• The forum software have been upgraded to the latest version.

    If you notice anything that looks off, or does not work, please let us know.

    For more information, click here.

The Random Thread of Random Randomness

Killer Angel said:
My hands are not enough for the facepalm i need...

https://www.oscars.org/news/academy...n-and-inclusion-standards-oscarsr-eligibility
Click to expand...

This is considerably depressing.

To be clear, I have nothing against any of the groups mentioned, but to have this an enforced inclusion into whether or not a movie or performance is of the highest artistic quality is non-sequitor.

The point of whether or not an actor did a good job is in his portrayal of a role, how he delivers it, the details that he adheres to, etc. This comes down to whether he has drilled being able to assume various identities, whether he has done his research, whether he has practiced, really learned his lines so that they are perfectly natural and as if he WAS the person being depicted. Whether he drilled sufficiently to assume the accent, mannerisms, etc. of the person whether fictional or not.

I would also argue that, to a degree, it maintains a stigma on the groups mentioned. Meaning that it continues the idea that they are different or lower or what have you.
 
Killer Angel said:
My hands are not enough for the facepalm i need...

https://www.oscars.org/news/academy...n-and-inclusion-standards-oscarsr-eligibility
Click to expand...
Lizards of Renown said:
This is considerably depressing.

To be clear, I have nothing against any of the groups mentioned, but to have this an enforced inclusion into whether or not a movie or performance is of the highest artistic quality is non-sequitor.

The point of whether or not an actor did a good job is in his portrayal of a role, how he delivers it, the details that he adheres to, etc. This comes down to whether he has drilled being able to assume various identities, whether he has done his research, whether he has practiced, really learned his lines so that they are perfectly natural and as if he WAS the person being depicted. Whether he drilled sufficiently to assume the accent, mannerisms, etc. of the person whether fictional or not.

I would also argue that, to a degree, it maintains a stigma on the groups mentioned. Meaning that it continues the idea that they are different or lower or what have you.
Click to expand...
Guys, this is a massive overreaction. Having read the article, from what I can gather all a film needs to do to pass the requirements is have a female makeup artists and hair stylist and a couple of bisexual interns. That’s it. I actually think you’d have to go out of your way to not meet them. It’s not even for every category either - only the Best Picture nomination requires said requirements to be met (and not until 2024 at that). Frankly, if you can’t meet those laughably bare minimum requirements it raises serious fucking questions about whether the makers of the film are extremely misogynistic, racist, homophobic or ableist, because the extent you’d have to go to to not meet the requirements would require a conscious effort to exclude said groups from the making of the film.
 
Killer Angel said:
My hands are not enough for the facepalm i need...

https://www.oscars.org/news/academy...n-and-inclusion-standards-oscarsr-eligibility
Click to expand...
I came across this as well. At least they made it official. Let's be honest, over the last couple of years, qualifiers such as these have already been in place, they were simply unspoken. The Oscars have been shifting in the woke direction for years now and their viewership has predictably suffered. The Oscars are irrelevant.

Get woke, go broke.

Lizards of Renown said:
This is considerably depressing.

To be clear, I have nothing against any of the groups mentioned, but to have this an enforced inclusion into whether or not a movie or performance is of the highest artistic quality is non-sequitor.

The point of whether or not an actor did a good job is in his portrayal of a role, how he delivers it, the details that he adheres to, etc. This comes down to whether he has drilled being able to assume various identities, whether he has done his research, whether he has practiced, really learned his lines so that they are perfectly natural and as if he WAS the person being depicted. Whether he drilled sufficiently to assume the accent, mannerisms, etc. of the person whether fictional or not.

I would also argue that, to a degree, it maintains a stigma on the groups mentioned. Meaning that it continues the idea that they are different or lower or what have you.
Click to expand...
+1
download.jpg
 
ravagekitteh said:
Guys, this is a massive overreaction. Having read the article, from what I can gather all a film needs to do to pass the requirements is have a female makeup artists and hair stylist and a couple of bisexual interns. That’s it. I actually think you’d have to go out of your way to not meet them. It’s not even for every category either - only the Best Picture nomination requires said requirements to be met (and not until 2024 at that). Frankly, if you can’t meet those laughably bare minimum requirements it raises serious fucking questions about whether the makers of the film are extremely misogynistic, racist, homophobic or ableist, because the extent you’d have to go to to not meet the requirements would require a conscious effort to exclude said groups from the making of the film.
Click to expand...

Technically you are right. However, the fact that the first standard is all about actors, is a warning sign. I don't like where this is going.
 
Killer Angel said:
Technically you are right. However, the fact that the first standard is all about actors, is a warning sign. I don't like where this is going.
Click to expand...
Give them an inch and they'll take a mile. It always starts like that.

Is it too much to ask that movies be judged purely on the merits of the movies themselves?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top