NYT: One Oscar category for male and female acting nominees?

[Captain Hilts]

I disagree with this column because of the different types of roles men and women get. Here, on DU, there was once a discussion of great speeches in film. All the responses were about speeches made by men. Women don't get to make speeches on film. In fact, you can sit through a parade of previews at the theatre these days and not hear a single female voice. So, I think this is a no-go.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/04/opinion/04elsesser.html?ref=opinion

MANY hours into the 82nd Academy Awards ceremony this Sunday, the Oscar for best actor will go to Morgan Freeman, Jeff Bridges, George Clooney, Colin Firth or Jeremy Renner. Suppose, however, that the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences presented separate honors for best white actor and best non-white actor, and that Mr. Freeman was prohibited from competing against the likes of Mr. Clooney and Mr. Bridges. Surely, the academy would be derided as intolerant and out of touch; public outcry would swiftly ensure that Oscar nominations never again fell along racial lines.

Why, then, is it considered acceptable to segregate nominations by sex, offering different Oscars for best actor and best actress?

...

But separate is not equal. While it is certainly acceptable for sports competitions like the Olympics to have separate events for male and female athletes, the biological differences do not affect acting performances. The divided Oscar categories merely insult women, because they suggest that women would not be victorious if the categories were combined. In addition, this segregation helps perpetuate the stereotype that the differences between men and women are so great that the two sexes cannot be evaluated as equals in their professions.

[frazzled]

1. Of course that should be the case

Your argument to the contrary only supports the continuation of second-class writing for women.

I'd never thought about this before, but there is no logical reason why acting awards should be divided according to gender. Directing awards are not, nor are the awards for set design, cinematography, costume design, etc.

Let's move to a post-gender world: and what better place to start than the stupid Oscars?

[Captain Hilts]

2. I actually think there should be separate categories for comedy and drama. nt

[joeybee12]

5. I disagree...the types of roles men and women get are vastly different

and the way they are acted is vastly different...I doubt combining the categories will doa nything to improve writing for women since movies are market-driven, and geared towards a young make audience.

[Captain Hilts]

7. Agree. Women don't get nearly as many speeches or meaty, emotional roles. For example,

think of all the GREAT war movies in which women don't get much to say.

Think of all the GREAT westerns in which women don't get much to say.

[Bicoastal]

16. Ridiculous. You clearly haven't watched enough movies to make those statements.

Women don't get meaty, emotional roles? :rofl:

[Captain Hilts]

20. They do not have the opportunities for leading roles men have. Only 1 woman is among

the top 15 box office stars.

[cali]

22. yeah, but I think that's more because of the appetite for action flicks

I disagree that there are "better" roles for men.

[Captain Hilts]

24. Yes. That's why only 1 woman is among the all-time 15 greatest box office stars. nt

[Bicoastal]

27. How much a thespian's movies make has nothing to do with their opportunities as an actor.

That's a completely different argument on a completely different topic.

Do you watch movies other than the war, western, action genres?

[Captain Hilts]

30. It shows what interests drive writing, interests and expectations.

Um, no.

I really enjoy films featuring women in major roles.

[Bicoastal]

38. Ahnold's movies made tons of money, but how many Oscars did he win?

Oscars aren't awards for "Biggest Movie Star," they're ostensibly for people judged to have given the best performance in any particular year.

And for the record, these are the actors nominated for Best Actor this year:

# Jeff Bridges - Crazy Heart as Bad Blake
# George Clooney - Up in the Air as Ryan Bingham
# Colin Firth - A Single Man as George Falconer
# Morgan Freeman - Invictus as Nelson Mandela
# Jeremy Renner - The Hurt Locker as Sgt. William James

Were any of these blockbusters? "The Blind Side," which Sandra Bullock was nominated for, made more money than ANY of these!

YOU'RE arguing that movies starring name actors make more money, which is true. But it's not the same as saying that actresses are underutilized in film--in blockbusters, maybe, but not in film. Apples and Oranges.

[Captain Hilts]

44. Women have fewer lines in major films now than ever. You're another man who thinks women

just need to get with the program.

And, a truly expressive artist - such as you claim to be - should not need to use stupid pictures to get their message across. You must be a lousy actor.

And, yes, I have ties to the theatre. And film.

[frazzled]

8. Yeah? You tell me how the way Streep and Clooney act is "different"

I kind of defy anyone to explain some underlying difference in the methodology or art or technique of acting between men and women. Every actor, of course, is unique ... but there is no gender split here, no physiological or even psychological difference.

The only argument for keeping them separate is to make more awards available, and to get more cleavage time for viewership. Which is fine. But there is no rational reason to assume men and women "act" differently.

[joeybee12]

9. A man is not going to get a role where he cries a lot, or loses a child...

...they are producing different emotions and from different experiences...acting is not solely technique...sorry you can't see that. If you're gonna have a woman play an army commander and a man also play that, they might be the same, but you're not gonna get that, and until the roles and expectations of the audiences change, there is and always will be that difference.

[frazzled]

11. Oh, that is so stupid

First of all, acting is not judged on whether the role consists of a soldier or a mother: it's about craft and art. Also, we could indeed have a female army commander (there are quite a few Lieutenant Generals in the US military) or a bereaved, crying father. Stop stereotyping.

Meryl Streep playing Sophie in Sophie's Choice would have beaten Russell Crowe in Gladiator in a heartbeat.

[joeybee12]

19. No, what is stupid is someone who doesn't understand acting,

and acts like an expert...geesh.

[RaleighNCDUer]

40. But would she have beaten Ben Kingsley as Ghandi?

Or Dustin Hoffman in 'Tootsie', Jack Lemmon in 'Missing', Paul Newman in 'The Verdict', or Peter O'Toole in 'My Favorite Year'?

She DID beat Julie Andrews's 'Victor/Victoria', Jessica Lange's 'Francis' (she was robbed), Sissy Spacek in 'Missing' and Debra Winger in 'Officer & a Gentleman' (which was a supporting role at best in the first place).

Those are the roles she was up against; not 'Gladiator'. Look at those lists. Nobody can say that those male roles were not deserving - solid, meaty parts that made the decision between them difficult. OTOH, it looks like they were stretching to find 5 female roles that year. Sissy Spacek? Debra Winger? Both fine actors, but those parts were far from the best work they've ever done. You could easily put Streep's role in the top five roles that year (sorry Dustin) and I'd include Francis as well (she didn't win because she was a shoo-in for best suppporting for Tootsie, and that made it easier to no have to choose between her and Streep). Do any of the other three female leads compare with any of the male leads in substance (other than the obvious comparison of Tootsie and Victor/Victoria)?

And would Streep have won going head to head with Ben Kingsley, considering the difference in box (translates as butts in the seats) between Ghandi and Sophie's Choice? Or would her outstanding performance be relegated to 'also ran', the way Lange's 'Frances' has been?

[Captain Hilts]

15. He gets to talk more, shout more and be angry more than a woman does. nt

[cali]

25. bwahahaha. they have and they have.

[Captain Hilts]

17. Men get to make speeches and women do not. nt

[frazzled]

29. Phaedre, Antigone, Lysistrata?

God, the best roles in all of Greek and classical tragedy belong to women.

[Captain Hilts]

31. In theatre, women DO get great roles. Not so much on film. nt

[frazzled]

35. Theater awards are segregated, too

Your argument is falling apart faster than a cheap suit.

[Captain Hilts]

37. Can't change that we have different expectations for men and women in theatre, film and life.

We live in a world that still prefers to hear male voices as those for authority.

Financial firms always choose male voices - often the voices of black men - as their spokesmen. The guy from "The Unit" has picked up where James Earl Jones left off. Before him, Jeffery Holder.

John Houseman.
The guy from Law and Order.
Jason Robards.
James Earl Jones.
The guy from The Unit.

All men.

[frazzled]

39. You can if you change the system

If you keep accepting things the way they are, women will never achieve equality. Financial firms also don't have many women on their boards--and had none until we women spent a few decades fighting for gender equality.

Nobody put a black voice on television until years of pressure about the ways in which African Americans were portrayed, hired, etc. in films and television. That led to more roles for blacks ... which in turn led to more acceptance.

It's a process, not a fact.

[Bicoastal]

42. What do you consider to be a "great" role?

Screen time? Salary? Emotions displayed? Name above the title?

[Captain Hilts]

45. Oh, and please name something written since 1900. nt

[RaleighNCDUer]

26. Bullcrap.

Get yourself a pen and paper. Make two columns. One, top 50 male stars. Two, top 50 female stars.

By the time you get to #25 of the 'male stars' list, you're still pulling up name that command multi-million dollar salaries, that had two or three major projects every year, that are household names across the country and even the world. By #25 on the female stars list, you're getting into 'Lifetime Movies of the Week' actors.

The parts just are not there for women. That being the case, the number are not there either. You take the top movies for male roles, you get huge blockbusters. You take the top movies for female roles and you get art house releases that NOBODY has seen.

Two catagories raises the visibility of female leads and gives them the recognition they deserve; if blended with the male leads they would vanish, making hollywood even MORE male dominated than it is today.

[Captain Hilts]

23. Political PR folks say you can't give female candidates as many lines in an ad because

people have a lower tolerance for hearing a woman speak.

We have such different expectations.

[Enrique]

3. I'm for anything that would make the ceremony shorter

:thumbsup:

[Captain Hilts]

4. No. More. Musical. Numbers. East Coasters HATE them!

[KingFlorez]

6. I think it should stay separate

Dividing it won't make change how roles are written, Men and Women will continue to play different sorts of roles. Besides, I think having it separate allows for more talent to be rewarded.

[Bicoastal]

10. I totally disagree with this PC bullshit. As someone who's been involved with theater for years...

...I know that I wouldn't audition men for a role written specifically for a woman, and vice versa (not unless the role was specifically written as gender-neutral.) So why would I, as a member of the Academy, be expected to judge a male performance against a female performance?

Separating the thespian's performance from the writer's creation is a pretty difficult cast, and no judge who takes their craft seriously wants to award an actor for an average performance in a well-written role. The only way the Academy can easily judge 10 actors' great performances against each other is to consider them among the larger pool of talent and judge them within a body of their peers. Are there women in Hollywood who could have played the role of Julia Child better than Meryl Streep, or Gabourey Sidibe better than Precious? It's certainly debatable. Are there MEN who could've played Julia Child or Precious better? No. (Not without RADICALLY changing the nature of either work, at least.)

Keep them separate. It's hard enough trying to rank the performances of Penelope Cruz and Mo'Nique without having to compare both of them to Matt Damon.

[cliffordu]

32. Yep.

[Nye Bevan]

34. And you wouldn't audition a 25 year old for a role written specifically for a 60 year old

but you would still judge a 25 year old's performance against a 60 year old's.

And you wouldn't audition a white guy for a role written specifically for a black guy. But you would judge a white guy's performance against a black guy's.

Why is men versus women so different? And what if that guy had won "Best Actor" in "The Crying Game"? Shouldn't it really have been Best Actress?

[Bicoastal]

41. You're not an actor, are you?

Because I know many, and I've never heard anyone complain that they didn't get a major role that eventually went to someone of the opposite gender. Younger? Yes. A different race? Yes. But never a man who lost out to a woman, or vice versa. It probably happens in a few isolated instances, but the exception doesn't prove the rule. This is one workforce where separate-but-equal sex discrimination isn't only acceptable, it's necessary.

I'm guessing an actor didn't write this Op-Ed, either.

[951-Riverside]

12. During the LA Marathon they let women run 20 mins ahead of the men

then declare the woman the winner.

[Captain Hilts]

13. Huh?

[951-Riverside]

18. This will explain it better

http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:x:www.lamarathon.com/pdfs/LAMar_09-release-51909-challenge.pdf+La+Marathon+Challenge&hl=en&gl=us

[Captain Hilts]

21. I've run in races where men go first. This is interesting. nt

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

14. I could live with that if they then had one award for best perfomance in a drama and

one for best performance in a comedy/musical. IMHO, the dramatic actors always have an upper hand when it comes to winning.

[Captain Hilts]

33. Yes. Comedic acting has never gotten the respect it deserves. nt

[DevonRex]

28. I agree with you. nt

[Romulox]

36. The last paragraph somewhat reeks of eating cake and having it too...

"But separate is not equal. While it is certainly acceptable for sports competitions like the Olympics to have separate events for male and female athletes..."

Wait, what? Surely the "biological" differences between top athletes and, say, people like me are as profound as the differences between the genders.

[Bicoastal]

43. Telling that this article was written by a Professor of Womens Studies and not an actor...

...I know many and I've never heard anyone pissed that they didn't get a role that went to someone of the opposite gender. I DOUBT anyone lucky enough to be nominated for an Oscar or Tony or Emmy ever gets mad because their performance is being judged out of those of four other women (or four other men.)

At the very least, this system gives more actors the opportunity to get nominated for these kinds of awards. The alternative would be choosing the best performance of the year PERIOD out of only 5 people, which seems inadequate--and out of 10 would be too difficult and contentious a decision. And FURTHERMORE, what if one year more men were nominated then women? ARRRGH, quit being so difficult, PC people.