Uncensored video of Will Smith and Chris Rock at the Oscars

Tools    





I find "to create buzz" as an explanation a lot more plausible when a) the people involved clearly need the buzz and b) the people involved have a plausible chance of coming off well.

Neither is coming off well (and it's hard to imagine how they could've expected to), and both of them are already insanely rich and successful and at the top of their respective professions. So apart from the various ways in which it doesn't look scripted, I don't think even the standard "you're talkin' about it, aren't you???" motivation exists here.
I'm just speculating... but perhaps they felt the Oscar ceremonies themselves needed the buzz after such poor ratings and a droppage in viewership in recent years?

I keep reading on other media how people are posting how they now wished they'd seen it live, but they "missed out" because they'd chosen to forego watching the Oscars for the foreseeable future as it had become so boring and dismal. So, this might have been a way spark buzz to raise viewership in the future (kind of like the promise of fights at a hockey game).



Re: they did it for the Oscars. I see a few issues with that.

First, it doesn't work retroactively. Nobody expected it, and people tuning in for a few minutes after is a drop in the bucket, if they even bother (the "good stuff" ends up on social media anyway). So it can't help in the here and now.

Second, it's not clear it works going forward. Oscar viewership didn't spike sharply upwards the year after the La La Land debacle. And why would it? It's a whole year later. There'll be 50 stories bigger than this by next year's broadcast, and again, you'll hear within minutes if anything interesting happens.

Third, why would these two people risk their reputations for something so amorphous? There's nothing to suggest they have some special interest in (or allegiance to) the Academy here. They don't seem to benefit from it adding viewership, particularly the relatively small number that could be realistically expected.



This is a good line I've somehow never heard before that I'm sure I'll use in the future.
I thought of it as I wrote it, so I'm pleased you've not heard it before.

Yesterday I kept asking, if this was fake then what was the point?
The only thing I could come up with was... to create media buzz?
Now, if it WAS fake, and the goal was to create media buzz... then it turned out to be a wildly successful venture!
You seem to be saying that 2+2=4 is the same as 1+3=4 though. They have the same answer, but they're not the same question.
__________________
5-time MoFo Award winner.



Clearly he was triggered. Just as clearly it was over something he knew was innocuous.
Anyone noticed how “triggered” everyone is these days? A year ago, nobody used this word as much as they do now.
__________________
I’m here only on Mondays, Wednesdays & Fridays. That’s why I’m here now.



Re: they did it for the Oscars. I see a few issues with that.

First, it doesn't work retroactively. Nobody expected it, and people tuning in for a few minutes after is a drop in the bucket, if they even bother (the "good stuff" ends up on social media anyway). So it can't help in the here and now.

Second, it's not clear it works going forward. Oscar viewership didn't spike sharply upwards the year after the La La Land debacle. And why would it? It's a whole year later. There'll be 50 stories bigger than this by next year's broadcast, and again, you'll hear within minutes if anything interesting happens.

Third, why would these two people risk their reputations for something so amorphous? There's nothing to suggest they have some special interest in (or allegiance to) the Academy here. They don't seem to benefit from it adding viewership, particularly the relatively small number that could be realistically expected.
All good points.
It still just "looks" fake to me.

But I can be wrong.
After all, I'm still waiting for Bruce Jenner to admit to a Kardashian-influenced publicity stunt... and that hasn't happened... yet.



Anyone noticed how “triggered” everyone is these days? A year ago, nobody used this word as much as they do now.
I did... But then, I was in therapy for 5 years. We used the word triggered a looooooootttt.

That said, it is annoying.



Well, as I mentioned earlier, we all have an idea of what we think "looks fake," but it seems clear that idea comes from media itself, so I don't think it would be reliable. I also just don't see any indication that your average person is actually good at saying what does or doesn't look fake just from watching a clip. The reactions sure don't seem fake, but you can't really argue that kind of thing.

It also makes perfect sense that a trained actor would hit someone in a way that resembles a "stage hit" even if he was actually hitting him. To that end, I saw another slow motion video this morning where the physical contact is very clear, just in case the skepticism is about that. If it's "oh yeah he hit him but Rock was okay with that," then sure, whatever, we're at an impasse.



“If it was something that I really committed myself to, I don’t think there’s anything that could stop me becoming President of the United States.” – Will Smith



I just found it funny he called him "Richard" when he was walking towards him on stage.



Victim of The Night
I mean, I’m never generally for punching people, but why/how the **** is that joke okay? Her hair loss is due to a health issue and she has made it known it bothers her/has caused some anxiety. When I had an asthma-like breathing condition people would follow me and imitate my breathing, it felt awful and was anything but a joke though they would call it such - admittedly they were in their early teens in a boarding school, and this is an adult male in charge of a giant room and ambiance thereof.

Good on Will.
Ok? It was a joke. The jokes at the awards show are frequently at the expense of the audience members, by design, and really, it was a pretty soft one.

Smith's behavior was a f*cking disgrace, he shamed himself, his family, and the Oscars too which is a shame on what was otherwise a very good night. What a complete piece of garbage to have everything he has in this world and be on that stage, talking about being a vehicle for love and understanding in this world or whatever total BS his speech was after that reprehensible action, to be a role model to boys and young men, and act like that.
Boo on him. Shame and disgrace on him and his house. If there is a mother*cker I would cancel today, it's Will F*cking Smith.



I just found it funny he called him "Richard" when he was walking towards him on stage.
I caught that too!
Was that just a mis-hearing of something else Rock said or actually what he said?



Ok? It was a joke. The jokes at the awards show are frequently at the expense of the audience members, by design, and really, it was a pretty soft one.

Smith's behavior was a f*cking disgrace, he shamed himself, his family, and the Oscars too which is a shame on what was otherwise a very good night. What a complete piece of garbage to have everything he has in this world and be on that stage, talking about being a vehicle for love and understanding in this world or whatever total BS his speech was after that reprehensible action, to be a role model to boys and young men, and act like that.
Boo on him. Shame and disgrace on him and his house. If there is a mother*cker I would cancel today, it's Will F*cking Smith.
Again, as someone who had a major chronic health condition and has heard jokes like that, it is entirely up to Jada to decide if it was a soft one and how she should feel about it. What gives anyone the right to decide if the people affected should be offended or not? Let’s take the piss out of Gaga’s fibromyalgia and Michael Douglas’ cancer, why the **** not, it’s all good fun, he hasn’t died yet?

The “role model”/“vehicle for love” speech aspect certainly was hypocritical (and ********), yes, but then again, as I said above, it was no more hypocritical than the fact no one had a problem with the joke because apparently Jada wasn’t enough of a “persecuted minority”. Imagine if it had been a joke on transgender people or LGBT people or something.

I appreciate your perspective, but I could write the exact same post saying Rock’s behaviour was a “****ing disgrace” and that he stooped to the lowest level of freak show-type cringe comedy etc etc, and neither of us would be in the right or wrong. I guess this one is, once again, down to opinion.



“Throughout life people will make you mad, disrespect you and treat you bad. Let God deal with the things they do, cause hate in your heart will consume you too.” – Will Smith



I caught that too!
Was that just a mis-hearing of something else Rock said or actually what he said?

He definitely said it, I think he was being humorous.



You ready? You look ready.
This whole looks fake thing is so annoying. Like everything on broadcast TV looks fake. Television is a medium which makes a bad copy of an original. Sure, we’ve made it look nicer over the years but things will always look fake when presented through the medium. It’s why they have such a thing as a wardrobe test for cameras. It’s not to see how it looks on you but to see how bad the camera/lights is going to mangle the copy.