General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsA 'Green Book' Best Picture Win Proves Hollywood's Still A Sucker For White Saviors
"Capping off a year that boasted movies as progressive as Black Panther, The Favourite and BlacKkKlansman, the Oscars took us back in time on Sunday, giving Best Picture to something straight out of 1989.
Reverse Driving Miss Daisy ― you know it as Green Book ― nabbed the top prize, and with it the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences sent a clear message about how Hollywood sees race in 2019. The film tells the story of real-life black jazz pianist Don Shirley (Mahershala Ali) through the lens of the racist white chauffeur (Viggo Mortensen) in his employ, treating the latter as a hero because he overcomes his bigotry. Its a clichéd, insulting conceit that dupes audiences into feeling good when the white character extends mild graciousness.
A Green Book win is proof positive that popular culture has only improved so much on matters of race since Crash won Best Picture in 2006.
The categorys preferential balloting system ensures the trophy goes to a movie that hits a consensus spot among voters. The winner therefore stands in as a median representation of the academys taste, providing a snapshot of how Hollywood views itself. This year, it turns out people were most comfortable handing the industrys highest honor to a movie that places its black character in the backseat, literally and figuratively. "
.
"The win also tells us just how little the academy pays attention to the discourse surrounding the titles in contention. Shirleys family called Green Book a symphony of lies, saying it greatly embellished the central friendship and challenging its assumption that Shirley was disconnected from the black community. Ali, who won Best Supporting Actor on Sunday, apologized to Shirleys relatives in response. Factual integrity isnt paramount in a fiction film, but in this case the script distorts a black mans biography to benefit its white lead. Voters didnt seem to care about that flap, nor did they mind that Mortensen used the N-word at a post-screening Q&A while trying to make a point about how such slurs are no longer acceptable. By the time director Peter Farrelly was apologizing for having exposed his penis on sets when he was younger, everyone had already made up their minds about the movie. "
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/best-picture-green-book-oscars_n_5c736ca7e4b03cfdaa571b71
WhiskeyGrinder
(22,522 posts)catbyte
(34,546 posts)underpants
(183,043 posts)All white men except for Ali, who won an Oscar last night, and another black person on the opposite side of the stage. Then the person at the mic profusely praised Viggo (who by all accounts is a good guy and very liberal) for making the whole thing possible. I get that him signing on was a big deal in terms of getting financing and making it but they had an actual Oscar winner there and they barely acknowledged him.
The Seth Meyers "White Savior" fake trailer is spot on.
dsc
(52,173 posts)underpants
(183,043 posts)I didnt know who he was.
BeyondGeography
(39,395 posts)Hey, at least it was better than Driving Miss Daisy and Dances With Wolves. Opinions may vary of course.
My main complaint: not a single nomination for Leave No Trace, which should receive an award for best film not to receive a nomination.
Cuthbert Allgood
(5,010 posts)Because it isn't.
BeyondGeography
(39,395 posts)Did you miss that part?
Green Book at least held my attention. Driving Miss Lazy bored me after the first 45 minutes.
socdem60
(52 posts)Black Klansman should have won best picture.
Zoonart
(11,916 posts)Of all the nominated films, Black Klansman was the film that will be remembered and will last in the cannon of cinematic art.
HootieMcBoob
(3,823 posts)That is a movie that is absolutely groundbreaking. It will be studied in film courses for years to come.
Zoonart
(11,916 posts)I write horror fiction and Get Out is a masterpiece. It's unique subtlety is what makes it so powerful. Bloody guts are overrated. Psychological horror is the most lasting...the most scarring...racism is the horror that keeps on giving.
Dave Starsky
(5,914 posts)It is a horror/thriller that works on every single level, from the simple to the profound. I thought about that movie for days after I saw it. That's how I know a film is great.
I wish every horror/thriller could be like that.
JustABozoOnThisBus
(23,384 posts)That's the only nominee I've seen so far. I'll have to check out the others.
Maybe it was a slow year.
dsc
(52,173 posts)or (though I didn't see it) Roma. I think both of those will last. Since I didn't see Roma it is possible that film was better though I loved Blackkklansman
JustAnotherGen
(32,046 posts)And get bored and switch it off. I'm the viewer who needs a beginning, a middle and an end. I felt like it was a movie about a guy who loves Fellini - not a story unto itself.
Docreed2003
(16,905 posts)"Roma" is a beautiful film at times, but dang it's just so slow. It just never drew me in the way some movies do.
TexasBushwhacker
(20,256 posts)But he seemed pretty happy with the Best Adapted Screenplay Oscar.
Cuthbert Allgood
(5,010 posts)I had Lee for Best Picture is my pool, though. I thought this was going to be the one. Then Green Book shit on it.
ananda
(28,914 posts)I felt that the white guy was the one who was "saved"
from his inhuman prejudice.
The black guy literally helped him become human again.
WhiskeyGrinder
(22,522 posts)Only by being traumatized overtly and covertly. That's not help; that's slaughter. White people can do better than that, and better than this movie.
MaryMagdaline
(6,859 posts)But I think dr Shirley was the one mentoring Tony. He was strong on ethics vs Tonys short cuts and thievery (taking stone). Maybe Shirley saw Tony as no more than the help as Shirleys family alleges, but its possible that Tony saw Shirley as a significant factor in his life ... someone who opened up another world to him ... music, high culture, ethics. Shirley did not treat Tony as a goomba but someone capable of much more. Tony had a sense of ethics (keeping his word about the contract, being faithful to his wife) but Shirley brought it home to him about devotion to art, ethics and honor.
Not a fabulous movie but solid. Tony might be a zero to the Shirley family but not the other way around. He had an influence on Tonys life.
Doremus
(7,261 posts)Some people saw a white guy saving the day. I saw a white guy taken to school by a black guy who'd had his fill after a lifetime of bigotry.
The period costumes and scenery were a bonus I enjoyed immensely as I sell a lot of mid century stuff in my antique shop.
Bernardo de La Paz
(49,075 posts)... not shit on media depicting people bridging the gap between races.
I haven't seen either film, and there are undoubtedly valid criticisms of both. Some of the points made about Green Book seem valid on the face of them but focusing on them to the exclusion of everything else about it is not helpful.
It is not helpful to put every single racial interaction under a microscope.
The perfect is the enemy of the good. Democrats are suckers for seeking perfection and falling prey to right wing shenanigans in that regard. We lost an extremely good Senator (Franken) because enough Democrats demanded perfection.
Yes, Spike Lee should have been recognized more officially for Do The Right Thing, which I have seen.
WhiskeyGrinder
(22,522 posts)We are discussing a movie that does little to "bridge the gap between races" because it shows the only way to do that is for a white person to directly witness the suffering and degradation of a black person, and then makes it equivalent to the black person employing the white person and being pals with him -- and that's all without digging into the shameful way this movie was produced in the first place.
The perfect may be the enemy of the good, but this movie isn't even good. We must do better.
TexasBushwhacker
(20,256 posts)I have a big problem with that nd I'm white. I have a problem with the fact that Shirley's character was considered a supporting role too. I'll probably watch it eventually, but I'm not in a big rush.
WhiskeyGrinder
(22,522 posts)FakeNoose
(32,917 posts)Mahershala Ali should have won the Oscar for Best Actor in a Leading Role. I'm glad he won something, but he was cheated out of a better award in the process. Or one could argue that BOTH Dr. Shirley (Ali) and Tony the Lip (Mortensen) were leading roles and they both deserved to be nominated for the Leading Actor award. How could they choose one and not the other? My guess is that maybe Viggo Mortensen's agent got something in his contract early on, stating that only he would be the leading role. Does that even happen any more?
Amishman
(5,559 posts)Green book was a really good film and loved by critics and audiences. It's a legit choice for best picture.
USALiberal
(10,877 posts)Hermit-The-Prog
(33,563 posts)Initech
(100,149 posts)"They pissed people off by hiring and firing Kevin Hart. And then they pissed people off by announcing and then unannouncing that they will air certain categories during the commercial break. Now they will piss people off by choosing one of the following 8 movies for Best Picture."
Beaverhausen
(24,476 posts)I saw it and it was about the relationship between the two men, not about one being a savior.
USALiberal
(10,877 posts)Exposes what he had to deal with not that long ago.
MFGsunny
(2,356 posts)During Jim Crow era, said Green Book ITSELF - published from 1936 to 1964 - had very real aspects of saving grace.
https://www.blackpast.org/african-american-history/negro-motorist-green-book-1936-1964/
WhiskeyGrinder
(22,522 posts)no perspective from Shirley's family, thus centering the white man's experience of racism.
In so doing, perpetuates the lie that racism is the result of ignorance, not a system built into the infrastructure of this nation that continues to this day to disenfranchise and oppress black people.
Progressive Law
(617 posts)Why can't both be true, that racism can be a result of ignorance and that racism is a result of "a system built into the infrastructure of this nation..."?
Beaverhausen
(24,476 posts)EffieBlack
(14,249 posts)For all we know, Green Book got one more vote than the several other black/brown-themed films. It's possible that Black Panther, BlackKKKlansman and Roma together received substantially more votes than Green Book.
I think we're reading way too much into this. I'm just glad that so many diverse films were in the running and are being recognized.
sweetloukillbot
(11,163 posts)The edgier takes on race split the vote, leaving the safe one to win.
RhodeIslandOne
(5,042 posts)The vote was likely split.
Stand and Fight
(7,480 posts)WhiskeyGrinder
(22,522 posts)Stand and Fight
(7,480 posts)WhiskeyGrinder
(22,522 posts)How do you define "outrage culture"?
SoCalDem
(103,856 posts)BlueintheSTL
(135 posts)Bill Maher was spot on in his Oscar rant a couple weeks ago regarding the nominees. Bohemian Rhapsody not good enough because it downplays his sexuality! Green Book not good enough because it is not liberal enough! You know what, if John Lewis has no problem it, then who am I to say otherwise? Anyone who has ever watch a movie "based on a true story" knows that the movie is never 100% or even 75% accurate from the book or whatever original material it came from.
WhiskeyGrinder
(22,522 posts)entertainment about issues that are important to them.
still_one
(92,526 posts)implication, which perhaps is why the media exploits it because they realize the emotion it generates
MicaelS
(8,747 posts)Is going to piss off people and cause a (seemingly) big controversy.
BlueintheSTL
(135 posts)Life is just too short to get angry or offended by everything people do, especially over a freaking movie of all things. This is becoming the norm these days with everything in society, and it continues to get progressively worse.
Mosby
(16,422 posts)Because they just upset people and the people voting could be bigots.
The award shows are just enabling bigotry.
Time to move on.
MicaelS
(8,747 posts)That way no one is left out.
Oneironaut
(5,547 posts)Mr. Quackers
(443 posts)on the television at the bar last night.
I thought to myself and told another patron: "none of this has any bearing on reality whatsoever."
BlueintheSTL
(135 posts)People watch movies movies to be entertained, not for a reality check. How many movies have ever giving you any bearing of reality? If that is what you want in movies, stick to documentaries.
Mr. Quackers
(443 posts)FrankBooth
(1,610 posts)No wonder Democrats and American left can't hold together election coalitions commensurate to their actual popularity. It's idiotic purity test bullshit like this. Did they actually watch the ceremony? It was a great representation of diversity in action, without hyperbole or didactic grandstanding ... it was very measured, low-key and effective IMO.
Hollywood is under no obligation to make your perfect movie -- you can go ahead and do that yourself if you have a few extra $M to throw around.
Hollywood is under no obligation to hire the crew you think they should hire. Don't like it? Don't go see the movie, problem solved. In Hollywood's defense, there is an overt, industry-wide push to address their diversity issues, with differing levels of success of course -- but they are trying and in many instances, succeeding. It's certainly not perfect or complete, but compared to many, if not most industries, film is hardly the problem.
Studio movies are about making a profit FIRST -- not your political agenda. Don't like that? Stop watching them and make your own.
Would I have given the nod to Spike over Green Book? Probably. Personally I would have given it to Roma over both. Green Book was nothing special IMO, but it was entertaining and had heart -- because it was made by so-called "white guys" it's somehow a political failure? Total nonsense -- the Academy has always favored sappy, sentimental movies like Green Book.
Issues like this are perfect for exploitation by those who want to divide the left as there's no way to win or resolve them.
still_one
(92,526 posts)is somehow related to the Democrats and the left?
There was NOT one mention of Democratic politics or the left in that piece.
And I stand by my comments.
still_one
(92,526 posts)volumes about stereotyping
Most are giving there opinions for or against, they are NOT blaming Democrats or the left for those opinions
FrankBooth
(1,610 posts)Sure it doesn't.
And yeah, stereotyping. Right.
still_one
(92,526 posts)FrankBooth
(1,610 posts)I guess I can't be a Democrat. Wow, news to me -thanks for clearing that up.
still_one
(92,526 posts)toward them.
I just found it interesting that you felt so inclined to interject Democrats and the left into the conversation, which is why I responded
In fact it might surprise you, but I think we probably agree on more things than disagree
FrankBooth
(1,610 posts)On more things than not. I think that's true for 90% of all the arguments that happen between posters on this site. We all have much more in common than not, and yet we spend an inordinate amount of time sniping over the disagreements. I'd go so far as to say that obsession with the 10% here is unhealthy and vulnerable to exploitation by those who willfully seek to divide us. I had no intention of exacerbating that situation, but perhaps I have and should have just not posted anything.
I'm not sure why you're surprised I'd interject politics into my comment, but to clarify.
1. This is a political discussion forum, so it's not outrageous to address political implications of a given post, whether it was stated overtly or just implied.
2. My comment was not just to you, but a reply to many (but not all) of the comments on here. Plenty of political opinions. I obviously didn't make that clear.
3. My comment about Democrats and the left refers to the above point about our agreements/disagreements. We know for a fact that there are forces out there on the Internet who want to divide Democrats. Issues like this are low-hanging fruit-- easy to exploit for those who wish to do so. Again, I probably failed in making that clear ... but after the Bernie/Hillary shitshow in '16, this division is something that concerns me. And IMO, division based on this HuffPo piece are not helpful to the left or Democrats.
4. The HuffPost link shows an amazing lack of understanding of Hollywood. You yourself said you don't enjoy the Oscars, which is fine. I am ambivalent. But Hollywood, warts and all, is way, way ahead of the curve regarding attempts to tackle diversity/access issues in their industry compared to pretty much any other big industry. Also, Hollwyood gravitates to sentimental, feel-good stories like Green Book for one reason, and one reason only -- they make more $$ (or are at least perceived to by the financiers calling the development shots.)
still_one
(92,526 posts)I was just perplexed about where Democrats and the left came into this, but boy you sure explained it eloquently, and I sure appreciate that.
Thanks
NewJeffCT
(56,829 posts)because this is a political site for Democrats/liberals/progressives and this post had 50+ responses before Frank made his replies. The implication about white saviors is political by itself.
I do agree that Hollywood like feel good movies in general - Forrest Gump over Pulp Fiction and Shawshank Redemption; Rocky over All the President's Men, Network and Taxi Driver; etc
ADX
(1,622 posts)..."Green Book" was one of the best movies I saw all last year and I saw a LOT of them. The movie deals with some sensitive subject matter in a very human way that transcended racial politics. At the end of the day, it's about two guys from very diverse backgrounds who learn to bridge their differences and become lifelong friends.
What's so controversial about that?
USALiberal
(10,877 posts)MineralMan
(146,351 posts)I wonder if the writer of this saw it, but I'm not going to go and find out.
The thing is that it won an award that was voted on by a predominantly white group of people connected to the film industry.
That's all it is. I'm not going to make the logical error of assuming that the Oscar is any more significant than that. Now, I'll probably see the movie, eventually, and then I'll make my own assessment of it.
What I assume, though, is that it told a story based on real events, and told it well enough to impress a bunch of film industry people. The Oscars are what they are, and that's all they are.
malaise
(269,328 posts)Seriously
krawhitham
(4,651 posts)Green Book does not claim to be a documentary, movies generally want to 1st make money, 2nd win awards, 3rd get people talking about the film
Green Book has done its job very well,
* It made a fair amount of money grossing 144 million while costing 23 million
* It won awards, 3 Oscars plus another 46 awards. It even got a rare A+ CinemaScore
* It brought awareness, it got people talking, googling, and learning. Without this movie no one (media, blogs, twitter) would be currently talking about Dr. Don Shirley, Victor Hugo Green, or Jim Crow
lindysalsagal
(20,795 posts)Regardless if the content.
I think it made us care about both characters and brought compassion to both of their challenges and motivations.
Black Panther was unapologetic fantasy. Green book offered a realistic redemption we all need now. It was too timely to lose.
Docreed2003
(16,905 posts)A). There is no "white savior" in "Green Book". The biggest issues the movie has are in the cringeworthy way they have a white guy try to teach a black guy to "be black" and the fact that the "Green Book" is only peripherally mentioned in the movie.
B). Everyone is getting bent out of shape about the historical innacuarcy of "Green Book" and no one seems bothered in the least that "BlackKKlansman" largely fictionalized the final part of that film (ie the bombing).
C). Somehow every thinks Vigo's turn from racist bigot to being open minded is unrealistic over two hours, but Adam Driver's somewhat racist turn not racist in KKklansman isn't?? Um ok.
D). The movie in the Best Picture category with the most realistic representation of racial interactions for me was not either of those two films...it was "A Star is Born". I thought Chappelle's character and that set of scenes added heart to the movie...but maybe it's because I'm biased in that I know I have friends in Memphis that I could show up drunk on their front yard and they'd be cool with it and put me up if I needed it... .
E). Ali is a phenomenal actor, but was his performance really the best on that category? I thought Grant in "Can you ever forgive me?" was a better performance, but that's obviously subjective.
F). Finally, it was appropriate that most of the better films in the Best Picture category were honored in some way in other categories (Ie Best Actor/Actress/Screenplay/Director/Supporting Roles/And Song). I think that speaks to how strong those films were and how there wasn't ONE standout film this year but a bunch of really good ones.