Posted on 02/27/2017 2:55:33 AM PST by SkyPilot
In the most shocking mix-up in Oscars history, Moonlight won best picture at the Academy Awards but only after presenter Faye Dunaway announced La La Land as the winner, setting off mass confusion inside the Dolby Theatre in Los Angeles.
I want to tell you what happened, co-presenter Warren Beatty explained after the mix-up was revealed. I opened the envelope, and it said Emma Stone, La La Land. Thats why I took such a long look at Faye and at you. I wasnt trying to be funny.
Well, I dont know what happened. I blame myself for this, Kimmel joked after the moment. Lets remember, its just an awards show. I mean, we hate to see people disappointed, but the good news is we got to see some extra speeches. We have some great movies. I knew I would screw this show up, I really did. Thank you for watching. Im back to work tomorrow night on my regular show. I promise Ill never come back. Good night!
Speaking after the mix-up had been rectified, Moonlight director Barry Jenkins said, Very clearly, very clearly in my dreams this could not be true. But to hell with my dreams. Im done with it because this is true. Oh my goodness.
He added a note of praise to his La La Land opponents: And I have to say it is true. Its not fake. Weve been on the road with these guys for so long. My love to La La Land. My love to everybody. Man.
After the Oscars, PricewaterhouseCoopers which tabulates the Oscar votes released a statement apologizing for the flub: We sincerely apologize to Moonlight, La La Land, Warren Beatty, Faye Dunaway, and Oscar viewers for the error that was made during the award announcement...
(Excerpt) Read more at ew.com ...
My guess is she thought Beatty was pulling her leg, just clowning for the camera or trying to annoy her. She took a quick look at the card, saw “LaLaLand” and read it. She didn’t see “Emma Stone” on the card and wasn’t looking for anything like that. I don’t think she was in a scrutinizing mode. She just assumed things were straightforward and Warren was just putting on a stupid stunt.
I was wrong, apparently he was there.
shocking? LOL
Definitely; I believe that is why you see these stories of brawls in malls as well. I suspect people given money for “free” spend it more loosely than those of us who work for it...
I suspect in many cases that is related to how they get the money (not working for it).
The blacks with whom I work don’t seem to waste money on such nonsense; they are busy paying their bills and unfortunately, their children’s student loans.
I agree, and admittedly clever for Hollywood folks : )
1. You said the math in “Hidden Figures” was high-school level. I pointed out that the scene in the movie where the location of Glenn’s splashdown was calculated used a numerical approximation method for solving differential equations. This is not high-school math unless, perhaps, the high-school is the Bronx High School of Science. The use of Euler’s Method in the blackboard scene is a plot device, but Johnson’s contribution to solving the problem is not.
2. The movie does not state or imply that “unsung black women” “got us to the moon” or that “black women were the real force behind America’s space exploration” or that Johnson was the “the black brain allegedly behind NASA’s greatest glories.” Any such claim is an absurd distortion of the plot of the movie. But you wouldn’t know that since you refuse to see the movie. So, who is the victim of propaganda here?
3. You continue to be obsessed with Johnson’s physical characteristics, pointing out NASA’s description of her as blue-eyed and light-skinned. I’m not sure what your point is, but her appearance was sufficiently “colored” that she went to a segregated college and was then relegated to a segregated work team and segregated bathrooms at NACA. That Johnson never played the “victim card” is something to be admired.
4. The main point of the book, and the movie on which it is based, is that the contribution of the female “computers” (some of whom were black in an era of racial segregation) to the space program was unheralded and worth telling. If the story was widely known, through previous biographies and autobiographies, the book might not have been written by Shetterly.
4. I did not “lionize” Hidden Figures. I said it was a good, but not great, movie. It takes some liberties with the truth, as all movies (even documentaries) do, but it is largely based on fact and does not wildly exaggerate the contributions of the central characters.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.