General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWhat's striking about last night's Oscars was that it exposed a dichotomy in Hollywood
I suppose that you can say that there has always been two "Hollywoods."
There's the conservative Hollywood, white and hetero-supremacist, hell bent on protecting establishment themes and standardized images at all cost. This is the one that only thinks of the bottom line. It whitewashes the world for public consumption. It's the image of bland normality. It was this "Hollywood" that sanctioned the nominations for the Oscars.
And on the other hand, you have the artists, most of whom have considerable free time and money to further their own causes once they've achieved a certain level of success. From racial, gender, LGBTQ equality to suicide prevention, disability and family issues, they live it everyday. They know full well that establishment Hollywood only pays lip service to these issues that would never be associated with Hollywood unless the artists themselves lend considerable time and money to advocation and activism.
When the wingers excoriate Hollywood for being too liberal, they're actually pointing a finger at artist activism. The wingers are doing what they can to diminish the voices of those artists who speak out for the less fortunate. They couldn't give a tinker's damn about the establishment, corporate controlled side.
In many cases, the very same wingers are getting paid by the very same people who own and run the major studios. It's not their masters that they're waging a war of words against, it's the hired talent.
I love it when the artists take the few seconds they have on stage to speak for those whom establishment Hollywood stereotypes, misrepresents, diminishes and ignores. Regular people. Most artists were once regular people too... I love the fact that aside from their wealth, fame and success, many of them have never forgotten that.
samsingh
(17,599 posts)Fumesucker
(45,851 posts)I think you are quite right.
nichomachus
(12,754 posts)The Academy was founded as a right-wing, union-busting organization and has been corrupt from the beginning
http://www.alternet.org/media/oscars-history-corruption
homegirl
(1,432 posts)Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences still a non profit, if so, why?
nichomachus
(12,754 posts)The NFL can be non-profit, why not?
Tuesday Afternoon
(56,912 posts)BlueMTexpat
(15,370 posts)but this article from the Guardian (UK) is one of the best, IMO.
http://www.theguardian.com/film/2015/feb/23/academy-strange-relationship-with-race-on-display-oscars-2015?CMP=fb_gu
Penn, who starred in Iñárritus 21 Grams all the way back in 2003, probably thought it was a funny joke with an old friend. But racism from friends assumed to be benign can be the worst kind, especially at an awards show: just ask black author Jackie Woodson, whose friend used presenting her with a National Book Award to make a watermelon joke.
The incident highlighted Oscars uneasy relationship with race, which was on full display throughout last nights ceremony. Along with Tinseltowns fraught relationship with American militarism, Penn bookended a politically awkward and often uncomfortable evening, which started with host Neil Patrick Harris making a joke about Hollywood celebrating its best and whitest.
Four hours later, Penn reminded the world that white supremacy is never far away in America, and its at its most insidious and powerful when wielded by self-proclaimed Hollywood liberals like Penn.
progressoid
(49,992 posts)The author's use of Sean Penn as typically Hollywood is kind of a dumb premise. Yes, Hollywood has liberals (faux and otherwise). It also has conservatives and independents, union members and money grubbing executives, feminists and misogynists, rich and poor, idiots and geniuses, etc. It's not a monolithic culture.
Archae
(46,340 posts)They are out to make money.
And Samuel Goldwyn said decades ago, "If you want to send a message, call Western Union."
progressoid
(49,992 posts)BlueMTexpat
(15,370 posts)a "monolithic culture" (what really is, after all, when each human being is an individual?), but the article illustrates the OP's premise, at least as perceived by a non-American. I have read several similar articles written by Americans, however.
So long as the Oscars ceremony continues to be the most extravagantly obvious annual commemoration of the US film industry and so long as representatives of that industry loom larger than life as they do, those who take part in the ceremony will be perceived as "typically Hollywood," whether we - or they - like it or not.