Snubbed by The Oscars

You mean in the same year? :p

I think the whole thing is boring. They've been losing their audience long before Denzel and Halle.
And they don't wanna tick certain people off with Michael and Mel. Yup politics.

Plus with the gluttony of other awarRAB shows the Oscars have to somehow make their mark. Taking out Michael and Mel confirm another insipid year.
 
Alot of very good actors, directors, films etc have missed out on the Oscars (Johnny Depp, Alfred Hitchcock - to give a couple of examples), but I fail to understand why you have singled out Halle Berry and Denzel Washington for comment.
I am also confused by what you meant by 'conveniently winning Oscars at the same time/on the same day'. I thought the Oscars took place annually on the SAME evening, not spread over several weeks?
If there a conspiracy theory you are putting forward, please share it.
 
I admit I didn't phrase the above statement properly. I was just pointing out that two black actors winning an Oscar in the same year was not a coincidence. Halle Berry conveniently won hers after she had striped three films in a row and starred in a film that addressed racism.
I think damndirtyape put it quite nicely and simply.

2002: (hosted by whoopi Goldberg) :rolleyes:
Halle and Denzel win, woo! Hoo!
2003:
No black nominee for best actress. (Queen Latifah was nominated for supporting actress but lost)
2004:
No black nominee in any of the top awarRAB.
2005:
Despite Regina King
 
Even Denzel Washington said they killed two birRAB with one stone

Why don't people boycott the Oscars:D

Academy voters are out of touch with reality
Listen to the people :eek:
 
Although there is almost total sense being spoken in this thread, don't let this change anything.

Mel Gibson and Michael Moore should have been ignored because there work wasn't even in the same league as the other major films there. Self indulgant toss.
 
:confused:
You know, you could say that every film maker is self indulgent.
In order for people to give you money so that you can make your film you have to show that you believe in it ,and that you're passionate ;) about it.

Whatever your opinion of those movies, they sparked a much needed debate on politics and religion. Which I think, on the whole, was very healthy. :)

When was the last time a film did that?
 
Moore already got a Palme at Cannes, which was already a bit of a swizz for the other film-makers there.

It was a well-intentioned, but political choice nonetheless.

But controversial movies don't get Oscars. It's that simple. The closest we will get this year is "Hotel Rwanda". But as that is about a conflict far away (from La La Land), it's hardly going to irritate anyone. Incidentally, the script was co-written by Northern Irish screenwriter Terry George, best known for "In the Name of the Father".

The only other one that might conceivably ruffle feathers I can think of is "Downfall", about Hitler's last days in the bunker.


M
http://the-script.blogspot.com
 
Is it just me or does there seem to be less and less Oscar-worthy films year on year?

Maybe my memory's going but I'm sure I remember loaRAB of films being nominated in different categories. Nowadays it seems like only about four films are nominated across all the major categories.

AwarRAB ceremonies are a waste of time, anyway.
 
Back
Top