy staff changed since then, but it shows that there's hope.

But I think every award ceremony for movies, in every country operates this way. Let's take the South Korean Blue Dragon Film Awards for example. Has there ever been a movie foreign to South Korea that was nominated for best picture?

Well Green Zone may not have deserved best picture, but 2018 was such bad year movies from what I recall, that I didn't see anything better that year. So it was slimmer pickings perhaps? However, I haven't seen Vice yet, so maybe I might like that better.

Re: Why is Parasite nominated for best picture, when it's a foreign fi
 

The category exists to make sure lesser-known foreign language films get more attention, and it achieves that. When one of those films is particularly good it creates an edge case scenario where it supersedes the category. Not much more to it than that. Tolerating the occasional weirdness (where the sub-category is a foregone conclusion) probably makes more sense than having lots of little exceptions and sub-rules for the category. You get the same thing when an animated film is nominated for Best Picture. No big deal, the awards are (ostensibly) about recognition and not just creating drama.

Re: Why is Parasite nominated for best picture, when it's a foreign fi
 

I don't know the rules... But does it have American production? That might qualify it I guess. But googling doesn't show up anything of note. Or maybe it's so good they had to, which I can understand. Best of the year. Hands down!

I think this is overstating things a tad, given that film quality, contra much simpler art forms, correlates highly with affluence. Even assuming a perfectly even distribution of talent and quality across the world, one would expect more great films from wealthier countries, and more than that, one would expect this to persist even as that gap narrowed, assuming we also believe that filmmaking experience correlates with quality.

That isn't to say the Academy hasn't overlooked lots of quality foreign films or does not have a bias towards English-language films, but I think there are lots of structural reasons some bias would exist even in a perfect (whatever that means when judging art) process.

I also think, even if somebody doesn't accept any of that, we'd probably be dealing more with implicit bias than out-and-out racism, though perhaps the latter term is a lot less charged in your usage than in mine.

Re: Why is Parasite nominated for best picture, when it's a foreign fi
 

Another consideration, which I think I've alluded to in other discussions: because there's more money to be made in English-speaking markets, lots of foreign directors with a great deal of talent end up making movies in English anyway. Those films might not be considered non-English, but in many cases the talent behind them is.

Re: Why is Parasite nominated for best picture, when it's a foreign fi
 

That's true, the director of Parasite did Snowpiercer in English, and some movies coming out of Europe have been in English in the last few years.

Re: Why is Parasite nominated for best picture, when it's a foreign fi
 

The Acadamy Awards sometimes do things with more "pop-mindedness" than what's generally assumed, though it is minor. Besides, a lot of people in this world, no matter what country, gets bothered by subtitles. That's quite a shame. But to immediately assume "xenophobic" is coming from an anger-mindset. Did it ever occur to the people who whip these words out like pistols are sometimes the first to do the offending? It's an immediate assumption people make to bring a villain in their lives to justify their anger mindset. The Academy Awards do whatever makes them money.

1. America, like every other country, loves things from its own country. Common factor. Not racist.

2. Big name ceremonies will do whatever grabs the most money, usually capitalizing on the country-based aesthetic all countries have. Not racist.

3. English is the most-spoken language on Earth, and the dominant language of two continents. Not racist.


4. Subtitles are known to distract people. Not racist.


5. Immediately throwing hateful words like "xenophobic." Not the Academy Awards, and a bit rude. Not everything has to be turned into "sticks and stones don't break your bones but words will massacre your body" to fit an agenda. If people are worried about morality, they'll realize "words eill never hurt me" shouldn't be so easily forgotten, and those that do forget sometimes look for offense.

Why would it be a cheat? If a foreign film is the Best Picture winner it is by default Best Foreign Picture. It would be a cheat to deny it the opportunity to run for Best Picture if it genuinely is.

The rationale for having a foreign language award is that it draws attention to other film industries in other countries- an acknowledgement that Hollywood isn’t everything,

Good points, but you only need to look at the Cannes film festival to see that a "fair" film awards system can exist. Their version of best film has been won by a far more diverse selection of directors in this generation, albeit not many females (Kore-eda, Haneke, Coen brothers, Dardennes, Bong Joon Ho, Ken Loach, Michael Moore, Tarantino, David Lynch, Lars von Trier etc etc etc).

It can be done. The academy simply chooses not to do it. They changed their "Best foreign film" award to "best international film" award. Then disqualified Nigeria's entry, because it was in English (Nigeria's official language is English.) Nice.

Aren't the Blue Dragon awards specifically for South Korean films?

Ignorance isn't an excuse for a lack of diversity / xenophobia.

Which is fine. But the credibility of these awards should then be acknowledged as zero.

How is this true? As a second language maybe. But mandarin speakers are almost 4 times the number as a native language. And which second continent speaks English as a majority? In North America, English just edges out marginally.

Yeah. This was a kicker. Nigeria, Australia, New Zealand and maybe even Canada, will get the boot. Total rubbish.

I think the film industries in those countries are more likely to succeed. They are wealthier countries.

But it's such a shame for a country like Nigeria to be told you can never compete in this category. It's not like there are already a number of Nigerian films kicking around that we've all seen.

That maybe, but again, if it is being fair, then wealth should not be taken into consideration as well. And lets face it, the Aussies and Kiwis are richer, but their movie industry is just not up to scratch. Considering they speak English, they just make the jump to Hollywood, without trying to work in their own local environment.

That's the way of the world. If offered more chances and more money, you're going to take it.

If a Canadian or Aussie film is good enough, then it should be in Best International film.

Re: Why is Parasite nominated for best picture, when it's a foreign fi
 

But it might not be actual xenophobia. Lack of diversity and hating other races for the sake of it are two totally different things.

Re: Why is Parasite nominated for best picture, when it's a foreign fi
 

I just checked a babbel article written last year. North America's top language, English, has 300 million speakers, while Spanish, the second, has 121 million.

Though I admit I was wrong about Europe, where it's fourth, but fourth is still pretty high.

LOL! Cannes has an equally unfair system, just works by different criteria. To win Cannes you need to make a film that has a very strong political/social stance at its center. They haven't judged films by their intrensic quality in decades!

The Academy is based in Hollywood, it's american, they are free to award the films they want, they even didn't need to create a foreign category but they do. The importante each ones gives to the Award depends on each one, not on them. I hate the thing, I don't watch it. But calling them racists just because they use criterias I don't agree with is going way too far.

I don't agree at all. 'Amour' ? 'Uncle Boonmhee'? 'The Tree of Life' ?

Sure they can do what they want, and they will. I'm just calling it out as having a lack of diversity.

If 'Parasite' wins best picture it will be the first foreign language movie to win in the entire 92 year history of the thing. That is not a good look. You can sugar coat that whatever way you want but it is not good.

Well I strongly believe it is. Xenophobia / lack of diversity isn't always borne out of hate. As I mentioned previously it can be of ignorance.

Re: Why is Parasite nominated for best picture, when it's a foreign fi
 

Maybe we're using the words differently, but I believe the words "xenophobia" and "racism" (the latter in particular) require the presence of fear and/or hatred.

Re: Why is Parasite nominated for best picture, when it's a foreign fi
 

Read the post under yours. If you use a cheap excuse like what you just said, anyone on Earth can be a xenophobe. It makes no sense. All it is is Americans thinking about the country they've been surrounded by their whole lives.

Right. Because it is a perception that something someone is not used to is strange / unnatural / different etc.

Yes, I agree. They are only thinking very narrowly.

Well, perhaps (I don't think all racism works like this, but we'll put that aside for now). The main thing is that the causality does not flow evenly in both directions. We can say that a racist or a xenophobe always fears or hates other cultures/races, and we can say (for the sake of argument) they do this because they are different, but that does not imply that anyone who finds another culture strange or difference is therefore hateful or fearful of it.

In other words, finding other cultures odd is a necessary but not sufficient component of racism and xenophobia.

Re: Why is Parasite nominated for best picture, when it's a foreign fi
 

By your own logic, you'd be guilty of this too. Isn't it narrow to assume a simple human habit is completely related to heartless offense? How many people have you offended by making assumptions about them?


You can't "blame" anybody for being influenced by their surroundings. I am positive most foreign awards ceremonies value their own country's films more as well. That's not xenophobia. In fact, that's closer to patriotism. And suddenly it's evil when it's American?

Re: Why is Parasite nominated for best picture, when it's a foreign fi
 

Just a reminder to remain civil. Everyone has so far! Just want it to stay that way. Reasonably heated topic and all that. Thank you in advance. :)

Erm, I don't know I guess you'd have to ask them.


Well I've said what I believe the reasoning is. I don't think it's patriotism. If it were, Parasite wouldn't be in the best picture slot. You just cannot ignore the fact that no foreign language film has ever won the best picture award. You just can't.

What was the reasoning behind the lack of diversity before the #OscarsSoWhite movement?

I don't think the underlined bit is true. Much of the bias in culture is subconscious.

I'm not sure anyone is disputing this. Nobody says it's totally irrelevant or tells us nothing. What's at issue is whether or not it demonstrates racism and xenophobia, rather than something a lot less insidious, like a normal amount of cultural bias or preference for the familiar, possibly amplified by the size and scope (and tendency to assimilate artists from all over) of the English-speaking film industry.

Well, it was a mostly thoughtless hashtag, so I'm not sure it qualifies as a data point or something that needs to be reconciled. That said, I noted at the time (I can dig up some of the discussions on here if you're interested) that historically the Oscars are about in line with a rote population percentage comparison as far as African-Americans are concerned. Which is admittedly a simplistic measurement, but by definition no more simplistic than the complaint.

I agree, but I noted as much earlier in the same post ("I don't think all racism works like this"). I was assuming it for the sake of argument, since what I was trying to say applied either way.

Anyway, the long and short of all this is that calling the Academy narrow-minded or culturally biased is probably reasonable (though I think there are a lot of innocuous factors about the nature of being a dominant market force that have to be considered), but calling them racist or xenophobic is much more serious claim that is, while not really disprovable, certainly not demonstrated by the frequency or foreign-language winners or nominees alone.

This entirely. That was a meaningless hashtag that should hardly be taken seriously. Scarlet, I'm certain you wouldn't take this complaint to other countries

Yes that's my point. The American Oscars are way ahead of diversity if they allow a South Korean film in, when the South Korean film awards do not allow any films that are foreign to them, to be eligible it seems.

Re: Why is Parasite nominated for best picture, when it's a foreign fi
 

That's a good point. By definition the only places that even open themselves up to charges of insufficient diversity are the ones at least ostensibly considering more diverse films to begin with. Is it less diverse to purport to represent film in general and still have that innate bias against foreign films, or is it less diverse to not even try?

Re: Why is Parasite nominated for best picture, when it's a foreign fi
 

Oh I am not sure. I just thought it was ironic for people to criticize the American Oscars for not having diversity, when other countries, have even less in their film awards, it seems.

Re: Why is Parasite nominated for best picture, when it's a foreign fi
 

It's an American award, I don't have problems with it stuffing Hollywood movies at all. But my thing is when the field is weak why not put some foreign movies which are good. And award one please. Many years, the winner of the best foreign film has been miles better than the one from Hollywood. This decade sticks out.

Re: Why is Parasite nominated for best picture, when it's a foreign fi
 

That's true, I have only seen three of the best picture nominees this year so far, but from those three, Parasite is the best movie of the year after letting it soak in more.

Re: Why is Parasite nominated for best picture, when it's a foreign fi
 

Relevant:

https://twitter.com/JustinCChang/sta...39604264390656

I don't buy this at all.

The Blue Dragon awards aren't pretending to be anything other than what they are. The same cannot be said for example the best picture award. A token nod every so often doesn't tick the diversity box. If anything it is condescending.

This is like when people claimed the MOBO awards were racist towards white poeple. Very dangerous route to take.

They're not pretending to be anything broader than what they are, but they're not attempting to be, either. Combined with the belief that ignorance does not mitigate or dilute xenophobia, I'm not sure how this can be seen as perfectly fine. It doesn't bother me, personally, but then I don't find an affinity or bias for your own culture to be an especially heinous thing. It certainly isn't an uncommon one.

And if the application of a behavioral principle to all people is dangerous, that suggests the principle itself is dangerous. Which is, of course, usually the point of taking one of these behavioral standards and applying it universally: to demonstrate its flaws or limitations, or to expose the degree to which it contains other assumptions or rules.

Re: Why is Parasite nominated for best picture, when it's a foreign fi
 

Well I disagree. I guess it's all objective as to what we think they are supposed to be.

I think when combined with the gravitas that the oscars hold, it then becomes important.

I don't really understand this. I don't think I have used a principle universally.

Re: Why is Parasite nominated for best picture, when it's a foreign fi
 

The Oscars are just fine. I think people like to hang their own political/social beliefs on the Oscars, using them as a means to promote their own narratives.

Re: Why is Parasite nominated for best picture, when it's a foreign fi
 

The Oscars favour predictable conservatism (hence the term Oscar-bait, which everyone understands what that refers to). You can never prove the charge of racism because the selection of actors is so tiny compared to all the performances out there. What people find distasteful is black actors/actresses being nominated for roles relating to slavery (a topic deemed ‘worthy’) rather than recognising their good performances in other work.

#OscarsSoWhite isn’t simply a headcount of how many people of colour there are- it’s arguing against a narrow conservative idea of what makes a good film or good performance. And of course there’s the obsession the Oscar committee have about showbiz films- even better, films about Hollywood. Impersonating a worthy celebrity is another shoo-in, and if you’re playing the supportive wife of a male genius. Able bodied straight actors are lavished with praise for playing gay characters yet gay actors rarely get acclaim for playing a straight character. Patriotism is another- war films and monarchs.

Precisely. Once Upon a Time in Hollywood is a shoe-in for Best Picture based on popularity, subject matter, casting choices and nostalgia. No movie foreign or American had a chance at the awards, and I was certain of that as soon as I saw the trailer.

Re: Why is Parasite nominated for best picture, when it's a foreign fi
 

If there was ever a Foreign film to snag Best Picture at the Oscars....I'm hoping it's Parasite.

Re: Why is Parasite nominated for best picture, when it's a foreign fi
 

Me too. I might even put Parasite in my top ten movies of all time now, after it soaked in more.

I didn't think that black actors being nominated because of slavery roles was because of racism. The Oscars like historical films, and those ones seem to be the biggest Oscar bait, if I am correct on that. So because they are the biggest Oscar bait, that is why black actors are nominated for those roles, not because it's a slavery role, but because it's a historical film.

Unless I am wrong on that?

It's also the same with the white actor nominees, as a lot of them are picked if they play historical roles as well. For example if a movie is set during a war, you can bet that actor is going to get nominated.

Re: Why is Parasite nominated for best picture, when it's a foreign fi
 

I just finished a nominations. It's a straight up dogfight between Parasite and 1917. Anyone of them win is a good winner. But I guess they will share the spoils.

Re: Why is Parasite nominated for best picture, when it's a foreign fi
 

This but with another Korean film: Oldboy. That movie's brutally perfect. In my eyes, the movie's got more going for it, has more great twists, and more technique. Paradise is still wonderful.

Re: Why is Parasite nominated for best picture, when it's a foreign fi
 

Oldboy was good, but I don't know if I would call it a masterpiece. The story was entertaining but found it to go maybe too far over the top, to reach masterpiece status. But still a solid thriller. But I'll have to watch it again.

Re: Why is Parasite nominated for best picture, when it's a foreign fi
 

I love over the top, if it's done right.

See I don't even think Parasite is Bong Joon Ho's best film. It's certainly not the best South Korean movie ever made. It's way off.

Black history is much broader than slavery- that’s why people find it offensive. Rather than getting to play a range of historical characters, it’s pigeonholing. Again, the obsession with historical films means that women also get sidelined (unless you’re playing a monarch of course).

To some extent it’s obvious that historical films would regularly get nominated, because you have something real you can compare to, like Meryl Streep winning the Oscar for her portrayal of Margaret Thatcher. However, do we want films that are always looking back rather than forwards?

I'm not really sure what there is to disagree with. Regional film awards, by definition, are not attempting to represent cultural and geographic diversity. Whether or not that's a problem is another question, of course.

I think the issue with this is that you're holding the Oscars responsible for the importance other people place on them, rather than through anything they themselves are actively doing.

Correct, and that's precisely my point: that the logic used to condemn the Oscars here is being applied somewhat selectively, and if applied more broadly leads to odd or counterintuitive results, like condemning regional awards for merely being regional.

Anyway, this is a bit off the main point, which I think is still this:

But that's exactly what it was, and it wouldn't have existed except for that simple head count.

There's a bait-and-switch quality to a lot of race relation arguments in which something very superficial and simplistic (like a head count) is used to launch a complaint, but can't be refuted by the same.

Correct. Part of the issue is that people have a very poor sense of sample sizes and statistics. Or at least, that would be a problem if people had bothered to see what the statistics even were before using the hashtag or perpetuating the grievances (most did not).

This feels like a lose-lose proposition. If this doesn't happen, I feel fairly confident there would be accusations about "hiding" the shameful history of slavery, instead.

I also strongly suspect that there's some confirmation bias at work, too. There's a similar joke about how you can get nominated by playing someone with a mental handicap, but it seems to only take a few high-profile examples for this to stick in people's minds and become something Everyone Knows but nobody actually measures.

Yes exactly. So they are not attempting to be diverse. The oscars are, and are failing at it.


Maybe, But the oscars attempted to change after a diversity row a few years ago. So they are responsible in a way.


I think we'll just have to agree to disagree. :up:

I'm curious as to what it is for you. My personal favorite, as I mentioned recently on another thread, is Oldboy, and I would also say it's the best foreign movie I've ever seen (but my favorites to watch are La Dolce Vita and The Mirror).

Most of the stories we have, because of historical oppression, are not about black people. By all means, be upset about this. I am. Be upset about all the stories lost. There must be thousands upon thousands of tragic and inspiring tales that were simply never written down or preserved. It's awful to contemplate. It's an invisible Library of Alexandria, like so much of human experience.

As tragic as it is, it means that, to filmmakers, these stories simply do not exist. As reality changes and more diverse stories enter recorded history, art will reflect this more. It makes very little sense to condemn modern filmmakers for the fact that almost all the true stories they may want to tell have this limitation.

This critique falls into the same trap that a lot of modern policy ideas do: they condemn the symptom and not the disease. They attack natural and unoffensive things downstream of the actual offensive thing. It's not reasonable to task filmmakers with counterweighting history with their art.

That last sentence sounds nice, but I'm not sure what it actually means, in practice. More science fiction? ;)

Anyway, I reject the premise (if this is indeed what you're saying) that there's a mutual exclusivity to the two. Those who do not learn from the past are doomed to repeat it, and it's only with time that broader lessons become clear. There is nothing bad or retrograde about telling stories from history. Progress is not a race down a straight line, it's a marathon without a map that requires constant reevaluation and course correction.

Re: Why is Parasite nominated for best picture, when it's a foreign fi
 

Making a top 10 of Korean movies is hard, but if I stick my neck out it would be Ho's other film, Memories of Murder. But parasite would be close second, coz the story is much more nuanced and and characters are much more vivid. Rich people are not always douchebags. It tackles class, money, struggle to make it rich all packed into one.

And if it's just plain action, I saw the devil, hands down! Then probably a toss up between Oldboy, a Bittersweet Life and A man from nowhere depending on the mood.

I'm not sure why one award can be racist for merely being culturally biased or ignorant of different films, but another cannot be for willfully ignoring them entirely.

To be clear, I don't have a problem with either, but I'm not sure how this standard can be used to critique one and not the other.

This almost makes the whole thing sound like a trap. "They acknowledged the complaint and ostensibly tried to address it, so now they're responsible." It seems awfully counterintuitive to place more blame on the organizations that engage with these problems at all than the ones that simply ignore them, and laying into the ones that respond doesn't seem to incentivize them to do so.

I'm usually happy to if there's a genuine impasse, but I'm not sure we've reached that point. You used the term "racist" to describe the nominations. I noted racism involves fear or hatred. I don't see how we've come anywhere close to establishing either is present here, and I don't think the discussion has progressed beyond that point.

I've barely seen any Korean movies older than the 1990s. But these lot would be high on my Korean list.


My Sassy Girl 2001

The Handmaiden 2016

Oasis 2002

Spring, Summer, Fall, Winter… and Spring

Failan 2001

Memories of Murder 2003

A Tale of Two Sisters 2003

Christmas in August 1998

Re: Why is Parasite nominated for best picture, when it's a foreign fi
 

From what I recall , that hashtag came about when Straight out of Compton didn't get a nomination. Which in isolation was really really hard. Then picked up again when Elba didn't get a nomination for Beasts of no nation. Which again in isolation is very bad. But to be fair, there haven't been any Oscar worthy stuff featuring black actors. Now you don't expect Madea to win it now, do you? Now it's getting better and they are getting nominations and wins too.

In the same way a non-American can't be president of the USA. It's a question of eligibility. Nobody would determine that the constitution is prejudice in this way.


That's fine but I'm not sure we'll do anything other than go round in circles.. I firmly believe that the branch nominators have huge subconscious bias when choosing nominations. I believe that that subconscious bias stems from xenophobic and ignorant reasons. I believe that the voters ARE in fear of their own standing, and this stems from Hollywood in general being fearful of ITS' own standing. The collective in Hollywood is so narcissistic that it would rather vote it's own films for awards over international films, no matter of the quality. That's the xenophobic bit there. The fear of international films being better than their own.

I'd prefer that no foreign language film could be eligible for the best picture award. 12 out of 563 is just insulting. Let's face it - 'Parasite' is only up there because of the recent campaign by NEON to push for i (as is the case with all films for best picture, which is a nonsense in itself - awards should be on merit, not who has the most money available for a marketing campaign, but that's a separate point)...... So the academy would have possibly faced a backlash and Parasite not been nominated after all this huge praise and the director being on American talk shows etc. As for other foreign language films - they haven't got a chance of being nominated. They're not anywhere near the radar of the voters. Some may call all this "narrow minded" not "xenophobia", but ask yourself why they are narrow minded. It's not a question of intellect. These people are highly intelligent.

On 'racism' - I'll concede that that was to heavy handed a term , apologies.

Re: Why is Parasite nominated for best picture, when it's a foreign fi
 

Appreciate you saying that, thanks. :up: I think we're within a reasonable range of disagreement on the rest, at least.

The suggestion that they should exclude foreign films from Best Picture is an interesting one. At first I didn't like it, but the more I think about it, I think it might make sense. The idea of choosing a best picture from the entire world is a nice one, but it might not even be plausible. For one, cultural bias will always exist in all people to some degree, and for another, it just might not be realistic to expect the Academy as a whole to take in enough cinema from around the world to give them all proper consideration. I'm not sure it's feasible to have any award for art that purports to cover the entire world. There's just too much out there.

Re: Why is Parasite nominated for best picture, when it's a foreign fi
 

Initially I was also amazed but after some research I found this also has happened before 7,8 times

Yeah maybe... I will give it another watch.

Re: Why is Parasite nominated for best picture, when it's a foreign fi
 

I guess the Academy isn't xenophobic after all!!!!

Hopefully this will now inspire people to watch a tonne more foreign language films, and in turn, mean that a whole load more foreign language films get put in theatres.

Re: Why is Parasite nominated for best picture, when it's a foreign fi
 

I'm happy for Parasite! Happy for Bong joon ho (this is not even his best imo)! But what I'm most happy for, is for South Korea and asian cinema in general! I always told everyone that I knew to watch more films from other countries (specially asian ones). Here in Brazil, most people watch American films only, the cinemas are 98% American. ScarletLion's words above summarize what I hope for this victory. I was rooting for Ford v Ferrari 'cause I didn't believe the academy would have the balls to give Best Movie for a foreign.

This is well worth watching. :D:D:D

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lTr6sYWWCNI

Re: Why is Parasite nominated for best picture, when it's a foreign fi
 

The thumbnail would indicate otherwise.

EDIT: heh, it's now been marked as private and is now literally unwatchable.

Hopefully it will encourage people to stop hating on America, Americans and anything made in Hollywood.

Re: Why is Parasite nominated for best picture, when it's a foreign fi
 

Next up China! I saw the Abominable a few weeks ago and that was a blatant Chinese sell out to get over 34 movies limit. Not to mention how they are slowly taking over Hollywood. Korea wins the artistic merit. China buys the whole industry!

Re: Why is Parasite nominated for best picture, when it's a foreign fi
 

I think the reason why Parasite won though for the academy, maybe it wasn't a hugely great year for Hollywood movies, so Parasite's story really stood out from the crowd maybe? I have only seen two other of the best picture nominees, and they were good, but not near as good as Parasite I felt... so I am just guessing maybe that's the case, why the Academy picked Parasite perhaps?

I don't think this is a case of the Oscars going 'woke', like in the video, but more of a case, that it was slimmer picking this year for really good Hollywood movies? I mean of the Oscars were to pick a movie like say Ip Man 4: The Finale, then can argue the Oscars are doing it to be 'woke'. But Parasite is actually best picture material though.

I suppose the guy in the video does have a point though, is how can it be nominated for best foreign film and best picture, which is what my OP was originally about.

True.

My No.1 film of the last year was an American movie. There are good American films out there. You just have to look a bit harder.

The guy makes a good point. Foreign films have two chances to win a "Best Picture" Oscar, whereas U.S. films have only one. Accordingly, perhaps there should be a Best U.S. Picture category.

Re: Why is Parasite nominated for best picture, when it's a foreign fi
 

About as much as there should be a Straight Pride parade.

Re: Why is Parasite nominated for best picture, when it's a foreign fi
 

Well there is also this video commentary on it here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9JBTMStysy8

In the video, the one guy on the left, says perhaps the filmmaker who submits their foreign film to the Academy should be given the option of which category they should submit to: Best Picture, or Best International Picture. That way, the fillmmakers can pick which category they want to submit to, and do not get two chances of winning. Would this be more fair?

The problem is, the best international film award doesn't go to the Director. I believe it technically goes to the country of origin. Which is why Bong won 3 oscars and not 4.

Asking people what awards they want to be up for is never really going to be a good look.

This is really crazy, and more crazy thing is that I haven't even watched it :D:D:D:D:D

Re: Why is Parasite nominated for best picture, when it's a foreign fi
 

Yes, countries submit films to be considered for the Best International Feature, not filmmakers.

What do you mean the 'country' does? The government of a country is not involved in submitting to the Oscars, are they?

Re: Why is Parasite nominated for best picture, when it's a foreign fi
 

They're submitted by some kind of film organization from that country, so it necessarily varies. It's usually not the top of the government, formally, but sometimes a committee formed by it, or something. Various levels of involvement.

Re: Why is Parasite nominated for best picture, when it's a foreign fi
 

Oh okay, I thought it was up to the producers.

Yes.

HERE is a recent article about the process.

The creative forces behind the project must be from the submitting country and each country designates an organization or film academy of their own to determine what the country's one submission per year will be. The AMPAS has no oversight of these bodies. If a country is open about their process, that's great, but if it is a regime like China they can suppress or promote whatever they want.

If there are say five amazing movies made in France in a given year they can only submit one for the Best International Feature Film Oscar. But how they make that determination is up to them.

Re: Why is Parasite nominated for best picture, when it's a foreign fi
 

It's the film board of every country that submits what they feel is their best chance of winning. That is what I know. And the boards are governmental wings.