theavc:Interviews with Oscar voters reveal they are kind of awful, vaguely racistWhile we at The A.V
theavc:Interviews with Oscar voters reveal they are kind of awful, vaguely racistWhile we at The A.V. Club can only discuss the Oscar race, make predictions, and complain about snubs, The Hollywood Reporter is running a new series of “brutally honest” interviews with the people who actually pick the Oscar winners. So far two interviews have been released, and under the protection of anonymity these Academy members are very honest about who they’re voting for and why, not to mention very defensive about perceived insults to the Academy.“I didn’t think Selma was a particularly good film, apart from the main actor [David Oyelowo], and I think the outcry about the Academy being racists for not nominating it for more awards is offensive,” explained one male member of the Academy’s animation branch. A female member of the public relations branch (who is hopefully more tactful in her day job) adds:“What no one wants to say out loud is that Selma is a well-crafted movie, but there’s no art to it. If the movie had been directed by a 60-year-old white male, I don’t think that people would have been carrying on about it to the level that they were. And as far as the accusations about the Academy being racist? Yes, most members are white males, but they are not the cast of Deliverance—they had to get into the Academy to begin with, so they’re not cretinous, snaggletoothed hillbillies. When a movie about black people is good, members vote for it. But if the movie isn’t that good, am I supposed to vote for it just because it has black people in it? I’ve got to tell you, having the cast show up in T-shirts saying “I can’t breathe” [at their New York premiere]—I thought that stuff was offensive. Did they want to be known for making the best movie of the year or for stirring up shit?”Full story at avclub.com -- source link
#av club#oscars#sigh