Image 01 Image 03

Next Up: Diversity Test for Oscar Noms

Next Up: Diversity Test for Oscar Noms

The award for Best Use of the Race Card goes to…

The Oscar nominations have been revealed, and everyone is talking about this year’s nods, snubs, and most importantly—the racial and gender makeup of the Academy and its nominees.

Of course. Here we go again. We’re barely over this weekend’s total freakout over the various combinations of skin color and genitalia that won top rights at the Golden Globes; you’d think we’d be given at least a week to recuperate. But no:

That’s right, ladies and gentlemen. The internet spent an entire day lobbing hate at a group of talented entertainers whose only crime is the relative paleness of their skin:

For only the second time in nearly two decades, the 20 Academy Awards acting nominations went to a group made up entirely of white actors and actresses.

Among the notable snubs was David Oyelowo, who received praise for his turn as the late Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. in Selma.

In 2011, the 20 nominees also were entirely white. Before that, one has to go back to 1998 for an all-white acting group.

The all-white nominees list comes at a time when Hollywood is fielding criticism for not doing enough to promote diversity in filmmaking. And just last month, Sony Pictures co-chairman Amy Pascal and producer Scott Rudin were apologizing for leaked emails that appeared to be racially insensitive. Rudin was nominated this morning for producing best picture nominee The Grand Budapest Hotel.

There’s even a hashtag: #OscarsSoWhite:

The institutional left, led by General Emeritus Al Sharpton, is out in force to criticize the talents skin color of the various nominees:

Rev. Al Sharpton — who formed a Hollywood diversity committee in response to the leaked emails — reacted angrily to the nominees list in a statement released in the wake of this morning’s announcement: “The lack of diversity in today’s Oscar nominations is appalling. … With all of the talent in Selma and other Black movies this year, it is hard to believe that we have less diversity in the nominations today than in recent history.” Sharpton added, “The movie industry is like the Rocky Mountains, the higher you get, the whiter it gets.”

Twitter, of course, had a field day with this:

It’s 2014, and here we are judging people not by the content of their character—or the quality of their performances—but by the color of their skin. Isn’t there a nominee for Best Picture that deals with this sort of thing?


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


Henry Hawkins | January 15, 2015 at 8:21 pm

As predicted, the PC predator libs have begun to eat each other.

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha.. (breath) ..hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha……..

I’m surprised that they didn’t find a way to nominate more blacks.
Interestingly, in foreign film category they nominated a Polish film, an Estonian film (really?) and a Russian film named Leviathan that’s supposed to be about corruption and bleak reality.

At some point I just want to say: Funk off!

Big deal…..who watches anyway.

Years ago I saw that the Academy consistently seemed to select films focused on Jews and the Holocaust. Make a file…. get an award…. Now it is make a film on Black America and expect an award. The Jewish/Holocaust era is gone and the Black American suck up era has begun. Please understand that this is about “films”… Israel and the Jews are in far more peril today. Ferguson and Travon have diluted the real world in which Selma played out.

I’m just sitting here, trying to figure out how to express how very little I care.

I have no words for it.

JimMtnViewCaUSA | January 15, 2015 at 10:38 pm

Am I wrong to feel buoyed up by this comment over at an Instapundit post about Dem Party troubles and demographics? It has quite a politically incorrect feeling to it, yet I feel elevated when I read it… Bravo Mr “X”

Andrew X
I wonder how much of this state of affairs is due to rising white consciousness.

Allow me to explain, if you please – I am a 50 year old man, pale of pallor, a bay-area expat Californian with very liberal parents. And I have never….. never……. NEVER…. NEVER…… EV-ER….. considered my personal “whiteness” (or gender) in any sense. The whole “white rights” or God knows whatever movement I found, and still find, appalling, etc etc. NEVER has my “race” ever been any sort of factor. Or gender.

Until now. Until I encountered an administration and its myrmadons that would forthrightly and joyously make whatever race or gender you are a core fundament of every decision it would make. That would stare me in eye and tell me that race (and gender) was the end all and be all of the world I live in, and that I was going to bend over, accept that, and by God, like it. And would clearly inform me that I had simply no place, no place whatsoever, in their worldview, except as a cow to be milked and a Goldstein to be attacked at the whim of the current power…..i.e. The Man…. (Myn?)

Well, fine. Message received. So, I do thank them for a certain clarity to my life now. I can now happily forget ever again giving a rat’s a$ about “racism” or “sexism” in any form. Done. Thanks. That ship has both sailed and been driven onto the rocks by an endless stream of people willing to create “racism” and “sexism” out of whole cloth to further their own political, personal, and even financial ends. I cannot stop them from doing it, but I can damn sure inform them they can take their whining elsewhere, they get nothing from me except what they take by force. And the more they do the latter, the more inclined I am to return the favor whenever I may get the chance.

And this is ALL new to me. All of it. Unheard of.

Thanks, Mr. President. Nice work.

“The lack of diversity in today’s Oscar nominations is appalling. … With all of the talent in Selma and other Black movies this year,..

The hypocrisy is appalling.
So it’s OK to have “black movies” but anything and everything “white” is outrageous.
It’s sickening.

    DINORightMarie in reply to Exiliado. | January 15, 2015 at 11:20 pm

    I thought that was the whole point of desegregation – no more “white” movies, “black” movies, “whites-only” bathrooms, “black-only” bathrooms, etc. etc. etc.

    The whole reason, the purpose, of Selma was desegregation and equal rights, wasn’t it?!

    Oh, the irony. I read earlier that Rev. Al said if MLK Jr. were here today, he would be angry at the “snubbing.” I think he would be sick at the focus on the “color of [one’s] skin” vs. the talent of the individuals nominated.

Selma came out on 1/9/2015, per a Googling … and I think the Oscar awards only consider 2014 releases? Sorry, I don’t care enough to be bothered to send more than 2-3 minutes Googling and reading the rules.

    Caver37 in reply to MrE. | January 16, 2015 at 5:14 am

    As for the release date of the movie, the “rules” allow for the showing of these films in like three(3) theaters in Wyoming during a year and that makes it eligible for inclusion. The release of the movie to the wider audience can be months later. Also the idea is to release it late in the year, so there is a buzz. Too early and it is forgotten about. Which is what makes “The Grand Budapest Hotel” so unusual, since it was released last spring.

    amwick in reply to MrE. | January 16, 2015 at 8:04 am

    There was a limited release Dec 25 in LA, so it did qualify for the 2014 nominations.

    NC Mountain Girl in reply to MrE. | January 16, 2015 at 11:06 am

    Many critically acclaimed films go into limited release in December simply in order to qualify for last year’s Oscars.

    The reason for this is particularly since the advent of pay per view cable TV, videotapes then DVDs being released within a couple of months after the movie is out of theaters there had been the feeling that any movie released early in the year is “stale” by the time the awards will be voted on. So the pattern now is that the movies the Academy tends to dismiss as nor being serious- comedies, action adventure & fantasy- get released in Spring and Summer while the “serious” dramas academy voters favor at award time are eeleased in November through early January.

I am guessing that understanding these people is a bit like licking your own asshole. Not only would it very difficult to do, it is probably not all that rewarding when you do.

Last year, “Twelve Years a Slave” got a bunch of awards (Academy & others), but somehow the same people who voted for them have become racist since then.

Lupita (first name suffices) was officially anointed “Most Beautiful” and “Woman of the Year,” and was widely, breathlessly praised as the most stylish and glamorous at every event she attended. I don’t mean to belittle her merits or her fashion sense, but it was so over-the-top as to sound patronizing. There’s usually more disagreement about who was most stylish and glamorous when only white women are being compared.

    Observer in reply to Radegunda. | January 16, 2015 at 8:00 am

    I once read an article in which Halle Berry was recounting her life story, and every beauty contest, modeling job, acting role, award, etc., that she had ever won was because she was the best and deserved it, and every one that she had ever lost was because of . . . racism.

    It’s the same attitude on display here. In years when blacks receive a disproportionately high number of the nominations and/or awards, it’s because they were simply better and deserved it. In years when blacks don’t get as many nods, it’s totally because of raaaaaacism.

This is my favorite; “‘The nominations send a brutal message: Academy voters do not appear to care about diversity.'”

Perhaps that is because its not their job to “care about diversity” its their job to make nominations for people to be awarded what is pretty much the highest honor in their field.

The longer I live the more I realize that these groups of habitually offended morons really do have people just sitting around looking for more ways to be offended. geez.

This might sound stupid (definitely not a first for me), but just cause they’re all white does not mean they’re all the same.

What’s the ethnic makeup of the nominees? Might be a little more diverse than just “white.”

When I lived in Hawaii, I used to laugh how the locals crowed about diversity there, as if the Mainland wasn’t.

On the block I grew up on, the guys on the corner were Italian grocers. Next to them was the bar run by the Greek. Then came my Irish parents’ deli. In our apartment building there were the Poles upstairs, and next to them was the German lady who was like a grandmother to me. Next to that building was the Polish Jew. And that’s just in the first five buildings on the block.

We weren’t all just “white.”

    NavyMustang in reply to NavyMustang. | January 16, 2015 at 4:12 am

    Oh, and everyone I mentioned were immigrants. Legal immigrants I might add. Hardworking legal immigrants who would have thrown themselves off a building before they accepted government assistance.

    Just sayin’.

    Gremlin1974 in reply to NavyMustang. | January 16, 2015 at 5:15 pm

    I remember being in a collage class once when the issue of slavery and reparations came up. Of course the prevailing opinion, even almost 20 years ago, was that whites owed something for slavery and/or blacks were owed something for slavery.

    Of course me being me….well lets just say keeping my mouth shut in the face of glaring stupidity isn’t really my strong suit.

    So I raised my hand and asked if I could have equal time. The professor, who may not have agreed but was very fair and respected others opinions, said absolutely. Plus it was a class rule he instituted at the beginning.

    My first question was simple. “Who “owned” you or any of you, and can you provide proof with freed slave documents?”

    I expected screaming, but you could have heard a pin drop. After not getting an answer a few seconds later, I added; “Ok, if not for you can you provide these documents for your parents and/or grand parents. Or for that matter can any of you even name a person in your family who was a slave?”

    I will give one girl credit, she did know that her Great, great, great grandmother was a freed slave, but she was the only one.

    Next question; “So since none of you were actually slaves, nor do you even know a family member that was a slave, with the one notable exception, why do you deserve a damned thing?”

    “Also, though I am apparently guilty of the crime of being white, my family only came to America after the civil war, between WWI and WWII, neither in Germany nor Scotland did they own slaves, so why do I owe you a damned thing”

    By this time a couple of them had recovered enough to call me a “redneck racist”, though they never answered the questions. Then one of them asked; “Why do you hate black people?”

    As I sat down I simply said what I still believe today. “I don’t hate anyone, but I refuse to take responsibility for something that happened more than 100 years ago that my family couldn’t have been involved in.”

    Oh, other than the accusations for racism, none of them ever actually answered any of my questions.

So now if you do not win an oscar you were “snubbed”? Got it.

I just love the way liberals latch on to their little catch phrases, it’s so much like high school.

    Gremlin1974 in reply to Miata Shinsen. | January 16, 2015 at 5:21 pm

    See that’s exactly what I mean. The habitually offended making up new ways to be offended.

    They don’t want equality, they wouldn’t have anything to gripe about then.

      rabidfox in reply to Gremlin1974. | January 16, 2015 at 8:58 pm

      Ah, but you underestimate their ability to find new things to be racist. Micro-agression/racism is a winner for these people.

Cry racist and let slip the dogs of hate

(apologies to a dead white guy, William Shakespeare)

Every year now there’s a “Big Black Movie” that’s put together to accomplish nothing but win all the awards. It’s kind of silly secret in Hollywood that this goes on. The story isn’t all that interesting but it’s a ‘significant’ film. The problem is that the BBM lobby overplayed their hand this year thinking that because the BBM won nearly everything last year they were entitled to win everything this year too.

all of the potential African American nominees where aborted years ago …

the lesson is if you tell an important story (Selma) with a crappy movie you still can’t win an award …

NC Mountain Girl | January 16, 2015 at 11:37 am

One factor here may be that members of the Motion Picture Academy tends to be older than working filmmakers in general.
Some of these voters were active in Civil Rights campaigns in the 1960s. They are more keenly aware of the distortions and omissions found in Selma than they are in the BBM movies made about other time periods. People tend not to be appreciative when someone who hadn’t been born yet rewrites their own history. Also, the BBMs they really gobble up tend to have a prominent white liberal who shows blacks how to do things in the plot line. Just looking at the cast of the movie I don’t see an obvious person for that role.

It couldn’t happen to a nicer bunch than the Hollywood elite. God Speed race baiters!

How to win an Oscar, guaranteed:
1) Protagonist is kind, sensitive, caring and of the sacrosanct identity class;
2) Antagonist is e-e-e-vil and stupid Corporate/Military Industrial warmonger;
3) Young female hot-bod who peels down a couple times.

I haven’t seen Selma, but if it is at all close to history, it probably missed out on all 3 points. Dr. King did not take special pains to avoid offending anyone; the antagonists were Democrats instead of Republicans; and unless the movie went into the rumored liaisons of Dr. King, it didn’t have nubile hot bodies flashing around.

How on earth did they expect to win?

Why, its almost whiter than the MoveOn staff.