Sure, but while we're talking "integrity"... I'd be willing to bet that not every one of those actors who backed the campaign to nominate Riseborough had seen To Leslie. And I'm damn sure that not everyone who voted for her has seen the film. First because the film has hardly been seen by anyone. And secondly because even if you pressed play on your For Your Consideration tape or DVD you probably didn't get past the first very, very tedious half of the film.
@@joshdrayton1230 honey, if you think watching the film was ever a requirement to vote for someone at the Oscars, you’re entirely wrong. It’s always been about publicity and faux prestige of those awards.
the fact that the academy conducted an investigation into the campaign is so hilarious considering campaign tactics in the past. its only okay if big studios use their millions and millions of dollars to get nominated
Bruh people are busy. Therefore the campaigns are meant to get the movie in front of people. While it seems like this was done to whip votes. That’s two completely different things
You're not taking into account the rules of the Academy. If the studios want to spend their money on a big campaign so be it. But the investigation was about the chance that Andrea's campaign was outside the stipulated rules of the Academy.
@@benrualfThis video is all about that: The Academy keeps emphasizing that they want a fair and ethical process, but the fact that only $10 million campaign can put movies into the voters’ consideration is not fair. Some rules are specific; some are vague. Your ”so be it” is just an indication that we’re accustomed to the game, even though it’s fixed.
May I use this platform to express my still existing frustration with Toni not being nominated for Hereditary? Just as an example (the best one, as far as I'm concerned) of performances in genre movies not recognized by the Academy, due to decades long biases and its need to perpetually nominate the same actors.
Because there is a windows of gentes and performances they would support... This "grassroots" campaign was not there for Audra Mcdonald a few years ago when she was worthy
I feel really bad for Daniel Deadwyler. As for Viola Davis, if it's any consolation, she just won a Grammy for her audiobook and therefore is now in the EGOT club (Emmy, Grammy, Oscar, and Tony).
After watching your takes on so many classic Oscar races, most times I wasn't even born yet, it feels kind of surreal to witness such Oscar history as it unfolds. 🤣 great work as usual though!!!
That's the thing, the people who helmed the To Leslie campaign were well connected campaign savy people who knew what they were doing. Not everyone has that access or influence. Just look at Jeremy Pope(I know, not an actress but still good example) in 'Inspection', he was phenomenal. Got lots of praise from critics along with quite a few critics award nomination, had A24 backing as well. You don't see academy A listers campaigning for that film. It's all about knowing a selective group of people who have power and influence.
But Viola Davis, who was bumped out, had worked with Meryl Streep, Amy Adams, Liam Neeson, Tom Cruise, Robert Duvall, Colin Farrell, Michael Douglas, Sandra Bullock, Tom Hanks, Paul Dano, Denzel Washington, Emma Stone, etc, etc, etc. Anyone who's acted long enough has friends and connections, and this is some massive questioning of the integrity of pretty much everyone in Hollywood, that's pretty unfounded
@@okonh0wp the question is does she have the same clout amongst her white peers, of course they respect her craft and undeniable talent but that doesn't mean a clout of familiarity. I maybe wrong, but I doubt if she was in the same boat as Riseborough, she would have been granted the same opportunity. Also, here I would compare Viola Davis with say a Michelle Williams(?category fraud) or Ana De Armas(?quality), why is it when a white indie artist has to be nominated it is at the expense of a black actress?!
You people are talking a load of WANK, it's hysterical. Andrea Riseborough is one of the most obscure actors to nominated for an Oscar in modern times. Viola Davis lives in a completely different league of fame, has already been recognised with every major acting award and was playing the lead character in a blockbuster that topped box-office. She's fiends with Oprah Winfrey ffs - she was not the underdog here. About 10,000 people vote for the Oscars, the idea that Andrea Riseborough is like some malevolent snake that bribed them all for votes is IDIOTIC.
I think the problem with The Inspection was that A24 campaigning too many movies at the same time with a small budget to compared to other studios. Along with The Inspection, A24 was also campaigning Aftersun, The Whale, and Everything Everywhere All At Once, which did payed off for them because each of those 3 films got at least 1 Oscar nomination.
I mean, did you have a doubt she was probably working on one? 😂 Can’t expect her to rush release one though. Every BKR video is very thought out with strong analysis and incredibly well-researched.
The speed with which I clicked... The Gina Prince-Bythewood article in the Hollywood Reporter is way more articulate than I could be. Once again, the meritocracy was revealed to be a lie but it was also another crushing reminder that the progressivism is just talk. They don't show up for us. They actively work against us.
academy basically said: "if someone gets nominated and we don't profit in any way, than that's either against the rules or we need to find a way to monetize it"
I don’t think that’s what they said though. They literally said they wasn’t taking the nomination but somethings raised concerns. Meaning some things broke the rules
@@ikexbankai but lets not pretend that this is anything more than someone breaking in without playing by the industry rules, and that costing people money. And I mean the awards industry, not film. This is capitalism auto-enforcing itself, and people will be manipulated into getting outraged for those who were left out this year, but there are worthy professionals left out EVERY year.
@@danpsou that’s my point exactly. There’s people deserving of nominations every year but unfortunately only 5 get them. 5 that follow the rules. Her campaign definitely bent if not outright broke some rules
this campaign will be the template for any aspiring indie to contest noms. just get somebody big in the industry to spread the word. some fans, films and actors were just mad they got outcampaigned by a cash strapped production
This is the first time I've heard real anger from Izzie in all the years I've been watching her videos. Danielle Deadwyler and Viola Davis did the work, checked all the boxes, and were still ignored. Not gonna lie, I've stanned Michelle Yeoh for this Oscar ever since I saw Everything, but this, again, does not look like a level playing field.
@@mellyj3581 I honestly think that race is being weaponized here to get people on the side of what's basically an elitist industry of marketing through award shows.
@@mellyj3581 You're not well informed about Viola Davis. The movie had a divisive racist campaign. The academy would be sending a horrible message by rewarding it.
Your comments at the end really stuck with me. I respect their grassroots approach and think Riseborough is worthy of a nomination, but it can't be ignored that the actresses that were "snubbed" to make way for this are the Black women who were in consideration. Not to say that Riseborough "took" their place, but rather that the voters were more willing to dump Black actresses over white who imo were less deserving. Frankly, Williams should be in the supporting category and de Arams shouldn't be nominated at all, and Davis and Deadwyler should be in their place, but that's just my opinion.
This is the take i've been waiting for. Davis and Deadwyler were considered a lock by many, while Williams was also very appreciated and de Armas campaign had lost a lot of its initial momentum and wasnt really considered. Yet despite that, Riseborough an de Armas got the nomination. That means that Deadwyler and Davis' (THE Viola Davis, ladies and gentlemen) performances were the least appreciated by the Academy members to begin with, which proves the institutional racism and racial bias inside the Academy. Black women artistry is an afterthought for the predominant white members of the Academy's acting branch and Riseborough nomination proves it
@@diegopaz8366 The problem I have with this take is that you are complaining about the Academy's "institutional" racism that's giving two Oscars to black women this year (Angela Bassett, and Euzhan Palcy) and gave an Oscar to Tyler Perry (before he gets metooed) for his sexual issues that some people know about but Hollywood is deliberately ignoring.
I think the space taken for black actresses like Daniel Deadwyler is Michelle Williams. Her performance was mediocre. Deadwyler should have replaced her
Letitia Wright should have at least been considered. Letitia's work was a power onto its own. She had an opinion that was (and is), quite frankly, *popular* among Americans (why were people acting brand new?) yet was stigmatized for it even after she retracted/apologized, even having the Hollywood Reporter compare her to men who committed SA. I'm not saying I agreed with her, but a Kanye she was not. She simply voiced her distrust and concern, and, quite frankly, as someone with black family STILL suffering due to the apathy of the of American healthcare system to this very minute, I understand any minority who has second thoughts/mistrust. I didn't get the help I needed until I LEFT the States, and I've had multiple _necessary surgeries_ since. Point is, there are politics behind Letitia Wright not being nominated...even though people who have said/done legitimately bad things have been nominated and won before...and even though a _ton_ of Americans have shared the same thoughts or crazier ones. Maybe it could be that they didn't want to nominate two people from a "comic book movie," but I think that it's more than that. She gave a powerful performance that showed a range that even some veterans have skirted by without ever achieving (including some of my faves). And she really didn't have to. She had the excuses of it "just" being a comic book film and her grief over losing Chadwick, but she didn't phone it in. No one did. So, things like this always takes me back to thinking that an another, more objective awards show needs to rise in prominence or people's successes should just stand as their own awards. As things are, the film broke records with her at the helm, so maybe I'd take that over being nominated for something that didn't. And that's not even getting into "Woman King."
I feel like "grassroots" would be fans promoting it, not wealthy people inside the industry who can afford to pay for some of the promotional mechanisms out of their own pockets.
What they did was still grassroots, because it was simply them emailing/asking big name celebs to watch their movie, and if they liked it, to spread the word. Average people aren't going to make big waves like that for an indie actor/movie, because 1. They dont hold that much weight 2. Only already established actors get that kind of reaction from viewers because they're already fans. A movie shouldn't win just because an actor is popular or because their production teamed had the millions of dollars to campaign and bribe.
Thank you for breaking this down. I'm of two minds about Riseborough's nomination. I'm happy that a tiny movie was able to subvert the powerhouse studios. But I also feel like this wouldn't happen for a woman (or man) of color, even if they had the support like Riseborough had simply because the Academy continues to have a large issue with race. I do think that this nomination will create change in how campaigns are run, just not for the better
For some reason, when I heard about it, it didn't sound like the grassroots campaign was successful, just snobs getting one over the other snobs. I'm really that ignorant about the industry.
Also, her grassroots campaign doesn't mean small movies can find their way into the limelight as she was actually helped by A-listers so, in a way, it's still a money/influence situation that can't actually be reproduced.
I love indie films, so I'm not against Andrea's nomination if based on performance. However, even though she was in a major-budgeted film, I don't care what anyone says: Letitia Wright should have been up for consideration/nominated. It might have been a "comic book movie," but it had depth and a sincere, bittersweet story about loss and grief. And _she acted her butt off_ in that role with an impressive range. She more than held her own next to a legend like Angela Bassett. But I guess it'd be too much for two actresses from a "mere" comic book movie to be considered, aside from other things. But I'm looking at performance alone. So, if that's the case with Andrea, okay, but I agree that what you suppose wouldn't happen.
Oh my god… 💤 💤💤💤💤 this is getting boring now with your rubbish comment about race, the whole race thing is always an excuse or bollocks to make sure a person of colour gets a nominee. It’s not fair if we must nominate because a person of colour didn’t get nominated, so if 5 white people let’s say actors had the most amazing performances but because their isn’t a black person nominated then one of those white person won’t get in because what…? Race? That’s bullshit. If their were 5 black actors who had the most incredible performances and better than any white person would we batter an eyelid….no! No one would kick a stink. If their was 5 great black actors getting nominated and not one white person and it was through merit then I would have no problem.
That's the least informed statement I've ever read and this constant anti-racism crusade is completely taking any integrity away from the Oscars. Turning the Oscars into some de facto reparations committee rather than something resembling what honors the best in film is counter-productive towards anyone taking those awards seriously, even when they go to someone like Ariana DeBose who explicitly campaigned and was championed by the press on breaking the glass ceiling of being Queer, Black, and Latina (negating your first argument that no one ever champions a person of color). The truth is that the Academy has bent over backwards to satiate the small vocal market of people who are upset that Black actors are not being constantly lionized all the time and can never be satiated so I see little reason to cede to this vocal block of the entertainment media (largely allies of Black people and a small literate class of Blacks, rather than Black people who usually care about bigger things. I should know. I spent seven weeks over the past 2 years campaigning for Raphael Wernock in 2021 and 2022 and interacting with Black communities as a pollster, and woke people greatly reread the Black community): -The protests over Oscars so White that were initiated in 2015 was based on microstatistics rather than macrostatistics. In truth, the Academy had awarded nominations to 30 black actors over a 14-year period, which amounts to 10.8 percent or just 1.4 percent shy of the black population in America, according to the 2010 census, and that was before we started collectively caring as a society. The arguments largely come from a micro-focus on a specific year or the 90-year history of the awards. If we go by the latter, then there's simply no way we'd ever have parity unless we automatically give the Oscars for the next 5 or 6 years to all Black people. It's hardly fair to turn a contest that's supposed to be about a voluntary process about who the best is into some accounting for the burden of the past 100 years. -From 2016 to 2019, all four best picture races were decided through vicious smear campaigns over what was least offensive to wokeness. In 2016, they acted like it was a crime against humanity that a white person could possibly appreciate jazz (inaccurate because Gosling's character cited his influence). In 2017, they said it was unacceptable that a racist character would be redeemed (the incident for which he's labelled as a racist happens off-screen so we don't know what it is, and he doesn't exactly get redeemed since he loses his job), in 2018, they tried to paint Green Book as dishonoring Don Shirley's family and made a big deal of a fried chicken scene (the actual family did approve of it after seeing it, but that was underreported), In 2019, Parasite won because it was less acceptable to have a white protagonist. -The bottom line is that everyone gets snubbed. It's a sign of greatness. Joaquin Phoenix has won and been nominated 4 times, but he was also snubbed for Her and Inherent Vice; ditto Leonardo DiCaprio and Django Unchained and Don't Look Up; Meryl Streep, Prime and Manchurian Candidate; Bradley Cooper, Nightmare Alley; Tom Hanks Bridge of Spies, The Post. There is never this much media outrage unless it's a Black person. Why is it that we must destroy the Oscars every time Viola Davis gets snubbed? -The Oscars are the most liberal institution in the World. They're doing everything they can short of rigging the vote to ensure Viola Davis wins every time, to please critics for the Black community to avoid press. Yet, why is there any reason to go after them? In the year after #oscarsoshite, they didn't rig the voting, but they gave the hosting gig to a Black man, had a Black woman as president of the Academy, and they gave an honorary Oscar to a Black man. In fact, they've been giving far more honorary Oscars to Black and POC actors (for example, Tyler Perry, whose pretty young and whose films have been critically panned, even by the black community) than what the critical community has deemed worthy as of late. In light of that You really think that snubbing Viola Davis (who has already won an Oscar) or Regina King for One Night in Miami (who, again, already won an Oscar) is motivated by overt or even covert racism? Why don't you put this energy to the banking industry or higher academia, or classical music or any other industry that actually discriminates against Black people -I also think we need to drop the people of color label here. The vocal critical community that demands Black people win more Oscars is nothing like the one in which Hispanic people or Asian people win Oscars. Bottom Line: -The Oscars are a process of voluntary mass voting. It has power because people voluntarily choose the best. The #oscarssowhite crowd simply wants to rig the game for Black actors by creating affirmative action (which would take away the power),. I'm not saying this affirmative action is a good or bad thing but it would take away the power of the voluntary nature of the process, and the critics want to simply have their cake and eat it too. n't Look Up and Django Unchained, Phoenix for Her,
I honestly doubt they would ever pull her nomination but I wonder how this will change rules surrounding Oscar campaigning in the future. My money is on Michelle Yeoh winning. She is the first openly Asian woman to be nominated for best actress. I hope she can make history. Edit: for those who have asked. There have been other actresses who have historically hidden their ancestry. Merle Oberon, for instance, was born in India, but passed as a white British actress during her career. Oberon was nominated for best actress in 1935, but her ancestry was not revealed until after her death in the late 70s. Michelle Yeoh is the first openly Asian woman to be nominated for best actress.
I think Michelle has the win locked up because her performance is too good to deny her and Blanchett has already won two Oscar’s and will likely be nominated for more in the future. The odds of Michelle getting a nomination like this again is sadly unlikely.
I have very similar thoughts on this situation. On the one hand, Andrea Riseborough feels like an actor we look back on decades from now and wonder why tf she was never nominated, but here she somehow managed to get in by exploiting holes in this very exclusive system. On the other hand, it's disheartening to see that so many Academy members are aware of how much influence they can wield for their fellow actors yet they can't use this platform to highlight more underground and PoC films. Could Nicole Beharie have followed her Saturn award win into a Best Actress nomination for Miss Juneteenth? Could Regina Hall have broken through for Support the Girls? Why are so many figures that could realistically change this category only showing up now? It's all broken down super well in this video, and my hope is that we DO see the Academy make this process more accessible and that Actors use their platform to help their colleagues benefit.
It's really weird that yall are using words like exploit and finding issue with her and her team for simply emailing and asking big name celebs to watch their movie, and if enjoyed, spread the word about it. By all consideration, it's a good thing that simple word of mouth praise was able to have this effect rather than multi-billion dollar production companies spending millions on promoting it (and if truth be known, bribing important figures).
@@JessieP07 I see your point but the truth is only white people benefit from that. If Andrea wasn't white she would've NEVER got that "grassroots" campaign. And that's the whole problem here: white Hollywood elites never want to prop up black talent.
I always thought there was this type of unspoken rules that voting members of the Academy should not be publicly endorsing any particular film or candidate in the running for a nomination if they had no professional involvement in the making and the distribution of the film. So it was surprising for me to see so many white members came out to publicly endorse Riseborough which we don’t see that all with other non white academy members. It’s like non white members were less likely to test the boundaries of the rules than white members. It feels like the same game is being played with 2 different standards.
As maybe many others watching this video, THIS WAS THE VIDEO I WAS CRAVING. You laid out so perfectly how I feel about this (but never could articulate) and have such a comprehensive view of how this Oscar campaign worked. Perfect!
I'm so grateful for your last arguments! Because the thing that bothered me the most is how they act like it was a real grassroots campaign, when we know that a true grassroots campaign of an indie movie would never succeed like this, even less if it was done and/or starred by people of color, in special because most don't have the connections the people involved has. This was a small campaign, yes, but it feels like it's more akin to a rich kid using their father's wealth and connections than a proper grassroots campaign.
This all of this because some of the comments on here come across as having missed this point or flat out ignored it. This was not grass roots it was manipulation and led to progression, inclusion and diversity being overlooked. Riseborough may get her profile raised but her reputation will take a hit as a result.
The racist accusation is pretty bogus though. I can buy that some unknown actors won't break through but black actresses like Anjenue Ellis, Regina King, Ruth Negga, Audra Davis, and Ariana DeBose....none of those people were anyhwere close to being household names when they scored their first nominations in the past few years. You can literally see how many favorites or hits they got on IMDB and it was pretty close to zero. And Viola Davis, who was bumped out, had worked with Meryl Streep, Amy Adams, Liam Neeson, Tom Cruise, Robert Duvall, Colin Farrell, Michael Douglas, Sandra Bullock, Tom Hanks, Paul Dano, Denzel Washington, Emma Stone, etc, etc, etc. The idea of racism in the Academy is based on extreme cherry-picking of statistics. People point out that only one black LEAD actress has won ever, but 50% of the past actresses int he supporting actress category have been Black over the past 12 years. That's very very high over the 12-13% of the population that Blacks are in this country. I'm not saying there needs to be a limit, but come on, to suggest the dearth in one single category while ignoring that, say between 10-11% of acting nominees were black in the 14 years preceeding #OscarsSoWhite , is just plain irresponsible. The Oscars are the most liberal institution in the World. They're doing everything they can short of rigging the vote to ensure Viola Davis wins every time, to please critics for the Black community to avoid press. Yet, why is there any reason to go after them? In the year after #oscarsoshite, they didn't rig the voting, but they gave the hosting gig to a Black man, had a Black woman as president of the Academy, and they gave an honorary Oscar to a Black man. In fact, they've been giving far more honorary Oscars to Black and POC actors (for example, Tyler Perry, whose pretty young and whose films have been critically panned, even by the black community) than what the critical community has deemed worthy as of late. In light of that You really think that snubbing Viola Davis (who has already won an Oscar) or Regina King for One Night in Miami (who, again, already won an Oscar) is motivated by overt or even covert racism? Why don't you put this energy to the banking industry or higher academia, or classical music or any other industry that actually discriminates against Black people -I also think we need to drop the people of color label here. The vocal critical community that demands Black people win more Oscars is nothing like the one in which Hispanic people or Asian people win Oscars.
@@okonh0wp some of the actresses winning best supporting actress, is a way of saying "look, we're not racists". But it's weird non are ever chosen for best actress. it's a consolation price.
@@okonh0wp lmao, of course! I forgot racism was over the moment Obama had become president! And I forgot that a institution that awards a person of color every other time is not racist at all, after all, they have friends that are people of color! Some of their favorite people are poc!
@@Stephaniacat haha, ok so if you admit that it’s done to appease people into showing they’re not racist (which I agree), then why would it matter if they did the same thing for a lead actress. Besides, you want to break the news to the 24 other actresses in the last 12 years that they lost Oscars bc of a political/pr gesture or the six actresses that won that they won not by the value of their work but because people wanted to use them as a way to apologize for civil rights failures? In2013 it came out that many people didn’t see 12 years a slave but voted for the film so as not o appear racist and people didn’t like that either. The O scars only have value if it’s a meritocracy
I'd be interested to see a comparison video with the Rambling Rose campaign where Diane Ladd invited people to her home for spaghetti dinners and ended up with both Ladd and her daughter Laura Dern receiving nominations.
Diane Ladd’s spaghetti dinner campaign was for 1990’s Wild at Heart not 1991’s Rambling Rose. She received Best Supporting Actress nominations for both films though.
Most of us WOC know all too well that it’s one rule for Them and another for the rest of us. It doesn’t matter how talented we are, how hard we work and how nice or professional we are.
It’s so true and I’m so upset about it. At least Viola got her EGOT but I feel for Danielle. She at least deserved to be nominated. This system is so broken.
For Danielle Deadwyler and Viola Davis, it really is an idea that Scandal drove home for me: run the race, only for people to change the rules once you see the finish line.
I always thought there was this type of unspoken rules that voting members of the Academy should not be publicly endorsing any particular film or candidate in the running for a nomination if they had no professional involvement in the making and the distribution of the film. So it was surprising for me to see so many white members came out to publicly endorse Riseborough which we don’t see that all with other non white academy members. It’s like non white members were less likely to test the boundaries of the rules than white members. It feels like the same game is being played with 2 different standards.
Solid analysis. Riseborough's performance absolutely deserves the nom - but - the coordinated celeb gambit that prefaced itself to be a genuine, happenstance "Hey, check this amazing movie out" was a knowingly disingenuous ploy for Oscar gold & a supremely gross flex of white clique privilege. In a predominantly white contest & voting body that's fundamentally skewed against equal appreciation of Black contribution to the arts, that was a gambit only white ppl could play - and that subversion was only ever going to come at the expense of the non-white nomination. Rescindment of the nom would've been unjust, the performance merited recognition, but absolute condemnation of the actors' ploy is due.
Exactly; Money talks... and I guess Blonde talked more than Woman King (which Viola paid for some of the marketing for that film mind you) or Till... it sucks. But are we surprised? no. Im glad Yeo is nominated though, at least as POC, we can support each other, even if we can't all be "on the pedestal together" ...
I always thought there was this type of unspoken rules that voting members of the Academy should not be publicly endorsing any particular film or candidate in the running for a nomination if they had no professional involvement in the making and the distribution of the film. So it was surprising for me to see so many white members came out to publicly endorse Riseborough which we don’t see that all with other non white academy members. It’s like non white members were less likely to test the boundaries of the rules than white members. It feels like the same game is being played with 2 different standards.
The humor, the information, the opinions, balanced perfectly. Loved seeing you changing it up with something so current but still felt like your historical vids. Congrats on going full time with this and can’t wait to see what’s next
I question the whole "small independent film" thing. I like classic films. I like quiet movies. I'm fine with reading subtitles. I like character-driven stories. That doesn't mean I want to watch histrionic poverty porn or shallow, poorly-paced acting showcases. I'm not rejecting some of these Oscar bait movies because I love blockbusters full of explosions. I find them tired and boring. I've seen something like it before. If you don't love the main actor, a lot of these movies are not compelling.
I have to agree. I'm a cinephile, I'll watch an auteur film and then watch a joke of a film like "Samurai Cop" because both amuse me in some way. I know the difference between good/bad films and performances, but what ultimately matters is that they deliver sustained entertainment.
Great analysis, as always. I particularly agreed with your parting words. It's most definitely not an even playing field. I'm rooting for Yeoh because Everything Everywhere All at Once is so good, but also because it would be only the SECOND time an actress that isn't white wins the award. It's such an audacious statistic, that the Academy hasn't ever awarded a POC Best Actress outside of Halle Berry over twenty years ago, and with this year being the 95th edition of the Academy Awards? "Only Supporting Actress for certain folks" So snobbish country club, really. Some years (all years), the voting body, just sticks with their friends. But all you really need to know is that simple stat of just one winner ever. You'd like for it to be based on mostly merit, whatever "mostly" means. But in years gone by when Michelle Yeoh wasn't nominated for Crouching Tiger, even when that film won a bunch of other Oscars, it becomes apparent that "merit" is something afforded to the privileged. Remember when Pam Grier wasn't acknowledged for Jackie Brown (her co-star was in Supporting, though), despite being in a TARANTINO film? The film following PULP FICTION. It's audacious. And the film was a critical darling. Or when Angela Bassett almost wilted away after wowing the year she was nominated - I mean wilted from ever joining the Best Actress discussion again. Holly Hunter was an unstoppable juggernaut that year for her beautiful turn in the Piano, but everyone in 1994 thought that Bassett was ready to accomplish the impossible given time. Looks like it's Supporting instead, years later. Best Actress resides up at the front.
I fully relate to your comments at the end of the video, the reaction to this nomination and the outcome that followed has put me off film twitter, Awards season and award guilds completely. I will still of course support your channel and always look forward to your content and thank you for this video!
Just makes me think back to Mya Taylor in 'Tangerine' and the talk (operative word) about how to push her for a nomination for best supporting actress at the Oscars. She did win an independent spirit award. It's a great opportunity to reflect on just who is being pushed forward for recognition.
The deeper reality is that Privileged Racist White Women will ALWAYS act Racist. So a Privileged English Racist got a Nomination while more deserving, BETTER, actors get ignored BECAUSE they are Black... This (and the Best Actor) nominations were a KKK wet dream
I have no issue with Andrea. She didn't ask for this. My big issue is with Frances Fisher. She sent out a message stating that "Deadwyler & Davis" were a lock. That was in no way true! She knows that a Black woman has only won best actress once out of all the years the Oscars have been around. She knows how hard it STILL is for a Black woman to get a best actress nomination. Especially when you have an Asian actress in the mix. She KNOWS the academy is not inclusive. They pretty much pick one non-white group of actors & focus on them to try to prove they aren't racist and then ignore them the next year. Also the trashing of marvel movies by her & the fellow white actresses is also pretty shitty. Especially knowing that without them Angela Bassett would continue to be ignored by the academy. There have been PLENTY of opportunities for these women to go to bat for a Black actress in smaller films, yet, they never took the time to help them? Frances has done nothing but continue to do what white women do best, stand by and uphold the structrue of white supremacy. I also find it very interesting that Cate Blanchett continues to be a "pillar" of the acting community while continuing to support Roman Polanski. So much for the MeToo movement.
What do you mean by "especially with an Asian woman in the mix"? Do you mean to say that Asian actresses have a better probability of getting nominated as compared to Black actresses?
@@keizerinsoze4368 Definitely not. What I mean by that is that the oscars can't have more than one minority actress in the best actress catagory. Only one non-white actress can be in the running. Can't give up more than one spot on the nominee list to a Black woman, Asian woman or Latina. The academy is most definitely not fair to Asian actresses.
Well, they should have for Taraji P. Henson’s brilliant performances in both HIDDEN FIGURES and THE BEST OF ENEMIES, and I’m saying this based solely on the MERIT of those two performances and NOT the color of her skin.
@@ethannielson942 Hidden Figures portrayed an extraordinary episode in US History, and it was well produced and directed - a fine movie. But the acting was TimeLifeish, because the script is no Ghandi. It's just what it is.
Honestly I wish she didn´t get nominated just because there have been many great indie films like To Leslie that were more well known but still were too small to get noticed by the Academy because they didn´t have the luxury of a well connected lead actor. Such as Red Rocket for example
The question this has put in my mind is this; if Cynthia Erivo made a low budget movie and was extremely good in it, but the movie didn't have the ingredients (money) to get it nominated, and so Viola Davis, Halle Berry, Octavia Spencer, Oprah Winfrey, Angela Bassett and Whoopi Goldberg started a social media campaign to get it seen and nominated, would it get nominated......?
Sure, it's possible to see Riseborough's nomination as a triumph for an underdog and/or a slap in the face for the cashed-up studio awards machine. But really they're just gaming the system in a slightly different way. You can only really be excited about it if you think the performance is worthy. Having seen the film I would contend that, while Riseborough's turn is painstaking and spirited, it's not appreciably different of better than a hundred other performances by actors playing addicts through the years. More to the point, To Leslie is in no way groundbreaking. In fact, it's a seriously flawed film. The first hour (at least) is tedious and predictable, and it's not until the home stretch that we even begin to like Leslie as a character or become invested in the film. Rightly or wrongly, Oscar generally likes to highlight great performances in films that are outstanding, or at least above average. To Leslie is deeply average, even more reminiscent of the old TV Movie of the Week than a cinema release, which might account for the dismal box office. Yes, Riseborough carries the film, but she doesn't carry it well enough to make the first half engaging, or, some would say, bearable. On that basis, I'd say she doesn't deserve the nomination, certainly not over Viola Davis or Danielle Deadwyler. I'd say the same for Ana De Armas. Her performance is also highly accomplished, but it's in a film that is complete trash - cynical, exploitative and even offensive. I can only imagine that her nomination is a case of Hollywood egregiously stoking its own legends and myths.
God, thank you! The idea that this will help any single other indie movie is ridiculous, when that was always nothing more than the Hollywood cover excuse and their own ego-preservation for the only reason this performance was actually nominated; crazy powerful insider connections. Which is somehow an even more inaccessable method of winning nominations than the studio machine is for most people already on the margins. If this does anything to the system at all, it will be making it worse. To call this grassroots makes my blood boil. And also yes, thank you again! This movie got overpraised so ridiculously, and maybe everyone has now seen this movie and is being genuine and I just disagree. But in my cynicism it feels that, to seem balanced in analyzing this issue, some people feel the need to first acknowledge; "she's a great actress who totally deserved it, however..."? Andrea Riseborough has been great in other more original movies, but To Leslie is a movie 100% in the rather well-covered ballpark of "Poor people drama for rich people, starring an older-but-not-too-old thin white woman without makeup who's going through it", of the sort that Hollywood loves. I can see why a neverending adoration for poverty porn, and a desire to avoid backlash now, would make rich hollywood people double down on claiming it the greatest performance ever put to film, but...? They make half a dozen of these kinds of movies every year. Riseborough's a good actress yes, but many working actors are, especially if we're gonna consider all of indie cinema. Is this really everyone's favourite now, and we're just the odd ones out, or do people just not want to be too mean or unbalanced in talking about the drama surrounding this, to argue thiat this belongs in their top 5 of the whole year? And besides the irritation at the lack of similar opportunities for any other indie movies or for more unconventional, non-white actors, and also the irritation over Viola Davis and Danielle Deadwyler as you mention especially.... I am personally also very annoyed at the particular way this is overshadowing EEAAO/Michelle Yeoh: A nomination that would seem unlikely given everything about the Oscars, a low-budget indie nomination, starring a veteran but underappreciated older actress, a true underdog with true grassroots support, daringly unconventional in many ways, a genre movie, an actress competing in the whitest oscars category as possibly the first asian woman to ever win. And her entire oscars journey narrative basically gets hijacked, or at least gets way less attention than it deserves now for how groundbreaking and historic it is, because the Riseborough campaign crew really needs to hammer down many parts of this narrative for themselves in the press. To pretend that this wasn't rich industry insiders astroturfing a campaign with clearly equal power to what a studio gets done. I mind that because it's ignoring the real thing for a lie. And I mind that because Oscar narratives matter in your chances for Oscar wins. Cate Blanchett being Cate Blanchett has a solid Oscar narrative that she has on lock obviously. And what; Michelle Yeoh now suddenly isn't the only (or even main) veteran in this competition to struggle to the top anymore? She has to share her sincere PR story with dozens of big names pushing this manifactured nonsense about their pet project? Sorry, clearly I am frustrated. The transparent BS should make awards meaningless, but if it matters to what movies get made, if it matters to what minorities get a chance, I unfortunately care. I hope Michelle Yeoh knows she has the people's vote.
I'm enjoying it as a slap to the face of the whole awards ecosystem in general. It only underscores that these things are mostly popularity contests to crown prom king and queen. It's nice to give art recognition, but the current method for doing so is so fundamentally flawed that I'd rather see it burned down. All the talk about whether something will get an award takes up space that would be better spent talking about its artistic merit, and studios are too incentivized to put out movies that are calculated with certain tropes to win these things (hence the term "oscarbait") rather than prioritizing artistic instinct.
Welcome to Nebula! And thank you for this breakdown -- I had no idea any of this was going on tbh but it's not surprising in the least that Davis & Deadwyler were excluded. So goddamn heartbreaking.
I love how the "Be Kind" part of your channel's name is always so thoroughly true. I'm one of those people who just happened to be offline for a few days, so this was a fascinating surprise. Couldn't agree more with your conclusions.
Wonderfully investigated, thorough, but human and ultimately warm and lovely. As you always are. Love you Be Kind Rewind/ya’ll. Been a part of my life for years and I always know something good is coming when your work drops. Cheers homie! ❤️
Women of color would never get this kind of endorsement and that's the problem. That's not necessarily Riseborough's fault, but the fault of the system.
Fascinating. Raises many questions. You kept going deeper and deeper yet. You are amazing. I'm personally completely over anything related to corporate activity, especially awards. Wishing we could all just bypass the machine in favor of meaningful creativity. Whoah, just got to the sponsor feature! Will definitely check it out. Thanks for mentioning them.
As Whoopi Goldberg once put it referring to ‘Saving Private Ryan’ vs ‘Shakespeare in Love’ when she hosted the Oscars once: “They fought World War 3 over World War 2.”
An incredible, well-researched video that helps break down multiple sides of a complex issue to all of us who didn’t know anything about any of this 🙌 So glad I found this channel
i'm all for supporting indie film, but this nomination almost certainly came at the expense of a nomination for viola davis or danielle deadwhyler. furthermore, i doubt the academy would've done this for a black indie film.
This was the best and most balanced analysis about this I have seen. Thank you for putting it together! (I am personally pulling for Yeoh to win this!)
Holy cow you really outdid yourself with this video. I had no idea how complicated the Academy’s rules were for running an Oscar campaign. Let along how the grass roots push for Andrea Riseborough was done. Bravo! Love your channel and videos. You are awesome!
I was hoping there would be a video about Andrea Riseborough’s nomination. I’m hoping this surprise nomination could lead to some change when it comes to campaigning for awards, especially for more exposure for women and POC
If any changes are made I'm betting they'll be more in the direction of tightening things up to make it less possible for those who can't afford it to campaign rather than in the direction of opening things up to make it more accessible and fair.
If the academy wanted to take the easy way out they could always add 2-5 more slots for the acting and directing categories. That doesn’t solve anything but if I’m being honest that’s one of the few ways for performances from more independent or genre films to be considered.
The problem is they can't correct for inherent bias and internal racism. They tried expanding the number of voters and diversifying the membership but we can see from this how the majority wants to vote.
It would totally be the opossite if this type of campaign stays because people of color, or lgbtq, or latinos, asians, continue to be the smaller part of the industry, which means they could never move an army of famous people for them like the a list that did it for Andrea. So don't be surprise when the next smaller white performer that has friends gets nominated cause it wants to
A well researched video…of course I wouldn’t expect anything else from this quality channel. Congratulations on joining Nebula! I was gonna sign up through Patrick, now I get to enjoy your work on there, too 😊
I haven't watched the video yet but they tried to campaign with money (50K spend per event, idk how, who's money?). They realized it didn't work bc people (normal citizens) didn't really watch it, no one talked about it. So, the directors wife started campaign of sending DAILY emails (which is against the rules) to their friends (and strangers, basically all voters) and ASKED them to spread the word. So they did. Andrea got nominations only for the Oscars and only bc of her famous Hollywood friends. Award season is never fair but this really rubbed me the wrong way. ESPECIALLY bc her nomination was at the expense of two women of colour, whom were nominated elsewhere (not just the Osacrs). "Grassroots campaign" could not be farther from the truth. Also the emailing didn't go through academy email list, she did it privately, which you are not supposed to do either.
I think we can recognise POC artists who played the game how it's meant to can get screwed over but there is a systemic issue around financial gatekeeping from the Academy that doesn't make it a level playing field where members can just vote purely based on "artistic and technical merits". $20K is a lot just to put your film on the Academy portal, on top of the other marketing costs. The whole system needs to be overturned to be more inclusive, if the Academy are serious.
You explain everything soo well. I knew about Halle being the only WoC to win but I didnt even realize how the 2 potential black female nominees had films that followed the equation for nominations and STILL couldnt get considered. I dont know a way to remove the overwhelming influence of money and lobbying. Im kind of of the mind that newer generations should ignore the Oscars and let it die out as a concept like the monarchy. With far fewer big budget cerebral dramatic films being released in theaters I think a new reward recognition system should take its place.
I strongly feel the same about ignoring the Oscars and letting it fade into obscurity. I think that a new, truly equal/objective type of award should be created or people let their work stand for itself.
They actually had something called the people's choice awards, which was based on average folks 'voting' for their faves. They never carried as much weight as the awards from professional guilds tho
Interestingly, the first time I heard of "To Leslie" was on Howard Stern, months before the push for the nomination. Stern and his wife, Beth, raved about the movie. How did he hear about it: oh, because Mary McCormick is a friend and played his (first) wife in "Private Parts".
Wow, what a beautifully constructed video. High quality as always. I learned so much, and I admire how objective you were in explaining what happened. This was really fascinating.
If we're talking overlooked performances though, the glaring oversight to me is Taylor Russell in Bones & All. Spent the entirety of the credits of that movie silently weeping because her performance moved me so much.
yep. produced by mgm and had like very little budget to promote, mostly used chalamets celebrity to get any attention, and her performance was amazing and deserved a chalamet like breakout awards run. where was the rallying behind her from all these actors who long for the days of “real movies” for her? oh right. cause she wasn’t as connected and couldn’t call in favors to a bunch of very big names to nab her votes. ultimate eyeroll. taylor was robbed
Yes, Taylor Russell was really fabulous but another UA-cam channel said that the films content/genre would be too divisive to get Academy votes for her nomination (cannibalism/horror genre)
@@Lilah_Ninigigun_Belet-Eanna No doubt the genre and the unorthodox plot had something to do with it, yeah. Too lurid. Which is just another indictment of the academy really.
Thank you whenever I say that tagline for Andrea and to Lelise being “the small movie with a giant heart” or Charlie Theron saying that to Lelise is the type of film that reminds her of movies from the 70s and 80s … Taylor Russell and her performance in bones and all literally came to my mind.
I think it’s so interesting in comparison to Paul Mescal - he was also the lone nominee from his tiny indie film, but it seems to be genuinely on the merit of his performance and not due to a last-minute rush of campaigning like Riseborough’s. I might be wrong though!
Yeah Paul Mescal’s nomination wasn’t too surprising to anyone since many predicted he was going to take the fifth slot for Best Actor. He also got nominated for Spirit Awards, Critic’s Choice, and BAFTA as well so there was definitely some precursor merit behind his nomination, unlike Riseborough’s.
Plus he's a current young "It" guy, whose star has been rising since a breakout performance several years ago. Ana de Armas would be the equivalent on the ladies side. There's usually one such nominee on each side every year.
I wouldn't be surprised if vote splitting also ended up playing a role in the nomination for Riseborough (and De Armis, for that matter). I feel like vote splitting is often kind of underestimated, especially when it comes to these kinds of unexpected nominations. As we got closer to the nominations announcement I was hearing more and more people start to talk about Davis and Deadwyler as maybe being an either/or situation, so I think it's definitely possible that enough voters did view it in that way that it could have split the vote between them, which could have also then been exacerbated by some of the other actresses who were on the awards periphery this year, like Olivia Coleman and Margot Robbie.
de arnis is a shit actresss in one of the most mysoginist vile films ever made and if you think I'm wrong that she's just a shit actor, go watch " pistol" The Danny Boyle 6 parter on the sex pistols - she plays Chrissie Hynde ( pretenders ) and she's so dammed wide eyed crap bad saccharine ( she's PRETTTTTYYYYYY THOUGH) I was distracted and mesmerised by how she got cast ! she's awful.no chops just a face - that's not enough ,
Not Danielle and Viola splitting who should be the token Black of the season causing neither of them to get the nom. Lmfao completely makes sense for the academy
What a lot of casual followers don’t know (not talking about you specifically) is that there’s a preferential voting ballot. For all we know, Viola Davis and Danielle Deadwyler might have appeared on a lot of ballots… they just didn’t get enough #1s. Andrea Riseborough probably appeared on far fewer ballots than Davis and Deadwyler but received enough #1s to secure the nomination. It’s the reason why a lot of actors miss despite getting precursor support. (Amy Adams in Arrival. 😭)
@@Michael-xi9nb Ranked voting creates such an interesting voting atmosphere, and I can't decide whether I'm for or against it. It's certainly more complex than non-preferential voting.
I'm so over award season now, but I love Everything Everywhere All At Once so much that I can't help but be excited and hopeful that they sweep this year. Probably won't watch tho. But, yeah, I'm very *insert Patti LaPone meme here* over all. Really appreciate your awesome vids.
Mary McCormick needs to be my life coach. Just goes to show, it's not what you know or what you do or how skilled you are. It's WHO you know and if they like you and are loyal TO you.
Michelle Williams and Ana De Armas did not deserve their nominations over Viola and Danielle. Sorry, but that’s how I feel. Riseborough only complicates that because you have people who don’t deserve to be nominated already in this category, and then you come in after not doing any of the events Viola or Danielle did. It’s not fair at all.
you brought a very good point in your video: people defending this compaign against the "sistem" clearly don't see how everything is about power -- with money or not money at all. she was able to secure this nomination with a lot of rich, powerful and celebrated actors that have a strong influence in this industry. it wasn't just a word of mouth, but powerful people exercising their power in the world they dominate. I don't take sides here. I mean, I take the horror side. the TRULY underdong abscent in this race.
Awards are mostly about merit, tho - the highest-quality performance. No one would have lobbied for Andrea's performance unless they felt it was actually worthy of recognition. (Granted, I haven't seen the movie.)
Thank you for this analysis and acknowledging the caucasity of it all. Imagine if those organizing efforts were self reflective enough to include a lens about race and not just corporate power. This is why intersectionality is important. If your feminism isn’t inclusive then what is it? Appreciate your perspective. Thank you.
Greetings from Guatemala! I recently discovered your channel and I'm so hooked on it. I recommended it on my small, almost 99% Spanish-speaking podcast. 😃 Keep up with these great videos!
I think the campaign was interesting and in some ways needed -- it's obscene the amount of money required to compete, and it undermines the idea (flimsy as it already is) that the Oscars are truly presenting the very best performances of the year if only a handful of the very most resourced and connected films have a chance. However! As you said, their campaign was so successful because the To Leslie team is made up of such well-connected insiders. I think it is extremely unfortunate that this happened in the year that we have Michelle Yeoh finally on the ticket. I sincerely hope she wins, and it would be devastating if this campaign for Andrea Riseborough knocks her out of first place. I also think Viola Davis and Danielle Deadwylder should be on the list instead of Ana de Armas and Michelle Williams. Fine but unremarkable (and in de Armas's case, problematic) performances.
Keep in mind that the top production companies usually end up wrangling the top talent in any given field (i.e. acting, screenwriting, directing). Many 'indie' movies rely on unproven or B- or C-list talent, due to budgetary constraints.
You absolutely bring up an interesting point. Would -or could- a woman of color campaign and earn a nomination so brazenly the way Riseborough did? What she and her team managed to do is worth a golf clap, but I just can’t think those same avenues of opportunity would have been available to Davis or Deadwyler. And when talking about this nomination, these two incredible performances will always be a footnote.
To me, this all feels sort of convenient to the Academy. Rather than having to reckon with why there were no black women nominated (for now 3 out of the last 5 years) and having to reckon with the implications this has about on the lack of diversity behind the scenes like the Golden Globes, they have this distraction that too many people are willing to point to as the cause. There's more drastic reform needed than a "clarification of campaign rules"
I appreciate your video on this. I wasn’t aware of the controversy (although I didn’t know who Andrea Riseborough was when I saw the list). I remember your video on Cher and feeling similar about Sally Kirkland: sure, it’s impressive that she went up against actresses who were in bigger films (and who were some of the most famous people in the world), but it also doesn’t happen without her having rich and famous friends. To describe Riseborough’s nomination as a David vs. Goliath story seems especially tone-deaf when two Black women were conspicuously omitted, as you observed. Although I am unabashedly rooting for Michelle Yeoh because, yes, I think she had a great performance but more honestly because I’m Asian-American, so I recognize that we all have our biases!
I had no idea what to expect, but this video was extremely rewarding to watch! I really had no idea what the process was, and you broke it down very well! I'm deeply appreciative of you spending time talking about the issues of privilege, access and race. Hopefully the Academy can use the opportunity to make changes. (Spoiler: They won't) Love all your videos!
Well, the movie director got his wish as the film will now be remembered for ages (even if only by Academy Awards-obsessed followers). Sad to see my favorite performance of the year - Danielle Deadwyler for Till - not making the cut, but this is absolutely not Andrea Riseborough’s fault and all the vile words directed at her thr last few weeks were simply unfair. If anything, this grassroots - or maybe astroturfed, why not? - campaign will serve to push for renovations to the whole system. Let’s hope they can take fairness and balance - be it to performances on small movies, POC or any other underlying issue - to this approach. Knowing how corporate the whole thing is, though, does not make me hopeful at all. Great video as always! Fairness and balance are not losing any ground here! 👌🏻
Excellent, excellent, excellent! Addressed a controversy I knew pretty much sod all about and left me feeling much more informed. Couldn't ask for more.
Your final question has been mine ever since nomination morning; Is the nod where the campaign stops? Or will the To Leslie supporters try to get her the trophy? And we won't know until Oscar night.
I cannot say I entirely agree with your take, especially your tone regarding the very legitimate grievances many made about calling this campaign " grassroots". It is a great simplification to equate big studios/big money with bad tactics, and small studios and little money with them being the good guys. This " grassroots " campaign understood pretty well that not only economic power was part of this imperfect, unfair system, but also the power of connections. If they eliminated the 20.000 dollars fees to even acess the email blast system, then the only major rule about emailing would be not to spam anyone. Dear Mary was spamming her very large list of connections, knowing damn well she was 1) breaking the rules and 2) would not answer for it. Who has never been contacted by a relentless acquantance before, asking for a favor, until you relent because you are feeling guilty or want to be polite? this is what we are talking about. the fact that dear Mary, who is white, had a pool of 99,99% white actors to feel comfortable contacting on the behalf of her husband´s indie movie without any fear of being labelled " pushy" or " agressive" by a sympathetic press is a tacit acknowledgement that neither Viola Davis or Deadwyler would be treated in the same way. Let´s face it, this is a smilar situation as the admissions scandals, where people know damn well that poeple of colour will end up in jail for postal fraud by faking their adress so their children could attend a better school and being lablled as scammers, while white and wealth parents would be called "concerned" and " misguided" when caught cheating for their children to attend a prestigious university, when the " legal" way of doing for them would be to, you know, pay up for a libray or etc... So, yes, let´s not be afraid to call it for what it is and expect that yes, they better change the rules to make it easier for both small indie movies and people of colour to play y the rules and have a shot.
This whole situation feels like a strange mix between defying the odds and getting a nomination despite the huge amounts of money that big studios can make use of to promote their movies and afford the campaign for votes (which is usually the case) and having enough privilage and connections in the industry to have a chance to get a nomination just through that. Either way, it's a shame that money and influence come before the genuine appreciation for the art of cinema so often.
THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU for touching on the big fat snub Danielle and Viola faced, and for calling out the iniquity as well as inequality of the industry when it comes to representation for POC, particularly black women. Much appreciated ❤
This was real, real mid. gina prince-bythewood's article in the Hollywood Reporter debunks a lot of the assumptions and holes in logic and perspective concerning the very rushed section on the racial aspects of this whole issue and the whole Francis Fisher thing being minimized. Those who are breaking the rules like mentioned in 20:28, don't look like Michelle Yeoh or Danielle Deadwyler like the call is coming from inside the house.
I had a chance to read her op-ed. It’s unfortunate that many members of the Academy didn’t even bother to see her movie. I can understand her frustration on how can her film be judge fairly on its merits when so many voters won’t even give it a chance in comparison to other movies in contention.
As usual, you provide the most nuanced, detailed and humorous take on the Academy and Hollywood's place in American culture. Of all the commentaries I've read, you sum up the issues of race most succinctly: it's not that Andrea Riseborough stole Viola's or Danielle's nominations. But her team used methods that aren't available to/effective for women of color. I'm also concerned by what Ana de Armas's inclusion says about gender, objectification of women, and power(lessness) through sexuality, but you've already covered that :)
I have seen To Leslie and it really was one of best performances of this year. She should have been nominated everywhere! But then again so should Toni Colette for Hereditary and Essie Davis for The Babadook. So I wasn’t suprised that yet again the best performance was being ignored.
@@Wired4Life2 haven’t seen it so can’t comment on that performance. But I recently rewatched I Am Sam and I mean wasn’t Dakota Fanning just amazing at that young age! She should have been awarded with an Oscar. If Paper Moon did it then so could I Am Sam.
Why are the nominations limited to 5? They expanded the Best Picture category, not sure why the acting categories have to be set so low. Also agree with everything you said in this video.
I'm so glad you covered this as I don't keep up to date with nomination news, this was such a fascinating and well done take. Plus I love the way you edited this!
My main takeaway from this is that Mary McCormack should be in charge of the DNC. She'd have kept that blue wall up in '16. Might have even flipped Texas and Florida.
I get it. A small movie with such a low budget gets often buried and it is a shame as that should not dictate the worth of a movie. However, I can’t help but wondering that the way this movie was suddenly advertised everywhere by a bunch of celebs raving about it could also be a little dangerous.
My feeling for Riseborough's rise is also mixed. On one hand, I get so excited seeing how a small underdog movie makes waves to subvert the power dynamics in the big studio game but at the same time, it leaves Davis and Deadwyler two big snubs of this years (and they totally deserve it). I hope that in the future, there'll be more rule breakers like To Leslie though. Oscar is old with loads of prejudices toward their nominations and voting that it rarely gives much chance to movies that don't fit in their "taste" despite how they can be real powerhouse
I'm sorry, if any member of the Academy can read that "the integrity of our esteemed institution" quote with a straight face, THEY deserve an Oscar...
🤣😂🤣 true
Sure, but while we're talking "integrity"... I'd be willing to bet that not every one of those actors who backed the campaign to nominate Riseborough had seen To Leslie. And I'm damn sure that not everyone who voted for her has seen the film. First because the film has hardly been seen by anyone. And secondly because even if you pressed play on your For Your Consideration tape or DVD you probably didn't get past the first very, very tedious half of the film.
@@joshdrayton1230 ...and that's different from many of the other nominations how? Which is the point I think Cinema OCD was getting at.
@@joshdrayton1230 honey, if you think watching the film was ever a requirement to vote for someone at the Oscars, you’re entirely wrong. It’s always been about publicity and faux prestige of those awards.
Seriously. If there is one thing that I picked up on in these videos, it’s that they have never had an ounce of integrity. 😂
the fact that the academy conducted an investigation into the campaign is so hilarious considering campaign tactics in the past. its only okay if big studios use their millions and millions of dollars to get nominated
Bruh people are busy. Therefore the campaigns are meant to get the movie in front of people. While it seems like this was done to whip votes. That’s two completely different things
But rules were broken, though? Maybe not by Riseborough. But the fact is her "team" (White Hollywood A-Listers) broke some of the campaigning rules.
You're not taking into account the rules of the Academy. If the studios want to spend their money on a big campaign so be it. But the investigation was about the chance that Andrea's campaign was outside the stipulated rules of the Academy.
And also powerful moguls weaponizing SA. Lest we forget THAT.
@@benrualfThis video is all about that: The Academy keeps emphasizing that they want a fair and ethical process, but the fact that only $10 million campaign can put movies into the voters’ consideration is not fair. Some rules are specific; some are vague. Your ”so be it” is just an indication that we’re accustomed to the game, even though it’s fixed.
May I use this platform to express my still existing frustration with Toni not being nominated for Hereditary? Just as an example (the best one, as far as I'm concerned) of performances in genre movies not recognized by the Academy, due to decades long biases and its need to perpetually nominate the same actors.
I was rooting for Pfeiffer that year. Wasn’t impressed with _Hereditary._
I feel you. I still think about that snub to this day.
Preach it ☝️
Excellent performances in horror films continue to be ignore (current example: Mia Goth for Pearl) 😪
Because there is a windows of gentes and performances they would support... This "grassroots" campaign was not there for Audra Mcdonald a few years ago when she was worthy
I feel really bad for Daniel Deadwyler. As for Viola Davis, if it's any consolation, she just won a Grammy for her audiobook and therefore is now in the EGOT club (Emmy, Grammy, Oscar, and Tony).
I hope she winds up getting a Pulitzer some day. Viola Davis deserves the highest honors
My hope is that Danielle Deadwyler's snub opens more doors for her than if she had been nominated bc of how outrageous this whole thing is.
Viola literally just posted about this a few hours ago. Saying it would have never worked for a woman of color and I agree
@@ikexbankai Yeah, I still root for Andrea (even though I doubt she'll win) but I def agree... :/
I say kick out Williams, she's terrible.
After watching your takes on so many classic Oscar races, most times I wasn't even born yet, it feels kind of surreal to witness such Oscar history as it unfolds. 🤣 great work as usual though!!!
It almost doesn’t feel like it’s real history, like this feels more like a comedy sketch that isn’t very funny
That's the thing, the people who helmed the To Leslie campaign were well connected campaign savy people who knew what they were doing. Not everyone has that access or influence. Just look at Jeremy Pope(I know, not an actress but still good example) in 'Inspection', he was phenomenal. Got lots of praise from critics along with quite a few critics award nomination, had A24 backing as well. You don't see academy A listers campaigning for that film. It's all about knowing a selective group of people who have power and influence.
But Viola Davis, who was bumped out, had worked with Meryl Streep, Amy Adams, Liam Neeson, Tom Cruise, Robert Duvall, Colin Farrell, Michael Douglas, Sandra Bullock, Tom Hanks, Paul Dano, Denzel Washington, Emma Stone, etc, etc, etc.
Anyone who's acted long enough has friends and connections, and this is some massive questioning of the integrity of pretty much everyone in Hollywood, that's pretty unfounded
@@okonh0wp the question is does she have the same clout amongst her white peers, of course they respect her craft and undeniable talent but that doesn't mean a clout of familiarity. I maybe wrong, but I doubt if she was in the same boat as Riseborough, she would have been granted the same opportunity. Also, here I would compare Viola Davis with say a Michelle Williams(?category fraud) or Ana De Armas(?quality), why is it when a white indie artist has to be nominated it is at the expense of a black actress?!
You people are talking a load of WANK, it's hysterical. Andrea Riseborough is one of the most obscure actors to nominated for an Oscar in modern times. Viola Davis lives in a completely different league of fame, has already been recognised with every major acting award and was playing the lead character in a blockbuster that topped box-office. She's fiends with Oprah Winfrey ffs - she was not the underdog here. About 10,000 people vote for the Oscars, the idea that Andrea Riseborough is like some malevolent snake that bribed them all for votes is IDIOTIC.
@@yeahiagree1070 Nobody said anything bad about Riseborough, I actually happen to admire her as an actress.
I think the problem with The Inspection was that A24 campaigning too many movies at the same time with a small budget to compared to other studios. Along with The Inspection, A24 was also campaigning Aftersun, The Whale, and Everything Everywhere All At Once, which did payed off for them because each of those 3 films got at least 1 Oscar nomination.
I was waiting for a Andrea Riseborough nomination video from BKR ever since the Oscars nominations came out.
I mean, did you have a doubt she was probably working on one? 😂
Can’t expect her to rush release one though. Every BKR video is very thought out with strong analysis and incredibly well-researched.
The speed with which I clicked... The Gina Prince-Bythewood article in the Hollywood Reporter is way more articulate than I could be. Once again, the meritocracy was revealed to be a lie but it was also another crushing reminder that the progressivism is just talk. They don't show up for us. They actively work against us.
SAME
You and BKR's army of us....
Me too!
academy basically said: "if someone gets nominated and we don't profit in any way, than that's either against the rules or we need to find a way to monetize it"
Exactly
I don’t think that’s what they said though. They literally said they wasn’t taking the nomination but somethings raised concerns. Meaning some things broke the rules
@@ikexbankai but lets not pretend that this is anything more than someone breaking in without playing by the industry rules, and that costing people money. And I mean the awards industry, not film. This is capitalism auto-enforcing itself, and people will be manipulated into getting outraged for those who were left out this year, but there are worthy professionals left out EVERY year.
@@danpsou that’s my point exactly. There’s people deserving of nominations every year but unfortunately only 5 get them. 5 that follow the rules. Her campaign definitely bent if not outright broke some rules
this campaign will be the template for any aspiring indie to contest noms. just get somebody big in the industry to spread the word. some fans, films and actors were just mad they got outcampaigned by a cash strapped production
“If you spent your life learning to play a game that was not designed for you to win, would you risk subverting it so blatantly?” This 🙏🏾
This is the first time I've heard real anger from Izzie in all the years I've been watching her videos. Danielle Deadwyler and Viola Davis did the work, checked all the boxes, and were still ignored. Not gonna lie, I've stanned Michelle Yeoh for this Oscar ever since I saw Everything, but this, again, does not look like a level playing field.
@@mellyj3581 I honestly think that race is being weaponized here to get people on the side of what's basically an elitist industry of marketing through award shows.
@@mellyj3581 You're not well informed about Viola Davis. The movie had a divisive racist campaign. The academy would be sending a horrible message by rewarding it.
@@griduserWhat was it’s divisive racist campaign? Please elaborate or send sources.
@@griduserwhat’s divisive or racist about it ? Right nothing
Your comments at the end really stuck with me. I respect their grassroots approach and think Riseborough is worthy of a nomination, but it can't be ignored that the actresses that were "snubbed" to make way for this are the Black women who were in consideration. Not to say that Riseborough "took" their place, but rather that the voters were more willing to dump Black actresses over white who imo were less deserving. Frankly, Williams should be in the supporting category and de Arams shouldn't be nominated at all, and Davis and Deadwyler should be in their place, but that's just my opinion.
This is the take i've been waiting for. Davis and Deadwyler were considered a lock by many, while Williams was also very appreciated and de Armas campaign had lost a lot of its initial momentum and wasnt really considered. Yet despite that, Riseborough an de Armas got the nomination. That means that Deadwyler and Davis' (THE Viola Davis, ladies and gentlemen) performances were the least appreciated by the Academy members to begin with, which proves the institutional racism and racial bias inside the Academy. Black women artistry is an afterthought for the predominant white members of the Academy's acting branch and Riseborough nomination proves it
@@diegopaz8366 The problem I have with this take is that you are complaining about the Academy's "institutional" racism that's giving two Oscars to black women this year (Angela Bassett, and Euzhan Palcy) and gave an Oscar to Tyler Perry (before he gets metooed) for his sexual issues that some people know about but Hollywood is deliberately ignoring.
I think the space taken for black actresses like Daniel Deadwyler is Michelle Williams. Her performance was mediocre. Deadwyler should have replaced her
Letitia Wright should have at least been considered. Letitia's work was a power onto its own. She had an opinion that was (and is), quite frankly, *popular* among Americans (why were people acting brand new?) yet was stigmatized for it even after she retracted/apologized, even having the Hollywood Reporter compare her to men who committed SA. I'm not saying I agreed with her, but a Kanye she was not. She simply voiced her distrust and concern, and, quite frankly, as someone with black family STILL suffering due to the apathy of the of American healthcare system to this very minute, I understand any minority who has second thoughts/mistrust. I didn't get the help I needed until I LEFT the States, and I've had multiple _necessary surgeries_ since.
Point is, there are politics behind Letitia Wright not being nominated...even though people who have said/done legitimately bad things have been nominated and won before...and even though a _ton_ of Americans have shared the same thoughts or crazier ones. Maybe it could be that they didn't want to nominate two people from a "comic book movie," but I think that it's more than that. She gave a powerful performance that showed a range that even some veterans have skirted by without ever achieving (including some of my faves). And she really didn't have to. She had the excuses of it "just" being a comic book film and her grief over losing Chadwick, but she didn't phone it in. No one did. So, things like this always takes me back to thinking that an another, more objective awards show needs to rise in prominence or people's successes should just stand as their own awards. As things are, the film broke records with her at the helm, so maybe I'd take that over being nominated for something that didn't.
And that's not even getting into "Woman King."
For me the five should have been
Cate Blanchett
Michelle Yeoh
Danielle Deadwyler
Viola Davis
Margot Robbie
How did she miss SAG best actress ? That's the bigger mystery, considering how this is mainly actor backed.
Red tape,bureaucracy and the scummy "money people"
I feel like "grassroots" would be fans promoting it, not wealthy people inside the industry who can afford to pay for some of the promotional mechanisms out of their own pockets.
They will always move the goal post for the rich & wealthy.
What they did was still grassroots, because it was simply them emailing/asking big name celebs to watch their movie, and if they liked it, to spread the word. Average people aren't going to make big waves like that for an indie actor/movie, because 1. They dont hold that much weight 2. Only already established actors get that kind of reaction from viewers because they're already fans. A movie shouldn't win just because an actor is popular or because their production teamed had the millions of dollars to campaign and bribe.
Exactly. This shows that power in the industry actually rests with a very few elite.
I am a fan of To Leslie to this day
Thank you for breaking this down. I'm of two minds about Riseborough's nomination. I'm happy that a tiny movie was able to subvert the powerhouse studios. But I also feel like this wouldn't happen for a woman (or man) of color, even if they had the support like Riseborough had simply because the Academy continues to have a large issue with race. I do think that this nomination will create change in how campaigns are run, just not for the better
For some reason, when I heard about it, it didn't sound like the grassroots campaign was successful, just snobs getting one over the other snobs. I'm really that ignorant about the industry.
Also, her grassroots campaign doesn't mean small movies can find their way into the limelight as she was actually helped by A-listers so, in a way, it's still a money/influence situation that can't actually be reproduced.
I love indie films, so I'm not against Andrea's nomination if based on performance.
However, even though she was in a major-budgeted film, I don't care what anyone says: Letitia Wright should have been up for consideration/nominated. It might have been a "comic book movie," but it had depth and a sincere, bittersweet story about loss and grief. And _she acted her butt off_ in that role with an impressive range. She more than held her own next to a legend like Angela Bassett. But I guess it'd be too much for two actresses from a "mere" comic book movie to be considered, aside from other things. But I'm looking at performance alone. So, if that's the case with Andrea, okay, but I agree that what you suppose wouldn't happen.
Oh my god… 💤 💤💤💤💤 this is getting boring now with your rubbish comment about race, the whole race thing is always an excuse or bollocks to make sure a person of colour gets a nominee.
It’s not fair if we must nominate because a person of colour didn’t get nominated, so if 5 white people let’s say actors had the most amazing performances but because their isn’t a black person nominated then one of those white person won’t get in because what…? Race? That’s bullshit.
If their were 5 black actors who had the most incredible performances and better than any white person would we batter an eyelid….no!
No one would kick a stink.
If their was 5 great black actors getting nominated and not one white person and it was through merit then I would have no problem.
That's the least informed statement I've ever read and this constant anti-racism crusade is completely taking any integrity away from the Oscars. Turning the Oscars into some de facto reparations committee rather than something resembling what honors the best in film is counter-productive towards anyone taking those awards seriously, even when they go to someone like Ariana DeBose who explicitly campaigned and was championed by the press on breaking the glass ceiling of being Queer, Black, and Latina (negating your first argument that no one ever champions a person of color).
The truth is that the Academy has bent over backwards to satiate the small vocal market of people who are upset that Black actors are not being constantly lionized all the time and can never be satiated so I see little reason to cede to this vocal block of the entertainment media (largely allies of Black people and a small literate class of Blacks, rather than Black people who usually care about bigger things. I should know. I spent seven weeks over the past 2 years campaigning for Raphael Wernock in 2021 and 2022 and interacting with Black communities as a pollster, and woke people greatly reread the Black community):
-The protests over Oscars so White that were initiated in 2015 was based on microstatistics rather than macrostatistics. In truth, the Academy had awarded nominations to 30 black actors over a 14-year period, which amounts to 10.8 percent or just 1.4 percent shy of the black population in America, according to the 2010 census, and that was before we started collectively caring as a society. The arguments largely come from a micro-focus on a specific year or the 90-year history of the awards. If we go by the latter, then there's simply no way we'd ever have parity unless we automatically give the Oscars for the next 5 or 6 years to all Black people. It's hardly fair to turn a contest that's supposed to be about a voluntary process about who the best is into some accounting for the burden of the past 100 years.
-From 2016 to 2019, all four best picture races were decided through vicious smear campaigns over what was least offensive to wokeness. In 2016, they acted like it was a crime against humanity that a white person could possibly appreciate jazz (inaccurate because Gosling's character cited his influence). In 2017, they said it was unacceptable that a racist character would be redeemed (the incident for which he's labelled as a racist happens off-screen so we don't know what it is, and he doesn't exactly get redeemed since he loses his job), in 2018, they tried to paint Green Book as dishonoring Don Shirley's family and made a big deal of a fried chicken scene (the actual family did approve of it after seeing it, but that was underreported), In 2019, Parasite won because it was less acceptable to have a white protagonist.
-The bottom line is that everyone gets snubbed. It's a sign of greatness. Joaquin Phoenix has won and been nominated 4 times, but he was also snubbed for Her and Inherent Vice; ditto Leonardo DiCaprio and Django Unchained and Don't Look Up; Meryl Streep, Prime and Manchurian Candidate; Bradley Cooper, Nightmare Alley; Tom Hanks Bridge of Spies, The Post. There is never this much media outrage unless it's a Black person. Why is it that we must destroy the Oscars every time Viola Davis gets snubbed?
-The Oscars are the most liberal institution in the World. They're doing everything they can short of rigging the vote to ensure Viola Davis wins every time, to please critics for the Black community to avoid press. Yet, why is there any reason to go after them? In the year after #oscarsoshite, they didn't rig the voting, but they gave the hosting gig to a Black man, had a Black woman as president of the Academy, and they gave an honorary Oscar to a Black man. In fact, they've been giving far more honorary Oscars to Black and POC actors (for example, Tyler Perry, whose pretty young and whose films have been critically panned, even by the black community) than what the critical community has deemed worthy as of late. In light of that You really think that snubbing Viola Davis (who has already won an Oscar) or Regina King for One Night in Miami (who, again, already won an Oscar) is motivated by overt or even covert racism? Why don't you put this energy to the banking industry or higher academia, or classical music or any other industry that actually discriminates against Black people
-I also think we need to drop the people of color label here. The vocal critical community that demands Black people win more Oscars is nothing like the one in which Hispanic people or Asian people win Oscars.
Bottom Line:
-The Oscars are a process of voluntary mass voting. It has power because people voluntarily choose the best. The #oscarssowhite crowd simply wants to rig the game for Black actors by creating affirmative action (which would take away the power),. I'm not saying this affirmative action is a good or bad thing but it would take away the power of the voluntary nature of the process, and the critics want to simply have their cake and eat it too.
n't Look Up and Django Unchained, Phoenix for Her,
I honestly doubt they would ever pull her nomination but I wonder how this will change rules surrounding Oscar campaigning in the future. My money is on Michelle Yeoh winning. She is the first openly Asian woman to be nominated for best actress. I hope she can make history.
Edit: for those who have asked. There have been other actresses who have historically hidden their ancestry. Merle Oberon, for instance, was born in India, but passed as a white British actress during her career. Oberon was nominated for best actress in 1935, but her ancestry was not revealed until after her death in the late 70s. Michelle Yeoh is the first openly Asian woman to be nominated for best actress.
I'm 95 years, only ONE actress of color has won that award. With white Hollywood hijacking the system, I doubt Yeoh will be able to pull off a win.
Same, I'm kinda hoping the votes are split between Blanchett and Riseborough and Yeoh takes the award home.
You and me both.
I think Michelle has the win locked up because her performance is too good to deny her and Blanchett has already won two Oscar’s and will likely be nominated for more in the future. The odds of Michelle getting a nomination like this again is sadly unlikely.
I'm sorry, but what does it mean to be "openly asian?"
I have very similar thoughts on this situation. On the one hand, Andrea Riseborough feels like an actor we look back on decades from now and wonder why tf she was never nominated, but here she somehow managed to get in by exploiting holes in this very exclusive system. On the other hand, it's disheartening to see that so many Academy members are aware of how much influence they can wield for their fellow actors yet they can't use this platform to highlight more underground and PoC films. Could Nicole Beharie have followed her Saturn award win into a Best Actress nomination for Miss Juneteenth? Could Regina Hall have broken through for Support the Girls? Why are so many figures that could realistically change this category only showing up now? It's all broken down super well in this video, and my hope is that we DO see the Academy make this process more accessible and that Actors use their platform to help their colleagues benefit.
It's really weird that yall are using words like exploit and finding issue with her and her team for simply emailing and asking big name celebs to watch their movie, and if enjoyed, spread the word about it. By all consideration, it's a good thing that simple word of mouth praise was able to have this effect rather than multi-billion dollar production companies spending millions on promoting it (and if truth be known, bribing important figures).
@@JessieP07 I see your point but the truth is only white people benefit from that. If Andrea wasn't white she would've NEVER got that "grassroots" campaign. And that's the whole problem here: white Hollywood elites never want to prop up black talent.
I always thought there was this type of unspoken rules that voting members of the Academy should not be publicly endorsing any particular film or candidate in the running for a nomination if they had no professional involvement in the making and the distribution of the film. So it was surprising for me to see so many white members came out to publicly endorse Riseborough which we don’t see that all with other non white academy members. It’s like non white members were less likely to test the boundaries of the rules than white members. It feels like the same game is being played with 2 different standards.
As maybe many others watching this video, THIS WAS THE VIDEO I WAS CRAVING. You laid out so perfectly how I feel about this (but never could articulate) and have such a comprehensive view of how this Oscar campaign worked. Perfect!
I'm so grateful for your last arguments! Because the thing that bothered me the most is how they act like it was a real grassroots campaign, when we know that a true grassroots campaign of an indie movie would never succeed like this, even less if it was done and/or starred by people of color, in special because most don't have the connections the people involved has. This was a small campaign, yes, but it feels like it's more akin to a rich kid using their father's wealth and connections than a proper grassroots campaign.
This all of this because some of the comments on here come across as having missed this point or flat out ignored it. This was not grass roots it was manipulation and led to progression, inclusion and diversity being overlooked. Riseborough may get her profile raised but her reputation will take a hit as a result.
The racist accusation is pretty bogus though. I can buy that some unknown actors won't break through but black actresses like Anjenue Ellis, Regina King, Ruth Negga, Audra Davis, and Ariana DeBose....none of those people were anyhwere close to being household names when they scored their first nominations in the past few years. You can literally see how many favorites or hits they got on IMDB and it was pretty close to zero.
And Viola Davis, who was bumped out, had worked with Meryl Streep, Amy Adams, Liam Neeson, Tom Cruise, Robert Duvall, Colin Farrell, Michael Douglas, Sandra Bullock, Tom Hanks, Paul Dano, Denzel Washington, Emma Stone, etc, etc, etc.
The idea of racism in the Academy is based on extreme cherry-picking of statistics. People point out that only one black LEAD actress has won ever, but 50% of the past actresses int he supporting actress category have been Black over the past 12 years. That's very very high over the 12-13% of the population that Blacks are in this country. I'm not saying there needs to be a limit, but come on, to suggest the dearth in one single category while ignoring that, say between 10-11% of acting nominees were black in the 14 years preceeding #OscarsSoWhite , is just plain irresponsible.
The Oscars are the most liberal institution in the World. They're doing everything they can short of rigging the vote to ensure Viola Davis wins every time, to please critics for the Black community to avoid press. Yet, why is there any reason to go after them? In the year after #oscarsoshite, they didn't rig the voting, but they gave the hosting gig to a Black man, had a Black woman as president of the Academy, and they gave an honorary Oscar to a Black man. In fact, they've been giving far more honorary Oscars to Black and POC actors (for example, Tyler Perry, whose pretty young and whose films have been critically panned, even by the black community) than what the critical community has deemed worthy as of late. In light of that You really think that snubbing Viola Davis (who has already won an Oscar) or Regina King for One Night in Miami (who, again, already won an Oscar) is motivated by overt or even covert racism? Why don't you put this energy to the banking industry or higher academia, or classical music or any other industry that actually discriminates against Black people
-I also think we need to drop the people of color label here. The vocal critical community that demands Black people win more Oscars is nothing like the one in which Hispanic people or Asian people win Oscars.
@@okonh0wp some of the actresses winning best supporting actress, is a way of saying "look, we're not racists". But it's weird non are ever chosen for best actress. it's a consolation price.
@@okonh0wp lmao, of course! I forgot racism was over the moment Obama had become president! And I forgot that a institution that awards a person of color every other time is not racist at all, after all, they have friends that are people of color! Some of their favorite people are poc!
@@Stephaniacat haha, ok so if you admit that it’s done to appease people into showing they’re not racist (which I agree), then why would it matter if they did the same thing for a lead actress. Besides, you want to break the news to the 24 other actresses in the last 12 years that they lost Oscars bc of a political/pr gesture or the six actresses that won that they won not by the value of their work but because people wanted to use them as a way to apologize for civil rights failures? In2013 it came out that many people didn’t see 12 years a slave but voted for the film so as not o appear racist and people didn’t like that either. The O scars only have value if it’s a meritocracy
I'd be interested to see a comparison video with the Rambling Rose campaign where Diane Ladd invited people to her home for spaghetti dinners and ended up with both Ladd and her daughter Laura Dern receiving nominations.
legends!
Diane Ladd’s spaghetti dinner campaign was for 1990’s Wild at Heart not 1991’s Rambling Rose. She received Best Supporting Actress nominations for both films though.
The production for Emily in Paris took the judges to Paris in order to get an Emmy nomination, IIRC.
@@LadyAstarionAncunin*Golden Globes
@@LadyAstarionAncunin i think you mean the golden globes
Most of us WOC know all too well that it’s one rule for Them and another for the rest of us. It doesn’t matter how talented we are, how hard we work and how nice or professional we are.
It’s so true and I’m so upset about it. At least Viola got her EGOT but I feel for Danielle. She at least deserved to be nominated. This system is so broken.
Yeah. You are and always will be a victim. Whatever.
@@smileytownSF Spoken like someone who will never understand.
For Danielle Deadwyler and Viola Davis, it really is an idea that Scandal drove home for me: run the race, only for people to change the rules once you see the finish line.
So true
I was shocked when neither of those two were nominated
I always thought there was this type of unspoken rules that voting members of the Academy should not be publicly endorsing any particular film or candidate in the running for a nomination if they had no professional involvement in the making and the distribution of the film. So it was surprising for me to see so many white members came out to publicly endorse Riseborough which we don’t see that all with other non white academy members. It’s like non white members were less likely to test the boundaries of the rules than white members. It feels like the same game is being played with 2 different standards.
Solid analysis. Riseborough's performance absolutely deserves the nom - but - the coordinated celeb gambit that prefaced itself to be a genuine, happenstance "Hey, check this amazing movie out" was a knowingly disingenuous ploy for Oscar gold & a supremely gross flex of white clique privilege. In a predominantly white contest & voting body that's fundamentally skewed against equal appreciation of Black contribution to the arts, that was a gambit only white ppl could play - and that subversion was only ever going to come at the expense of the non-white nomination. Rescindment of the nom would've been unjust, the performance merited recognition, but absolute condemnation of the actors' ploy is due.
Exactly
Exactly; Money talks... and I guess Blonde talked more than Woman King (which Viola paid for some of the marketing for that film mind you) or Till... it sucks. But are we surprised? no. Im glad Yeo is nominated though, at least as POC, we can support each other, even if we can't all be "on the pedestal together" ...
..and there you have it
I always thought there was this type of unspoken rules that voting members of the Academy should not be publicly endorsing any particular film or candidate in the running for a nomination if they had no professional involvement in the making and the distribution of the film. So it was surprising for me to see so many white members came out to publicly endorse Riseborough which we don’t see that all with other non white academy members. It’s like non white members were less likely to test the boundaries of the rules than white members. It feels like the same game is being played with 2 different standards.
Can always count on this channel for good taste, nuanced opinions, and dragging the award show machine
Such a broken system. You shouldn't have to spend millions to get votes. It should just be about the best performance in a film. Period.
The humor, the information, the opinions, balanced perfectly. Loved seeing you changing it up with something so current but still felt like your historical vids. Congrats on going full time with this and can’t wait to see what’s next
But Francis Fishers' statement: I dont care how much traffic her social doesnt get. That statement if she is a member should have gotten her suspended
I question the whole "small independent film" thing. I like classic films. I like quiet movies. I'm fine with reading subtitles. I like character-driven stories. That doesn't mean I want to watch histrionic poverty porn or shallow, poorly-paced acting showcases. I'm not rejecting some of these Oscar bait movies because I love blockbusters full of explosions. I find them tired and boring. I've seen something like it before. If you don't love the main actor, a lot of these movies are not compelling.
I have to agree. I'm a cinephile, I'll watch an auteur film and then watch a joke of a film like "Samurai Cop" because both amuse me in some way. I know the difference between good/bad films and performances, but what ultimately matters is that they deliver sustained entertainment.
Great analysis, as always. I particularly agreed with your parting words. It's most definitely not an even playing field. I'm rooting for Yeoh because Everything Everywhere All at Once is so good, but also because it would be only the SECOND time an actress that isn't white wins the award.
It's such an audacious statistic, that the Academy hasn't ever awarded a POC Best Actress outside of Halle Berry over twenty years ago, and with this year being the 95th edition of the Academy Awards? "Only Supporting Actress for certain folks" So snobbish country club, really. Some years (all years), the voting body, just sticks with their friends. But all you really need to know is that simple stat of just one winner ever.
You'd like for it to be based on mostly merit, whatever "mostly" means. But in years gone by when Michelle Yeoh wasn't nominated for Crouching Tiger, even when that film won a bunch of other Oscars, it becomes apparent that "merit" is something afforded to the privileged. Remember when Pam Grier wasn't acknowledged for Jackie Brown (her co-star was in Supporting, though), despite being in a TARANTINO film? The film following PULP FICTION. It's audacious. And the film was a critical darling. Or when Angela Bassett almost wilted away after wowing the year she was nominated - I mean wilted from ever joining the Best Actress discussion again. Holly Hunter was an unstoppable juggernaut that year for her beautiful turn in the Piano, but everyone in 1994 thought that Bassett was ready to accomplish the impossible given time. Looks like it's Supporting instead, years later.
Best Actress resides up at the front.
Danielle Deadwyler was robbed, her performance was brilliant. No one can convince me De Armas deserves her nomination.
Neither Blanchett
I fully relate to your comments at the end of the video, the reaction to this nomination and the outcome that followed has put me off film twitter, Awards season and award guilds completely. I will still of course support your channel and always look forward to your content and thank you for this video!
Thrilled that you were able to get this together so quickly! It’s a gem, per usual.
A new BKR video already?? I am spoiled!!
Just makes me think back to Mya Taylor in 'Tangerine' and the talk (operative word) about how to push her for a nomination for best supporting actress at the Oscars. She did win an independent spirit award. It's a great opportunity to reflect on just who is being pushed forward for recognition.
she was so wonderful, too. it would have been such a cool outcome had she been nominated
The movie sucked
@@singstreetcar5881 nah, it was wonderful.
The deeper reality is that Privileged Racist White Women will ALWAYS act Racist.
So a Privileged English Racist got a Nomination while more deserving, BETTER, actors get ignored BECAUSE they are Black...
This (and the Best Actor) nominations were a KKK wet dream
I love that movie... she deserved more recognition.
I have no issue with Andrea. She didn't ask for this. My big issue is with Frances Fisher. She sent out a message stating that "Deadwyler & Davis" were a lock. That was in no way true! She knows that a Black woman has only won best actress once out of all the years the Oscars have been around. She knows how hard it STILL is for a Black woman to get a best actress nomination. Especially when you have an Asian actress in the mix. She KNOWS the academy is not inclusive. They pretty much pick one non-white group of actors & focus on them to try to prove they aren't racist and then ignore them the next year. Also the trashing of marvel movies by her & the fellow white actresses is also pretty shitty. Especially knowing that without them Angela Bassett would continue to be ignored by the academy. There have been PLENTY of opportunities for these women to go to bat for a Black actress in smaller films, yet, they never took the time to help them? Frances has done nothing but continue to do what white women do best, stand by and uphold the structrue of white supremacy. I also find it very interesting that Cate Blanchett continues to be a "pillar" of the acting community while continuing to support Roman Polanski. So much for the MeToo movement.
True.
What do you mean by "especially with an Asian woman in the mix"? Do you mean to say that Asian actresses have a better probability of getting nominated as compared to Black actresses?
@@keizerinsoze4368 Definitely not. What I mean by that is that the oscars can't have more than one minority actress in the best actress catagory. Only one non-white actress can be in the running. Can't give up more than one spot on the nominee list to a Black woman, Asian woman or Latina. The academy is most definitely not fair to Asian actresses.
@@singingpepper makes sense
@@singingpepper actually, Diana Ross and cicely Tyson were both up for the same award in 1973.
"would white actors ever have mobilized so aggressively for a Black woman?" SAY THAT
Yes, they would have, if a performance existed that moved them enough. Look at Ruth Negga getting nominated over Amy Adams in 2016.
Yes, they do it all the time.
Well, they should have for Taraji P. Henson’s brilliant performances in both HIDDEN FIGURES and THE BEST OF ENEMIES, and I’m saying this based solely on the MERIT of those two performances and NOT the color of her skin.
@@ethannielson942 Henson was not very good in Hidden Figures, lol.
@@ethannielson942 Hidden Figures portrayed an extraordinary episode in US History, and it was well produced and directed - a fine movie. But the acting was TimeLifeish, because the script is no Ghandi. It's just what it is.
Just watched To Leslie, Riseborough is unforgettable
I believe she deserves the nomination but not at the expense of Deadwyler, who got robbed
The lack of a nomination for Deadwyler is genuinely devastating.
Agreed. She had the best performance that year.
Honestly I wish she didn´t get nominated just because there have been many great indie films like To Leslie that were more well known but still were too small to get noticed by the Academy because they didn´t have the luxury of a well connected lead actor. Such as Red Rocket for example
The question this has put in my mind is this; if Cynthia Erivo made a low budget movie and was extremely good in it, but the movie didn't have the ingredients (money) to get it nominated, and so Viola Davis, Halle Berry, Octavia Spencer, Oprah Winfrey, Angela Bassett and Whoopi Goldberg started a social media campaign to get it seen and nominated, would it get nominated......?
Yes
Possibly
@@doosha1986 No it wouldn't.
Sure, it's possible to see Riseborough's nomination as a triumph for an underdog and/or a slap in the face for the cashed-up studio awards machine. But really they're just gaming the system in a slightly different way. You can only really be excited about it if you think the performance is worthy. Having seen the film I would contend that, while Riseborough's turn is painstaking and spirited, it's not appreciably different of better than a hundred other performances by actors playing addicts through the years. More to the point, To Leslie is in no way groundbreaking. In fact, it's a seriously flawed film. The first hour (at least) is tedious and predictable, and it's not until the home stretch that we even begin to like Leslie as a character or become invested in the film. Rightly or wrongly, Oscar generally likes to highlight great performances in films that are outstanding, or at least above average. To Leslie is deeply average, even more reminiscent of the old TV Movie of the Week than a cinema release, which might account for the dismal box office. Yes, Riseborough carries the film, but she doesn't carry it well enough to make the first half engaging, or, some would say, bearable. On that basis, I'd say she doesn't deserve the nomination, certainly not over Viola Davis or Danielle Deadwyler. I'd say the same for Ana De Armas. Her performance is also highly accomplished, but it's in a film that is complete trash - cynical, exploitative and even offensive. I can only imagine that her nomination is a case of Hollywood egregiously stoking its own legends and myths.
God, thank you! The idea that this will help any single other indie movie is ridiculous, when that was always nothing more than the Hollywood cover excuse and their own ego-preservation for the only reason this performance was actually nominated; crazy powerful insider connections. Which is somehow an even more inaccessable method of winning nominations than the studio machine is for most people already on the margins. If this does anything to the system at all, it will be making it worse. To call this grassroots makes my blood boil.
And also yes, thank you again! This movie got overpraised so ridiculously, and maybe everyone has now seen this movie and is being genuine and I just disagree. But in my cynicism it feels that, to seem balanced in analyzing this issue, some people feel the need to first acknowledge; "she's a great actress who totally deserved it, however..."?
Andrea Riseborough has been great in other more original movies, but To Leslie is a movie 100% in the rather well-covered ballpark of "Poor people drama for rich people, starring an older-but-not-too-old thin white woman without makeup who's going through it", of the sort that Hollywood loves. I can see why a neverending adoration for poverty porn, and a desire to avoid backlash now, would make rich hollywood people double down on claiming it the greatest performance ever put to film, but...? They make half a dozen of these kinds of movies every year. Riseborough's a good actress yes, but many working actors are, especially if we're gonna consider all of indie cinema. Is this really everyone's favourite now, and we're just the odd ones out, or do people just not want to be too mean or unbalanced in talking about the drama surrounding this, to argue thiat this belongs in their top 5 of the whole year?
And besides the irritation at the lack of similar opportunities for any other indie movies or for more unconventional, non-white actors, and also the irritation over Viola Davis and Danielle Deadwyler as you mention especially.... I am personally also very annoyed at the particular way this is overshadowing EEAAO/Michelle Yeoh:
A nomination that would seem unlikely given everything about the Oscars, a low-budget indie nomination, starring a veteran but underappreciated older actress, a true underdog with true grassroots support, daringly unconventional in many ways, a genre movie, an actress competing in the whitest oscars category as possibly the first asian woman to ever win.
And her entire oscars journey narrative basically gets hijacked, or at least gets way less attention than it deserves now for how groundbreaking and historic it is, because the Riseborough campaign crew really needs to hammer down many parts of this narrative for themselves in the press. To pretend that this wasn't rich industry insiders astroturfing a campaign with clearly equal power to what a studio gets done.
I mind that because it's ignoring the real thing for a lie. And I mind that because Oscar narratives matter in your chances for Oscar wins. Cate Blanchett being Cate Blanchett has a solid Oscar narrative that she has on lock obviously. And what; Michelle Yeoh now suddenly isn't the only (or even main) veteran in this competition to struggle to the top anymore? She has to share her sincere PR story with dozens of big names pushing this manifactured nonsense about their pet project?
Sorry, clearly I am frustrated. The transparent BS should make awards meaningless, but if it matters to what movies get made, if it matters to what minorities get a chance, I unfortunately care. I hope Michelle Yeoh knows she has the people's vote.
I'm enjoying it as a slap to the face of the whole awards ecosystem in general. It only underscores that these things are mostly popularity contests to crown prom king and queen. It's nice to give art recognition, but the current method for doing so is so fundamentally flawed that I'd rather see it burned down. All the talk about whether something will get an award takes up space that would be better spent talking about its artistic merit, and studios are too incentivized to put out movies that are calculated with certain tropes to win these things (hence the term "oscarbait") rather than prioritizing artistic instinct.
Welcome to Nebula! And thank you for this breakdown -- I had no idea any of this was going on tbh but it's not surprising in the least that Davis & Deadwyler were excluded. So goddamn heartbreaking.
I love how the "Be Kind" part of your channel's name is always so thoroughly true. I'm one of those people who just happened to be offline for a few days, so this was a fascinating surprise. Couldn't agree more with your conclusions.
Your insight on all things in the Academy awards and all things movies is once again un matched here on Be Kind Rewind.
Wonderfully investigated, thorough, but human and ultimately warm and lovely.
As you always are. Love you Be Kind Rewind/ya’ll. Been a part of my life for years and I always know something good is coming when your work drops.
Cheers homie! ❤️
Women of color would never get this kind of endorsement and that's the problem. That's not necessarily Riseborough's fault, but the fault of the system.
Fascinating. Raises many questions. You kept going deeper and deeper yet. You are amazing.
I'm personally completely over anything related to corporate activity, especially awards. Wishing we could all just bypass the machine in favor of meaningful creativity.
Whoah, just got to the sponsor feature! Will definitely check it out. Thanks for mentioning them.
As Whoopi Goldberg once put it referring to ‘Saving Private Ryan’ vs ‘Shakespeare in Love’ when she hosted the Oscars once: “They fought World War 3 over World War 2.”
That’s my Manchurian Candidate post on r/oscarracecirclejerk. Thanks for the shoutout, BKR!
An incredible, well-researched video that helps break down multiple sides of a complex issue to all of us who didn’t know anything about any of this 🙌 So glad I found this channel
I've been waiting for you to be on Nebula, I am so thrilled! You're exactly the kind of channel they should have! :D
i'm all for supporting indie film, but this nomination almost certainly came at the expense of a nomination for viola davis or danielle deadwhyler. furthermore, i doubt the academy would've done this for a black indie film.
This is the type of nuanced discussion this issue deserves. Thank you for the great video. And congrats on joining Nebula!
This was the best and most balanced analysis about this I have seen. Thank you for putting it together! (I am personally pulling for Yeoh to win this!)
A small video with a big heart
Holy cow you really outdid yourself with this video. I had no idea how complicated the Academy’s rules were for running an Oscar campaign. Let along how the grass roots push for Andrea Riseborough was done. Bravo! Love your channel and videos. You are awesome!
In the end of the day, it's either Cate Blanchett or Michelle Yeoh who will win The Oscar for Best Actress this year.
I was hoping there would be a video about Andrea Riseborough’s nomination. I’m hoping this surprise nomination could lead to some change when it comes to campaigning for awards, especially for more exposure for women and POC
If any changes are made I'm betting they'll be more in the direction of tightening things up to make it less possible for those who can't afford it to campaign rather than in the direction of opening things up to make it more accessible and fair.
If the academy wanted to take the easy way out they could always add 2-5 more slots for the acting and directing categories. That doesn’t solve anything but if I’m being honest that’s one of the few ways for performances from more independent or genre films to be considered.
The problem is they can't correct for inherent bias and internal racism. They tried expanding the number of voters and diversifying the membership but we can see from this how the majority wants to vote.
Hate the game? Fix the game!
It would totally be the opossite if this type of campaign stays because people of color, or lgbtq, or latinos, asians, continue to be the smaller part of the industry, which means they could never move an army of famous people for them like the a list that did it for Andrea. So don't be surprise when the next smaller white performer that has friends gets nominated cause it wants to
A well researched video…of course I wouldn’t expect anything else from this quality channel. Congratulations on joining Nebula! I was gonna sign up through Patrick, now I get to enjoy your work on there, too 😊
I haven't watched the video yet but they tried to campaign with money (50K spend per event, idk how, who's money?). They realized it didn't work bc people (normal citizens) didn't really watch it, no one talked about it. So, the directors wife started campaign of sending DAILY emails (which is against the rules) to their friends (and strangers, basically all voters) and ASKED them to spread the word. So they did. Andrea got nominations only for the Oscars and only bc of her famous Hollywood friends. Award season is never fair but this really rubbed me the wrong way. ESPECIALLY bc her nomination was at the expense of two women of colour, whom were nominated elsewhere (not just the Osacrs). "Grassroots campaign" could not be farther from the truth.
Also the emailing didn't go through academy email list, she did it privately, which you are not supposed to do either.
So happy you're in the Nebula crew now! Been feeling you ought to be there for a while
I think we can recognise POC artists who played the game how it's meant to can get screwed over but there is a systemic issue around financial gatekeeping from the Academy that doesn't make it a level playing field where members can just vote purely based on "artistic and technical merits". $20K is a lot just to put your film on the Academy portal, on top of the other marketing costs. The whole system needs to be overturned to be more inclusive, if the Academy are serious.
such an amazing video, you presented this so beautifully! at this point I just say throw the whole thing away
You explain everything soo well. I knew about Halle being the only WoC to win but I didnt even realize how the 2 potential black female nominees had films that followed the equation for nominations and STILL couldnt get considered. I dont know a way to remove the overwhelming influence of money and lobbying. Im kind of of the mind that newer generations should ignore the Oscars and let it die out as a concept like the monarchy. With far fewer big budget cerebral dramatic films being released in theaters I think a new reward recognition system should take its place.
I strongly feel the same about ignoring the Oscars and letting it fade into obscurity. I think that a new, truly equal/objective type of award should be created or people let their work stand for itself.
They actually had something called the people's choice awards, which was based on average folks 'voting' for their faves. They never carried as much weight as the awards from professional guilds tho
Interestingly, the first time I heard of "To Leslie" was on Howard Stern, months before the push for the nomination. Stern and his wife, Beth, raved about the movie. How did he hear about it: oh, because Mary McCormick is a friend and played his (first) wife in "Private Parts".
Wow, what a beautifully constructed video. High quality as always. I learned so much, and I admire how objective you were in explaining what happened. This was really fascinating.
If we're talking overlooked performances though, the glaring oversight to me is Taylor Russell in Bones & All. Spent the entirety of the credits of that movie silently weeping because her performance moved me so much.
yep. produced by mgm and had like very little budget to promote, mostly used chalamets celebrity to get any attention, and her performance was amazing and deserved a chalamet like breakout awards run. where was the rallying behind her from all these actors who long for the days of “real movies” for her? oh right. cause she wasn’t as connected and couldn’t call in favors to a bunch of very big names to nab her votes. ultimate eyeroll. taylor was robbed
Yes, Taylor Russell was really fabulous but another UA-cam channel said that the films content/genre would be too divisive to get Academy votes for her nomination (cannibalism/horror genre)
@@Lilah_Ninigigun_Belet-Eanna No doubt the genre and the unorthodox plot had something to do with it, yeah. Too lurid. Which is just another indictment of the academy really.
Thank you whenever I say that tagline for Andrea and to Lelise being “the small movie with a giant heart” or Charlie Theron saying that to Lelise is the type of film that reminds her of movies from the 70s and 80s … Taylor Russell and her performance in bones and all literally came to my mind.
I think it’s so interesting in comparison to Paul Mescal - he was also the lone nominee from his tiny indie film, but it seems to be genuinely on the merit of his performance and not due to a last-minute rush of campaigning like Riseborough’s. I might be wrong though!
Yeah Paul Mescal’s nomination wasn’t too surprising to anyone since many predicted he was going to take the fifth slot for Best Actor. He also got nominated for Spirit Awards, Critic’s Choice, and BAFTA as well so there was definitely some precursor merit behind his nomination, unlike Riseborough’s.
Plus he's a current young "It" guy, whose star has been rising since a breakout performance several years ago. Ana de Armas would be the equivalent on the ladies side. There's usually one such nominee on each side every year.
exactly.. AfterSun was more natural
The stupid thing is that his performance wasn’t even anything to write home about.
He barely did anything but float around and act depressed.
I wouldn't be surprised if vote splitting also ended up playing a role in the nomination for Riseborough (and De Armis, for that matter). I feel like vote splitting is often kind of underestimated, especially when it comes to these kinds of unexpected nominations. As we got closer to the nominations announcement I was hearing more and more people start to talk about Davis and Deadwyler as maybe being an either/or situation, so I think it's definitely possible that enough voters did view it in that way that it could have split the vote between them, which could have also then been exacerbated by some of the other actresses who were on the awards periphery this year, like Olivia Coleman and Margot Robbie.
de arnis is a shit actresss in one of the most mysoginist vile films ever made and if you think I'm wrong that she's just a shit actor, go watch " pistol" The Danny Boyle 6 parter on the sex pistols - she plays Chrissie Hynde ( pretenders ) and she's so dammed wide eyed crap bad saccharine ( she's PRETTTTTYYYYYY THOUGH) I was distracted and mesmerised by how she got cast ! she's awful.no chops just a face - that's not enough ,
@@courtneymichelle4498 What are you talking about, Ana de Armas wasn't even in Pistol...
Not Danielle and Viola splitting who should be the token Black of the season causing neither of them to get the nom. Lmfao completely makes sense for the academy
What a lot of casual followers don’t know (not talking about you specifically) is that there’s a preferential voting ballot. For all we know, Viola Davis and Danielle Deadwyler might have appeared on a lot of ballots… they just didn’t get enough #1s. Andrea Riseborough probably appeared on far fewer ballots than Davis and Deadwyler but received enough #1s to secure the nomination.
It’s the reason why a lot of actors miss despite getting precursor support. (Amy Adams in Arrival. 😭)
@@Michael-xi9nb Ranked voting creates such an interesting voting atmosphere, and I can't decide whether I'm for or against it. It's certainly more complex than non-preferential voting.
I'm so over award season now, but I love Everything Everywhere All At Once so much that I can't help but be excited and hopeful that they sweep this year. Probably won't watch tho. But, yeah, I'm very *insert Patti LaPone meme here* over all. Really appreciate your awesome vids.
Mary McCormick needs to be my life coach. Just goes to show, it's not what you know or what you do or how skilled you are. It's WHO you know and if they like you and are loyal TO you.
Sally Kirkland be watching this scandal giggling and saying "rookie mistake"... 🤭🤭
Sally got a golden globe award
I don't understand how they can have so many noms for Best Picture and yet limit Best Actress to only 5? That seems arbitrary to me.
Michelle Williams and Ana De Armas did not deserve their nominations over Viola and Danielle. Sorry, but that’s how I feel. Riseborough only complicates that because you have people who don’t deserve to be nominated already in this category, and then you come in after not doing any of the events Viola or Danielle did. It’s not fair at all.
Wrong, AdA absolutely did a stellar performance and 100 percent deserves the nomination. Have not watched ME film.
@@ROCKDEES1 That film was not an accurate portrayal of Marylin Monroe’s life.
I’m really happy you decided to talk about this! I was itching for your perspective on this event
you brought a very good point in your video: people defending this compaign against the "sistem" clearly don't see how everything is about power -- with money or not money at all. she was able to secure this nomination with a lot of rich, powerful and celebrated actors that have a strong influence in this industry. it wasn't just a word of mouth, but powerful people exercising their power in the world they dominate. I don't take sides here. I mean, I take the horror side. the TRULY underdong abscent in this race.
Awards are mostly about merit, tho - the highest-quality performance. No one would have lobbied for Andrea's performance unless they felt it was actually worthy of recognition. (Granted, I haven't seen the movie.)
Thank you for this analysis and acknowledging the caucasity of it all. Imagine if those organizing efforts were self reflective enough to include a lens about race and not just corporate power. This is why intersectionality is important. If your feminism isn’t inclusive then what is it? Appreciate your perspective. Thank you.
Greetings from Guatemala! I recently discovered your channel and I'm so hooked on it. I recommended it on my small, almost 99% Spanish-speaking podcast. 😃 Keep up with these great videos!
I think the campaign was interesting and in some ways needed -- it's obscene the amount of money required to compete, and it undermines the idea (flimsy as it already is) that the Oscars are truly presenting the very best performances of the year if only a handful of the very most resourced and connected films have a chance. However! As you said, their campaign was so successful because the To Leslie team is made up of such well-connected insiders. I think it is extremely unfortunate that this happened in the year that we have Michelle Yeoh finally on the ticket. I sincerely hope she wins, and it would be devastating if this campaign for Andrea Riseborough knocks her out of first place. I also think Viola Davis and Danielle Deadwylder should be on the list instead of Ana de Armas and Michelle Williams. Fine but unremarkable (and in de Armas's case, problematic) performances.
From another perspective it could be a way to keep Michelle Yeoh, the first asian lady nominated, from winning #oscarssowhite
How? Rich people helping one of their less wealthy friends buy a nomination…why was it needed?
Keep in mind that the top production companies usually end up wrangling the top talent in any given field (i.e. acting, screenwriting, directing). Many 'indie' movies rely on unproven or B- or C-list talent, due to budgetary constraints.
You absolutely bring up an interesting point. Would -or could- a woman of color campaign and earn a nomination so brazenly the way Riseborough did? What she and her team managed to do is worth a golf clap, but I just can’t think those same avenues of opportunity would have been available to Davis or Deadwyler. And when talking about this nomination, these two incredible performances will always be a footnote.
Studios likely spent plenty on ad campaigns for them tho.
@@wylier Doesn't matter if the powerful white elite that backed Riseborough don't want to vote for black women though.
To me, this all feels sort of convenient to the Academy. Rather than having to reckon with why there were no black women nominated (for now 3 out of the last 5 years) and having to reckon with the implications this has about on the lack of diversity behind the scenes like the Golden Globes, they have this distraction that too many people are willing to point to as the cause. There's more drastic reform needed than a "clarification of campaign rules"
Whenever I see you on my feed, I'm so happy.
CONGRATULATIONS on being featured on Nebula! 👏🏽
I appreciate your video on this. I wasn’t aware of the controversy (although I didn’t know who Andrea Riseborough was when I saw the list). I remember your video on Cher and feeling similar about Sally Kirkland: sure, it’s impressive that she went up against actresses who were in bigger films (and who were some of the most famous people in the world), but it also doesn’t happen without her having rich and famous friends. To describe Riseborough’s nomination as a David vs. Goliath story seems especially tone-deaf when two Black women were conspicuously omitted, as you observed. Although I am unabashedly rooting for Michelle Yeoh because, yes, I think she had a great performance but more honestly because I’m Asian-American, so I recognize that we all have our biases!
I had no idea what to expect, but this video was extremely rewarding to watch! I really had no idea what the process was, and you broke it down very well! I'm deeply appreciative of you spending time talking about the issues of privilege, access and race. Hopefully the Academy can use the opportunity to make changes. (Spoiler: They won't) Love all your videos!
Well, the movie director got his wish as the film will now be remembered for ages (even if only by Academy Awards-obsessed followers).
Sad to see my favorite performance of the year - Danielle Deadwyler for Till - not making the cut, but this is absolutely not Andrea Riseborough’s fault and all the vile words directed at her thr last few weeks were simply unfair.
If anything, this grassroots - or maybe astroturfed, why not? - campaign will serve to push for renovations to the whole system. Let’s hope they can take fairness and balance - be it to performances on small movies, POC or any other underlying issue - to this approach. Knowing how corporate the whole thing is, though, does not make me hopeful at all.
Great video as always! Fairness and balance are not losing any ground here! 👌🏻
Anyone else reminded of how Sally Kirkland got a nomination for 'Anna' in 1988?
And Carol Kane in the 70s!
Excellent, excellent, excellent! Addressed a controversy I knew pretty much sod all about and left me feeling much more informed. Couldn't ask for more.
Your final question has been mine ever since nomination morning; Is the nod where the campaign stops? Or will the To Leslie supporters try to get her the trophy? And we won't know until Oscar night.
I cannot say I entirely agree with your take, especially your tone regarding the very legitimate grievances many made about calling this campaign " grassroots".
It is a great simplification to equate big studios/big money with bad tactics, and small studios and little money with them being the good guys.
This " grassroots " campaign understood pretty well that not only economic power was part of this imperfect, unfair system, but also the power of connections. If they eliminated the 20.000 dollars fees to even acess the email blast system, then the only major rule about emailing would be not to spam anyone. Dear Mary was spamming her very large list of connections, knowing damn well she was 1) breaking the rules and 2) would not answer for it.
Who has never been contacted by a relentless acquantance before, asking for a favor, until you relent because you are feeling guilty or want to be polite? this is what we are talking about. the fact that dear Mary, who is white, had a pool of 99,99% white actors to feel comfortable contacting on the behalf of her husband´s indie movie without any fear of being labelled " pushy" or " agressive" by a sympathetic press is a tacit acknowledgement that neither Viola Davis or Deadwyler would be treated in the same way.
Let´s face it, this is a smilar situation as the admissions scandals, where people know damn well that poeple of colour will end up in jail for postal fraud by faking their adress so their children could attend a better school and being lablled as scammers, while white and wealth parents would be called "concerned" and " misguided" when caught cheating for their children to attend a prestigious university, when the " legal" way of doing for them would be to, you know, pay up for a libray or etc...
So, yes, let´s not be afraid to call it for what it is and expect that yes, they better change the rules to make it easier for both small indie movies and people of colour to play y the rules and have a shot.
I agres
What 'rule changes' would those look like? Just curious.
This whole situation feels like a strange mix between defying the odds and getting a nomination despite the huge amounts of money that big studios can make use of to promote their movies and afford the campaign for votes (which is usually the case) and having enough privilage and connections in the industry to have a chance to get a nomination just through that. Either way, it's a shame that money and influence come before the genuine appreciation for the art of cinema so often.
THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU for touching on the big fat snub Danielle and Viola faced, and for calling out the iniquity as well as inequality of the industry when it comes to representation for POC, particularly black women. Much appreciated ❤
This was real, real mid. gina prince-bythewood's article in the Hollywood Reporter debunks a lot of the assumptions and holes in logic and perspective concerning the very rushed section on the racial aspects of this whole issue and the whole Francis Fisher thing being minimized. Those who are breaking the rules like mentioned in 20:28, don't look like Michelle Yeoh or Danielle Deadwyler like the call is coming from inside the house.
I had a chance to read her op-ed. It’s unfortunate that many members of the Academy didn’t even bother to see her movie. I can understand her frustration on how can her film be judge fairly on its merits when so many voters won’t even give it a chance in comparison to other movies in contention.
As usual, you provide the most nuanced, detailed and humorous take on the Academy and Hollywood's place in American culture. Of all the commentaries I've read, you sum up the issues of race most succinctly: it's not that Andrea Riseborough stole Viola's or Danielle's nominations. But her team used methods that aren't available to/effective for women of color. I'm also concerned by what Ana de Armas's inclusion says about gender, objectification of women, and power(lessness) through sexuality, but you've already covered that :)
I have seen To Leslie and it really was one of best performances of this year. She should have been nominated everywhere! But then again so should Toni Colette for Hereditary and Essie Davis for The Babadook. So I wasn’t suprised that yet again the best performance was being ignored.
And Michelle Pfeiffer in _Where Is Kyra?_
@@Wired4Life2 haven’t seen it so can’t comment on that performance. But I recently rewatched I Am Sam and I mean wasn’t Dakota Fanning just amazing at that young age! She should have been awarded with an Oscar. If Paper Moon did it then so could I Am Sam.
I have to say, this is the most concise, clear, and least demeaning video here about the whole Andrea Riseborough brouhaha. Well done!
Why are the nominations limited to 5? They expanded the Best Picture category, not sure why the acting categories have to be set so low. Also agree with everything you said in this video.
I think there should at least be 8 or as many acting nominations as picture nominations.
I'm so glad you covered this as I don't keep up to date with nomination news, this was such a fascinating and well done take. Plus I love the way you edited this!
My main takeaway from this is that Mary McCormack should be in charge of the DNC.
She'd have kept that blue wall up in '16. Might have even flipped Texas and Florida.
I love the work you do on these topics and just really appreciate it. Thank you.
I get it. A small movie with such a low budget gets often buried and it is a shame as that should not dictate the worth of a movie. However, I can’t help but wondering that the way this movie was suddenly advertised everywhere by a bunch of celebs raving about it could also be a little dangerous.
My feeling for Riseborough's rise is also mixed. On one hand, I get so excited seeing how a small underdog movie makes waves to subvert the power dynamics in the big studio game but at the same time, it leaves Davis and Deadwyler two big snubs of this years (and they totally deserve it). I hope that in the future, there'll be more rule breakers like To Leslie though. Oscar is old with loads of prejudices toward their nominations and voting that it rarely gives much chance to movies that don't fit in their "taste" despite how they can be real powerhouse