Onstage at the 65th Academy Awards whilst presenting the Oscar nominees for Art Direction – in front of a star-studded audience and one billion viewers worldwide – Richard Gere went off-script for one minute 39 seconds to deliver a hard-hitting message to China’s then-leader, Deng Xiaoping, on the human rights atrocities in China and Tibet:
“I was really struck by this idea that there are one billion people watching this thing, it’s astonishing […] I wonder if Deng Xiaoping is actually watching this right now […] with the knowledge [of] what a horrendous, horrendous human rights situation there is in China, not only towards their own people, but to Tibet as well […] we could all kind of send love and truth and kind of sanity to Deng Xiaoping right now in Beijing so that he will take his troops, and take the Chinese away from Tibet, and allow these people to live as free independent people again.”
He did eventually return to the teleprompter to announce the winner, but was reportedly unofficially banned from attending the Oscars for the next 20 years. A speculative and unofficial ban which was not in fact enforced, as he did return to the ceremony in 2003.
This was not, however, the first time the Oscars have been steeped in controversy, politics and Hollywood cause célèbre, and given that the headlines surrounding the runup to this year’s ceremony have been somewhat turbulent so far, it’s also possibly not the last.
Isn’t it supposed to be a celebration of great cinema?
The Oscars 2023
In 1973, Marlon Brando did not attend the ceremony and refused to accept the Oscar for Best Actor for his role in The Godfather in protest of Hollywood’s mistreatment of Native Americans.
In 2015, #OscarsSoWhite went viral on Twitter in protest of the lack of diversity amongst nominees.
And of course last year, we all remember Will Smith slapping Chris Rock across the face onstage.
Despite the Academy showing commitment to lead the film industry by example in many ways, the runup to the Oscars this year has become a controversial window into the darker side of Hollywood movie-making, as issues associated with the lack of diversity, the war in Ukraine, possible Russian censorship, links to the Chinese Communist party and lobbying campaigns have, in part, overshadowed this year’s nominees and upcoming ceremony.
In terms of the more trivial aspects of the ceremony, this year the Academy enlisted the help of the MET gala creative team to help revive proceedings and the show’s viewing ratings. One of the changes is to the red carpet (which has reportedly previously cost upwards of $24,000 and takes 600 hours to lay down) which has been replaced with a champagne-coloured one.
The contents of the $100,000+ boujee goody bags gifted to nominees have also changed slightly. This year, the swag includes a plot of land in Australia, botox vouchers and Japanese milk bread, whereas last year’s offering involved a Scottish plot (plus the accompanying Lord or Lady title), a $25,000 voucher for home renovations and a tea gift set from Oprah.
The menu has also changed, last year it was “crispy heirloom rice cakes” and Hungarian beef cheeks, this year attendees will be eating good old English fish and chips followed by trifle.
Some have even hailed this year’s ceremony as “the most populist Oscars in a long time,” claiming that this year’s nominations are for movies that most people have watched. This may be a good thing considering the Oscars telecast will be going head-to-head with the finale of the hit HBO zombie show, “The Last of Us.”
Related Articles: Avatar Inspires Activism: An Environmental Message From the World of Pandora | ‘RRR’: The Indian Film Disrupting Hollywood’s Award Season | ‘All Quiet on the Western Front’: Oscar Nominee Offers a Dark yet Fresh Take on WWI | ‘Cancel Culture’ Hits the ‘French Oscars’?: Cesar Awards Ban Those Accused of Sex Crimes From 2023 Ceremony
Vanity Fair’s after-party entry price has not changed though, it still reportedly costs $80,000 per couple to get in. However, you can opt to watch all the celebs in their expensive attire from the comfort of your sofa via the party’s live stream instead.
The depleting viewing rates combined with the, arguably, overwhelming and expensive rigmarole of the Oscars, unfortunately begs the question: Why do actors care so much about attending the ceremony and winning an Oscar anymore?
For prize money? No, there’s no cash prize. For the bronze statue? No, the Academy has a policy which states that winners must offer it to the Academy for $1 before they can sell it. Why then?
Perhaps to satisfy some of the archetype desires of humanity: Power, pride, popularity and prestige.
And there are of course many honourable and professional benefits associated with winning an Oscar – many actors go on to obtain high-paying roles as a result – but that’s also not a given as there’s also the “Oscar curse” to worry about.
All of this being said, there have been, and still are, many good things happening at the Oscars.
What the Oscars are getting right
There are of course many examples of the Academy or its members championing charities, global causes and representation, for example:
In 2016, upon winning his first Oscar for Best Actor (after 25 years of acting) Leonardo DiCaprio used his acceptance speech to raise awareness for climate change and “man’s relationship to the natural world.”
In 2017 – despite the infamous onstage La La Land mixup – “Moonlight,” an LGBTQ-centred coming-of-age drama won three Oscars: Best Picture, Best Supporting Actor and Best Adapted Screenplay.
Despite some voices claiming the wave of change after the #MeToo movement has not occurred fast enough, the Academy has made a concerted effort to show support for the movement and women’s rights, notably in 2018, when the ceremony celebrated many powerful female actors and activists.
In 2019, Bong Joon-Ho’s “Parasite” made history as the first foreign film to win Best Picture, opening the Western world’s eyes to the brilliance of South Korean cinema.
This year, Michelle Yeoh, TIME’s “Icon of the Year” and martial arts maestro is the favourite to win Best Actress for her lead role in “Everything, Everywhere All at Once,” leading the way for Asian representation in Hollywood.
A song from the Indian blockbuster “RRR” has been nominated for Best Original Song, and as well as being the first song from an Indian film to receive an Oscar nomination, there is no denying that “Naatu, Naatu” is anything short of absolutely incredible.
James Cameron’s pro-environmentalism epic, “Avatar: The Way of Water,” has received a nomination for Best Picture, and continues to bring the interrelated crises of climate change and biodiversity loss to the silver screen.
Another Best Picture nominee is the film adaptation of the 1929 German novel, “All Quiet on the Western Front,” which, along with its eight other Oscar nominations including Best Foreign Film, shines a much-needed light on the cruelty and futility of war.
Regardless of whether these nominations culminate in a win or not, the Academy’s recognition of their global importance demonstrates an enormous step forward in Hollywood’s mindset on representation, diversity and sustainability within the cinematic art form.
However, and without denigrating these well-deserved nominations in any way, how is it possible that in the 21st Century, a Malaysian actress and an Indian song, if they win, could be considered “first” wins?
Where do the issues lie?
The Academy have, at many times, shown dedication to address diversity and inclusion in Hollywood. For example, in 2020, the Academy announced that films must comply with new representation and inclusion standards. What’s more, they also very recently reinforced this dedication by revealing that, next year, there will be new diversity-focused eligibility criteria for nominations to help improve representation and lead the way for better diversity and inclusion in the film industry.
However, despite these efforts, lack of diversity still remains an issue in movies and in the making of them.
Recent analysis of “The Anatomy of an Oscar Winner” conducted by Sky News reveals:
- Female winners are getting older, but the average female winner is still younger (39 years old) than the average male winner (47 years old).
- Only 10% of Oscar-winning screenwriters have been female.
- Only three women have ever won Best Director; this year there are none nominated.
- Halle Berry is the only black woman to have won an Oscar; no black women were nominated this year.
- A total of 55 out of 3140 Oscars statuettes have been won by ethnically diverse people in all four acting categories, plus directing and screenwriting.
- Despite a thriving international film industry, most of the awards still go to American nominees (74%), followed by British nominees (13%).
Aside from issues of diversity, the runup to the Oscars this year has been awash with several other prominent issues that have caught public attention.
One of which has been centred on the late Sacheen Littlefeather: The activist who Marlon Brando famously sent to deliver his non-acceptance speech at the 1973 award ceremony. The controversy stems from Littlefeather allegedly lying about her Native American ancestry.
The war in Ukraine has featured two-fold in the headlines around this year’s ceremony. First due to the Academy reportedly rejecting President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s request to appear virtually at the event, and second, as a result of the international non-profit, the Ukrainian World Congress, calling for the Best Picture favourite “Top Gun: Maverick’s” nomination to be reviewed due to accusations of the film’s Russian sponsorship and potential censorship.
As well as nominees’ ties with Russia, links to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) have sparked concerns amongst activists, as one of this year’s hosts – martial arts star and “Ip Man” front man, Donnie Yen – has previously been accused of supporting the Chinese government.
Potential outside authoritarian influence aside, a closer-to-home issue surrounding Oscars campaigning also surfaced in the runup to this year’s ceremony, as the star of “To Leslie,” Andrea Riseborough, was caught up in a lobbying campaign investigation.
Riseborough herself, as well as the mentioned Academy members, were not accused of any wrongdoing at all, however it was initially alleged that some of her supporters encouraged public endorsement for her performance from Academy members, as, according to the New York Times, many celebrities hosted screenings of the film and showed praise for it on social media and elsewhere, including Charlize Theron, Jennifer Aniston, Gwyneth Paltrow, Edward Norton and Kate Winslet, amongst many others.
However, after an investigation was opened by the Academy, they found no existing rules had been broken and the claims were very quickly dismissed, with the nomination still standing.
Further, in an effort to prevent any kind of dispute resulting in transgressions during this year’s ceremony, the Academy has this year formed an on-hand crisis team who can step in, keep the peace and prevent another “slapgate.”
Are these Oscars controversies a reflection of our world?
The upsurge in an overly-politicised narrative overshadowing the true sentiment of the Oscars is, in many ways, most likely due to the morbid public appetite for scandal. But it must also be said that the entrenched stereotypes and inequalities of Western society could also be possibly, in part, to blame.
Perhaps, when the complexities of human nature are combined with years of global instability, members of the film industry – like all industries – may have been pushed to the brink, now desperately grabbing at opportunities to distinguish themselves.
In the New York Times Bestseller “Oscar Wars: A History of Hollywood in Gold, Sweat, and Tears,” author Michael Schulman states:
“America does not have royalty […] the Oscars, more than anything, are a battlefield, where the history of Hollywood – and of America itself – unfolds in dramas large and small. The road to the Oscars may be golden, but it’s paved in blood, sweat, and broken hearts.”
Furthermore, in the wake of streaming giants like Netflix dominating viewer preferences, the popularity of watching anything on live television or outside of the four walls of one’s home is shrinking rapidly.
In a Saturday Night Live (SNL) sketch about the Oscars aired last month, where both the celebrity guests and host, Bowen Yang, were roleplaying eccentric characters on a fictional gameshow, Pedro Pascal (in character) asked Yang (in character), “where did all the big, popular movies go?” to which Yang responded (in character), “Oh they’re still here, they’re just on your phone, and you can watch them on the toilet.”
Though confined, in principle, to the walls of the Dolby Theatre on the Hollywood Boulevard, just as Goldie Hawn described Will Smith slapping Chris Rock onstage at the Oscars as “indicative of our culture right now” and a “microcosm” of our world, perhaps one way to view the chaos which seems to be increasingly submerging the message of great cinema and the many awards ceremonies that celebrate it, is as a concentrated, star-studded reflection of global society.
— —
Correction: This article has been updated to further clarify the following points: Richard Gere’s ban was never officially made by the Academy and he did attend the 2003 Oscars ceremony, the Academy has made many efforts to support the #MeToo movement and lead the way in improving diversity and inclusion in the film industry, the reported controversy associated with this year’s Oscars was mostly linked to the nominees and other parties opposed to the Academy itself, the investigation into Andrea Riseborough’s nomination was in no way focused on any of her actions or those of the listed celebrities’, the SNL sketch was intended as an entirely fictional and comical role-play.
Editor’s Note: The opinions expressed here by the authors are their own, not those of Impakter.com. — In the Featured Photo: Gold statuette shrouded in smoke. Featured Photo Credit: Engin Akyurt
