🤣😂🤣 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. 😂

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.

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

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 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.

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

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.

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.

It almost doesn’t feel like it’s real history, like this feels more like a comedy sketch that isn’t very funny

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!

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

Red tape,bureaucracy and the scummy "money people"

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.

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.

So true I was shocked when neither of those two were nominated

And then have half the spectators in the stands try to gaslight us into thinking these were the rules all along. The Academy is definitely broken as a feature and not a bug, but what really disheartened me after watching this was some of the comments playing "move the goalposts" and "watch me miss the point" when it comes to how disparate the treatment is for black and brown actors/directors. It's exhausting watching people pretend we live in a meritocracy after watching literal proof that we don't for 30 minutes.

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.

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

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'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?"

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.

Neither Blanchett

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

Agreed. She had the best performance that year.

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.

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.

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.

Yes

Possibly

@@doosha1986 No it wouldn't.

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.

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 KZfaq channel said that the films content/genre would be too divisive to get Academy votes for her nomination (cannibalism/horror genre)

@@Rhauxshna82 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.

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.

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.

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

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.

Sally got a golden globe award

To be fair the First Avatar film recieved a Best Picture nomination as well.

I mean Top Gun got pretty stellar critical reception, so I don't see why it's a knock against the Academy to nominate it.

THIS

@@TheDailySchist it’s military propaganda

@@sasha8345 Does that necessarily make it a bad film tho? Don't get me wrong, I do think the only thing it actually accomplishes EXEPTIONALLY is the action, but does something being propaganda automatically deflate its plot and character writing?

I agres

What 'rule changes' would those look like? Just curious.

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

And Carol Kane in the 70s!