This weekend, I finally went to see Selma. I loved it! The film had some flaws – like, the script was uneven, to say the least – but overall, this is a great film. I’m mad that Ava DuVernay was snubbed for a Best Director Oscar nomination, but I’m ENRAGED that David Oyelowo was snubbed for a Best Actor nomination. Oyelowo did a masterful job as Martin Luther King Jr., one of those rare conjuring tricks rarely seen in film (see also: Daniel Day-Lewis’s Abraham Lincoln or Jamie Foxx’s Ray Charles). And Oyelowo was snubbed for nearly every award nomination. It’s crazy. The cast was snubbed for Best Ensemble at the SAG Awards too, which is also pretty insane. While Tom Wilkinson and Tim Roth (LBJ and George Wallace, respectively) were woefully miscast, everyone else was pitch-perfect.
So, obviously, we’re still talking Selma’s Oscar snubs. The film was nominated for Best Picture and Best Song, and that’s it. People are (justifiably) upset. Surprisingly, one of those people is NOT Spike Lee, who has been on the receiving end of some of the most egregious Oscar snubs in awards history (Do the Right Thing and Malcolm X weren’t nominated for Director or Picture). Spike gave a surprisingly forward-looking interview to The Daily Beast last week about Selma’s snubs – Spike told TDB that Selma and Birdman were his favorite films of the year, and that Selma will stand up, unlike some of the other nominees. Here are some highlights:
What he thinks of Selma’s snubs: “Join the club! But that doesn’t diminish the film. Nobody’s talking about motherf–kin’ Driving Miss Daisy. That film is not being taught in film schools all across the world like Do the Right Thing is. Nobody’s discussing Driving Miss Motherf–kin’ Daisy. So if I saw Ava today I’d say, ‘You know what? F–k ’em. You made a very good film, so feel good about that and start working on the next one.”
Selma’s snubs following last year’s victory for 12 Years a Slave: “Anyone who thinks this year was gonna be like last year is retarded. There were a lot of black folks up there with 12 Years a Slave, Steve [McQueen], Lupita [Nyong’o], Pharrell. It’s in cycles of every 10 years. Once every 10 years or so I get calls from journalists about how people are finally accepting black films. Before last year, it was the year [in 2002] with Halle Berry, Denzel [Washington], and Sidney Poitier. It’s a 10-year cycle. So I don’t start doing backflips when it happens.”
Diversity and the message of films: “Let’s be honest. I know they’re trying to become more diverse, but when you look at the Academy and Do the Right Thing or Driving Miss Daisy, are they going to choose a film where you have the relatively passive black servant, or are they going to choose a film with a menacing ‘Radio Raheem?’ A lot of times, people are going to vote for what they’re comfortable with, and anything that’s threatening to them they won’t.”
On the Academy’s president, a black woman named Cheryl Boone Isaacs: “The Academy is trying to be more diverse. Cheryl is trying to open it up and have more diversity amongst the members of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences. But with Selma, it’s not the first time it’s happened, and every time it does I say, ‘You can’t go to awards like the Oscars or the Grammys for validation. The validation is if your work still stands 25 years later.’”
Of course Spike is defending his own films which were snubbed by the Academy, but he’s completely correct. It’s not often that the Academy “gets it right” and chooses the films or performances that will stand the test of time. It’s always been this way. And sometimes it’s not even about making an incorrect choice: I always think of the year that Peter O’Toole was nominated for Lawrence of Arabia. It’s insane that he didn’t win, right? Except that was the same year Gregory Peck was up for To Kill a Mockingbird. Not so insane now, right? In that case, both films stand up, and both performances stand the test of time. And yes, I think Selma will stand up much more than many of the other nominated films. And years from now, people are going to wonder how David Oyelowo could play MLK so brilliantly and not even get nominated for Best Actor.
Cheryl Boone Isaacs also addressed the lack of diversity in an interview with the Associated Press on Friday – go here to read. She basically says that the Academy has made great strides and more diversity is coming, blah blah.
Photos courtesy of WENN.
“Anyone who thinks this year was gonna be like last year is retarded […]”
What a shame it is that such an intelligent, socially aware man as Spike Lee cannot come up with a term other than “retarded” to indicate that something is stupid and backward.
100% agree with you
Thank you. THIS.
I agree with you, except I’m not not surprised. I’ve never liked him. I think he’s talented, but I think he’s mean.
The one word removed, he has a solid point and has made solid points through out the years.
I watched his Who Do You Think You Are episode and he just came off horribly.
@Kiddo
You can make solid points and still be insensitive and mean and unlikeable. I think he’s talented, as I said, and I agree he makes sense a lot of the time, but he is so alienating and hate-filled, in my opinion, that his influence is highly diminished.
Totally GNAT.
+1. He comes off very poorly. But, in this case, even though he’s mean, he’s 100% right. On to the next one, Ava!
John Stewart was using the same term just a a scant few years ago. I’m not saying it’s right, just that the rest of his position being dismissed on account of it, seems extreme, especially adding that because he isn’t as fuzzy as he should be, his message is moot.
He might be “mean”, but isn’t that kind of the point he’s making about which films are more ‘acceptable’ based on character types?
@ kiddo
if you substituted the n word, would his opinions still be valid?
using such a derogatory word does invalidate his opinions, to me.
That Is pretty much what turns me off of Him GNAT That he is always so angry/bitchy/mean spirited… I Mean I see why he’d feel that way but He never advances anything he’s lobbying for because of how AWFUL he always comes off
I completely agree. He’s very, very talented and I have a lot of respect for him as a director, but he always sounds so bitter, grumpy and unpleasant.
In a way I think he’s like Azealia Banks, without the thirst. I think Azealia makes very, very valid points in all of her arguments – but she comes across as such a troll.
He lacks a filter and always turns the argument back to himself. I think the man is talented, he is making a great point about the snubs, and that Do the Right Thing was robbed, but he loses me when he goes off on the rants and tangents. I immediately cringed at the word retarded.
I also find him to be rude and alienating. Not a fan.
Kiddo – did not mean his message was moot.
Spike Lee is amazing director, producer and writer. Unfortunately, his language and meanerisam has always been unfiltered. His point of view on any subject is always directed somehow towards his body of work and racial justice. In this case I think he is right. Many amazing director never got oscar nods just to name few: Orson Wells, Stanley Kubrick , Arthur Penn……..
And when you make the next one, tell the story TRUTHFULLY, please. Leaving parts out can cause one to miss out in an Academy Award nomination for Best Director.
Right, and this happens while he’s talking about diversity. ..
yeah, that’s what stuck out for me, too.
he has a point, and then he diminished it by using a derogatory term. come ON man, haven’t you been on the receiving end of those enough to know not to use one?…
and I agree with you GNAT…talented but kind of a mean (and sometimes bigoted) guy.
Yes, I recoiled. He should know better than to use derogatory terminology like that regardless of how valid his point is or how frustrated he might be.
Agree. He rarely minces words or bothers with PC. No excuse for the use of this term, but the message to Ms. DuVernay is clear. I think she has staying power in the industry now and should put this Oscar BS behind her. Same for David O.
thank you. I was just going to post the same sentiment.
That jumped out at me and I just can’t. It is never okay to use that word in that fashion.
His message gets lost when he uses language like that.
I think that is Spike’s problem a lot of the time. He is usually trying to make a salient point, but he muddles it when he uses that language.
Not to excuse him but I actually think that it is one of those words that was so commonly used when he grew up that he just doesn’t think about it’s meaning. I’m the same age and growing up that word was used for everything and today I consciously have to make sure I don’t use it.
Then he needs to consciously choose not to use it. There are a lot of words that many of us grew up with that we don’t use now. Because we know better.
When I read that, Spike’s use of the word was so unexpected that I did giggle in surprise, to be honest. I just can’t get the vapors over it.
I understand, and people are forgetting his words were spoken as a message to Ms. DuVernay, not us. Spike could give a f*** what we think.
ditto
Slightly off-topic, but I still can’t believe that Leonardo didn’t get, at least, a nomination for Django Unchained. I still want to know what Christoph Waltz did that was so superb in Django.
Christoph played the same character he plays in every film. Such a shame really. He has such talent; but he is cast as the villain in every movie now and it is the same villain.
He wasn’t a villian in Django, but he still played the same role he always plays. I think he is just super charming and hypnotizes the audience! He also reminds me a bit of Sean Connery and Liam Neeson, in that he has the same accent in every movie no matter who is playing.
I still can’t believe Tarantino made it seem like Django was the lead when all I saw in that movie was Christoph, Christoph and some more Christoph.
Yep. That was the reason why Will Smith passed up the role. He realised that the real star of the film dies and everything after that is just blood soaked fluff.
I know I am in the minority here but Django really offended me. Its a film about how black people have no agency until some white guy teaches it to them. Remember all the black people who stand around waiting to be told that they should run or kill their enslavers. That movie is filled with scenes like that.
Its also about a woman in distress being rescued by some guy. She does absolutely nothing to help her own escape, if anything, like a typical woman”, she is unable to hide her emotions and in that way ruins the plan. She is a “spoiler”, there only as some weak plot device.
As a black person and as a woman, that movie hit below the belt. Unforgiveable. And Tarantino was already on thin ice with me.
I absolutely loathe Tarantino. His films are both racist and misogynist and nothing’s going to change it. He’s a pig and almost as bad as Oliver Stone. He loves violence to a sickening point.
Except she did try to help herself. Remember her first scene was being pulled from or place in a box because she tried to save herself? Jeez. She even had scars on her back because she tried to rescue herself. And Django wasn’t some guy, he was her husband.
I hate Tarantino. Loathe him as a person and filmmaker, but I did enjoy Django. I don’t think he went far enough to show the horrors of that time. I think he took his marching orders from the blackploitation films he loves so much; which is a pity, but again I still enjoyed the film.
As for Spike Lee, he’s the same as he’s always been. A bitter, loud, straightforward, misogynist, truth-teller. As soon as 12YAS won, I knew there was NO hope for Selma. No way two predominately black films would get love back to back. Never going to happen.
I’d give Christoph Waltz all the Oscars forever and ever if it was up to me. I think he’s brilliant. I think Leo should probably also have gotten a nomination that year, since he was brilliant in Django, but I would still have voted for CW if it were up to me.
He is super charming, and you can’t help but enjoy it when he is on screen even if he is the villain!
Spike has made some wonderful films and documentaries but he always seems so angry when interviewed.
“The validation is if your work still stands 25 years later.’””
thats a very good point and so many people in hollywood dont get it. its about shiny show business awards which are all meaningless anyway. its a marketing tool and a popularity contest. some people even cry when they get an Oscar, im always so sad, they must have such empty, meaningless lives if they cry for such phony BS.
for me the only interesting part of the Oscar is to see how all those “private” actors suddenly sell out their love life to get a showbusiness trophy. plus they dont even get that if people vote for them based on their girlfriend being pregnant it has nothing to do with their acting.
I think that is the most salient point out of all of this. Do The Right Thing is still a powerful movie 25 years later, and Selma will still be a powerful film 25 years from now. Pajiba had a really great article on why awards can still be important people’s careers and opening doors. However, that doesn’t always seem to be the case. Look at the careers of Lupita (right now), Octavia, Monique, Jennifer Hudson and Cuba Gooding Jr. Hollywood’s diversity problem is at the heart of the matter.
Lupita is doing great. No one should worry about her. She’s the lead in Mira Nair’s next project QUEEN OF KATWE, she’s developing AMERICANAH with Plan B, and she has STARWARS coming out this year.
Plus all the fashion brands she’s spokesperson. As much as people don’t rate fashion as a film career booster, it is indee especially when you are shilling for brands that are global rather than niche.
The lack of nominations is bizarre, if a movie is nominated for best film then surely *some* of the other elements that went into it being a best film nomination were a factor, be it an actor or a director or a script. None of the other movies are wholly perfect, ToE and IG have flaws up the wazoo, personally I felt IG shouldn’t have gotten a best director nod (when you look at the other nominations it’s lacking) there was nothing groundbreaking about the direction and the script was hammy (waits for IMDB people to kill me)
When I saw The Imitation Game I thought “people watching this ten years from now will be embarrassed for Benedict Cumberbatch in this performance.” I’m not sure it’s even his fault, it’s just the way they decided to write the character. Bloodless. It would fit in with the satirical Best Actor clips in Tropic Thunder. TIG has the markers of Important Historical Drama, but it’s just not very good all around.
I said it in another thread, but I dare anyone to sit through THE GREATEST SHOW ON EARTH (best picture, 1952) and tell me that’s a good film. It won because it was popular and the director, Cecil B. DeMille, had never won and was older than dirt.
It’s like the line from ELECTION, excuse me while I paraphrase, the only people who care about the awards are the winners (and their agents).
#OscarsasrelevantasMissAmerica
He’s right; she should go make her next film and move on. An Oscar win or even a nomination doesn’t define or make your career. If it did we would still see all those past Oscar winners working. Go take a look. See where they are now.
this has happened before. Malcolm X, Color Purple, and so many others. I’m sad that Belle’s actress Gugu Mbatha-Raw didn’t get any love. If you saw the film and her performance.. tell me that this woman was not better or equally so as some others that got nominated or were considered. The Oscars is not fair nor just. So that being said people should not watch the telecast if they are upset. Ava will go on to make more movies.. her actors hopefully will go on to make more movies.. and like the past has shown us many of the winners and nominees will disappear in that void that comes after.
I’m not watching this year. Will it make a difference. NO; but it will make me feel a lot better.
On a more rational note (see my irrational one below), I think BELLE fell to the curse of same subject films being released very close together. In the past 2 years, we’ve had 3 films that were about 18th century slavery and effects.
DJANGO came out first, so that received all the money, outrage, chatter etc, 12YAS came second and that swept up the awards, if not huge BO. By BELLE everyone is fatigued.
Not saying repeat films on the same subject don’t do well and shouldn’t be attempted, it’s the timing of the releases that’s the problem.
Same thing also happened with the 2 films about Truman Capote. CAPOTE was released first, swept up awards, BO etc. Very few people remember or care about INFAMOUS which out a few months later though technically in different oscar years. INFAMOUS is a much better film than CAPOTE, but as they say, whoever gets to the couch first, wins. Everybody else is an also ran…….
I feel bad for BELLE. It is such a good film AND Gugu did a good job, but very unfortunate timing.
Problem is Lisa2 that Belle came out in 2013 making in ineligible for this year’s awards-would have been last year that Gugu should have been nominated.
It’s odd that IMDB lists BELLE as 2013 when it’s release date was 2014. It opened in the UK in June 2014 and in USA May 2014. That makes it eligible for the current award season.
Belle could have stilled been nominated here is why. The movie Crash was a 2004 film that won Oscars in 2006 and people wondered how was that possible. It was because it was a limited release in 2004 and a much broader release the spring of 2005 making it eligible to be nominated for awards. Belle’s release is smilar to that.
@Lisa2 We normally don’t agree on a certain topic but let’s put that to the side. I’m in 100% agreement with you about Belle. Gugu was amazing in that film but the movie garnered little recognition and so did she.
I remember around the time Belle was released there was a discussion on CB about lack of roles for Black women. I said well if people supported Black women in the lead roles there might be more of a chance for Black women getting better and more roles. I recommend that CB readers go out and support Belle but I’m wondering how many actually did.
V4real: do you remember that discussion we were having about why black audiences don’t support black films, i’ve been thinking about this so long that i’ve probably given myself a permanent migraine, but to be honest, I don’t know the answer.
I think if there were more films that were more *mainstream with leads that happened to be black or any other non white ethnicity, it would stop being such an issue. As a result of people seeing themselves at the movies.
Failing that, as we concluded, people need to support these films, even if it takes forever to get to the cinema showing it. Hollywood is about money. If a film doesn’t make money more will not be made.
Final question: How was BELLE marketed in the USA?
We had lots of history lesson type marketing about the real life Belle across all media. The focus has been the story rather than individual performances.
@LAK Yes I remember that discussion. I agree that if they cast women of other races and ethnicities that it wouldn’t be an issue. Halle Berry as a Bond girl and her role in Swordfish was neutral. Any woman regardless of race could see themselves in her. I think about Whitney Houston in The Bodyguard and Thandi Newton in MI 2, all neutral race roles.
Hollywood needs to stop acting as if interracial relationships doesn’t exist. The mayor of NYC wife is Black, a darker skinned Black woman at that.
Belle was marketed ok in the USA but they could have done better. The trailor did run a lot on TV. It also had a limited release. I recall VC being a part of that discussion and it wasn’t being released
@V4REal
Your comment about interracial relationships not existing in Hollywood, put me to the mind of what happened when my dad brought all of us back to his hometown. Like everyone (not his immediate family) was completely shocked that he married a dark skinned black woman who wasn’t on the creamy crack (perm). Sometimes I think people around where I live don’t even see us, and just refer to us as “that black family”. Seriously. I said it before–I went to my dad’s work Christmas party, and everyone thought I was my mom (even though we are two entirely different skin colors), and the year before that, everyone thought my mom was my older sister (my older sister and me look the same). It’s like they don’t even see us, and just file us away as “oh, he’s that guy who married the black woman”.
But yes–it would be LOVELY to see an interracial relationship film, where that’s NOT the focus. So many films have been made, where there would only need to be minute changes if one of the characters were not white.
And yes–about Belle. I don’t have tv, so I only saw ads on youtube when the dvd was coming out. But where I live, unless it’s Will Smith shooting a gun, they do not show any sort of black led films. Period.
Your comment is full of yes, Lisa2. Belle and Beyond the Lights were both really good. I’d love to see Gugu get more and more great roles.
I just watched Belle, I thought it was good, and Gugu was wonderful in it. I’ve seen her in a few things and have always liked her.
This year’s nominations in Best Actor were a bit hard to figure out. There were a lot of great performances. I was down on B Cooper last week (wanted Jake G or David to be there instead) but having seen American Sniper now, I can see why he was included (movie was just ok, but he was excellent). The only performance I haven’t seen yet is Benedict Cumberbatch so I can’t speak to his worthiness but everyone else was very deserving. Hard to see who to remove to include others and which others to include.
I completely agree.
Also (I’m gunna get flack for this), I understand people getting upset about Selma, but honestly who would you have taken out to make room? There are plenty of other actors who I also thought should have gotten nominated (Jake G., and Timothy Spall definitely). Same thing with best director. I have no idea who I would take out to make room for Selma’s director…I also think Whiplash’s director should have been nominated…in fact more than Selma’s director. I understand people being upset, but I’m sorry I liked other performances and directors better. It was a good movie, but wasn’t amazing IMO (still an important film, don’t get me wrong)
Oyelowo should have taken Cumberbatch’s spot, tbh.
Matter of opinion. I liked cumby’s performance better, you liked David’s. Just saying the lack of nomination isn’t as racially charged as many are making it out to be.
You also have when you look objectively an uneven film by a first time feature director. That’s like people being in an uproar about Angie not getting a nom for Unbroken-which we’re not. Because the flaws of the film are being judged separate from its subject matter. Should Ava have gotten the nom simply for being a black woman? To me Selma was pretty much a paint by numbers bio pic that anyone could have directed. David O’s performance was the big thing that stood out-not the direction. Well that and the fact they tried to paint LBJ as a racist when the man was anything but if you know a lick of his history. David O simply had a the bad luck to land in a year with a strong pool of male performances.
Lol. The pool of actors wasnt as spectacular as people are claiming here. Neither Benedict Cumberbatch (who is there courtesy of the Weinstein machine) or Bradley Cooper (who is there because he has powerful friends) belong there.
Tentacle Kitten are you talking about the guy who branded the Civil Right Bill, the “N-word Bill”? That guy? At this point there are so many accounts of this mans racism, I dont know why anybody would bother trying to sanitize his past.
LBJ supported the civil rights movement for the same reason De Klerk ended apartheid. Political foresight over came their internal prejudices.
IMO they belong there, they both gave great performances (especially cooper…most people were complaining about cooper when AS was only in FOUR theaters. I doubt all those complainers actually saw him in the film). If you think not, that’s fine. My point stands: the voters chose who they thought best, they weren’t not voting for Selma to be racists. Plus, I’d still put Jake G, Timothy Spall, and even the guy in Unbroken over David.
Here is what one if the editors of Variety says about the nominations. I agree with him.
Oscar’s Diversity Woes: Why Protesters Got it Wrong
http://variety.com/2015/film/news/oscars-diversity-woes-why-selma-protesters-got-it-wrong-1201408129/
@Tentacle Kitten
Selma is not a biography of MLK.
This has been a really good year for male actors. Since the new film year started, everybody has been saying how hard it was to narrow the field.
The only person who truly lost steam as far as the year went on is Timothy Spall. He was thought a cert for best actor and the film for best film/director after the first showing in Cannes last year.
Then came the autumn and other performances overtook his. Or perhaps better PR campaigns.
The only person who has been consistently lauded since the first screening of his film is Michael Keaton. More so than Ben Cumberbatch.
Selma was robbed. How can a film be nominated for Best Picture, without having an outstanding cast, or director, or script, or anything else besides Song? Nonsense. But Lee is telling only truths here.
Slumdog Millionaire didn’t get noms for cast.. and that win for BP was ridiculous too
It’s like last year. How can a movie be nominated for Best Movie, be winning all over the place before the Oscars and for Best Director, and then it not only is nominated for Best Movie but wins, yet not only didn’t the director win, he was never even nominiated for a Best Director Oscar, just like Selma. Well, how the hell did the movie become a best movie with the director? A Best Director nom, even if not winning, makes zero sense. Meet last year’s director Ben Affleck. That happened to him. He deserved a nomination.
So how is Selma nominated for Best Movie without either a Best Director nom or a Best Screenplay nod, something?
Someone told me That there’s 10 Best Picture nominations and only five Best Director nominations. In that case, five are excluded from Best Director and/or Best Screenplay. But I’m not sure if my information is correct about that.
They can nominate up to 10 films for Best Picture. This year they nominated 8. There are five nominations for Best Director and Screenplay. I think also 5 each for the acting awards as well.
Back to Spike Lee, while the “retard” comment was uncalled for, he is right-don’t look to the awards for validation, make movies that people will be talking about for 25 years (or more!).
On the one hand, he is right.
On the other…..*adjusting tinfoil hat*…..i blame it on Oprah.
Every film she touches barring THE COLOUR PURPLE when she was still an unknown rather than a media powerhouse is snubbed. Whether it’s box office or awards.
It’s almost as though the academy specifically hates her and will not reward any film she’s a part of or she’s just a jinx as far as films are concerned.
The only exception to this conspiracy theory is of course PRECIOUS, but seriously, every single film she is involved with is snubbed……….
Ha, Oprah’s part in Selma was pretty small, and I thought she did a wonderful job! But yeah, she produced the film. I think Oprah should have worked the Oscar campaign a bit harder on behalf of David Oyelowo and Ava.
Brad Pitt produced it too. I was surprised to see that Brad had a hand in producing Selma and after the credits rolled, I realized he was involved in producing the AIDS crisis film, A Normal Heart, on HBO this year also.
It’s nice to see Brad and his company is out there having some kind of role, even if not major, in producing movies like this.
Jayna: I understand that there are other elements to the film like BP, but every time Oprah is involved in a film, whether as an actor or as a producer or whatever, no matter how small her role is, the film is snubbed. No matter the quality of it.
As soon as I saw her credit on SELMA months ago, my first reaction was ‘oh no!’
It’s irrational, but seriously…………
Oprah is definitely working the Oscar campaign, but IMHO she’s working it for herself. IF Selma wins then Oprah wins an Oscar as a producer. I’ve followed her for over 20 years and learned the hard way that whenever she’s “promoting” anything she is always first and foremost promoting OPRAH.
Kaiser as you stated starting with The Color Purple and any movie that she’s somehow associated with since then it is always about Oprah. It doesn’t matter if she’s just producing it or have a supporting or minor role in the movie it’s all about her. Last year the movie “The Butler” was supposed to be about a Butler but we had to hear about Oprah’s “academy worthy role” and then she went on to talk about her current issues of racism and suddenly it’s all about a purse (not saying it didn’t happen) but the movie was no longer about the Butler but about Oprah.
I know this is a long post but I’ll just repeat my statement that if you look carefully Oprah is successful this year as opposed to last year when she was not nominated. This year she’s managed a nomination even though people are complaining that the director Ava and the lead actor David were not treated fairly by the academy.
Yeah, but it’s not Oprah’s fault that the Acadamy is a white people club.
Supposedly without her the movie wouldn’t have gotten off the ground, she provided a lot of the financing and support because they’d been struggling to make the film for years.
I blame Oprah too, not because she didn’t came enough for Ava and David, but because she campaigned too much for herself. I think that if she stepped into the shadows like Brad Pitt did last year for 12YAS and Selma, I think that both Ava and David would’ve positioned themselves in a better way.
For me, whenever I see Oprah, I see Oprah jockeying for control of the conversation. Also, when I see Oprah associated with a ‘Black’ film, I see it as her profiting in some way. Like Precious – the heirs of the Celestial Seasons fortune funded that film from jump and yet, all we saw was Oprah and Tyler Perry associated with it. Admittedly, I hold a major grudge for the major blackout (pun intended) during the last years of her talk show in favor of placating her white, Minivan demographic. Showcasing Something New four weeks after it was released, when she knows better than anyone that Black film is often rushed out of the multiplexes within 2 weeks?
My hope is for Ava and David to stop letting Oprah act like she is their personal benefactoress and get on with finding their next projects, because if they do get new projects and Oprah isn’t on board, all of a sudden people will start questioning the lack of an Oprah connection and think that it’s whack or something. People who have watched Oprah knows how she rolls, and yet the press, per usual, is slow on the uptake about this.
@pwal, I just wish they would stop letting Oprah act. While watching The Butler, all I could think of was how much better the film would be if Viola Davis or Octavia Spencer or Taraji Henson were in that part. Every time I saw her in Selma, I wondered what Alfre Woodward was doing that she wasn’t available.
Word, Oprah is and always been about herself. Her and Tyler just added their name to Precious but took all the credit.
Wow. It’s sad that we can’t have a successful black woman around who isn’t dissed for being too successful. Not only are some people mad at her, they’re prepared to punish the director and actors in Selma to make their point.
Oprah doesn’t need anything. Not more fame or more money or more popularity. She didn’t need to make this film. Good for her. History will be on the side of Selma.
I realized a while ago with “Precious” that Oprah’s name is the new dog whistle for black films. People will go to the mat to defend awards of merit from being “bought” by Oprah and her as of now, non-awards getting Influence, yet they rarely say a thing about Weinstein, Rudin, Pitt, or Clooney hustling for their films.
EXACTLY!!! Well said CK
And don’t get me started on Weinstein in particular lol.
I haven’t seen Selma and cannot comment on possible snubs before I do see it, but if you say “The film had some flaws – like, the script was uneven, to say the least” then it doesn’t sound like a good candidate for best picture or best director to me. I’m not saying the ones nominated are flawless (I think at least two are too avarage and I haven’t seen three), but perhaps some voters recognised the same problems as you did and Selma just didn’t come through all the picks?
Edit to add: I don’t doubt racism in Academy and Holywood … It’s just that if even supporters of the films think it’s flawed, than it might actually be too flawed.
I have to agree with you. I saw “Selma,” and I liked it, but I did not think it was a great film. David’s embodiment of the role however was BRILLIANT, and I am surprised he was not nominated. I have seen all of the nominated films except American Sniper, (not my cup of tea) and like you I think that there are more worthy films on the list. I too acknowledge the racism in the Academy, but if we proceed on the premise that “Selma,” was left out because of racism, what then are the reasons for movies like Mr. Turner, Whiplash, and Night Crawler being excluded? Could we for a moment then consider that they like Selma simply (in the minds of the voters) were not Oscar worthy?
Wrote similar comment above concerning actors and directors. Which actor would we take out to fit in David? What about other actors that people wish were nominated? I personally wish Whiplash’s director would have been nominated.
I saw Gone Girl and liked it, but was it a perfect film with important subject matters and flawless performances. Not. So not.
It’s a bit like Unbroken. Very worthy story, but the execution is lacking. Unlike Unbroken it has some really brilliant performances which lift it, but I can’t see how Ava could deserve a Best Director nod when the direction was one of the weakest aspects of a very flawed film.
David deserved a nomination over Bradley, Benedict and Steve, but so did Jake and Timothy and I’d throw in Tom Hardy for Locke, Oscar Isaac for A Most Violent Year and Miles Teller for Whiplash. I forget whether Calvary was eligible, but if it was Brendan Gleeson also deserved a nomination.
But that’s the Oscars. They very rarely reward the best films or best performances, it literally seems to happen almost by accident every 10 years or so. If Selma had run a better campaign it could have gotten nominated for a lot more despite not being a great film. But it ran a pretty lousy campaign and it’s not a good enough film to overcome that.
I myself have not seen the movie but I intend to very soon…………..but what what I’ve seen and heard, of all the ‘Oscar Bait’ movies this year, Selma has the highest rating on Rotten Tomatoes and also has great reviews on IMDB from critics.
But again, since I haven’t seen it, I will not pass judgement ATM.
Before you make a judgement on the film based on the comments you read…………why don’t you watch the film first and then form your own opinion?
I like “Driving Miss Daisy” very much. I watched it two or three times. I think it deserved an award.
I didn’t read the entire interview, only the excerpt, but he never said it wasn’t a good film. He’s saying that films depicting a certain portrayal of African Americans are more likely to get nominated because those character types sit better with the establishment. Whether or not you agree, that was his point.
He said that his film is much better. I disagree. I don’t like his work as much as I liked “Driving Miss Daisy”. He thinks that it was chosen because the black person in it was a servant. I think it was chosen because as a work of art it is better and more nuanced.
Agree with Kiddo, though I also liked Driving Miss Daisy and loathed Do The Right Thing. I think you can certainly make an argument that white people are more comfortable with portrayals of black/ white relationships where the white person is the benevolent employer and the black person is the wise and loyal employee, and their relationship is really a friendship, but it falls into a “comfortable” category. Because white people want to believe that’s how it was. Or is.
Spike hates Driving Miss Daisy and has been saying so for 25 years. He is pretty bitter about it, but he also thinks Morgan Freeman played a stereotypical role and his film was cutting edge and was ignored. Spike is a pretty bitter guy. I like Driving Miss Daisy, but I think Do The Right Thing is the better film. Whenever I think of Driving Miss Daisy, I always think of my mom saying how big Dan Aykrod’s butt got… so maybe that’s my bias 🙂
I think Meryl Streep keeps getting nominations that aren’t Oscar worthy because of either a weak female lead acting field or because she’s Meryl Streep. She’s still an amazing actress, but some of her roles in recent years are not Oscar worthy.
Totally. Such a knee-jerk reaction: Oh, it’s Meryl Streep, everyone knows she’s a modern classic and a certified genius, so we must nominate her.
She is absolutely brilliant, of course. And always delivers an amazing job. But sometimes the characters are just not interesting or deep enough for it to become truly an Oscar-worthy thing. On the other hand, having given Julia Roberts an Oscar for playing Julia Roberts, they would probably feel guilty to not nominate Meryl every time she plays anything at all, even cards ))
I second what he said, move on and do better movies. Forget about these (mostly) begged and borrowed fraud awards. We, the people, care and admire what you do Ava DuVernay and David O!
I loved Selma very much but I did not get the “fire in the belly” from David O speech in Selma as I’ve seen being delivered by Dr King. Imo, David O was good but not as charismatic as Martin Luther King. if I’m comparing this Selma’s director to SMcQ, then he did a much better job bringing tears to the eyes and feeling the hate that was prevalent. I cry when I remember Dr King speeches and watching them on TV. David O did not take me to that place, but it was a wonderful movie.
Just an fyi but Spielberg owns the rights to King’s speeches so Selma had to try to get the gist of his speeches without actually using King’s own words. Kind of makes me hate Spielberg. Those speeches are iconic and everyone should be able to use them.
How can you own the rights to someone else’s speeches? That’s strange!
Alice, that is incorrect.
The King family owns the rights; it’s distributed by EMI (now owned by Sony) and they do the “policing” of the usage.
Speeches are copyrighted and so MLK’s family owns the rights to them and has sold the rights to use them in a movie to Spielberg some years ago.
This is what Edelstein says on npr, “EDELSTEIN: Those words aren’t King’s, by the way. His family sold the film rights to his speeches to Steven Spielberg for a proposed biopic.
Here’s the link:
http://www.wbur.org/npr/376120614/the-selma-criticism-for-how-it-portrays-lyndon-b-johnson-is-it-fair
well, someone should inform the MLK family and estate, because they’re still under the impression that they own the rights.
they may have “leased” them to Spielberg for a fee, but they did not sell them outright. simply put, Edelstein is wrong.
I don’t know. I liked Selma, but I didn’t think DuVernay did the better job than other nominated directors. Steve McQueen built exquisite career before 12 years a slave, this movie is only her first major film.
Nothing but truth in everything he said.
I actually understand why he isn’t angry. He’s in Ava’s position, he’s one of the few with the power and control to make these films while those who are angry are the ones who just have to choose which films are offered to them. You get angry when the one great AA film of the year is snubbed, you don’t get angry when you’re the one directing them and know this sht will be your whole life. So do you quit or do you keep ploughing ahead? Clearly if they were looking for respect or rewards they wouldn’t have gotten into this field as AA directors since that’s been a clear pattern. So they keep ploughing ahead. It’s the same way so many films have some mistakes in their historical accuracy but because Selma didn’t offer up a white savior in LBJ it gets skewered for its inaccurate portrayal of him.
I especially loved his comments on getting calls from reporters about this being ‘the year’. We hear this nonsense with women in the business too. “Ooh a woman directed film was so successful! This is really gonna open doors right?!” Nope. Unless that film makes an unprecedented trillion dollars it will never be enough to change a system that doesn’t want to reward women or POC. That only comes with time and a more diversified Academy (could take another 50 yrs).
On the LBJ….it’s one thing not to offer up a ‘white saviour’ it’s another to imply that a man who was a passionate supporter of the poor and marginalized of every race was a racist. LBJ’s early experiences as a teacher and seeing his Mexican and African American students left out of the prosperity that was America was the bloody inspiration for the man becoming a politician. Not every movie needs a ‘white saviour’ but not every movie needs a white devil either especially not when you apply that label unfairly.
Well said.
I have one thing to say, as a black woman, why don’t black people support black movies? Every time I go to see a movie starring black actors there are more white people in the theatre. We talk a lot of blah, blah, blah but we are not supporting black movies. I went to see Selma on Saturday and there were about a dozen black faces in a theatre that was about 3/4 full. I was very surprised that the BO was so low. Btw, it was the same with 12 years a slave.
Depends on where you live. In my high school, I was one of two black people in my high school by ninth grade–the other was my twin brother. The only reason we have non-white people in my area is because I live by Michigan Technological University. Most of the black, Indian and asian students that live around my town go to that college. As a result, I don’t see any type of “black” film unless it’s Denzel Washington in an action movie i.e “The Equalizer”…and if I want to go to a different theater, I would have to drive three hours to get there. So quite honestly, I only ever hear about new films (especially the “artsy” ones) on this site, or if I see ads on youtube. And I can only see them when they come out on DVD. But the one thing my family does make sure to do is to buy black films–like I hadn’t even heard of “Belle” until my mom came home w/the dvd.
@BNA Fan, who wrote: “I have one thing to say, as a black woman, why don’t black people support black movies? Every time I go to see a movie starring black actors there are more white people in the theatre.”
But isn’t that what we want … to walk into a theater and see a mixture of people enjoying a film for the film’s sake and not because the lead/supporting actors (or Directors) are Asian, Black, Indian, Native American, or White? But to answer your statement directly, I think @Virgilia Coriolanus is right in saying that it all depends upon where you live. I happen to live in an area where Blacks ‘do’ show up to support black films at my favorite AMC. 🙂
I had the opposite experience with seeing Selma – when I went to the theater, it was filled with black and brown persons. This situation happened before with other black films, such as the Butler, Django, etc.
IMO, I think black people certainly want to support black films if they’re aware of them. Sometimes black films (and other types as well such as independent ones or documentaries) are poorly marketed so people simply don’t know about them.
For example, I saw a great independent film about a black teen lesbian called “Pariah” that was wonderfully acted and directed. I even considered it Oscar-worthy but knew there was no way in hell it would get any major awards consideration due to its honest and frank subject matter that would likely make some voters feel “uncomfortable.” Anyway, I only heard about the film through word of mouth.
Same case for another great documentary I recently saw about Anita Hill during her sexual harassment experiences with Clarence Thomas prior to his Supreme Court appointment. I had to drive over an hour out of my way to an independent theater in DC to watch it because it wasn’t available at my local AMC, which is a shame for such a good film.
I think Hollywood sometimes underestimates who will actually watch their films and thus don’t bother marketing them accordingly or appropriately.
Spike Lee is a jackwagon, and he doesn’t need to insult other films when talking about his, but he’s right in this case. The director, the cast, most especially the lead actor, ALL should’ve been nominated. Go on and kick a– in your next films, but call out the racism that is both prevalent and obvious in this case.
This is not racism. It’s called the voters liked other performances better. I’m not denying that there probably are some dumb racists voting, but personally I wouldn’t have changed the acting category. And if I could add some, it would be Jake G and Timothy Spall, not David. I really think this is more of a Hollywood problem. It IS VERY sad that the only roles up for African Americans were from Selma, a historically based movie. It kills me that African Americans can only get good parts if the movie is about slaves of some other historical movie. BUT, I really don’t think them being snubbed is racial.
Yes, true about the only African-Americans being from Selma, but there is no denying it was a powerful and terrific film and if it was good enough to be nominated for Best Picture, then it should have received other nominations as well. The director and the actors made the film what it was. Hollywood is as racist and misogynist as it gets, and not just for this reason.
But you could say that about ALL 8 films nominated…there’s only 5 spots for director, and 5 spots for best actor. Which brings me back to my point: it’s hard to narrow it down to only 5. Selma was left out because the performances and director weren’t as good as the others in the voters’ eyes.
I guess we just don’t agree. I don’t cry racism at everything, but Hollywood is still content to have white people drive everything. I think Selma had incredible performances and an amazing director and I am perplexed- to say it nicely- that they were overlooked so completely.
This is a common misunderstanding; you don’t have to hate black people to be racist. The fact that minorities (Black, Latino, Asian) weren’t included to be honored at an awards show IS RACISM. It doesn’t matter if it’s because not enough minorities were greenlighted by the major studios to make films, or producers and directors chose not to cast minorities, or the academy chose not to vote for them. The fact that we reach the end of the year and there aren’t any is all the evidence that is needed. Looking at one aspect of an incredibly racist institution and absolving that aspect is so narrow minded. In the law they call it Res Ipsa Loquitur – the thing speaks for itself.
There are more great performances/films not being nominated than otherwise, right? It will always be like this and I agree with SL – if your work stands out today, it will stand out tomorrow, award or no award
Not to change the point, but why don’t women support other women? Spike Lee is right although not eloquent on what he said, and a bit full of himself as I don’t really agree with the Driving Miss Daisy point, but if you really want to be a fish swimming upstream try being a woman director in Hollywood. At least Spike Lee has some men of color working with him. You can probably count prominent women directors on one hand. Also women’s roles in movies are almost always underdeveloped or supporting, unless you are talking about the few Young Adult films that come from books. Supposedly they don’t sell, but we won’t tell the Hunger Games people that. Meryl Streep does always get nominated, but a lot of it is because she can make a very poor undeveloped role seem important. The competition from the poorly written female roles are just not there, and if they are in independent films which I think has some they aren’t being seen or promoted enough. Hollywood to me is far more misogynistic than racist, although it is both. I wanted Ava nominated, because I want more women in the club too.
My sister votes for one of the guilds and gets all of the movies to watch beforehand EXCEPT this one. And this was before Christmas. I cannot speak for the Academy but how can my sister vote if she doesn’t get to see the film before the awards show?
I did recently watched Selma in theaters and I am so sad that David and Ava were not nominated.
We have the same thing in our family. My father in law in a member of the Technical Academy. We got screeners for nearly every nominated film…except Selma.
Just a question: how in the world do people get early screeners for these movies? Do you have to work in/around Hollywood or something?? Be a member? How do you do that?? Geez, I wish someone would send me free movies ever year.
I was in a shoe store one day, and they had pre-screening tickets being offered. My sister gets them a lot. I’ve never asked her how, but I think it’s pretty random, odd ways.
I don’t know if that’s the same thing. I call it pre-screening, but it’s before the movie opens in wide release.
My sister is an assistant director and a member of the guild so she gets all of the movies in order to vote.
Pre-screening is more a marketing tool for the film and is open to the public.
A screener is something only industry people receive. Priority is guild membership. Beats going to a theatre to watch the film or even figure out what cinema the film is showing.
It helps if you are related to or friends of the guild member/industry person because they might let you watch the films to vote <- this happens a lot.
LAK, you need to hook me up with some of your industry friends, for serious….I’ll vote for them, lol.
But that would be SO cool–you get to see a ton of great (at least they’re supposed to be) films before anyone else does. I would be so excited if I could do that. I should start a Change.com petition…..let 20 year old biracial women vote in the Academy Awards…..
This. Especially if it’s getting “snubbed” at a lot of other awards shows, it’s probably because the campaigning was insufficient. Hell, I had never even heard about it until right before Christmas.
“Once every 10 years or so I get calls from journalists about how people are finally accepting black films. Before last year, it was the year [in 2002] with Halle Berry, Denzel [Washington], and Sidney Poitier. It’s a 10-year cycle. So I don’t start doing backflips when it happens.””
If this is the only time that journalists want to hear from Spike then that’s pretty frightening. I am a big fan of his work and love hearing his opinion. You don’t have to agree with him but at least when he speaks it opens up a dialog for intelligent debate.
@Kaiser, who wrote: “I always think of the year that Peter O’Toole was nominated for Lawrence of Arabia. It’s insane that he didn’t win, right? Except that was the same year Gregory Peck was up for To Kill a Mockingbird.”
I’m with you on that, Kaiser. But Peter O’Toole had lousy luck with the Academy. His other sterling performance was as King Henry II in the 1968 film “The Lion in Winter” (I absolutely recommend this brilliant film!), opposite Katherine Hepburn as Queen Eleanor of Aquitaine. If I reach 90-years of age I’ll still consider Peter O’Toole’s performance as King Henry II in the top 10 performances of all time. Katherine Hepburn’s performance as Eleanor of Aquitaine will forever remain in my top 5 performances of all time. Cliff Robinson won the Best Actor Oscar for the film “Charly” and Katherine Hepburn won the Best Actress Oscar for “The Lion in Winter.”
Aside from the film’s two sterling leads, “The Lion in Winter” introduced us to Anthony Hopkins (as Richard the Lion Heart), Nigel Terry as Prince John, John Castle as Prince Geoffrey (the brother no one remembers), and Timothy Dalton as young King Philip II of France.
How good is this film? “The Lion in Winter,” a period piece film from 1968, has a current 8.2 rating at IMDb. 🙂
THE LION IN WINTER is also the source material for the new TV show ‘Empire’ starring Terence Howard and Taraji P Henson.
Spike Lee is an asshole. But he’s my kind of asshole. He is to Black America what Larry Kramer is to gay America. He’s pissed off all of the time because what is happening to his community is so beyond outrageous that he can’t even think straight. If your house is burning down and you run out naked and cursing, nobody blames you for the indecency and foul language. Discrimination in any form, particularly as blatant and obnoxious as it is today is like my house burning down. I don’t care how assholish they are, their anger gives me life.
I haven’t read most of the (undoubtedly insightful) comments on this thread yet, but his last line quoted in the article could be applied to pretty much any film or art made by anyone, black, white any color: “You can’t go to awards like the Oscars or the Grammys for validation. The validation is if your work still stands 25 years later.’”
Not to take away his legitimate point regarding diversity, but yea-society in general tends to go for the comfort zone choices. But, if your work stands decades later and continues to impact and make people think, THAT Is successful. Still important to make strides in the industry, but artists are desperately needed, whether to make films or other genres, regardless of recognition and financial gain they might receive.
So “lack of diversity” are the new weasel words for racist.
Also, at the moment 94% of the Oscar voters are white and 77% are male. That needs to be addressed immediately. I’d also like to see term limits placed on people’s eligibility to vote. For example let people vote for say four years and then move them on and bring in someone new.