Forum home Road cycling forum The cake stop

Well said Charlotte Rampling

mr_goomr_goo Posts: 3,770
edited January 2016 in The cake stop
At last somebody has the 'testicular fortitude' to speak up about reverse racism. And as she clearly states, there were no acting performances by a Black, Asian or Martian worthy of being nominated.


BTW. No great loss that Will Smith has decided that he will not attend.
Always be yourself, unless you can be Aaron Rodgers....Then always be Aaron Rodgers.
«1

Posts

  • DeVlaeminckDeVlaeminck Posts: 7,787
    I don't know enough about the film industry to comment on where the problem lies but it does seem likely that there is a problem of discrimination somewhere.

    Whether that is further down the line which means black actors aren't getting the opportunities or something else I don't know but in a country with a large black population surely you'd expect awards for a popular entertainment industry would reflect that ?
    [Castle Donington Ladies FC - going up in '22]
  • rick_chaseyrick_chasey Posts: 60,938 Lives Here
    Yeah white men have had it so tough for the last 300 years.

    I mean just look at that Oscar nomination list. Not a single whi...oh.
  • Stevo_666Stevo_666 Posts: 49,314
    Mr Goo wrote:
    At last somebody has the 'testicular fortitude' to speak up about reverse racism. And as she clearly states, there were no acting performances by a Black, Asian or Martian worthy of being nominated.


    BTW. No great loss that Will Smith has decided that he will not attend.
    So is social media in meltdown witb people taking offence on behalf of others?
    "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]
  • letap73letap73 Posts: 1,608
    The force awakens is not up for best picture or for any of the acting awards or director awards. I wonder if the producers would swop major oscar success for box office?
  • awaveyawavey Posts: 2,368
    letap73 wrote:
    The force awakens is not up for best picture or for any of the acting awards or director awards. I wonder if the producers would swop major oscar success for box office?

    I dont think there was ever any chance Star Wars would have been considered for the non-technical awards, Harrison Ford might have been an outside bet for a supporting actor nomination, but even best soundtrack (and its far from John Williams best work) seems more of nomination for lifetime achievement, even if I liked the film alot Id struggle to say it deserved any of the other major acting or directing awards

    but movie studios have to engage in a promotion game with the academy members, they dont just pick nominations at random from all the eligble films, you have to submit the film to the academy, as a DVD presser for those that cant view the film at the members cinema, for consideration and state which categories you are submitting the work for, that actually costs alot of money to do along (6000 DVD copies potentially) plus the full page ads in Variety and push to keep the film healthy at the box office and talked about, which is why movie studios generally only submit films they think are guaranteed nominations and/or wins.

    ultimately the award nominations are purely a function of the type of films and casting decisions being made in a year,and we are currently stuck in a run of mainly biopic films, as they generally seem to do good box office and sweep the awards seasons and that limits the type of casting decisions you can make.
  • pblakeneypblakeney Posts: 19,064
    Surely it is not the Oscar's fault if there are no suitable actor or actresses' performances?
    The blame must lie with the writers and producers. Or, are there performances being overlooked?
    The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
    I am not sure. You have no chance.
    Veronese68 wrote:
    PB is the most sensible person on here.
  • Mr Goo wrote:
    At last somebody has the 'testicular fortitude' to speak up about reverse racism. And as she clearly states, there were no acting performances by a Black, Asian or Martian worthy of being nominated.


    BTW. No great loss that Will Smith has decided that he will not attend.

    You'll need to take off your white hood and put out the burning cross pal. She's already come out with a retraction and claims she was misquoted.
  • ukiboyukiboy Posts: 891
    Yeah white men have had it so tough for the last 300 years.

    I mean just look at that Oscar nomination list. Not a single whi...oh.


    Get off your lefty liberal self indulgent high horse FFS!!
    Black, white, and lots of other races have existed for far longer than 300 years...
    Let's just decide Oscar nomination on merit and not on political agenda..
    Outside the rat race and proud of it
  • I don't know enough about the film industry to comment on where the problem lies but it does seem likely that there is a problem of discrimination somewhere.

    Whether that is further down the line which means black actors aren't getting the opportunities or something else I don't know but in a country with a large black population surely you'd expect awards for a popular entertainment industry would reflect that ?
    I tend to agree with this.
    Tail end Charlie

    The above post may contain traces of sarcasm or/and bullsh*t.
  • socratessocrates Posts: 453
    Maybe and just maybe there were no black actor performances good enough. Michael Caine summed it up well when he said that you cannot vote for someone just because of their colour. It is the performance that counts. No matter what happens someone will feel aggrieved. As for Will Smith and Jada Pinkett not turning up, gee what loss.
  • bianchimoonbianchimoon Posts: 3,942
    I'm a bit confused, If there were no black actors good enough to be nominated is it right to give a spurious nomination with no chance of winning anything? If there was a performance by a black actor that was good enough during relevant period for the award would we not know about it by now? I would have thought the headlines would be Will Smith or an other was superb in "the film" and it's a travesty that he wasn't nominated. All i've seen is that the ratios are unequal not any proof that this is a deliberate ploy by the 'academy'. For what its worth pretending to be someone else is about as real a job as racing a bike for a living :wink:
    All lies and jest..still a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest....
  • chris_basschris_bass Posts: 4,913
    We can safely assume your race does not affect your ability to act so it should follow that the proportion of nominations reflects the make up of races in the countries where the films are produced.
    So we have a few options

    1 - people prefer watching films that star white actors whch would suggest the watching public have the issues not the awards
    2 - people writing films are writing roles for white people more than black people , the writers are in the wrong
    3- people paying for films to be made are more likely to invest in films starring white people, the investors are wrong - institutional racism isn't exactly unheard of
    4 - the countries where the majority of films are made are skewed towards whites, both in population make up and opportunities -as above really
    5- the people choosing the nominations are more likely to nominate whites actors - this is what people seem to think if you believe social media.
    5 - there is no problem just a freak/bad year - not exactly unusual so probably not

    any others? all of the above?
    www.conjunctivitis.com - a site for sore eyes
  • pblakeneypblakeney Posts: 19,064
    I would suggest a combination of 2, 3 and your second 5 as I said earlier.
    It is telling that no one is shouting that anyone in particular has been overlooked.
    The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
    I am not sure. You have no chance.
    Veronese68 wrote:
    PB is the most sensible person on here.
  • ballysmateballysmate Posts: 15,903
    Chris Bass wrote:
    We can safely assume your race does not affect your ability to act so it should follow that the proportion of nominations reflects the make up of races in the countries where the films are produced.
    So we have a few options

    1 - people prefer watching films that star white actors whch would suggest the watching public have the issues not the awards
    2 - people writing films are writing roles for white people more than black people , the writers are in the wrong
    3- people paying for films to be made are more likely to invest in films starring white people, the investors are wrong - institutional racism isn't exactly unheard of

    4 - the countries where the majority of films are made are skewed towards whites, both in population make up and opportunities -as above really
    5- the people choosing the nominations are more likely to nominate whites actors - this is what people seem to think if you believe social media.
    5 - there is no problem just a freak/bad year - not exactly unusual so probably not

    any others? all of the above?

    Not in the wrong at all. If I were writing/producing a film I would want to maximise my audience/profit. If that meant catering for a particular audience, who has the right to say I am in the wrong. You can't force people to write black/Asian/Mexican/Chinese or even white roles.

    Come to think of it, people are making a point about the lack of black nominations, but make scant mention of other ethnic groups. Chinese nominations?
  • finchyfinchy Posts: 6,686
    There are plenty of black male star actors. There are far fewer black female star actors. That's where the discrepancy comes in. I'll guess it's because more non-black women fancy black men than non-black men fancy black women. I know that lots of black women struggle to find partners in majority white countries. I don't know whether this is something social, biological or whatever, but that's my stab at an explanation.
  • pblakeneypblakeney Posts: 19,064
    finchy wrote:
    There are plenty of black male star actors. There are far fewer black female star actors. That's where the discrepancy comes in. I'll guess it's because more non-black women fancy black men than non-black men fancy black women. I know that lots of black women struggle to find partners in majority white countries. I don't know whether this is something social, biological or whatever, but that's my stab at an explanation.
    Halle Berry counters that opinion for most white men that I know.
    The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
    I am not sure. You have no chance.
    Veronese68 wrote:
    PB is the most sensible person on here.
  • finchyfinchy Posts: 6,686
    Well, that's one... and she's mixed race.
  • pblakeneypblakeney Posts: 19,064
    finchy wrote:
    Well, that's one... and she's mixed race.
    So are most of the people in the Northern Hemisphere.
    That tends to be forgotten amongst the most vocal on the subject.
    The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
    I am not sure. You have no chance.
    Veronese68 wrote:
    PB is the most sensible person on here.
  • chris_basschris_bass Posts: 4,913
    Ballysmate wrote:
    Chris Bass wrote:
    We can safely assume your race does not affect your ability to act so it should follow that the proportion of nominations reflects the make up of races in the countries where the films are produced.
    So we have a few options

    1 - people prefer watching films that star white actors whch would suggest the watching public have the issues not the awards
    2 - people writing films are writing roles for white people more than black people , the writers are in the wrong
    3- people paying for films to be made are more likely to invest in films starring white people, the investors are wrong - institutional racism isn't exactly unheard of

    4 - the countries where the majority of films are made are skewed towards whites, both in population make up and opportunities -as above really
    5- the people choosing the nominations are more likely to nominate whites actors - this is what people seem to think if you believe social media.
    5 - there is no problem just a freak/bad year - not exactly unusual so probably not

    any others? all of the above?

    Not in the wrong at all. If I were writing/producing a film I would want to maximise my audience/profit. If that meant catering for a particular audience, who has the right to say I am in the wrong. You can't force people to write black/Asian/Mexican/Chinese or even white roles.

    Are you saying people prefer watching white actors? why would it make a diference?

    I think one problem is that films are often based on history and our view of recorded history is very much seen through white eyes so the roles are always going to give more opportunities to whites.
    www.conjunctivitis.com - a site for sore eyes
  • finchyfinchy Posts: 6,686
    Chris Bass wrote:
    Are you saying people prefer watching white actors? why would it make a diference?

    Some people prefer watching white actors. Don't ask me why, 'cos I can't understand why people wouldn't watch a good film due to the presence of a black actor.
  • ballysmateballysmate Posts: 15,903
    Chris Bass wrote:
    Ballysmate wrote:
    Chris Bass wrote:
    We can safely assume your race does not affect your ability to act so it should follow that the proportion of nominations reflects the make up of races in the countries where the films are produced.
    So we have a few options

    1 - people prefer watching films that star white actors whch would suggest the watching public have the issues not the awards
    2 - people writing films are writing roles for white people more than black people , the writers are in the wrong
    3- people paying for films to be made are more likely to invest in films starring white people, the investors are wrong - institutional racism isn't exactly unheard of

    4 - the countries where the majority of films are made are skewed towards whites, both in population make up and opportunities -as above really
    5- the people choosing the nominations are more likely to nominate whites actors - this is what people seem to think if you believe social media.
    5 - there is no problem just a freak/bad year - not exactly unusual so probably not

    any others? all of the above?

    Not in the wrong at all. If I were writing/producing a film I would want to maximise my audience/profit. If that meant catering for a particular audience, who has the right to say I am in the wrong. You can't force people to write black/Asian/Mexican/Chinese or even white roles.

    Are you saying people prefer watching white actors? why would it make a diference?

    I think one problem is that films are often based on history and our view of recorded history is very much seen through white eyes so the roles are always going to give more opportunities to whites.


    No idea. But studios don't invest billions in movies without thinking about what the public want to see do they?
  • morstarmorstar Posts: 5,054
    My personal feeling is that it's not the Oscars at fault, it is the fact that there are proportionately fewer black central characters than you'd expect given the ethnic make up of the US.
    Probably reflects my film viewing choices but I don't think any films I've seen at the cinema have had a black lead in the last 12 months. I don't watch loads at the cinema but statistically it suggests the black lead is less common than could be expected as race has o bearing on my film choices. I'd argue the Oscars reflect that.
    Zoe Saldana hmmm. Although she's rarely black! Blue in avatar, green in something else (Avengers?) and pointy ears in Star Trek.
  • seanoconnseanoconn Posts: 9,139
    With the exception of Morgan Freeman and Denzel Washington, all black actor nominations for the past 25 years have been biopics and three of the seven Freeman and Washington nominations were also biopics.
    Pinno, מלך אידיוט וחרא מכונאי
  • mr_goomr_goo Posts: 3,770
    Look at the number of films produced Hollywood with black actors as lead/co-stars. Lots of them, judging by the listings on Netflix, but they are very unlikely to ever be nominated for an award. The same can be said of many white acted lead roles/co-stars. You certainly are never going to see Nicholas Cage up for a gong with he half dozen films he churns out each year. But it pays good money. These actors make millions and live a good life. Is Will Smith really that bothered about a gong? Everything I've seen him in he plays Will Smith. So why get het up about not getting a role in a film that is likely to be nominated? It probably wouldn't pay as much as some trashy SciFi movie with your son or daughter in support role.
    Always be yourself, unless you can be Aaron Rodgers....Then always be Aaron Rodgers.
  • bianchimoonbianchimoon Posts: 3,942
    finchy wrote:
    Chris Bass wrote:
    Are you saying people prefer watching white actors? why would it make a diference?

    Some people prefer watching white actors. Don't ask me why, 'cos I can't understand why people wouldn't watch a good film due to the presence of a black actor.

    In the same vein, I would much prefer to watch a British or European film than an American one, I can identify more with the people, the landscapes etc . Having said that I recently watched 'the martian' but that don't count like, cos he was a martian, wasn't he. :)
    All lies and jest..still a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest....
  • Mr Goo wrote:
    Look at the number of films produced Hollywood with black actors as lead/co-stars. Lots of them, judging by the listings on Netflix, but they are very unlikely to ever be nominated for an award. The same can be said of many white acted lead roles/co-stars. You certainly are never going to see Nicholas Cage up for a gong with he half dozen films he churns out each year. But it pays good money. These actors make millions and live a good life. Is Will Smith really that bothered about a gong? Everything I've seen him in he plays Will Smith. So why get het up about not getting a role in a film that is likely to be nominated? It probably wouldn't pay as much as some trashy SciFi movie with your son or daughter in support role.

    +1 on this.

    Nicholas Cage films are often just good entertainment to pass an hour or so. He's worth the money IMHO. He's not a top level actor capable of winning an Oscar.

    Will Smith is entertaining in an all his characters are the same kind of way. If you like him you'll probably like his films. He's purely about his style. It is acting and probably at a decent standard but it is just not at the top level that award winning performances are at. Personally I've seen too many of his films to want to see any more. I'm also not a fan of his son's work, I wish him all the best because it's good that someone is getting on in a field he wants to be in. I'm not a fan of their family production company that is pretty much about promoting their family. I disliked the ruining of karate kid (IMHO an 80s classic of the light, family feel good film). It just wasn't good and any attempt at redoing an older film that was popular and has been on tv a lot over the years deserves a good treatment. This was not because it just did not have good screenplay and actors. Jackie Chan was the mentor character but he's.just not that kind of actor IMHO.

    That aside there's been some very talented black.actors IMHO. Freeman, Poitier, Washington, Laurence Fisheburne, Forest Whittaker, Cuba Gooding Jr, etc. Just some I think are good black actors. Very few I feel have done anything worthy of an Oscar. Those that have IMHO done something worthy have all been nominated or have been awarded an Oscar. That is how it works IMHO. Do something really good get a gong. Be great and win a gong, be good in a different way and earn millions. Either way gets you money, recognition and fans. That should be good enough.
  • graeme_s-2graeme_s-2 Posts: 3,382
    Nicholas Cage films are often just good entertainment to pass an hour or so. He's worth the money IMHO. He's not a top level actor capable of winning an Oscar.
    Nicholas Cage has already won a Best Actor Oscar:
    "Cage received an Academy Award, a Golden Globe, and Screen Actors Guild Award for his performance as an alcoholic Hollywood writer in Leaving Las Vegas (1995)"
  • pblakeneypblakeney Posts: 19,064
    Must be said, he did play a drunk very convincingly.
    The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
    I am not sure. You have no chance.
    Veronese68 wrote:
    PB is the most sensible person on here.
  • morstarmorstar Posts: 5,054
    Ultimately, who cares? It's additional reward and recognition for an industry that intrinsically has reward and recognition built in. Therefore, it's self indulgent.

    Reward and recognition is a powerful tool in a salaried industry where success or good performance does not of itself reap direct benefit to the employee. Rewarding movie stars is mutual back slapping.
  • seanoconnseanoconn Posts: 9,139
    Graeme_S wrote:
    Nicholas Cage films are often just good entertainment to pass an hour or so. He's worth the money IMHO. He's not a top level actor capable of winning an Oscar.
    Nicholas Cage has already won a Best Actor Oscar:
    "Cage received an Academy Award, a Golden Globe, and Screen Actors Guild Award for his performance as an alcoholic Hollywood writer in Leaving Las Vegas (1995)"
    Beat me to it :D

    Oh tangled metal :lol::lol:
    Pinno, מלך אידיוט וחרא מכונאי
Sign In or Register to comment.