Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

Ken Burch

(50,254 posts)
Wed Jan 20, 2016, 04:00 AM Jan 2016

All Hollywood stars who oppose racism should BOYCOTT OSCAR NIGHT!

ALL of them.

And Chris Rock should stand down as host(announcing the decision at the start of the evening on live tv, if possible).

They should all be outside the ceremony with signs.

That's the only hope there is of ever changing the totally out-of-touch Academy Awards voting community, and making sure that no disgraces like this year's all-Aryan nominee list will ever be repeated.

23 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
All Hollywood stars who oppose racism should BOYCOTT OSCAR NIGHT! (Original Post) Ken Burch Jan 2016 OP
Well, I'm not going so I guess I'm boycotting it. Kablooie Jan 2016 #1
This is getting stupid CBGLuthier Jan 2016 #2
The voters get all the films. If they didn't watch certain ones, that's a problem in itself. merrily Jan 2016 #4
They get the NOMINATED films. That happens AFTER they nominate films they saw. GreatGazoo Jan 2016 #12
Thank you. merrily Jan 2016 #13
Dig through this about the process, byzantine as it is... Bluenorthwest Jan 2016 #15
Thanks, Bluenorthwest! I will boomark that. merrily Jan 2016 #20
That said, I think your more general point is valid GreatGazoo Jan 2016 #18
To use the way of speaking Chuck Toad has been affecting: merrily Jan 2016 #19
This is one of the greatest problems. There are plenty of roles. vaberella Jan 2016 #8
I liked the Equalizer - don't think it deserved any awards, but it passed the time agreeable enough. el_bryanto Jan 2016 #11
We should ALL boycott it. Don't effing watch and complain to sponsors. merrily Jan 2016 #3
Boycotting the Oscars is pointless. romanic Jan 2016 #5
+1 nt Javaman Jan 2016 #21
Do you think race should be a factor in determining who wins acting awards? oberliner Jan 2016 #6
You blew up my hyperbole meter. Any idea how much these cost!? Action_Patrol Jan 2016 #7
Yeah, no Blue_Adept Jan 2016 #9
And we should boycott any movie made by anybody who attends the Oscars el_bryanto Jan 2016 #10
In fact, we should boycott anyone who even mentions the Oscars, including ourselves! Lizzie Poppet Jan 2016 #17
That would be a protest, not a boycott. GreatGazoo Jan 2016 #14
Yay, quotas! Lizzie Poppet Jan 2016 #16
protesting the oscars will have very little effect... Javaman Jan 2016 #22
I'm still mad that they snubbed Mr T for a Best Supporting Actor nomination for Rocky 3 in 1982, Nye Bevan Jan 2016 #23

CBGLuthier

(12,723 posts)
2. This is getting stupid
Wed Jan 20, 2016, 04:16 AM
Jan 2016

A group of actors and actresses made the nominations. They made them based on the films they saw. A lot of them did not see the two movies with strong performances by african american actors. Yes, that group needs to have a lot of new blood to change things but to make such a big deal out of the results of a vote is stupid.

The fault lies in the lack of good parts and good performances. Period. Even Denzel Washington has started to do some shit like The Equalizer.



And as for Chris Rock giving up a job. What are you, fucking high? One thing is for sure you got to be white to have so much anger over this.

merrily

(45,251 posts)
4. The voters get all the films. If they didn't watch certain ones, that's a problem in itself.
Wed Jan 20, 2016, 04:29 AM
Jan 2016

Even if they all voted without the tiniest bit of bias, how would you suggest sending a message to Hollywood in general about this? Boycotting the casting directors' ball?

Odd claim that only white people would be angry about this. African Americans started the protest--and I agree with them.

GreatGazoo

(3,937 posts)
12. They get the NOMINATED films. That happens AFTER they nominate films they saw.
Wed Jan 20, 2016, 09:44 AM
Jan 2016

Phase 1 is Nominations where only the people in your category vote. So actors nominate performance for Best Actor and Best Supporting Actor.

Then the nominations are announced, 5 noms in each category.

Phase 2 is all the Academy members, in theory, sees all of the nominated performances (that they haven't already seen) and then vote on everything, inside and outside of their categories.

GreatGazoo

(3,937 posts)
18. That said, I think your more general point is valid
Wed Jan 20, 2016, 10:26 AM
Jan 2016

The films that are not seen by >90% of the voting members have much less chance of making it through the nominations process. The films that everyone saw, however mediocre they may be, have a great chance at getting nominations relative to those that were seen by 70% or less of the voting members.

merrily

(45,251 posts)
19. To use the way of speaking Chuck Toad has been affecting:
Wed Jan 20, 2016, 10:41 AM
Jan 2016

"If I'm an actor," I am hearing buzz about good performances and reading about them in trade publications. Also, most films that contain good performances are good films. So, why am I not seeing these films, even if am not getting them in the mail?"

That is one issue. The other is, how do we impact casting directors, if not by making a statement about these Oscars? Boycotting movies entirely seems draconian. We'd put a lot of innocent people out of work. Maybe I am prejudiced about that because a close family member is a camera operator, although most of his work is in TV.

vaberella

(24,634 posts)
8. This is one of the greatest problems. There are plenty of roles.
Wed Jan 20, 2016, 09:17 AM
Jan 2016

But they want White men and White women in the role versus Black, Asian, or Latino ones.

el_bryanto

(11,804 posts)
11. I liked the Equalizer - don't think it deserved any awards, but it passed the time agreeable enough.
Wed Jan 20, 2016, 09:42 AM
Jan 2016

And I don't begrudge him an occasional paycheck; i liked him in this sort of role a lot more than Liam Neeson.

Bryant

merrily

(45,251 posts)
3. We should ALL boycott it. Don't effing watch and complain to sponsors.
Wed Jan 20, 2016, 04:25 AM
Jan 2016

Watching the red carpet before the show while eating Chinese food is my favorite part of the Oscars and I don't think my conscience will let me do even that.

As for Chris Rock, he is contractually obligated and I'm pretty sure he's African American. He would really "never work again in this town" if he broke his contract that way.

romanic

(2,841 posts)
5. Boycotting the Oscars is pointless.
Wed Jan 20, 2016, 05:01 AM
Jan 2016

To think a boycott would make an impact is a pipe dream.

The problem isnt the Oscars, its the aftermath of the problem. Hollywood does'nt make enough roles for black actors/actresses or any other minority out there. The roles that are out there usually tie into the actor's race (12 Years a Slave for example) which limits the talent of said actors.

It's up to black celebrities to create thier own companies and roles imo. Break the barriers themselves instead of asking the Academy to do it. To expect White Hollywood to change because of a little boycott is useless.

 

oberliner

(58,724 posts)
6. Do you think race should be a factor in determining who wins acting awards?
Wed Jan 20, 2016, 06:20 AM
Jan 2016

Would you support having one slot set aside in each category for a non-white person?

Action_Patrol

(845 posts)
7. You blew up my hyperbole meter. Any idea how much these cost!?
Wed Jan 20, 2016, 08:59 AM
Jan 2016
That's the only hope there is of ever changing the totally out-of-touch Academy Awards voting community, and making sure that no disgraces like this year's all-Aryan nominee list will ever be repeated.


Blame their peers.

Blue_Adept

(6,397 posts)
9. Yeah, no
Wed Jan 20, 2016, 09:28 AM
Jan 2016

While I would have liked to have seen a bit more included, and rightly so, the problem is far more the material available than the performances.

Perhaps if folks had more than three names to hold up as potential nominees, and just in best actor category and just men, then I might take the complaints more seriously.

Frankly, a lot of the general posting about it (as opposed to some well written articles) comes from people who don't actually go to or watch movies or are truly critical of them. They just go for entertainment and that's it.

I'm still ticked that my best movie of last year didn't make the list with Ex Machina, which should have gotten Oscar Isaac a nod for that as well.

el_bryanto

(11,804 posts)
10. And we should boycott any movie made by anybody who attends the Oscars
Wed Jan 20, 2016, 09:41 AM
Jan 2016

And not just actors and actresses; directors, producers, editors, technical artists, and the like - all should be punished.

Bryant

 

Lizzie Poppet

(10,164 posts)
17. In fact, we should boycott anyone who even mentions the Oscars, including ourselves!
Wed Jan 20, 2016, 10:26 AM
Jan 2016

Burn the theaters!

GreatGazoo

(3,937 posts)
14. That would be a protest, not a boycott.
Wed Jan 20, 2016, 09:56 AM
Jan 2016

Boycotts only apply to things we buy, like bus service or products. An effective boycott tells the offending party what they need to do in order to end the boycott and then maintains the boycott (not buying the service or product) until the desired change is made.

Celebrities aren't the customer for the Oscars. They are the product. Similarly, us, the audience for the Oscars is not the customer but rather what is being sold. TV sells audiences to advertisers. If TV was KFC we would be the chickens.

What performances do you think were the most overlooked and which nominees would you replace with them?

And how did the Golden Globes escape this protest?
http://www.goldenglobes.com/winners-nominees

Javaman

(62,510 posts)
22. protesting the oscars will have very little effect...
Wed Jan 20, 2016, 01:30 PM
Jan 2016

primarily because of the institutionalized voting system.

most of the voting members of the academy are very old and are completely unknown by us.

on top of that, may of the voters get dozens upon dozens of moves to watch each year to vote on.

from the very good to the obscenely bad.

most, in reality, never watch the movies. they usually give them to their relatives to watch.

generally, they vote the status quo.

how do I know this? while I'm not a voting member of the academy, I have several friends who are and are so overwhelmed by movies to watch, they usually get burnt out on them.

here is my prediction: within the next 5 to 10 years, the "face" of the academy awards and the nominees will change dramatically. granted, there will be some of the same old "traditional" crap when it comes to the actual show and it's presentation, but those directly involved in the voting and choosing of the nominees will change.

Why?

because the last of the "old guard" will die off and there will be younger members voting.

Hollywood is a giant aircraft carrier that takes 5 to 10 miles to slow down just to turn around. It's coming

Nye Bevan

(25,406 posts)
23. I'm still mad that they snubbed Mr T for a Best Supporting Actor nomination for Rocky 3 in 1982,
Wed Jan 20, 2016, 01:31 PM
Jan 2016

ignoring his sublime portrayal of Clubber Lang.

This endemic racism in the Oscars is not a new phenomenon.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rocky_III

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»All Hollywood stars who o...