The Andrea Riseborough nomination "controversy"


A system of cells interlinked
It's old news, but, MoFo and the MoFo chat is the only reason I bother with the Oscars!
"There’s absolutely no doubt you can be slightly better tomorrow than you are today." - JBP

That's what the Oscar chat is: one big group cringe/eye-gouge.

You guys are the best, wouldn't wanna gouge my eyes out with anyone else.
I'm there for sure this year. Probably.
"Don't be so gloomy. After all it's not that awful. Like the fella says, in Italy for 30 years under the Borgias they had warfare, terror, murder, and bloodshed, but they produced Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci, and the Renaissance. In Switzerland they had brotherly love - they had 500 years of democracy and peace, and what did that produce? The cuckoo clock."

Please come here and go away
Riseborough is not a household name but you've likely seen her in films before. She was in Birdman

I understand now

The Force is Favreau
She looks like the child of Steve Buscemi and a conventionally attractive person.

The Force is Favreau

I can buy the racial exclusion argument, conceptually.

Two highly regarded performances were left out: Viola Davis in “The Woman King” and Danielle Deadwyler in “Till.” That the category’s most glaring snubs were both Black women has been a point of discussion.
I don't know if it is true (it might be), but what matters is that it is coherent (and it is). I don't buy this statement by Chinonye Chukwu,
“We live in a world and work in industries that are so aggressively committed to upholding whiteness and perpetuating an unabashed misogyny towards Black women.”
If some women are benefiting, while some women are not, then the net effect on "women" (as a class/category) is "zero." It's not misogyny. If it is intentionally and/or functionally, interpersonally and/or systemically NOT a case where more of fewer women are affected, it isn't misogyny by any metric (traditional or novel). Rather, it is racism (intentionally, or functionally, interpersonally or systemically) and the victims happen to be female.

EX: Someone beats "X" to a coma because of their skin color. That's racism. That that person also happened to be Buddhist, libertarian, a Taylor Swift fan, over six feet tall, are incidental. It would not make sense to say that "This is yet another case of tall people being targeted for violence!" or that "The marginalization of Swift fans continues."

The frustrating aspect of today's reasoning is that it is so unreasonable, on face. The contradictions are right there, on the surface, waiting for anyone who dares to cross the Orthodoxy to point them out. But if you do...

The temptation to double-dip on a non-unique attribute, however, needs to stop. If it is racism, then let's call it racism and deal with it. If it is cronyism, then call it cronyism. If it is nepotism, then give it that name. Piling on charges like a greedy district attorney only confuses matters.

The Oscars don't need to end they just need new leadership. The biggest problem with the Oscars and media in general is following a propagandist movement. We might agree with the message but it shouldn't be a directive when it comes to art. The point of the Oscars is to recognize the work of artists and to basically codify them for history.

The academy is actually running out of distinguished black artists to award so this year the Academy is giving a lifetime achievement award to a woman who made one film of distinction 30 years ago. Euzhan Palcy is literally only receiving an honorary Oscar so the Academy can feel good about themselves. Filmmakers like John Carpenter, Costas-Garvas, Terrence Mallick and many others are nearing the end of their lives and will never be honored because the Academy has become optics first.

Ultimately it sends a very sad message to future filmmakers that the artists matters more than the art. If you don't look a certain way your work will be scrutinized, ignored, and disrespected because it makes a bureaucracy look bad.

This looks like there's a reaching out to the general public while these nominations appear to be handled internally, so maybe while not specific hard lines were crossed there does seem to be a reach around there and the awards people aren't keen on being undermined. Theres plenty of room for misinterpretation and my opinion is those big movie stars that avoid social media like Twitter are doing the right thing and set a good example. Then once again, maybe she got snubbed and it was an exceptional captivating performance but I can't say because I haven't seen these films myself.

You gotta also remember how many absolutely classic movies these one Oscar actors made that didnt get nominations while they are considered the greatest movies of all time in everyones collection, so its really sort of a thing where why sweat the small stuff if youre probably going to get one someday anyway?