Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Whacking Phoenix

Options
13»

Comments

  • Options
    #62
    Stateofyou
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,431 ✭✭✭Stateofyou


    chrissb8 wrote: »
    Taking Phoenix again as another example of hypocrisy. He goes on about how the meat industty is cruel yet, in the same speech talks about discrimination in an industry he has been years in, and has just accepted an award off? "I feel conflicted" Here's an idea. Don't accept the award.

    He's recognised the flaws in his industry and he feels compelled to do something about it by speaking up. If he speaks up, and other's speak up, and the support is there, then the pressure will be on those who can make the changes needed. Because if they don't, then the awards themselves become de-valued and stand for nothing.

    I wonder if there's anyone in the meat industry, taking a stand against the cruelty and injustice of which that person is a part of, whistleblowing the shi**y practices therein?


  • Options
    #63
    Stateofyou
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,431 ✭✭✭Stateofyou


    Millicently wrote: »
    I don't watch award shows as I have no interest in the views of pampered wealthy celebrities who feel they have some sort of right to lecture the planet on whatever their particular cause is. Look at it this way, I'm hearing more about a 'lack of diversity' than I am about the films.

    So what is being proposed is awards for gender, colour, sexual orientation etc. Now I always thought it was supposed to be about merit.


    I heard rumours that he had someone else write it for him.

    Ah- so speaking up is working I see! People are now talking about a lack of diversity more than the films. Excellent. See, that's why award shows will be under pressure to change. Otherwise they risk becoming irrelevant. It won't be about merit because the awarding is obviously skewed. So speaking up works, and he used his privilege to help others.

    You "heard," eh? From Joaquin himself or would that be from Dailymail.com? :pac:

    It IS supposed to be about merit. But if talented people from diverse backgrounds are being excluded due to bias, then it's not based on merit is it. It's about being inclusive, not separate awards for diversity categories.


  • Options
    #64
    chrissb8
    Registered Users Posts: 1,169 ✭✭✭chrissb8


    Stateofyou wrote: »
    What I'm getting at is that they don't lose their right to speak up on whatever they want just because they're famous. And if the average person doesn't have time (which just isn't true) then all the better to let anyone who does have the time and desire to speak out and up.

    Some people don't mind "being told," aka taking a fair point and perspective from someone speaking on something valid. It's a cop out is what that is. I would say people far less like being ordered to do something, being left with no choice to make. If we leave things as they are the choice to listen or not will eventually be taken from us all. If you agree that fair points have been made it shouldn't matter who said it. Right is right. If people shut down out of stubbornness then that's their moral failing. The fault doesn't lie with the person who chose to speak up and do something about it. It's not just Joaquim that has an entitlement to speak up, if that's the way you want to put it. We're all entitled to should we choose. He didn't display a lack of self awareness, quite the opposite actually. He called himself out in his own speech. I'm sure he's well aware (and he sounded quite nervous) that not everyone was going to accept what he's saying, but he chose to do so anyway according to his own standards and morals which he lives up to by all accounts. That's not hypocrisy.
    Who is he to tell anyone anything? Same as the rest of us. On a bigger platform, so maybe those who have a bigger voice have an even bigger responsibility to speak out because it makes a bigger impact and difference. On my social media feed alone, there are quite a few conversations about it including one old work mate who didn't really know how cows produced milk- he didn't really think about it and had assumed some cows are just "milk cows." There ya go.

    If people shut down rather than keeping open minded and considering the message on it's merit and working on positive change where they can, well what can I say other than it's contributing to the sh*t show the world is in. I don't respect people who just stubbornly dig their heels in and say, nope, I don't like being told what to do. Some people need to remove their heads from their own arses. "You have to earn the right to say that kind of stuff..."Horrible attitude to have about the plight of others and this world we all share. Again, for one to even have that ability to check out is to be in a place of privilege.

    Where would you suggest he deliver that speech? And the others he also made? For one there wouldn't be the same global reach, which is the POINT. Secondly, part of it was to do with the actual acceptance of the award(s) and pointing out a lack of diversity and the message that sends to people of colour as he put it. If he feels called to speak out against that, he's every right to do it and it was the absolute appropriate venue to do so.

    At my company holiday party last year, leadership talked about what we've achieved internally and in the community and how we could do more. In fact that's happened at almost every company party, and award event I've been to. A lot of people take that opportunity to talk about where they'd like us to go further and do more. It's actually quite a normal thing to do, Oscars/famous or not.

    Fair, I get what you are saying. But I'm saying this is not how humans respond and this is not the way to get the message across.

    Infact, it does more harm than good. As it just feels like people are getting it rammed down their throat. Whether that is the case or not.

    Let's look at someone like David Attenborough, different argument to Phoenix I know, who gently reminds us through showing the beauty of nature coupled with his narration in bbc/his documentaries how all "this" could soon be gone if we don't make drastic changes.

    Most people I know took more from that than an abrupt speech out of nowhere. Because it was delivered in a reasoned, measured manner. As in, "you see all this beauty in the world, well we are to blame if it's gone". Not accusatory just eye opening that makes the viewer reflect on themselves. They were educated and enlightened and could get a full picture of what it means and how it will impact them. Like telling a smoker smoking is bad, show them a cancerous lung and that might just be the wake up call they need.

    If you are speaking, and you want people to listen than tou adhere to standards of communication that will make your message well received.

    There's an art and subtelty to convincing people. Not just blurting it out any any occassion. Good sentiments or not. If people feel perceived they are being "told" what to do than they are right.

    Because they are the receptors of the message and have the right to interpert that as they will. This doesn't make them closed minded, it just means they have a way in which you communicate to them.


    A standard if you will. Engage in guilt shaming tactics and WAKE UP SHEEPLE babble does not help. It will make the listener feel stupid and no one likes to feel stupid.

    If we have time to have lavish ceromonies to award actors than they have time to make sure they get their message across right. That's if they can even perceive how it is to talk to the average person as I mentioned. Who, where and how will always be essential.

    You keep mentioning social media and your feed, now watch that dry up in a day or two and then it will be the next "moving speech" and the same sentiments coming up again and again. It is a useless measure of anything as culpable action afterwards rarely occurs. Most people think in that sharing or retweeting they have done their bit, like sharing a post for a lost dog in Houston Texas.

    You may say it gets people thinking, which yeah is a good thing, but the reality is how long? most people don't go on to do the charitable work your going on about do they? They don't stop buying the brands they love and they don't make drastic meaningful impactful changes in their life. It has been years now with stuff like this being said, if there was going to be major changes it would have happened by now. Sanctimonious speeches do nothing except make honest good sentiments in Phoenix's speech couture topics for a limited time on social media and isolate a bunch of other people.

    But anyway, feel free to reply obviously but I'll be leaving it there, I don't really have anything more to say. Just wanted a debate tbh.


  • Options
    #65
    Stateofyou
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,431 ✭✭✭Stateofyou


    chrissb8 wrote: »
    Fair, I get what you are saying. But I'm saying this is not how humans respond and this is not the way to get the message across.

    Infact, it does more harm than good. As it just feels like people are getting it rammed down their throat. Whether that is the case or not.

    Let's look at someone like David Attenborough, different argument to Phoenix I know, who gently reminds us through showing the beauty of nature coupled with his narration in bbc/his documentaries how all "this" could soon be gone if we don't make drastic changes.

    Most people I know took more from that than an abrupt speech out of nowhere. Because it was delivered in a reasoned, measured manner. As in, "you see all this beauty in the world, well we are to blame if it's gone". Not accusatory just eye opening that makes the viewer reflect on themselves.

    If you are speaking, and you want people to listen than tou adhere to standards of communication that will make your message well received.

    There's an art and subtelty to convincing people. Not just blurting it out any any occassion. Good sentiments or not. If people feel perceived they are being "told" what to do than they are right.

    Because they are the receptors of the message and have the right to interpert that as they will. This doesn't make them closed minded, it just means they have a way in which you communicate to them.

    A standard if you will. Engage in guilt shaming tactics and WAKE UP SHEEPLE babble does not help. It will make the listener feel stupid and no one likes to feel stupid.

    If we have time to have lavish ceromonies to award actors than they have time to make sure they get their message across right.

    I hear you. But again, I would point to the overwhelming positive responses on social media to him speaking up and say that obviously not everyone takes the stubborn route. Many remain open minded and willing to hear messages and take those on board.

    That people are now talking more about his speech than perhaps other aspects or the films themselves just further shows that it actually does more good than harm. He received a rapturous applause in the event too. The pressure will be on the industry now to change.

    Joaquin wasn't the opposite of gentle. He was self depreciating, humble, kind, intelligent, hard truths and well spoken. Just because some of us felt shame for hearing the difficult truth that we take newborn calfs milk from a distraught mother cow, doesn't mean that the act of saying it was shameful. Some things ARE shameful, and that's one of them- and also fitting into the larger point made of taking from the earth as if we're the only ones who matter. It will eventually catch up to us all if we carry on with that egocentric pov.

    He took the time to get a message across when he didn't have to. Many people took it on board, are discussing it (including us) and applauding him for doing so. His speech reached millions across the world. Absolute great opportunity to take.


  • Options
    #66
    Millicently
    Closed Accounts Posts: 478 ✭✭Millicently


    Stateofyou wrote: »
    Ah- so speaking up is working I see! People are now talking about a lack of diversity more than the films. Excellent. See, that's why award shows will be under pressure to change. Otherwise they risk becoming irrelevant. It won't be about merit because the awarding is obviously skewed. So speaking up works, and he used his privilege to help others.

    You "heard," eh? From Joaquin himself or would that be from Dailymail.com? :pac:

    It IS supposed to be about merit. But if talented people from diverse backgrounds are being excluded due to bias, then it's not based on merit is it. It's about being inclusive, not separate awards for diversity categories.
    You should eat some protein, you sound very angry. :D What he thinks is irrelevant, if he gave a damn about diversity he wouldn't have accepted his award. Lets just cut to the chase and introduce the following new categories to all film award ceremonies


    The award for being gay
    The award for being black
    The award for being female
    The award for not speaking English as a first language
    The award for being transgender


    Then we can just get on with reality and everyone will be happy. In the real world what any celebrity says matters not a jot and only the naive or the extremely woke and deluded believe otherwise.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #67
    Rufeo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 503 ✭✭✭Rufeo


    I used to think his name was pronounced JoeAhQuinn. God, i am so unsophisticated haha.


  • Options
    #68
    Shuhada Davitt
    Registered Users Posts: 69 ✭✭Shuhada Davitt


    I saw his "speech" and while it was in english, my first language, it made absolutely NO sense whatsoever. he went from saying gender buzzwords to climate buzzwords, phrases about equality and none of it tied together coherently at all.

    he looked off his nut too.

    i think he threw in the bit about his brother at the end just to gain some sympathy after he realised he had fooked up the entire speech.

    what about just saying a thanks to the people involved in helping you win the award? you know, the film-makers and actors you worked with.

    there's so many things people can make political now, that just dont say anything.

    the heads of the lot of them though - total satan fest.
    sure the stage was literally in the shape of a black and gold all seeing eye.
    i've said too much


  • Options
    #69
    Cordell
    Registered Users Posts: 5,837 ✭✭✭Cordell


    Joaquin Phoenix wrote:
    I think we’ve become very disconnected from the natural world
    Indeed we have, when we are paying millions to a few actors and minimum wage to millions of hard working people.


  • Options
    #70
    Stateofyou
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,431 ✭✭✭Stateofyou


    Millicently wrote: »
    You should eat some protein, you sound very angry. :D What he thinks is irrelevant, if he gave a damn about diversity he wouldn't have accepted his award. Lets just cut to the chase and introduce the following new categories to all film award ceremonies


    The award for being gay
    The award for being black
    The award for being female
    The award for not speaking English as a first language
    The award for being transgender


    Then we can just get on with reality and everyone will be happy. In the real world what any celebrity says matters not a jot and only the naive or the extremely woke and deluded believe otherwise.

    I'm not angry, but clearly you're ignorant. You should eat a dictionary!

    There is no such thing as separate award categories like that, nor has it been suggested here or by Joaquin. It's not about separate or preferential treatment. Look up the word inclusiveness and what that means. You're embarrassing yourself with your lack of awareness. Wow... :rolleyes:


  • Options
    #71
    Millicently
    Closed Accounts Posts: 478 ✭✭Millicently


    Stateofyou wrote: »
    I'm not angry, but clearly you're ignorant. You should eat a dictionary!

    There is no such thing as separate award categories like that, nor has it been suggested here or by Joaquin. It's not about separate or preferential treatment. Look up the word inclusiveness and what that means. You're embarrassing yourself with your lack of awareness. Wow... :rolleyes:
    You are pure comedy gold but it's time for you to do your homework now.:D


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #72
    Stateofyou
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,431 ✭✭✭Stateofyou


    Millicently wrote: »
    You are pure comedy gold but it's time for you to do your homework now.:D

    I've already done it and I plan to continue it. But please, do elaborate on how you think I should add to it!

    It's way past time to do your homework on what inclusivity means. Try and understand bias and systemic racism which he points out is at the root of the problem.


  • Options
    #73
    Rothko
    Registered Users Posts: 12,842 ✭✭✭✭Rothko


    Millicently wrote: »
    Take the film The Favourite for example, an over hyped absolute piece of sh*t that shouldn't have got a nomination yet alone won an award but it was peak #MeToo and an actress who didn't wear make up and doesn't run a hairbrush through her hair won an award for a very dull film because of her appearance not her work in 2 Billboards outside of wherever the feck. The Favourite left me hugely disappointed and with a serious WTF about all the praise it received. It only won because it had a mostly female cast. Did Phoenix even write his acceptance speech? I heard rumours that he had someone else write it for him.

    You mean Olivia Colman? She wasn't in Three Billboards Outside Ebbing Missouri.


  • Options
    #74
    Bobblehats
    Registered Users Posts: 4,707 ✭✭✭Bobblehats


    Rufeo wrote: »
    I used to think his name was pronounced JoeAhQuinn. God, i am so unsophisticated haha.

    Joking.

    Joking Phoenix ..for a fella who put in some great roles verging on silent in the decade that was he sure had a lot to say. All he had to do was collect the Oscar; check it’s integrity and sidle off


  • Options
    #75
    Millicently
    Closed Accounts Posts: 478 ✭✭Millicently


    Rothko wrote: »
    You mean Olivia Colman? She wasn't in Three Billboards Outside Ebbing Missouri.
    I knew that bit wouldn't be clear:o I meant Frances McDormand in Three Billboards and Olivia Coleman in The Favourite. I only saw clips of 3 billboards but a lot of people thought it over hyped and I was hugely disappointed with The Favourite, literally the only entertaining parts of the film were the ones in the trailers. This started a few years back with Will Smiths' wife complaining about racism because he didn't get an Oscar, the following year there were token black nominations.



    Then came #MeToo so there were nominations for mostly female casts or in Frances Mc Dormands case an actress who couldn't be less of the glamorous Hollywood actress than you could find. Then last year there were complaints that there weren't enough International films so this year the Korean one got best picture this year, I haven't seen it so I don't know if it's good. What's being demanded is essentially participation prizes or quotas.


  • Options
    #76
    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,474 ✭✭✭Obvious Desperate Breakfasts


    Millicently wrote: »
    I knew that bit wouldn't be clear:o I meant Frances McDormand in Three Billboards and Olivia Coleman in The Favourite. I only saw clips of 3 billboards but a lot of people thought it over hyped and I was hugely disappointed with The Favourite, literally the only entertaining parts of the film were the ones in the trailers. This started a few years back with Will Smiths' wife complaining about racism because he didn't get an Oscar, the following year there were token black nominations.



    Then came #MeToo so there were nominations for mostly female casts or in Frances Mc Dormands case an actress who couldn't be less of the glamorous Hollywood actress than you could find. Then last year there were complaints that there weren't enough International films so this year the Korean one got best picture this year, I haven't seen it so I don't know if it's good. What's being demanded is essentially participation prizes or quotas.

    Are you new to the Oscars? Undeserving people and films have been winning for decades. Seriously, take a look back at past winners and nominees and see how many forgettable films feature. I’m not sure what McDormand’s or Colman’s wins have to do with diversity or the #metoo movement. They don’t seem emblematic of either of those things at all. They’re women who won an award in the Best Actress category and they’re both white. The Oscars aren’t really that ageist either when it comes to the big awards and sure Colman wasn’t old anyway.


  • Options
    #77
    Rothko
    Registered Users Posts: 12,842 ✭✭✭✭Rothko


    Millicently wrote: »
    I knew that bit wouldn't be clear:o I meant Frances McDormand in Three Billboards and Olivia Coleman in The Favourite. I only saw clips of 3 billboards but a lot of people thought it over hyped and I was hugely disappointed with The Favourite, literally the only entertaining parts of the film were the ones in the trailers. This started a few years back with Will Smiths' wife complaining about racism because he didn't get an Oscar, the following year there were token black nominations.



    Then came #MeToo so there were nominations for mostly female casts or in Frances Mc Dormands case an actress who couldn't be less of the glamorous Hollywood actress than you could find. Then last year there were complaints that there weren't enough International films so this year the Korean one got best picture this year, I haven't seen it so I don't know if it's good. What's being demanded is essentially participation prizes or quotas.

    Ah, ok. Well, I actually thought The Favourite was fairly good. Better than I expected tbh. Anyway, to each their own.

    Overall, I wouldn't put much stock in the Oscars at all. Award shows mean nothing.


  • Options
    #78
    1800_Ladladlad
    Registered Users Posts: 3,352 ✭✭✭1800_Ladladlad


    This is the problem with these celebrities and their brave display of virtuosity. Natalie Portman’s production company has only ever hired 1 female director and that has been herself. no gender or race diversity :pac: the hypocrisy is outstanding

    https://twitter.com/TheWrap/status/1226664073917431808

    EQdZynyVAAEzKzd?format=png&name=small


  • Options
    #79
    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,474 ✭✭✭Obvious Desperate Breakfasts


    Portman is a dose.


  • Options
    #80
    Richard Hillman
    Registered Users Posts: 12,033 ✭✭✭✭Richard Hillman


    I remember a time when actors were liked and even respected. Men were masculine rebels, women were sassy trendsetters. Now the men are feminist soyboys and the ladies are whiney attention seekers.


  • Options
    #81
    DavidLyons_
    Registered Users Posts: 1,252 ✭✭✭DavidLyons_


    1800_Ladladlad wrote: »
    This is the problem with these celebrities and their brave display of virtuosity. Natalie Portman’s production company has only ever hired 1 female director and that has been herself. no gender or race diversity :pac: the hypocrisy is outstanding

    https://twitter.com/TheWrap/status/1226664073917431808

    EQdZynyVAAEzKzd?format=png&name=small
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=


    The same half-wit signed a petition to pardon confessed and convicted child rapist, Roman Polanski.

    https://medium.com/@hannahmatthews/an-open-letter-to-all-those-celebrities-who-signed-the-roman-polanski-petition-9da4ed1c2756

    The vile Meryl Streep once led a standing ovation for the same man at the Oscars



    Hollywood is a cesspool of hypocritical scum.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #82
    Millicently
    Closed Accounts Posts: 478 ✭✭Millicently


    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »
    Are you new to the Oscars? Undeserving people and films have been winning for decades. Seriously, take a look back at past winners and nominees and see how many forgettable films feature. I’m not sure what McDormand’s or Colman’s wins have to do with diversity or the #metoo movement. They don’t seem emblematic of either of those things at all. They’re women who won an award in the Best Actress category and they’re both white. The Oscars aren’t really that ageist either when it comes to the big awards and sure Colman wasn’t old anyway.
    They are both women who are much older and much less attractive than the average A list Hollywood actress. I don't believe that you don't see the connection with 2 atypical white actresses winning awards at the height of the #MeToo thing. Most of the clips for mainly black cast movies that I've seen have al been heavily focused on racism historical or otherwise and tbh I don't have any interest in being lectured on it let alone paying to be lectured to. The latest lark is casting non white actors in white roles which is utterly ludicrous. Colour shouldn't be an issue unless a characters skin colour is mentioned.


  • Options
    #83
    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,474 ✭✭✭Obvious Desperate Breakfasts


    Millicently wrote: »
    They are both women who are much older and much less attractive than the average A list Hollywood actress. I don't believe that you don't see the connection with 2 atypical white actresses winning awards at the height of the #MeToo thing. Most of the clips for mainly black cast movies that I've seen have al been heavily focused on racism historical or otherwise and tbh I don't have any interest in being lectured on it let alone paying to be lectured to. The latest lark is casting non white actors in white roles which is utterly ludicrous. Colour shouldn't be an issue unless a characters skin colour is mentioned.

    Again, are you new to the Oscars? Check out the winners of Best Actress and Best Supporting Actress Oscars down the years. They have often been older actresses. More often than not I would say. Indeed, the academy seems to favour those who have paid their dues. Frances McDormand is a very highly regarded actress. And Colman was only 45 when she won. You are really reaching here. And how does that link to the #metoo movement? You better believe I don’t see the connection. Especially as it had died down by the time Colman won. The movement was not at its peak then.


  • Options
    #84
    Millicently
    Closed Accounts Posts: 478 ✭✭Millicently


    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »
    Again, are you new to the Oscars? Check out the winners of Best Actress and Best Supporting Actress Oscars down the years. They have often been older actresses. More often than not I would say. Indeed, the academy seems to favour those who have paid their dues. Frances McDormand is a very highly regarded actress. You are really reaching here. And how does that link to the #metoo movement? You better believe I don’t see the connection. Especially as it had died down by the time Colman won. The movement was not at its peak then.
    Clearly you are being deliberately obtuse.


  • Options
    #85
    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,474 ✭✭✭Obvious Desperate Breakfasts


    Millicently wrote: »
    Clearly you are being deliberately obtuse.

    I’m not. Let’s break this down. The #metoo movement was about highlighting sexual harassment and casting couch situations in the entertainment industry. What statement do you believe is being made about the movement with these two wins? If the link is obvious, enlighten me.

    And you’re talking like older actresses rarely get these awards which highlights your ignorance on the topic.


  • Options
    #86
    AllForIt
    Registered Users Posts: 8,298 ✭✭✭AllForIt


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nmN1rF1Tt3o

    Really enjoying this old video that popped up on my youtube feed, with the recently deceased Kirk Douglas. It's the humility he shows in this interview that I so enjoy rather than the modern day type where they disingenuously make everything about their personal opinions for their own self fulfillment and promotion.


  • Options
    #87
    Millicently
    Closed Accounts Posts: 478 ✭✭Millicently


    AllForIt wrote: »
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nmN1rF1Tt3o

    Really enjoying this old video that popped up on my youtube feed, with the recently deceased Kirk Douglas. It's the humility he shows in this interview that I so enjoy rather than the modern day type where they disingenuously make everything about their personal opinions for their own self fulfillment and promotion.
    Unlike Joaquim I doubt Kirk Douglas wore tinted moisturiser, powder and concealer to accept his award. God I can't stand vain men, especially men who wear more make up than I do. It really only has a place on young lads who are going through a Goth phase.


  • Options
    #88
    the purple tin
    Registered Users Posts: 10,943 ✭✭✭✭the purple tin


    I only found out his real name is Joaquim Bottom!


  • Options
    #89
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Ipso wrote: »
    If you use the term virtue signaling then you’re doing it.

    Such horse manure. Replace "virtue signalling" with "racist" and tell me does it make sense to you?


Advertisement