Will secret prejudice hurt 'Dreamgirls' at the Oscars?
Last weekend I had a long, leisurely breakfast with one of Hollywood's most notable studio chiefs. While we chatted casually, he said, in between the lattes and bagels matter-of-factly, what we all know but seldom admit out loud: "Of course, 'Brokeback Mountain' didn't win best picture because of the gay thing."
He's an academy member, seasoned Oscar veteran, a "str8" chap, as the lingo goes, and not affiliated with "Brokeback."
"I couldn't believe how many academy members even refused to watch it," he added, shaking his head. "There's no doubt in my mind that we saw the secret, ugly side of Hollywood when the best picture winner was announced. I'm not saying 'Crash' wasn't a great film, no, no, but that's not why they voted for it. Look, I've been in this Oscar game long enough to know how to read these things. Believe me. What we saw was a disgusting display of anti-gay bigotry. Yep, in so-called liberal Hollywood."
There's much evidence to back up this studio boss' assertion. Many academy members both hip (Sarah Jessica Parker) and old school (Ernest Borgnine, Tony Curtis) admitted they didn't watch "Brokeback" before voting. In toto, "Brokeback" received more best-picture awards from kudos organizations than any other film in history — 26 — but not the film academy. Odd, eh?
"Brokeback" had the most Oscar nominations. That usually translates into a best-pic victory in the vast majority of cases. Like most best-pic winners, it won Oscars for best director and screenplay. Voters admired the film enough to give it all that, but, when the time came to decide the top prize, they just couldn't, in the privacy of their own home or office while no one was watching, give that gay movie the best-picture trophy. Many Oscar voters have admitted this to me. Over all, it's clear to me how they think: It's OK to give Oscars to straight stars portraying gays assaulted with violence or AIDS (Hilary Swank, Tom Hanks), but, come on, "Brokeback" was a love story. By installing that into Oscar's best-picture pantheon, they'd be embracing gay love itself. Yeowsa, those old, straight white guys who comprise the vast majority of voters absolutely refused to do it. Quite a few of them even told me, brazenly, how much the whole thing disgusted them. Just like the studio boss mentioned above, I encountered dozens of voters who admitted to me that they refused to watch their DVD screeners. It didn't matter how good the film was, they weren't going to consider it.
So how did it win the other races?
"They saw Larry McMurtry's and Ang Lee's names on the ballot and thought, 'Oh, OK, I can vote for them,'" said the studio chief. "It eased their consciences a bit so they didn't feel so bad about screwing 'Brokeback' elsewhere."
So, wow, if all of that's true . . . shouldn't that make us worry about the possibility of secret anti-black bigotry being an issue in the current derby with "Dreamgirls" now the frontrunner?
It's no secret that the academy has been stingy to black films in the past. Prior to the 2001 derby when race became a big issue at last, African-Americans had claimed a lead-acting award only once (Sidney Poitier, "Lilies of the Field") and only 5 had prevailed in the supporting races (Hattie McDaniel, "Gone with the Wind"; Whoopi Goldberg, "Ghost"; Louis Gossett Jr., "An Officer and a Gentleman"; Denzel Washington, "Glory"; and Cuba Gooding Jr. , "Jerry Maguire"). When all of this erupted into a major hubbub five years ago and academy members were publicly accused of being prejudiced, voters scrambled to make good for past oversights and they gave both the lead-actor and actress trophies to black stars in the same year, shocking everybody: Denzel Washington ("Training Day") and Halle Berry ("Monster's Ball").
Now, for the first time ever, it looks like an African-American movie can not only win, but romp across most categories: "Dreamgirls." Oscarologists everywhere are declaring it to be the clear frontrunner. If so, it should have an easy time of things at the Golden Globes, which have always embraced black artists and musical movies warmly.
But, hmmmm, what about those weird Oscars? Will voters display another secret flash of ugly prejudice?
This question not only applies to "Dreamgirls," but to "The Pursuit of Happyness," "Catch a Fire" and "The Last King of Scotland," too. This year we see so many great films featuring African-Americans in the lead that we could actually see something that's never occurred at the Oscars: three black nominees in one acting race — Will Smith, Derek Luke and Forest Whitaker all up for best actor.
Hopes now run high that this could be a milestone year for African-Americans at the Oscars. Much like hopes ran high among gays at the last derby. Will the same outcome occur?
There's one hopeful sign that things may work out just fine this time. Let's recall that the film that beat "Brokeback" was about secret racial prejudice. Voters embraced "Crash" enthusiastically, but it featured many white stars like Matt Dillon, Sandra Bullock and Ryan Phillippe. If many white voters feel shut out of "Dreamgirls" like many straight voters felt about "Brokeback," they might respond selfishly again. But will they? Click on the "Comments" link below and pipe in!
Photos: On rare occasions, films with a mostly black cast have broken into the best picture race: "Ray" (2004) and "Sounder" (1972). "The Color Purple" reigns as the biggest loser in Oscar history (tied with "The Turning Point") with 11 snubbed nominations.
(Universal/ 20th Century Fox)
More importantly, I look forward to a time when a motion picture about gays or African Americans will win an Oscar for best picture and such film will not include hatred, stereotypes, prejudice, cliches or struggles due to the color of ones skin or who they love. That will be a great film and a great day. Will that be in our lifetime? At this rate unfortunately and sadly not. Injustice runs thick and deep in this world.
Posted by: Bruce Roger | November 18, 2006 at 03:25 PM
Thanks, James. I'm always adding 2 extra noms to the record losing tally. This is the second or third time I've done that here recently, even though I know better -- at last here's our ultimate proof that I'm crazy.
But for now I've fixed the tally again thanx to readers like you on the ball! TX muchly
Posted by: Tom O'Neil | November 18, 2006 at 10:56 AM
First off, Tom, I just wanted to mention that The Color Purple and The Turning Point are tied for ELEVEN losses, not thirteen. That's a fact I learned from this Academy Award history book which I just recently and happily discovered you wrote, haha.
But I think you raise an excellent point. Crash had so many white cast members. Plus, it wasn't just about African-American racism, but numerous other ethnicities. Dreamgirls is sure to get nominated, but may alienate some voters when it comes time for the big prize. They might feel giving the prize to something more uplifting, say Little Miss Sunshine, or something incredibly successful, like The Departed, would be safer.
What digusts me is that it's not manditory to see all nominees. Many of the voters should've been forced to see Brokeback Mountain, and I bet many would've been surprised that it wasn't all that controversial nor appalling for a straight person to see. They kissed twice. They weren't constantly all over each other. It was more of a character study than a full-on romance. Stupid old people. It makes me feel better that Jack Nicholson, whom I initially assumed was pro-Crash, actually voted for Brokeback Mountain. At least he has some taste.
The good news? Most of these old farts will be dead within the next decade, leading the way for more free-thinking people to vote.
Posted by: James | November 18, 2006 at 09:21 AM
I think its such a shame that bigotry in this form still exists today. The ugly truth is that it still does.
Ask any 25 or 35 year old black human being and you will be surprised to hear how they still feel that prejudice is still rampant out there but like a bad make-up job you just can't hide the ugliness. Ask any gay male or female and they will tell you that they still feel the stares when they go to check into a one bedroom with no sofa bed.
I saw both Brokeback and Crash. I thought both movies were excellent. If you had set Brokeback's love story with a male and female lead, it would have been boring; been there done that for 100 years. This was brand spanking new. I thought it came out at a time when amongst all the sneers and jeers and it would have been triumphant. I was right to some extent. It was however, robbed of its deserved honor over Crash.
I haven't seen Dreamgirls yet, but I have been following the press since before they even started shooting the movie. I will be seeing the road show film wihtout interruptions on December 15. I can't imagine I won't see Oscar written all over it. If it misses at the Oscars, I will never watch another televised Oscar show again.
Posted by: Wilson Toia | November 18, 2006 at 08:57 AM
And because of all the reasons above, BABEL will probably win Best Picture.
Posted by: Mongoose | November 18, 2006 at 08:41 AM
"Dreamgirls" a black movie directed by a white guy.
Posted by: Armando (Caracas, Venezuela) | November 18, 2006 at 07:12 AM
The only thing that surprised me about the Denzel/Halle year was that neither of them really deserved an Oscar for those roles/movies. Training Day was not Denzel's best performance/character (and he's just gone downhill since then) and Halle only stood out because compared to "Swordfish" and 'X-Men" her performance in "Monster's Ball" (which she probably didn't charge $100 grand to show her t*ts) was noteworthy. I can't even remember who else was up that year, but I thought that year it was about "sending a message" more than rewarding the most noteworthy performance. I'm not sure Dreamgirls will have a probllem because it's a musical and frankly, it's a pretty weak year, but I'd rather see Babel or The Queen pull an upset.
Posted by: EDouglas | November 18, 2006 at 04:56 AM
When Were You When…?
I enjoyed reading your article and I agree with you. Thanks for your frankness and for shedding some light on the attitude of some of the Academy members.
It doesn’t seem like the racism issue is as divisive in Hollywood as it used to be and that’s a good thing. Hey, they just gave their top prize to a preachy and moralizing “made-for-TV” movie that deals with the subject matter and, “anti” racism is now used as a safe haven to make the Academy “look good”.
In reality, the Academy discredited itself more than ever before with the Brokeback Mountain snub last March and clearly showed its ugly side. BBM was an extraordinary and exceptional film. It has undeniably been “THE” movie event of 2005 and arguably of the last decade. Even now, a year after its release, there are still, on a daily basis, countless mentions and references to it in newspapers, on the Internet, in columns, television talk shows, magazine covers, film festival posters, etc. Few other films in recent history have generated such a strong & lasting cultural phenomenon and have been elevated to such a “cult status”. OK, Brokeback was groundbreaking and made history partly because it dealt with a gay theme. Mind you, there have been numerous other gay-themed movies in the past. But the truth is, the main reason that Brokeback’s presence on the movie scene has been “historical” in scope is because that film was so dam good, riveting, engaging, and produced an unmatched emotional impact. Brokeback Mountain was a movie experience like no other … but, it did not fit the typical Hollywood mold.
The shocking upset on Oscar night didn’t serve the Academy’s already poor reputation, nor did it serve Crash which is now regrettably, but without a doubt, remembered as one of the most undeserving films ever to win Best Picture. We saw once again that these awards are not really about the movies but about inside politics and how pushy and aggressive the campaigns are. Understandably, many movie fans feel like they have been blatantly cheated.
I remember reading articles and columns commenting the fact that Brokeback Mountain, after its historical sweep in all previous award shows and after earning truly exceptional international acclaim, had finally been snubbed by the “LA-based” Academy for the most mediatised of all prizes. One of these articles asked “Where were you when Crash won the Oscar won for Best Picture?”
Of course, the shocking announcement made by Jack Nicholson had come as such an unbelievable surprise (it was indeed un-be-lie-va-ble!) and had left everyone in such absolute dismay that I found the question interesting and quite revealing, especially when one realizes that that same question is normally asked when referring to disasters, tragedies, or events with blatantly unjust turnouts. Here are the most common ones:
- “Where were you on 9/11?”
- “Where were you when JFK was shot?”
- “Where were you when Elvis died?”
- “Where were you when you heard the OJ Simpson verdict?”
And now, the latest on this infamous list…:
- “Where were you when Crash won the Oscar won for Best Picture?”
It made me chuckle.
Posted by: Daniel | November 18, 2006 at 01:25 AM
I couldn't agree with you more. Like "Citizen Kane," "Brokeback Mountain" was the victim of a
fear campaign and its loss was a dispicable injustice that even the hiring of lesbian comic
Ellen DeGeneres as host next year cannot erase. Voters who admit to not viewing nominated
films should lose their voting priviliges. They undermine the entire awards process and the
credibility of it all.
Posted by: John | November 18, 2006 at 12:25 AM
I think a lot of the BBM obstacle was people refusing outright to see the film (yet voting anyway -- tsk tsk). I don’t see this particular sort of prejudice affecting “Dreamgirls” -- what, someone being so offended by the idea of black people singing and dancing that they refuse outright to see the film? Unlikely. If memory serves, Morgan Freeman’s first two noms were for playing (1) a pimp, and (2) a chauffeur -- not exactly rattling stereotype cages there. (This is not a comment on the performances, just on the receptivity of anyone with hidden prejudices.) The Will Smith thing seems to be about a black guy trying to achieve yuppiedom through Hard Work and Personal Responsibility. Well, Trent Lott supports that cause, too; it’s hardly challenging stuff, whereas BBM was in class by itself. “Dreamgirls” and the thesps mentioned seem safe.
Posted by: raeann | November 17, 2006 at 08:01 PM
I don't think so. Dreamgirls is not like BBM in anyway. An Africa Americans movie can be much easier accepted by AMPAS members than gay movie, and Dreamgirls has the taste of oscar while BBM doesn't.
Posted by: nemo | November 17, 2006 at 07:49 PM
I want to give the academy the benefit of the doubt and say that racism is not as commonplace in their world as homophobia seems to be, but would I be surprised to see a Dreamgirls shutout the same way The Color Purple got cheated? Not at all.
Posted by: Jon P. | November 17, 2006 at 05:45 PM
I don't actually think Brokeback Mountain was hurt by any bias, after all Crash also is a movie about discrimination and has a strong interracial cast (black actors Thandie Newton and Terrence Howard delivering, in my opinion, the strongest performances of the ensemble).
I honestly believe Crash IS a better film than Brokeback Mountain, and therefore DESERVED to win. Were I an Academy voter, I too would have awarded Crash as Best Picture of the year.
I think a lot of people rather blame it on prejudice just because they can't admit that someone has an earnest bias-free opinion that differs from their own. Even if it means accusing the Academy of being full of prejudice for picking as Best Picture a film whose main topic is... Prejudice!!!
Had Brokeback Mountain won, those who were more pleased with Crash could have started ranting about the Academy's racial-bias, could have not? To me, it would be equally silly! Both Crash and Brokeback are great films (though I still like Crash better).
It is an interesting article (hence my bothering to write such a long comment), though I disagree!
PS. Can't wait to see Dreamgirls!!
Posted by: Bill | November 17, 2006 at 04:51 PM
That picture of "Sounder" is not from the 1972 movie. It is from the 2003 TV movie. The original "Sounder" starred Paul Winfield and Cicely Tyson, who both earned Oscar nominations. That looks like Suzzanne Douglass, who was in the remake, not Cicely Tyson.
Posted by: D. Johnson | November 17, 2006 at 04:49 PM
I really expected Hollywood to be over these kind of prejudices....
Posted by: Kamila | November 17, 2006 at 04:17 PM
What about A Color Purlpe? Could Dreamgirls be this year's A Color Purple?
Posted by: Mike. B. | November 17, 2006 at 03:56 PM
Remember though that two years ago two African Americans triumped in actor races, Morgan Freeman and Jamie Foxx, and 5 of the 20 acting nominees were African Americans. I don't think the race issue will be that big of a factor.
Posted by: Lee | November 17, 2006 at 03:52 PM
Remember though that two years ago two African Americans triumped in actor races, Morgan Freeman and Jamie Foxx, and 5 of the 20 acting nominees were African Americans. I don't think the race issue will be that big of a factor.
Posted by: Lee | November 17, 2006 at 03:52 PM
Again, I must stress the Academy is not known for being bold or daring come Oscar time. They prefer to play it safe. Snubbing of films such as Blue Velvet, sex, lies & videotapes, and many others in the past are great examples of the Academy's past sins. But Dreamgirls has its advantages...it's a popular musical, it has well-known stars. It has a well known director at the helm, well-made in all technical aspects and looks like a big commercial hit aka box office bonzo! That would be hard to ignore. Plus if you have other Best Pic finalists like Babel (very multiracial pic) and say Blood Diamond in the mix then you could hardly scream "racism". Take a look at Best Pic 1967: IN THE HEAT OF THE NIGHT--a movie that was not only about a murder but also dealt with racism as well or MISSISSIPPI BURNING (1988) or GUESS WHO'S COMING TO DINNER (1967). DREAMGIRLS has a good chance of taking Best Pic because mainly it will be a huge commercial hit and a safe bet for the Academy. Otherwise, the Academy might as well give the Best Pic prize to THE QUEEN...BABEL, again that would be too bold a choice for the Academy.
Posted by: Frankie R. | November 17, 2006 at 02:36 PM
Dreamgirls will be fine. As "black" movies go, it's the whitest of the white, as mainstream as it gets. Because it's not about race. It would face more prejudice as a musical, but that's been overcome by Chicago.
And by the way, Hollywood's anti-gay sentiment, however closeted, is alive and well - the proof being in Brokeback's loss to Crash. Anyone who adamantly denies that is just trying to make themself feel better.
Posted by: Richard | November 17, 2006 at 01:47 PM
Dreamgirls will be fine. As "black" movies go, it's the whitest of the white, as mainstream as it gets. Because it's not about race. It would face more prejudice as a musical, but clearly, that's been overcome by Chicago.
And by the way, Hollywood's anti-gay sentiment, however closeted, is still alive and well - the proof being in Brokeback's loss to Crash. Anyone who adamantly denies that is just trying to make themself feel better.
Posted by: Richard | November 17, 2006 at 01:40 PM
"Brokeback" received more best-picture awards from kudos organizations than any other film in history "
-More than Schindler's List and LA Confidential? Is it just b/c there are more kudos now than in the 90's?
Posted by: Alex | November 17, 2006 at 01:29 PM
It wouldn't surprise me if "Dreamgirls" lost due to the Academy's bigotry. "Brokeback Mountain's" loss was completely revealing. I was stupid enough to believe that these hypocrites who call themselves artists would be free of bigorty and prejudice, but if you look at their history, one must know better. It took them over 70 years to award a black woman Best Actress. The Academy isn't as liberal or brave as they think they are.
Posted by: Keir | November 17, 2006 at 01:02 PM
Crash is the blackest movie to ever win Best Picture. Howard, Newton Cheadle Ludacris so many black actors. It won the Black movie award and the NAACP movie award. So a director who directs gay sex and love and writers who write gay sex and love are OK. PLEASE.
Posted by: Brian | November 17, 2006 at 11:26 AM