Oscars Open Thread

I'm a little late posting this, and I missed the red carpet (but I'll catch up), so here is a running update by CBS, including a recap of Jimmy Kimmel's opening.

This is an open thread for all things Oscar related.

< Sunday Open Thread | Turkey Arrests 4 Suspected ISIS Members in U.S. Embassy Plot >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    Rita Moreno (5.00 / 1) (#2)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Mar 04, 2018 at 08:08:17 PM EST
    Is wearing the same dress she wore to accept her Oscar for West Side Story.

    I thought the overall theme of the show IMO (5.00 / 1) (#31)
    by vicndabx on Mon Mar 05, 2018 at 10:33:07 AM EST
    of inclusion/diversity as indicated by statements, performances and awards was well done.

    More moral superiority... (2.00 / 2) (#19)
    by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Mon Mar 05, 2018 at 07:47:48 AM EST
    From the people (5.00 / 4) (#21)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Mar 05, 2018 at 08:07:22 AM EST
    who represent the most morally challenged president in the history of our country. Y'all make me laugh.

    "Morally challenged"??? (5.00 / 2) (#25)
    by Yman on Mon Mar 05, 2018 at 09:34:58 AM EST
    I know you wingers love to hate you some Hollywood celebs, but how are they "morally challenged"?  They're holding Weinstein et. al. accountable, as opposed to conservatives/Republicans who continue to support Trump and a credible accused pedophile, among many others.  

    "Party of God" and "family values".  Heh.  Might want to remove that log from your eye before you worry about the speck of sawdust in theirs.


    Well, the Oscar to Kobe Bryant (none / 0) (#27)
    by Towanda on Mon Mar 05, 2018 at 10:01:58 AM EST
    negates the attacks on Weinstein.

    I think the Oscar (none / 0) (#30)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Mar 05, 2018 at 10:07:53 AM EST
    Belongs to Keane

    How,exactly? (none / 0) (#37)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Mar 05, 2018 at 03:56:02 PM EST
    Kobe Bryant was tried and acquitted on all charges. The jury's yet to be rounded up for Harvey Weinstein -- assuming, of course, that he is ever arrested and charged with a crime.

    On a similar note, I found myself quite annoyed with #MeToo founder Tarana Burke yesterday, when she publicly called upon E! brass to summarily remove Ryan Seacrest from his anchor gig for the network's Red Carpet coverage at last night's Academy Awards ceremony. (Never mind that I and probably many others find Seacrest to be an ingratiating boor.)

    Now, an independent investigation recently undertaken of Seacrest at the network's behest found insufficient evidence that he harassed and / or assaulted his former stylist. But that wasn't enough for Ms. Burke, who apparently belives that Seacrest should be seen as guilty until he proves himself innocent. (And even then.)

    Look, I get it. Speaking as an historian, it's long been well established that men's behavior toward and treatment of women in western societies have generally been, to put it mildly, appalling. Something's clearly got to change, and we're likely at a crossroads-type of moment when such change is indeed possible.

    There's no doubt in my own mind that anger of the #MeToo movement is entirely justified. But that being given, here's the thing. Most social movements, provided that their leaders and members truly desire a long-lasting and positive impact upon the societies in which they live, must eventually transition from a desire for vengeance upon their tormentors to a quest for justice and reconciliation, if they are to ultimately be successful in their mission to change hearts and minds.

    However, that transition will never occur so long as #MeToo's proponents continue to insist upon dispensing with due process and treating mere allegations of wrongdoing as findings of actual fact, while further holding fast to the notion that men are somehow simply incapable of seeing reason, learning from their mistakes, and rectifying the errors of their past ways.

    I really and truly want women to win this fight, for the sake of my daughters and yours, as well as for that of our grandchildren. But as most women no doubt well know, while intimidation may initially spark fear in its targets, it eventually fosters anger and resentment in the same, as well.

    So long as Tarana Burke and #MeToo continue to target individual high-profile miscreants, rather than do the thankless and less-than-glamorous work of addressing and tackling the underlying system of patrimony which protects and favors men while shackling and oppressing women, nothing's really going to change.

    Fear and intimidation have never ensured a just and lasting peace in any society. I can assure you that eventually, #MeToo's targets will learn to cope with the movement's tactics and respond accordingly.

    If and when that finally happens, and -- Heaven forbid -- men eventually feel compelled to band together and break the siege, the movement will be left with only a few celebrity heads mounted on its wall, but otherwise will have achieved nothing of lasting social consequence.

    At the end of the day, if this movement is ever to realize a positive and proactive socio-economic impact over the long term, women are going to need enlightened men to see reason, embrace their perspective and take their side. And I'm telling you right now, you're going to have a lot of imperfect allies in that regard, of whom I'm one. (See also "Franken, former U.S. Senator Al," et al.) And as both you and I know, perfect is always the enemy of the good.



    The charges were dropped (none / 0) (#39)
    by McBain on Mon Mar 05, 2018 at 04:06:48 PM EST
    against Bryant when the accuser refused to testify. I believe he would have been found not guilty.    

    Agree, there was no trial (none / 0) (#42)
    by Jeralyn on Tue Mar 06, 2018 at 11:23:28 PM EST
    The case was dismissed by prosecutors. I covered it extensively (more than 100 posts) from the defense point of view. All posts are assembled here.

    As to why the case was dropped: According to prosecutors and lawyers in the civil case, who were interviewed by the LA Times, the accuser did miserably on a mock cross-examination a few weeks before the trial.

    The Los Angeles Times, in a long investigative piece based upon statements by prosecutors and the accuser's civil lawyers, as opposed to anonymous sources or legal analysts, reports that the accuser performed so badly during a cross-examination at a mock trial held just a few weeks before the scheduled start of the real trial, that both prosecutors and her civil lawyers knew she had to fold.

    It tells the story behind the apology negotiations, conducted by her civil lawyers and local defense lawyers who were on the team but not members of Haddon and Mackey's firm; the bitter feuds between the prosecutors which left two of them not speaking up to the week the trial was set to begin and the details of the mock cross that was devasting for the accuser. Almost all of the quotes are from the prosecutors and civil lawyers involved.

    The only lawyers not commenting are Pam Mackey and Hal Haddon, who have consistently refused to speak with the press, citing ethical reaons. This article sounds like a prelude to a book on the case, and for once, much of what the reporters say rings true.

    But the point is he was (none / 0) (#43)
    by Jeralyn on Tue Mar 06, 2018 at 11:26:13 PM EST
    not convicted and the settlement in the civil case is not an acknowledgment of or evidence of wrongdoing on his part.

    Yes, but outside of court (none / 0) (#46)
    by Towanda on Wed Mar 07, 2018 at 12:01:43 PM EST
    he admitted it. I take him at his word, when it doesn't cost him.

    Do you mean his apology? (none / 0) (#48)
    by Yman on Thu Mar 08, 2018 at 07:24:08 AM EST
    I didn't really follow the case, but I remember his apology didn't involve an admission but an acknowledgment that they both viewed the encounter differently:

    "I also want to make it clear that I do not question the motives of this young woman. No money has been paid to this woman. She has agreed that this statement will not be used against me in the civil case. Although I truly believe this encounter between us was consensual, I recognize now that she did not and does not view this incident the same way I did. After months of reviewing discovery, listening to her attorney, and even her testimony in person, I now understand how she feels that she did not consent to this

    I was a huge Lakers fan (none / 0) (#49)
    by MKS on Thu Mar 08, 2018 at 05:11:48 PM EST
    when this Kobe issue came up.  The drama up to that point in time involved Kobe's alleged friction with Shaq.  I took the position at the time that Kobe deserved the benefit of the doubt, etc.

    But over time, that did not feel right.   Maybe no crime was committed, but Kobe lost a lot of his luster because of it.....


    Agreed MKS regarding the Lakers, (none / 0) (#52)
    by fishcamp on Sat Mar 10, 2018 at 02:44:27 PM EST
    but I'm still a huge fan.  It took me a long time to realize I could have several NBA and NFL teams as favorites, without guilt.  Being from Portland I have to have the Trailblazers on the list, but down here in Florida, they're  barely heard of.  Then in Aspen for all those years we had the Nuggets and the Broncos, during the days of John Elway.  Now here in the keys, we have all the Miami teams and an entire state full of football and basket ball teams, professional and collegiate.   David Beckham is trying to build a futbol stadium.  We have Gulfstream horse racing and jai alai (Sp).  Hockey is huge.  Hard to keep up.

    I didn't read TalkLeft back then (none / 0) (#50)
    by McBain on Fri Mar 09, 2018 at 09:53:17 AM EST
    but I'm pretty sure I saw you on TV a few times talking about the case.... making good legal arguments, using common sense.  I also remember Wendy Murphy doing the opposite.

    Wow, I wonder where she is (none / 0) (#53)
    by Jeralyn on Sat Mar 10, 2018 at 03:33:09 PM EST
    now.  MSNBC always paired us together, we even did several live episodes for a pilot series where we were pitted against each other in a courtroom they built--they used different NBC (rather than MSNBC) reporters play the host while we battled out. And since MSNBC was flying us in for that, they would have us battle it out on the other shows while we were in town. The episodes aired live, at 1:00 pm, we must have done 5 or more of them. I never learned it was a pilot for a new series until they decided not to make it a regular series. I thought it was just part of my job as an analyst for them.  Geraldo also had us do his show on CNBC the nights we were both there and even when we were home. No one made my blood pressure rise like Wendy -- especially in the Nanny and Jonbenet cases, but we ended up being personally on good terms because we were stuck in that studio together for days at a time and there was no one else to talk to but each other. (everybody else was working, on the phone, in meetings, makeup or on the air.)

    Do those videos still exist? (none / 0) (#54)
    by McBain on Sat Mar 10, 2018 at 07:42:28 PM EST
    I'd love to see them.  Maybe I did see some of those but I don't specifically remember you vs. Murphy, just you being a good advocate for our justice system and Wendy being Wendy.

    The case she spoke out about that made my BP rise the most was Duke Lacrosse. The last I remember seeing her on TV (I think it was the Nancy Grace show) she was talking about the Zimmerman case. Surprisingly, she was pro Zimmerman's self defense claim in that one.

    One thing I've noticed about the former prosecutors/ victim's rights advocates who I often disagree with is they usually make a lot more sense when talking about something other than their cause.


    Because he has admitted it (none / 0) (#45)
    by Towanda on Wed Mar 07, 2018 at 11:59:00 AM EST
    if he also has apologized.

    No opinion on Kobe (none / 0) (#51)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Mar 09, 2018 at 10:12:51 AM EST
    I know nothing about it.

    But I really hope Glen Keanes Oscar is not tainted by it.

    Its recognition of a lifetime of work.  For a good man.  Who would probably agree with just about everything you might say.

    He deserves it.  f Kobe.


    Good night for glam (none / 0) (#1)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Mar 04, 2018 at 07:14:33 PM EST
    Male and female

    So far my vote goes to Chadwick Boseman and Nicole Kidman

    I'm likein seeing the guys (none / 0) (#3)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Mar 04, 2018 at 08:11:08 PM EST
    Break out of the straight black cookie cutter tux

    I guess I'm the only one watching (none / 0) (#4)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Mar 04, 2018 at 08:41:28 PM EST
    I'm glad Dunkirk is winning most of the technical awards.  Sound, sound mixing, editing.  It really is flawlessly put together.

    Also people who do not understand visual effects should not pick the winner for visual effects.  That was a travesty.

    I'm watching, just not finding it (5.00 / 1) (#5)
    by Anne on Sun Mar 04, 2018 at 08:47:36 PM EST
    particularly exciting, the jokes are falling kind of flat.

    Just feels a little "meh" to me this year.


    No surprises (none / 0) (#6)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Mar 04, 2018 at 08:53:59 PM EST
    But no production numbers either so...

    I was watching on and off. (none / 0) (#16)
    by vml68 on Sun Mar 04, 2018 at 11:38:02 PM EST
    I haven't seen any of the movies nominated this year, so was not very invested in wins/loses.

    I love Woody Harrelson but I'm also a big fan of Sam Rockwell, so was happy to see him win.
    Same for Gary Oldman. Any other time, I would have been rooting for Daniel Day-Lewis or Denzel Washington.

    Highlight for me...Eddie Vedder. Anytime, I get to hear that man sing, I am happy.


    That was nice (none / 0) (#18)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Mar 05, 2018 at 07:44:39 AM EST
    There are always a couple I missed.

    I did not know Jonathan Demme was dead.


    Jeanne Moreau (5.00 / 1) (#34)
    by jondee on Mon Mar 05, 2018 at 11:42:19 AM EST
    was kind of the French Meryl Streep for decades.

    With beautiful eyes and the eternal French cigarette.

    She was unique.


    Orson Welles once called her (none / 0) (#35)
    by jondee on Mon Mar 05, 2018 at 12:17:27 PM EST
    the world's greatest actress.

    I've been watching while (none / 0) (#7)
    by Jeralyn on Sun Mar 04, 2018 at 09:00:15 PM EST
    doing other things. Nothing has stood out enough for me to comment on yet. It seems very scripted and unspontaneous.

    I liked the visit (none / 0) (#8)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Mar 04, 2018 at 09:02:20 PM EST
    To the screening of A WRINKLE IN TIME across the street.

    I got a major thunderstorm here (none / 0) (#9)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Mar 04, 2018 at 09:24:57 PM EST
    If the power goes off before I find out best picture I'm going to be really pi$$ed

    All the big awards (none / 0) (#10)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Mar 04, 2018 at 10:06:30 PM EST
    Have been totally expected.  Frances is next.

    But I'm feeling a surprise for best picture

    Not much of a surprise (none / 0) (#11)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Mar 04, 2018 at 10:27:02 PM EST
    But totally deserved

    Surprise! (none / 0) (#12)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sun Mar 04, 2018 at 10:46:29 PM EST
    "The Shape of Water" is named Best Picture. Well, that's not so much a surprise, really. Academy voters divvied up the spoils this year. All the other honors went pretty much as expected, save for longtime cinematographer Roger Deakins, who surprised many by finally winning on his sixth nomination for "Blade Runner 2049." His work was really the best part of that movie, and his Oscar is well deserved. I'm also glad to see Jordan Peele and "Get Out" honored for Best Original Screenplay.

    I'm also glad to see James Ivory become ... (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sun Mar 04, 2018 at 11:14:58 PM EST
    ... the oldest Oscar winner in Academy history at age 89, winning for Best Adapted Screenplay with his work on "Call Me By Your Name."

    Not that most people care (none / 0) (#13)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Mar 04, 2018 at 10:51:09 PM EST
    But visual effects was not expected.  Of all the nominated films Blade Runner would have been my last choice.

    WAR FOR PLANET OF THE APES totally deserved to win.  Some time effects people do their job so well I think people forget they are watching effects.  And it's just a bunch of monkeys giving a list performances.


    I'll agree with you on that. (none / 0) (#14)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sun Mar 04, 2018 at 11:10:21 PM EST
    I was surprised by that one. In that category, "War for the Planet of the Apes" was much better than "Blade Runner 2049," which save for the hologrammed resurrection of a young Rachel really didn't improve on the visual effects of the original film from 35 years ago.

    The thing is (none / 0) (#17)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Mar 05, 2018 at 07:42:21 AM EST
    The "Rachel" scene was not really very good.  Good deal of effects chatter a out that.  It looked totally CGI.  That process has been done several times.  And much better.

    APES on the other hand had a whole ensemble of apes that were in every shot and that looked and felt absolutely real.

    I was glad to see Glen Keane win for the short animated basketball thing with Kobe.

    Keane is one of the only old school animator guys I got to have any interaction with at Disney.  When I was on TREASURE PLANET.  Very nice man.   And an animation God.


    Variety (none / 0) (#20)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Mar 05, 2018 at 07:59:03 AM EST
    Fox's "Apes" franchise has consistently been dismissed by voters as mere entertainment while, year after year, effects-heavy awards-season projects swoop in and snatch the trophy. The British Academy may have pointed the way here: Expect Denis Villeneuve's sci-fi sequel to be the heartbreaker this time.
    Will win: "Blade Runner 2049"
    Could win: "War for the Planet of the Apes"
    Should have been here: "Okja"

    I don't think Okja should have won but it was way better than Blade Runner


    It does seem like (none / 0) (#26)
    by CST on Mon Mar 05, 2018 at 09:58:36 AM EST
    Planet of the Apes is getting hit for not being considered a "serious" film.  I can't really think of any other reason they keep getting overlooked.  The apes are fantastic - true characters in the films, not just props.

    That said, I have not seen Blade Runner 2049.

    Agree that Dunkirk deserved the "technical" wins.


    Blade Runner (none / 0) (#29)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Mar 05, 2018 at 10:07:10 AM EST
    Was ok

    That's all.  It was "futuristic" and had flying cars so the old men who vote thought it was awsum.


    Having seen only (none / 0) (#22)
    by KeysDan on Mon Mar 05, 2018 at 08:50:17 AM EST
    "Get Out," I, necessarily, bring Javanka-like expertise to the discussion of the awards.  But, from the awards show perspective, I found it to be rather true to form:  long, of course, but an instructive primer on extremely significant cultural trends of the country.  Jimmy Kimmel's opening was less overtly political than I expected, ignoring Trump directly, saving named ridicule for Pence.  And, surely, Trump was disappointed in the sense of his not being the focal point.  And, he should not have been.  This was a night for recognizing achievements in increasingly sophisticated and competitive fields.

    The Academy did have its own political issues to deal with, starting with Jimmy's reference to Harvey Weinstein, hitting its mark with Frances Dormand's clarion call, with a lot of attention in-between.  The inclusivity of the presenters, nominees, and winners was part of the story being told.

    The bling of the stage and the glam of the women's fashions were in keeping with the legacy of Hollywood movie stars. And, the apparent work gone into appearances honors the occasion.  In a rare difference of opinion with the Captain, I prefer that the men, try for male elegance in a traditional tuxedo.  While Arme Hammer looks good in maroon velvet, it is not many who can get away with a short-sleeved tux jacket set off by white tennis shoes.

    While only hearing about these movies, I now have a better idea of which I want, or do not want, to see.  Some reviews of Dunkirk, for example, made me think that it would not be worthwhile--another WWII movie.  But, the technical awards alone made it among my priorities.

    Dunkirk (none / 0) (#23)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Mar 05, 2018 at 09:06:17 AM EST
    Definitely worth it.   All I have seen are.

    The only one I have not see was the PHANTOM THREAD and I'm sure it's great because everything Paul Thomas Anderson does is great.

    But especially SHAPE OF WATER.  I've been thinking of going back to the theater for a second shot.   Which I never ever do.

    It's very special


    PS (none / 0) (#24)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Mar 05, 2018 at 09:09:21 AM EST
    I agree the 3/4 length sleeves and running shoes might hAve been trying a tiny bit to hard.

    Dunkirk is excellent (none / 0) (#28)
    by Towanda on Mon Mar 05, 2018 at 10:03:39 AM EST
    and Ruffalo ought to have had an Oscar nomination,

    Rufalo? Do you mean Mark Rylance? (none / 0) (#33)
    by caseyOR on Mon Mar 05, 2018 at 11:25:10 AM EST
    Rylance played the skipper of the featured civilian rescue boat.

    Oops, ues (none / 0) (#44)
    by Towanda on Wed Mar 07, 2018 at 11:57:57 AM EST
    and what a weird error, as I live in Rylance's hometown, where we saw him earn ra cognition even in high school theater.

    you intended (none / 0) (#47)
    by KeysDan on Wed Mar 07, 2018 at 03:12:17 PM EST
    Of Kenosha . I think.

    I wouldn't consider (none / 0) (#32)
    by CST on Mon Mar 05, 2018 at 10:34:43 AM EST
    Dunkirk a typical WW2 movie.  The biggest difference, to me at least, was that it was almost entirely defensive.  The "heroes" aren't out killing bad guys, they're just surviving chaos.

    That, and the way it was shot it puts you right in the thick of the chaos.  Like the beginning of Saving Private Ryan, only for the entire movie.


    I saw Dunkirk in an IMAX theater (none / 0) (#36)
    by McBain on Mon Mar 05, 2018 at 01:09:03 PM EST
    and the sound was awful.  Cranked up way too high. Too much bass or whatever made everything shake.  There was a constant buzzing noise that, along with British accents, made it difficult to understand what anyone was saying.  

    I'm sure it's a good film when shown with appropriate sound.  I guess I just don't get the "IMAX experience"


    Oh, those darn Brits! (none / 0) (#38)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Mar 05, 2018 at 04:05:24 PM EST
    Why can't they learn to speak proper English like Americans?

    I saw it at home (none / 0) (#40)
    by CST on Mon Mar 05, 2018 at 10:11:19 PM EST
    And thought "I really should have seen this in the theater".

    Apparently maybe not?


    I don't know if all IMAX theaters are like that (5.00 / 1) (#41)
    by McBain on Tue Mar 06, 2018 at 10:52:19 AM EST
    My modest home theater doesn't have a super surround sound set up... just a simple soundbar and subwoofer. I keep the volume at a moderate level most of the time.  My theory is the sound shouldn't overwhelm the visuals.