December 01, 2005

Fake Humility for Oscar Contenders

Around this time of year we start hearing the same nonsense from Oscar hopefuls as you're used to hearing from professional athletes. But instead of hearing lines like "We just gave 100%" or "We take it one game at a time", we get treated to things like "Oh, I don't really thing about it (the Oscars)", or "If I get recognized by my peers that would be nice, but it's not why I do what I do". Yeah yeah yeah... BULLSH*#!

Don't be fooled. These actors/actresses salivate minute by minute once they realize the film they're working on will put them in contention for an Oscar nod. They dream about it, they obsess over it, they practice fake acceptance speeches in the mirror almost hourly and fantasize about walking down that red carpet and get asked about what they're wearing by Joan Rivers.

Even the fake modesty is just another part of playing "The Game". ABCNews ran a great little article on this topic, here's an excerpt of what they had to say:

"If my work is recognized in that way, great," said Claire Danes, who has caught Oscar buzz for the romantic drama "Shopgirl." "If not, that's fine. That's not why I do the work that I do. I just want people to have a chance to reflect on their own lives while watching my movies."

That's precisely the sort of rhetoric favored by the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, whose 5,800 actors, filmmakers and other industry professionals vote on the Oscars, whose nominations come out Jan. 31 with the awards following March 5. Academy management frowns on anything that smacks of campaigning.

The best strategy for stars and directors is to keep visible enough through interviews and public appearances, but never look as though they're glad-handing for an Oscar. Too much exposure can backfire. During the 1999 Oscar race, best-actress front-runner Annette Bening of "American Beauty" looked as though she was running for office with endless appearances on talk shows and at Hollywood events. She lost to Hilary Swank for "Boys Don't Cry."

So watch these performers carefully over the next little while and always know this: They're lying through their teeth... but they're doing it for a reason.


Posted by John Campea at December 1, 2005 08:31 AM


Comments

Hehe, what a true! I remember Sean Penn before... and after... receiving the Prize. What a "subtle" change. Even Woody Allen gave up to the ceremony.

"The republic is not what it once was"

Posted by: Peter at December 1, 2005 12:02 PM

Of course they want that Naked Golden Boy. It shows that they have made it! Not only that it puts them in a higher pay scale. It will be interesting to see who will win this year. I was pulling for Clive Owen and Natalie Portman for Closer. At lest they got the Golden Glob.
Donna A.

Posted by: Donna A. at December 1, 2005 09:30 PM

For once I would like to see an actor who would admit he was very disappointed that he didnt win, that he actually deserved it more than the other actors nominated alongside him.

Posted by: Simone at December 1, 2005 09:42 PM

Yeah, it's no surprise that actors will act with humility. Nobody would really brag about winning when deep inside they really happy they won. Human Nature.

Posted by: Andrei at December 1, 2005 10:42 PM

Well, I don't know what happened to todays "Round Table", but I hope this gets talked about in the newest Audio Edition.

Posted by: Elliott at December 1, 2005 11:28 PM

WHERE THE HELL ARE YOU GUYS!?

ONLY ONE POST YESTERDAY, NO AUDIO EDITIONS!? WHAT'S GOING ON!?


-Drewbacca
www.moviepatron.com

Posted by: Drewbacca at December 2, 2005 12:20 PM

Simone, you said, "For once I would like to see an actor who would admit he was very disappointed that he didnt win, that he actually deserved it more than the other actors nominated alongside him."

Didn't Bill Murray say something along those lines when he lost the Oscar for Best Oscar when he was nominated for LOST IN TRANSLATION?

At any rate, we can criticize the actors and directors all we want, but aren't we part of the problem if we keep watching these insipid award shows that practically never reward the one who truly deserves the award, and instead gives the Oscar for political reasons? The Oscars are a useless judge of talent. Maybe the Best Oscars should go to those who do the best acting job when it comes to campaigning instead.

Posted by: John N at December 2, 2005 03:41 PM