Well, "Gone With the Wind," definitely should not have beaten "The Wizard of Oz," but it did. A mere 81 years ago, but one of the Wind cast members, Olivia De Havilland, is most definitely not Gone, even at 103--so take that whippersnappers.
17
So now we are supposed to go back to judging people based on the color of their skin and their sex? That is called racism, bigotry, and discrimination. It is immoral and destructive to our society.
104
I am in a period of my life where I watch about one adult film in the theaters per year, so I generally have no opinion on what movies deserve Oscars over the others. I did see Jo Jo Rabbit and thought Scarlett Johannsen was excellent. I am psyched to see Parasite at some point. I just don't have any burning desire to see another mob movie or movie about Hollywood.
20
"The 2017 fiasco that left “La La Land” confused for “Moonlight” is a rare example of front-runners set close to now. "
Does anyone remember anything about these movies?
14
I didn't see 5 of the nominated movies for best picture because they are about white male experience. Please Mr Morris, do not lump white women in with white men. We indeed have enjoyed much more privilege than black or brown women, and haven't suffered from the heinous injustices that black and brown men have experienced at the hands of white men, but being a woman of any hue is no picnic in a male dominated and privileged world.
49
Pretty soon we’ll be handing out roles, titles, and just about everything else based on a quota. It will be comforting to know that when flying or having surgery it might not have been the best person but the person we hired to avoid articles like this one. I’m all in for the best person for the job whomever that is.
78
But what if the definition of “best” is biased and based on qualities that neglect or disparage those of others.
40
The Oscars are a pathetic anachronism - like the Miss America and Miss Universe pageants, they’re an embarrassing relic of the last century. In the digital age, with many of the best screen dramas and comedies being independently produced and streamed directly to viewers, the landscape has been forever altered, but the Academy and mainstream media are still trying to find their way using an obsolete map.
51
@Archibald McDougall
I pretty much agree with you but I love film, and I value the archival quality of much of the promotional content the studios put out during awards season. I would submit ‘but-for’ the awards process the studios wouldn’t invest in this content and support the extra press junkets and featurettes that provide invaluable opportunities to create a record of the making-of a given film.
For example, there are those that would perpetuate a false narrative about Quentin Tarantino. During this awards season it was great to hear interviews and watch content from some of Tarantino’ key collaborators (Arianne Phillips and Barbara Ling) that tells the real story.
7
What I feel is a bit tiring it's how easy it is to know in advance what topics are going to be the most considered for an Oscar: Something about Hollywood, First and Second World War, British Royalty, mafia and gangsters, slavery, racism. That's why I think Parasite is so outstanding: a contemporary movie dealing with contemporary issues such as climate change and inequality. It's the best film this year without any doubt
36
I don't think Morris really made a persuasive argument for...? On the other hand, I'm so tired of 1) mob movies (dysfunctional straight white men), 2) comic book movies (dysfunctional straight white men), 3) Hollywood nostalgia movies (dysfunctional straight white men). Every year seems to deliver big budget and star filled versions of the same old same old. I admit it, I have round heels for Hollywood based movies (see: "Bombshell" and "Shampoo" and "The Player" for example), but as I much as I enjoyed and admired the highly skillful nostalgia bath of "Once Upon A Time...", it was hardly Oscar worthy. The Hollywood movie I'd like to see is a bio-pic of Hattie McDaniel. I can dream, can't I? "Parasite", however, was amazing on all fronts, and universally pertinent to our time. My vote for best picture.
31
Bottom line Academy, this year's Oscar crop exhibits such striking dominant-culture homogeneity that I'm bored and won't be watching... Seems like you really aren't listening are you?
11
Mr. Morris, we need to talk. The only color any awards show is concerned with is green, the color of money.
You see, rubes come in all shapes, sizes, and color, but all are willing to open their wallets for the usual junk.
27
Merit should be the sole criteria for anything to advance. Equality of opportunity is what needs to be stressed upon. An article over how and why people of colour face hindrance when making movies/ acting etc. is something much worthy to be written about. In this case one could have spoken about movies more deserving from people of colour which did not get the Oscar nod, and that should have definitely been an article. Ensuring equality of outcome is not desirable in the least, and one could think about numerous ways it can go wrong (pitting different communities against each other, restricting something more deserving etc.). This is a failure on the left that is super persistent somehow. We need to have greater clarity before airing our displeasure. Also if it matters this comes from a person of colour.
53
I'm not surprised that almost all of the nominated American films take place in the past. We're in a very backwards-looking moment as a country right now (which is utterly depressing in a supposed optimistic and forward looking country), and I guess the culture reflects that.
I'm not saying that the films are bad - The Irishman deserves all the praise it's gotten - but the contrast with Parasite is stark. The latter film is brimming with energy and mischief and fun. The bulk of the other nominations feel like they should be preserved in ember.
The one that really has me scratching my head is Joker. The film is quite literally a ripoff of late 70s/early 80s Scorsese - the aesthetics, the mood, it even manages to mash up Taxi Driver and King of Comedy! I thought the movie was fine, but come on - how does something that is the definition of derivative get a Best Picture nod? And alongside the real Scorsese to boot!
12
Ugh “BlacKkKlansman" was just so embarrassingly mediocre to see win for best adapted screenplay if the Academy's going to pass up a movie like "Us", which I was absolutely shocked to see nominated for nothing.
Lupita Nyong'o would have easily been an Oscar nominee if they'd just released it during Oscar season. Hmph.
12
Yet it was a much, much better film than “Green Book” - which actually won best picture. There was nothing fresh or exciting about “Green Book” and it had nothing new to say about the human condition.
12
This line is key: " . . . .after “Hidden Figures,” “Get Out” and “Black Panther” and “BlacKkKlansman”; after “Moonlight. . . .”
I look at 2019 and I see the Accordion Effect at work. Sure there were good films like 'Us' and 'Last Black Man in San Fransisco' but I'd submit that this year's more diverse releases were fewer and not as strong as in other years. I have no doubt that there are tons of good films in the pipeline with good diverse casts, production leads and stories.
Similarly, I submit that the number of historical films this year is also a manifestation of the Accordion Effect and the films of 2019 is too small a sample to make any generalizations or guesses about nefarious trends.
12
Seems like quality films rise to the top, regardless of race issues.
29
@mikey Quality films take money to make. Race and gender impact where the money flows because the financiers, agents, producers, managers, corps, etc and even film schools are not diverse enough to support diverse films.
20
@mikey what makes you say that? Crash? Dances with Wolves? Green Book? The King's Speech? Those are just a few examples that come to mind - utterly forgettable films (really, are any of the films I just cited remembered with any sort of fondness or admiration?) that won because they tickled something in the academy's membership - or as is usually the case, the producers had a better marketing department.
Let me guess? You're a white dude? It's invariably the case when someone says "quality rises to the top." I'd encourage you to educate yourself as to why so many nonwhite folks and so many women know this to be an utterly bogus argument.
19
I simply cannot give credence to the author's implied assertion that an organization that gave its 2016 Best Picture award to "Moonlight" -- a relatively low-grossing, lesser-seen movie about a black, gay man from a troubled background -- is racist. If the Academy was racist, "Moonlight" would not have been nominated, let alone won. I do agree, however, that Alfre Woodard should have been nominated for "Passion Fish" and "Twelve Years a Slave."
29
It was a decent film but nowhere near the best film that year. Whether it’s the spate of awards for black films or holocaust themed ones, there’s definitely a soft spot at the Academy.
13
My number-one favorite thing about all the hype leading up to the Academy Awards --
February is "Oscar Month" on Turner Classic Movies -- which means that every single movie shown during the month - 24/7 - has at least an Oscar nomination - if not an award (or multiple awards) - for a person or element of the film --
For fans of classic movies going back to the first year of the Oscars - to 1938 (considered the greatest year in movie-making) - right up until the present - this is a feast of wildest dreams --
Watch "All About Eve" - which still holds the record for most Oscar nominations - or "The Third Man" - with that haunting score --
When Betty Davis says - "Fasten your seatbelt, it's going to be a bumpy night" - it still gives chills - sisxty years later...
21
There ARE talented non white and female directors, actors, and crew. I, for one, want more recognition for them. America doesn’t look like what the Oscars are dishing out this year. Or at least, that’s not the only America that exists. I want more and better. It’s not too much to ask, and the Academy needs to wake up and smell the 2020.
13
Does the ethnicity of the director or cast determine the merit of the production?
38
@Daphne No it does not. However it is becoming increasingly clear that the Oscars are not voted for based on merit but what people 'Like' or 'Feel Should Win Because' and at best a lot of those 'becauses' are unconsciously biased and at worst they are racist. Imagine one Oscar voter voting multiple times for OUATIH because of his/her nostalgia and declining to vote for Parasite because it's not an American film. My goodness!
5
The problem is in the vetting process for great scripts: too often executive producers and distributors (the ones with the $$ to back a film or pay for its release) doubt the viability of a serious film without white/male leads.
This IS a matter of bias -- it is a disbelief in the existence of a serious audience for movies with women or black or brown people characters.
The beauty of great stories is that you can step into the shoes of someone you have almost nothing in common with and deeply identify with them. As a former college film major and a white woman I identify with male and non-white characters all the time!
It is time to check out which films are getting made and released -- that is where our biases are really on display.
21
Back around 1940 Billy Wilder expressed his opinion of the value of the Oscars thusly:
"Walter Brennan has three and Garbo has none."
Nothing's changed. It's a popularity contest. Hitchcock and Kubrick were denied Oscars by dim talents not fit to move props on one of their sets.
26
I heard someone report that to end the sexism just pit the women against the men for best actor, no male or female awards, only one. The men would never win because they rarely emote as much, and across so many emotions in one scene, let alone the movie. sounds about right.
4
Look at every (Predictable) story this guy does. ALL the same tone. https://www.nytimes.com/by/wesley-morris
26
There was a time when the Oscars was about movies. Now it is about activism.
Instead of trying to ascertain which are the best films in a given year, we are inundated by lectures on Oscars so White, or the Me Too movement, or why Trump should be removed from office.
Not that I don't agree that Trump should be removed---it's just that I'll make that decision without the help of the self-proclaimed "thought leaders." It is arrogant for filmmakers or pundits or actors and actresses to presume to tell the rest of us what to think.
So I just won't watch the Oscars this year. I seldom agreed with their choices anyway. If you want to accuse the Oscars for not having enough black actors, I'll criticize it for focusing only on English language films, which makes it difficult for Americans to actually understand cultures outside the US.
Yes, miraculous films were produced in Hollywood. But how chauvinistic it is to devote only one award to the foreign language films! I remember also great French, Italian, German, Russian, Chinese, Japanese and Indian films of the past, seldom acknowledged by Hollywood.
Yes, I will still go the occasional Hollywood film, or rather watch it on Amazon Prime or Netflix. But no, I don't consider actors as superior beings whose every utterance is worthy of worship. I will make my own political choices, thank you, and ignore the actor pronouncements on whatever is the politically correct cause du jour. And that goes for critics too.
44
I wish Mr. Morris would tell us more about the movies, directors, actors and others that should have been nominated but weren't.
35
Did he actually finish by lamenting that “Bad Boys 3” was overlooked. I think he actually wants a quota system, even in years without movies like “Moonlight” or “Twelve Years a Slave” available to choose from.
9
Dear Wesley, Love you back!
1
Liberals always have something to complain about. For what it's worth, my bet for Best Picture is "The Irishman."
6
@Mark
Ha ha ha! Right, because conservatives NEVER complain about anything. Fox News has been the jolliest news network for decades. I tune in to hear them praising everything! All positivity and feel good stories all day long!
35
@Deanna
They complain about liberals, because liberals complain about everything but themselves.
5
PARASITE for best everything!!!
8
Where is Last Black Man in SF?! I loved that movie!! :(
9
Racism comes in all colors.
22
@Nelson Indeed!!!
4
A friendly advice for the "Women and nonwhite folks", GIT GUD!
5
I could give a hoot about the Oscars or the movie industry. My advice to you sir, stop supporting an industry that has never supported people of color and never will. Black people spend trillions of dollars consuming other people products and yet, we can't gather two nickels to rub together to get our own? To be blunt, white people know this that's why we are easily dismissed and used.
5
Wow -- racist much? Is it politically incorrect to suggest that just as much as you a Black man really enjoy movies about Blacks, that me, a White woman, don't.
I don't identify, and I lose interest. I don't get the language or culture anymore than a German war movie. You probably just wrote this article for the clicks so I'll lay off. But seriously, does everything have to be intentional? I don't like cartoon movies, war movies, sports movies, or stereotypical movies involving other races. I'm not interested; I don't connect. Simple as that.
33
I thought Jonathan Majors deserved a nomination for Last Black Man in San Francisco. Why didn’t everybody????
10
Racial quotas for Oscars ! Please give me a break!
30
@Ahmet Goksun That is not what he said or implied. He’s talking about fairness in representation, not quotas. Quotas are, quite apparently, your issue.
9
When Stephen King timidly suggested in a recent tweet that Oscars should be awarded on quality, he was attacked by the identity crowd, outraged by the (apparently) implied racism. If I read this Orwellian Op-Ed correctly, some should be more equal than the others.
50
Without going directly to the root of the issue here (why do movies seem always to involve mostly white casts and directors,usually men), there is another one the Oscars have wrestled with. Should an immensely popular movie, like the Star Wars Trilogy, be up for various awards outside technical/music, or should that go to 'deserving' movies only (In the third police squad movie, Drebbin announces "its the bomb" [meaning the envelope has the bomb in it],but everyone assumes that means the winner is the movie that made almost no money. Are we celebrating commercial success or what the critics and auteurs think is 'real'
Speaking only for myself, I would rather the movie celebrate what it means to be a hollywood movie, there are some really great serious movies that also were fun to watch, there also were winners that were bores but were 'serious'. Black Panther won a lot of awards, but in the end it was a comic book movie, yet in winning it said a lot about Hollywood, too, that an enjoyable movie with something of a social theme is worthy of consideration (heck, if I had a vote, I would vote for "Ford Vs Ferrari, ultimate popcorn movie).
Maybe if we took it that way, then it would be easier to nominate more diverse films, when we don't have to worry if they are 'serious enough' (tho Bad Boys III would be a stretch). While doing it simply because it featured non white actors/directors/writers is silly, maybe it is time the voters consider that when choosing among equals
2
Absolutely excellent and thoughtful essay - thank you!
7
Instead of the current system for the awards, let's just move directly to put an end to this annual whining. Let's have Best Black Actor, Best Latina Actress, Best Asian Director, etc. The awards can be staged over three consecutive nights with each night limited to four consecutive hours. It will be just like grade school. Everyone is a winner.
Perhaps then everyone will be satisfied but no one will be happy. And no one will watch.
25
I couldn’t disagree more with the author. There is a tone here that non white films should be given more credit became they have less white people. Are we asking for affirmative action for non-white films? Films featuring non-whites seem to get reasonably weighed against white films. I will award a film on the credit of it; not the color of the film which I think the author is implying we should do. Is that, itself, not racism from the author? A good film is a good film. Should I be sorry and penalize whites for making good films? My favorite this year was Parasite, sorry I will pass on Gemini Man and Bad Boys 3, is that wrong? Or do you want me to give them undue reward when they are terrible?
24
If you don't like it then don't watch. Easy.
16
Every year dozens of writers pop up with a slight variation on this opinion piece and imagine that this time their wokeness is going to at last, at last, thwart all those dastardly old white men. It is such an easy column to write because every year all the movies and actors that get "snubbed" are "of color", right? Why not just be frank about it: some of us movie lovers will not be happy until the Oscars are doled out on a quota system.
20
I don’t know where to begin. Should I begin by mentioning the author’s focusing on Manson’s racism when that’s the least of his problems, and when his victims are white? Or his focusing on one comment made about crying in front of Mexicans which was so minor I can’t even recall it, and how this would only stand out as a point worth mentioning to someone with a very specific agenda? Or his conjuring irony in white women’s “freedom” (I’d call it hardship) after the men are off fighting to end slavery, overlooking the big theme of Joker which is disenfranchisement, and completely missing the point that theme is central to racism itself? I think really it’s all of the above and the general overlooking of the quality of the films in question and longing for a criteria based more on skin color. Reminds me of the decline of the literary canon in the name of diversity. Really sad because it’s the art that suffers from this, yes, racist approach to evaluating its worth.
31
The author would have been praising academy if it had nominated several black movies. In the name of diversity, we need to ignore real talent and nominate subpar movies to please the race industry.
23
I stop watching all these awards shows years ago. There are so many they have become meaningless and vapid and aren't worth my time.
9
At some point, activists need to take a step back and see if what they're doing is working. I like a lot of what Mr Morris writes and usually find him insightful on podcasts, but the kind of meta analysis in this article is gag-worthy.
We all lament that we live in a post-truth society, but how much of that is due to media elites putting an article like this on the front page inferring "this is what you, humble reader, should be thinking" on poorly thought out opinions that are at best intended to be polemic and nothing else? While I do think some of it is woke fatigue, the article doesn't even have real analysis, it's dithering complaints without a coherent argument and a GRE word sprinkled in every once in a while.
If the Oscars a health check on the movie industry, are the comments section (gasp) a health check on the rhetoric of the writing? Every single reader recommended comment is critical! Every single one, and this is the New York Times, the vanguard of social liberalism. If you've even lost them, you've lost everyone.
17
The writer of this article is seeing what he wants to see. Aren’t most Oscar-nominated films set in the US? Yes, because the Oscars are an American institution. What does Joker have to do with whiteness? Nothing. The Joker has almost always been a Caucasian man, but that’s not a part of his story; the actor who plays him is inconsequential.
What the author wants to see is movies that no one cares about being honored at a massive awards show. Spoiler alert: the Academy usually honors movies that people saw, movies that made money. It may be shocking, but it’s true. The only place I ever heard about Parasite has been in articles bemoaning how it won’t win best picture. By and large, no one cares about Little Women- it’s been made and remade so many times (most recently in 2018) that it’s passé. Did he really believe Get Out would win an Oscar? Since when do horror movies get best picture?
The author is being deliberately divisive and inflammatory, couching his own problematic beliefs in pat film criticism and vague accusations about whites conspiring to ignore movies made by people of color.
20
"The Irishman" was boring — not as boring as the Avenger movies — but still boring. The critique of "BlacKkKlansman" was that it was too "Forrest Gump" in encapsulating an actual man's experience. "Once Upon a Time in Hollywood" was the result of writer's block. "Greener Grass" was a better picture.
1
Yea, I dont get this article as reflected in the writer's suggestion there werent any shafted movies. Personally, I think average to above average movies get a bit of an uplift already because it focuses on a minority protagonist/antagonist. I dont mind it at all, just chalk it up to some of the politics and sometimes ridiculousness of the academy i.e. Shakespeare in Love. But, these sorts of suggestions seemingly contribute to a lack of merit in how we judge things nowadays.
1
This hogwash article represents liberalism at its worst, and only serves to have many sensible moderates (and even some liberals) consider voting for conservatives.
16
Wait a sec.. No non-binary albino was nominated for best supporting non-binary? I won't be watching..
17
The Joker for Best Picture ?. Give me a break - I refuse to see this movie, not I to gratuitous violence. Even if The lead actor is good - but please spare me, this is not something that should qualify for best picture an inferior movie at best
5
@Saskia Markowski :
Didn't see it, can't comment on it...
7
The country's black population is about 15%, something that often surprises people, but it is. Be careful about demanding quotas, you may get what you wish for, but no more.
As for "whiteness", which I can see is becoming A Thing: would you say "The Garden of the Finzi-Continis" and "Fiddler on the Roof" were about Jewishness or whiteness?
None of 2019's films floored me, although some had good performances, which makes this just another year in the biz; every year there is a stunning lack of memorability. But none are as atrociously bad as the much-lauded yet tediously awful La La Land and Crazy Rich Asians, and some are quite a bit better.
That equality of opportunities for minorities in film need to be increased is undeniable. But to assert that all non-black films are ipso facto about "whiteness" is absurd. It's the kind of reductionism that has a real chance of being turned on its head: oh, yeah, that's this year's "black" film.
Was the "The Prime of Miss Jean Brodie" about whiteness or dangerous narcissism?
Stupid calls? "Dunkirk" was much better than "1917" but got far less recognition. Ralph Fiennes lost Best Supporting Actor for his magnificent performance as Amon Goeth, the concentration camp commandant in "Schindler's List", to Tommy Lee Jones as the detective in "The Fugitive". Mr. Jones is a decent actor, but come on.
In this arena, managed expectations are a necessity. The sad truth is ultimately, reductionism and quotas are never the friends of art.
15
Everyone should have art that speaks to them. The end of "The Irishman" affected me and might make me change my life a little. If I weren't middle-class white, maybe this movie wouldn't have affected me as much, who knows? The solution is for there to be diversity in the capitalization of movies (and other art) so everyone ends up with plenty of art they can identify with.
5
The sad reality is that not a lot of underrepresented voices hit mainstream theaters. In turn, it’s that much more difficult for one of those films to get an award. It’s simply not fair to discount the quality of the nominated films because they’re too “white”/depict the “wrong” story. The real question is how can we get a greater diversity of voices presented on the big screen to begin with?
PS
To all those “above the Oscars:” Name films featuring underrepresented cores from 2019. How do they stack up against the nominated films? If you don’t like the nominees, give some alternatives.
PPS
It’s a bit like the chicken and the egg: What came first the Oscars or the films?
3
I take the tone of the article as more tongue in cheek, and I think it's revealing how much push back there is to the author's points. That the Oscars reflect the systemic racism in Hollywood is undeniable, whether you agree with the author's approach to this subject or not. The key word here is 'systemic' - very hard for people of color to get a foot hold in. And this reflects in the stories that are told, produced, directed, etc. etc.
I'm a big fan of movies including some of the nominees this year, and I'm a creative myself. But the Oscars to me have become irrelevant. I, and many in my generation, have stopped watching them a long time ago.
16
Well, that's pretty harsh. I've seen 7 of the best picture nominees and think it's a great crop of films. I get Wesley's point, but I'm not in favor of setting racial quotas in the Academy Awards or film industry.
36
I concur. It should be based on skill not the color of ones skin
8
@Mark McIntyre I am guessing you are white?
2
@Mark McIntyre I didn't see 5 of the best picture nominees because they are about white male experience. Pretty much all one ever hears about is white male experience. What a cosseted demographic. Ugh.
3
My wife worries that Trump is the start of the end of America, but I keep telling her it started before Trump.....everyone thinks they are now on the defensive about themselves (clan, tribe, race, etc.) and too few see us as a common people united in a democracy.
16
There was a time when I went to see a movie and either enjoyed it or didn't find it to my liking. I like the Usual Suspects, I like Se7en, I liked the Truman Show, I didn't like US Marshalls.
That was about as far as it went. I'd head home afterwards and wouldn't think of the movie again until it appeared in Cable.
Now I'm told that I've gone to see the wrong type of movie, that there was not enough diversity, that the main character is vile and inciting violence, that having a female lead in an action movie represents progress for women.
There was a time, in Australia at least, where I thought we had moved past pointing out race at every opportunity. Can we just appreciate a film for what it is without counting the number of diverse actors or the number of lines a character from a particular gender has. If you are at that point yourself when you walk into a theatre then you most likely won't enjoy the film.
48
I think a lot of commenters here have fully missed the point of this article. Mr. Morris is saying that the problem lies precisely *not* with the Academy, but with the industry.
He's laid out the same grievances with the film industry that so many commenters here have leveled against his article: that a superficial focus on diversity for diversity's sake is precisely that -- superficial. The industry feels that it has been there, done that, and "moved on" -- which is to say, reverted -- to producing quality movies that are, once again, overwhelmingly white. (Notably they've done so in a supremely uninspired way: historical pieces, in which the existence of people of color can be conveniently, uniformly ignored.)
Enacting real and meaningful change is hard, long, and often unrewarding work; by returning to a default of whiteness in its best-picture efforts, the industry has revealed that it was only ever interested in the optics of diversity -- precisely the grievance of so many offended commenters here. Perhaps they would do well to ask themselves what they find more offensive: an Academy tasked with forever delivering a diverse selection of nominees, or an industry that can't be bothered -- is too lazy, or lacks the creativity, or whatever -- to include anyone other than white folks in its best-picture efforts.
Thus: "Let the Academy Awards do what they have always done: Tell on the industry."
24
@Ben Rost "I think a lot of commenters here have fully missed the point of this article. Mr. Morris is saying that the problem lies precisely *not* with the Academy, but with the industry. "
Missed the point? You've put your finger on the problem with this article. Not only was it easy to miss the point, I'm not sure it even had one.
26
@Ben Rost
As long as diversity for diversity's sake is a goal, whatever diversity is achieved will remain not only superficial, but artificial.
28
Last night, in the State of the Union Address, President Trump stressed the importance
of the fact that African-American unemployment is now at the lowest number in history, and that the poverty rate has dropped . On the other hand, Wesley Morris apparently thinks he's extremely clever and doing America a great favor by proving that the Oscars are too white, and that this injustice is one of the important issues of our time. With all things considered, I'd say that Trump, who I abhor, has a more practical and useful view of American life, when compared to Morris.
23
@George I'm pretty sure African-American unemployment isn't at its lowest point in history. The unemployment rate for black folks in 1840, for example, was very, very, very low. Wages, on the other hand, were about the same.
15
Am I the only one getting tired of the representation of our culture in award ceremonies. 10 percent of the U.S. population is African-American. That means about 1 film a year should be nominated on behalf of the 10% population, if we want to be equal. Otherwise, arguments about a disproportionate number of prisoners are African-American would be mute.
As far as women being represented, I keep track of popular movies and their directors since films began and starting in the 1980s there has been a huge leap in the number of female artists being recognized. The problem is in the last 10 to 15 years, the best and brightest directors either black white or female have gone into television's expandable format.
24
I think the greater point is that maybe 3-4 of the 9 Best Picture nominees are not sub par given the strength of 2019's year of film. Like politics, there is too much money in the Oscar race. We saw smaller studios without the financial clout of the Warner Bros of the world produce far more original and excellent films that will be lost to history or a few die hard cinephiles.
7
I had bacon and eggs with a side of wheat toast for breakfast. (yaaaaaawwwwwwwwn)
12
I was appalled to see that a fair proportion of these comments contained racially offensive remarks, whose authors clearly didn’t recognize them as such. One of Mr. Morris’s major points was that the demographics of the voting members of the Academy tend to bias the nominations in favor of stories about white people, as well as white male filmmakers. Some of the movies nominated weren’t even well-reviewed, such as “Joker” and “1917.” He also gave shoutouts to performances and movies that were about African Americans that he thought were overlooked, including two of my favorites, Alfre Woodard in “Clemency” and “Queen and Slim.” As a cultural critic at large, I believe he largely has free rein in what he chooses to write about, and often does so in a freewheeling style. He’s one of my favorite writers at the Times and won a Pulitzer while at the Boston Globe. Yet many of the letters in the comment thread speak as if he were merely playing a race card, wanting African Americans like himself to be more represented in film as part of some kind of quota system, with a barely hidden implication that this would mean a decline in the quality of movies. Wesley Morris is always interesting and, in this case, spot-on in his views. And I’m saying this as a 73-year-old white woman.
26
@Sandra Wilde "1917" was well reviewed.
6
@Sandra Wilde
And I'm saying as a 50 year old white man that you people are making our society into a pack of whiney people who feel they are owed something. Get some backbone and buck up.
16
Stop trying to social engineer everything. It's a movie. I can understand why people vote for Trump. We don't need a black santa clause or a white man playing Nelson Madela. The oscars are the least important thing in my life. I don't care.
42
I think the whole oscar thing is a foolish popularity contest, but no one made better films than "Parasite" and "1917". No one of any race or gender.
It has to be about the work.
As a female writer, I do not want to force an institution to take my work because I am female. I want them to judge it blind. This way, no one can say I got in because I am a female.
This is impossible with the Oscars, but it still has to be about the work.
37
@RW But his point is that the industry is not judging people blind. If the Oscars are just about the work, then you have to examine who is being given the opportunities to make that work. Women and POC just aren't given the same opportunities or support from the industry that their white male peers receive. So either consciously or not, they're excluded from doing the type of work that the Oscars rewards. And that's another thing - the work of women and POC are often downplayed as niche or "urban" or "chick-flick." The notion that only flashy, big budget spectacles are Oscar-worthy is something we've bought into, but it doesn't have to be that way.
11
@RW But his point is that the industry is not judging people blind. If the Oscars are just about the work, then you have to examine who is being given the opportunities to make that work. Women and POC just aren't given the same opportunities or support from the industry that their white male peers receive. So either consciously or not, they're excluded from doing the type of work that the Oscars rewards. And that's another thing - the work of women and POC are often downplayed as niche or "urban" or "chick-flick." The notion that only flashy, big budget spectacles are Oscar-worthy is something we've bought into, but it doesn't have to be that way.
1
@LMB
Thanks for responding. They can't judge blind.
Yes, increase the opportunities for someone to make as great a film as Parasite or 1917. I am all for that.
No one can argue that Kathryn Bigelow's work on "The Hurt Locker" or "Zero Dark Thirty" are chick flix. And a more quiet movie can and has won!
I'm disappointed that "Just Mercy" did not get more noms, but it can not compare to those two films in its structure, writing or
BUT Acting? Jamie Foxx and Rob Morgan deserve nominations and the awards. Just as David Oyelowo deserved one for Selma.
So, the actor thing is completely wrong. But best picture, I can't agree.
Statistics presented by The Economist show blacks are over represented among Oscar winners, but this compares the precent of Oscars won to the racial ethnic demographics of the entire U.S. population. This isn’t the right yardstick. The Academy awards go only to movies screened in Los Angeles County theaters. So, the question is what percent percent of eligible movies have predominantly white casts and white directors. It may be that white actors and directors are underrepresented.
https://www.economist.com/prospero/2016/01/21/how-racially-skewed-are-the-oscars
15
There is great scene in Spike Lee's iconic ' Do The Right Thing' where a black African customer Buggin Out looks at all of the pictures of Italians on the walls of Sal's pizzeria and ask how come there weren't any pictures of any brothers?
And Sal replies that if you want some pictures of any brothers then you should get your own restaurant. Buggin Out notices that there aren't any Italians in the restaurant.
If black African Americans want to see themselves in more films and awards then they must follow the examples of Tyler Perry and Oprah Winfrey. And to a lesser extent the likes of Spike Lee, Will Packer and Charles Burnett.
15
WHY TALK DOWN THE MAJORITY WHEN WE ABSOLUTELY MUST RESPECT MINORITY?
Dear Wesley Morris.
As a white Nordic human being, I feel it is discriminating to talk about all these white old people in the Academy in your first sentence.
As an anti-racist Icelandic citizen from one of the smallest and whitest nations on Earth - to me, it is simply racism.
Sure, I know that Europeans have a different view on race - as most people in Europe don't think such a thing exists, as do the sciences.
And I know America is America, and it is a different planet when it comes to racial issues - but please realize that when you write about whites who are actually the total majority in America - you are both talking about the absolute majority of your country who have the right to be who they are - and also putting people in a box based on their whiteness alone - which is basically racism.
According to Wikipedia 72% of the US is white. African American: 12,6%. Hispanic: 16,3%. It's not academic, empirical but Wikipedia - but it tells us that being white is the absolute majority.
Anyway, I know it's a very sensitive topic in the US, but we need to be aware of the fact that white people also have feelings and are also humans like everyone else. And that they are the majority.
And regarding religion (same source): Christianity: 71,9%, Judaism: 2,1%, Mormonism: 1,8%, Islam: 0,8%.
Democracy is about majority, and about respecting minority. We need to respect both.
///
42
@Ragnar Halldorsson I don't agree with the author of this article. I think it's a divisive piece of writing and inconsequential to most people's lives, but please pick up a history book before you start espousing on the 'racial' politics and the demographics of the United States as a foreign citizen based on quotes from Wikipedia. Demographics differ greatly depending on the region or state you live in, how people self identify 'racially', and what point in American or colonial history you are talking about. This 'minority' you are speaking of is responsible for a large part of the popular culture we enjoy today in the U.S. and around the globe ; the blues, jazz, swing, early rock and roll, funk and hip hop all originated from people of black American and mixed race American ancestry and have gone on to be shard and celebrated globally. They have also served this country in the armed forces and combat, often in overrepresented numbers since the founding of this country. When you add up all of the 'minorities' based on current projections, people of European descent will soon be equal to those groups in terms of collective figures. Democracy is about social equality not numbers.
4
@M Democracy is Rule By Majority, actually. Literally, it means “Rule By The People.” Practically, the only way this can be accomplished is through voting and implementing the recommendation made by the majority of voters.
Social Equality has nothing to do with democracy. It’s a laudable goal, but it’s so beyond fallacious to conflate the two that it’s not even wrong.
5
@Ragnar Halldorsson
you miss the definition of racism by a mile. a huge component of racism is about the exercise of power to discriminate and prejudge others. i think you should be honest enough to acknowledge who has been wielding the power in the US -- people of white EUROPEAN ancestry. Black people by definition aren't racist when they point out the inequity and the power dynamic.
stop lecturing americans about racism, we learned it from you.
5
Tarantino's movie was so lame it was beyond belief. I lived in LA during that era and saw nothing recognizable but his gay love for Brad Pitt. I was so much looking forward to The Irishman I saw it in a theater and it was a flatline snoozer. How either of these got Oscar nominations I have no idea. No energy, no tension, no love affairs, nothing. Just plain boring.
12
@John
"Once Upon A Time in .... Hollywood" may not be the best movie of the year (Tarantino was probably just too self-indulgent), but it was by far my favorite movie of the year. In fact, it's been a long time since I've loved a movie so much.
It so captured the time and place of Los Angeles that I could smell the orange blossoms and the smog. It was an absolute time warp. He could have gone kitschy with it, but he was restrained, and so, SO detailed. There is a split-second shot of a bus bench with an ad for George Putnam News on it. He didn't have to bother to put it there. Anyone who didn't grow up in LA at the time would not have gotten it.
But the movie itself, and the unabashedly movie-masculine nature of Pitt's character was a throw-back to that era. It captured the zeitgeist, as they say, in an uncanny way.
That said, I thought "Irishman" was also overrated, and I would could live very well with "Parasite" getting best picture. It was maginificent.
10
@John I loved both of the movies you hated. Thought they were among the best I've ever seen. The way "The Irishman" ended was devastating and made me wonder about my own life.
2
@John Spot on, John. Not only American politics have been dumbed down to the ground, so have our movies. The very idea that Tarantino spends the gruesome last half hour in his revolting revenge fantasy, and be lauded for it, is a testament to our current cultural idiocy.
4
It's all about race. Let's just set quotas - No need to pretend otherwise.
14
I have an idea ... EVERYONE gets a statue. That way no hurt feelings and 100% diversity ... make sense?
23
@W
Yep. Problem solved!
3
In writing about what's wrong with the Oscars, Mr. Morris includes, "All those old white voters." Really? Why does the New York Times allow something that is not only racist but ageist, in its pages? Is it because Mr. Morris is Black and young? By the way, all of the old white voters in the Academy accomplished something in their careers to gain entrance into the organization. When Mr. Morris does the same and gains admittance into the Academy, then he can complain all he wants and vote forever whom he chooses. For now, he's just an outsider writing for outsiders.
39
@Andy Marx ...Because you fundamentally misunderstand what racism is if you think a black writer can be "racist" towards white Academy voters.
Why are so many people getting this wrong in the NYT comment section??
Folks: there's No Such Thing as "reverse racism" -- it's a made-up concept by alt-right trolls, and literally doesn't track to the definition of racism in our current time/space continuum.
1
The only way that OSCARs (and other award systems) should go is to be certain that there are 15% black, 16% Hispanic, 4% Asian and 50/50 men and women. These quotas need to be applied to all categories regardless of quality. If they are not, then it is the end of civilization as we know it.
If an award ceremony had 20% black, that would be an indication that racism was involved. (This includes the awards for BET and for basketball.) If an award ceremony had 55% women, it would be an indication that sexism was involved. (This includes the Stevie Awards.)
13
the Irishman is a sad way for Martin Scorsese to end his career.
Tarantino's "Once Upon a Time in Hollywood" following on the heel of the "Hateful Eight" confirms he has exhausted what little original cinematic vision he had.
The grasp of the tight control of feature films by money men is strengthened only by the rigor mortis setting in on a dead business model.
6
Do you know what Antonio Banderas, Jonathan Pryce, Leonardo DiCaprio, and Adam Driver have in common with Denzel Washington, Michael B. Jordan, Will Smith, Donald Glover? Middle-class or higher parents. Do you want to bet that the majority of actors, directors, and producers also share that similarity?
I grew up in rural Indiana. My mom worked at a lawnmower factory makes $10 an hour. My dad would take overtime as much as he could. He would come home bragging about how big his paycheck would be at $18 dollars an hour. By the time I was in middle school, my mom still made $10 an hour. My dad made an unemployment check. And they both made the decision to get a divorce.
I'm white. The privileged race. And I was too poor to even dream of being an actor. To even have the thought go through my head. You probably haven't ever imagined trying to breath dirt and exhale diamonds. That is as strange as imagining being an actor is for most poor.
Almost half of the poor population is Hispanic, Latino, or Black. Does that mean they can't be actors? Of course not. But it isn't likely. So why don't we mention that in these articles?
Why give whites such agency? Such control over the fate of the black community. What messages do these articles send to black kids who read them? That they have no chance unless white people change for them?
At some point, this blame needs to give way to discussions on concrete interventions instead of distracting from it. It's an industry of despair.
17
@Dylan
Thank you, thank you, thank you for your comment. If white supremacists wanted to undermine non-white people, they couldn't do better than promoting the self-defeating attitudes demanded by articles such as this one.
6
The Times’ foregrounding of racialized perspectives on...everything has become truly tiresome. Good art is good art, and when it’s good, it finds its audiences, and is properly respected and celebrated. Examples: Tyler the Creator, Billie Eilish, Bong-Joon Ho, Barry Jenkins, Donald Glover... I could go on and on. I love these folks’ work for its quality, not the color or gender of its makers. Not that color and gender are irrelevant, but rather that when it comes to art, to any creative work, they are waaaay in the background, for me, and I think for many if not most other consumers of cultural products, regardless of our skin color or gender or sexual identities.
It is with some sadness but mostly exasperation that today I will be ending my long subscription with The Times. It’s now-contestant oppositional narratives are predictable, depressing, and, worst of all, dull.
24
@Omar Alan
I love the NYT, but I am also exasperated by its attempt to be cool probably exasperated by the mix of young people who have a need to constantly beat their own drum.
10
The author here has only disdain for JoJo Rabbit. I think it's the best movie of the year.
I get the criticism of its comical portrayal of Hitler (which Charlie Chaplin did in "the Great Dictator" and Mel Brooks in "the Producers"). But theses critics don't understand what this movie, or the book it was based on, was about.
Set in Germany in 1944, a 10 year old Hitler Youth boy, whose imaginary muse is no less than Adolf Hitler himself, discovers that his mother (played wonderfully by Scarlett Johansson) is hiding a teenage Jewish girl in their attic. What is he to do? What a dilemma?
I won't give any more away, but this movie is really about not following evil, crazed, ridiculous leadership; instead discovering for yourself what is right and what is wrong.
Certainly a lesson for our times as well.
22
@Steven Roth ABSOLUTELY. By far the best movie of the year. I've seen it twice and, while not perfect, it is brilliant in its writing, acting (the boy is wonderful), satire, and topicality.
4
@Steven Roth
you really think that Mr. Morris, who's job it is to see movies, didn't see the movie he criticized? he has a legitimate gripe with it. you love it. chaque a son gout.
1
"For reasons too dumb to get into, I’ve bought four different copies of 'Inside Oscar...'"
Reasons too dumb to get into, but somehow so important that they have to be mentioned anyway.
3
Back when Hollywood started, a bunch of new tycoons (mostly Jewish) got together and created their own studios and made the movies they wanted to make, most of them making money. They created the industry still with us today.
So why, 100 years later, can't black or other minority tycoons (LaBron, Jay-Z, Beyonce, Eddie Murphy, etc.) get together and create their own studio with their mega-fortunes? Why doesn't millionaire Tyler Perry green-light prestige "non-white" movies? That way folks like Morris will be less likely to whine and fuss (every year) how black folks are systematically excluded from the Oscars. Which they are not.
18
More from Wesley, please!
I've been thinking a lot about Hustlers and Jennifer Lopez, especially since Wesley and Jenna devoted a podcast episode to her. So, I don't think she got robbed because, well, Hustlers was just not a good movie. Partly due to the fact that JLo didn't let go of her diva status to be able to give a truly honest performance (I mean, even Mariah Carey accomplished this, so we know it's not impossible). This failure though, is precisely what Wesley is trying to point out, so yeah, thank you! Example: Hustlers was a project by Gloria Sanchez productions, a 'sister' company to Gary Sanchez Productions owned by Will Ferrell and Adam McKay. But like, why the need to segregate the Sanchez's at all? Booksmart and Hustlers were good ideas, had some good moments, but overall were sloppily executed, mostly in post production.
Which makes me think that, just like the rest of us, Gloria is paid 70¢ to Gary's dollar.
2
“Has too many white people” is a political, not cinematic criterion. And you might have mentioned how, in Once Upon a Time, the police finished their investigation and left the scene almost immediately, though the scene of carnage included someone being fried by a flame-thrower. All the while, the Tate party doesn’t miss a beat. Mr Tarantino, I love your movies, but that was a whopper of a continuity problem. Perhaps if you’d added more black people. . . .
4
@Anonymous
Fairy tales are constructed with continuity-problem whoppers.
Mr. Tarantino. I hate your movies, the few I've seen. But the alternative-history, wish-fulfillment ending of your latest, though ridiculous, was perfect.
2
The premise of this opinion article is that three adjectives: "white", "male", and "american" are inherently bad. I take issue with that. It's highly pre-judgemental and dismissive, racist, AND sexist to hold such views. I know, it's very fashionable to hate white men. Can we ... in 2020, make this the year we stop telling white men they are bad? America seems to be obsessed with a very narrow notion of "diversity", along gender and pigmentation. I can think of 1,000 other types of diversity. How about mental health diversity? Joker is about the mentally ill. How about diversity of life experience? 1917 is about the human life experience of traversing the absolute horror of senseless warfare to try to save lives. If these or others are not good movies, nominate others based on their human merits, but enough of dismissing caucasian men. Oh, there are some racist and sexist caucasian men. Most, like myself, are not, and so generalizing to all white men, is simply not helpful.
17
Wesley, you and I both know none of this going to change for AT LEAST a generation (and maybe not even then). Polite cajoling won’t move the needle one bit. BOYCOT. You have the platform. Do something with it.
1
Ford vs Ferarri was a template stamped movie.
The Irishman wasn't even based on facts.
Once upon a time in Hollywood was Tarantino but it was also Tarantino. Been there, done that.....entertaining but not Oscar worthy again.
Parasite! Yes Please!
Little Women? Again?
1917, Band of Brothers, II
Dolomite! How refreshing!
The Two Popes..........only time we actually see a rare glimpse of a little truth out of the Vatican.
Let 2020 be the year of some good art!
5
Quick fix: Voting members represent the diversity of our population:
51% women
39% minorities
5
Awards are about celebrating excellence. Maybe non-white, non-male identifying artists should create better work? Parasite is a good example. The idea of celebrating and rewarding mediocrity because of political correctness and 'inclusivity' is silly, if not condescending.
14
So we should nominate "Bad Boys For Life"
If you really want to take a stand, campaign for who was left off the list (really, your argument is over Queen & Slim and JLo) and who should have been left off (I hated the Irishman).
3
The NBA All Star game will be played next week and over 90 parent of the players will be black.
Sigh
Year after year it's the same story.
White players are totally underrepresented in the All Star game
There can only be one reason: racism
24
"The Irishman" was boring. The actors played all these same roles before, usually better when they were younger.
"Dolemite Is My Name" was funny, interesting & compelling. A true American story, and a substantially better American story than "The Irishman". Eddie Murphy poured his heart & soul into that role & it's a tragedy it was nominated not Best Picture & Best Actor.
5
OK, just so I understand.....
Movies about the past featuring black people = worthy cinema. Movies about the past featuring white people = boring & racist.
Also, Green Book was not a "real" black movie, so its Oscar win didn't count. And when people say they're concerned about "non-white" representation in films, they're not really talking about Asians and Latinos.
Got it.
8
The irony that you, Mr. Morris, casually literally your article with glib and unaware racist dismissals of “old white people“ is not lost on discerning readers. May I suggest that rather than judging a work of art based on the color of the skin of those involved, you judge it based on the content of its creation? 
15
People don’t have anything better to do than watch a bunch of self absorbed, pretentious egos congratulate themselves on their wonderfulness? What a waste of time. Take the dog for a walk.
3
Oscars so Trite.
Find something real to grouse about. And don't rely on the imprimatur of a silly organization designed to line its own pockets by manufacturing confectionary plaudits.
2
I don't understand much of what was written in this article.
5
The Oscars are away to increase business, we all have different opinions about these movies. This is injecting the hint of racism into where it isn't needed. Do you love movies or do you love complaining?
Mr. Morris, why do you think “Crash” was “risibly self-congratulatory”?
2
I’m not a voter but I’m old, 75, and white, germanic specifically. What’s wrong with that? I didn’t choose my ancestors. I suppose I did choose to get old in that I didn’t choose to commit suicide. What makes you think I prefer movies with only traditional actors/plots/whatever? Stop your stereotyping.
20
I didn't even finish reading this. These awards are for quality not diversity. When will you ever learn that?
12
Can someone just come out and say that THE IRISHMAN was not a good film?
3
This is heartbreaking. I saw the title of the article about the best picture nominees being poor choices and I swear before clicking, I thought, "I hope this article is not just another uninformed diatribe about diversity, with no mention of the films' quality. "
Sadly, my thoughts were confirmed. When an avid reader of this paper like myself clicks onto an article with that fear, you no there is a problematic pattern.
12
Please people stop looking to Hollywood for for social progress. It's a billion dollar money making monster that will be glad to make movies made by women, AA, Latino's, Asians, etc, etc,etc (Oops I forgot Gender Fluid) if they think it can make any money. Period, end of debate.
6
This narrative feels forced
3
Is it just possible that these were the best movies that the Academy deemed should be nominated? According to the author it is not. Good Lord are these articles getting tiresome! Not everything that happens in this world is based on racism and the Oscars are one of them. I beg you NYT to use some discretion in what editorials you post because it's obvious you currently do not.
6
I just could not slog through this whole article. Blah blah blah, then yadda yadda yadda . . . all to say that the Oscar nominations this year reflect the institution's history and that history is heavy with, um, racism? and misogyny? Altho I am more repulsed by the overt racism than the also overt misogyn and I am a female.
3
What do you expect from an industry that labels its "artistic creations" "product"?! One that gives awards to people they feel were "slighted" in the past so they get an Oscar this year, even though this year's work isn't as good as past years' or as other nominees this year? When you look at movies that have endured over time as "favorites" or "great films or performances", many were not Oscar winners or even nominees.
So ageism is totally cool, i.e., "all those old white voters," but racism, homophobia, and misogyny--even if of minor and/or unintentional varieties--are stoneable offenses. Got it!
Also, while we're speculating on why only certain types of films seem to get made in any substantial numbers, we might attend to something as basic and entirely unhidden as the profit motive. Films about black, Native American, or Latina experience will simply not get financial backing if the money people are not already convinced that they will see a solid ROI. Whether the studios (even the small ones) are or are not racist doesn't actually address the root problem. (Note that I'm not talking about the effects of disproportionate representation, but rather about its primarily economic causes.)
White audiences will typically only flock to a movie about black experience if that movie features a redemptive story arc that is (a) easily digestible, and (b) likely to make the moviegoers feel good about their own virtue. This is why the execrable CRASH won three Oscars and was apparently considered some kind of landmark statement on race, but Sorry to Bother You generated some scholarly buzz and not much else.
Even smaller, semi-independent films are expensive to make (Sorry cost 3.2M). The execs who green light the funds are just not that inclined to take chances.
Medium-sized genre films like Get Out are, happily, occasions for optimism.
6
Yup, 87% of the population should just shut and sit on the sidelines. Everyone knows that the other 13% is all so much more talented and creative. No wonder Trump, with all the horribleness he represents, commands 50% of the population.
9
@rl -- We all likely recognize your remarks as merely seeking to inflame but not to shed actual light, so let's deal with your facts. And since this article isn't about national electoral politics, I'll stick to the first part of what you wrote.
What does your "87%" purport to represent? It's unclear. But if you're speaking about race, white non-Hispanic people represent about 60% of America. Is it too much to ask that the other 40% see themselves represented by -- just tossing out a wild number here -- 40% of the roles and directing jobs? Do you know that even if you count Hispanic people who identify as white, the number of white folks is around 75%? I bet people of color would be OK with being up for a quarter of these nominations.
2
@Brkln.df White Americans are nearly 3/4 of the population, as a matter of fact.
Ah the Oscars. The annual pretense that the movie industry is not just primarily a money making machine.
Junk the awards, or give them to the highest earners. Time will show us which movies were actually more than mere spectacle.
3
Sadly, in all of this, the author seems to have forgotten one of the best films of this year, with a cast that was largely non-white, non-white director, and which was a brilliant, yet searing social commentary on America from a brilliant, radicalized, Neo-Hitchcock, deeply psychoanalytic perspective...
That movie was Jordan Peele's Us, whose exclusion, of course, has less to do with racial politics and far more to do, I imagine, with the typical content-based exclusion of the close-minded, semi-liberal Academy voters whose idea of film is tired and shallow and superficially political. Such a rebuke of our fantasy America could not possibly merit a nomination, even if, in my opinion, it was the best film of the year.
Nice to see Tarantino in there again, although the more controversial his work (back in the day), the less likely we were to see it getting any nominations.
3
@Kyle "racialized...perspective"—God I hate autocorrect
Thank you for such an insightful, poignant, article. You hit all the right points here. People of color (especially Black Americans) don't need any "consolation prize" or "special consideration" from the Academy. Excellent films are being made and people of color are shining as actors, directors, composers, costume designers, and the like. The outstanding work that artists of color are producing is simply not recognized by the Academy in the same way that the work of White artists is recognized. If anyone were to look at the 2020 Oscar nominees, and consider that these nominees are best of past year, one would assume that only White people are making good films. That is far from the truth. If there is to be any consolation prize in all of this, its that Black artists are creating more and more great work, and that in the end, audiences get to decide what the best of the best truly is.
5
The answer to ALL of this is to create our own... Without their money or help ... by us for all... and that goes for almost every aspect of life we feel left out of ... our own Cable companies not just networks... Our own Care products, Food businesses and movies everything we beg them for inclusion with we need to provide for ourselves...
3
Awards should be given and accepted quietly, surrounded only by one's peers.
1
Ageism and sexism in writing about voters is not the answer. What if someone wrote, "All those old black voters?" It would not and should not be accepted in a publication that seeks to be the publication of record. Nor should "old white voters." Something really sophisticated and ethical is needed. And in news stories it has to be sophisticated and ethical language that pushes the imagination toward democratic and representational ideals.
11
@Joyce
Your point is true. Why do they have categories of races eliminate the categories maybe we could eliminate some of the isms.
I enjoyed this article, and was surprised to see the volume of vitriol in the comments. Did a troll fire get fired up somehow? The overall point is not that these movies are bad (they are great!), and not that we need some kind of Oscar affirmative action (terrible idea), but that this is indicative of an industry where opportunity ($$$) is still concentrated in a certain demographic group, and so, no surprise, that's where the award winners come from. It's disappointing.
It's a personal take on the Oscars, so who cares if it's a bit rambling -- that's what makes it fun.
7
@Travis ...true enough, but things are changing...slowly, of course, but changing for sure...
So...you are saying these are not good films based on the color of their skin...
4
I've been watching the Oscars for over 50 years. I remember great performances and films of color winning. Sidney Poitier, Hattie McDaniel (before him), Mahershala Ali (2), Denzel Washington (2), Morgan Freeman), Halle Berry, Octavia Spencer, Jennifer Hudson, Forrest Whitaker, Jamie Foxx, Whoopi Goldberg, Viola Davis, Cuba Gooding Jr, Louis Gosset Jr, Mo'Nique, Lupita Nyongo, Regina King, 12 Years a Slave, and Moonlight. Ang Lee (2), Rita Moreno, George Chakiris, Jordon Peele, and some I might have missed. All of these people listed won deservedly. I hope more seasoned members are included in the membership, people of color especially, to fairly represent quality in film making.
2
I'm sorry, but "The Irishman" and "Once Upon a Time... in Hollywood" are just bad movies. Like, they stink as movies. In terms of a movie-watching experience, they are simply unpleasant.
After trying to watch "The Irishman" for an hour, I was personally angry at the idea that Martin Scorcese would go out of his way to criticize the Marvel movies. Yeah, they are cinematic junk food, but you know what you are getting.
"The Irishman" is the Peter Luger Steakhouse of movies.
8
@NFC Agree 100% those two movies really do not deserve the nomination. They were both so terrible and disappointing. It just goes to show how pathetic Hollywood has become that such terrible movies get nominated in this category.
1
The problem is attempting to equate art with business. The name of the game is show BUSINESS. And that's all it is: sell tickets, make deals, make money.
Forget any faux "inclusion", or "equality" propaganda. It's ONLY about money. It's run by rich, white men. There is no
"academy" (MUST say it reverently!), that's just a scam.
And more money changes hands getting to the "nominations" than we'd ever want to know.
It was never about any artistic component. Still isn't.
2
The most important movie of the year was Just Mercy. It's amazing it was excluded. If you think it was embellished, read the book.
3
Every year there is a problem with the Oscars. The show is not good, never has been. It's long, boring, gross. A 3+ hour infomercial for the "best" of Hollywood. Will I be watching? Of course I will.
1
Why can’t we put non-white people “where they weren’t?” I think audiences’ minds are far more open than you all assume. We accept and enjoy and appreciate way more unusual and unexpected things in film and theatre all the time.
1
Anyone here who has not seen Parasite.... needs to. Not just the best movie of 2019 but maybe the best movie of 2010-2019.
5
I don't agree with your assessment. Joker is dope and all these movies were well made.
3
The two top picks this year for best actor and best actress appear to be Renee Zellweger who portrays a pill popping and heavy drinking Judy Garland in her last year of her life, and Joaquin Phoenix who portrays a psychopathic serial killer who become the darling of the "average man." Whether Hollywood plant it that way or not, it seems appropriate for the times.
3
As a long standing liberal, this may sound strange but why is it that every conversation about diversity tends to paint the bad guy as an old white male? When will it ever be just about what were the best films and who were the best actors, writers and directors, regardless of race and gender.
Do we really need more films like Get Out and Black Panther or The Irishman for that matter? They really weren't very good movies, whether made by black or white filmmakers. Is it time to stop trying to divide up how many prizes each race and gender got and just get down to the business of making better films, better music and writing better books, period? Oh, and 1917 is far and away the best picture in my book.
11
Sorry but I am a bit tired of a forced "diversity" being applied to the arts in general. As for the Academy Awards, they have become an anachronistic bore which fewer people watch or care about every year. I think its time to just do away with meaningless awards. If Rush Limbaugh can receive a presidential medal on national television, perhaps its time we stopped subjective awards all together. Oh, but that will never happen, because awards are all about money!!
11
Thank you for this article. I appreciate your perspective, even if I don’t agree with every point. Your comment about academy membership and credits is a very specific example of how the Oscars created their own representation problem and I’m really glad you mentioned it.
2
This year I replaced going to the cinema with Netflix. I watched movies/series from Sweden, France, Japan, Korea, Great Britain, Ireland and more with actors and stories representing all viewpoints, whether straight, gay, trans, white, black, Asian, women, men, etc. It is just wonderfully diverse and I just love finally hearing all those voices. Netflix is extremely smart in understanding that to have a global reach you need to diversify the storytelling. I hope the movie industry understands one day, before they are made irrelevant.
6
Why should there be a minority consolation prize for the Academy Awards? And why can't the Academy vote on whom they feel are those performers/artists deserving to be nominated for excellence in their fields, without having to consider that XYZ minority tribe would feel hurt? Many of the new Academy members are non-white, so is it supposed to follow that they would vote in a block to nominate a black person regardless of the quality of their film or acting? If so, doesn't that defeat the purpose of it all? Why have these overrated pop culture awards in the first place?
Hollywood movies vary in quality from year to year, and so why not grant awards for what hundreds of film professionals consider the short-list best of the given year? As it happens, it was a crowded field of great films for 2019. Get over it.
13
I used to resist arguments about the Oscars not being diverse; it did seem like like asking for quotas. What changed my mind was seeing Spike Lee’s “Chiraq.” The idea that such a brilliant, ambitious film didn’t even get mentioned at the Oscars – while other (especially British?) films seemed to become top contenders automatically – struck me as scandalous.
Then again, it helps to remember that the Oscars are simply NOT important, and the amount of attention they receive is ludicrous. In two days, you’ll forget who won.
3
@Kate No, many will not forget who won because movie marketing will be shoving the wins down our throats.
2
Ugh...This article was drudgery to read, particularly from a Pulitzer Prize winner.
On the merits, I like the points raised (even if their presentation was marred).
I would like to see a companion piece to this... Let's have someone defend the Oscar choices and/or to address some of the concerns raised in this article. What would be even more interesting is if that companion article was written by a woman or someone non-white.
I have not watched many movies this year, but before this year's nominees are criticized, let's get a full picture / sense of what's going on and hear a different perspective. Could it be that there were not any non-white or female led movies or nominees or were there but they did not rise to the level of the current nominees? (I haven't seen Little Women yet, so I just don't know). I would like to hear that from someone else, because Wesley Morris either was not interested in it, told to not write on it, or he failed to coherently discuss it.
9
@Drew Drew I so agree with you. This article was such a drag to get through. Last year my favorite film was The Rider which only made a lasting impression with the NY Film Critics and this year my absolutely most enjoyable moments spent at the movies was with Rocketman. What a glorious, bustling onslaught of melody, pain and redemption. The underwater pool scene with Elton as a little boy at the bottom of the pool was an art direction joy and the elevation (literally) at the Troubadour reminded me of all my glorious nights among fellow music lovers each knowing all the words to the songs! A total blast!
3
Black KKKlansman (2018) never played at our local theater, nor do any movies of that 'type,' if you know what I mean. Largely I agree with the top comments here, however there IS a problem with the film industry, and not just on the production end of things.
4
Oh brother.
It must just be me because when I decide on which movie to watch, I don't look to see if the actors starring in the flick are Black, White, Asian, Hispanic (or any other ethnic race which I did not include because I am restricted on the number of characters i can submit).
I look to see if the movie story itself is worth seeing.
And then I look to see if I like any of the actors in the film.
I love Denzel Washington because I think he's a great actor. I also love Tom Hanks, Joe Pesci, Idris Elba and
Mahershala because they're great actors too.
There are times when I am speechless when a movie or a TV series or a particular actor or actress does not make the nomination list. Heck, that happens every year. But that's what happens when something like an awards show is subjective in the choosing and voting realm.
Maybe it's because of all of this political stuff lately, but the last place I want to read about injustice is in the movies and the academy awards show. The real complaint and issue should be if there will ever be a host that is funny but not rude or mean. Bring back Letterman or Billy Crystal.
23
@Marge Keller Right there with ya, Marge
2
@Guin
Thanks! Very much appreciated.
1
"The Farewell" should have been at least nominated -- it was a great film that I personally saw seven times, that where I live in Upstate NY was in cinemas for almost two months. Lulu Wang should have been nominated if not for best director, than best adapted screenplay. Oh well, I saw "Last Christmas" nine times and the critics hated that film.
4
@Benjamin ...well, of course we all have our favorite films that "should" get this award or that award every year...that is no argument for anything other than our likes don't match the awarding group's preferences......
2
I trust everyone realizes that the Oscars are an exercise in marketing more than art appreciation, much less building a better society. If you want the Oscars to be that then you can establish a Ministry of Culture and give it to them, along with the Grammys, Tonys, Pulitzers and everything else, and it can be their job to ensure that good art leads to better democracy.
5
@Thollian Agree, the fact that they'll purposely omit streaming-only films only solidifies how antiquated and exclusive this "award" is. I used to love tuning in to the Oscars but frankly I'm over them as a concept and as a form of entertainment. I haven't watched the Academy presentation in over a decade and rarely do I care whether or not a film, actor or other talent have been nominated when I'm selecting a film to watch.
2
@Guin I haven't watched the Oscars since they dissed Apocalypse Now.
1
This lament is just too much for me to get my mind around and it’s killing my buzz about, well, loving movies.
I’ll just add that:
I disagree with the assertion that we are in the middle of a shift. Things are shift all the time.
Joker is about a comedian? Um, no.
The Academy Awards are just plain silly.
And finally, order a DVD — Atlantics?— through your local public library so it’s accessible.
5
"Joker" seems to be one of those films that people either love or hate. I really liked it and think Joaquim Pheonix deserves the Oscar.
I gave up on the Oscars a long time ago. I still can't believe that Pulp Fiction didn't win best picture in 1994, or Angela Basset didn't win for playing Tina Turner in 1993, and I understand Wesley's frustration at the lack of diversity, but it's really not that important. Years from now, people will remember the brilliant movies that moved them, not who won what award.
5
@Sallie Great performance (Joaquin Phoenix) Dull film.
2
The problem isn't with the Academy, it's with the industry at large. better representation beginning with the studio level will increase representation further down the line. It's not up to the Academy to fix Hollywood's diversity problem. Hollywood needs to fix the Hollywood diversity problem.
This means hiring more female and people of color in all areas from director to hair and makeup. More underrepresented people in those jobs will translate to more nominations and awards.
4
Taika is an indigenous filmmaker. Although not indigenous to North America but he still represents how someone in a colonial mostly white society (much like America) is represented and can thrive as a filmmaker.
Not seeing yourself represented is not a good feeling, but I can't remember there ever being a film like the one Taika created and by someone from his perspective.
Speaks volumes to perspective that this was left out, much like the people the author would like to see who were not represented. Maybe that's how perspective works now? We see what we want to see and the rest isn't considered? Or because we're human that's the way it's always been. 2020 or not.
1
Dear Wesley:
Perhaps you need to find a new job. Movies should be judged for their artistry, their ability to tell a compelling story, their ability to entertain. If your primary concern is representation--get a job as a humanities professor in some university where your anger and protestations will find a small but devoted audience.
And the rest of us can go back to watching movies.
22
I don't think the author was complaining about the lack of representation at the Oscars, but rather pointing out how the push for diversity has resulted in non-white people being pushed into roles in less "artistic" filmmaking, so that they're less likely to appear in award-winning films as a result.
3
@DrD - Dr. D, his point was not so much about representation, but having work by non-white filmmakers being recognized for their work.
1
@DrD - You realize that film studies is a university subject typically taught by humanities professors, right? And that "representation" is pretty much a synonym for "the humanities"?
Also, nobody is stopping you from watching movies and appreciating them based on your own (reductive, narrow) criteria.
1
This is about show business, the emphasis on business, so it's all about the bottom line like everything else in this country.
Next, it's kind of unclear who the target audience of this article is.
Is it directed toward studio executives and Academy voters who decide these things, or is the average film goer to write to someone and demand diversity? Is the author suggesting legislation of some kind? To those who already feel outraged, is there any catharsis from this piece?
Are we to demand movie production and award nominations be allocated according to census data of percentages of ethnic, racial, and sexual orientations?
The author is simultaneously preaching to the choir and providing kindling for those who eagerly weaponize identity politics.
How about solutions instead of the unending airing of grievances? Perhaps speaking directly to those who make the decisions to green-light projects and come up with award nominations would be a start.
3
@steven23lexny - Steven, back in the 90's, Hollywood said that they could not put black people in leading roles because international audiences would not go see a movie with a black lead. In 1995, "Men & Black" refused to send Will Smith to promote the film in Europe and Latin America with the rest of cast, so he paid his own way (bought his own flights and booked his own hotels) and went to the press conferences and audiences loved him.
Prior to 2016 Hollywood said they couldn't cast black people because moviegoers in Asia wouldn't see a film with a black lead, then "Black Panther" become the most profitable Marvel film ever released in China.
Hollywood often makes incorrect assumptions that the public only wants to see films starring and about white people.
5
@Sallie Yeah, they're often wrong. Then as soon as they realize how wrong they are, they bandwagon around that very thing as you've aptly pointed out. Are we supposed to think/believe/hope "Hollywood" is some magical place where people think magical thoughts, produce the right films, always cast the right people? Anyone who does believe that -- or tries to cling to some manufactured belief that Hollywood is supposed to reflect some societal ideal -- is as deluded as our current POTUS' base. Hollywood (and as an extension, the Academies) is a business plain and simple. It runs much like any other business in this country including corruption, criminal activity, cover-ups, and yes, at times, it does embrace artistic brilliance and recognize (though often not so much).
2
Well put -- I agree with everything you said! This is the first year in my life I will not be watching the Oscars; I have just had it! For all the reasons you mention and more. They seem to all but ignore genre film (unless the genre is "war"). Some of the best films and performances have come from Horror (in my humble opinion), but the Academy will not even consider them. This year? "Midsommar" and "Us" needed some props!! I'm still ticked that Toni Collette didn't get nominated for "Hereditary" last year. Nope, I am finally "breaking up" with the Oscars.
2
I think Wesley Morris sincerely loves the movies. I also think that some day he will have to choose between his genuine love of great movies on the one hand--a love which I think transcends demographic categories--and his wish that acclaimed movies give what he regards as fair representation to nonwhitemales on the other. When one gives political considerations priority over artistic ones, art goes out the window. There are only a few really good or great movies every year. There is no guarantee that they will cover a demographic spectrum.
16
To assert that aging white males are incapable of making neutral, objective artistic judgments because of the color of their skin and gender is racist, offensive and hurtful.
73
@Trajan ok is it really hurtful lol
I am troubled that the author of this article dismisses Jojo Rabbit as just another whit, male film when the maker of it, and one of the stars, is a person of color. The extremely interesting thing about the film too is that Taika Waititi wears “white face” to play Hitler, turning years of Hollywood whitewashing and offensive face painting on it’s head while skewering bigots. I’m disappointed that this was all overlooked.
27
@LB I was thinking the same thing. I guess not being American brings with it own kind of invisibility, despite the passing mention. Taika Waititi's indigenous ("native") NZ background is on display in the brilliant short film "Two Cars, One Night"- available on YouTube- which was filmed outside the pub in the town he grew up in, and chronicles the sort of difficult, neglectful impoverished upbringing that he experienced while there. For a more in-depth look, watch "Boy" which expands on this. The last thing Taika is, is a white male, aged or otherwise.
1
@LB In an early scene, Jojo Rabbit shows ten year old boys being taught to hate Jews and kill people. Yes, it is infused with ridiculous satire but fear of death hangs over the entire film. How anyone could describe this movie as a comedy is beyond my imagination.
The Irishman was a terrible movie - sorry, but it was. The make-up and wigs alone were really stupid and ridiculous. Having the characters played by younger actors and age appropriate and then have the standard gangster actors play the parts when age appropriate would have made much more sense. And, I might add, Pacino couldn't play an Irishman if you held a gun to his head, again - sorry, but he couldn't. Love him, but he couldn't and what this movie is, is a memory piece of what these men looked like 40 years ago. What a waste of time.
24
@Patrick De Niro played the Irishman. I'm glad you say you watched the movie tho. Paying attention is hard.
2
@Patrick
Pacino played Jimmy Hoffa, Champ.
2
Art is subjective - its fine if you didn't like the Irishman - others did. ** Small note Al Pacino played Jimmy Hoffa - DeNiro played the "Irishman" which was his "hitman" nickname.
2
Are you suggesting there should be an ‘affirmative action’ in every corner of our lives? Even when movies with non-white characters are just mediocre we should still nominate some of them? Give me a break. The world isn’t as racist or sexist as you think. In fact, most of us don’t give a toss about the Oscars!
32
Celebrities are vacuous and self adsorbed. Their childishness is only surpassed by that of their fans. The Oscars are like any other award, meaningless.
If you think the opinions of vacuous children matters you are part of the problem.
Cultures are the anchors to the past that keep us from evolving. Stop protecting culture.
1
"And even though this is the only movie of the bunch (the only non-Korean, Hitler-free movie) to feature even remotely meaningful parts for nonwhite actors (a bunch of Latinos beat up Joker in the opening minutes; his social worker and neighbor are black women), guess what: He kills a lot of them!"
I must be missing something. I don't recall the Joker killing any nonwhite actors in the movie. Granted, it is vague as to whether he killed his neighbor. But all of the people I remember the Joker killing where white males.
8
@Mike agreed. It feels like he didn't watch the movie right ? ** Also - Todd Phillips and Joaquin came out and said the Joker did not kill his neighbor - "The Joker only kills people who have hurt him" end quote. Per Google
1
@Mike It isn't entirely clear that he killed his neighbor, but I think you're supposed to assume he did.
Insightful piece. Parasite blew most of these out of the water. Adding Waves to my watch list.
7
Tried to read this article but lost interest somewhere after the 5000th word, when I still couldn’t glean one cogent point. Where has well written, concise journalism gone?
28
Boooooooooooooooooooooooooooooring.
Endless self pity is just that.
23
What do you suggest Wesley? At no point in your screed do you arrive at a coherent point. You acknowledge that there's no "shafted movie" but then go on to say that the movies up for consideration are too white (whether they be about white history, directed by white people, etc.
Maybe the proper diagnosis is that there aren't enough persons of color making compelling movies that are worthy or praise by the Academy. And if there are, then in my opinion the fault falls squarely on the shoulders of outlets like yours. What we do with that diagnosis is an entirely separate issue.
My lunch hour is almost over so I'm going to stop here.
11
@Bart J. Most films that get made require that others with the money to back them, believe in them. African Americans have less money on average -- this is because they were not paid for 250 years and were excluded from most jobs, unions, and home/education loans. This means that mostly white people with money need to fund African Americans scripts for them to get made. I think there is a lot of non-white talent out there that is having a hard time convincing the producers that their stories are valuable.
Mr. Morris; instead of writing an op-ed, you should use your skills to write an award winning screenplay, then you'd have your cake and eat it too.
13
this writer will denigrate any film that does not have african americans in it.
he does not even offer up an alternative. just moaning about whites, who make most films.
12
Chris Rock said it best before he hosted the Oscars, “Giving awards for art is stupid.” If this critic or anyone else doesn’t like the nominees, then start your own awards program. Stop whining already.
9
@W Smith The rest of Rock's statement should have been, "but that's not why we're here."
1
I usually don’t comment on Times articles of the arts or movies because I just don’t get to museums, movies or the theater because of where I live and I’m fine with that. I usually wait until video but last year I saw Joker in the theater, and toast month I watched Parasite and Once upon a time.....In Hollywood. Next I’ll watch the rest of the nominees. That being said I was expecting a better written article not one that seems as if it was written by a third grader who was looking to get revenge on his classroom bullies. That’s what this seems like. So, according to the author, Parasite, an excellent, if not for everybody film, that was excellently executed, doesn’t qualify as a minority film because none of the actors are POC? That’s utter claptrap. Playing the race card every single time will win over nobody. Films get nominated because they’re good and because certain elements of the film won over the voters more than other films, not because a woman or a black man or woman directed it. I didn’t even finish the article because the writing style seemed geared more towards millennials than a boomer like myself. NYTimes you can do better.
16
So old, white, straight dudes mostly like films made by white dudes about white dudes. That's a problem - because old white dudes are biased. If we get in there a few queer, young, black dudes - who are never biased, we'll get a balanced vote. Oh - make sure to also include female queer, young black gals - also never biased, and you get a perfect balance.
Enough already. When queer, black, female filmmakers make films about anything other than queer, black female suffering and injustice, we can have a conversation about bias.
14
@Barry I think you just made the point you were trying to argue against. You basically said it's ok for white dudes to make films about white dudes, but queer black female filmmakers... can't make films about queer black females? Should also make films about white men? That's hypocrisy. Just say you prefer films by and about white men and the status quo is ok with you. Others can and will disagree. But don't pretend it's a concern about reverse bias or some nonsense.
2
@Barry
as an old straight white dude I take exception to your comment.
if The Irishman had been Scorcese's first film it would have been his last.
Terentino's films are now just remakes of his first two movies which were remakes of classics.
Another article about how sad it is that so many of the nominees are White. The truth is that the majority of the country is White too so if you want to make hit movies, you should probably make them about things White people can relate too.
There are many talented actors of color out there, but where are the good roles for them to play?
There is nothing wrong with "old white voters." The NYTimes should stop publishing racist remarks like this.
11
Please Google List of black Academy Award winners and nominees to find the Wikipedia chart listing them.
3
This article should be titled "Wandering Musings."
4
Same old, same old! Diversity! Diversity! Diversity! It's really getting annoying!
9
@Mark African Americans were legally tortured for 250 years, prevented from voting for 100 more, and yet most African Americans are kind, civil and patient with the people who have systematically undermined them and are simply asking, can't we do better?
Where is your compassion?
Yeah, but, is "Bad Boys for Life" really "best picture" material? Haven't seen it, but read the NYT review.
Hated "Parasite", liked "the Irishman", actually haven't seen any of the others yet. Don't want to see "JoJo Rabbit" which seems to trivialize Naziism and the Holocaust....but. Don't think I can TAKE yet another "Little Women", woman director aside.
Do we have to make quotas for the Oscars? So many transgender males, so many Pacific Islanders etc? I really hope not.
7
@RLiss JoJo Rabbit does NOT trivialize Nazism and the Holocaust. It is one of the most brilliant anti-Nazi films ever
2
@RLiss JoJo Rabbit is the best movie of the year. Doesn't trivialize the Holocaust at all. Quite the opposite.
2
This is, by far, the worst "analysis" of the Oscars. All of your " but I don't hate it, I love it", "I'm not crazy about it, but let's talk about it", your failed entendres are pitiful. Diversity and your SJW ways doesn't merit recognition in the arts, nor should it be. You don't praise or analyze any of these films.
This an overly-stretched twitter rant. NYT, please for the love of all things Holy, don't publish these tweets again.
10
I doubt you could find a single solitary voting member of The Academy who supports Donald Trump. Yet these left-wing Hollywood titans are a bunch of racists who make themselves fell good by supporting unworthy white actors and actresses? Think about that for a moment.
3
@Erik The issue is not that the nominated performers are “unworthy” (they are a tremendous group of artists),but that the nominated films had very few roles for nonwhite actors.
Your favorite LGBT art house drama from a minority Brooklyn director who acts as well did not win an Oscar, thus the Oscars must be at fault.
This is Meritocracy at its worst
5
I'm so tired of articles like that judge so much - politics, art and personal success -- through the lens of personal identification and race. This article is as racist as the very people it identifies as it's elite white antagonists.
12
@Marc s Hmmm, Marc, I wonder what you would say if every single actor nominated in every category were black.
1
"Woke" now means you are cool with saying old white people are the root cause of any problem you care dream up. I guess I'll go back to "sleep."
9
Expecting the Oscars to celebrate independent, alternative voices or recognizing cutting edge, new voices is a lost cause. It’s like expecting the Grammies to award anything but established mainstream acts (back in the Sixties the Grammies would have you believe The Fifth Dimension was a superior act to The Beatles). The Oscars is an industry award for industry insiders. Even within that narrow framework, the Oscars Best Picture award has often gone to safe picks (I.e. Ordinary People over Raging Bull ?!?)
9
If you think JoJo Rabbit is a Hitler youth comedy, you’ve missed it.
11
What's with the NYT always dismissing white men as some annoying relic we all need to get past? When I read those glib `old white voters' and `dead white men' lines I try to imagine the vitriol that would pour forth like Niagara Falls if you used the word `black' or `brown' instead. This endless woker-than-thou ethnic navel gazing is making the NYT increasingly dull.
19
I suggest that the jury members only be film critics, since it is their job to give damn-near every movie their time, rather than just the "prestigious" stuff.
2
Jeez, learn to write without parentheses...
3
Interesting except for the ageist and rascist author.
9
Isn't the whole objective of the entertainment industry to make money, much like every other industry. These awards only carry meaning for those that want meaning applied. The true winner of 2019 was Avengers: Endgame, followed by The Lion King both netting over $1B USD WorldWide. If anyone tells you otherwise, they don't understand how the world works. Stop griping about a bunch of people giving themselves a pat on the back and if you want to change the system convince people to spend their money on different movies.
6
@Steve Hunt
There is a difference between a gripe and a well informed critique that you, Steve don't seem to appreciate. It is not just about box-office receipts, as you and Wesley -in his last sentence--point out. It about blind spots and viewing white males as the center of the universe in film-- and life.
2
@Steve Hunt I don't think an industry has an objective, given that it's an abstract idea. On a personal level, yes, maximizing profits would likely be the "whole objective" for the shareholders of publicly traded entertainment companies. The objectives for the people making those movies are likely be different -- personal payout, fame, artistic pursuit, opportunity to travel, whatever. We live in a capitalist system, but using that as a singular lens to understand human action implies that one may not, in fact, understand how the world works.
I believe the problem is my deeper than this story speaks too. Some people mention wealth in the comments but maybe focus on the communities where there is a lack there of. Growing up (in the early 00s to early 10s) I remember many people speaking out to reduction of funding and cutting of Music & Arts programs in schools around the country but it never seemed to effect schools and communities in my area ( I grew up in the northern/northwestern suburbs of Chicago where many schools are 1. Mostly white 2. Fairly wealthy) but many minority groups don’t live or cannot afford to live in these areas where there are Music & Arts programs or that didn’t receive significant cuts to those departments. How can we as a country cultivate talented people in the theater/film within minority groups if they aren’t exposed to it and it’s possibilities. Though this is only part of the issue to this problem and no one single thing will fix this issue as a whole, but I do believe it is something that should be more talked about.
4
The article makes the academy voters look like they harbor the same self absorbed resentments as trump voters. In what world?
1
@Narwhal Earth, 2020.
@Narwhal
and the same as anti-Trump voters.
I understand Mr. Morris' critique, but its worth understanding why films get nominated. Nominations happen because of campaigning within the Academy. If your movie gets buzz (like Parasite) or has the right people attached to it (Brad Pitt was a producer of Moonlight), your film gets a better chance of being nominated. Also, you have to hope that your movie is actually seen by members of the Academy. There's no requirement that voting members have to see all the movies. Just like the movie going audience, they see the films that are preferable to their tastes and have the most advertising. Also worth noting that the world of streaming makes seeing movies so difficult because there's just so many works being produced now. Everything can't be nominated.
6
I always thought, in some naive way, that the Oscars were supposed to reward great performances - not to mollify a race or creed or whatever.
22
Giving awards to works of art drains the joy out of living What's the Best Tree on Earth? What mammal got the most nominations? What child is Best Child on Earth? Are there no actual problems we could address if we devoted all that time, money and attention to solving it?
3
Funny, just this morning I was thinking about how the (lone) black characters in two recent PBS Masterpiece series, Howards End and Sanditon, both at some point just stop appearing in their stories - it's odd - the plots just abandon them.
In Howards End, the one black character starts out poor and ill; later, after the death of the man who provides her with (meager) affection and sustenance, her situation becomes truly dire - at which point the story abandons her and proceeds to its "happy ending." In the original work, this character is white. I am not sure why they chose to cast a black woman, but if anything, that made me more conscious of how casually the story forgets her, as if her terrible fate (inadvertently caused by the white characters) didn't signify. It's esp ironic considering that a main theme of the story is the reconciling of the heroines' liberal ideals with the reality that their comfortable lifestyle is sustained by money made by ruthless businessmen oppressing laborers, etc.
Sanditon was a bit different because the one black character in the PBS series was black in the original novel. But the adaptation changed her from sickly to feisty, connected her more integrally to the hero and heroine, and built a major subplot around her. So it felt very odd when the story at some point just drops her. And the creators of that series don't have the excuse of being constrained by the original because the Austen novel was unfinished.
5
@mm: I, too, was excited to see Miss Lamb have an interesting plot line, but I don't think she was dropped. It's clear the writers set the series up for a second season, and it's clear that Miss Lamb's story is supposed to be continued -- she still wore the locket with her lover's portrait, and we saw her look at it, an obvious indication that she had not put him out of her mind. He pleaded for a second chance, and she wisely refused him, but I don't think he is gone forever from her life. I would LOVE to find out what happens to Miss Lamb. The trouble is, I've heard that Sanditon was not renewed for a second season, so we won't get to discover what happens to everyone. The first season left us with a cliffhanger. Sanditon fans need to write to the BBC and urge them to produce a second season. It was a great first season!
3
@Allison It never occurred to me that there might be a second season!! LOL.
I was shocked by the ending, partly because Austen would never have ended a novel like that. I was imagining till the last second that Miss Lamb would hear about the problem and offer to guarantee a loan!! Why didn't it occur to her ward and friend to ask her?
Btw, I am surprised to hear it did not get renewed. It had so many ingredients I'd have thought would guarantee its popularity. I will write the BBC - it would be great to have better closure, lol!!
1
Remember when Marlon Brando sent the Native American woman to accept his Oscar and they BOO'd her . So much for accepting people that are not like us Hollywood. History repeats the old conceits. Marlon was wise well beyond his times.
5
@bonemri
He was offensive, brash, and crazy - but happened to sublimate his oddness with acting.
1
@bonemri Were they booing Sacheen Littlefeather, or were they booing Brando's boycott of the Oscars and sending her to make a political statement that might have been more powerful had he delivered it himself, as Joaquin Phoenix did the other night at the BAFTAs?
I find the tenor of most of these responses so disappointing. Mr. Morris made no claim that people of color should win all the awards, or win every year, he was calling for the Academy, and by inference all the other award granting film institutions, to recognize that one particular perspective on what makes a movie “great” or award worthy has held sway for too long. Not all of us are excited by tales of war, certainly there are other ways of understanding courage than being under direct fire, there are other tales of greatness than who can make a car go fastest, and there are other tales of families than a middle class white couple whose marriage is dissolving.
This year we had Waves, Just Mercy, Us, and Hustlers, to name a just a few, with excellent performances, good direction, and terrific storytelling. But there is not a single nomination from these movies, any one of which I would put up against Marriage Story or The Irishman for complexity and drama. They are stories of different lives and different perspectives then those we usually see. That does not make them less, it makes them different. And it is that diversity of lived lives worth filming and honoring that is being asked for of the Academy.
16
@B R
The Oscars are about the movies that were made and chosen, not about other possible movies that weren’t made.
1
@Phil Coates I mentioned several that were made. Not getting your point.
Lessee,
The movie industry is dominated by white males like Harvey Weinstein, and the writer complains about the white bread offerings nominated for prizes.
In our land of diminishing resources, there are hundreds of movies produced each year. 20 of them have distribution funding, the rest disappear after a week in the public sector. The streaming industry can help us view hard to find movies, but people in their living rooms aren't voting for the Oscar winners.
The Oscars always celebrate the rich and famous. Nothing much has changed except the movie titles.
4
@Zeke27
It’s a tad over the top to say that all the white males who have power in Hollywood are “like Harvey Weinstein.” Such a claim could easily be seen as both sexist and racist.
3
As a professional screenwriter who has sold many scripts to the studios, I take particular issue with Mr. Morris' glib dismissal of credits to become an Academy member.
While I see real benefit in diversifying the Academy's membership, to suggest that people with barely any credits (or no credits at all) should get in is deeply insulting to those of us who have spent our professional lives developing our craft.
Professional credits are the coin of the realm in Hollywood. For everyone, no matter what color, gender or sexual orientation. When we start giving NYT columns to people who have never written a word, but are "really interested" in journalism, then I will be fine with handing out Academy memberships to people who have in no way distinguished themselves in their field in the movie business.
82
@Sparky Your point of view is understandable - you worked hard to earn your credits so everyone should have to do that. Sounds sensible and fair. But the reality is that for many people of color, there are extra, often insurmountable, obstacles to success, even for those who are talented and hardworking. Discrimination was LEGAL in this country when I was a kid (I am 65), and is still rampant; mass incarceration continues to decimate communities of color; people of color are still subject to separate and unequal housing, education, medicine, etc. So, while you are right to value fairness, you might have to rethink your framework to take into account that the playing field is not level in the first place.
9
@mm I hear what you're saying and I do support diversity in hiring even though it disadvantages me personally because I recognize the value in giving people who were historically underrepresented a leg up.
But the honor of being asked to join the Academy must be earned, at least to some extent. To award that honor to people who have virtually no credits or credits on nothing films truly serves no one. It will take longer for the Academy to diversify organically. But it is the only fair way to do it.
3
Regardless who makes up membership in the Academy, the mistake is in believing Hollywood is a meritocracy. It never has been and it never will be. So long as that is the case, we cannot expect it to be representative of America. May the best awards campaign... I mean film win!
10
I don't think it's as simple as "Oscar judges are racist." People like what they like, and that is usually based on seeing a film that resonates with them. By all means, let's get a better mix of Academy members in there to freshen up the voting and give other films some visibility.
However, how do you substantiate the claim that all those films are about white people? Take "Marriage Story," for example. Is it about white people because the two lead actors are white? Is that all it takes to disregard the universal messages and undertones about marriage, committment, family, forgiveness, betryal, etc..and unilaterally declare it a "film about white people." Maybe, just maybe, part of the problem is that you're missing the forest fo for the trees.
28
This really is an old complaint. It's not that important (we are talking about Hollywood, after all.) And it's becoming tiresome.
44
@Nat Because you think its old you think it isn't relevant... You are wrong on so many levels and are too apart of the problem
1
I always wonder what I am missing.
The Oscars-machine points everyone to watch a select group of films which, as the author notes, are from a particularly narrow slice of the artistic and entertainment pie. I know there is a much greater and diverse artistic world out there — but it’s harder to explore, particularly after the blaring Oscars spotlight and promotional machine has occupied the available big screens.
I’m fine with The Oscars as they are. What I am missing is a readily accessible what to explore other films, other viewpoints, and other artistic visions that don’t match those of the Oscar voters.
4
Wesley, as usual, well stated. But essentially, the issue is not with the Oscars -- the Oscars are a symptom of the problem, not the problem itself. The issue is with the film industry. Why is Joker staring a white person? And don't answer "because the character is white" because the first person to play the Joker to wide audiences was Casar Romero (Cubin/Spanish). I don't see why that part had to be played by him. I love Adam Driver and Scarlet Johannsen as actors, I do. But why not cast people of color in those roles? Why not make a gangster movie in the style of the Irishman but have it be about an old time black mob boss? I think that Wesley is stating that if more movies are made with more diverse casts, then the Oscars will follow. Similarly, if more women are directing, then more women will be nominated.
10
@Gabe Your point is actually what I took away from his article. The Oscars are showing what's wrong with the industry.
4
@Gabe Caesar Romero was white. The fact that he was from Cuba doesn't change the fact that he was 100% European.
Maybe I'm having a slow day but this article seemed detached from the sub-headline which drew me to it.
Not sure what the point of this piece was.
13
The article's sub-head is click-bait, designed to lure readers who, if they knew the true theme, would avoid it.
2
Apparently the Oscars, unlike the NYTimes arts section, does not use social justice as its sole litmus in determining a work's merit
73
"All those old white voters?" Racism and bigotry are alive and well.
90
@JB Especially after the Academy invited the most diverse group for membership in the organization's history a year or so ago.
5
God awful films.
2
It seems to me that Mr. Morris set out to write a piece lambasting this year's Oscars and then couldn't figure out why. For the record, I think he's actually being far too kind to this year's Best Picture nominees, of which only "The Irishman," "Little Women" and "Marriage Story" truly deserved their nominations. Some of the others are more or less okay but hardly the stuff of greatness. I agree with him about "Joker" but would also cite "1917" as a movie whose problems way outnumber its attributes ("War is Hell," is not what you'd call a controversial statement, and a camera style that organizes and prettifies its chaos doesn't allow for even that point to be made effectively). I can easily come up with a half dozen worthier candidates for the year's best film (hello, "Ad Astra") but, then again, nobody asked me.
8
@stu freeman... I stopped reading your comment when you included “The Irishman” as worthy of an Oscar nomination. Really? Three great actors play roles they’ve rehashed several times for a script that anyone who’s watched The Godfather, Goodfellas or Casino a billion times could have developed. I’m surprised Ray Liotta wasn’t cast for that abomination. Seriously? Best movie. I guess Pacino, De Niro and Pesci needed the money to so willingly cashed in on their star power.
1
My current landlord, for about one more week, is a member of the academy. It's been a bit of an eye-opener to the whole process. For instance, if an academy member doesn't like an actor's politics - such as outspoken RDN - they won't vote for anything that they do; no credit given to whether the movie is good or not for any reason: not directing, supporting cast, costume, etc., nothing. In fact, I was informed that if someone they do not like is in the movie, they won't even watch it. The opposite is also true, of course. So not much open-mindedness going on at the Oscars. Just another fawning old-boys show with a dollop of petty callousness and a heap of bigotry tossed in for good measure. These Hollywood types really hate it when you don't suck-up to them, and give them freebies, and then they complain when they don't, or didn't in years past, get enough attention. What a spoiled bunch of brats, basically, with no sense of real life at all.
13
Hollywood is about money not art... not race... not gender... not politics. Money. If producers can make money off of any of the aforementioned groups they will produce the films. And they have. I have never seen so many films that are about gender and race issues over the past few years. And most are boring to bad. Instead of giving then Oscars nominations... they should go direct to video.
23
I despise the Oscars. They are, and always have been, nothing but a cheesy marketing gimmick, where clear-cut bribery and favoritism outrule both measures of quality and popular preference. Stunning performances are overlooked for either scenery chewing or simply ordinary acting. Year after year, films that last down the ages are cast aside so schmaltzy forgettables get the prize. I mean, "Citizen Kane" for decades set the standard for extraordinary film making becoming the legend it deserves. Meanwhile it lost to "How Green was My Valley", which, AFAIK, nobody under 75 has ever seen, and nobody under 50 ever heard of.
Or when Jimmy Stewart's good, but pedestrian performance in "The Philadelphia Story" (which wasn't nearly as good as Cary Grant's in the same movie) took home "Best Actor" when Henry Fonda's STUNNING and transcendental "Tom Joad" in "Grapes of Wrath" was passed over--"Too controversial" I guess. I could give a 100 more examples up to and including last year's "awards".
And it's all in a boring show with stupid, when not downright tasteless jokes.
So, thanks but no thanks. I don't expect to watch it again.
12
I am a 22 y/o white girl living in a heavily white U.S. city. And I am severely disappointed with these comments.
Is it not possible for (obviously also white) NYT readers to respond thoughtfully to comments by a black critic of arts? These responses scream of the same incompetence to handle discussions of race I witnessed in the comments of Kaitlyn Greenidge’s review on the “bearable whiteness” of Little Women. Her point about empathy being required in one direction and optional in the other seems at play here.
After watching Little Women, and previewing the trailer for Bombshell, I talked with my mom about my frustrations: why are new films SO white? Her excuse (though well intentioned) was that the stories themselves were contextually white. I agreed, mostly. The problem is not the casting of talented white actors. The problem is the INSISTENCE of the film industry to, almost exclusively, tell stories about white folks. As this author notices, it seems there is no period of history the industry won’t scour to ensure the stories told remain about white folks. And that excellent stories told about black folks remain situated on slavery. There is so much room to grow, and there has been for some time.
20
So well written, and so very, very true.
2
"Whiteness here is a tragic, symbolic condition..."
Oh, please. If anyone wrote that blackness is a deeply tragic symbolic condition they'd be (rightly) panned for racism. Oscars is notable for having bent over backwards to give prizes to minority productions even when these were clearly subpar - eg, Moonshine.
Give the Oscars to movies people want to watch, period.
29
@Kai you couldn't even get the name of the movie right (it's a wonderful film, but I won't be convincing you).
1
We need affirmative action for the Oscars. Movies should be assigned bonus votes based on the sexuality, race, gender, topic, and political inclinations (oops.. no, that's already in there) of directors, writers, cast, and technical staff. We weight average those scores and come up with a composite score that is then reviewed by our most progressive media, which then determines the final rankings.
12
@Ronald Weinstein I can't tell if you are kidding
@Ronald Weinstein Why do we need that stuff for the Oscars?
I stopped being enamored of the Oscars--and the Eurocentricity they invariably represent in an anachronistic fashion--years ago. I mean Woody Allen said it best in "Annie Hall": "Awards, awards. All they [Hollywood] ever do is give out awards. They give out awards for the best dictator currently oppressing his people." I think it's too bad Trump wasn't nominated for that category.
3
I’m with you on that bloated epic, “Crash.” To think it won Best Picture over “Brokeback Mountain” still makes my stomach churn.
8
I doubt very much I will watch this year. It seems to get worse each year. Several Nominations are abominable, Marriage Story, Banderas,,,,,,,why waste a good Sunday evening.
Scorsese has only one won Oscar for best picture and best director in his 40plus years of making undeniable classics. Maybe the academy is racist towards Italian Americans?
24
I am Asian, but I simply think they’re just telling stories. Too much focus on race is no different from “you own this prize bc of your race”. It’s a time where everyone knows racists can only be white ppl. I cherish pc a lot, but focusing it too much might lead you away from real arts. I watched all of these movies and they can’t be concluded in such a simple way: a story about white ppl. They’re all great great movies about complex humanity which is beyond race.
18
Life is not about proportionate representation of every group of people in every human activity. Would we change Olympic rules because one thinks too many Kenyan runners or Chinese athletes win gold medals? Why not change the game of basketball and have more Asians in the NBA? Change rules of spelling bee because too many Indian-Americans win it?
No one of any group is entitled to favorable outcome or awards because of their ethnicity, gender, religion, age, nationality, etc.
As societies and countries change, hopefully, life will be more equitable for all. But, we need to stop excusing our own inadequacies by pointing fingers at others.
21
@Jack
"No one of any group is entitled to favorable outcome or awards because of their ethnicity, gender, religion, age, nationality, etc."
This is precisely the opposite of what identity politics tries to foist on us. Some groups, apparently, are special, and entitled.
2
I think the old male white writers/actors/directors/producers know their contributions to modern story telling are not now in step with modern audiences, so revisit the times past where their credibility and authenticity were the only game in town and seek to maintain their dominance in the industry til it's pried from their cold dead hands.
No one lives forever and eventually subsequent generations will have their shot at steering the zeitgeist. May we all remember when our time comes to gracefully hand over the wheel to the generations that come after us and learn to listen to and learn from their stories instead of demanding that our experience define the status quo.
4
@Megan
Weren’t these old male writers/actors/producers/directors once young, just like anyone who has ever lived?
I've seen five of the films and "Marriage Story" was by far the best of the lot.
"Once Upon a Time ....In Hollywood" was kind of a cheesy mess
but I'm fine with it winning because of the production values and the great Brad Pitt.
Whoever asked where is the nomination for "Us"..... I agree.
I watch a lot of British TV shows, and so many have diversified casts that you don't even see the racial difference between the characters. It's so natural. Also, I'm surprised that Pain and Glory was not mentioned in the comments, one of the most beautiful movies made this year and by a Spanish director. I have seen all of the black movies made in recent years, and paradoxically, the audience was mostly white.
4
In one arena, people are bashed for not telling other people's stories from other people's perspectives. In another, they are bashed for "exploiting" other people's stories or not telling them with enough skill and authenticity (think "American Dirt"). It's a tough line to walk.
18
@Natalia
I'm not so sure it's really that tough a line to walk.
For starters, if the industry weren't so overwhelmingly white, it wouldn't be a question of telling "other people's stories."
P.S. The people really being "bashed" in this country are mostly black and Hispanic
2
Just a reminder that the Golden Globes, the film critics, the Producers Guild, the Directors Guild and the BAFTA awards all pretty much picked the same movies. So I do not understand why people wait until the Academy does what everyone else has already done to protest. These conversations have to happen a lot earlier for anything to be done about it. The consensus is built early, like in September, and it rarely changes. That is how the system works now. It should not be all on the Academy.
3
@Sasha Stone These conversations have been happening for a long, long, long time. And, as the leading entitiy in Hollywood, much should indeed fall on the Academy. Much.
2
Not a single phrase in this article discussed the artistic quality of any of the movies. Not a word about plot, performances, or how entertaining they were. Interesting.
49
@KC Because this article is not a review of the films as films. It's a reflection on the Oscars and their selection process at this moment in history.
5
@KC I think Wesley states in the opening graphs that he adored all of the movies except for Joker and he is not arguing the merits of the films, but he is arguing that representation in film (be it with women directors or non-white actors or non-white stories) is the real issue. The Oscars reflect the film industry and thus when it is Oscar season these issues are heightened because the Oscars "mean" something. I think what Wesley is arguing is that the value of the Oscars is lessened when they reflect a body of work that is not in-step with life in 2020.
3
So, we have moved from artistic and entertainment quality to identity quotas for characters? artists? writers? producers? actors? actresses? What is the legitimate quota distribution to make a film "acceptable?" Isn't it interesting that, rather than focusing on the "joylessly algebraic nomination process," we have no discussion of why more and more Americans are not going to the movies because of the schlock and politically correct gunk served up at $13+ per ticket? The artistic decline of film, rather than the latest quota apportionment so that we allegedly "look like America" to the hyper-racially sensitive, would interest me far more.
34
@JOHN A very common, and - frankly - tired arguement. Usually made by white people. I won't try to guess the commentors race.
@John Ryan One could also say that quota counts are also "tired," and I would not guess the commentator's race because it's irrelevant. Either we are a country where arguments stand on their own, irrespective of color, or we are a racialist country that has now shifted to say that "arguments of/by/advocated from claimants of" color get extra points because of that fact. In other words, the old reverse discrimination redressed under some new euphemism.
1
Well, they are paying you to be predictable. so you go on...
Whatever can be said about the Academy Awards, it is not (and has never been) a "now it's our turn!" thing. This mindset doesn't really work with anyone who counts.
9
Make movies about life. Most of these films just aren't that compelling. Really. They're well crafted in many ways, enjoyable in many ways. But they're not really "I see the world differently", or "I felt something new," or "I got an insight into myself or my fellow humans", or even "I see our nation's history differently" films. They're entertainments. And that is the mainstream film industry. The relevance factor is way down for the most part. They don't really grapple with things. If they did, you'd automatically feel a diversity of perspective and experience, regardless of the specific racial and gender makeup of the cast and crew. And I do think that approach would find more African Americans and women and others in front or behind the camera. Ultimately, Hollywood makes cliches, and they don't try very hard not to. So any diversity tends to feel like tokenism anyway.
5
When did it become acceptable and even laudable to stereotype an entire group of people with phrases like "old white voters" and "dead white men" (the latter even has its own initialism, DWM)? These phrases are used so glibly and reflexively that they have become normalized and the characteristics attributed to these groups seen as universal truths, which is exactly why stereotyping is so insidious.
57
@Anonymous I agree that the terms are glib and dismissive. However, a film made by someone who isn't white and male is often overlooked by the majority white and male voter not because of some malice, but because of some subconscious dismissive predilection that pushes away such films. Moonlight was an aberration. No one saw it coming. It's amazing to me now that it won 3 years ago. But the larger issue is that great artists who are truly gifted are being denied access not because of their talent or skill, but because of their gender or race. "#OscarsSoWhite" isn't about the Oscars as much as it is about Hollywood being still "an old boys club". As much as I love Martin Scorsese's work, I find Greta Gerwig much more refreshing to watch today. I'd love more of what she is offering and a little less of what he is offering. I want more of the inventive directing from Jordan Peele and less of what Sam Mendes has to offer me. Imagine what Jordan Peele -- with his sense of story and shock would have done with Joker. I'd love to see that movie.
1
@Anonymous. "When did it become acceptable and even laudable to stereotype an entire group of people with phrases like "old white voters" and "dead white men" (the latter even has its own initialism, DWM)?"
About 3 years ago.
3
I hope “For Sama” wins an Oscar.
#Aleppo
#SaveIdlib
3
I agree with only one thing in this article: some of the movies considered for awards are not worthy. But that has nothing to do with the color of the skin of their director/writer/cast. They were substandard on their own merit. The Irishman is abysmal in so many categories that it belongs definitely more to the Rasberry Awards selection than anywhere else.
8
The director of Jojo Rabbit is a bi-racial Jewish Maori from New Zealand. That's about as minority as you can get in the U.S. of A.
I agree that one thing this crop of movies all share is telling stories from (white) male perspectives of history. As time moves forward I hope this will change and more movies will be made from women's and minorities perspectives.
8
@Lisa I think Wesley Morris knows this. But, Joker, The Irishman, Ford Vs. Ferari, 1917, Marriage Story, Once Upon a Time In Hollywood (6 of the 9) are white male directors with all white mostly male starring casts. That's not an Oscar issue, that's a Hollywood issue.
1
I'm disappointed this year's crop of great filmmakers, actors and directors are being belittled based on their race and gender. Art is art. Good films are good films. When we start judging art based on the artist's race or gender, we no longer see things through the lens of merit, but something else entirely.
16
Look, according to the U.S. Census Bureau, the percentage of blacks in the US population is 13.4%, the percentage of Hispanics is 18.3%, and the percentage of mixed race people is 2.7%. "Whites" -- and let's keep in mind that such a vague label erases an enormous amount of very unprivileged ethnicity -- comprise 76.5% of the population. So, why, suddenly, should every situation, film, program, news article, and award show have to represent (in much greater proportion than in our actual society) the angry, loud voices of a vastly smaller subset of individuals? If you look at our country as a group of 10 people about to eat a cake, why has it come to the point that it's ok for 1 of those people to feel he deserves two-thirds of the cake? I'm just talking math, people.
60
@dannycostello
No, really, you're not. But if you do want to talk numbers, how do you account for the fact that so many of the films are by and about men?
1
@dannycostello
Nowhere, nowhere in the article, does it says that someone is asking for more than "half the cake." How about equal representation?
3
@Thad
Maybe the people who have, or can raise, the money to make films are just men, and they just don't want to make films about women, or other culturally-different groups of people. Obviously, if those more diverse films were making enough money to satisfy the moneylenders, they would also be being produced. The one thing you can't say about Hollywood producers is that they're not greedy.
2
After reading through many of the comments thus far, I started to see a pattern: They criticize the article's author for his complaint about the lack of racial diversity in cinema. They ask, Where are the alternatives? Where are the great movies featuring POC?
To all those commenters: You're making his point.
Only 12.6% of film directors are minorities. The percetnage of minority writers is even smaller. When the pool of directors and writers is so small, what do you suppose is the statistical probability of a director creating an Oscar-worthy film?
Hollywood continues to nurture and support film-making that is predominantly white-funded, white-produced, white-directed, and white-acted. It's a systemic issue that inevitably sees big movie money directed toward minority directed and acted films only in certain genres (superheroes, action films). And before anyone starts claiming director Kathryn Bigelow as the exception to the rule, keep in mind that her work has been focused in male-dominated arenas (soldiers, cops).
The alternatives to this current crop of nominees aren't there because the money isn't there.
10
There’s a reason that business tends to prevail where governances fail. Generally business is the art of enticement, of honey, and governance the artlessness of edict - with a vinegar dressing.
The failure of Hollywood woke-ness with all its munchausen seeking of emotional injury is its tendency toward governance - mandating preachy scripts and outcomes.
So the depressing propagandistic woke movies with few exceptions have bombed horribly. At some point there is no more money to fund bad product for a nonexistent audience.
5
@Mia I'd say you are incorrect about many things, but the your gravest error is to think that the money will dry up. There will always be money to fund bad product!!!
I find it hard to be sympathetic because it's obvious that when the shoe is on the other foot there is no effort made to share the spotlight or to act altruistically towards others. The demands for inclusion are always a one way street.
22
@Lisa R You're absolutely right! Those selfish people who simpley wanted to give women the right to vote! Those idiots who thought it might be good to fight anti-miscegenation! The fools who thought the gays should be taxed equally in their relationships as the straights! All those people demanding inclusion were careening carelessly down a one-way street!
You have it wrong, Lisa, and history isn't on your side. The fight for inclusion, which, being a woman I'm sure you appreciate, usually initiaties from those who simply want equality in a world that has never wanted to "share the spotlight."
1
I thought this was going to be an article on the artistic merit of movies. Why does everything have to be about social agenda. Movies are about entertainment. The true measure of how good a movie is is how well it ages.
43
Frankly, I stopped watching the Oscars a while ago. I used to be a serious movie buff as a teen. I would buy Leonard Maltin's guide and rifle through films I'd seen. I was big on old B&W films. VHS tapes of Oscar highlights when Marlden was president were in my collection.
Then one day I started to wonder why we care so much about this. What are the qualifications? Why do we care so much about what a particular industry thinks of itself. We've all seen awards for films that weren't exactly the best.
I took it one step further with films. I used to read reviews, A.O. Scott and Peter Travers were tops for me. EW magazine, Rolling Stone, NYtimes, WAPO, LAtimes, ... and then one day I also decided I would never read a review before watching a film. It was refreshing to not be conditioned. Eventually I got to the point where I barely look at reviews even after watching a film, unless I want some insider info etc.
As entertainment, Oscars and other award shows, ok. But, maybe we should find a way to care and highlight the achievements of things that really matter for our future existence on this planet with the same gusto. There was a commercial a few years ago about young people wearing t-shirts with a scientist's face and harping her achievements. Don't remember what it was selling but I liked the idea.
Young people looking up to brilliance not superficiality.
Then again, it is 2020 and look at who's president. Image still sells, both ways.
7
I never actually see any evidence of a systematic denial of opportunity for women and persons of color to make movies. This seems to be an assertion that has come to be taken as an established fact. Their absence from Academy Awards nominations or selection by itself doesn't support the notion that they have no chance to make movies that ought to be considered. Of course, I don't know much about how movies get made. Enlighten me. As for the analysis of how many movies deal with the past or the future, I think you're greatly overreaching in trying to make anything of this.
11
@John Films are made when someone— a studio, a director, or a group of investors— believe it will make money, so they fund it.
1
@ John Isn't the whole Weinstein affair an example of the systematic denial of opportunity for women? Imagine a system where men had to give sex to old men in order to be involved in film-making?
Agree with you entirely, but like current politics, one needs to detach from the realities of the choices as they're all so questionable. I was dumbstruck that "Us" got no major nominations, whereas "Marriage Story" is being crammed, like food down the gullet of a goose, by Netflix onto Academy voters. "Marriage Story" is at best a film school student's good try at a first effort, but by no means an Academy contender in any category. This does seem like the year of old white men.
6
I’m all for diversity in the film industry, but the criticism for this years’ Oscars is a bit out of hand... In the 2000s, African-American actors took the best actor award twice in three years (Forrest Whitaker and Jamie Fox), and just three years ago, Moonlight took the awards for best picture; I can’t see a tragedy if this doesn’t happen every year, I guess...
32
How can the author cling to the notion that an ensemble of incredible movies are worth bemoaning simply because they are by or, more perplexingly, 'about' white people? Yes, the industry should be more inclusive but no, the quality of a good movie cant not measured by these metrics.
15
@A I'm assuming you're white.
1
Where's a story about Joaquin Phoenix's speech??? That's front page material.
1
This again?
Tiresome, indeed.
48
One hundred years ago or so, when I was in high school, there was a rule that our 10-member cheerleading squad was required to have two black girls. It didn't matter if they were completely uncoordinated or simply couldn't follow the routines. They were on the coveted varsity squad ONLY because of their skin color. And everyone knew it....and nothing is as vicious as a senior class.
The system, the idea, the concept - no matter who well-intentioned - failed. And movies are no different.
11
@Emma Woodhouse
Well the minority girls should of started their own squad so they wouldn't have to be around uncoordinated white girls and their racism.
I don't have an interest in seeing white people on the screen see enough of them and their antics everyday, so Hollywood=golf=racism= why brother life is to short to deal with paying to see white people on the screen.
However there were very good minority films this year and like the ignorance of stupid white people they were never given a chance.
Don't worry we have enough black directors, screen writer, performers we dont need white people to green light our projects. keep doing Little Women, Little men, and all things white
2
Note to Mr. Morris: Most people don't care about the Oscars any more than the Iowa caucuses. The media may say it's a shame they both get such endless attention, but it's the media (including the NYT) who keep shoving stories about both at us, endlessly.
I'd be glad not to read another word about either for a good long while.
14
@Frank O:You could have experienced that sense of gladness when you saw the word "Oscars" above Mr. Morris' op-ed. Yet you took the time to read and respond to it: another story about the Oscars.
The human instinct to bemoan that which we are drawn to does not surprise me. Self-deception and hypocrisy appear to be existential necessities, especially for adulterers, unfaithful lovers, and politicians--and in particular a certain one who has occupied all three of the foregoing categories, as well as currently the White House on occasion. He has combined and deployed self-deception and hypocrisy as no politician has never done before. I for one cannot wait for a biopic that can capture this man's intellectually and financial inadequacies and insecurities, which a frightened Donny tries to keep hidden beneath a mask of execrable egoism.
Why not get rid of best picture Oscar and replace it with Best White Picture, Best Black Picture, Best Latinx Picture, etc. Get rid of the Best Actor Award and replace it with Best Black Actor, Best White Actor, Best Asian Actor, etc. And so on, you get the idea. Or perhaps one of the five new award shows that seem to appear every year will adopt this system.
8
@P.T.
Sounds like a good plan to me.. right now all we se is the best picture by white people who are always behind the scenes of every picture that is made.
When all the white people go up to get their awards, they are all over the place with their whiteness.
Hollywood= Trump=Rush= Whiti racism
It's unfortunate that Wesley Morris missed a compelling and deep insight into the contemporary intersection of race and class. In "Joker," The miserable life of Arthur Fleck and the enviable life of Thomas Wayne are defined by their social distance to black and brown people. The misery of Arthur is most clearly evidenced by his inability to have any social distance nor power over racial minorities: they are his neighbors, social worker, bullies, tormentors, and a target of his affection. The film answers the question, "If you are white, do you know when you are down and out in American society?": you have to live with black and brown people. The great violence that Thomas Wayne committed on Penny and Arthur Fleck was to drop them from his bubble of white privilege and condemn them into black and brown poverty and squalor that grinds and breaks them. The presence of characters of color in "Joker" is a lot more important in the story than simply being killed off or being in the background. Slightly more critical reading can place them at the center.
11
@UC Graduate That's a fascinating way to look at it. Personally, though so far I've only seen the last half-hour of "Joker" (semi-accidentally, because I wasn't interested in seeing a comic book movie) I was enthralled by its plunge into the malevolence and damnation of mental illness, and how the public creates "heroes" out of psychopaths. To me, it's a no-brainer that Joaquin Phoenix deserves Best Actor.
So artistic merit doesn't matter anymore... The criteria is it has to be pushing an agenda and have "cultural relevance" and that's it? Whose culture? What relevance?
25
@Ansley
I guess it is the white culture since that is all we hear about everyday.
mayor Pete said minorities don't have role models and he wonders why no self respecting minority wants o be in his camp.
Hollywood doesnt pay white women their fair share in wages and minorities aren't even given an interview.
So don't worry white people you guys have it all wrapped up.
Can we please stop grouping Jojo Rabbit in with the white crew. Taika Waititi is MAORI. This guy, who wrote, directed and starred in the film, is of the indigenous people of New Zealand. How many NZ director's films ever get nominated? Not many. How many native NZ director's films ever get nominated? Even fewer.
36
@Esther. He is also half Jewish. But JoJo Rabbit is far and away the best, most original film of the year.
2
Different races have different tastes.
Most of the “black” movies that get Oscar attention are movies made with or about blacks, but made for white audiences. Black Panther being the exception that proves the rule.
Take a look at top box office for black movie goers, that will illustrate what Hollywood has known for ages.
2
Last year a black male and a black female won in the Oscars as did a movie about racism. And yes, in a former year recently, the wonderful Moonlight beat out LaLa Land, as it should have. So I'm trying to understand the complaint here: is it that every year black actors and filmmakers should win? And which of those was snubbed this year? I myself hope that Parasite takes it away--phenomenal movie, both artistically and politically.
25
This constant refrain about lack of diversity at the Oscars is tiresome. The only thing that will satisfy this author is if black actors, directors, etc win everything. Anything short of that is racism. Art should not be subjected to affirmative action and quotas. Institutions and people should not be guilted and harangued to choose winners in order to satisfy a group of people. I for one preferred La La Land over Moonlight, and disagreed with that choice, but oh well. If that situation were reversed, the oscarsowhite crowd would be crying racism.
16
@Eric C
Where did you read that a totally non-white sweep of the Oscars is the only thing that would "satisfy this author"?
And I assume you're white.
When you are minority, you have to work twice as hard to get to the same place as those in the majority. Likewise, movies have to be twice as good, actors have to be twice as good as their white counterparts, to get an Oscar nod.
Those old white gents will fade away. Maybe not soon enough for us, but they will.
All we can do is help it along by putting our noses down and being twice as good. It’ll change, because it must.
3
@NYLAkid Please tell us which movies should have been nominated that weren't, and which nominees should be removed from the list, and why?
6
@Lefty but not Looney
Geez. It isn't a term paper or thesis the guy was trying to write. Your accusation - pardon me, your question - demands specifics (not a terrible demand) but does so in a way that it automatically combative. Great way to encourage debate.
I only watch the clothes at the red carpet. The nominations and awards [for the most part] bear no resemblance to those who really qualify. Even though Hollywood is the land of make believe, the awards usta...a word I use more and more, reflect the talent of actors, directors etc. It was always strange that an actor could win "Best" and the director or picture itself win nothing, as though not connected.
2
A good movie is, well, a good movie and it matters not (except to racists) about who directed it, wrote it or acted in it. The reality is that modern movies are made to entertain, not to lecture or propagandize and since most consumers won't pay for non-entertaining lectures, they won't be made. It is just a matter of numbers.
11
It bums me out that I see so much focus on "I judge a movie on it's entertainment value, and that's it!" I understand the argument, but it doesn't change the fact that we aren't seeing as many movies/nominations for actors/directors/screenwriters of color as we should be. We have to recognize that POC aren't being given the opportunities that so many white men and women get with ease.
Sure, Green Book won Best Picture last year. But that story was about a racist white man befriending a black artist. In the end, the white man ended up befriending the black man, and the white man ended up the hero by inviting the black man into his home. So many movies featuring POC frequently a white person saving the POC.
Overall, POC deserve more representation and opportunities, and chances to be portray more than a racial stereotype.
10
The problem is that about 30 years ago Hollywood stopped trying to make movies about real people.
9
@Lenny Z Amen x 1000!
Mr Morris has achieved this part of his apparent goal: he has succeeded in reducing the quality of artistic criticism about film.
15
The industry giving themselves awards is no longer interesting. I stopped watching this about 5 years ago. The best is not the best and politically correct awards are not the way to make selections.
8
The idea that it is possible that the only criterion Winning quality is some accepted “we know it when we see it”, and that awarding for any other criterion some how dilutes the true results is actually a wonderful example of what is wrong.
Our standards of excellence are by definition western/white/ euro- centric and usually male. That is the default position of North American culture whether it is art, literature, sport, science, psychology or business.
If sweet is the only flavour considered normal in a culture, then sour or savoury will never be considered eligible for the top prize for flavour.
5
Didn't mention Antonio Banderas in Pain and Glory. His performance was so good I wanted to watch it over again almost immediately after it ended. Sure, he was nominated. Will he win? Nah; Phoenix will take home the prize. Of course, it will happen partly because he didn't win for "Walk the Line." This is also how it goes in Hollywood, where Academy voters--yep, virtually all white--reward actors for earlier films. Still rooting, however, for Brad Pitt, who has been overlooked for years.
5
I agree with the author, entirely. And I find it extremely disheartening to see so many comments essentially supporting the racial status quo. I want us to be better than this.
9
@Duana Welch The best movies should be nominated. Movies should not be included/excluded to fill racial quotas. The year Moonlight won, Moonlight was indeed the best movie. This year, the only movie I was surprised got nominated for best picture was Ford v. Ferrari.
14
@Duana Welch "Better" means judging movies by the color of their cast and creators, giving them affirmative action oscars, and any other way is racist? People like you got Trump elected.
@Kevbo That's kind of a joke of a response.
The best movies?
Who gets the chance to make them?
The best actor?
Who gets a chance to audition?
The best script?
Who gets a chance to write one from a new perspective?
No one's trying to fill racial quotas - but your response is proof that the idea of "best" (Who's best? The Academy's?) is usually just a lazy way of saying, "Can't we just ignore this whole systemic racism thing?"
1
These comments are shocking and totally missing the point of the article. The sadly homogeneous Oscar ballot is just a symptom of the larger problem that the industry itself is still not allowing diverse voices to create quality media.
The whole last paragraph of the article really sums it up well. The industry is churning out movies for the masses that are more diverse (hello Marvel for finally getting its act together!) but is still not letting auteurs that are POC's and women come out to play. It's hard to create Oscar worthy prestige movies when the movie company continues to only put faith and (more importantly) money into the pockets of white, male filmmakers to create Oscar-bait movies.
The industry is finally beginning to stop only letting white men into movie making spaces. Now it just has to also start letting POC's and women into Oscar-worthy movie making spaces.
17
A critique of Mr. Morris's critique.
Most of the Oscar nominated movies for best picture are from the past because society is wrestling with it's past as it always is. However, I believe we are wrestling with the past today because so much is changing dramatically. In many ways some of the nominated films address that in their own artistic way. Film is art, and not all art addresses the full realities of the world we share. I don't believe the Oscars are a diagnosis of the health of movies nor do the shed a light on what the industry thinks. Making movies is a costly business and very few movies are profitable, the movies people are watching and the artistic quality of those movies, is a more accurate account of the health of movies. Complaints of lack diversity in movies are more harmful than helpful and lead to casting for the sake of quieting these complaints.
5
I was expecting Morris to list the movies, performances and directors that he felt had been overlooked in this year’s nominations. Why didn’t he make his case with concrete examples? If there’s a story here, my guess is that it has more to do with the dearth of Oscar-worthy films made by people of color this year, not necessarily for lack of talent, but for lack of money and opportunity. It takes a lot of money and influence to make a big, great movie, the type the Oscars pay attention to. (Not to say that there’s no unconscious bias involved— look how long it took the Academy to recognize Spike Lee.)
It’s also a numbers game. How many white people make movies every year? Lots and lots of them, is the answer, and most of them don’t get an Oscar nomination. Picking a number out of the air for the sake of argument, if only 1/10 or 1/20 of all the movies made were by people of color, the chances are that much lower that one of them will be nominated. Would Morris be happier if any old mediocre movie by a Black director got nominated? I hope not.
One overlooked film that Morris might have mentioned was Jordan Peele’s “Us,” which could have been nominated for best picture, best director and best actress!
15
@LingoDuo Agree with everything you said except the comments about Us. It was def a step down from Get Out.
2
@Kevbo
Our responses to artistic endeavors are subjective, so it's no surprise that people have very different tastes in every art form, including movies.
2
I stopped watching the Oscars when Gandhi won. The presenter said, Gandhi, a man of peace. It won because they were giving the Oscar to the man rather than the movie.
The Oscars should concentrate on the film itself, not some other extraneous factors, like who directed it or if some people think a studio deserves one. Comedies never win even though they are some of the best films. Adding sex or race to the mix of who should win further cheapens the value of the award.
Who or what is best should not be affected by any factors other than its value in the category. Looking back at some of the winners, it is clear there were many poor choices even without adding these other factors.
8
@S.L. Gandhi was a good movie though and the best movie nominated for best picture that year by far.
1
"It’s not as though you can’t find nonwhite people at the movies. 'Bad Boys for Life' has been at the top of the box office for three weeks. And that might be part of the problem because the closest 'Bad Boys' will ever get to the Oscars is three billboards outside the Dolby Theatre."
There is a "maker" problem -- and there is an audience problem. Where is the audience for art house films made by POC and women? Americans of all colors have been trained to be suspicious and fearful of intellectuals and serious artists and their work. I've been in this business for years, and I guarantee that if there were a large paying audience for art house films made by POC and women, there would be more opportunities for both. The (mostly white) men who finance films are in it for the money. They are businessmen, not artists. They don't want to lose money. They are not inclined to take risks with their money. They will finance anything that has the potential to make them more money. Everyone complaining about the dearth of opportunities for themselves needs to look at their own behavior, and that of their social circle. How many go to the movies regularly, at least once a week? How many choose the more obscure titles over the blockbusters? How many consistently patronize their local art house? How many look out the window and decide to stay at home with Netflix, rather than head out into cold or rainy weather to support the films they claim they want to see?
19
@Allison You would have to pay me at least a couple thousand dollars to sit through Bad Boys for Life, but it is a very commercially successful film.
It is made to to make money, not win awards and if the studio is happy and the audience is pleased, I'm not sure where the crime is. To suggest, as Mr. Morris does, that it is problematic that it is not an Oscar movie is simply obtuse.
2
The best performance by any actor or actress this year was Renée Zellweger portraying Judy Garland. I realize she’s white, but so was Judy Garland. I can’t help that.
25
@Queenie And the biggest snub for an actor this year was for (shockingly!) Adam Sandler. White, Jewish and transcendent in Uncut Gems.
1
Alas, the Oscars matter a lot commercially. For any nominated film, a nomination is their primary advertising campaign. For wins, it can frequently double their gross.
At another level, Oscars do not matter at all. They are old, hidebound, and mostly celebrate financial might over art. And, kiss of death for an art form, they are deeply conservative. (Not as in US politics, but in the sense of stasis vs. change.) Such entrenched organizations have never been important for art to move forward. In fact, they have frequently held art back.
2
My caring about the Oscars ceased when every public relations string was pulled and every bit of Weinstein influence was played out to get Gwyneth Paltrow the Oscar over Cate Blanchett. The former performance, so monolithic; the latter, a symphony. Also give me Sam Jackson any day.
6
@Fran Walheim , agreed. I wouldn't go so far as to call Ms. Paltrow's performance monolithic, but Cate Blanchett was undeniable. Her transformation as Elizabeth was superb, whereas Ms. Paltrow played the same character throughout her film.
3
@Susan T.
Both statement show how money and the right last name get you awards that your great acting did not get for you. So with that being said and Weinstein forcing himself on every woman in Hollywood including Ms. Paltrow once again it is all a farce.
Ms. Paltrow never stood up for anyone so if the writers dont stand up what is ever going change
I love this line: “...the assembly of these movies feels like a body’s allergic reaction to its own efforts at rehabilitation.”
Such true words! Isn’t the same thing happening in our country right now, and more broadly, in the democratic world? The old, conservative guard keeps convulsing out yet another ‘antibody’ designed to suppress/erase the very things and people that are the way of the future. The world will be different when millennials comprise the majority of the Academy, Congress, etc.
9
I do not agree with most of ideas and opinions in this article. For me, I judge movies almost exclusively on their entertainment value, and I thus want to spend two hours sitting in a comfortable seat and watching an absorbing story, and I don't really care about the race, gender, ethnicity, or country of origin of the actresses, actors, directors, producers or any of the other personnel involved in any movies. Considering the movies released in 2019, I found that "Parasite," a movie that was dubbed and had an all Korean cast, was challenging, disturbing in parts, engrossing though out, and exceptionally entertaining. In 2018, I was entranced by the performances of Ali and Mortensen in the stunning film "Green Book." I am a 77 white male and I vividly recall the fantastic Italian and French movies of the 1960's, including films by Fellini, Resnais, and others, and the poignant English slice-of-life movies such as "This Sporting Life" and "A Taste of Honey." For me, an intriguing plot and believable acting are what's required regardless of any other factors.
54
@Mathman314
The problem, Mathman314, is not whether the nominated movies are entertaining -- or good for that matter. It is the feeling by most POC that they, and ultimately all of us, are being deprived of the entertainment values inherent in cultural perspectives other than the normative, Eurocentric viewpoint we've all been fed for so long.
Case in point: the entertainment value of the Kung Fu flicks from Asia in the 70s or 80s is sui generis; no Western movie maker would have captured the magic in those films. However corny one may find such movies, they offered aesthetic pleasures different from out own.
1
I love art. I love film and look forward to the Awards. I’m also a fierce social worker and take backseat to no one on issues of social justice. I absolutely agree that art should be reflecting our cultural struggles and push our vision. The Academy and other art institutions have done good work in honoring diversity and that should continue and improve. However, I disagree that art and artists should be given awards just because they, or their work, represents a particular political issue or group. That doesn’t make the work art. I’m also troubled by a number of the nominations this year (both film and artists) – but not because of political issues. I just don’t think their art work is good enough for a nomination.
30
I certainly believe that there need to be opportunities for all voices to be heard in the film industry. I disagree, however, with force-balancing the Oscars to get more diversity. It is, and should always be, a meritocracy, just as it with sports. Social justice experiments have their place, but they don't belong in the Oscars. May the best picture win.
79
@Spiral Architect Hear! Hear!
Scorsese, Tarantino, Sam Mendes are all masters of their craft who made remarkable films this year and for the past three (Scorsese like 4) decades. They deserve all the recognition they get. There were no black movies or black directors snubbed this year because they were black. When Jordan Peele or Spike Lee make amazing films they get the recognition they deserve too. The oscars are not a social justice representation of society. They are an awards show for Hollywood that wants nothing more then to represent diverse films. Black panther was nominated for an Oscar, Captain America never was. Any questions?
76
@Mat Yep. "Malcolm X" was a tour-de-force for Spike Lee. Think it was good enough for an Oscar.
@kathleen cairns
Oh Please. Spike Lee's talent is in taking a robust social cause, or person, and diminishing it. He's the exact reason political correctness in art is the kiss of death. Get Out made a far more powerful statement about race relations, was for more entertaining and creative than anything Lee has ever made. His only film that had gravitas was Do the Right Thing.
1
This article is toothless, shallow, and boring. If you can't name a film that deserved a nomination (but didn't get one) AND a film that it should replace, any other argument you might have is moot. A film can be both great and the 6th greatest film this year for a particular category, hence it not being nominated. Why are you applying a race/gender litmus test to film and how is that possibly constructive? Waves was a great film. Should it have been nominated for Best Picture? Surely, the answer to that question is debatable. If I were the director of a film, the last thing I would want is for my race to play any role whatsoever in the selection process.
138
@Sam T Waves was a wasted exercise in filmmaking, imho. A so-called black-themed film directed by a white director who clearly doesn't understand the black experience. In any meaningful respect.
1
@Liz V I just mentioned Waves because the author of the article did.
1
I have always loved film and the experience of the cinema, and have only cared and been drawn to what moves me in a particular way, thoroughly independent of skin color or any other superficial qualities, and have increasingly ignored the Acadamy Awards as merely another popularity contest for the industry, like the Grammys, and not about celebrating art. I was hoping that the article was about how gutless and uninspired the Academy Awards have become rather than another argument that popular culture must reflect the diversity of its population as a barometer of worth. If, hypothetically, the Academy Awards, using its current template for selection criteria, mathematically reflected racial and ethnic diversity, the results would unfortunately be no different except that it would clearly demonstrate that all races and and ethnicities are capable of producing garbage.
5
To be perfectly honest, I suspect that the producers, directors, writers, etc., while keeping an eye on the Oscars, are simply making one movie at a time without thought to equity and social justice, only profit. At the end of the year, the tally is made and then we discover that the white supremacist, patriarchal, cis- and heteronormative movie industry is, in fact, exactly that: a white supremacist, patriarchal, and cis- and heteronormative industry that fits in nicely with the rest of America.
We have no right to clutch our pearls at this display. We can vote with our pocketbooks and at least get recognition/awards from the Golden Globes.
4
I suspect the academy will make up for the whiteness of the nominees by inviting every Poc actor of color to present. A cringey cosmetic fix for a very real institutional problem.
1
Superficial over substance, real change versus woke on-line outrage, facts versus propaganda – Hollywood can’t fix America and Oscar awards can’t solve the divisive culture wars of our country. Its not Hollywood’s job to do so and they are incapable of it in any event. The country’s leadership that are supposed to be addressing, healing these things are using this new reality, stoking it to their own political advantage, not staunching or even confronting it.
This story coincides with a whirlwind of events, from a disastrous Dem 1st caucus to a jaw-dropping SOTU address that amounted to a victory lap/MAGA rally. And today, the most toxic, corrupt, divisive President in history will be acquitted of illegal activity caught on tape.
The juxtaposition of this opinion piece, one critical of Hollywood and the political realities exploding all around us exemplifies the state of America’s chaotic dissociated psyche that is our political landscape.
One group is cheering for the real changes taking place in the social fabric(s) of our country, a group that wants, among other things, to return to a time when Whites didn’t have to worry about what they said. The other group is demanding that the Oscars not be so White, as if that will change anything in the real world.
Woke on-line and social media outrage is not political activism, and that includes this comment…
.
17
From the examples given by this author, he only likes movies with African-American leads, which delve into issues important to African-Americans and show African-Americans in positive roles, I don't blame him. The White Fuddy-Duddies who are voting in the Oscar nomination process are doing the same. Welcome to the club Bro, we all have the same biases.
5
My husband and I, then my boyfriend, pulled our enthusiasm from the Oscars after The Wrestler's Mickey Rourke lost the best actor award to Milk's Sean Penn. We were crestfallen. We still watch, but it's drive by watching now.
I love Wesley's writing but his taste confuses me. After often praising the long, boring, undramatic The Irishman with its somnambulist acting, it's hard to take seriously his artistic view of the movies, however insightful his cultural notes.
3
Living here part of the years in Santiago, Chile and the other half of my time in the San Francisco Bay Area in California, I find a lot of similarities between the two places which are also reflected in Joke. Lots of homeless people down on their luck, suffering mental illness living life at the edge of society. I fail to see how people think Joker was a bad movie as the acting was wonderful and the topic spot on about our societies falling apart. I was in Chile when the civil uprising started just three days after I saw the movie and it was like living in that intense movie complete with looting, burning and street violence. I find this mediocre critic's dismissal of the movie sort of lame and strange; he did not like it because there was not enough black folks? He wrote about Joker that, "his social worker and neighbor are black women), guess what: He kills a lot of them!" The movie had a lot of intense reflections of our dismal world and hardly used black people as a punching bag or did not cast them in good roles. I do not know which film this guy watched but in Joker Phoenix killed mostly white people and really hated mostly white people and actually stuck up for the Latinos kids that beat him down.
9
While I agree with Wesley Morris that the movies need more diversity, I find his "all race, all the time" approach boring and narrow-minded.
As a dark-skinned Hispanic woman, I enjoy seeing people like me on the screen, but my favorite movie this year was "Parasite," which involves people who look nothing like me living in a place I'll probably never go.
Art takes us outside ourselves and teaches us to empathize with people who are different from us. Wesley's obsession with "whiteness" suggests that he lacks imagination.
235
The awards are not reflective of anything the viewing public generally would choose. It's all about advertising and studio press. Like any awards ceremony, it's all about boosting marketing for a product.
9
Sadly, I also noticed that rather than film contemporary stories set in a diverse America, Hollywood has consistently chosen to set their TV shows and films during periods when there were very few people of color to deal with: Medieval times, Westerns, WWII, the American Civil War, Prohibition/1930s gangsters, the Cold War. Some of my favorite films/TV shows are all like this: "The Road to Perdition", "Saving Private Ryan", "Deadwood". It feels like Hollywood is going out of its way to avoid including non-white people.
As a person of color, I find solace in how the only place people of color exist in numbers is either fantasy ("Game of Thrones"), science fiction ("The Expanse"), or the apocalypse ("The Walking Dead").
4
Steve Martin had a routine about telling a joke at a plumber’s union party, only plumbers get the joke and they love it. The Oscars have always been awards for a particular industry group. Now that group has completely stopped caring whether those of us not in the group get their selections. That new focus has always been that group’s prerogative and we just need to accept it. I don’t care who gets to vote, how they vote or what thought process they use in honoring the members of their club anymore than I care how the Elks select a lodge leader. I can enjoy the work they deliver or not. That is how I exercise my vote.
6
It’s been a long long time since I’ve understood the rationale for Oscar nominees - films, actors, actresses, etc. In 2000 when “The Talented Mr. Ripley” received only one nomination - for Jude Law, who won for Best Supporting Actor - I said to a friend that I was surprised the film hadn’t been nominated for Best Picture. He commented that “The Talented Mr. Ripley” wasn’t the kind of movie the Oscars liked. I have viewed all the nominees in that light ever since. The omissions continue to confound me.
7
@Janelle Meehan Jude Law did not win; he was nominated.
Thank you, John. I mis-remembered that award.
4
Michael Caine did mention Jude at the ceremony saying he knew that one day you will win. Hasn’t happened yet, but it just takes one role.
I don't think we need to keep score by race, but this year did seem a bit frozen in amber, such as our Christmas music. And, yes, damn it, I like Bing Crosby, but not every year, all the time. I honestly thought the "Once upon a time" conceit the most egregious. Like, not just celebrating a golden era that few people care about in Hollywood, but also literally changing history that hardly anyone knows, for a violently "happy" ending that only modern fascist America could approve of. It was incredibly regressive and obviously appealing to an indulgent, aging Hollywood.
Cary Grant lives on on Amazon. com but not in America's heart it seems.
4
in my opinion every single one of the Movies nominated for best Film is Oscar worthy Mr Morris is of course entitled to feel differently and since he is the movie Critic perhaps he may even be correct.
However it is hard for me to me to buy into the argument that anything other than talent should be taken into account when selecting who receives an Oscar or any other award.
I don't want as some other commentator suggested awards for best Black performance by an actor, if we go down that road where do we end.
When Regina King and Mahershala Ali won their respective awards last year, my eyes were not rolling, no I was delighted to see two excellent performances being recognized . The color of these two excellent actors skin never for a nano second entered my head .
Why is there an assumption made that because all the movies are directed by men, or all the best actor nominations are white actors that there is something untoward going on. Perhaps the Academy members are doing their job and nominating the best and most talented. performance . I too was disappointed that Little Women did not get more recognition, but perhaps the other movies were more deserving.
Can we please give up on the notion that a certain percentage pf awards must be set aside for any group racial or otherwise. Try once more to just enjoy Oscar Night .
18
The last straw for me was when a Fish Man got the award and LadyBird was snubbed.
There was no comparison in acting, plot, emotion and attachment.
They whiffed the. and whiffed again this year with the same Director and “Little Women”.
The Academy - isn’t.
4
You're a great guy, but if you substituted all your adjectives--switch 'white' to 'black', 'women' to 'men', I think you would be offended at characterizing people only by their physical qualities. Racism and sexism are wrong because they are false and demeaning to to the variation in each individual. And justifying that approach to perception by saying that punching 'up to power' is pure Machiavelli.
I DO vote for the Oscars, and I did vote for 'Straight Outta Compton. But I'm tired of being blamed for what really is a production issue, and one of time needed to balance things out. If there are only a couple serious dramas focused on black experience the odds are lower, and there are almost no women who've been directing as long as Scorcese. But remember that one who does have a track record, Kathryn Bigelow, actually won best director years ago.
It's easy to blame the Academy, but everyone I know in it tries really hard to make the best and most balanced choice possible from the films that were made.
56
I’m not entirely sure what Morris wants. Should there just be an obligatory nomination for a “black” movie every year? Should there be an obligatory Hispanic movie nominated every year?
What if there isn’t a movie with minorities that doesn’t deserve the best picture nomination? Should we just include it anyway because otherwise, we’ll see continual flak from the coastal elites who feel nothing at seeing actual inequality, but absolutely can’t stand it in their fictional worlds?
54
You can add another category that has had some blatant discrimination: movies about LGBTQ people. Heath Ledger was shockingly passed over for his performance in Brokeback Mountain (and the Oscars sheepishly gave him a supporting actor win, posthumously, for ... oh wait ... his take on the Joker). And Timothee Chalamet was exponentially more brilliant in Call Me By Your Name than any other actor that year -- certainly more so than Gary Oldmann's one-of-many Churchill mimics that very year.
9
Why are indigenous people so often excluded from being noticed in these conversations? Why are you not celebrating that a Maori filmmaker has two huge nominations? Taika Waititi is a phenomenon and yet you are ignoring his achievements. Why is that?
52
"eight of the nine movies are about white people." Why does that matter? Does everything have to be equally representative of the demographics of the country in order for it to be approved by the Woke contingency? This obsession with race clouds judgement and will prevent any real progress.
111
@John It's not that it was just white..............they were cookie cutter stamped...............we can do better. Come on. One Saturday afternoon, sneak into an indie theater and see a good movie. Just for fun.
Dear NBA and NFL, I love you.
But we need to talk.
125
@John
Best comment of the lot.
4
So, did I miss the writer's opinion about which movies should have nominated but were not? If I am not mistaken, Green Book won best picture in 2019 and BlackKlansman and Black Panther were nominated. Was Get Out (my personal pick) not nominated in several categories in 2018? This column does a lot of finger pointing but that's about it.
10
What point is this essay trying to make? It reads like total stream of consciousness and I have no idea what Morris wants me to think other than “something is bad.”
16
Color tests have historically reflected a racial bias. Still does.
4
What a depressing, and depressingly predictable, take on the Oscars. I predict in another 20 years, Mr. Morris will be writing complaints like, "Well, 85% of this years acting awards might have gone to non-white people, but still, most producers were white males. When will white people stop dominating Hollywood?!"
15
By not including Little Women and Parasite in the headline photos you make your point that the Oscars are about white men but at a disservice to those 2 other movies that deserve recognition. You hurt those you try and help. Why not include separate photos from those movies but apart from the others? Why do you instead reinforce the inequity?
2
The author should add a glaring lack of creativity to his litany of lament. "Joker" was "Taxi Driver" in clown makeup. Scorsese continues to think he can find beauty in thuggery. Vastly overrated Tarantino persists in putting out movies that are flabby beyond belief (and btw, Margot Robbie watching the real Sharon Tate on screen? seriously?).
Come out to West Hollywood and watch the 405 with me. Every lane is a conformity convoy of black Range Rovers, all driven by people who make the same movie over and over. It's no wonder the Oscars are such a salute to Caucasian mediocrity.
7
I was surprised so know that a Brazilian documentary on a supposed " coup d'Etat" that ousted ex-president Dilma Rousseff was accepted as an Oscar nominee. Brazil is a full democracy and our ex-president was submitted to a legal impeachment process. The party she belongs to was involved in the largest bribery and corruption scandal on earth. During her mandate as president of the board of Brazilian giant oil company Petrobras, the purchase of an American Refinery plant, called Pasadena, so rusty that was nicknamed as "red-haired" after that, caused immense losses to American sotck holders. Worst of all, the director of this film is an heiress to one of the companies involved in the Petrobras bribery scandal. To award any prize to this documentary will symbolize rewarding corruption and manipularion of information, besides painting Brazil as a banana republic.
4
For all of the people complaining about this article please note all we ask is to have a seat at the table and share in the feast equally. It is really not that hard. Have studios back more diverse stories, actors and actresses. We are not asking to be judged by race and gender but to be judged equally. How can that happen if we are shut out or limited from the get go? The quality films that should have been nominated were not, e.g. Queenie & Slim and Waves. Both excellent films. Thank you for understanding and I hope you will view both.
6
A few years ago I just stopped watching. I realized that "what the people who make our movies like" wasn't really what I liked and called it a day. You get four hours of your life back each year and you can care about one less thing. Try it, it's easy.
15
@asterios
Agreed 100%. It's a self-aggrandizing waste of time.
1
The same groups of people who once insisted that they not be judged by race and gender now judge everything by race and gender.
239
@Richard No we just want a seat at the table and for our talents to be recognized and judged equally. Thank you for understanding.
18
@Zoenzo
I too want you to be at that table, but who will be the Judge of what is fair and equal? I think the comments here reflect a desire to see a film as art and not race and gender politics. My wife and I just say Harriet last night and it is a beautifully crafted film. Never once did we think of it as a "black" movie.
35
@Richard Amen. Maybe these are the pictures that people went to see.
8
I disagree with the author. The selection this year is great. The Oscars are about rewarding great acting, directing and all the other aspects of the movie-making art. This year's selection is aiming to achieve exactly that. When the next Moonlight or Get Out are produced, I bet they will be rewarded as well.
25
My first deep experience with movie criticism was "Agee On Film", some 50 years ago. I think I've read every form of film criticism since then, from dozens of critics.
Along the while I've learned to ignore any critic who uses the Academy Award as a benchmark for anything other than a momentary societal impulse--or a chance to see famous people dress up.
Every decade or so, "Sight and Sound" does a worldwide critics poll of film, including a top ten greatest films list. The correlation between those films and the Oscars is almost negative, except for Best Foreign Film--the award no one in Hollywood cares about.
13
@Steve Paradis But even Sight and Sound's selection is undeniably white and male. We have to be so much more present thinking.
@Mariano
Critics from all around the world vote; it's a much more diverse cohort than anything you'll see in America, outside of immigration court.
2
@Steve Paradis
The argument from wokeness: But is it really woke enough? And am I woke enough to appreciate that wokeness even though I have a wrong skin tone?
1
in reality, the films the come up for consideration each year do not fit a projected normal curve, or the agenda of those who prefer particular agendas. Art is art. Last years' better films were disproportionately non-majority. Arts awards should reflect art, not ANY other agenda. Do I agree with all of the nominations? Of course not, but using them to advance agendas makes them meaningless.
25
I don’t know if Just Mercy qualified for this year’s Oscars. If it didn’t the studio knew it had no chance of a nomination. It’s the very type of movie Hollywood should promote. Rather than glorify violence and evil, it portrays conviction and the struggle for equal justice. It appeals to the angels of our better nature. Obviously something that is not that important to the academy's voters.
3
@Jeff It did qualify and it was pushed pretty hard by WB with screenings etc but I’m sorry, it was not a great movie. It’s too bad, I wanted to like it and it was such a great subject matter but awards worthy... not a chance.
2
The Oscars already have separate awards for actors and actresses, so the obvious solution to the problems raised in this article is to have separate awards for best black actor/actress, best black male director and female director, best latin actor/actress, best asian actor/actress, best lgbtq actor, etc.
It only makes sense.
16
@Mon Ray Yeah. The Oscars just aren't long enough.
1
@Mon Ray
Best Black Actor/Actress in a White film and vice versa and so on and so forth.
3
@Mon Ray Demanding a seat at the table, demanding to be heard, to be considered in the awards the studio system and the average moviegoer still thinks as the highest honor is not demanding quotas, it's improving and expanding your worldview, and the art you consume.
Like do you really think most of the best movies are produced by, directed by, written by, feature white people? That's telling.
4
The Oscars are no longer about superb acting, but are now a popularity contest. When minorities and older female actors are continually excluded from the running, it shows how little the academy really cares about the performers.
The show and the awards are only about money and popularity. It's abysmal what the show has become.
11
@Pamela L. The show has always been about that. That's why it is broadcast on ABC. When people have seen the movies, the ratings up. When they are niche movies with little relevance to a wider audience, the ratings go down.
4
@Pamela L.
People seem entirely comfortable to make whatever claim they want. This comment does so, and so does the op-ed. The op-ed for example actually complains that there was "no woman being a two-time directing nominee." So now that there are women who have been nominated, the problem is that none of them have been nominated twice? At some point we need to stop pretending that no progress has been made.
And in the above comment is the name that older female actors are "continually excluded from the running." Below are female actresses nominated by year, along with their age at the time:
2013: Cate Blanchett 44, Judi Dench 79, Meryl Streep 64
2014: Jullianne Moore 54
2015: Cate Blanchett 46, Charlotte Rampling 69
2016: Isabelle Huppert 62
2017: Frances McDormand 60, Sally Hawkins 41, Meryl Streep 68
2018: Olivia Colman 45, Glenn Close 72, Melissa McCarthy 49
2019: Charlize Theron 44, Renée Zellweger 50
Pick a different cutoff if you want. But this group clearly includes women of ages that would be considered mid-, late, or post-career in most fields. We have to stop ignoring the progress that has been made in these areas.
Here's the real story of the Oscars. Over time they have been getting more diverse. It's not perfect. But we have to acknowledge the progress so that we can be sure to maintain the societal changes that have brought us to this point.
7
@SJG Nice try. You can't condone an all white (primarily) nominating process each and every year and expect a few minorities and older woman to suffice as sufficient "progress."
Please don't insult my intelligence and that of others who are adamant about changing the "old boys club" mentality regarding nominations.
The cache of receiving an Oscar has eroded over the years. This, you can't deny.
In addition to the grievances written by the author, let's not forget that many in Hollywood have an additional problem with the Oscars: the inclusion of made-for-TV-movies... er, uh... "streaming media" in any traditional category. The open secret in the industry is that most will refuse to ever vote for these types of properties unless a separate category is made for them. I applaud the Producers Guild of America for this year's decision to include one a streaming category. Anything short of that is to engage in a marketing campaign by Netflix, Amazon, et al, that seeks to pull the wool over the eyes of the movie going public, leading them to believe that product intended for the small screen is actually traditional movie theater fare.
1
Why aren't films from Turkmenistan better represented??
The diversity argument will never, and can never, rest. Is it possible that films from name-your-region are not up to the standard that we expect? Is it possible that American tastes will never fully appreciate narratives from exotic locales and wildly different life experiences?
I'm not completely disagreeing with Wesley Morris's argument. We can do better to expand our tastes and support a wider range of storytelling. I just don't understand the urge to walk away entirely from film awards. We don't have to take them too seriously, if we don't want to. They are what we make of them.
42
@Justin Frankly I don’t understand nominating Parasite for Best Picture instead of Best Foreign Film
From what I've seen of the nominees, OUATIH, Irishman, Marriage Story and Parasite are excellent. The Lighthouse is a great movie as well.
I'm glad movies like this still get made. The majority of streaming content is mush for the masses, and don't even get started on network tv.
17
This argument is getting old, but blame Hollywood. So more non-white films? I like several new & older black directors, but the black saga noir is well travelled & a small audience.
5
You know what’s really wrong with this society? The fact that I saw the topic of the article and the race of the author and knew immediately - despite his winding introduction - what the grievance was going to be.
You think Parasite, a movie full of “POCs” (which I thought were now all the same?) and themes of inequity has no relevance to American blacks? At what point is your own American neurosis about your race, and indeed your racism, the problem?
By the way, before you write another article complaining about why this one wasn’t up for a Pulitzer: it’s terribly written, self-justifies like an adolescent girl and has absolutely nothing to say whatsoever. It’s not because you’re black.
426
@HH
Amazing comment. I just made the same comment, before reading yours. You expressed my thoughts even more eloquently. I am glad I am not the only one.
I am so glad the NYT let you publish it!
22
@HH That this comment is so highly recommended speaks to the observation of the author-- "what could the Academy have done to prevent itself from duplicating schisms beyond the movie theater?" One doesn't have to be black to share the "grievance" of the author, coming up against the opposing grievance so well-aired in these comments: "we're so tired of talking about race! why do we have to talk about race?" You saw the race the author. I saw my favorite cultural critic. You find the author complaining. The voice in my head says, thank you for your candor, Wesley Morris, for telling it like it is, with style. It's not because I'm black (I'm not). It may be in part because I'm not white?
(PS whoever has been saying POCs are "all the same" does not seem to be contributing meaningfully to the conversation.)
14
@HH Thank you. I thought the same thing. This article is like something one would find in a high school newspaper. I wondered how this guy got his job at the NYT. And I'm black.
27
In my humble opinion, the criteria for a "great" movie does not include the color, gender, or sexual orientation of the cast. Rather, what makes a movie great (or bad, alternatively) is the plot, the acting, the direction, the dialogue, and the cinematography.
Art should stand on its own merits. Diversity is a perfectly admirable goal to strive towards, but a movie is not (and should not) be deemed less a great work of art because it didn't meet the right diversity quota. Period.
268
@Weave77 “Queen & Slim”. Watch it. It stands on it's own merits.
5
@Weave77 : Have you seen "The Irishman?" Just not that good. Oh, the usual quality Scorscese stuff is there. But who cares about another Scorscese film about mobsters? I certainly don't. I tried to make it through but couldn't, as much as I love DeNiro.
So yeah, race matters. The nomination of "The Irishman" is a testament to that.
7
@Weave77 While I agree with your point that art should stand on its own merits, sports is *actually* based on merit, whereas art is subjective. I don't think it is fair to argue that Hollywood is a meritocracy like demonstration of athletic ability is. People get opportunities based on who they know, and when that prevailing network is White, then the industry itself is largely White. There are a lot of mediocre people failing upwards in this industry-- of all races and genders.
2
For relevancy look no further than those who make up the Academy and who they are and what they look like. There is a generational change taking place across many walks of life and institutions in the US. Time will solve this issue, too.
5
I'm sorry but why are you solely concerned with acting nominations? Here are the frontrunners for the other awards that don't involve standing in front of a camera:
--Best Original Score, Joker – Hildur Guðnadóttir (female)
--Best Adapted Screenplay, Jojo Rabbit – Taika Waititi (non-white)
--Best Original Screenplay, Parasite - Parasite – Han Jin-won (female)
--Best Animated Feature Film, Klaus – Jinko Gotoh (female)
--Best Costume Design, Little Women – Jacqueline Durran (female)
--Best Sound Editing, 1917 – Rachael Tate (female)
191
@Noah Thank you! Not to mention the eight female producers nominated for Best Picture
15
@Noah Totally agree. I think it's generally a reflex of people who appreciate films but who don't actually make them. Diversity in every other category outside of the ones general audiences care about (the ones that are big an glitzy like Best Actor / Actress, Director, etc) gets overlooked like crazy. As a woman who has worked on sets for the better part of 10 years, it does annoy me when this talk inevitably comes back around during Oscar season.
To that end though, I don't think anyone is overly surprised when women are nominated in hair/ make-up, costume design, art, etc. as those are seen as predominantly female centric departments, even by people outside the film set.
Find me a female cinematographer who works on big budget, Oscar movies and then we'll talk.
3
An honest question: Do most of this year's nominees for best picture rest on more violence and overall meanness than usual?
8
It seems as though the other commenters have missed the point of the article. It’s not that any film or nominee was passed over—the issue is that there is still a lack of quality films offering opportunities to people of color.
15
@J And fewer stories being written and movies produced that reflect the lives and stories of more people of color. It's not about complaining about racism, or complaining about being left out...in my humble opinion it's about retelling the same stories over and over in different formats, casting younger actors, but still telling the same American classics, if you will, stories and making it seem like there are no other people on the planet. I used to think that my people (Black Americans) had no stories to tell which is hogwash. That I think is the issue. And by the way, there is so much violence in what is being filmed, when will that change? It is hard for artists, black, white or purple, to hold in their stories, expressions of life and art. It's supremely selfish to not recognize that there is more than white superiority in this world. And I love the USA, but come on now!
10
@DA I wish I could recommend your comment a thousand times. Thank you for your comment. If you have not watch “Queen & Slim” it is wonderful.
@J This comment is so completely vague as to what it ultimately means. Every year there’s more films with more black, Hispanic, Asian people etc, but it always somehow needs to be more.
But in my anecdotal experience I think you’re just totally wrong, the best movies I’ve seen this year were “Joker” and “Parasite”, and they didn’t lack minorities. Maybe you just watch the wrong films.
5
This article’s focus is primarily cultural criticism and largely devoid of insight into film or storytelling. Kinda like the Oscar’s themselves.
59
Put up or shut up. If you don't like the nominees, what are the diverse movies you do think should be nominated? Make a case for them!
147
I don't know why everyone takes these awards so seriously or considers them to be anything other than advertising. Does anyone think that the winner is even remotely going to be considered the best film 5 years from now. A very simple question- "Did Stanley Kubrick ever win a Best Picture Oscar?" That's right the director of Paths of Glory, Dr. Strangelove, 2001, A Clockwork Orange, Barry Lyndon, The Shining, Full Metal Jacket and Eyes Wide Shut never won a Best Picture Oscar. So basically the whole think is a big advertising joke. Any of those films is better than any film that won the Best Picture Oscar in the last 40 years. And I might add they are better remembered. Oh yeah, I forgot American Beauty and Crash. Those are really great films that significantly added to man's cultural, philosophical, and artistic legacy...………….
10
@steve I love Kubrick but your opinion is just that. An opinion.
Great article. Someone will make The Sonny Liston Story and win an academy award, perhaps several.
5
Hey, thanks a bunch for the "Once Upon a Time ..." spoiler. Believe it or not, some people who want to watch it haven't seen it yet.
6
Eh, you’re out of the statute of limitations
Good lord.
I'm exhausted by this relentless attempt to frame everything that happens as "racist".
It's lazy and tired to continue on with this type of commentary.
A movie is not good because it features white or african-american actors. It's good because it's good.
The implication of this article and 1,000 others like it is that the academy is racist if it doesn't include lots of black nominees and winners.
What does that even mean? An award should be given simply because of the skin color of the people involved?
Listen to yourself. This is ridiculous.
Interestingly, you don't appear to be interested in promoting representation of Asian or Latino people in movies. So I guess "black" movies are more Oscar-worthy than movies by other people of color.
Hollywood is bending over backwards to promote women and people of color, to the point where better movies are being passed over because of the "woke" quota being imposed on everything.
Can we please just grow up and stop using race as an excuse for everything?
353
@Bay Area Resident
I understand your exasperation regarding the discussion of race and claims of racism, but you are creating a straw man and missing the point. With the exception of the Joker, the author says he loves most of nominated films.
It feels to me that the complication and passion of recent years is unfortunately absent in this years crop of nominees - despite there being so many quality movies. The problem is the lack of new voices, perspectives, and narrative innovation.
14
@Bay Area Resident These days the slow drip drip of identity politics can be heard everywhere.
51
@Bay Area Resident "Interestingly, you don't appear to be interested in promoting representation of Asian or Latino people in movies. So I guess "black" movies are more Oscar-worthy than movies by other people of color." I was looking for a way to say that without looking bad for a long time now. Thanks.
35
The Oscars and all other award shows are guilty pleasures with very little guilt and very little pleasure. Their purpose is to generate revenue for the producers. Art is subjective and need not be a competition although it is.
10
I gave up on the Oscars decades ago. The awards show was boring. And every Oscar movie that I've gone to see has been a disappointment to me. Granted, the Academy (probably) knows what they're looking for, but I now use an Oscar as I sign that I won't be watching THAT movie.
5
There was an early 90s show, Dream On, in which the protagonist informed the audience about his inner thoughts with clips from 50s tv shows. That's kinda my life, but with me, it's clips from any of the zillions of movies I've seen. And I don't just watch movies, I see them, I'm deeply immersed...unless I'm not and then it's a pretty sure bet it's a sloppily made movie. There are so many great movies that never become popular. But then, Trump's popular. I think the Academy has lost the point about movies...it's not a popularity contest. It's not about selecting a movie just because an old, popular director made it. Or because an A list actor is playing against character. Or even because fun, popular actors are playing their fun, popular selves. The Oscars should embolden, should encourage and should set the artistic bar higher, they should teach the public about great cinema and what makes it. There should be a category every year called "what we missed". 'Cause they miss a lot. And importantly, streaming series, which are really long form movies, should be added to the mix. None of the choices should be based on a person's sex or color or whatever woke measure is currently popular...the choices should be made based solely on content.
9
@Skidaway Thanks for helping me to remember the name of the show "Dream On," which I loved but have not seen since it was first aired.
1
@John Great cast - great show. My boss used to call me Toby.
Don’t be mad at the Oscars, be mad at Hollywood for not producing more great movies with colored people. The academy has shown that if there is a great movie - 12 years as a slave - Moonlight - they will nominate it.
They should have a separate awards show for people like the author called Woke Oscars. It has nothing to do with how good a movie or actor is, but instead just nominates based on each race, gender and special protected class of peoples. Everybody gets and award like a participation trophy. Sure it would be a waste of time but so is reading this article and listening to people complain about this every year.
130
How about just making some decent entertaining movies? I don’t care who’s in them. An even bigger discrimination in Hollywood besides color is the one against good story plots. If I was a POC I wouldn’t want to be in most of these turkeys.
11
For me, I’m tired of seeing the same old stories on the screen. I think I get the male white man journey. I’ve seen it in every permeation possible. Let’s see other points of view..other stories from female, nonwhite, non western, non fill in the blank.
36
@Karen Curry I'm pretty sure I've seen where if Hollywood thinks they can make a dime off of it, they'd sell most of their loved ones.
Maybe it's a chicken or the egg thing, but buying tickets to the movies you love should get some results, right?
4
@Karen Curry
Spike Lee, Tyler Perry, Ava DuVerney, Denzel Washington and Barry Jenkins may be quite surprised to hear that their movies don't have a non-white point of view.
13
@Karen Curry How about non-war? 1917 is great but I am SO TIRED of the prestige movies about war.
6
Well this is one of the reasons why my generation (gen z) doesn’t care for the oscars and arrivals like this one. It’s simply too political and Netflix for a while was a good escape from the obvious politics but that is changing fast as well.
3
Every year it’s the same whining and moaning, the same complaining. These people doing the whining and complaining act like the AMPAS are the be all, end all arbiters of what the best performance was, or the best writing was, or the best film was. Newsflash: they aren’t. They are just one of dozens of groups making up their own list. Accolades are cheap, and they are merely opinions. The AMPAS and the Oscar award it gives out is so utterly meaningless, yet people like the author of this piece are hoodwinked in believing that it holds some sort of universal truth and value. Here’s a tip: Don’t pay attention to it and don’t watch it if it causes you so much consternation, or find another group whose opinions might align with your own.
64
the Oscars are for actresses, actors, and others engaged in movie making. I don’t understand why movie goers should care about them. Personally I think the Joker was one of the best movies I’ve seen in years and I wasn’t counting how many minorities were in the movie.
20
Awkwafina Is first Asian Woman to win a Best Actress Golden Globe. This story never gained traction like a black actor winning. Why so dismissive of The Farewell?
27
@M
Have you seen Nora from Queens? It’s excellent.
I must say -- and with respect to Mr. Morris, whose work I have read and admired for quite some time -- that this line of critique has become tiresome. Elements of culture represented in movies, literature, sports and business, must be viewed foremost on their own terms and merits; these elements and the people who create them cannot shoulder a higher-level, social obligation beyond the domain they occupy. Mr. Morris' argument implies such an obligation--or the wish that one exist--where one cannot be imposed.
In addition, phrases like "all those old white voters" are so offensive to liberal sensibilities and yet are used glibly and without any hint of embarrassment at this point. The opinions of these white voting members of the Academy are not worthy when it comes to judging the industry's films? If not, why not? This remark sounds eerily similar to claims made elsewhere in public discourse that only individuals of certain races and, by extension, experience can speak truthfully about all manner of ethical questions---about civil rights, cultural prejudice, or most any form of injustice. No person or group has special knowledge in these areas and, for the same reason, no person or group in the Academy is disqualified from valid opinions on films by virtue of race or gender. Surely Mr. Morris does not wish to argue this is the case, and yet he does.
385
@Anson Baer
"All those old white voters" is used too glibly, but I don't see where the author wrote that the voters are not worthy of judging the industry's films. The problem is that nearly all the voters happen to be white and old. Additional qualified voters with other backgrounds would be welcome.
As noted elsewhere in the comments, the critique in the article is not on the quality of the films, but the lack of additional exciting choices to nominate.
I think the line of critique you refer to is tiresome because it is straw man. The author does not claim that these nominated movies (with the exception of the Joker) owe us more or have the responsibility to be something else.
The primary problem is simply a lack of inclusivity and opportunity for underrepresented stories to go alongside these deserving movies.
11
Of course old white votes are worthy.
His point is they are so worthy, they dominate and what you get is a lot of whitewashing.
11
@Anson Baer If an author complained about "young black voters", they almost certainly (and justifiably) be condemned for being both racist and ageist.
I guess some ageism and racism are more acceptable than others.
79
I want to agree with the author, but I can't. There is no real analysis here. The author does not even both to criticize the writing, acting, or direction of the nominated films. Nor does he praise the writing, acting, or direction of the films he would have liked to have seen nominated. Instead, the argument seems to be that diversity is the only valid measuring stick when it comes to movies. That just cannot be.
610
@Wade I completely agree. While it's fine to prefer a diverse cast in a movie, whether or not a movie adheres to one's diversity preferences does not impact that movie's intrinsic quality... and intrinsic quality is what the Academy Awards is supposed to honor.
67
@Wade
Your interpretation of the argument is wrong. The point is that while these movies are mostly great, the collectively miss so much of current cultural discourse.
In your comment and many others represent an unfortunate, defensive knee-jerk reaction to the concept diversity. It is not that whiteness or maleness or oldness is always bad. It is that there are other stories and perspective that could also be great; potential movies that this author and many others would hope to have the opportunity to see and judge on their merits.
36
@Wade You obviously did not read the article and therein lies the problem. You don't see his critique you see his color and make assumptions. He clearly state sin his that he loves all the nominated movies excerpt joker which he tried to watch 4 times. " Most of them I love. As for the one failure, I’ve never worked harder to get with the program. But after four tries, I gave up. This Joker, quite often literally, has no clothes."
Are we not supposed to point out the obvious? There were a few movies made that deserved some recognition, Queenie & Slim, waves, Just Mercy that were excellent and beautifully filmed yet overlooked. This goes for Asian artists as well. Why are there not more movies aimed at them. The Farewell was fantastic. Where are the nods for Best Picture, Director, Writer etc.
20
IMO the very last thing we need is to "escape" from what is happening in this country as opposed to dealing with it directly. Going to the movies is not the answer.
11
We don't need to balance diversity in every aspect of our lives and certainly not in the arts. The only objection I can see about how the Oscars are chosen is that it's so political- kind of like some sort of popularity contest. I've seen all the nominees for best picture except one and they are all very different. Right now we need movies to escape what's happening to our country- kind of like in 1939 when there were many good movies and "Gone With the Wind" won.
53
I’m glad you found escapism in “Gone With the Wind”. I didn’t. That movie reminds me how hollywood still prefers me to be Mammy - just roll over and be grateful we allow you to squawk and shed a tear. Hattie McDaniel was the 1st African American to win the Oscar for that role- playing a loyal house slave in Oleander scented South whose world falls apart when her darling Ms. Scarlet and her ilk may have to get dirty and toil in the field. AND pick their own cotton!
What was the rest of the Hollywood’s lesson? Know you place Know your place and hey, you might get a backside swat and a red satin petticoat and an Oscar! Wink. Wink.
My escapism would be if the Scarlets and the Rhetts and their entire Oscar world never existed.
These movies aren’t escapism for people like me. It’s hell.
3
@Kathleen
I disagree. I think we should hope that the diversity of our culture is represented and respected in the public aspects of our lives, especially the arts.
Why is it good to accept a lack a diverse range of voices and perspectives in our lives?
1
@Natasha It was 1939. I think we've moved on from that era.
1