But usually what this does is point out how out of touch, and ignorant Academy voters are. Remember last year when several voters admitted to not even watching "12 Years A Slave"? Though the film ended up winning Best Picture, it points out how flawed the system is; Voters aren't watching the films, which points out what a farce the Oscars themselves are.
This year is no different, as an interview conducted with a female voter is choosing Patricia Arquette for "having no work done in 12 years" and believes "there is no artistry in 'Selma'".
According to the interview (which you can read here), this particular voter is "A longtime member of the Academy's 378-member public relations branch".
The interview starts out by the voter announcing her distaste for the term 'snub':
"First, let me say that I'm tired of all of this talk about "snubs" — I thought for every one of [the snubs] there was a justifiable reason. What no one wants to say out loud is that Selma is a well-crafted movie, but there's no art to it. If the movie had been directed by a 60-year-old white male, I don't think that people would have been carrying on about it to the level that they were. And as far as the accusations about the Academy being racist? Yes, most members are white males, but they are not the cast of Deliverance — they had to get into the Academy to begin with, so they're not cretinous, snaggletoothed hillbillies. When a movie about black people is good, members vote for it. But if the movie isn't that good, am I supposed to vote for it just because it has black people in it? I've got to tell you, having the cast show up in T-shirts saying "I can't breathe" [at their New York premiere] — I thought that stuff was offensive. Did they want to be known for making the best movie of the year or for stirring up shit?"
Reading through the rest of the article, the voter openly admits to not watching or finishing several of the nominated films. So to say her opinion is already irrelevant goes beyond saying, but it's very clear she did not really pay attention while watching "Selma", and she missed the point of the film entirely. [I didn't formally review "Selma" due to time constraints, but it did top my 10 best list of last year, so you can read what I thought of it there] "Selma is a film that achieved something none of the other nominated films did this year, and stands out amongst the other biopics nominated. It's a film that doesn't feel constrained by its dated setting; as a period piece, the story taking place in the past is something that often suffocates the narrative and filmmaking. But director Ava DuVernay, and the rest of her team were able to deliver a poignant, thought provoking message that transcended the plot's setting of the 1960s.
The cases of Eric Garner (which gave way to the "I Can't Breathe" T-Shirts), Mike Brown and countless others, remind us that the events of "Selma" are not that far behind us. Racially motivated police brutality is a huge problem in our country, and it's clear this Academy voter was not paying attention at all during the film; DuVernay's message that we as a nation have not progressed as far as we would like to believe is evident throughout the film's duration, and if you needed a finer example of this, look no further than that quote from this voter. Why she was offended that the actors and filmmakers stood in solidarity with others suffering from the fate of those presented in the film, is racist ignorance at best. You don't have to even watch the film to know that.
To make it worse, this voter continued her ignorant and unbearable barrage on this year's slate of Oscar nominees by saying that "American Sniper is the winner of the year" on the grounds that "it can galvanize America and shows that people will go if you put out something that they want to see." Never mind that the film is a hot bed of controversy, what with its questionable facts and clear racist objectives. But never mind that, it made money, and that's why it should win.
"I'm voting for Patricia Arquette. She gets points for working on a film for 12 years and bonus points for having no work done during the 12 years. If she had had work done during the 12 years, she would not be collecting these statues. It's a bravery reward. It says, "You're braver than me. You didn't touch your face for 12 years. Way to freakin' go!"
This is downright offensive to single out Arquette's work down to her appearance. Sure, the fact that Arquette did not succumb to the pressure to 'preserve her youth' that runs rampant in Hollywood made her performance as a mother a bit more authentic. It's hard not to mention that when citing the performance's quality, however, to say that is the sole reason she's winning the prize? That's disrespectful and completely undermines Arquette's work in the film. She spent 12 years painstakingly creating this woman, who deals with spousal abuse and the difficulty of being a single parent, grappling with watching her kids grow up. To do that at all would have been a pretty admirable feat, but to stay with her for 12 years? And accurately depict the emotional changes as well as she did? Incredible. That is why she's winning the award. Not because she decided against plastic surgery.
But these are the type of people voting for the Academy Awards, which is frightening, given the offensive, backwards way of thinking. You can argue awards don't matter, and in the grand scheme of things, you may be right. But representation matters, and when you have great work like David Oyelowo's performance as Martin Luther King Jr. or Ava DuVernay's excellent directing being edged out on the basis that a protest was deemed "offensive" and "stirring up shit" by a party that has no real right in throwing their opinion into that conversation anyway, it's downright wrong. DuVernay, Oyelowo and everyone else put their beliefs first, regardless of what these privileged and ignorant voters would think. So props to them for doing the right thing.
If anything else, it just is another example of how out of touch the Academy is, how flawed their system is and how ignorant the majority is. Voters do not need to be "snaggletoothed hillbillies" from the film "Deliverance" to be racist, or ignorant. And if your job is to actually watch the nominated films, perhaps you should do just that, before opening your mouth with a bunch of hastily formed opinions, or better yet, revoke your membership and keep your mouth closed.
No comments:
Post a Comment