General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsTwo Oscar Voters Admit They Didn't Watch 12 Years A Slave, Voted For It Anyway
Millions of dollars were spent along the "campaign trail" leading up to Steve McQueens masterful 12 Years a Slave taking Best Picture at the Oscars this year. The film held its World Premiere at the exclusive Telluride Film Festival, and held press opportunities at film and awards events around the globe in hopes of winning the top prize. And it worked
though now were learning that all the time and money might not have mattered, and the historically important film might have won no matter what happened prior to the Oscars.
Thats because in the wake of the films victory, two Oscar voters privately admitted to the L.A. Times that they voted for McQueens movie without even seeing it. They feared that actually watching the movie would be "upsetting," but confessed that they felt "obligated" to vote for the movie because of its "social relevance." (The quotes are from the Times piece, and not the words of the anonymous voters.) Personally, I think thats disgusting. And I dont want to put words in McQueens mouth, but Im fairly confident hed reject the votes of an Academy member who didnt even bother to WATCH his film before casting a ballot. In todays day and age, a movie can win Best Picture without certain Academy members even seeing it? Im not trying to be naïve, but how is that acceptable?
If theres a silver lining to this, its that the label "Best Picture" applied to 12 Years a Slave will convince more people to check it out, and its really a brilliant film. You could make an easy argument that, even without the racial guilt built into the equation, 12 Years would have won the Best Picture Oscar on merit. The film boasts a 96% Fresh on Rotten Tomatoes, and banked an impressive $140 million worldwide. All of us who bothered to watch it know that it earned its Oscar. The full Academy membership should be able to say the same. http://www.cinemablend.com/new/Two-Oscar-Voters-Admit-They-Didn-t-Watch-12-Years-Slave-Voted-It-Anyway-41981.html
joeybee12
(56,177 posts)It's all about hype...happens every year...studios try to create buzz, not necessarily get you to see thier movie and you'll vote on the buzz alone...
spanone
(135,851 posts)villager
(26,001 posts)...actually seeing the movie!?
What's next -- inexplicable winners in categories like "Best Documentary!?"
I'm shocked... shocked I tell ya!
frazzled
(18,402 posts)Happened to have the DVD from Netflix but hadn't gotten around to watching it.
I must say: what a HOT MESS that movie was, cinematically. Really sloppily done. And I love love love Darlene Love and Merry Clayton.
I didn't see any of the other docs. But none of them should probably be judged on their subject matter, but rather on their cinematic value.
That said, I am so in love (platonically, musically) with Lisa Fischer:
villager
(26,001 posts)But this one sounds like it'd be fun to see.
I heard this year that every member of the Academy can now vote on every award, which didn't used to be the case: i.e., directors voted for director, editors for editing, etc. then everyone would vote on "Best Picture" (and more recently "Best Animated Picture"
With people voting on categories outside the area of their own profession, it makes you start to wonder what some of the criteria is -- for a costumer voting on sound mixing, for example.
On the other hand, like any other election, there are evidently more blanks left in "down ballot" races...
demwing
(16,916 posts)geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)gollygee
(22,336 posts)there are thousands of people who vote. Two didn't watch the movie? I sincerely doubt all of the people who vote actually watch all of the movies. I'm sure the vast majority of them do, but two isn't that many.
Scuba
(53,475 posts)joeglow3
(6,228 posts)I gave up on figuring out who and how they are picked.